September 21, 2007 Ninth Circuit Opinions.
On September 21, 2007, the Ninth Circuit issued six new published opinions:
In Pintos v. Pacific Creditors, the Ninth Circuit held that under the Fair Credit Reporting Act,” debt collection may service as a legitimate basis for obtaining and furnishing a credit report only when the consumer voluntarily participates in the credit transaction. Here, the debt arose from the towing of a vehicle registered to Pintos but apparently abandoned, and therefore the debt did not involve a voluntary transaction by Pintos.
In Washington v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Retirement Plan, the Ninth Circuit held that a plan did not violate it fiduciary duty by failing, during settlement negotiations, to inform a participant of a decision that undermined the Plan’s determination of benefits under it previous iteration, but had not effect on the current eligibility requirements. Under the previous plan, Washington had been granted only “nonfootball injury ”benefits because he could not tie his disability to a single foot ball injury. An 8th Circuit decision rejected the requirement that a single injury be the cause. Under the new plan, his disability was deemed not to have arisen out of “League football activities.” The 8th Circuit decision had no impact on the latter determination, and so the Court here held that knowledge of the decision would not have affected Washington’s acceptance of his settlement. Judge Fisher dissented from that portion of the Court’s ruling.
In Sigma Micro Corporation v. Healthcentral.Com, the Ninth Circuit held that N. D. California Bankruptcy Court Local Rule 9015-2(b), as it sets forth a procedure to withdraw reference to the bankruptcy court inconsistent with Congressional mandate. The court further held that, where there is a right to a jury trial, the bankruptcy court may retain jurisdiction to pre-trial matters. The court partially reversed the grant of summary judgment, however, finding a material issue of fact exited as to Sigma Micro’s § 547(c)(2) claim.
In Kay v. Rancho Palos Verdes, the Ninth Circuit held that damages are not an appropriate remedy for violation of the Telecommunications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 332. Additionally, the Court held that the District Court should have stayed, rather than dismissed certain of Kay’s claims, but found the claims now barred due to the finality of the state court proceedings based on the same “primary right” of Kay’s right to freedom from restriction of son his speech by virtue of the city’s regulation of antennae..
In Alaska Right To Life v. Feldman, the Ninth Circuit vacated the district court ruling invalidating certain of Alaska’s judicial canons, finding the District court should have declined jurisdiction as the matter was not ripe for adjudication. The Plaintiffs had sought to invalidate judicial canons prohibiting judges from pledging, promising or committing to particularly conduct while inn office.
In Redding v. Safford Unified School District #1, the Ninth Circuit held that a search of a student, based primarily upon student informants’ accusations, was reasonably justified under the circumstances presented here, and was permissible in scope. Judge Thomas dissented, finding the search, consisting of removal of the student’s and movement of her underwear to expose her breasts and pubic area, taken to determine whether she possessed ibuprofen tablets, albeit of “prescription strength,” and made outside the presence of the student’s parent, was unreasonable.
