And... Last Post. This Starbucks is determined to close, and is strict (and loud) in its arrest. Halfway through the Eighth.
TK, possibly:
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171931P.pdf
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171925P.pdf
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/161847P.pdf
https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/?pk_id=0000009531
https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/clerk/opinions/daily
http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/todays-published-opinions
https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders
Again, this site is just something that I do for batting practice. Don't rely, expect, or give credence.
-CB
Since 2011. An occasional commonplacing of the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal.
Neither an authoritative statement of the law nor legal advice. Quick work.
Eighth Circuit: Landon Michael v. Joshua Trevena
Denial of qualified immunity for warrantless arrest grabbing plaintiff's throat and breaking his arm with a baton, as the cause of the arrest was a nonviolent misdemeanor. No basis for arrest, since the police officer had already decided that the statement was false, and the false staement statute requires that the statement mislead the police.
Dissent: Arguable probable cause -- might have proved confusing.
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171946P.pdf
Dissent: Arguable probable cause -- might have proved confusing.
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171946P.pdf
Eighth Circuit: Daaron McAdoo v. Amy Martin
Statute's requirement of physical injury is a threshold requirement to bar frivolous claims, so causation does not have to be established between the injury and the evil of the statute -- plaintiff can recover for any harms traceable to unconstitutional deliberate indifference so long as there is an injury associated with the claim.
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171952P.pdf
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171952P.pdf
Eighth Circuit: Randy Kinder Excavating v. JA Manning Construction Co.
No clear error in holding that general contractor's threatened withholding of payment and interference was the first material breach of agreement with contractor; contractor's continued performance made the termination of the agreement breach, since the fact that the contractor didn't formally challenge a corps of engineers decisions didn't present a per se claim of nonperformance. Damages reasonable.
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/172886P.pdf
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/172886P.pdf
Sixth Circuit: Jamal Thomas v. George Stephenson
Ambiguity in state statute of Assault with Intent to Kill that seems to allow conviction for uncharged conduct, i.e., a potential future deadly assault rather than the charged non-deadly assault is, at most, an error of state law that does not rise to the level of a constitutional violation.
Dissent: Licit conviction for a crime that the deft did not commit rises to the level of extreme malfunction of the state criminal justice system.
http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0161p-06.pdf
Dissent: Licit conviction for a crime that the deft did not commit rises to the level of extreme malfunction of the state criminal justice system.
http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0161p-06.pdf
Sixth Circuit: Auburn Sales, Inc. v. Cypros Trading & Shipping, Inc.
State tortious interference claim requires the specific intent to interfere with the business relationship.
Even for a requirement or output contract, state statute of frauds requires a writing enforceable against the deft for any claim arising from the transaction.
http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0162p-06.pdf
Even for a requirement or output contract, state statute of frauds requires a writing enforceable against the deft for any claim arising from the transaction.
http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0162p-06.pdf
Sixth Circuit: EEOC v. Dolgencorp, LLC
Plaintiff gains the benefit of a longer statute of limitations on the federal claim by filing a state claim alleging discrimination, but not necessarily discrimination under the same theory as the federal claim.
Denial of request for a reasonable accommodation sufficed for discrimination -- plaintiff had no duty to request alternate accommodations.
Award of fees correct.
http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0163p-06.pdf
Denial of request for a reasonable accommodation sufficed for discrimination -- plaintiff had no duty to request alternate accommodations.
Award of fees correct.
http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0163p-06.pdf
Fifth Circuit: Hebbronville Lone Star Rentals, et al v. Sunbelt R
Arbitrators reformation of agreement for mutual mistake exceeded the bounds of its power, as the purchase agreement limited the scope of arbitration to calculation of specific sums, and the letter of engagement's reference to threshold levels did not empower the arbitrator to revisit the agreement that set the levels.
http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/17/17-50613-CV0.pdf
http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/17/17-50613-CV0.pdf
Third Circuit: USA v. Dominique Johnson
No plain error in the fact that the jury didn't decide the question of whether the weapon was brandished, an element of the increased sentence, since no reasonable finder of fact could have decided otherwise.
