Ninth Circuit: Miguel Reynaga Hernandez v. Derrek Skinner

 

As there was no particular and objective basis for the Terry stop and the arrest of the foreign national was effectuated by handcuffing and placing into the patrol car prior to the contact with federal immigration authorities that gave probable cause for the arrest, S1983 suit against the officer states a claim.

As the actions of the Justice of the Police who called the officer to the courtroom upon leaning from a testifying witness that the plaintiff was in the country illegally were both a but/for cause and a proximate cause of the deprivation of 4A, the JP was a sufficiently integral participant for the purposes of a S1983 claim.

Circuit caselaw was clearly established at time, holding that lack of documentation or other admission of illegal presence was insufficient probable cause for an arrest for illegal entry.

Miguel Reynaga Hernandez v. Derrek Skinner

Ninth Circuit: USA v. Alexander Oriho

 

Court order to repatriate funds is sufficiently final for interlocutory review.

Order to a pretrial detainee to repatriate funds in the amount of the alleged fraud violates 5A privilege against self-incrimination, as the location of many of the funds haven't been established or suggested by the government, and the limited use immunity offered by the prosecuting jurisdiction would not protect against use of information as a link in the chain or against uses by other jurisdictions.

USA v. Alexander Oriho

Ninth Circuit: USA v. Juan Fuentes-Galvez

 

As  ensuring that the plea is knowing and voluntary under FRCrimP. Rule 11 implicates an alien deft's 5A Due Process rights, magistrate judge's plea colloquy that merely asked deft if his plea was voluntary was plain error.

USA v. Juan Fuentes-Galvez

Seventh Circuit: Todd Kurtzhals v. County of Dunn

 

Loss of reasonably expected overtime pay is sufficiently materially adverse to present an issue for trial on an ADA claim by an employee placed on paid leave.

Insufficient evidence of pretext to present an issue for trial where the employee's action facially violated workplace rules, but the employee claims that the supervisor's knowledge of employee's PTSD was a but-for cause of the adverse action.

Subsequent fitness for duty evaluation was not proscribed by statute or inconsistent with business necessity, given responsibilities of police officers.

Todd Kurtzhals v. County of Dunn

Seventh Circuit: USA v. Earl R. Orr

 

Warrant affidavit that didn't include any actual statements of the confidential informant was sufficiently backed by information from investigation, and the good faith exception would save in in any event.

Discretionary rulings during the cross of the deft -- opening the door to evidence of contraband and past convictions -- justify retrial given prior finding of improper ex parte communications between the prosecutor and the judge.

USA v. Earl R. Orr

Sixth Circuit: Todd Courser v. Keith Allard

 

Court appropriately dismissed S1983 & S1985 claims, as the constitutional interests were not pleaded with particularity.

Court appropriately did the same to state constitutional claims, as those are limited to official-capacity claims.

Alleged CFAA violations resulted in no harm, and there is no civil c/a to enforce the criminal elements of the statute.

Defamation claim was time-barred under state SOL.

To state a claim for civil conspiracy, the underlying tort harm needs to be established -- the defts can't be implicated in a tort that requires them to be the tortfeasors by a claim of conspiracy.

Other tort and RICO claims legally or factually insufficient.

Wiretap Act time-barred.

Court appropriately set aside default judgment against one deft on equitable grounds.

Todd Courser v. Keith Allard

Sixth Circuit: Zackery Beck v. Hamblen Cty., Tenn.

 

Sheriff entitled to qualified immunity as to S1983 claim arising from jail violence and overcrowding, as there was no personal knowledge of the specific circumstances that caused the particular harm, the claim does not establish that the Sheriff would be incompetent in thinking that the responses to the situation met constitutional muster, and there is no specific precedent indicating otherwise.

Zackery Beck v. Hamblen Cty., Tenn. 

Sixth Circuit: United States v. Benjamin Bradley

 

Criminal forfeiture under the statute is in personam, and therefore money judgments are permitted, despite the common law's historical aversion.

Proceeds from the crime that are subsequently disbursed to co-conspirators are a permissible basis for a forfeiture order against the deft.

No clear error in court's calculation of forfeiture, including funds possessed during the conspiracy and property acquired during the conspiracy, as deft could likely not have legitimately afforded the latter.

No Apprendi protections for criminal forfeiture determinations -- the protections are statutory.

Forfeiture not excessive under 8A.

United States v. Benjamin Bradley

Fifth Circuit: Plaquemines Parish v. Riverwood Production Co.

 

Motion to remove to federal court was untimely, as the facts underlying the claimed notice of federal subject matter were already evident in the claim prior to the amendment of claim that prompted the removal.

Plaquemines Parish v. Riverwood Production Co.

Fourth Circuit: Robert Salley v. Paul Myers

 

Where an arresting officer later initiates a nolle prosequi, and the credibility-dependent facts of the case might allow a reasonable person to find that the plaintiff was innocent, a S1983 claim for malicious prosecution presents a genuine issue for trial -- the nolle prosequi might prove to be a sufficiently favorable termination.

