Andrew David Hurwitz
How Judge Hurwitz rules, drawn from 34 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Hurwitz decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Individual-capacity claims against tribal officials can proceed when the requested recovery runs against the officials rather than the tribe. The practical target of the remedy, not merely the officials’ duties, controlled the immunity analysis.
“In sum, the tribal defendants have not shown that the remedy sought by the Welshes would run against CRIT or that CRIT is ‘the real party in interest.’”
Contractual disclaimers do not automatically defeat materiality in a criminal wire-fraud case. Other representations may still support liability, and the panel left their materiality to the jury.
“we hold that contractual disclaimers do not render immaterial other representations in criminal wire fraud prosecutions.”
Procedural preferences
An agency rejecting equitable tolling should give concrete reasons tied to the record. Merely reciting the legal standard and announcing that it was not met is insufficient for meaningful appellate review.
“We stress that, to facilitate future appellate review, the BIA should provide ‘specific and cogent reasons’ if it rejects Garcia’s equitable tolling argument on remand.”
Cautions
A crime involving moral turpitude need not require a specific intent to harm. A state offense requiring knowing deprivation of necessary care qualified because its minimum conduct carried a substantial risk of serious harm.
“But specific intent to cause harm ‘is not required for a crime to involve moral turpitude.’”
A pre-enforcement plaintiff must show a credible threat, beginning with whether the intended conduct is at least arguably prohibited. The age of the law and its enforcement history also bear on whether the asserted threat is too speculative.
“Where, as here, the government has not actually threatened prosecution of any plaintiff, to determine whether the threat of prosecution is nonetheless credible, we must first consider whether the plaintiff’s intended conduct is at least arguably proscribed by the challenged law.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The panel granted a petition for review of a decision of the Benefits Review Board awarding benefits to petitioner under the Longshore and Harbor Workers Compensation Act. ... The panel remanded to the agency to recalculate petitioner's partial disability benefits.”
“The panel affirmed the district court's denial of a 28 U.S.C. 2254 habeas corpus petition and granted a motion by appointed counsel to withdraw, after holding that counsel had followed the proper procedure under 9th Cir. R. 4-1(c)(6) in seeking to withdraw.”
“Applying Harris and its Ninth Circuit progeny, we hold that Smith did not default his claim and vacate the district court's dismissal of his habeas petition.”
“The panel affirmed convictions for conspiracy, money laundering, and failure to appear, but vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing and recalculation of restitution and forfeiture.”
“The panel affirmed the district court's summary judgment and vacated its denial of costs in a putative class action alleging violations of federal and state law in the sale of annuities.”
“The panel reversed the district court's order remanding the case to state court, and remanded with instructions for the district court to exercise federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act.”
“The panel reversed the district court's dismissal of claims brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 by a California state inmate against two physicians alleging deliberate indifference to medical needs, and remanded for further proceedings.”
“Applying that opinion, we affirm the district court's dismissal of Cardenas' complaint.”
“The district court held that the claim failed as a matter of law. We agree, and affirm.”
“The district court suppressed Gilton's statements under the rule of Miranda v. Arizona ... We affirm.”
“The panel dismissed for lack of jurisdiction an interlocutory appeal from the district court's order denying Kum Tat Limited's motion to compel arbitration ... where the arbitration motion relied only on state law and was not filed pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act.”
“Thus, the bankruptcy court did not err in this case in approving Sunnyslope's plan of reorganization and valuing the collateral assuming its continued use after reorganization as low-income housing.”
Draft for Judge Hurwitz with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Hurwitz, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Hurwitz's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace