Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 27 JANUARY 2017

Simultaneous Decisions From The 7th Circuit: How The Later-Argued Case Became Binding Precedent

The Seventh Circuit is very serious about treating its panel decisions as the "law of the court" unless and until they are overruled by the en banc court or a higher authority.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The Seventh Circuit is very serious about treating its panel decisions as the "law of the court" unless and until they are overruled by the en banc court or a higher authority. Hence, its Circuit Rule 40(e) requires a panel that contemplates issuing an opinion that would overrule a prior decision or create a conflict between or among circuits to circulate it among the active members of the court, affording a majority the chance to order the case reheard en banc.

A couple of months ago, we discussed Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, the case in which the opinion of a Seventh Circuit panel arguably overruled a prior Seventh Circuit decision and created a circuit split, either of which would normally have precluded its publication without complying with Rule 40(e). But five of the nine active judges recused themselves from the case, so there could not be a majority to vote to rehear en banc and the panel decision was published as the law of the circuit. We mentioned

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from