Hour 1
Fired Michigan Magistrate Loses Speech Lawsuit Against Court
The First Amendment protects public employees from adverse employment actions when they speak as citizens on matters of public concern, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit said. But public employees aren’t protected if their speech falls within the ordinary scope of their job duties, the unpublished opinion by Judge Jane Branstetter Stranch said.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/fired-michigan-magistrate-loses-speech-lawsuit-against-court
Wood’s speech fell well within the scope of her duties as chief magistrate as she described them, the court said. Even her conversations with outside counsel to prepare for the ACLU case were part of her job duties because she attended those meetings, not as a citizen, but as chief magistrate, it said.
ACLU sues Maine over its ‘unconstitutional’ substitute for a public defender system
“Every other state in the country has found that it’s impossible to provide the necessary, required training, supervision, oversight, funding for the public defense system without a public defender’s office somewhere in the state,” Heiden said. “If you come out of law school and want to be a prosecutor, you can go work in a district attorney’s office. They’ll give you training, they’ll give you an office, they’ll give you support, they’ll give you support staff, but if you want to be a criminal defense attorney in Maine, you’re on your own.”
https://www.wmtw.com/article/aclu-sues-maine-over-its-unconstitutional-substitute-for-a-public-defender-system/39287767
Sixth Amendment Center, Inc.
The establishment of the Sixth Amendment Center (6AC) in Boston in 2013 represents a dawning in our country’s now 50-year struggle to ensure a fair day in court for the indigent accused. Far too often, our state and local courts fail to provide an attorney at all to poor people charged with crime, or, if they do so, they appoint an attorney who has financial incentives to do as little work as possible, is appointed far too late in the case to be effective, and is expected to juggle the cases of several hundreds of defendants all at the same time.
https://sixthamendment.org/about-us/
Leonard A. Sacks & Associates P.C. v. International Monetary Fund, No. 21-7034 (D.C. Cir. 2022)
Sacks is a law firm with a 20-year history of working with the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/21-7034/21-7034-2022-02-25.html
In 2011, IMF hired Sacks to negotiate disputed claims of various contractors that worked on the renovation of its headquarters.
IMF removed the case to federal court and moved to dismiss it on immunity grounds pursuant to its Articles of Agreement, given effect in the U.S. by the Bretton Woods Act, 22 U.S.C. 286h.
‘Drunk’ Florida lawyer arrested ‘for stripping at a bar and refusing to put her clothes back on’
Two days before the disorderly conduct arrest, Elkins was jailed for allegedly having no money to pay for lunch and drinks at a Thai restaurant.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10538995/Drunk-Florida-lawyer-arrested-stripping-bar-refusing-clothes-on.html
According to a complaint filed in that case . . . Elkins had lunch and multiple alcoholic beverages valued at just over $38 at Nori Thai restaurant in St Petersburg on Wednesday afternoon.
When she received the bill, Elkins did not have money to cover the charges and instead offered her purse as payment.
Message Received: Service of Complaint by Email Found Sufficient
Viahart subsequently moved for entry of default judgment against defendants that failed to appear or otherwise respond to the complaint. The district court granted the default judgment motion and determined that each defaulting defendant was liable for $500,000 each plus attorneys’ fees and costs.
https://www.ipupdate.com/2022/03/message-received-service-of-complaint-by-email-found-sufficient/#page=1
Judge McMahon’s Trial Memo: Argue Objections In “25 Words or Less” And Other Guidance
Judge McMahon issued a memo today to the parties scheduled for a forthcoming civil trial, and the memo sets forth various rules reflecting her efforts to keep trials running efficiently.
https://www.sdnyblog.com/judge-mcmahons-trial-memo-argue-objections-in-25-words-or-less-and-other-guidance/#page=1
Highlights of the memo include: . . . [see the order]
Federal Trade Commission, Department of Justice, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration sued several for selling “Earth Tea,” that claims to prevent or cure COVID-19.
“Our Clinical Trial was successful. So successful we are offering a Money Back Guarantee against covid-19 if 2 bottles do not get you negative you will get your money back.” [It’s only $60 per 16-ounce bottle.]
