The Month in Federal Appellate Jurisdiction: November 2023
Last month’s major appellate-jurisdiction development involved another court narrowing the availability of Perlman appeals. In other decisions, the Fifth Circuit carved a new, video-evidence exception to the scope of qualified-immunity appeals. The Third Circuit addressed what to do with a partial objection to an untimely criminal appeal. The Ninth Circuit applied Dupree to part of a summary-judgment denial. And a Fourth Circuit panel stuck by the rule that the 30-day deadline for immigration appeals is jurisdictional, though a concurrence doubted that rule’s soundness. Plus an improper qualified-immunity appeal and two decisions on the scope of interlocutory appeals.
- The Fourth Circuit Cut Back on Perlman Appeals
- A Video-Evidence Exception for Qualified-Immunity Appeals
- Partially Objecting to an Untimely Criminal Appeal
- Applying Dupree to Part of a Summary-Judgment Denial
- The Jurisdictionality of the Immigration-Appeal Deadline
- The Month’s Improper Qualified-Immunity Appeals
- Quick Notes
The Fourth Circuit Cut Back on Perlman Appeals
In In re Grand Jury 2021 Subpoenas, the Fourth Circuit joined several other circuits in holding that only non-parties can take Perlman appeals. I wrote about this issue a few years ago when the Second Circuit did the same. This cutting back on Perlman appeals is as wrong now as it was then.
Read more: The Fourth Circuit Cut Back on Perlman Appeals.
In re Grand Jury 2021 Subpoenas, 2023 WL 8103935 (4th Cir. Nov. 22, 2023), available at the Fourth Circuit and Westlaw
A Video-Evidence Exception for Qualified-Immunity Appeals
In Argueta v. Jaradi, the Fifth Circuit created a new exception to the bar on reviewing the genuineness of fact disputes in qualified-immunity appeals. In most of those appeals, the court must take as given the district court’s determination of what facts a reasonable jury could find. But according to the Fifth Circuit, an appellate court doesn’t have to do that when video evidence exists.
Read more: A Video-Evidence Exception for Qualified-Immunity Appeals.
Argueta v. Jaradi, 2023 WL 7974744 (5th Cir. Nov. 17, 2023), available at the Fifth Circuit and Westlaw
Partially Objecting to an Untimely Criminal Appeal
In United States v. Crump, the Third Circuit permitted the government to partially object to the untimeliness of a criminal appeal. That meant the court of appeals had to dismiss the appeal insofar as it raised the objected-to issues. But the court could address the other issues that the defendant raised on appeal.
Read more: Partially Objecting to an Untimely Criminal Appeal
United States v. Crump, 2023 WL 7297334 (3d Cir. Nov. 6, 2023), available at the Third Circuit and Westlaw
Applying Dupree to Part of a Summary-Judgment Denial
In Cottonwood Environmental Law Center v. Edwards, the Ninth Circuit applied the Supreme Court’s decision in Dupree v. Younger to permit review of part of a summary-judgment denial. In the course of doing so, the court rejected the argument that the denied summary-judgment motion needed to have been potentially dispositive as to the need for a trial.
Read more: Applying Dupree to Part of a Summary-Judgment Denial.
Cottonwood Environmental Law Center v. Edwards, 2023 WL 8043823 (9th Cir. Nov. 21, 2023), available at the Ninth Circuit and Westlaw
The Jurisdictionality of the Immigration-Appeal Deadline
In Martinez v. Garland, the Fourth Circuit reiterated the rule that the 30-day deadline for immigration appeals is jurisdictional.
The Supreme Court held in Stone v. INS that this deadline is “mandatory and jurisdictional” and “not subject to equitable tolling.” But the Court’s decision earlier this year in Santos-Zacaria v. Garland has raised some questions about Stone. Santos-Zacaria held that immigration’s exhaustion requirement is not jurisdictional. As Judge Floyd pointed out in his concurrence in Martinez, the reasons for deeming exhaustion non-jurisdictional arguably apply to the appeal deadline, too.
