Appellate

BSCR has briefed and argued cases in federal and state appellate courts in Missouri, Kansas and Illinois, and across the country.  Our appellate litigation clients include those whose cases we have handled at the trial court level, those who have retained us specifically to handle their appeals, and major national organizations such as the Product Liability Advisory Council (PLAC) to the Kansas Supreme Court and the Defense Research Institute (DRI) requiring the preparation of amicus curiae briefs.

Our appellate work covers the full spectrum of legal subject-matter areas, and includes developing effective legal strategies and analysis, preparing appellate and amicus briefs and motions, presenting oral argument, and (when appropriate) assisting the client in settlement negotiations.

Recent appellate matters handled by BSCR attorneys include:
103 Investors I, L.P. v. Square D Co., 470 F.3d 985 (10th Cir. 2006) – Sustaining summary judgment dismissing Plaintiff’s “failure to warn” claim, and upholding sanctions for spoliation by a plaintiff who allowed important evidence to be destroyed.
Sawyer v. Southwest Airlines Co., 145 Fed.Appx. 238 (10th Cir. Aug. 10, 2005) – Sustaining summary judgment against plaintiffs who claimed that a flight attendant’s use of the rhyme “eenie, meenie, minie, mo” over the plane’s public address system while passengers were boarding was a racist taunt directed toward plaintiffs.
Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Smith, case no. 07-99546-S, filed amicus curiae brief on behalf of Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc., regarding attorney-client privilege and application of the “joint defense” doctrine.
Group One, Ltd. v. Hallmark Cards, Inc., 407 F.3d 1297 (Fed. Cir. 2005) – Reinstating our client’s claims that his patents for a ribbon-curling machine had been infringed by a major greeting card company.
Shikles v. Sprint/United Management Co., 426 F.3d 1304 (10th Cir. 2005) – Upholding dismissal of case based on age discrimination plaintiff’s failure to cooperate in EEOC investigation, notwithstanding EEOC opposition to dismissal on this basis.
Messer v. Amway Corp., 106 Fed.Appx. 678 (10th Cir. Aug. 10, 2004) – Sustaining summary judgment for defendant in a products liability action against the manufacturer of a chemical floor stripper product.
Weber v. McBride & Son Contracting Co., 182 S.W.3d 643 (Mo.App.E.D. 2005) – Sustaining summary judgment for defendant subcontractors, who were held to owe no duty of care to an injured painter on a job site.