In United States v. Hunt, defendants Smith and Hunt were convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute after assisting a cooperating witness in preparing and packaging drugs for sale. The defendants moved for judgments of acquittal under Rule 29 or, alternatively, new trials under Rule 33, arguing insufficient evidence and trial errors including improper prosecutorial comments. The court denied the motions for acquittal, finding the evidence sufficient when viewed in the light most favorable to the government, but granted the motions for new trials due to prejudicial error from the prosecutor's closing argument remarks that improperly highlighted the defendants' post-arrest behavior in a manner that violated their rights. Smith's motion for release pending sentencing was deemed moot as a result.
In Dent v. American International Life Assurance Co., the plaintiff sought additional life insurance benefits as beneficiary under her son's ERISA-governed policy from his former employer Wal-Mart, after he died during the policy's conversion period following his termination. The defendant insurer had paid $37,000 total, consisting of basic coverage based on the son's salary plus $25,000 in optional coverage, but the plaintiff claimed she was entitled to a higher guaranteed issue amount of $50,000 for basic coverage without evidence of insurability. The court granted summary judgment to the defendant, holding that the policy language required evidence of insurability for amounts exceeding the guaranteed issue limit and that the insurer's interpretation and payment decision were not wrong under de novo review. The ruling emphasized that the guaranteed issue amount referred to the threshold for underwriting requirements rather than a fixed payable benefit, and the son's failure to submit evidence of insurability or convert the policy supported the limited payout.
This interpleader case concerns competing claims to $110,632.24 in proceeds from the liquidation sale of a furniture business formerly operated by Benjamin S. Youngblood, Inc. PFP, the IRS (via federal tax liens), and assignees of a bank loan secured by the business assets each asserted priority interests. The court granted PFP partial summary judgment, awarding it $49,354.80 on its perfected security interest, ruled that the bank's assignees hold rights to any remaining debt amount, and found the IRS entitled to any leftover proceeds after those claims. Core reasoning addressed UCC perfection rules, concluding the original financing statement remained effective despite the debtors' later incorporation because it was not seriously misleading, and noted the bank's subordination agreement favoring PFP.
The case involved an African-American male insurance agent over age 40 who alleged that Allstate denied him the chance to buy a retiring agent's book of business because of his race and age, in violation of Title VII and the ADEA, along with related state-law claims. After converting to independent-contractor status in 1999 under an R3001 agreement, the plaintiff inquired about purchasing the book but was told he lacked required securities licenses; he never submitted a formal purchase proposal, and the book was sold to a younger white buyer. The court granted Allstate's motion for summary judgment, holding that the undisputed facts established the plaintiff was an independent contractor rather than an employee under the hybrid economic-realities test, rendering Title VII and the ADEA inapplicable; the court also found no genuine issues of material fact on the state claims. The ruling turned on the plaintiff's tax treatment, control over his own operations, and failure to meet licensing prerequisites rather than any evaluation of discriminatory intent.
The case involves trade associations and companies suing ACGIH, a private nonprofit, along with federal defendants from the Departments of Labor and Health and Human Services, to block the adoption and enforcement of Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) setting workplace exposure limits for chemicals including silica, copper, n-propyl bromide, and diesel particulate matter. Plaintiffs alleged that the TLVs were developed and applied in violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Georgia deceptive trade practices law, tortious interference principles, the Federal Register Act, the Paperwork Reduction Act, and the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause. The court addressed multiple motions to dismiss and granted them in part and denied them in part, primarily concluding that FACA does not create a private right of action while allowing certain APA claims against the government defendants to move forward.
This removed interpleader action involves competing claims to funds from the liquidation of a furniture business's inventory, with Plaintiff Planned Furniture Promotions depositing sale proceeds into the court registry. The Georgia Department of Revenue sought summary judgment asserting priority for its state sales tax lien over the IRS's federal employer tax liens. The court denied the motion, holding that federal tax liens attach upon assessment and are perfected upon filing notice, and that the federal liens here were both first in time under the choate lien doctrine and superior to the later state lien. The core reasoning applied the traditional priority rules for competing tax liens, finding the federal liens assessed and filed before the state lien became choate.
