Legal News

Case Summaries

Civil Rights

[12/31] Haybarger v. Lawrence County Adult Prob. & Parole
In a case alleging violations of both federal and state antidiscrimination laws, plaintiff's employer is not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity from her Rehabilitation Act claim. Although the employer does not receive federal funds, it is one of many subunits of the Fifty-Third Judicial District, one of which receives federal funds.

[12/30] Taylor v. United Parcel Serv. Inc.
In a race discrimination and retaliation suit brought by an African-American employee, district court erred in granting summary judgment to the employer where: 1) all claims were timely because the statute of limitations was tolled through the conclusion of an appeal on a similar discrimination class action against UPS in which plaintiff was a class member; and 2) plaintiff had submitted sufficient evidence to make out a prima facie case of discriminatory and retaliatory pay disparity.

[12/30] Baloch v. Kempthorne
In a lawsuit where a government employee alleged discrimination, retaliation and hostile work environment, summary judgment in favor of the government is affirmed. Plaintiff failed to prove: 1) that reassignment of his duties constituted an adverse employment action; 2) that he suffered discrimination on account of his race, religion, age or disability; 3) that he suffered retaliation, because none of employer's actions (including poor performance reviews and profanity-laden outbursts) amounted to a "material adversity"; and 4) that employer's actions created a hostile work environment.

More...

Constitutional Law

[12/30] Gonzalez v. Duncan
A sentence of 28 years to life imprisonment under California's "Three Strikes" law violates the Eighth Amendment where: 1) the offense was Petitioner's failure to update his annual sex offender registration within five working days of his birthday; and 2) he was living at his registered address throughout the relevant time period. Habeas relief is warranted because the state court's application of the gross disproportionality principle was objectively unreasonable.

[12/30] Kaemmerling v. Lappin
The Prison Litigation Reform Act does not require convicted felon to exhaust administrative remedies on his Constitutional challenge to the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act because the Federal Bureau of Prisons has no discretion not to collect his DNA, and hence there is no administrative process to exhaust. Dismissal is affirmed for failure to state a claim for relief, since extraction and storage of appellant's DNA does not burden his religious exercise.

[12/29] Grossmont Union High School Dist. v. California Dep't of Educ.
In a claim against defendant-California Department of Education seeking declaration that plaintiff-high school should not have to pay for mental health services for special education students because of a reduction in state funding for such services, judgment in favor of defendant-department of education is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff-high school was not an intended beneficiary of the federal-state special education funding laws; 2) the requirement that plaintiff-high school provide services to special education students did not deprive regular students of equal protection, although regular education programs would be cut; 3) plaintiff's complaint failed to state a cause of action; and 4) because plaintiff-high school did not suggest how the complaint might be amended, leave to amend was properly denied.

More...

Criminal Law & Procedure

[12/31] US v. House
Defendant's sentence of 188 months for distribution of crack cocaine is affirmed where the district court: 1) properly adjusted base offense level due to defendant's obstruction of justice in asking defense witness not to testify; 2) did not abuse its discretion in declining to reduce sentence based on the disparity in the sentencing guidelines for powder cocaine versus crack cocaine; and 3) properly considered all the requisite factors under sentencing law.

[12/31] US v. Hill
Conviction for bank robbery is affirmed where the district court committed harmless error in admitting evidence that defendant bought a luxury car shortly after the bank robbery. Defendant's challenge to the impartiality of his jury is also rejected because the court's method of questioning potential jurors was sufficient to assure that any prejudice would have been discovered and, in any event, defendant had failed to use all his peremptory challenges.

[12/31] Corcoran v. Buss
District court's grant of death row inmate's habeas petition is reversed because prosecutor's offer to forego seeking the death penalty if defendant would agree to a bench trial did not penalize defendant for exercising his constitutional right to a jury trial. State supreme court properly examined and rejected defendant's claim that he was incompetent to waive post-conviction proceedings.

More...