United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 97-2402EM

_____________

United States Fidelity and Guaranty *

Company, a corporation, *

*

Plaintiff-Appellee, *

*

v. *

*

Concrete Holding Company, formerly *

known as St. Charles Quarry Company, *

doing business as Defiance Quarry, *

doing business as Kurtz Concrete, Inc., * Appeals from the United States

doing business as Goellner Redi-Mix, * District Court for the Eastern

Inc., a corporation; St. Charles County * District of Missouri.

Sanitary Landfill, Inc., an *

administratively-dissolved corporation; * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Defendants-Appellees, *

*

Quarry Holding Company, a voluntarily- *

dissolved corporation, *

*

Defendant-Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

John J. Barnes, Jr.; Quarry Holding *

Company; *

*

Third Party Defendants, *

*

John J. Barnes, Jr.; Quarry Holding *
-2-

Company; James P. Davis; Quarry *

Development Company; Community *

Title Company, *

*

Cross Defendants. *

____________________ *

*

Concrete Holding Company, *

*

Third Party Plaintiff- *

Appellee, *

*

v. *

*

James P. Davis, individually, and as *

statutory and common law trustee for *

defendant Quarry Holding Company; *

Quarry Development Company; *

Community Title Company, *

*

Third Party Defendants- *

Appellants. *

_____________

No. 97-2405EM

_____________

United States Fidelity and Guaranty *

Company, a corporation, *

*

Plaintiff-Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

Concrete Holding Company, formerly *

known as St. Charles Quarry Company, *
-3-

doing business as Defiance Quarry, *

doing business as Kurtz Concrete, Inc., *

doing business as Goellner Redi-Mix, *

Inc., a corporation; St. Charles County *

Sanitary Landfill, Inc., an *

administratively-dissolved corporation; *

Quarry Holding Company, a voluntarily- *

dissolved corporation, *

*

Defendants-Appellees, *

____________________ *

*

John J. Barnes, Jr.; Quarry Holding *

Company; *

*

Third Party Defendants, *

*

John J. Barnes, Jr.; Quarry Holding *

Company; James P. Davis; Quarry *

Development Company; Community *

Title Company, *

*

Cross Defendants, *

____________________ *

*

Concrete Holding Company; *

*

Third Party Plaintiff, *

*

James P. Davis, individually, and as *

statutory and common law trustee for *

defendant Quarry Holding Company; *

Quarry Development Company; *

Community Title Company, *

*

Third Party Defendants. *
-4-

_____________

No. 97-2408EM

_____________

United States Fidelity and Guaranty *

Company, a corporation, *

*

Plaintiff-Appellee, *

*

v. *

*

Concrete Holding Company, formerly *

known as St. Charles Quarry Company, *

doing business as Defiance Quarry, *

doing business as Kurtz Concrete, Inc., *

doing business as Goellner Redi-Mix, *

Inc., a corporation; *

*

Defendant-Appellant, *

*

St. Charles Sanitary Landfill, Inc., an *

administratively-dissolved corporation; *

*

Defendant, *

*

Quarry Holding Company, a voluntarily- *

dissolved corporation, *

*

Defendant-Appellee, *

______________________ *

*

John J. Barnes, Jr.; Quarry Holding *

Company; *

*

Third Party Defendants, *
-5-

John J. Barnes, Jr.; Quarry Holding *

Company; James P. Davis; Quarry *

Development Company; Community *

Title Company, *

*

Cross Defendants, *

____________________ *

*

Concrete Holding Company; *

*

Third Party Plaintiff- *

Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

James P. Davis, individually, and as *

statutory and common law trustee for *

defendant Quarry Holding Company; *

Quarry Development Company; *

Community Title Company, *

*

Third Party Defendants- *

Appellees. *

_____________

No. 97-2763EM

_____________

United States Fidelity and Guaranty *

Company, a corporation, *

*

Plaintiff, *

*

v. *

*

Concrete Holding Company, formerly *
-6-

known as St. Charles Quarry Company, *

doing business as Defiance Quarry, *

doing business as Kurtz Concrete, Inc., *

doing business as Goellner Redi-Mix, *

Inc., a corporation; St. Charles County *

Sanitary Landfill, Inc., an *

administratively-dissolved corporation; *

Quarry Holding Company, a voluntarily- *

dissolved corporation, *

*

Defendants, *

*

v. *

*

John J. Barnes, Jr.; Quarry Holding *

Company; *

*

Third Party Defendants, *

*

John J. Barnes, Jr.; Quarry Holding *

Company; James P. Davis; Quarry *

Development Company; Community *

Title Company, *

*

Cross Defendants, *

____________________ *

*

Concrete Holding Company, *

*

Third Party Plaintiff- *

Appellee, *

*

v. *

*

James P. Davis, individually, and as *

statutory and common law trustee for *

defendant Quarry Holding Company; *
-7-

Third Party Defendant- *

Appellant, *

*

Quarry Development Company; *

*

Third Party Defendant, *

*

Community Title Company, *

*

Third Party Defendant- *

Appellant. *

_____________

No. 97-3512EM

_____________

United States Fidelity and Guaranty *

Company, a corporation, *

*

Plaintiff, *

*

v. *

*

Concrete Holding Company, formerly *

known as St. Charles Quarry Company, *

doing business as Defiance Quarry, *

doing business as Kurtz Concrete, Inc., *

doing business as Goellner Redi-Mix, *

Inc., a corporation; St. Charles County *

Sanitary Landfill, Inc., an *

administratively-dissolved corporation; *

Quarry Holding Company, a voluntarily- *

dissolved corporation, *

*

Defendants, *
-8-

v. *

*

John J. Barnes, Jr.; Quarry Holding *

Company; *

*

Third Party Defendants, *

*

John J. Barnes, Jr.; Quarry Holding *

Company; James P. Davis; Quarry *

Development Company; Community *

Title Company, *

*

Cross Defendants, *

____________________ *

*

Concrete Holding Company, *

*

Third Party Plaintiff- *

Appellee, *

*

v. *

*

James P. Davis, individually, and as *

statutory and common law trustee for *

defendant Quarry Holding Company; *

*

Third Party Defendant- *

Appellant, *

*

Quarry Development Company; *

Community Title Company, *

*

Third Party Defendants. *

_____________
The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern *

District of Iowa, sitting by designation.

-9-

 Submitted: March 9, 1998

Filed: March 26, 1998

_____________

Before McMILLIAN and FAGG, Circuit Judges, and BENNETT, District Judge. *

_____________

PER CURIAM.

The court has considered the briefs of the parties and heard oral argument in this

diversity case. The parties raise an assortment of contentions about instructions,

admissibility of evidence, trial-related orders, and post-trial rulings deemed adverse to

them. Their arguments have been carefully analyzed and considered. After review of

the record in the context of the parties' arguments, we find the record supports the

district court's decisions with the exception of the court's ruling on United States

Fidelity and Guaranty Company's request for prejudgment interest. Because our review

involves the application of established principles of law in a fact-intensive case, and the

parties' submissions show they are thoroughly familiar with the issues before the court,

we conclude that an extensive discussion would serve no useful precedential purpose.

We thus remand to the district court with instructions to award appropriate prejudgment

interest to the United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company; otherwise, we affirm the

district court without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.