“Offerman appeals judgment in bat attack case”: The Associated Press has a report that begins, “Former major league baseball player Jose Offerman is appealing a federal court order that he pay $940,000 to a catcher injured during a minor league brawl in 2007.”
Late last month, The Connecticut Post reported on the verdict in an article headlined “Jury awards Bluefish catcher $940k in bat-attack trial.”
My earlier coverage of this matter — linking to an article about the plaintiff, who is now a practicing attorney — can be accessed here.
“Court rules records of threats against Kasich are not public”: The Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch has a news update that begins, “The Ohio Supreme Court ruled today that records of threats against Gov. John Kasich are not public records since they contain information that could threaten the safety of the governor.”
You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Ohio at this link.
“Democrats embrace ‘McCutcheon’ decision; New ‘jumbo’ joint fundraising committee follows liberals’ harsh criticism of Supreme Court ruling”: The Center for Public Integrity has this report.
“State court: Workers’ comp OK for kickball injury.” The Associated Press has this report on a 3-to-2 ruling that the Supreme Court of South Carolina issued today.
“Appeal Judge Sees Tradition of Racism in Gay-Marriage Ban”: Andrew Harris of Bloomberg News has this report.
“Court overturns convictions in Amish hair attacks”: The Associated Press has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued today.
Circuit Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton delivered the opinion for the majority on a divided three-judge panel.
U.S. District Judge Edmund A. Sargus, Jr. (S.D. Ohio) (sitting by designation) begins his dissenting opinion as follows:
This is the first appellate case involving a religious hate crime under the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, 18 U.S.C. sec. 249. While I respect the majority’s efforts to construe a deceivingly simple, but actually complex, statute, I dissent. In my view, the majority has adopted an unduly restrictive interpretation of the statute.
You can access the dissenting opinion directly via this link.
Update: In other coverage, The Cleveland Plain Dealer has a news update headlined “Federal appeals court overturns Amish beard-cutting convictions, citing erroneous jury instructions.”
“Katyal ice bucket challenge”: Neal Katyal has today posted this video online at YouTube.
“U.S. District Judge Mark Fuller should resign”: Today’s edition of The Montgomery (Ala.) Advertiser contains an editorial that begins, “A federal judgeship exemplifies the concept of an office of public trust, perhaps more than any other. Federal judges wield great authority and exercise great influence in the judicial system — and they do so with the Constitution’s provision of a lifetime appointment.”
“Supreme Court may take up D.C. drug case; Civil liberties groups see judicial overreach”: Jim McElhatton of The Washington Times has this report.
“Cleveland’s ‘jock tax’ is legally justifiable, state tells Supreme Court”: The Cleveland Plain Dealer has this report.
You can view the State of Ohio’s amicus brief at this link, while the brief for appellant — former Chicago Bears linebacker Hunter T. Hillenmeyer — can be accessed here.
“In Boise, Justice Scalia calls Idaho water review ‘a great state triumph’; The state asserts its authority by securing water rights along with those of Indian tribes”: The Idaho Statesman has this report.
“Supreme Court social media rap-lyrics case brings Eminem into the fold; When does online speech become a ‘true threat’ unprotected by the US Constitution?” David Kravets of Ars Technica had this report yesterday.
You can view the merits brief for appellant filed last week in the U.S. Supreme Court in Elonis v. United States at this link.
“Indefensible: Why Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s lawyer is leaving the defense team — and the Army.” Gabriel Urza has this jurisprudence essay online today at Slate.
“Nice Try, Obama — The president’s latest accommodation to the contraception mandate has one problem: Religious employers won’t go for it.” Emily Bazelon has this jurisprudence essay online today at Slate.
“How the Supreme Court Protects Bad Cops”: Erwin Chemerinsky will have this op-ed in Wednesday’s edition of The New York Times.
“Federal appeals court says groups can sue over Blair Mountain”: Paul J. Nyden of The Charleston (W. Va.) Gazette has this news update.
Reuters reports that “U.S. court rules for groups defending historic site from coal mining.”
And The Hill has a report headlined “Court: Greens can sue to protect coal labor battle site.”
You can access today’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit at this link.
“Appellate court to hear arguments on island for first time in 12 years”: The Pacific Daily News of Guam has this report.
You can click here to learn the identities of the three judges who are making the very lengthy flight to Guam to hear a total of 90 minutes worth of oral arguments.
In the September 2014 issue of ABA Journal magazine: Mark Walsh has an article headlined “Home-care aides don’t owe union fees, but court stops short of overruling a key precedent.”
And the new installment of Bryan A. Garner’s “On Words” column is headlined “Stop: Before you hit ‘send’ . . . .”
“Gripes About Federal Bench: Banal to Bizarre; Peek into 11th Circuit misconduct file shows many complaints, no discipline.” Alyson M. Palmer will have this article in Wednesday’s edition of The Fulton County Daily Report.
You can freely access the full text of the article via Google News.
“Thousands of Electronic Case Files Lost in Transition”: Today at WSJ.com’s “Law Blog,” Joe Palazzolo has a post that begins, “The federal judiciary has ditched years of electronic court documents, as part of a migration to a new system, a courts spokeswoman said.”
The official announcement of the news — which will affect electronic access to certain case files of four federal appellate courts — can be accessed here.
Update: In other coverage, Joe Mullin of Ars Technica reports that “US courts trash a decade’s worth of online documents, shrug it off; For pre-2010 documents in three appeals courts, you’ll have to go in person.”
“U.S. Supreme Court expert joins legal team fighting Oklahoma’s same-sex marriage ban; Stanford University’s Jeffrey L. Fisher will be lead counsel for the Tulsa County couple at the center of Oklahoma’s same-sex marriage case”: Chris Casteel of The Oklahoman has this report.
“Birmingham attorney Donald Watkins tells U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice that federal judge Mark Fuller should be removed from bench”: The Birmingham News has this update.
And last Thursday, the AL.com Editorial Board posted online an editorial titled “Personal failings should lead federal judge to resign.”
Access online the audio from today’s Seventh Circuit oral argument in the Indiana same-sex marriage case: Via this link (17.7 MB mp3 audio file). Update: The oral argument in the Wisconsin same-sex marriage case can now be accessed via this link (22.8 MB mp3 audio file).
In early coverage, Jill Disis and Tim Evans of The Indianapolis Star have a news update headlined “Judges quiz state about gay marriage ban’s impact on kids.”
Patrick Marley of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has a news update headlined “Court calls Wisconsin, Indiana gay marriage bans into question.”
And Michael Tarm of The Associated Press reports that “Judges blast Indiana, Wisconsin gay marriage bans.”
Update: In other coverage, Reuters reports that “U.S. appeals court challenges states on gay marriage bans.”
Bloomberg News has this updated report.
And Chris Geidner of BuzzFeed reports that “Indiana, Wisconsin Lawyers Get Tough Questions Over States’ Marriage Bans; The three 7th Circuit Court of Appeals judges appeared ready to strike down Indiana’s law and Wisconsin’s constitutional amendment banning same-sex couples from marrying.”
“Philip Morris Loses Bid to Toss Military Contract Litigation”: Bloomberg News has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued today.
And in other coverage, Lawrence Hurley of Reuters reports that “Philip Morris ordered to defend fraud suit over U.S. military vendors.”
“Same-sex marriage case: A look at the dueling attorneys.” Tim Evans of The Indianapolis Star has this report.
Patrick Marley and Dana Ferguson of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel previewed today’s oral argument in an article headlined “Federal court to take up gay marriage bans in Wisconsin, Indiana.”
And Bloomberg News reports that “Wisconsin, Indiana Join Rush for Same-Sex Marriage Review.”
“New plea to limit gun rights in D.C.” Lyle Denniston has this post today at “SCOTUSblog.”
“Crowds line up to hear federal gay marriage appeal”: The Associated Press has this report from Chicago.
When the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit posts online the audio of today’s oral arguments, I will link to it.
“We decline to rule that Strickland requires an appellate attorney to read advance sheets and consider newly-decided cases in the weeks or months after a direct appeal is fully briefed, argued, and submitted for decision.” So rules the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in a decision issued today rejecting a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel in a criminal case.
Received in yesterday’s mail: An advance review copy of the forthcoming book “Judging Statutes,” by Robert A. Katzmann. The book’s author currently serves as Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
The book’s announced on-sale date is September 11, 2014. According to the publisher’s web page, the book “[o]ffers a powerful challenge to Antonin Scalia’s textualist approach” and presents “[a] spirited and compelling defense of why judges must look at the legislative record behind a law — and not merely the statute itself.”
“Indiana, Wisconsin couples in gay marriage case”: The Associated Press has this report.
The three-judge Seventh Circuit panel assigned to hear and decide these cases, being orally argued today, consists of Circuit Judges Richard A. Posner, Ann Claire Williams. and David F. Hamilton.
“Republican Lawyers’ Latest Sneak Attack on Obamacare Is Their Most Brazen Yet”: Simon Lazarus has this essay online at The New Republic.
Last week at the “Balkinization” blog, Rob Weiner had a post titled “Taking Liberties with the Last Word.”
And in response, at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Jonathan H. Adler had a post titled “Taking liberties with law and word — a surreply to Rob Weiner.”
“The Witness: For more than a decade, it was Michelle Lyons’s job to observe the final moments of death row inmates — but watching 278 executions did not come without a cost.” Pamela Colloff will have this article in the September 2014 issue of Texas Monthly.
“Journalists, ACLU file federal lawsuit over botched Oklahoma execution; A group of international and local journalists are suing the Oklahoma Corrections Department, alleging the closing of the blinds during the botched execution of Clayton Lockett violated the public’s First Amendment rights”: Graham Lee Brewer has this article in today’s edition of The Oklahoman.
The Guardian (UK) reports that “ACLU challenges Oklahoma over first amendment violation in execution; The Guardian and the Oklahoma Observer join ACLU in arguing the state acted unconstitutionally by drawing a screen during Clayton Lockett execution.”
The Oklahoma Observer reports that “Lawsuit Seeks Uncensored Access To Executions.”
And The Associated Press reports that “News media sue over Oklahoma execution procedures.”
Yesterday, the ACLU issued this news release and posted online the complaint initiating suit.
“Federal appeals court questions Kansas’ proof-of-citizenship rules”: The Wichita Eagle has this news update.
And The Associated Press reports that “Appeals court questions proof-of-citizenship rules.”
“First Day of Classes Without Dan Markel”: WCTV in Tallahassee has this report today.
