Posted On: August 31, 2010

New York is Moving Forward on E-Discovery and E-Filing

In his August 31, 2010 New York Law Journal article, Court Rule Altered to Buttress E-Discovery; I-Filing Advances, Joel Stashenko discusses the amended Uniform Rules of Trial Courts of the State of New York as an effort to insure that lawyers keep "up to speed" regarding their clients' records at the early stages of discovery. The amended rules were published August 18 and went into effect immediately, having been approved beforehand by Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman and the presiding justices of the four appellate division departments.

Much of this activity has been influenced by a New York court system report, Electronic Discovery in the State of New York, published in February 2010. The key recommendations of that Report includes: establishing an e-discovery work group; improving the preliminary conference; more e-discovery programs in Education and Training; more court attorney referees serving as e-discovery specialists, establishing an institutional presence at the Sedona Conference; and working harder to improve the quality of E-Discovery practice.

On the second front mentioned in Mr. Stashenko's article, electronic filing of litigant papers is said to be proceeding in New York at a deliberative pace. While more than10,000 lawyers registered for New York's electronic filing system in 2009, compared to only 300 in 2002, there is , as Chief Administrative Judge Ann Pfau has observed, "there is a long way to go: before e-filing and E-Discovery are required in all New York Courts. After 11 years of experimentation with electronic filing, New York has accorded permanent status to the effort and is now beginning to institute mandatory e-filing in limited areas.

Posted On: August 23, 2010

Findlaw Case Summaries: Criminal Law and Procedure

To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw

August 16-20, 2010.

United States First Circuit, 08/17/2010
US v. Donath
Defendant's appeal of his conviction for his participation in a conspiracy to distribute cocaine and other drugs and a below-guidelines sentence of 90-months' imprisonment is dismissed as defendant's waiver of his right to appeal his plea or sentence if it did not exceed 120 months as part of his plea agreement is enforceable and his argument that district court's error in calculating his sentence by mischaracterizing his prior crimes constituted a miscarriage of justice is meritless.

United States First Circuit, 08/17/2010
Grant v. Warden, Maine State Prison
District court's denial of defendant's request for habeas relief from his murder conviction of his mother-in-law is affirmed where: 1) the Maine Supreme Judicial Court's (SJC) application of the general standard announced in Mosley to the particular facts of defendant's case falls within the broad limits of reasonableness; and 2) regardless of whether the SJC described its analysis as a "totality of the circumstances" test or a four-factor test, its conclusion was not an unreasonable application of Mosley.

United States Second Circuit, 08/16/2010
Friedman v. Rehal
In a sexual abuse prosecution, the denial of petitioner's habeas petition is affirmed where: 1) the fact that hypnosis may have been used to stimulate alleged victims' memory recall and potentially induce false memories of abuse was a circumstance that would fit comfortably under the general understanding of impeachment evidence -- evidence that "is offered to discredit a witness . . . to reduce the effectiveness of [her] testimony by bringing forth evidence which explains why the jury should not put faith in [her] or [her] testimony"; and 2) even if hypnosis evidence comes within Brady's broader definition of exculpatory evidence, the petition would still have to be denied

Continue reading " Findlaw Case Summaries: Criminal Law and Procedure " »

Posted On: August 23, 2010

Findlaw Case Summaries: Constitutional Law

To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw

August 16-20, 2010.

United States Third Circuit, 08/18/2010
McCauley v. Univ. of the Virgin Islands
In plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit against a university, its president and two other individuals arising from the university's decision charging plaintiff with violating provisions of the Student Code of Conduct (Code) for his alleged harassment of an individual who had accused his friend of rape, claiming that various Code provisions violated the First Amendment, district court's judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) district court's dismissal of all claims against the university in holding that it was not a "person" for purposes of section 1983 is affirmed; 2) the two individuals, as employees of the university acting in their official capacities, were likewise not "persons" for purposes of section 1983; 3) adjudication of plaintiff's as-applied challenge to Major Infraction Paragraph E was unnecessary because the district court had already concluded that the paragraph was facially unconstitutional; 4) district court's dismissal of Paragrap h B for lack of an injury should be reversed and judgment should be entered in favor of the two employees because that paragraph has a limited, constitutional construction; and 5) Paragraphs H and R are unconstitutional infringements on students' First Amendment right to free speech.

