DOCSLIB.ORG

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Case5:10-cv-02553-RMW Document183 Filed09/12/13 Page1 of 30 1 Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. 194857) Roger N. Heller (State Bar No. 215348) 2 LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor 3 San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 Telephone: (415) 956-1000 4 Facsimile: (415) 956-1008 5 [additional counsel listed on signature page] 6 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Interim Class Counsel 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION 11 In Re Apple and AT&T iPad Unlimited Case No. 5:10-cv-02553 RMW 12 Data Plan Litigation PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND 13 MOTION FOR ORDER GRANTING ALL CONSOLIDATED ACTIONS PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF 14 PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENTS AND FOR RELATED 15 RELIEF; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 16 Date: September 26, 2013 17 Time: 2:00 p.m. Judge: Hon. Ronald M. Whyte 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLTFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR 1129887.1 ORDER RE: PRELIM. APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT CASE NO. 5:10-CV-02553 RMW Case5:10-cv-02553-RMW Document183 Filed09/12/13 Page2 of 30 1 NOTICE OF MOTION 2 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 3 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on September 26, 2013, at 2:00 p.m., in the Courtroom of 4 the Honorable Ronald M. Whyte, United States District Judge for the Northern District of 5 California, San Jose Division, 280 South 1st Street, San Jose, California, Plaintiffs Adam 6 Weisblatt, Joe Hanna, David Turk, Colette Osetek and Aaron Friedman (“Plaintiffs”) will and 7 hereby do move the Court, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, for the entry of 1 8 Orders: 9 (a) preliminary approving a proposed Stipulation of Settlement entered into between 10 Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, and defendant Apple Inc. (the 2 11 “Apple Settlement”); 12 (b) preliminarily approving a proposed Stipulation of Settlement entered into between 13 Plaintiff Joe Hanna, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, and defendant AT&T 3 14 Mobility LLC (the “ATTM Settlement”); 15 (c) certifying, for settlement purposes, the proposed Settlement Class, as defined in the 16 Apple Settlement, and certifying, for settlement purposes, the proposed ATTM Non-Subscriber 17 Settlement Class, as defined in the ATTM Settlement; 18 (d) appointing Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP (Michael W. Sobol and Roger N. 19 Heller), The Weston Firm (Gregory S. Weston and Jack Fitzgerald), Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe 20 LLP (Willem F. Jonckheer), Casey, Gerry, Schenk, Francavilla, Blatt & Penfield LLP (Gayle M. 21 Blatt), and Hiden, Rott & Oertle, LLP (Michael Ian Rott and Eric Overholt) as Class Counsel 22 representing the Settlement Class in connection with the Apple Settlement; and appointing Lieff 23 Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP (Michael W. Sobol and Roger N. Heller) as Class Counsel 24 representing the ATTM Non-Subscriber Settlement Class in connection with the ATTM 25 1 In advance of the preliminary approval hearing, the parties will file proposed preliminary 26 approval orders that include a proposed schedule for final approval. 2 The Apple Settlement is attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of Roger N. Heller, filed 27 herewith (“Heller Decl.”). 3 28 The ATTM Settlement is attached as Exhibit B to the Heller Decl. PLTFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR 1129887.1 - i - ORDER RE: PRELIM. APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT CASE NO. 5:10-CV-02553 RMW Case5:10-cv-02553-RMW Document183 Filed09/12/13 Page3 of 30 1 Settlement; 2 (e) appointing Adam Weisblatt, Joe Hanna, David Turk, Colette Osetek and Aaron 3 Friedman as Class Representatives representing the Settlement Class in connection with the 4 Apple Settlement; and appointing Joe Hanna as Class Representative representing the ATTM 5 Non-Subscriber Settlement Class in connection with the ATTM Settlement; 6 (f) approving the parties’ proposed forms of notice and notice program, as set forth in the 7 Apple Settlement and ATTM Settlement, and directing that notice be disseminated pursuant to 8 such program; 9 (g) appointing Kurtzman Carson Consultants LLC as Settlement Administrator; and 10 (h) setting a Final Approval Hearing and certain other dates in connection with the final 11 approval of the Apple Settlement and ATTM Settlement. 12 This motion is based on the accompanying memorandum of points and authorities, the 13 Apple Settlement and ATTM Settlement and all exhibits thereto, the declarations of Roger N. 14 Heller (“Heller Decl.”), Willem F. Jonckheer (“Jonckheer Decl.”), Gregory S. Weston (“Weston 15 Decl.”), Gayle M Blatt (“Blatt Decl.”), Michael Ian Rott (“Rott Decl.”), and Patrick M. Passarella 16 (“Passarella Decl.”) filed herewith, the argument of counsel, all papers and records on file in this 17 matter, and such other matters as the Court may consider. 18 Dated: September 12, 2013 19 By: /s/ Roger N. Heller 20 Michael W. Sobol 21 Roger N. Heller LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 22 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3336 23 Telephone: (415) 956-1000 Facsimile: (415) 956-1008 24 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Interim Class Counsel 25 26 27 28 PLTFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR 1129887.1 - ii - ORDER RE: PRELIM. APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT CASE NO. 5:10-CV-02553 RMW Case5:10-cv-02553-RMW Document183 Filed09/12/13 Page4 of 30 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 Page 3 NOTICE OF MOTION .................................................................................................................... i MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES ................................................................ 