Posts

Defendant’s sentence for escaping from federal prison affirmed US v. Holcomb, 08-6520, concerned a challenge to the district court’s imposition of a 10-month sentence upon a defendant convicted for escaping from a federal prison camp. In affirming the sentence, the court held that the district court’s decision was well reasoned and sufficiently detailed to easily pass muster as procedurally reasonable. The court also held that defendant’s sentence was substantively reasonable as the district court properly calculated the applicable guidelines range and discussed the relevant section 3553(a) factors, evaluated the nature and circumstances of the offense and the need for the sentence imposed, in determining that a below-guidelines sentence would best differentiate between this case and other more serious escapes....

In a petition for review of an order removing petitioner from the U.S., the petition is denied where petitioner’s felony conviction for receipt of stolen property under California Penal Code section 496(a) categorically constituted an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act. Read Verdugo-Gonzalez v. Holder, No. 06-73733 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted July 17, 2009 Filed September 14, 2009 Judges Opinion by Judge Clifton Counsel For Petitioner: Kristine L....

Over the weekend, Zoom Video Communications agreed to pay $85 million and increase its security measures to settle a proposed class-action lawsuit—although Zoom still denies any wrongdoing. It’s no surprise that Zoom saw a huge increase in business during the pandemic—more than four times as much—but that spike didn’t come without some growing pains. The company scrambled to patch up security issues following an inquiry by the New York Attorney General and faced public scrutiny when it revealed that its end-to-end encryption didn’t live up to the name....

Arguably, it was a simple reporting mistake. But that simple mistake could cost legal tabloid-blog Above The Law as much as $50 million. Meanith Huon, 44, is a Chicago attorney. He was once accused of and charged with rape. A jury, however, made short work of the charges and acquitted him. An ATL blogger, while the case was pending, mistook past news reports about the same incident as prior accusations of rape, falsely branding Huon as a serial rapist with a few careless keystrokes....

In an action under 26 U.S.C. section 7431(a) claiming that the IRS disclosed false tax information regarding plaintiffs in violation of 26 U.S.C. section 6103(a), summary judgment for defendants is vacated where section 7431(d)’s statute of limitations is jurisdictional, and the district court therefore needed to determine whether the claim was timely filed. Read Aloe Vera of Am., Inc. v. US, No. 07-15577 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted October 24, 2008...

Federal courts do not have jurisdiction to hear lawsuits from fired civil servants who want to challenge the constitutionality of their firing. The Supreme Court announced Monday in a 6-3 opinion that the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) precludes district court jurisdiction over civil servants’ claims that they were fired for failing to sign up for the draft. The court reasoned that it is fairly discernible that Congress intended the CSRA’s review scheme to provide the exclusive avenue to judicial review for covered employees challenging adverse employment actions, reports The Associated Press....

A federal appeals court ruled that Michigan may suspend driver’s licenses for people who don’t pay fines – even if they cannot afford to pay. In Fowler v. Benson, the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals said the state has a legitimate interest in suspending licenses to get people to pay their fines. Over the objections of the plaintiffs and legal aid groups, the appeals court said the state did not violate anybody’s constitutional rights to due process and equal protection....

While millions of Americans are filing for unemployment, and millions more are getting used to working from home, others find themselves having to show up to work each day at their “essential” workplaces. But essential doesn’t necessarily safe. A Smithfield pork processing plant in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, is responsible for more than 700 COVID-19 infections among employees and their family members. Across the country, more than 40 grocery store workers have died from COVID-19, and countless others have been infected....

How easy is it to appeal the admissibility of evidence gathered from wiretaps? The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals might be addressing this question in the Galleon insider trading case say the attorneys for Galleon founder, Raj Rajaratnam. According to Reuters, however, many legal pundits and experts are saying that Rajaratnam faces an uphill battle in bringing the issue before the 2nd Circuit. Rajaratnam was recently convicted on 14 courts of securities fraud and conspiracy by a federal jury....

Just a Wisconsin is known for cheese, Illinois is known for shady politicians, Indiana is known for the 500, and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals’ feeder courts are known as breeding grounds for class action lawsuits. Some of those claims make the class certification cut. Others fail. But even when one federal judge closes a class certification door, a different judge might open a certification window. This week, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that comity between federal district judges’ rulings on class certification rulings is not preclusive....