From the Complaint
New York Eastern District Court
United States of America v. B4B Earth Tea LLC et al
Mother Sues Abbott Over Infant Formula
“[S]trong links between cow’s milk-based products and NEC causing and/substantially contributing to death in preterm and severely preterm, low-weight infants, along with many other health complications and long-term risks to these babies.”
From the Complaint
* * *
“NEC was six to ten times more common in exclusively formula-fed babies than in those fed breast milk alone”
Illinois Northern District Court
De Los Santos v. Abbott Laboratories
Court Structure By State Diagrams
https://cspbr.azurewebsites.net/
Niemitalo v. Seidel (South Dakota Supreme Court, 2022)
Julie asserted that while the divorce action was pending Richard attacked her, bound her, and raped her. A jury found Richard guilty of all offenses. In Julie’s pending civil suit she brought claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment, and civil battery. The circuit court granted summary judgment for Richard, determining that a divorce agreement between the parties was unambiguous and interpreted it to be a broad release and full and final settlement of all claims.
https://law.justia.com/cases/south-dakota/supreme-court/2022/29653.html
Zappia v. Town of Old Orchard Beach (Maine Supreme Judicial Court, 2022)
The Town’s code enforcement officer denied Appellant’s application because “an accessory structure cannot be located in the front yard.” The Town’s Zoning Board of Appeals upheld the denial, concluding that a particular provision of the Town’s Zoning Ordinance prohibited Appellant from building the structure in her front yard. The Supreme Judicial Court vacated the order below, holding that the provision at issue did not prevent Appellant from building a greenhouse in her front yard.
https://law.justia.com/cases/maine/supreme-court/2022/2022-me-15.html
ROLL TIDE, BUT NOT WITH THESE PLATES
Citing his extensive knowledge of Constitutional law, Mr. Kirk was quoted in AL.com accordingly: “Most people only think it’s free speech if it only represents a certain aspect of the country or a certain portion of the country, and that’s not what the First Amendment is about. . . . I have the right to put a tag on my vehicle and it can say what I want it to say.”
https://graydon.law/roll-tide-but-not-with-these-plates/
I hate to nitpick here, but Mr. Kirk is completely wrong. In a 2015 case the United States Supreme Court held . . .
Hour 2
Holding Off Foreclosures While Homeowners Await Billions in Homeowner Assistance Fund Payments
A Department of Treasury February 24, 2022, guidance explains that states can distribute HAF funding to prevent mortgage delinquencies, defaults, and foreclosures, loss of utilities, and displacement. Each state, territory, and tribe must establish criteria, process applications, and distribute funds. States can distribute funds so that homeowners can reinstate a delinquent mortgage, reduce the mortgage principal, or pay delinquent property taxes, past-due condominium, homeowner association fees, and past-due utility bills. Funds are sent directly to the mortgage servicer or other entity approved to receive payments, not to the homeowner directly.
https://library.nclc.org/holding-foreclosures-while-homeowners-await-billions-haf-payments
Threat To Opposing Counsel Draws Sanction
The opinion stated the Court’s independent review of the record provides overwhelming evidence that the sole purpose of Whipple’s motion was to force Synenberg to stop questioning Kristina’s capacity and agree to dismiss the case. The Court noted Whipple’s own actions at the hearing refute his claims that he had sincere concern for the opposing attorney. Whipple only agreed to withdraw the motion if Synenberg agreed to settle.
https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_profession/2022/02/a-decision-yesterday-of-the-ohio-supreme-court-is-summarized-by-dan-trevas-the-supreme-court-of-ohio-today-suspended-a-cuyah.html
The Court’s video record of the matter.
Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct
https://www.odc.ohio.gov/rules
Music Credits
Bad Moon Rising · Creedence Clearwater Revival
https://youtu.be/tKJwvQfraY8
Fun Fun Fun- The Beach Boys
https://youtu.be/dDHErN3dOkc
15 second snips
https://sectorradio.ru/space/
Copyright 2022. All rights reserved in print and audio content.