Checks and balances temporarily beat back Prez Trump's muslim immigration ban.

On January 28, 2017 Judge Ann Donnelly of the U. S.District Court for the Eastern District of New York entered an order staying operation of the Administration's faith-based travel ban.  A full copy of the order can be read here.

In Seattle, Judge James Robart entertained a similar motion and also entered an order staying operation of the travel ban. Here is a one hour video of the full court hearing, leading to his decision.

Here is the complete docket for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit where you can read all filings in the appeal.

Want to help the lawyers fighting the faith-based travel ban? Contribute.

February 10, 2016: Here are some links of interest, after the appellate court's decision to leave the temporary stay of the Executive Order in Place--

1. February 9, 2017 Opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
   
2. Summary of the various Amicus Briefs filed by others.
   
3. Amicus Brief of HIAS, a refugee relief organization.
   
4. Amicus Brief of fifteen States and the District of Columbia.
   
5. Memorandum of law to the Amicus Brief of fifteen States and D.C.
   
6. Amicus Brief of the Fred Korematsu Ctr. for Law and Equality.
   
7. Amicus Brief of the Anti-Defamation League.
   
8. Amicus Brief of the ACLU and ACLU of Washington State.
   
9. Amicus Brief of technology companies and various businesses.
   
10. Motion for leave to file as Amicus Curiae by various law professors.
    
11. Amicus Brief of Freedom Watch in favor of the Executive Order.

A title insurer's duty to defend may not terminate until the check is written!

A New York case feeds the debate about when a title insurer's duty to defend ends. In Busch v. Fidelity National Title Ins. Co., 2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 03948, 2011 WL 197259 (N.Y.A.D. 3 Dept.), the title insurer offered money to its insured for diminution in value caused by a neighbor's claimed easement over the insured's property.  Fidelity stopped paying for the insured's counsel, and the insured continued the litigation for several years, hiring a succession of lawyers.

Fidelity was sued by its insured, who sought recovery of fees he spent in the litigation.  Fidelity took the position that its duty to defend ended when it made an offer to pay for diminution in value.  The insured alleged that there was no such agreement made.

The appellate court said that more litigation was necessary to flesh out the terms of the offer, and whether there was a settlement.  It was important to the court that Fidelity never tendered a settlement check. But the court was clear that an offer, alone, does not terminate the duty to defend.  There must be  a tender of money, a signed agreement or a release.

So, my claim handling friends, what is the lesson?  It is sound practice, in any state, to tender a check and obtain a signed document.  And if the check is not negotiated, or the agreement is not signed, the insurer is left to either continue defending or to file a declaratory judgment action that seeks relief from the policy.

Lawyers can't be two-faced on Facebook.

A New York ethics opinion says that lawyer can't create fake accounts and identities on Facebook and Youtube to entice contact with potential witnesses. When done by a lawyer, this is considered "dishonest" and is sanctionable.

But yet, a 30 year old male cop can pose as a 13 year old girl on-line to entice contact with the potential pedophile?

And what of the many ruses used to entice an evading defendant to accept service of legal process? This is done through an agency relationship with counsel, so isn't this effectively his dishonest behaviour?