In Lynch v. Christie, a Maine chiropractor sued a former patient for defamation and wrongful use of civil proceedings after she accused him of sexual assault during treatment, reported the claims to police and a licensing board, filed a federal civil lawsuit that she later dismissed with prejudice, and later posted anonymous accusations on a website and social media that eventually identified him. The defendant moved to dismiss under Maine’s anti-SLAPP statute, arguing her statements and lawsuit were protected petitioning activity, and also under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. The court denied both motions, finding that the plaintiff had made a strong showing the prior lawsuit and statements lacked reasonable factual support and caused him actual injury, and that the amended complaint plausibly alleged the elements of the tort claims under Maine law.

free speechproceduretorts & liability

The case involved a defendant indicted and convicted by a jury of being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). The defendant renewed a motion for acquittal, arguing that the government failed to prove the firearms were not antiques excluded from the statutory definition of firearm. The court denied the motion, holding that the antique firearm exception under 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(16) is an affirmative defense that the defendant must timely raise and support with evidence, rather than an element of the offense that the government must disprove in every prosecution. The court noted that the defendant presented no such evidence at trial and raised the issue only after the evidentiary record closed. It aligned with decisions from other circuits on this allocation of burdens.

criminal lawguns

The case involved a dispute between United Systems Access Telecom, Inc., a debtor in bankruptcy proceedings operating as a Competitive Local Exchange Carrier, and FairPoint, an Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier, over amounts owed under agreements including the Interconnection Agreement and Wholesale Advantage Services Agreement, particularly whether Performance Assurance Plan penalties could offset debts. The debtor sought to withdraw the reference from the Bankruptcy Court to the District Court, arguing that the matter required interpretation of federal telecommunications law under the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The court granted the motions to withdraw the reference, holding that adjudication would require consideration of federal law regulating interstate commerce, which mandates withdrawal under 28 U.S.C. § 157(d) given the FCC's extensive regulation of telecommunications and FairPoint's commitments under Section 271 approvals.

business & regulatoryfederal powerprocedure

In United States v. Enzinger, the defendant was convicted by a jury after a brief criminal trial on charges not detailed in the opinion, and later moved for a new trial based on a post-verdict letter from one juror who claimed to have misunderstood the unanimity requirement and gone along with the guilty verdict rather than holding out. The court denied the motion to set aside the verdict. The ruling followed the longstanding rule against inquiring into jury deliberations except in narrow circumstances under Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b), such as extraneous prejudicial information, outside influences, or errors in recording the verdict on the form, none of which were present; a juror's misunderstanding of instructions does not qualify as an exception, even under the First Circuit's limited constitutional exception for racial bias. The judge noted that the instructions clearly required each juror to decide individually and that the verdict was confirmed by all jurors in open court without objection.

criminal lawprocedure