Youakim v. Busey Bank

Seventh Circuit

Youakim v. Busey Bank

100 F. App'x 579

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

DecidedJune 9, 2004

DocketNo. 03-4130

StatusPublished

This text of 100 F. App'x 579 (Youakim v. Busey Bank) 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

Youakim v. Busey Bank, 100 F. App'x 579 (7th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

Dominique Youakim filed a notice of appeal challenging the district court’s grant of summary judgment against him on his employment discrimination claim. His appellate brief, however, focused not on the grant of summary judgment, but rather on the court’s pretrial discovery rulings.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 3(c)(1)(B) requires that a notice of appeal “designate the judgment, order, or part thereof being appealed.” The notice of appeal designated only the grant of summary judgment as being appealed, but we are unable to discern any argument in Youakim’s briefs that takes issue with the district court’s judgment. Although we liberally construe filings by pro se litigants, we must still be able to ascertain the arguments a litigant raises. Anderson v. Hardman, 241 F.3d 544, 545 (7th Cir.2001). Further, Youakim neglected to provide citations to the record or to relevant authority to support his general assertions of error. See Fed. R.App. P. 28(a)(9); Anderson 241 F.3d at 545-46. For all these reasons we dismiss his appeal.

DISMISSED.

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

ORDER

Dominique Youakim filed a notice of appeal challenging the district court’s grant of summary judgment against him on his employment discrimination claim. His appellate brief, however, focused not on the grant of summary judgment, but rather on the court’s pretrial discovery rulings.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 3(c)(1)(B) requires that a notice of appeal “designate the judgment, order, or part thereof being appealed.” The notice of appeal designated only the grant of summary judgment as being appealed, but we are unable to discern any argument in Youakim’s briefs that takes issue with the district court’s judgment. Although we liberally construe filings by pro se litigants, we must still be able to ascertain the arguments a litigant raises. Anderson v. Hardman, 241 F.3d 544, 545 (7th Cir.2001). Further, Youakim neglected to provide citations to the record or to relevant authority to support his general assertions of error. See Fed. R.App. P. 28(a)(9); Anderson 241 F.3d at 545-46. For all these reasons we dismiss his appeal.

DISMISSED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

100 F. App'x 579, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/youakim-v-busey-bank-ca7-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack