Second Circuit: Banks Must Comply with House Subpoena for Trump Financial Records

By Michael Keough on Posted in SDNY Blog

In a opinion today, the Second Circuit held that two financial institutions must comply with recent subpoenas issued by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Financial Services Committee seeking information related to the Trump Organization and Trump family businesses.  President Trump and others had filed a suit to prevent the banks from complying with the subpoenas (see our previous coverage here).

The Second Circuit affirmed in part Judge Ramos’ earlier denial of President Trump’s request for an injunction.  In part, the Second Circuit found that the public interest outweighed individual privacy concerns because the lead plaintiff was the President of the United States: Continue Reading

Judge Kaplan Denies Recusal Request Over “Troll” Reference

By Michael Keough on Posted in SDNY Blog

In an order last week, Judge Kaplan denied a serial plaintiff attorney’s request that the judge recuse himself for referring to the plaintiff’s attorney as a “troll” in an opinion (see our previous coverage here).  Judge Kaplan observed that the request was based on several inaccurate assertions: Continue Reading

Magistrate Judge Wang: “Sheer Volume” of Deposition Objections Not Enough for Sanctions

By Charles Michael on Posted in SDNY Blog

In an opinion today, Magistrate Judge Wang denied a motion for sanctions premised on (among other things) the “sheer volume” of objections during two depositions, including, in one instance, a deposition with an objection on approximately 80% of the transcript pages.

Judge Wang concluded that the number of objections alone was not enough, given that the objections were largely appropriate: Continue Reading

Judge Engelmeyer Vacates HHS “Conscience Rule” In Its Entirety

By Michael Keough on Posted in SDNY Blog

In a 147 page opinion today, Judge Engelmayer vacated the so-called “conscience rule” that would have allowed health care providers who receive federal funds to decline to provide services to patients based on religious or moral grounds.  The plaintiffs, a group of state and local governments, challenged the regulation based on improper rulemaking, violations of the Establishment Clause, and because the threat of denying federal funds to health care providers who did not allow employees to decline care based on religious grounds was unconstitutionally coercive.

While Judge Engelmayer declined to invalidate the rule on Establishment Clause grounds, the opinion cited several fatal flaws with how the rule was enacted, including that the alleged reason the rule was drafted in the first place (a spike in health care workers raising “conscience” complaints) was factually untrue.  Given the pervasive nature of the issues, Judge Engelmayer concluded that the rule was so “shot through with glaring legal defects” that it had to be invalidated entirely: Continue Reading

Second Circuit Refuses to Block Manhattan DA Subpoena to Trump for Tax Returns

By Charles Michael on Posted in SDNY Blog

In an opinion this morning, the Second Circuit largely affirmed the decision by Judge Marrero (covered here) to allow the Manhattan DA to enforce a grand jury subpoena to President Trump’s accountants seeking (among other things) President Trump’s tax returns.

The Second Circuit acknowledged that the President, occupying “a unique position in the constitutional scheme,” could be shielded from certain types of judicial process, but concluded that a subpoena to his accountants did not merit that protection: Continue Reading

Copyright Lawyer Asks that Judge Kaplan Recuse Himself for Referring to Lawyer as “Troll”

By Michael Keough on Posted in SDNY Blog

In a motion this week, a lawyer representing photographers in copyright suits asked that Judge Kaplan recuse himself after a recent order observed that other judges in the District had referred to the lawyer as a “copyright troll.”  The order described the over one thousand cases filed by this particular lawyer as “strike suits, designed to extort settlements.”  According to the motion, the word “troll” was “meant to defame, degrade, and stereotype a person as a rotten miscreant or nefarious villian” and thus warranted recusal.  The motion also noted that no settlement offer had been made, and that the plaintiff had only sought judgment on the merits against the defendant (a media company that had allegedly infringed on the plaintiff photographer’s copyright).

In a short response, the defendant provided an email to the court showing that the plaintiff had offered to settle the action shortly after it was filed.

Judge Daniels Enjoins “Public Charge” Rule Aimed At Restricting Immigration

By Charles Michael on Posted in SDNY Blog

In an opinion Friday, Judge Daniels preliminarily enjoined a new regulation that would change the framework for determining when those applying for legal residency are denied admission as a “public charge.”  The new proposed rule would have focused on whether the applicant was likely to receive 12 months of public benefits within 36 months.  Judge Daniels concluded that the rule, which was set to go into effect on October 15, was arbitrary, in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act: Continue Reading

Judge Marrero Rejects Trump’s “Sweeping” Claim to Immunity from DA Subpoena Over Tax Returns

By Charles Michael on Posted in SDNY Blog

In an opinion this morning, Judge Marrero dismissed President Trump’s lawsuit (see prior coverage here) seeking to block enforcement of a grand jury subpoena from the Manhattan District Attorney that seeks (among other things) Trump’s tax returns.

Judge Marrero concluded that, while presidents may enjoy some measure of immunity from criminal process in some circumstances, Trump’s “sweeping” claim of absolute immunity from any criminal process went too far: Continue Reading

Judge Oetken Dismisses Constitutional Challenge to Cap on State and Local Tax Deductions

By Charles Michael on Posted in SDNY Blog

In an opinion today, Judge Oetken rejected a lawsuit (covered here) by which four states, including New York, sought to invalidate the newly-enacted cap on the deduction for state and local taxes (SALT) on a filer’s federal income tax returns.  The challengers argued the law “verg[es] into territory that is constitutionally reserved to the states.”  But Judge Oetken found that, while the law may alter what types of state tax laws are more or less attractive—for example, it creates disincentives for high state tax rates—the law nonetheless does not improperly infringe on states’ sovereign authority to exercise their taxing powers as they wish: Continue Reading

Second Circuit Revives Suit Against Fox News for “Campaign of Emotional Torture” Against Family of Murdered DNC Staffer

By Michael Keough on Posted in SDNY Blog

Last week, the Second Circuit vacated a decision by Judge Daniels that dismissed a suit against Fox News by the family of DNC staffer Seth Rich (see our coverage of that decision here).  The complaint alleged that Fox News and two contributors intentionally exploited the murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich during the 2016 election season.  According to the complaint,  Rich was murdered in Washington in what authorities believed was a botched robbery; Fox News then allegedly reported a false story that Rich had been murdered after leaking thousands of DNC emails to Wikileaks.

According to the Second Circuit, the family members had plausibly plead their claims against the network for intentional infliction of emotional distress: Continue Reading

LexBlog