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: United States v. Juan Johnson
Sentencing
Despite ministerial omissions, sentence not procedurally unreasonable, as court seemed to be aware of the relevant factors.
Sentence for violation of terms of supervised release not substantively unreasonable, as it was within the maximum for the original offense of conviction.
No error in not recusing.
United States v. Juan Johnson
Despite ministerial omissions, sentence not procedurally unreasonable, as court seemed to be aware of the relevant factors.
Sentence for violation of terms of supervised release not substantively unreasonable, as it was within the maximum for the original offense of conviction.
No error in not recusing.
United States v. Juan Johnson
Eighth Circuit: Carlos Rivas-Quilizapa v. Loretta E. Lynch
Immigration
Statements in interview establishing that the country was a dangerous place did not mandate that the IJ advise the petitioner of forms of relief.
Facts that would have been the basis of a claim were in evidence.
Carlos Rivas-Quilizapa v. Loretta E. Lynch
Eighth Circuit: Danny Connor v. CO 1 Box
Prisons
Dismissal of S1983 claim was improper, given claim's suggestion that officials thwarted attempts to file grievances. Leave to amend was properly denied.
Dismissal of S1983 claim was improper, given claim's suggestion that officials thwarted attempts to file grievances. Leave to amend was properly denied.
Danny Connor v. CO 1 Box
Eighth Circuit: Donnie Cooper v. General American Life Ins. Co
FRCP
Denial of statutory penalty & attorneys fees, as there was no asserted or actual breach of insurance policy terms.
Donnie Cooper v. General American Life Ins. Co.
Denial of statutory penalty & attorneys fees, as there was no asserted or actual breach of insurance policy terms.
Donnie Cooper v. General American Life Ins. Co.
Eighth Circuit: United States v. Michael Lindsey
Sentencing, ACCA
As the challenge to the existence of the predicates in the PSR was untimely and did not make a showing as to why an untimely challenge should be allowed, the convictions are considered to be undisputed facts.
State assault statute that proscribes acts that cause the fear of assault is a valid ACCA predicate.
United States v. Michael Lindsey
As the challenge to the existence of the predicates in the PSR was untimely and did not make a showing as to why an untimely challenge should be allowed, the convictions are considered to be undisputed facts.
State assault statute that proscribes acts that cause the fear of assault is a valid ACCA predicate.
United States v. Michael Lindsey
Eighth Circuit: United States v. Christopher Fisher
Sentencing
Per curiam - within-guidelines sentence for violations of supervised release not substantively unreasonable.
United States v. Christopher Fisher
Seventh Circuit: William Charles Construction v. Teamsters Local Union 627
Labor Law, Statute of Limitations, Arbitration
Clock did not begin to run on the time to challenge a decision of a committee authorized by a CBA until the movant received a copy of the notice of decision at the commencement of litigation.
.
Where a contract explicitly supersedes the CBA and establishes an exclusive remedy, party is not bound by CBA arbitration outcome.
Special appearance at arbitration to dispute its validity does not establish consent to arbitration.
William Charles Construction v. Teamsters Local Union 627
Seventh Circuit: USA v. Alexis Miranda-Sotolongo
Fourth Amendment, Sentencing
Check of license plate registration in a database is not a Fourth Amendment search.
Where the facts are ambiguous, the stop is lawful, so long as the possibility of illegal activity is sufficiently probable.
Supervised release conditions (including earning GED) remanded for clarification.
USA v. Alexis Miranda-Sotolongo
Check of license plate registration in a database is not a Fourth Amendment search.
Where the facts are ambiguous, the stop is lawful, so long as the possibility of illegal activity is sufficiently probable.
Supervised release conditions (including earning GED) remanded for clarification.
USA v. Alexis Miranda-Sotolongo
Seventh Circuit: Joseph Felton v. City of Chicago
S1983
S1983 excessive force suit states a claim if the only evidence to the contrary is in newspaper stories outside of the record.
Joseph Felton v. City of Chicago
Seventh Circuit: USA v. Saliou Mbaye
Fraud, Crim, Sentencing
Testimony of co-defts and lack of tax reporting established sufficient evidence for bank fraud.
Obstruction enhancement appropriate where deft sticks to alibi on the stand.
Within guidelines sentence substantively upheld.
USA v. Saliou Mbaye
Seventh Circuit: Jack Brown v. Kevin Smith
ADA
Question of essential function is for the fact-finder, even where local government holds the qualification to be a prerequisite for the position.
Time allocation was a fair method of determining essential nature of function.
No claim for lack of mitigation, as there was only one bus company in town, and plaintiff started his own business.
Jack Brown v Kevin Smith
Seventh Circuit: USA v. Juan Adame
Crim, Interstate commerce, FRE
Sufficient evidence on merits.
Use of building for rental establishes interstate commerce requirement of the arson statute.
Historical cell site data admissible under Daubert, since it was appropriately qualified. Ultimately harmless.
Agent testimony variations from deposition are not properly considered here, since the record was not amended to include the deposition version.
Fact that deft talked about fire on incidental audio associated with video allowed into jury room not overly prejudicial.
USA v. Juan Adame
Seventh Circuit: Noah Dietchweiler v. Steve Lucas
Due Process
Per curiam -- Due process satisfied for high school suspension where there was notice of the general allegation and a chance to be heard, despite lack of date-specific accusation of drug use.
Concurrence (2) -- troublingly unspecific notice.
Noah Dietchweiler v. Steve Lucas
Seventh Circuit: Arlene Simpson v. St. James Hospital
Discrimination, Title VII
Anecdotal evidence insufficient to establish valid comparators.
Arlene Simpson v. St. James Hospital
Seventh Circuit: Chun Sui Yuan v. Loretta E. Lynch
Immigration
Insufficient substantial evidence for agency's adverse findings on credibility.
Chun Sui Yuan v. Loretta E. Lynch
Insufficient substantial evidence for agency's adverse findings on credibility.
Chun Sui Yuan v. Loretta E. Lynch
Fifth Circuit: Mary Smith, et al v. Regional Transit Authority
ERISA, Agency
IRS standard is the appropriate test for determining, for the purposes of ERISA, if a private company is an agency or instrumentality of a government body, and by this standard, the private company that operates the transit system qualifies.
Deft not estopped from invoking governmental exemption, as the terms of the statute control.
Statute of limitations ran from first letter saying that some claims would not be funded.
PArty asserting discovery violation has to establish significance of the evidence sought.
Mary Smith, et al v. Regional Transit Authority
Fifth Circuit: Patricia Morris v. Town of Independence, et al
Discrimination
Given window clerk's part-time status and sui generis duties, there were no relevant comparators to test a claim of racial discrimination.
Patricia Morris v. Town of Independence, et al
Given window clerk's part-time status and sui generis duties, there were no relevant comparators to test a claim of racial discrimination.
Patricia Morris v. Town of Independence, et al
Fifth Circuit: Noris Rogers v. Pearland Indep School District
FRCP, Title VII,
Mere statement asserting claim is not enough to preserve disparate impact theory of claim.
Difference between comparator's criminal record and that of plaintiff establishes that they are not similarly situated.
Dissent: Comparator valid, since the relevant bit is that the convictions were not disclosed on the application form.
Noris Rogers v. Pearland Indep School District
Mere statement asserting claim is not enough to preserve disparate impact theory of claim.
Difference between comparator's criminal record and that of plaintiff establishes that they are not similarly situated.
Dissent: Comparator valid, since the relevant bit is that the convictions were not disclosed on the application form.
Noris Rogers v. Pearland Indep School District
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)