Jurisdictional Statement

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Jeremy Lowrey, et al. v. Andrew Tilden, et al.

Case No.: 19-1365; 19-3145

Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, in chambers.

Focus: Jurisdictional Statement

In the two cases I have consolidated only for purposes of this opinion, a magistrate judge issued the final judgment from which the appeal has been taken. Circuit Rule 28(a)(2)(v) requires an appellant in such a case to include in its jurisdictional statement not only information about the magistrate judge’s involvement, but also “the dates on which each party consented in writing to the entry of final judgment by the magistrate judge.” See also 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). The information provided in each of these appeals fell short of the requirements of Circuit Rule 28. In Lowrey v. Tilden, No. 19-1365, the appellees informed the court in their jurisdictional statement that the parties had consented to have a magistrate judge hear the case; they did so after observing that the pro se appellant’s jurisdictional statement was not complete and correct and appropriately moving on to provide their own complete jurisdictional summary. See Circuit Rule 28(b). But counsel failed to provide the dates of consent of each party to the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction. In McCray v. Wilkie, No. 19-3145, counsel not only failed to provide the dates of consent, but he also neglected to mention that the decision from which the appeal was being taken had been rendered by a magistrate judge.

The significance of the information about the magistrate judge’s involvement and the consent of all parties to that judge’s resolution of the merits cannot be overstated. See Coleman v. Labor & Indus. Rev. Comm’n of the State of Wis., 860 F.3d 461 (7th Cir. 2017) (a magistrate judge has no authority to issue a final decision that is directly appealable to the court of appeals unless all parties consent). This rule is not a secret. It is clearly spelled out in Circuit Rule 28(a)(2)(v), and this court’s Practitioner’s Handbook for Appeals (2019 ed.) is readily available on the court’s public website, as the second item under the tab “Rules and Procedures.” See http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/rules-procedures//Handbook.pdf. The Handbook explicitly refers to the failure to provide dates of consent to proceed before a magistrate judge as one of the recurring problems that the court encounters when performing jurisdictional screening. See Handbook at 145.

In each of these cases, counsel shall have seven days in which to file an amended jurisdictional statement that complies in all respect with the rules.

So Ordered

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is trademark corporate counsel for Harley-Davidson. Hawkins oversees the prosecution and maintenance of the Harley-Davidson’s international trademark portfolio in emerging markets.