Willamette Law Online

(34 summaries)

Samuel Rayburn

9th Circuit Court of Appeals

TitleExcerptFilling Date
Lal v. CaliforniaCivil Rights § 1983: Ninth Circuit upholds qualified immunity in officer involved shooting where "suspect posed an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others." Further, qualified immunity "does not become less if [the] assailant is motivated to commit 'suicide by cop.'"(03-31-2014)
United States v.Morales-IsabarrasImmigration: Delays in executing a warrant under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(i) must be "'reasonably necessary,' taking into account 'the legitimate interests of the defendant and the government."(03-13-2014)
United States v. WilliamsCriminal Procedure: An Alford plea to a state charge does not provide sufficient evidence “to prove commission of a state crime for purposes of a federal supervised release violation” when the state does not treat the plea as “sufficiently probative of the fact that the defendant actually committed the acts constituting the crime or crimes of conviction.” (02-03-2014)
Legal Voice v. Stormans, Inc. Civil Procedure: A non-party may appeal an interlocutory order within thirty days after entry of final judgment to the same extent that a party may appeal such an order.(12-31-2013)
United States v. Roybal Criminal Law: Allowing a child pornography victim to access pornographic images stored on a computer and “create copies of those images” constitutes “distribution” under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2), regardless of whether the "child victim was in-person rather than over the internet."(12-10-2013)
Seven Arts v. Content MediaCopyright: When parties are in a “close relationship,” the three-year statute of limitations under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 507(b), will bar an untimely claim “for copyright infringement where the gravamen of the dispute is ownership." (11-06-2013)
United States v. TostiCriminal Procedure: The Fourth Amendment does not protect information that is voluntarily turned over to a third party and then subsequently viewed by law enforcement officers.(10-01-2013)
Wild Fish Conservancy v. JewellAdministrative Law: Section 8 of the Reclamation Act of 1902 "makes clear that Congress did not intend to permit private parties who lack water rights a private right of action to compel enforcement of state law against federal agencies."(09-11-2013)
Flores v. DanielsonBankruptcy Law: Under 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b)(1)(B), a bankruptcy court may confirm a Chapter 13 plan if it is at least as long as the period set forth in § 1325(b)(4); Maney v. Kagenveama’s holding that “§ 1325(b)(1)(B) does not impose a minimum duration for a Chapter 13 plan” for debtors with no projected income is overruled.(08-29-2013)
Ching v. MayorkasImmigration: An individual has a protected property interest in an I-130 visa petition and therefore "is entitled to the protections of due process." (08-07-2013)
Brown v. Electronic Arts, Inc.Trademarks: Video games are expressive works "entitled to the same First Amendment protection as great literature, plays, or books," and, as a result, claims asserted against video game manufactures under the Lanham Act are subject to the Rogers test.(07-31-2013)
Woods v. CareyAttorney Fees: Provision of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 USC 1997e(d)(2), capping attorney fees to 150% of the monetary judgment "does not apply to fees incurred on appeal by a prisoner who successfully defends the verdict he obtained in the district court." (07-17-2013)
City of San Buenaventura v. The Ins. Co. of Pa.Insurance Law: "Continuous exposure" and "continuous damage" language in an insurance policy will not provide a remedy for an occurrence arising prior to coverage. (06-26-2013)
Regalado-Escobar v. HolderImmigration: Opposition to a political party's violence constitutes a "political opinion that is a protected ground for asylum purposes."(06-05-2013)
United States v. Sandoval-OrellanaCriminal Law: Sexual penetration by a foreign object, in violation of Cal. Penal Code § 289(a)(1), "involves a substantial risk of the use of force against another and therefore qualifies as an aggravated felony crime" as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F).(05-09-2013)
Sams v. Yahoo! Inc. Civil Law: The good faith reliance defense available under the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2703(e), is satisfied when "the defendant complies with a subpoena that appears valid on its face, in the absence of any indication of irregularity sufficient to put the defendant on notice that the subpoena may be invalid or contrary to applicable law."(04-15-2013)
United States v. HayatCriminal Law: Exclusion of hearsay statements which may help establish the bias of a witness does not violate the confrontation clause if the facts already on the record were "adequate to develop the issues of bias."(03-12-2013)
