Lawyers USA Your Business Partner

Supreme Court rules on eyewitness identifications 

Published: January 11, 2012

Tags: eyewitness identifications

The Due Process Clause does not require a trial court to screen an out-of-court eyewitness identification for reliability unless it was procured by unnecessarily suggestive circumstances arranged by the police, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled.

EMPLOYMENT 

Published: January 11, 2012

Tags: employment, First Amendment

The First Amendment bars a disability discrimination suit brought by a teacher who was fired by a religious school.

See “Constitution bars job-bias suit against religious school”

U.S. Supreme Court. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC, No. 10-553.  Jan. 11, 2012. Lawyers USA No. 993-3481.

CIVIL RIGHTS 

Published: January 10, 2012

Tags: civil rights

A federal prison inmate could not seek damages for a violation of his constitutional rights from the employees of a private company that operated the facility.

See “Inmate at private prison can’t pursue ‘Bivens’ claim”

U.S. Supreme Court. Minneci v. Pollard, No. 10-1104.  Jan. 10, 2012. Lawyers USA No. 993-3475.

CRIMINAL 

Published: January 10, 2012

Tags: eyewitness testimony

Prosecutors’ failure to disclose evidence undermining the testimony of a key eyewitness required the reversal of a defendant’s capital murder convictions.

See “Murder convictions overturned due to ‘Brady’ violation”

U.S. Supreme Court. Smith v. Cain, No. 10-8145.  Jan. 10, 2012. Lawyers USA No. 993-3476.

ARBITRATION 

Published: January 10, 2012

Tags: arbitration

Because the Credit Repair Organizations Act is silent on whether claims can proceed in arbitration, the Federal Arbitration Act mandates that the parties’ arbitration agreement be enforced.

See “Justices hold Credit Repair Act claims can be arbitrated.”

U.S. Supreme Court. CompuCredit Corp. v. Greenwood, No. 10-948. Jan. 10, 2012. Lawyers USA No. 993-3474.

IMMIGRATION 

Published: December 12, 2011

Tags: arbitrary and capricious, deportation, immigration law, Supreme Court, §212(c)

The Board of Immigration Appeals’ policy for deciding when resident aliens may apply for discretionary relief from deportation under §212(c) is arbitrary and capricious.

See “High Court finds deportation policy ‘arbitrary and capricious’”

U.S. Supreme Court. Judulang v. Holder, No. 10-694. Dec. 12, 2011. Lawyers USA No. 993-3410.

SEX OFFENDERS 

Published: June 28, 2011

Tags: Ex Post Facto clause, juvenile defendant, sex offenders, SORNA

The 9th Circuit lacked the authority to decide whether the Ex Post Facto Clause prevented the application of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act to a juvenile defendant whose court-ordered registration requirement had expired.

U.S. Supreme Court. U.S. v. Juvenile Male, No. 09-940.  June 27, 2011. Lawyers USA No. 993-3042.

ELECTION LAW 

Published: June 27, 2011

The Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Act’s matching funds scheme violates the First Amendment.

U.S. Supreme Court. Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett, No. 10-238. June 27, 2011. Lawyers USA No. 993-3044.

FIRST AMENDMENT 

Published: June 27, 2011

A California law that restricts the sale or rental of violent video games to minors violates the First Amendment.

U.S. Supreme Court. J. Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Assn., No. 08-1448. June 27, 2011. Lawyers USA No. 993-3043.

PRODUCT LIABILITY 

Published: June 27, 2011

Tags: foreign manufacturers, jurisdiction, product liability, Supreme Court

Plaintiffs cannot bring state-law product liability suits against foreign manufacturers where the manufacturers did not engage in activities in the forum state.

U.S. Supreme Court. J. McIntyre Machinery v. Nicastro, No. 09-1343. June 27, 2011. Lawyers USA No. 993-3040; Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations v. Brown, No. 10-76, June 27, 2011. Lawyers USA No. 993-3041.