On remand from the Supreme Court, deft can raise claims arising from cases decided during the pendency of the direct appeal.
State crime of unarmed bank robbery is categorically a predicate crime of violence.
Although jury was erroneously instructed that accomplice liability attached for brandishing a firearm if the deft was aware of it at the time that it happened, error is insufficiently plain to justify reversal.
Where a deft is not advised that the later counseled brief supersedes the earlier pro se filing, the court can equitably consider arguments raised in the earlier filing.
Although a predicate was double-counted in the indictment, insufficiently plain error, as other predicate counts resulted in convictions.
Other challenges -- 10th Amendment, Commerce clause - sufficient evidence.
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/111615p.pdf
On remand from the Supreme Court, deft can raise claims arising from cases decided during the pendency of the direct appeal.
State crime of unarmed bank robbery is categorically a predicate crime of violence.
Although jury was erroneously instructed that accomplice liability attached for brandishing a firearm if the deft was aware of it at the time that it happened, error is insufficiently plain to justify reversal.
Where a deft is not advised that the later counseled brief supersedes the earlier pro se filing, the court can equitably consider arguments raised in the earlier filing.
Although a predicate was double-counted in the indictment, insufficiently plain error, as other predicate counts resulted in convictions.
Other challenges -- 10th Amendment, Commerce clause - sufficient evidence.
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/111615p.pdf
Third Circuit: Reading Health System v. Bear Stearns Co Inc.
As the claim for arbitration as a matter of right arises from the rules and not from the broker-dealer contract, the forum selection clause in the broker-dealer contract does not prevent a court of a different forum from determining the threshold question of the right to arbitration.
Forum selection clause in the contract does not implicitly waive the right to arbitration, as absent an explicit waiver in the contract, the presumption for arbitration and the enacted regulatory scheme favor the right.
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/164234p.pdf
Forum selection clause in the contract does not implicitly waive the right to arbitration, as absent an explicit waiver in the contract, the presumption for arbitration and the enacted regulatory scheme favor the right.
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/164234p.pdf
Third Circuit: Thomas St. Pierre v. Retrieval Masters Creditors Bureau
Disclosure of account information through mailing envelope window is a sufficiently concrete and particular intangible harm for standing.
Although incurring highway tolls was a consensual transaction, the primary purpose was not personal or household benefit, as the benefit provided by tolls is the maintenance of the roads. The debt therefore does not qualify under the Act.
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/171731p.pdf
Although incurring highway tolls was a consensual transaction, the primary purpose was not personal or household benefit, as the benefit provided by tolls is the maintenance of the roads. The debt therefore does not qualify under the Act.
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/171731p.pdf
Third Circuit: James Tepper v. Amos Financial LLC
A debt collector is covered by the Act if their principal purpose is the collection of the debt; the fact that they are also the creditor does not preclude a finding that debt collection is the primary purpose of the organization.
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/172851p.pdf
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/172851p.pdf
End of day.
The day's saga ends halfway through the Fifth.
To paraphrase Toscanini: "Here, the Starbucks closed."
-CB
To paraphrase Toscanini: "Here, the Starbucks closed."
-CB
Fifth Circuit: City of Pontiac Gen Empl Retmn v. Vinit Asar, et al.
Statement admitted into evidence from the company's Audit Commission report was not impermissible group pleading, as it was admitted not for the statements asserted, but rather to establish what the committee members knew.
Statements by corporate leadership don't establish a strong inference of scienter, as the allegations do not set out the precise statements, and there is no indication that the fraud went from the top down, as opposed to from the bottom up.
Audit committee's description of historical accounting practices raises sufficiently strong inference of scienter as to accounting leaderships' role in improperly enhancing financials reporting.
Sarbanes-Oxley filings evince improprieties, but none so glaring that being unaware of them would amount to reckless behavior.
&c, &c.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)