Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Law (19)
- Constitutional Law (18)
- Labor and Employment Law (13)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (10)
- Environmental Law (9)
-
- Intellectual Property Law (9)
- Evidence (4)
- Immigration Law (3)
- Jurisprudence (3)
- Other Law (3)
- Civil Law (2)
- Education Law (2)
- Judges (2)
- Commercial Law (1)
- Communications Law (1)
- Contracts (1)
- Courts (1)
- Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law (1)
- Family Law (1)
- Health Law and Policy (1)
- Housing Law (1)
- International Law (1)
- International Trade Law (1)
- Juvenile Law (1)
- Legal Biography (1)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (1)
- Military, War, and Peace (1)
- Property Law and Real Estate (1)
- Securities Law (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 98
Full-Text Articles in Law
Newdow V. Rio Linda Union School Disctrict: Religious Coercion In Public Schools Unconstitutional Despite Voluntary Nature Of Partially Patriotic Activity, Daniel D. Blom
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Note examines Newdow v. Rio Linda Union School District and explains why California Education Code Section 52720 and the School District’s policy of reciting the Pledge violate the Establishment Clause. Part I discusses the background facts and procedural history of the case and the three tests that were developed by the United States Supreme Court to analyze Establishment Clause challenges. Part II examines the Ninth Circuit’s application of the three Establishment Clause tests to the facts of this case. Finally, Part III explains why the Coercion Test is the determinative test in the context of government action in public …
Benay V. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc.: New Standard Needed For Determining Actual Use, Brian Casido
Benay V. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc.: New Standard Needed For Determining Actual Use, Brian Casido
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Note examines Benay v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., and the substantial-similarity standard under a California breach of an implied-in-fact contract claim and a federal copyright infringement claim. The standard used in Benay will hinder the free flow of ideas by deterring producers from accepting an author’s screenplay for fear of breaching an implied-in-fact contract. Part I of this Note summarizes the history and development of the protection of rights to creative works. Part II provides the facts and procedural history of Benay v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. Part III analyzes and criticizes the Ninth Circuit’s holding in Benay …
United States V. Pineda-Moreno, Tracking Down Individuals' Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy In The Information Age, Caitlin Emmett
United States V. Pineda-Moreno, Tracking Down Individuals' Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy In The Information Age, Caitlin Emmett
Golden Gate University Law Review
In Pineda-Moreno, the Ninth Circuit held that prolonged police monitoring of a defendant’s precise location through the use of GPS transmitters did not constitute a search. In so holding, the Ninth Circuit relied on the Supreme Court decision in United States v. Knotts. Knotts held that “[a] person traveling in an automobile on public thoroughfares has no reasonable expectation of privacy in his movements from one place to another.” Prior to the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Pineda-Moreno, most federal appellate courts interpreted Knotts to hold that location tracking outside the home is analogous to physical surveillance and …
Introduction, Marsha S. Berzon
Introduction, Marsha S. Berzon
Golden Gate University Law Review
As judges of the geographically largest and busiest federal circuit court of appeals, the 26 active and 22 senior Ninth Circuit judges rarely have the luxury of looking back at the cases we have decided, rather than working on the opinions yet to be written and preparing for the new cases coming up for argument. That the Golden Gate University Law Review has for so many years (since Volume 6 in 1976) produced this annual volume documenting and analyzing our work product has been essential in filling the gap by providing an objective assessment of what – and how – …
Kazarian V. United States Citizenship And Immigration Services: Clarifying “Extraordinary Ability” Visa Qualifications, Jaimie Bombard
Kazarian V. United States Citizenship And Immigration Services: Clarifying “Extraordinary Ability” Visa Qualifications, Jaimie Bombard
Golden Gate University Law Review
In 2007, Dr. Poghos Kazarian appealed the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service’s denial of his application for an “extraordinary ability” visa. Prior to Kazarian v. US Citizenship & Immigration Services, the Ninth Circuit had never addressed the issue of how the statutory and regulatory requirements for the “extraordinary ability” visa should be interpreted. The Kazarian court determined that the regulations outlining the evidence sufficient to qualify for the “extraordinary ability” classification were extremely restrictive. The court then concluded that, since Dr. Kazarian had presented only two of the three types of evidence required to meet the eligibility criteria, the …
