Case Result: The Supreme Court granted the Government’s motion to vacate the judgments of the District of Columbia Circuit, and remanded the case to the Circuit with instructions to direct the District Court to vacate its judgment and dismiss the cases as moot.
Case Name: Mississippi v. USA
Court: U.S. Ct. App. 5th Cir. Docket: 21-60772
Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)
Filed: 4/5/2022
Case Issue: Did the district court erred in finding that the State of Mississippi violated the Americans with Disabilities Act when the State did not provide services to people with mental illness in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs?
Case Name: Our Lady of Consolation Care Ctr. v. Rivera-Zayas
Court: U.S. Ct. App. 2d Cir. Docket: 21-02164
Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF) Decision (PDF)
Filed: 4/4/2022
Case Issue: Does the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act of 2005 completely preempted state law claims brought during the pandemic such that a nursing facility resident cannot bring a lawsuit in state court against a nursing facility for injuries and death caused during the pandemic? Does the federal officer removal statute apply to cases that nursing facility residents bring during the pandemic?
Case Name: Cedarbrook Residential Ctr. v. North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina Docket: No. 36A22
Read: Amicus Brief (PDF)
Filed: 3/28/2022
Case Issue: Can an adult-care facility sue the state for allegedly “negligent” inspection of the facility?
Case Name: Lake v. State Health Plan
Court: North Carolina Supreme Court Docket: 436 PA 13-4
Filed: 3/11/2022
Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF), Decision (PDF)
Case Issue: The North Carolina Supreme Court held that State retirees possess a vested right in their retiree health benefits program and that that right is protected under the Contracts Clause.
Case Name: DiCocco v. Garland
Court: U.S. Ct. App. 4th Cir. Docket: 20-1342
Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)
Filed: 2/4/2022
Case Issue: Does 20 U.S.C. § 633a(a), the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) permit a plaintiff to prove age discrimination via a “disparate impact” theory—i.e., by showing that age-neutral policies/practices had the effect of disadvantaging older workers?
Case Name: Texas Tech Univ. v. Niehay
Court: Eighth Judicial Cir. Ct. El Paso (Texas) Docket: 08-19-00201
Decided: 1/31/2022
Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF), Decision (PDF)
Case Result: Affirmed trial court order denying summary judgment as to plaintiff’s disability discrimination in employment “regarded as” claim and rejecting motion to exclude plaintiff’s evidence regarding legal advice provided by defendant’s counsel.
Case Name: Bagnall v. Becerra (formerly Cochran)
Court: U.S. Ct. App. 2d Circuit Docket: 20-1642
Decided: 1/25/2022
Read AARP Amicus Brief (PDF), Article, and Opinion (PDF)
Case Result: Affirmed preliminary injunction requiring the Secretary to provide hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries a mechanism to timely appeal the Medicare coverage-altering reclassification of their hospital stay from inpatient, which is covered by Medicare Part A, to outpatient “under observation,” which is not.
Case Issue: Does the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment by denying hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries, initially classified as inpatients and later designated as outpatients under observation, an expedited due process hearing to challenge the hospital’s classification of their stay?
Case Name: Hughes v. Northwestern Univ. (Employee Benefits)
Court: U.S. Supreme Court Docket: 19-1401
Read AARP Amicus Brief (PDF) Decision (PDF)
Decided: 1/24/2022
Case Result: The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held, consistent with AARP and AARP Foundation’s brief, that plan fiduciaries must eliminate investment options with excessive fees, and that giving participants a “choice” to select among investment products is not sufficient if some of those options are imprudent.
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: Opiotennione v. Bozzuto Management Co.
Court: U.S. Dist. Ct. Maryland Docket: 20-1956 Decided: 7/20/2021
Read AARP Amicus Brief (PDF) and Decision (PDF)
Case Result: The Court held that Plaintiff did not have standing to assert her claims and dismissed the case.
