7th Cir.

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Every decision we've summarized from United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Apr 13 2026
24-2245 Panel Decision

JOHN DOE v. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN INDIANA, et al

The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of an adult plaintiff's request to litigate a Title IX lawsuit under a pseudonym. The court held that absent a substantial risk of physical harm or retaliation beyond the consequences of public truth, the public interest in transparency outweighs privacy interests in federal appellate proceedings.

Apr 13 2026
24-3175 Panel Decision

MARWAN MAHAJNI v. VU DO and SCOTT WOIDA

The Seventh Circuit dismissed an appeal challenging a district court's denial of qualified immunity because the lower court's ruling was not a final adjudication. The appellate court held that the district court's decision to deny immunity without prejudice and invite further arguments at summary judgment did not satisfy the collateral order doctrine.

Apr 2 2026
24-1612 Panel Decision

Stingley v. Laci Transport Inc.

The Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for shuttle truck drivers transporting auto parts, holding their intrastate routes fell within the Fair Labor Standards Act's motor carrier exemption. The court ruled that moving goods from out-of-state storage lots to a Chicago assembly plant was part of a continuous interstate journey.

Apr 2 2026
24-1613 Panel Decision

Stingley v. Laci Transport Inc.

The Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for trucking defendants, holding that shuttle drivers moving auto parts within Illinois were engaged in interstate commerce. Consequently, the drivers are exempt from state and federal overtime wage requirements under the Motor Carrier Act.

Apr 2 2026
24-1998 Panel Decision

Nos. 24-1998 & 24-2210 Don Lippert v. Latoya Hughes, et al.

The Seventh Circuit affirmed a district court's modification of a consent decree requiring the Illinois Department of Corrections to provide adequate medical care, holding that the PLRA's specific findings requirement was satisfied by the parties' stipulation and the court's explicit amendment. The court dismissed appeals regarding the extension of the decree and the removal of a procedural stipulation, concluding those issues fell outside its interlocutory jurisdiction.

Apr 2 2026
24-2210 Panel Decision

Nos. 24-1998 & 24-2210 DON LIPPERT v. LATOYA HUGHES, et al

The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court's enforcement of a consent decree requiring the Illinois Department of Corrections to provide adequate medical care to prisoners. The court rejected the department's argument that new findings under the Prison Litigation Reform Act were necessary because the lower court had already satisfied those statutory standards when approving the implementation plan.

Apr 2 2026
24-2432 Panel Decision

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. EDLANDO M. WATSON

The Seventh Circuit affirmed Edlando Watson's conviction for possessing a firearm as a felon, holding that disarming individuals convicted of dangerous drug-dealing felonies aligns with the nation's historical tradition. The court applied the Supreme Court's two-step *Bruen* test to find the statute constitutional as applied to Watson, while explicitly declining to rule on whether non-dangerous felons may be similarly restricted.

Apr 2 2026
24-3252 Panel Decision

ROBERT W. BARKER and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. EDWARD BOETTCHER and BEVERLY BOETTCHER

The Seventh Circuit affirmed a district court order that remanded a state property dispute to state court while retaining a separate subpoena enforcement proceeding in federal court. The court held that the federal officer removal statute allows federal agencies to remove only ancillary proceedings involving their employees, not the underlying state-law case.

Apr 2 2026
25-1553 Panel Decision

THOMAS T.D. POLK v. PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY and SECURA SU- PREME INSURANCE COMPANY

The Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Progressive and Secura, holding that Illinois law permits anti-stacking provisions to cap total recovery at the highest single-policy limit. The court ruled that the plaintiff's existing $900,000 recovery from other sources satisfied the cap, leaving the insurers liable only for the remaining $100,000.