In plaintiffs' action under the Truth in Lending Act against defendant for refusing to refund a $500 deposit plaintiffs' demanded after they attempted to exercise their right to rescind prior to closing on a loan to refinance their house, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed as a consumer cannot exercise the right to rescind created by 15 U.S.C. section 1635(a) until after consummation of a consumer credit transaction.     

Read Weintraub v. Quicken Loans, Inc., No. 08-2373

Appellate Information

Argued: October 29, 2009

Decided: February 5, 2010

Judges

Opinion by Circuit Judge Niemeyer

Counsel

For Appellant: J. Brady Jr.

For Appellee:   Michael R. Ward, Morris & Morris

Defendant's conviction and sentence for aiding and assisting in the preparation of false tax returns and other crimes is affirmed where: 1) the evidence was sufficient to prove that the information was transmitted by interstate wire communication in furtherance of a scheme to defraud, thus satisfying each element of the offense; and 2) the district court did not err in calculating the tax loss for sentencing purposes.  

Read US v. Mehta, No. 08-4489

Appellate Information

Argued: October 30, 2009

Decided: February 5, 2010

Judges

Opinion by Circuit Judge Shedd

Counsel

For Appellant:  David Schertler, Schertler & Onorato LLP

For Appellee:   David Ira Salem, Office of the US Attorney

In plaintiffs' action against defendants-labor unions, alleging that the union provided them with false information regarding their eligibility to receive retirement incentive packages in 2007, the judgment of the district court is affirmed in part, vacated and reversed in part and remanded where: 1) district court correctly ruled that the defendants timely filed the notice of removal; and 2) the district court was without subject matter jurisdiction over the retirees' claims because the doctrine of complete preemption does not apply here to create a basis for removal under 28 U.S.C. section 1441 

Read Barbour v. Int'l Union United Auto. Aerospace & Agric. Implement Workers of Am., No. 08-1740

Appellate Information

Argued: September 22, 2009

Decided: February 4, 2010

Judges

Opinion by Circuit Judge Agee

Counsel

For Appellant:  Thomas C. Costello, West & Costello LLC

For Appellee:   Ava Barbour, International Union, UAW

In plaintiff-former deputy's suit against a sheriff in his official capacity under Title VII for sexual harassment and in his individual capacity under Virginia law for battery, district court's substitution of new sheriff as the defendant in her official capacity in the Title VII claim and jury verdict in favor of plaintiff is affirmed as to accept defendant's argument that because each sheriff in Virginia is by state law a singular entity with an independent tenure, she could not be substituted in her official capacity as the successor to the former sheriff in the Title VII claim, would be to allow a state law to override Title VII in violation of the Supremacy Clause.  Defendants' remaining challenges are rejected. 

Read King v. McMillan, No. 08-1667

Appellate Information

Argued: October 30, 2009

Decided: February 3, 2010

Judges

Opinion by Circuit Judge Michael

Counsel

For Appellant:  John Adrian Gibney, Jr., Thompson McMullan, PC

For Appellee:    Elizabeth Kay Dillion, Guynn Memmer & Dillion, PC

In an action for breach of contract, district court's holding that the  original decision to seek specific performance precluded the non-repudiating party from being able to claim monetary damages is reversed as there is no reason why, as a general matter, a party who initially seeks specific performance cannot later switch his preferred relief to an award of damages in the event that specific performance is rendered impractical or impossible. 

Read Homeland Training Center, LLC. v. Summit Point Auto. Research Center, No. 08-2272

Appellate Information

Argued: October 27, 2009

Decided: February 3, 2010

Judges

Opinion by Circuit Judge Wilkinson

Counsel

For Appellant:  John Harlan Mahaney, II, Huddleston & Bolen LLP

For Appellee:    William Richard McCune, Jr.

In a prosecution for being a felon in possession of a firearm, district court's sentence of life imprisonment is affirmed where: 1) the district court properly relied on defendant's prior juvenile convictions to enhance his sentence under the ACCA; 2) district court properly rejected defendant's argument that his juvenile burglaries do not constitute prior offenses under the ACCA because he did not carry a firearm while committing a crime of violence; and 3) district court did not err in sentencing defendant to life in prison as the sentence was reasonable in light of his instant offense, his adult conviction for aggravated assault and battery, and his three prior convictions for burglary of firearms from residences.      

Read US v. Wright, No. 08-4679

Appellate Information

Argued: December 2, 2009

Decided: February 3, 2010

Judges

Opinion by Circuit Judge Wilkinson

Counsel

For Appellant:  David Bruce Betts

For Appellee:    Carrie Ann Fisher, Office of the US Attorney

In plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit against a police officer and the police department, arising from an incident where plaintiff's lost and intoxicated thirteen-year-old son was bitten by a police patrol dog used by an officer to find him, district court's denial of defendants' motion for summary judgment on basis of qualified immunity is reversed and remanded as, qualified immunity is appropriate because the officer did not violate clearly established law in his search for a missing boy who faced serious potential injury.   

Read Melgar v. Greene, No. 08-2393

Appellate Information

Argued: October 29, 2009

Decided: January 29, 2010

Judges

Opinion by Circuit Judge Wilkinson

Counsel

For Appellant:   William Antoine Snoddy, Office of the County Attorney for Montgomery County

For Appellee:    Terrell Roberts, Roberts & Wood

District court's denial of defendant' 28 U.S.C.A. section 2255 motion is affirmed as, decisions involving mistrials - whether to seek a mistrial or accept a mistrial offered by the trial court - are tactical decisions left to the sound judgment of counsel, and the decision remains counsel's to make even if the client expresses disagreement with the decision, and counsel's decision is not unreasonable simply because the client disagrees.   

Read US v. Chapman, No. 08-7976

Appellate Information

Argued: December 1, 2009

Decided: January 29, 2010

Judges

Opinion by Chief Judge Traxler

Counsel

For Appellant:   Lartease Martrell Tiffith, Kirkland & Ellis LLP

For Appellee:    Jefferson McClure Gray, Office of the US Attorney

In habeas proceedings, district court's ruling in favor of defendant on the merits of his ineffective assistance of counsel claims is reversed and remanded as, in reaching its conclusions, the district court ignored the several state post-conviction proceedings which had determined that the evidence defendant presented was not credible and that his constitutional claim was without merit, and such a de novo do-over was impermissible under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. 

Read Sharpe v. Bell, No. 09-6206

Appellate Information

Argued: December 4, 2009

Decided: January 29, 2010

Judges

Opinion by Chief Judge  Wilkinson

Counsel

For Appellant:   Clarence Joe DelForge, III.

For Appellee:    William Gregory Duke

Defendant's convictions for conspiracy to distribute and possess drugs and related crimes is affirmed as the automobile exception does not have any exigency requirement apart form the inherent mobility of the automobile, and thus, if the police have probable cause, the justification to conduct a warrantless search does not vanish once the police have established some degree of control over the automobile. Defendant's remaining claims are rejected as without merit.     

Read US v. Kelly, No. 08-4982

Appellate Information

Argued: December 3, 2009

Decided: January 28, 2010

Judges

Opinion by Chief Judge  Wilkinson

Counsel

For Appellant:  Jon Michael Babineau, Riddick Babineau PC

For Appellee:   Sherrie Scott Capotosto, Office of the US Attorney