For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices or call 213-229-5424.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Read Today's Digital Edition
Place Your Legal Notices
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...
Daily appellate reports
Enewsletter Sign-up
    Filter by date
     to 
    Search by Case Name
    Search by Judge
    Search by Case Number
    Search by DJ Citation Number
    Search by Category
    Search by Court

Name Category Published
Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr
Order 		USSC Jun. 25, 2019
Ovalles v. Barr
Order 		USSC Jun. 25, 2019
Dex Media Inc. v. Click-To-Call
Order 		USSC Jun. 25, 2019
Maine Community Health Options v. U.S.
Order 		USSC Jun. 25, 2019
Moda Health Plan Inc. v. U.S.
Order 		USSC Jun. 25, 2019
Land of Lincoln Mutual Health v. U.S.
Order 		USSC Jun. 25, 2019
Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org Inc.
Order 		USSC Jun. 25, 2019
Banister v. Davis
Order 		USSC Jun. 25, 2019
Dutra Group v. Batterton
Mariner may not recover punitive damages on unseaworthy claim; punitive damages are not a traditional remedy for unseaworthiness. 		Maritime Law USSC Jun. 25, 2019
Iancu v. Brunetti
Lanham Act's 'immoral or scandalous' bar to trademark registration under Section 1052(a) was viewpoint-based and unconstitutional under the First Amendment. 		Constitutional Law USSC Jun. 25, 2019
Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media
Commercial or financial information customarily and actually treated as private by its owner and imparted under assurance of privacy is 'confidential' under the Freedom of Information Act's Exemption 4. 		statutory_interpretation USSC Jun. 25, 2019
U.S. v. Davis
Under 18 U.S.C. Section 924(c)(3)(B), the residual clause defining 'crime of violence' in federal criminal prosecution for using a firearm during commission of the underlying crime, is unconstitutionally vague. 		Criminal Law and Procedure USSC Jun. 25, 2019
Eisen v. Tavangarian
Under California law, a landowner has no right to an unobstructed view, which includes any obstructions that may be caused by new improvements to neighboring property. 		Real Property 2DCA/7 Jun. 25, 2019
Modification: Timlick v. National Enterprise Systems, Inc.
Trial court erred in dismissing entire putative class action because defendant voluntarily gave special treatment to named plaintiff only, resulting in the elimination of her standing to maintain putative class action. 		Civil Procedure 1DCA/3 Jun. 25, 2019
People v. Mitchell
Trial court properly refused to instruct jury pursuant to CALJIC No. 8.73.1; in calling victim 'devil' defendant may have been referring to victim's horn tattoos, not because he was hallucinating. 		Criminal Law and Procedure CASC Jun. 25, 2019
People v. Canizales
Kill zone instruction was improper because evidence was insufficient to support a reasonable inference that defendants intended to create a zone of fatal harm around a primary target. 		Criminal Law and Procedure CASC Jun. 25, 2019
Center for Biological Diversity v. Ilano
Designation of landscape-scale areas under Healthy Forests Restoration Act does not trigger National Environmental Policy Act analysis; thus, summary judgment in favor of defendant affirmed. 		Environmental Law 9th Jun. 25, 2019
Gundy v. United States
34 U.S.C. Section 20913(d), requiring the Attorney General apply the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act's requirements to pre-Act offenders as soon as possible, was not an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority. 		statutory_interpretation USSC Jun. 24, 2019
Financial Oversight Bd. v. Aurelius Investment
Order 		USSC Jun. 24, 2019
Aurelius Investment v. Puerto Rico
Order 		USSC Jun. 24, 2019
Official Committee of Debtors v. Aurelius Investment
Order 		USSC Jun. 24, 2019
U.S. v. Aurelius Investment
Order 		USSC Jun. 24, 2019
Utier v. Financial Oversight Bd.
Order 		USSC Jun. 24, 2019
McDonough v. Smith
The statute of limitations for fabricated evidence claim under Section 1983 began to run when the criminal proceedings against plaintiff terminated in his favor. 		Constitutional Law USSC Jun. 24, 2019
American Legion v. American Humanist Assn.
The Bladensburg Cross did not violate establishment clause of the First Amendment because the cross became a symbol of fallen World War I soldiers' sacrifice. 		Constitutional Law USSC Jun. 24, 2019
PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton Harris Chiropractic, Inc.
The extent to which a 2006 Federal Communications Commission order interpreting the term 'unsolicited advertisement' binds lower courts may depend on the resolution of two preliminary questions; thus, matter remanded. 		Civil Procedure USSC Jun. 24, 2019
Knick v. Township of Scott
State-litigation requirement under 'Williamson County Regional Planning Comm'n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City' imposes an unjustifiable burden on takings plaintiffs, conflicts with the rest of takings jurisprudence, and must be overruled. 		Constitutional Law USSC Jun. 24, 2019
Rehaif v. U.S.
Under U.S.C. Section 922(g) and Section 924(a)(2) the Government must prove that the defendant knowingly possessed a firearm and knew of his unlawful or illegal immigrant status. 		Criminal Law and Procedure USSC Jun. 24, 2019
North Carolina Dept. of Revenue v. Kimberley Rice Kaestner 1992 Family Trust
Beneficiaries' residence could not, consistent with due process, serve as the sole basis for State's tax on trust income; thus, tax violated due process. 		Constitutional Law USSC Jun. 24, 2019
Flowers v. Mississippi
Trial court committed clear error by concluding the State's peremptory challenge of a black prospective juror was not motivated in substantial part by discriminatory intent. 		Criminal Law and Procedure USSC Jun. 24, 2019
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.