Seventh Circuit Roundup
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit covers three important states – Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin – and multiple major metro areas, including Chicago, Indianapolis, and Milwaukee. It handles a wide variety of cases and is home to a prominent and thought-provoking cast of judges, so there’s rarely a dull moment in CA7’s Dirksen Federal Building. Hosts Kian Hudson and Mark Crandley of Barnes & Thornburg track what’s going on in the Seventh Circuit, highlight interesting cases, and read between the lines of notable opinions.
Seventh Circuit Roundup
February Roundup: A Botched Beneficiary Change, and a Discrimination Claim That Didn't Make It Past the Pleadings
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
Show Notes:
Hosts Kian Hudson and Mark Crandley examine two recent Seventh Circuit decisions that clarify critical pleading and compliance standards.
Cases Discussed:
Packing Corporation of America Thrift Plan v. Dina Langdon
When a divorced employee sends a fax requesting a beneficiary change but dies before submitting the proper forms, who gets the retirement benefits—the ex-wife or the estate? The court addresses whether the "substantial compliance" doctrine survives recent Supreme Court precedent and draws a bright line: good intentions aren't enough if you don't follow the plan's procedures.
Miao v. United Airlines
After being removed from a flight following a dispute over overhead bin space, a passenger alleges racial discrimination. The court tackles a fundamental question: when is differential treatment enough to get past a motion to dismiss? The answer reveals the high bar discrimination plaintiffs face at the pleading stage, even when they identify a comparator.