Chapman v. First Index, Inc.

Docket Number14-2773,14-2775
Decision Date06 August 2015
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
150 cases
  • Koss v. Norwood
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • March 29, 2018
    ...moot only when it is impossible for a court to grant any effectual relief whatever to the prevailing party." Chapman v. 1st Index, Inc. , 796 F.3d 783, 785 (7th Cir. 2015) (quoting Knox v. Serv. Emps. Int'l Union, Local 1000 , 567 U.S. 298, 307, 132 S.Ct. 2277, 183 L.Ed.2d 281 (2012) ).Defe......
  • Berger v. Perry's Steakhouse of Ill., LLC
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • December 23, 2019
    ...validity of the offset fee policy itself, and the issue of damages.Tender of partial payment. Defendants, citing Chapman v. First Index, Inc. , 796 F.3d 783 (7th Cir. 2015), contend that Plaintiffs' refusal of the offset fee tender should "preclude Plaintiffs from continuing to sue on amoun......
  • Physicians Healthsource, Inc. v. Allscripts Health Solutions, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • June 2, 2017
    ...receiving future messages." Turza , 728 F.3d at 683 (citing 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(C)(iii), (2)(D) ). See also Chapman v. First Index, Inc. , 796 F.3d 783, 784 (7th Cir. 2015) (TCPA "establishes some simple rules that many fax senders ignore ... [including] that commercial faxes include inst......
  • Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • January 20, 2016
    ...v. ACT, Inc., 798 F.3d 46, 52 (C.A.1 2015) ; Hooks v. Landmark Industries, Inc., 797 F.3d 309, 315 (C.A.5 2015) ; Chapman v. First Index, Inc., 796 F.3d 783, 787 (C.A.7 2015) ; Tanasi v. New Alliance Bank, 786 F.3d 195, 200 (C.A.2 2015) ; Stein v. Buccaneers Limited Partnership, 772 F.3d 69......
  • Get Started for Free
2 firm's commentaries
2 books & journal articles
  • Resolution Without Trial
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Litigating Employment Discrimination Cases. Volume 1-2 Volume 2 - Practice
    • May 1, 2023
    ...F.3d 46, 51–52 (1st Cir. 2015); Hooks v. Landmark Industries, Inc ., 797 F.3d 309, 314–315 (5th Cir. 2015); Chapman v. First Index, Inc ., 796 F.3d 783, 786–787 (7th Cir. 2015); Tanasi v. New Alliance Bank , 786 F.3d 195, 199–200 (2nd Cir. 2015); Stein v. Buccaneers Limited Partnership , 77......
  • What Are Courts For? Have We Forsaken the Procedural Gold Standard?
    • United States
    • Louisiana Law Review No. 78-3, April 2018
    • April 1, 2018
    ...is another of the surprisingly many junk-fax suits under . . . the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.” Chapman v. All Am. Painting, Inc., 796 F.3d 783, 784 (7th Cir. 2015) (Easterbrook, C.J.). See generally Marcus, Bending in the Breeze, supra note 45, at 520–30. 804 LOUISIANA LAW REVIEW [V......

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