Doe v. Smith, Case No. 25-1373 (1st Cir. 2026).
The common-law presumption of public access to civil trials and the strong presumption against pseudonymous litigation permit neither trial closure nor continued pseudonymity absent a sufficiently particularized and compelling justification that outweighs the public interest in open judicial proceedings, and a nondisclosure agreement concerning the plaintiff’s lottery winnings and assertion that public disclosure would endanger his minor child are not sufficiently compelling justifications.
Harward v. City of Austin, Case No. 25-50160 (5th Cir. 2026).
Pullman abstention is not available when a federal equal-protection claim does not turn on a genuinely uncertain issue of state law whose resolution could eliminate or substantially modify the federal constitutional question.
NexPoint Real Estate Partners, L.L.C. v. Highland Capital Management, L.P., Case No. 25-11185 (5th Cir. 2026).
A bankruptcy court may impose inherent-power sanctions, including one of $825,940.55, when clear and convincing evidence establishes that a litigant filed and litigated a proof of claim in bad faith or willfully abused the judicial process.
Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic v. Baldwin, Case No. 25-2562 (9th Cir. 2026).
Federal district courts possess jurisdiction under 9 U.S.C. § 203 to consider, in a single New York Convention enforcement proceeding, whether parties not named as debtors in foreign arbitral awards are liable as alter egos of the award debtors.
Mueller v. Walmart Corp., Case No. 23-12854 (11th Cir. 2026).
A district court may, after dismissing all claims within its original jurisdiction, exercise supplemental jurisdiction over some related state-law claims while declining jurisdiction over others if its claim-specific application of 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c) falls within its broad discretion.
