FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Con Law

Norse v. City of Santa Cruz

Tue, 3 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 9th Cir., Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Government Law) In a First Amendment action based on plaintiff's ejection from city council meetings, judgment for defendants is affirmed where the ejection was not on account of any permissible expression of a point of view, and plaintiff was protesting the good faith efforts of the chairperson to enforce the council's rules.

Arar v. Ashcroft

Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 2d Cir., Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Immigration Law) In an action under the Torture Victim Protection Act and the Fifth Amendment based on plaintiff's detention at a U.S. airport and subsequent removal to and alleged torture in Syria, the dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where 1) plaintiff insufficiently pleaded that the alleged conduct of defendant U.S. officials was done under color of Syrian law; and 2) in the context of extraordinary rendition, allowing a Bivens action against policymaking federal officials would have the natural tendency to affect diplomacy, foreign policy, and the security of the nation.

Arar v. Ashcroft

Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

Brown v. City of Pittsburgh

Fri, 30 Oct 2009 21:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 3d Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Government Law, Health Law) In plaintiff's section 1983 action against city challenging the constitutionality of the ordinance which establishes two different kinds of zones around health care facilities providing abortions, district court's judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, vacated in part, dismissed in part, and remanded where: 1) district court's denial of preliminary injunctive relief with respect to plaintiff's facial challenge is reversed; 2) the combination of the ordinance's buffer and bubble zones is invalid but either zone, individually, is valid on its face; 3) district court's denial of preliminary injunctive relief with respect to plaintiff's claim of selective enforcement is affirmed but vacated with respect to her claim that the ordinance is unconstitutional as applied to particular clinic locations; and 4) plaintiff's appeal from the district court's order partially dismissing her complaint is dismissed.

Holder v. Town of Sandown

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Evidence) In plaintiff's section 1983 action against the town and employees arising from his arrest for simple assault of his estranged wife, grant of defendants' motion for summary judgment is affirmed as an officer had sufficient information to conclude that the state offense of simple assault had taken place, and as such, there was no violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Guillemaro-Ginorio v. Contreras-Gomez

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Government Contracts, Government Law, Injury And Tort Law, Insurance Law) In plaintiffs' case against the Office of the Insurance Commissioner of Puerto Rico and two consecutive Insurance Commissioners claiming that they were investigated and sanctioned for Insurance Code violations solely because of their political affiliations, district court's judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in the amount of $4.7 million and a permanent injunction is affirmed as all of defendants' grounds for relief are without merit.

US v. Bush

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 4th Cir., Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Health Law) District court's grant of government's motion for an order permitting it to involuntarily medicate defendant to render her competent to stand trial is vacated and remanded as the government had the burden of satisfying the Sell v. US, 539 U.S. 166 (2003), standard by clear and convincing evidence, and when the current state of the record is considered with this higher standard of proof, questions arise as to whether the government carried its burden under Sell.

Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky

Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 9th Cir., Constitutional Law, Drugs & Biotech, Health Law) In a First Amendment action seeking to require pharmacies to deliver lawfully prescribed FDA150approved medications and prohibit discrimination against patients, a preliminary injunction in favor of plaintiffs is reversed where the district court incorrectly applied a heightened level of scrutiny to a neutral law of general applicability, and the injunction was overbroad. (Superseding opinion)

Brodheim v. Cry

Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 9th Cir., Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure) In a prisoner's action claiming that an official violated his First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances, summary judgment for defendants is reversed where there were genuine issues of material fact as to the existence of an adverse action against plaintiff, the causation for the adverse action, the chilling of plaintiff's rights, and the relationship of any action to a legitimate correctional goal.

US v. Kilbride

Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 9th Cir., Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Cyberspace Law, Evidence, Sentencing) In a prosecution arising from defendants' conduct relating to their business of sending unsolicited email, or spam, advertising adult websites, defendants' electronic mail fraud convictions and sentences are affirmed where: 1) no authority supported defendants' notion that a district court must provide a clear geographic definition of the relevant community in an obscenity prosecution; 2) a national community standard must be applied in regulating obscene speech on the Internet, but the district court's failure to instruct on this standard was not plain error; 3) defendants' as-applied vagueness challenge to the CAN-SPAM Act failed even applying a heightened requirement of clarity; and 4) the district court properly concluded that one defendant's related lawsuit was meritless and amounted to obstruction of justice.

George v. Smith

Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 7th Cir., Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Habeas Corpus) Denial of a petition for habeas relief brought by a defendant convicted of sexual assault and false imprisonment is affirmed as defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claim is rejected as he failed to offer some basis for the court to believe that a witness was available to testify to the victim's sexual orientation and that there was a reasonable probability that this witness's testimony would have made a difference in the outcome of the trial.

Beta Upsilon Chi Upsilon Chapter v. Machen

Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 11th Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Education Law) In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action claiming that a university denied plaintiff fraternity official recognition because of its refusal to adhere to the university's nondiscrimination policy in violation of the First Amendment, plaintiff's appeal from the denial of a preliminary injunction is dismissed as moot where the university amended its nondiscrimination policy to allow plaintiff to register as a student organization.

Hollywood Park Land Co., LLC. v. Golden State Transp. Fin. Corp.

Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Constitutional Law, Gaming Law, Government Contracts, Government Law, Indian Law) In plaintiffs' reverse validation action, raising constitutional challenges to the compact bonds arising from amendments involving Indian class III gaming, plaintiffs' appeal of trial court's judgment in favor of defendants is dismissed as Gov. Code section 63048.8(e) states the exclusive means to obtain review of such a judgment shall be by petition to the Supreme Court for writ of review. Defendants' cross-appeal is also dismissed as they have not offered any reason not to dismiss it.

Oliver v. Fiorino

Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 11th Cir., Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure) In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action alleging excessive force by police, denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds to defendants is affirmed where the alleged repeated tasering of plaintiff's decedent into and beyond his complete physical capitulation was grossly disproportionate to any threat posed and was unreasonable under the circumstances.

Bowling v. Rector

Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 10th Cir., Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure) In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action alleging an unlawful search, denial of summary judgment for defendant based on qualified immunity is affirmed in part where defendant's alleged conduct in exceeding the scope of the search warrant violated plaintiff's clearly established right under the Fourth Amendment. However, the order is reversed in part where: 1) defendant's alleged violation of Oklahoma law was not, without more, significantly relevant to the Fourth Amendment analysis; and 2) a search warrant was constitutionally valid.