You go on vacation for a little more than a week and … wait for it … nothing happens. Yep. You’d think, with the end of the October Term, that there’d be some titillating opinions, such as Noel Canning, McCutcheon, or Town of Greece, but um, there was a railroad right-of-way case and some notable denials. Sorry about that. We’ll tell RBG to speed things up a bit next time we’re in D....
Ask 99 percent of America what the Tenth Circuit is and they will either stare at you blankly or mumble some guess about science fiction. But despite its “flyover” circuit status, the Tenth Circuit has been big this year. First to address gay marriage? Yep. Citizens United II? Uh-huh. Here are the 10 most popular Tenth Circuit blog posts for 2014: 10. 10th Cir. Refuses to Go Further than NLRB in Teamsters Lock-Out Claim Anyone remember that big case (Noel Canning) where the Supreme Court held that President Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board were unconstitutional and invalid?...
You might be thinking of your small business as a secular oasis – solely a place for work that is either an escape from or quiet alternative to religious argument or worship. Your employees, on the other hand, may not see it the same way, or so easily separate the two. Or, perhaps you want to bring what you think are good religious principles into the practice of work, only to find your staff isn’t so receptive to that message....
Though the founders of our country sought to evade religious persecution, and explicitly sought to separate church and state, more than 200 years later we are still talking about the intersection of religion and public life. (Sidebar: Someone please give Congress a refresher on our country’s history. Today.) And, we’re not talking about a case coming out of the Bible Belt, the latest religion case comes out of the usually hip older sister circuit, the Second....
The US Patent and Trademark Office’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), among other things, issues decisions on whether two marks are confusingly similar to the point where one of them shouldn’t be entitled to trademark registration. But can the TTAB’s decision have preclusive effect on courts when the same two marks become the subject of a trademark infringement claim? The Eighth Circuit recently tackled that issue in the case of B&B Hardware, Inc....
District court’s denial of defendant’s motion to dismiss his indictment for conspiracy to commit computer fraud is affirmed where: 1) defendant did not properly preserve his factual specificity of the indictment argument; 2) defendant failed to establish that the face of the indictment failed to charge the elements of a federal offense; 3) no violation of the statute of limitations occurred as the indictment was returned within five years of the last act in furtherance of the conspiracy; 4) defendant failed to demonstrate that he was actually prejudiced by a pre-indictment delay; and 5) the district court committed no error in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss based upon entrapment as a matter of law....
Lucy Cheng and Mait Dubois claimed to work for OMEI, which represented investors in Ocean View, which lent money to another entity called Southgate Development Group (SDG), which was the owner of a real estate development called Southgate Crossing. Are you following along? If you think the need for multiple layers of corporations is a red flag, the Third Circuit is right along with you in this tale of “highly dubious business activities” taking place in the U....
Don’t like a court order? You could appeal it (well, in this case, arguably they couldn’t), or, if you’re feeling lucky, you could try for the “Hail Mary” remedy of a writ of mandamus. The latter was employed by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a privacy advocacy organization that keeps lawyers on staff to litigate important issues such as the ongoing NSA surveillance scandal. As customers of Verizon, they found themselves snooped-upon, yet were without a remedy, as they weren’t a party to the secret court proceedings that authorized the NSA-Verizon surveillance....
Ray Caprio filed a complaint against Healthcare Revenue Recovery Group, LLC (HRRG) alleging two claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Last week, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals revived his claim. Caprio filed a putative class action complaint under the FDCPA based on a collection letter he received from HRRG. He specifically alleged that HRRG violated 15 U.S.C. §1692g because the instructions in the letter were confusing....
A federal appeals court has rejected a consumer’s suit against Time Warner Cable for retaining personal information he gave the company when he subscribed to its services. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal said the plaintiff did not have any damages or standing to sue the cable company. The plaintiff claimed the company violated the Cable Communications Policy Act, which provides that a cable operator “shall destroy personally identifiable information if the information is no longer necessary....