US v. Lujan, No. 09-2046, involved the U.S.’s appeal, in a capital murder matter, of the district court’s order excluding evidence that defendant had been responsible for prior murders. The court of appeals reversed on the grounds that 1) the federal government sought to introduce evidence that defendant committed the prior murders only for the purpose of proving a non-statutory aggravating factor for sentencing for the murder presently at issue; 2) the district court abused its discretion in concluding that, in this case, any evidence of the double homicide posed such a great risk of unfair prejudice that it outweighed its high probative value; and 3) the district court could limit any prejudice with an instruction to the jury....

Letting anyone sign your name to anything without at least a cursory review is inviting trouble. Just ask the semi-retired lawyer who’s now facing a 90-day suspension for a secretary at his firm basically using his name on boilerplate forms, without his review, in social security administration cases. And while the bulk of the practice consisted of submitting form pleadings to the court without much care or attention, in one of those case, the court found the legal work so deficient it ordered the attorney to personally deliver a copy of the court’s order to the client and instruct the client to carefully read the order....

The percentage of equity partners shrank at America’s big law firms last year. But that’s only half the story. At the same time, the average revenue per lawyer increased. That might be more significant, especially to those associates who will never share in the profits. The decrease in equity partners has been declining steadily. On the other side of the coin, per-lawyer revenue last year saw the biggest bump in almost a decade....

The lawsuit at the root of this appeal alleged that a host of defendants – including the former Prime Minister of Singapore, the Governor of Wisconsin, and tenants in the plaintiff’s apartment building – conspired to ruin Plaintiff Khor Chin Lim’s life. Shockingly, the district court dismissed the complaint as “fantastical.” Lim had 30 days to appeal the judgment to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Since he took almost 90 days to appeal, he filed a motion to reopen the appeals period under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure (FRAP) 4(a)(6)....

In US v. Hatchett, No. 10-1062, the court affirmed defendant’s wire fraud sentence where the district court did not err in finding that the testimony at sentencing, bank records, and defendant’s admissions were sufficient to establish the number of victims by a preponderance of the evidence. In Newberry v. Burlington Basket Co., No. 09-3082, an action alleging that defendant violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Iowa Civil Rights Act (ICRA) by terminating plaintiff’s employment because of her age, the court affirmed judgment for plaintiff where 1) the jury’s award of damages was supported by the finding of liability under the ICRA, and the incorrect statement of the law under the ADEA did not prejudice defendant; and 2) the district court expressly considered the factors relevant to determining a reasonable fee award under Iowa law, and made findings of fact regarding those factors....

Ben & Jerry’s has long been known for its playful ice cream flavor names. Names like Cherry Garcia, Phish Food and Late Night Snack all pay homage to pop culture (Jerry Garcia, the band Phish, and Jimmy Fallon, respectively). They’ve even had some racy names like Karamel Sutra, and who can forget Schweddy Balls? But, when the tables were turned on Ben & Jerry’s, they didn’t like it one bit....

In an action for slander of title regarding statements made by defendant about its alleged ownership of certain software copyrights, summary judgment for defendant is reversed where: 1) the parties’ agreement satisfied the Copyright Act’s writing requirement; and 2) the admissible evidence concerning the ambiguous contract language regarding copyright ownership was not so one-sided as to warrant summary judgment. Read SCO Group, Inc. v. Novell, Inc., No. 08-4217 Appellate Information...

An inmate on death row asked the state of Texas if his pastor could touch him and audibly pray for him during his execution by legal injection, but his request was denied. He chose to sue. The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court, who decided in Ramirez v. Collier on March 24 of this year that the inmate would likely prevail on the merits of his religious rights claims. SCOTUS sent the case back to the lower courts to decide on a suitable accommodation for the inmate’s religious rights....

The use of nationwide preliminary injunctions has been on the rise in recent decades. A preliminary injunction is a court order that prohibits one party in a lawsuit from taking a certain action or the government from enforcing a particular rule or law. Unlike, say, a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction can last for the entirety of the litigation. In the case of lawsuits against the federal government, a nationwide injunction applies to all states, regardless of whether a state is party to the lawsuit....

Stayart v. Yahoo! Inc., 09-3379, concerned a challenge to the district court’s dismissal of the complaint on the ground that plaintiff lacked standing under the Lanham Act to sue for trademark infringement, in plaintiff’s suit against Yahoo! and others for trademark infringement and various other state law claims, claiming that search results that appear with her name improperly gave her endorsement to pornography and online pharmaceuticals. In affirming the dismissal, the court held that plaintiff does not have standing under the Lanham Act to bring suit because she does not have a commercial interest in her name....