Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 1983 (2)
- ERISA (2)
- First amendment (2)
- Immigration (2)
- Securities (2)
-
- ACCA (1)
- ATF (1)
- Antitrust (1)
- Antitrust law (1)
- Armed Career Criminal Act (1)
- Asylum (1)
- Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores (1)
- Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (1)
- CAFA (1)
- Charitable solicitation (1)
- Christian Legal Society v. Walker (1)
- City of Chicago v. United States Department of Treasury Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Class Action Fairness Act (1)
- Consolidated Appropriations Act (1)
- Copyright infringement (1)
- Copyright law (1)
- Crawford v. Washington (1)
- Drunk driving (1)
- Edelson v. Ch’ien (1)
- Equal Pay Act (1)
- Establishment Clause (1)
- Fda (1)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1)
- Federal Sentencing Guidelines (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 32
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Seventh Circuit Turns A Blind Eye To The Playmate: The Application Of The Probate Exception After Marshall V. Marshall, Gillian Nagler
The Seventh Circuit Turns A Blind Eye To The Playmate: The Application Of The Probate Exception After Marshall V. Marshall, Gillian Nagler
Seventh Circuit Review
The probate exception to federal jurisdiction prohibits federal courts from hearing cases involving matters related to the probate of wills or administration of estates. Though it has traditionally been applied in the context of diversity, the courts are split on its applicability in federal question cases. The decision of the United States Supreme Court in Marshall v. Marshall clarifies the scope of the exception in the context of bankruptcy proceedings, but what about its application in other federal question cases? In Jones v. Brennan, which involved a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 arising out probate proceedings, the Seventh …
Table Of Contents, Seventh Circuit Review
Table Of Contents, Seventh Circuit Review
Seventh Circuit Review
No abstract provided.
Post-Verdict Motion Practice After Fuesting V. Zimmer, Christopher Proesel
Post-Verdict Motion Practice After Fuesting V. Zimmer, Christopher Proesel
Seventh Circuit Review
After Unitherm Food Systems, Inc. v. Swift-Eckrich, Inc., a court of appeals has no power to order either the entry of judgment for an appellant or a new trial based on the legal sufficiency of the evidence where that appellant failed to move for such an order pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure after the civil jury returned a verdict for the appellee. According to the Seventh Circuit in Fuesting v. Zimmer, this rule does not affect its ability to order a new trial where it finds prejudicial error in the trial court’s erroneous admission of …
The Monopoly Game: Has The Seventh Circuit Given Patent Holders A Get Out Of Jail Free Card?, Erin Conway
The Monopoly Game: Has The Seventh Circuit Given Patent Holders A Get Out Of Jail Free Card?, Erin Conway
Seventh Circuit Review
In a day when companies invest millions of dollars in research and development and the United States Patent and Trademark Office grants upwards of 140,000 utility patents per year, intellectual property rights are more powerful than ever before. Yet, protecting competition and consumer welfare through the antitrust laws is equally important to our country’s economy. Unfortunately, in Schor v. Abbott Laboratories, the Seventh Circuit let antitrust considerations fall by the wayside at the expense of upholding patent rights. In order for the antitrust and patent laws to achieve this mutual goal of protecting consumers by promoting competition, they must …
Who’S The Boss? Seventh Circuit Limits Executive Branch, Roy Chamcharas
Who’S The Boss? Seventh Circuit Limits Executive Branch, Roy Chamcharas
Seventh Circuit Review
Taxpayer standing has generally been prohibited by a line of Supreme Court cases with one narrow exception – if it involves a congressional statute that violates the Establishment Clause. This Note examines whether the Seventh Circuit correctly interpreted Supreme Court precedent as permitting taxpayer standing when the executive branch allegedly violated the Establishment Clause with unearmarked funds appropriated from Congress. Furthermore, this Note examines whether the Seventh Circuit’s denial of rehearing en banc was proper even though the three judge panel expanded a long standing Supreme Court exception. Both the majority and dissenting opinions agreed that the controversy warranted Supreme …
Got Rights? Not If You’Re A Sex Offender In The Seventh Circuit, Sheila T. Caplis
Got Rights? Not If You’Re A Sex Offender In The Seventh Circuit, Sheila T. Caplis
Seventh Circuit Review
Sex offender legislation has grown exponentially over the past decade and in conjunction the courts have demonstrated an unwillingness to find such legislation unconstitutional. Civil commitment, public registration, and residency restrictions have uniformly been upheld. However, how far can the courts continue this trend without stripping away the fundamental rights and interests of sex offenders. This issue is explored in light of a piece of legislation directed at banning a specific sex offender from the city parks.
