16 results for 'judge:"Gould"'.
J. Gould finds that the lower court must reevaluate the amount of attorney fees owed to a transgender inmate for a successful Eighth Amendment claim. The inmate obtained an injunction requiring the state of Idaho, private prison company Corizon, and individual Idaho prison officials to provide the inmate with adequate medical care, including gender-confirmation surgery. The lower court awarded $2.58 million in attorney fees to the inmate, but improperly assessed the fees by calculating the lodestar amount to include fees incurred litigating unsuccessful claims advanced in the complaint. However, the district court correctly applied an enhancement to the lodestar amount given that counsel operated under extraordinary time pressure. Vacated in part.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould, Filed On: April 5, 2024, Case #: 22-35876, Categories: Health Care, Attorney Fees, Prisoners' Rights
J. Gould vacates defendant's convictions on two counts of encouraging or inducing an alien to come to, enter or reside unlawfully in the United States for private financial gain following remand from the Supreme Court. The matter is vacated because the jury instructions for the two counts omitted certain elements, making the instructions erroneous. Reversed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould, Filed On: April 3, 2024, Case #: 17-10548, Categories: Immigration, Jury
J. Gould finds that the district court properly entered summary judgment in favor of a Scottsdale Police Officer and the City of Scottsdale in an action alleging constitutional violations arising from a restaurant owner's arrest and citation for violating a Covid-19 emergency executive order, which prohibited restaurants from offering on-site dining. The restaurant owner was arrested for the exact behavior for which he had received previous warnings and he had sufficient notice to comply with the emergency executive order. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould , Filed On: December 8, 2023, Case #: 22-16004, Categories: Covid-19
J. Gould finds that the district court properly dismissed an antitrust action against Apple, alleging monopolist operation of the Apple App Store. App developers failed to state an antitrust claim under the Sherman Act. The dispute arose from Apple’s rejection of the developers' apps, Coronavirus Reporter and Bitcoin Lottery, for distribution through the App Store because they "did not sufficiently allege a plausible relevant market, either for their rejected apps as compared to other apps, or for apps in general." Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould, Filed On: November 3, 2023, Case #: 22-15166, Categories: Communications
J. Gould finds that the district court improperly found that the physicians did not have standing to pursue their action alleging that an Arizona law criminalizing the performance of certain abortions is unconstitutionally vague. Arizona’s "Reason Regulations" criminalize the performance of abortions sought solely because of genetic abnormalities in the fetus or embryo. The doctors' standing "is based on their economic interest in providing medical services." Reversed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould, Filed On: October 30, 2023, Case #: 23-15234, Categories: Constitution, Health Care, Injunction
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Gould agrees in part with the intermediate court's decision that a son's allegation of stockholder oppression is sufficient in a suit he brought against his parents' food distribution firm. The son had a share equal to that of his brother, and he was promoted quickly. His father moved to Thailand and the board made the brother president of the firm against the son's wishes. When the son attempted to get information from human resources for a dividend study, his brother and their mother blocked the request, and the son was fired shortly thereafter. As the son was an employee and a stockholder, his family's conduct foiled his logical expectations of remaining employed, input as a manager and receiving shareholder profits, which is sufficient to proceed. However, the son fails to successfully argue breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment. Affirmed in part.
Court: Supreme Court of Maryland, Judge: Gould, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: C-13-CV-21-000666, Categories: Fiduciary Duty, Partnerships, Business Practices
J. Gould agrees with the lower court’s ruling that a group of health care employers fired a radiation therapist not because she was a whistleblower but because she demonstrated unprofessional behaviors a number of times. The technician claims that she was fired because she witnessed two doctors applying radiation to a patient when they knew that a mechanical piece was broken — which can result in injury to a patient and inaccurate scans — then reported the incident. However, both doctors followed necessary procedures to keep the patient safe and the scans were sufficient. For her part, the technician accrued a number of infractions, including not getting patients’ consent before using radiation, which is required, then later going back and manipulating said documents to look at though consent had been given. Affirmed.
