United States Seventh Circuit

In an action to collect a debt defendant-farmer owed to a third party through its grain-marketing program, which debt was subsequently acquired by plaintiff, judgment against plaintiff is affirmed where the district court did not clearly err in finding that: 1) defendant and third party had not entered into an agreement authorizing the trading of grain futures on plaintiff's behalf; and 2) the third party had kept possession of corn delivered as collateral for a loan it paid off on defendant's behalf.

Appellate Information

• Argued 01/22/2008
• Decided 09/02/2008
• Published 09/02/2008

Judges

• WOOD, Circuit Judge., Before EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, and WOOD and SYKES, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Seventh Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Robert Lindstrom (argued), Mustain, Lindstrom & Henson, Galesburg, IL, Randall L. Mitchell, (argued) Adducci, Dorf, Lehner, Mitchell & Blankenship Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Timothy J. Rathbun (argued), Rathbun, Cservenyak & Kozol, Joliet, IL, for Defendant-Appellee.