Posts

Last year, a three-judge Eighth Circuit panel ruled that Manchester, Missouri could not enforce a local ordinance banning protests near funerals. The ordinance, of course, was adopted to stop the controversial Westboro Baptist Church protestors from further upsetting grieving families at military funerals. Tuesday, the en banc Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the panel, ruling that the final version of the Manchester ordinance — which prohibits “picketing or other protest activities …within 300 feet of any funeral or burial site during or within one hour … of a funeral or burial service” — is a legitimate time, place, and manner regulation consistent with the First Amendment....

Habeas corpus. It seemed so important in law school — those halcyon days when you thought you would spend your career fighting for civil liberties — but years of bankruptcy/M&A/insurance defense/family law hearings make habeas irrelevant to most lawyers. For many of us, habeas corpus remains a lofty principle rather than a part of practice. (Because the U.S. government doesn’t just lock an American up for months without due process, right?...

All parolees have a diminished expectation of privacy, the Tenth Circuit reminds us, in a case that denied the defendant’s motion to suppress a search. Several months after his release, defendant Bruce Mabry violated the terms of his parole by leaving the state of Kansas. Mabry was pulled over by police in Utah. The car was driven by another parolee and there were 22 pounds of marijuana found, as well. The other parolee was arrested, but Mabry was not....

Having written four majority opinions for the U.S. Supreme Court this term, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is ahead of her class. The head-count puts her above the next member of the court, Justice Clarence Thomas, who has written three majority opinions. Justice Samuel Alito Jr., on the other end of the bench, has written none. Majority opinions can reveal the general direction of the court. In Ginsburg’s case, courtwatchers say it is changing....

The video game industry is not off the hook just yet. Former Rutgers football player, Ryan Hart, just got the go ahead from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals to continue his Electronic Arts lawsuit. Hart had sued EA for misappropriation of his likeness in their NCAA Football video games depicting a college football player similar to him when he played. This case is about all balancing rights; a celebrity’s rights of publicity and the video game company’s rights of expression....

The April docket of oral arguments for the High Court is pretty packed with 12 cases over two weeks. And still no word on whether Justice Ginsburg will attend the hearings or be working from home. Arguments will kick off on April 15 and conclude on April 24, unless the Justices decide to take up the Trump administration’s appeal on the 2020 census issue. However, as Amy Howe of SCOTUSblog notes, even if the Justices do decide to take that case up ahead of the federal appeals court hearing the matter, it could be heard in a special session in May, rather than added to the April calendar....

The Crime: Distribution of a Schedule I or II drug, where “death or serious bodily injury results from the use of such substance.” 21 U.S. C. § 841 (b)(1)(C). The Punishment: Twenty-year mandatory minimum. The Elements: That’s the question. Obviously, there has to be a drug deal. Here, that’s not an issue. Everyone agrees: Burrage sold heroin to the deceased, Mr. Banka. The question is, did Banka’s death, which was caused by a lengthy multi-drug bender, “result from” the purchase of heroin from Burrage?...

In what is being hailed as a big victory for one exonerated criminal defendant, lawyers are likely to be among the most amazed. A Philadelphia man was just acquitted of murder, after already serving 13 years behind bars, enduring 4 criminal trials and one appeal. In the first two trials and the appeal, he was represented. But after winning his appeal on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel, he opted to be his own lawyer in the third, and then fourth trials....

Telecommuting for work is a hot topic right now, with Yahoo’s anti-telecommuting policy setting off a national debate. But if a worker claims he can’t make it into work for medical reasons, must his employer allow him to telecommute as a “reasonable accomodation” under the Americans with Disabilities Act? Not always, according to the Tenth Circuit. The case involved the late Doyle “Rocky” Brown, who was diagnosed with cancer that required surgery....

You might assume a will is something only older people need to be concerned about. In actuality, every adult should have a will and estate plan, whether they are 18 or 99 years old. Determining if You Need a Will You need a will if any one of these is true: You have a bank account, cash, or investments in any amountYou own a home or vehicleYou own any items of value or importance to you, such as electronics, collectibles, jewelry, or designer pieces of clothingYou are married, remarried, have children, or are expecting a childYou have a petYou want to donate to a charity after you dieYou want to leave items to non-family membersYou are older than 60 or have a serious medical conditionYou would like to control who receives your property after you are goneYou want to make things easier for your family after you dieYou want to control who will manage and distribute your assets after your deathYou have or anticipate having difficult relationships with family members If you haven’t noticed yet, nearly every adult fits into one of these categories, meaning it is important for all adults to take action and make a will....

