Barnett v. Norman
Where a “necessary and material” witness refuses to testify (notwithstanding constitutional, statutory, or common-law rules that bar the testimony), a judge must attempt to encourage the testimony—or explain on the record why no attempt was made—and cannot permit witnesses to opt out of testifying.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Rights § 1983
Doe v. Ayers
Counsel must investigate if counsel knows, or should know, that particular evidence might yield more mitigating evidence with further investigation.
Area(s) of Law:- Habeas Corpus
United States v. Fries
Where the nature of criminal acts have the potential to cause suffering to many people, the federal government has the authority to prosecute pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 229(a)
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Maldonado v. Holder
The Convention Against Torture does not place the burden on the petitioner to prove that internal relocation is impossible with regard to internal relocation and deferral of removal proceedings; also, such evidence, if relevant, must be considered when assessing whether it is more likely than not that a petitioner will be tortured if removed.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
United States v. Moe
When a defendant is charged with a single conspiracy, the court is not required to instruct the jury on the difference between a single conspiracy and multiple conspiracies if the instructions already inform the jury as to that difference.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
United States v. Shaw
In bank fraud, the government does not need to prove that a financial institution was the intended victim of the fraud.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Crow Tribal Housing Auth. v. HUD
When the Department of Housing and Urban Development is acting under the authority provided in 25 U.S.C. §§ 4165, an on-site investigation resulting in deductions in grant payouts triggers the opportunity for a hearing, but the party being investigated must invoke the right to a hearing in a timely manner.
Area(s) of Law:- Tribal Law
Medina v. Chappell
A court must take into account all mitigating evidence to evaluate whether a defendant has been prejudiced because of ineffective counsel.
Area(s) of Law:- Habeas Corpus
United States v. Haischer
A defendant in a criminal prosecution is not required to admit guilt as a precondition to raising an affirmative defense.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
United States v. Hymas
A preponderance of the evidence standard is appropriate when calculating losses due to charged conduct; and a clear and convincing standard is appropriate when calculating losses related to dismissed charges.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Kohler v. Bed Bath & Beyond
A tenant store of a shopping center is not responsible for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act that exist in common areas controlled by the landlord.
Area(s) of Law:- Disability Law
Navarro v. Encino Motorcars
Where there is more than one reasonable interpretation of an administrative regulation, and the administrative agency has accepted one of those interpretations, the court must defer to that decision.
Area(s) of Law:- Labor Law
MTB Enter. v. ADC Venture 2011-2
Plaintiffs suing under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, are jurisdictionally limited to bringing the claim only before the District Court for the District of Columbia, or the district court in which the depository institution’s principal place of business is located.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
United States v. Marcia-Acosta
A court “may not rely on an extraneous factual-basis statement detail, standing alone, to supply the narrowing for purposes of the modified categorical approach” for sentencing, when there is “no narrowing through the indictment, information, or other charging document, and no narrowing of the offense of conviction through the actual conviction documents or pleas.”
Area(s) of Law:- Sentencing
Kohler v. Eddie Bauer
A plaintiff bringing an Americans with Disabilities Act lawsuit is not required to prove a violation through expert testimony, rather a lay witness may be used.
Area(s) of Law:- Disability Law
Lisker v. Monsue
Police officers acting as witnesses may claim absolute immunity to protect themselves from liability for testimony at trial and preparatory activities “inextricably tied” to testimony at trial.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Rights § 1983
Munns v. Kerry
In order for a claim of relief to be granted, a plaintiff must show the potential for future harm they are likely to suffer if their claim is not granted.
Area(s) of Law:- Standing
Ali v. Rogers
A district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over claims brought against a private individual when the claims are required to be brought against the United States pursuant to the Public Vessel Act and Suits in Admiralty Act.
Area(s) of Law:- Admiralty
Curiel v. Miller
The one year limitations period in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act for a state prisoner to file a federal habeas petition is not tolled when the state appeal was determined to be untimely.
Area(s) of Law:- Habeas Corpus
Daire v. Lattimore
When a defendant brings an ineffective assistance of counsel claim alleging an evidentiary omission, the court must consider all the relevant evidence that could have been presented, but cannot second-guess sound trial strategy.
Area(s) of Law:- Habeas Corpus
Picot v. Weston
A district court may properly dismiss a diversity action for lack of specific personal jurisdiction when a defendant neither purposefully avails his or herself of the privilege of conducting activities in the forum state, nor aims his or her conduct at the forum state.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Baker v. Microsoft Corp.
