Posts

In re Hundley, No. 09-1899, concerned a dispute over ownership of a tax refund between a non-debtor spouse and the trustee of husband’s bankruptcy estate, involving a question of whether a non-debtor spouse is entitled to a portion of a pre-petition tax refund, where the couple filed a joint return and the non-debtor spouse earned no income for the tax year for which the return was filed. However, because there is no controlling statute or precedents on the issue, the matter is certified to the Massachusetts Supreme Court....

Earlier this month, the U.S. Senate invoked the so-called “nuclear option,” killing the ability of senators to stall voting on presidential nominees via the filibuster. Some have called the move a “power grab” by Democrats, and a “court-packing plan.” Others defend the move as a necessary reaction to unprecedented gridlock, and an appropriate response to Republicans’ continued refusals to confirm nearly any of President Obama’s nominees. Necessary or not, the move unquestionably reduces the ability of the minority party to debate the merits of nominees....

Among President Trump’s covfefe’s, dictating Donald Trump Jr.’s statement about a meeting with a Russian lawyer registers high on the Richter scale. The exact impact will be determined by history. Right now, it’s big enough that the special counsel has convened a grand jury amidst growing evidence concerning the Russia affair. It is a lesson for Trump but also for attorneys who dictate information for clients that is destined for third parties....

The Florida man who was sentenced to eight years for knowingly accessing a computer with intent to view child pornography got no relief from the Eleventh Circuit, which recently affirmed the lower court’s decision. The decision expands current law as to who may consent to give access to your materials in the face of a warrantless search. Wife Gave Password Access Eric Thomas’s wife accessed the couple’s computer and found child pornography....

Another admitting privileges case is making its way to the Fifth Circuit, this time from a Mississippi abortion law. On Monday, the Fifth Circuit notified the parties that it would hear oral arguments on April 28 from both the state of Mississippi and the Jackson Women’s Health Organization as to whether the Mississippi “admitting privileges” requirement should apply to the clinic. This case should remind you of the recently passed Texas law, and it may not be coincidence that neither case has been resolved yet....

Sure, keep your Post-It notes and legal pads, your expensive pens and marble paperweights. But when it comes to the important stuff – client files, court filings, memos and the like – your firm should be paperless. Going paperless makes it easier to maintain and organize your records, share information between members of your firm, and, frankly, it just makes it much easier to work in today’s always-connected environment. Here are seven of FindLaw’s best “how to go paperless” posts to help you out....

Gene Daniel Levoff, who was Apple’s senior director of corporate law, made some bad trades with his company shares. He didn’t lose money on the deals. According to reports, he sold nearly $10 million in stock over five days in 2015. The bad part, says the Security and Exchange Commission, was that he sold his shares based on inside information. Inside Information Levoff was part of Apple’s Disclosure Committee, and was responsible for telling employees not to trade during blackout periods....

Several years ago, Facebook users became aware that the social media giant could track them across websites that used Facebook tracking cookies. Some users became upset, but Facebook assured them that these cookies could track Facebook users only while they were logged in to Facebook. Except that turned out not to be true, either. Eventually, Facebook closed the glitch (was it a glitch?) allowing sites to track users’ activity even while they were logged out of Facebook....

Sullivan v. Leor Engy. LLC, No. 06-20867, involved an action for breach of an employment contract. The court of appeals affirmed the dismissal of the complaint on the grounds that 1) under Texas law, a contract for a stated term longer than one year is not taken out of the statute of frauds when there is a mere possibility of termination within one year due to contingent events set forth in the contract, including termination by a party; 2) payment of a salary for services rendered was insufficient to take the alleged agreement out of the statute of frauds because the services were fully explained by the salary without supposing any additional consideration; and 3) plaintiff’s equitable estoppel claim failed because he did not allege reliance damages....

The Civil Rights Act’s protections against discrimination ‘on the basis of sex’ do not protect gay and lesbian workers who face discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation, the Eleven Circuit ruled on Friday. But those earlier cases still stand, the Eleventh ruled, and they still bind the court’s interpretation of civil rights laws today. The case, Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital, arose after Jameka Evans quit her security guard job at a hospital after allegedly experiencing discrimination, harassment, and abuse because of her sexuality....

