Knowing and voluntary appeals waiver in plea deal forfeited the right to challenge a sentence that, given subsequent developments in the law, has become in excess of the statutory maximum sentence for the crime. Circuit precedent to the contrary was dicta.
http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0136p-06.pdf
Sixth Circuit: In Re: Estate of Jerry West v. U.S. Dep't of Veterans Affairs
As the state court lost jurisdiction over the matter when the district court took it up, common-law probate remand to the state court had no basis, as there was no dual jurisdiction to resolve. Also, state court did not have jurisdiction over claim, due to statutory administrative review procedures.
Dissent: Statute requires District Court to remand; District Court has no power to examine state forum's basis for jurisdiction.
http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0134p-06.pdf
Dissent: Statute requires District Court to remand; District Court has no power to examine state forum's basis for jurisdiction.
http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0134p-06.pdf
Fifth Circuit: Arthur Mitchell v. City of Naples, et al
To present a genuine issue of material fact for trial as to the qualified immunity of the defendants in a wage discrimination claim, the plaintiff must present valid comparators with substantially similar positions.
http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/17/17-40737-CV0.pdf
http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/17/17-40737-CV0.pdf
Second Circuit: Massey v. United States
Habeas petition is untimely when petitioner was sentenced under an earlier-abrogated provision of the law that established certain crimes as predicate convictions based on the use of force, but petitions for relief under a subsequent holding of the Supreme Court as to the residual clause of the same law, since only the latter announced a substantive change in the law.
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/d97b88cf-c722-4c12-a6fc-67b8ddb371fe/1/doc/17-1676_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/d97b88cf-c722-4c12-a6fc-67b8ddb371fe/1/hilite/
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/d97b88cf-c722-4c12-a6fc-67b8ddb371fe/1/doc/17-1676_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/d97b88cf-c722-4c12-a6fc-67b8ddb371fe/1/hilite/
Federal Circuit: Texas Optoelectronic v. Renesas Electronics
Although two of the three theories of trade secret misappropriation advanced at trial were legally erroneous, the evidence of the one remaining theory preponderated, and so the verdict can stand, but remanded to determine amount of equitable disgorgement under that theory. As disgorgement was not available as a remedy for IP infringement in 1791, there is no right to demand a jury trial on the question.
Many other small things, and time is short.
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/16-2121.Opinion.7-9-2018.pdf
Many other small things, and time is short.
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/16-2121.Opinion.7-9-2018.pdf
DC Circuit: Morley v. CIA
Court did not abuse its discretion in denying award of fees in FOIA action, as court might reasonably have found the agency's actions to be reasonable.
Dissent: Violation of a statute requiring agency to disclose otherwise available documents instead of referring the requester to the alternate source was, by it terms, unreasonable.
https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/FAFBF71409B33B0E852582C50070FE19/$file/17-5114-1739739.pdf
Dissent: Violation of a statute requiring agency to disclose otherwise available documents instead of referring the requester to the alternate source was, by it terms, unreasonable.
https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/FAFBF71409B33B0E852582C50070FE19/$file/17-5114-1739739.pdf
Tenth Circuit: Lamb v. Norwood
Absent case-specific medical findings, a prisoner's assertion of medical necessity of gender transition does not present a genuine issue of deliberate indifference for trial.
Petitioner did no have standing to challenge the preliminary investigative report or to supplement it, as its conclusions could be rebutted in the motions for and against summary judgment.
https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-3171.pdf
Petitioner did no have standing to challenge the preliminary investigative report or to supplement it, as its conclusions could be rebutted in the motions for and against summary judgment.
https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-3171.pdf
Tenth Circuit: United States v. Garcia-Herrera
After entry of judgment, a court has no jurisdiction over a subsequent motion by a deft to compel former counsel to produce files that would aid in his defense.
https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-6209.pdf
https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-6209.pdf
Tenth Circuit: Polukoff v. St. Mark's Hospital
Realtor's claim that a physician was billing the government for unnecessary cardiac surgeries states a claim where the medical opinion that a procedure is reasonable and necessary does not comport with the government's definitions of reasonability and necessity.
Such a claim survives elevated pleading under the rules, as a general state of mind can be alleged.
https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-4014.pdf
Such a claim survives elevated pleading under the rules, as a general state of mind can be alleged.
https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-4014.pdf
Tenth Circuit: Warnick v. Cooley
Absolute prosecutorial immunity shields prosecutors from a S1983 claim arising out of allegedly false charges, despite allegations of related unshielded conduct.
Balance of claims pleaded with insufficient particularity, leave to amend properly denied, as no draft claim was filed, no formal motion to amend was filed, and three years have passed since filing of claim.
https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-4065.pdf
Balance of claims pleaded with insufficient particularity, leave to amend properly denied, as no draft claim was filed, no formal motion to amend was filed, and three years have passed since filing of claim.
https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-4065.pdf
Ninth Circuit: Morris v. Ernst & Young LLP
Per curiam summary affirmance on remand.