In an employment termination action, district grant of summary judgment in favor of plaintiff and the arbitrator’s award for plaintiff is affirmed where the arbitrator provided exactly what the parties bargained for, and interpreted what he perceived to be ambiguity within the Last Chance Agreement to address a situation that he concluded the contract did not contemplate by its express terms. Read United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 1546 v. Illinois-American Water Co....

District court’s imposition of 46-months’ imprisonment and three years of supervised release on a defendant convicted of illegally reentering the United States subsequent to a conviction for the commission of an aggravated felony is affirmed where: 1) it is apparent that the district court was aware of the discretionary nature of the Guidelines and its authority to impose a sentence outside of the prescribed range, but it had no obligation to exercise that discretion in favor of the defendant; and 2) defendant’s sentence is substantively reasonable....

In a firearm possession prosecution, denial of defendant’s motion to suppress is affirmed where the police lacked probable cause to search defendant’s vehicle, but the search was justified by the good-faith exception because the reach of the exclusionary rule does not extend beyond police conduct to punish the mistakes of others, be they judicial officers or employees, or even legislators. Read US v. McCane, No. 08-6235 Appellate Information Filed July 28, 2009...

Defendant’s drug distribution conviction and sentence are affirmed where, even if plain error review did not apply, there was no error in the District Court’s failure sua sponte to strike a juror for cause based on the murder of the juror’s uncle by a drug dealer. Read US v. Mitchell, No. 08-10027 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted October 20, 2008 Filed June 23, 2009 Judges Before: J. Clifford Wallace, Sidney R....

Defendant’s robbery and attempted murder convictions are affirmed where: 1) the district court’s denial of defendant’s motion to sever his trial from that of his brother did not prejudice him because the record showed that defendant chose to testify for reasons other than simply exonerating his brother; and 2) no reasonable juror would infer from the prosecution’s cross-examination of a defense psychologist that successful malingering would in fact get defendant “out of trouble” by setting him free....

For many United States citizens, it comes as a shock to learn that fellow U.S. citizens living in the U.S. territories don’t have the right to vote for the president. While Puerto Rico, Guam and the Virgin Islands are all part of the United States, and the residents born there are all citizens, they simply do not get the right to vote for president under the constitution. This lack of a constitutional right to vote was recently confirmed by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Segovia v....

In a tort action arising out of a motorcycle crash, denial of defendant’s post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law is reversed where: 1) a plaintiff may not establish wanton conduct by satisfying the notice or knowledge element of the tort as to one risk – e.g., a broad generalized risk – and the second element of indifference of that risk to a differently defined risk – e.g., the specific risk that caused the accident at issue; and 2) even if plaintiff had put on evidence that defendant knew that a certain part of the motorcycle race at issue was dangerous, plaintiff did not show that defendant was “completely indifferent” to that danger....

Though noting that “the underlying circumstances of the case are tragic,” the Third Circuit last week nonetheless affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a case in favor of the police. The case involves Tabitha Gonzalez, who was having an asthma attack, and two Philadelphia police officers. Tabitha had the attack in her front yard, and police responded to the house following a report of “a person screaming” at the house. Though the family had made five “understandably frantic” calls to 911, the police were never made aware that the screaming and the medical emergency were related....

In an opinion that made national headlines, U.S. District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez early in June held that California’s longstanding assault weapons ban was unconstitutional. At the request of California’s attorney general, however, Judge Benitez issued a stay of the ruling for 30 days. On Monday, June 22, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel extended that stay, meaning California’s 1989 law prohibiting assault weapons, including the sale of AR-15s, will stand unless the Ninth Circuit upholds Judge Benitez’s decision later this year....

With extra time at home while the pandemic continues, you may be thinking of using your free moments to prepare to apply to law school. But should you take the LSAT or the GRE? The answer depends on a few factors. The LSAT is a Safer Bet The LSAT is not a requirement at every single law school, but you might have difficulty finding a program that won’t accept LSAT scores as part of your application....