End of day

Much more here:

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Time=week&FromMonth=&FromDay=&FromYear=&ToMonth=&ToDay=&ToYear=&Author=any&AuthorName=&Case=any&CaseY1=&CaseY2=&CaseN1=&CaseN2=&CaseN3=&CaseN4=&Submit=Submit&RssJudgeName=Wood&OpsOnly=yes

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/TodayOpn.pl

https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/?pk_id=0000009531

https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/clerk/opinions/daily

http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/todays-published-opinions

http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders

Sixth Circuit: Jonathan Gaffers v. Kelly Servs., Inc.

Arbitration agreement is not displaced by the FLSA; a challenge to the agreements on the basis that compelling individual arbitration precludes collective action is a challenge to the purpose of arbitration, and therefore not permissible under the savings clause of the Act.

http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0170p-06.pdf

Third Circuit: Corey Bland v. City of Newark

Qualified immunity for officers firing into car after car chase, as the chase was dangerous, the driver continued to verbally threaten them, and a recent carjacking had been armed, leading the police to think that the driver was armed.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/172228p.pdf

Second Circuit: Amy Colvin v. Hubert Keen, et. al.

Initial denial of summary judgment not binding under law of the case.  Denial of summary judgment is not an adjudication of rights or liabilities.

http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/d561ea22-a702-410d-a0e4-6e8d6bef72b9/1/doc/16-3650_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/d561ea22-a702-410d-a0e4-6e8d6bef72b9/1/hilite/

First Circuit: Sihotang v. Sessions

Abuse of discretion for agency not to reopen immigration removal proceedings where there is a clear factual basis for a claim of changed country conditions affecting his religion and its required practices.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-2183P-01A.pdf

First Circuit: US v. Valdes-Ayala

Sufficient evidence for bankruptcy fraud, as the petitions filed were the bare minimum to get the clients released from jail.

Sufficient evidence for wire fraud, as Microsoft has no email servers in Puerto Rico.

Sufficient evidence for identity fraud, as victims testified that they didn't sign many of the documents.

No constructive amendment of indictment alleging defrauding of creditors using the court, as the court filings were identified as the fraudulent element, and the offense was the deception in the filings.

No plain error in not sending the full offense-specific jury instruction into the deliberations room; no plain error in omission of materiality from fraud instruction.

Authorized use of names and power of signature is without lawful authority when used unlawfully.

Plain error in use of superseded sentencing guidelines.

Bankruptcy court is a legitimate recipient of restitution order.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/16-1002P-01A.pdf

End of day

Ending today's run in Texas.  The rest of the cases can be found on the half-dozen sites whose many employees do this for a living.  (All of which launched well after us.)

This kind of partial coverage is rare  -- generally, we go all-out or not at all.  Given many demands on time/spirit/coffee budget recently, though, this type of partial coverage will be likely be the rule in the coming weeks. 

Basically, it's batting practice, keeping these skills up while writing a dissertation, etc.  Cheers.

-CB

Fifth Circuit: Malcolm Kelso v. Christine Butler, et al

Although the pragmatic function of a motion for judgment as a matter of law is to allow the opposing party to cure any defects in the case before presented to the finder of fact, the deft here was not prejudiced by the granting of the motion without receiving an opportunity to cure the defect, as no proof would have been possible.

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-30169-CV0.pdf

Fifth Circuit: 21st Mortgage Corporation v. Kayla Glenn

As the statute directs that the value of the possessions retained by the debtor is the value that a retail merchant could derive from them, delivery and setup costs of a mobile home are not considered part of the value of the retained property.

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/17/17-60533-CV0.pdf

Third Circuit: W.R. Grace & Co. v.

Injunction channelling recoveries in asbestos bankruptcies applies to both named and un-named parties; the injunction does not pre-empt state workman's compensation laws by governing recoveries by workmans comp funds, as it doesn't modify rights or duties under the law.

Test of whether recoveries are governed by the injunction is whether the injury is wholly separate from the asbestos liability.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/171208p.pdf

Third Circuit: Traci Berardelli v. Allied Services Institute

Where the standards of liability of two statutes are substantively identical, administrative regulations enacted for one are due deference in interpreting the other.

Requested accommodation was reasonable as a matter of law -- jury instruction giving plaintiffs the burden to establish reasonability was error.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/171469p.pdf

Second Circuit: D’Addario v. D’Addario, et al.

Although a claimant's claim against the estate is not yet ripe, as its present lack of value might change, a claim based on the claimant's collection expenses is sufficiently final.

Estate, which as a matter of state law is an inchoate entity, can serve as the nexus for a civil RICO association-in-fact.


http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/aa7d1353-0417-45d3-8cb2-69fbe6d60e55/1/doc/17-1162_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/aa7d1353-0417-45d3-8cb2-69fbe6d60e55/1/hilite/

Second Circuit: In re: Matthew N. Murray

Creditor seeking to initiate an involuntary bankruptcy must demonstrate prejudice from inadequacy of state legal remedies and that the petition serves the purposes of the Act.

http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/aa7d1353-0417-45d3-8cb2-69fbe6d60e55/2/doc/17-1272_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/aa7d1353-0417-45d3-8cb2-69fbe6d60e55/2/hilite/

First Circuit: Lemus v. Sessions

Exigent grounds for adjustment of immigration status do not repoen the filing period for the claim.

Sua sponte decisions of whether to open a case are unreviewable absent colorable constitutional or legal claims.

Past agency adjudication holding that the agency would modify procedures where a claimant was prima facie eligible antedates the current rules and does not make the present holding arbitrary and capricious.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-2068P-01A.pdf

First Circuit: US v. Sosa-Gonzalez

General objection to reasonableness of sentence at trial does not preserve specific procedural sentencing challenges.

Sentence procedurally and substantively reasonable.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-2005P-01A.pdf

First Circuit: US v. Gierbolini-Rivera

Sentence procedurally and substantively reasonable.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/15-2076P-01A.pdf

End of Day. Oddly exhausted.

Also:

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/TodayOpn.pl

https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/?pk_id=0000009531

=https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/?pk_id=0000009531

https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/clerk/opinions/daily

-CB

Eighth Circuit: BNSF Railway Company v. Seats, Incorporated

State common-law tort action against railway suppliers is not preemepted.

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171399P.pdf

Eighth Circuit: Mark Tettey Kom Degbe v. Jefferson B. Sessions, III

Challenge to denial of untimely asylum appeal construed as challenge to decision not to remand.  Insufficient grounds.  Deference to Executive on country conditions.

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171338P.pdf

Eighth Circuit: Brian King v. The City of Crestwood, MO

Where plaintiff lacks standing to seek federal review of state court decision on the merits, dismissal under Rooker-Feldman is not mandatory; the case can be dismissed for standing.

Municipal court is not a policymaking authority; the outcome of an adjudication therefore can't give rise to a municipal liability claim under S1983.

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/164560P.pdf