End of day

Ending today's run in Texas.  The rest of the cases can be found on the half-dozen sites whose many employees do this for a living.  (All of which launched well after us.)

This kind of partial coverage is rare  -- generally, we go all-out or not at all.  Given many demands on time/spirit/coffee budget recently, though, this type of partial coverage will be likely be the rule in the coming weeks. 

Basically, it's batting practice, keeping these skills up while writing a dissertation, etc.  Cheers.

-CB


Fifth Circuit: Malcolm Kelso v. Christine Butler, et al

Although the pragmatic function of a motion for judgment as a matter of law is to allow the opposing party to cure any defects in the case before presented to the finder of fact, the deft here was not prejudiced by the granting of the motion without receiving an opportunity to cure the defect, as no proof would have been possible.

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-30169-CV0.pdf

Fifth Circuit: 21st Mortgage Corporation v. Kayla Glenn

As the statute directs that the value of the possessions retained by the debtor is the value that a retail merchant could derive from them, delivery and setup costs of a mobile home are not considered part of the value of the retained property.

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/17/17-60533-CV0.pdf

Third Circuit: W.R. Grace & Co. v.

Injunction channelling recoveries in asbestos bankruptcies applies to both named and un-named parties; the injunction does not pre-empt state workman's compensation laws by governing recoveries by workmans comp funds, as it doesn't modify rights or duties under the law.

Test of whether recoveries are governed by the injunction is whether the injury is wholly separate from the asbestos liability.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/171208p.pdf

Third Circuit: Traci Berardelli v. Allied Services Institute

Where the standards of liability of two statutes are substantively identical, administrative regulations enacted for one are due deference in interpreting the other.

Requested accommodation was reasonable as a matter of law -- jury instruction giving plaintiffs the burden to establish reasonability was error.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/171469p.pdf

Second Circuit: D’Addario v. D’Addario, et al.

Although a claimant's claim against the estate is not yet ripe, as its present lack of value might change, a claim based on the claimant's collection expenses is sufficiently final.

Estate, which as a matter of state law is an inchoate entity, can serve as the nexus for a civil RICO association-in-fact.


http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/aa7d1353-0417-45d3-8cb2-69fbe6d60e55/1/doc/17-1162_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/aa7d1353-0417-45d3-8cb2-69fbe6d60e55/1/hilite/

Second Circuit: In re: Matthew N. Murray

Creditor seeking to initiate an involuntary bankruptcy must demonstrate prejudice from inadequacy of state legal remedies and that the petition serves the purposes of the Act.

http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/aa7d1353-0417-45d3-8cb2-69fbe6d60e55/2/doc/17-1272_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/aa7d1353-0417-45d3-8cb2-69fbe6d60e55/2/hilite/

First Circuit: Lemus v. Sessions

Exigent grounds for adjustment of immigration status do not repoen the filing period for the claim.

Sua sponte decisions of whether to open a case are unreviewable absent colorable constitutional or legal claims.

Past agency adjudication holding that the agency would modify procedures where a claimant was prima facie eligible antedates the current rules and does not make the present holding arbitrary and capricious.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-2068P-01A.pdf


First Circuit: US v. Sosa-Gonzalez

General objection to reasonableness of sentence at trial does not preserve specific procedural sentencing challenges.

Sentence procedurally and substantively reasonable.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-2005P-01A.pdf

First Circuit: US v. Gierbolini-Rivera

Sentence procedurally and substantively reasonable.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/15-2076P-01A.pdf