(California Court of Appeal) - In a dispute between two factions of a church over control of church property, the trial court's judgment is affirmed over meritless claims that it erred: 1) when it found in favor of respondents based on appellants' excommunication from the Holy Hill Community Church (Church) by the Western California Presbytery (WCP); 2) by admitting evidence of events occurring after the cross-complaint was filed; and 3) when it prevented appellants' counsel from cross-examining a representative of the WCP whose testimony was sought by respondents.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In an action brought by two nonprofit organizations challenging the California Attorney General's collection of IRS Form 990 Schedule B forms, containing identifying information for their major donors, under California's Supervision of Trustees and Fundraisers for Charitable Purposes Act, Cal. Gov't Code section 12584, the district court's preliminary injunction for plaintiffs is modified to prohibit making the information public but permit defendant to keep collecting the data for enforcement

(California Court of Appeal) - In a property tax refund action based on the welfare exemption set forth in Revenue and Taxation Code section 214, the trial court's judgment in favor of plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) the State Board of Equalization's (SBE) interpretation of section 214 was clearly erroneous; 2) the SBE's advisory rule regarding who must file a welfare exemption is not binding and therefore should not be given independent legal effect; and 3) the County failed to establish that the trial court should have denied a tax refund because plaintiff's claims were tardy and its claim forms were incomplete.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In a putative class action against an employer, alleging it has not maintained its pension plan in compliance with the the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. section 1001 et seq., the District Court's partial summary judgment in favor of plaintiff is affirmed where pension plan was subject to the requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and did not qualify for ERISA’s church-plan exemption.

(California Court of Appeal) - In a case to decide whether the City and County of San Francisco can compel state universities that operate parking lots in the city to collect city taxes from parking users and remit them to San Francisco, the trial court's denial of the City's petition for writ of mandate is affirmed where the California Constitution's 'home-rule provision' -- which grants charter cities broad powers, including the power to tax -- does not create an exception to the long-recognized doctrine that exempts state entities from local regulation when they are performing governmental functions.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Upheld the constitutionality of California's requirement that charitable organizations must disclose the names and addresses of certain large contributors. Two nonprofit organizations contended that the disclosure requirement infringed their First Amendment right to free association. Disagreeing, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the disclosure requirement survived exacting constitutional scrutiny because it was substantially related to an important state interest in policing charitable fraud. The panel reversed and remanded for entry of judgment in the state's favor.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Revived a church's claim that a city's zoning code violated federal and state statutes protecting religious freedom by treating religious uses of property on unequal terms with analogous secular uses and unreasonably limiting where religious organizations may locate in the city. Reversed a grant of summary judgment and remanded.

(United States Second Circuit) - In an antitrust action, alleging that Time Warner's requiring consumers to lease cable boxes in order to receive a package of television channels violates the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C., section 1, the district court's dismissal is affirmed where plaintiff's third amended complaint fails to: 1) plausibly allege that the cable boxes are a separate product from the premium cable channels; and 2) plausibly allege defendant's market power in the particular product and geographic markets defined in the complaint.

(United States Second Circuit) - In a class action securities brought by investors in a French entertainment company, alleging defendant's persistently optimistic representations during the period from October 30, 2000 to August 14, 2002, constituted securities fraud under section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. section 78j(b), as well as the Securities Exchange Commission's Rule 10b–5 promulgated thereunder, 17 C.F.R. section 240.10b-5, the District Court's entry of the jury verdict finding defendant liable for fraud under under section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 is affirmed where: 1) plaintiffs relied on specifically identified false or misleading statements; 2) defendant's claim that certain statements constituted non‐actionable statements of opinion is not preserved for appellate review; 3) defendant's claims that certain statements constituted non‐actionable puffery and that others fall under the Private Securities Law Reform Act's (PSLRA) safe harbor provision for 'forward‐looking statements,' 15 U.S.C. section 78u‐5(c), is without merit; 4) evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict; and 5) there was no abuse of discretion in admitting expert testimony. As to plaintiff's cross appeal: 1) the court did not abuse it's discretion in excluding certain foreign shareholders from the class; and 2) did not err in dismissing claims by American purchasers of ordinary shares under Morrison v. Nat'l Austl Bank Ltd., 561 U.S. 247 (2010)

(United States Second Circuit) - In a suit alleging direct and contributory copyright infringement by defendant Barnesandnoble.com, which, under license, uploads books and book samples to digital 'lockers' that the defendant maintains for its individual customers, and when the license granted by plaintiff was terminated, defendant did not delete a sample of plaintiff's book, the District Court's dismissal of the complaint at summary judgment is affirmed where the allegedly infringing conduct was authorized by the contracts at issue.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In the appeal of a breach of contract and copyright infringement case involving the movie 'The Purge,' the district court's denial of defendant's anti-SLAPP motion to strike a state law claim for breach of implied-in-fact contract, is affirmed where the breach of contract claim did not arise from an act in furtherance of the right of free speech since the claim was based on defendants' failure to pay for the plaintiff's idea, not the creation, production, distribution, or content of the films.

(United States Second Circuit) - Affirming the dismissal for failure to state a claim allegations of First Amendment violations by the City of New York, but reversing as to Manhattan Community Access Corporation and its employees because public access TV channels are a public forum and the corporation and its employees were state actors when they fired workers who produced segments critical of the corporation.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirming the district court's rejection of First Amendment violation claims brought by an exotic dancing venue complaining that a city regulates sexually oriented businesses differently than it does mainstream performances such as ballets and concerts, that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by barring 18 to 21 year olds from owning sexually oriented businesses, but finding that the district court erred in rejecting a claim that the denial provisions of the licensing regulation are an unconstitutional prior restraint, striking this provision from the Ordinance and remanding to consider its severability.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Held that a company had legal standing to challenge a city council resolution barring it from holding a controversial love- and sex-themed expo at the city's convention center. Reversed the district court's ruling on standing, which was based on the specific language of the resolution, in a case where the company asserted First Amendment, equal protection, and other claims against the city.

(United States Second Circuit) - Affirmed a finding of copyright infringement, in a lawsuit that involved copyrighted music recordings resold through an internet platform. The suit was brought by several record companies.

(United States First Circuit) - In an infringement action to determine whether a Puerto Rico credit union infringed a bank's word mark and trade name ORIENTAL with its competing marks COOP ORIENTAL, COOPERATIVA ORIENTAL, ORIENTAL POP, and CLUB DE ORIENTALITO, the District Court's finding of non-infringement and refusal to enjoin their use is: 1) reversed as to COOP ORIENTAL, COOPERATIVA ORIENTAL, and ORIENTAL POP, where the district court's determination of non-infringement was clearly erroneous; and 2) affirmed where the district court's determination is supportable as to CLUB DE ORIENTALITO.

(United States Federal Circuit) - In a petition filed by Adidas, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's final judgment cancelling a Church's trademarks for failing to use the marks in commerce before registering them, on the grounds of the Church's de minimus sale of two marked hats to an out-of-state reside, is reversed where: 1) the Lanham Act defines commerce as all activity regulable by Congress; and 2) the Church's sale to an out-of-state resident fell within Congress’s power to regulate under the Commerce Clause.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirming that a 1999 amendment to trademark statutes did not eliminate the plaintiff's requirement that they establish wilfulness to justify the award of defendant's profits in a trademark infringement case, but reversing the holding that the defendant's mark was not likely to cause confusion and remanding for inquiry into intent.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed the refusal to register the trademark DETROIT ATHLETIC CO. for sports apparel retail services because it was likely to be confused with DETROIT ATHLETIC CLUB for clothing goods. The Federal Circuit affirmed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's ruling.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed the dismissal of a trademark infringement lawsuit brought by a financial services company, holding that the use of its trademarks by a publishing company constituted nominative fair use.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Remanded for recalculation of an attorney fee award in a trademark infringement action, in which one nonprofit organization accused another of stealing its logo. Both organizations endorse political candidates.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that the Tennessee Valley Authority is subject to suits challenging any of its commercial activities, just as if it were a private corporation supplying electricity. The TVA insisted that, as a government-owned corporation, it has sovereign immunity from all tort suits arising from its performance of so-called discretionary functions. However, the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed in a unanimous opinion delivered by Justice Kagan.

(United States Supreme Court) - On a question of administrative law, held that where the Social Security Administration Appeals Council has dismissed a request for review as untimely after a claimant has obtained a hearing from an ALJ on the merits, that dismissal qualifies as a final administrative decision so as to allow judicial review. Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion for a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that a private entity operating public access cable TV channels was not subject to First Amendment constraints on its editorial discretion. The producers of a controversial documentary film contended that the nonprofit corporation running the public access channels was a state actor because it was exercising a function traditionally exclusively reserved to the State, and therefore was subject to suit for violating their free speech rights. However, the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed. Justice Kavanaugh delivered the opinion of the 5-4 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Clarified when the statute of limitations begins to run on a fabricated-evidence claim. Held that the clock started when the criminal proceedings terminated in the defendant's favor -- that is, when he was acquitted at the end of his second trial. Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the 6-3 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Reversed and remanded. Defendants sought disclosure, through a FOIA request, of names and addresses of retail stores who participated in the national food stamp program. Plaintiff refused to provide that information stating that substantive competitive harm would be caused. The district court disagreed with plaintiff and ordered disclosure. The US Supreme Court reversed and held that data provided under an assurance of privacy was an exemption to a FOIA request.

(United States Supreme Court) - Struck down a Tennessee requirement that applicants for a license to operate a retail liquor store have resided in the State for the prior two years. Held that the residency requirement violates the Commerce Clause because it blatantly favors the State's residents and has little relationship to public health and safety, and further held that the Twenty-first Amendment does not save the state law. Justice Alito delivered the opinion of the 7-2 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that when a motorist suspected of drunk driving is unconscious and cannot be given a breath test, the exigent-circumstances doctrine generally permits a blood test without a warrant. Justice Alito announced the judgment of the Court and delivered a plurality opinion, joined by three other justices. Justice Thomas concurring in the judgment.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Remanded. The panel held that petitioner’s reliance on his lawyer’s erroneous advice that he was not required to update his fingerprints was reasonable and constituted “good cause” to grant a continuance, and remanded.

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

RT @rickhanlonii: It's free

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

Aside from a few wild guesses, Izuku had no idea how this had happened. But here he was, about to bear All Might's child, and all he could think to blame it on was a jar of rice.

Yeet the rich

RT @nikolas_linck: Pankstraße, Berlin-Wedding: Kostenloses 5-geschossiges Parkhaus steht werktags zu 95% leer. Draußen fehlt der Radweg. Denn da stehen schon Autos, kostenlos. Wer kann das Parkplatz-Gejammer von ADAC, "Unternehmensverbänden" und co. eigentlich ernst nehmen, solange es sowas gibt?

RT @VanityFair: Trumpworld's campaign to blame China for creating the coronavirus is ramping up—even as the U.S. intelligence community and WHO insist otherwise

RT @EU_Commission: Today is #EuropeDay. It marks the 70th anniversary of the Schuman Declaration, a starting point towards the EU as we know it today. ???????? Only through unity and solidarity are we able to maintain the European project. Together we are stronger.

I’m always talking about ducks

Najnowsze wiadomości - TVN24 Little Richard, znany między innymi z przeboju "Tutti Frutti", zmarł w sobotę w wieku 87 lat - poinformował na swojej stronie internetowej magazyn "Rolling Stone". Piosenkarz, pianista i pastor jest uważany za jednego z pionierów rock and rolla. https://ift.tt/37OsBj9

RT @antimega: At @GDSTeam we’re running a number of online events for Global Accessibility Awareness Day on 21 May - please join us! #accessibility #AccessibilityRegulations

RT @onward_always: 8. Mai 1945. Tel Aviv feiert den Verlust deutscher Gestaltungsmöglichkeit.

via Criticidades https://ift.tt/1RabwUr

RT @400tiakka: 採餌中のイカルチドリ。足を高速で震わせて、餌となる生物を追い出してとるらしい。ものすごい波紋。