Posts

In a petition for review of a civil monetary penalty imposed by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services on petitioner nursing home for an “immediate jeopardy” violation of 42 C.F.R. section 483.13(c), which required nursing homes to thoroughly investigate all allegations of resident neglect or abuse, including injuries of unknown sources, the petition is granted where the Secretary’s finding of the likely harm necessary to warrant an immediate-jeopardy-level finding was based on pure speculation and not supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record as a whole....

In this private class action against Kid Brands, Inc, and its officers, a private shareholder’s pleading requirements are examined, and clarified. Kid Brands is the parent company of four subsidiaries, all in the business of importing low cost baby furniture and products from China, for resale to the public in the U.S. In December 2010, Kid Brands was informed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection that its import practices and procedures would be investigated in a “Focused Assessment....

What makes an office an “office” has been changing recently. Workplaces are more open, inviting, and include rest areas, games, and even slides. Businesses seem to want to make themselves fun places to hang out. But when does attracting customers become an attractive nuisance? Here’s what small biz owners need to know. Fatal Attraction “Attractive nuisance” generally refers to an aspect of private property that might catch the attention of children, but could be dangerous....

Grant of habeas relief from a conviction for criminal sexual conduct with an 11 year old girl is affirmed as: 1) there was no serious dispute that a violation of the Confrontation Clause occurred via an officer’s testimony regarding a prior complainant; and 2) the officer’s testimony had a substantial and injurious effect or influence on the jury’s verdict under the Brecht v. Abrahamson test for harmless error. Read Jensen v....

If attorneys John Bush and Damien Schiff were running for office, they might have been well-suited to serve in the Republican-controlled Congress. Bush has made politically polarizing comments about issues such same sex-marriage, abortion, and women’s rights. Schiff has publicly disparaged gays and even said states should be allowed to criminalize consensual sodomy. But Bush and Schiff are in the running for judicial appointments. President Trump likes them for the federal courts; LGBT rights groups, not so much....

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals knows a miscarriage of criminal justice when it sees one, but that doesn’t mean that it will entertain civil litigation to right the wrong. Last week, the Sixth Circuit affirmed a district court decision dismissing a lawsuit filed by a man who was held for 17 years without a trial after a state appellate court overturned his first conviction, reports The Chattanoogan. According to the judge who presided over Heyerman’s criminal trial, the procedure in place in his court in 1989 was to notify the parties and schedule a status conference when a case was remanded from the court of appeals....

The Sixth Circuit’s Judge Damon J. Keith has served on the bench since 1967, and on the Sixth Circuit for four decades, but the 94-year-old jurist isn’t exactly a household name. That may be changing soon, though. A new documentary, “Walk With Me: The Trials of Damon J. Keith” seeks to introduce Judge Keith to a wider audience, while exploring his work as a judge and a civil rights leader....

In a peculiar twist of events, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled in favor Uber, Lyft and other rideshare services’ challenge to a Seattle law that would allow the drivers to unionize. In short, the appellate court found merit to the challengers’ argument that allowing the unionization could violate the Sherman Antitrust Act. The case made its way up to the Ninth Circuit after the federal district court in Seattle dismissed the challenge....

The Garden State is a special kind of place. This week the rest of the country learned that New Jersey law says that injuries caused by a co-worker’s prank are covered under the state’s workers’ compensation plan. So, if a bang snap placed under a toilet seat by one of your co-workers blows up and causes second-degree burns to your scrotum and a contusion to your left testicle, don’t come to the courts for relief....

The facts of Fisher v. University of Texas are simple. Caucasian girl applied to the University of Texas at Austin, didn’t get in, and blamed the university’s affirmative action policies because others, who may have been less qualified, but were ethnically diverse, were admitted under the university’s two-stage admissions system. UT’s unique admissions plan consists of two groups of students. The first is the “ten-percent.” Everyone who graduates in the top ten percent of their Texas high school class is guaranteed admission, regardless of the quality or location of the school....

