Posts

In a trademark infringement and state tort action by celebrity Paris Hilton against the greeting card company Hallmark for using her image and catchphrase in a birthday card without her permission, a denial of defendant’s motion to strike under California’s anti-SLAPP statute is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff had some probability of prevailing on the merits before a trier of fact on the issue of whether defendant’s use of her image was transformative; and 2) defendant could not employ the public interest defense because its birthday card did not publish or report information....

There is a lot of confusing information about rights in this country. It is difficult for Americans to know their rights or to respond appropriately when stopped by authorities. This is all the more true for immigrants, who are less likely to speak English as a first language or to understand how to interact with law enforcement. But it is extremely important to know your rights, as well as your responsibilities....

A federal judge ordered a halt to drilling for oil and gas on more than 300,000 acres because the government did not properly consider the impact on climate change. Judge Rudolph Contreras said the Bureau of Land Management failed to take a “hard look” at greenhouse emissions for 303,000 acres in Wyoming. He enjoined further drilling until the government can account for the environmental impact. The decision is a blow to the Trump administration’s pro-drilling policy, but it is not likely to stop the drilling for long....

In a securities fraud action alleging that defendant executives and auditor defrauded plaintiffs by inducing them to invest in a company through misrepresentations and false statements about its financial condition, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where plaintiffs failed to allege how two statements by the auditor, as compared to the complaint’s long list of alleged misrepresentations and omissions by the executives, proximately caused the investors’ losses. Read McAdams v. McCord, No....

In a Federal Land and Policy Management Act challenge to the exchange of certain private lands for several parcels of land surrounding a mine site and owned by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), summary judgment for plaintiffs is affirmed in part where: 1) the BLM should have taken the reasonably probable use of public lands for a landfill into consideration as part of the highest and best use analysis; and 2) as a result of its unreasonably narrow purpose and need statement, the BLM necessarily considered an unreasonably narrow range of alternatives....

Sidewalk lemonade stands are as common a sight in summer as Little League baseball games, barbecues, and children running through sprinklers. But every year we read about someone, somewhere, who had to ruin the fun for some children who wanted to make a quick buck without nagging their parents. After one such spin through the outrage cycle, a state representative in Texas decided to do something about it, drafting a bill that prevents local governments in the Lone Star State from prohibiting children from selling lemonade on private property....

In plaintiff’s constitutional challenge to defendant-city’s junk-dealer ordinance requiring him to comply with certain building and safety-code provisions and to fence his outdoor auto storage from the view of his surrounding residential neighbors, summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed as plaintiff has not shown that the city has treated him differently than other similarly situated businesses. Read Reget v. City of La Crosse, No. 06-1621 Appellate Information Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin...

In an Administrative Procedure Act (APA) challenge to a National Park Service river management plan, the circuit court adopts the district court’s opinion and summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where the APA does not allow the court to overturn an agency decision because it disagrees with the decision or with the agency’s conclusions about environmental impacts. Read River Runners for Wilderness v. Martin, No. 08-15112 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted June 10, 2009...

In an ERISA action seeking retroactive pension and savings benefits allegedly owed to plaintiff under two of defendants’ employee benefits plans, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where the plan administrator’s denial of plaintiff’s claim for benefits was not arbitrary or capricious because, inter alia, plaintiff was ineligible for benefits under the Plans as an independent contractor. Read Scruggs v. ExxonMobil Pension Plan, No. 08-6145 Appellate Information Filed November 9, 2009...

One wrong word can make a big difference when a debt collector comes calling. No, it’s not a four-letter word. (Debt collectors can be aggressive.) The word is “settlement.” A company broke the law when it offered a settlement on a time-barred debt, a federal appeals court said. In Tatis v. Allied Interstate, the decision revived a class-action lawsuit. Fair Debt Collection Practices The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals said Allied violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by misleading debtors with settlement offers after the statute of limitations for enforcement....

