“Va. Ban On Spam Is Ruled Unlawful; E-Mail Restriction Called Violation of First Amendment”: The Washington Post on Saturday will contain an article that begins, “The Virginia Supreme Court yesterday ruled that the state’s anti-spam law, designed to prevent the sending of masses of unwanted e-mail, violates the First Amendment right to freedom of speech. Virginia Attorney General Robert F. McDonnell (R) promptly said he would appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
My earlier coverage of today’s Supreme Court of Virginia ruling appears at this link.
“Obama, McCain make a joint appearance — in frivolous lawsuits”: Michael Doyle of McClatchy Newspapers provides this report.
“$54 Million Pants Case Set for Appeal”: Jeff Jeffrey has this post today at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times.”
“Appeals court rules ‘Crosses’ can stay”: The Las Cruces (N.M.) Sun-News provides an update that begins, “Appeals have been denied in two lawsuits that argued the city of Las Cruces and its school district violated the U.S. Constitution by using Christian crosses in city logos and buildings. The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver this morning issued an opinion that affirmed a lower court ruling, dismissing a lawsuit by Las Crucens Paul Weinbaum and Martin Boyd against the city, and another lawsuit by Weinbaum against Las Cruces Public Schools.”
You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit at this link.
Why not include a smiley face in your appellate court ruling? Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner includes a smiley face in an opinion he issued today, and that opinion happens to be a dissent.
☺
“Va. court strikes down anti-spam law”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The Virginia Supreme Court declared the state’s anti-spam law unconstitutional Friday and reversed the conviction of a man once considered one of the world’s most prolific spammers. The court unanimously agreed with Jeremy Jaynes’ argument that the law violates the free-speech protections of the First Amendment because it does not just restrict commercial e-mails.”
You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Virginia at this link. The author of the opinion is former Justice G. Steven Agee, who now serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Second Circuit rejects antitrust challenge against the exclusive licensing agent for Major League Baseball clubs’ intellectual property: You can access today’s ruling by a three-judge, all female panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at this link. The case was argued on January 23, 2007.
“Supreme Court vetting process damaged by apparent leak, Newfoundland minister says; Hearn, who said some judges turned down invitations, says he didn’t know names”: Wednesday’s edition of The Toronto Globe and Mail contained an article that begins, “The federal government has permanently damaged its Supreme Court of Canada nomination process by appearing to leak confidential information about judicial candidates to a cabinet minister, Newfoundland and Labrador Justice Minister Jerome Kennedy said yesterday.”
“Lawsuit Rx: If we can’t sue drug companies, where’s the accountability?” Thomas Kostigen has this commentary online at MarketWatch.
“Supreme Court justice attends Notre Dame practice”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts stopped by the University of Notre Dame on Thursday to watch the Fighting Irish football team practice. Coach Charlie Weis talked to the team about the attacks on September 11th seven years ago, then Roberts talked to them about those serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. The practice and talks were closed to the media.”
“Supreme Court Justice Scalia to speak at UM Sept. 24”: Today’s issue of The Montana Kaimin contains an article that begins, “The University of Montana will welcome Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia as its fifth U.S. Supreme Court speaker on Sept. 24 in the University Theater.”
“State Supreme Court: Porreco prenup OK.” The Erie (Pa.) Times-News today contains an article that begins, “After circling through the legal system for nearly 10 years, a dispute over a fake diamond engagement ring and a prenuptial agreement has ended.”
“Conn. Supreme Court to hear cases at Law School today”: This article appears today in The Yale Daily News.
“Secret sex tape can’t be used, court says; Man accused of assault of wife in coma”: Today’s edition of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel contains an article that begins, “Prosecutors can’t use secret videotapes of a Watertown minister having sex with his comatose wife while she was in a nursing home, the 4th District Court of Appeals ruled Thursday. The man faces eight felonies — four counts of second-degree sexual assault of an unconscious person and four counts of third-degree sexual assault — as well as a misdemeanor. The case raises a number of issues, including a nursing home’s obligation to protect the health and safety of a patient, an individual’s right to privacy and questions of marital sexual abuse.”
And The Capital Times of Madison, Wisconsin reports today that “Appeals court throws out video evidence in nursing home sex case.”
My earlier coverage of yesterday’s ruling of the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, District IV, appears at this link.
“Panel lays out case against judge; Pace of proceedings in U.S. House lags”: This front page article appears today in The Times-Picayune of New Orleans.
My two earlier posts about the recently issued Order and Public Reprimand against U.S. District Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr. of the Eastern District of Louisiana appear immediately below.
