Posts

In the recently released opinion, Bucklew v. Precythe, a five to four majority held that a death row inmate could be put to death with a lethal injection despite the fact that medical experts testified that he was likely to die choking on his own blood, in excruciating pain, for several minutes. Five Supreme Court Justices did not believe that the inmate’s Eighth Amendment challenge was proper for several reasons. Meanwhile, the four dissenting judges seemed to be in disbelief over the majority’s opinion that eschewed past precedent....

Officer Anton Mark was involved in a de minimis incident with Plaintiff Miles LaCross in 2006. Officer Mark suspected that LaCross, who appeared to be a minor, and who had a female companion, may have been consuming alcohol. The parties discussed the matter, and at some point, LaCross ended up in the back of the squad car. The court also noted, in a footnote, that while the Taser was used three times....

In class action cases claiming a vast conspiracy between some of the nation’s largest insurance brokers and insurance carriers involving bid rigging and steering of customers, district court’s orders granting final approval of a $121.8 million settlement and a $28 million settlement, as well as the district court’s order approving an award of $29.5 million for attorneys’ fees and expenses is affirmed where: 1) each element of the alleged RICO violations and violation under the Sherman Act involved common questions of law and fact which predominated over any individual ones and therefore satisfies the predominance requirement of Rule 23(b)(3); 2) the district court’s decision not to certify separate subclasses or require separate representation did not constitute an abuse of discretion and likewise, its approval of the settlement agreement and plan of allocation was also within its discretion; and 3) district court’s award of attorneys’ fees was reasonable and not an abuse of discretion....

Sometimes the odor of an obnoxious client sticks to a genteel lawyer. Once in a while, a lawyer’s unprofessional antics can tarnish a seemingly saintly client. In a rare case, they can somehow manage to make each other look terrible. Case in point — the Travis County, Texas, defamation lawsuit against right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. He was represented in that case by attorney F. Andino Reynal. Recall that the jury returned a nearly $50 million verdict against Jones for lying about the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre....

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a self-described “professing Evangelical Christian” has a First Amendment right to distribute copies of the Bible at a gay pride festival. The 2-1 panel ruling reversed a decision by U.S. District Judge Michael Davis, who ruled last year that the Park Board had made reasonable provisions for Brian Johnson to distribute Bibles at the Twin Cities Pride Festival, which takes place each June....

A Kansas City man who was sentenced to three years in jail for pointing a laser pointer at a police helicopter challenged the application of a sentencing enhancement. Interestingly, while the guidelines on his conviction, with the enhancement, recommended 41 to 51 months, the judge only imposed a 36 month sentence. Nevertheless, the laser-happy defendant claimed that the sentencing enhancement for reckless conduct shouldn’t apply – despite intentionally shining the laser at the helicopter while being fully aware of the risk of harming the pilot and endangering the lives of those onboard the helicopter....

“A brand new multi-billion-dollar industry has risen up in a few short years,” writes Aaron Smith of TechCrunch, “and yet, most financial institutions in the U.S. remain reluctant to work with cannabis businesses due to fears of violating federal money laundering laws.” That leaves marijuana startups without access to both funding sources and checking accounts, meaning most cannabis businesses operate on a cash-only basis, “creating massive security risks, logistical nightmares and regulatory headaches for all parties involved....

In a labor labor dispute involving reduction of healthcare benefits to union members, decision of the district is reversed as a defendant who successfully obtains dissolution of a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction in a labor dispute case may recover its damages, fees and costs under section seven of the Norris-LaGuardia Act, 29 U.S.C. section 107, even if no bond was ordered prior to dissolution of the injunction. Read Michigan American Fed’n of State County & Mun....

An employer did not violate the Americans With Disabilities Act when it rescinded an offer to an overweight candidate, the Eighth Circuit ruled last month. In doing so, the court rejected a claim that obesity is a disability and that the obese are protected against discrimination under the ADA – as long as that obesity isn’t linked to or caused by another medical condition. Litigation over obesity is becoming more common as American’s waistlines expand....

In re Novartis Wage & Hour Litig., No. 09-0437, involved an action by pharmaceutical company salespersons for overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The court of appeals reversed summary judgment for defendant, on the ground that, under the Department of Labor’s regulations, the salespersons were not outside salesmen or administrative employees for purposes of the FLSA. As the court wrote: “In these consolidated class actions, the plaintiffs, current or former pharmaceutical sales representatives employed by defendant Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation (“Novartis”), appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Paul A....