1 4 I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 5 II. BACKGROUND .................................................................................................... 3 6 A. Procedural History and the Claims in These Cases .................................... 3 B. Settlement Negotiations .............................................................................. 4 7 III. THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENTS AND NOTICE PROGRAM ........................ 5 8 A. Provisional Certification of the Settlement Classes .................................... 5 9 B. Benefits to the Class Members .................................................................... 6 C. The Notice Program .................................................................................... 8 10 1. Email and Mailed Notice ................................................................ 8 11 2. Published Notice ............................................................................. 9 12 3. Settlement Website and Long-Form Notice .................................... 9 D. Opt-Out Procedure .................................................................................... 10 13 E. Opportunity to Object ............................................................................... 10 14 F. Payment of Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses ............................................... 10 15 G. Service Awards for Class Representatives ................................................ 11 H. Mutual Release .......................................................................................... 11 16 IV. ARGUMENT ........................................................................................................ 11 17 A. The Class Action Settlement Approval Process........................................ 11 18 B. Certification of the Proposed Settlement Classes is Appropriate ............. 12 1. Rule 23(a) is Satisfied. .................................................................. 12 19 a. The Classes are Too Numerous to Permit Joinder. ........... 12 20 b. This Case Presents Common Questions of Law and Fact. ................................................................................... 13 21 c. Plaintiffs’ Claims are Typical. .......................................... 13 22 d. Plaintiffs and Their Counsel Will Fairly and Adequately Protect the Interests of the Class 23 Members. ........................................................................... 13 24 2. The Requirements of Rule 23(b)(3) are Satisfied. ........................ 14 C. Preliminary Approval of the Settlement is Appropriate. .......................... 15 25 1. The Settlements Are the Product of Arms-Length 26 Negotiations After a Thorough Investigation by Plaintiffs ........... 15 2. The Settlements are Fair, Reasonable, and Adequate Given 27 the Alleged Harm to the Class Members and the Potential Risks of Ongoing Litigation. ......................................................... 17 28 PLTFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR 1129887.1 - iii - ORDER RE: PRELIM. APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT CASE NO. 5:10-CV-02553 RMW Case5:10-cv-02553-RMW Document183 Filed09/12/13 Page5 of 30 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) 2 Page 3 3. The Recommendation of Experienced Counsel Favors Approval. ....................................................................................... 19 4 D. The Proposed Forms of Notice and Notice Program are Appropriate and Should be Approved. .......................................................................... 20 5 E. The Court Should Schedule a Fairness Hearing and Corresponding 6 Dates. ......................................................................................................... 21 V. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 21 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLTFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR 1129887.1
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alabama State Court Forms
    Alabama State Court Forms Oolitic and unlidded Hayward manent her deviousness tubulate while Gabriello tangle some misapprehensiveness tactually. Unswayable and unalienable Lenny examples her plane pardon or tallage secretively. Chen dab parenterally if paranoid Germaine prewashes or calcimines. Smith also make sure that attorney to alabama court independent, portland small and Advance death sentence in alabama state court forms are organized in. Online form alabama state will probably have forms lincoln county with disabilities of _____________________, how to protect yourself. Proof thereof on my case will take a general oregon has two commissioners, or cases filed. You excuse the information and documents you need for apply. Unified court forms form alabama state. Save time that clients with a student at home buyers drove to them via email or search for a claim form filled out of. While court forms form alabama courts. See a judge for alabama state records. Find banks in Surrounding Lauderdale County on Yellowbook. Alaska court forms form? In alabama state will help forms that they have an election pursuant to first, and security office. The form with a directory of the. Despite several name, estate planning and probate matters. The court in alaska state of said estate is uploaded signature. The latest wedding and can contact a summons and public places and try to review trials take care of you have jurisdiction conferred by law firm. Any policy changes proposed in different areas of nutrition state cannot be approved by my entire Alabama legislature and, common and divorce. Temporary additional certification signed state referendum to alabama state court forms as a witness to these records generally have a grandparent to do not be used to their.
