Fifth Circuit Judges Clash in Gun “Free Speech” Case About Whether Mandamus Was Appropriate Relief to Vacate Joint Severance and Transfer Order

In Defense Distributed v. Bruck, No. 21-50327 (5th Cir. Apr. 1, 2022), a 2-1 panel of the Fifth Circuit issues a writ of mandamus directing a federal judge in the Western District of Texas to vacate an order severing and transferring part of a case to the District of New Jersey, and to request thatContinue reading “Fifth Circuit Judges Clash in Gun “Free Speech” Case About Whether Mandamus Was Appropriate Relief to Vacate Joint Severance and Transfer Order”

Referral of Lawyer to Disciplinary Committee Is Not an Appealable Final Judgment, Holds D.C. Circuit

In Wisconsin Voters Alliance v. Harris, No. 21-5056 (D.C. Cir. Mar. 22, 2022), the D.C. Circuit holds that a district court judge’s decision to refer a lawyer to a bar disciplinary committee for misconduct was not a final judgment subject to appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. “To call the underlying action in this caseContinue reading “Referral of Lawyer to Disciplinary Committee Is Not an Appealable Final Judgment, Holds D.C. Circuit”

Split Eleventh Circuit Panel Holds That 28 U.S.C. § 1453(c)(1) Grants No Appellate Jurisdiction Over Remand to State Court Under CAFA If the District Court Grants It Sua Sponte

In Ruhlen, et al. v. Holiday Haven Homeowners, Inc., No. 21-90022 (11th Cir. Mar 10, 2022), owing to a quirk in the statutory language, a 2-1 panel holds that 28 U.S.C. § 1453(c)(1) – which ordinarily allows a U.S. Court of Appeals to hear an appeal “from an order of a district court granting orContinue reading “Split Eleventh Circuit Panel Holds That 28 U.S.C. § 1453(c)(1) Grants No Appellate Jurisdiction Over Remand to State Court Under CAFA If the District Court Grants It Sua Sponte”

Injunctive Order in State-Court Action Removed to Federal Court Not Immediately Appealable Under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), Holds Sixth Circuit

In Schuler v. Adams, No. 21-1613 (6th Cir. Mar. 7, 2022), the Sixth Circuit faces the novel question of whether a preliminary injunction entered in a state-court action before it is removed to federal court can be immediately appealed under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). The panel dismisses the appeal, holding that it has “jurisdiction onlyContinue reading “Injunctive Order in State-Court Action Removed to Federal Court Not Immediately Appealable Under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), Holds Sixth Circuit”

Tenth Circuit Affirms Preliminary Injunction Under Lanham Act, but “Went Too Far” With Mandatory Provision Requiring Removal of Two Sculptures from School Campus

In The Trial Lawyers College v. Gerry Spence Trial Lawyers College, No. 20-8038 (10th Cir. Jan. 27, 2022), the Tenth Circuit substantially affirms a district court’s preliminary injunction in a dispute between two rival factions at a trial-lawyer school, though it holds the district court abused its discretion by  “ordering removal of sculptures bearing theContinue reading “Tenth Circuit Affirms Preliminary Injunction Under Lanham Act, but “Went Too Far” With Mandatory Provision Requiring Removal of Two Sculptures from School Campus”

State Lacked Standing to Challenge Appointment of Federal Defender in State Post-Conviction Proceedings, Holds Eleventh Circuit

In Booker v. Florida Dep’t of Corr., No. 20-14539 (11th Cir. Jan. 3, 2021), an Eleventh Circuit panel holds that whatever intrusion it might present on an ongoing state proceeding, the state lacks Article III standing to object to appointment of a federal defender to represent a death-row prisoner in a state post-conviction proceeding. BookerContinue reading “State Lacked Standing to Challenge Appointment of Federal Defender in State Post-Conviction Proceedings, Holds Eleventh Circuit”

Eleventh Circuit Casts Doubt on “Matter of Substantive Law” Exception to Appellate Jurisdictional Bar of 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d)

In Vachon v. Travelers Home & Mar. Ins. Co., No. 20-12765 (11th Cir. Dec. 14, 2021), the Eleventh Circuit held that it lacked appellate jurisdiction over a remand order under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d), rejecting application of the “matter of substantial law” exception. In a concurring opinion, two judges hold that they would have affirmedContinue reading “Eleventh Circuit Casts Doubt on “Matter of Substantive Law” Exception to Appellate Jurisdictional Bar of 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d)”

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)”

“Home State” Exception to Class Action Fairness Act Jurisdiction Does Not Apply Where the “Primary Thrust” of the Case Is Liability Against an Out-of-State Defendant, Fifth Circuit Holds

In Madison v. ADT LLC, No. 21-90028 (5th Cir. Aug. 24, 2021), the panel holds that the district court should have disregarded the nominal in-state defendant when evaluating the “home state” exception to the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(4)(B). It holds that primary defendants include those at whom a lawsuit isContinue reading ““Home State” Exception to Class Action Fairness Act Jurisdiction Does Not Apply Where the “Primary Thrust” of the Case Is Liability Against an Out-of-State Defendant, Fifth Circuit Holds”

Split Second Circuit Panel Holds That Collateral Order Doctrine Allows Interlocutory Review of Order of Fugitive Disentitlement, Creating a Circuit Split

In United States v. Sindzingre, No.19-1698 (2d Cir. Aug. 5, 2021), a 2-1 panel decides both its appellate jurisdiction to review an interlocutory order under the fugitive disentitlement doctrine, disagreeing with the Sixth and Eleventh Circuits. The panel majority also holds that the district court erred in holding that the doctrine applied to “a foreignContinue reading “Split Second Circuit Panel Holds That Collateral Order Doctrine Allows Interlocutory Review of Order of Fugitive Disentitlement, Creating a Circuit Split”