James Luttrull Docket

24-3246 | U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

Dale Economan, et al v. Garrison Law Firm, LLC.
Filed Dec. 11, 2024 | Nature of Suit 2440 Civil Rights — Other
Original Case 1:20-cv-00032 | Cause 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

January 2020

Economan files a Complaint on January 21, 2020.

Civil Cover Sheet filed on January 21, 2020.

September 2024

Judge Lund enters a scathing Order on September 30, 2024.

November 2024

Judge Simon enters an Order on November 7, 2024.

  • This case has been referred to Judge Philip P. Simon for a settlement conference on November 19, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. (CST). To understand Judge Simon's procedure and requirements, and to assist in promoting settlement, each party should review the "Settlement Conference" page on Judge Simon's website at: www .innd .uscourts .gov /sites /innd /files /PPSSettlementConferencelnstructions .pdf in advance of the settlement conference. This includes instructions regarding the pre-conference demand and offer, submission of settlement memoranda, attendance requirements, and the conference format. SO ORDERED. ENTERED: November 7, 2024.

Economan files Plaintiffs' Objection and Response to Defendants' Collective Motions to Reconsider and Request for Clarification of the Court's November 6, 2024 Docket Entry on November 8, 2024.

Defendant The Garrison Law Firm's Motion For Leave to Visually Attend Judicial Settlement Conference filed on November 12, 2024.

Federal Defendants' Motion for Leave to Appear Virtually at the Judicial Settlement Conference filed on November 14, 2024.

Judge Lund enters an Opinion and Order entered on November 14, 2014.

Defendant's Memorandum Addressing Failure to Intervene Claim filed on November 19, 2024.

Defendant The Garrison Law Firm's Supplemental Brief in Support of Motion for Reconsideration of Denial of Summary Judgement filed on November 19, 2024.

Plaintiffs' Objection to Notice of Substitution of United States of America in the Place of Defendants Gary L. Whisenand and Tonda Cockrell for the Second and Third Claims for Relief in Plaintiffs' Complaint filed on November 19, 2024.

Federal Defendants' Statement Regarding Failure to Intervene filed on November 19, 2024.

James Luttrull and Jessica Krug file a Notice of Appeal on November 26, 2024.

December 2024

Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Briefs in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Failure to Intervene Claim filed on December 3, 2024.

Benjamin Jones files an Appearance on December 11, 2024.

  • Appearance form filed by Attorney Benjamin Jones for Appellants Jessica Krug and James Luttrull in 24-3165.
    [2] [7423139] (L-Yes; E-Yes; R-No) [24-3165, 24-3246] [2] [7423139] [24-3165, 24-3246].
    --[Edited 12/11/2024 by HTP to reflect addition of counsel.] (Jones, Benjamin) [Entered: 12/11/2024 01:33 PM].
    U.S. civil case docketed. Fee paid. Docketing statement filed. Transcript information sheet due by 12/26/2024. Appellant's brief due on or before 01/21/2025 for Garrison Law Firm, LLC.
    [1] [7423121] [24-3246] (JMB) [Entered: 12/11/2024 12:24 PM].

Plaintiffs' Motion to Reconsider, Response and Objection to Defendants' Motion to Stay Proceedings, and Request to Certify Krug and Luttrull's Appeal as Frivolous filed on December 11, 2024.

Judge Lund issues an Order on December 11, 2024.

  • The court, on its own motion, orders these appeals are CONSOLIDATED for purposes of briefing and disposition. The briefing schedule is as follows: The appellants shall file briefs and required short appendices on or before January 21, 2024. The appellees shall file a consolidated brief on or before February 20, 2025. The appellants shall file reply briefs, if any, on or before March 13, 2025. A review of the short records reveals that these appeals involve more than one appellant represented by different counsel. Counsel for appellants are encouraged to avoid unnecessary duplication by filing a joint brief or a joint appendix or by adopting parts of a co-appellant's brief. Duplicative briefing will be stricken and may result in disciplinary sanctions against counsel. See United States v. Torres, 170 F.3d 749 (7th Cir. 1999); United States v. Ashman, 964 F.2d 596 (7th Cir. 1992). Appellants, however, may not adopt the “Jurisdictional Statement” of another. Each appellant's brief must include a complete “Jurisdictional Statement.”
    JXK [3] [7423171] [24-3165, 24-3246] (CG) [Entered: 12/11/2024 02:51 PM].

Transcript Information Sheet filed on December 12, 2024.

