In Argonaut Ins. Co. v. St. Francis Med. Cntrs., No. 19-17314 (9th Cir. Nov. 17, 2021), the Ninth Circuit holds that the ordinary rule that (1) a declaratory-relief claim brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 becomes mandatory if combined with a monetary claim does not apply if (2) the monetary claim is a conditional counterclaimContinue reading “Ninth Circuit Holds That Conditional Counterclaim for Damages Does Not Bring Declaratory Action Within Court’s Mandatory Jurisdiction”
Category Archives: Uncategorized
Failure to Effect Service on U.S. Attorney and Attorney General Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1)(A)–(B) Dooms Lawsuits Against Agencies, Split D.C. Circuit Holds
In Morrissey v. Mayorkas, No. 20-5024 (D.C. Cir. Nov. 9, 2021), the court consolidates two appeals presenting the same issue: whether plaintiffs who properly served the federal agencies where they worked in their age discrimination actions but failed to timely serve the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and the U.S. Attorney General mustContinue reading “Failure to Effect Service on U.S. Attorney and Attorney General Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1)(A)–(B) Dooms Lawsuits Against Agencies, Split D.C. Circuit Holds”
Another Court of Appeals Has to Write an Opinion Reminding Litigants That Fed. R. Evid. 702 Applies to Nearly All Cases in Federal Court Involving Expert Testimony
In Love v. United States, No. 20-3534 (7th Cir. Nov. 4, 2021), the Seventh Circuit issues a short opinion devoted entirely to knocking down an argument that state rather than federal expert-witness evidence rules apply to a case governed by state law. This mirrors a recent Second Circuit opinion from October 6, 2021. Plaintiff VargasContinue reading “Another Court of Appeals Has to Write an Opinion Reminding Litigants That Fed. R. Evid. 702 Applies to Nearly All Cases in Federal Court Involving Expert Testimony”
Fourth Circuit Holds That District Court Had Subject-Matter Jurisdiction Over Complaint with Pseudonymous Plaintiff
In B.R. v. F.C.S.B., No. 21-1005 (4th Cir. Nov. 2, 2021), the Fourth Circuit accepts an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) and holds that a federal court has subject-matter jurisdiction over a claim despite not knowing the plaintiff’s true name. A plaintiff – named “Kate” in the opinion – “commenced this action byContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Holds That District Court Had Subject-Matter Jurisdiction Over Complaint with Pseudonymous Plaintiff”
Tenth Circuit Panel Splits Over Analysis of Finality of Judgment When Unserved Party Remained in the Case
In Adams v. C3 Pipeline Constr., No. 20-2055 (10th Cir. Nov. 2, 2021), the panel holds that the appeal was timely filed “more than 10 months after the summary judgment order” being appealed “but only three weeks after” final judgment was entered against a defaulting party. Still, the judges disagree on the correct analysis ofContinue reading “Tenth Circuit Panel Splits Over Analysis of Finality of Judgment When Unserved Party Remained in the Case”
Class Waiver of Appeals from Award Determinations Enforced by Fifth Circuit, Sidestepping the Issue of Who the Proper Appellee Might Be
In Frego v. Settlement Class Counsel, No. 20-30596 (5th Cir. Oct. 27, 2021), the panel sidesteps an “odd” question of who the proper appellee might be in a “closed” fund class settlement, holding instead that the plaintiff-appellants waived the right to appeal the award under the class settlement. “After ten years of litigation, a classContinue reading “Class Waiver of Appeals from Award Determinations Enforced by Fifth Circuit, Sidestepping the Issue of Who the Proper Appellee Might Be”
The Doctrine of Consular Nonreviewability Does Not Go to Subject-Matter Jurisdiction, Holds Eleventh Circuit
In Del Valle v. Secretary of State, No. 19-14889 (11th Cir. Oct. 26, 2021), the panel in an issue of first impression for the circuit holds that the doctrine of consular nonreviewability – by which a federal court declines to consider a challenge to a consular official’s denial of a visa, Kleindienst v. Mandel, 408Continue reading “The Doctrine of Consular Nonreviewability Does Not Go to Subject-Matter Jurisdiction, Holds Eleventh Circuit”
Government’s Appeal of CDC’s Eviction Moratorium Is Dismissed on Its Own Motion but the District Court’s Order Remains in Effect, Fifth Circuit Holds
In Terkel v. Centers for Disease Control, No. 21-40137 (5th Cir. Oct. 19, 2021), a published per curiam order of the Fifth Circuit, the court dismisses the federal government’s appeal of an order enjoining a national eviction moratorium but notably leaves the lower court order in effect. Subject to certain exceptions, when a federal caseContinue reading “Government’s Appeal of CDC’s Eviction Moratorium Is Dismissed on Its Own Motion but the District Court’s Order Remains in Effect, Fifth Circuit Holds”
Foreign Defendants Have No Due Process Right to Personally Attend a Civil Forfeiture Hearing, Holds Eleventh Circuit
In USA v. Approximately $281,110.00, No. 20-11107 (11th Cir. Oct. 13, 2021), the Eleventh Circuit affirms a civil forfeiture verdict where the jury rejected an innocent-owner defense for Chinese nationals who were barred from entering the country for trial. “The main issue on appeal is whether foreign nationals have a constitutional right to enter theContinue reading “Foreign Defendants Have No Due Process Right to Personally Attend a Civil Forfeiture Hearing, Holds Eleventh Circuit”
Seventh Circuit Criticizes District Court’s Delay in Issuing Its Merits Opinion Months After Ordering Dismissal of the Case, Citing Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(7)(A)(ii)
In The Association of American Physicians & Surgeons v. American Board of Medical Specialties, No. 20-3072 (7th Cir. Oct. 10., 2021), affirming dismissal of an antitrust complaint brought under § 1 of the Sherman Act, the Seventh Circuit criticizes the district court’s delay in issuing the final opinion—a practice that in other circumstances cold “risk[]Continue reading “Seventh Circuit Criticizes District Court’s Delay in Issuing Its Merits Opinion Months After Ordering Dismissal of the Case, Citing Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(7)(A)(ii)”
Paul Mollica's Federal Courts Blog 