United States Sixth Circuit, 08/17/2010
McKenna v. Honsowetz
In plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit against two police officers who responded to a 911 report that plaintiff was having a medical seizure and and thereafter allegedly violated his Fourth Amendment rights, district court's denial of defendants' motions for summary judgment based on qualified immunity and reduction of an award for pain and suffering from $275,000 to $10,000 are affirmed where: 1) whether the officers were entitled to qualified immunity depends on whether they acted in a law-enforcement capacity or in an emergency-medical-response capacity when engaging in the conduct that plaintiff claimed violated the Fourth Amendment, and here, the view of the facts undoubtedly supports a finding that the officers acted in a law-enforcement capacity; 2) the record contained ample evidence to support the determination that the officers unreasonably searched the home and seized plaintiff; and 3) plaintiff's appeal of the reduction in the award is denied as the Suprem e Court has clearly stated that a plaintiff cannot appeal a remittitur after he has accepted it. .

United States Sixth Circuit, 08/20/2010
Hussein v. City of Perrysburg
In homeowners' suit against a city, a city inspector and other individuals in their official and personal capacities, claiming that defendants violated their procedural and substantive due process rights by ordering a construction worker to remove a temporary asphalt layer in their driveway, judgment of the district court is reversed and remanded where: 1) defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because state officials are permitted under the Constitution to inform citizens of the officials' view that they are violating state or local law and state officials are also permitted to threaten litigation or prosecution if citizens do not agree to conform their actions to state or local law; and 2) defendant did not violate plaintiffs' substantive due process rights as the asphalt driveway incident did not implicate specific constitutional guarantees.

Continue reading " Findlaw Case Summaries: Constitutional Law " »

Posted On: August 20, 2010

New Politics of Judicial Elections, 2000-2009: Decade of Change

A new study of judicial independence from the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University Law School

Authored by James Sample, Adam Skaggs, Jonathan Blitzer, Linda Casey
Edited by Charles Hall

Foreword by Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor

August 16, 2010.

This Report has been out less than one week and is already receiving wide attention.

From the Executive Summary

State judicial elections have been transformed during the past decade. The story of America’s 2000–2009 high court contests—tens of millions of dollars raised by candidates from parties who may appear before them, millions more poured in by interest groups, nasty and misleading ads, and pressure on judges to signal courtroom rulings on the campaign trail—has become the new normal.

For more than a decade, partisans and special interests of all stripes have been growing more organized in their efforts to use elections to tilt the scales of justice their way. Many Americans have come to fear that justice is for sale. Unlike previous editions, which covered only the most recent election cycle, this fifth edition of the “New Politics of Judicial Elections” looks at the 2000–2009 decade as a whole. By tallying the numbers and “connecting the dots” among key players over the last five election cycles, this report offers a broad portrait of a grave and growing challenge to the impartiality of our nation’s courts. These trends include:

➜➜The explosion in judicial campaign spending, much of it poured in by “super spender” organizations seeking to sway the courts;

➜➜ The parallel surge of nasty and costly TV ads as a prerequisite to gaining a state Supreme Court seat;

➜➜ The emergence of secretive state and national campaigns to tilt state Supreme Court elections;

➜➜ Litigation about judicial campaigns, some of which could boost special-interest pressure on judges;

➜➜ Growing public concern about the threat to fair and impartial justice—and support for meaningful reforms.

