Posts

We have a well-documented law crush on Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner. While some people think that public professions of law crushes are odd, we have found that we’re not alone in our admiration for this particular jurist. Every time we discuss Judge Posner with a fellow attorney, we hear the same thing: You love Judge Posner? I love him, too. With that in mind, we’re pandering to the Posner-philes and capping off the first week of 2012 with some of our favorite Posner-penned opinions of 2011....

Methamphetamine Conviction Affirmed In US v. Yeley-Davis, No. 10-8000, the court affirmed defendant’s conviction and sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute, and to distribute, over 500 grams of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine where 1) because neither defendant’s cell phone records nor their authenticating documents were testimonial, no Confrontation Clause violation occurred; 2) defendant’s mandatory life sentence pursuant to 21 U.S.C. section 841(b)(1)(A) did not violate the Eighth Amendment; and 3) admitting lay testimony about how cell phones worked did not have a substantial impact on the outcome of the case, and therefore the error was harmless and did not warrant reversal....

Many have complained, time and time again, that the Supreme Court’s refusal to allow cameras in the courtroom is the wrong move. Cameras in the court would help Americans understand how the co-equal third branch of the government works. It would increase transparency and trust in the Court’s decisions as well. And, it would likely be extremely entertaining. Alas, there are no cameras in the Court, not unless you sneak one in....

The Tenth Circuit can be so fickle. There are days when there is nothing interesting going on, and then there are days like today, with some interesting cases to cover. With two cases getting national attention, we couldn’t just pick one, so we’ll give you a quick rundown of both. First, we have an update on the horse slaughter case we discussed back in November, followed by news on polygamy and the meaning of marriage, courtesy of “Sister Wives....

The Americans with Disabilities Act was up at issue before the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals recently. In EEOC v. C.R. England, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling granting a motion for summary judgment on the issue that medical information voluntarily disclosed by an employee was not protected by the Americans With Disabilities Act. Quick Facts: The original plaintiff, a driver, wanted to become a trainer shortly after starting....

Graffiti from New York City artist Jonathan Cohen and others were protected works under federal law, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals has held. In a unanimous decision, the federal appellate court awarded Cohen and others $6.75 million in damages after the building owner whitewashed the walls of his Queens, New York, warehouse in preparation for their renovation into luxury apartments. The court found the building owner willfully destroyed the graffiti without giving a chance for the artists to recover or commemorate their work....

Ash-har Quraishi, Marla Cichowski, and Sam Winslade, reporters from Al Jazeera America news network, turned on their camera at 9:24 pm on August 9, 2014, to record a live broadcast covering the protests that followed the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. But instead of a live update on the protests, the camera ended up recording footage of the reporters being tear-gassed and shot with rubber bullets by St. Charles County police officers....

Denial of petition for writ of habeas corpus is affirmed where: 1) petitioner’s claim is procedurally barred as he failed to adequately exhaust state remedies before seeking federal habeas relief; and 2) habeas relief is not warranted as petitioner cannot demonstrate that clearly established Supreme Court precedent compelled the state court to conclude that his confession was inadmissible as the product of interrogation rather than admissible as a volunteered statement. Read Acosta v....

In 2012, the Alabama legislature redrew the state’s legislative districts. In doing so, it attempted to keep the districts roughly equal in population and, in order to remain compliant with the Voting Rights Act, keep about the same black population percentage in existing majority-minority districts. These goals were sometimes at odds with each other, and in the end, Alabama added more black voters to existing majority-minority districts in order to prevent the percentage of minority voters in those districts from declining....

Faegre Baker Daniels and Drinker Biddle & Reath are currently discussing a possible merger. So are Pepper Hamilton and Troutman Sanders. These are just the latest high-profile examples of an industry increasingly likely to support lateral hiring and mergers. Over 90% of large law firms plan to grow through lateral hiring. With fewer equity partnerships available, lateral hiring has become more attractive to associates, as well. Firm-hopping is simply a part of the industry ­– one that is likely here to stay....

Last month, a Ninth Circuit panel held that the Second Amendment requires the state to allow its citizens to both “keep” and “bear” arms. In plain English, that meant that California had to either allow concealed or open carry in public. Currently, the state leaves it up to local law enforcement agencies’ discretion as to whether a person has demonstrated sufficient need for a concealed carry permit. The City and County of San Diego, the defendants in the case, declined to appeal the panel’s ruling....

To many Americans, the sometimes violent confrontations between police and protesters have been all too familiar. It happened across the nation in the 1960s and it’s flared up more locally here and there since then — most notably, perhaps, in Los Angeles in 1992 and in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014. In each, police have often used force in an attempt to exert control. In each, police have often been criticized for going too far....

The problem with reading appellate opinions all day is that it makes us question what is wrong with the characters that occupy the courts, on both sides of the bench. This week, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a district court can’t just spitball and award a litigant $8,000 in attorneys fees, ($1,000 for each day of an eight-day trial), when the party asked for $503,000. There has to a method to the madness, and an explanation for that method....

In an action for fraud, district court judgment dismissing plaintiff’s case is affirmed where: 1) the court properly dismissed plaintiff’s claim under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act for lack of standing as the circumstances of the alleged fraudulent activity did not occur primarily and substantially in Illinois; 2) the court properly concluded that plaintiff failed to state an actionable claim of common-law fraud as none of the alleged statements made by defendant gave rise to a duty to disclose; and 3) the court properly dismissed plaintiff’s claim under the RICO statute as his allegations are insufficient to state a claim based on an association-in-enterprise or a claim that defendant controlled the operation or management of the organization defendant sold its insurance through....

In an action brought against the Employment Training Administration of the Department of Labor (DOL) and the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) challenging a DOL regulation retroactively invalidating labor certifications that had been issued to plaintiffs, judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) 20 C.F.R. section 656.6.30(b) as amended is within the scope of DOL’s statutory authority in compliance with the explicit language from section 1182(a)(5)(A)(i)(I) which imposes a time limit between the certification and the visa application; and 2) the application of the amended section 656....

Companies that are making plans to reopen offices and workplaces have received a green light from the federal government that they may require returning employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19. On May 28, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued an advisory stating that employers could require vaccinations for those who are returning to the job as long as they are not “coercive" and meet other legal requirements. It’s important to note that this assertion by EEOC is really more a clarification of existing law and policy than an announcement of something new....

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals just affirmed a district court’s ruling that mega-mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are private companies, not agents for purposes of the False Claims Act. Realtors in Nevada originally brought a suit in a Nevada district court against various lenders and loan companies. Dispute erupted when the realtors alleged that loans that had been purchased by Fannie and Freddie were unencumbered and clear of particular HOA liens, but weren’t....

In Skilling v. US, No. 08-1394, the Court affirmed in part the Fifth Circuit’s affirmance of defendant Jeffrey Skilling’s honest-services fraud conviction, holding that pretrial publicity and community prejudice did not prevent Skilling from obtaining a fair trial, and he did not establish that a presumption of juror prejudice arose or that actual bias infected the jury that tried him. However, the Court vacated in part, on the ground that 18 U....

Appeal from Prison Reform Injunction by Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio In Graves v. Arpaio, No. 08-17601, Maricopa County, Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio’s appeal from the district court’s order requiring him to take affirmative measures to address conditions in Maricopa County jails that violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, the court affirmed the order where 1) it was not an abuse of discretion for the district court to hear evidence on both rights and remedies at one hearing; 2) the district court did not clearly err in finding that air temperatures above 85° F greatly increased the risk of heat-related illnesses for individuals who took psychotropic medications; and 3) there was no error in ordering prospective relief to address inadequate food....

Beaven v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 08-5297, involved a Federal Tort Claims Act and Privacy Act case brought by staff members at the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) claiming that defendants allowed an employee roster containing plaintiffs’ sensitive personal information to be disclosed to improper persons, including prison inmates and other BOP staff. Brown v. Owens Corning Inv. Review Comm., 09-3692, involved former Owens Corning (OC) employees’ class action lawsuit against the fiduciaries of their retirement plans pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), claiming that the fiduciaries failed to protect plan participants by not divesting the plans of the OC stock before the shares became virtually worthless when the company filed for bankruptcy....