Shows
Seventh Circuit RoundupRapid-Fire Rulings: Seventh Circuit Issues Major Back-to-Back Decisions in MarchThis month’s podcast focuses on a trio of significant cases the Seventh Court handed down in mid-March within days of each other. Each of these cases has major ramifications for those in the Seventh Circuit.First, Kian takes on the Court’s en banc opinion in St. Anthony Hospital v. Whitehorn, which addresses when Section 1983 may be used to enforce Medicaid requirements. The opinion reversed a panel opinion discussed on the podcast earlier this year. The case sets out key guideposts for all cases attempting to enforce federal statutes through Section 1983.Second, Lara tackles an o...2025-04-281h 09Seventh Circuit RoundupNew Decisions on Section 1983 and Qualified Immunity (Plus: Who Decides When Litigation Conduct Waives Arbitration?)In this month’s podcast, the trio discusses three new Seventh Circuit decisions. First, Kian takes a deep dive into a fractured en banc decision on an unusual qualified immunity issue. Next, Lara gets philosophical with a case that raises the question of whether an Indian tribe can be a Section 1983 plaintiff — but definitely doesn’t answer it! To round out the program, Mark addresses a decision on who decides when litigation conduct constitutes a waiver of the right to arbitrate. No spoilers, except to say that in Judge Easterbrook’s own words, “it has nothing to do with mootness.”2025-03-1455 minSeventh Circuit RoundupSeventh Circuit Issues Critical Holdings on Criminal Conspiracy, Punitive Damages, and JurisdictionKian, Lara and Mark take on a new batch of key Seventh Circuit cases in this month’s podcast. First, the three discuss the Court’s en banc decision in U.S. v. Page, in which the Court changed the standard for proving conspiracy to distribute in drug cases and limited the availability of plain error review for jury instructions. Second, Lara takes on the constitutional limits on punitive damages in an interesting new trademark case. Finally, Kian (aka “Mr. Jurisdiction”) explains two recent jurisdictional cases, one involving a vacatur of a stay that destroyed appellate jurisdiction and one holding...2025-02-131h 12Seventh Circuit RoundupMajor FLSA Decisions About Multi-Plaintiff Actions & Commuting Time (Plus Fourth Amendment Rules for Pole Cameras!)In this special episode, Mark and Kian welcome a third member to the podcast team – Lara Langeneckert, commercial litigator at Barnes & Thornburg and formerly of the Indiana Solicitor General’s Office and the Southern District of Indiana U.S. Attorney’s Office. The team begins with a labor law extravaganza, discussing three significant cases under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA): Jacks v. DirectSat, Acevedo v. Professional Transportation, and Walters v. Professional Labor Group. These cases address the requirements for (and distinctions between) class actions and collective actions under the FLSA, as well as the FLSA’s rules for...2025-01-081h 00Seventh Circuit RoundupLive Episode: Mark and Kian Discuss Four August Opinions With Students From the IU McKinney School of LawIn this special live episode, Mark and Kian are hosted by the Federalist Society chapter of the Indiana University McKinney School of Law in Indianapolis. This episode is an appellate procedure extravaganza, with our hosts managing to cover four separate cases in under an hour – Gilbank v. Wood County Department of Human Services (a split en banc decision on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine), Indiana Green Party v. Morales (a First Amendment challenge to Indiana ballot-access rules), World Seed Church v. Village of Hazel Crest (a discussion of mootness, standing, and Rule 60(b)), and Vanegas v. Signet Builders (a split panel op...2024-09-1753 minSeventh Circuit Roundup“Mootness Fees” in Federal Securities Litigation and Private Right of Actions To Enforce Federal Statutes Under Section 1983In this month’s podcast, Kian and Mark address two cases dealing with two completely different but equally complex areas of federal law: securities litigation and Medicaid. In Alcarez v. Akorn, the Court examined the avenues of federal review of so-called “mootness fees” in securities litigation. These fees arise when securities plaintiffs sue over lack of disclosures but the case is rendered moot when the company later provides the disclosure. Mootness fees then sometimes become part of the settlement of the now moot litigation. Alcarez provides a roadmap for how shareholders may intervene and oppose the payment