Foreword by Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
"This report, the latest in a series begun in 2000, provides a comprehensive review of the threat posed by money and special interest pressure on fair and impartial courts. . . . We all have a stake in ensuring that courts remain fair, impartial, and independent. . . . For 10 years, the New Politics reports have played a leading role in documenting the growing threat to the credibility of our courts. I applaud the authors . . . for working to protect the courts that safeguard our rights."
— Sandra Day O'Connor


Posted On: August 20, 2010

Network Neutrality: Some Background and Perspectives (Updated August 26, 2010)

David Badertscher

Introduction

In an August 6, 2010 posting on the AALL Washington Blawg, “As Talks Break Down, What is Next for Neutrality”, Emily Feldman discussed the implication of talks on network neutrality between the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and stakeholders of network neutrality falling apart, or at least being sidetracked, as part of the fallout from the private proposal presented by Google and Verizon regarding the management and possibly financing of internet traffic. As Ms. Feldman correctly noted, network neutrality is a priority for the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) because law librarians “are providers, creators and users of digital information, and it is up to law libraries to ensure that everyone has equal access to the information they need”.Although librarians are special stakeholders in issues relating to the nature and the existence of network neutrality due to the nature of their mission, everyone in our society should have special concerns about the outcome of these discussions and debates because of the increasing perception of web based information as increasing in value as a service, and even perhaps as a commodity (or something like a commodity).

The above considerations have inspired me to create a new posting to update information previously posted on this blog about network neutrality and also to incorporate new discussion about what network neutrality is, providing some added information to help bring the recent FCC, Google, Verizon interactions into perspective, and conclude by providing some information regarding positions taken on network neutrality by two organizations with which I am most familiar, the American Association of Law Libraries and the Internet Society.

What is Network Neutrality?

Network neutrality (also net neutrality, internet neutrality) is essentially a principle or concept which holds that companies providing Internet services should treat all sources of data equally and that there should be no restrictions by Internet service providers and governments on content, sites, platforms, on the kinds of equipment attached, and also no restrictions on the modes of communication allowed. See also New York Times: Times Topics discussion on Network Neutrality updated to August 12, 2010.

Google Verizon and the FCC

Critics of network neutrality have argued that some kinds of data discrimination on the Internet for some purposes, such as to guarantee quality of service, are actually highly desirable. Such divisions of opinion have resulted in large internet companies talking about creating a two-tiered Internet with a “fast lane and a slow lane”. An alternative approach has recently been presented in a joint proposal by Google and Verizon. In their proposal, Google and Verizon advocate enforcing network neutrality principles on wired communications but not on the wireless Internet. The Google/Verizon proposal also includes something they refer to as “additional differentiated online sources”.What this means appears to be an open question as noted in the following e-mail received from the New York Chapter of the Internet Society:

The break up of the FCC’s ‘secret talks’ and the publishing of
the Google/Verizon joint legislative proposal has certainly stirred up a
net neutrality hornets nest. Just what ‘differentiated services’ do they
have in mind? Is wireless really out the window?

The New York Chapter of the Internet Society have prepared a discussion regarding the Google/Verizon involment including a chronology with links to related documents.at "Google/Verizon Statement on Open Internet Net Neutraltiy" on their website. I was prepared to do some reasonably extensive research on this topic myself but thanks to the people at ISOC-NY it was unnecessary for me to do so

Positions Taken on Network Neutrality by the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) and the Internet Society (ISOC).

American Association of Law Libraries (AALL):

The American Association of Law Libraries is a member of the Save the Internet Coalition and the Open Internet Coalition, both of which bring together individuals, non-profit organizations, businesses and bloggers who strongly support network neutrality . AALL also maintains a Net Neutrality Issue Brief which is currently updated to June 2010.

Internet Society (ISOC)

While the Internet Society does appear to have an Official Statement (included among the Google/Verizon documents mentioned earlier) which addresses the Google/Verizon Proposal I have been unable to determine if they have a document approved by their Board of Directors which constitues an official position of ISOC regarding network neutrality. That does not mean however that ISOC has not taken positions on this subject.. As an example see the ISOC paper "Open Inter-networking" (February 21, 2010) which includes a useful discussion of open network considerations including network neutrality which it considers to be" a broad and ill-defined term that encompasses a range of policy objectives including free expression, user choice, and discrimination as well as business issues including network traffic management, pricing and overall business models." This paper also asserts that "[T]he Internet Society believes that the proper focus in this discussion [open inter-networking] is on the desired outcome: continued open inter-networking. Current debate centres on whether or how IP packets can be treated impartially"

Update as of August 26, 2010.

