Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Bradley R. Hartke v. WIPT, Inc.
Date: 01-19-2019
Case Number: 17-3685
Judge: Per Curiam
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on appeal from the District of Minnesota (Hennepin County)
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Defendant's Attorney:
Description:
Bradley R. Hartke, Douglas P. Hartke, and Joan L. Hartke, individually and as
trustees of Hartke-related trusts (collectively, Hartkes) filed an action in the United
States District Court seeking a declaration that promissory notes they executed to
entities owned by Roger Dean Waldner were unenforceable. Waldner
counterclaimed, seeking recovery on the notes. All parties moved for judgment on
the pleadings. The district court denied 1 Waldner’s motion for judgment on the
pleadings and granted the Hartkes’ motion for judgment on the pleadings. Waldner
appeals.2 We have jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and review de novo the district
court’s entry of judgment on the pleadings, Schnuck Markets, Inc. v. First Data
Merchant Services Corp., 852 F.3d 732, 737 (8th Cir. 2017), and its interpretation and
application of state law, Nolles v. State Committee for Reorganization of School
Districts, 524 F.3d 892, 901 (8th Cir. 2008). Having carefully reviewed the parties’
briefs, the record, and the applicable legal principles, we find no reversible error in
the district court’s disposition of this matter.
Bradley R. Hartke, Douglas P. Hartke, and Joan L. Hartke, individually and as
trustees of Hartke-related trusts (collectively, Hartkes) filed an action in the United
States District Court seeking a declaration that promissory notes they executed to
entities owned by Roger Dean Waldner were unenforceable. Waldner
counterclaimed, seeking recovery on the notes. All parties moved for judgment on
the pleadings. The district court denied 1 Waldner’s motion for judgment on the
pleadings and granted the Hartkes’ motion for judgment on the pleadings. Waldner
appeals.2 We have jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and review de novo the district
court’s entry of judgment on the pleadings, Schnuck Markets, Inc. v. First Data
Merchant Services Corp., 852 F.3d 732, 737 (8th Cir. 2017), and its interpretation and
application of state law, Nolles v. State Committee for Reorganization of School
Districts, 524 F.3d 892, 901 (8th Cir. 2008). Having carefully reviewed the parties’
briefs, the record, and the applicable legal principles, we find no reversible error in
the district court’s disposition of this matter.
Outcome:
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of Bradley R. Hartke v. WIPT, Inc.?
The outcome was: Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
Which court heard Bradley R. Hartke v. WIPT, Inc.?
This case was heard in United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on appeal from the District of Minnesota (Hennepin County), MN. The presiding judge was Per Curiam.
When was Bradley R. Hartke v. WIPT, Inc. decided?
This case was decided on January 19, 2019.