Topic
Every decision we've filed under Other Civil.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal filed by Michelle L. Adams against the United States. The dismissal was granted by mutual agreement of the parties under the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
The Fourth Circuit vacated a summary judgment in a Federal Tort Claims Act case because both parties incorrectly argued that Maryland law applied to a tort occurring in the District of Columbia. The court declined to apply District of Columbia law as a matter of first instance, directing the parties to present their arguments to the district court instead.
The Eleventh Circuit dismissed an appeal because the district court's order did not constitute a final decision under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The court held that the order denying summary judgment was interlocutory and did not qualify for the collateral order doctrine.
The Eleventh Circuit vacated a district court's grant of judgment as a matter of law on claims of wantonness and punitive damages, finding sufficient evidence for a jury to find U.S. Steel acted with reckless disregard for the Winthers' property rights. The court affirmed the denial of U.S. Steel's cross-appeal regarding causation, ruling that expert testimony was not required to prove the developer's activities caused erosion and debris damage.
The Tenth Circuit granted a stipulation to voluntarily dismiss an appeal filed by multiple states against the U.S. Department of Education. The court dismissed the case with each party bearing its own costs, leaving the underlying district court judgment in place.
The Tenth Circuit granted the parties' stipulation to voluntarily dismiss their appeal from a district court ruling. The court dismissed the case with each party bearing its own costs, leaving the underlying district court judgment in place.
The Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of claims against Dr. Mogerman but vacated summary judgment on remaining medical negligence claims. The court held that Pennsylvania's certificate of merit rule does not apply to Federal Tort Claims Act actions in federal court.
The D.C. Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of leave to file a new complaint, ruling that the proposed filing failed to meet Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) standards and contained frivolous claims previously enjoined. The court further held that challenges to the underlying pre-filing injunction were barred by prior failure to appeal, and rejected allegations of judicial bias as meritless.
The D.C. Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the appellant's complaint, ruling that certain claims were patently insubstantial and failed to present a federal question. The court further held that sua sponte dismissal was proper under the Twombly pleading standard because the amended complaint lacked the required short and plain statement of claim.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of a motion to reopen a civil case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). The court held that the plaintiffs' motion was untimely because it was filed more than one year after the original judgment.