Posts

In another round in the war over sanctuary cities, a federal appeals court ruled California’s sanctuary law does not impede enforcement of federal immigration laws. The decision in United States of America v. State of California comes as Gov. Gavin Newsom and President Trump engage in a verbal battle over the president’s threat to send illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities and states. The politicians are playing a game of headlines, but the appeals court is not....

Adam Jasinski, the winner of CBS’s Big Brother reality TV show on Season 9, was arrested by federal DEA agents in Boston and charged with having and trying to sell oxycodone a/k/a ‘Oxy’ a/k/a ‘Hillbilly Heroin.’ Instead of refusing to answer questions until he had an attorney, a DEA agent maintains that Big Brother Adam “waiv[ed] his Miranda Rights,” and then admitted to using his $500,000 in Big Brother winnings to “purchase large quantities of pills” that he would re-sell up and down the East Coast (see charges below)....

Boat Collision Case In Am. Milling Co. v. Brennan Marine, Inc., No. 08-3915, a case involving an allision between one or more barges and a casino boat on the Mississippi River, the court affirmed the district court’s order requiring plaintiff to pay interest on its security at a rate of six percent compounded annually, and denying plaintiff’s motion to deposit the cash value of the security into the court registry at a later stage of the proceedings, holding that 1) Supplemental Rule for Admiralty or Maritime Claims F(1) permitted the district court, in its discretion, to award compound interest at a rate of six percent annually; and 2) it was not an abuse of discretion for the district court to forbid the company to change its position at a late stage in the litigation in a manner that would have been detrimental to the claimants....

In plaintiff’s disability discrimination action against his former employer, district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant-employer is affirmed in part, reversed and vacated in part, and remanded where: 1) the disability-discrimination claim is remanded as although, plaintiff’s impairments are not sufficient to show that he is disabled, the record contains adequate evidence to support a theory that defendant regarded him as being disabled in the major life activities of walking, caring for himself, and speaking; 2) district court’s summary judgment on the reasonable-accommodation claim is affirmed; 3) district court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery on certain issues is reversed; and 4) award of sanctions are vacated because the magistrate judge unreasonably imposed them in response to plaintiff’s discovery requests....

Antonio Briggs was indicted for substantive and conspiratorial drug crimes. He was arraigned on August 17, 2010. On September 1, 2010, Magistrate Judge Hugh Scott ordered Briggs held without bail pending trial. The district court affirmed that decision, finding that Briggs poses a flight risk and danger to the community. Briggs has been sitting in jail for two years, and is understandably antsy. He claims that his continued detention violates due process....

If you’ve seen the trailer for “The Mule,” starring Clint Eastwood, you pretty much get the idea of the job – using an unsuspicious person to bring something illegal into a country. In “The Mule,” the product is cocaine. But more often than not, the product is money. Money Mules are people that launder money, which means that they “clean” dirty money obtained through illegal means by having it processed in such a way that police have a hard time linking the clean money to the original crime....

In a dispute involving the termination of long term disability benefits, district court’s grant of summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where defendant’s determination cannot be branded arbitrary and capricious as its decision to deny benefits was not unreasonable and had rational support in the record. Read Fischer v. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston, No. 08-2617 Appellate InformationAppeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division....

In what is definitely not a battle of the sexes, the Girl Scouts of the United States of America are suing the Boy Scouts of America. The principle allegations involve trademark infringement on the use of the word “Scouts” without a gender modifier, and the Boy Scouts’ recent decision to start allowing girls to join. The Girl Scouts, being a large, fully established and independent organization claims that Boy Scouts is now marketing to girls and tricking parents into signing girls up for Boy Scouts when the intention was to sign up for Girl Scouts....

Highland Park’s assault weapon ban does not violate the Second Amendment, the Seventh Circuit ruled on Monday. The ritzy Chicagoland suburb had banned the weapons in 2013, in part to evade a state law which would have prevented future legislation on such bans. The issue was so contentious at the time that residents skipped the Stanley Cup finals to debate the issue. Judge Easterbrook wrote the opinion, with Judge Williams joining and Manion dissenting....

We’ve all seen those mall jail cells in TV shows and in movies like “Paul Blart: Mall Cop.” But what exactly are the legal rights of security guards in malls and stores to detain you in those mall jails? Legal Authority of Security Guards Generally speaking, private security guards do not have the same authority as police officers. A security company is not a law enforcement agency. Other than assisting in medical emergencies and breaches of the peace, they basically have the same rights to act on crime as the average private citizen....

