Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

27 Aug Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

Apologies that this edition is delayed. I was tied up with a significant filing for the past week. The courts were busy too. Here are the last two weeks’ published decisions involving local governments:

First Circuit

• Penn v. Escorsio, No. 13-2309 (Aug. 22, 2014): The court affirmed the district court’s denial of qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage to corrections officers alleged to be deliberately indifferent to risk that detainee could commit suicide.  The court found that the issues presented on appeal were purely factual, and the court had no jurisdiction to decide them on interlocutory appeal.

Second Circuit

• United States v. Erie County, No. 1303653 (Aug. 18, 2014): The court found that the public’s right of access to judicial documents under the First Amendment requires public access to reports on County’s progress improving conditions in correctional facilities.
• Central Rabbinical Congress v. New York City Dept. of Health & Mental Hygiene, No. 13-107 (Aug. 15, 2014): The court remanded for the district court to apply strict scrutiny to free-exercise challenge to ordinance prohibiting the direct oral suction of circumcision wound (a religious practice known as metzitzah b’peh) without consent form that contains warning about the procedure.
• Terebesi v. Torreso, No. 12-3867 (Aug. 21, 2014): In case arising out of botched police raid, the court granted in part and denied in part defendants’ motions for summary judgment based on their assertions of qualified immunity.

Third Circuit

• Lodge No. 5 of the Fraternal Order of Police v. City of Philadelphia, No. 13-1516 (Aug. 18, 2014): The court held that the City’s restriction on members of the police department from contributing to their union’s political action committee violates the First Amendment.

Fifth Circuit

• Hurst v. Lee County, No. 13-60540 (Aug. 21, 2014): The court affirmed judgment for County in suit alleging that County had terminated Hurst’s employment in violation of his First Amendment rights because Hurst’s statements fell within the scope of his official duties, and he was not speaking as a citizen for First-Amendment purposes.
• Munn v. City of Ocean Springs, No. 13-60806 (Aug. 18, 2014): The court found that the City’s noise ordinance sets an objective standard and is not unconstitutionally vague.

Sixth Circuit

• N.W. v. Boone Cnty Bd. of Ed., No. 13-6514 (Aug. 18, 2014): In case under the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (“IDEA”), the court ruled that the IDEA prevents a district court from ordering reimbursement absent a finding that the school district failed to provide a FAPE.
• Carl v. Muskegon County, No. 13-2296 (Aug. 15, 2014): The court found that private psychiatrist who evaluated detainee acted under the color of state law and therefore could not avoid potential 1983 liability.

Seventh Circuit

• Council v. Vill. of Dolton, No. 13-2654 (Aug. 22, 2014): The court reversed district court’s conclusion that 1983 action by former employee alleging that he had been fired in violation of his federal due process and free speech rights was barred by collateral estoppel.
• Petkus v. Richland County, No. 13-3603 (Aug. 19, 2014): The court affirmed judgment against County in suit alleging unreasonable Fourth Amendment search of property.
• McDowell v. Vill. of Lansing, No. 13-3423 (Aug. 18, 2014): The court affirmed district court’s summary dismissal of suit against officer alleging violation of substantive due process.
• Seiser v. City of Chicago, No. 13-1985 (Aug. 12, 2014): The court affirmed summary judgment for City and officers, in suit brought by police officer alleging that probable cause did not support order that he undergo breathalyzer exam or citation that he had violated open-container requireemnt.
• Marshall v. City of Chicago, No. 13-2771 (Aug. 11, 2014): The court rejected challeges to jury-selection process, in case in which jury returned verdict for City after Marshall alleged that he was arrested without probable cause.

Eighth Circuit

• NE Colorado Cellular v. City of North Platte, No. 13-3190 (Aug. 22, 2014): The court affirmed district court’s determination that City’s denial of request to place cell tower did not violate the Telecommunications Act (47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7); the decision was “in writing” and supported by substantial evidence.
• Gibson v. Cook, No. 13-2179 (Aug. 20, 2014): The court affirmed dismissal of 1983 claims against City and officers based on alleged delay in Gibson’s relase.
• Doucette v. Morrison County, No. 13-2424 (Aug. 15, 2014): The court affirmed grant of summary judgment against Doucette on claim that her discharge constituted discrimination based on sex and age in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act.
• Withers v. Johnson, No. 13-2646 (Aug. 15, 2014): The court affirmed dismissal of suit against County alleging violation of ADA, Rehabilitation Act, and Familiy and Medical Leave Act.
• Jacobson v. McCormick, No. 12-3530 (Aug. 15, 2014): The court ruled that officers were entitled to qualified immunity in suit alleging that strip search violated the Fourth Amendment.
• Meehan v. Thompson, No. 13-2680 (Aug. 14, 2014): The court ruled that officer did not violate clearly established Fourth Amendment rights by arresting Meehan or frisking her, and therefore was entitled to qualified immunity.

Ninth Circuit

• Am. Tower Corp. v. City of San Diego, No. 11-56766 (Aug. 14, 2014): The court ruled, among other things, that the City’s decision to deny permit for cell tower was supported by susbtantial evidence, did not constitute unreasonable dimscrination, and did not constitute an effective prohibition.
• Weaving v. City of Hillsboro, No. 12-35726 (Aug. 15, 2014): The court ruled that because jury could not have found that officer’s disorder substantially limited his ability to work within the meaning of the ADA, no reasonable jury could have found officer disabled within the meaning of the ADA.
• Thomas v. County of Riverside, No. 12-55470 (Aug. 18, 2014): In suit alleging that County and employees retaliated against her based on her First-Amendment activity, the court found that the the district court erred in determining that the County was not subject to liability and in dismissing employment actions as trivial evidence.
• Int’l Society for Krishna Consciousness v. City of Los Angeles, No. 12-56621 (Aug. 20, 2014): The court affirmed summary judgment for City in First Amendment challenge to code provision that bans continuous or repetitive solicitation for the immediate receipt of funds at LAX.

(Aug. 11, 2014-Aug. 22, 2014)

Image courtesy of Flickr from Ken Lund (creative-commons license, no changes made).