The Sobering Truth: The Seventh Circuit Categorizes Drunk Driving As A Violent Felony, Jennifer Chow
The Sobering Truth: The Seventh Circuit Categorizes Drunk Driving As A Violent Felony, Jennifer Chow
Seventh Circuit Review
The Armed Career Criminal Act ("ACCA") supplements states’ law enforcement efforts against chronic violent offenders by substantially raising the penalty for armed criminals with past “violent felony” convictions. The ACCA defines the term “violent felony” by giving several specific examples and then adding a catch-all clause. One question that has continued to face courts since the ACCA’s enactment is what constitutes a violent felony under the catch-all clause. The Seventh Circuit recently categorized the offense of drunk driving as a “violent felony” under the catch-all clause and qualified drunk driving as a predicate act subject to recidivist sentence enhancement under …
Hooking The Crook: The Seventh Circuit Justifies The Suspicionless Search Of A Probationer, Meira Greenberg
Hooking The Crook: The Seventh Circuit Justifies The Suspicionless Search Of A Probationer, Meira Greenberg
Seventh Circuit Review
A plea bargain allows an individual, accused of a crime, an opportunity to reduce their sentence by bargaining with the prosecution. Although such agreements often stipulate that the accused waive certain constitutional rights, the conditions attached to a bargained-for-probation sentence are not beyond judicial review. Normally, courts examine the constitutionality of the probationary condition, but in United States v. Barnett, the Seventh Circuit summarily upheld the suspicionless search of a probationer upon the consent/contract theory. This Comment contends that the consent/contract theory employed by the Seventh Circuit improperly hooks the crook by upholding unreasonable probationary conditions that violate the …
A Presumption Of Reasonableness: The Seventh Circuit’S Unreasonable Approach To The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Zachary A. Jacobs
A Presumption Of Reasonableness: The Seventh Circuit’S Unreasonable Approach To The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Zachary A. Jacobs
Seventh Circuit Review
When the United States Supreme Court instructed federal appellate courts to use a "reasonableness" standard of review following U.S. vs. Booker, a significant question remained: what role do the Federal Sentencing Guidelines play when determining whether a sentence is “reasonable”? While the Supreme Court has recently granted certiorari for this very question, the Seventh Circuit has chosen to grant sentences falling within the range provided by the Guidelines a presumption of reasonableness. In doing so, however, the court has neither provided convincing justification nor remained consistent in its application. This Comment will first trace the development of the presumption within …
Stuck In Unfriendly Skies: How The Seventh Circuit’S Decision In Summers V. State Street Bank & Trust Company Left United Airlines Employees With Nothing But Hot Air, Jeffrey P. Swatzell
Stuck In Unfriendly Skies: How The Seventh Circuit’S Decision In Summers V. State Street Bank & Trust Company Left United Airlines Employees With Nothing But Hot Air, Jeffrey P. Swatzell
Seventh Circuit Review
In Summers v. State Street Bank & Trust Company, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit was asked whether State Street Bank & Trust Company, a directed trustee of United Airlines’ employee stock ownership plan, acted imprudently by failing to cause the plan to sell its United stock after the company suffered massive financial losses in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Ultimately, the court found that although State Street, as a directed trustee, was bound by certain fiduciary duties under ERISA, it did not act imprudently by continuing to follow the named …
The Seventh Circuit Hangs Up On Charitable Rights, Nicholas A.J. Wendland
The Seventh Circuit Hangs Up On Charitable Rights, Nicholas A.J. Wendland
Seventh Circuit Review
Under Indiana’s Telephone Solicitation of Consumers statute telemarketers are prohibited from calling all households who opt to place their numbers on the statewide do-not-call list. This prohibition exempts charities, as long as they refrain from using professional telemarketing companies, and rely solely on volunteers or in-house employees. For many charities, particularly ones supporting unpopular causes, telemarketing represents the most successful manner in which they can inform people of their goals and raise money. Charitable solicitation has long been recognized as a protected form of free speech, and any restriction on that right protected by constitutional scrutiny. However, in ruling on …
Left Without A Prayer: Can Antidiscrimination Regulations Protecting Gays Survive?, Adam C. York
Left Without A Prayer: Can Antidiscrimination Regulations Protecting Gays Survive?, Adam C. York
Seventh Circuit Review
In Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, the United States Supreme Court held that a New Jersey public accommodations law could not compel the Boy Scouts to accept homosexual scoutmasters. In Christian Legal Society v. Walker, the Seventh Circuit overextended this precedent when it held that the Southern Illinois Law School could not refuse official recognition of the Christian Law Society because the Society refused to accept homosexual members. By deciding the case on an incomplete record and declining to apply a narrow reading of Dale, the Seventh Circuit exposed to attack all regulations protecting homosexuals.