of the...2024-06-1051 minSeventh Circuit RoundupCollateral Order Doctrine Meets Church Autonomy Doctrine and Takings Meets State Sovereign ImmunityMark and Kian return to discuss two of the Seventh Circuit's March 2024 opinions.In Garrick v. Moody Bible Institute, a split 2-1 panel (Judge St. Eve writing and joined by Judge Hamilton, with Judge Brennan dissenting) refused to exercise appellate jurisdiction over a district court order rejecting a motion to dismiss that was based on the church autonomy doctrine. Because they do not end the proceedings, decisions denying motions to dismiss are interlocutory and thus generally not immediately appealable. Under the collateral order doctrine, however, federal appellate courts will hear an appeal from an interlocutory order where...2024-05-2349 minSeventh Circuit RoundupDiscussing the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine, Claim Preclusion, and Lay Opinion TestimonyIn this episode, Mark and Kian chat about two opinions the Seventh Circuit issued in February 2024.The first case, Chicago Joe’s Team Room v. Village of Broadview, is a long-running Section 1983 case brought by a would-be adult-entertainment venue against the Chicago suburb that prevented it from opening. In 2008, the district court found the suburb violated the First Amendment, and the parties then spent more than a decade litigating damages, which were based on a lost-profits theory. The venue eventually failed to prove lost-profits damages because the district court excluded all of its evidence, which mostly consisted of...2024-03-2732 minSeventh Circuit RoundupDiscerning State Law Under Erie & Defining “Claim” Under The False Claims ActThe two cases Mark and Kian discuss in this episode each raise a tricky but important question.The first, Green Plains Trade Group, LLC v. Archer Daniels Midland Co., addresses how federal courts should discern the content of state law. The landmark Supreme Court case Erie Railroad v. Tompkins says federal courts should try to predict what the state supreme court would do. And in implementing this rule, the Seventh Circuit (like other federal appellate courts) has cautioned district courts from accepting novel state-law theories. In Green Plains, the Seventh Circuit clarified when this “maxim” against novel theo...2024-03-0443 minSeventh Circuit RoundupInterview with Former Indiana Solicitor General Tom FisherIn this month’s very special episode of Seventh Circuit Roundup, hosts Kian Hudson and Mark Crandley interview legendary Seventh Circuit litigator Tom Fisher. Tom recently concluded nearly two decades of service as Indiana’s solicitor general, a role that frequently led Tom to the Seventh Circuit courthouse. Indeed, few if any lawyers have argued more high-profile cases before the Seventh Circuit. In this interview, Tom shares his thoughts on how to find one’s way into appellate advocacy, tips for appellate litigators, Seventh Circuit-specific wrinkles, and more.2024-02-0644 minSeventh Circuit RoundupInternational Discovery and Local ControversiesThe eighth episode of Seventh Circuit Roundup examines two cases dealing with important federal procedural statutes. First, In Re Venequip reviewed the requirements for a party in a dispute obtaining discovery in federal court under 28 USC 1782(a). In Venequip, the Seventh Circuit examined the requirements for obtaining discovery for an international suit and reviewed the role played by forum selection and choice of law clauses in that analysis. Second, the Court in Sudholt v. Country Mutual Insurance Co. considered whether a class action should be remanded under the internal affairs exception of the Class Action...2023-12-1140 minSeventh Circuit RoundupRemedies and Marriage: Right to Injunction Constitutional Violations and Addressing Marital PrivilegeIn the seventh episode of Seventh Circuit Roundup, Kian and Mark address cases from very different areas of the law that offer some practical insights for those practicing in the Seventh Circuit.First, Kian discusses Finch v. Treto, which concerns the circumstances when a district court might decline to issue an injunction even in the face of a potential constitutional violation. Finch concerned a Commerce Clause challenge to Illinois’ licensing system for cannabis dispensaries. The Court declined to require the district court to enjoin all licenses granted to dispensaries. Kian discusses the circumstances that led to that co...2023-11-1737 minSeventh Circuit RoundupAugust Opinions Address Whether Paying Bail Is Speech and When Courts Can Decide Cases