End of day

More here:

http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0192p-06.pdf

http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0193p-06.pdf'
'
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D08-29/C:17-3196:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:2210037:S:0

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D08-29/C:17-1399:J:Rovner:aut:T:fnOp:N:2210117:S:0

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/164372P.pdf

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171327P.pdf

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171414P.pdf

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/172612P.pdf

Also 9, 10 & 11th.

-CB

Fifth Circuit: SCF Waxler Marine, L.L.C., et al v. Aris T M/V, et al.

Appellate court does not have jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal challenging the trial court's holding that contractually, the excess insurers liability under the state's direct recovery statute is limited to the insured vessel.

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/17/17-30805-CV0.pdf

Fifth Circuit: Swinterton Builders v. Oklahoma Surety

Insurer had duty to defend, since the written agreement establishing the company as an insured party did not need to be countersigned by the company to be a written agreement; the company's consent can be inferred.

Where the claim is for breach of contract, an insurer still has a duty to defend against a claim for property damage where the factual situation alleged might present a claim for property damage.

Whether or not anti-stacking provisions apply to duty to defend, it would be inequitable to apply them here.

Damages in suit where insurer breached duty to defend qualify for state statute requiring prompt payment for the schedule.

Damages can be recovered under statute regardless of independent injury from the lack of payment.

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/16/16-20195-CV1.pdf

Third Circuit: Ronald Cup v. Ampco Pittsburgh Corp

An order compelling arbitration, when issued while dismissing all counts in the present action, is sufficiently final for appeal.

Absent an explicit mention, employees who retired before the CBA are not integrated in the CBA   by references to other documents without an attempt to incorporate them.  As the arbitration provision requires that the matters arise under the CBA, it was error to compel arbitration.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/172349p.pdf

First Circuit: Campbell v. Ackerman

As deft shifts the argument from actual innocence to an unjustified use of force during the search, trial court's exclusion of testimony as to irregularities in the search warrant is prudentially upheld, as the second argument was not raised squarely below.

Where the trial court found no liability, a claim of error in the damages testimony is moot.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-1927P-01A.pdf

First Circuit: Perry v. Spencer

Qualified immunity for prison officials in suit challenging placement of inmate in segregation cells, as it was unclear at which point the due process interest arose, and safety concerns allow prison officials considerable discretion in scheduling adversarial challenges to administrative decisions.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/16-2444U-01A.pdf

End of day

The pace, it must increase.  Look for increased coverage in coming days, if you're reading this.  Which you shouldn't be, as it shouldn't be relied upon for anything.

Other precedential holdings on 8/28

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/171990p.pdf

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/163346p.pdf

http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0190p-06.pdf

http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0191p-06.pdf

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D08-28/C:17-2132:J:Easterbrook:aut:T:fnOp:N:2208964:S:0

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D08-28/C:17-2920:J:Barrett:aut:T:fnOp:N:2209369:S:0

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/164275P.pdf

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/164440P.pdf

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171300P.pdf

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/172296P.pdf

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/08/28/16-55249.pdf

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/08/28/16-50096.pdf

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/08/28/15-17517.pdf

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/08/28/15-17517.pdf

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/08/28/15-17497.pdf

http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201711742.pdf

-CB