Posts

Vince Sicari, coined the “joking judge” in New Jersey, couldn’t win over a tough crowd – the Supreme Court of New Jersey. Sicari, a part-time municipal judge, moonlights as a comedian and actor. But New Jersey’s Supreme Court wanted the curtains to close. The state’s highest court unanimously ordered the joking judge to either quit comedy or step down from the bench. By day, Vince Sicari is a part-time municipal judge in South Hackensack, where he handles minor offenses such as traffic ticket and disorderly persons cases, reports The Associated Press....

This week was a big news week within the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had many new announcements regarding nominations and vacancies. Nomination to the Arizona District Court The most newsworthy item for the Ninth Circuit this week was probably the filling of a very important vacancy in the District Court of Arizona. President Barack Obama nominated not one, but two, to the Arizona District Court this week....

Rabbi S. Binyomin Ginsberg enrolled in Northwest Airlines’ frequent flyer program and attained “Platinum Elite” status, the highest level, in 2005. Three years later, Northwest revoked his membership in the frequent flyer program because, according to the airline, he’d abused the program. Ginsberg sued Northwest in federal court alleging breach of contract, breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing, negligent misrepresentation, and intentional misrepresentation. The district court held that all of the claims, except for breach of contract, were pre-empted by the Airline Deregulation Act (“ADA”), and dismissed the breach of contract claim, without prejudice, for failure to state a claim....

There were no winners in this week’s Adoptive Couple decision. On one side, you have a biological father, who despite not taking responsibility initially, has fought for the right to raise his then four-month, now four-year-old child, and has done so since the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled in his favor, citing the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978. On the other side, you have the adoptive couple, which supported the biological mother, emotionally and financially, throughout her pregnancy and delivery....

It seems that cannabinoid oil, simply called CBD oil, has exploded onto the market. But, that doesn’t mean it’s welcome everywhere. Just ask the 69-year-old grandmother who was arrested for having CBD oil in her purse at Walt Disney World. The Happiest Place on Earth … Unless You Have CBD Oil Hester Burkhalter was arrested on April 15th after security at Disney World found a vial of CBD oil in her purse....

In an action to secure a maritime attachment, district court’s order denying plaintiff’s motion to compel defendant to post security in lieu of garnishment is affirmed where a district court lacks the legal capacity under the Admiralty Rules to order a party to post security in lieu of garnishment. However, the district court’s order equitably vacating plaintiffs’ Rule B writ and exonerating security posted for that writ is reversed where the district court abused its discretion by concluding that it was bound by res judicata to vacate the writ to conform with the Southern District of New York’s decision to vacate the writ involved in a related action pending there....

Puerto Rico may have its own constitution, elect its own leaders, and pass its own laws, but when it comes down to it, Congress, not the people of Puerto Rico, is the ultimate source of the island government’s power. That’s the lesson from today’s Supreme Court ruling in Puerto Rico v. Sanchez Valle, over whether the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico could prosecute criminals already tried by the federal government, as the 50 states can....

Raymond Lee Oyler, an arsonist in California who set a wildfire in Southern California, got sentenced to death today for murdering five firefighters who perished trying to keep the blaze away from a home. Many people hear about arson murder in the context of people setting fire to structures with individuals inside. But they might be surprised to know that even setting a wildfire relatively far from civilization could still lead to the ultimate punishment under the law....

Are the San Diego’s policies employing canine units to “bite and hold” an unconstitutional violation of civil rights? Reasonable minds may disagree, and that is why the Ninth Circuit has reversed a lower court dismissal of the lawsuit allowing the suit to move forward to trial. However your opinion may lean on this issue – we’re almost sure that it didn’t help when the police officer told the victim that she was “very lucky,” because the dog “could have ripped [her] face off....

Sexual contact with a teenager can pose legal risks, and not just for adults. In some states, minors can also face prosecution for statutory rape, depending on a variety of factors. Punishments for statutory rape can include probation, fines, mandatory prison time, and even a requirement to register as a sex offender. A key factor is where the alleged sex acts took place, because each state’s laws are different. In general, states consider four factors when it comes to statutory rape laws:...

