The case involved owners of Nookie’s Bistro & Spirits, a restaurant and bar in Hermiston, Oregon, who sued the city and its police chief after the Oregon Liquor Control Commission denied their application for a temporary outdoor liquor license for a special event. The denial followed the chief’s recommendation, which was based on dozens of prior police calls to the location involving fights, disturbances, drug activity, and other incidents. Plaintiffs alleged violations of their constitutional rights, including claims against the city under Monell and against the chief individually. The court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment, dismissing all claims with prejudice. It concluded there was no evidence of any constitutional violation by the chief, insufficient basis for municipal liability, and that the chief was entitled to qualified immunity.
In Barnett v. BAC Home Loan Servicing, L.P., plaintiff Jeffrey Barnett alleged that he had entered into a permanent loan modification agreement with BAC regarding his mortgage on property in Hillsboro, Oregon, after the original note and trust deed had been transferred among various entities including Fannie Mae, but defendants nonetheless scheduled a foreclosure sale for February 28, 2011. The U.S. District Court granted Barnett's motion for a temporary restraining order, restraining defendants from proceeding with the sale. The court's reasoning was that Barnett had made reasonable efforts to notify defendants of the impending complaint and motion, there was insufficient time before the sale for defendants to appear and respond, and the risk of irreparable harm to the plaintiff from losing his property outweighed the brief delay imposed by the order; the court also required a $500 bond as security.
In Erickson v. United States, the petitioner sought a writ of coram nobis or audita querela to vacate his 1968 felony conviction for refusing induction into the military during the Vietnam War, arguing his conscientious objection based on ethical and moral beliefs should have been recognized, and also requested expungement of the conviction records due to its impact on his eligibility for certain employment programs. The court granted the writ of audita querela, setting aside and vacating the conviction, but denied the request for expungement without prejudice. The decision to vacate was based on the invalidity of requiring religious belief for conscientious objector status and the issuance of a presidential pardon, while expungement was denied because no extraordinary circumstances were shown to outweigh the government's interest in maintaining criminal records.
The case involved Cynthia Maria Wilson Ste Claire's challenge to the Social Security Administration's denial of her application for Disability Insurance Benefits based on conditions including fibromyalgia, chronic pain, migraines, and hyperacusis. The court reversed the Commissioner's decision, finding that the ALJ failed to adequately consider the effects of the plaintiff's hyperacusis on her ability to work, the impact of her obesity on other impairments, and the opinions of examining physicians. It remanded the matter for further administrative proceedings to reassess the plaintiff's residual functional capacity and determine if she can perform jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy.
This case arose from a business dispute in which plaintiffs alleged that defendants misused their idea for a door-lock light after an agreement to develop and market the product ended, asserting state-law claims for breach of implied contract, violation of Oregon’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act, and breach of fiduciary duty. Plaintiffs originally filed in state court, but defendants removed the action to federal court on the basis that the claims were preempted by federal patent law because they sought patent-like protection for an unpatented idea. The court denied plaintiffs’ motion to remand, finding federal jurisdiction proper due to preemption; granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the ground that all claims were preempted by federal patent law; and denied leave to file an amended complaint adding a conversion claim as futile for the same preemption reason.
business & regulatoryfederal powerprocedureproperty
This case involves a contractual dispute arising from a 1998 agreement in which BNSF Railway conveyed rail line assets and a permanent easement to Albany & Eastern Railroad Company (AERC), including a liquidated damages clause imposing a $2,000 per car fee if AERC interchanged traffic with railroads other than BNSF. After AERC acquired the assets and later sought to interchange traffic with Union Pacific without paying the fee, it initiated arbitration before the Surface Transportation Board, leading to further litigation over contract enforcement, alleged fraud by BNSF, and various affirmative defenses and counterclaims. The court granted partial summary judgment to both BNSF and the defendants, denied BNSF's motion to file a third amended complaint, dismissed BNSF's fraud claims, and dismissed the defendants' fifth through ninth affirmative defenses along with all counterclaims. The rulings were based on principles including claim preclusion from the prior arbitration, interpretation of the agreement's terms regarding trackage rights and interchange restrictions, and the absence of viable fraud allegations. The case centers on enforcement of the rail service easement and related business arrangements between the railroads.