The Seventh Circuit’S Statutory Interpretation Misfires, Wounding The Already Fragile Freedom Of Information Act, Layla Amiryaghoobi
The Seventh Circuit’S Statutory Interpretation Misfires, Wounding The Already Fragile Freedom Of Information Act, Layla Amiryaghoobi
Seventh Circuit Review
In City of Chicago v. United States Department of Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (“ATF”), the Seventh Circuit held that the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2005 effectively ended the long running debate over the issue of whether the contents of the Firearms Trace System databases, which the City of Chicago had requested from ATF and believed it was entitled to under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), could be disclosed to the public. After the passage of several riders contained within federal appropriations legislation precluding the use of federal funding to retrieve the requested data, and two …
Say It Ain’T So!: How The Seventh Circuit's Holding In Edelson V. Ch'ien Unnecessarily Narrows The Scope Of Section 13(D)'S Implied Private Right Of Action, Mark A. Diomede
Seventh Circuit Review
Section 13(d) of the Williams Act was meant to insure that public shareholders were provided adequate information about the qualifications and intentions of third parties making cash tender offers or acquiring large blocks of shares in publicly held companies as a means to possibly contest company control. This Note discusses the cases of Edelson v. Ch’ien and Indiana National Corporation v. Rich, where the Seventh Circuit defined the scope of Section 13(d)’s implied cause of action and discussed standing to sue under the statute. In Indiana National, the Seventh Circuit took a broad stance apropos Section 13(d), allowing for …
Semper Fi? The Infidelity Of The Seventh Circuit In Applying A Good Moral Character Requirement To Naturalizing War Veterans, Joshua P. Montgomery
Semper Fi? The Infidelity Of The Seventh Circuit In Applying A Good Moral Character Requirement To Naturalizing War Veterans, Joshua P. Montgomery
Seventh Circuit Review
In a case of first impression, the Seventh Circuit misinterpreted naturalization statutes to hold that a good moral character requirement is applicable to aliens who served honorably in the military during times of war. The obligation of naturalizing aliens to show good moral character is listed among the residency requirements of 8 U.S.C.S. § 1427. However, 8 U.S.C.S. § 1440 excuses alien wartime veterans from making this showing by exempting them from the residency requirements in 8 U.S.C.S. § 1427. In supporting its position that alien wartime veterans must prove good moral character in order to naturalize, the Seventh Circuit …
A Domestic Disturbance: The Seventh Circuit Encroaches On Foreign Related Party Transactions, Erica S. Khalili
A Domestic Disturbance: The Seventh Circuit Encroaches On Foreign Related Party Transactions, Erica S. Khalili
Seventh Circuit Review
Has deference to administrative regulation gone too far in its impact on American corporations and consequently become to great a foe to American corporations in a global marketplace? In the wake of the widespread corporate scandals, many of the regulations enacted are aimed at combating corporate fraud. Recently, in Square D Co. v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the validity of one such regulation, requiring taxpayers to utilize the cash basis method of accounting to deduct interest payments made to tax-exempt foreign related parties. This Note examines where this regulation fits …
Table Of Contents, Seventh Circuit Review
Table Of Contents, Seventh Circuit Review
Seventh Circuit Review
No abstract provided.