  • Filed Seventh Circuit Transcript Information Sheet by Appellant Garrison Law Firm, LLC. [4] [7423432] [24-3246] (JMB) [Entered: 12/12/2024 03:13 PM].

Evan Comer files an Appearance on December 18, 2024.

  • Appearance form filed by Attorney Evan Comer for Appellants Jessica Krug and James Luttrull in 24-3165.
    [5] [7424580] (L-Yes; E-Yes; R-No) [24-3165, 24-3246].
    --[Edited 12/19/2024 by PS - to reflect the addition of counsel.] (Comer, Evan) [Entered: 12/18/2024 03:42 PM].

Jacob W. Zigenfus files a Disclosure Statement and Appearance on December 19, 2024.

  • Circuit Rule 26.1 Disclosure Statement and Appearance filed by Attorney Jacob W. Zigenfus for Appellant Garrison Law Firm, LLC in 24-3246.
    [8] [7424802] (L-No; E-Yes; R-No) [24-3246, 24-3165] [Edited 12/19/2024 by CG to reflect the addition of counsel.] (Zigenfus, Jacob) [Entered: 12/19/2024 02:00 PM].

Michael E. Brown files a Disclosure Statement and Appearance on December 19, 2024.

  • Circuit Rule 26.1 Disclosure Statement and Appearance filed by Attorney Michael E. Brown for Appellant Garrison Law Firm, LLC in 24-3246.
    [7] [7424800] (L-No; E-No; R-No) [24-3246, 24-3165] (Brown, Michael) [Entered: 12/19/2024 01:57 PM].

Crystal G. Rowe files a Disclosure Statement and Appearance on December 19, 2024.

  • Circuit Rule 26.1 Disclosure Statement and Appearance filed by Attorney Crystal G. Rowe for Appellant Garrison Law Firm, LLC in 24-3246.
    [6] [7424798] (L-Yes; E-Yes; R-No) [24-3246, 24-3165] [Edited 12/19/2024 by CG to reflect the addition of counsel.] (Rowe, Crystal) [Entered: 12/19/2024 01:53 PM].

January 2025

Judge Lund enters an Order on January 2, 2025.

  • On November 27, 2024, all Defendants, including Tonda Cockrell, Gary L. Whisenand, The Garrison Law Firm L.L.C., James Luttrull, Jessica Krug, and the United States requested this Court stay all proceedings pending the outcome of the interlocutory appeal filed by Defendants James Luttrull and Jessica Krug on November 26, 2024. [DE 251; DE 253]. Plaintiffs responded to Defendants' Motion to Stay on December 11, 2024, at [DE 287], with Defendants replying on December 18, 2024, at [DE 289]. Having reviewed the parties' respective arguments, the Motion to Stay, [DE 253], is GRANTED. Defendants' Motion to Stay is Granted On November 26, 2024, Defendants James Luttrull and Jessica Krug filed an interlocutory appeal requesting review of this Court's denial of qualified immunity in the September 30, 2024 Opinion and Order resolving the Motions for Summary Judgment, and the November 5, 2024 hearing resolving the Motions for Reconsideration. [DE 225, 234, 239, 242]. In both, the Court denied Defendants Luttrull's and Krug's assertions of absolute and qualified immunity against Plaintiff's claims of malicious prosecution (wrongful use of civil proceeding), fourth amendment violations, and fifth amendment violations. [DE 254]. "Qualified immunity is an entitlement not to stand trial or face the other burdens of litigation. The privilege is an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability; and, like an absolute immunity, it is effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial." Allman v. Smith, 764 F.3d 682, 684 (7th Cir. 2014) (citing Siegert v. Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 232-33 (1991)); see Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 525-27 (1985)). And so "when a public official takes an interlocutory appeal to assert a colorable claim to absolute or qualified immunity from damages, the district court must stay proceedings." Allman v. Smith, 764 F. 3d 682, 684 (7th Cir. 2014) (quoting Goshtasby v. Board of Trustees of University of Illinois, 123 F.3d 427, 428 (7th Cir. 1997)). Once a trial has taken place, the official has incurred the very costs the doctrine is designed to avoid, and thus any review that can occur at the end of the case is limited at best. Estate of Davis v. Ortiz, 987 F.3d 635, 639 (7th Cir. 2021) (citing Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 525-27 (1985)). The privileges of absolute and qualified immunity are lost if a case is erroneously permitted to proceed to trial. See Allman, 764 F.3d 682, 684. For this reason, Defendants Luttrull's and Krug's appeal is not frivolous. And, for the same reason, Defendants' Motion to Stay, IDE 253], is GRANTED. Plaintiffs Motion to Reconsider, [DE 2871, is DENIED. All Parties' Motion for Clarification, [DE 279], is also DENIED. SO ORDERED.

