Roy Wirtz v. City of South Bend, 669 F.3d 860

City of South Bend bought land to transfer to a Catholic high school for use of an athletic complex and asked only the right to use the facility at specified times.
Residents sued to enjoin the transfer as a potential establishment clause violation and the district court granted a preliminary injunction.
The City did not appeal the injunction but moved to modify to permit sale at the appraised value; the district court denied the first modification.
The City then modified again to permit sale to the highest bidder, and the land was sold to the high school adjacent to its campus.
The City appealed from the final judgment dissolving the injunction; the City challenged two interlocutory orders but the appeal was untimely and moot.
The court dismissed the appeal as untimely and moot, and discussion considered whether the mootness exception for repetition would apply.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Timeliness of appeal from dissolution of injunction	City asserts timely review of mootness via interlocutory decisions and final dissolution.	City cannot appeal a final dissolution it sought to avoid; moot and untimely.	Untimely and moot; dismissal.
Applicability of the mootness exception for cases capable of repetition yet evading review	Exception applies because the dispute could recur between same litigants and evade review.	Exception does not apply; unlikely to arise again between same parties and City caused mootness.	Not applicable; case did not fit the exception.
Whether City could have pursued an immediate appeal from the grant of the injunction and sought an expedited decision	City could have appealed the injunction and requested a stay/expedited resolution.	City did not pursue timely appeal or stay; options were available but not pursued.	Alternative path available; failure to pursue it supports dismissal.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) (capable of repetition yet evading review context cited)
Fitzgerald v. Porter Memorial Hospital, 523 F.2d 716 (7th Cir. 1975) (repetition and mootness principles discussed)
Doe v. Poelker, 497 F.2d 1063 (8th Cir. 1974) (repetition mootness framework cited)
Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 637 F.3d 783 (7th Cir. 2011) (timeliness and final-order review discussed)
Pearson v. Ramos, 237 F.3d 881 (7th Cir. 2001) (interim rulings and mootness context cited)
Board of Trustees of University of Illinois v. Organon Teknika Corp., 614 F.3d 372 (7th Cir. 2010) (modification of judgment/arising orders discussed)
Mueller v. Reich, 54 F.3d 438 (7th Cir. 1995) (appeal-from-judgment principles referenced)
In re Montgomery County, 215 F.3d 367 (3d Cir. 2000) (principles on appealability of orders discussed)