Posts

Disgraced politician Vincent Fumo returned to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in December to challenge court-ordered restitution in his fraud case, and may end up paying even more restitution. Maybe that challenge wasn’t such a good idea? A unanimous jury convicted Fumo in 2009 of conspiracy, fraud, obstruction of justice, and tax violations for using state employees and consultants for political and personal purposes. In the process, Fumo defrauded the state and two non-profit groups of $3....

Judd v. Libertarian Party of Virginia (1 Amicus) Woollard v. Gallagher (6 Amici) (Set for Oct. 11 Conference) Lane v. Holder (2 Amici) (Oct. 11 Conference) Abramski v. United States (2 Amici) (Oct. 11 Conference) Related Resources: Does Maryland’s ‘May Issue’ Concealed Carry Law Violate 2nd Amendment? (FindLaw’s Fourth Circuit Blog) Woollard Decision: Court Jumped the Gun in Concealed Carry Case? (FindLaw’s Fourth Circuit Blog) Antique Firearms, Black Powder Ammo in Felon-in-Possession Case (FindLaw’s Fourth Circuit Blog) MORE COVERAGE: Ineffective Assistance in a Plea: Lafler Redux?...

Conviction and sentence for drug crimes and firearms possession is affirmed where the court properly denied plaintiff’s motion under 28 U.S.C. sec. 2255 as plaintiff’s claim that newly discovered evidence would have triggered the exclusionary rule if presented earlier is barred by Stone v. Powell’s limitation on the exclusionary rule in collateral attacks. Read Brock v. US, No. 07-3504 Appellate InformationAppeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division....

In a dispute involving disability insurance benefits, district court judgment dismissing plaintiff’s ERISA claim is affirmed where the court was correct to enforce the limitations period of the benefits plan in its entirety, including its prescribed start date, and to dismiss plaintiff’s claim as time-barred as it was brought after the expiration of the limitations period. Read Burke v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Long Term Disability Plan, No. 08-1611 Appellate InformationAppeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York....

The upcoming return to school is the latest hot topic in the COVID-19 news cycle. Parents — many tired of distance learning yet worried about the pandemic — want clarity. But can parents keep their children home if their schools choose to return to in-person learning and they are uncomfortable with it? The coronavirus is a new phenomenon, and not one anticipated by our laws, but there are still several options for parents who are looking for alternatives to in-person schooling this fall....

Wednesday’s Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals en banc hearing did not go well for America’s Toughest Sheriff, Joe Arpaio. Though a three-judge panel dismissed a First Amendment retaliation lawsuit against the Maricopa County sheriff and his cohorts in June based on qualified immunity, the full court seemed to question Arpaio’s defense that he should be entitled to immunity because he wasn’t directly involved in the arrests at issue in the case....

It’s one thing for a politician to engage in a little embellishing. But it’s another thing altogether for them to fabricate their entire resume. Long Islanders elected New York Republican George Santos to represent New York’s 3rd Congressional District in the 118th United States Congress. At least, they thought they did. The person who has been seated as a member of the House of Representatives bears virtually no resemblance to the man Santos portrayed himself to be....

In a petition for review of the BIA’s dismissal of petitioner’s appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of his motion to reopen an in absentia removal order, the petition is granted where the BIA failed to serve petitioner’s counsel of record with a hearing notice. Read Hamazaspyan v. Holder, No. 05-72267 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted June 9, 2009 Filed December 21, 2009 Judges Opinion by Judge Bea Counsel For Petitioner:...

You might recall that the Supreme Court decided a little case called U.S. v. Jones back in January. The issue in the case was whether warrantless GPS tracking constituted an unreasonable search. Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, concluded that physical trespass upon the vehicle in question — police attached a GPS tracker to the undercarriage of the car to track the suspect — triggered the unreasonable search. The problem that — oh, everyone — pointed out at the time is that GPS tracking is far more likely to occur without placing a tracker on a car these days, and the majority neglected to address whether warrantless GPS tracking in general was an unreasonable search....

A condo dweller in Ybor City, Florida, has had enough of his noisy and destructive neighbors who think they rule the roost. Why, he wants to know, are they free to wander around, damaging property and relieving themselves wherever they want? Why are they free to wake everyone up at 4 a.m. with their noise? This might sound like a common occurrence anywhere. But in Ybor City, the situation is a wee bit different....