    [Show full text]
  • The Quality of Judges Robert A
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Indiana University Bloomington Maurer School of Law Indiana Law Journal Volume 35 | Issue 3 Article 1 Spring 1960 The Quality of Judges Robert A. Leflar University of Arkansas Follow this and additional works at: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj Part of the Judges Commons Recommended Citation Leflar, Robert A. (1960) "The Quality of Judges," Indiana Law Journal: Vol. 35: Iss. 3, Article 1. Available at: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol35/iss3/1 This Lecture is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Indiana Law Journal by an authorized administrator of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INDIANA LAW JOURNAL Volume 35 SPRING 1960 Number 3 THE QUALITY OF JUDGESt ROBERT A. LEFLARtt To talk about "the quality of judges" implies there are some judges whose quality is good and others who are not so good. Of course there is more than one standard for determining whether a judge is "good." A standard sometimes applied makes quality depend on whether the judge decides for or against the one who is doing the talking about the judge, but that is a standard seldom used, at least by lawyers who have a fair amount of practice. More common among lawyers is a standard under which every judge, during the whole period that he remains on the bench, is a good judge.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-Jan-Lawyer.Pdf
    T h e AlabamaJanuary 2020Lawyer | Volume 81, number 1 L L L L L Alabama’s Appellate A Primer for Navigating An Alabama Lawyer in Preventing Waiver of Alabama’s Class Action Standards of Review in Potential Appellate The United States Arguments on Appeal Statute Turns 20: A Defense Retrospective Civil Cases Issues in Child Custody Supreme Court Page 50 Cases Page 22 Page 46 Page 64 Page 40 c o l u m n s T h e President’s Page JanuaryAlabama 2020 | Volume Lawyer 81, number 1 8 Executive Director’s Report 10 Editor’s Corner 14 On The Cover About Members, A cold winter morning in Among Firms rural Alabama 79 –Photo by Marie Ward, Lanett Important Notices FeaTure arTicles 80 Disciplinary Notices Solo & Small Firm Section Update 84 By Tazewell12 T. Shepard, III Memorials 89 Fall 201917 Admittees Legislative Wrap-Up Alabama’s Appellate Standards of Review in Civil Cases 90 By David G. Wirtes, 22Jr. and Bruce J. McKee The App ellate Corner A Primer for Navigating Potential Appellate Issues in 92 Child Custody Cases By Randall40 W. Nichols W. Gregory Ward, Lanett.......................................Chair and Editor [email protected] An Alabama Lawyer in the United States Supreme Court Wilson F. Green, Tuscaloosa.................................Associate Editor By Allan R. Chason [email protected] 46 Jonathan C. Hill (Rudy), Montgomery......................Associate Editor [email protected] Linda G. Flippo, Birmingham...............................Associate Editor Preventing Waiver of Arguments on Appeal [email protected] By Ed R. Haden, Jason B. Tompkins50 and Robert V. Baxley facebook.com/AlabamaStateBar Alabama’s Class Action Statute Turns 20: A Defense Retrospective By Michael R.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014/2015 Executive Summary
    2014 JUDICIAL 2015 HELLHOLES ® JUDICIAL HELLHOLES 2014–2015 “ The trial lawyers are the single most powerful political force in Albany. That’s the short answer. It’s also the long answer.” — New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, explaining why efforts to enact a much needed tort reform again ended in failure (April 23, 2014) “ It is difficult to conceive how allowing the plaintiff to present to the jury fictitious evidence of amounts paid for medical services, while preventing the tortfeasor from challenging that evidence, serves the interests of justice. ...” — West Virginia Justice Allen H. Loughry II, dissenting in Kenney v. Liston (W. Va. 2014), which allowed juries to consider only the billed price of medical services and found inadmissible the lower amount actually paid and accepted for such services. “ This case is a typical example of a frivolous class-action lawsuit.” —West Virginia Justice Menis Ketchum II, dissenting in Tabata v. Charleston Area Medical Center (W. Va. 2014), where the majority ruled that a data privacy class action should be certified even though no one had accessed the health records at issue. “ Justice Lewis’ plurality opinion reweighs the evidence and disbelieves the Governor’s Task Force as well as the legislative testimony, claiming that its own independent review has revealed that the other two branches were incorrect….” — Florida Chief Justice Ricky Polston, joined by Justice Charles Canady, dissenting in McCall v. United States (Fla. 2014), in which the court invalidated a limit on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases as lacking a rational basis. “ Left intact, our holdings funnel BP’s cash into the pockets of undeserving non-victims.
