44 results for 'cat:"Civil Procedure" AND cat:"Due Process"'.
J. Liman tosses a legal challenge against the U.S. Eastern District Court’s rule of automatically assigning related cases filed by self-represented litigants to the same judge. In this case the litigant, a father, filed several suits related to his state child custody hearings, each of which were assigned to the same judge, who promptly dismissed the cases for various reasons. The court rules the system does not violate pro se litigants’ equal protection or due process rights.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Liman, Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv4330, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Procedure, due Process, Equal Protection
J. Mullins finds the hearing officer from the Commission of Motor Vehicles improperly admitted the incident report from the police officer regarding his arrest of the petitioner on DUI charges. The report was not completed within three days of the petitioner's request, as required under Connecticut law. Although the three-day filing requirement contains no prohibitory language, it is mandatory because it ensures the arresting officer's recollection of the incident is accurate and affords the arrested individual due process. Reversed.
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court, Judge: Mullins, Filed On: April 9, 2024, Case #: SC20703, Categories: civil Procedure, Licensing, due Process
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Soto denies a company’s motion for rehearing in a convoluted real-estate dispute with a second company and withdraws a previous opinion on the case, substituting it with this one. As this court explained in a closely related case, there is a dispute over whether an alleged receiver had authority to act on behalf of the second company, and the lower court was wrong to deny the second firm’s due process right to challenge that authority. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Soto, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 08-22-00225-CV, Categories: civil Procedure, due Process, Banking / Lending
J. Soto finds a lower court erred in a convoluted real-estate dispute and withdraws a previous opinion on the case, instead substituting it with this one. This court’s prior understanding of this case relied in part on a motion to dismiss filed by a receiver who said he had authority to represent one of the companies involved in the case, but that company has disputed that receiver’s authority and has a due process right to challenge it, and the lower court was wrong to allow the receiver to assert his authority without giving the company opportunity to respond. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Soto, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 08-22-00073-CV, Categories: civil Procedure, due Process, Banking / Lending
J. Gallagher finds the lower court properly denied the father's motion to amend his filings to include arguments regarding custody of the child. The mother did not consent to litigate the issue of custody at the hearing intended solely to determine whether the father received adequate parenting time under the couple's shared parenting plan; therefore, any discussion of that issue by the father would have violated the mother's due process rights. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gallagher, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-661, Categories: civil Procedure, Family Law, due Process
[Consolidated.] J. Bradberry finds that the trial court properly granted the exception of res judicata filed by the medical parties in the doctor's suit alleging the "bad faith release" of confidential information in his medical school residency file. The judgment in the federal court suit barred the doctor's claims in the subsequent lawsuit, which involves the same parties and same cause of action. The medical parties are awarded $7,500 in attorney fees for defending the frivolous appeal. Affirmed as amended.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Bradberry, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: CA-23-353, Categories: civil Procedure, Education, due Process
J. Barrett finds the county court properly authorized garnishment of funds to be distributed to the beneficiary in probate from the estate. The court ordered the funds to be paid pursuant to two foreign contempt orders registered before the court. Though the beneficiary said the arrearages had been paid, he failed to produce evidence sufficient to establish any payments had been made on any of the court's orders. He also failed to raise the issue of insufficiency of service of process or lack of notice. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Barrett , Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: CV-22-108, Categories: civil Procedure, Wills / Probate, due Process
Per curiam, the Louisiana Court of Appeal reverses the trial court’s ruling and grants a former convict’s supervisory writ for the petition for expungement of a criminal theft conviction, regardless of whether he has paid off restitution in the case. Under Louisiana law, payment of restitution is not a requirement for expungement, as the amount owed can be converted to a civil monetary judgment, payable even if a related criminal conviction is no longer on the books. Vacated.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: December 22, 2023, Case #: 23-KH-91, Categories: civil Procedure, due Process, Enforcement Of Judgments
J. Donohue finds that the lower court’s order sustaining the Department of Corrections’ preliminary objections to a prisoner’s timely filed petition alleging that he was denied his procedural due process rights when the department deducted certain payments from his prison-account deposits. The department violated the prisoner’s procedural due process rights when it increased the rate of his deductions without pre-deprivation notice and an opportunity to be heard. Reversed.
Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Judge: Donohue, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: J-32-2023, Categories: civil Procedure, due Process
J. Goldstein finds that the lower court improperly dismissed the appellant church's contract and fraud case for want of prosecution. The dismissal order indicated that "counsel failed to file a motion for continuance," but counsel was not notified that dismissal would result from not filing the motion. Also, the record lacks the "purported applicable local rules" that the appellees reference. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Goldstein, Filed On: December 14, 2023, Case #: 05-22-01232-CV, Categories: civil Procedure, due Process
J. Ho grants the former Kuwaiti attache's motion to dismiss trafficking claims but denies his wife's motion to dismiss the same claims based on their employment of a housekeeper. The Hague Convention does not apply in this case because the attache's address is unknown and the housekeeper exercised reasonable diligence in searching for his and his wife's physical addresses. The housekeeper's proposed alternative service, namely service by personal email, Facebook, text, and WhatsApp comply with due process.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Ho, Filed On: December 8, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv321, NOS: Other Labor Litigation - Labor, Categories: civil Procedure, Civil Rights, due Process
J. Jenkins vacates the trial court's judgment annulling the default judgment to the lumber supplier and awarding a judgment in favor of the builder. In this case, the supplier's due process rights related to notice of trial were violated because there is nothing in the record showing that notice of the trial date was issued directly to it. The notice was only provided to its former counsel who was ineligible to practice law. Vacated.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Jenkins, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 2023-CA-0186, Categories: civil Procedure, Debt Collection, due Process
J. Goldstein finds that the lower court properly ruled in favor of the bank in this debt collection case. The customer contends that his due process rights were violated when he was given the wrong information about the trial setting by someone in the "administrative office," specifically when he was told that the trial was no longer scheduled for a certain date. However, he failed to preserve the issue for appellate review by raising it in the trial court. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Goldstein, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 05-22-00883-CV, Categories: civil Procedure, Debt Collection, due Process
J. Larkin affirms the district court's decision terminating the mother's parental rights. The district court did not clearly err in allowing the mother to waive her right to counsel, since it adequately warned her of the difficulties proceeding pro se would present. It also did not violate her right to due process by removing her from trial for disruptive conduct and proceeding in default. She also failed to preserve evidentiary objections for review on appeal, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that termination was in the child's best interests. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Larkin, Filed On: November 27, 2023, Case #: A23-0935, Categories: civil Procedure, Family Law, due Process
J. Palafox finds a lower court erred in granting no-answer default judgment to a man who had sued his former employer, a car dealership, for alleged employment discrimination and other claims. While a process server for the man was unable to serve the car dealership’s registered agent, he instead served another person, but it is not clear the server exercised “reasonable diligence to effect personal service,” nor did he provide adequate information connecting the served defendant to the car dealership. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Palafox, Filed On: October 16, 2023, Case #: 08-22-00187-CV, Categories: civil Procedure, due Process, Employment Discrimination
J. Adams grants an individual to file an amended complaint regarding allegations of discrimination against the city’s employees allegedly asking him to leave from the library. The individual must comply with the Federal Rule of Civil Procedures when laying the complaint out, if he no longer wishes to file the amendment, he must file notice informing the court.
Court: USDC Middle District of Alabama, Judge: Adams, Filed On: September 8, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv196, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Procedure, due Process, Employment Discrimination