LATEST SUMMARIES

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, CIVIL PROCEDURE, GOVERNMENT LAW, TRANSPORTATION
• Aux Sable Liquid Products v. Murphy

CIVIL RIGHTS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, FAMILY LAW, GOVERNMENT LAW
• Michael C. v. Gresbach

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, HABEAS CORPUS
• Carlson v. Jess

SECURITIES LAW
• Jones v. Harris Associates L.P.

LATEST SUMMARIES

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, CIVIL PROCEDURE, GOVERNMENT LAW, TRANSPORTATION
Aux Sable Liquid Products v. Murphy, No. 07-1402
In an appeal involving the scope of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) preemption after defendant limited access to Interstate 57 on its local road to vehicles weighing less than 14 tons, summary judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) section 31114 of the STAA prohibits states from denying commercial vehicles "reasonable access" to and from the interstate while allowing state and local government to use their police powers over state highways and local roads so long as they do not impede "reasonable access" for commercial vehicles; and 2) although the STAA does not prohibit denying any form of access to and from the interstate, preemption occurs when reasonable access is denied. Read more...

CIVIL RIGHTS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, FAMILY LAW, GOVERNMENT LAW
Michael C. v. Gresbach, No. 07-1756
In an action against a caseworker in the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare alleging a violation of children's Fourth Amendment rights by conducting under the clothes examination of the children's bodies during interviews at their private school, denial of a motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity for is affirmed where: 1) the children's Fourth Amendment rights were violated when the defendant conducted a search on private property without consent, a warrant or probable cause, or exigent circumstances; and 2) there was clearly established doctrine as to what actions a caseworker must take when conducting a child abuse investigation at a private school. Read more...

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, HABEAS CORPUS
Carlson v. Jess, No. 07-3428
Grant of a writ of habeas corpus based on a denial of a motion to substitute counsel and for a denial of a motion for a continuance is affirmed where: 1) the trial court made unreasonable findings of fact that the communication between the petitioner and his trial counsel had not broken down; 2) the court of appeals did not look at the evidence presented by petitioner and merely relied on the court's factual findings; 3) the trial court's concern for delay in the trial was so rigid as to be arbitrary; 4) the age of the victim as an excuse not to delay the trial was unpersuasive since the victim did not make his claim until six years after the events took place; and 5) denial of petitioner's right to retain his counsel of choice had an adverse effect on the presentation of his case. Read more...

SECURITIES LAW
Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., No. 07-1624
Summary judgment for defendant in an action alleging high fees in violation of section 36(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 is affirmed where the circuit court rejects the approach in Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc. 694 F.2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982) interpreting section 36(b) as merely delineating a fiduciary standard and not creating a "reasonableness" approach in relation to the fees imposed. Read more...