What's The Deference?: United States V. Hinkson Outlines A New Test For “Abuse Of Discretion”, William B. Jones
What's The Deference?: United States V. Hinkson Outlines A New Test For “Abuse Of Discretion”, William B. Jones
Golden Gate University Law Review
Prior to United States v. Hinkson, under the prevailing analysis used to determine whether the trial court had engaged in an “abuse of discretion,” there was arguably “no effective limit” on an appellate court’s power to substitute its own judgment for that of the district court. Rather, it was left to the appellate panel to decide whether it had a “definite and firm conviction that [a] mistake [had] been committed,” or whether a trial court’s factual finding was even “permissible.” But in Hinkson, an en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit took the opportunity to elaborate on the abuse-of-discretion standard. …
Rodriguez V. Hayes: Government Accountability For Immigrants In Prolonged Detention, Otis Carl Landerholm
Rodriguez V. Hayes: Government Accountability For Immigrants In Prolonged Detention, Otis Carl Landerholm
Golden Gate University Law Review
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) chooses to keep many immigrants incarcerated while they await the results of their hearings before immigration judges, appeals to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), or second appeals to the federal courts of appeals. Starting with Zadvydas v. Davis in 2001, federal courts have been facing the question of whether such lengthy detentions are permissible under either the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) or the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court in Zadvydas held that indefinite detention “would raise serious constitutional concerns” and decided to construe the prolonged-detention statute at issue “to contain …
“When Can I Tase Him, Bro?”: Bryan V. Mcpherson And The Propriety Of Police Use Of Tasers, Sam W. Wu
“When Can I Tase Him, Bro?”: Bryan V. Mcpherson And The Propriety Of Police Use Of Tasers, Sam W. Wu
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Case Summary begins by detailing the factual and procedural history of Bryan. Next, it outlines the “reasonable use of force” analysis of the Ninth Circuit as applied to Tasers. Finally, it concludes by briefly discussing the broad implications of Bryan, both for law enforcement and for every individual who may someday find himself or herself facing a police officer armed with a Taser.
Limits Of The Inevitable Discovery Doctrine In United States V. Young: The Intersection Of Private Security Guards, Hotel Guests, And The Fourth Amendment, Lauren Young Epstein
Limits Of The Inevitable Discovery Doctrine In United States V. Young: The Intersection Of Private Security Guards, Hotel Guests, And The Fourth Amendment, Lauren Young Epstein
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Note analyzes the Young court’s opinion and the potential consequences of the majority’s cursory rejection of the government’s inevitable discovery argument. This Note also reconciles the differing applications of the inevitable discovery doctrine by the Young majority and dissent and highlights the speculative nature of employing the inevitable discovery doctrine based on the facts of Young. Part I of this Note presents the background of the case and the historical development of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, focusing on the inevitable discovery doctrine as articulated by the Supreme Court in Nix v. Williams. Part II outlines the Young decision and analyzes …
United States V. Payton: Redefining The Reasonableness Standard For Computer Searches And Seizures, Susan A. Rados
United States V. Payton: Redefining The Reasonableness Standard For Computer Searches And Seizures, Susan A. Rados
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Note examines United States v. Payton and the issue of when it is reasonable to search a computer if it is not expressly authorized on the search warrant. Part I discusses the background facts of Payton and the Fourth Amendment. Part II analyzes why the Ninth Circuit ultimately decided Payton correctly but focused on the wrong underlying reason in its holding. The reasonableness standard for computer searches should be whether the computer “could” contain the evidence, rather than the stricter standard of “would” contain the evidence announced in Payton. However, because computers are different from traditional containers, they should …
Sec V. Talbot: The "Misappropriation-Plus" Theory, Kalina Laleva
Sec V. Talbot: The "Misappropriation-Plus" Theory, Kalina Laleva
Golden Gate University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Giving Employers Guidance: The Proper Response To No-Match Letters Under Aramark Facility Services V. Service Employees International Union, Local 1877, Steffanie Bevington
Giving Employers Guidance: The Proper Response To No-Match Letters Under Aramark Facility Services V. Service Employees International Union, Local 1877, Steffanie Bevington
Golden Gate University Law Review
