Skip to content
 

On the Docket: Reducing Key Expenses

Case Name: Brown v. District of Columbia 

Court: U.S. Ct. App. D.C. Cir.    Docket: 17-7152

Read  Announcement, Opening Brief (PDF),  Appellant's Reply Brief (PDF) and Opinion (PDF)

Case Issue: Was the court’s finding that Plaintiffs failed to establish “systemic deficiencies” in the manner in which the District of Columbia enrolls nursing home residents into home and community-based services against the weight of the evidence?

Did the court commit legal error by holding that it cannot craft class–wide injunctive relief if class members who have suffered discrimination cannot all benefit from the relief provided due to individualized circumstances (e.g., some have homes to which to return and others do not)?

Result:The Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit reversed the trial court and remanded this Olmstead case. Now a class of approximately 1000 nursing facility residents wanting to live in their own homes with the same kind of medical services and supports as they receive in nursing facilities need D.C. to provide assistance.


Case Name: Brown v. District of Columbia (formerly known as Thorpe v. District of Columbia)

Court: U.S. Dist. Ct. D.C.    Docket: 1:10-cv-02250-ESH

Read Opinion (PDF)

Case Result: Court ruled that the Plaintiffs did not prove systemic deficiencies that could be resolved with class-wide injunctive relief. 


Case Name: California v. Texas (formerly, Texas v. United States)

Court: U.S. Supreme Court   Docket: 19-840 & 19-1019

Decided: 6/17/2021

Read Amicus Brief (PDF), Press Release for filing, Decision (PDF), Press Release for decision

Case Result: The Supreme Court found that the State and individual plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the case because they failed to show a concrete, particularized injury that was traceable to the government’s alleged unlawful conduct. It reversed the Fifth Circuit’s decision with regard to standing, vacated the judgment, and remanded the case to the district court with instructions to dismiss based on the lack of standing.


Case Name: HSBC v. Morris

Court: Supreme Judicial Ct., Mass. Docket: SJC-13191

Filed: 1/18/2022

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)  

Case Issue: Can a borrower raise defenses and counterclaims under the Mass. Predatory Home Lending Practices Act (PHLPA) in the eviction after the foreclosure from the home securing the loan.


Case Name: Ryan v. Mary Ann Morse Healthcare

Court: Supreme Judicial Ct., Mass. Docket: SJC-12708

Decided: 12/5/2019

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)  and Decision (PDF)

Case Result: The Mass. Supreme Judicial Court held that the Assisted Living Residence (ALR) statute, incorporates applicable consumer protection laws, including the Landlord-Tenant Security Deposit Law. As a result, ALRs may no longer charge general community fees like the $2,800 fee at issue in this case. An ALR is not in violation if it charges an upfront fee for the distinctive services assisted living facilities provide that are not applicable to traditional landlord-tenant relationships, such as fees related to initial assessments of residents to determine their suitability for placement in an assisted living facility. 


Case Name: Texas v. U.S.

Court: U.S. Supreme Court Docket: 19-840, 19-841

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)  

Case Issue: Should the Supreme Court agree to review an appeal of a Fifth Circuit decision finding the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional and remanding the case back to the district court?


Case Name: Texas v. United States

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 5th Cir.   Docket: 19-10011

Read Amicus Brief (PDF)  Decision (PDF), Listen to Podcast

Case Result: The Fifth Circuit partially affirmed the district court’s decision and found that the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is unconstitutional. It then remanded the case back to the district court to consider whether the rest of the ACA can remain intact.


Case Name: Texas v. United States

Court: U.S. Dist. Ct. ND Tex.   Docket: 18-00167

Read AARP Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: The federal district court granted partial summary judgment for the plaintiffs, declaring that the individual mandate provision was unconstitutional, and that the remaining provisions of the ACA are inseverable and therefore invalid. The court stayed the decision pending appeal. The case is now before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.


Case Name: Thryv v. Click-to-Call

Court: U.S. Supreme Ct.  Docket: 18-916

Decided: 4/20/2020

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF) and Decision (PDF)

Case Issue: Is the decision by the Patent Trial & Appeal Board to review a patent through the inter partes review process final and nonappealable?

Case Result: The Federal Circuit’s decision was vacated.


Case Name:  Tyler v. Hennepin Co.

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 8th Circuit Docket: 20-3730

Filed: 3/29/2021

Read AARP Amicus Brief (PDF) 

Case Issue: Does the Takings Clause of either the U.S. or the Minnesota Constitution forbid public officials from confiscating the amount of surplus equity yielded in a tax foreclosure sale above the amount of taxes (and related costs and penalties) owed by the former taxpayer?


Some of the content presented here is in Adobe PDF format. You will need the free Acrobat Reader to access these files.