News

Business

• [07/22] Borders begins liquidation sales at all stores
• [07/22] Second Greece bailout sends Asia stocks higher
• [07/22] Oops! Forklift smashes $1 million worth of wine

Crime

• [07/22] Police: Parolee died from self-inflicted wound
• [07/22] Prison resumes forcible medication of Loughner
• [07/22] Georgia's videotaped execution sets new precedent

Environment

• [07/22] Feds: Gulf disaster final report delayed slightly
• [07/22] Exxon cleans up 4 sites in Yellowstone oil spill
• [07/22] NYC mayor: Progress on fixing river sewage spill

Case Summaries

Environmental Law

[07/22] Conservation Force v. Salazar
In a case involving a challenge to the seizure and administrative forfeiture of two leopard trophies by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service from two hunters who attempted to import the trophies without the proper export permits, judgment of the district court dismissing action is affirmed where because plaintiffs chose to pursue administrative remedies, they waived the opportunity for judicial forfeiture proceedings under 50 C.F.R. section 12.24(a).

[07/18] Brod v. Omya
In a dispute involving the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), judgment of the district court partially vacating its summary judgment order is affirmed where it properly: 1) determined that the potential harm posed by aminoethylethanolamine (AEEA) in defendants' waste did not constitute a serious endangerment; 2) granted defendants’ motion to dismiss all claims related to AEEA because plaintiffs had failed to satisfy the citizen suit notice requirements of the RCRA; and 3) found that arsenic was not present at a level high enough to subject defendants to liability under RCRA.

[07/15] Myers v. US
In an action seeking damages from the United States for injuries to a child allegedly caused by exposure to the toxic heavy metal thallium from soil dumped into a landfill by the Navy, judgment of the district court is reversed where the court erred in finding that the United States acted reasonably and did not breach any duty, and in holding that the discretionary function exception barred the defendant's liability on and the court’s subject matter jurisdiction over claim.

[07/14] Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach
In a dispute arising from defendant-city's ban of the use of plastic bags by local businesses and involving the standing requirement to challenge an environmental impact report (EIR) and whether defendant was required to prepare an EIR prior to enacting the ban, judgment of the court of appeal is affirmed where plaintiff qualifies for public interest standing and standing on its own because corporations are not subject to heightened scrutiny when they file citizen suits and plaintiff represents businesses directly affected by the ban, but reversed where the trial court improperly held that defendant needed to compile an EIR, since substantial evidence and common sense support the city's determination that the ban would have no significant environmental effect.

Family Law

[07/21] In re K. C.
In a dependency dispute involving standing to appeal an order concerning placement, judgment of the appeals court is affirmed where a parent whose parental rights have been terminated, Welf. and Inst. Code section 366.26(c), and who does not challenge that decision, lacks standing to appeal an order entered at the same hearing denying a petition by the dependent child's grandparents to have the child placed with them.

[07/20] In re A.C.
In a Welfare and Ins. Code section 300 dispute involving the termination of dependency jurisdiction and an order of visitation with minor daughters who had been adjudged dependent minors, judgment of the juvenile court is affirmed where an oral visitation order, which conflicts with a form final judgment, is controlling and is not an improper delegation of authority to determine the circumstances of visitation.

[07/18] In re T.W.
In an appeal from an order terminating the parental rights of a Mother to two of her 11 children, case is dismissed where the appeal: 1) challenges order on the grounds of defective notice and insufficiency of evidence, but does not assert that the order terminating parental rights was improper; and 2) makes no claim that the children were not adoptable, or that Mother has maintained regular visitation, or that the children would benefit from continuing the relationship.

[07/14] Henry v. Purnell
In a Section 1983 action arising from the non-fatal shooting of a suspect wanted for misdemeanor failure to pay child support, summary judgment in favor of defendant-police officer is reversed because: 1) although defendant intended to use his Taser rather than his gun to stop fleeing suspect, Tennessee v. Garner prohibits shooting suspects who pose no significant threat of death or serious physical threat; and 2) defendant's use of force could be viewed by a jury as objectively unreasonable.

Probate Trusts

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.