Decisions

Every decision we've summarized — searchable, filterable, neutral.

Jul 10 2026
11th Cir. 1:22-cv-23519-KMM Published

Akerlund v. Atlas Air, Inc.

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by airline employees challenging pandemic-era vaccination and masking policies. The court held that the district court lacked personal jurisdiction over one defendant and that the plaintiffs failed to state valid claims against the other.

Jul 10 2026
4th Cir. 26-1312 Per Curiam

In re CLARENCE HICKS, JR

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed in part and denied in part a petition for a writ of mandamus filed by Clarence Hicks, Jr. The court found the request to compel a ruling moot and determined that mandamus relief was not available to lift a grant of indefinite leave to reply.

Jul 10 2026
4th Cir. 25-1369 Per Curiam

POCAHONTAS COAL COMPANY, LLC; BRICKSTREET/ENCOVA MUTUAL INSURANCE v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; RONNIE L. WOLFORD: POCAHONTAS COAL COMPANY, LLC; BRICKSTREET/ENCOVA MUTUAL INSURANCE v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; RONNIE L. WOLFORD

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied a petition for review of a Black Lung Benefits Act award. The court affirmed that an administrative law judge properly weighed conflicting medical evidence to find a miner totally disabled.

Jul 10 2026
9th Cir. 5:25-cv-00860-DOC-DTB Unpublished

AMEZCUA V. NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC.

The Ninth Circuit vacated a district court order remanding a civil case to state court due to an insufficient amount in controversy. The appellate court held that the district court erred by excluding civil penalties and attorneys' fees from the jurisdictional threshold calculation without providing the defendant a fair opportunity to prove the amount.

Jul 10 2026
9th Cir. 25-3016 Unpublished

Navaperez v. Nissan North America, Inc.

The Ninth Circuit vacated a district court order remanding a case to state court due to an incorrect calculation of the amount in controversy. The appellate court held that the district court erred by excluding civil penalties and attorneys' fees from the jurisdictional threshold without providing the defendant a fair opportunity to prove the amount.