Recently in Civil Rights Law Category

In an action alleging that the police unlawfully arrested plaintiffs during a protest, summary judgment for plaintiffs is affirmed in part where the city did not have probable cause to believe that the protesters knew the protest at issue lacked a permit.  However, the order is reversed in part where: 1) the city only needed to show that the officers had reasonable grounds to believe that everyone arrested was part of the rioting group; and 2) the city could lawfully complete the mass arrest without first ordering the crowd to disperse and giving plaintiffs an opportunity to comply.

Read Carr v. Dist. of Columbia, No. 08-7083

Appellate Information

Argued September 16, 2009

Decided November 20, 2009

Judges

For Appellant:

Stacy Anderson, Peter J. Nickles, Todd S. Kim, Donna M. Murasky, Office of the Attorney General for the District of Columbia, Washington, DC

For Appellees:

Daniel M. Schember, Susan B. Dunham, Arthur B. Spitzer and Fritz Mulhauser, Washington, DC

In a prisoner's application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal, the application is denied where, although plaintiff had only two "strikes" under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) and thus the PLRA did not automatically bar him from proceeding IFP, the court denied the application as a discretionary matter because of plaintiff's pattern of abusive litigation in the past and his failure to qualify for IFP status under the imminent danger exception.

Read Mitchell v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, No. 05-5420

Appellate Information

Argued October 5, 2009

Decided November 20, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Tatel

Counsel

For Appellant:

Sara Kaiser, Steven H. Goldblatt, Cecily Baskir and Charlotte Garden, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC

For Appellee:

Harry B. Roback, R. Craig Lawrence, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Washington, DC

In an action claiming that the government unlawfully wiretapped plaintiff's phone and placed him on a terrorism watch list, dismissal of the action is affirmed where plaintiff's claims were patently insubstantial and implausible.

Appellate Information

Argued October 8, 2009

Decided November 17, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Williams

Counsel

For Appellant:

Lori Alvino McGill, Richard P. Bress and Gabriel K. Bell, Washington, DC

For Appellees:

Teal Luthy Miller and Douglas N. Letter, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC

In an action alleging detainee abuse by private military contractors that provided services to the U.S. government at the Abu Ghraib military prison during the war in Iraq, denial of summary judgment to one defendant is reversed where plaintiffs' tort claims were preempted under the military contractor immunity doctrine.  Judgment for the other defendant is affirmed on the same grounds.

Read Saleh v. Titan Corp., No. 08-7008

Appellate Information

Argued February 10, 2009

Decided September 11, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Silberman

Counsel

For Appellants:

Susan L. Burke

Katherine Gallagher

For Appellee:

Ari S. Zymelman, Williams & Connolly LLP, Washington, DC

F. Whitten Peters, Williams & Connolly LLP, Washington, DC

In an action against prison administrators for indifference to plaintiff's medical needs, summary judgment for defendants is reversed where: 1) no administrative remedies were available for plaintiff to exhaust; and 2) plaintiff, who was acting pro se, was plainly and reasonably confused over whether defendants' summary judgment motion remained pending.

Read Malik v. Dist. of Colum., No. 08-7046

Appellate Information

Argued May 1, 2009

Decided August 4, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Garland

Counsel

For Appellant:

David J. Shaw, Georgetown University, Washington, DC

Steven H. Goldblatt, Georgetown University, Washington, DC

For Appellees:

Lori L. Voepel, Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, P.L.C, Phoenix, AZ

Daniel P. Struck, Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, P.L.C, Phoenix, AZ

In an action to enjoin further implementation of a police checkpoint program in Defendant city, the denial of a preliminary injunction is reversed, where the checkpoint did not meet the Fourth Amendment's requirement of individualized suspicion.

Read Mills v. Dist. of Columbia, No. 08-7127

Appellate Information

Argued May 8, 2009

Decided July 10, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Sentelle

Counsel

For Appellants

Mara E. Verheyden-Hilliard, Washington, DC 

For Appellee:

Todd S. Kim, Solicitor General, Office of the Attorney General for the District of Columbia, Washington, DC

In a Title VII action for Defendant's allegedly racially discriminatory failure to promote Plaintiff, summary judgment for Defendant is affirmed, where Plaintiff failed to offer evidence supporting an inference that, absent discrimination, she would have been picked for the job.

Read Hendricks v. Geithner, No. 07-5392.

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia
(No. 03cv02239)
Filed June 19, 2009

Judges

Before: SENTELLE, Chief Judge, and GINSBURG and BROWN, Circuit Judges.
Opinion for the Court filed by Chief Judge SENTELLE.

Counsel

Molly E. Buie argued the cause for appellant. With her on the briefs was Robert C. Seldon.

Alan Burch, Assistant U.S. Attorney, argued the cause for appellee. With him on the brief were Jeffrey A. Taylor, U.S. Attorney, and R. Craig Lawrence, Assistant U.S. Attorney. Andrea W. McBarnette, Assistant U.S. Attorney, entered an appearance.