Another new lawsuit has been filed against Wells Fargo, the nation’s fourth largest bank, over its handling of Paycheck Protection Plan (PPP) loans. Federal and state agencies began investigating Wells Fargo’s handling of PPP loans in late April and early May. They are already facing class actions in Texas, California, and Colorado. The lawsuits allege that, rather than distribute PPP loans on a first-come, first-served basis, as directed by U.S. Treasury and Small Business Administration, Wells Fargo prioritized large businesses....

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action claiming that a town selectman violated plaintiff’s right to petition the government under the First Amendment by refusing to meet with him in retaliation for his filing a lawsuit against the town, judgment as a matter of law for defendants is affirmed where, given that plaintiff had no business with the town and suffered no harm or injury, the town’s reasonable precaution to communicate with an adverse litigant only in writing was not a violation of a constitutional right....

Defendant’s drug importation sentence is affirmed where defendant’s prior California convictions were not expunged for purposes of the Sentencing Guidelines, because under California law the convictions in question could still be used at a later time in a variety of circumstances. Read US v. Alba-Flores, No. 08-50135 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted July 7, 2009 Filed August 18, 2009 Judges Opinion by Judge Fernandez Dissent by Judge Kozinski Counsel For Appellant...

Defendant’s conviction for possession of a controlled substance while on parole for a cocaine distribution conviction is affirmed where: 1) district court did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress as there was probable cause to arrest him for possession of a controlled substance, and as such, the subsequent seizure of crack cocaine from his pants was lawful; 2) district court’s denial of a motion to suppress evidence recovered from the search was proper as the issuing state court judge had a substantial and legally sufficient basis for concluding that probable cause existed to issue the warrant; and 3) the district court did not violate Rule 11(c)(1) during the plea colloquy....

Reentry Conviction Affirmed In US v. Quintana, No. 09-2749, the court affirmed defendant’s conviction for re-entry by a deported alien following an aggravated felony conviction, holding that 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion, much less commit plain error, in relying on an officer’s affidavit without a hearing; 2) the Border Patrol made a sufficient showing of probable cause to believe that defendant was a deportable alien; and 3) the government did not need to prove that use of the IAFIS/IDENT system was the quickest means of investigation reasonably available to determine whether defendant was in the country illegally....

Morgan Stanley will pay $150 million for cheating teachers and other public employees in California, the state attorney general announced. The payment settles claims that the company concealed high-risk securities it sold to the state’s major retirement funds. According to reports, the risky investments severely undercut the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and the California State Teachers Retirement System. The bank agreed to pay the settlement but did not admit any wrongdoing....

Weeks after a federal appeals court concluded that a wedding videographer’s free speech rights trumped Minnesota’s anti-discrimination law, the Arizona State Supreme Court similarly ruled that a wedding invitation company’s free speech rights trump Phoenix’s anti-discrimination law. Both court decisions open the door for wedding vendors (and perhaps other public accommodations) to refuse service to same-sex couples and LGBT people in general. And, because the Supreme Court side-stepped the issue of LGBT discrimination in last year’s infamous wedding cake discrimination case, both rulings will likely stand, at least for some time....

In an action against a U.S. territory seeking recovery of income tax rebates and accrued interest under the territorial tax code, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where the rebate provisions of the tax code provided the legal basis for plaintiff’s rebate claims and thus the claims did not “arise under federal law” under 28 U.S.C. section 1331. Read Armstrong v. N. Mariana Islands, No. 07-16126 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted November 18, 2008...

When we think of religion and abortion, we tend to focus on religion’s role in the anti-abortion movement. New laws banning abortions 15 weeks after conception go into effect this summer in Arizona and Florida. Oklahoma and Texas now ban abortions after detection of a “fetal heartbeat,” usually about six weeks after conception. Oklahoma is also the first state to pass a “fetal personhood” law giving fertilized eggs the same rights as human beings — five other states are also considering it....

In US v. Salem, No. 08-2378, the Seventh Circuit faced a challenge to defendants’ contention that the district court erred in its relevant conduct findings, in its sentencing of defendants for wire fraud and receiving stolen funds related to a scheme to defraud buyers of various items on the internet. As stated in the decision: “A district court must first determine the scope of the criminal activity the defendant agreed to jointly undertake, and then determine whether the conduct of others was in furtherance of, and reasonably foreseeable to the defendant in connection with, that activity....