pwmollica1961

Fifth Circuit Judge Expounds on Internal Operations, Castigates Justice Department in Dissent from Denial of Rehearing En Banc

In a dissent from denial of a sua sponte vote for rehearing en banc in a direct federal criminal appeal, United States v. Ramirez, No. 22-50042 (5th Cir. Sept. 19, 2023), Judge Jerry E. Smith rakes over the panel majority, the majority of active judges who voted against rehearing, and the Justice Department (for notContinue reading “Fifth Circuit Judge Expounds on Internal Operations, Castigates Justice Department in Dissent from Denial of Rehearing En Banc”

Eleventh Circuit Holds That Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) Stipulation Must Be Signed by All Parties Who Have Appeared in a Lawsuit to Be Effective, Creating Split with the Fifth Circuit

In City of Jacksonville v. Jacksonville Hospitality Holdings, L.P., No. 22-12419 (11th Cir. Sept. 13, 2023), the Eleventh Circuit holds in a matter of first impression that all parties to a case—not just those directly involved in the dismissal—must sign a Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) dismissal motion for it to be effective. Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)Continue reading “Eleventh Circuit Holds That Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) Stipulation Must Be Signed by All Parties Who Have Appeared in a Lawsuit to Be Effective, Creating Split with the Fifth Circuit”

Tenth Circuit Holds District Court May Not Use Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) to Reopen a Case Voluntarily Dismissed Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a), Creating Split with the Fifth Circuit

In Waetzig v. Halliburton Energy Services, No. 22-1252 (10th Cir. Sept. 11, 2023), a 2-1 panel of the Tenth Circuit holds that a district court lacks power under Rule 60(b) to reopen a case voluntarily dismissed by a plaintiff under Rule 41(a), because such a dismissal is not a “a final judgment, order, or proceeding.”Continue reading “Tenth Circuit Holds District Court May Not Use Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) to Reopen a Case Voluntarily Dismissed Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a), Creating Split with the Fifth Circuit”

Eighth Circuit Holds That Stipulations About Citizenship Are Not Binding When Evaluating Diversity Jurisdiction, Signaling a Possible Split with Other Circuits

In Great River Entertainment, LLC v. Zurich American Ins. Co., No. 21-3815 (8th Cir. Sept. 11, 2023), the Eighth Circuit reverses and remands a final judgment dismissing this insurance coverage lawsuit, holding that—despite an admission by the plaintiff in the district court that the parties were diverse—the plaintiff could contradict that stipulation on appeal withContinue reading “Eighth Circuit Holds That Stipulations About Citizenship Are Not Binding When Evaluating Diversity Jurisdiction, Signaling a Possible Split with Other Circuits”

Concurring Judge Urges Seventh Circuit to Revisit Spousal Testimonial Privilege as Applied to Co-Conspirators

In United States v. Diggs, No. 22-1502 (7th Cir. Sept. 5, 2023), a concurring judge in an opinion otherwise affirming a criminal conviction urges that the circuit revisit its stance on the spousal testimonial privilege as applied to alleged co-conspirators, holding that the standing circuit law was overruled by Trammel v. United States, 445 U.S.Continue reading “Concurring Judge Urges Seventh Circuit to Revisit Spousal Testimonial Privilege as Applied to Co-Conspirators”

No Leniency for a Pro Se Litigant Who Is Also a Licensed Attorney, Holds Ninth Circuit

In Hoffman v. Lindgren, No. 22-35471 (9th Cir. Sept. 1, 2023), the Ninth Circuit resolves an intracircuit split and holds that no leniency is due to pro se litigants who are also licensed, practicing attorneys. “Huffman, a practicing attorney, sued a municipal court judge, a prosecutor, and the City of St. Helens, Oregon in ColumbiaContinue reading “No Leniency for a Pro Se Litigant Who Is Also a Licensed Attorney, Holds Ninth Circuit”

Third Circuit Dismisses Pre-Enforcement Challenge to Attorney Ethics Rule on Discrimination (Rule 8.4(g)) on Article III Standing Grounds

In Greenberg v. Lehocky, No. 22-1733 (3d Cir. Aug. 29, 2023), the Third Circuit reverses a preliminary injunction against Pennsylvania’s recently adopted professional responsibility rule, PRPC 8.4(g), prohibiting discrimination and harassment in the practice of law. It holds that the plaintiff, a lawyer who lectures on free-speech issues, demonstrated no credible threat that he wouldContinue reading “Third Circuit Dismisses Pre-Enforcement Challenge to Attorney Ethics Rule on Discrimination (Rule 8.4(g)) on Article III Standing Grounds”

Second Circuit Holds That Party Accused of Fabricating Evidence is Not Entitled to a Jury Trial on a Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(e) Sanctions Motion

In Rossbach v. Montefiore Med. Cntr., No. 21-2084 (2d Cir. Aug. 28, 2023), the Second Circuit joins other courts in holding that the Seventh Amendment does not require a jury trial to evaluate a claim of evidence fabrication and spoliation under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(e) and 28 U.S.C. § 1927. The district court dismissedContinue reading “Second Circuit Holds That Party Accused of Fabricating Evidence is Not Entitled to a Jury Trial on a Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(e) Sanctions Motion”

Fifth Circuit, in Reissued Decision, Expounds on Limits of State’s Parens Patriae Authority to Litigate in Federal Court on Behalf of Suspended Students

In Louisiana State v. Jefferson Parish School Board, No. 22-30143 (5th Cir. Aug. 22, 2023), the Fifth Circuit dismisses the State of Louisiana’s continuation of a case in federal court against a local school board that sought to discipline two student who displayed weapons during remote-learning sessions during the COVID lockdown. (The original decision wasContinue reading “Fifth Circuit, in Reissued Decision, Expounds on Limits of State’s Parens Patriae Authority to Litigate in Federal Court on Behalf of Suspended Students”

Fifth Circuit Rejects “Futility” Exception to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) Remand Requirement

In Spivey v. Chitimacha Tribe, No. 22-30436 (5th Cir. Aug. 16, 2023), the Fifth Circuit joins the majority of circuits in holding that there is no “futility” exception to ordering the remand of a case to state court under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) when it determines that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over a removedContinue reading “Fifth Circuit Rejects “Futility” Exception to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) Remand Requirement”