Michael Stephen Kanne
How Judge Kanne rules, drawn from 32 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Kanne no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Kanne decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a trademark case involving foreign defendants, Kanne applied Rule 4(m)'s textual exception to the ordinary service deadline. The plaintiff had begun the foreign-service process promptly and pursued it diligently, so the district court could not dismiss merely because service exceeded 120 days.
“The explicit language of this rule makes it very clear that the 120-day limit is inapplicable in cases involving service in a foreign country.”
In a dispute over a spam text, Kanne applied state contract principles to determine whether a non-signatory could be compelled to arbitrate. Illinois promissory estoppel did not bind the plaintiff to contracts his mother had signed where the party seeking arbitration disclaimed detrimental reliance.
“We recently clarified that—even in the arbitration context—the court must apply traditional state promissory estoppel principles to decide whether a non-party should be bound by the terms of another’s contract.”
In a suppression appeal involving a probationer, Kanne assessed an unmonitored phone in the context of the officer's lawful home visit, prior violations, and the probationer's conduct. Those circumstances made the phone's connection to a supervised-release violation immediately apparent under the plain-view doctrine.
“Because the incriminating nature of the phone was immediately apparent, Officer Williams’s seizure was lawful under the plain-view doctrine, and the evidence that stemmed from that seizure need not be suppressed.”
Procedural preferences
In a debt-collection case, Kanne required the district court to resolve contested jurisdictional facts before reaching the merits. When the truth of facts supporting Article III standing was disputed, an evidentiary hearing under Rule 12(b)(1) was the appropriate procedure.
“At this stage in the litigation, the appropriate mechanism to resolve factual disputes about standing is an evidentiary hearing on the defendant’s motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(1).”
Cautions
In a First Amendment retaliation case, Kanne used a practical account of the employee's actual duties rather than relying only on a written job description. Because revising misconduct reports at supervisors' direction was part of the investigator's work, his refusal was employee speech outside First Amendment protection.
“Because Davis's refusal was pursuant to his job duties, he spoke as a public employee rather than a private citizen. His speech, therefore, falls outside of the First Amendment's scope.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“We REVERSE the dismissal and REMAND for further proceedings.”
“Because this case is moot, it is Dismissed.”
“We AFFIRM the sentences of both Re and Calabrese.”
“But Washington waived this challenge, and we reject his argument.”
“Finding no reason to reverse the decision of the district court, we AFFIRM.”
“Illinois River now appeals, but because it raises only arguments that were not before the district court, we affirm.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Circuit judges do not carry a trial caseload; not enumerated. Kanne's prior N.D. Ind. district caseload (1982-1987) is a separate unbuilt layer.
A historical record
Judge Kanne no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.