Category Archives: Uncategorized

Rule 11 Did Not Apply to Party Already Dismissed from the Action, Holds Eighth Circuit

In Martin Leigh PC  v.  Leyh, No. 22-1975 (8th Cir. Apr. 3, 2024), an Eighth Circuit panel holds that when a party had already been dismissed from an action for two months, it is too late to invoke Rule 11 by operation of the Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c)(2) 21-day safe-harbor provision. “On October 5,Continue reading “Rule 11 Did Not Apply to Party Already Dismissed from the Action, Holds Eighth Circuit”

Risk Posed by Contaminated Baby Formula Alone Was Not Enough to Constitute Concrete Injury for Article III Standing, Holds Seventh Circuit

In Economic Loss Plaintiffs v. Abbott Laboratories, No. 23-2525 (7th Cir. Apr. 2, 2024), the Seventh Circuit holds that  “a potential class of consumers who purchased infant formula manufactured by Abbott Laboratories at a facility later deemed unsanitary” failed to establish Article III standing based on “potential risk of injury.” “Abbott Laboratories produces powdered infantContinue reading “Risk Posed by Contaminated Baby Formula Alone Was Not Enough to Constitute Concrete Injury for Article III Standing, Holds Seventh Circuit”

Undisclosed Juror Tweets and Facebook Posts Called for District Court to Conduct Further Proceedings on Actual Bias in Boston Marathon Bombing Case, Holds Split First Circuit Panel

In United States v. Tsarnaev, No. 16-6001 (1st Cir. Mar. 22, 2024), a 2-1 First Circuit panel remands the penalty phase of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s prosecution in order for the district court to revisit whether two jurors might have been biased, based on their social media posts that they failed to disclose in voir dire. ‘InContinue reading “Undisclosed Juror Tweets and Facebook Posts Called for District Court to Conduct Further Proceedings on Actual Bias in Boston Marathon Bombing Case, Holds Split First Circuit Panel”

“Law of the Case” Does Not Apply to Subject-Matter Jurisdiction Ruling by Motion Panel, Holds Split Eighth Circuit Panel

In Nordgren  v.  Hennepin Cnty., No. 22-1902 (8th Cir. Mar. 21, 2024), a 2-1 Eighth Circuit panel holds that a merits panel may reconsider the timeliness of an appeal even after a motion panel has already denied a motion to dismiss on the same ground, notwithstanding the “law of the case” doctrine. In a §Continue reading ““Law of the Case” Does Not Apply to Subject-Matter Jurisdiction Ruling by Motion Panel, Holds Split Eighth Circuit Panel”

Ninth Circuit Holds That Mootness is Discretionary, Rather Than Jurisdictional, Doctrine After the Court of Appeals Has Rendered Its Decision

In United States v. Perez-Garcia, No. 22-50314 (9th Cir. Mar. 18, 2024), the Ninth Circuit holds that once it has already announced a decision, any arguments thereafter regarding mootness are discretionary rather than jurisdictional, subject to “equitable and pragmatic considerations.” During a criminal proceeding below, two defendants – as a condition of pretrial release –Continue reading “Ninth Circuit Holds That Mootness is Discretionary, Rather Than Jurisdictional, Doctrine After the Court of Appeals Has Rendered Its Decision”

Second Circuit Holds That a District Court Has No Duty to Consider a Belated Argument in Support of Subject-Matter Jurisdiction

In Behrens v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., No. 21-2603 (2d Cir. Mar. 13, 2024), the Second Circuit publishes an opinion  “to consider a question of first impression in this Circuit: whether the existence of subject-matter jurisdiction requires a district court to exercise it, even if it is invoked belatedly—on analogy to the rule that aContinue reading “Second Circuit Holds That a District Court Has No Duty to Consider a Belated Argument in Support of Subject-Matter Jurisdiction”

Split Second Circuit Panel Holds That an Organization Must Identify At Least One Affected Member by Name to Qualify for Article III Associational Standing

In Do No Harm v. Pfizer, Inc., No. 23-15_(2d Cir. Mar. 6, 2024), a 2-1 panel of the Second Circuit holds that “an association must identify by name at least one injured member for purposes of establishing Article III standing under a summary judgment standard.” “Do No Harm, a nationwide membership organization, filed suit againstContinue reading “Split Second Circuit Panel Holds That an Organization Must Identify At Least One Affected Member by Name to Qualify for Article III Associational Standing”

Lawsuit to Unseal Court Records Fails Because No Defendant Was Named, Holds Eighth Circuit

In Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press v. United States of America, No. 22-3326 (8th Cir. Mar. 1, 2024), the Eighth Circuit affirms dismissal of an action for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that there was no “adversity” between the parties, owing to the supposed failure of plaintiff to name a defendant inContinue reading “Lawsuit to Unseal Court Records Fails Because No Defendant Was Named, Holds Eighth Circuit”

Seventh Circuit Holds That Even a Brief Interruption of Self-Employment Can Be An Injury For Article III Purposes, But It Must Be Proven Factually

In Brown v. CACH, Inc., No. 23-1308 (7th Cir. Feb. 29, 2024), the Seventh Circuit observes that a self-employed person may argue, as an Article III injury, that they were interrupted from remunerative work – even briefly – but that the injury must be proven, not assumed. In response to a call at home aboutContinue reading “Seventh Circuit Holds That Even a Brief Interruption of Self-Employment Can Be An Injury For Article III Purposes, But It Must Be Proven Factually”

Appeal Became Moot While Counsel Sought Multiple Briefing Extensions, Holds Sixth Circuit

In Marketing Displays Int’l v. Shaw, No. 23-1028 (6th Cir. Feb. 22, 2024), the Sixth Circuit dryly notes that counsel who were appealing a preliminary injunction allowed it to become moot, in part because they obtained multiple extensions on their briefing schedule. “In life, sometimes it’s better to show up late than not at all.Continue reading “Appeal Became Moot While Counsel Sought Multiple Briefing Extensions, Holds Sixth Circuit”