Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Eighth Circuit· 1/19/2010

Huggins v. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc.

Citations

  • 592 F.3d 853
  • 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 1020
  • 2010 WL 154883

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that plaintiff’s conclusory reference to a statutory provision in the complaint’s jurisdictional allegations, without more, “did not give the opposing party fair notice of such a claim”
  • noting that drivers “performed work that was the essence of FedEx’s business, namely, 'transportation and delivery service’ ”
  • noting that drivers “performed work that was the essence of FedEx’s business, namely, ‘transportation and delivery service’”
  • holding, under Missouri law, that FedEx’s appearance requirements “show the extent of FedEx’s control” over drivers’ work
  • ruling to accept untimely materials due to excusable neglect reviewed for abuse of discretion
  • affirming exclusion of untimely materials because party seeking admission of materials failed to make “affirmative showing of excusable neglect”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gruender, Arnold, and Benton, Circuit Judges

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Huggins v. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.