Posts

Thirteen years ago, Erris Edgerly was standing alone in a playground located in a housing project in San Francisco. It turns out, intentionally or not, that he may have been trespassing. He was not a resident of the housing project and was standing in a fenced-in area with “No Trespassing” signs displayed frequently and prominently. What happens when one commits the offense of trespassing? For a first-timer, it is a mere infraction - which should mean “ticket and release....

In Portlandia, Fred Armisen’s hilarious series about Oregon’s most famous city, Armisen claims that the dream of the ’90s is alive in Portland. He supports this theory with statements like, “Portland is where young people go to retire,” and “In Portland, you don’t have to [give up clowning.]” Similarly, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia claims that the dream of the lawyer work-life balance is alive in Cleveland. For those of you who want to be a Supreme Court Justice when you grow up, Justice Scalia suggests following his path: Go to Jones Day in Cleveland, work less, become involved in your community, and get a Supreme Court nod....

In an action seeking a garnishment order in Kansas against an insurance company for its alleged negligent or bad faith refusal to settle plaintiff’s claim against defendant’s insured, judgment for defendant is reversed where the issue was governed by the law of the place where the contract was made, in this case Kansas, and thus the district court erred in applying Missouri law. Read Moses v. Halstead, No. 08-3088 Appellate Information...

The Ninth Circuit confirmed this week that the past can come back to haunt you, even when it’s been expunged. In a surprising policy shift, the court reversed its equal protection holding in Lujan-Armendariz v. INS so that expungement of a state-law conviction for simple drug possession no longer insulates an alien from deportation. The court’s opinion in Nunez-Reyes v. Holder affirms a Board of Immigration Appeals decision to deny Flavio Nunez-Reyes’s application for cancellation of removal....

Alternative Title: Expectation of Privacy Doesn’t Apply to Pocket-Dials An expectation of privacy doesn’t apply to your accidental pocket-dials, the Sixth Circuit ruled on Tuesday. Someone who pocket-dials, butt-dials, purse-dials, or otherwise unintentionally calls another party doesn’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy, the court ruled, and whoever is on the receiving end of the call is free to eavesdrop – even to record your conversations. The case came after an executive accidentally pocket-dialed a colleague’s secretary....

After figuring out what a fish is (and is not), then telling us that anyone, not just dentists, can perform teeth-whitening, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear a round of contentious cases dealing with unreasonable searches, drawing legislative boundaries, and – drum roll please! – the latest challenge to the Affordable Care Act. This issue is hot, hot, hot! Many states, frustrated over how political the process of drawing legislative districts has become, transferred that power to independent, nonpartisan commissions....

For the first time in a decade, the Second Amendment will finally have its day in the U.S. Supreme Court. The timing is noteworthy because the Justices know it’s been a long stretch without judicial review. Justice Clarence Thomas noted it last year when he called the Second Amendment a “disfavored right” in the Supreme Court. Now that it is before them in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v....

Some lawyers chose the legal profession for the money that clients toss at their well-shod feet. In that regard, they have something in common with strippers. Occasionally, lawyers and strippers cross paths on a professional level. That’s what we have in today’s Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals case, a doozy of a decision on res judicata. Plaintiff Crystal Ludwig, an exotic dancer, filed a civil rights lawsuit to challenge the Van Buren Township nudity ordinances....

2013 was a rough year for leftist Court watchers. The Court punted on affirmative action, weakened employment discrimination protections, and cut out the heart of the Voting Rights Act. If there was solace to be had, it was in Justice Ginsburg’s steadfast dissents. In two days, she read three dissents from the bench – an almost unprecedented sign of strong disagreement. Justice Ginsburg was quickly immortalized as the Notorious RBG by a fawning Tumblr blog....

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld the constitutionality of testing police officers for steroids. Approximately 250 police officers and firefighters, including several from the Jersey City police force, were accused of getting prescriptions for anabolic steroids and human growth hormones. In response, Jersey City police chief Tom Comey ordered his officers to test for the performance-enhancing drugs and suspended them from active duty until their testosterone levels went down in 2008....

Tucson shooter Jared Lee Loughner can stay unmedicated in Arizona for now. Last week, U.S. District Judge Larry Burns ordered Loughner back to a Missouri facility for treatment to restore his mental competency. Burns also ruled that doctors at the facility could forcibly mediate Loughner with anti-psychotic drugs, Los Angeles Times reports. On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed that order. The staff at the Missouri prison facility where Loughner was being treated decided in September to continue with Loughner’s forced medication treatment after finding that Loughner posed a threat to himself, reports the AP....

