Category Archives: General Litigation & Trial Practice
|
Court Permits States To Impose Sales Taxes On Online Retailers Under The Commerce Clause
In prior cases going back to 1992, the Court had ruled that the Commerce Clause precluded States from imposing sales taxes on sellers who did not maintain a physical presence in the State. But then the Internet exploded, and online retailers like Amazon regularly sell products in the various States while eluding sales taxes. In South Dakota v. Wayfair, ... Read More
|
Court Upholds District Court Judge’s Explanation For A Sentencing Modification
A criminal drug offender was originally sentenced to 135 months’ imprisonment after the Sentencing Guidelines provided a range of 135 to 168 months. The U.S. Sentencing Commission thereafter revised the range for the same crime to 108 to 135 months. The defendant moved the district court to modify his sentence accordingly. The judge lowered the sentence to 114 months, not ... Read More
|
Courts Of Appeals Are Obligated To Correct Plain Sentencing Guideline Errors Under Federal Rule Of Criminal Procedure 52(b)
Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b), a court of appeals “should exercise its discretion to correct” an error in the district court’s application of the Sentencing Guidelines if the error “seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” In Rosales-Mireles v. United States, after the defendant was sentenced under a miscalculation under the Sentencing Guidelines ... Read More
|
Court Denies Injunctive Relief In Maryland Gerrymandering Case
In Benisek v. Lamone, several Republican voters filed suit in 2017 challenging Maryland’s 2011 redrawing of its Sixth District as being gerrymandered against their constitutional rights. Those voters moved for a preliminary injunction in the district court, to allow the creation of a new districting map. The district court denied that relief and stayed the proceedings pending the decision ... Read More
|
Plaintiffs Lacked Standing To Bring Gerrymandering Claims
In Gill v. Whitford, twelve Democratic voters brought claims arguing that the redrawing of Wisconsin’s districts after the 2010 census was an unconstitutional gerrymandering that made it harder for Democratic candidates to get elected. Specifically, the redrawing allegedly “cracked” Democratic voters into other districts where they could not reap a majority, and “packed” Democratic voters into a few districts ... Read More
TAGGED: scotus, Standing, Gerrymandering, Gill v. Whitford
|
Court Permits First Amendment Retaliation Claim Against Municipality Despite Probable Cause To Arrest
Fane Lozman was something of a political gadfly to the City of Riviera Beach’s city council, and had filed a lawsuit against it. During a closed meeting, one of the council members suggested that the council “intimidate” Mr. Lozman, which the council supported. At a subsequent public meeting, when Lozman sought to discuss the recent arrest of a former county ... Read More
|
Minnesota Law Banning Political Insignias In A Polling Place Struck Down Under The First Amendment
Under Minnesota law, a “political badge, political button, or other political insignia may not be worn at or about the polling place” where voters head to vote in elections. Election judges working the polls have authority to determine whether a particular item violates the prohibition, and those who refuse to remove offending items go through an administrative process that may ... Read More
|
Statements From Foreign Governments Entitled To Respectful Consideration Under Rule 44.1, But Not Conclusive
In Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., American purchasers of Vitamin C accused the selling Chinese companies of fixing prices in violation of U.S. antitrust laws. The Chinese companies argued that Chinese law required them to fix the prices, and the Chinese government, through its Ministry of Commerce, filed a statement in support of that ... Read More
|
Contracts Clause Permits Retroactive Minnesota Law Changing Life Insurance Beneficiaries
In Sveen v. Melin, Mark Sveen purchased a life insurance policy naming his wife, Kaye Melin, as the primary beneficiary, and his two children from a prior marriage as contingent beneficiaries, in 1998. In 2002, Minnesota enacted a law under which a divorce automatically removed a spouse as a beneficiary from such a policy. Sveen and Melin divorced in ... Read More
TAGGED: Contracts Clause, Life Insurance, Sveen v. Melin
|
Court Limits Tolling Of Statute Of Limitations In Class Actions To Future Filers
Under prior Court precedent, when a class action is filed but then fails to gain certification, the statute of limitations is tolled for those within the putative class, allowing them to intervene as individual plaintiffs in that action, or bring an individual suit. In China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, instead of bringing a separate individual suit or intervening, the ... Read More
