Emily Guildner

9th Circuit Court of Appeals (31 summaries)

Lim v. Holder

The “continuous presence exception” available to aliens who served in active duty in the United States Armed Forces is a limited exception to cancellation of removal and does not extend to another country’s military.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

United States v. Brizan

Criminal Procedure: A waiver of appeal in a plea agreement will be upheld as long the district court conducts a thorough Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 colloquy and the sentence does not contradict any plea agreement or exceed a statutory limit.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Smith v. Hedgpeth

For purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause, “[c]learly established federal law does not require the consideration of sentencing enhancements when determining if one offense is a lesser-included offense of another under the ‘same elements’ test.”

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

United States v. Sideman & Bancroft, LLP

A taxpayer's Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination is not violated where it is established that, before issuing an administrative summons relating to a criminal investigation of that taxpayer, the IRS had independent knowledge of the summonsed documents’ existence and authenticity, and of the respondent’s possession of the documents.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tax Law

Medrano v. Flagstar Bank

A mortgage-loan servicer's duty to respond under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2605, is not triggered unless the borrower includes her name and account information, the reasons the borrower believes the account is in error, and a request for information regarding the service of the loan.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Law

Akhtar v. Mesa

In a civil rights case, a prisoner's pro se status requires courts to explain deficiencies in the prisoner's complaint and allow leave to amend before dismissal with prejudice.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Rights § 1983

Western Watersheds Project v. Ellis

Denial of attorney fees is not an abuse of discretion if the court considered both the reasonableness of the administrative decision and the reasonableness of the litigation.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Attorney Fees

Maxwell v. County of San Diego

Law enforcement officials can be held liable for constitutional violations if they leave a victim in a more dangerous situation than that in which they found her and if the detention of witnesses is more than minimally intrusive.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Greene Archives v. Marilyn Monroe

Judicial estoppel precludes a party from asserting California’s posthumous right of publicity where that party “consistently represented during probate proceedings and elsewhere that [the celebrity] was domiciled in New York to avoid payment of California estate taxes.”

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

FTC v. EDebitPay

A party who stipulated to terms in a contract may not later attack those terms as overly broad or vague.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Contract Law

Rodriguez v. Disner

Under long standing equitable principles, a district court has broad discretion to deny fees to an attorney who commits an ethical violation, such as representing clients with conflicting interests, regardless of whether or not the clients are harmed by the ethical violation.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Attorney Fees

In Re ATM Fee Antitrust Litigation

Plaintiffs alleging price fixing of ATM fees may not bring an antitrust lawsuit when they are not direct payers of the fee.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Standing

CGI Technologies and Solutions v. Rose

Courts cannot be limited by contract terms in their ability to act as a court of equity, and may consider traditional equitable defenses under § 502(a)(3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Law

Brewers v. Commissioner SSA

Materials reviewed by the appeals council for the first time are accepted into the administrative record even if the appeals council denied a review of the administrative law judges' opinion.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

Flournoy v. Small

Federal law does not clearly establish a Confrontation Clause violation where the trial court allows a forensic expert to testify based on reports prepared by other analysts.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Wood v. San Diego

A pension plan that has a disparate impact with respect to sex does not violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, so long as the pension plan is facially neutral.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

In Re Jacobson

The homestead exemption requirement of reinvestment of proceeds applies to homestead sales that occur after a bankruptcy judgment has already been entered.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Bankruptcy Law

Ben-Sholom v. Ayers

A defendant who fails to show prejudice by counsel’s failure to present a state of mind defense does not establish a right to habeas relief, and therefore is not entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel during the guilt-phase of trial.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

Kilgore v. KeyBank, Nat'l Ass'n

The Federal Arbitration Act preempts state law when enforcing arbitration agreements in contracts; unless there is some reason to revoke the contract.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Preemption

Towery v. Ryan

An attorney did not abandon his client by failing to raise a colorable claim on a habeas corpus petition when considering all the circumstances the attorney's behavior did not breach the duty of loyalty.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

Gomez Zarate v. Holder

Removal from the United States after a criminal proceeding, even if not in front of a Immigration Judge, is enough to break the continuous and uninterrupted presence requirement on an application for cancellation of removal.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

Perry v. Brown

Proposition 8, which defines marriage in California as between a man and a woman, is an unconstitutional violation of Equal Protection.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Farris v. Seabrook

Washington campaign contribution restrictions to committees in recall elections are an impermissible restriction on Free Speech.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Family PAC v. McKenna

Ballot measure disclosure requirements do not violate the first amendment when they are substantially related to important government interests.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

United States v. Leal-Felix

Traffic citations are not arrests under the traditional definition and therefore should not be included in calculating a sentence based on the Sentencing Guidelines.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Rhodes v. Blades

Motion for stay of execution based on a pending Supreme Court case is not granted if the petitioner waits until the deadline and is unable to demonstrate why the pending case would change the outcome for the petitioner.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

Glenn v. Washington County

Summary judgment is appropriate only when there is no genuine issue of material fact. In the case of qualified immunity for police officers the actions of the officer should be objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

Russell Country Sportsmen v. USFS

The Montana Wilderness Study Act of 1977 provides for a minimum standard for maintaining wilderness character. A final environmental impact statement will not violate the National Environmental Policy Act if the adopted plan falls within a range of alternatives and does not make any substantial changes.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Environmental Law

Gonzales v. Arrow Financial Services

Debt collection practice will be judged by the least sophisticated debtor standard, which protects those of below average intelligence but presumes a basic level of understanding. Unfair collection practices may also be compensated under both federal and state law.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Law

United States v. Ayala-Nicanor

A categorical crime of violence warrants an increased offense level during the sentencing phase if the statutory definition complies with the federal definition and no state cases have applied the statute more broadly than the federal definition.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Sivak v. Hardison

Prosecutors, that knew or should have known that given material information was false or material information was withheld, violate a defendant’s due process rights according to the Brady and Napue standards.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure