Late last month, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Dupree v. Younger, No. 22-210. The case presents a seemingly arcane issue of federal civil procedure: whether a Rule 50 motion after trial is required to preserve for appeal a purely legal claim that was previously rejected at summary judgment. The question, however, is more interesting and consequential for civil litigators and their clients than it may seem at first blush. That’s especially so for practitioners in the Second Circuit, where the law—once considered reasonably settled—has been in doubt since 2021’s decision in Omega v. 375 Canal.

The facts of Dupree are cruel and tragic. Kevin Younger, a pretrial detainee in a Maryland state prison, was brutally assaulted by a trio of prison guards in September 2013, who then ordered Younger to report he had fallen off his bed. The attack left Younger with permanent injuries; the three guards were later convicted for their roles. Younger eventually filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the guards and Neil Dupree, a corrections officer alleged to have directed the guards’ attack. Younger prevailed at trial, and a jury awarded him $700,000 in damages.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]