This November begins with a bang in the Supreme Court. While the rest of us are still nursing our Halloween candy hangovers, the High Court is hearing two of the year’s most interesting cases, Foster and Spokeo. Foster deals with race and jury selection, specifically whether a prosecutor’s use of peremptory challenges to strike all black candidates from a jury is prohibited racial discrimination. (We’ll get to Spokeo tomorrow.) So, how’d things go?...

In an appeal from the Bankruptcy Court’s order allowing Creditors’ claims against Debtors based on gambling debts, the order is affirmed where: 1) Wisconsin courts, applying their forum’s choice-of-law analysis, would apply Nevada law to govern the claims; and 2) the claims were enforceable under Nevada law. Read the full decision in Jafari v. Wynn Las Vegas, LLC. Appellate Information: Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Wisconsin....

In a habeas petition under the Indian Civil Rights Act, claiming that petitioners’ disenrollment by members of the Pechanga Tribal Council was tantamount to an unlawful detention, denial of the petition is affirmed where the tribe did not detain petitioners within the meaning of the Act, and thus, the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Read Jeffredo v. Macarro, No. 08-55037 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted April 17, 2009 Filed December 22, 2009...

In In re: Sherwin-Williams, Co., No. 10-1639, the Seventh Circuit dealt with a defendant’s petition for a writ of mandamus requesting that a district judge be recused from presiding over four cases against manufacturers of white lead carbonate pigments, claiming that a law review article co-written by the judge creates an appearance of bias. As stated in the decision: “Where a judge’s comments, writings, or rulings are the basis for recusal request, our analysis assumes that a reasonable person is familiar with the documents at issue, as well as the context in which they came into being....

The Center for Public Integrity recently completed an audit of federal appeals courts, checking financial disclosures against panel assignments for missed conflicts. On the surface, the results were worrisome: twenty-six definite conflicts over three years throughout the system. These were cases where a judge had a financial interest in one of the parties, or one of the law firms that represented the parties, and should’ve recused. Well, so far, from our review of the conflicts, it’s been much ado about nothing, with nearly all of the conflicts coming in unanimous decisions, most of which were nonprecedential and unpublished....

Judges sometimes wear more than one hat on the bench. They always wear the rule-maker hat. In court trials, they also become fact-finders. And in some criminal cases, they may look like the executioner. But the judge should not have “played doctor” in Akin v. Berryhill. That’s not the judge’s job, said the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Fibromyalgia In 2011, Rebecca Akin claimed she became disabled due to fibromyalgia, back and neck pain, and headaches....

Petition for review of an order of removal is granted and the matter remanded where: 1) plaintiff is not precluded from relief under INA sec. 212(c) by the Supreme Court’s decision in St. Cyr; 2) the matter must be remanded to the Board of Immigration Appeals because it failed to consider whether plaintiff was eligible for nunc pro tunc INA sec. 212(c) relief under the In re L- line of cases; 3) retroactively applying the amended definition of aggravated felony to his pre-IIRIRA conviction for sexual abuse of a minor did not violate the due process right to fair notice and repose; and 4) the present court lacks jurisdiction to consider plaintiff’s claim that the BIA erred in denying his request for withholding of removal because that decision is discretionary....

In a Freedom of Information Act action seeking locations and potential blast ranges of military explosive ordnance, judgment for defendant is affirmed where the information sought was predominantly used for the internal purpose of instructing agency personnel on how to do their jobs, and was thus exempt from disclosure. Read Milner v. US Dep’t of the Navy, No. 07-36056 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted March 12, 2009 Filed August 5, 2009...

The Obamacare debate rages on. It’s currently in front of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals as well as the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. Many people follow the Obamacare debate, but it’s a complicated issue and not always one that makes total sense, even to those following it. Last week, President Barack Obama’s administration made some effort to defend the individual mandate. Unfortunately for them, their words got used against them....

This week, we’re wrapping up the orders in the Supreme Court with a look at a notable cases that were both granted and denied certiorari. So who will be heading to First Street come Fall, and who will slink back home in disappointment? Read on and find out. The Supreme Court is expected to hand down more orders and opinions on Monday, June 18. There are 14 outstanding cases left from the October 2011 term....