on State Law GroundsIn its sixth episode, Seventh Circuit Roundup covers two August opinions—Bail Project v. Indiana Department of Insurance and St. Augustine School v. Underly. The first case is a Free Speech Clause challenge to an Indiana law that requires charitable bail organizations to register with the State and limits for whom such organizations can pay cash bail. A divided 2-1 panel of the Seventh Circuit upheld the law, concluding that “paying cash bail does not inherently express any message,” since “a reasonable observer would not understand” the “payment of cash bail at the clerk’s office as an expression o...2023-09-2754 minSeventh Circuit RoundupSeventh Circuit Roundup: July Opinions Include Decisions on Intervention Standards and Constitutional Claims for Sexual AssaultThe fifth episode of Seventh Circuit Roundup covers two July opinions—Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections and Hess v. Garcia. In Bost, the Democratic Party of Illinois tried to intervene to defend the validity of an Illinois election law, which the Illinois State Board of Elections was already defending. The Seventh Circuit denied intervention: It held that the Party could not show that the Board’s representation “may be” inadequate—though it noted that the Party might later be able to make this showing if the Board were to fail to appeal an adverse decision or fail to...2023-08-3056 minSeventh Circuit RoundupJune Opinions Address Religious Discrimination In Prisons and Discovery Against Federal AgenciesIn the fourth episode of Seventh Circuit Roundup our team covers the religious-discrimination case, Emad v. Dodge County, and the third-party-discovery case, St. Vincent Medical Group v. U.S. Department of Justice. In Dodge County, a Muslim inmate alleged that Wisconsin prison officials violated the Free Exercise Clause and Equal Protection Clause by allowing Christian inmates to engage in certain forms of prayer while prohibiting him (and other Muslims) from doing the same. The Seventh Circuit had “no trouble concluding [the inmate’s] claims fall in the heartland of these constitutional protections” and reversed the grant of qualified immunity. And in...2023-07-3144 minSeventh Circuit RoundupDecisions Issued in May Involve Applying “Heck Bar” to Section 1983 Claims and Imposing Class-Notice Costs on DefendantsThe third episode of Seventh Circuit Roundup covers two significant decisions the Seventh Circuit issued in May — Courtney v. Butler and Bakov v. Consolidated World Travel. In the first case, the Seventh Circuit applied the Supreme Court’s 1994 decision in Heck v. Humphrey — which held that a plaintiff ordinarily cannot bring a Section 1983 constitutional-rights claim if a judgment in his favor “would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence” — to parole-revocation decisions (it concluded Heck did not bar the plaintiff’s claim that prison officials unconstitutionally failed to effect his release). The second case, a class...2023-07-1153 minSeventh Circuit RoundupApril Cases Include Major Decisions on Religious Accommodations and Article III StandingThe second episode of Seventh Circuit Roundup covers three important Seventh Circuit decisions issued in April – Kluge v. Brownsburg Community School Corp., Pucillo v. National Credit Systems, and Indiana Right to Life v. Morales. In the first case, a split 2-1 panel rejected a public schoolteacher’s Title VII religious-accommodation claim, which arose after the teacher objected to his school’s policy requiring teachers to refer to students, including transgender students, by the names registered in the school’s official student database. The latter two cases, meanwhile, address cutting-edge standing issues: Pucillo concerns whether unsolicited debt-collection letters cause injuries sufficie...2023-06-0654 minSeventh Circuit RoundupJurisdiction, ERISA, and Remands, Oh My! April Brings Complex Cases to 7th CircuitThe first episode of Seventh Circuit Roundup covers a couple of interesting cases in the Seventh Circuit – Hadzi-Tanovic v. Johnson and Hughes v. Northwestern. The former, a constitutional-rights case arising out of a state-court child-custody battle, addresses when the Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars plaintiffs from challenging state-court decisions in federal court. The latter, a case remanded to the Seventh Circuit following a 2022 SCOTUS decision, concerns ERISA breach-of-fiduciary-duty claims. Our team explains the reasoning and the significance of both of these important decisions.2023-04-2647 min