On Tuesday the Supreme Court issued two unanimous opinions granting law enforcement officers qualified immunity.highway stop  These ruling were unsurprising; the lower court errors in both cases were obvious. In Plumhoff v. Rickard the Sixth Circuit did not so much as discuss the qualified immunity standard when denying qualified immunity.  In Wood v. Moss the Ninth Circuit viewed the qualified immunity question at a high level of generality causing dissenting Judge O’Scannlain to (accurately) warn:  “Our court's track record in deciding qualified immunity cases is far from exemplary, and with this decision, I am concerned that our storied losing streak will continue.” But at least Plumhoff v. Rickard contained a surprise.

Here are last week's published decisions involving local governments:Alexandria-court First Circuit
  • Gericke v. Begin, No. 12-2326 (May 23, 2014) (affirming denial of qualified immunity for police officers on First-Amendment retaliatory prosecution claim where plaintiff was arrested after she attempted to film a traffic stop).
Eighth Circuit
  • Walton v. Dawson, No. 12-4000 (May 20, 2014) (affirming in part and reversing in part denial of qualified immunity in failure-to-train claims against officers arising out of jail-cell attack that occurred after officers did not lock cell doors).

Almost all legal positions that matter to one side in a dispute have contrary law supporting a different legal position.8122523_ab151ea98b_z  I’ve got some cases on my side and you’ve got some cases on your side.  One of the serious mistakes I can make is to focus so greatly on the good cases that I fail to distinguish and destroy your cases that hurt my position.  In Coghlan v. Starkey, 852 F.2d 806 (5th Cir. 1988), the court awarded sanctions for frivolous appeal for that mistake.  “Here, the appellate brief indicts counsel as having recognized that no authority supports the claim. Not only was there scant discussion of adverse decisions cited by the magistrate, but only two cases were even named in the brief. This is poor appellate practice and an abuse of the appellate process.” Id. at 816 (footnote omitted). What are some ways to address the cases that hurt? 

Here are last week's published decisions involving local governments:Gavel Second Circuit

The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit has adopted some materials designed to assist attorneys and litigants involved in a bankruptcy appeal before the BAP.law books Although many of the excellent materials address the peculiarities of bankruptcy appeals, Appendix I has advice for all attorneys in any court. Do’s and Don’ts for an Effective Appeal DO: 1. Know what relief you want (and why). 2. Know your audience. BAP judges generally possess a level of expertise in bankruptcy matters superior to that of most district court judges and their law clerks. 3. Understand the role of the appellate court. While its dominant role is to assess whether the trial court reached the correct result,

I wish I had learned some things earlier. That's especially true when it comes to my writing. So I thought I'd share five writing tips that I wish I had known earlier. The first tip concerns an edit at the sentence level. Other tips will address changes at the paragraph and word levels. Tip # 1: Place important and new information at a sentence's ending. This one is counterintuitive: a sentence's most valuable real estate is not where it starts but where it finishes. At the sentence's ending, a reader naturally stops -- it's sometimes called a "stress position." These natural pauses give a writer an opportunity:

After filing an opening brief,edits you have a month or more to see what your opponent has to say.  The day finally arrives, and you snatch up your opponent’s brief and read it only to discover that your opponent has filed a truly bad brief, an extraordinarily poor piece of work that makes you laugh and cringe at the same time.  How do you respond in your reply brief?

Here are last week's published decisions involving local governments:Alexandria-court First Circuit
  • Jones v. City of Boston, No. 12-2280 (May 7, 2014) (in suit challenging police department's drug-testing program as causing disparate impact based on race, reversing denial of summary judgment for plaintiffs on whether they had proved a prima facie case of disparate impact under Title VII).
Sixth Circuit

If you spend your time following baseball, local governments, and appellate litigation (as I do),Baseball the Ninth Circuit case of City of San Jose v. Office of the Commissioner of Baseball, No. 14-15139, is one to watch. The issues are simple: the City of San Jose would like the Oakland A's to relocate there, but MLB has refused to permit it. Why? According to the City, another team, the San Francisco Giants, "owns" the exclusive rights to San Jose. The City explained that MLB teams have an "exclusive territorial rights agreement,"one that the City claims "constitutes a blatant market allocation scheme that is illegal under the American antitrust laws in all other professional sports." The district court found that

When is a judgment a judgment for purposes of res judicata or the doctrine of full faith and credit when the judgment is obtained in one court and sought to be enforced in a different court?  Dictionary Many possible answers come to mind: when the judgment is entered, when the time for appeal has elapsed, during the pendency of an appeal for which no supersedeas bond was provided, when any appeal of the judgment is finished, when the judgment is final in the court that entered it, when the judgment is final in the court in which enforcement is sought. There may be a State and a circumstance in which every one of these possible answers is the right answer.