Counsel for Cockrell and Whisenand file a Notice of Appeal on January 6, 2025.

Judge Lund issues a Notice on January 6, 2025.

  • Circuit Rule 46(a) requires the lead attorney and any attorney who intends to present oral argument be admitted to practice in this court. The lead attorney for each party represented by counsel must apply for admission to practice in this court by the later of: (a) 30 days from the docketing of the matter in this court; or (b) 15 days from being retained or appointed as counsel. An attorney who intends to present oral argument must apply for admission to practice in this court before the filing of the appellees brief. Our records indicate Attorney Benjamin M. L. Jones for Appellants James Luttrull and Jessica Krug has not been admitted to practice in this court as of this date. The "Application for Admission to Practice in the Seventh Circuit" form can be found at: https://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/forms/applctn.pdf. The filing of the completed application must be accomplished via the CM/ECF filing system.
    [9] [7427056] [24-3165] (LJ) [Entered: 01/06/2025 09:45 AM].

Judge Lund issues an Order on January 7, 2025.

  • The court, on its own motion, orders these appeals are CONSOLIDATED for purposes of briefing and disposition. The briefing schedule is as follows: Appellants shall file briefs and required short appendices on or before February 18, 2024. Appellees shall file a consolidated brief on or before March 20, 2025. Appellants shall file reply briefs, if any, on or before April 10, 2025. A review of the short records reveals that these appeals involve more than one appellant represented by different counsel. Counsel for appellants are encouraged to avoid unnecessary duplication by filing a joint brief or a joint appendix or by adopting parts of a co-appellant's brief. Duplicative briefing will be stricken and may result in disciplinary sanctions against counsel. See United States v. Torres, 170 F.3d 749 (7th Cir. 1999); United States v. Ashman, 964 F.2d 596 (7th Cir. 1992). Appellants, however, may not adopt the “Jurisdictional Statement” of another. Each appellant's brief must include a complete “Jurisdictional Statement.”
    [7427511] JXK [10] [7427511] [24-3165, 24-3246, 25-1020] (CG) [Entered: 01/07/2025 12:47 PM].

Sarah W. Carroll and Weili J. Shaw file their Appearance on January 10, 2025.

  • Appearance form filed by Attorney Weili J. Shaw, Sarah W. Carroll for Appellants Tonda Cockrell and Gary L. Whisenand in 25-1020.
    [11] [7428332] (L-Yes; E-Yes; R-No) [25-1020, 24-3165, 24-3246] [11] [7428332] [25-1020, 24-3165, 24-3246]
    --[Edited 01/13/2025 by HTP to reflect addition of counsel.] (Shaw, Weili) [Entered: 01/10/2025 05:55 PM].

David E. Hollar files a Request for Transcript filed on January 17, 2025.

January 2026

Brennan, Scudder, and Pryor issue an Order on January 12, 2026.

  • This appeal concerns the criminal “pill-mill” investigation and prosecution of Dale Economan and his medical practice, Economan and Associates Family Medicine. In 2014, federal and Indiana state law enforcement initiated a joint investigation of Economan and EAFM for overprescribing controlled substances. Following a state prosecution, Economan pleaded guilty to a lesser offense and agreed to relinquish his medical license. Economan and EAFM then went on the offensive, invoked 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and sued Drug Enforcement Administration agents, Indiana state prosecutors, and a law firm involved in the criminal case alleging violations of his Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights.
    The district court denied defense motions for summary judgment requesting qualified and absolute immunity, and this appeal followed. This case, which has persisted for nearly six years and come before three district court judges, arrives on appeal as a tangled mess, laden with confused claims and the misapplication of legal doctrines. We have done our best to sort it out and provide guidance to move the litigation forward and to finality.
    We conclude that all defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the Fifth Amendment due process claims against them. DEA Investigator Gary Whisenand is entitled to qualified immunity, and prosecutors James Luttrull and Jessica Krug to absolute immunity, on the Fourth Amendment claims against them. We dismiss Garrison Law Firm's Fourth Amendment appeal for lack of jurisdiction.