Eleventh Circuit
The following decisions, not yet summarized here, have been issued by the Eleventh Circuit since the first of the year:
Anheuser-Busch v. Philpot (1-9-03) affirms a judgment dismissing A-B's claims against a guy whom the company sued for defamation; the District Court did not err in requiring an evidentiary hearing before it would award monetary relief in favor of A-B after a default by the defendant, nor did the District Court err in finding that A-B had failed to prove that the guy caused any damage to A-B.
Textron Financial v. United Financial Group (1-9-03) is about the perfection of security interests, and is therefore completely uninteresting to me.
Burke v. State of Wisc. Investment Board (1-8-03) holds that the appointment of a lead plaintiff in a securities class action is an unreviewable order after the approval of a settlement; the court also, however, vacates the order distributing fees among plaintiffs' counsel because the district court had not made sufficient findings as to the reasons for its distribution so as to allow appellate review.
Anderson v. U.S. (1-7-03) involves a guy hurt by a bomb dropped from a plane that had taken off from an aircraft carrier during a training exercise. The Court holds that the guy could not bring a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act because the claim was covered by admiralty law instead -- and that his claim under admiralty-related statutes was not filed within the applicable limitations period.
US v. Rubio (1-7-03) is a sentencing case, affirming enhancements for (a) criminal history (holding that a previous conviction for DUI causing serious physical injury is a "crime of violence"; and (b) obstruction of justice (just because he pinched a witness against him, after his conviction, when they ran into each other in the prison yard!) and (c) affirming the denial of an "acceptance of responsibility" reduction, where Rubio had withdrawn his guilty plea and never thereafter accepted responsibility.
Hubbard v. Haley (1-7-03) denies habeas corpus in a capital case, rejecting various arguments including ineffective assistance of counsel.
U.S. v. Jordan (1-6-03) reverses the dismissal of criminal charges. The District Court dismissed the case based on prosecutorial misconduct regarding the failure to turn over evidence (Brady, Giglio, Jencks Act, that sort of thing); the Court of Appeals reverses, finding the prosecutor's conduct to have been proper.
In Re: the Bal Harbour (1-2-03) affirms the dismissal of a bankruptcy petition, holding that the petition had been filed in bad faith.
U.S. v. Adams (1-2-03) is about sentencing -- more precisely, about downward departures for overrepresentation of criminal history.
The following decisions, not yet summarized here, have been issued by the Eleventh Circuit since the first of the year:
Anheuser-Busch v. Philpot (1-9-03) affirms a judgment dismissing A-B's claims against a guy whom the company sued for defamation; the District Court did not err in requiring an evidentiary hearing before it would award monetary relief in favor of A-B after a default by the defendant, nor did the District Court err in finding that A-B had failed to prove that the guy caused any damage to A-B.
Textron Financial v. United Financial Group (1-9-03) is about the perfection of security interests, and is therefore completely uninteresting to me.
Burke v. State of Wisc. Investment Board (1-8-03) holds that the appointment of a lead plaintiff in a securities class action is an unreviewable order after the approval of a settlement; the court also, however, vacates the order distributing fees among plaintiffs' counsel because the district court had not made sufficient findings as to the reasons for its distribution so as to allow appellate review.
Anderson v. U.S. (1-7-03) involves a guy hurt by a bomb dropped from a plane that had taken off from an aircraft carrier during a training exercise. The Court holds that the guy could not bring a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act because the claim was covered by admiralty law instead -- and that his claim under admiralty-related statutes was not filed within the applicable limitations period.
US v. Rubio (1-7-03) is a sentencing case, affirming enhancements for (a) criminal history (holding that a previous conviction for DUI causing serious physical injury is a "crime of violence"; and (b) obstruction of justice (just because he pinched a witness against him, after his conviction, when they ran into each other in the prison yard!) and (c) affirming the denial of an "acceptance of responsibility" reduction, where Rubio had withdrawn his guilty plea and never thereafter accepted responsibility.
Hubbard v. Haley (1-7-03) denies habeas corpus in a capital case, rejecting various arguments including ineffective assistance of counsel.
U.S. v. Jordan (1-6-03) reverses the dismissal of criminal charges. The District Court dismissed the case based on prosecutorial misconduct regarding the failure to turn over evidence (Brady, Giglio, Jencks Act, that sort of thing); the Court of Appeals reverses, finding the prosecutor's conduct to have been proper.
In Re: the Bal Harbour (1-2-03) affirms the dismissal of a bankruptcy petition, holding that the petition had been filed in bad faith.
U.S. v. Adams (1-2-03) is about sentencing -- more precisely, about downward departures for overrepresentation of criminal history.
posted by sam at
10:22 AM
