Posts

Advocates for free speech and government transparency scored a big win in July with a decision by the Fourth Circuit that the City of Baltimore cannot force victims of police brutality to choose between a settlement and speaking out. The lawsuit dates back all the way to 2012 when Ashley Overbey, then 25 years old, was beaten by police officers responding to a burglary report that Overbey herself called in. Overbey settled her claims against the City of Baltimore for $63,000....

It’s here folks, and it’s exactly as expected: In a joint opinion for Latta v. Otter (from Idaho) and Sevcik v. Sandoval (from Nevada), the Ninth Circuit has struck down Idaho and Nevada’s gay marriage bans, citing its own precedent from the SmithKline gay juror case: Now that we’ve spoiled the non-surprise, let’s get to the meaty preliminary issues of jurisdiction and the effect of a decades-old Supreme Court order which, really, were the only true undecided issues left in this case....

Another of Arizona’s oft-criticized and oft-litigated immigration statutes has been voided by the court, pending any further appeals. The section at issue in this appeal, § 13-2929, deals with transporting, concealing, harboring, or shielding an unauthorized alien from detection and applies to “a person who is in violation of a criminal offense.” Last year, a district court judge enjoined enforcement of the statute, holding that the plaintiffs had established a high probability of success on their claims that the statute was unconstitutionally vague and preempted by federal laws....

In a dispute involving the removal of a class action, district court judgment finding removal improper is reversed where: 1) plaintiff had no reasonable basis to believe that defendant JEVIC was amenable to suit, and thus defendant was a fraudulently joined party and its status as a defendant could not be used to defeat otherwise proper federal jurisdiction; and 2) the court erred in remanding the case to state court as defendant was not properly before the district court since it was never served with legal process....

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action based on actions taken by the employees of the New York City Administration for Children’s Services in connection with an investigation into the death of plaintiff’s infant son, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) the lawyer defendants were fulfilling functions similar to a prosecutor and were thus entitled to absolute immunity; and 2) caseworker defendants essentially functioned much more like investigators than prosecutors, so they were not entitled to absolute immunity, but they were nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity....

US v. Davis, No. 08-3240, concerned the government’s motion for summary affirmance of a defendant’s child pornography possession sentence before the appeal of the sentence had been fully briefed. The court of appeals affirmed, on the ground that the appeal rested on neither fanciful allegations of fact nor inarguable assertions of law. N.Y. Marine & Gen. Ins. Co. v. Lafarge N. Am., Inc., No. 08-5504, involved an action by a barge operator against an insurer for defense costs associated with Hurricane Katrina-related damages....

Robert Sills - who we’ll call by his drug-runner street name, “Fat Cat” - appealed his conviction for conspiracy to distribute five kilograms of more of cocaine based on insufficient evidence and prosecutorial misconduct. Here’s why Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against him. Fat Cat was charged with being a member of the “Black Mafia Family,” a nationwide drug conspiracy headquartered in Detroit. Four co-defendants turned against Fat Cat, and testified that they had driven vehicles with secret compartments filled with cocaine to St....

Hours after the college football season kicked off last weekend, former Penn State team physician Dr. Scott Lynch kicked off litigation with the school and head football coach James Franklin. Lynch, who was relieved of his duties in February, claims he was removed from two positions he held on the athletic department’s medical staff “as a result of [his] good faith reporting of Franklin’s attempts to influence and interfere with [his] medical management and return-to-play decisions related to student-athletes....

Clayton Act Action Concerning Merger In Ginsburg v. InBev NV/SA, No. 09-2990, an action by beer consumers suing to enjoin the now-consummated acquisition of Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc. by InBev NV/SA on the ground that the transaction violated Section 7 of the Clayton Act, the court affirmed judgment on the pleadings for defendant where any antitrust injury plaintiffs could prove would be both speculative and localized, and the hardship and competitive disadvantage resulting from forced divestiture would be both dramatic and certain....