Court: U.S. Ct. App. 4th Cir. Docket: 21-1919 Filed: 12/17/2021
Read AARP Amicus Brief (PDF)
Case Name: Maddox v. Bank of New York Mellon Trust
Court: U.S. Ct. App. 2d Cir. Docket: 19-1774
Decided: 11/17/2021
Read Amicus Brief (PDF) Decision (PDF)
Case Issue: Can a borrower seek damages in federal court for a mortgage lender's violation of state law?
Case Result: Reheard and reversed
Case Name: Driggs v. Saul
Court: U.S. Ct. App. 9th Cir. Docket: 20-16426
Decided: 11/1/2021
Read AARP Amicus Brief (PDF)
Case Issue: Was the district court correct in holding that the nine-month marriage duration requirement could not constitutionally be applied to deny Social Security survivors benefits to a spouse when the sole reason the couple had not yet been married nine months before the wage earner’s death was that the state they lived in unconstitutionally barred same-sex marriage?
Case Result: Defendants-Appellants voluntarily dismissed their appeal.
Case Name: Ely v. Saul
Court: U.S. Ct. App. 9th Cir. Docket: 20-16427
Decided: 11/1/2021
Read AARP Amicus Brief (PDF)
Case Issue: Was the district court correct in holding that the nine-month marriage duration requirement could not constitutionally be applied to deny Social Security survivors benefits to a spouse when the sole reason the couple had not yet been married nine months before the wage earner’s death was that the state they lived in unconstitutionally barred same-sex marriage?
Case Result: Defendants-Appellants voluntarily dismissed their appeal.
Case Name: Schmoll v. Saul
Court: U.S. Ct. App. 9th Cir. Docket: 20-16445
Decided: 11/1/2021
Read AARP Amicus Brief (PDF)
Case Issue: Was the district court correct in holding that the nine-month marriage duration requirement could not constitutionally be applied to deny Social Security survivors benefits to a spouse when the sole reason the couple had not yet been married nine months before the wage earner’s death was that the state they lived in unconstitutionally barred same-sex marriage?
Case Result: Defendants-Appellants voluntarily dismissed their appeal.
Case Name: United States v. Vaello-Madero (Public Benefits)
Court: U.S. Supreme Court Docket: 20-303
Read AARP Amicus Brief (PDF) and Decision (PDF)
Filed: 9/3/2021
Case Issue: Did Congress violate the equal-protection rights of Puerto Rico's residents by categorically excluding them from the Supplemental Security Income Program?
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?
Case Name: Pelcha v. MW Bancorp
Court: U.S. Ct. App. 6th Cir. Docket: 20-3511
Filed: 2/11/2021
Read AARP Amicus Brief (PDF)
Case Issue: In a disparate treatment case, does the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) require a plaintiff to prove that her age was “the” only “but-for” cause (i.e., the “sole cause”) of challenged conduct by the employer adverse to the plaintiff.
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: 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 Name: Jammal v. Am. Family Insurance
Court: U.S. Ct. App. 6th Cir. Docket: 20-3226
Filed: 6/10/2020
Read Amicus Brief (PDF)
Case Issue: Was the district court correct in its initial finding that American Family treated its insurance agents as employees?
Case Name: Lake v. State Health Plan
Court: North Carolina Supreme Court Docket: 436 PA 13-4
Filed: 6/29/2020
Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)
Case Issue: Is the health insurance benefit North Carolina promised to state and municipal retirees a form of deferred compensation?
Case Name: Texas v. U.S.
Court: U.S. Supreme Court Docket: 19-840, 19-841
Filed: 1/15/2020
Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF) and Press Release
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: Dorman v. Charles Schwab Corp.
Court: U.S. Ct. App. 9th Cir. Docket: 18-15281
Filed: 9/20/2019
Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)
Case Issue: Should the Ninth Circuit grant rehearing en banc of its panel's ruling that employers, via arbitration contract, can strip individual 401(k) retirement plan participants of their right under ERISA to bring federal court actions for fiduciary breach on behalf of the entire plan, see 29 U.C.S. §§ 1132(a)(2) and 1109(a).
Case Name: 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
Read Amicus Brief (PDF)
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?
