Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Federal Judiciary Blogs -> California Appellate Report

Federal Judiciary

: California Appellate Report

Tortu v. LVMPD (9th Cir. - March 3, 2009)

By Shaun Martin

You've got to read this one. If only (1) if you've ever been in McCarran Airport (in Las Vegas) and/or (2) ever thought about trying to board a plane without a ticket. Let's just say: It did not turn out well for Mr. Tortu.

There's also a fascinating debate between the majority (Judge Hug) and the dissent (Judge Randy Smith) about the ability of the district court to grant a new trial on the ground that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. Plus a warning -- significant in this case, and to which all the judges agree -- that you can't move for a post-trial judgment as a matter of law under Rule 50(b) if you haven't first made a similar motion at the close of the evidence under Rule 50(a). Oops. So for proceduralists like me, it's a gold mine.

But even if you could care not in the slightest about procedural complexities, you've got to read this one. Because never before have I read a case in which the central dispute revolved almost entirely around the following question: "If the police didn't unlawfully beat me, then how come my balls hurt so much?"

Check out the majority and the dissent on this point. It's an instant classic.

Full post as published by California Appellate Report on March 03, 2009 (boomark / email).