Conviction of defendant for sexual exploitation of a child in the manufacture of child pornography and possession of child pornography is affirmed where: 1) district court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress as the private-citizen search that uncovered incriminating evidence did not violate the Fourth Amendment; 2) defendant’s as-applied challenge under the Commerce Clause is meritless; and 3) after the Supreme Court’s decision in Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005), U....

Defendants’ drug convictions and sentences are affirmed in part, where the District Court’s RICO instructions were adequate because they required that the members of the alleged RICO enterprise shared a common purpose, that they interacted or associated in some way to advance this shared purpose, and that the members of the enterprise so functioned long enough to complete a pattern of racketeering activity; but reversed in part, where Defendants’ convictions for both drug conspiracy and for participating in a continuing criminal enterprise amounted to double jeopardy....

In an options backdating prosecution of a former Broadcom executive, the district court’s order suppressing all evidence reflecting defendant’s statements to attorneys from Broadcom’s outside counsel regarding the stock option granting practices at Broadcom is reversed where, by approaching the exclusion question with a presumption that the privilege attached, the district court inverted the burden of proof, improperly placing the onus on the government to show what information was not privileged....

Prior state conviction for Class C felony battery a crime of violence US v. Taylor, 10-2947, In a prosecution of defendant for being a felon in possession of a firearm, district court’s imposition of a 64-month sentence, based in part on its conclusion that defendant’s prior state conviction for Class C felony battery qualified as a “crime of violence,” is affirmed as the offense of which defendant was convicted - touching someone in a rude, insolent, or angry manner by means of a deadly weapon - qualifies as a crime of violence because such will ordinarily involve the threatened use of physical force....

Cottier v. City of Martin, No. 07-1628, concerned a Voting Rights Act action claiming that a city ordinance establishing boundaries for three voting wards within the city diluted the votes of Indians in each ward. The court of appeals affirmed judgment for defendant, on the ground that the district court did not commit clear error in finding that the plaintiffs failed to meet the third Gingles precondition, i.e., that the white majority in the city voted sufficiently as a bloc to enable it usually to defeat the minority’s preferred candidate in city council elections....

In a series of blog posts, we’ve been talking about when to hire outside counsel. Join the club, you say, right? General counsel talk about it all the time. When to do it, when not to do it; it’s a regular dialogue. But since we’re talking, let’s get real. There is one time when in-house counsel must turn to outside counsel. Let’s say it together: when there’s a conflict. When There’s a Conflict Conflicts can precipitate life-or-death consequences for companies....

In a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) action filed by attorneys for Guantanamo Bay detainees seeking information regarding whether the government intercepted plaintiffs’ communications relating to the representation of their detainee clients, an order upholding the National Security Agency’s (NSA) and Department of Justice’s responses neither confirming nor denying the existence of such records is affirmed where: 1) a Glomar response was available to agencies as a valid response to FOIA requests; 2) an agency may issue a Glomar response to FOIA requests seeking information obtained pursuant to a publicly acknowledged intelligence program, at least when the existence of such information has not already been publicly disclosed; 3) the NSA properly invoked the Glomar doctrine in response to plaintiffs’ request for information pursuant to FOIA Exemption 3; 4) the government’s affidavits sufficiently alleged the necessity of a Glomar response in this case, making it unnecessary for the court to review or to require the district court to review ex parte and in camera any classified affidavits that the NSA might proffer in support of its Glomar response; and 5) there was no evidence in the record that the NSA invoked Glomar for the purpose of concealing activities that violated the Constitution or were otherwise illegal....

District court judgment denying petition for habeas corpus in a robbery case is affirmed where the state court’s rejection of plaintiff’s ineffective assistance of counsel argument was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law. Read Brown v. Greene, No. 07-5383 Appellate InformationAppeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.Argued: March 25, 2009Decided August 13, 2009 JudgesBefore FEINBERG, STRAUB, and RAGGI, Circuit Judges....

Recently, a Walgreen’s employee refused to sell condoms to a couple because of his faith. Walgreen’s stated their company policy allows employees to express religious exemptions. However, companies may not always support your choices. If you do not want to do your job like that worker, your employer can fire you for insubordination. However, depending on your employment status, your employer can fire you anyway, even if you do your job....