In Johnson v. Johnson, No. 24-2058 (6th Cir. Oct. 24, 2025), the Sixth Circuit affirms dismissal of an action to compel arbitration under Section 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act, holding that – under the probate exception – the lower court lacked equitable jurisdiction to interfere with a state in rem proceeding. The decedent “Mrs.Continue reading “Citing the Probate Exception, Sixth Circuit Holds District Court Lacked Equitable Jurisdiction to Compel Arbitration of Action Proceeding In Rem in State Court”
Category Archives: Uncategorized
Splitting With the Fifth Circuit, First Circuit Holds That a Third-Party Claim May Bring a Case Within Appellate Jurisdiction Under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(3)
In United States v. Ernst Jacob GmbH & Co. KG, No. 23-1969 (1st Cir. Oct. 23, 2025), the First Circuit rejects a holding in the Fifth Circuit and holds that a third-party defendant’s complaint for subrogation or contribution is enough to give a U.S. Court of Appeals jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C.Continue reading “Splitting With the Fifth Circuit, First Circuit Holds That a Third-Party Claim May Bring a Case Within Appellate Jurisdiction Under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(3)”
Lawsuit Against Attorneys for Alleged Conduct During a State-Court Action Not Blocked by Rooker-Feldman Doctrine, Holds Fifth Circuit
In English v. Crochet, No. 25-30074 (5th Cir. Oct. 8, 2025), a Fifth Circuit panel partially reverses a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) dismissal of a diversity case, holding in relevant part that the tort suit is not blocked by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine even though it calls into doubt monetary sanctions entered by a state-courtContinue reading “Lawsuit Against Attorneys for Alleged Conduct During a State-Court Action Not Blocked by Rooker-Feldman Doctrine, Holds Fifth Circuit”
Split Second Circuit Panel Affirms Attorney Fee Sanction Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) Under “Unusual Circumstances,” Where Defendant Continued to Resist a Motion to Remand on Grounds That Federal Courts Widely Rejected After the Original Removal
In The City of New York v. Exxon Mobil Corp., No. 24-1568 (2d Cir. Oct. 3, 2025), a 2-1 panel holds that Exxon could be sanctioned under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) for pressing the same grounds for removal that eight U.S. Courts of Appeals had rejected after the original removal. The dissent would hold thatContinue reading “Split Second Circuit Panel Affirms Attorney Fee Sanction Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) Under “Unusual Circumstances,” Where Defendant Continued to Resist a Motion to Remand on Grounds That Federal Courts Widely Rejected After the Original Removal”
Joining Circuit Split, Ninth Circuit Holds That District Court May Not Establish Diversity of Citizenship by Judicial Notice
In Rosenwald v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., No. 24-299 (9th Cir. Sept. 24, 2025), the Ninth Circuit dismisses an appeal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, holding that the district court erred in taking judicial notice of the corporate defendant’s citizenship. It thus took the side of the Tenth Circuit, which holds that a court cannot judicially noticeContinue reading “Joining Circuit Split, Ninth Circuit Holds That District Court May Not Establish Diversity of Citizenship by Judicial Notice”
Third Circuit Holds That District Court Erred by Disregarding Unsworn Statement of Party for Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e) Relief
In Lauria v. Lieb, No. 24-1461 (3d Cir. Sept. 12, 2025), the Third Circuit, while agreeing that a party’s unsworn statement should be disregarded on a Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a) summary judgment motion, holds that the district court erred in disregarding it for purposes of weighing Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e). Rule 56(c)(4) prescribesContinue reading “Third Circuit Holds That District Court Erred by Disregarding Unsworn Statement of Party for Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e) Relief”
Eleventh Circuit Closes Off Resort to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a) to Dismiss Remaining Claims as an Expedient to Appeal Contested Claims Dismissed Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b)
The Eleventh Circuit, in CMYK Enterprises, Inc. v. Advanced Print Technologies, LLC, No. 24-13766 (11th Cir. Sept. 12, 2025), rejects a common tactic used by parties to speed-up the appeal of a partial dispositive order, i.e., voluntarily dismissing the remaining claims under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a). The panel holds that, by its plain terms,Continue reading “Eleventh Circuit Closes Off Resort to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a) to Dismiss Remaining Claims as an Expedient to Appeal Contested Claims Dismissed Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b)”
Fifth Circuit Holds That 28 U.S.C. § 1359 Precludes Appointment of a “Sham” Trustee to Create Diversity Jurisdiction
In Fugedi v. Initram, Inc., No. 24-40283 (5th Cir. Sept. 9, 2025), the Fifth Circuit affirms dismissal of a case for lack of diversity jurisdiction, holding that appointment of a supposedly diverse trustee was a sham in violation of 28 U.S.C. § 1359. Section 1359 provides that “A district court shall not have jurisdiction ofContinue reading “Fifth Circuit Holds That 28 U.S.C. § 1359 Precludes Appointment of a “Sham” Trustee to Create Diversity Jurisdiction”
Two Fifth Circuit Panelists Tweak Presiding Judge for Forcing Second-Chair Lawyer to Proceed with Oral Argument When the Lead Counsel Had a Medical Emergency
In an unsigned order, Doe v. HHS, No. 24-40778 (5th Cir. Sept. 8, 2025), two concurring panelists lambaste their presiding colleague for proceeding with oral argument when the lead counsel for plaintiff called in with a medical emergency two hours prior. The text of the order is brief: “The court heard oral argument in thisContinue reading “Two Fifth Circuit Panelists Tweak Presiding Judge for Forcing Second-Chair Lawyer to Proceed with Oral Argument When the Lead Counsel Had a Medical Emergency”
Second Circuit Considers What It Means to “Ratify” Action Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(a)(3)
In Ripple Analytics Inc. v. People Center, Inc., No. 24-490 (2d Cir. Aug. 26, 2025), the Second Circuit holds that a putative real party in interest did not sufficiently ratify an action to prevent its dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(a)(3). The general rule under the federal rules is that “[a]n action must beContinue reading “Second Circuit Considers What It Means to “Ratify” Action Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(a)(3)”
Paul Mollica's Federal Courts Blog 