15 Cited authorities

Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp.
486 U.S. 800 (1988) Cited 3,153 times 21 Legal Analyses
Holding that the appeal belonged before the regional circuit because the claims did not arise under patent law
Kowalski v. Tesmer
543 U.S. 125 (2004) Cited 708 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that attorneys lacked third party standing to assert the rights of future, as yet unascertained clients with whom “they ha[d] no relationship at all”
David v. Caterpillar, Inc.
324 F.3d 851 (7th Cir. 2003) Cited 651 times
Holding that liability can be based on the bias of employees who have the duty to recommend other employees for promotion, where the decision maker said he "received the necessary information" for decisions from those recommending employees
Santamarina v. Sears, Roebuck Co.
466 F.3d 570 (7th Cir. 2006) Cited 315 times
Holding that transferee judge was permitted to reconsider order denying remand by transferor judge
Jarrard v. CDI Telecommunications, Inc.
408 F.3d 905 (7th Cir. 2005) Cited 117 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that an appellant who "failed to develop [an argument] in the district court (or here for that matter) with citation to relevant authority or meaningful argument" forfeited the argument on appeal
Methode Electronics v. Adam Technologies
371 F.3d 923 (7th Cir. 2004) Cited 69 times
Holding that, when a judge proceeds under Rule 11 without a motion from the parties, a judge is without authority to award attorney fees
Potter v. Janus Investment Fund
483 F. Supp. 2d 692 (S.D. Ill. 2007) Cited 46 times
In Potter, Judge Herndon held that where the "gravamen" of a plaintiff s complaint is that negligence and breaches of fiduciary duty by defendants have allowed market-timing traders to engage in a pattern of market-timing trades in the shares of a mutual fund, to the detriment of long-term shareholders, the fact that the plaintiffs have chosen to characterize their claims in terms of negligence and breach of fiduciary duty under state law is not enough to avoid the preclusive effect of the Securities Litigation Act. Potter, 483 F. Supp. 2d at 702.
Russell v. City of Milwaukee
338 F.3d 662 (7th Cir. 2003) Cited 46 times
Holding that "the district court did not abuse its discretion under Rule 6 by enforcing the [90-day] deadline" under Rule 25 where the plaintiff did "not ma[k]e any showing or argument of excusable neglect"
U.S. v. Thomas
11 F.3d 732 (7th Cir. 1993) Cited 46 times
Holding that we lacked jurisdiction to review the downward departure decision at issue because the district court had exercised its discretion
Doe v. Hersemann
155 F.R.D. 630 (N.D. Ind. 1994) Cited 33 times
Holding that FED. R. CIV. P. 45 permits service of a subpoena by certified mail
Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 5 Cited 22,480 times 16 Legal Analyses
Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system
Rule 45 - Subpoena
Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 Cited 16,891 times 108 Legal Analyses
Holding that a subpoena may command a person to attend a trial, hearing, or deposition "within 100 miles of where the person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person"
Section 1927 - Counsel's liability for excessive costs
28 U.S.C. § 1927 Cited 8,889 times 81 Legal Analyses
Granting courts the power to charge "excess costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees reasonably incurred" due to "unreasonabl[e] and vexatious" conduct

Lightspeed Media Corporation v. Smith et al

15 Cited authorities

Holding that the appeal belonged before the regional circuit because the claims did not arise under patent law

Holding that attorneys lacked third party standing to assert the rights of future, as yet unascertained clients with whom “they ha[d] no relationship at all”

Holding that liability can be based on the bias of employees who have the duty to recommend other employees for promotion, where the decision maker said he "received the necessary information" for decisions from those recommending employees

Holding that transferee judge was permitted to reconsider order denying remand by transferor judge

Holding that an appellant who "failed to develop [an argument] in the district court (or here for that matter) with citation to relevant authority or meaningful argument" forfeited the argument on appeal

Holding that, when a judge proceeds under Rule 11 without a motion from the parties, a judge is without authority to award attorney fees

Holding that "the district court did not abuse its discretion under Rule 6 by enforcing the [90-day] deadline" under Rule 25 where the plaintiff did "not ma[k]e any showing or argument of excusable neglect"

Holding that we lacked jurisdiction to review the downward departure decision at issue because the district court had exercised its discretion

Holding that FED. R. CIV. P. 45 permits service of a subpoena by certified mail

Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system

Holding that a subpoena may command a person to attend a trial, hearing, or deposition "within 100 miles of where the person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person"

Granting courts the power to charge "excess costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees reasonably incurred" due to "unreasonabl[e] and vexatious" conduct