DISCLAIMER:  Any unofficial case summaries below are prepared by the clerk's office
                        as a courtesy to the reader. They are not part of the opinion of the court.

093144P.pdf   01/19/2010  Walter Huggins  v.  FedEx Ground, etc.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  09-3144
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Arnold, Author, with Gruender and Benton, Circuit Judges]
   Civil case - torts. District court did not abuse its discretion by denying
   plaintiff's untimely motion to supplement his response to defendant
   Teton's motion for summary judgment as it appeared that plaintiff
   consciously delayed filing the supplement for strategic reasons and thus
   could not establish excusable neglect for the untimely filing; district
   court erred in holding that plaintiff could not make a claim against FedEx
   based on respondeat superior as there was evidence which would support
   a reasonable inference and a jury finding that FedEx had a right to control
   the performance of the driver of its truck and was his employer for
   respondeat superior purposes; plaintiff failed to plead a claim under the
   Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations and could not state claim that
   FedEx was vicariously liable for the driver's negligence under the
   regulations.