David Frank Hamilton

How Judge Hamilton rules, drawn from 66 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Position
Circuit judge
Status
Senior status
Appointed by
Barack Obama (Democratic)
Commissioned
November 23, 2009
ABA rating
Well Qualified
Education
Haverford College (B.A., 1979); Yale Law School (J.D., 1983); University of Tubingen, Germany (graduate study as a Fulbright Scholar)
Signed orders read
66

About Judge Hamilton

David Frank Hamilton is a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Hamilton received a commission on November 23, 2009. Judge Hamilton previously served on the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, commissioned there on October 11, 1994. Judge Hamilton assumed senior status on December 5, 2022.

Judge Hamilton's practices and standing orders

The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Hamilton's own (checked October 11, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).

Standing orders for every case in this court

Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 11, 2026).

The court's local rules ↗

How Judge Hamilton decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

A False Claims Act knowledge inquiry focused on the defendant's actual knowledge and beliefs rather than a later objectively reasonable interpretation.

“respondents’ knowledge and subjective beliefs”

Federal habeas review did not permit the court to create a new constitutional restriction without a clear holding from the Supreme Court.

“we may not create new constitutional restraints on habeas review.”

Planned government deprivations fell outside the narrow exception that allows post-deprivation remedies when advance process is impractical.

“Pre-deprivation notice and hearings are not impractical, and therefore fall outside the narrow Parratt exception”

Procedural preferences

A Federal Tort Claims Act claim had to be presented to the appropriate agency within two years after accrual or it was time-barred.

“Under the FTCA, a tort claim against the United States must be presented to the appropriate federal agency within two years of the claim’s accrual or it is ‘forever barred.’”

An order attempting to recruit counsel for an indigent civil litigant did not create an entitlement to appointed counsel when recruitment efforts failed.

“right simply does not exist in federal civil litigation.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Brendan Dassey v. Michael Dittmann
16-3397 · 2017-12-08
Appeal (appellant (the State / warden Dittmann)) Granted

“Given the state courts' reasonable findings of fact and the absence of clearly established Supreme Court precedent that compels relief for Dassey, the district court's grant of habeas relief is REVERSED. The case is REMANDED to the district court with instructions to dismiss the petition.”

United States ex rel. Todd Heath v. Wisconsin Bell, Inc.
22-1515 · 2023-08-02
Appeal (relator-appellant (Todd Heath)) Granted

“The judgment of the district court is REVERSED and the case is REMANDED to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Tracy Luster v. Village of Ashmore
22-3065 · 2023-08-02
Appeal (appellant (plaintiff Tracy Luster)) Granted

“We VACATE the judgment and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. The state-law claims, which are based on the same facts as the due process claim, are reinstated as well.”

Lazerek Austin v. Cheryl Hansen
23-2946 · 2025-06-06
Appeal (appellant (plaintiff-prisoner Lazerek Austin, pro se)) Denied

“The district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to make further efforts. ... Because he conducted an 'individualized and practical inquiry' into Austin's ability to litigate his case ... he did not abuse his discretion. AFFIRMED.”

George Dernis v. United States
23-2821 · 2025-05-01
Appeal (appellant (plaintiffs George and Maria Dernis)) Denied

“We affirm. The Dernises failed to timely exhaust their administrative remedies for most of their claims, and their only timely claim is barred under the FTCA's intentional torts exception.”

Patricia Ann Koehn v. Delta Outsource Group, Inc.
No. 19-1088 · 2019-09-25
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.”

Reyna Cruz v. Costco Wholesale Corporation
No. 24-1843 · 2025-04-21
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“The judgment of the district court is REVERSED and the case is REMANDED to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Frankenmuth Mutual Insurance Company v. Fun F/X II, Inc.
No. 22-1933 · 2023-02-28
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.”

Kimberly Nelson v. City of Chicago
No. 20-1279 · 2021-03-25
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.”

Larry Howell v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc.
No. 19-3210 · 2021-02-05
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“We affirm.”

Donnell D. Wilson v. Ron Neal
No. 23-2316 · 2024-07-24
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“We agree and, on that basis, affirm the denial of Wilson's petition on the merits.”

Karl W. Nichols v. Lance Wiersma
No. 22-3059 · 2024-07-16
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“We affirm.”

Draft for Judge Hamilton with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Hamilton, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Hamilton's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace