Willamette Law Online

(6 summaries)

Edwin Shoaf

9th Circuit Court of Appeals

TitleExcerptFilling Date
Monge v. Maya Magazines, Inc.Copyright: In a Copyright issue, the fair use doctrine does not protect unauthorized use of copyrighted material when that use was: commercial and non-transformative; the first instance of that material being published; total; and the use destroys the potential market for the material.(08-14-2012)
United States v. MeredithCriminal Law: Evidence supporting convictions for conspiracy and fraud is sufficient where the defendant’s speech underlying the crime was “integral to [the] criminal conduct,” and therefore unprotected under the First Amendment.(06-26-2012)
United States v. FerroConstitutional Law: In an [italics]in rem[/italics] forfeiture proceeding under 18 U.S.C. § 924(d), the determination of whether a forfeiture violates the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment should be based solely on the actions of the actual property owner, and the actions of the person that caused the forfeiture to occur.(06-12-2012)
Thomas v. ChappellHabeas Corpus: When a defense attorney unreasonably fails to investigate and locate witnesses to corroborate a witness’s critical testimony and support the primary defense strategy of third-party culpability in a difficult-to-decide case, such performance prejudices the defendant.(05-10-2012)
Stengel v. Medtronic Inc.Preemption: A claim under state law challenging the safety of medical equipment given premarket approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is preempted by the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) if the state law provides a requirement “different from” FDCA requirements. Further, a plaintiff’s claim of injury based on a medical equipment manufacturer’s failure to report information to the FDA is invalid, because the FDCA does not provide a private right of action.(04-16-2012)
United States v. RodriguesPost-Conviction Relief: A conviction for theft of honest services, based on a jury instruction lacking a kickback element, prior to the Supreme Court case Skilling v. United States is not in error if the record contains no evidence that could rationally lead to a contrary finding with regard to the new element.(03-27-2012)