Things aren’t looking too good for public sector unions after oral arguments in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association. The case involves ten California teachers who aren’t members of the public school teachers’ union. While those teachers benefit from the higher wages and better conditions bargained for by the union, they object to the California law which requires them to pay “fair share” fees to the teachers’ union to cover the cost of collective bargaining, arguing that the fees violate their First Amendment rights....

Some Oregonians and northern Californians are so proud of their “rural values” that they want to leave their politically liberal states. And they intend to do it while staying put. Come again? How do you exit your state without physically leaving? Simple. By getting your neighboring state to shift its borders to take you in. In this case, that would be Idaho, a state with a political bent more to the liking of many rural people in Oregon and northern California who are not happy about the liberal Democratic leanings in their own states....

Chief Justice John Roberts announced on Facebook this morning that the Supreme Court has shifted its position on cameras in the Court. “In light of the overwhelming response to the same-day audio recordings in the same-sex marriage cases last week, we are moving forward with a new plan to introduce the Court into multimedia platforms including television and social media,” the Chief Justice wrote in a post that has already received over six million “likes....

We read a lot of appellate search and seizure challenges, but rarely do we find those appeals accompanied by photographs. This case was a rare exception. Kansas Highway Patrol Trooper Josiah Trinkle saw a pickup truck driving on the interstate with its license plate hanging on one side. Kansas law requires that a vehicle’s license plate “shall at all times be securely fastened to the vehicle … to prevent the plate from swinging,” so Trooper Trinkle tailed the truck....

In defendant-juvenile’s appeal from a proceeding in which he was found to be a juvenile delinquent, the order is affirmed in part where: 1) the U.S. Attorney may certify to the absence of state court jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. section 5032 if he learns that the appropriate state prosecutor has decided not to prosecute a particular juvenile for the specific crime at issue; and 2) there was no violation of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act’s speedy trial provision because defendant caused the delay in the start of his trial by lying about his age....

Defendant’s conviction for aggravated sexual abuse of a child is affirmed where: 1) the district court was not required to make a finding on the record as to each of the Fed. R. Evid. 807 requirements and the Thunder Horse factors as long as the record demonstrated that the district court considered the relevant factors; 2) because defendant did not show that playing the entire DVD recording of the forensic interview with the victim had a substantial influence on the jury’s verdict, any error in admitting it was harmless; and 3) a witness was qualified to give her lay opinion based on her personal knowledge and perception of the victim and her experience performing forensic interviews of allegedly abused children....

Conviction for drug crimes is affirmed where the district court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress as there is no basis to reassess the credibility of the sole witness, and there was nothing in the record that compelled a conclusion that the government acted illegally in identifying a co-defendant’s telephone number. Read US v. Terry, No. 08-3411 Appellate InformationAppeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin....

Defendant’s drug and firearm possession convictions are affirmed where: 1) the district court properly determined whether defendant lacked the mental capacity to conduct trial proceedings; and 2) the district court’s decision to deny defendant’s request for a continuance was more than fair and reasonable. Read US v. Thompson, No. 07-50351 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted November 3, 2009 Filed December 3, 2009 Judges Opinion by Judge Smith Counsel For Appellant:...

Denial of motion to suppress in conviction of defendant for drug possession affirmed US v. Williams, 10-1608, concerned a challenge to the district court’s denial of a defendant’s motion to suppress, in a prosecution of the defendant for possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of a substance containing cocaine and sentenced to 60 months’ imprisonment. In affirming, the court held that the DEA task force had enough information to support a finding of probable cause to search the vehicle and that information can be imputed to the officers who conducted the stop and search under the collective knowledge doctrine....

In a consolidated appeal of a denial of three defendants’ motions to modify their sentences pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 3582(c)(2), denial of the motions is affirmed where: 1) defendants did not give up their right to appeal the denial of the motions as section 3582(c)(2) motions do not fall within the appeal waiver’s scope; and 2) the district court did not err in finding the defendants ineligible for a reduction where the court did not make findings inconsistent with those of the original sentencing court and it did not abuse its discretion in light of the large quantity of drugs involved and in finding that the defendants were responsible for more than 4....