This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page . (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
|
Robert David Sack | |
---|---|
Senior Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit | |
Assumed office August 6, 2009 | |
Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit | |
In office June 16,1998 –August 6,2009 | |
Appointed by | Bill Clinton |
Preceded by | Roger Miner |
Succeeded by | Denny Chin |
Personal details | |
Born | Robert David Sack October 4,1939 Philadelphia,Pennsylvania,U.S. |
Education | University of Rochester (BA) Columbia University (LLB) |
Robert David Sack (born October 4,1939) is a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. [1]
Born in Philadelphia,Pennsylvania,Sack was raised in Brooklyn,New York. His father was Eugene Sack,who served as rabbi of Congregation Beth Elohim for 35 years. [2] [3] In 1989 he married his second wife,the lawyer Anne K. Hilker;he had been divorced from his first wife. [2] Sack received a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Rochester in 1960 and received his Bachelor of Laws from Columbia Law School in 1963. [1] [4]
He first clerked for Judge Arthur Stephen Lane of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. In 1964,he joined Patterson,Belknap &Webb,eventually becoming a partner of the firm. During 1974,he served as Associate Special Counsel and Senior Associate Special Counsel for the House Judiciary Committee's impeachment inquiry into President Richard Nixon. Following his government service,Sack returned to Patterson Belknap. In 1986,he joined the law firm of Gibson,Dunn &Crutcher as a partner. Throughout his career in private practice,Sack specialized in press law and represented numerous United States and foreign-based media companies. [5] [6] [4]
Sack was nominated by President Bill Clinton on November 6,1997,to a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated by Judge Roger J. Miner. [1] He was confirmed by the United States Senate on June 15,1998,and received commission on June 16,1998. He assumed senior status on August 6,2009. [7] [4]
Judge Sack was an officer and director of the William F. Kerby and Robert S. Potter Fund,which assisted in funding the legal defense of journalists abroad,and a member of the advisory boards of the Bureau of National Affairs' Media Law Reporter and the ABA Forum Committee's Communications Lawyer. He is a member of the board of visitors of the Columbia Law School and was a member of the board of trustees of Columbia University Seminars on Media and Society. He has,since 2001,been an adjunct professor of law at Columbia Law School. He was Columbia Law School's commencement speaker in 2007. He was adjunct professor of political science and special guest lecturer at the University of Rochester in 2012 and a distinguished visiting jurist at the University of Chicago Law School in 2013. He is a member of the American Bar Association,the New York City Bar Association (Chair,Communications Law Committee,1986–89),and the American Judicature Society. He is a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation. Sack is an adviser,American Law Institute's Restatement Third of Torts,Defamation and Privacy,2019– ;an adviser to the "Global Media Freedom Initiative's High-Level Panel of Legal Experts" convened at the request of the UK and Canadian governments,2019– ;and a member of the editorial board of the Journal of Free Speech Law,2021–.
•Sack on Defamation:Libel,Slander and Related Problems (5th ed. 2017) (updated annually)
•New York Times Co. v. Sullivan —50-Year Afterwords,66 Ala. L. Rev. 273 (2014)
•"Protection of Opinion Under the First Amendment:Reflections on Alfred Hill,'Defamation and Privacy Under the First Amendment,'" 100 Colum. L. Rev. 294 (2000)
•Advertising and Commercial Speech:A First Amendment Guide (1999) (co-author)
•"Hearing Myself Think:Some Thoughts on Legal Prose," 4 The Scribes Journal of Legal Writing 93 (1993)
•"Reflections on the Wrong Question:Special Constitutional Privilege for the Institutional Press," 7 Hofstra L. Rev. 629 (1979)
Doe v. Trump Corporation,6 F.4th 400 (2d Cir. 2021):Sack,writing for the panel,held that defendants Trump Corporation,Donald J. Trump,and members of his family were not entitled to have the district court enforce an arbitration agreement in a suit for unfair business practices and deceptive statements regarding a multi-level marketing company.
United States v. Ceasar,10 F.4th 66 (2d Cir. 2021):Sack,writing for the panel,held that a sentence of 46 months' imprisonment for a defendant who pled guilty to providing material support to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria was shockingly low and thus substantively unreasonable,when the defendant had already exhibited recidivist behavior while awaiting sentencing and faced a Guidelines range of 360 to 600 months' imprisonment.
