Court Opinion

ID: 9494075
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 15:28:44.348347+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:56:12.354492
License: Public Domain

WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and in the judgment.
I join the majority opinion only insofar as it holds that Dr. Austin has not demon*975strated an “important economic interest” in membership in the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. Without an important economic interest, Dr. Austin may not challenge in the courts the Association’s private, internal procedure under Illinois law. Van Daele v. Vinci, 51 Ill.2d 389, 282 N.E.2d 728, 731 (1972). As that holding is dispositive of this case, in my view we need not proceed to predict whether Ilhnois would find the Association’s procedure a violation of public policy. Cf. Disher v. Info. Res., Inc., 873 F.2d 136, 141 (7th Cir.1989) (“We are reluctant to opine unnecessarily on questions of state law.”); Graphic Sales, Inc. v. Sperry Univac Div., Sperry Corp., 824 F.2d 576, 581 (7th Cir.1987) (“As a federal court whose jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship, we are particularly hesitant to decide unsettled questions of state law unnecessarily.”).