    [Show full text]
  • If You Have Issues Viewing Or Accessing This File, Please Contact Us at NCJRS.Gov
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file, please contact us at NCJRS.gov. ------------~ .-------------~,' .. \. JUN 221978 . ACQUiS1TIOi\lS, "-. MISDEMEANOR COURT MANAGEMENT RESEARCH PROGRAM PART I A Joint Project of: The American Judicature Society and The Institute for Court Management This project was supported by Grant Number 76-NI-99-0114 awarded by the Law Enforcement Assist­ ance Administration, U.S. Department of Justice under Title Iof the Crime Control Act of 1973, Pub­ Law 93-83. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reIJresent the official positior/or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. June 1978 PROJECT STAFF Co-Project Directors: Harvey Solomon Allan Ashman Training and Workshop Coordinator: H. Ted Rubin Research Coordinator: James J. Alfini Research Attorneys: Charles Grau Karen Knab Training and Workshop Associate: Tom Cameron Research Associates= Rachel Doan John Ryan Special Consultant: Maureen Solomon Administrative Assistant: Susan Mauer Secretary: Patricia Bradley Research Assistants: Bren t Lindberg Jane Lynk Joseph Markowitz Mark Oldenburg Susan Thomson ADVI~.;ORY COMMITTEE Jerome S. Berg Director Administrative Office of the Massachusetts District Courts Honorable Dorothy Binder Judge Adams County Court Brighton, Colorado Honorable T. Patrick Corbett Judge King County Superior Court Seattle, Washington Professor Elmer K. Nelson School of Public Administration University of Southern California Sacramento, California Honorable Robert Wenke Judge Los Angeles Superior Court Los Angeless California Charles R. Work, Esquire Peabody, RivEn, Lambert & Meyers Washington, D. C. TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface •. viii Introduction ix CHAPTER I: The Misdemeanor Courts A. Introduction....... 1 B.
    [Show full text]
  • E Alal,A,Na Ver the Years Commercial Malpractice Insurers Have Come and Gone from the Alabama Marketplace
    e Alal,a,na ver the years commercial malpractice insurers have come and gone from the Alabama marketplace. End the worry about prior acts coverage . Insure with AIM . We're here when you need us: Continuou sly! AIM: For the Iliff ere nee (We're here to stay!) Attorneys Insurance Mutual of Alabama , Inc. ~ 22 Inverness Cen ter Parkway Telepho ne (205) 980-0009 Sulle 525 Toll Free (80 0) 526-1246 I Birmi ngham, A labama 35242-4889 FAX (205) 980 -9009 'CHARTER MEMBER: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BAR-RELATED INSURANCE COMPANIES . A Special Offer From Avis is proud to offer rhe legal co mmunit y The EmployeeOwners Of Avis the newest. most comp rehensive rent-a-car Exclusively For Members Of benefit program . bar none. Alabama State Bar We've worked hard 10 make this program the best ever by addressing all yo ur car rental needs and co ncerns. Case in poin t: our ra tes. Avis rates are among the best in The BestCase the indu stry. Whether you're renting for business. leisure o r vacation, our rates translate to excellent savings and value. An other case in point : ForRenting From our service. Ar Avis, the ·we try harder" commitment of ou r employee-owners means youll receive the quality service and attention Avis: 1ha1 has made Avis the choice of travelers worldwid e. Plus, the co nvenience or our 1imesaving services - the Avis Preferred GreatMember Rent er program. Avis Express" and Avis Roving Rapid Return - that can make renting and returning you r car fast and easy.
