Notable—and quotable—Chicago lawyer Patrick Eckler joins us for a crash-course in Seventh Circuit paranoia (if you’re paranoid about jurisdictional questions at oral argument—which you really should be). A co-host of the Podium and Panel Podcast, Patrick gives a primer on how federal appellate judges look at things The Chicago Way and then explains how a recent oral argument went off the rails quite quickly. The resulting opinion about the Federal Arbitration Act and how it relates to Amtrak was pretty short, mostly because the lawyers seem to have forgotten they work for a railroad. Then Christie Hebert of IJ takes us on an up-and-down ride in the Eighth Circuit with a takings case (and a bit of Contract Clause thrown in) that despite its hopeful beginnings on appeal two years ago ends in a meaningless one-page opinion. Along the way she shares what she learned at the Supreme Court earlier this year in IJ’s property rights case, DeVillier. And, for those who can’t find such content anywhere else, there’s a spirited defense of Rule 12(c) motions.

Click here for transcript.

Montoya v. Amtrak

Oral argument in Montoya

Heights Apartments v. Walz (2022)

Heights Apartments v. Walz (D. Ct. 2023)

Heights Apartments v. Walz (2024)

Podium and Panel Podcast (Apple)

Patrick on LinkedIn

The Railway Children

Latest episode of Unpublished Opinions

Recent Episodes

Short Circuit 432 | Moth-Eaten Precedent

A wild, and tragic, story from the Fifth Circuit with a bit of good (yet confusing) news at the end. IJ’s Diana Simpson tells us […]

Listen Now

Short Circuit 431 | Hard but not Impossible

We welcome back a treasured many-times guest, the first time since he’s left IJ. Brian Morris served in our merry band of libertarian litigators for […]

Listen Now

Short Circuit 429 | A Fifth of Circuit

In our #12Months12Circuits series it’s time to drink an entire Fifth. Now, regular listeners will be very familiar with the Fifth Circuit’s waters and may […]

Listen Now