================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SIRA v. MORTON (08/02/04 - No. 03-0156)
In a suit alleging due process violations, the district court properly
denied summary judgment on plaintiff's due process claims of inadequate notice and non-disclosure of evidence, but incorrectly denied summary judgment on plaintiff's sufficiency of evidence challenge.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/030156p.pdf

MAKE THE ROAD BY WALKING, INC. v. TURNER (08/04/04 - No. 02-7876)
Plaintiff's claim that defendant's access policy violates the First
Amendment is dismissed as defendant's welfare office waiting rooms are
nonpublic fora and the exclusion of plaintiff was reasonable and
viewpoint neutral.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/027876p.pdf

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
JOELNER v. VILLAGE WASHINGTON PARK (08/04/04 - No. 03-2669)
In a First Amendment case involving adult entertainment regulation, the
district court properly found defendant's city ordinances
constitutional, but the district court erred when it denied plaintiff
the right to continue operating his adult bookstore without the payment
of disputed fees, pending final disposition of that case.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/032669p.pdf

PUGEL v. BD. OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIV. OF ILLINOIS (08/06/04 - No. 03-3717)
The district court's decision to dismiss plaintiff's claim, which
alleged that her dismissal for academic misconduct violated her due
process rights, is affirmed where plaintiff received notice and a
meaningful opportunity to clear her name. Plaintiff's free speech claims
were also dismissed as defendant's interest in academic integrity
outweighed any speech interests of plaintiff.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/033717p.pdf

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
MCCLELLAN v. MENELEY (08/04/04 - No. 03-3215)
In a First Amendment retaliation claim, denial of defendant's qualified
immunity is reversed where his single action in running a background
check would not have chilled the speech of a person of ordinary firmness
engaged in political debate.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/10th/033215.html

THE SKULL VALLEY BAND OF GOSHUTE INDIANS v. NIELSON (08/05/04 - No. 02-4149)
The district court's decision, that a state statute regulating nuclear
fuel is preempted by federal law, is affirmed over defendant-state of
Utah's contentions that: 1) the plaintiffs who challenged the statute
lack standing to bring the lawsuit and 2) the case is not ripe for
review.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/10th/024149.html

HARDEMAN v. CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE (08/06/04 -
No. 03-2001, 03-2017)
Defendant unsuccessfully appeals a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff,
on her discrimination claims, where defendant failed to satisfy the
requirements for relief under Rule 50(b) and Rule 59 and, accordingly,
its motions for judgment as a matter of law and a new trial are denied.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/10th/032001.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Supreme Court of California
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
BRONCO WINE CO. v. JOLLY (08/05/04 - No. S113136)
State labeling statute, permitting the word "Napa" to appear on the
label only when 75 percent of grapes used are from Napa County, is not
preempted by federal law.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/s113136.doc

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/s113136.pdf