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/07/09/13-16599.pdf
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/07/09/13-16599.pdf
Seventh Circuit: Illinois Department of Revenue v. First Community Financial Bank
Bankruptcy court did not err in valuing the state revenue department's lien against post-petition bulk sales by the executor at zero, as the amount is, in practice, subject to negotiation, and a foreclosure would void the interest.
Seventh Circuit: Maurice Wallace v. John Baldwin
Solitary confinement for eleven years, combined with suicidal behavior, presents sufficient showing of imminent danger to allow a prisoner to advance a claim for relief without paying the fees. The "three strikes" assessed under the statute to the contrary are, in fact, only two, due to legal error.
Seventh Circuit: Scott Robinett v. City of Indianapolis
State indemnification statute's requirement that the challenged conduct be within the scope of employment is determined by the final finding of the court, not the allegations in the claim.
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D07-09/C:17-2609:J:Sykes:aut:T:fnOp:N:2183558:S:0
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D07-09/C:17-2609:J:Sykes:aut:T:fnOp:N:2183558:S:0
Seventh Circuit: Anthony Kaminski v. Nancy Berryhill
Treating physician's opinions should have been given greater weight by the agency, since, among other things, the petitioner's statements to the contrary merely evinced his inability to perceive his own injury.
Remand with instructions to calculate award, as all other findings of fact have been made.
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D07-09/C:17-3314:J:Hamilton:aut:T:fnOp:N:2183347:S:0
Remand with instructions to calculate award, as all other findings of fact have been made.
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D07-09/C:17-3314:J:Hamilton:aut:T:fnOp:N:2183347:S:0
Third Circuit: Norman Walsh v. Defenders Inc
Given the deft's direct contractual relationship with a significant part of the Class, its presence in the litigation is sufficient to justify the an element of the CAFA local controversy exception, regardless of whether it will ultimately shoulder responsibility for any judgment.
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/182156p.pdf
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/182156p.pdf
Third Circuit: Brittan Holland v. Kelly Rosen
Plaintiff's opting out of the bail hearing does not deprive him of standing to challenge the bail law, since the challenge is not to the detention order, but to the lack of constitutionally sufficient procedure.
As the bail-bonding agency has only a hypothetical relationship with future customers, it does not have third-party standing to challenge the law on their behalf.
The Eighth Amendment does not guarantee a fair consideration of potential monetary bail, as that was not the practice at the time of adoption, and the Amendment does not mention monetary bail.
Cash bail and corporate surety are not protected by substantive due process, as they are neither sufficiently historically rooted nor inherent in the concept of ordered liberty. Statute's subordination of monetary bail to non-monetary restrictions is rationally related to a legitimate government purpose.
Where deft is able to ask the court for decreased restriction, sufficient procedural due process in a scheme where non-monetary pretrial appearance guarantees are prioritized over monetary bail.
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/173104p.pdf
As the bail-bonding agency has only a hypothetical relationship with future customers, it does not have third-party standing to challenge the law on their behalf.
The Eighth Amendment does not guarantee a fair consideration of potential monetary bail, as that was not the practice at the time of adoption, and the Amendment does not mention monetary bail.
Cash bail and corporate surety are not protected by substantive due process, as they are neither sufficiently historically rooted nor inherent in the concept of ordered liberty. Statute's subordination of monetary bail to non-monetary restrictions is rationally related to a legitimate government purpose.
Where deft is able to ask the court for decreased restriction, sufficient procedural due process in a scheme where non-monetary pretrial appearance guarantees are prioritized over monetary bail.
http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/173104p.pdf
Second Circuit: Williams v. Annucci
Since the statute contemplates increased costs in compliance, simple assertion of the costs of compliance is an insufficiently particular compelling government interest to justify summary judgment. Government's refusal to accommodate inmate's sincerely held religious beliefs in the provision of meals has not been demonstrated to be the least restrictive means.
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/1/doc/15-1018_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/1/hilite/
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/1/doc/15-1018_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/1/hilite/
Second Circuit: United States v. Jimenez
Facial challenge is first analyzed as-applied in the context of a direct appeal of a criminal conviction.
Statute prohibiting the possession of a bullet by a dishonorably-discharged former soldier who was found guilty of felony-equivalent conduct by a military tribunal is substantially related to an important government interest, and would therefore not be barred by the Second Amendment.
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/2/doc/17-287_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/2/hilite/
Statute prohibiting the possession of a bullet by a dishonorably-discharged former soldier who was found guilty of felony-equivalent conduct by a military tribunal is substantially related to an important government interest, and would therefore not be barred by the Second Amendment.
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/2/doc/17-287_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/2/hilite/
Second Circuit: Allen v. Credit Suisse Secs. (USA) LLC
Bank foreign currency clearinghouses did not have sufficient control over Plan funds for a fiduciary duty or functional fiduciary duty to arise during arms length transactions that were allegedly fraudulent in their effects and structure.
No abuse of discretion in denial of leave to amend where the prospect of discovering contractual relationships was speculative.
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/3/doc/16-3327_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/3/hilite/
No abuse of discretion in denial of leave to amend where the prospect of discovering contractual relationships was speculative.
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/3/doc/16-3327_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/05194beb-c7ca-4533-89f8-3cdc4043f522/3/hilite/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)