|
Closely Divided Court Upholds Ohio Law Maintaining Voter Rolls
Under Ohio law, when a voter fails to vote for two years, the state sends the nonvoter a postage prepaid return card to verify his or her address. Voters who do not return the card and do not vote in any election for four more years are then presumed to have moved and are removed from the voting rolls. In ... Read More
|
Court Dismisses As Moot Lawsuit Over Unlawful Immigrant’s Abortion
When a pregnant minor unlawful immigrant sought to get an abortion while in the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the Office’s policy prohibited her from getting an abortion without the Director’s permission. The minor moved for a temporary restraining order of the policy, which the district court granted. The minor then attended preabortion counseling as required under Texas ... Read More
TAGGED: scotus, Dismisses As Moot, Abortion, Azar v. Garza
|
Criminal Defendants Sentenced Under Mandatory Minimums Not Entitled To Relief Under 18 U.S.C. sec. 3582(c)(2)
In Koons v. United States, after several criminal defendants pleaded guilty to drug conspiracy charges, the district court discovered that the mandatory minimum sentence provided under 21 U.S.C. sec. 841(b)(1) was higher than the sentencing range provided under the Sentencing Guidelines. The district court decided that the mandatory minimums trumped the Guidelines, and sentenced the defendants under that range, ... Read More
|
Court Permits Bankruptcy Discharge Despite Oral Misrepresentation Over Ability To Pay Legal Bill
When R. Scott Appling fell behind in paying his legal bills, he orally told his attorneys that he would repay them with a tax refund he was expecting to get. When he got the (lower than expected) refund, he used it to pay other expenses instead, lying to his attorneys so they would continue with the representation. After the attorneys ... Read More
|
Court Resolves Confusion In Certain Plea Agreements, Holds They Are Subject To Sentencing Guidelines
In 2011, the Court had to decide whether a criminal defendant who entered into a plea deal under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) could petition to reduce his or her sentence under 18 U.S.C. sec. 3582(c)(2) (which permits a reduction upon a change in the Sentencing Guidelines) if the Sentencing Guidelines were later amended to lower the sentencing range ... Read More
|
Court Sides With Baker Who Refused To Bake Custom Cake For Gay Wedding
When Jack Phillips refused, on religious grounds, to make a custom wedding cake for a gay couple, the couple filed a charge with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission alleging the refusal violated Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act. Phillips maintained he had a First Amendment right to refuse to bake the cake, but the Commission found him in violation of the Act and ... Read More
|
Private Investigations Not Compensated Under Mandatory Victims Restitution Act
The Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 requires defendants convicted of certain federal offenses to reimburse victims for “lost income and necessary child care, transportation, and other expenses incurred during participation in the investigation or prosecution of the offense or attendance at proceedings related to the offense.” 18 U.S.C. sec. 3663A(b)(4). When Sergio Lagos defrauded a lender for tens of ... Read More
|
Police Cannot Search Vehicle Within Curtilage Of A Home Without A Search Warrant
The Fourth Amendment has long required that any police officer entering the curtilage of a home to have a search warrant. However, the Fourth Amendment also has an “automobile exception,” permitting warrantless searches of vehicles due to their ready mobility. In Collins v. Virginia, a police officer entered the curtilage of a home (its driveway) without a warrant to ... Read More
|
Private Arbitration Agreements Preclude Employee Class Actions
In Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, employees sued their employer in a class action for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Those employees each had signed an agreement to arbitrate employment disputes under the Federal Arbitration Act, and the employer invoked those agreements to preclude the class actions. The employees argued that the National Labor Relations Act triggered ... Read More
|
Prior Precedents Did Not Preclude Tribal Sovereign Immunity In A Property Dispute
After the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe purchased a 40-acre parcel of land in Washington State, a survey of that parcel revealed that approximately an acre of it lay on the other side of a boundary fence, which the Tribe’s new neighbors, the Lundgrens, believed they had owned for decades. The Lundgrens file a quiet title action, and the Tribe asserted ... Read More
|
Complaints Of Use Of Full Restraints Moot After Criminal Cases Ended
A group of criminal defendants challenged the policy of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, which permitted officers to put in-custody defendants in full restraints for nonjury proceedings in court. The district court denied the claims, but while the appeal before the Ninth Circuit was pending all of the cases involving those defendants resolved. The ... Read More
|
Drivers Have A Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy In A Car Rented By Another
In Byrd v. United States, Terrence Byrd was pulled over while driving a car rented by Latasha Reed, although the rental agreement did not list Byrd as an authorized driver. The police searched Byrd’s car and discovered 49 bricks of heroin in the trunk. Byrd moved to suppress the evidence as fruits of an unlawful search, but the district ... Read More
|
Court Rejects Facial-Insufficiency Challenge To Overbroad Wiretap Orders
A federal judge is only authorized to issue a wiretap order for wiretaps conducted within his or her jurisdiction. In Dahda v. United States, a Kansas federal judge issued wiretap orders authorizing wiretaps in Kansas, but also contained language permitting wiretaps in Missouri. Federal investigators conducted the wiretaps in Missouri, and the evidence they gathered led to Los and ... Read More
|
Court Strikes Down Federal Law Banning Sports Betting
In a 7-2 opinion by Justice Alito, the Court reversed the Third Circuit and held that the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act was unconstitutional for violating the “anticommandeering rule” inherent in the Tenth Amendment, as it impermissibly sought to regulate state regulation of sports betting. The Act in question forbid states from authorizing betting schemes based on competitive sporting ... Read More
|
Sixth Amendment Permits Defendant To Insist On Not Conceding Guilt For First-Degree Murder
Robert McCoy was charged with first-degree murder for killing his estranged wife’s mother, stepfather, and son. The evidence was damning, but McCoy insisted that he was innocent. His attorney at trial, Larry English, decided that the best strategy in the face of the evidence was to admit to the jury that McCoy committed the murders, but argue that his mental ... Read More
|
Court Strikes Portion Of Immigration and Naturalization Act as Void for Vagueness
In one of Justice Scalia’s last majority opinions before his death, the Court held that part of a federal law defining “violent crime” was unconstitutionally void for vagueness in Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. --- (2015). The Immigration and Nationality Act similarly provided that a person could be deported for committing an “aggravated felony,” which included a “crime of ... Read More
|
Court Awards Qualified Immunity To Officer Who Shot Woman Claiming Excessive Force
In Kisela v. Hughes, officers reporting to a call of a woman acting erratically with a large knife discovered Ms. Hughes emerging from her house with a knife in her hand, heading toward another woman, Ms. Chadwick, who it turned out was Hughes’ roommate. Hughes stopped six feet from Chadwick, and the officers drew their firearms and told Hughes ... Read More
TAGGED: scotus, qualified immunity, Excessive Force, Kisela v. Hughes
|
Service Advisors Are Exempt From Fair Labor Standards Act Overtime-Pay Requirement
The Fair Labor Standards Act exempted “any salesman, partsman, or mechanic primarily engaged in selling or servicing automobiles” from overtime-pay requirements under the Act. In Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro, a group of service advisors sued for overtime pay under the Act when the Department of Labor decided in 2011 that they were excluded from the exemption. The Court ... Read More
|
Court Rejects Fifth Circuit’s “Substantial Need” Test For Funding Under 18 U.S.C. sec. 3599(f)
Under 18 U.S.C. sec. 3599(f), a defendant charged with a crime punishable by death can petition the trial court for funds that would be “reasonably necessary” for investigative, expert, or other services needed for the defense. In Ayestas v. Davis, a man sentenced to death made such a petition to support his federal habeas claim for ineffective assistance of ... Read More
|
Court Permits State Court Jurisdiction Over Securities Class Actions
In Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund, the Fund purchased shares in Cyan which then declined in value, prompting the Fund and others to file a class action suit against Cyan in state court under the Securities Act of 1933. Cyan argued that the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998, as it amended the 1933 Act, ... Read More