Litigation
Cal. Litig. 2015, Volume 28, Number 1
Content
- A Fond Vaarwel...
- A Path to Writeousness: What the Seven Deadly Sins Might Teach Us About Written Advocacy
- Adr Update: Dealing with Ab 2617
- Be Prepared: Your Week in Legal London Jurisdiction is no bar - the English barrister is abroad
- Editor's Foreword Class Without Ostentation
- Forfeiture at the Pleading Stage: Ask Permission First, Don't Apologize Later
- "I Learned About Litigating from That" Adapt and Take Advantage of Opportunities
- Litigation Section Executive Committee Past Chairs
- Masthead
- McDermott On Demand: Pass the Scalpel, Please
- Past Editors-in-Chief
- Reclaiming Our Noble Profession: Civility in the Practice of Law
- Table of Contents
- The Disentitlement Doctrine: a Trap for Unwary Judgment Debtors in Civil Appeals
- The Fine Line Between Protected Demand Letters and Extortion
- The Litigator's Must-Know Lexicon of Idioms Used by Young Business Professionals
- Trial Lawyers Hall of Fame: Being a Trial Lawyer
- Employers Take Note: the U.S. Supreme Court Has Entered the Digital Age
Employers Take Note: The U.S. Supreme Court Has Entered the Digital Age
By Jill L. Friedman
Jill L. Friedman
Social media blew up over the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2014 decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (2014) 134 S.Ct. 2751. That uproar nearly squelched any chatter about the Court’s historic, nearly unanimous opinion just five days earlier in Riley v. California and United States v. Wurie, which were combined into one opinion, Riley v. California (2014) 134 S.Ct. 2473. Both cases involve whether and how to apply the "search incident to arrest" doctrine to cell phones that police find in the possession of an arrestee.
[Page 29]