Since the above information was posted two additional documents useful to this discussion have come to our attention:

Access to Broadband Networks: The Net Neutrality Debate
Report No. R40616
Subjects: Telecommunications
CRS Reports, 111th Congress (8/11/2010; Posted: 8/26/2010)
SEE SUMMARY

Campbell, Robert. "Lawmakers Argue Against Adoption of Verizon-Google Net Neutrality Plan," Originally posted on Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & LLP website. August 20, 2010. Also on Lexology.com.(viewed August 26, 2010.

In an August 20, 2010 paper posted on Lexology, " Lawmakers Argue Against Adoption of Verizon-Google Net Neutrality Plan," Patrick Campbell of Paul Weiss Rifking Wharton & Garrison in New York reports that four Democratic members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee have written to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski voiceing their concerns with the net neutrality policy framework proposed by Verizon Communications and Google, Inc. Mr. Campbell writes: "The lawmakers claim that the agreement 'reinforces the need for resolution of the current open proceedings at the Commission to ensure the maintenance of an open Internet.' In the week since its introduction, the regulatory roadmap offered by Google and Verizon has added considerable ammunition to the debate over net neutrality that continues to intensify in the wake of the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision in the Comcast- BitTorrent case. Specifically, the companies’ plan would prohibit wireline broadband operators from selectively blocking web transmissions while exempting wireless mobile broadband providers from net neutrality regulation..."

Posted On: August 17, 2010

Book Review: Justice Brennan: Liberal Champion

TITLE: JUSTICE BRENNAN
SUBTITLE: Liberal Champion
AUTHORS: Seth Stern & Stephen Wermiel
PUBLICATION DATE: October 4, 2010
PUBLISHER: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
PAGE COUNT: 688 pp.
ISBN: 978-0-547-14625-7 (Paper)
PRICE: $35.00

Stern, a reporter for CQ, and Wermiel, a law professor and former WSJ reporter, team up to chronicle the career of US Supreme Court Justice William Brennan, who served on the High Bench during a tumultuous period from 1956 to 1990. Working from a repository of newly-released documents, as well as interviews with friends, family, colleagues, and Justice Brennan himself, the authors show how Brennan staked a liberal claim with the progressive side of the Warren Court during the mid-Twentieth Century, often invoking civil rights and privacy protections for minorities, women, and the working class. Especially revealing and insightful are the authors’ revelations about the inner workings of the Supreme Court, how the Justices arrive at their decisions, and the infrequent, yet riveting, confrontations between Brennan and his conservative counterparts. The book is a historian’s guide to the tactics and strategies behind many of the legal battles of the era over the extent of Constitutional rights and the legal struggles over such contentious issues as desegregation, affirmative action, school prayer, the death penalty, and abortion. Aimed at a scholarly audience; highly recommended for academic and law libraries, as well as larger public libraries.

Philip Y. Blue, New York State Supreme Court Criminal Branch Law Library, First Judicial District, New York, New York

Posted On: August 16, 2010

CLLB Information Security Newsletter

Volume 3 Number 7 July 2010

July 2010

PROTECTING DATA CONTAINED IN COPIERS AND PRINTERS

From the Desk of David Badertscher

What kind of data can be stored in copiers and printers?

You are probably familiar with many of the standard best practices for safeguarding your data, such as avoid carrying unencrypted sensitive data on portable devices; use a complex password; and keeping your PC current with updated anti-virus software and security patches. However, do you realize that another important aspect of safeguarding your data means taking precautions about the information contained on printers or copiers?

Increasingly, printers, copiers and related devices come with hard drives capable of storing large volumes of information. The data you print, copy, scan, or fax may be stored on the hard drive permanently.

