| You may forward this e-mail in its entirety.
Table of Contents Government Relations Cases FindLaw's case summaries are copyrighted material and are not intended for republication without prior approval. You may, however, freely redistribute this e-mail in its entirety. To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com.
Government Relations Cases United States Supreme Court, 01/20/2012
Perry v. Perez, No. 11-713
In cases challenging redistricting plans in Texas for race discrimination under the federal Constitution and section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, orders of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas implementing interim electoral district maps for the 2012 Texas elections are vacated and cases are remanded for further proceedings, where the district court erred to the extent it exceeded its mission to draw interim maps that do not violate the Constitution or the Voting Rights Act, and substituted its own concept of the collective public good for the Texas Legislature�s determination of which policies serve the interests of the citizens of Texas. Read more... United States First Circuit, 01/20/2012
Davis v. US, No. 10-1418
In consolidated suits under the Federal Tort Claims Act brought by families of murder victims, seeking to impose liability on the United States for the actions of FBI agents for protecting gang members who were also FBI informants, the judgments of the district court are affirmed save as to sanctions, where: 1) the FBI agent's actions were the but-for and proximate cause of the victims' deaths; 2) loss of consortium is "other damage to the person" under Massachusetts statute; 3) the amount awarded for pain and suffering could not be said to be so low as to represent an abuse of discretion; 4) the government's assertion of a comparative negligence defense was not in itself improper, but might have been made with the intent to harass, so that remand was required. Read more... United States First Circuit, 01/20/2012
Litif v. US, No. 10-1417
In a case seeking review of a judgment awarding $1.15 million to the family and the estate of a murder victim of FBI informant James "Whitey" Bulger in 1980, judgment is affirmed, where: 1) the plaintiffs' claims were not barred by the Federal Tort Claims Act statute of limitations; 2) the district court did not err in finding that the plaintiffs had shown that it was more likely than not that Bulger caused the victim's death; and 3) the amount of the district court's award of damages was not an abuse of discretion. Read more...
United States Ninth Circuit, 01/20/2012
Alvarez v. Hill, No. 10-35865
In a suit by a former prisoner alleging that Oregon Department of Corrections employees substantially burdened the practice of his religion in violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), the district court's dismissal of the claims is affirmed, where: 1) Oregon's sovereign immunity barred the plaintiff's RLUIPA claims for money damages against the defendants sued in their official capacity; and 2) the plaintiff's claims for declaratory and injunctive relief were moot. Read more... United States Federal Circuit, 01/25/2012
Otay Mesa Property, L.P. v. US, No. 2011-5002
On appeal from a decision of the United States Court of Federal Claims awarding plaintiffs $3,043,051, plus interest, for the temporary taking of a blanket easement over five parcels of land and limiting the government's liability to the taking of an easement over those five parcels and limiting the period of the taking to April of 1999 to October of 2008, the judgment is affirmed in part and vacated in part, where: 1) the Claims Court erred when it concluded that the government's taking of the easement was a temporary rather than a permanent physical taking, resulting in an erroneous calculation of the plaintiffs' damages; and 2) the Claims Court did not err in limiting the government's liability. Read more... California Court of Appeal, 01/20/2012
Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation v. County of El Dorado, No. C064875
In a case arising from the County of El Dorado's adoption of an oak woodland management plan and mitigation fee program without an environmental impact report (EIR), the district court's judgment in favor of the county is reversed, where: 1) the county could not rely on an earlier program EIR for its conclusion that the adoption of the plan and fee program would have no greater adverse environmental effect than that already anticipated in the program EIR, and its adoption of a negative declaration; and 2) the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) required a tiered EIR to be conducted prior to the county's adoption of the plan and fee program. Read more... California Court of Appeal, 01/24/2012
Marken v. Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District, No. B231787
In a suit by a public school teacher who had been investigated for sexually harassing a student, requesting a preliminary injunction against disclosure of his personnel records to a parent of a student at the school, the district court's denial of the request is affirmed and the parent's appeal from denial of an ex parte application to intervene in the action is dismissed, where: 1) a person has the right to file a "reverse-CPRA action" seeking a judicial ruling precluding the holder of confidential public records concerning that person from disclosing the documents; but 2) the trial court properly denied the request for a preliminary injunction because the public interest in disclosure of the investigation report and letter of reprimand outweighed the teacher's privacy interest; and 3) the appeals court did not have jurisdiction to review the denial of the application to intervene. Read more... California Court of Appeal, 01/25/2012
General Development Co., L.P. v. City of Santa Maria, No. B228631
On appeal from a judgment of dismissal entered in favor of the City of Santa Maria after the trial court ruled that a developer's petition for writ of mandate was time barred by Government Code section 65009 for failure to timely challenge the denial of a zone change, judgment is affirmed, where the trial court did not err in ruling that City's denial of the developer's rezoning application was a "decision of a legislative body to adopt or amend a zoning ordinance" within the meaning of section 65009. Read more...
 FindLaw includes summaries of all Supreme and Appellate Court slip opinions posted on the official Illinois Courts site. FindLaw summaries include opinions that have not yet been released for publication and may be subject to modification, correction or withdrawal. Check the Illinois Courts site to determine if a specific opinion has been released before relying on that case as precedent.
Feedback
We value your comments! Please take a moment to tell us what you think by sending us an e-mail. | Subscription Information
Click here to subscribe to a FindLaw Newsletter. To unsubscribe, click here. | Advertising Information
For more information about advertising in FindLaw Newsletters, click here. | | 800 W. California Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086 |
|
