In In re Express Scripts, Inc., No. 25-2281 (4th Cir. May 15, 2026), the Fourth Circuit grants mandamus to direct that defendant Express Scripts get a jury trial in a public nuisance lawsuit, because at least one remedy sought—an abatement fund for drug rehabilitation—is a classically legal remedy, covered by the Seventh Amendment. “In thisContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Grants Mandamus Holding That Express Scripts Is Entitled to a Jury Trial on a Government Action for Public Nuisance That Seeks to Create an “Abatement Fund””
Tag Archives: Fourth Circuit
Split Fourth Circuit Panel Holds That There Was No Injury Fairly Traceable to Maryland State Officials Under the Federal Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, and Thus No Article III Standing by Servicemembers to Enforce the Act
In Rouse v. Fader, No. 25-1004 (4th Cir. Mar. 24, 2026), a 2-1 panel of the Fourth Circuit holds that the plaintiffs—“three married couples, each with one spouse who was an active-duty servicemember”—lacked Article III standing to enforce the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, 50 U.S.C. § 3902, because no injury was fairly traceable to theContinue reading “Split Fourth Circuit Panel Holds That There Was No Injury Fairly Traceable to Maryland State Officials Under the Federal Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, and Thus No Article III Standing by Servicemembers to Enforce the Act”
Fourth Circuit Holds That Stipulation of Dismissal Without Prejudice Can Be Remedied by Plaintiff Waiver in Appellate Briefing or Argument
In Metz v. McCarthy, No. 24-1820 (4th Cir. Feb. 25, 2026), the Fourth Circuit holds that a stipulation in the district court of dismissal without prejudice, which would deprive the court of appellate jurisdiction, can be repaired on appeal by the expedient of the plaintiff agreeing in briefing or argument that dismissal of all claimsContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Holds That Stipulation of Dismissal Without Prejudice Can Be Remedied by Plaintiff Waiver in Appellate Briefing or Argument”
District Court May Not Grant Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) Motion Solely Because Plaintiff Failed to Oppose It, Holds Fourth Circuit
In Guzman v. Acuarius Night Club LLC, No. 24-1555 (4th Cir. Feb. 13, 2026), the Fourth Circuit holds that “failing to oppose a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion is not a sufficient ground for a court’s concluding that a complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” Plaintiffs are “professionalContinue reading “District Court May Not Grant Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) Motion Solely Because Plaintiff Failed to Oppose It, Holds Fourth Circuit”
Fourth Circuit Splits with Seventh Circuit in Holding That a Court May Not Award Appellate Attorney’s Fees Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c)
In Black v. Mantei & Associates, Ltd.. No. 24-1439 (4th Cir. July 30, 2025), the Fourth Circuit holds that the fee-shifting provision applicable to removal petitions, 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), does not authorize – let alone mandate – attorney’s fees for defending an award of attorney’s fees on appeal, rejecting decisions in the Seventh CircuitContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Splits with Seventh Circuit in Holding That a Court May Not Award Appellate Attorney’s Fees Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c)”
Fourth Circuit Panel Splits Over Whether the Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens Requires That There Be a Single Foreign Forum Available to Hear the Claim
In AdvanFort Co. v. Zamil Offshore Srvs. Co., No. 24-1007 (4th Cir. Apr. 22, 2025), a Fourth Circuit panel splits 2-1 over whether forum non conveniens can apply when the alternative foreign forum for a case may require filing in two separate courts. “AdvanFort filed a five-count complaint in the district court for the EasternContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Panel Splits Over Whether the Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens Requires That There Be a Single Foreign Forum Available to Hear the Claim”
Is There a Standard of Judicial Review Lower Than “Arbitrary and Capricious”? Yes, Holds the Fourth Circuit
In Dorado-Ocasio v. Averill, No. 24-1360 (4th Cir. Feb. 13, 2025), the Fourth Circuit holds that for review of an administrative action by an agency of the uniformed armed services, judicial review is merely for “a discernible path for its determination.” Plaintiff Dorado-Ocasio is a captain in the United States Army. She challenged an adverseContinue reading “Is There a Standard of Judicial Review Lower Than “Arbitrary and Capricious”? Yes, Holds the Fourth Circuit”
Fourth Circuit Panel Holds 2-1 That Defendants Won the Race to the Courthouse Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447, Filing a Notice of Appeal That Stayed the District Court’s Authority to Remand a Removed Case Back to State Court
In City of Martinsville, Va. v. Express Scripts, Inc., No. 24-1912 (4th Cir. Feb. 10, 2025), a 2-1 panel holds that because the defendant filed its appeal before the district court physically mailed a remand order to state court under 28 U.S.C. § 1447, the order had no legal effect. The panel judges differ overContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Panel Holds 2-1 That Defendants Won the Race to the Courthouse Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447, Filing a Notice of Appeal That Stayed the District Court’s Authority to Remand a Removed Case Back to State Court”
Fourth Circuit Provides Guidance on the Division of Bench and Jury Duties in an Eminent Domain Proceeding under Fed. R. Civ. P. 71.1(h), Noting a Split with the First Circuit
In Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC v. 9.89 Acres of Land, No. 23-2129 (4th Cir. Jan. 27, 2025), the Fourth Circuit addresses an issue of apparent first impression about the division of bench and jury duties under Fed. R. Civ. P. 71.1(h), governing federal eminent domain proceedings. On the admissibility of expert testimony, the panel issuesContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Provides Guidance on the Division of Bench and Jury Duties in an Eminent Domain Proceeding under Fed. R. Civ. P. 71.1(h), Noting a Split with the First Circuit”
Fourth Circuit Holds Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A) Applies to Interlocutory Appeals, Creating a Split with the Eleventh Circuit
In Gelin v. Baltimore Cnty., No. 23-1541 (4th Cir. Dec. 4, 2024), the Fourth Circuit holds an appeal before it “in abeyance” until the district court decides a pending Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 motion. The panel has occasion to decide that Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A) – which provides that certain motions in theContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Holds Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A) Applies to Interlocutory Appeals, Creating a Split with the Eleventh Circuit”
Paul Mollica's Federal Courts Blog 