U.S. Ninth Circuit - The FindLaw 9th Circuit News and Information Blog

U.S. Ninth Circuit - The FindLaw 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog


Charles Lee Gillenwater, II is either reality-challenged or Mel Gibson. The court, psychiatrists, and his counsel believe the former. He’ll now have the opportunity to prove it’s the latter.

From the record, it seems that Gillenwater worked construction for Caesar’s casino, and while working there, blew the whistle on OSHA violations involving asbestos. Since then, he alleges that the lawyers, Democrats, President Obama, and members of his cabinet are all involved in a plot to silence him. At one point, he contacted Federal Protective Services and told them:

Perhaps a motion for rehearing might be in order here?

Two weeks ago, if someone were to tell you that the National Security Agency was monitoring your phone records, your phone’s GPS location, and basically everything you do online, you might’ve said that such a statement was “speculative.” Or, if you aren’t as soft-spoken as the Ninth Circuit, you might’ve told that person to get back on their medication and to remove the tin foil from their head.

How about now? And will the recent NSA scandal cause the Ninth Circuit to reconsider today’s unpublished dismissal of Center for Constitutional Rights v. Obama?

Lets play a word association game. What are the first things you think of when you hear "Ninth Circuit"?

Liberal. Western. Reversals.

The Ninth's reputation precedes it, and with the results of the recent spate of Supreme Court decisions, it may have reclaimed it's title as the most reversed circuit court in America (though the Sixth is certainly putting up a good fight).

In December, the ABA Journal stated that the Sixth Circuit had surpassed the infamous Ninth as the most reversed court, with an 81.6 percent reversal rate since the fall of 2005. The Ninth Circuit, which held the second-place spot, was reversed in "only" 78.1 percent of cases.

Ronald Deere has been described in many ways, none of which are positive. Murderer. Incompetent. Suffering from either multiple personality disorder or borderline personality disorder. A man with a death wish.

The late Judge Fred Metheny, who presided over his 1982 trial, sentencing, and resentencing, barely fares better, being described as eccentric, incompetent, senile, and suffering from dementia and Alzheimer's.

Gabriel Watters had a slick car heist scheme. He allegedly went to New Orleans, post-Katrina, and towed a number of abandoned cars back home for resale. Clever, immoral, and obviously illegal, right?

Except, he was found not guilty … at least of the Katrina heist offenses.

Jesse Engebretson pled guilty to four counts of sexual assault in 1993. Because he had also been convicted of a felony burglary within five years of committing the sexual assaults, he was classified as a persistent felony offender by the court under Montana law.

That classification entitled him to an extra thirty years in prison after his four concurrent 20-year terms for the four sexual assaults. The judge suspended the sentence, however, and instead sentenced him to thirty-years probation.

Newsflash: California is in the midst of a budget crisis. Also, the sky is blue.

As part of Governor Jerry Brown’s plan to curb state spending and reduce the deficit, after consulting with Secretary Kathleen Sibelius, of the Department of Health and Human Services, the governor instituted 10 percent cuts in payments paid to Medi-Cal providers.

On Friday, the Ninth Circuit upheld those cuts for the second time, issuing a revision of their opinion from late last year and denying rehearing of the case. The court noted that none of the circuit’s judges requested a vote on an en banc hearing.

Like many law grads, Michael Headlund hasn't had the easiest time, economically. Though he graduated back in 1997, he's had the same experience as recent grads, with over $100,000 in student loan debt and no hope whatsoever of paying it off.

Ten years ago, he filed for bankruptcy after The Educational Resources Institute (TERI) and Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (PHEAA) demanded payments far beyond his means. TERI ended up settling for a payment plan, but PHEAA fought to prevent partial or full discharge of his remaining $85,000 or so in debt.

The bankruptcy court ruled in his favor, but the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel reversed. The Ninth Circuit vacated the BAP's holding and remanded the case for consideration the three-part Brunner test. The bankruptcy court judge passed away in the meantime, leading to more delay and a case reassignment.

For such a hotly-debated topic, the law regarding bans and burdens on abortion hasn’t changed much. Any ban or undue burden on pre-viability abortions is unconstitutional per the Supreme Court’s holdings in Roe, Casey, and Gonzales. Since 1973, the bright line rule that a woman’s right to privacy trumps the state’s interest in “the potentiality of human life” is been repeatedly reaffirmed by the Supreme Court and the Circuit Courts of Appeal, despite many chances to modify or reject that rule.

Last year, Arizona passed H.B. 2036, which prohibited physicians from performing abortions on any fetus with a gestational age of twenty weeks or later, absent some medical emergency endangering the life of the mother. This was in addition to an existing law that prohibited abortions (absent medical emergency) at or after the point of viability.

You know what stinks about class-action settlements? Sometimes, the payout for the consumer is absolutely meaningless. This Hewlett-Packard settlement is a perfect example. Consumers sued because HP supposedly misled them about their cartridges' true ink levels (causing premature replacement), hid expiration dates, and engaged in a few other practices that made their wallets sad from 2001 to 2010.

Maybe they were right. Maybe not. They lost a number of pretrial motions, including one of three separate class certifications. The District Court pointed out the weakness of the evidence before accepting the settlement here, despite a handful of objectors (including the great class-action dissenter: Ted Frank).

What was the objection? As always, it was excessive attorneys' fees.