194 F.3d 922 (8th Cir. 1999), 98-3528, Kansas v. Reimer
|Citation:||194 F.3d 922|
|Party Name:||Kansas Public Employees Retirement, System, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. Reimer & Koger Associates, Inc., a, Kansas Corporation; Ronald Reimer, an individual; Kenneth H. Koger, anindividual; Clifford W. Shinski, an individual; Brent Messick, an individual; Robert Crew, an individual; Sherman Dreiseszun, an individual; I. I. Ozar, an individual; Frank|
|Case Date:||October 05, 1999|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit|
Submitted: May 11, 1999
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.
Before McMILLIAN, BOWMAN, and JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judges.
JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge.
Kansas Public Employees Retirement System appeals the district court's 1 denial
of its motion for relief from final judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b). In the underlying case, summary judgment was entered against KPERS in favor of all the defendants in this case (except Michael Russell) on the ground that KPERS's claims were barred by the applicable Kansas statutes of limitations. KPERS v. Blackwell, Sanders, Matheny, Weary & Lombardi, 114 F.3d 679 (8th Cir. 1997)(KPERS VI), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 738 (1998), leave to file for rehearing denied, 118 S.Ct. 1834 (1998). Shortly after our decision in KPERS VI affirming the summary judgment, the Kansas Supreme Court decided KPERS v. Reimer & Koger Assoc., Inc., 941 P.2d 1321, 1343 (Kan. 1997), disapproving of our interpretations of Kansas law that led to the summary judgment against KPERS. KPERS received the benefit of this change in state law in KPERS v. Russell, 140 F.3d 748 (8th Cir. 1998) (KPERS VII), which held that Michael Russell was not entitled to summary judgment under the statute of limitations defense. KPERS moved to reopen the case under Rule 60(b) in light of the change in Kansas law. The district court denied KPERS's motion and we affirm.
KPERS initially filed this action in state court in Kansas against its investment advisors to recoup KPERS's investment of some $65 million in debentures of Home Savings Association, a thrift that failed. When KPERS joined as defendants certain former directors of Home Savings, the directors impleaded the Resolution Trust Corporation, receiver of Home Savings. Acting under 12 U.S.C. § 1441a(l)(3), the RTC removed the case to the Western District of Missouri, which resulted in the application of Missouri, rather than...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP