Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Robert J. Doyle v. Jacqueline M. Vigilante

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, No. 19-2538 · judgment May 6, 2020


Certiorari denied · January 11, 2021
Pre-decision estimate: 5% cert probability

Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a Third Circuit decision below, a circuit split argued in the petition, and counsel who has filed here before.

Question presented

The Right to Sue and access to the courts are basic and fundamental rights provided for in the United States Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment also provides procedural due process protections, ensuring that litigants are treated equally and given the opportunity to be heard. In this case, a civil plaintiff’s legal malpractice lawsuit was dismissed by the district court without addressing one the claims alleged by the plaintiff. On appeal, the plaintiff squarely asked the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to remand so the unaddressed claim could be adjudicated. Despite this issue being the PlaintiffAppellant’s primary claim of error on appeal, it was entirely unaddressed by the Third Circuit’s written decision. This Court has never, to the best of Petitioner’s research, decided what Constitutional violations are implicated when a claim by a civil litigant was unaddressed both in the District Court and on review by a Court of Appeals. It is of the utmost importance that citizens have confidence that the courts will fully hear and resolve the disputes in front of them. The questions presented in this case, which are a matter of first impression, are: Whether or not the Right to Sue, Right to Access Courts to Be Heard, and Procedural Due Process Rights in the US Constitution require that a Court of Appeals, upon issuing a written opinion, address and resolve every issue raised and necessary to a final disposition of the appeal? Whether or not the Third Circuit Court of Appeals violated Petitioner’s due process rights, right to sue, and right of access to the courts by dismissing his appeal

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Alfred Joseph Fluehr
Francis Alexander LLC

For respondent
Patricia Fecile-Moreland
Marks O'Neill O'Brien Doherty and Kelly

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Proceedings

  1. Jan 11 2021
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Dec 23 2020
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
  3. Dec 07 2020
    Brief of respondent Jacqueline Vigilante in opposition filed.
  4. Oct 30 2020
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 7, 2020)