Mandamus Appropriate Remedy to Correct Violation of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 and Rejection of Plea Agreement, Sixth Circuit Holds

In In re United States, No. 21-1318 (6th Cir. Apr. 26, 2022), the Sixth Circuit grants a writ of mandamus against a district court’s rejection of a plea bargain – and violation of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 – based on the judge’s “longstanding practice” of rejecting plea agreements containing appeal waivers. During a pretrialContinue reading “Mandamus Appropriate Remedy to Correct Violation of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 and Rejection of Plea Agreement, Sixth Circuit Holds”

Interlocutory Appeal Under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) Should Not Be Granted Where It Will “Not Accelerate [the] End” of Litigation, Holds Sixth Circuit

In In re Nicholas Paul Somberg, No. 22-0101 (6th Cir. Apr. 21, 2022), the Sixth Circuit in a published but unsigned order denied a certified appeal of denial of summary judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Despite that the district court certified the appeal and defendant did not oppose it, the panel holds that theContinue reading “Interlocutory Appeal Under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) Should Not Be Granted Where It Will “Not Accelerate [the] End” of Litigation, Holds Sixth Circuit”

States’ Challenge to Secretary of Homeland Security Guidance To Deputies Probably Lacking In Standing, Holds Sixth Circuit

In Arizona v. Biden, No. 22-3272 (6th Cir. Apr. 12, 2022), the Sixth Circuit stays pending appeal a nationwide preliminary injunction of a federal memorandum of “immigration enforcement priorities and policies” concerning “arrest, detention, and removal decisions.” “Congress has tasked the Secretary of Homeland Security, currently Alejandro Mayorkas, with establishing ‘national immigration enforcement policies andContinue reading “States’ Challenge to Secretary of Homeland Security Guidance To Deputies Probably Lacking In Standing, Holds Sixth Circuit”

Sixth Circuit Finds Preliminary Injunction Barring a Defendant From “Competing” With Plaintiff, Without Time Limits, Fails the Specificity Requirement of Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d)

In Union Home Mortg. Corp. v. Cromer, No. 21-3492 (6th Cir. Apr. 6, 2022), in a case involving enforcement of a non-compete covenant, the Sixth Circuit vacates a preliminary injunction against the defendant to bar him from “competing with Union Home,” finding that it was overbroad and “fails to satisfy the specificity requirements of FederalContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Finds Preliminary Injunction Barring a Defendant From “Competing” With Plaintiff, Without Time Limits, Fails the Specificity Requirement of Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d)”

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”

Sixth Circuit and En Banc Eleventh Circuit Each Forgive the Government’s Abandonment of Fourth Amendment Arguments, Finding Them Forfeited Rather Than Waived

Two courts issue decisions the same day considering Fourth Amendment arguments that the government forfeited, holding that federal courts of appeals have the power and can properly exercise their discretion to reach such issues. United States v. Campbell, No. 16-10128 (11th Cir. Feb. 16, 2022): Defendant Campbell was indicted for possessing a firearm as aContinue reading “Sixth Circuit and En Banc Eleventh Circuit Each Forgive the Government’s Abandonment of Fourth Amendment Arguments, Finding Them Forfeited Rather Than Waived”

Summary Judgment Inappropriate Even Where Plaintiff’s Only Eyewitness Account Is Contradicted by Others on the Scene as Well as by the Witness’s Original Police Statement, Holds Sixth Circuit

In Gambrel v. Knox Cnty., Ky., No. 20-6027 (6th Cir. Feb. 8, 2022), the panel reverses in part summary judgment in a § 1983 Fourth Amendment excessive force case. Applying Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007), the panel holds that the principle that witness testimony may be disregarded on summary judgment if it is “blatantlyContinue reading “Summary Judgment Inappropriate Even Where Plaintiff’s Only Eyewitness Account Is Contradicted by Others on the Scene as Well as by the Witness’s Original Police Statement, Holds Sixth Circuit”

Sixth Circuit Panel Splits Over Whether Michigan’s Affidavit-of-Merit and Presuit-Notice Rules for Medical-Malpractice Actions Apply in Federal Court Under Erie and Hanna

In Albright v. Christensen. No. 21-1046 (6th Cir. Jan 31, 2022), a 2-1 panel holds that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure bar application of Michigan state-law rules requiring that a lawsuit against a medical professional for malpractice be preceded by 182-days’ notice to the defendant and accompanied by an  “affidavit of merit signed byContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Panel Splits Over Whether Michigan’s Affidavit-of-Merit and Presuit-Notice Rules for Medical-Malpractice Actions Apply in Federal Court Under Erie and Hanna”

Homeowners Association Lacked Standing to Enforce Consent Decree with Postal Service to End Delivery of Mail Addressed to “Ypsilanti” to Its Development, Split Sixth Circuit Holds

In Glennborough Homeowners Ass’n v. USPS, No. 21-1340 (6th Cir. Dec. 22, 2021), a panel affirms an order dismissing a case by a housing development seeking to enforce a consent decree against the U.S. Postal Service, though it divides on the reasoning. The majority affirmatively holds that the plaintiff Association lacks standing, while one judgeContinue reading “Homeowners Association Lacked Standing to Enforce Consent Decree with Postal Service to End Delivery of Mail Addressed to “Ypsilanti” to Its Development, Split Sixth Circuit Holds”

Split Sixth Circuit Panel Holds that Government Did Not Forfeit Argument on Appeal That the Plaintiff Failed to State a Bivens Claim

In Elhady v. Unidentified CBP Agents, No.20-1339 (6th Cir. Nov. 19, 2021), the panel majority skips over the qualified immunity issue presented in the interlocutory appeal to hold that the plaintiff failed on the merits to state a Bivens claim against several border-patrol agents. The judges disagree about whether the government forfeited this merits argumentContinue reading “Split Sixth Circuit Panel Holds that Government Did Not Forfeit Argument on Appeal That the Plaintiff Failed to State a Bivens Claim”