FindLaw for Legal Professionals Constitutional Law

CAN'T FIND A COURT REPORTER WHEN YOU NEED ONE? Visit FindLaw's Legal MarketCenter, where you can review over 30,000 listings from a variety of legal support vendors. You can quickly and easily search by location and service category. Find your support services TODAY

U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals

Nieves-Vega v. Ortiz-Quinones (04/05/06 - No. 05-2043)

Summary judgment for defendants, employees of the Puerto Rico Planning Board, in a 42 U.S.C. 1983 case alleging political discrimination is affirmed where plaintiff's claim was time-barred, and plaintiff's extrajudicial claim seeking only equitable relief did not toll the statute of limitations.

http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/1st/052043.html

Cardona-Martinez v. Rodriguez-Quinones (04/06/06 - No. 04-1494)

Judgment as a matter of law for defendants in a political discrimination action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 is affirmed where the plaintiffs could not prove unlawful political discrimination because the positions from which they were removed were political positions.

http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/1st/041494.html

U.S. v. Landrau-Lopez (04/06/06 - No. 05-1299, 05-1300)

Conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine is affirmed where a jury instruction issued by the court did not incorrectly shift the burden of proof to the defendant, and where the admission of certain evidence was probative of knowledge, motive or intent and was not unduly prejudicial.

http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/1st/051299.html

Cruz-Gomez v. Rivera-Hernanez (04/07/06 - No. 05-1864)

Defendant's interlocutory appeal in a political discrimination case under 42 U.S.C. 1983 is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction where orders of the district court denying pretrial motions for summary judgment typically are not appealable at the time they are entered, and where the trial court found an issue of material fact concerning qualified immunity.

http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/1st/051864.html

U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals

Denney v. Jenkens & Gilchrist (04/03/06 - No. 05-1275)

Judgment certifying a class action is affirmed over claims that: 1) the class contains members who have not yet been assessed tax penalties and thus lack standing; 2) the representatives do not adequately represent the interests of all class members; 3) the district court erroneously conditioned certification on the reaching of a settlement; and 4) the district court violated due process and Rule 23(e) in failing to provide a second opt-out period when the settlement terms were finalized. Order approving a settlement with a law firm defendant is vacated.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/051275p.pdf

Cioffi v. Averill Park Bd. of Ed. (04/04/06 - No. 04-5593)

Grant of summary judgment in favor of school district, school board, and municipal defendants is reversed because plaintiff athletic director has shown sufficient factual issues regarding whether defendants abolished his position in retaliation for protected speech he made regarding a high school football hazing incident.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/045593p.pdf

Deegan v. City of Ithaca (04/06/06 - No. 04-4708)

Grant of summary judgment for defendants is reversed and remanded for entry of judgment in favor of plaintiff who alleged that his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when he was prevented, under purported authority of municipal noise ordinances, from preaching in Ithaca Commons.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/044708p.pdf

New York Ass'n of Homes & Servs. for the Aging, Inc. v. DeBuono (04/06/06 - No. 04-3448)

Grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants is affirmed because the challenges to the New York State budget measures aimed at controlling Medicaid costs are either barred by the Eleventh Amendment or are not susceptible to enforcement by the plaintiffs.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/043448p.pdf

U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals

US v. MacEwan (04/05/06 - No. 05-1421)

The use of the Internet satisfies the interstate commerce element of the federal law prohibiting the receipt of child pornography, 18 U.S.C. section 2252A(a)(2)(B).

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/3rd/051421p.pdf

U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals

US v. Milam (04/06/06 - No. 04-4224)

Sentences at bottom of guideline range, based on guilty pleas to aiding and abetting in distributing an unspecified quantity of Ecstasy, are vacated because the district court violated defendants' Sixth Amendment rights when it relied on facts stated in the presentence report to enhance the defendants' sentences beyond the statutory minimum.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/4th/044224p.pdf

U.S. v. Johnson (04/07/06 - No. 05-4378)

Sentences are presumptively reasonable within a properly calculated guidelines range where: 1) they are legislatively sanctioned and reviewed; 2) Congress identified a certain set of prominent factors under 18 U.S.C.A. section 3553(a) to use in sentencing determinations; and 3) where sentences are based on a factfinding process that invites defendants to raise objections and requires courts to resolve them.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/4th/054378p.pdf

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals

Nair v. Oakland County Cmty. Mental Health Auth. (04/04/06 - No. 05-1177)

Under circumstances where defendants raise sovereign immunity as an "alternative" ground for rejection of claims and under any circumstances in which a state (or the U.S.) declines to raise sovereign immunity as a threshold defense, federal courts have discretion to address the sovereign immunity defense and the merits in whichever order they prefer.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/6th/051177p.pdf