Foreword, Harold J. Krent
Preface, Hal R. Morris
Seventh Circuit Moves To The Head Of The Class: Recent Decisions Provide A Broad Interpretation Of Federal Jurisdiction Under Cafa, Meghan J. Dolan
Seventh Circuit Moves To The Head Of The Class: Recent Decisions Provide A Broad Interpretation Of Federal Jurisdiction Under Cafa, Meghan J. Dolan
Seventh Circuit Review
The Class Action Fairness Act ("CAFA") expands removal jurisdiction to include most state court class action suits that "commenced" before CAFA's enactment. The question facing many courts now is what constitutes a suit's commencement? The Seventh Circuit recently determined that the addition of new defendants or new claims that do not relate back to the original cause of action, "commence" a new suit for purposes of removal jurisdiction under CAFA. This article examines the Seventh Circuit's interpretation and concludes that it will likely upset the settled expectations of plaintiffs who filed their cases in state court expecting to go to …
Cross Jurisdictional Tolling Of The Statute Of Limitations In Antitrust Claims: Plaintiffs Lose Their Day In Federal Court, John J. Koltse
Cross Jurisdictional Tolling Of The Statute Of Limitations In Antitrust Claims: Plaintiffs Lose Their Day In Federal Court, John J. Koltse
Seventh Circuit Review
How great is the divide between federal and state courts when state law mirrors federal law? Can federal courts improve judicial efficiency by extending the statute of limitations for federal antitrust claims based on concurrent state antitrust class actions? The Seventh Circuit's recent attempt at docket control in In re Copper Antitrust Litigation refused to accept this counter intuitive approach. This article addresses the effect of the Seventh Circuit's decision, which actually decreased judicial efficiency by encouraging state antitrust class action members to file duplicative claims in federal court despite identical state and federal antitrust statutory schemes.
Civil Right Of Prisoners: The Seventh Circuit And Exhaustion Of Remedies Under The Prison Litigation Reform Act, Devin Mccomb
Civil Right Of Prisoners: The Seventh Circuit And Exhaustion Of Remedies Under The Prison Litigation Reform Act, Devin Mccomb
Seventh Circuit Review
Inmates confined to correctional facilities have necessarily forfeited many of their civil rights. But what happens when the institution that houses them restricts one of their few remaining rights? The answer for many inmates was to sue in federal court alleging violations under 42 USC § 1983. In an attempt to limit the number of inmate suits heard by an already over-burdened federal judiciary, Congress enacted the Prisoner's Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA") in 1996. The PLRA requires that inmates exhaust the administrative remedies available to them as a prerequisite to filing suit in federal court. The effects of the PLRA …
Copyright, Technology & The Boston Strangler: The Seventh Circuit And The Future Of Online Music Access, Jeffrey J. Escher
Copyright, Technology & The Boston Strangler: The Seventh Circuit And The Future Of Online Music Access, Jeffrey J. Escher
Seventh Circuit Review
The United States Supreme Court previously ruled that recording television programs or movies using Betamax or VHS tapes does not constitute copyright infringement. However, the Supreme Court recently held that downloading music from a peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing network does constitute copyright infringement. Thus, federal district court decisions are now targeting individuals who illegally download music from these networks and entering large monetary judgments against them. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is upholding these judgments. This article discusses the difference between video taping and downloading and why is there a discrepancy in terms of copyright law.
Crawford V. Washington — How The Seventh Circuit Improperly Defined "Testimonial", Robert L. Windon
Crawford V. Washington — How The Seventh Circuit Improperly Defined "Testimonial", Robert L. Windon
Seventh Circuit Review
In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court overturned years of precedent holding that any hearsay statement that is deemed "testimonial" cannot be admitted into evidence unless the defendant has the opportunity to confront and cross-examine the declarant. Because the Court did not define testimonial, trial and appellate courts have been required to do so. Many Courts of Appeals have held that a statement is testimonial if a reasonable declarant would believe the statement would be used in court. However, in United States v. Gilbertson the Seventh Circuit abandoned the Supreme Court's reasoning in Crawford v. Washington when it held …
Conflict Of Interest And The Standard Of Review In Erisa Cases: The Seventh Circuit’S Refusal To Acknowledge What Other Circuits Already Know, Barbara C. Long
Conflict Of Interest And The Standard Of Review In Erisa Cases: The Seventh Circuit’S Refusal To Acknowledge What Other Circuits Already Know, Barbara C. Long
Seventh Circuit Review
The Supreme Court's decision in Firestone v. Bruch required that conflicts of interest by a plan administrator be "weighed as a factor in determining whether there is an abuse of discretion" in the decision to deny benefits. Nearly every circuit court of appeals, except the Seventh Circuit, has determined that where the plan administrator is also the funder or insurer of a plan, there is an inherent conflict of interest that warrants adjusting the standard of review. This article discusses the Seventh Circuit's reasons for departing from the wisdom of the other circuit courts, and why its reasons are unjustifiable.