Court: Supreme Court of Maryland, Judge: Gould, Filed On: August 30, 2023, Case #: 24-C-19-002767, Categories: Employment, Health Care, Whistleblowers
J. Gould reverses the intermediate court’s ruling that an airport should not build high-density housing as the amendment to a local ordinance that allows it to do so violates the uniformity rule in applying the ordinance. The airport, struggling financially in recent years, is also responsible for multiple plane accidents, some fatal. The county council has pressured the airport to sell or diversify its income to bring itself out of debt. The intermediate court is wrong because the county’s ordinance regarding population density of new housing construction does not discriminate against similarly situated properties and its exception as to the airport furthers a valid public purpose. Reversed.
Court: Supreme Court of Maryland, Judge: Gould, Filed On: August 22, 2023, Case #: C-02-CV-20-001850, Categories: Government, Property, Zoning
J. Gould finds that the district court properly entered judgment in favor of the City and County of San Francisco after officers arrested an individual. The police had probable cause to conduct the arrest of the individual. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould, Filed On: August 18, 2023, Case #: 21-16547, Categories: Civil Rights
J. Gould vacates a Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) denial of a petition for discretionary review of a plan to construct 72 wind turbines to generate renewable energy in Southern California. The FAA’s rejection of the organization's petition for discretionary review for the sole reason that the organization did not comment on the aeronautical study of the project was arbitrary.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould, Filed On: August 15, 2023, Case #: 21-71426, Categories: Environment, Public Record
J. Gould finds that the district court properly entered a conviction after a jury trial for attempting to commit racially motivated violence. The district court conducted the trial under general orders issued in response to the Covid-19 pandemic, providing that only individuals with official court business may enter the courthouse. Under those orders, defendant alleged that he was denied the right to a public trial. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould, Filed On: August 1, 2023, Case #: 21-10369, Categories: Fair Trial, Hate Crimes
J. Gould agrees with a hearing judge’s findings that an attorney whose actions represented a conflict of interest in an estate battle should be indefinitely suspended. The attorney denies any conflict of interest or the fact that he represented either party. However, the attorney, who is not admitted to practice law in Maryland, represented an elderly widow at the same time the widow’s daughter-in-law, whom he also represented, was trying to appropriate the widow’s estate. Affirmed.
Court: Supreme Court of Maryland, Judge: Gould, Filed On: July 10, 2023, Case #: C-15-CV-21-000332, Categories: Sanctions, Attorney Discipline
J. Gould finds that the district court properly granted summary judgment to individual police officers and the City and County of San Francisco on federal claims based on qualified immunity. The matter stems from the arrest of an individual. The officers, city, and county were entitled to qualified immunity and sufficient evidence existed to show that officers had probable cause to conduct the arrest of the individual. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould, Filed On: July 6, 2023, Case #: 21-16547, Categories: Civil Rights, Immunity
J. Gould finds that the district court properly entered summary judgment in favor of a county after a company alleged an equal protection claim related to the county’s Covid-19 enforcement actions. The company alleged that it was receiving differential treatment. The treatment was not differential, rather the court simply had no other known violators. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould, Filed On: June 26, 2023, Case #: 21-17105, Categories: Covid-19
J. Gould finds that the district court properly dismissed an individual's action alleging that The Procter & Gamble Company violated California consumer protection laws by labeling some of its products with the words “Nature Fusion” in bold, capitalized text, with an image of an avocado on a green leaf. The individual relied heavily on a consumer survey commissioned by his counsel. The survey was not particularly instructive or helpful in deciding the matter as survey participants did not have access to the back label of the products. The omission "undermined the extent to which the panel could fairly rely on the survey results as being instructive of how the 'reasonable consumer' understood the phrase 'Nature Fusion.'" Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould, Filed On: June 9, 2023, Case #: 22-15080, Categories: Consumer Law
J. Gould finds that the district court improperly denied defendant's habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction and 10-to-25-year sentence for second-degree murder. Defendant showed that his attorney's decision to waive closing argument was not based on strategy and that he was prejudiced by his counsel’s waiver. Reversed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Gould, Filed On: May 24, 2023, Case #: 22-15557, Categories: Ineffective Assistance, Murder, Sentencing