United States v. Pickering, No. 14-3730 (7th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CasePickering was mailed a summons for federal jury duty, and later was sent a reminder. When she neither responded nor appeared, the judge asked the Justice Department to institute criminal contempt proceedings. The government sought a rule to show cause. Defendant testified that she had received the summons but had forgotten about it; she had been five months pregnant with her first child, with a complicated pregnancy involving modified bed rest to reduce the risk of miscarriage. She was also taking intermittent leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act, to care for her mother, who was undergoing a total knee replacement and suffering from angioedema. She testified that she is not opposed to serving on a jury—she had appeared for jury duty twice in the state courts. The government declined to cross-examine her. The judge declared her guilty of willful contempt beyond a reasonable doubt, without explaining the basis of his conclusion. He imposed a fine of $250 and placed a criminal conviction on her record, “not a good thing for a bank employee.” The Seventh Circuit reversed, stating that the litigation has been mishandled by the court and the Justice Department, noting that the judge addressed the defendant by her first name.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.