Posts

Two giant tobacco companies, R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris, had a $37 million verdict against them overturned by the Florida Court of Appeals because of inflammatory comments made by the lawyer for plaintiff Richard Mahfuz to the jury at closing arguments. Mahfuz sued the tobacco companies for wrongful death after his wife passed away from lung cancer. The jury awarded actual and punitive damages in almost exactly the amount the plaintiff requested....

The closely watched Masterpiece Cakeshop case may be a far cry from Masterpiece Theater, but all eyes were certainly on Justice Kennedy during the case’s oral argument. Commentators have long expected that Justice Kennedy would be the swing vote deciding the matter. Unfortunately for the commentators, Kennedy did not provide a very clear indication of any potential leanings. In fact, he seemed to swing back and forth during the arguments, appearing to support either side at various times....

This one’s a doozy. Jane Doe met Sammy Hagar in 1983 when she was working as a Playboy bunny at the Playboy Club in Lansing, Michigan. In 1988, Doe told Hagar she was pregnant and he was the father, which he denied, but signed an agreement with Doe, anyway. The child was born, but died shortly afterward. In a 2011 autobiography, Hagar said that the paternity claim was just an attempt to extort money out of him and he doubts there ever was a baby at all....

If you are a practicing attorney in California, you’ve seen what the budget apocalypse has done to the state courts. Some courthouses have closed in the name of “consolidation,” case numbers no longer match the courts, and lawyers and clients are driving all over Los Angeles before finding the correct venue. Judge Margaret McKeown is going to have her work cut out for her. The press release also noted that the appellate court judge is going to take over the post as president of the Federal Judges Association....

In a dispute over damages and attorney’s fees stemming from a Religious Freedom Restoration Act and tort action, district court judgment is vacated where that the district court assessment of the evidence was based on an improper interpretation of the interrogatories and verdict sheet and thus the court erred in attributing a portion of plaintiff’s tort award to her RFRA claim. On remand, the Hensley standard should guide the district court’s consideration of pendent state claims in a litigation where a plaintiff has prevailed on a fee-eligible federal claim....

Abdulhaseeb v. Calbone, No. 08-6092, concerned an action under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), and 42 U.S.C. section 1983, setting forth claims concerning plaintiff’s conditions of incarceration. The court of appeals affirmed summary judgment for defendants in part, on the ground that the prison administrative process was not inadequate and thus plaintiff failed to exhaust certain claims. However, the court vacated in part, holding that 1) plaintiff remained incarcerated in the Oklahoma Department of Correction’s (ODOC) custody, subject to ODOC policies, and a judgment in his favor could require ODOC to modify those policies, and thus his claims were not moot; and 2) there was no evidence in this record that plaintiff did not sincerely hold his expressed beliefs that he should eat a halal diet that includes meats, even though other Muslims may find a vegetarian or non-pork diet sufficient to satisfy Islam....

In Alday v. Raytheon Co., No. 08-16984, an action alleging that defendant breached collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) with plaintiffs and violated the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA) and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), the court affirmed summary judgment for plaintiff where 1) the language of the CBAs made clear that defendant’s agreement to pay retiree medical insurance premiums continued beyond the term of the CBAs, even where its agreement to pay non-retired employee premiums did not; 2) defendant’s leeway to amend its benefit plans did not allow it to alter the terms of the CBAs under which it agreed to provide company-paid health insurance to retirees; and 3) plaintiffs failed to allege sufficient facts supporting their claim for punitive and extra-contractual damages....

A class action lawsuit out of Northern District Court of California alleges that inmates in Alameda County jail are suffering from cruel and unusual punishment due to lack of sleep. As if jail wasn’t bad enough already, the complaint alleges that inmates barely get 4 hours on a good night. In short, the inmates claim that the amount of time provided for them to sleep at night is insufficient and is regularly interrupted....

The big day is here. The first federal appellate case post-Windsor made its way through oral arguments this morning, and it was not without its own wave of drama. Even before the arguments began, Utah officials backtracked on authority used in their briefs. Then, in oral arguments, the panel seemed to be deeply divided, with two judges sticking to their predicted ideological lines, and a third serving as the wildcard....

In US v. Erickson, No. 09-1818, the court of appeals affirmed defendant’s convictions for assault with a dangerous weapon and assault resulting in serious bodily injury, holding that 1) any error in admitting an excited utterance was harmless given the overwhelming evidence against defendant; and 2) given the similarities between the offenses and their spacial and temporal proximity to one another, as well as the presumption in favor of the efficiency achieved through joinder, the offenses were properly joined....

