Filed: Dec. 09, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 AMENDED December 9, 2010 December 8, 2010 Before RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge No. 10-1963 AMERICAN BANK, Appeal from the United States Plaintiff-Appellant, District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond v. Division. CITY OF MENASHA, et al., No. 4:09-cv-0064-TLS-APR Defendants-Appellees. Theresa L. Springmann, Judge. ORDER Upon consideration o
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 AMENDED December 9, 2010 December 8, 2010 Before RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge No. 10-1963 AMERICAN BANK, Appeal from the United States Plaintiff-Appellant, District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond v. Division. CITY OF MENASHA, et al., No. 4:09-cv-0064-TLS-APR Defendants-Appellees. Theresa L. Springmann, Judge. ORDER Upon consideration of..
More
United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 AMENDED December 9, 2010 December 8, 2010 Before RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge No. 10-1963 AMERICAN BANK, Appeal from the United States Plaintiff-Appellant, District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond v. Division. CITY OF MENASHA, et al., No. 4:09-cv-0064-TLS-APR Defendants-Appellees. Theresa L. Springmann, Judge. ORDER Upon consideration of the motion filed by the defendants on December 2, 2010 to amend the opinion in this case issued on November 29, 2010, the sentence on page 3 of the slip opinion, beginning ("In an example of”) is deleted and the following sentence substituted: (Menasha's brief barely mentions, and does not discuss, the public-records law and contains no citation to it, as if to insinuate that there is no legal basis for American Bank's insisting on compliance with the request and as if therefore the stay granted by the district court did not preempt state law.)
