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

Apr 15 2026
9th Cir. 2:19-cv-00185-TLN-AC Unpublished

DERIK NATHANIEL WALKER v. E. ARNOLD; J. LEE; KEVIN FOX; ANTHONY THOMAS

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a California prisoner's civil rights claims, ruling that his allegations regarding strip searches, segregation, and disciplinary hearings failed to state a constitutional violation. The court held that the complaint lacked specific factual support necessary to overcome the high pleading standards required for prisoner litigation.

Apr 15 2026
11th Cir. 1:21-cv-04531-TWT Per Curiam

K. JEFF CARNEY, M.D., PHARM.D v. EMORY UNIVERSITY

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Emory University, holding that requiring a physician to undergo leadership coaching did not constitute a prohibited medical examination under the ADA. The court reasoned that the record failed to support a reasonable inference that the coaching involved inquiries into physical or mental impairments.

Apr 15 2026
9th Cir. 2:23-cr-00149-FLA-1 Unpublished

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DAEKUN CHO

The Ninth Circuit affirmed Daekun Cho's convictions for extortion and carjacking, ruling that any evidentiary errors at trial were harmless given the overwhelming proof of guilt. The court also upheld the sentencing enhancement for victim vulnerability, finding that Cho targeted victims based on their immigration status and language barriers.

Apr 15 2026
10th Cir. 6:91-CR-10038-EFM-1) Panel Decision

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. LORENZO MORALES

The Tenth Circuit reversed a district court's dismissal of a Rule 36 motion, holding that the original sentencing court retains exclusive authority to correct clerical errors in judgments regardless of probation transfers. The appellate panel remanded the case with instructions to evaluate the merits of the defendant's new evidence regarding his social security number.

Apr 15 2026
10th Cir. 1:23-CV-01628-GPG-KAS) Panel Decision

RODNEY DOUGLAS EAVES v. KEN PAXTON; CELENA CONTRERAS; RICARDO GARCIA; CYNTHIA ROSA; VIRGINA FREED

The Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of claims against Texas officials but reversed the dismissal of claims against a Colorado social services worker. The court held that while the Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars challenges to the underlying Texas child support order, it does not preclude a due process claim regarding the refusal to hold a hearing on modified financial circumstances.

Apr 15 2026
10th Cir. 2:24-CV-00700-DAO) Panel Decision

RICHITA MARIE HACKFORD v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR; MARK LEE GREENBLAT Inspector General; DEB HAALAND Secretary of the Interior; BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS; DARRYL LAC...: RICHITA MARIE HACKFORD v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR; MARK LEE GREENBLAT Inspector General; DEB HAALAND Secretary of the Interior; BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS; DARRYL LAC…

The Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Richita Marie Hackford's pro se lawsuit challenging her classification under the Ute Partition Act. The court held that the statute grants the Secretary of the Interior broad discretion in determining membership rolls and that the statutory window for challenging such determinations has long closed.

Apr 15 2026
9th Cir. 3:23-cr-00202- 2-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. HIGINIO ALEJANDRO GONZALEZ-REYES

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of a motion to dismiss an illegal reentry charge, holding that a California rape conviction categorically matches the federal definition of rape as an aggravated felony. Because the state offense qualifies as an aggravated felony, the defendant could not satisfy the fundamental unfairness requirement necessary to collaterally attack his removal order.

Apr 15 2026
10th Cir. 1:24-CV-00006-SWS Panel Decision

FOUR B PROPERTIES, LLC; RANCH 10, LLC; GARY A. BINNING v. THE NATURE CONSERVANCY

The Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for The Nature Conservancy, ruling that an alleged oral promise to allow construction was too indefinite to support a claim of promissory estoppel. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to meet Wyoming's strict proof requirements for a clear promise, reasonable reliance, or the necessity of enforcement to avoid injustice.