Terence Thomas Evans

How Judge Evans rules, drawn from 39 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Evans no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Position
circuit
Status
Retired 2011
Served
1995–2011
Appointed by
Bill Clinton (Democratic)
Commissioned
1995-08-11
Education
Marquette University (B.A., 1962); Marquette University Law School (J.D., 1967)
Signed orders read
39

How Judge Evans decides

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

What persuades

A combination-products theory could not survive without competent evidence explaining how the products interacted to cause the injury.

“If there is no evidence of how the products operate in combination, there can be no claim.”

A retaliation claim reached trial when the recommending employees could be inferred to know of the protected complaint even if the ultimate decisionmaker denied knowledge.

“Summary judgment is not proper when one can infer that persons who recommended the employment action had knowledge of the complaint.”

Uncharged conduct supported a sentencing enhancement only when it had a strong relationship to the convicted offense in similarity, regularity, and timing.

“Courts look for ‘a strong relationship between the uncharged conduct and the convicted offense, focusing on whether the government has demonstrated a significant “similarity, regularity and temporal proximity.” ’”

Procedural preferences

An injunction had to state its reasons and identify the restrained acts in specific, self-contained detail rather than incorporating another document.

“Rule 65(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that the injunction set ‘forth the reasons for its issuance; ... be specific in terms; ... [and] describe in reasonable detail, and not by reference to the complaint or other document, the act or acts sought to be restrained.’”

Prevailing-party status did not automatically entitle a litigant to every requested fee; the district court still had to determine a reasonable award.

“We conclude that Karraker is a prevailing party. That conclusion, however, does not end this dispute. Farrar also makes clear that prevailing party status does not automatically make the plaintiffs eligible for all the fees they request.”

Signed rulings

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

United States v. Gail R. Winnie
97 F.3d 975 · 1996-10-07
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Winnie was violating the law on the day the cheetah was seized, and the judgment of the district court is affirmed.”

Unisys Medical Plan v. Gary Timm and Kandis Timm
98 F.3d 971 · 1996-10-23
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is Affirmed.”

Brian Overbeek v. Charles Heimbecker
101 F.3d 1225 · 1996-12-09
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“Finding no fault with any of the decisions of the district court, its judgment is Affirmed.”

United States v. Lawrence Norton
108 F.3d 133 · 1997-03-03
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment below is, therefore, Affirmed.”

Allen ex rel. Allen v. Callahan
120 F.3d 86 · 1997-07-21
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“There is substantial evidence in the record supporting the decision to deny benefits. The decision of the district court is Affirmed.”

Jane Doe v. Sheriff of DuPage County
128 F.3d 586 · 1997-10-27
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“For these reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.”

United States v. Jerry Pardue
134 F.3d 1316 · 1998-01-26
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“All of which leaves us far from convinced that the district court abused its discretion in denying Pardue's motions. The judgment is Affirmed.”

Thomas Adkins v. Briggs & Stratton Corporation
159 F.3d 306 · 1998-10-23
Appeal (appellant (prevailing ADA defendant)) Granted

“Accordingly, we reverse the order denying costs and remand the case to the distinguished and experienced district judge for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

George Kirstein v. Parks Corporation
159 F.3d 1065 · 1998-10-29
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“For all of these reasons, the judgment of the district court is Affirmed.”

United States v. Frederick R. Bradley
165 F.3d 594 · 1999-01-28
Appeal (cross-appellant (government)) Granted

“For these reasons, the judgment of conviction is affirmed but the sentence is vacated and the case remanded for resentencing consistent with this opinion.”

Walter Richard Kyle II v. Detective Lawrence Patterson
196 F.3d 695 · 1999-11-10
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“The judgment of the district court is Affirmed.”

Sandra M. Scott v. Sunrise Healthcare Corporation
195 F.3d 938 · 1999-12-09
Appeal (appellant) Granted in part

“Accordingly, we Affirm the grant of summary judgment dismissing the Fair Labor Standards Act claim. We Reverse the grant of summary judgment on the claim based on the Illinois Reporting Act and Remand that claim to the district court for further proceedings.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Circuit judges do not carry a trial caseload; not enumerated.

A historical record

Judge Evans 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.