9 Cited authorities

U.S. v. Male
564 U.S. 932 (2011) Cited 290 times
Holding that there is no presumption of collateral consequences for an expired sentence
Damasco v. Clearwire Corp.
662 F.3d 891 (7th Cir. 2011) Cited 196 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding that unaccepted Rule 68 offer of full relief before class certification did moot case
Rand v. Monsanto Co.
926 F.2d 596 (7th Cir. 1991) Cited 267 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding individual plaintiff's case mooted by defendant's offer for “the full amount by which answers to interrogatories assert that [the plaintiff] was injured, plus the costs of the suit”
Griesz v. Household Bank
176 F.3d 1012 (7th Cir. 1999) Cited 168 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that an offer of judgment that encompasses the relief claimed “eliminates a legal dispute upon which federal jurisdiction can be based,” because “[y]ou cannot persist in suing after you've won”
Holstein v. City of Chicago
29 F.3d 1145 (7th Cir. 1994) Cited 160 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a plaintiff "may not spurn this offer of all the damages he is owed and proceed to trial"
Gates v. City of Chicago
623 F.3d 389 (7th Cir. 2010) Cited 59 times
Holding that Plaintiffs' restitution claims were properly dismissed as moot, but that the grant of summary judgment to Defendants on the due process "notice" and "procedures" issues was in error
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 354,229 times 943 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 5 Cited 22,753 times 16 Legal Analyses
Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system
Section 227 - Restrictions on use of telephone equipment
47 U.S.C. § 227 Cited 5,735 times 740 Legal Analyses
Granting exclusive jurisdiction to federal courts over actions brought by state attorney generals

Scott v. Westlake Financial Network, Inc.

9 Cited authorities

Holding that there is no presumption of collateral consequences for an expired sentence

Holding that unaccepted Rule 68 offer of full relief before class certification did moot case

Holding individual plaintiff's case mooted by defendant's offer for “the full amount by which answers to interrogatories assert that [the plaintiff] was injured, plus the costs of the suit”

Holding that an offer of judgment that encompasses the relief claimed “eliminates a legal dispute upon which federal jurisdiction can be based,” because “[y]ou cannot persist in suing after you've won”

Holding that a plaintiff "may not spurn this offer of all the damages he is owed and proceed to trial"

Holding that Plaintiffs' restitution claims were properly dismissed as moot, but that the grant of summary judgment to Defendants on the due process "notice" and "procedures" issues was in error

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

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

Granting exclusive jurisdiction to federal courts over actions brought by state attorney generals