In Aramark Facility Services v. Service Employees International Union, Local 1877, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit provided some guidance to employers in receipt of a no-match letter. Finding that receipt of a no-match letter does not give an employer "constructive knowledge" that an employee is unauthorized to work in the United States, the Ninth Circuit upheld an arbitration award reinstating employees who were terminated after their employer received a no-match letter. The Ninth Circuit held that termination of the employees was unwarranted under the circumstances because the company did not have sufficient information that it …
Witt V. Department Of The Air Force Subjects "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" To Intermediate Scrutiny, Jessica L. Beeler
Witt V. Department Of The Air Force Subjects "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" To Intermediate Scrutiny, Jessica L. Beeler
Golden Gate University Law Review
"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ("DADT") refers to the statutory U.S. policy of excluding openly homosexual individuals from serving in the military. It prohibits members of the armed forces from engaging in homosexual acts, stating that they are gay or bisexual, or openly marrying a person of the same sex. Although the constitutionality of DADT has been upheld several times in federal Court, these cases preceded the United States Supreme Court's holding in Lawrence v. Texas. In Lawrence, the Supreme Court struck down a Texas antisodomy statute as unconstitutional and declared that the private homosexual conduct targeted by the law was …
The Extension Of Privacy Rights To Workplace Text Messages Under Quon V. Arch Wireless, Heather Wolnick
The Extension Of Privacy Rights To Workplace Text Messages Under Quon V. Arch Wireless, Heather Wolnick
Golden Gate University Law Review
In Quon v. Arch Wireless Operating Co., a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a public employer violated the Fourth Amendment by searching the contents of text messages sent and received on a public employee's work-issued pager. In so holding, the Ninth Circuit found that the public employee had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of the text messages, despite a formal Internet and computer policy stating otherwise. Relying on the two-part O'Connor test for public-employer searches, the court found that the search was more intrusive than necessary to determine …
Out The Smokestack: Retooling California's Marine Vessel Rules For Federal Authorization, Seth Mansergh
Out The Smokestack: Retooling California's Marine Vessel Rules For Federal Authorization, Seth Mansergh
Golden Gate University Law Review
To illustrate how California can effectively regulate the emissions from auxiliary engines on ocean-going vessels, Part I will provide an overview of California's regulatory authority in this area. It will then illustrate how CARB responded to the harms caused by the regulatory failures at the international and national level with the Marine Vessel Rules. Part II provides an overview of the Marine Vessel Rules and the procedural history that led to the Ninth Circuit's decision in Pacific Merchant. Part III examines the reasoning of Pacific Merchant in determining the Marine Vessel Rules were a preempted emission standard. Part IV discusses …
Natural Resources Defense Council V. Environmental Protection Agency: A Call For Evenhanded Application Of The Clean Water Act Of 1972, Mary Lim
Golden Gate University Law Review
In Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA ("NRDC v. EPA"), the Natural Resources Defense Council ("NRDC") challenged the EPA's permit exemption for oil and gas construction sites as a violation of the CWA, claiming that the exemption was inconsistent with the CWA's goal of protecting the nation's waters. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the EPA's rule was arbitrary and capricious in light of the EPA's consistent, long-standing position of requiring permits for sediment discharges. In addition, the Ninth Circuit supported its reasoning with the fact that Congress did not specifically mention the term …
Dissent, Judge William A. Fletcher
Dissent, Judge William A. Fletcher
Golden Gate University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Preschooler Ii V. Clark County School Board Of Trustees: A Closer Look At Application Of Qualified Immunity In Public School Districts, Rachael Crim
Golden Gate University Law Review
During the 2002-2003 school year, the mother of a pre-school aged, non-verbal, autistic child became concerned when her child came home with unexplained bruises and began exhibiting violent behavior. The mother brought an action on behalf of herself and her child seeking relief under the Individuals with Disabilities Act ("IDEA"), Americans with Disabilities Act, and claimed constitutional violations under Section 1983. In Preschooler II v. Clark County School Board of Trustees, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held: 1) teacher's alleged conduct in beating, slapping, and head-slamming child violated Fourth Amendment rights for purposes of a …
Dirty Property For Dirt Cheap: Cgl Coverage For The Diminished Value Of Contaminated Sites Under Goodstein V. Continental Casualty Co., Daniel S. Cho