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Lindell v. Litscher (04/04/06 - No. 04-2020)

Summary judgment for defendants in a prisoner's suit against prison guards for violation of the Eighth Amendment is affirmed where: 1) there was no compelling reason for the guard to believe that the prisoner was at risk; 2) there is no right to be housed with cellmates of the same race or culture; and 3) the prisoner was capable of pro se representation.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/042020p.pdf

Mlynczak v. Bodman (04/04/06 - No. 04-3238)

Summary judgment for defendant in a race and gender discrimination and retaliation case involving the Department of Energy is affirmed where the plaintiffs did not present evidence that would convince a trier of fact that they had suffered discrimination or an adverse reaction to a protected activity.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/043238p.pdf

Tomic v. Catholic Diocese of Peoria (04/04/06 - No. 04-4219)

Dismissal of an age discrimination case because of the rule against federal jurisdiction over internal affairs of religious associations is affirmed where plaintiff's position involved a significant religious dimension and where the Diocese's statement that it was an equal opportunity employer did not affect the jurisdictional analysis.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/044219p.pdf

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals

Warnock v. Archer (04/04/06 - No. 05-1626, 05-1713)

An order holding defendants, a school district and its employees and officials, in contempt of an injunction prohibiting them from orchestrating or supervising prayers at ceremonies is affirmed where the finding of contempt was justified, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to impose monetary sanctions.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/051626p.pdf

La Tour v. City of Fayetteville (04/06/06 - No. 03-2824)

Orders favoring defendants in a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 challenge to the constitutionality of a municipal ordinance prohibiting plaintiff from displaying a flashing or blinking electronic sign are affirmed where the ordinance was content-neutral on its face, was narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest in aesthetics and traffic safety, and allowed ample alternative channels for communication of plaintiff's messages.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/032824p.pdf

U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals

State of Wyoming v. US Dep't of Interior (04/04/06 - No. 05-8026, 05-8027, 05-8035)

Order denying relief on all causes of action and dismissing an action alleging constitutional claims, violations of the Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act is affirmed in a dispute over agencies' alleged failure to manage and control the gray wolf population in Wyoming and to initiate delisting of the gray wolf as an endangered species.

http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/10th/058026.html

State of Wyoming v. Livingston (04/07/06 - No. 04-8085, 04-8087)

Grant of motions to dismiss misdemeanor prosecutions for trespass and littering brought against a federal officer and contractor involved in the federal reintroduction of wolves in Wyoming is affirmed where the district court properly granted defendants immunity based on the Supremacy Clause, since the evidence supported a suspicion that the prosecution was not a bona fide effort to punish a violation of state law, but rather an attempt to hinder a locally unpopular federal program.

http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/10th/048085.html

Supreme Court of Texas

In re Mays-Hooper (04/07/06 - No. 04-1040)

A petition for writ of mandamus challenging a trial court order granting a grandparent "possession" of a child for certain periods over the objection of the mother is conditionally granted where there was no evidence that the child's mother was unfit, that the child's health or emotional well-being would suffer if the court deferred to her decisions, or that the mother intended to exclude the grandmother's access completely.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/texasstatecases/sc/041040.pdf

California Appellate Districts

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. City of Turlock (04/05/06 - No. F047372)

Order denying a writ of mandate regarding a city zoning ordinance prohibiting the development of "big box" retail stores containing a full service grocery department is affirmed over a claim that defendant city unconstitutionally exceeded its police powers and failed to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act.

http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/caapp4th/slip/2006/f047372.html

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/f047372.pdf

Hillsboro Props. v. City of Rohnert Park (04/06/06 - No. A110441)

A property owner prevented from charging increased rent by a rent control ordinance eventually ruled unconstitutional is not entitled to recover the lost rental income, either from its tenants or from the city that imposed the limit, if the ordinance did not deny the owner a fair return on its investment.

http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/caapp4th/slip/2006/a110441.html

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/a110441.pdf

Come shop over 5,000 law books, legal forms, Westlaw resources, textbooks, and more--right from your desktop.

Click here to learn more.

Feedback Subscription Management Advertising

Opinion Summaries Archive. You may freely redistribute this e-mail in whole. This is a recurring mailing. This email address was submitted to FindLaw via http://newsletters.findlaw.com. Company Contacts

Copyright © 2006 FindLaw, a Thomson Business

You are currently subscribed to conlawcase as: abogado@pacbell.net.

To manage your newsletter accounts go to: http://newsletters.findlaw.com/nl/sub/review-account.jsp

or to unsubscribe, send a blank email to leave-conlawcase-1121106E@info.legalminds.org