Tech News, Magazine & Review WordPress Theme 2017
  • Home
  • Supply Chain Updates
  • Global News
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Supply Chain Updates
  • Global News
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
No Result
View All Result
Home Supply Chain Updates

Self-Representation And A Maze Of Obtuse Federal Court Rules Yields Injustice

usscmc by usscmc
November 8, 2019
Self-Representation And A Maze Of Obtuse Federal Court Rules Yields Injustice
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

corn maze

(c

Denver Post via Getty Images

One problem with federal courts is they are too expensive and too difficult for average Americans to navigate.

And yet, they are the forum in the United States for deciding civil rights complaints. So average Americans, most of whom can’t afford to hire an attorney, have no choice but to represent themselves.

This situation creates predictable problems that are graphically illustrated in a recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit based in Chicago.

A three-judge 7th Circuit panel complains that Edith McCurry, an African-American, filed lengthy and “rambling pro se complaints” alleging race, sex, disability and age discrimination against her former employer, Kenco Logistics Services, which handled management services for an Illinois warehouse owned by the candy maker, Mars, Inc.  McCurry, a former clerical employee in the plant’s human resources department, also argued Kenco and Mars conspired to violate her civil rights.

Kenco filed a pretrial motion to dismiss McCurry’s complaint because McCurry failed to follow local federal court Rule 7.1(D) which required her to answer every “material” and “immaterial” fact asserted in Kenco’s motion. U.S. Judge Colin S. Bruce interpreted all of Kenco’s facts as being admitted by McCurry. Then he dismissed her case.

Appeal Record Is Blank

McCurry secured counsel to file an appeal to the 7th Circuit, Jordan T. Hoffman, who appears to specialize in tax law.  

The 7th Circuit panel upheld the dismissal of McCurry’s case in a decision in which it called Hoffman’s lengthy appeal “utterly frivolous” because it didn’t challenge Judge Bruce’s decision to enforce Rule 7.1(D). As a result, the panel said the appeal record technically contained no evidence to support her claims. Furthermore, the panel called Hoffman’s lengthy brief a “monstrosity” and ordered him “to show cause why he should not be sanctioned or otherwise disciplined.”

In oral arguments, a member of the appeals court panel almost immediately interrupted Hoffman and asked:  “Do you agree that Ms. McCurry did not comply with the local rules in responding to the summary judgment?”

Hoffman said McCurry “technically attempted to address [the rule] but she wasn’t able to.”  Regardless, he said, Judge Bruce should have given “deference” to the declarations and evidence in the case, including affidavits from both McCurry and her boss.

Never Posted the Position

The judge then expressed incredulity that McCurry complained she was a victim of race discrimination when she was not promoted to manager of the human resources department even though she had never applied for the job.

Hoffman responded the job was never posted, in violation of Kenco policy, and so McCurry was not given an opportunity to apply for the position.

“In addition,” he said, McCurry “had 15 years of experience doing HR activity related to benefits, discipline, hiring termination, leave of absence …” Hoffman argued that Kenco hired a white woman who was 17 years younger than McCurry who had only a couple of years of limited experience and no special HR certifications.

Kenco was represented by professional counsel, Julia  P. Argentieri , an associate of Jackson Lewis, a national law firm with an office in Chicago. Argentieri claimed that it was not a violation of Kenco’s policy to hire candidates without posting the position. Which, of course, begs the question of whether Kenco’s failure to have such a policy is evidence of discrimination.

Rule 7.1(D)

It is not a surprise that a former clerical worker failed to obey an obscure local procedural rule adopted by a U.S. District Court to supplement the national Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

For the record, Rule 7.1(D)(1)(a)-(c) requires the plaintiff in response to a summary-judgment motion to “identify, in separate subsections: (1) the undisputed material facts; (2) the disputed material facts, (3) the disputed immaterial facts; (4) the undisputed immaterial facts; and (5) any additional material facts.”

There must be rules for a court system to operate efficiently but Rule 7.1(D) is not easy to understand and might even be unintelligible to a former clerical worker:

  • The rule presumes that self-represented litigants, most of whom did not graduate from law school and/or conduct an appellate litigation practice in the 7th Circuit, are aware of the rule.
  • Even if aware that there are local rules, it is unlikely a self-represented litigant knows there is a specific rule outlining how to respond to a defendant’s dismissal motion.
  • Self-represented litigants are unlikely to understand what constitutes a “material” and “immaterial” fact. This is a complex legal term. It basically refers to a fact that would make a difference to the outcome of the case.
  • It  is not clear what Rule 7.1 means when it directs litigants to “identify, in separate subsections” the material and immaterial facts. This is the clause that apparently requires the plaintiff to deny or admit each fact, separately. Why don’t they just say that?

McCurry’s pleadings may be obtuse, hard to understand and, to some extent, unintelligible, but so are the Court rules.

The federal court system rakes in approximately $8 billion taxpayer dollars a year. Shouldn’t some of those billions be dedicated to improving the system by making it transparent and accessible to the people who pay the bills?

The Judges on the panel were Diane S. Sykes, who wrote the opinion, and Michael Y. Scudder, Jr., and Amy J. St. Eve. The case is McCurry v. Kenco Logistics Services, LLC., et al, No. 18-3206 (November 7, 2019). The 7th Circuit serves Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin

usscmc

usscmc

No Result
View All Result

Recent Posts

  • Volkswagen Announces Pricing of 25% Equity Stake Sale in Porsche
  • Can software simplify the supply chain? Ryan Petersen thinks so
  • A strategic approach to cost reduction for banks and fintechs
  • Study examines supply chain issues and opportunities
  • Instacart acquires hyper local grocery e-commerce platform

Recent Comments

  • Top 5 Supply Chain Certifications that are in high demand | Top 5 Certifications on Top 5 Globally Recognized Supply Chain Certifications
  • 3 Best Procurement Certifications that are most valuable | Procurement Newz on Top 5 Globally Recognized Supply Chain Certifications

Archives

  • September 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • September 2019

Categories

  • Global News
  • Supply Chain Updates

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

slot gacor slot slot gacor 2023 slot 2023 slot gacor terbaru slot gacor terpercaya slot gacor slot gacor slot slot gacor 2023 slot 2023 slot gacor terbaru slot gacor terpercaya slot gacor slot gacor slot slot gacor 2023 slot 2023 slot gacor terbaru slot gacor terpercaya slot gacor

Pages

  • Home
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Antispam
  • Contact Us

Categories

  • Global News
  • Supply Chain Updates
slot gacor slot slot gacor 2023 slot 2023 slot gacor terbaru slot gacor terpercaya slot gacor slot gacor slot slot gacor 2023 slot 2023 slot gacor terbaru slot gacor terpercaya slot gacor slot gacor slot slot gacor 2023 slot 2023 slot gacor terbaru slot gacor terpercaya slot gacor

Tags

APICS Globally Recognized Supply Chain Certifications IIPMR Certifications International Institute for Procurement and Market Research (IIPMR) ISM Next Level Purchasing Top 5 Supply Chain Certifications top supply chain certifications

Trending

No Content Available
  • Antispam
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Home
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use

© 2023 www.usscmc.com

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Supply Chain Updates
  • Global News
  • Contact Us

© 2023 www.usscmc.com

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled

Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.

Non-necessary

Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.

SAVE & ACCEPT