Category Archives: Uncategorized

Panel Holds That Fourteenth Amendment Standards Constrain Fifth Amendment Personal Jurisdiction Over a Foreign Defendant, But Urges Reversal En Banc

Ed note 7-2-21: The Fifth Circuit vacated this opinion and will hear it en banc. https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/20/20-30382-CV1.pdf In Douglass v. Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha, No. 20-30379 (5th Cir. Apr. 30, 2021) (per curiam), the panel struggles with application of the federal due process personal jurisdiction test to a foreign defendant. While agreeing with the plaintiff inContinue reading “Panel Holds That Fourteenth Amendment Standards Constrain Fifth Amendment Personal Jurisdiction Over a Foreign Defendant, But Urges Reversal En Banc”

Eleventh Circuit Holds That 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(1) Does Not Grant Concurrent Jurisdiction in U.S. District Court Over Case for Overpayment Interest Owed to the Taxpayer

In Paresky v. United States, No. 19-14589 (11th Cir. Apr. 30, 2021), the Eleventh Circuit holds “a matter of first impression within our Circuit” that 28 U.S.C. § 1346, the general federal jurisdiction statute for cases where the United States is a defendant, does not confer jurisdiction “concurrent with the United States Court of FederalContinue reading “Eleventh Circuit Holds That 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(1) Does Not Grant Concurrent Jurisdiction in U.S. District Court Over Case for Overpayment Interest Owed to the Taxpayer”

Defendant Waited Too Long to Move for Forum Non Conveniens, Holds Eighth Circuit

In Hersh  v.  CKE Restaurants Holdings, Inc., No. 19-2794 (8th Cir. Apr. 28, 2021), the Eighth Circuit holds that under any standard of timeliness, the defendants waited too long to raise their forum non conveniens defense – 18 months after the case commenced. The case involved a wrongful death, an electrocution at an indoor playgroundContinue reading “Defendant Waited Too Long to Move for Forum Non Conveniens, Holds Eighth Circuit”

Second Circuit Holds That the Costs of “Proactive Measures” to Avoid Identity Theft Is Not an Actual Injury for Title III Purposes

In McMorris v. Carlos Lopez & Assocs., LLC, No. 19-4310 (2d Cir. Apr. 27, 2021), the Second Circuit holds that state-law claims for an intraoffice data leak may constitute an “actual injury” for Article III standing purposes, though in this case plaintiffs factually failed to allege an injury for taking “proactive measures.” Defendant CLA “providesContinue reading “Second Circuit Holds That the Costs of “Proactive Measures” to Avoid Identity Theft Is Not an Actual Injury for Title III Purposes”

Tenth Circuit Finds No “Practical Finality” Exception to Administrative Remand Rule in IDEA Case

In C.W. v. Denver Cnty. Sch. Dict., No. 19-1407 (10th Cir. Apr. 20, 2021), the panel dismisses an Individuals with Disabilities Education Act appeal under the “administrative remand” rule and remands with directions to stay the action pending the administrative hearing. “Through his parents, C.W. sought and received a due process hearing with a stateContinue reading “Tenth Circuit Finds No “Practical Finality” Exception to Administrative Remand Rule in IDEA Case”

Seventh Circuit Goes Off-Script to Express “Grave … Concerns” About Continuation of 1972 Consent Decree

In Shakman v. Clerk of Cook Cnty., No. 20-1828  (7th Cir. Apr. 16, 2021), while affirming the district court’s denial of a motion to vacate a consent decree over hiring in Cook County, Illinois, the panel urges “[d]iligence, not dormancy” in future proceedings. For those living in Northeastern Illinois, the Shakman Decrees are well-known toContinue reading “Seventh Circuit Goes Off-Script to Express “Grave … Concerns” About Continuation of 1972 Consent Decree”

First Circuit Finds an “Exception to the Exception” of the Merger Rule to Review Interlocutory Order

In Commonwealth Sch. Inc. v. Commonwealth Acad. Holdings, No. 20-1112 (1st Cir. Apr. 14, 2021), the First Circuit holds that it has appellate jurisdiction over an interlocutory order denying enforcement of a settlement, in a case testing the length of an exception to the merger rule. The parties, two private schools, were locked in aContinue reading “First Circuit Finds an “Exception to the Exception” of the Merger Rule to Review Interlocutory Order”

Sixth Circuit Grants Initial Hearing En Banc in Review of Tennessee Abortion Law, Over Dissent of Six Judges

In Bristol Regional Women’s Center, PC v. Slatery, No. 20-6267 (6th Cir. Apr. 9, 2021), the Sixth Circuit took the unusual step under Fed. R. App. P. 35(a) of granting initial hearing en banc of a challenge to Tennessee’s abortion waiting period law. A prior three-judge panel had denied the state’s motion for a stayContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Grants Initial Hearing En Banc in Review of Tennessee Abortion Law, Over Dissent of Six Judges”

Counting Rule for Court Closure Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(3) Applies Even Though Appellant Could Have Filed Rule 50 Motion Electronically

In Circuitronix, LLC v. Kinwong Electronic (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd., No. 19-12547 (11th Cir. Apr. 8, 2021) – an appeal from the trial of a breach of contract claim – the Eleventh Circuit holds that a motion for judgment as a matter of law was timely under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a), because the courthouseContinue reading “Counting Rule for Court Closure Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(3) Applies Even Though Appellant Could Have Filed Rule 50 Motion Electronically”

Split Sixth Circuit Panel Holds That A Federal Civil Litigant Has An Equal Protection Right to a Jury Deliberation Free of Racial Bias

In Harden v. Hillman, No. 20-5056 (6th Cir. Apr. 6, 2021), a split panel vacates and remands a defense verdict in a § 1983 case, where a juror testified post-trial that other jurors engaged in racial stereotyping during deliberations. The plaintiff, who is Black, claimed excessive force against Officer Hillman, who allegedly roughed him upContinue reading “Split Sixth Circuit Panel Holds That A Federal Civil Litigant Has An Equal Protection Right to a Jury Deliberation Free of Racial Bias”