Dirty Property For Dirt Cheap: Cgl Coverage For The Diminished Value Of Contaminated Sites Under Goodstein V. Continental Casualty Co., Daniel S. Cho
Golden Gate University Law Review
In Goodstein v. Continental Casualty CO., the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the diminution in sale value of property due to pollution does not constitute "property damage" under a comprehensive general liability insurance policy where the sale contract did not require the buyer to remediate as a condition of the sale. In so holding, the court found that diminished property value is not "physical injury to tangible property," nor is it "damage" that the "insured shall become legally obligated to pay" because of "property damage." However, without determining whether the mere designation of property …
Possession Of Reading Material And Intent To Commit A Crime In United States V. Curtin, Anna L. Benvenue
Possession Of Reading Material And Intent To Commit A Crime In United States V. Curtin, Anna L. Benvenue
Golden Gate University Law Review
The majority opinion in United States v. Curtin held that simple possession of reading material can be evidence of a defendant's criminal intent, even without proof that the accused ever read the materials. Circuit Judge Stephen S. Trott, who wrote the majority decision, overruled prior Ninth Circuit precedent that would have made such evidence inadmissible as irrelevant under Federal Rule of Evidence 401. However, the majority also found the district court judge's failure to properly analyze the evidence under Rule 403 warranted reversal and remand. As a result, the remaining seven judges on the panel filed or joined concurrences, rather …
Justifying Discrimination: How The Ninth Circuit Circumvented The Intent Of The Fair Housing Act, Katherine Brinson
Justifying Discrimination: How The Ninth Circuit Circumvented The Intent Of The Fair Housing Act, Katherine Brinson
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Note argues that the test applied by the Ninth Circuit in Community House was unreasonably inflexible and inconsistent with the goals of the Fair Housing Act, and that, by allowing for only limited, inflexible exceptions, the court foreclosed an opportunity to expand free or affordable housing for homeless women, men, and families. By contrast, a more flexible approach that weighs the adverse impact on the alleged victim against the benefits of the offered justifications, would better serve the purposes of the Fair Housing Act by allowing each community to maximize the housing opportunities it offers.
Requiring Exhaustion: An International Law Perspective Of The Alien Tort Claims Act In Sarei V. Rio Tinto, Steffanie Bevington
Requiring Exhaustion: An International Law Perspective Of The Alien Tort Claims Act In Sarei V. Rio Tinto, Steffanie Bevington
Golden Gate University Law Review
This Note will analyze the opinion of the three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit regarding exhaustion of local remedies in Sarei. The panel majority concluded that the court could not read an exhaustion requirement into the ATCA "where Congress has declined to do so, and in an area of international law where the Supreme Court has called for the exercise of judicial caution rather than innovation." The Ninth Circuit has granted en banc rehearing in Sarei, and the matter remained pending as this Note went to press. However, regardless of whether the en banc panel can or should read an …
"On Certiorari To The Ninth Circuit Court Of Appeals": The Supreme Court's Review Of Ninth Circuit Cases During The October 2006 Term, Jessica L. Hannah, Kevan P. Mclaughlin
"On Certiorari To The Ninth Circuit Court Of Appeals": The Supreme Court's Review Of Ninth Circuit Cases During The October 2006 Term, Jessica L. Hannah, Kevan P. Mclaughlin
Golden Gate University Law Review
Whether reversed, affirmed, vacated, or remanded, a review of the interaction between the two courts over twenty-two cases reveals several fundamental differences between the two courts on key issues. This Comment examines these differences by exploring twenty of those decisions and how they illustrate the relationship between the Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court. Part I examines the decisions that arose from the Supreme Court's review of Ninth Circuit decisions. Part II ties these decisions and conclusions into a larger motif emerging between the Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court, and Part III ultimately concludes that the future is likely to continue …
The Ninth Circuit Lands A "Perfect 10" Applying Copyright Law To The Internet, Robert A. Mcfarlane
The Ninth Circuit Lands A "Perfect 10" Applying Copyright Law To The Internet, Robert A. Mcfarlane
Golden Gate University Law Review
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued three landmark decisions in 2007 that addressed how copyright protections apply to images that can be accessed over the Internet. Internet publisher Perfect 10 initiated these lawsuits based on allegations that its registered copyrights were infringed when unauthorized copies of its photographs appeared on third-party websites where they could be viewed, downloaded, and purchased without payment to Perfect 10. This Article briefly summarizes the facts of these three cases, explains the central holdings of each decision, and then concludes with a discussion of the collective impact that the three decisions have on enforcement …
