This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

U.S. Supreme Court,
California Supreme Court,
Appellate Practice

Jun. 23, 2017

SCOTUS slaps down CASC on Specific PJx; Qualified Immunity up for Review?

SCOTUS slaps down California's 'sliding scale' approach to specific personal jurisdiction, explains Blaine Evanson (Gibson Dunn & Crutcher); and as Justice Thomas expresses 'skepticism' over qualified immunity in Ziglar v. Abbasi, Professor William Baude (Univ. of Chicago Law) argues that the doctrine's uncertain legal foundations are ripe for reconsideration

Blaine H. Evanson

Partner Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP

Appellate and Constitutional Law and Intellectual Property

3161 Michelson Drive
Irvine , California 92612-4412

Phone: (949) 451-3805

Email: bevanson@gibsondunn.com

Columbia Univ Law School

Blaine is based in the firm's Orange County office, where he practices in the Appellate and Constitutional Law group.

William Baude

Neubauer Family Assistant Professor of Law University of Chicago Law School



This week, on the first edition of the Weekly Appellate Report podcast, Rulings Editor Brian Cardile and three guests speak about two recent rulings of significance. The first is Vergara v. State of California (B258589), filed earlier this month in the 2nd District Court of Appeal, a reversal that salvages multiple state statutes pertaining to public school teacher tenure and dismissal policies. Catherine Fisk, a professor at UC Irvine, tells Brian why she thinks the ruling got it right; Jeremy Rosen, a partner with Horvitz and Levy who filed a brief on behalf of the case's respondents, offers an opposite viewpoint.
The second ruling discussed on this episode is the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Welch v. United States (15-6418), which deemed substantive and, thus, retroactive, a criminal justice ruling from last term pertaining to a particular clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act that mandated 15 year minimum sentences for certain defendants. Professor Hadar Aviram, from UC Hastings College of the Law, discusses the impact this case may have on California habeas practitioners, as well as the larger trend in courts and legislatures to reconsider automatic sentencing structures.
Note that one hour of CLE credit is available for listeners of the podcast who complete a short series of questions at its completion (see the link on this page for more details). We thank you for listening and hope you'll tune in again next Friday to another episode of the Weekly Appellate Report.

#328559

Brian Cardile

Rulings Editor, Podcast Host, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reporter
brian_cardile@dailyjournal.com

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com