Blog

Last week was eventful. The Tenth Circuit joined the Fourth and Ninth Circuits in holding that an exception to § 1447(d)’s bar on reviewing remand orders allowed review of only the expressly excepted grounds for removal. All three of those decisions could be on their way to the Supreme Court. In a case involving service of process via Twitter on a former head of state, the D.C.…

In Strange v. Islamic Republic of Iran, the D.C. Circuit held that district courts cannot “recertify” an order and thereby restart the ten-day window for seeking permission to appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). The district court in Strange had rejected the plaintiffs’ efforts to serve process on former President of Afghanistan Hamid Karzai via Twitter.…

Another court of appeals has weighed in on the scope of remand appeals. 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) generally prohibits appellate review of orders remanding an action to state court. But it includes two express exceptions: when an action is removed under the federal-officer or civil-rights removal statutes. Recent climate-change litigation has required the courts of appeals to address the scope of remand appeals when one of those exceptions applies.…

The Fifth Circuit’s finality trap has another victim. In Firefighters’ Retirement System v. Citco Group Ltd., the court held that the district court had not issued a final, appealable decision when claims against one defendant had been dismissed without prejudice. To appeal, the plaintiffs needed to obtain a certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) (and will presumably be allowed to do so).…

Last week saw two decisions in which courts had to reject fact-based qualified-immunity appeals. A new cert petition asks if the government can use mandamus to take interlocutory appeals in criminal cases that are not otherwise authorized by statute. The Fifth Circuit addressed the appealability of decisions severing or transferring third-party admiralty claims.…

Qualified immunity makes it especially—and unjustifiably—difficult for plaintiffs to prevail in civil-rights suits. And the special appellate procedures that accompany qualified immunity ensure that litigating those suits will be complicated, expensive, and time consuming. Defendants have a right to appeal from the denial of immunity. That right—standing alone—is an immense procedural hurdle for plaintiffs.…

Updated to correct the publication dates in the article cites.

The Akron Law Review just published its symposium on federal appeals. The symposium collects contributions from Cassandra Burke Robertson & Gregory Hilbert, Andrew Pollis, Michael Solimine, Adam Steinman, Joan Steinman, and me. The in-person portion of the symposium was unfortunately canceled due to COVID-19.…

Last week, in a split, unpublished opinion, Seventh Circuit held that motions to reconsider the denial of First Step Act relief extend the time for appealing. The D.C. Circuit held that would-be intervenors seeking to unseal judicial records can immediately appeal the denial of permissive intervention. The Tenth Circuit addressed its jurisdiction to review an order adding entities to a receivership.…

In United States v. Rutherford, a divided Seventh Circuit held that a motion to reconsider the denial of First Step Act relief extended the time for filing a notice of appeal. The majority concluded that these motions were common law motions to reconsider. And common law motions to reconsider in criminal cases extend the time for appealing; the motion makes the judgment non-final, and the judgment becomes final only after the district court resolves the motion.…

There were lots of interesting decisions last week. The Third Circuit held that attorneys can immediately appeal from denials of motions to withdraw due to a conflict of interest. The D.C. Circuit heard an appeal from an administrative remand in a suit involving the rates paid to pilots on the Great Lakes.…