Mooted and Vacated

Smith v. Edwards examined whether a preliminary injunction should be vacated when the dispute became moot on appeal:

     “[H]istorically, the established rule was to vacate the judgment if the case became moot on appeal.” However, in U.S. Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall Partnership,  “[t]he Supreme Court made clear and emphasized that vacatur is an ‘extraordinary’ and equitable remedy . . . to be determined on a case-by-case basis.” One principal consideration “is whether the party seeking relief from the judgment . . . caused the mootness by voluntary action.” “Thus, for example, ‘vacatur must be granted where mootness results from the unilateral action of the party who prevailed in the [district] court.’” 

     The equitable principles espoused in U.S. Bancorp and recognized by Staley apply in this case. Though Defendants complied with the preliminary injunction by removing the youths from BCCY-WF, they did not cause mootness by voluntary action. And though the injunction automatically expired under the PLRA, Plaintiffs could have sought an extension to extend its duration. . Having been “frustrated by the vagaries of circumstance, [Defendants] ought not in fairness be forced to acquiesce in the judgment.

No. 23-30634 (Dec. 19, 2023).