Harrington v. Berryhill, s. 17-3179 & 17-3194

Decision Date04 December 2017
Docket NumberNos. 17-3179 & 17-3194,s. 17-3179 & 17-3194
Citation876 F.3d 889
Parties Stacy HARRINGTON, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Nancy A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant–Appellee, and Andrew Banks, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant–Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

Mahesha P. Subbaraman, Attorney, Subbaraman PLLC, Minneapolis, MN, Adriana Maria de la Torre, Attorney, Carina Maria de la Torre, Attorney, De La Torre Law Office, LLC, Indianapolis, IN, for PlaintiffsAppellants.

Jill Z. Julian, Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, Indianapolis, IN, Michael Jason Scoggins, Attorney, Social

Security Administration, Office of the General Counsel, Region V, Chicago, IL, for DefendantAppellee Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security (Case No. 17–3179).

Tina L. Nommay, Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, Fort Wayne, IN, Jason Scoggins, Social Security Administration, Office of the General Counsel, Region V, Chicago, IL, for DefendantAppellee Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security (Case No. 17–3194).

Before Hamilton, Circuit Judge.

Hamilton, Circuit Judge.

I write this short in-chambers opinion because it might help counsel streamline the fair processing of motions before our court concerning case management. This opinion is intended as a practical gloss on this court's Operating Procedure 1, available on the court's public website, as well as Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 27. The bottom line: If you want this court to act quickly on your case-management motion, contact opposing counsel and ask whether they will or will not oppose the motion.

In these two similar appeals from actions of the Social Security Administration, the appellants have filed a motion to consolidate the appeals, to adopt a briefing schedule, and to allow briefs that are a little longer than would be allowed in each appeal by itself. The motion asserts that both the facts and the legal issues in the appeals are essentially identical. When the motion was filed, it was referred to me as the motions judge for the week.

While the motion seemed sensible, this is an adversarial system. Experience teaches that case-management matters—even matters as mundane as brief length, briefing schedules, and consolidation—can sometimes have tactical or strategic effects for the parties that courts cannot predict reliably. The court has the option of reaching out to opposing parties and inviting a response, and often does so. Another...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • United States v. Silvestre-Gregorio
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • December 22, 2020
  • Harrington v. Berryhill
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • October 10, 2018
    ...the parties brought these appeals, which we have consolidated because they pose the same legal questions. See Harrington v. Berryhill , 876 F.3d 889 (7th Cir. 2017). We believe it would be imprudent to entertain new administrative claims that are only minimally related to the judgments, so ......
  • United States v. Estrada, 17-5081
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • December 4, 2017
  • United States v. Perez-Lopez
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Kentucky
    • April 27, 2018
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT