Federal Civil Practice

The Seventh Circuit affirmed the denial of a motion challenging the allocation of fees among plaintiffs’ attorneys in the settlement of a multidistrict litigation. The appellate court also expressed concern that the district court’s order could be interpreted as having delegated final authority to lead plaintiffs’ counsel to distribute the total fee award but explained that the district court did not abuse it discretion by enforcing its prior orders establishing procedures and requirements for seeking attorney fees and expenses. (BRENNAN and SCUDDER, concurring)

Plaintiff, a public employee, believed that his employer had taken action against him for unlawful reasons and sought relief under both state and federal law in both administrative proceedings and lawsuits. The Seventh Circuit considered the question of whether the law of claim preclusion defeated plaintiff’s claims. The appellate court concluded that the principles of claim preclusion blocked most of plaintiff’s claims filed in a federal lawsuit except for those claims brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

Plaintiff appealed after U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services rejected his petitions to have his spouse classified as his immediate relative under the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act. The rejection was premised on the government’s determination that plaintiff, who was previously convicted of aggravated criminal sexual abuse involving a minor, failed to show that he did not pose a risk to his spouse. The district court dismissed all but one count for lack of jurisdiction and dismissed the sole reviewable count for failure to state a claim. The Seventh Circuit agreed that plaintiffs’ claims were either not reviewable or failed on the merits and affirmed. (RIPPLE and LEE, concurring)

Plaintiff filed a trademark infringement and counterfeiting action against dozens of e-commerce vendors, most of which, including the defendant, resided in China. The district court allowed plaintiffs to serve defendant in China by email by finding that the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (also known as the Hague Service Commission) permitted service in that manner. The district court then entered default judgment. Defendant eventually appeared and moved to vacate the judgment for lack of proper service. The district court denied the motion and defendant appealed. The Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded, explaining that the Convention prohibits email service in China and that the district court must decide whether the Convention applied at all to the matter. (JACKSON-AKIWUMI and PRYOR, concurring)

Plaintiff secured a loan from defendant by offering a mixed-use building as collateral. After one of the building’s largest tenants filed for bankruptcy, a dispute arose regarding how long the loan servicer could hold excess building revenue in a special account as additional security. The district court dismissed the plaintiff’s breach of contract claim and plaintiff appealed. The Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded, finding that the agreements in question were ambiguous and that a breach of contract claim cannot be resolved on a motion to dismiss where the language of a contract is ambiguous. (RIPPLE and ST. EVE, concurring)

Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against her employer and two other employees alleging discrimination. The lawsuit was stayed in favor of arbitration and after the arbitrator ruled in the defendants’ favor, plaintiff asked the district court to set aside the award. The district court instead confirmed it and plaintiff appealed. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that plaintiff’s allegations regarding the entry and consideration of evidence during the arbitration did not constitute misconduct or misbehavior by the arbitrator. (ROVNER and SCUDDER, concurring)

Plaintiff, a towing company, filed a lawsuit against the defendant county after the county removed the plaintiff from a list of towing businesses that were available on a rotating basis to recover vehicles on public roads. Plaintiff alleged that the defendant violated its procedural due process rights. The district court dismissed the complaint by finding that it did not plausibly allege that it had a protected property interest in a spot on the county’s towing rotation list. The Seventh Circuit agreed and affirmed. (ST. EVE and PRYOR, concurring)