Richard Guertin was Corporation Counsel for the City of Middletown, New York (presumably centrally located), in 2004. From 1997 to 2004, Middletown received federal funds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development to “promote the ‘development of viable urban communities.’” As a result of eight questionable loans, Guertin, along with Middletown Mayor Joseph DeStefano and Middletown Community Development Director Neil Novesky, were indicted on charges that the three conspired in an illegal scheme to benefit from loans stemming from federal funds....

Restricting the sale of guns in the United States is a difficult task, thanks to the lobbying power of the National Rifle Association (NRA) and other anti-gun control activists, organizations, and individuals. But a new law in New York and a lawsuit against a Nevada gun manufacturer might finally provide legal grounds to restrict the sale of guns like those used in mass shootings. Ohio Shooting Victims Bring Suit In 2019, a shooting in Dayton, Ohio, left 10 dead, including the perpetrator....

Estate of Smithers v. City of Flint, No. 09-1164, involved a 42 U.S.C. sections 1983 and 1985(2) & (3) suit against a city and two police officers in connection with the fatal shooting of an individual and the injury of two other plaintiffs, by the deceased individual’s girlfriend shortly after being released from custody for trespassing. In rejecting the plaintiffs’ main contention that the officers are liable because they arrested the girlfriend for trespassing rather than for domestic violence, which would have kept her in custody longer, the court affirmed the dismissal of the claims in holding that the district court did not err in granting defendants’ summary judgment on the procedural due process claim....

Yost v. Stout, No. 09-3099, involved a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 challenge to the “endorsement clause” of the Kansas Code of Judicial Conduct that generally prohibited a judge or judicial candidate from publicly endorsing or opposing another candidate for public office. The Tenth Circuit dismissed plaintiff’s appeal from summary judgment for defendants, holding that the notice of appeal was untimely. Little v. Jones, No. 08-7095, concerned an action under 42 U....

In Coppinger-Martin v. Solis, No. 09-73725, an action alleging that Nordstrom, Inc. violated the whistleblower-protection provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, by terminating petitioner’s employment in retaliation for her reporting to supervisors conduct she believed violated the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the court affirmed the Department of Labor’s Administrative Review Board’s order dismissing petitioner’s complaint as untimely filed where petitioner filed her complaint on October 13, 2006, more than 90 days after her final day of work, and equitable tolling did not apply....

In the face of constant ICE raids and incessant immigration arrests, even U.S. citizens are wondering what documentation they need to carry to prove their citizenship and prevent being detained. U.S. passport? Valid state driver’s license? Social Security card? As it turns out, if you look a certain way or have a certain last name, even that may not be enough. Ramon Torres was arrested on suspicion of DUI in Ascension Parish, Louisiana last year....

In a capital habeas matter, the denial of petitioner’s habeas petition is affirmed where: 1) petitioner was not prejudiced by the trial court’s decision to shackle him during the guilt phase of the trial; 2) counsel’s thorough mitigation investigation was more than reasonable; 3) further evidence about petitioner’s childhood and gang activity would have suggested violent propensities at odds with counsel’s goal of portraying petitioner as less culpable; and 4) the proposed additional evidence was mostly cumulative of the information already presented at the penalty phase trial....

Royal & Sun Alliance Ins., PLC v. Ocean World Lines, Inc., No. 08-4324, involved an action based on damage to a printing press shipped pursuant to a bill of lading. The court of appeals affirmed partial summary judgment for defendant on the ground that the Supreme Court previously held that the Carmack Amendment “does not apply to a shipment originating overseas under a single through bill of lading,” in Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd....

Until yesterday, we would have guessed that an ERISA claim stemming from autoerotic death would be a matter of first impression for any federal court. We would have been wrong. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals kicked an ERISA claim stemming from a self-electrocution incident back to an insurer for further review this week in a summary order. The court noted that, while the insurer’s interpretation of the policy’s “intentionally self-inflicted injury” provision had been accepted by other federal courts in autoerotic asphyxiation cases, the insurer in the present case had not properly explained its reasons for denying the plaintiff’s claim....

The Florida Education Association, the state’s largest teacher’s union, filed suit this week to stop the “reckless and unsafe reopening of schools.” Educators from Miami-Dade, Broward, and Orange Counties have joined on as plaintiffs, as well as the NAACP. The lawsuit comes as concerns grow over the surge of COVID-19 cases in the state and a recent emergency order requiring schools to open next month. Teachers Fear Opening Too Fast The order issued earlier this month by Florida Education Commissioner Richard Corcoran requires that all school districts “must open brick and mortar schools at least five days a week for all students....