Skip to content

Docket: Other

Case Name:  Moreheart v. So. Cal. Edison

Court: Supreme Court of California Docket: S264970

Filed: 11/16/2020

Read AARP Letter Brief (PDF)

Case Issue:  Does California Code of Civil Procedure section 36(a), mandating trial preference for elderly and infirm plaintiffs, apply in JCCP coordinated proceedings?

There are thousands of victims of California’s massive fires that have sued utility companies. Are gravely ill elderly litigants entitled to statutory trial preference when they are part of a coordinated proceeding that involves thousands of other litigants?

Case Name:  Merrill v. People First of Alabama  (Voting Rights)

Court: U.S. Supreme Court Docket: 20A67

Read AARP Brief (PDF)

Decided: 10/21/2020

Case Result: Granted stay of September 30 Order of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, after an evidentiary hearing, enjoining enforcement of the AL Secretary of State’s de facto ban on local election officials offering the option of “curbside voting” for the general election November 3, 2020. 

Case Name: People First of Alabama v. Merrill (Voting Rights)

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 11th Cir. Docket: 20-13695-B

Read AARP Brief (PDF)

Filed: 10/6/2020

Case Issue: Do the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution justify a district court order (i) enjoining the Alabama Secretary of State from barring local election officials from choosing to provide “curbside voting” for voters medically vulnerable to COVID-19 infection, including older voters and persons with disabilities such as diabetes and (ii) enjoining local election officials from enforcing State law requiring absentee voters to include a copy of their photo ID with their absentee ballot? 

Case Name: Andino v. Middleton (Voting Rights)

Court: U.S. Supreme Court Docket: 20A55

Read AARP Brief (PDF)

Decided: 10/5/2020

Case Result: Granted stay of order of U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina enjoining enforcement of SC’s rule requiring absentee ballot voters to obtain the signature of a witness (eligible voter or notary) to cast their ballot. Effectively resolves case in favor or applicants-defendants as no further relief is likely before November 3 election.

Case Name: Org. for Black Struggle v. Ashcroft (Voting Rights)

Court: U.S. Dist. Ct. WD Missouri Docket: 20-4184-BCW

Read AARP Brief (PDF)

Filed: 10/1/2020

Case Issue: Does the Materiality Provision of the 1964 Civil Rights Act bar rejection of absentee ballots for trivial defects and do the U.S. Constitution’s guarantees of Due Process and no undue burden being imposed on voting forbid such rejection, in the circumstances of the COVID-19 crisis, absent  an opportunity to cure such defects without exposure to serious illness due to the coronavirus, because of a requirement that absentee ballot envelope defects must be corrected in-person? 

Case NameNAACP Minnesota-Dakotas Area State Conference v. Simon

Court: U.S. Dist. Ct. Minn.  Docket: 62-CV-20-3625

Decided: 9/18/2020

Read Amicus Brief (PDF), Order on Motions (PDF), Stipulation and Consent Decree (PDF), Stipulation and Consent Decree 2 (PDF), Press Release

Case Result: Trial Court issued orders approving settlement of witness requirement and absentee ballot mailing issues also, settlement of witness signature issue was a total victory as the Secretary of State (SOS) agreed to waive enforcement of the requirement for the November 3 election. The settlement of the absentee ballot mailing issue was a partial victory as the SOS agreed to mail absentee ballot applications, rather than absentee ballots themselves, to all registered voters in the State. 

Case Name: Jarman v. HCR Manorcare (Healthcare/Income)

Court: Cal. Supreme Court Docket: NS241431

Decided: 8/17/2020

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

Case Result: The California Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case to the district court. It held that California Health and Safety Code Section 1430(b) allows for a maximum award of $500 in statutory damages per lawsuit, rather than $500 for each violation of the statute.

Case Name: Merck v. HHS (Healthcare/Consumer)

Court: U.S. Ct. App. D.C. Cir. Docket: 18-882

Read Amicus Brief (PDF) and Opinion (PDF)

Decided: 6/16/2020

Case Issue: Does HHS have the statutory authority to promulgate a rule requiring pharmaceutical companies to disclose the list prices of certain drugs to consumers in the companies' television advertisements?

Case Result: Although the specific regulation at issue was overturned as overbroad, the Court “emphasized that nothing in this opinion holds that the Secretary is categorically foreclosed from regulating pharmaceutical advertisements.” 

Case Name: Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 5th Cir.  Docket: 19-10169

Decided: 3/24/2020

Read AARP's Amicus Brief  (PDF)

Case Result: Rehearing en banc denied.

Case Name: GGNSC Chestnut Hill v. Schrader (Arbitration)

Court: Mass. Supreme Judicial Ct.  Docket: SJC-12714

Decided: 2/27/2020

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

Case Result:  The Court held that wrongful death actions in Massachusetts are derivative of a decedent's claims, and therefore a decedent's agreement to arbitrate can be enforced against her beneficiaries. 

Case Name: Texas v. U.S. (Healthcare)

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

Filed: 1/15/2020

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: Stewart v. Azar  (Healthcare)

Court: U.S. Ct. App. D.C. Cir.   Docket: 19-5095, 19-5097

Decided: 1/8/2020

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: The Fifth Circuit granted the Commonwealth of Kentucky's motion to voluntarily dismiss the appeals of the district court's decision vacating the U.S. Department's approval of its Section 1115 Medicaid waiver

Case Name: Thetford (In re) (Guardianship)

Court: Supreme Court of Texas  Docket: 17-0634

Decided: 10/4/2019

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: The Supreme Court of Texas denied Petitioner's Motion for Rehearing of its decision finding that a lawyer who had apparent conflict of interest should not be disqualified from her guardianship proceedings.

