Richard C. Wesley

How Judge Wesley rules, drawn from 32 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Position
circuit
Appointed by
George W. Bush (Republican)
Commissioned
2003-06-12
Education
State University of New York at Albany (B.A., 1971); Cornell Law School (J.D., 1974; editor, Cornell Law Review)
Signed orders read
32

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Pavlova v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
04-1704-ag · 2006-03-14
Petition for review (petitioner (Tatiana Pavlova, asylum applicant)) Granted

“Because the IJ's credibility finding rested on serious errors, and because he misstated the legal standard governing the level of government involvement needed to support a claim of persecution, we grant the petition for review, vacate the decision of the BIA, and remand the case to the BIA for further proceedings.”

Garcia v. USICE (Department of Homeland Security)
09-4211-pr · 2011-12-29
Appeal (appellant (petitioner Carlos Garcia)) Granted

“Therefore, we VACATE and REMAND for a hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1852(b)(5)(B). In addition, we instruct the district court to appoint Petitioner pro bono counsel.”

United States v. Gilliard
11-1088-cr · 2012-02-17
Appeal (appellant (defendant Troy Gilliard)) Denied

“We conclude that the sentence was neither procedurally nor substantively unreasonable. AFFIRMED.”

Dandamudi v. Tisch
10-4397-cv · 2012-07-10
Appeal (appellants (defendants -- New York State education officials / the State)) Denied

“Applying strict scrutiny, therefore, and finding, as the state concedes, that the statute cannot survive such review, we affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment.”

Reynolds v. Barrett
10-4208-pr · 2012-07-11
Appeal (appellants (plaintiffs Jerry Reynolds and Khalib Gould, prisoner-employees)) Denied

“Disparate impact liability is unavailable because the statutes on which they base their claims require intentional discrimination. Further, the pattern-or-practice framework is ill-suited to establish the liability of the individual state officials named as defendants. AFFIRMED.”

United States v. Siddiqui
10-3916-cr · 2012-11-05
Appeal (appellant (defendant Aafia Siddiqui)) Denied

“We address five of Siddiqui's arguments here ... AFFIRMED.”

Mashantucket Pequot Tribe v. Town of Ledyard
12-1727-cv · 2013-07-15
Appeal (appellants (defendants -- Town of Ledyard and the State of Connecticut)) Granted

“We hold that the district court (1) appropriately reached the merits of the case but (2) erred by finding the tax to be preempted. REVERSED and REMANDED.”

United States v. Bernacet
12-2584-cr · 2013-08-01
Appeal (appellant (defendant Ronnie Bernacet)) Denied

“We therefore AFFIRM the district court's judgment. AFFIRMED.”

Poventud v. City of New York
13-1789-cv · 2014-01-16
Appeal (appellant (plaintiff Marcos Poventud)) Granted

“Heck, therefore, does not bar Poventud's claims. Accordingly, the district court's summary judgment for defendants is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Motors Liquidation Co. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
13-2187-bk · 2014-06-17
Appeal (appellant (plaintiff Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors)) Moot / procedural

“We conclude that this case presents an issue of first impression under Delaware law--whether a secured lender must authorize the act of filing a UCC-3 termination statement or must authorize the termination of the security interest identified for termination on that UCC-3 statement--and certify the question to the Delaware Supreme Court. QUESTION CERTIFIED.”

Martin v. Hearst Corporation
13-3315 · 2015-01-28
Appeal (appellant (plaintiff Lorraine Martin)) Denied

“We conclude that the Erasure Statute does not render tortious historically accurate news accounts of an arrest and therefore affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment for the Defendants.”

Davis v. Bombardier Transportation Holdings (USA) Inc.
14-4543-cv · 2015-07-22
Appeal (appellant (plaintiff Natasha Davis)) Denied

“For the reasons below, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.”

Draft for Judge Wesley with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Wesley, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Wesley's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace