Amy Joan St. Eve

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois district Retired 2018 · served 2002–2018 Appointed by George W. Bush (Republican) 19 signed orders read

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

How Judge Eve decides

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

Procedural preferences

As a Rule 702 / Daubert gatekeeper she demanded case-specific, methodologically reliable expert work, excluding an opinion that offered sweeping generalizations about the field rather than analysis tied to the actual parties and facts before her.

“the majority of Dr. Manning’s nine-page report is comprised of sweeping generalizations regarding ‘police organizations,’ ‘police departments,’ the police ‘organizational culture,’ and the attitudes and characteristics of police officers. Dr. Manning offers CPD-specific opinions only sporadically in the report.”

Signed rulings

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

Yost v. Chicago Park District
· 2014-02-19
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Court grants the Park District’s motion for summary judgment (R. 26), and dismisses this case with prejudice”

Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance v. Stonitsch Construction, Inc.
· 2008-08-21
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“the Court denies Defendant Stonitsch’s cross-motion for summary judgment (R. 60-1)”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“grants Plaintiff Westchester’s motion for summary judgment (R. 57-1) in favor of Plaintiff and as to Count I of Defendant’s Counter-Complaint”

LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. v. Whirlpool Corp.
· 2011-08-10
Motion for judgment as a matter of law (defendant) Granted

“the Court grants Whirlpool’s motion for judgment as a matter on LG’s IUDTPA claim”

Civix-DDI, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P.
· 2010-02-01
Motion for leave to amend (defendant) Granted

“grants Yahoo’s and Hotels.com’s motions for leave to amend their answers and counterclaims”

Judgment on the pleadings (plaintiff) Denied

“the Court denies Civix’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (R. 531-1)”

Xechem, Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.
· 2003-07-28
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, the Court grants Defendant’s motion to dismiss.”

Tate v. Showboat Marina Casino Partnership
· 2003-03-14
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendants’ motions to strike, to dismiss and for protective order (R. 129-1) are granted and the Harkins Plaintiffs’ claims are dismissed with prejudice.”

Motions to strike (defendant) Granted
Motion for protective order (defendant) Granted
Wafra Leasing Corp. 1999-A-1 v. Prime Capital Corp.
· 2004-10-12
Motion in limine (defendant) Granted in part

“For the reasons set forth below, the Moving Defendants’ Motion is granted in part and deferred in part.”

Davis v. Potter
· 2004-02-05
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, the Postal Service’s motion to dismiss is granted.”

Moore v. Illinois State Police
· 2003-02-11
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant’s motion is granted and judgment is entered in its favor.”

Brandt v. Board of Educ. of City of Chicago
· 2006-03-13
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“the Court denies Plaintiffs’ Partial Motion for Summary Judgment”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“grants Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment”

United States v. Marzook
· 2006-06-22
Motion to suppress (defendant) Denied

“the Court denies Ashqar’s motion because the current facts do not warrant application of the exclusionary rule”

Moffat v. Unicare Health Ins. Co. of the Midwest
· 2005-01-20
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the Court grants Defendants’ motion”

A historical record

Judge Eve 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.