Every decision we've summarized — searchable, filterable, neutral.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the denial of special monthly compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(r) for a veteran with schizophrenia, holding that the statute requires specific anatomical losses or sensory impairments. The court clarified that the need for a higher level of care alone does not qualify a veteran for the enhanced rate without first meeting the predicate disability requirements.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the employer, holding that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination under the ADA. The court further ruled that the plaintiff's proposed comparator was not similarly situated, defeating her age discrimination claim under the ADEA.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the City and officers, ruling that the plaintiff failed to establish a protected possessory interest in the neighbors' portion of an alleyway. The court further held that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity and that the district court committed no abuse of discretion regarding procedural rulings.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed Undray Lamond Lowery's 120-month sentence for felon-in-possession of a firearm, rejecting claims that the sentence was procedurally or substantively unreasonable. The court held that even if the district court erred in applying a four-level sentencing enhancement, the sentence remained reasonable because it fell well below the statutory maximum and the record reflected a proper consideration of the statutory factors.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a personal injury lawsuit against Target, ruling that California's two-year statute of limitations applies to the case rather than North Dakota's six-year period. The court held that under California's governmental interest approach to choice of law, the state has a stronger interest in applying its laws to a California resident suing in a California court for products purchased there.
The Tenth Circuit affirmed a drug trafficking conviction after determining that the defendant's appeal raised no non-frivolous issues. The panel upheld the district court's denial of a motion to suppress, finding the traffic stop was justified by observed violations and the dog sniff did not unlawfully extend the detention.
The First Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a habeas corpus petition filed by a deported individual, holding that federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 requires the petitioner to be in custody of state authorities at the time of filing. Because the petitioner had been deported to Trinidad and Tobago before filing her claim, she failed to satisfy the statutory custody requirement.
The Tenth Circuit affirmed the denial of Gregory Crosby's motion for compassionate release because he failed to adequately challenge the district court's finding that he did not exhaust administrative remedies. The court also held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to order a transfer to a residential re-entry facility.
The First Circuit affirmed Michael Mao's 121-month sentence, rejecting his challenge that his prior Virginia firearm-robbery conviction did not constitute a crime of violence. The court also held that his argument regarding conspiracy as a controlled substance offense is foreclosed by binding circuit precedent.
The Tenth Circuit affirmed the denial of a motion to dismiss a felon-in-possession indictment, holding that prior circuit precedent mandates upholding the statute against Second Amendment challenges. A panel court cannot overrule binding precedent, even if the defendant argues the prior felony was non-violent.