Badilla v. Midwest Air Traffic Control Service,Inc.,8 F.4th 105 (2d Cir. 2021):Sack and Lohier,writing for the panel,held that state-law wrongful death claims against an air traffic controller for negligently causing a civilian flight to crash into a mountain near Kabul Afghanistan International Airport were not preempted by the combatant activities exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act,and that factual disputes remained regarding breach of duty of care and proximate cause.
Chamberlain Estate of Chamberlain v. City of White Plains,960 F.3d 100 (2d Cir. 2020):Sack and Hall,writing for the panel,reinstated claims for unlawful entry,excessive force,and supervisory liability against officer-defendants who fatally shot a U.S. Marine veteran with mental illness after the officers forced their entry into his apartment.
United States v. Napout,963 F.3d 163 (2d Cir. 2020):Sack,writing for the panel,affirmed convictions of two International Federation of Association Football (FIFA) officials for multiple counts of fraud conspiracy,concluding that the convictions rested upon permissible domestic applications of the federal wire fraud statute and rejecting defendants' arguments that the honest services fraud statute is unconstitutionally vague as applied to them.
In re Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC,976 F.3d 184 (2d Cir. 2020):Sack,writing for the panel,held that transfers of fictitious profit from the Madoff Ponzi scheme were not "for value" for purposes of the fraudulent transfer provision of the Bankruptcy Code,so bankruptcy trustee for Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC was entitled to recover those funds.
Compania Embotelladora Del Pacifico,S.A. v. Pepsi Cola Company,976 F.3d 239 (2d Cir. 2020):Sack,writing for the panel,held that an "exclusive bottler appointment" contract between Pepsi Cola and one of its bottlers in Peru contained no clear statement of perpetuity and was thus terminable at will.
Sleepy's LLC v. Select Comfort Wholsesale Corp.,909 F.3d 519 (2d Cir. 2018):Sack,writing for the panel,held that mattress manufacturer's allegedly defamatory statements to retailer's agents could satisfy the publication element of a slander claim,and that remand was necessary for the district court to consider whether the retailer consented to the utterance of those allegedly slanderous statements.
Peterson v. Islamic Republic of Iran,876 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2017):Sack,writing for the panel,vacated in part a district court order dismissing claims by judgment creditors against Iran and Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security;Sack held that certain of the judgment creditors were not bound by a settlement agreement releasing Iran's central bank from liability,and that the bond proceeds held by a Luxembourg bank on behalf of Iran's central bank were not immune from execution under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.
Perez v. City of New York,832 F.3d 120 (2d Cir. 2016):Sack,writing for the panel,held that fact issues precluded summary judgment as to whether donning and doffing activities by urban park rangers were "integral and indispensable," as required to be compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
In re Arab Bank,PLC Alien Tort Statute Litigation,808 F.3d 144 (2d Cir. 2015):Sack,writing for the panel,held that the Alien Tort Statute did not confer original jurisdiction over claims of terrorism victims against bank that allegedly financed and facilitated organizations who committed attacks in Israel,the West Bank,and the Gaza Strip.
Turley v. ISG Lackawanna,Inc.,774 F.3d 140 (2d Cir. 2014):Sack,writing for the panel,held that the evidence supported an intentional infliction of emotional distress verdict,where an African-American steelworker was subject to an abusive work environment replete with racial insults,intimidation,and degradation;jury's award of $1.32 million in compensatory damages was proper,although award of $24 million in punitive damages,which was later remitted to $5 million,was excessive.
Bailey v. Pataki,708 F.3d 391 (2d Cir. 2013):Sack,writing for the panel,held that the due process right to notice and an adversarial hearing prior to involuntary civil commitment to a psychiatric facility was clearly established,and thus defendants,who included the former Governor of New York and various state officials,were not entitled to qualified immunity.
Marvel Characters,Inc. v. Kirby,726 F.3d 119 (2d Cir. 2013):Sack,writing for the panel,held that children of influential comic book artist Jack Kirby,who produced drawings for Marvel Comics,had no rights to Kirby's works between 1958 and 1963 because those drawings were "works made for hire" within the meaning of the Copyright Act of 1976.
