Legal News

News

Top Headlines

[02/09] Obama to sign proclamation on childhood obesity
[02/09] Jackson doctor out on bail, back for April hearing
[02/09] Toyota recalls 437,000 Priuses, hybrids globally
[02/09] Man charged in Newark Airport breach due in court
[02/09] Brother now says Ohio doc admitted poisoning wife

More...

Case Summaries

Constitutional Law

[02/08] People v. Superior Ct.
In a prosecution of defendant for felony murders, judgment of a court of appeal setting aside a superior court's ruling prohibiting the prosecution at issue based on the doctrine of nonmutual collateral estoppel is affirmed where: 1) a verdict regarding one defendant has no effect on the trial of a different defendant, and courts should determine the propriety of a prosecution based on that prosecutions' own record, not a different record; and 2) nonmutual estoppel does not apply to verdicts in criminal cases.

[02/08] Covell v. Menkis
In plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit following his termination by a government agency, summary judgment in favor of the defendant is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff failed to sufficiently demonstrate that he had a property interest in his employment because he did not establish that there was a mutually explicit understanding that he could only be terminated for cause; and 2) plaintiff failed to sufficiently demonstrate that the defendant's actions deprived him of a liberty interest.

[02/08] Turner v. Saloon, Ltd.
In plaintiff's employment discrimination suit against his former employer, summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded where: 1) the judgment of the district court is affirmed to the extent that it dismissed plaintiff's ADA claims, his overtime claims, and his Title VII retaliation claim; but 2) judgment of the district court with respect to plaintiff's hostile-workplace claim based on alleged sexual harassment is reversed and remanded as the court dismissed the claim after excluding most of the alleged instances of harassment as time-barred, contrary to Supreme Court precedent establishing that in a hostile-workplace claim, acts of harassment falling outside Title VII's statute of limitations may be considered as long as some act of harassment occurred within the limitations period.

[02/08] Reget v. City of La Crosse
In plaintiff's constitutional challenge to defendant-city's junk-dealer ordinance requiring him to comply with certain building and safety-code provisions and to fence his outdoor auto storage from the view of his surrounding residential neighbors, summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed as plaintiff has not shown that the city has treated him differently than other similarly situated businesses.

[02/08] Ward v. Dixie Nat'l Life Ins. Co.
In a class action lawsuit against multiple insurance companies alleging that defendants violated a contractual promise under insurance policies to pay policyholders the "actual charges" of cancer treatments, judgment in favor of the plaintiffs is affirmed where: 1) under the three-step retroactivity analysis, the presumption against retroactivity operates to bar the application of the South Carolina statute to the claims in this case; and 2) defendants' remaining arguments are meritless.

More...

Asset Forfeiture

[02/02] US v. Resnick
In a wire fraud case arising as a result of defendant's role in a check-kiting scheme that caused the failure of a federal savings bank, wherein the government sought to collect defendant's financial obligations to the FDIC from third party-bookie who received money from the insolvent defendant, judgment in favor of the government under a theory of fraudulent transfer under the Federal Debt Collection Procedure Act (FDCPA) is affirmed as defendant's transfers of money to his bookie fell within the scope of the FDCPA, and the bookie is liable to the government for the constructively fraudulent transfers. The bookie's remaining arguments regarding supplementary proceedings and affirmative defenses are rejected.

[01/12] Full Throttle Films, Inc. v. Nat'l Mobile Television, Inc.
In ex parte proceedings, arising after plaintiff obtained a writ of attachment and levied on certain deposit accounts of defendant, a grant of third-party claimant-Wachovia Capital Finance Corporation's application for release of the levied property and order quashing the levy is reversed where: 1) the record contains no evidence to support the trial court's finding that Wachovia holds a perfected security interest in the accounts on which plaintiff levied; and 2) the record contains no evidence that Wachovia met any of the alternative requirements for showing that its security interest was not subordinated to plaintiff's attachment lien.

[01/11] In Re: Jones
In defendants' Chapter 7 proceedings, district court's judgment that plaintiff-creditor had the right to repossess their vehicle is affirmed where: 1) district court did not err in holding that the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCPA) eliminated the ride-through option; 2) plaintiff had authority to repossess the vehicle pursuant to the contract's ipso facto clause without giving the defendants prior notice of a right to cure the default under state law; and 3) plaintiff was not required to give defendants notice of default and right to cure before repossessing the vehicle as both parties agree that the event that triggered default, the filing of a bankruptcy petition, cannot be cured.

[12/17] US v. $500,000 in US Currency
In an asset forfeiture proceeding in which a company claiming to be the rightful owner of the funds at issue objected and filed a claim pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 983, dismissal of the claim for lack of standing is reversed where: 1) the pleadings alleged that claimant owned the actual seized dollars; and 2) the evidence claimant attached to its response to the government's motion to dismiss supported the pleadings' allegations.

[12/14] Haag v. US
In an action by the government against defendant-taxpayers to reduce to judgment federal income tax liabilities, dismissal of defendants' claims of improper notice based on their attorney's supposed failure to receive notice of tax liens and the IRS's improper failure to consider an innocent spouse defense, is affirmed as the claims are foreclosed by res judicata and are without merit.

More...

Evidence

[02/09] US v. Hodge
Defendant's conviction and sentence for conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine are affirmed where: 1) there was no basis to disturb the jury's finding that the government witnesses were credible; and 2) there was no evidence at trial that defendant affirmatively withdrew from the charged conspiracy, and it was reasonably foreseeable that the conspiracy would continue while he was incarcerated.

[02/09] US v. Butler
Defendant's firearm possession conviction and sentence are affirmed where: 1) no Franks violation occurred which would require suppression based on the challenged portions of an affidavit in support of the police's warrant to search defendant's residence; 2) the drug-related evidence introduced at trial, including the paraphernalia, was closely and integrally related to the issue of ownership and possession; and 3) the sentencing transcript establishes that the district court thoroughly considered the 18 U.S.C. section 3553(a) factors.

[02/09] US v. Jenkins
Convictions of defendant for drug and gun related crimes are vacated and remanded where the evidence of his prior conviction for an unrelated drug offense eight years earlier was substantially more prejudicial than probative.

[11/20] State of Texas v. Central Expressway Sign Assoc.
In the state's condemnation of an easement that was leased to an advertising company for the purpose of erecting a billboard and selling advertising space, judgment of the court of appeals is reversed and remanded as the trial court abused its discretion in excluding certain expert testimony, as adequate compensation does not include profits generated by a business located on condemned land.

[10/23] Unifund CCR Partners v. Villa
In plaintiff's case against defendant-debtor for purchase of a credit card debt that was discharged in bankruptcy proceedings, trial court's dismissal of the suit is reversed as the trial court abused its discretion in assessing sanctions against plaintiff as there was no evidence to support the findings underlying the sanctions.

More...

Criminal Law & Procedure

[02/09] US v. Hodge
Defendant's conviction and sentence for conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine are affirmed where: 1) there was no basis to disturb the jury's finding that the government witnesses were credible; and 2) there was no evidence at trial that defendant affirmatively withdrew from the charged conspiracy, and it was reasonably foreseeable that the conspiracy would continue while he was incarcerated.

[02/09] US v. Butler
Defendant's firearm possession conviction and sentence are affirmed where: 1) no Franks violation occurred which would require suppression based on the challenged portions of an affidavit in support of the police's warrant to search defendant's residence; 2) the drug-related evidence introduced at trial, including the paraphernalia, was closely and integrally related to the issue of ownership and possession; and 3) the sentencing transcript establishes that the district court thoroughly considered the 18 U.S.C. section 3553(a) factors.

[02/09] US v. Jenkins
Convictions of defendant for drug and gun related crimes are vacated and remanded where the evidence of his prior conviction for an unrelated drug offense eight years earlier was substantially more prejudicial than probative.

[02/08] In re David V.
Court of appeals' decision upholding the juvenile court's decision sustaining a petition charging juvenile defendant with possession of metal knuckles is reversed as a cylindrical object like the (bicycle) footrest in this case is not a device "worn...in or on the hand," under the definition of "metal knuckles" provided in Penal Code section 12020(c)(7).

[02/08] People v. Superior Ct.
In a prosecution of defendant for felony murders, judgment of a court of appeal setting aside a superior court's ruling prohibiting the prosecution at issue based on the doctrine of nonmutual collateral estoppel is affirmed where: 1) a verdict regarding one defendant has no effect on the trial of a different defendant, and courts should determine the propriety of a prosecution based on that prosecutions' own record, not a different record; and 2) nonmutual estoppel does not apply to verdicts in criminal cases.

More...

Sentencing

[02/09] US v. Hodge
Defendant's conviction and sentence for conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine are affirmed where: 1) there was no basis to disturb the jury's finding that the government witnesses were credible; and 2) there was no evidence at trial that defendant affirmatively withdrew from the charged conspiracy, and it was reasonably foreseeable that the conspiracy would continue while he was incarcerated.

[02/09] US v. Butler
Defendant's firearm possession conviction and sentence are affirmed where: 1) no Franks violation occurred which would require suppression based on the challenged portions of an affidavit in support of the police's warrant to search defendant's residence; 2) the drug-related evidence introduced at trial, including the paraphernalia, was closely and integrally related to the issue of ownership and possession; and 3) the sentencing transcript establishes that the district court thoroughly considered the 18 U.S.C. section 3553(a) factors.

[02/08] US v. Goodpasture
District court's imposition of a 180 month sentence, as an armed career criminal, on a defendant convicted of unlawful possession of a firearm is reversed and remanded as a California offense of a lewd or lascivious act involving a person under the age of 14 is not a violent felony and as such, the 15 year minimum sentence for an armed career criminal does not apply.

[01/14] Johnson v. State of Florida
Defendant's request for postconviction relief is granted and the death sentences vacated and remanded where the newly disclosed evidence shows the following: 1) after defendant was arrested and counsel was appointed, the State intentionally created a situation likely to induce defendant to make incriminating statements to a jailhouse informant in violation of defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel; 2) although the prosecutor at defendant's first trial knew that his statements were impermissibly elicited and that his testimony was inadmissible, the prosecutor knowingly used false testimony and misleading argument to convince the court to admit the testimony; and 3) because defendant's testimony was admitted and later used by a different prosecutor at defendant's 1988 trial, and because the State has failed to show that this error did not contribute to the jury's advisory sentences of death, the death sentences are vacated and remanded under Giglio v. US.

[01/14] Ferrell v. State of Florida
In postconviction proceedings of a defendant convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death, trial court's grant of a new penalty phase but denial of guilt-phase claims is affirmed where: 1) trial court did not err in denying defendant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in the guilt phase; 2) defendant has failed to establish a Giglio violation; 3) defendant's Brady claims are without merit; 4) defendant's claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel in his habeas petition are denied; and 4) defendant's claim that his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise on direct appeal a Cronic violation of per se ineffectiveness is rejected as the ineffectiveness was not apparent on the face of the trial record.

More...