Michael Yale Scudder Jr.

How Judge Scudder rules, drawn from 50 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Position
circuit
Appointed by
Donald Trump (Republican)
Commissioned
2018-05-21
Education
Saint Joseph's College (B.B.A., co-valedictorian); Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law (J.D., magna cum laude, 1998; Order of the Coif)
Signed orders read
50

How Judge Scudder decides

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

What persuades

At the panel level, he treats circuit precedent as controlling and directs parties seeking a change to en banc or Supreme Court review.

“They can ask our full court to revisit our position or seek Supreme Court review. But, as a panel, our only course is to affirm.”

For genuinely unsettled state-law questions, he uses certification to the state's highest court and then applies that court's answer to the dispute before him.

“Because Delaware law governs the RSU Agreements, we certified two questions to the Delaware Supreme Court seeking guidance on the enforceability of forfeiture-for-competition provisions.”

Procedural preferences

He favors resolving an appeal on a narrow preserved ground rather than reaching a broader constitutional question that the case does not require.

“In the final analysis, then, we AFFIRM and leave for another day the sure-to-come challenging questions about how Second Amendment standards after Heller and Bruen interact with applications of Terry on facts not far from those presented here.”

An appellant challenging an administrative decision must engage the record and show a lack of substantial evidence, not merely criticize the order's reasoning.

“It is not enough to nitpick the ALJ’s order. To warrant reversal, Morales must show that the ALJ’s determination was not supported by substantial evidence.”

Cautions

Persistent noncompliance with an agency or court order can produce contempt, fees, and escalating coercive fines that remain avoidable only through prompt compliance.

“Parties ignore court orders at their peril. This is true in civil and criminal litigation, and this opinion reinforces that the point applies with full force to orders of the National Labor Relations Board.”

Briefs must be checked for factual and legal accuracy; citation errors that do not alter the result may still prompt a public warning about counsel's professional obligations.

“the court expects members of our bar to exercise care and diligence in preparing their briefs to en- sure complete factual and legal accuracy.”

Signed rulings

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

LKQ Corporation v. Robert Rutledge
23-2330 · 2025-01-22
Appeal (appellant (plaintiff LKQ Corporation)) Granted

“We therefore reverse the district court's entry of summary judgment for Rutledge on LKQ's claim that he breached the RSU Agreements. ... For these reasons, we REVERSE the district court's entry of summary judgment for Rutledge on LKQ's claim that he violated the RSU Agreements.”

Morgan Morales v. Martin O'Malley
23-2796 · 2024-05-31
Appeal (appellant (plaintiff/claimant Morgan Morales)) Denied

“We have no difficulty affirming, as abundant evidence supports that decision. ... For these reasons, we AFFIRM.”

United States v. Emanuel Dameron
22-3291 · 2024-05-31
Appeal (appellant (defendant Emanuel Dameron)) Denied

“In the final analysis, then, we AFFIRM and leave for another day the sure-to-come challenging questions about how Second Amendment standards after Heller and Bruen interact with applications of Terry on facts not far from those presented here.”

NLRB v. Haven Salon + Spa, Inc.
21-2413 · 2023-02-27
Petition for review (petitioner (National Labor Relations Board)) Granted

“We therefore hold Haven in contempt. ... We also order Haven to pay a fine of $1,000, as well as a fine of $150 per day for every day of the next week that Haven fails to comply.”

National Casualty Company v. Continental Insurance Company
23-3373 · 2024-11-22
Appeal (appellant (plaintiffs National Casualty Company and Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company)) Denied

“National Casualty and Nationwide now appeal the district court's order granting Continental's motion to compel arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act. Because our precedent required that outcome, we affirm. ... For these reasons, we AFFIRM.”

Ruben Santoyo v. City of Chicago
No. 24-2352 · 2025-07-25
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Due process required no more, leaving us to AFFIRM.”

Manuel Antonio Herrera Hernandez v. Theresa Lee
No. 23-2497 · 2025-02-14
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“For these reasons, we REVERSE and REMAND.”

Terrance Shaw v. Paul Kemper
No. 21-3265 · 2022-10-25
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“For these reasons, we VACATE and REMAND for further proceedings.”

Terri LoBianco v. Bonefish Grill, LLC
No. 23-2213 · 2024-03-04
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“For these reasons, we REVERSE and REMAND for proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Lorenzo Davis v. Billy Rook
No. 23-1655 · 2024-07-12
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“For these reasons, we AFFIRM.”

Kevin Johnson v. Martin Purdue
No. 23-2478 · 2025-01-21
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“So, while this case is plenty messy, in the end we affirm.”

William Groves v. South Bend Community School Corporation
No. 21-3336 · 2022-10-19
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“In the end, Groves’s case suffered from a failure of proof—he alleged a theory and account of reverse race discrimination but ultimately never backed it with enough evidence to allow a jury to find in his favor. For these reasons, we AFFIRM.”

Draft for Judge Scudder with the record in hand

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

Opens in Ezel Pro.

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