Federal 7th Circuit / Civil
Preliminary Injunctions
| S.D. Ill.
Monroe v. Bowman, No. 23-3371
(December 5, 2024)
(HAMILTON)
Vacated and remanded.
In a class action lawsuit challenging the treatment of prisoners with gender dysphoria by the Illinois Department of Corrections, the defendant prison officials appealed from the imposition of several injunctions and a finding of civil contempt by the district court. The Seventh Circuit vacated the injunctions finding that they were preliminary in nature and expired 90 days after they were entered and that they could not retroactively be transformed into permanent injunctions as was argued by the plaintiffs. The appellate court dismissed the challenge to the findings of contempt for lack of jurisdiction because the district court had not yet imposed any sanctions. (ROVNER and KIRSCH, concurring)
|
Federal 7th Circuit / Civil
Statute of Limitations
| S.D. Ind., Indianapolis Div.
Dent v. Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., No. 24-1480
(November 22, 2024)
(PER CURIAM)
Affirmed.
Plaintiff filed a complaint alleging racial discrimination against her former employer and appealed after the district court dismissed the case because it was filed five days late and was time-barred. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that the late filing, which was due to human error, did not constitute an “extraordinary circumstance” that would warrant equitable tolling and the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting the motion to dismiss. (ELLIS and COBBS, concurring)
|
Federal 7th Circuit / Civil
Employment Discrimination
| E.D. Wis.
Thomas v. JBS Green Bay, Inc., No. 24-1404
(November 8, 2024)
(EASTERBROOK)
Reversed and remanded.
Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against his employer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act alleging that he was discriminated against on account of his race. The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. The Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded, finding that the complaint was dismissed prematurely based on a lack of evidence but that the question of the sufficiency of the evidence is more appropriate at summary judgment or trial and not the pleadings stage of proceedings. (JACKSON-AKIWUMI and MALDONADO, concurring)
|
Federal 7th Circuit / Civil
Appellate Jurisdiction
| S.D. Ind., Evansville Div.
Acevedo v. Professional Transportation, Inc., No. 23-2813
(October 31, 2024)
(EASTERBROOK)
Appeal dismissed.
In a collective action brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Seventh Circuit dismissed the appeal, explaining that the appellate court had no jurisdiction because the appeal was brought by non-parties. The appellate court noted that the Act requires that each plaintiff in a collective action to consent in writing to join the suit and file the consent in the court in which the action was brought, but that the “named plaintiffs” in the appeal did not satisfy either of those requirements because they had entered their consent in a separate lawsuit. (ROVNER and JACKSON-AKIWUMI, concurring)
|
Federal 7th Circuit / Civil
Civil Procedure
| S.D. Ill.
Brockett v. Effingham County, Illinois, No. 23-2360
(August 29, 2024)
(ROVNER)
Affirmed.
Plaintiff, a former county sheriff’s department employee, filed a lawsuit alleging that he was fired for supporting the former sheriff in disputes between the sheriff and the county chair, and for reporting misbehavior by two correctional officers under his supervision. The district court dismissed the lawsuit and plaintiff appealed. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that plaintiff’s argument failed to demonstrate that he was entitled to relief and, as a result, his claims were waived. (BRENNAN and KIRSCH, concurring)
|
|
