Tag Archives: Second Circuit

Judge Did Not Err in Recalling Jury When Courtroom Deputy Announced That They “Made a Mistake” on the Verdict Form, Second Circuit Holds

In Emamian v. Rockefeller Univ., No. 19-127 (2d Cir. Aug. 19, 2020), the Second Circuit upholds a jury verdict over the defendant’s objection that a discharged jury should not have been recalled to continue deliberations and submit a new verdict form. After a six-week jury trial of a race and national-origin discrimination claim under theContinue reading “Judge Did Not Err in Recalling Jury When Courtroom Deputy Announced That They “Made a Mistake” on the Verdict Form, Second Circuit Holds”

One Day After the Second Circuit Rules, a Split Fourth Circuit Panel Comes Out the Other Way on the Trump Administration’s “Public Charge Rule” and Nationwide Injunctions

Finding “nationwide injunctions” to be a “drastic and extraordinary remedy” restricted “to the most exceptional circumstances,” a divided Fourth Circuit panel holds in Casa De Maryland, Inc. v. Trump, No. 19-2222 (4th Cir. Aug. 5, 2020) that the district court abused its discretion by issuing an injunction that reached beyond the organization and its membersContinue reading “One Day After the Second Circuit Rules, a Split Fourth Circuit Panel Comes Out the Other Way on the Trump Administration’s “Public Charge Rule” and Nationwide Injunctions”

Second Circuit Exercises Discretion to Scale Nationwide Injunction of “Public Charge Rule” Back to Geographic Scope of Circuit

In New York v. United States Dep’t of Homeland Sec., No. 19-3595 (2d Cir. Aug. 4, 2020), the Second Circuit joins the roiling debate about the authority of federal district courts to enter nationwide injunctions against the federal government. The panel affirms a preliminary injunction entered against the Trump Administration’s 2019 amendments to the “publicContinue reading “Second Circuit Exercises Discretion to Scale Nationwide Injunction of “Public Charge Rule” Back to Geographic Scope of Circuit”

Second Circuit Confirms That a 2014 Amendment to Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(1)(B) Expands Admissibility of Prior Consistent Statements

In United States v. Purcell, No. 19-238 (2d Cir. July 23, 2020), affirming in substantial part a conviction for operating a prostitution ring, the court considers a challenge to the admissibility of prior consistent statements of a witness, under the recently-amended Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(1)(B)(ii). A prosecution witness, Wood, was cross-examined by the defense aboutContinue reading “Second Circuit Confirms That a 2014 Amendment to Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(1)(B) Expands Admissibility of Prior Consistent Statements”