“Effective September 24, 2014, the Clerk’s Office will no longer provide change to paying customers. Exact change will be required if you choose to pay with cash.” The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit posted this announcement online today.
Imagine, hypothetically, that the first customer of the day pays exact change to the Fifth Circuit’s clerk’s office for a payment due of $4.00. Assume further that the second customer of the day owes a fee of $6.00 but only has two $5 bills. Presumably in this hypothetical scenario, at least, the Fifth Circuit’s clerk’s office actually could provide change to the second customer of the day if it wanted to.
“A Conversation Between Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Professor Robert A. Stein”: You can view at this link the video of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s remarks yesterday at the University of Minnesota Law School.
“High court: Photography law is ‘unconstitutional.'” The San Antonio Express-News has this report on a ruling that the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas issued today.
According to the article, “The law had banned taking photos or videos of anyone in public without consent if they were to be used for sexual gratification.”
“Coming of Age for the Federal Circuit”: Law professor Robin Feldman will have this article in a forthcoming issue of The Green Bag.
In reports from The National Law Journal’s “Supreme Court Brief”: Marcia Coyle reports that “Orrick Hires Five Former Supreme Court Clerks” (freely access the full text via Google News) and “Professor Examines Nixon, Hoover Role in Fortas’ Fall” (freely access the full text via Google News).
And Tony Mauro has an article headlined “Arm in a Cast, Sotomayor Tours Oklahoma and Meets Tribal Leaders” (freely access the full text via Google News).
“Gucci, Tiffany dealt blow in fake goods case against China banks”: Reuters has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today.
“Book Review: David Lat’s Supreme Ambitions.” Steve Klepper has this post today at the “Maryland Appellate Blog.”
“Schooling the Supreme Court on Rap Music: Is it art or a true threat of violence?” Dahlia Lithwick has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.
“Opponents of Wisconsin voter ID law seek reversal of court’s decision”: Patrick Marley of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has this news update.
The Wisconsin State Journal reports that “Groups appeal voter ID ruling, allege ‘eleventh-hour’ changes will disenfranchise thousands.”
And Bloomberg News reports that “Wisconsin Voter ID Ruling Assailed in ACLU Reversal Bid.”
I linked to the petition for rehearing en banc filed late yesterday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in this post earlier today.
“Model Networking Site Must Face Rape Victim’s Lawsuit”: Karen Gullo of Bloomberg News has this report.
And Courthouse News Service reports that “Claim by Woman Raped by Model Mayhem Users Revived by 9th Circ.”
My earlier coverage of today’s Ninth Circuit ruling can be accessed here.
“Richard Shelby: Judge Mark Fuller should resign.” Mary Orndroff Troyan and Brian Lyman of The Montgomery Advertiser have a news update that begins, “Sen. Richard Shelby on Wednesday called for U.S. District Judge Mark Fuller to step down from the bench, joining a growing chorus of federal lawmakers seeking the judge’s resignation after his arrest on domestic violence charges last month.”
The Pa. Supreme Court denies review of four rulings addressing the impact of federal preemption, in the aftermath of Mensing and Bartlett, on state law personal injury claims brought by plaintiffs injured as the result of ingesting Reglan and/or metoclopramide: I will link to the specific orders of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, docketed this afternoon, denying review in all four cases when they are posted online later today. (Update: The orders denying review can be accessed here, here, here, and here.)
Back on June 29, 2013, I had this post linking to the Pa. Superior Court‘s rulings in all four cases, which I had orally argued on appeal on behalf of the plaintiffs.
Update: In early news coverage, P.J. D’Annunzio of The Legal Intelligencer reports that “Justices Decline to Hear Reglan Preemption Cases.” You can freely access the full text of the article via Google News.
And Law360.com reports that “Pa. High Court Nixes Appeal In Reglan Preemption Battle” (subscription required for full access).
“Barry Bonds appeal heads back to court”: The Associated Press has this report.
Tomorrow, an 11-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will convene a rehearing en banc in the case.
Federal Circuit evades the allure of Fed. R. Civ. P. 19(a), votes to deny rehearing en banc of mandatory joinder issue: You can access today’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denying rehearing en banc, and the concurrence and two dissents therefrom, at this link.
Model Mayhem indeed: Construing the Communications Decency Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today reversed a district court’s dismissal of a failure to warn claim against the owner of the Model Mayhem website.
