Third Circuit: Troy Reese v. Warden Philadelphia FDC

The Bail Reform Act system for contesting pretrial detention is the sole remedy for challenging federal pretrial detention; although Habeas theoretically runs, the prudential limits on the writ require the courts to deny any requests for relief not channeled through the Bail Reform Act processes.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/181749p.pdf


4th Circuit

New decisions haven't been appearing for several days on the 4th's site, and they appear to be replacing their web team.   Biglaw salmon-shirted minions, solos in Dinwiddie and other budding aristos are likely getting everything through PACER and the gossip down on Cary Street, but the People's Website will wait for the public feed to open up.  Unless, you know, we get bored or something. 

-CB

    Other cases:

    (Serious brain-cloud setting in here -- punting the balance.)

    http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0210p-06.pdf

    http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0211p-06.pdf

    http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/09/161467P.pdf

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/09/20/16-56546.pdf

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/09/20/16-36072.pdf

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/09/20/14-56834.pdf

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/09/20/13-10637.pdf

    http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/16-2691.Opinion.9-20-2018.pdf

    http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/17-2256.Errata.9-20-2018.1.pdf


    -CB

    Sixth Circuit: United States v. Erik McCoy

    The facts that the deft was regularly selling drugs, and that he was apprehended in possession of a large amount of drugs while at work provided sufficient explanation in the warrant's affidavit for a search of the apartment that he shared with another employee to be permissible under the good faith exception.

    http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0209p-06.pdf

    .

    Third Circuit: In Re Hertz Global Holdings Inc.

    Executive resignations, poor results, cavalier tone, and insider trading during the turmoil raise an inference of scienter, but not a strong one, and therefore do not state a claim.

    http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/172200p.pdf

    Third Circuit: Carol Walker v. Brian Coffey

    Production of work emails by a public university in response to a facially infirm subpoena did not violate a clearly established constitutional right, as there was no legitimate expectation of privacy in emails which an employer could freely disclose.  Dismissal without prejudice to allow a refiling for statutory claims.

    http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/172172p.pdf

    Second Circuit: United States v. Lobo

    Witness assertion, when credited, suffices to establish that drugs made it to US markets.

    Aggravating role sentence increase upheld.

    "http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/1aad3dd4-e94a-4e4b-a3b1-6cd4b00c0df9/1/doc/17-2894_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/1aad3dd4-e94a-4e4b-a3b1-6cd4b00c0df9/1/hilite/

    First Circuit: US v. Vallellanes-Rosa

    As the court was not compelled to vary downward for the federal carjacking count, the sentence was substantively reasonable; as the relevant factors were mentioned during the sentencing, the sentence was procedurally reasonable.

    http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-1541P-01A.pdf

    Other precedential cases from today

    http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0208p-06.pdf

    http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D09-19/C:17-1080:J:Sykes:aut:T:fnOp:N:2220907:S:0

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/09/19/14-71768.pdf

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/09/19/12-55911.pdf

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/09/19/16-73801.pdf

    http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201713611.pdf

    http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/18-1101.Opinion.9-19-2018.pdf

    -CB

    Sixth Circuit: Jesse Busk v. Integrity Staffing Solutions

    Door to door utility canvassers are subject to the travelling salesman exception to the statute, since although the utility has the final power to ratify the sale or not , gaining the consent of the customer is the work of the salesman.

    Although the portal-to-portal act puts some security screening time outside the Labor act's compensation mechanism, state law might cover the claim, since state law does not mimic the exception, and work need not involve exertion.

    http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0207p-06.pdf

    Second Circuit: Kevin Flood, et al. v. Just Energy Marketing Group, et al.

    To qualify for the Travelling Salesman exception to the Act, the  work of the employee must be closing sales.   The fact that the company could ultimately decline to ratify the deal and proceed with the transaction is irrelevant to this consideration, as the salesman's task is to get the customer's consent to the transaction.

    Court did not err or abuse discretion in refusing offensive collateral estoppel against the insurer for litigating the opposite view in another form, as the two contract interpretations are not precisely identical, and not all claims have yet been litigated to their conclusion. 

    http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/85b366f3-f243-43e5-81c8-b4640a784328/3/doc/17-546_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/85b366f3-f243-43e5-81c8-b4640a784328/3/hilite/                                                                                  

    Second Circuit: Munoz-Gonzalez, et al. v. D.L.C. Limousine Serv.

    From the plain meaning of the statute, black cars are taxis.

    http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/85b366f3-f243-43e5-81c8-b4640a784328/2/doc/17-2438_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/85b366f3-f243-43e5-81c8-b4640a784328/2/hilite/

    Second Circuit: Hartford Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp. v. Interstate Fire & Cas. Co.

    The term "occurrence" in the policy generally signifies an unexpected event; under state law, except for some strict liability events, the test is actual subjective expectation, not that which a reasonable person would expect.

    The challenging of claims by the insurer did not violate state trade practice laws. 

    http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/85b366f3-f243-43e5-81c8-b4640a784328/1/doc/16-2999_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/85b366f3-f243-43e5-81c8-b4640a784328/1/hilite/


    Others

    http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0205p-06.pdf

    http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0206p-06.pdf

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/09/18/17-30061.pdf

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/09/18/16-50439.pdf

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/09/18/16-17347.pdf

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/09/18/15-15791.pdf

    https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/17/17-3119.pdf

    http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201710189.pdf

    http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201710189.pdf

    http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201712091.pdf

    https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/8AE80A6C0FBDFB7B8525830C004D863A/$file/16-1159-1751123.pdf

    Fifth Circuit: George Alvarez v. City of Brownsville

    Insufficient connection between municipality's policies and the withholding of the evidence in this case; placing sole discretion in a single officer does not amount to deliberate indifference, and the officer's conduct was no worse than negligent.

    Deft did not have a constitutional right to pre-plea-deal disclosure of exculpatory evidence in the possession of the government.  

    Concurrence: Federal District Court had obligation to allow challenges to potentially doctored pieces of evidence.

    Concurrence: Brady is a trial right, waiveable at plea stage.

    Dissent: Constitutional right.


    Third Circuit: K. D. v. Downingtown Area School District

    Student's free and appropriate public education was sufficient, since the student made reasonable progress, and there is no requirement that educational goals for disabled students ensure that they advance normally with their age cohort.

    http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/173065p.pdf

    Second Circuit: United States of America v. St. Juste (Paul)

    Since the videotape of crime leaves no doubt as to what occurred, error for sentencing court to have held that the deft restrained the victims during the commission  of the crime.

    http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/ebd08708-88fc-4318-b2eb-94e7493863f0/2/doc/17-2702_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/ebd08708-88fc-4318-b2eb-94e7493863f0/2/hilite/

    Second Circuit: United States v. Washington

    Consent to polygraph testing as a condition of supervised release is onerous and not invariably part of similar sentences; the addition of the requirement in the written sentence after omitting it in the spoken sentence was therefore an impermissible modification. 

    http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/ebd08708-88fc-4318-b2eb-94e7493863f0/1/doc/17-2841_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/ebd08708-88fc-4318-b2eb-94e7493863f0/1/hilite/

    First Circuit: US v. Pineda Mateo

    In conspiracy prosecutions, the government cannot compel the testimony of a co-conspirator spouse.

    http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-1857P-01A.pdf

    First Circuit: US v. Garcia-Ortiz (Corr.)

    On page 17, line 4, the word "concurrent" is replaced with "consecutive." 

    http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/16-1405E-01A.pdf