Recently in Court Rules Category

It ain't easy being a trial judge. Litigants of all shapes, sizes, and abilities appear before you, and for some with special needs, they are entitled to reasonable accommodation. Most of the time, that accommodation is simple, such as having an interpreter in the room.

Other times, it's not.

The anonymous complainant here, who suffers from a communications disability, is a pro se litigant who sought to have his caretaker act as his "authorized representative" and "address the court in his behalf." That, of course, sounds more like the job of an attorney, as the requested accommodation was not mere transmittal of the litigant's statements -- it was full-on representation.

Attorneys have a responsibility to ensure that they don’t represent clients with divergent interests. Class representatives have responsibility to represent their own interests as well as the interests of the other members of the class.

Conditioning a class representative’s award on their approval of the terms of the settlement, therefore would seem to cause a bit of an issue. Will a class representative reject a settlement and risk losing a $5,000 award? What about a situation where the attorneys get $16 million, the class representatives get $5,000 each, and the members of the class get between $26 and $750?

It's a question that has plagued mankind (assuming lawyers are human) for centuries. And by centuries, we mean since the great Civil Procedure shakeup of 2007-2009.

If a complaint is filed in a state court under notice pleading requirements, then removed to federal court on diversity grounds, does it have to comply with Iqbal and Twombly standards?

Pardon us while we desperately call our old Civil Procedure professors. Oh wait, never mind. The Ninth Circuit just answered the question for us.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held this week that an Arkansas retailer is subject to personal jurisdiction in Washington state when its only relevant contact with the state is a claim that it willfully violated a copyright held by a Washington corporation.

Move over, International Shoe, because Washington Shoe is about to get up in your personal jurisdiction.

It's really hard to fire people. When you actually find a way to get rid of an employee who isn't performing well, then you have to worry about a lawsuit, (which your insurer will probably force you to settle).

While everything you know to be right and good may not matter in an employment lawsuit, it does still matter in a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals judicial misconduct complaint.

Today, we have the tale of a complainant who alleged that a district judge mishandled the termination of two former employees and interfered with one of the employee's efforts to get a new job.

The complaint didn't go very far.

Here at FindLaw, we understand the pressures of being a legal professional - most of us are recovering lawyers - so we want to help by tossing you that preferred life preserver of the legal profession, the short list.

Today's topic: Ninth Circuit Rules for Phones and Other Electronic Devices.

The Ninth Circuit is often recognized as progressive court, so it stands to reason that - unlike airlines - Ninth Circuit rules on electronic devices would also be progressive. While some courthouses ban phones altogether, the Ninth Circuit understands that we live in a digital age. Here's what you should know about the Ninth Circuit's electronic device policy.

Today's Ninth Circuit opinion features the misnomer of the week.

The appellant, a Louisiana-based non-profit called Conservation Force, sounds like a superhero union in vein of Captain Planet and the Planeteers. Instead, it is "wildlife conservation" group that explains on its website that "hunting uniquely provides self actualization, completeness and expression which are complex, higher order needs deserving of protection." So it should come as no surprise that Conservation Force sued Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar after the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) seized two leopard trophies that American hunters imported into the U.S. from Africa.