In R.A. v. McClenahan, No. 24-1008 (4th Cir. Dec. 3, 2024), the Fourth Circuit reverses a district court’s action granting leave to the plaintiff to amend their complaint after remand from the first appeal, despite that a panelist on the first appeal (who has since taken senior status) expressly suggested that course in a separateContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Castigates District Court for Reopening Case on Remand, Even Though a Concurring Judge Originally Suggested That Possibility”
Tag Archives: Fourth Circuit
Fourth Circuit Holds District Court Did Not Abuse Discretion in Striking Complaint Filed Pro Se Via Fax Machine
In Folse v. Hoffman, No. 23-1709 (4th Cir. Nov. 20, 2024), the Fourth Circuit finds no error in the district court striking a complaint and dismissing an action, where the pro se plaintiff attempted to file the action “electronically,” by way of a fax machine. “Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(d)(3)(B)(i) says pro se litigantsContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Holds District Court Did Not Abuse Discretion in Striking Complaint Filed Pro Se Via Fax Machine”
Fourth Circuit Holds That “General Merger Rule” of Newly Amended Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(4) Means That Notice of Appeal of Summary Judgment Confers Appellate Jurisdiction Over an Interlocutory Order Denying Appointment of Counsel
In Jenkins v. Woodard, No. 22-6197 (4th Cir. July 22, 2024), the Fourth Circuit confronts an issue arising under 2021 amendment to Fed. R. App. P. 3: how to apply the new “general merger rule” to a federal notice of appeal that names just the summary judgment order. The amendment of Rule 3 was meantContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Holds That “General Merger Rule” of Newly Amended Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(4) Means That Notice of Appeal of Summary Judgment Confers Appellate Jurisdiction Over an Interlocutory Order Denying Appointment of Counsel”
Fourth Circuit Holds That It Lacks Appellate Jurisdiction Under Perlman Doctrine to Review Criminal Defendant’s Interlocutory Appeal Concerning a Grand Jury Subpoena
In In re Grand Jury 2021 Subpoenas, No. 22-1654 (4th Cir. Nov. 22, 2023), the Fourth Circuit holds that because of Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009) – which scaled back the collateral-order doctrine as applied to attorney-client privilege – it must reassess the continued viability of the Perlman doctrine (Perlman v.Continue reading “Fourth Circuit Holds That It Lacks Appellate Jurisdiction Under Perlman Doctrine to Review Criminal Defendant’s Interlocutory Appeal Concerning a Grand Jury Subpoena”
Order Denying of Preliminary Injunction “For The Reasons Stated on the Record During the . . . Telephone Conference” Insufficient Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a)(2), Holds Fourth Circuit
In Frazier v. Prince George’s Cnty., Md., No. 23-6359 (4th Cir. Nov. 15, 2023), the Fourth Circuit holds that a judge’s denial of a preliminary injunction that merely cites the “reasons stated” during a telephonic hearing does not meet the standard of Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a)(2), which requires a statement “of the findings andContinue reading “Order Denying of Preliminary Injunction “For The Reasons Stated on the Record During the . . . Telephone Conference” Insufficient Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a)(2), Holds Fourth Circuit”
Split Fourth Circuit Panel Holds That Fed. R. Civ. P. 52 and 65 Standards for Injunctive Relief Applied to Prohibitory Order Enforcing Settlement Agreement
In Wudi Industrial (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. v. Wai Wong, No. 22-1495 (4th Cir. June 5, 2023), a 2-1 panel of the Fourth Circuit holds that the district court procedurally erred when it ordered a party to a settlement to “immediately cease” certain conduct prohibited by their agreement, holding that the judge was obliged to enterContinue reading “Split Fourth Circuit Panel Holds That Fed. R. Civ. P. 52 and 65 Standards for Injunctive Relief Applied to Prohibitory Order Enforcing Settlement Agreement”
Fourth Circuit Holds That Plaintiffs Should Have Submitted Prejudgment Interest Claim to Jury, Vacating $36 Million Interest Award Entered Post-Trial by District Court
In Gilliam v. Allen, No. 21-2313 (4th Cir. Mar. 8, 2023), while substantially affirming a $62 million compensatory damage verdict (and $13 million in punitive damages) for two plaintiffs who improperly served 31 years in prison, the Fourth Circuit tosses an extra $36 million post-judgment award of prejudgment interest by the district court, holding thatContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Holds That Plaintiffs Should Have Submitted Prejudgment Interest Claim to Jury, Vacating $36 Million Interest Award Entered Post-Trial by District Court”
Fourth Circuit Joins First and Eleventh in Holding That a Disabled Tester Incurs an Informational Injury When Denied Access to Information on a Hotel Website, Creating Article III Standing
In Laufer v. Naranda Hotels, LLC, No.20-2348 (4th Cir. Feb. 15, 2023), the Fourth Circuit holds that a disabled customer had Article III standing to pursue her ADA claim against a Baltimore, MD hotel with an allegedly non-compliant website. I previously discussed this issue in a October 5, 2022 blog entry. “According to [her] Complaint,Continue reading “Fourth Circuit Joins First and Eleventh in Holding That a Disabled Tester Incurs an Informational Injury When Denied Access to Information on a Hotel Website, Creating Article III Standing”
En Banc Fourth Circuit Clarifies That Order of Dismissal Without Prejudice but No Leave to Amend Is Appealable “Final Order” Under 28 U.S.C. § 1291
In Britt v. DeJoy, No. 20-1620 (4th Cir. Aug. 17, 2022), the unanimous en banc Fourth Circuit abandons a case-by-case approach to finality under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and adopts a bright-line rule that “[w]hen a district court dismisses a complaint or all claims without granting leave to amend, its order is final and appealable.”Continue reading “En Banc Fourth Circuit Clarifies That Order of Dismissal Without Prejudice but No Leave to Amend Is Appealable “Final Order” Under 28 U.S.C. § 1291”
District Court Has No Discretion to Vacate a Partial Verdict Because It Is Supposedly “Irreconcilably Inconsistent” With A Hung Jury on Another Count, Holds Fourth Circuit
In Jordan v. Large, No. 19-7855 (4th Cir. Mar. 4, 2022), the Fourth Circuit holds that the district court erred when it vacated a partial verdict in favor of a prisoner-plaintiff because it was supposedly “irreconcilably inconsistent” with the jury’s inability to reach a verdict on another count. Plaintiff, “a prisoner in Red Onion StateContinue reading “District Court Has No Discretion to Vacate a Partial Verdict Because It Is Supposedly “Irreconcilably Inconsistent” With A Hung Jury on Another Count, Holds Fourth Circuit”
Paul Mollica's Federal Courts Blog 