Robinson ex rel. Estate of Robinson v. United States

Eighth Circuit

Robinson ex rel. Estate of Robinson v. United States

333 F. App'x 163

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided September 29, 2009·No. No. 08-1977·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Linda Robinson appeals the district court’s¹ adverse judgment and denial of reconsideration, following a bench trial in her medical-malpractice suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Having reviewed the district court’s fact findings for clear error and its conclusions of law and mixed questions of law and fact de novo, see United States v. Missouri, 535 F.3d 844, 848 (8th Cir.2008), we conclude that the judgment was proper for the reasons stated by the district court. We also conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying Robinson’s motion to reconsider, see Murphy v. Mo. Dep’t of Corr., 506 [164]*164F.3d 1111, 1117 (8th Cir.2007), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 1493, 170 L.Ed.2d 304 (2008); United States v. Metro. St. Louis Sewer Dist., 440 F.3d 930, 933 (8th Cir.2006), or her motion for sanctions, see United States v. Pugh, 445 F.3d 1066, 1068 (8th Cir.2006).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Linda Robinson appeals the district court’s¹ adverse judgment and denial of reconsideration, following a bench trial in her medical-malpractice suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Having reviewed the district court’s fact findings for clear error and its conclusions of law and mixed questions of law and fact de novo, see United States v. Missouri, 535 F.3d 844, 848 (8th Cir.2008), we conclude that the judgment was proper for the reasons stated by the district court. We also conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying Robinson’s motion to reconsider, see Murphy v. Mo. Dep’t of Corr., 506 [164]*164F.3d 1111, 1117 (8th Cir.2007), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 1493, 170 L.Ed.2d 304 (2008); United States v. Metro. St. Louis Sewer Dist., 440 F.3d 930, 933 (8th Cir.2006), or her motion for sanctions, see United States v. Pugh, 445 F.3d 1066, 1068 (8th Cir.2006).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

Robinson ex rel. Estate of Robinson v. United States, 333 F. App'x 163 (8th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

333 F. App'x 163 (Robinson ex rel. Estate of Robinson v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related