Case Name: U.S. ex rel. Paradies v. GGNSC Admin. Servs (Healthcare)

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 11th Cir.   Docket: 16-13004

Decided: 9/9/2019

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: The Eleventh Circuit upheld the lower court's ruling that the False Claims Act requires more than factual differences amongst experts.

Case Name: D.L. v. District of Columbia

Court: U.S. Ct. App. D.C. Cir. Docket: 18-7004

Decided: 5/21/2019

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: Panel reversed the district court decision applying alternate fee "matrix" to Laffey Matrix, concluding it resulted in inadequate compensation to plantiff's counsel. 

Case Name: Stewart v. Azar  (Healthcare)

Court: U.S. Dist. Ct. D.C.    Docket: 1:18-cv-152 

Decided: 4/4/2019

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF), Opinion (PDF), Blog, and Amicus Brief (filed 1/24/2019)

Case Result: The Court vacated the federal government's reapproval of Kentucky's section 1115 waiver and remanded the application back to the agency. The Court then stayed its decision pending appeal. 

Case Name: Boothby v. California Department of Health Care Serv. (Healthcare)

Court: Superior Ct. State of Cal., County of Los Angeles   Docket: BC627948

Reuest for Dismissal Filed: 3/22/2019

Read Complaint (PDF), Press Release (PDF), Writ (PDF) and Judgment (PDF)

Case Comment:  Settlement agreement entered into by the parties for retroactive pay and attorneys' fees totaling $447,308.00. California Dept of Health Care Services agreed to pay Registered Dental Hygienists in Alternative Practice 22 months of backpay. 

Case Name: GGNSC Chestnut Hill v. Schrader (Arbitration)

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 1st Cir.   Docket: 18-1779

Filed: 2/26/2019

Read AARP's Amicus Brief 

Case Issue: In Massachusetts, can an arbitration agreement between a nursing facility and a deceased resident be enforced against the resident's next of kin who files a wrongful death suit against the facility?

Case Name: Boothby v. California Department of Health Care Serv. (Healthcare/Income)

Court: California Ct. Appeals   Docket: B290534

Decided: 10/25/2018

Read Motion to Enforce (PDF) and Exhibits (PDF)

Result: Settlement agreement entered into by the parties for retroactive pay and attorneys' fees totaling $447,308.00. Approximately 135 dental hygienists will receive 2.7 million in back pay as a result of the trial court's order.

Case Name: MW & Am. Diabetes Ass'n v. U.S. Dep't of the Army

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 9th Cir.  Docket: 18-15242

Filed:  6/29/2018

Case Issue: Does a large entity engaged in legal advocacy incur an "injury-in-fact"-- required by Article III of the U.S. Constitution to establish "organizational standing"--by virtue of a single contact between the organization's legal advocacy staff and parents complaining about a matter affecting the group's organizational mission?

Case Name: Texas v. United States (Healthcare)

Court: U.S. Dist. Ct. ND Tex.    Docket: 4:18-cv-00167

Filed: 6/14/2018

Read AARP's Brief (PDF) and Press Release

Case Issue: Is the ACA unconstitutional and, thereby, unenforceable now that Congress has reduced the tax penalty for noncompliance with the individual mandate to zero?

Case Name: Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute

Court: U.S. Supreme Court Docket: 16-980

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

Decided:  6/11/2018

Case Result: The Supreme Court reversed an order of the Sixth Circuit striking down Ohio's Supplemental Process for culling voter rolls for ineligible voters on grounds that they have moved or died.

Case Name: D.L. v. District of Columbia

Court: U.S. Ct. App. D.C. Cir.  Docket: 16-7076

Decided: 6/23/2017

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's decision in every respect holding that the class definitions met the commonality and typicality requirements and that the injunctive relief requiring the District to meet numerical benchmarks and make programmatic changes was appropriate. 

Case Name: Hart v. Berryhill

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 4th Cir.  Docket: 16-1371

Decided: 6/7/2017

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: The Treasury Dept. agreed to stop seizing tax refunds to pay off old family debts and issued Emergency Message, EM-17014, to its staff. As a result, approximately 65,000 people are now eligible to recover up to $56 million in refunds. 

Case Name: Weatherford v. City of San Rafael

Court: Cal. Supreme Ct.  Docket: S219567

Decided: 6/5/2017

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: The California Supreme Court held that state law allowed taxpayers beyond property and business owners to challenge unlawful government policies.  AARP joined three other organizations to support this broader interpretation of the statute.

Case Name: Taylor v. Extendicare Health Facilities

Court: Supreme Ct. of Pa.   Docket: 19 WAP 2015

Filed: 2/10/2016

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Issue: Does the lower court's consolidation of survival claims and wrongful death claims under the state's wrongful death statute and rule of civil procedure violate the Federal Arbitration Act when the consolidation results in the trial of a claim within the scope of a valid arbitration agreement?

Case Name: King v. Burwell (Healthcare)

Court: U.S. Supreme Court    Docket: 14-114

Decided: 6/25/2015

Read Summary and AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: Under the Affordable Care Act individuals may receive federal tax credits to purchase health insurance on an exchange extablished by the federal government.

Case Name: Halbig v. Burwell (formerly Sebelius) [Healthcare]

Court: U.S. Ct. App. D.C.    Docket: 14-50118

Read Summary and AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their challenge to the availability of federal tax credits to subsidize health care premiums after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld such subsidies in King v. Burwell.

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