Posts

Ready for a three-peat of SCOTUS updates? Remember that big union case out of Florida, the case that could have changed top-down unionization and greatly weakened organized labor’s ability to unionize workplaces through deals with management? Never mind. And in a less exciting case, the Court clarified Younger abstention, reinstating a lawsuit by Sprint against a local telephone provider. Plus, Congress was just added to the oral arguments in Noel Canning, the National Labor Relations Board appointments dispute....

Drug Conviction Affirmed In US v. Crippen, No. 10-1299, the court affirmed defendant’s conviction and sentence for conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine and conspiracy to tamper with a witness where 1) a suspicion on the part of police that a person is involved in a drug transaction supports a reasonable belief that the person may be armed and dangerous because weapons and violence are frequently associated with drug transactions; 2) each of the statements defendant asked the district court to exclude from the recordings at issue merely provided context for other admissible statements made by defendant and his coconspirators and were not offered for their truth; and 3) there were at least two prior felony convictions for career offender purposes because there was an intervening arrest....

In a prosecution of defendant for possession of a firearm by a person with three prior felony convictions and drug related offense, denial of a motion to suppress and the resultant conviction are affirmed as, because police officers had specific, reliable facts indicating that at least one of a taxicab’s occupants had been involved in a shooting just minutes before, the Fourth Amendment’s requirement that a Terry stop be conducted in a reasonable manner was clearly met....

Defendant’s drug and firearm possession convictions and sentence are affirmed where: 1) absent a display of a weapon or some other type of show of authority, defendant voluntarily consented to further questioning by the officer who stopped her vehicle; 2) sufficient evidence supported defendant’s conviction for possessing a firearm in furtherance of her methamphetamine trafficking; and 3) the most natural reading of 18 U.S.C. section 924(c) was that its prefatory clause referred only to a minimum sentence provided by section 924(c) or any other statutory provision that proscribed the conduct set forth in section 924(c)....

Child Pornography Conviction Reversed in Part In US v. Wright, No. 08-10525, the court affirmed in part defendant’s conviction and sentence for the transportation and possession of child pornography, holding that any additional evidence concerning defendant’s alibi would have been merely cumulative. However, the court reversed in part where 1) at the time of defendant’s offense, 18 U.S.C. section 2252A(a)(1) required the government to prove that the child pornography images actually crossed state lines; and 2) the district court needed to make essential factual findings explaining the basis for its decision to deny defendant’s suppression motion....

The Tenth Circuit’s ruling in Peterson v. Martinez that the right to bear arms does not extend to concealed carry places it squarely in conflict with the Seventh Circuit, who released an update to their own concealed carry decision last week as well. It’s all pointing to one thing: Supreme Court Showdown. The Colorado Case Last week, the Tenth Circuit ruled that a Washington man, Gray Peterson, who holds concealed carry permits in three states, did not have his Second Amendment or Privileges and Immunities clause rights violated by Colorado’s refusal to allow him to carry a concealed weapon....

In a contract case involving an exclusive license to commercialize a jointly patented enzyme that can lower cholesterol levels, judgment of the district court is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded where: 1) district court properly granted summary judgment for the plaintiff on a breach-of-contract claim as defendant breached its license agreement by granting a sublicense in the the jointly patented enzyme to a third party without paying plaintiff its share of the sublicense fees; 2) district court should not have voided the plaintiff’s attempt to terminate the agreement as it was entitled to and properly terminated the agreement based on defendant’s breach; and 3) district court erroneously entered judgment for defendant on the issue of plaintiff’s claim to an ownership interest in the compounds as under the web of contracts at issue in the case, the plaintiff was entitled to a declaration of its ownership interest in the compounds....

In addition to the newsworthy speeches from Attorney General Eric Holder and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at this year’s ABA Annual Meeting, there were also a number of fascinating panels on issues of interest to readers of this blog, including one discussion in particular that focused on this past term’s most hyped, and perhaps least felt case: Fisher v. University of Texas. Here’s a brief recap of the case (full recap is here): Abigail Fisher, a white student, sued when she was denied admittance to the University of Texas....

Any entrepreneur or small business owner knows: successful business owners and productive employees often have strong personalities. And if you get too many strong personalities in one office, you’re bound to have some conflict. Sometimes a little creative conflict can be beneficial to your business – driving employees to be their best or challenging old ways of doing things. Other times, internal strife can tear a company apart. So how do you manage your employees’ emotions and conflict in the workplace?...

