Author Archives: pwmollica1961

Seventh Circuit Divides Over Whether There Is a “Corruption” Exception to the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine

In Hadzi-Tanovic v. Johnson, No. 21-3373 (7th Cir. Mar. 14, 2023), the Seventh Circuit overrules (over a two-judge dissent) prior panel decisions holding that a plaintiff can avoid the operation of the Rooker–Feldman doctrine by alleging that the state-court judgment was the product of corruption. “This case arises out of a custody dispute between plaintiffContinue reading “Seventh Circuit Divides Over Whether There Is a “Corruption” Exception to the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine”

Sixth Circuit Disapproves of “Administrative Closure” of Case by District Court As “Irreconcilable With the Requirements Set Forth in the [Federal] Rules” for Closing Cases

In Rodriguez v. Hirshberg Acceptance Corp., No. 20-2184 (6th Cir. Mar. 14, 2023), the Sixth Circuit – while recognizing the district court’s “tremendous freedom in managing their caseload” – holds that a common procedural method of tabling inactive litigation, the “administrative closure,” has no foundation in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and recommends aContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Disapproves of “Administrative Closure” of Case by District Court As “Irreconcilable With the Requirements Set Forth in the [Federal] Rules” for Closing Cases”

Fifth Circuit Holds Lawyer Could Be Sanctioned Under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 For “Irrelevant Lines of Questioning” in Depositions

In Vaughan v. Lewisville Independent School Dist., No. 22-40057 (5th Cir. Mar. 9, 2023), the Fifth Circuit held that a plaintiff’s lawyer who asked four deponents about subject areas far afield of the dispute could be personally monetarily sanctioned for “unreasonable” and “vexatious” multipliction of the proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 1927. “Frank Vaughan filedContinue reading “Fifth Circuit Holds Lawyer Could Be Sanctioned Under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 For “Irrelevant Lines of Questioning” in Depositions”

Fourth Circuit Holds That Plaintiffs Should Have Submitted Prejudgment Interest Claim to Jury, Vacating $36 Million Interest Award Entered Post-Trial by District Court

In Gilliam v. Allen, No. 21-2313 (4th Cir. Mar. 8, 2023), while substantially affirming a $62 million compensatory damage verdict (and $13 million in punitive damages) for two plaintiffs who improperly served 31 years in prison, the Fourth Circuit tosses an extra $36 million post-judgment award of prejudgment interest by the district court, holding thatContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Holds That Plaintiffs Should Have Submitted Prejudgment Interest Claim to Jury, Vacating $36 Million Interest Award Entered Post-Trial by District Court”

Ninth Circuit Holds Battery Maker Made “Purposeful Availment” of the State of Hawai’i Sufficient for Personal Jurisdiction, Yet A Product Liability Case Did Not “Arise Out of Or Relate To” Those Contacts

In Yamashita v. LG Chem, Ltd., No. 20-17512 (9th Cir. Mar. 6, 2023), the Ninth Circuit holds in a products-liability case that there was no personal jurisdiction in Hawai’i over a USA subsidiary of a South Korean manufacturer headquartered in Georgia, despite that the company ships their products through Honolulu and sells some of itsContinue reading “Ninth Circuit Holds Battery Maker Made “Purposeful Availment” of the State of Hawai’i Sufficient for Personal Jurisdiction, Yet A Product Liability Case Did Not “Arise Out of Or Relate To” Those Contacts”

Fourth Circuit Joins First and Eleventh in Holding That a Disabled Tester Incurs an Informational Injury When Denied Access to Information on a Hotel Website, Creating Article III Standing

In Laufer v. Naranda Hotels, LLC, No.20-2348 (4th Cir. Feb. 15, 2023), the Fourth Circuit holds that a disabled customer had Article III standing to pursue her ADA claim against a Baltimore, MD hotel with an allegedly non-compliant website. I previously discussed this issue in a October 5, 2022 blog entry. “According to [her] Complaint,Continue reading “Fourth Circuit Joins First and Eleventh in Holding That a Disabled Tester Incurs an Informational Injury When Denied Access to Information on a Hotel Website, Creating Article III Standing”

Second Circuit Holds That Foreclosure Order That Defers Calculation of Judgment Is Not a Final Appealable Order

In RSS WFCM2018-C44 – NY LOD, LLC v. 1442 Lexington Operating DE LLC, No. 22-1 (2d Cir. Feb. 13, 2023), the Second Circuit holds in a matter of first impression for the circuit that a foreclosure order that also “refers the case to a magistrate judge to calculate the amount of the judgment of foreclosureContinue reading “Second Circuit Holds That Foreclosure Order That Defers Calculation of Judgment Is Not a Final Appealable Order”

Third Circuit Panel Divides Over Whether a Federal Agent Can Take an Interlocutory Appeal Under the Collateral Order Doctrine of an Order Denying Dismissal of a Bivens Cause of Action

In Graber v. Boresky, No. 21-1407 (3d Cir. Feb. 10, 2023), a 2-1 panel holds that there is no automatic interlocutory appeal under the collateral order doctrine of a district court decision on a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion that there is a cause of action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of FederalContinue reading “Third Circuit Panel Divides Over Whether a Federal Agent Can Take an Interlocutory Appeal Under the Collateral Order Doctrine of an Order Denying Dismissal of a Bivens Cause of Action”

Eighth Circuit Holds That Non-Conclusory Allegations “On Information And Belief” May Be Considered Among the Well-Pleaded Allegations of a Civil Complaint Under Twombly

In Ahern Rentals, Inc.  v.  EquipmentShare.com, Inc., No. 22-1399 (8th Cir. Feb. 7, 2023), the Eight Circuit joins other circuits in holding that “allegations pled on information and belief are not categorically insufficient to state a claim for relief where the proof supporting the allegation is within the sole possession and control of the defendantContinue reading “Eighth Circuit Holds That Non-Conclusory Allegations “On Information And Belief” May Be Considered Among the Well-Pleaded Allegations of a Civil Complaint Under Twombly”

Eleventh Circuit Splits with Second and Holds That Contempt Order Without Sanctions Is Not An Appealable Final Order

Declaring a split with the Second Circuit, the Eleventh Circuit in In re Grand Jury Subpoena, FGJ-21-01-MIA, No. 21-13651 (11th Cir Jan. 31, 2023) holds that when a district court holds a party in civil contempt for failing to comply with a subpoena but enters no sanctions, the order is not an appealable final order.Continue reading “Eleventh Circuit Splits with Second and Holds That Contempt Order Without Sanctions Is Not An Appealable Final Order”