February 2016 Federal Civil Practice Newsletter

Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging First Amendment retaliation and procedural due process violations after their positions were eliminated by the defendants following an election in which the plaintiffs supported the winner of the election’s opponent. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants and plaintiffs appealed. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that even if the defendants were aware of the plaintiffs’ political activity the defendants carried their burden of showing alternative explanations for the plaintiffs’ terminations. (BRENNAN and TAIBLESON, concurring)

Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the City of Aurora claiming an equal protection violation under a “class of one” theory and breach of contract based on the plaintiff’s belief that the defendant gave plaintiff’s competitor a better contract and excused it from complying with certain requirements. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendant and plaintiff appealed. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, explaining that when a company complains about the terms of its lease or contract, without any class-based allegations, the company cannot seek recourse through a class-of-one claim under the Equal Protection Clause and that plaintiff did not meet the requirements to bring a breach of contract claim. (KIRSCH and KOLAR, concurring)

The Seventh Circuit considered an appeal of five cases making up a subsection of similar cases in a multidistrict litigation case filed against the manufacturer of an infant formula. The appellate court considered two questions certified by the district court: whether a plaintiff’s failure to demonstrate real or good faith intent to pursue a claim against a non-diverse defendant is a basis for finding that the non-diverse defendant was fraudulently joined and, if so, whether a plaintiff’s failure to engage in litigation against the non-diverse defendant and a verbal representation that they will not seek an appeal of a dismissal of their action against a non-diverse defendant meets the standard for finding ‘no real intent’ fraudulent joinder. The Seventh Circuit concluded that the district court took a view of the fraudulent joinder doctrine that was not consistent with existing case law and that the district court’s conclusion that the plaintiffs had not shown sufficient intent to pursue litigation against the non-diverse defendant was not an appropriate basis upon which to predicate a determination of fraudulent joinder. (KOLAR and MALDONADO, concurring)

The City of Chicago filed lawsuits against major fossil fuel companies seeking damages stemming from global warming. The defendants removed the action from Illinois state court to federal court under the federal officer removal statute. The district court remanded and defendants appealed. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that the plaintiffs claims were narrowly tailored and that the defendants’ assertion that federal jurisdiction was appropriate on the grounds that the lawsuit related to their fuel production for the federal government was too attenuated from the plaintiff’s claims to support removal. HAMILTON and MALDONADO, concurring)

Plaintiff filed a consolidated class action complaint against defendant alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act. The defendant moved to dismiss the TCPA claims, arguing that the provision that plaintiff relied on only created a private right of action for phone calls, not text messages. The district court agreed and dismissed the case after declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claim and plaintiff appealed. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that the language of section 227 of the Act does not permit plaintiffs to file a lawsuit for the receipt of unwanted texts. (PRYOR and MALDONADO, concurring)