|
Players Win Relief From Stanford Receiver's Clawback Attempt
A group of current and former professional baseball players recently won a big victory in a courtroom instead of on the ball field. Because of a 5th Circuit ruling, the seven ballplayers and about 500 other investors will be able to keep money they earned on CDs they purchased from Stanford International Bank. Gene Besen (pictured) represents the players.
SPONSOR SPOTLIGHT
Privilege Logs: A Call for Change
Claiming and adjudicating privileges in eDiscovery presents significant challenges and costs. Hon. John Facciola (U.S. Magistrate Judge, District of Columbia) and Jonathan Redgrave (Partner, Nixon Peabody LLP) discuss their soon to be published law review article addressing potential solutions for privilege issues. Moderator Vickie Redgrave contributes her in-house and outside counsel experience.
|
Discipline Report: Webb County Lawyer Suspended, Three Others Sanctioned
One lawyer was suspended from the practice of law, another was placed on probation, and two others received public reprimands. The suspended lawyer, Armando Trevino of Webb County, was suspended for one month and placed on probation for 35 months. The Bar cited violations involving rules requiring a lawyer to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly complying with reasonable requests for information under the Rules of Disciplinary Procedure.
Commentary: Master Outlook's Features to Increase Productivity
By combining some of Microsoft Outlook's best undiscovered features with a little ingenuity, a lawyer can slash her stress level and perhaps add a bit of leisure time to her schedule, says the Assistant-at-Law. For starters, few users know inbox subfolders are not just for e-mails. Microsoft Outlook is not perfect, she says, but there is more to its e-mail and calendar functions than meets the eye.
|
| 5TH U.S. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS |
|
TORTS
Peterson v. City of Fort Worth, Texas
(5th Cir. 11/17/2009)
This case, brought as a §1983 action, presents the question whether the city of Fort Worth incurs municipal liability under Monell v. Dep't of Social Servs. for the alleged excessive force of two of its police officers. If appellant had sued the officers, he would have had a colorable claim. Nonetheless, he chose not to do so and because the evidence will not support municipal liability for the individual misconduct of the officers, summary judgment was proper. 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 08-10258, 11-17-2009
SPONSOR SPOTLIGHT
Discovery: Inside the Investigation
In-house and outside counsel are under pressure to manage e-discovery to maximize efficiency and control costs. Learn from technology, investigative and legal professionals at BDO and DLA Piper about important e-discovery considerations, including the type of information that can impact the investigative strategy and best practices for cost containment. FREE Webcast. Now Available.
|
|
| TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS |
|
CRIMINAL PRACTICE
Leal v. State
(Tex.Crim.App. 11/18/2009)
The jury found appellant guilty of capital murder as charged in the indictment, which included both kidnapping and aggravated-sexual-assault paragraphs. Appellant did not show that there is greater than a 50 percent chance that, if the DNA testing provided exculpatory results, he would not have been convicted under either paragraph. Court of Criminal Appeals, No. AP-76,049, 11-18-2009
CRIMINAL PRACTICE
Simon v. Levario
(Tex.Crim.App. 11/18/2009)
Lagrone v. State is not limited in principle to the type of psychiatric evidence presented at the punishment phase of a death-penalty case. Therefore, it may not be limited in principle to the punishment phase of a capital murder death-penalty trial, or even to death-penalty cases at all. Accordingly, appellant has not established a clear right to be insulated from examination by a State's psychiatric expert. Court of Criminal Appeals, No. AP-76,183, 11-18-2009
|
|
APPEALS
Butler v. State
(Tex.App. Dist.6 11/12/2009)
Appellant never argued to the trial court that the search of his vehicle was improper as a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. Under the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 33.1(a)(1)(A), in order for a complaint to be presented on appeal, a timely request, objection or motion must have been made to the trial court stating the grounds for the ruling "with sufficient specificity to make the trial court aware of the complaint." Texarkana Court of Appeals, No. 06-08-00194-CR, 11-12-2009
CIVIL PRACTICE; FAMILY LAW
In re J.G.
(Tex.App. Dist.5 11/18/2009)
The trial court's finding that the children's habitual residence was Mexico was not supported by the evidence. Because the father bore the burden of proof on that issue under Gitter v. Gitter, 396 F.3d 124, the trial court abused its discretion by granting relief under the Hague Convention and the International Child Abduction Remedies Act, 42 U.S.C.A. §§11601-11610. Dallas Court of Appeals, No. 05-08-00717-CV, 11-18-2009
CIVIL PRACTICE
Internet Advertising Group, Inc. v. Accudata, Inc.
(Tex.App. Dist.5 11/18/2009)
Because the record does not demonstrate that appellant had sufficient minimum contacts to support the exercise of general or specific jurisdiction over it, the trial court erred in denying the special appearance. Inc., Dallas Court of Appeals, No. 05-09-00405-CV, 11-18-2009
TORTS
Overstreet v. Underwood
(Tex.App. Dist.7 11/16/2009)
Where, as here, the statement cannot properly be construed as ambiguous nor in the ordinary and proper meaning convey a defamatory interpretation, such meaning cannot be enlarged by claims of innuendo. The test for innuendo is not how the plaintiff construes the words but how the statement would be construed by the average reasonable person or the general public. Amarillo Court of Appeals, No. 07-08-0388-CV, 11-16-2009
CRIMINAL PRACTICE
Ramirez v. State
(Tex.App. Dist.3 11/18/2009)
Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are governed by the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Strickland v. Washington. In this case, the record reflects a reasonable probability that the outcome at sentencing would have been different sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome as it currently stands. Austin Court of Appeals, No. 03-08-00723-CR, 11-18-2009
CRIMINAL PRACTICE
Sepeda v. State
(Tex.App. Dist.7 11/17/2009)
Article 64.02(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that, on receipt of the motion, the court is to require the attorney representing the State to either deliver the evidence to the court or explain in writing why the State cannot deliver the evidence. The State did not file a response in this instance. Because appellant failed to raise this matter, she waived it. Amarillo Court of Appeals, No. 07-08-0190-CR, 11-17-2009
ATTORNEYS FEES
Wilkerson v. Atascosa Wildlife Supply
(Tex.App. Dist.4 11/18/2009)
There is nothing in the record to indicate the trial court's decision to include travel time in the attorney's fees award was unreasonable or arbitrary. Houston 14th Court of Appeals, No. 04-08-00468-CV, 11-18-2009
|
| |
|
Advertisement
| |
