Tag Archives: Sixth Circuit

Divided Sixth Circuit Panel Queries Diversity Jurisdiction in Case Against a Lloyd’s of London “Syndicate” of Underwriters

In Halbower v. Hiscox Syndicate 33 of Lloyd’s of London, No. 25-1152 (6th Cir. May 29, 2026), the panel unanimously remands an insurance dispute to reconsider diversity jurisdiction where the defendant is a Lloyd’s of London “Syndicate,” an unincorporated group of underwriting members. The panel, nevertheless, splits over the proper analysis. Syndicates are loose associationsContinue reading “Divided Sixth Circuit Panel Queries Diversity Jurisdiction in Case Against a Lloyd’s of London “Syndicate” of Underwriters”

While Noting That the District Court Legally Erred in Its CAFA Remand, the Sixth Circuit Nevertheless Holds That the Defendant Forfeited Its Chance to Timely Challenge the Order

In Ewalt v. GateHouse Media Ohio Holdings, No. 25-4015 (6th Cir. May 22, 2026), the Sixth Circuit agrees with the defendant that the district court ought not have remanded this CAFA (Class Action Fairness Act) case after denying class certification, but holds that the remand could no longer be challenged after the 30-day window forContinue reading “While Noting That the District Court Legally Erred in Its CAFA Remand, the Sixth Circuit Nevertheless Holds That the Defendant Forfeited Its Chance to Timely Challenge the Order”

Sixth Circuit Overrules Authority That Required “Clear and Convincing” Proof on a Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 Motion for a Preliminary Injunction

In PCC Airfoils, LLC v. Daugherty, No. 25-3794 (6th Cir. May 19, 2026), the Sixth Circuit declares definitively that there is no “clear and convincing” standard of proof on a Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 motion for a preliminary injunction, disaffirming a prior nonprecedential circuit decision and a string of district court opinions citing theContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Overrules Authority That Required “Clear and Convincing” Proof on a Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 Motion for a Preliminary Injunction”

Two Circuits Address Scott v. Harris and Video Evidence in Assessing Qualified Immunity for Police Officers Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

In Smith v. Miami Valley Hosp., No. 24-3983 (6th Cir. Apr. 20, 2026) and Perez v. Guetschow, No. 25-1617 (7th Cir. Apr. 20, 2026), two panels decide interlocutory appeals of qualified immunity decisions under 42 U.S.C. §1983 where the central issue is video evidence, per Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007). In each case,Continue reading “Two Circuits Address Scott v. Harris and Video Evidence in Assessing Qualified Immunity for Police Officers Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983”

Sixth Circuit Reverses a District Court for Exercising Supplemental Jurisdiction and Granting Summary Judgment on a Novel Michigan State-Constitutional Claim

In Williams v. Addison Cmty. Schs., No. 25-1205 (6th Cir. Mar. 2, 2026), the Sixth Circuit issues a rare published opinion reversing a district court for exercising supplemental jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1367(a)), here over a Michigan state-law claim that raised issues of first impression. Plaintiff Williams was removed as President of the Addison CommunityContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Reverses a District Court for Exercising Supplemental Jurisdiction and Granting Summary Judgment on a Novel Michigan State-Constitutional Claim”

The Prospect of a New, Future Administration in the White House Does Not Rescue a Gun-Rights Case from Mootness, Holds Sixth Circuit

In Gun Owners of America, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, No. 24-1881 (6th Cir. Oct. 30, 2025), the Sixth Circuit holds that the possibility that a new U.S. Administration in 2029 might not be a sympathetic to gun rights as the current one did not warrant an exception to mootness in a challenge toContinue reading “The Prospect of a New, Future Administration in the White House Does Not Rescue a Gun-Rights Case from Mootness, Holds Sixth Circuit”

Citing the Probate Exception, Sixth Circuit Holds District Court Lacked Equitable Jurisdiction to Compel Arbitration of Action Proceeding In Rem in State Court

In Johnson v. Johnson, No. 24-2058 (6th Cir. Oct. 24, 2025), the Sixth Circuit affirms dismissal of an action to compel arbitration under Section 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act, holding that – under the probate exception – the lower court lacked equitable jurisdiction to interfere with a state in rem proceeding. The decedent “Mrs.Continue reading “Citing the Probate Exception, Sixth Circuit Holds District Court Lacked Equitable Jurisdiction to Compel Arbitration of Action Proceeding In Rem in State Court”

Sixth Circuit Holds That Placement of a Website Server in a State Does Not Automatically Expose Those Who Use It to Personal Jurisdiction There

In Carbone v. Kaal, No. 24-3795 (6th Cir. June 20, 2025), the Sixth Circuit affirms the dismissal of a tort action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2), holding that though the defendants allegedly transmitted defamatory statements through a server in Ohio, this fact alone did not support laying specific personal jurisdiction in that forum. “Robert Carbone,Continue reading “Sixth Circuit Holds That Placement of a Website Server in a State Does Not Automatically Expose Those Who Use It to Personal Jurisdiction There”

Sixth Circuit Charts Its Own Course on Abstention from Declaratory Actions That Are Part of a “Mixed Action” Seeking Injunctive or Legal Relief

In Fire-Dex, LLC v. Admiral Ins. Co., No. 24-3781 (6th Cir. June 2, 2025), the Sixth Circuit rejects the holdings of seven other circuits and holds that when a demand for relief under the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201(a), is combined with a claim for injunctive relief or damages (“coercive relief”), it isContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Charts Its Own Course on Abstention from Declaratory Actions That Are Part of a “Mixed Action” Seeking Injunctive or Legal Relief”

The Sixth Circuit, Adding to A Circuit Split, Holds That the Plaintiff Has the Burden of Establishing Venue Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391

In Tobien v. Nationwide Gen. Ins. Co., No. 24-5575 (6th Cir. Apr. 2, 2025), the Sixth Circuit follows the majority rule in holding that on a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(3) motion to dismiss for improper venue, it is the plaintiff that must prove that their case lies in the district where they filed it.Continue reading “The Sixth Circuit, Adding to A Circuit Split, Holds That the Plaintiff Has the Burden of Establishing Venue Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391”