Raymond E. Echevarria v. Darrin Jackson

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
June 22, 2026
Before
KENNETH F. R IPPLE, Circuit Judge
M ICHAEL Y. S CUDDER , Circuit Judge
AMY J. S T. EVE, Circuit Judge
No. 25-1271
R AYMOND E. ECHEVARRIA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
DARRIN JACKSON , et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Northern District of
Illinois, Eastern Division.
No. 1:20-cv-05271
Lashonda A. Hunt,
Judge.
O R D E R
The opinion of the court issued on June 16, 2026, is amended as follows:
In footnote 10, lines 1 and 2, “both parties have” is stricken and replaced with
“Mr. Echevarria has.” In line 4, “their briefs. Both parties” is stricken and replaced with
“his brief. He has.” In line 5, “28(b)” is stricken. The corrected footnote should read:
While it does not form the basis of our ruling, we note that Mr. Echevarria
has failed to fully comply with the briefing requirements of Federal Rule
of Appellate Procedure 28 by omitting required components from his brief.
He has failed to include a Summary of Argument section as required. Fed.
R. App. P. 28(a)(7). Additionally, Mr. Echevarria failed to provide the court
with an appendix containing the relevant docket entries from the district

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 25-1271 Page 2
court—omitting even a copy of the district court decision being appealed.
Fed. R. App. 30(a)(1). “Noncompliance with appellate rules wastes time
and resources and frustrates the review process.” McCurry v. Kenco
Logistics Servs., LLC, 942 F.3d 783, 791 (7th Cir. 2019). To that end, we must
“insist on meticulous compliance with rules sensibly designed to make
appellate briefs as valuable an aid to the decisional process as they can be.”
Avitia v. Metro. Club of Chi., Inc., 49 F.3d 1219, 1224 (7th Cir. 1995). Future
appellants, appellees, and counsel would be wise to keep this in mind in
all future appeals.

-- 2 of 2 --