Daily Opinion Summaries U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Summaries for September 11, 2014 Satkar Hospitality, Inc.v. Fox Television Stations, Inc. Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Communications Law, Constitutional Law, Injury Law Moultrie v. Penn Aluminum Int'l, LLC Civil Rights, Labor & Employment Law

Receive this and other FREE daily opinion summaries from Justia

Satkar Hospitality, Inc.v. Fox Television Stations, Inc. Docket: 11-3572 Opinion Date: September 10, 2014 Judge: Sykes Areas of Law: Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Communications Law, Constitutional Law, Injury Law Satkar owns Schaumburg, Illinois hotel and was mentioned in blog posts and a television news report as having made a large donation to a local politician and later won a property-tax appeal. In response, the Cook County Board of Review revoked Satkar’s property-tax reduction and opened an inquiry. Satkar sued the Board, its members and staff, the blog, the television station, and reporters, under 42 U.S.C. 1983, and for defamation and false light. The district court dismissed the 1983 claims against the Board and the officials. The Seventh Circuit affirmed. The court separately dismissed the state-law claims against the media defendants, applying the Illinois Anti-SLAPP statute. Because the section 1983 claims were still pending, the judge entered final judgment under FRCP 54(b) to permit appeal of the SLAPP issue. Later, the judge orally invited Satkar to ask for a Rule 54(b) judgment on the SLAPP dismissal, forgetting that he had already entered final judgment. Satkar did not correct the judge, did not seek clarification, and did not file a notice of appeal. After the deadline to appeal expired, Satkar sought an extension, claiming that the judge’s comment created confusion. The judge granted the extension, relying on the defunct “unique circumstances” doctrine. The Seventh Circuit dismissed an appeal, noting that the Supreme Court has disavowed the unique circumstances doctrine and Satkar has not otherwise demonstrated excusable neglect. http://j.st/ZxSh View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

Moultrie v. Penn Aluminum Int'l, LLC Docket: 13-2206 Opinion Date: September 10, 2014 Judge: Sykes Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Labor & Employment Law Moultrie, who began working at Penn Aluminum in southern Illinois in1990 and held various positions, was demoted from his position as a forklift operator in 2009. Before his demotion, he had filed a grievance concerning a work assignment. That grievance did not allege racial discrimination. He filed another grievance, after the demotion, again not mentioning race. After his claims were rejected by the Illinois Department of Human Rights and the EEOC, Moultrie sued. Penn asserted that Moultrie was demoted because of performance problems that caused delays and other problems and about which he was repeatedly warned. Moultrie, attributed Penn’s decision to racial discrimination and retaliation and claimed that Penn’s conduct violated the collective-bargaining agreement. The district court dismissed an Illinois state-law claim as time barred and entered summary judgment against Moultrie on all remaining claims. The Seventh Circuit affirmed. Moultrie failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his discrimination and retaliation claims. http://j.st/ZxS5 View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar