Parker v. United States

4 Citing cases

  1. Slabon v. Sanchez

    Case No. 15-cv-08965 (N.D. Ill. Sep. 28, 2020)   Cited 5 times

    A medical battery claim requires the existence of medical treatment. Parker v. United States, 721 F. App'x 531, 532-33 (7th Cir. 2018) ("A plaintiff claiming medical battery in Illinois may recover if he shows 'a total lack of consent to the procedure performed, that the treatment was contrary to the patient's will, or that the treatment was at substantial variance with the consent granted.'") (quoting Fiala v. Bickford Senior Living Group, LLC, 2015 IL App (2d) 150067, ΒΆ 20, 398 Ill. Dec. 324, 43 N.E.3d 1234).

  2. Andes v. United States

    Case No. 1:19CV00005 (W.D. Va. Jul. 10, 2020)   Cited 5 times

    Federal courts use their own adjudicatory procedures." Parker v. United States, 721 F. App'x 531, 533 (7th Cir. 2018) (unpublished). "Evidence required as a matter of state substantive law comes after the complaint, often at the summary-judgment stage, even if in state court the complaint must supply evidence and not just make claims." Id.

  3. Vandervelden v. United States

    Case No. 3:18-CV-1333-NJR-GCS (S.D. Ill. Mar. 4, 2019)

    Whether Vandervelden was required to file such an affidavit may be open to debate. See Parker v. United States, 721 F. App'x 531, 533 (7th Cir. 2018) (suggesting in dicta that a complaint filed in federal court need not include evidence, such as the affidavit required by state law); but see Sherrod v. Lingle, 223 F.3d 605, 613 (7th Cir. 2000) (stating that dismissal is mandatory if a plaintiff fails to abide by the affidavit requirement); Hahn v. Walsh, 762 F.3d 617, 629 (7th Cir. 2014). Illinois courts liberally construe certificates of merit in favor of the plaintiff, recognizing the statute as a tool to reduce frivolous lawsuits by requiring a minimum amount of merit, not a likelihood of success.

  4. Kessler v. Pass

    Case No. 3:18-cv-530-JPG-DGW (S.D. Ill. Nov. 15, 2018)

    Whether or not Plaintiff is required to file such an affidavit at the time of his complaint may be open to debate. See Parker v. United States, 721 Fed.Appx. 531, 533 (7th Cir. 2018) (suggesting in dicta that a complaint filed in federal court need not include evidence, such as the affidavit required by state law); but see Sherrod v. Lingle, 223 F.3d 605, 613 (7th Cir. 2000) (stating that dismissal is mandatory if a plaintiff fails to abide by the affidavit requirement); Hahn v. Walsh, 762 F.3d 617, 629 (7th Cir. 2014) (concerning this statute in particular). No Court in this District has waived the affidavit requirement.