Case Summaries
Family Law
Criminal Law & Procedure
Immigration Law
Uniform Commercial Code
Family Law
[08/22]
In re A.C.
Order terminating parental rights is affirmed where: 1) the dependency court's noncompliance with section 372 standing alone does not violate the parent's due process rights; and 2) the error is subject to a harmless error standard.
[08/22]
Iglesias v. Mukasey
Petition for review of BIA's denial of motion to reopen the case is denied where: 1) petitioner's allegation that BIA had ignored evidence put forth by petitioner regarding his marriage to an American citizen was an allegation of legal error subject to appellate review; but 2) petitioner did not provide clear and convincing evidence that his marriage was bona fide.
[08/21]
Combs v. Homer-Center Sch. Dist.
In a suit by parents who home-school their children seeking declaratory relief and a permanent injunction to prohibit the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania from requiring plaintiffs to comply with reporting and review requirements, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) the challenged statute was a neutral law of general applicability, subject to rational basis review, and was constitutional as it rationally furthered legitimate state interests; 2) plaintiffs did not assert a valid "hybrid-rights" claim under which, as a potential violation of both free-exercise rights and the parental right to direct a child's education, the law might be subject to greater scrutiny; 3) plaintiffs' claims did not fall under the narrow exception of Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), requiring heightened scrutiny when parents challenge compulsory-education laws on religious grounds; and 4) having disposed of all federal claims, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims under the Religious Freedom Protection Act.
[08/21]
US v. Carson
Sentence for conspiring to transport a minor across state lines for the purpose of unlawful sexual activity and interstate travel to engage in illicit sexual conduct is affirmed where, for purposes of applying a sentencing enhancement, the minor victim was properly determined to be in defendant's custody, care, or supervisorial control, despite argument that the victim's mother's presence gave her sole custody and control.
[08/20]
In re Adrianna P.
Order granting reunification services to presumed father is remanded with orders to vacate where: 1) the record made clear that providing reunification services to father would be detrimental to the child; and 2) the court abused its discretion when it ordered agency to provide reunification services to father. Order directing agency to provide reunification services to other presumed father is affirmed where: 1) despite court's erroneous legal conclusion regarding section 361.5, the court did not abuse its discretion with this order; and 2) there was sufficient evidence to support the court's implied finding that reunification was in the children's best interests.
More...
Criminal Law & Procedure
[08/27]
US v. Allen
A conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm and a felon in possession of ammunition is affirmed over claims that: 1) the district court erred in permitting two witnesses to be improperly impeached; and 2) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction.
[08/27]
US v. Hogan
A conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute meth, possession with intent to distribute meth, and distribution of meth, is affirmed over claims that the district court erred in denying his motions to suppress and for acquittal, and in sentencing him to 188 months' imprisonment.
[08/27]
US v. Espinosa
A sentence for drug- and firearm-related offenses is affirmed over defendant's claim that the district court erred when, for purposes of determining the advisory sentencing range, it grouped only conspiracy and manufacturing counts, but not firearms counts.
[08/27]
US v. Wessels
In a case wherein defendant was convicted and sentenced for unauthorized use of a credit card, and later had her supervised release revoked and was sentenced again, the judgment is affirmed over a Fifth Amendment due process challenge.
[08/27]
US v. Azure
Revocation of defendant's supervised release and imposition of a 24-month sentence are affirmed over claims that the judgment of the district court should be vacated and the case remanded because: 1) the magistrate judge lacked jurisdiction to conduct the revocation hearing; 2) the district court failed to undertake the requisite de novo review of the entire record; 3) defendant was not present at the time the district court adopted the magistrate judge's report and sentenced him; and 4) his sentence was unconstitutionally imposed to punish him for the offense underlying his revocation, rather than for his original offense.
More...
Immigration Law
[08/27]
Datau v. Mukasey
In an action brought by a native and citizen of Indonesia claiming she experienced persecution based on her Christian beliefs and the incorrect perception that she is ethnically Chinese, petition to review decision denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) is denied over claims of error that: 1) Board of Immigration Appeals' decision lacks support because it is based, in part, on the IJ's unclear credibility judgments; 2) petitioner presented substantial evidence of both past persecution and the likelihood that she would be subject to future persecution if forced to return to Indonesia; and 3) petitioner established grounds for withholding removal and protection under CAT.
[08/27]
Bolante v. Mukasey
In an immigration case involving a former official of the Philippine government, petition for relief from a BIA judgment denying asylum and ordering removal is denied where petitioner did not demonstrate that he faced an objective likelihood of future persecution upon his return.
[08/27]
Sicar v. Chertoff
In a class action claim for declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging the government has systematically misclassified plaintiffs' parole status during the course of status adjustment determinations under the Haitian Refugees Immigration Fairness Act of 1998, dismissal of class action complaint is affirmed where the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.
[08/26]
Zhao v. Mukasey
Petition for review of a denial of married Chinese Falun Gong practitioners' asylum claims is granted where petitioners are eligible for asylum because the evidence, especially when viewed in light of the recent decisions in Zhou v. Gonzales, 437 F.3d 860 (9th Cir. 2006), and Zhang v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 713 (9th Cir. 2004), compels a conclusion that they have established a well-founded fear of future persecution.
[08/26]
Pinto-Montoya v. Mukasey
Petition to review decision affirming removal to Guatemala is denied where the petitioners' contact with plainclothes immigration officials did not constitute a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment and accordingly, their statements were properly admitted.
More...
Uniform Commercial Code
[06/25]
BRASHER'S CASCADE AUTO AUCTION v. VALLEY AUTO SALES AND LEASING
The former version of the California Uniform Commercial Code requires a merchant buyer to adhere to reasonable commercial standards to obtain the status of a buyer in the ordinary course of business for purposes of section 9307.
[05/26]
PROPULSION TECHS. v. ATWOOD CORP.
An agreement to manufacture boat parts is unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds as a transaction in goods with no ascertainable quantity term, thus the claim for fraud in the inducement cannot survive.
[04/12]
CHATSKY & ASSOCS. v. SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY (BANK OF AM. CORP.)
The one-year limitations period of Code of Civil Procedure section 340(c), rather than the three-year limitations period of California Uniform Commercial Code section 4111, applies to claims by depositors against their bank for payment of forged checks written on the depositors' accounts.
[01/22]
HICKS v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY (KAUFMAN & BROAD HOME CORP.)
If set forth in conspicuous and understandable language, a disclaimer of the implied warranty of quality is enforceable. The trial court correctly concluded that written disclaimers in the sales and express warranty documents provided to the home buyers preclude their claim for breach of implied warranty.
[12/19]
DALLAS AEROSPACE, INC. v. CIS AIR CORP.
Summary judgment was properly granted to defendant on claims of breach of contract, fraudulent misrepresentation, and negligent misrepresentation. The sale contract for a used aircraft engine had not been modified; its terms were not unconscionable; it disclaimed any representation as to the engine's airworthiness, which was in any event easily discoverable by plaintiff; no special relationship existed between the parties.
More...
|
