Ali v. Chicago Bancorp, Inc.

334 F. App'x 761
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
DecidedJune 23, 2009
DocketNo. 09-1570
StatusPublished

This text of 334 F. App'x 761 (Ali v. Chicago Bancorp, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ali v. Chicago Bancorp, Inc., 334 F. App'x 761 (7th Cir. 2009).

Opinion

ORDER

Neser Em Neheh Ali sued Bancorp and other defendants for what appear to be commercial and contractual claims. His complaint is incoherent and contains no discernable claims, though Ali labels himself and the defendants as “vessels” in an attempt to invoke the admiralty jurisdiction of federal court. The district court dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Ali’s appellate brief is similarly incomprehensible. A litigant in this court must “supply an argument consisting of more than a generalized assertion of error, with citations to supporting authority.” Fed. R.App. P. 28(a)(9)(A); see Haxhiu v. Mukasey, 519 F.3d 685, 691 (7th Cir.2008). And although we construe pro se filings liberally, even litigants proceeding without the benefit of counsel must articulate some reason for disturbing the district court’s judgment. See Anderson v. Hardman, 241 F.3d 544, 545 (7th Cir.2001). Ali does not challenge the district court’s reasoning. In fact, it is impossible to discern any argument at all.

DISMISSED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Bobby J. Anderson v. Alfred Hardman
241 F.3d 544 (Seventh Circuit, 2001)
Haxhiu v. Mukasey
519 F.3d 685 (Seventh Circuit, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
334 F. App'x 761, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ali-v-chicago-bancorp-inc-ca7-2009.