U.S. Fourth Circuit: October 2009 Archives
U.S. Fourth Circuit - The FindLaw 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog

October 2009 Archives

Nken v. Holder, No. 08-1813

Petition for review of the BIA's order denying a citizen of Cameroon's motion to reopen his removal proceedings is granted and the BIA's decision vacated and remanded as the BIA did not explain why petitioner's new evidence failed to demonstrate a change of country conditions.   

Read Nken v. Holder, No. 08-1813

Appellate Information

Argued: September 22, 2009

Decided: October 30, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Motz

Counsel

For Appellant: Lindsay Claire Harrison, Jenner & Block, LLP, Washington, DC.

For Appellee:  Lindsay E. Williams, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC.

Green-Brown v. Sealand Servs. Inc., No. 08-1236

Plaintiff's petition for review of a decision of the Benefits Review Board of the US Department of Labor, affirming an ALJ's decision that awarded hearing loss compensation to plaintiff under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA) based on an audiogram that did not comply with the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), is granted and reversed because section 908(c)(13)(E) of the LHWCA mandates that hearing loss compensation be based on hearing loss determinations made in accordance with the AMA Guides. 

Read Green-Brown v. Sealand Servs. Inc., No. 08-1236

Appellate Information

Argued: September 22, 2009

Decided: October 29, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Michael

Counsel

For Appellant: Gregory Edward Camden, Montagna, Klein, Camden, LLP

For Appellee:  Patrick Michael Brogan, Davey & Brogan PC.

Kerns v. US, No. 08-1287

In plaintiff's lawsuit against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act, alleging that the government's employee negligently caused an automobile accident killing her husband, dismissal of the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is vacated and remanded as, when the scope-of-employment issue is determinative of both jurisdiction and the underlying merits of an FTCA claim, dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1) is inappropriate.     

Read Kerns v. US, No. 08-1287

Appellate Information

Argued: September 22, 2009

Decided: October 29, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge King

Counsel

For Appellant:  Paul David Bekman, Salisbury, Clements, Bekman, Marder & Adkins

For Appellees:  Ariana Wright Arnord, Baltimore, Maryland

US v. Bush, No. 08-6725

District court's grant of government's motion for an order permitting it to involuntarily medicate defendant to render her competent to stand trial is vacated and remanded as the government had the burden of satisfying the Sell v. US, 539 U.S. 166 (2003), standard by clear and convincing evidence, and when the current state of the record is considered with this higher standard of proof, questions arise as to whether the government carried its burden under Sell.     

Read US v. Bush, No. 08-6725

Appellate Information

Argued: September 24, 2009

Decided: October 29, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Niemeyer

Counsel

For Appellant:  Marta K. Kahn, Baltimore, Maryland

For Appellee:  Bonnie S. Greenberg, Baltimore, Maryland

US v. Armel, No. 08-4700

Defendant's conviction and sentence to thirty months in prison and three-year term of supervised release for threatening federal officials is affirmed but special conditions in connection with supervised release ordering defendant to not possess pornography, not enter places where pornography could be obtained, not have contact with children, and submit to invasive sex offender tests are vacated and remanded as the district court offered scant explanation for any of the challenged special conditions and no explanations for the pornography conditions. 

Read US v. Armel, No. 08-4700

Appellate Information

Argued: September 24, 2009

Decided: October 19, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Motz

Counsel

For Appellant:  Mary Elizabeth Maguire, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Richmond, Virginia

For Appellees: Stephen David Schiller, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia

In re Grand Jury Subpoena: John Doe, No. 06-1572

District court's refusal to quash a grand jury subpoena duces tecum seeking documents from a sitting Congressman's Chief of Staff is affirmed as, even if the congressional office is deemed to be a sole proprietorship, the Congressman is not entitled to bar his Chief of Staff from producing the documents to a grand jury by invoking his Fifth Amendment privilege, because as a sole proprietor, he could not assert Fifth Amendment privilege to quash a subpoena served on the Chief of Staff who had actual possession of the documents and was responsible for preparing and maintaining them.     

Read In re Grand Jury Subpoena: John Doe, No. 06-1572

Appellate Information

Argued: September 18, 2009

Decided: October 15, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge King

Counsel

For Appellant: Amy Berman Jackson, Trout Cacheris PLLC, Washington, DC.

For Appellees: Patty Merkamp Sternler, United States Department of Justice, Criminal Division, Appellate Section, Washington, DC.

Snider v. Lee, No. 08-1414

In plaintiff's Bivens action against an FBI agent and others arising from her extradition to South Korea for the murder of a fellow exchange student which resulted in an acquittal, district court's dismissal of plaintiff's claims except for her Fourth Amendment claim for malicious prosecution is reversed and remanded as the FBI agent is entitled to qualified immunity where plaintiff has not alleged a violation of her constitutional right to be free from malicious prosecution in the United States.   

Read Snider v. Lee, No. 08-1414

Appellate Information

Argued: May 12, 2009

Decided: October 6, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Niemeyer

Counsel

For Appellant:  Catherine Yvonne, United States Department of Justice

For Appellees:  J. Samuel Tenenbaum, Northwestern University School of Law