Every decision we've summarized — searchable, filterable, neutral.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court's grant of summary judgment in an uninsured motorist coverage dispute. The court held that the plaintiff failed to present evidence proving the at-fault driver was uninsured or underinsured.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed the appeal in this constitutional challenge against the Department of Health and Human Services. The parties agreed to the dismissal, and each side will bear its own costs.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed a conviction for illegal reentry after the defendant conceded that his constitutional challenge to the statutory sentencing enhancement was foreclosed by Supreme Court precedent. The court granted the Government's unopposed motion for summary affirmance.
The Third Circuit held that a court may exercise traditional quasi in rem jurisdiction to enforce a foreign arbitral award without establishing minimum contacts between the forum and the debtor. The court vacated the District Court's dismissal and remanded the case for further proceedings.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed a cross-appeal in a civil intellectual property dispute. The court also issued a correction to the official caption for the remaining appeal.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court dismissal of a pro se plaintiff's claim under the Electronic Funds Transfer Act for failing to allege proper notice of account errors. The court also upheld a prefiling injunction against the plaintiff due to his history of filing frivolous lawsuits.
The Fourth Circuit held that attempted armed bank robbery under Section 2113(d) of Title 18 is categorically a crime of violence under Section 924(c)(3).
The Fifth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a pro se complaint alleging excessive force, kidnapping, and false arrest. The court held that the district court correctly dismissed claims against the State for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and claims against the City as prescribed.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of a motion to compel arbitration, holding that a debt collection law firm is not a party to a borrower's arbitration agreement merely because it represents the creditor in litigation.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed the conviction but remanded the case to correct a clerical error in the written judgment. The court held that the written judgment must align with the district court's oral pronouncement regarding concurrent sentencing.