In Shelton v. Kennedy Funding, Inc., No. 09-1670, a breach-of-contract and fraud action arising out of the sale of an Arkansas cemetery and involving the alleged breach of a loan agreement, the court affirmed judgment for plaintiff where 1) the Estoppel Certificate at issue did not fall within the surety prong of the Arkansas Statute of Frauds; 2) a reasonable jury could find the certificate’s terms were sufficiently definite to impose an obligation upon defendant to place $675,000 in an escrow account for plaintiff’s benefit in the event of a default on the loan; and 3) projections of future events or conduct could not support a fraud claim as a matter of law....

Toy Collins says her American Red Cross co-workers discriminated against her and harassed her. She filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 2006. Red Cross employees say that Collins stirred tensions among her co-workers and was paranoid that people were out to get her. The charity fired Collins in 2007. In the she-says, they-say battle surrounding Collins’ unlawful retaliation claim, they win because she failed to demonstrate a causal connection between her complaint and her subsequent termination....

If you’re working on a case headed for oral arguments before the Third Circuit, then a trip to Philadelphia (if you’re not already based there), is in store for you. I spent five years of my life in the City of Brotherly Love – four years as an undergrad, and one year as a judicial clerk – so I thought I’d share some things to do while you’re in Philadelphia....

Everybody needs a little R&R, even our Supreme Court Justices. While the most exciting thing (to us) that has happened to our Justices is their fashioning into comic book heroes (with my favorite justice as my favorite hero), they are actually traveling the country on speaking engagements. Let’s take a look at what the Justices have been up to this summer. Chief Justice Roberts Chief Justice Roberts spoke earlier today at the ABA 2014 Annual Meeting....

When Samantha Bachynski was arrested by Michigan police – after being found in a stolen truck with the dead owner in the back – the 19-year-old initially invoked her Miranda rights, refusing to speak until she had an attorney present. But when it came time to pick a lawyer, she changed her mind, confessing to murder, torture, and other crimes. Bachynski later moved to suppress her confessions, arguing that they were coerced in violation of her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights....

Sentence for being illegally in the United States after having been deported is affirmed where the court did not err in applying a 16-level increase in defendant’s offense level under the Sentencing Guidelines, and is not required to consider the argument that the guideline is invalid and unworthy of application because it was promulgated without adequate deliberation by the Sentencing Commission. Read US v. Aguilar-Huerta, No.08-2505 Appellate InformationAppeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division....

Defendant’s attempted armed robbery conviction is affirmed where the government’s summary of an expert’s proposed testimony stated that she would testify that the latent fingerprint on a job application left at the scene of the crime was defendant’s, as did her own report, and thus the summary substantially complied with Fed. R. Crim. P. 16. Read US v. Brown, No. 09-6079 Appellate Information Filed January 22, 2010 Judges Opinion by Judge Siler...

Defendant’s firearm possession sentence in connection with a murder is affirmed where the district court was not bound at sentencing by the terms of the federal homicide statutes, and a perfect match was not required between defendant’s conduct and the homicide guideline selected as the most analogous. Read US v. Cherry, No. 08-7090 Appellate Information Filed July 13, 2009 Judges Opinion by Judge Hartz Counsel For Appellant: Robert Ridenour, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Office of Federal Public Defender, Eastern District of Oklahoma, Tulsa, OK...

Conviction for firearms possession is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing reference to defendant’s legal name; and 2) the court did not abuse its discretion and violate defendant’s Sixth Amendment rights in allowing the admission of the witness’s out-of-court statement to a police officer. Read US v. Dodds, No. 08-2458 Appellate InformationAppeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin....

Defendant’s conviction for possessing pseudoephedrine knowing it would be used to manufacture methamphetamine is affirmed where: 1) the information in support of the search warrant at issue supported a belief that defendant was engaged in an ongoing criminal enterprise and that evidence of her illegal activities would be found at her residence; and 2) based on the information obtained from a police drive-by, the government informant, and other investigative efforts, the police had sufficient cause to believe that certain chemical odors emanated from the defendant’s house....