In Universal Concrete Prod. Corp. v. Turner Constr. Co., No. 09-1569, the Fourth Circuit dealt with the issue of the applicability and enforceability of a “pay-when-paid” clause agreed to by a general contractor and its subcontractor. As stated in the decision: “[W]e believe that under Virginia law, the contract unambiguously reflects both parties’ understanding that Universal would only be paid for its work after Turner was paid by the owner.” According to the facts in the case, by the time the subcontractor had substantially completed all of its work, the owner could no longer finance the project due to the recent collapse of the real estate market, and the general contractor could not pay the subcontractor because it had not been paid by the owner....

In US v. Scroggins, No. 08-10966, a defendant appealed his conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon claiming “that the government obtained evidence necessary to his conviction in violation of the Fourth Amendment and that his conviction is unconstitutional in light of the Second Amendment.” Furthermore, the Second Amendment argument fell short as “…those arguments are foreclosed by our circuit’s existing precedent. Prior to Heller, this circuit had already recognized an individual right to bear arms, and had determined that criminal prohibitions on felons (violent or nonviolent) possessing firearms did not violate that right…....

As our dear First Circuit court has remained relatively silent for the past week, we thought it might be a good opportunity to discuss an ongoing debate in First Circuit states: the proper limits on drone usage. New Hampshire Though we admire the spirit of the proposed legislation, it does seem to be quite flawed. It’s language prohibits the use of aerial or satellite photography where either a human or a man-made structure can be identified....

Megan Sands was seriously injured in a jet ski accident in 2006 while in the Bahamas. Sands filed a products liability action against Kawasaki, the jet ski manufacturer, under maritime law. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Sands on her design defect claim, and awarded her $3 million, The Nassau Guardian reports. The district court ultimately entered judgment for $1.5 million because the jury found that she was 50 percent responsible for her injuries....

A former EEOC judge’s lawsuit alleging discrimination and retaliation by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission can move forward, the Ninth Circuit ruled Monday. Mary Bullock served as an administrative law judge with the EEOC from 1999 to 2007, The Wall Street Journal reports. EEOC judges, of course, hear complaints alleging violations of federal employment-discrimination laws. But in an ironic twist, Bullock claims the EEOC discriminated against her because of her disability, and then unlawfully retaliated against her for filing a complaint....

As we grow older, our tastes mature. We start eating our broccoli. We prefer good cheese to mystery-flavored jellybeans. Waterparks lose favor as our vacation spot of choice. One thing that doesn’t change? We all hate going to the dentist. But today, we have a prison lawsuit out of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in which a Georgia prisoner argued that his rights were violated because he was not allowed to see a dentist....

Jaroslav Hornof, a seaman from the Czech Republic, is like a real-life version of Jason Bourne. He is not an assassin with long-term memory loss, but he was on a mission to uncover an explosive situation at sea. He secretly filmed a cargo ship pouring toxic oil into the water in violation of international law. Just as the shipping company was about to cut a deal with authorities, a federal judge in Maine shut it down....

Before you appeal a 12(b)(1) dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, ask yourself: Am I really sure this is a jurisdiction issue? Should we be debating a 12(b)(6) motion instead? That moment of reflection could save you the embarrassment of an appellate court’s admonishment that you don’t know the “fundamental difference” between 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) motions. The attorneys in a recent Jones Act appeal, no doubt, wish they had paused to consider that issue after the Fourth Circuit criticized both the parties in this appeal and the district court for misunderstanding the basics of subject matter jurisdiction....

Appeal by Objectors to Hurricane Settlement In In re: Katrina Canal Breaches Litig., No. 09-31156, an appeal by objecting members of a proposed settlement class of plaintiffs damaged or injured by Hurricanes Katrina or Rita, seeking review of the district court’s certification of a limited fund mandatory class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(1)(B) and its approval of a final class settlement, the court reversed where 1) the Supreme Court’s opinion in Ortiz v....

Judge Koh, dubbed (by us) “the most powerful woman in Silicon Valley,” flexed her judicial strength on Friday when she rejected a proposed settlement in the Silicon Valley anti-poaching antitrust lawsuit involving some of high-tech’s biggest players, reports Bloomberg. Finding the proposed settlement amount of $324 million “troubling” in light of plaintiffs’ substantial and compelling evidence, Judge Koh refused to approve the settlement. Let’s take a look at the reasons why....