Ct. of Appeals denied govt.-appellee’s motion for summary affirmance of Dist. Ct.’s order that had dismissed for failure to state valid claim plaintiff’s Federal Tort Claims Act lawsuit, alleging negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress, where, according to plaintiff, lead attorney for U.S. Military Commission Defense Organization that, along with plaintiff, represented person charged as al-Qaeda enemy combatant, disclosed to client plaintiff’s gay sexuality and falsely told client that plaintiff was infatuated with client and was pursuing that interest. While plaintiff’s opening appellate brief failed to comply with Rule of App. Pro. 28 by failing to provide either adequate statement of case, legal citations or identification of legal errors associated with Dist. Ct.’s order in argument section, summary affirmance was not warranted, since: (1) sparse briefing alone is not reason to enter merits judgment; and (2) plaintiff’s brief did not rise to level of “incompressible or completely insubstantial” brief. Moreover, Ct. gave plaintiff seven days to request leave to strike his initial brief and file substitute brief that complies with Rule 28.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Appellate Procedure