Does indemnity extend to a breach of contract? The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals says it does not. Wilder Corporation owned 6600 acres of farmland in Fulton County, southwest of Peoria, Ill. In 2000, Wilder sold the land for $16.35 million to The Nature Conservancy, an environmental organization, which wanted to restore Wilder’s land to its pre-20th century condition as an ecologically functional floodplain. Wilder expressly warranted in the contract of sale that there was no petroleum contamination of the land, but the land was, in fact, contaminated by petroleum....
Today, the Ninth Circuit decided two capital habeas matters and one case under the Privacy Act. In Robinson v. Schriro, No. 05-99007, a capital habeas case, petitioner appealed the district court’s denial of his habeas petition. The Ninth Circuit reversed in part and remanded for a new sentencing proceeding because: 1) the state courts arbitrarily found that petitioner committed the murder at issue in an especially cruel, heinous, or depraved manner in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and 2) petitioner received ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing in violation of the Sixth Amendment....
For the shoe-obsessed, it may be the most important case to ever be heard in court. Ever. Last week, Judge Vincent Marrero denied Christian Louboutin’s motion for a preliminary injunction to halt production of Yves Saint Laurent’s (YSL) Resort 2011 all-red shoes. In his opinion, Marrero explained, “Because in the fashion industry color serves ornamental and aesthetic functions vital to robust competition, the Court finds that Louboutin is unlikely to be able to prove that its red outsole brand is entitled to trademark protection even if it has gained enough public recognition in the market to have acquired secondary meaning....
She spent more than two decades on death row before the Ninth Circuit set her free because of questions about the investigating detective’s credibility. Now, thanks to those questions, the case against her is unraveling. Deborah Milke was convicted in 1991 of having her 4-year-old son murdered. But decades later, Milke was set free after the Ninth Circuit granted habeas, citing multiple findings by lower courts of Detective Hector Saldate’s misconduct in other cases....
The old saying, “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again,” does not ring true in the law. While the appellate process provides a certain number of second chances, you can’t relitigate final decisions after you’ve exhausted the appellate process, thanks to double jeopardy and res judicata. In certain criminal cases, state and federal prosecutors can collaborate on a double jeopardy workaround: criminal defendants can be charged and tried separately for state and federal violations stemming from the same conduct....
May is Mental Health Awareness Month. In recognition of this, there are numerous articles about promoting lawyer well-being you can find online. That law firms need to prioritize mental health is not new information. By now, it’s well-established that the demands of the legal profession can exact a toll on attorneys in the form of anxiety, depression, burnout, and substance use disorder. Fortunately, law firms have begun to provide resources on dealing with mental health....
Prominent federal court and federal appellate court Justice Damon Jerome Keith, now 95 years old, is celebrating his 50th year of judging, and doesn’t show any signs of getting off the bench. Judge Keith started his judicial career in 1967 when President Lyndon Johnson appointed him to the federal Eastern District Court in Michigan. A decade later President Jimmy Carter nominated Judge Keith for the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, where he has remained for the last 40 years....
A federal judge denied a last-minute request by Native Americans to exempt them from a North Dakota law that requires voters to show proof of residence when voting. It was a tough call for Judge Daniel Hovland, who expressed concern that Native Americans were disenfranchised by the requirement. Voters have to show valid identification with a street address, but reservations don’t have standard addresses. It was too late for the judge, however, to change the status quo in Spirit Lake Tribe v....
Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but it’s also cause for damages in a trademark infringement lawsuit. Monday, U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled in favor of Gucci on four of five contested issues in the companies’ trademark infringement litigation. Gucci had claimed that Guess and its licensees knocked off Gucci designs, producing items that featured the brand’s diamond-shaped logoed pattern, square “G” design, a signature script and tri-striped motif, reports Women’s Wear Daily....
In an action claiming retaliation in violation of the First Amendment, district court’s grant of summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the officer’s disputed statements were not a matter of public concern, and thus were not protected by the First Amendment; and 2) the revised confidentiality policy issued by the Sheriff’s Office did not constitute an unlawful prior restraint because it regulates only speech not subject to First Amendment protection....