In a First Amendment challenge to a city’s adult business zoning ordinances, the District Court’s order granting partial summary judgment to both parties is affirmed in part, where the ordinances were content-neutral and facially constitutional; but reversed in part, where, once the ordinances were declared unconstitutional as applied to Plaintiff, Plaintiff became entitled to use its property for any lawful purpose. Read H.D.V.-Greektown, LLC v. Detroit, No. 08-1329. ARGUED: Bradley J....

With voters standing close to each other in line and polling workers handling thousands of ballots, in-person voting can be a potential recipe for community transmission of COVID-19. Thus, states are taking different measures to ensure Americans can safely cast a vote during the pandemic. By now, most states have either allowed absentee voting or postponed their primaries. What Is Absentee Voting? If you are voting absentee, that means you can vote early or by mail....

Pop star Katy Perry has been trying to buy a convent in Los Angeles, but the five nuns who live there opposed the sale. Meanwhile, the local archdiocese says they decide who buys. Now a judge has sided with church officials and Perry seems primed to buy the property. According to a CNN report with a remarkable number of the star’s song titles, LA Superior Court Judge Stephanie Bowick threw out a prior sale by the nuns....

The U.S. Supreme Court will have one fewer case to argue this term, following the release of a Louisiana inmate who’s been in prison for almost 30 years. In 1985, George Toca was convicted of the murder of his best friend during an armed robbery gone wrong. At the time of the murder, which occurred a year earlier, Toca was 17. He was sentenced to life without parole. Toca’s question was whether Miller v....

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals had an interesting week. Or rather, they had a very interesting copyright lawsuit. See if you can wrap your legal minds around the following scenario: A photographer does a photo shoot of two local radio hosts, Craig Carton and Ray Rossi. In this photo, the radio hosts are wearing nothing. That’s right – buck naked, in the buff, in their birthday suits – call it what you will, but it’s really nothing more than a bit of spice to the case, since the nudity wasn’t the issue....

Another year, another child abduction case in the Supreme Court. This time, the issue is equitable tolling, or to put it in non-legal terms, whether a parent should benefit by hiding a kid away for more than the one-year period for presumptive return of the child. Diana Montoya Alvarez absconded with her child, first to a battered women’s shelter (there was a non-dispositive and disputed issue of abuse), then to France, then to the United States....

In a normal year, the Supreme Court’s review of the Arizona immigration law – S.B. 1070 – might have been the case to watch. This year, however, has been anything but normal. In March, the Supreme Court heard six hours of oral arguments on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. The two attorneys responsible for most of the arguments in the healthcare debate were Paul Clement and Donald Verrilli. The pair will meet again on First Street this Wednesday in the second-biggest case of the year: the Arizona immigration law appeal....

Everyone knows you shouldn’t drink and drive, or more generally, drive while impaired. Yet DUI and DWI are relatively common offenses, the types of crimes committed at all levels of society. For this reason, it is a good idea to know a few things about handling a charge in advance of it happening. Of course, no one plans to get pulled over for DUI or charged with a crime, but why not be prepared for the worst just in case?...

US v. Cook, No. 08-2297, involved a prosecution for various offenses arising out of a prison murder. The Tenth Circuit reversed the grant of defendant’s motion suppressing his statement to a jailhouse informant, holding that defendant was completely unaware that he was in the presence of a government agent when he made the suppressed statement and Miranda and its progeny were directed at the prevention of pressure and coercion in custodial interrogation settings, and thus the fears motivating exclusion of confessions that were the product of such custodial interrogation settings were not present....

The 9th Circuit clarified the law for misdemeanants seeking Habeas Review this Wednesday. The court en banc overruled its own 1995 decision, Larche v. Simons, requiring misdmeanants in California to exhaust all available state remedies before seeking Federal Habeus review by filing a petition in California’s highest court. The circuit found that Larche created “needless confusion for California misdeamants seeking federal habeas review,” particularly in wake of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA)....

You may not realize it, but the catalytic converter under your vehicle contains metals that have become more valuable than gold. While you may not be aware of that fact, thieves definitely are. And due to the perverse rules of supply and criminal demand, thefts of these devices are skyrocketing. Your vehicle’s catalytic converter is the shiny, oval-shaped object between the engine and the muffler. Its purpose, as required by the U....