A Crime Victim's Right To Be "Reasonably Heard": Kenna V. United States District Court, Michael P. Vidmar
A Crime Victim's Right To Be "Reasonably Heard": Kenna V. United States District Court, Michael P. Vidmar
Golden Gate University Law Review
In Kenna v. United States District Court, the Ninth Circuit held that under the Crime Victim's Rights Act ("CYRA"), a crime victim's right to be "reasonably heard" during sentencing was not limited to written impact statements, but included the right to allocute at any public proceeding. This was an issue of first impression in the Ninth Circuit. "No court of appeals had addressed the scope of this particular CVRA right." Two district courts had considered this issue and had reached contrary decisions. The Ninth Circuit agreed with the United States District Court for the District of Utah that a plausible …
To Download Or Not To Download: Is Mere Membership Enough To Justify A Search Of A Home Computer For Child Pornography Under United States V. Gourde?, Erin Frazor
Golden Gate University Law Review
In the nine to two decision by the en banc Ninth Circuit panel in United States v. Gourde, the court ruled that probable cause existed to search the defendant's home computer based in part on his two-month subscription to a website that offered child pornography. The majority opinion sought to conform to Supreme Court precedent in its probable cause analysis, while the dissenting opinions expressed great concern about the door being opened to this type of governmental invasion of privacy. Gourde has sparked reactions by commentators regarding the implications of the decision, and has influenced the analysis of subsequent child …
Uncovering Fraud Against The Government By Way Of Freedom Of Information Act Requests: United States V. Catholic Healthcare West, Katherine Watts
Uncovering Fraud Against The Government By Way Of Freedom Of Information Act Requests: United States V. Catholic Healthcare West, Katherine Watts
Golden Gate University Law Review
In United States v. Catholic Healthcare West, the Ninth Circuit held that when information leading to a False Claims Act ("FCA") suit is obtained from a Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") request, that suit is not necessarily barred for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The FCA contains a jurisdictional bar prohibiting suits based on publicly disclosed information from certain enumerated sources. The Ninth Circuit disagreed with the Third Circuit and found that information obtained from an FOIA request does not necessarily bar a FCA claim. The court found that the inquiry should not be whether the FOIA response qualifies as …
Parental Due Process: Fields V. Palmdale School District, Roxana M. Smith
Parental Due Process: Fields V. Palmdale School District, Roxana M. Smith
Golden Gate University Law Review
The Ninth Circuit reaffirmed in Fields v. Palmdale School District that the constitutional "due process right of parents to make decisions regarding their children's education does not" authorize "individual parents to enjoin school boards from providing information" deemed appropriate in the performance of their educational function. The court further held that the parental right of privacy over the upbringing of children does not entitle parents to prohibit public schools from providing curricula about sex which the schools' boards deem educationally appropriate.
Voir Dire Racial Discrimination Under A "Comparative Juror Analysis" In Kesser V. Cambra, Andje Morovich
Voir Dire Racial Discrimination Under A "Comparative Juror Analysis" In Kesser V. Cambra, Andje Morovich
Golden Gate University Law Review
In Kesser v. Cambra, the en banc Ninth Circuit panel held that a California State Prosecutor's justifications for peremptory challenges during jury voir dire were pretexts for purposeful discrimination. The Ninth Circuit concluded that the California Court of Appeal failed to apply the proper Supreme Court test under Batson v. Kentucky to determine whether the prosecutor's nonracial motives were pretextual. Applying a "comparative juror analysis" (comparing the characteristics of a stricken juror with an impaneled juror), the Ninth Circuit majority held that the California Court of Appeal improperly relied solely on the prosecutor's own self-serving testimony as to his race-neutral …
Nonconsensual Waiver Of A Jury Trial: Closing The Door, But Not Completely: United States V. United States District Court, Dije Ndreu
Golden Gate University Law Review
In United States v. United States District Court, the Ninth Circuit held that the circumstances of a child sexual abuse case did not warrant an exception to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, which requires the government's consent for a defendant to waive a jury trial. The court determined that the district court's ruling, which allowed the defendant to waive a jury trial without the government's consent, was clearly erroneous as a matter of law, and granted the government's petition for a writ of mandamus to require the district court to hold a jury trial.