District Court order authorizing the sale of substantially all of Chrysler LLC’s assets to New CarCo Acquisition LLC is affirmed where: 1) the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in approving the sale as the sale did not constitute an impermissible sub rosa plan and prevented further, unnecessary losses; 2) the court properly held that although the plaintiffs did not consent to the sale order’s release of all liens on Chrysler’s assets, consent was validly provided by the collateral trustee, who had authority to act on behalf of all first-lien credit holders; 3) the plaintiffs lack standing to raise the issue of whether the Secretary of the Treasury exceeded his statutory authority by using TARP money to finance the sale of Chrysler’s assets as they cannot demonstrate that they have suffered an injury in fact; and 4) arguments advanced by present and future tort claimants against the portion of the sale order extinguishing all existing and future claims against New Chrysler are rejected....

Pleading “no contest” to a criminal charge means you do not admit fault or try to fight for your innocence. You are not saying you are guilty, but you are also not saying you are innocent. This is a “neutral” option that neither accepts or denies the charges. “No contest” is similar to pleading guilty and you can still face punishment, but legally speaking, it means you’re conceding to the charge without admitting guilt and without presenting a defense....

Judge Barbara Crabb is the kind to say, ‘I told you so.’ In 2013, she said a tax break for clergy housing was unconstitutional. Four years and one appeal later, she said it again. In a 47-page decision designed to withstand another appeal, the federal judge basically said, “Didn’t you hear me the first time?” Parson’s Allowance Under 26 U.S.C. Section 107(2), clergy may exclude from their income compensation they receive for rental payments, utilities and other housing-related expenses....

In a breach of contract action concerning an Independent Retail Brokerage Service Agreement, the District Court’s order remanding the action to state court is affirmed, as Plaintiffs’ motion to remand was based on a forum selection clause and thus was not subject to the thirty-day requirement of 28 U.S.C. section 1447(c). Read the full decision in Kamm v. ITEX Corporation, No. 07-35079. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon....

It was the largest civil class action lawsuit ever, until the Supreme Court cut it down. Now, the gender bias suit against Walmart has returned, short a million and a half class members or so. The Sixth Circuit revived a gender bias class action against the world’s largest private employer. The class action was filed on behalf of all female employees in Walmart’s Region 43, centered in Tennessee but reaching to Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, and Mississippi....

An Indian casino driver cannot claim tribal immunity from suit after he crashed into a car on an interstate highway, the nation’s highest court ruled. The U.S. Supreme Court said that William Clarke was sued in his personal capacity – not an official capacity – and so he could not escape responsibility as a driver for the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority. The plaintiffs Brian and Michelle Lewis claimed Clarke, and not the tribe, caused their injuries....

When Alva and Sandra Butler purchased a restaurant in Angola, Indiana, they had big plans to convert the venue into a nude dancing bar. Curiously, within days of buying the place, the city amended its zoning laws such that nude dancing would violate use restrictions… Rather than alleging any taking by the government, the couple opted to raise a First Amendment violation and various other violations under Indiana law. After having their first petition for injunction denied, the Circuit seems to have taken a “hands off” approach....

New York Governor David Paterson recently announced his plans to withhold $750 million worth of aid to New York public schools, local governments and health insurers already promised, planned and budgeted for by those institutions. This action comes due to a failure of the legislature to cut state spending as much as the Governor would have liked. To ease the state’s cash shortage, Paterson will keep the school funds in the state’s pocket, for now....

Despite the horrible events that happened to Plaintiff Misti Lee Schneider, the proof still was not enough to sustain a § 1983 action. The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants earlier this month and said just that. Schneider fought to allege a § 1983 violation of her substantive due process rights on a few counts – the relevant one being that the GJPD were deliberately indifferent to the risk that the rape would occur....

In an employment sex discrimination and retaliation case, summary judgment in favor of defendants is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff failed to demonstrate actual employment action as she was merely on leave and not terminated; 2) plaintiff’s hostile work environment claim failed on alternative theory of constructive discharge as there was insufficient evidence showing that working conditions were so intolerable that she had to quit; 3) defendant was entitled to raise its affirmative defense that it exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct the problem, and defendant demonstrated that plaintiff failed to take advantage of the complaint procedure policy; and 4) plaintiff failed to prove retaliation claim by either the direct method of proof or the indirect method and she cannot make out a prima facie case of retaliation as she suffered no adverse employment action....