Am I the only one whose ears perk up when I hear “porno copyright trolls”? Let’s back up. The Prenda Law saga began several years ago when a law firm began suing for copyright infringement on behalf of Lightspeed Entertainment, which makes adult films. Prenda Law alleged that many thousands of John Does were illegally downloading copyrighted material and tried to use the discovery process to get their real names....
In case you missed it: On May 23, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that state prisoners do not have a constitutional right to present new evidence in federal court to prove their trial counsel was ineffective. The court reviewed the cases of two Arizona prisoners, David Martinez Ramirez and Barry Jones. Both men were convicted of capital crimes and sentenced to death in state court. After the Arizona Supreme Court denied post-conviction relief, both men filed federal claims arguing their state trial lawyers were ineffective....
In a Fourth Amendment action brought against police officers, district court judgment grant of summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) the court applied an acceptable methodology in addressing the qualified immunity test and evaluating whether the officers’ actions violated plaintiff’s constitutional right; and 2) the record establishes that the officers’ actions were reasonable under the circumstances, and that they did not employ excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment....
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to revive a lawsuit against two defense contractors, which alleged that the defense contractors’ employees engaged in torture at Abu Ghraib prison. The lawsuit was filed in 2004 after the Abu Ghraib prison scandal became public and was brought against CACI International Inc. and L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. The former provided interrogators at Abu Ghraib while the latter provided interpreters to the U.S. military, reports Reuters....
In a petition for review of the BIA’s order finding petitioner statutorily ineligible for asylum, the petition is granted where the BIA was required to determine whether, in an exercise of discretion, petitioner merited a grant of asylum under 8 U.S.C. section 1158(b). Read Taslimi v. Holder, No. 05-71006 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted December 10, 2008 Filed January 4, 2010 Judges Opinion by Judge Pregerson Counsel For Petitioner: Haleh Mansouri, Los Angeles, CA...
Techdirt, an irreverent blogsite about tech cases, backs up its talk when others walk. For example, the ezine just sued Immigration and Customs Enforcement for refusing its request for information under the Freedom of Information Act. See, Techdirt walks the talk. On the other hand, some Techdirt cases are not so serious – like the case of the so-called “inventor of email.” Techdirt wouldn’t pay the plaintiff, and so he walked....
Over the past two years, thefts of catalytic converters have skyrocketed. The thefts of these emission control devices have increased by roughly 300% each year, and tens of thousands of drivers have been forced to pay for replacements. However, this epidemic of car-part theft has caught the attention of public officials and lawmakers, who are responding with new bills, laws, and regulations. The Impacts of Catalytic Converter Theft Replacing a stolen catalytic converter isn’t cheap....
The fight over the next Supreme Court justice appears to be nearly over. Barring unexpected developments, nothing will derail the quick nomination and appointment of a third Supreme Court justice during President Trump’s first term. Looking past the next few months, there has already been talk about what approaches the Democratic Party might take after the election should it win control of both Congress and the White House. What are those options?...
If you a purchase a $200 sweater for $100, you have incurred a $100 charge on your credit card bill; it doesn’t matter what the sweater originally cost. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals says that same reasoning applies to a catastrophic care insurance policy: “Incurred” refers to the amount spent, not the value received. In 1995, Florence Metz took out a catastrophic care insurance policy from U.S. Life. Metz’s policy carries a $25,000 deductible....
Conviction of defendant for conspiracy, mail fraud, and wire fraud, arising from fraudulent marketing of defendant’s financial products is affirmed for the most part where: 1) there is ample evidence in the record to support the jury’s conclusion that defendant had the requisite intent to defraud and that he and another individual formed an agreement to commit fraud; 2) there was no error in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss, motion for a new trial and motion to reconsider as none of the district court’s rulings on the alleged Brady, Youngblood or Jenkins Act violations constitutes an abuse of discretion; and 3) district court’s enhancement for the number of victims is remanded because the court’s calculation of the number of victims did not focus on actual loss, and because that enhancement affects defendant’s sentencing range....