In the coming weeks, we’ll keep hearing arguments about why two Supreme Court Justices - Elena Kagan and Clarence Thomas - should recuse themselves from the Affordable Care Act arguments. As neither indicated in Monday’s orders that they would not participate in the decision, both are slated to be involved in these historic cases. Why are Court-watchers in such a tizzy about these two Justices? Conservatives describe Justice Kagan as long-time “cheerleader for Obamacare,” and argue that, as Solicitor General during the Congressional healthcare debate, she should recuse herself....

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a 2010 Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruling on the propriety of strip searches for minor offenses in an April 2 decision. The case, Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington, dealt with the strip search of a man on a minor traffic offense, finding that such searches were okay under the law. Albert Florence brought the case. Seven years ago he was arrested during a traffic stop and was mistakenly charged with contempt of court for failure to pay a fine....

The case of Vernon Madison has been headline news since his most recent round of appeals got started back in 2016. Madison, an inmate in his late 60s, contends that he should not be executed because he cannot remember committing the crime that landed him on death row. Now, the Supreme Court is gearing up to hear Madison’s case for a second time. While that novel argument seems to defy all credulity, Madison’s failing memory is actually an undisputed fact, and case law establishes that a convict should not be executed unless they can “rationally understand the connection between the crime he committed and the punishment he is to receive....

The Senate Judiciary Committee will vote today on whether or not former Kansas Attorney General Steve Six’s nomination for the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals should be forwarded to the full Senate. On March 9, 2011, President Barack Obama nominated Steve Six to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Six is currently a partner at Stevens & Brand in Lawrence, Kansas. As reported by the Alliance for Justice, Born in Lawrence, Kansas, Steve Six received his J....

Ray v. Am. Airlines, Inc., No. 09-2317, concerned a purported class action lawsuit against American Airlines alleging claims for false imprisonment and negligence arising from a nine hour tarmac delay. The court of appeals affirmed summary judgment for defendant, on the grounds that 1) plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to show that her detention on American’s plane was “without authority of law”; and 2) plaintiff’s allegations of an upset stomach and mild claustrophobia did not rise to the level necessary to support a negligence claim under Texas law....

Denial of Inmate’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis Taylor v. Watkins, 10-2353, involved a prisoner’s 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit against several officers and employees of the Illinois Department of Corrections, claiming that defendants violated his civil rights by contaminating his food, tampering with his mail, depriving him of his sleep, and assaulting him. The court affirmed the district court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on the ground that he has previously incurred three “strikes” in dismissing the case, and denied plaintiff’s request to proceed IFP on appeal as plaintiff has not shown that he was in imminent danger....

The recent outbreak of the new coronavirus in the United States has many businesses scrambling to figure out how to stay operational. And while restaurants and other local businesses are being hit the hardest, law firms should be taking note as well. A law practice is part of the customer service industry, after all. As cities and counties enact new restrictions to slow the spread of the virus, it’s time to get creative when it comes to communicating with clients....

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that a parent who sued a police officer for “forcing” her to accompany her daughter to the hospital did not establish a constitutional right violation. In 2009, police showed up at Warren and Cheryl James’ home after their 15-year-old daughter’s friend alerted authorities that the daughter planned to commit suicide by ingesting ibuprofen. When questioned by her parents, the daughter admitted that she had planned to commit suicide, but said that she had changed her mind and had not ingested any pills....

Parental Kidnapping Conviction Affirmed In US v. Miller, No. 08-1152, the court affirmed defendant’s conviction for international parental kidnapping, holding that 1) defendant’s argument ignored the basic principle that any “lawful parental rights” created by a state family court order came into existence when the order was issued; 2) defendant failed to establish prejudice because neither her family court appeal nor its ultimate outcome were relevant to the existence of the other parent’s rights during the period of the indictment while the Vermont order was still in effect and defendant was accordingly bound by it; and 3) the government provided sufficient evidence with respect to defendant’s intent....

Defendant’s supervised release revocation sentence is affirmed where the commission’s policy statement concerning whether a sentence reduction was authorized, U.S.S.G. section 1B1.10, was binding, and did not authorize a reduction in defendant’s supervised release revocation sentence. Read US v. Morales, No. 09-30047 Appellate Information Argued and Submitted November 4, 2009 Filed January 5, 2010 Judges Opinion by Judge Kozinski Counsel For Appellant: Stephen R. Sady, Alison M. Clark, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Portland, OR...