No. 23-353

John Jones v. Lyudmyla Pyankovska

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2023-10-03
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: attorney-liability child-custody custody-proceeding first-amendment omnibus-crime-control omnibus-crime-control-and-safe-streets-act recording-liability recordings right-to-petition title-iii
Key Terms:
FirstAmendment Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2023-10-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the First Amendment right to petition the government extend to insulate an attorney from liability under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act when presenting recordings relevant to a child custody proceeding?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Does the First Amendment to the United States Constitution’s protection of the right to petition the government extend to insulate an attorney, presenting to a court in a custody proceeding recordings made by one parent of private conversations of the other parent with their minor child, from liability under Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended, 18 U.S.C. 2510, et seq., when the attorney did not have any involvement in the unlawful recording and the recordings are directly relevant to the determination of the child’s best interest in the custody proceeding?

Docket Entries

2023-10-30
Petition DENIED.
2023-10-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/27/2023.
2023-10-04
Waiver of right of respondent Lyudmyla Pyankovska to respond filed.
2023-09-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 2, 2023)

Attorneys

John Jones
John Mathew NaylorNaylor & Braster, Petitioner
John Mathew NaylorNaylor & Braster, Petitioner
Lyudmyla Pyankovska
Brian WolfmanGeorgetown Law Appellate Courts Immersion Clinic, Respondent
Brian WolfmanGeorgetown Law Appellate Courts Immersion Clinic, Respondent