Individual causation does not need to be proven in a class action lawsuit where the plaintiffs are claiming that a design defect breached the express warranty.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law
Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign v. King County
Decisions to reject ads that threaten the transportation system’s mission to provide safe and reliable transportation for its customers, must be both reasonable and viewpoint neutral in order to comply with the First Amendment rights of those seeking to run the ad.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Rights § 1983
United State v. Zaragoza-Moreira
When potentially exculpatory evidence has been destroyed by a governmental body, a showing that the investigating officer understood its exculpatory value will result in a finding of bad faith and a violation of the defendant's due process rights.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Fairfield-Suisun USD v. Dep’t of Educ.
A school district lacks statutory right of action to seek declaratory and injunctive relief regarding alleged violations of certain procedural requirements of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and its implementing regulations regarding complaint resolution proceedings.
Area(s) of Law:- Alternative Dispute Resolution
Reid v. Johnson & Johnson
Claims of “no trans fat” authorized by the FDA may mean that the product contains an insignificant amount of trans fat.
Area(s) of Law:- Standing
Kyzar v. Ryan
It is proper to reject a sufficiency of the evidence claim when the state presented sufficient evidence of the elements of the alleged crime.
Area(s) of Law:- Habeas Corpus
NRDC v. EPA
Pursuant to section 172(e) of the Clean Air Act (“CAA”), a state may implement tighter air quality controls which are “not less stringent than” the requirements imposed by section 185 of the CAA.
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Taylor v. Yee
The California Comptroller is not violating property owner's due process rights when carrying out the notice procedures of the Unclaimed Property Law.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Aircraft Services Int'l v. Working Wash.
Before an airline may seek a preliminary injunction to prevent a labor strike, it must first comply with Section 8 of the Norris-LaGuardia Act.
Area(s) of Law:- Labor Law
CPR for Skid Row v. City of Los Angeles
Under § 403 of the California Penal Code, it is not a crime to disrupt a political meeting if no violence or force is used.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Rights § 1983
Rudin v. Myles
When a defendant diligently pursues her right to habeas corpus relief but extraordinary circumstances prevent her from timely filing a petition, she may be eligible for equitable tolling of the statute of limitations.
Area(s) of Law:- Habeas Corpus
Munoz Santos v. Thomas
Where torture allegations are inextricably intertwined with the witnesses’ recantations, the evidence is properly excluded where its consideration would have required a mini-trial on whether the witnesses’ initial statements were procured by torture.
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
Northstar Fin. Advisors v. Schwab Inv.
Adoption of a mutual fund’s fundamental investment objectives is sufficient to form a contract between shareholders and the fund itself, particularly when those objectives are subsequently incorporated into the fund’s registration statement and prospectuses.
Area(s) of Law:- Contract Law
Kohler v. Flava Enterprises, Inc.
Even though the Americans with Disabilities Act restricts dressing room benches to not be longer than forty-eight inches, a store can still comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act as an "equivalent facilitation” where a disabled individual could make a parallel transfer, while also being grandfathered in under previous standards.
Area(s) of Law:- Disability Law
Chapman v. Pier 1 Imports
Even if a public accommodation has an obstruction, the facility may still be in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and afford those individuals with disabilities full and equal access if the obstruction is only isolated and temporary.
Area(s) of Law:- Disability Law
Yousefian v. City of Glendale
A police officer's romantic relationship with a suspect's wife, after evidence has already been collected and documented in official reports, does not undermine the existence of probable cause to arrest the suspect; and, when a § 1983 claim for false arrest and malicious prosecution fails against individual police officers, claims of municipal liability will also fail.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Rights § 1983
Bank of Manhattan v. FDIC
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in its role as a receiver of a closed bank, will face consequences when breaching underlying asset contractual obligations.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law
Fyock v. City of Sunnyvale
Intermediate scrutiny is appropriate for a Second Amendment challenge if the law does not implicate the core Second Amendment right to possess the quintessential self-defense weapon, or does not place a substantial burden on that right.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
C.W. V. CAPISTRANO UNIFIED SCH. DIST.
When a plaintiff asserts both merited and frivolous claims, the prevailing defendant may only be awarded attorneys fees for the time attributed to defending the frivolous claims.
Area(s) of Law:- Attorney Fees
United States v. Mendez-Sosa
The applicable definition of “conviction” for purposes of implementing sentencing guidelines in the immigration context is to be found in federal law, not state law.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Weiland v. American Airlines
The Federal Aviation Administration’s Age 60 Rule is not abrogated by the Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act’s 49 U.S.C. § 44729(e)(1)(A) exception if the pilot turned 60 prior to its enactment.
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law