Robert Salley v. Paul Myers 

Second Circuit: Libertarian Party of Erie County v. Cuomo

For standing to challenge state firearms licensing scheme, plaintiffs must either apply for a license or demonstrate the futility of doing so.

11th Amendment bars claims against judges in their individual capacity when adjudicating firearms licensing applications, as the licenses issue under judicial order, although the refusals are communicated administratively.

As firearm licenses can be legitimately withheld for certain reasons, the statutory requirement of good moral character can be read to incorporate these reasons, and is therefore not unconstitutionally vague.

Licensing scheme doesn't offend Second Amendment, as there is a substantial relationship between the legitimate goals of the licensing scheme and the restrictions that it imposes.

Libertarian Party of Erie County v. Cuomo

Second Circuit: Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc. v. Bank of America N.A.

 [If I have this right...]  Investment bank's payments to noteholders of SPV on the occasion of its pre-petition default can't be recouped in bankruptcy, as the relationship between the bank and the SPV was of the type of asset-exchange swap obligation explicitly immunized from bankruptcy's modification of contractual rights and obligations.

Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc. v. Bank of America N.A.

Second Circuit: Lasher v. United States

 

As the order does not itself finally resolve any question on the merits and the statute provides for a second mechanism, a denial of a certificate of appealability on a motion to set aside the sentence is not a sufficiently final order for purposes of appeal.

Circuit split/tension flagged. 

Lasher v. United States

First Circuit: US v. Cotto-Flores

 

As Congress retains the power to legislate on police power matters in Puerto Rico, the amendment of the relevant statute to include commonwealths sufficiently indicated the intent of Congress that the law should apply to crimes committed entirely within the non-state commonwealth.

Sufficient evidence for conviction, as the impeachment of the witness didn't make the finder of fact's crediting of other evidence unreasonable.

Instructing the jury on the state predicate offense didn't confuse them about which offense they were weighing.

As live video testimony is only available in certain situations where the witness cannot reasonably communicate because of fear, allowing a witness to testify remotely where the fear was generalized to the situation and not specific to the deft, and the court accepted the witness' statement without adopting it as a reasoned finding, a retrial is an appropriate remedy.

Concur: 

Constitutional status of Puerto Rico is still that of an unincorporated territory, as the law creating the Commonwealth changed governance procedures rather than constitutional status, and was not a compact.

 US v. Cotto-Flores

Ninth Circuit & Federal Circuit

 There were a handful of decisions out from the 9th & Federal Circuit on Friday, but other work calls, and I need to close this window.  Possibly to be covered tomorrow, depending on how long the list is.

Again, folks, if for some reason you're reading this, you're basically watching somebody take batting practice. Don't rely; don't rely; don't rely.  Cheers.

CB

Eighth Circuit: United States v. Carlos Luna

 

Given the specific misrepresentations made, and the fact that insurers would have otherwise more carefully scrutinized the clinic, sufficient evidence for a scheme or artifice to defraud, despite the fact that some percentage of the claims were legitimate.

Restitution, and sentencing calculations should have been offset for the percentage of treatments that were medically necessary.  Forfeiture, though, looks to the gross proceeds of the criminal activity and did not have to be offset.

United States  v.  Carlos Luna

Sixth Circuit: Karst Robbins Coal Co. v. OWCP

 

Earlier administrative determination of employer's identity does not bind later adjudication under claim preclusion, since the earlier determination found no liability, and the determination of the employer's identity was therefore not essential to the decision.

Administrative regulation, state law, and equitable considerations of delay prevent an ex ante rescission of workers' compensation insurance contract, where that rescission would defeat the insurer's liability for adjudicated claims.

No 5A DP violation where the agency's administrative error was in a proceeding that eventually proved nondispositive.

Karst Robbins Coal Co. v. OWCP

Sixth Circuit: Sheila Armstrong v. Mich. Bureau of Servs. for Blind Persons

 

Arbitrator's decision that damages request was too speculative was not arbitrary or capricious, given insufficient evidence in the claim.

Federal statute providing for state administrative remedy, followed by federal arbitration, followed by Article III review provides sufficient enforcement mechanism to displace S1983 remedy.

Sheila Armstrong v. Mich. Bureau of Servs. for Blind Persons

Sixth Circuit: Alain Cuevas-Nuno v. William Barr

 

Alien's appeal citing an exceptional situation justifying sua sponte reopening of the matter did not sufficiently exhaust a claim for a statutory reopening of the matter due to exceptional circumstances.

Alain Cuevas-Nuno v. William Barr

Fifth Circuit: Donald Calhoun v. Jack Doheny Companies, Inc.

Given the evidentiary proffers of the parties at the preliminary injunction stage, state law compelled the court to attempt a reformation of the noncompete agreement as opposed to a preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement on the basis of overbreadth.

Donald Calhoun v. Jack Doheny Companies, Inc.