Apr 3 2026
6th Cir. 25-3323 Published

JOHN PETSCHE v. JERRY N. HRUBY; DAVID J. MATTY; GERALD F. BROSKI; LOUIS N. CAROUSE, JR.; LAURA REDINGER; KIMBERLY VERAS; CITY OF BRECKSVILLE, OHIO

The Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for city officials, ruling that a former council member failed to prove his prosecution was retaliatory because he lacked probable cause to rebut the presumption of validity arising from a grand jury indictment. The court held that the official's undisclosed financial interest in a public contract negated any First Amendment protection, regardless of the government's motive.

Apr 2 2026
9th Cir. 8:21-cv-01317-DOC-DFM Unpublished

CHARLES HEAD v. Officer J. ROCHA, individual; KENNETH CHIN, individual; Police Officer QUINN individual; Officer C. MCPHAIL, Officer Badge no. A171 La Habra Police Department

The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for police officers in a civil rights action, ruling that the plaintiff's own deposition testimony defeated his claims of evidence fabrication and malicious prosecution. The court held that the plaintiff's admission that he failed to register his weapon as required by law established probable cause for his arrest, which serves as a complete defense to both constitutional torts.

Apr 2 2026
9th Cir. 6:22-cv-00496-MO Unpublished

ROBIN R. GILLILAND v. Linn County Deputy EASON; Linn County Deputy LEDERER; Linn County Deputy Lt D. RANDALL

The Ninth Circuit reversed summary judgment on Gilliland's Eighth Amendment excessive-force claim against Deputy Eason, finding a genuine dispute of material fact regarding force used during transport. The court affirmed judgment for all other claims, including those against Deputy Lederer and Lieutenant Randall, while remanding the excessive-force claim for trial.

Apr 2 2026
8th Cir. 24-3181 Panel Decision

Designworks Homes, Inc.; Charles Lawrence James v. Columbia House of Brokers Realty, Inc., doing business as House of Brokers, Inc doing business as Jackie Bulgin & Associates;...

The Eighth Circuit affirmed a district court's award of attorney's fees against a plaintiff for bringing unnecessarily overbroad copyright infringement claims. The court held that the lower court acted within its broad discretion to deter litigation strategies that do not serve the purposes of the Copyright Act.

Apr 2 2026
7th Cir. 24-1613 Panel Decision

Stingley v. Laci Transport Inc.

The Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for trucking defendants, holding that shuttle drivers moving auto parts within Illinois were engaged in interstate commerce. Consequently, the drivers are exempt from state and federal overtime wage requirements under the Motor Carrier Act.

Apr 2 2026
7th Cir. 25-1553 Panel Decision

THOMAS T.D. POLK v. PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY and SECURA SU- PREME INSURANCE COMPANY

The Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Progressive and Secura, holding that Illinois law permits anti-stacking provisions to cap total recovery at the highest single-policy limit. The court ruled that the plaintiff's existing $900,000 recovery from other sources satisfied the cap, leaving the insurers liable only for the remaining $100,000.

Apr 2 2026
4th Cir. 24-6538 Per Curiam

Michael Jermaine Grace v. Alamance County; Graham Police Department; Officer Cross; Officer Z. Hulcher; Detective C.T. Denny

The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in a civil rights action, holding that the plaintiff waived appellate review of claims barred by the statute of limitations. For the remaining claims, the court found no reversible error after a de novo review of the record.

Apr 2 2026
10th Cir. 5:24-CV-00235-R) Panel Decision

DERRICK DUANE BARKER v. CITY OF WEATHERFORD EX REL WEATHERFORD POLICE DEPARTMENT; RYAN HETHERINGTON; SEAN LANIER; NORMANDO GUYTON; DYLAN OWENS; DEREK BECK; CHASE MURLEY; JUSTIN...

The Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for police officers in a Fourth Amendment excessive force case, holding they were entitled to qualified immunity. The court found the officers' use of force was objectively reasonable because the plaintiff remained actively resistant even after being tased.