The en banc Third Circuit is hearing two arguments on Wednesday morning. They’re both scheduled for 9 a.m. so I’m not sure which one will be first. Here’s a bit on each one.
I’ve posted about Vooys v. Bentley, the big Virgin Islands jurisdiction case, here. The basic issue is whether the Third Circuit still has certiorari jurisdiction over older Virgin Islands territorial-court cases. I noted in my prior post that the posture of the case suggests the court will reverse its prior panel ruling allowing such jurisdiction, and that suggestion got a little stronger last week when the court directed the parties to limit their argument to the jurisdictional issue, not the merits. The argument on behalf of the petitioners will be presented by two University of Virginia law students, as described here. UPDATE: and here’s a post about Dwyer Arce, the Nebraska associate who’s arguing Wednesday on behalf of the VI Bar Association.
The other case is Rotkiske v. Klemm, a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act appeal. The legal issue is whether the discovery rule tolls the FDCPA’s one-year statute of limitations. The case was orally argued before a panel (Fisher, Hardiman, Greenaway) early in 2017, and then 8 months later the court, sua sponte, granted rehearing en banc. That sounds a lot like a court considering overruling a prior panel opinion, but I haven’t dug into the details enough to know the whole story.
The court also has three panel arguments set for the afternoon. Two of them are habeas appeals, and the third is a challenge to New Jersey’s house-arrest statute being argued by Paul Clement.
Should be an interesting day of arguments. I’m hoping to be there to observe, but I have a Third Circuit reply brief due that day, so we’ll see.