In Retired Employees’ Assn. v. Cty. of Orange, No. 09-56026, involved an action challenging Orange County’s change to the structure of its health benefits under which the County began to split the pool of active and retired employees for purposes of setting premiums. The Ninth Circuit certified the following question to the Supreme Court of California: Whether, as a matter of California law, a California county and its employees can form an implied contract that confers vested rights to health benefits on retired county employees....

In US v. Wilder, No. 08-3056, the court of appeals affirmed defendants’ drug conspiracy convictions and sentences, on the grounds that 1) the district court did not err in excluding a document as hearsay because a witness was unable to verify that the proffered document was a public record created by the police department; 2) the government established that defendant knowingly and intentionally joined an agreement to distribute controlled substances; 3) the court was not convinced that the trial record presented an obvious case of a defendant with no predisposition to distribute crack cocaine, such that the district court plainly erred by failing to instruct the jury on entrapment; and 4) the district court explained that it had considered all of the 18 U....

It’s not unheard of for people to bend laws to their own uses. The latest attempt of this kind, however, was an unusual effort by an Oakland police officer to prevent publication of videos of him … by playing Taylor Swift’s music while he was being filmed. Officer on Aux Members of the Anti-Police Terror Project, a community organization, were recently protesting the death of Sam Taylor, a Black man killed in an encounter with police, outside an Alameda County courthouse....

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld the dismissal of a claim by Abiodun Oyewole, a founding member of the spoken word/rap group Last Poets, that Biggie Smalls’ “Party and Bullshit” infringed the group’s copyright. The suit also included singer Rita Ora, who had licensed the use of the phrase “party and bullshit” from B.I.G.’s estate for her single “How We Do (Party) in 2012,” as a defendant. The case pits two vastly different musical works - created decades apart - against each other....

A federal appeals court revived a lawsuit that alleges the NFL gave players painkillers to make them play hurt, often causing long-term injuries. In Dent v. National Football League, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a trial court that had dismissed the case. The appeals panel said the NFL had a duty to comply with the law when handing out pain medications. The ruling opens the door to more than 1,000 retired athletes....

Some decisions are easy – even the tough ones. In Doe v. Boyertown Area School District, a federal appeals court upheld a school district’s transgender bathroom policy. It means that high school students may go to bathrooms and locker rooms according to their gender identity. The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals made short work of the decision. The judges summed it up in three paragraphs. “Exceptionally Well Reasoned” Writing for the unanimous court, Judge Theodore McKee said a formal opinion will follow....

In 2003’s Demore v. Kim, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that permanent residents were not entitled to bail when in custody and appealing deportation rulings. The opinion’s logic was based, in part, on the brevity of those detentions. Government statistics, provided to the Supreme Court by the Department of Justice, showed that removal proceedings concluded quickly, that deportation appeals were rare, and that those appeals, too, were resolved with relative speed....

The NYPD was investigating an unrelated matter in Brooklyn when they happened upon John Rivera, a.k.a. Hubert Coleman (“Rivera”). Not wanting to interact with the officers, Rivera took off running, leading the officers to chase him down, search him, and find what would graciously be described as a gun (it was an inoperable pistol frame, sans serial number or cylinder … basically, a lump of metal). The operability of the pistol didn’t seem to matter, however, as the three-time felon pled guilty to a firearm possession charge, with an Armed Career Criminals Act (ACCA) sentencing enhancement....

On Oct. 28, the Federal Trade Commission announced that it is increasing enforcement to protect the public from the use of “dark patterns” by companies on the internet. So, what are dark patterns? If you’re not familiar with the term, there’s a good chance that you’re familiar with their effects. Dark patterns are devices and tricks used in websites and apps to make you do things you didn’t intend, like spend money....

District court’s order imposing sanctions and the order denying defendants’ motion to vacate is affirmed where: 1) the district court’s order of June 13, 2008 which dismissed all claims against all parties with prejudice, rendered final the orders appealed in the Court of Appeals because it ended the litigation on the merits and left nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment; 2) the doctrine of finality and mootness do not deprive this court of jurisdiction over this appeal; 3) although the sanctions are well supported by trial judge’s findings of fact and credibility determinations, September 28, 2007 sanctions are vacated against all appellants because the parties have settled the matter of the attorneys’ fees; and 4) March 30, 2006 Sanction Order is vacated as the trial judge’s ruling that the magistrate judge’s admonishment was a sanction was not a sound exercise of his discretion....

Losing clients can be tough, especially if they die. How far you go after that may depend on your practice. Probate lawyers, of course, do it all the time. A plaintiff’s attorney may continue litigating a wrongful death case for years. But if your client is a witness and dies mid-litigation, you have a duty to inform the court without delay. Some lawyers, however, don’t get that math. One Year = 30 Days In California, one attorney learned his lesson the hard way....