According to today’s Ninth Circuit ruling, the plaintiff — an aspiring model — alleged that two rapists used the website to lure her to a fake audition, where they drugged her, raped her, and recorded her for a pornographic video. Today’s decision holds that the Communications Decency Act did not bar plaintiff’s claim under California law alleging that the owner of the Model Mayhem site is liable for negligent failure to warn.
In April 2012, Courthouse News Service reported on the filing of the lawsuit in an article headlined “Model Claims Website Hushed Up Rapes.”
“It is this bedrock principle — known as the heckler’s veto doctrine — that the panel overlooks, condoning the suppression of free speech by some students because other students might have reacted violently.” So writes Circuit Judge Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain, in his dissent from a denial of rehearing en banc that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued today.
My coverage of the original three-judge panel’s ruling (which reissued today in amended form) appeared in a post titled “Ninth Circuit rules that high school administrators did not violate the First Amendment by barring students from coming to school on Cinco de Mayo with shirts containing the American flag.”
Update: In early coverage, Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has a report headlined “American flag T-shirt case: Court refuses to rehear challenge.”
Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle reports that “Morgan Hill schools’ ban on U.S. flag shirts upheld.”
And The Associated Press reports that “Court won’t reconsider school’s US flag shirt ban.”
“Arguments in Gilbert church sign case set for 2015”: Howard Fischer of The East Valley Tribune has this report.
“VirnetX to Vringo’s Lost Millions Show Patent Peril”: Susan Decker of Bloomberg News has this report, in which she notes that “[a] dozen smaller claims have been tossed by trial judges after the U.S. Supreme Court limited software patents in June.”
“BP Pulls Old College Trick, Fiddles With Line Spacing to Beat Court Filing Page Limit”: Elliot Hannon has this post online at Slate.
“The Disappearing ‘Undue Burden’ Standard for Abortion Rights”: Jeffrey Toobin has this daily comment online at The New Yorker.
“The Supreme Court takes a civil case on the sanctity of jury deliberations”: Senior U.S. District Judge Richard G. Kopf has this interesting post today at his “Hercules and the Umpire” blog.
“Assessing the Supreme Court”: Erwin Chemerinsky has this op-ed in today’s edition of The Orange County Register.
“Supreme Court ruling hasn’t stopped police from warrantless requests for data; Police continue to request Canadians’ personal information from telecoms; Sometimes with a warrant, sometimes without a warrant”: This front page article appears in today’s edition of The Toronto Star.
She sells Seychelles: The Seychelles News Agency reports that “Seychelles Supreme Court re-opens; acting CJ calls for the justice system to be revitalized into a centre of judicial excellence for the region.”
“Tories fast-tracked Supreme Court appointment after Globe report”: Today’s edition of The Toronto Globe and Mail contains a front page article that begins, “The federal government says it abandoned its normal process when it named Justice Clement Gascon to the Supreme Court in June because it was worried about leaks to The Globe and Mail detailing the flawed selection process used to choose the last candidate.”
And CBC News reports that “Harper sidestepped MPs on Supreme Court pick due to Nadon ‘leaks’; Justice Minister Peter MacKay’s claims ‘a bit rich,’ says NDP MP Francoise Boivin.”
“Targeted killings and the rule of law: Tactic is here to stay; legal system needs to catch up with military technology.” Law professor Alan M. Dershowitz has this op-ed in today’s edition of The Boston Globe.
“Will the Supreme Court Let Arizona Fight Gerrymandering? Voters cut their legislature out of the redistricting process; Now legislators want the Supreme Court to deal them back in.” Law professor Garrett Epps has this essay online at The Atlantic.
“Read the En Banc Brief in 7th Circuit Wisconsin Voter ID Case”: Rick Hasen has this post today at his “Election Law Blog.” You can access the petition for rehearing en banc at this link.
“Justice Ginsburg shares her views at U forum — up to a point”: In today’s edition of The Pioneer Press of St. Paul, Minnesota, Elizabeth Mohr has an article that begins, “At times deeply personal and funny, but ever the socially relevant public figure-cum-pop icon she’s known to be, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg appeared at the University of Minnesota on Tuesday evening for an intimate conversation.”
“Justice Clarence Thomas warns of constitutional ignorance during UT Tyler appearance”: The Tyler (Tex.) Morning Telegraph has this report.
