Eversheds Sutherland 11th Circuit Business Blog
content top

Fair Debt Collection Laws May Apply to Mortgage Statements

Answering a question of first impression for the court, the Eleventh Circuit held in Daniels v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 14013 (11th Cir. May 24, 2022), that a mortgage statement submitted to a borrower may, under certain circumstances, constitute a communication in connection with a debt that is subject to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C....

All-Risk Insurance Coverage Doesn’t Cover All Risks from COVID-19

The Eleventh Circuit has answered an important and timely question about insurance coverage for business losses due to COVID-19. Under Florida law, an “all-risk” insurance policy covering direct physical loss or damage does not insure against losses and expenses incurred by businesses as a result of COVID-19. In SA Palm Beach, LLC v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, 2022 U.S....

Passing the Test: ADA “Tester” Plaintiff Has Standing to Sue Based on Lack of Information on Hotel’s Website

An ADA plaintiff sufficiently pleaded a concrete intangible injury, and thus had standing to sue, when she alleged that she was unable to access information on a hotel’s website about accommodations for persons with disabilities, even though she visited the hotel only as a “tester” plaintiff and had no intent to return. Laufer v. Arpan LLC, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 8270 (11th Cir. Mar. 29,...

Full Court Nixes Appeal of Antitrust Immunity Ruling

Sitting en banc, the Eleventh Circuit unanimously held in SmileDirectClub, LLC v. Battle, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 21393 (11th Cir. July 20, 2021), that an interlocutory appeal may not be taken under the collateral order doctrine from the denial of the state-action antitrust immunity conferred by Parker v. Brown, 317 U.S. 341 (1943).  The case involved an action brought against members of...

Derivative Jurisdiction Doctrine Does Not Apply to Personal Jurisdiction

In the category of legal doctrines that have outlived whatever usefulness that they once had falls the doctrine of “derivative jurisdiction”—that a federal district court must dismiss a removed case if the state court from which it was removed lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. The doctrine was repealed by statute for cases removed under the general removal provision, 28 U.S.C. §...

« Older Entries