United States v. Stewart,686 F.3d 156 (2d Cir. 2012) (Stewart II):Sack,writing for the panel,held that in the resentencing of Lynne Stewart,her First Amendment rights were not abridged when the district court considered her public statements as a basis for quadrupling her original sentence;such use of public statements did not impermissibly chill speech.
Barclays Capital,Inc. v. Theflyonthewall.com,650 F.3d 876 (2d Cir. 2011):Sack,writing for the panel,concluded that the tort of hot news misappropriation was preempted by the Copyright Act as applied to the facts of the instant case,which concerned a novel lawsuit by various investment banks,which publish and disseminate equity research reports,against a small Internet-based aggregator of stock tips which sold the investment banks' recommendations to its own clients.
United States v. Stewart,590 F.3d 93 (2d Cir. 2009) (Stewart I):Sack,writing for a majority of the panel,affirmed the convictions of Lynne Stewart,the former attorney for "Blind Sheik" Omar Abdel-Rahman,on various counts including conspiracy,providing material support to terrorists,and defrauding the U.S. government,arising out of her conduct in knowingly passing information between her client and his supporters in Egypt in violation of government-ordered "special administrative measures". The panel also vacated her sentence and remanded for re-sentencing in light of Stewart's possible perjury at her trial as well as intervening factual developments in the case.
Arar v. Ashcroft,585 F.3d 559 (2d Cir. 2009):Sack,dissenting in part from the majority opinion en banc,wrote that a Bivens remedy should have been available to a dual Canadian-Syrian citizen who was detained by federal officials at John F. Kennedy airport,repeatedly denied access to a lawyer,and subsequently removed to Syria to be interrogated under torture by Syrian authorities for ten months.
Best Van Lines,Inc. v. Walker,490 F.3d 239 (2d Cir. 2007):Sack,writing for the panel,held that under New York law,making defamatory statements outside New York about New York citizens did not,without more,provide a basis for jurisdiction,even if the statements were published in a media accessible to New York readers.
Blanch v. Koons,467 F.3d 244 (2d Cir. 2006):Sack,writing for the panel,affirmed the district court's decision that artist Jeff Koons was protected by the doctrine of fair use,and therefore not liable for copyright infringement,when he incorporated a photographer's copyrighted photo of a woman's feet and lower legs into a larger collage painting,even though Koons had benefited commercially from the work.
Leebaert v. Harrington,332 F.3d 134 (2d Cir. 2003):Sack,writing for the panel,decided that a public school's requirement that students attend health-education classes did not violate principles of substantive due process or religious rights of parents who disagreed with the school's curriculum.
Doe v. Department of Public Safety on Behalf of Henry C. Lee,271 F.3d 38 (2d Cir. 2001):Sack,writing for the panel,held that a Connecticut sex-offender registration law violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,under a "stigma plus" theory,by authorizing public dissemination of information about sex offenders on the registry without first offering them an individualized hearing about whether they were likely to be dangerous.
DeStefano v. Emergency Housing Group,Inc.,247 F.3d 397 (2d Cir. 2001):Sack,writing for the panel,decided that a state does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by providing public funding to a private facility that also offers Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) sessions,which are religious in nature,so long as the staff does not require clients to attend AA sessions.
McMenemy v. Rochester,N.Y.,241 F.3d 279 (2d Cir. 2001):Sack,writing for the panel,decided that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 renders unlawful retaliation by an employer against an employee who opposes any unlawful employment practice involving any employer,not just the employee's own employer,so long as the employee establishes a causal connection between the retaliation and the employee's protected activity.
Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Vartuli,228 F.3d 94 (2d Cir. 2000):Sack,writing for the panel,concluded that a seller of an automatic-trading software program that instructs the user when to buy or sell currency futures is a "commodity trading advisor" under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA),and that the Act,as applied to that seller,did not violate the First Amendment.
In May 2008,Judge Sack was awarded the Learned Hand Medal for excellence in federal jurisprudence by the Federal Bar Council. [7]
Judge Sack has been identified as an "academic feeder judge," because a number of his former clerks have entered legal academia. [8] His former clerks include:
(This list does not include former clerks at law firms.)
Danny Julian Boggs is an American lawyer and a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. He was appointed to the court in 1986 and served as its chief judge from September 2003 to August 2009. Boggs was on the short list of President George W. Bush's candidates for the U.S. Supreme Court.
JoséAlberto Cabranes is an American lawyer who serves as a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and a former presiding judge of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review ("FISCR"). Formerly a practicing lawyer,government official,and law teacher,he was the first Puerto Rican appointed to a federal judgeship in the continental United States (1979).
Jon Ormond Newman is a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Diane Pamela Wood is an American attorney who serves as the director of the American Law Institute and a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School. She previously served as a circuit judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
Milan Dale Smith,Jr. is an American attorney and jurist serving as a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Smith's brother,Gordon H. Smith,was a Republican U.S. Senator from 1997 to 2009. Milan Smith is neither a Republican nor a Democrat,and he considers himself to be a political independent.
Hartman v. Moore,547 U.S. 250 (2006),is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the pleading standard for retaliatory prosecution claims against government officials. After a successful lobbying attempt by the CEO of a manufacturing company against competing devices that the US Postal Service supported,the CEO found himself the target of an investigation by US postal inspectors and a criminal prosecution that was dismissed for lack of evidence. The CEO then filed suit against the inspectors and other government officials for seeking to prosecute him in retaliation for exercising his First Amendment rights to criticize postal policy. The Court ruled 5-2 that to prove that the prosecution was caused by a retaliatory motive,the plaintiff bringing such a claim must allege and prove that the criminal charges were brought without probable cause.
Dennis Jacobs is a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Diarmuid Fionntain O'Scannlain is a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. His chambers are located in Portland,Oregon.
David Brookman "Brooks" Smith is a senior judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. He was previously Chief Judge of both the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania,and is the only judge in the history of the Third Circuit to have served as both a chief district judge and chief of the Court of Appeals.
Thomas Lee Ambro is a Senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Jerry Edwin Smith is an American attorney and jurist serving as a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Ziglar v. Abbasi,582 U.S. ___ (2017),is a Supreme Court of the United States case in which the Court determined,by a vote of 4–2,that non-U.S. citizens detained in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks cannot recover monetary damages from high level federal officials for the conditions of their confinement. The case was consolidated with Hastey v. Abbasi,and Ashcroft v. Abbasi. It was argued on January 18,2017.
Arar v. Ashcroft,585 F.3d 559,was a lawsuit brought by Maher Arar against the United States and various U.S. officials pursuant to the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA),and the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York dismissed Arar's complaint due to lack of personal jurisdiction and national security and foreign policy considerations. This ruling was ultimately upheld by a divided en banc panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Christopher Fitzgerald Droney is an American lawyer who formerly served as a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and judge of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut.
Kevin Thomas Duffy was an American lawyer and United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Wilfred Feinberg was a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and previously was a United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
John Thomas Noonan Jr. was a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Stephanos Bibas is an American lawyer and jurist who serves as a U.S. circuit judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Before his appointment to the bench,Bibas was a professor of law and criminology at the University of Pennsylvania Law School,where he also served as director of its Supreme Court clinic.
Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle,429 U.S. 274 (1977),often shortened to Mt. Healthy v. Doyle,was a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court decision arising from a fired teacher's lawsuit against his former employer,the Mount Healthy City Schools. The Court considered three issues:whether federal-question jurisdiction existed in the case,whether the Eleventh Amendment barred federal lawsuits against school districts,and whether the First and Fourteenth Amendments prevented the district,as a government agency,from firing or otherwise disciplining an employee for constitutionally protected speech on a matter of public concern where the same action might have taken place for other,unprotected activities. Justice William Rehnquist wrote the opinion.
Barclays Capital Inc. v. Theflyonthewall.com,Inc.,650 F.3d 876,was a case decided in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit where the Second Circuit,reversing the decision of the US District Court below it,found that the claims of three major financial investment firms against an internet subscription stock news service (theflyonthewall.com) for "Hot-news" Misappropriation under state common law doctrine could not stand,as they were pre-empted by several sections of the Federal Copyright Act.