Eighth Circuit Agrees With Third and Seventh That Social Media Site May Be Authenticated With Extrinsic Evidence Under Fed. R. Evid. 901(a)

In United States v. Lamm, No. 20-1128 (8th Cir. July 29, 2021), the Eighth Circuit affirmed a conviction for distribution, production, and possession of child pornography, holding that the district court did not err in admitting evidence from the defendant’s Facebook page over objections to authentication and hearsay. “A Homeland Security Special Agent was investigatingContinue reading “Eighth Circuit Agrees With Third and Seventh That Social Media Site May Be Authenticated With Extrinsic Evidence Under Fed. R. Evid. 901(a)”

Fifth Circuit Rebukes U.S. Attorney’s Office in Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g) Action for Breaching Grand Jury Secrecy and Holding onto Documents Identified as Privileged

In Harbor Healthcare System, L.P. v. United States, No. 19-20624 (5th Cir. July 26, 2021), a per curiam panel of the Fifth Circuit takes aim at the government’s “callous disregard” of the plaintiff’s attorney-client privilege, reversing the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s action for pre-indictment return of its privileged documents. Harbor was the subjectContinue reading “Fifth Circuit Rebukes U.S. Attorney’s Office in Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g) Action for Breaching Grand Jury Secrecy and Holding onto Documents Identified as Privileged”

Sixth Circuit Divides Over Whether Voluntary Dismissal of Undecided Claims Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2), “With the Intention of Reinstating the Dismissed Claims,” Creates an Appealable Final Judgment

In Rowland v. Southern Health Partners, Inc., No. 20-5944 (6th Cir. July 21, 2021), the panel splits over the meaning of its prior case law, holding that a voluntary dismissal without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(2) of claims that might be refiled after a successful appeal does not present a final, appealable judgment under 28 U.S.C.Continue reading “Sixth Circuit Divides Over Whether Voluntary Dismissal of Undecided Claims Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2), “With the Intention of Reinstating the Dismissed Claims,” Creates an Appealable Final Judgment”

Seventh Circuit Affirms Remand of City’s Royalty Lawsuit Against Video Streaming Services Back to State Court, Based on “Comity Abstention”

In City of Fishers, Indiana v. DIRECTTV, No.20-3478 (7th Cir. July 21, 2021), the Seventh Circuit holds that a suit involving “state taxation of commercial activity” belonged in state court, and should not have been removed to federal court, under the seldom-invoked “comity abstention” doctrine. This action was brought under Indiana’s Indiana Video Service FranchisesContinue reading “Seventh Circuit Affirms Remand of City’s Royalty Lawsuit Against Video Streaming Services Back to State Court, Based on “Comity Abstention””

Sixth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of 108-Page Prisoner Complaint for Lack of Clarity Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8

In Kensu v. Corizon, Inc., No. 21-1083 (6th Cir.July 20, 2021), the Sixth Circuit holds that the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing a complaint that it found was “woefully short on specifics,” “frequently connect[ed] back to conditions or complaints already litigated,” and “lack[ed] the substance needed for Defendants to answer andContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of 108-Page Prisoner Complaint for Lack of Clarity Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8”

Opening a Trap for the Unwary, the Eighth Circuit Holds That the Fourteen-Day Period to File a Fee Petition Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54 Applies to Preliminary Injunctions

In Spirit Lake Tribe  v. Jaeger, No. 20-2142 (8th Cir. July 16, 2021), the Eighth Circuit holds that a fee petition for work performed on a preliminary injunction must be submitted within 14 days of the interlocutory order, rather than waiting until the final judgment, contrary to the Advisory Committee Note’s commentary. “The plaintiffs suedContinue reading “Opening a Trap for the Unwary, the Eighth Circuit Holds That the Fourteen-Day Period to File a Fee Petition Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54 Applies to Preliminary Injunctions”

Fifth Circuit Panel Holds That 28 U.S.C. § 1631 Transfer Can Cure a Lack of Personal Jurisdiction

In Franco v. Mabe Trucking Co., No. 19-30316 (5th Cir. July 8, 2021), the Fifth Circuit joins other circuits that have held that 28 U.S.C. § 1631 can cure defective personal as well as subject-matter jurisdiction. But the panel split on the interaction between § 1631 and Louisiana’s “prescription” (limitations) law. A vehicular accident onContinue reading “Fifth Circuit Panel Holds That 28 U.S.C. § 1631 Transfer Can Cure a Lack of Personal Jurisdiction”

Split Sixth Circuit Panel Adheres to Prior Authority Applying Rooker-Feldman Doctrine to Interlocutory State-Court Order

In RLR Investments, LLC v. City of Pigeon Forge, Tenn., No. 20-6375 (6th Cir. July 13, 2021), a 2-1 panel holds that Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Indus. Corp., 544 U.S. 280 (2005) (Exxon), did not abrogate the circuit’s prior caselaw applying the Rooker-Feldman doctrine to state-court interlocutory orders. The Rooker-Feldman doctrine is aContinue reading “Split Sixth Circuit Panel Adheres to Prior Authority Applying Rooker-Feldman Doctrine to Interlocutory State-Court Order”

Judicial Internet Search into Possible Perjury Criticized by Fifth Circuit as “Improper,” But Ultimately Not a Basis for Recusal

In United States v. Brocato, No. 20-40624 (5th Cir. July 9, 2021) (per curiam), the panel affirms denial of a recusal motion, despite “that certain statements of the district court judge were ill-advised and certain actions of her staff were improper.” Defendants, a married couple who ran a lawn service business together, were convicted ofContinue reading “Judicial Internet Search into Possible Perjury Criticized by Fifth Circuit as “Improper,” But Ultimately Not a Basis for Recusal”

Second Circuit Holds That Plaintiff’s Mental Disability Was Not “Excusable Neglect” For Extension Under Fed. R. App. P 4(a)(5)

In Alexander v. Saul, No. 19-3370 (2d Cir. July 8, 2021), the Second Circuit affirms a district court decision holding that plaintiff’s post-traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, and opioid use disorder was not “excusable neglect” to justify an extension of time to file a notice of appeal, in a case where plaintiff failed to keepContinue reading “Second Circuit Holds That Plaintiff’s Mental Disability Was Not “Excusable Neglect” For Extension Under Fed. R. App. P 4(a)(5)”