Every decision we've summarized — searchable, filterable, neutral.
The Eleventh Circuit vacated a district court dismissal of a USERRA claim, ruling that the plaintiff adequately alleged standing. The appellate court found that reasonable inferences from the complaint showed the employer had not fully redressed the alleged injuries.
The Eleventh Circuit vacated a summary judgment ruling that denied an insurance claim for hurricane-prevention expenses. The court held that while the policy covered the costs of removing and reinstalling railroad gates, the applicable deductible was fixed at seven hundred fifty thousand dollars rather than a percentage of total property value.
The Fourth Circuit vacated a defendant's sentence because the district court erred in applying a crime-of-violence enhancement. The court held that a prior Virginia conviction for using a firearm during a robbery did not categorically satisfy the elements clause of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit remanded environmental litigation to the district court following a Supreme Court directive. The appellate court concluded that the energy companies plausibly alleged their case satisfied the federal officer removal statute.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit remanded consolidated environmental litigation to the district court following a Supreme Court directive. The appellate court concluded that the energy companies plausibly alleged their actions related to federal duties under the federal officer removal statute.
The First Circuit vacated a federal district court's denial of a habeas petition because the lower court failed to review essential trial testimony. The appellate court held that the district court could not evaluate the state court's Brady claim without a transcript of a key witness's testimony.
The Fourth Circuit vacated a district court dismissal of a fraud and conspiracy complaint against a hospital. The appellate court held that Maryland's general three-year statute of limitations applies to these claims rather than the five-year medical malpractice period.
The Fifth Circuit granted a pro se plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and vacated a dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court remanded the case to the district court to consider whether the plaintiff should be permitted to amend his complaint.
The First Circuit affirmed the revocation of supervised release where the defendant received notice of the violations in the probation officer's motion, even though the motion did not explicitly list every specific instance of drug use.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit vacated a district court judgment because the federal court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. The appellate court found that complete diversity of citizenship was absent among the parties as originally aligned in the complaint.
