Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.
572 U.S. 118 (2014) Cited 2,821 times 69 Legal AnalysesHolding that a plaintiff seeking to bring suit under a federal statute must show not only that he has standing under Article III, but also that his "complaint fall within the zone of interests protected by the law" invoked
Meraz-Camacho v. U.S.
417 F. App'x 558 (7th Cir. 2011) Cited 41 timesHolding that a surreply “should generally be allowed only for valid reasons, such as when the movant raises new arguments in a reply brief”
Almy v. Kickert Sch. Bus Line, Inc.
Case No.: 08-cv-2902 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 7, 2013) Cited 25 timesGranting leave to file surreply where reply brief "did not raise new arguments but was accompanied by exhibits not previously submitted or discussed"
Marbury Law Group, PLLC v. Carl
729 F. Supp. 2d 79 (D.D.C. 2010) Cited 25 timesHolding that § 1963 is limited to registering federal judgments
Destiny Health, Inc. v. Connecticut General Life Ins.
741 F. Supp. 2d 901 (N.D. Ill. 2010) Cited 14 timesFinding that the plaintiff acted promptly in seeking to amend within 10 days of receiving discovery responses that raised the issue
Maremont v. Susan Fredman Design Group
772 F. Supp. 2d 967 (N.D. Ill. 2011) Cited 11 timesDenying motion to dismiss false endorsement claim where plaintiff, a professional interior designer, alleged that defendant, a design competitor, authored fictitious Tweets and Facebook Posts using plaintiff's accounts
Championsworld LLC v. United States Soccer Federation, Inc.
726 F. Supp. 2d 961 (N.D. Ill. 2010) Cited 7 timesDenying motions for failure to comply with Local Rule 5.3(b)
Piphus v. Bd. of Educ. of Chi.
Civil Action No. 12 CV 7257 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 31, 2014) Cited 1 timesDismissing Monell claim because policy alleged could not have caused plaintiffs' injuries