Background
Anthony Trupia filed a lawsuit in Oklahoma state court against Bob Moore Enterprises, alleging the defendant sent automated text messages without prior express written consent. Trupia asserted claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, Oklahoma’s Telephone Solicitation Act, and common law intrusion upon seclusion. Bob Moore Enterprises removed the case to federal district court and moved to dismiss. The district court dismissed the federal TCPA claims, remanded the state-law claims to state court, and denied Trupia’s pending motions. Trupia appealed the order.
The court’s reasoning
The Tenth Circuit held that Trupia waived appellate review of the district court’s orders because his opening brief failed to comply with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure twenty-eight, subsection a, paragraph eight, subsection A. The brief listed issues but provided no supporting arguments, citations to authorities, or record citations. The court noted that pro se litigants must still follow procedural rules and that arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief are generally not considered. The court also found that Trupia forfeited review of his constitutional challenge to the Twombly and Iqbal pleading standards because he did not raise that specific argument in the district court or argue for plain-error review on appeal. Regarding the motion for sanctions, the court determined that the alleged abusive conduct occurred in state court after the federal remand, creating an insufficient connection to the federal appeal for the court to exercise its inherent power to sanction.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces that pro se litigants must adhere to strict briefing requirements to preserve issues for appeal and clarifies that federal appellate courts lack inherent authority to sanction conduct occurring solely in state court proceedings after a remand.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download