Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Search for legal issues
For help near (city, ZIP code or county)
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location

Civil Procedure, Criminal and Tort Cases

Article Placeholder Image
By FindLaw Staff on March 29, 2010 4:18 PM

Napoli v. New Windsor, No. 09-2547, involved a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action claiming that defendants retaliated against plaintiff for exercising his First Amendment rights.  The court of appeals dismissed defendants' appeal from the denial of qualified immunity, holding that the district court's clarification of issues completely unrelated to qualified immunity did not restart the time in which defendants could seek an interlocutory appeal, and thus defendants' appeal was untimely.

In US v. Menendez, No. 08-2761, the court of appeals affirmed defendant's drug conspiracy sentence, on the grounds that 1) the district court did not err in calculating the base offense level for defendant's conviction in Count Two, conspiracy to launder money, by considering the amount of narcotics involved in his conviction for Count One, conspiracy to distribute heroin; and 2) the sentencing disparities between defendant and his co-defendants were not unwarranted in this case.

Anglo-Iberia Underwriting Mgmt. Co. v. P.T. Jamsostek, No. 08-2666, concerned an action against the Republic of Indonesia and an Indonesian state-owned corporation based on their negligent supervision of the corporation's employee.  The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), holding that defendants were not engaged in "commercial activity" for purposes of the FSIA, and even assuming arguendo that they were involved in "commercial activity," their alleged negligent supervision of defendant corporation's employees was not "in connection with" such commercial activity.

Related Resources

Find a Lawyer

More Options