Recent news coverage has highlighted the fact that confidential information can be recovered from printers, copiers and similar devices after they are sent to surplus or returned to the vendor at the end of their lease. Some of the confidential information recently reported to be found on these machines included social security numbers, birth certificates, bank records, income tax forms, medical records, and pay stubs with names.

How do I keep my data secure?

Assume that any document that you printed or scanned is stored on the device. At a minimum, be aware that when you dispose of your printer, fax, copier or scanner, there may be a hard drive containing images of all of your documents. In order to properly dispose of the device, have the hard drive securely wiped before you give the device away or sell it, or if the device’s hard drive is removable, remove the drive entirely and have it securely destroyed.

Individuals and organizations should review the following recommendations for printers, copiers, scanners, and faxes:

· Settings: Configure the devices to encrypt the data, if possible.

· New Devices: Purchase\lease devices with disk encryption and immediate data overwriting capability.

· Disposal: Remove or wipe the hard drive before disposal.

· Use of Public Devices: Be cautious if using public printers\copiers\scanner\faxes for documents containing confidential information.

Additional Information:

· Identity Theft Awareness: http://www.identity-theft-awareness.com/digital-copiers.html

· Identity Theft Fixes: http://www.identitytheftfixes.com/company_copiers_and_identity_theft_--_is_your_company_at_ris.html

· CBS News - Digital Photocopiers Loaded With Secrets: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/19/eveningnews/main6412439.shtml

· SANS Reading Room: http://www.sans.org/reading_room/whitepapers/networkdevs/auditing-securing-multifunction-devices_1921

· Xerox: http://www.xerox.com/information-security/product/enus.html

· Cannon: http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/production/standard_display/security-main-page
· HP: http://h71028.www7.hp.com/enterprise/cache/617575-0-0-225-121.html

· Toshiba: http://www.copiers.toshiba.com/usa/security/device-security/index.html

For additional monthly cyber security newsletter tips visit: www.msisac.org/awareness/news/

The above information is from tips provided by the Multi-State Information and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC). To learn more about MS-ISAC go to http://www.msisac.org/

MORE NEWS AND INFORMATION.

Bandwidth Bandit - Symantec White Paper.

Summary:
Internet bandwidth is a finite and expensive resource; protect it from spammers, criminals, hackers, time-wasters and employee misuse. Your company’s internet link is precious. Not only is it expensive and limited but it is a vital business tool. Yet our analysis shows that companies can lose around a quarter of their internet bandwidth to employee web misuse, streaming media and spam. Imagine if you had to give up a quarter of your office space for non-work activities; it’s inconceivable. But when it comes to internet bandwidth, most companies don’t even know about the loss, let alone take steps to prevent it.

Part of the problem is that the internet is designed to continue operating even if links are busy or damaged; indeed that’s the whole point of it. This means that you probably don’t notice if your emails take longer to deliver, web pages take longer to load and internet phone and video conferences are lower quality. It all sort of works and you expect the occasional hiccup.

Download White Paper Here

Six Reasons to Worry About Cybersecurity

By William Jackson

Daily Government Computer News August 16, 2010.

The threats from increasingly professional cyber criminals, spies and hackers are evolving to address the adoption of new technologies and platforms by government and private-sector enterprises.



Posted On: August 16, 2010

OCLC Update 2010

Today we received a link to a slide presentation by Glenn Patton, Director of Wordcat Quality Management at OCLC on July 11 at the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) Annual Meeting in Denver, Colorado. We are sharing this information with you because these slides convey an important message regarding the urgency of establishing acceptable standards and developing techniques based on those standards for ensuring continued and improved access to structured data stored in various formats on web.2.0 and future versions as they evolve. .Topics covered include updates regarding the Connexion client, some discussion of the Virtual Internation Authority File (VIAF), and the ISO 27729 ISO Standard, International Standard Name Identifier (ISNI).