Inst. of Cetacean Research v. Sea ShepherdAdmiralty: A piracy claim requires acts "committed for private ends... [which] include those pursued on personal, moral or philosophical grounds." Belief that your actions serve the public does not insulate them from piracy claims.(02-25-2013)
Inst. of Cetacean Research v. Sea ShepherdAdmiralty: A piracy claim requires acts "committed for private ends... [which] include those pursued on personal, moral or philosophical grounds." Belief that your actions serve the public does not insulate them from piracy claims.(02-25-2013)
United States v. PleasantSentencing: A defendant’s “agreed sentencing range” is not necessarily his “applicable sentencing range.” “The applicable guideline range is determined before consideration of any departure provision in the Guidelines Manual or any variance.”(01-02-2013)
United States v. Hernandez-EstradaCriminal Law: To successfully plead violations of the Jury Selection Service Act of 1968, a plaintiff must show a substantial interference with the "Act's key goals of randomness and objectivity."(12-05-2012)
Miller v. WrightIndian Law: Entering into and complying with the legal requirements of a state contract does not amount to waiver of an Indian Tribe's sovereign immunity.(11-13-2012)
United States Aviation Underwriters v. NabtescoCivil Law: The eighteen-year statue of ultimate repose under § 2(a)(1)(A) of the General Aviation Revitalization Act "commences with the delivery date of the used part to its first purchaser."(10-02-2012)
Montes-Lopez v. HolderImmigration: An alien denied his statutory right to counsel during an immigration proceeding does not need to show "he was prejudiced by the absence of the attorney."(09-18-2012)
Lacey v. Maricopa CountyCivil Law: A claim against a party "dismissed with prejudice, and without leave to amend" is considered preserved for appeal, regardless of whether the dismissed party is included in a repled complaint.(08-29-2012)
United States v. Acosta-SierraCriminal Law: The proper standard to apply for a “criminal assault charge based on causing the apprehension of imminent bodily injury, under 18 U.S.C. § 111, is that of a “reasonable person who observes what the official observes.”(08-15-2012)
Carlin v. DairyAmerica, Inc.Civil Law: The USDA possesses sufficient regulatory authority over "agency-set minimum prices for raw milk" to make applicable the filed rate doctrine. The USDA’s expression of disapproval of prices set, while not necessarily an explicit rejection, may preclude application of the doctrine.(08-07-2012)
Terenkian v. Republic of IraqCivil Procedure: When asserting jurisdiction over a foreign country under the commercial activity exception of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. §1602, et seq., a plaintiff must assert more than the mere execution of a contract within the boarders of the United States and/or prove the action constituted a "legally significant act" which had a "direct effect on the United States."(07-16-2012)
Pacific Rivers Council v. USFSEnvironmental Law: An Environmental Impact Statement related to proposed changes of a forest regulated by the National Forest Management Act must, where "reasonably possible," take a "hard look" at the environmental consequences on wildlife likely to be affected by changes to the land.(06-20-2012)
M.M. v. Lafayette School DistrictAdministrative Law: In challenging an administrative proceeding under 20 U.S.C. § 1400 [italics]et seq[/italics] ., the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, a party may not seek review in district court until the ALJ makes a final decision as to all claims.(06-06-2012)
Alday v. Raytheon CompanyContract Law: When a collective bargaining agreement clearly establishes rights for eligible retired employees, their rights cannot be abrogated by clauses contained in an ERISA plan that is not incorporated into the collective bargaining agreement.(05-21-2012)
Buckwalter v. Nevada Board of Medical ExaminersCivil Rights § 1983: When exercising its summary suspension powers, the Nevada Board of Medical Examiners is performing a function "comparable to a judicial act" and is afforded absolute immunity from liability.(04-26-2012)
Brantley v. NBC Universal, Inc.Civil Law: To state a valid claim under the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, a plaintiff must plead facts that show actual injury to competition. It is not enough to allege a reduction of consumer choice or increased prices without demonstrating actual anticompetitive effects.(03-30-2012)
Angle v. MillerCivil Law: Ballot initiative legislation that requires initiative proponents to obtain signatures equal to 10 percent of the registered voters in the prior general election from each of a states congressional districts, does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause or the First Amendment.(03-14-2012)