Sentence and conviction of defendants for conspiracy to possess and distribute crack cocaine is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in denying defendants’ motion for a mistrial because, although the venire lacked any African-Americans, defendants did not show that systematic exclusion of African-Americans caused this void; 2) the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing a detective to identify defendants’ voices on the wiretap tapes; 3) the district court did not abuse its discretion when it allowed the jury to take transcript books back to the deliberation room; 4) the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding letters written by a witness, even under Rule 613; 5) there was no error in denying defendants’ motion for directed verdict based on the variance between the verdict and the indictment; and 6) there was no error in sentencing one of the defendants within the highest possible point in the Guidelines range....
Defendant’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act conviction is affirmed where, even though the predicate acts proved by the government were outside the statute of limitations, other trial evidence permitted the jury to conclude that both the charged racketeering conspiracy and defendant’s membership in it continued into the limitations period. Read US v. Pizzonia, No. 07-4314 Appellate Information Argued: September 25, 2008 Decided: August 19, 2009 Judges Opinion by Judge Raggi...
Defendant’s firearm possession conviction is affirmed where, according to the Sentencing Guidelines, if a defendant possesses a firearm in connection with the commission of another offense, the district court must apply the offense level for the other offense if the resulting offense level is higher than the offense level as calculated under the provision governing the unlawful possession of firearms. Read US v. Varela, No. 08-2275 Appellate Information Filed November 18, 2009...
Being stuck in a lockdown or a quarantine can be frightening. As bad as forced isolation can be, the worst part can be the uncertainty of what might lie ahead. Unfortunately, that’s the price each of us pays when governments determine that a virus must be contained by limiting its opportunity to spread. In this case, of course, that is SARS-CoV-2, otherwise known as the coronavirus. Entire states in the U....
While there’s no doubt about the fact that Justice Ginsburg is the biggest celebrity on the U.S. Supreme Court, Justice Sotomayor may be wrestling away the title of coolest judge. Sure, Ginsburg made a big splash with her workout, but Sotomayor can dance! Also, she’s credited with saving Major League Baseball. And though Ginsburg has a big movie coming out about her in a couple weeks, how can you ignore the fact that Sotomayor, and not Ginsburg, has been interviewed by Oprah....
You say ’tomato,’ I say ’tomato.' Wait, that doesn’t work. You say ‘Internet,’ I say ‘internet.’ Hold on. This only works if you’re writing, not talking. And it only seems to matter here if the U.S. Supreme Court has anything to say, er, write about it. It’s a Place In one of its last decisions this summer, the Court struck down a North Carolina law that banned registered sex offenders from using social media....
A First Circuit panel held that a provision of the Social Security Act excluding residents of Puerto Rico from receiving Supplemental Security Income violated the Fifth Amendment. SSI provides payments to low-income Americans who are over 65, blind, or disabled. However, under the SSA, only Americans who live in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the Northern Mariana Islands are eligible to receive benefits. The case arose when a resident of New York City began receiving SSI benefits....
Despite there being no vacancies on the United States Supreme Court, and no plans to expand the High Court, President Donald Trump has announced five more potential candidates to his already long and distinguished “shortlist” of nominees, should another vacancy arise. The new additions include: Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Kevin Newsom of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Britt Grant of the Georgia Supreme Court Judge Patrick Wyrick of the Oklahoma Supreme Court Notable Names If a couple of those names jump out at you, it may be because Judges Newsom and Barrett were confirmed within the last few months....
Michael Avenatti, the once-favorite lawyer of the media has now become a near constant topic of discussion due to the legal troubles of his own. After all, his legal troubles make for some rather dramatic television, especially for the lawyers that have been watching his meteoric rise, and now fall. After getting set up by Nike’s attorneys and the feds, he is now facing legal-career devastating allegations out of California. In short, he has been indicted for more than just mismanaging client money; included in the charges are allegations that he engaged in a nefarious operation of embezzling a client’s settlement to spend on himself, committing fraud, perjury, failing to pay taxes, commingling funds, and more....
Long Beach Area Chamber of Comm. v. Long Beach, No. 07-55691, involved an action challenging the Long Beach Campaign Reform Act (LBCRA), which prohibited “persons” from making any independent expenditures if they received contributions above certain amounts, as applied to the Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce (Chamber) and its affiliated political action committees (PACs). The court of appeals reversed summary judgment for plaintiff Chamber, holding that the Chamber failed to demonstrate that it suffered or faced a real and immediate threat of suffering an injury that was fairly traceable to the LBCRA....