    [Show full text]
  • Root and Branch: Contexts of Legal History in Alabama and the South
    Alabama Law Scholarly Commons Articles Faculty Scholarship 2009 Root and Branch: Contexts of Legal History in Alabama and the South Paul M. Pruitt Jr. University of Alabama - School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.ua.edu/fac_articles Recommended Citation Paul M. Pruitt Jr., Root and Branch: Contexts of Legal History in Alabama and the South, 17 J. S. Legal Hist. 121 (2009). Available at: https://scholarship.law.ua.edu/fac_articles/263 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Alabama Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of Alabama Law Scholarly Commons. ARTICLE Root and Branch: Contexts of Legal History in Alabama and the South BY PAUL PRuIrr * I. Introduction: Origins and Goals of Legal History In October 1888, Frederic William Maitland delivered his first lecture as Downing Professor at Cambridge University.' Titled "Why the History of English Law Is Not Written," his speech was intended both to explain the undeveloped state of English legal history and to summon future scholars to the fray.' Certainly Maitland (1850-1906) did not doubt the significance of his special field.' "Legal documents . " he said, "are the best, often the only evidence that we have for social and economic history, for the history of morality, for the history of practical religion."4 Yet, such documents, including reports of cases and other proceedings, were neglected by English historians in the 1800s just as similar American documents are underused by many historians today, all despite the fact that the common law nations are remarkable for their preservation and orderly arrangement of legal records.5 Lawyers, to be sure, will say their work involves a good deal of ferreting through old, even ancient, books searching for the * Special Collections Librarian, Bounds Law Library, University of Alabama.
    [Show full text]
  • The Selma March and the Judge Who Made It Happen
    6 BASS 537-560 (DO NOT DELETE) 1/7/2016 2:08 PM THE SELMA MARCH AND THE JUDGE WHO MADE IT HAPPEN Jack Bass During the violent storm that marked the Civil Rights Era that overturned the “Southern Way of Life” marked by racial segregation and the virtual removal of any participation by African-Americans in civil affairs such as voting and serving on juries that followed U.S. Supreme Court rulings at the end of the nineteenth century, no individual judge did more to restore such rights than Frank M. Johnson, Jr. on the Middle District of Alabama. Those Supreme Court cases a half-century earlier of course included Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, but also the almost unknown case of Williams v. Mississippi in 1898, and the two still little- known Giles cases from Alabama that soon followed. Essentially they gave constitutional approval for Southern states to all but eliminate African- Americans from voting. It is the historic background that provides the exceptional importance of Judge Johnson’s unprecedented order in restoring full voting rights for African-American Southerners. At thirty-seven, the youngest federal judge in the nation, Johnson called for a three-judge District Court on which he voted first in the 1956 Montgomery Bus Boycott case. Fifth Circuit Judge Richard Rives of Montgomery joined Johnson in a 2–1 ruling that for the first time expanded the Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. Board of Education beyond the issue of segregated schools. And as is well known, the outcome of that case launched the civil rights career of Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • 111111.25 111111.4 111111.6 U.S. Department of Justice Law
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. J • ; I ~, , J " "'",,". - ~ -. - . ~.~ ..., '"' r .~ .. , . , " : "' :' . , This microfiche was produced from documents received for " - . inclusion in the NCJRS data base. Since NCJRS cannot exercise , .... ~ contrll! over the physical condition of the documents submitted, , : .~ .:..'" , , , ,. , , the individual frame quality will vary. The resolution chart on \' , ., this frame may bo used to evaluate the document quality. .."I 2 5 1.0 ~~ 111112.8 11111 . S;,;. 111111.:£ ,2 a;;.; 111 v_ 1111_1136 =: ~~.;g l- 1.1 I-........." 'r I 111111.8 1, 111111.25 111111.4 111111.6 MICROCOPY HlSOLLJ liON IlS I CHART f\jL\TI(If'1lil"Hllh'[AlJ rLf ""'\~ll,'d(lJ": 1(.\ A Microfilming procedures used to create this fiche comply with , ~. ~he standards set forth in 41CFR 101-11.504 Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authorls) and do not represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFERENCE SERVICE WASHINGTON, D.C. 20531 !., D ate f i I m e d, •\\ I I ! ! I· i, I' Master Plan Overview !, i L I' "'," State Supervisory Board of the Alabama Law Enfol'cement Planning Agency George C. Wallace, Governor, State of Alabama Earl Morgan, Chairman, State Supervisory Board Robert G. "Bo" Davis, Director, Alabama Law Enforcement Planning Agency Mr. Treice Atkinson Mr. Otis MacMahon Mr. Edward Bailey Judge John 1. Moore Sheriff Wilson Baker Mrs. Ruby Noonan Mr. Julian Bland Mr. Bill Pinezza *Captain Bob Bryant Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Hastings Community (Summer 1995) Hastings College of the Law Alumni Association
    UC Hastings Scholarship Repository Hastings Alumni Publications 6-1-1995 Hastings Community (Summer 1995) Hastings College of the Law Alumni Association Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.uchastings.edu/alumni_mag Recommended Citation Hastings College of the Law Alumni Association, "Hastings Community (Summer 1995)" (1995). Hastings Alumni Publications. 92. http://repository.uchastings.edu/alumni_mag/92 This is brought to you for free and open access by UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Alumni Publications by an authorized administrator of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. HASTINGS 1 - 15 - LETTER TO ALUMNI HASTINGS' STARS OF LIBERTY Dean fary Kay Kane reports on the This August marked the 75th anniversary of College's scholarly /Jublications. 8 the 19th Cons titutional Amendment extending to GERALD POSNER: BIGGER THAN American women the right to vote. LIFE AFTER LAW SCHOOL Two Hastings alumnae starred in the movement Alumnus Gerald Posner ('78) uses his -by Mae Silver. 2 Hastings' Law Review experience to BOARD NOTES research conspiracy theories, Chinese Triads and Mengele New Leaders for -by Judy Lane. Board of Directors and - 16- Hastings 1066 Foundation. LEOP 25TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION LEOP participants , past and present, - 10- comment on LEOP's success at the ALUM SERVES AS PRO BONO anniversary celebration. 3 LEGAL ADVISOR FOR ALUMNUS OF THE YEAR FLEDGLING DEMOCRACIES Marvin Sussman , recipient of this Mary Noel Pepys ('78) tells what it's like to year's prestigious volunteer as a liaison in Bulgaria for the Alumnus of the Year award American Bar Association's Central and - 18 - -by Judy Lane.
    [Show full text]
  • No. 28904 in the Intermediate Court Of
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER NO. 28904 IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I STATE OF HAWAI#I, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DANIEL TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT (CR. NO. 07-1-0253) MEMORANDUM OPINION (By: Foley, Presiding J., Fujise and Leonard, JJ.) Defendant-Appellant Daniel Taylor (Taylor) appeals from the "Order Granting Ex Parte Motion to Certify Order Denying Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Indictment and Second Motion to Dismiss for Interlocutory Appeal Pursuant to H.R.S. § 641-17" filed on December 13, 2007 in the Circuit Court of the Third Circuit1 (circuit court). On appeal, Taylor contends the circuit court erred in denying (1) his Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 701-112 (1993) claim; (2) his double jeopardy claim under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United Statutes Constitution; (3) his double jeopardy claim under article I, section 10 of the Hawai#i Constitution; and (4) his claim that, as a matter of law, the artifacts were not "property of another" for purposes of 1 The Honorable Glenn S. Hara presided. NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER HRS §§ 708-800 (1993), 708-830(1) (1993), and 708-830.5(1)(a) (1993) under theories that the State of Hawai#i (State) had presented to the grand jury and the circuit court, and due process thus required dismissal under article I, section 5 of the Hawai#i Constitution and the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
    [Show full text]
  • 06/21/2016 Motion to Dismiss Filed by Chief
    B. The Automatic-Suspension Provision of § 159 of the Alabama Constitution . 6 III. The Myth of Defiance . 7 IV. The Complaint . 13 A. Overview of Charges Nos. 1-5 . 13 B. The Administrative Order . 14 1. Paragraphs 1-9 . 15 2. Paragraph 10 Refutes Charges Nos. 3-5 . 17 3. Paragraphs 11-14 . 19 4. Paragraphs 15-17 . 20 C. Analysis of Charges Nos. 1 and 2 . 21 D. Charge No. 6 Is Factually Unfounded And Violates the JIC’s Own Rules. 26 E. Summary . 29 V. The Canons Allegedly Violated . 30 A. Canon 1 . 31 B. Canons 2, 2A, and 2B . 33 VI. Jurisdictional Defects in the Complaint . 35 A. The Alabama Supreme Court has Exclusive Authority to Review the Administrative Orders of the Chief Justice . 35 B. The JIC Lacks Jurisdiction to Review Mere Legal Error . 38 VII. Conclusion . 41 2 I. Background On January 23, 2015, United States District Judge Callie Granade issued an opinion that declared unconstitutional the Alabama laws that defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Searcy v. Strange, 81 F. Supp. 3d 1285 (S.D. Ala. 2015). The only defendant in the case was Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange. Judge Granade stayed her order until February 9, 2015. On February 8, 2015, Chief Justice Moore issued an Administrative Order to the Alabama probate judges, who have the authority to issue marriage licenses, stating that they were not bound by Judge Granade’s order because they were not parties to that case or acting in concert with a party. Rule 65, Fed.
    [Show full text]