Case Notes

Home > Case Notes (Page 3)

Posted 29 Jun 2021 in Case Notes Written by: Amanda Karras

In Pakdel v. City & County of San Francisco, the Supreme Court held the Ninth Circuit erred when it required the petitioners who had alleged a regulatory taking to comply with the agency’s administrative procedures for seeking relief because it is a “settled rule” that “exhaustion of state remedies is not a prerequisite to an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.”  quoting Knick v. Township of Scott, 588 U.S. __ (2019) (emphasis in original).  In what could end up as...

Posted 24 Jun 2021 in Case Notes Written by: Amanda Karras

In a 6-3 opinion the Supreme Court, likening the protection of property rights to the preservation of freedom, held in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid that a California regulation that provided union organizers access to agricultural employers’ property for up to three hours per day, 120 days per year, was a per se physical taking under the Fifth Amendment.  While the case was a loss for the State, looming larger in the case was the question of how the decision...

Posted 25 May 2021 in Case Notes Written by: Erich Eiselt

Purdue Bankruptcy: Disclosure Statement Hearing May 26, 2021; Public May Dial-In-The much-debated Purdue Bankruptcy Disclosure Statement, which includes the controversial $4.3 Billion from Sackler family shareholders in exchange for complete releases of any liability for the opioid crisis, and which is opposed by Attorneys General from 24 states and the District of Columbia, will be considered by Judge Drain at a hearing tomorrow, May 26, 2021, at 9:00 AM.  As the Primeclerk website (https://restructuring.primeclerk.com/purduepharma) states: Members of the public who wish...

Posted 17 May 2021 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

Today in a unanimous, but narrow opinion, the Supreme Court struck down the First Circuit’s expansion of the exception to the warrant requirement known as the “community care-taking doctrine” from automobiles to the home.  The Court left open the possibility that exigent circumstances might justify a search without a warrant under these circumstances, but that issue was not before the Court in this case. In this case, Kim Caniglia and her husband got in a fight during which he went and...

Posted 23 Apr 2021 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Erich Eiselt

On Tuesday, April 20, 2021, federal Judge David Carter of the Central District of California ordered that the City and County of Los Angeles provide housing and related assistance for all homeless persons in the area known as “Skid Row” by October 18.  According to the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, that number now exceeds 4,600 people: 4700 - 2020 Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count—Skid Row (lahsa.org) Judge Carter’s decision in LA Alliance for Human Rights v. City of Los Angeles,...

Posted 25 Mar 2021 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

Today, in Torres v. Madrid, the Supreme Court provided a new rule for determining if a seizure occurs under the Fourth Amendment where force is used, but a suspect gets away.  In a 5-3 ruling (Justice Barrett did not take part in the decision), the Court concluded that “[t]he application of physical force to the body of a person with intent to restrain is a seizure, even if the force does not succeed in subduing the person.” In this case, two...

Posted 08 Mar 2021 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

Today, in a 8-1 decision, the Supreme Court held in Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski that an award of nominal damages on its own can redress a past injury in order to satisfy Article III, making it harder for local governments to dismiss a case based on a changed policy where no compensatory damages are at issue. In this case, Chike Uzuegbunam was a student at Georgia Gwinnett College. In 2016 campus police told him he could not distribute religious literature in an...

Posted 01 Dec 2020 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

The day before Thanksgiving, the Supreme Court issued a per curiam (unsigned) 5-4 opinion enjoining New York from imposing its 10 and 25-person occupancy limits on religious institutions.  Specifically, New York imposed restrictions on attendance at religious services in areas classified as “red” or “orange” zones in the State. In red zones, no more than 10 persons may attend each religious service, and in orange zones, attendance is capped at 25.  Religious entities in the state challenged the order claiming...

Posted 06 Oct 2020 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

Today, in a great victory for the City of Nashville and IMLA, the Sixth Circuit decided that Nashville did not violate the First Amendment when it fired a 9-11 dispatcher who used a racially offensive slur in the context of the 2016 election in a public Facebook post that identified her as an employee of the City.  The parties all agreed that her post was on a matter of public concern given the broader context of the election even though...

Posted 27 Jul 2020 in Case Notes, Commentary Written by: Amanda Karras

On Friday night, the Supreme Court denied a request for an injunction by a church in Nevada seeking to hold in person services on the same terms as other facilities in the State, including casinos.  The order limits religious gatherings to 50 people while allowing restaurants and casinos to operate as 50% capacity. The majority that denied the injunction offered no written opinion accompanying its decision (which is not unusual for this type of request), but Justice Alito (joined by Justices...