# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 7- 12 93

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ St ream be nd Pro pe rti es II, LLC; St ream be nd Pro pe rti es VIII, LLC

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s - Ap pe ll an ts

v.
Iv y Tower M in ne ap ol is , LLC; Iv y Tower De ve lo pm en t, LLC; Mo od y Grou p, LLC; Go be n En te rp ris es , LP; Wisc he rm an n Ho ld in gs , LLC; J effr ey Laux ; Gar y Ben so n; Bu rn et Real ty, LLC; Co m m on weal th Land Tit le Ins ur an ce Co m pa ny; Jo hn Doe; Mary Rowe; XYZ, Corp

. ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta - Mi nn eap ol is

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Nov em

be r 14 , 20 17 Fi le d: Nov em

be r 16 , 20 17 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re WOL LMAN, LOKEN , and COLLOTON, Cir cu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

W e ha ve se en th is cas e th ric e be fo re. Fi rs t, we he ld St ream be nd Pro pe rti es II, LLC an d St ream

be nd Pro pe rti es VIII, LLC (co ll ect iv el y , S t r eam be nd ) ha d al le ge den ou gh of a co nn ect io n wit h in te rs ta te co m m erce to go fo rward wit h clai m s aga in st

v a r i o u s pa rti es in vo lv ed in th e de ve lo pm en t of a res id en ti al co nd om in iu m whe r e S t r eam be nd ha d so ug ht to bu y un it s. See St ream be nd Pro ps . I I, LLC v . I v y To w e r Mi nn eap ol is , LLC, 45 1 Fed

. Ap p x
. 6 2 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (u np ub li sh ed pe r cu ria m ). Seco nd , we affi rm ed th e su bs eq ue nt di sm is sa l of so m e of th os e cl ai m s an d th e gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t to th e de fen da nt s on th e res t. See St ream be nd Pro ps

. II, LLC

v. Iv y Towe r M i n n e ap ol is , LLC, 78 1 F.3 d 10 03 (8 th Ci r. 20 15 ). Thi rd , in an
un rep or te d ord er, w e su m m ari ly affi rm ed aft er the di st ric t cou rt den ie d a m ot io n by St ream be nd ’s be ne fic ia l own er, Je ral d Ham m an n, to jo in th e cas e or ta ke St ream be nd ’s p l a c e a s p l ai nt iff

. In th e se co nd an d th ird ap pe al s, we al so de ni ed ad di ti on al m ot io ns or ig in al ly fil ed in th is co ur t se ek in g to a d d H a mm a nn to th is li ti ga ti on

.
Now, St ream

be nd ap pe al s fro m t h e d e n i al of it s m ot io n fo r rel ie f fro m th e jud gm en t, se e Fed

. R. Ci v
. P

. 6 0( b) (6 ), an d a ren ewed m ot io n fo r su bs ti tu ti on of pa rti es , se e Fed

. R. Ci v. P. 25 (c). W e ag ree wit h th e di st ric t co ur t th at th es e m ot io ns 1 rep res en t i m

pr op er at te m

pt s t o re li ti ga te is su es alr ead y de ci de d. Se e SDDS, In c. v. So ut h Dak ot a (In re SDDS, In c.), 22 5 F

. 3 d 9 7 0 , 97 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 00 ); se e al so Max fie ld v. Ci nt as Co rp ., No. 2, 48 7 F.3 d 11 32 , 11 34 -3 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ) (la w-o f-t he

cas e an d pr io r-p an el do ct rin es ). St ream be nd ’s ch al le ng e to ou r pr eced en t fo rb id di ng th e us e of Ru le 60 m ot io ns fo r su ch co ll at eral at ta ck s wou ld be un av ai li ng ev en if we fo un d it pe rs ua si ve , be cau se we can no t ov e r r u l e an ot he r pa ne l of th is co ur t. See Max fie ld , 48 7 F .3d at 1 13 5.

Fu rth er, we se e no rev ers ib le erro r in th e d i s t ric t co ur t’s im pl ic it refu sa l to gr an t St ream

be nd le av e to am en d th e co m pl ai nt o r c o n d u c t li m it ed di sc ov ery, as St ream be nd req ue st ed in it s br ie fs

. St ream be nd di d no t req ue st th is al te rn at iv e rel ie f

The Hon or ab le Jo an N. Eric ks en , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 1 of Mi nn es ot a. -2

-by m ot io n, di d no t ci te au th or it y su pp or ti ng it , di d no t su bm it pr op os ed am en dm en ts

fo r rev ie w, an d di d no t of fer an y th in g m or e th an sp ecu la ti on ab ou t wha t it ex pe ct ed to di sc ov er. Any o f th es e wou ld su ffi ce to jus ti fy th e di st ric t co ur t’s d eci si on . See Fed . R. Civ . P . 7 (b )(1 ) (m ot io ns ); Uni te d St at es v. Si gi ll it o, 7 59 F.3d 91 3, 9 33 (8t h Ci r

. 20 14 ) (le ga l au th or it y ); Po po al ii v. Co rr. Med

. Serv s., 51 2 F.3 d 48 8, 49 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ) (p ro po se d am en dm en ts ); cf

. T obe n v. Bri dg es to ne Ret ai l Ope rat io ns , LLC, 75 1 F .3d 88 8, 8 95 (8t h C ir. 2 01 4) (di sc ov ery).

W e aff irm th e d en ia l o f St ream

be nd ’s m ot io ns

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-3

-