Blockowicz v. Williams
630 F.3d 563
7th Cir.2010Background
- Blockowiczs obtained a permanent injunction requiring defendants to remove defamatory posts from ROR and other sites.
- Defendants did not respond to the injunction, prompting the Blockowiczs to seek enforcement against nonparties Xcentric and Magedson as ROR’s host and manager.
- Rule 65(d)(2)(C) authorizes enforcing an injunction against third parties with actual notice who are in active concert or participation with enjoined parties.
- Blockowiczs argued Xcentric and Magedson had actual notice and aided violation by virtue of their Terms of Service and involvement post-injunction.
- District court declined enforcement against Xcentric and Magedson; Blockowiczs appealed.
- Court held Xcentric and Magedson were not in active concert or participation under Rule 65(d)(2)(C) and affirmed the district court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 65(d)(2)(C) binds third parties | Blockowiczs contend Xcentric/Magedson aided in violation. | Xcentric/Magedson argue no active concert/participation post-injunction. | No binding under Rule 65(d)(2)(C). |
| Whether Xcentric and Magedson aided and abetted post-injunction violations | Contract terms and inaction constitute aid/abatement. | Pre-injunction contracts cannot bind post-injunction conduct; no post-injunction action shown. | Not proven; inactivity cannot constitute aid/abetment here. |
| Whether inherent authority or other theories could bind third parties | District court could use inherent authority to bind third parties to injunction. | Not raised properly; would be unwarranted and unsupported. | Inherent authority not shown; court affirmed district court. |
Key Cases Cited
- Regal Knitwear Co. v. N.L.R.B., 324 U.S. 9 (Supreme Court, 1945) (nonparties can be bound when aiding/abetting violations of an injunction)
- U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 772 F.2d 329 (7th Cir. 1985) ( Rule 65(d) scope and nonparty contempt principles)
- National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the U.S. of Am. Under the Hereditary Guardianship, Inc. v. Nat'l Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the U.S. of Am., Inc., 628 F.3d 837 (7th Cir. 2010) (active concert/participation and privity standards)
- Rockwell Graphic Sys., Inc. v. DEV Indus., Inc., 91 F.3d 914 (7th Cir. 1996) (nonparties can be bound by injunction under certain circumstances)
- United States v. Bd. of Educ. of Chicago, 11 F.3d 668 (7th Cir. 1993) (scope of injunction and contempt concepts)
- New York ex rel. Vacco v. Operation Rescue Nat'l, 80 F.3d 64 (2d Cir. 1996) (nonparty conduct and injunction enforcement considerations)