Every decision we've summarized — searchable, filterable, neutral.
The Eleventh Circuit held that the Hobbs Act requires force or threatened force to be used before or during the taking of property to constitute robbery. Because the defendant used force only after the property was stolen and carried away, the court set aside his Hobbs Act robbery conviction.
The D.C. Circuit affirmed the district court's orders compelling arbitration and dismissing the case because the appellant failed to preserve arguments against arbitration. The court further held that dismissal was proper since the appellant did not request a stay of proceedings or justify maintaining the initial stay after neglecting to initiate arbitration.
The D.C. Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a consumer protection lawsuit, ruling that plaintiffs lacked a private right of action to enforce the Consumer Financial Protection Act. The court further held that the CFPB and D.C. Attorney General were not required parties and that state law claims fell outside the court's supplemental jurisdiction.
The D.C. Circuit dismissed the Independent Market Monitor's petition for review because it lacked Article III standing to challenge FERC's decision. The court held that the monitor's alleged injury from exclusion was too speculative and failed to demonstrate a concrete, particularized harm traceable to the agency's order.
The D.C. Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction because the defendants failed to establish complete diversity of citizenship, a strict requirement for federal jurisdiction. The case is remanded to the District of Columbia Superior Court to proceed under state law.
The D.C. Circuit affirmed the dismissal of an Administrative Procedure Act claim filed by EB-5 visa applicants seeking immediate visa number allocation. The court held that an approved petition establishes eligibility to wait in line but does not create a discrete legal duty for the State Department to assign numbers immediately.
The D.C. Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a suit against Supreme Court officials, holding they are immune from damages and the court lacks jurisdiction to grant equitable relief. The court further ruled that the appellant forfeited challenges to his remaining claims by failing to address them in his brief.
The First Circuit held that a state prisoner's second habeas petition challenging a conviction is not 'second or successive' under AEDPA when the underlying sentence was modified by a state court ruling declaring the original sentence unconstitutional. Because the modification created a new judgment, the petitioner bypassed the federal court's gatekeeping requirements for successive petitions.
The Eleventh Circuit held that a district court lacks authority to depart below a statutory minimum sentence for one offense based solely on a government motion for substantial assistance regarding a separate offense. The court vacated the judgment and remanded for resentencing to ensure compliance with the specific statutory minimums attached to each count.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment against an employee's claims of national origin discrimination, religious discrimination, and retaliation. The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove a hostile work environment based on national origin and failed to exhaust administrative remedies for her religious discrimination claim.
