Seventh Circuit· 8/29/2012

Loretta Capeheart v. Melvin Terrell

Citations

695 F.3d 681
2012 WL 3711720
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 18278

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

concluding that claim seeking injunctive relief was not ripe for review because the possibility of harm was too remote and speculative
noting that a district court's decision to relinquish supplemental jurisdiction will be reversed only in extraordinary circumstances
noting that a district court’s decision to relinquish sup‐ plemental jurisdiction will be reversed only in extraordinary circumstances
finding prior retaliatory actions did not support plaintiff’s claim of vagueness where the prior actions emerged from discretionary actions taken by defendants
explaining that issues resting on the enactment of proposed polices are rarely ripe because a “proposed policy may never come into force and, even if it does, it could well change during the process that takes it from a possible rule to an actual one”
critical question for ripeness concerns is whether the claim involves uncertain events “that may not occur as anticipated, or [may] not occur at all”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Manion, Rovner, Tinder

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.