Martinez v. Garland, 2023 WL 7800113 (4th Cir. Nov. 16, 2023), available at the Fourth Circuit and Westlaw
The Month’s Improper Qualified-Immunity Appeals
I saw only one improper, fact-based qualified-immunity appeal last month: Williams v. Olsen, 2023 WL 7497231 (2d Cir. Nov. 13, 2023), available at the CourtListener and Westlaw
Quick Notes
Finally, two quick notes involving the scope of appeals:
In James v. Hegar, the Fifth Circuit reviewed the plaintiffs’ standing as part of an Eleventh Amendment/sovereign-immunity appeal. Review was necessary because standing went to the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. Further, the Eleventh Amendment/Ex parte Young and standing analyses significantly overlapped.
James v. Hegar, 2023 WL 7890069 (5th Cir. Nov. 16, 2023), available at the Fifth Circuit and Westlaw
And in In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company C-8 Personal Injury Litigation, the Sixth Circuit reviewed the plaintiff’s standing as part of a class-certification appeal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f).
In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company C-8 Personal Injury Litigation, 2023 WL 8183812 (6th Cir. Nov. 27, 2023), available at the Sixth Circuit and Westlaw
Final Decisions PLLC is an appellate boutique and consultancy that focuses on federal appellate jurisdiction. We partner with lawyers facing appellate-jurisdiction issues, working as consultants or co-counsel to achieve positive outcomes on appeal. Contact us to learn how we can work together.
Learn More ContactRelated Posts
April saw more decisions on whether temporary restraining orders were appealable injunctions. The Eleventh Circuit addressed the immediate appealability of Florida’s litigation privileges. And another court of appeals held that defendants cannot immediately appeal from the denial of a church-autonomy defense. Let’s start, however, with a particularly interested decision on what counts as a claim […]
Continue reading....
Last month featured a Sixth Circuit debate over jurisdiction to review Brady issues in appeals from the denial of qualified immunity. There was also an especially odd Second Circuit decision in which the court exercised pendent appellate jurisdiction over a normally non-appealable issue even though the court lacked jurisdiction over any other issue. And there […]
Continue reading....
Last month saw another rejection of pure Bivens appeals, an analysis of Perlman appeals in the grand-jury context, and a ruling on mandatory stays during a remand appeal. Plus an odd sovereign-immunity appeal, appeals without the express resolution of all claims, and much more.
Continue reading....
Last month produced decisions involving a variety of appellate-jurisdiction issues. The Fifth Circuit decertified a § 1292(b) appeal. Judge Pillard of the D.C. Circuit explained that appellate “standing” does not require re-establishing standing in the court of appeals. The Sixth Circuit said that qualified immunity and an action’s merits are intertwined, which suggests (perhaps unintentionally) […]
Continue reading....
Last month saw a pair of decisions on when post-judgment motions reset the appeal clock for interlocutory appeals. The Ninth Circuit addressed its jurisdiction over a government appeal when the government invites the district court to dismiss an indictment. The Ninth Circuit also addressed jurisdiction over cross-appeals under the administrative-remand rule. Plus an improper qualified-immunity […]
Continue reading....Recent Posts
Injunction appeals have been in the spotlight of late. We’ve seen a few recent decisions on appeals from temporary restraining orders. And this month has already produced three cases involving effective denials of preliminary injunctions. One of these cases raised a question about the test for effective—and thus appealable—injunction denials. Under the Supreme Court’s decision […]
Continue reading....
In Abraham Watkins Nichols Agosto Aziz & Stogner v. Festeryga, the en banc Fifth Circuit held that 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) does not bar review of waiver-based remands. In so holding, the court overruled its decision in In re Weaver.
Continue reading....
In Amazon.com Services LLC v. NLRB, the Fifth Circuit split over whether a party could appeal from the district court’s delay in deciding a preliminary-injunction motion. The would-be appellant sought to enjoin an order that it file a brief in an NLRB proceeding. When the deadline for that brief arrived, the district court had not […]
Continue reading....
April saw more decisions on whether temporary restraining orders were appealable injunctions. The Eleventh Circuit addressed the immediate appealability of Florida’s litigation privileges. And another court of appeals held that defendants cannot immediately appeal from the denial of a church-autonomy defense. Let’s start, however, with a particularly interested decision on what counts as a claim […]
Continue reading....
In Diaz v. FCA US LLC, the Third Circuit split over whether a district court had resolved distinct claims for purposes of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). The majority concluded that the district court had resolved only a distinct theory of recovery, not a distinct claim. Dissenting, Judge Phipps argued that claims are defined […]
Continue reading....