Federal Civil Practice

A group of protesters and journalists filed a lawsuit against multiple federal defendants alleging violations of their First and Fourth Amendment rights by using tear gas and other chemical agents to break up protests without justification. The district court entered an injunction regulating all federal immigration enforcement efforts district wide. The government appealed the injunction order. The plaintiffs then asked the district court to voluntarily dismiss the case by asserting that the immigration activities giving rise to the proceedings had ended. The defendants also filed a motion to dismiss the appeal and vacate the preliminary injunction. The Seventh Circuit vacated the district court’s preliminary injunction and dismissed the appeal. (EASTERBROOK, dissenting)

Plaintiffs filed a class action lawsuit alleging that defendant’s virtual try-on feature violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act through its capture and use of their facial data. The district court certified a class of users in the state of Illinois and defendant filed an interlocutory appeal. The Seventh Circuit found no abuse of discretion and affirmed, explaining that common questions relating to the defendant’s liability predominate and that class certification will streamline the litigation and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that users of the product lacked sufficient incentive to bring individual lawsuits. (HAMLTON and ROVNER, concurring)

In a bankruptcy case, the Seventh Circuit considered whether the company that filed for bankruptcy was responsible for unpaid legal fees incurred by one of two limited liability companies that served as managing members of the bankrupt company. The bankruptcy and district courts granted and affirmed summary judgment that objected to the law firm’s claim. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, rejecting the law firm’s arguments premised on an oral contract outside the scope of the statute of frauds, promissory estoppel, and statutory and contractual indemnification rights. (KIRSCH and JACKSON-AKIWUMI, concurring)

Plaintiffs, three employees at Illinois grade schools, filed a lawsuit after they were either put on unpaid leave or terminated by their employers for refusing to comply with state requirements that they either receive a Covid-19 vaccination or undergo weekly testing. Plaintiffs alleged that the schools’ actions violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscious Act. The district court dismissed the complaint and plaintiffs appealed and contested the dismissal of their Title VII claim, arguing for the first time that it also violated the Illinois Public Health Code. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that plaintiffs did not identify a religious objection to the schools’ requirement that they undergo weekly testing and that Title VII did not require the schools to contradict the Governor’s Executive Order. (EASTERBROOK and KIRSCH, concurring)

Plaintiffs filed a class action lawsuit against the defendant after the subscription-based wireless communication system in their vehicle that was manufactured by the defendant became obsolete and defendant refused to replace the system at no cost to the plaintiffs. Plaintiffs alleged breach of warranty under federal and state law. The district court granted the defendant’s motion to compel arbitration based on the product’s terms of service and plaintiffs appealed, arguing that they did not agree to arbitrate their claims. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, finding that defendant presented unrebutted evidence that subscribers received notice of the arbitration provision in the agreement prior to initiating their subscriptions. (ROVNER and SCUDDER, concurring)