Posted On: August 13, 2010

Skyriver and Innovative Interfaces v. OCLC

On JUly 28, 2010, Skyriver Technology Solutions, LLC and Innovative Interfaces, Inc. filed a complaint against Online Computer Library Center, Inc.(OCLC) in the District Court Northern District of California alleging federal and state antitrust violations and unfair competition. More specifically the complaint states that OCLC "...is unlawfully monopolizing the bibliographic data, cataloging services, and interlibrary lending markets and is attempting to monopolize the market for integrated library systems by anticompetitive and exclusionary agreements, policies and practices."

OCLC has responded though a Statement from Larry Alford, the Chair of the OCLC Board of Trustees and Jay Jordan OCLC President. The Statement reads in part:

"We at OCLC believe the lawsuit is without merit, and we will vigorously defend the policies and practices of the cooperative
.
"OCLC's General Counsel, working with trial counsel, will respond to this regrettable action by SkyRiver and Innovative Interfaces following procedures and timetables dictated by the court. This process will likely take months or even years, not days..".

We are not particularly surprised by this action because in our view it is a manifestation of growing concerns and tensions resulting from the increasing commercialization of many organizations serving libraries and other sectors of the information community. Those interested in this issue should also read, or perhaps re-read, Joni Cassidy's posting on this blog: Skyriver: Could It be a Contender?

Here are some other documents and postings we recommend to those interested in following this action. :

Complaint: Docket No 10-cv-03305-BZ

Link to Statement from OCLC Board of Trustees and President about Skyriver, Innovative Interfaces Complaint..

Library Journal article discussing the founding of SkyRiver as a competitor of OCLC and its potential impat on tehnical Service

"SkyRiver Tech and Innovative Interfaces Seeks Access to "OCLC's Unlawfully Acquired Database" in Unfair Competition Complaint" August 10 posting on Law Librarian Blog.


Posted On: August 13, 2010

Findlaw Case Summaries: Criminal Law and Procedure

To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw

August 2-6, 2010.

United States Second Circuit, 08/02/2010
US v. Johnson
Defendant's sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm is affirmed where a violation of Connecticut General Statute section 53a-179b (Rioting at a correctional institution) qualified as a "violent felony" under the Armed Career Criminal Act.

United States Second Circuit, 08/02/2010
Scott v. Fischer
In an action claiming that defendants deprived plaintiff of liberty without due process of law both by placing her on mandatory post-release supervision without a proper judicial sentence and by failing to take action to remove the supervision before or after she was rearrested for violating the terms thereof, dismissal of the action is affirmed where defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for all actions they took prior to the Second Circuit's decision in Earley v. Murray, 451 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2006), and further, plaintiff has not pleaded sufficient facts to state a claim upon which relief can be granted for any actions the defendants took thereafter. ..

United States Second Circuit, 08/03/2010
US v. Broxmeyer
Defendant's convictions for production of child pornography and for transportation of a minor across state lines with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity are reversed where: 1) the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant persuaded, induced, or enticed the victim to take Photos 1 and 2; and 2) an 18 U.S.C. section 2423(a) conviction cannot lie where the unlawful sexual act occurs before the crossing of state lines, and where there is no evidence of an intent to commit a sexual act when state lines were crossed.

Continue reading " Findlaw Case Summaries: Criminal Law and Procedure " »

Posted On: August 13, 2010

Findlaw Case Summaries - Constitutional Law

To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw

August 2-6, 2010.

United States First Circuit, 08/04/2010
IMS Health Inc. v. Mills
In a challenge to the constitutionality of 22 Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 22, section 1711-E(2-A), which allows prescribers licensed in Maine to choose not to make their identifying information available for use in marketing prescription drugs to them, district court's grant of plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction in prohibiting Maine from enforcing section 1711-E(2-A) on the basis of plaintiffs' First Amendment claims is reversed where: 1) plaintiffs' First Amendment challenges fail for the reasons stated in Ayotte, as the statute regulates conduct, not speech, and even if it regulates commercial speech, that regulation satisfies constitutional standards; 2) the Maine statute constitutionally protects Maine prescribers' choice to opt in to confidentiality protection to avoid being subjected to unwanted solicitations based on their identifying data; 3) plaintiffs' argument that the statute is void for vagueness is rejected; 4) section 1711-E(2-A) regulates prescript ion drug information intermediaries' out-of-state use or sale of opted-in Maine prescribers' data, and this interpretation does not raise constitutional concerns under the dormant Commerce Clause; and 5) nor would section 1711-E(2-A)'s regulation of prescription drug information intermediaries' out-of-state use of sale of opted-in Maine prescribers' identifying data raise constitutional concerns as a disproportionate burdens on interstate commerce under Pike.

United States Second Circuit, 08/02/2010
Scott v. Fischer
In an action claiming that defendants deprived plaintiff of liberty without due process of law both by placing her on mandatory post-release supervision without a proper judicial sentence and by failing to take action to remove the supervision before or after she was rearrested for violating the terms thereof, dismissal of the action is affirmed where defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for all actions they took prior to the Second Circuit's decision in Earley v. Murray, 451 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2006), and further, plaintiff has not pleaded sufficient facts to state a claim upon which relief can be granted for any actions the defendants took thereafter. ..

United States Second Circuit, 08/03/2010
US v. Broxmeyer
Defendant's convictions for production of child pornography and for transportation of a minor across state lines with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity are reversed where: 1) the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant persuaded, induced, or enticed the victim to take Photos 1 and 2; and 2) an 18 U.S.C. section 2423(a) conviction cannot lie where the unlawful sexual act occurs before the crossing of state lines, and where there is no evidence of an intent to commit a sexual act when state lines were crossed.

Continue reading " Findlaw Case Summaries - Constitutional Law " »

Posted On: August 5, 2010

U.S. District Court Rejects Same Sex Marriage in California

On Wednesday August 4, 2020 Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco struck down California's ban on same sex marriage in a 136 page opinioon, ruling that voter approved Proposition 8 violates the constitutional right of equal protection. Proposition 8 defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

This high profile case, Kristin Perry et. al. v. Arnold Schwarzenegger Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW, is being watched closely by both supporters and opponents of same sex marriage, as many believe it will make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court where it could result in a landmark decision.

Below are links to a discussion of this decision in the August 15 New York Times and to the decision as decided on Wednesday.

Article by James Wilson and Mary McKay in August 15 New York Times.

Kristin Perry et. al. v. Arnold Schwarzenegger Case3:09-cv-02292-VRW

Posted On: August 3, 2010

Judge Reiling on IT and the Access to Justice Crisis

Robert Richards, Editor in Chief of the VoxPopuLII Blog at the Legal Information Institute at Cornell has just announced an important and helpful posting "IT and the Access to Justice Crisis" by Judge Dory Reiling, Vice President of the Amsterdam District Court on that blog.

Mr. Richards writes: "Judge Dory Reiling, mag. iur., Ph.D., Vice President of the Amsterdam District Court, has posted 'IT and the Access to Justice Crisis,' http://j.mp/cKmHz5 , on the VoxPopuLII Blog, http://blog.law.cornell.edu/voxpop/ , published by the Legal Information Institute at Cornell University Law School.

In her post -- which is based on a chapter in her recent book entitled Technology for Justice: How Information Technology Can Support Judicial Reform, http://j.mp/cpG7OY -- Judge Reiling discusses what we currently know about citizens' information needs and behavior respecting access to civil justice. Judge Reiling describes the information that citizens need to resolve disputes outside of the legal system -- whether without a third party or via alternative dispute resolution (ADR) -- as well as the information they need in order to proceed pro se via the civil justice system. Judge Reiling then discusses how technology can be used to encourage dispute resolution outside of formal legal proceedings, as well as to improve outcomes for self-represented litigants in the civil justice system.

Judge Reiling's post should be of particular interest to the access to justice / pro bono community, court administrators, alternative dispute resolution professionals, developers of judicial and access-to-justice information systems, and to those who provide or seek to improve legal information services to the public."

-- Robert Richards
Editor in chief, VoxPopuLII