The Seventh Circuit's Erosion Of The Equal Pay Act, Jessica L. Linsted
The Seventh Circuit's Erosion Of The Equal Pay Act, Jessica L. Linsted
Seventh Circuit Review
Under the Equal Pay Act, an employer may avoid liability by proving the affirmative defense that a wage disparity is based "on any factor other than sex." Where an employee's starting salary is based on their prior salary, will this satisfy the "factor other than sex" defense? The Seventh Circuit recently approached this issue in Wernsing v. Dep't of Human Services. Unlike other circuits that require an employer to show a legitimate business reason for using prior salaries to set wages and satisfy the "factor other than sex" defense, this article discusses the Seventh Circuit's conclusion that prior salary …
Stop The Presses! Seventh Circuit Censors College Student Media, Julia R. Lissner
Stop The Presses! Seventh Circuit Censors College Student Media, Julia R. Lissner
Seventh Circuit Review
Can officials at public colleges and universities in the Seventh Circuit censor student speech? How free is the college free press? In Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, the U.S. Supreme Court permitted high school administrators to censor school-sponsored speech if their actions were supported by "legitimate pedagogical concerns." However, the high court specifically stated that it was not deciding whether the same degree of deference is appropriate with respect to speech in higher education. Thus, this article argues that the Seventh Circuit's application of the Hazelwood standard to assess a student newspaper censorship claim at a Illinois public university …
Seeking Asylum In A Hostile System: The Seventh Circuit Reverses To Confront A Broken Process, John R. Floss
Seeking Asylum In A Hostile System: The Seventh Circuit Reverses To Confront A Broken Process, John R. Floss
Seventh Circuit Review
The adjudication of asylum applications is of vital importance to refugees seeking safe haven within the United States and is often a matter of life or death. However, in its current term, the Seventh Circuit reversed the asylum decisions of immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals in approximately two-thirds of its published opinions. Many of these reversals can be traced to unsupported subjective assessments performed by immigration judges. Blame may also lie with the Board of Immigration Appeals, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Homeland Security. Although the Seventh Circuit identified several noticeable and repetitive problems, …
Medical Device Preemption: A Reasonable Avenue Of Tort Reform?, Jacob M. Eckburg
Medical Device Preemption: A Reasonable Avenue Of Tort Reform?, Jacob M. Eckburg
Seventh Circuit Review
Should manufacturers of cutting-edge medical devices ever be able to avoid liability from common law tort claims? Recently, the Seventh Circuit held that tort claims against these manufacturers are preempted when the manufacturer has received pre-market approval from the Food and Drug Administration. This article discusses whether this position adequately balances the competing concerns of developing technologically advanced medical devices with protecting the consumers of such devices.
Dismissing How The Purchaser-Seller Rule Affects Slusa, Stacy A. Manning
Dismissing How The Purchaser-Seller Rule Affects Slusa, Stacy A. Manning
Seventh Circuit Review
The Securities Litigation Reform Act ("SLUSA") grants exclusive federal jurisdiction to securities actions where plaintiffs have purchased or sold securities. Similarly, the Supreme Court case, Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores, requires that only purchasers and sellers of securities may bring private securities actions under federal securities law. This article discusses the cases of Kircher v. Putnam Funds Trust and Putnam Investment Management, LLC, et al., where the Seventh Circuit held that the purchaser-seller rule announced in Blue Chip Stamps did not affect SLUSA's coverage and that therefore a claim brought by a plaintiff class comprised entirely …