01-1852 McGuire v. City of Springfield

By: dmc-admin//February 18, 2002//

Listen to this article

“Failure to pay a judgment or comply with an injunction entered by a court or agency cannot usefully be called ‘retaliation for filing the complaint’; nor is slow payment or even nonpayment a separate violation of federal law. See Evans v. Chicago, 10 F.3d 474 (7th Cir. 1993) (en banc). It is just a reason to enforce the judgment in supplemental proceedings. So too here. McGuire should have complained to the IDHR if she believed that the City had undermined the IDHR’s order by dismissing her from the training program without adequate cause. … Her state-law theory could have been presented in federal court under the supplemental jurisdiction. But it was not, and there is no substantial federal claim. McGuire is a beneficiary of the IDHR’s order, and that the benefit could (or even should) have been greater does not amount to retaliation for initiating the proceedings.”

Affirmed.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, Mills, J., Easterbrook, J.

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event