TLR 3d Circuit Blog

Mayorga v. Attorney General

June 27, 2014

Petitioner’s crime of dealing firearms without a license is not categorically a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude under § 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Continue reading

Hildebrand v. Allegheny County

June 27, 2014: (1) a local government employee may not maintain an age discrimination claim under 42 USC § 1983, but must instead proceed under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”); (2) a plaintiff is not obligated to plead exhaustion of administrative remedies with particularity, but may instead allege in general terms that the required administrative process has been completed; and (3) the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) Intake Questionnaire, when properly completed, constitutes a charge of discrimination. Continue reading

US v. Waterman

June 17, 2014: Under U.S.S.G. § 2J1.2(b)(2) sentencing guidelines, a district court may determine whether—by preponderance of the evidence—a convict’s destruction of evidence is obstructive conduct resulting in a “substantial interference with the administration of justice.” The timing of such destruction (i.e. occurring during a judicial proceeding or investigation) is relevant to show that substantial interference was a “result,” although the Third Circuit did not need to make a relevance determination in the instant case. Continue reading

In re: G-I Holdings, Inc.

June 17, 2014: The Third Circuit held that a Producer Agreement permitted former asbestos producers to pursue a breach of contract action against G-I Holdings for its failure to pay contractually-obligated sums. While the contract designated the Center for Claims Resolution as the former producers’ sole agent in asbestos-related claims, the court refused to construe its terms as barring any type of claim amongst the parties. Continue reading

Gonzalez v. Waterfront Comm’n

June 17, 2014: The Younger doctrine—recently clarified by the Supreme Court in Sprint Communications, Inc. v. Jacobs—requires that federal courts abstain when review is requested for an administrative hearing involving a quasi-criminal, ongoing state court proceeding and the three Middlesex factors are met. Continue reading

US v. Stanley

June 11, 2014: There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in the path of an unauthorized wireless Internet signal. Therefore, tracing such a signal does not violate Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches. Continue reading