“This case presents the novel issue of whether an individual can have a ‘reasonable expectation of privacy’ in a storage unit rented with a stolen identity.” The quote that forms the title of this post is not the plot of an upcoming episode of “Mad Men.” Rather, it’s the opening line of an opinion that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued today.

“Case Spurs Pharmacies’ Fears of Lawsuits Over Drug Abuse”: Wednesday’s edition of The Wall Street Journal will contain this article about a case pending before the Supreme Court of Nevada. You can freely access the full text of the article via Google News.

“US Dem Reps Craft Bill To Prevent Easily Dismissing Lawsuits”: Dow Jones Newswires have a report that begins, “Three Democratic lawmakers plan to introduce a bill next week that would override a recent Supreme Court ruling, and make it easier for plaintiffs to get their cases heard in court.”

“Small Law Firm Open Thread: Appellate Law.” David Lat has this post today at “Above the Law.”

“Full judicial panel to decide if torture suit should go to trial; Three judges of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that the claims by five men that they were tortured could go to trial; The Justice Department sought and was granted a rehearing”: Carol J. Williams of The Los Angeles Times has this news update.

My earlier coverage of today’s Ninth Circuit order granting rehearing en banc appears here and here.

This evening’s DVD selection: The film “American Violet.” You can access reviews here and here.

“U.S. Wins Bid for Court Rehearing in CIA Torture Suit”: Bloomberg News has this report.

And Howard Mintz of The San Jose Mercury News has an update headlined “Court to reconsider suit against S.J. company linked to torture flights.”

My earlier coverage of today’s Ninth Circuit order granting rehearing en banc appears at this link.

“Appeals panel dismisses Fla. Christian frat case”: The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued today.

“Waiter, There’s a Gavel in My Soup”: Yesterday at the “City Room” blog of The New York Times, Gay Talese had a post that begins, “My writer friend Sidney Offit and I were dining at Lumi’s on 70th Street and Lexington Avenue on Saturday night with our mutual friend, the enduringly beautiful 78-year-old model Carmen Dell’Orefice; and seated next to our table, quietly engaged in conversation with his wife, Jane, while sipping red wine, was the chief justice of the United States, John G. Roberts Jr.” (Via WSJ.com’s “Law Blog“).

“Wis. group: Justices shouldn’t have to step aside.” The Associated Press has a report that begins, “A powerful business group that spent millions of dollars to help elect two Wisconsin Supreme Court justices is proposing a rule that would allow them to hear its cases.”

And in somewhat related commentary, The Capital Times of Madison, Wisconsin has posted online an editorial entitled “Gableman’s bias is showing.”

“Judge seals damage award against Wyeth”: Today’s edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer contains an article that begins, “A Philadelphia jury yesterday awarded punitive damages to an Illinois woman who said Wyeth’s Prempro hormone replacement therapy caused her breast cancer, but the world will have to wait at least another month before anyone knows how much.”

And Bloomberg News reports that “Pfizer Unit’s Prempro Punitive Damages Verdict Remains Secret.”

“Court to reconsider CIA ‘torture flight’ ruling”: Bob Egelko of The San Francisco Chronicle has a news update that begins, “A federal appeals court granted the Obama administration’s request today to reconsider a ruling allowing foreign captives to sue a Bay Area company that reportedly helped to plan CIA flights to countries where the prisoners were allegedly tortured.”

Via the ACLU’s web page devoted to the case, you can access the federal government’s petition for rehearing en banc and the plaintiffs’ opposition thereto.

You can access today’s order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granting rehearing en banc at this link.

In April 2009, a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel issued this ruling in the case, which revived the rendition lawsuit. Next, in August 2009, the three-judge panel issued this amended ruling.

My posts covering the Ninth Circuit’s original ruling can be accessed here and here. And my posts covering the original Ninth Circuit oral argument of the case and previews of that oral argument can be accessed here, here, here, here, and here.

“For Class Actions, It’s All About Location”: Today in The Daily Journal of California, Lawrence Hurley has an article that begins, “When the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments in a major class action case next month, trial lawyers in California will face a severe threat to their ability to file certain claims in plaintiff-friendly state courts.”

“DC sniper Muhammad set to die by lethal injection”: The Associated Press has this report.

Eleventh Circuit affirms denial of qualified immunity to two police officers who shocked a man, who was neither accused nor suspected of a crime, with a Taser gun at least eight times over a two minute span, ultimately leading to his death: You can access yesterday’s ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit at this link.