Kaass Law v. Wells Fargo Bank
The plain language in 28 U.S.C. § 1927 does not authorize sanctions against a law firm.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law
Andrade v. Lynch
Evidence of an asylum seeker’s non-gang related tattoos alone does not support a finding under the Convention Against Torture that the seeker is more likely than not to be tortured when removed to his home country.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Eno v. Jewell
Under the Equal Access to Justice Act, any grant of permission from the United States government is a license, regardless of form, and does not qualify as an adversary adjudication allowing the recovery of attorneys’ fees and expenses.
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Acosta-Olivarria v. Lynch
To determine whether Briones applies retroactively to an applicant for adjustment of status under 8 U.S.C. § 1255(i), the Montgomery Ward five-factor balancing test must be applied on a case-by-case basis
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Bennett v. Bank Melli
Section 201(a) of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act and 28 U.S.C. §1610(g) allow victims of terrorist attacks to collect money owed to them from instrumentalities of the state that sponsored the attacks.
Carrillo v. County of Los Angeles
An officer is entitled to qualified immunity if he or she meets two requirements: (1) the facts that the plaintiff alleges show a violation of a constitutional right; and (2) that constitutional right was “clearly established” at the time of the challenged conduct.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Rights § 1983
Paeste v. Gov’t of Guam
Taxpayers of territories are citizens under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and have rights to damages.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Rights § 1983
In re: Musical Instruments
Horizontal agreements between competitors are generally violations of the Sherman Act per se, whereas vertical agreements, such as those between a manufacturer and retailer, are analyzed under the rule of reason, which considers the facts, history, and reasons for the agreement to determine its effect on the market.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law
United States v. Christensen
The two-step process to determine if the crime-fraud exception applies to potentially privileged materials requires: (1) a factual basis adequate to support a good faith belief by a reasonable person that in camera review may reveal evidence to establish the claim that the crime-fraud exception applies, and (2) an in camera review to determine privilege, and if shown, whether the crime-fraud exception applies.
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
United States v. Sanchez-Gomez
The adoption of a generalized policy of shackling defendants during pretrial appearances before judges must have adequate justification.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Xcentric Ventures v. Borodkin
A finding of malicious prosecution includes proving an element, that the underlying claims were brought or continued without either factual or legal probable cause.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law
Acevedo v. Lynch
The definition of “child” in the Immigration and Nationality Act § 1101(c)(1) does not include stepchildren, and Congress did not intend § 1101(b)’s definition to apply to derivative citizenship under 8 U.S.C. § 1431(a).
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Edwards v. First American Corp.
To qualify for adjudication as a nationwide class, the class must have numerosity, commonality, typicality and adequacy; furthermore, the common issues must predominate over the individual issues.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
ONRC Action v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
When water is transferred from one portion of that body of water to another, and the bodies are not meaningfully distinct from one another, no pollutants are deemed added, and a permit under the Clean Water Act is not required.
Area(s) of Law:- Environmental Law
Bridewell-Sledge v. Blue Cross of Cal.
Under the Class Action Fairness Act, when two cases are consolidated they are to be viewed as one under a jurisdiction analysis.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
City of Oakland v Lynch
Judicial Review under the Administrative Procedure Act is precluded when the government’s decision to file a forfeiture action is committed to agency discretion by law, and when allowing the suit to proceed would impermissibly disrupt the existing forfeiture framework.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Salazar-Gonzales v. Lynch
In effective assistance of counsel is likely when an attorney advises a client to pursue relief that the client is statutory ineligible for, resulting in a the client’s inability to appeal.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
United States v. Chadwell
A district court has the discretion to provide technology to the jury in order to view properly admitted video evidence in the jury deliberation room.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
United States v. Rivera-Constantino
The standard definition of a crime should be used for sentencing when legislative intent informs the court what the definition was meant to be.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law