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.

participatory / Appellate Practice

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

Fisk catherine web

Catherine L. Fisk

Professor, UC Berkeley School of Law

Rosen jeremy web

Jeremy B. Rosen

Partner, Horvitz & Levy LLP

3601 W Olive Ave Fl 8
Burbank , CA 91505-4681

Phone: (818) 995-0800

Fax: (844) 497-6592


Duke Univ School of Law

Aviram hadar web

Hadar Aviram

Professor, UC Hastings College of the Law

200 McAllister St
San Francisco , CA 94102-4978

Phone: (415) 581-8890

Fax: (415) 565-4685


Hebrew Univ, Jerusalem


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.


Related Tests for Appellate practice

participatory/Appellate Practice

SCOTUS Preview 1: Immigration and Border Issues

participatory/Appellate Practice

The State of the Administrative State

participatory/Appellate Practice

High Court Endorses 'Least-Worst Rule'

participatory/Appellate Practice

The Drawn Out Battle over LA's City Council Maps

participatory/Appellate Practice

9th mulls nationwide injunctions and mootness

participatory/Appellate Practice

The Age of the Polar Court

participatory/Appellate Practice

The Age of the Polar Court