This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
I expect some possible confusion from the fact that the Judge is listed as being the chief judge of the United States District Court for the District of Alaska, and this case is in Arizona. It appears that Judge Sedwick, and there's only one district judge with that last name, and the first name and middle initial match as well, is "sitting by designation" in Arizona on a bunch of cases, various Google searches shows a pattern of that recently. I don't have a cite good enough to put my claim in the article that he's doing so in this case, but a bunch of notes like this one [1] (search for "designation") is convincing enough to me that this is the same Judge I'm linking to, and the wl to Sedwick is not in error. --j⚛e deckertalk02:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I moved this entry from the old case name Collins v. Brewer to the new one Diaz v. Brewer, and I expanded it some, though it could always use more work, especially explication of Sedwick's opinion. And it use an overall review for general editing, I'm sure. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 18:02, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]