LATEST SUMMARIES

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CONTRACTS, CORP. GOVERNANCE, CORPORATION & ENTERPRISE LAW, INJURY AND TORT LAW, INTERNATIONAL LAW
• Nocula v. UGS Corp.

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE, SENTENCING
• US v. Thomas
• US v. Seymour
• US v. Corley

LATEST SUMMARIES

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CONTRACTS, CORP. GOVERNANCE, CORPORATION & ENTERPRISE LAW, INJURY AND TORT LAW, INTERNATIONAL LAW
Nocula v. UGS Corp., No. 06-3386
In a suit involving various tort and contract claims against a parent company and its sublicensee that instituted criminal proceedings against plaintiff's company in Poland, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where the district court properly invoked the act-of-state doctrine because the adjudication of the claims would require American courts to question the legality of the seizure and loss of property during the Polish criminal prosecution. Appeal from the dismissal of several claims is dismissed where: 1) the first notice of appeal was ineffective to provide notice of one party's appeal; 2) the second notice of appeal was untimely; 3) most claims asserted belonged to plaintiff's company, which was not named as a party; and 4) plaintiff is barred by the rule against shareholder standing from asserting claims on behalf of the company. Read more...

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE, SENTENCING
US v. Thomas, No. 05-4222
Conviction and sentence on drug conspiracy and distribution charges are affirmed where: 1) there was sufficient evidence of a single conspiracy to overcome defendant's fatal variance claim; 2) there was no actual variance between the indictment and the proof offered at trial; 3) a grand jury investigation of defendant while he was under indictment on state charges did not constitute a vindictive prosecution; 4) the inclusion of an additional count that makes it easier for the government to argue for the admission of "other acts" evidence does not make the prosecution of the additional count vindictive; 5) closing statements made by the prosecution were not improper; 6) the district court properly applied the career offender guideline; and 7) the sentence imposed was reasonable. Read more...

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE, SENTENCING
US v. Seymour, No. 05-3904
Convictions and sentences on drug and weapons charges are affirmed over defendants' arguments that: 1) their Sixth Amendment rights were violated when the district court sentenced all defendants under 21 U.S.C. section 841(b)(1)(A) without having the jury make individualized findings regarding the quantities of drugs reasonably foreseeable to each defendant; 2) the district court erred by not suppressing a gun found in one defendant's possession during a traffic stop; 3) the district court abused its discretion when it denied the defendant's motion for a mistrial on the gun-related charge; and 4) there was insufficient evidence to support two defendants' convictions on gun-related charges. Read more...

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE, SENTENCING
US v. Corley, No. 05-1120
Conviction and death sentence for charges including bank robbery and capital murder are affirmed where: 1) the government did not exercise its peremptory challenges in a discriminatory manner; 2) the district court did not abuse its discretion or violate defendant's Fifth and Eighth Amendment rights in allowing the government to introduce evidence of unadjudicated conduct at sentencing; 3) cross-examination by the government was either proper or was properly handled with a limiting instruction, and a statement made by the prosecution during closing arguments did not constitute reversible error on its own; and 4) there was no reversible error in the court's refusal to give a residual doubt instruction or to allow a residual doubt argument. Read more...