No. 25-1146October Term 2025Before Arguments
Angelo Pesavento, et al., Petitioners v. Eddie L. Bolden
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
Case status
- Current stage
- Before Arguments
- Latest event
- Accepted by the Court
- Decision timing
- No window until argument is scheduled.
- What it's about
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
Question presented
Whether prejudgment interest should be unavailable as a matter of law on awards of noneconomic damages, such as pain and suffering and loss of a normal life.
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit / Accepted by the Court
- Area
Supreme Court case awaiting argument
Timing
Expected by late June 2026, if argued this term
The Court granted review but has not yet scheduled oral argument. Once argued, the median case reaches a decision in 94 days. Nearly all cases are decided by the end of the term in which they are argued.
Briefing
What it's about
The Supreme Court is being asked whether prejudgment interest (extra money for the time before judgment) should ever be unavailable as a matter of law on noneconomic damages, meaning money for harms like pain and suffering and loss of a normal life. The petition comes from a Seventh Circuit case involving former Chicago officers, the estates of two detectives, the City of Chicago, and Eddie L. Bolden.
Argument
This is only a petition for certiorari (the Court's decision to hear a case), and oral argument has not been scheduled. Petitioners argue that prejudgment interest should be unavailable as a matter of law for noneconomic damages.
Impact
The answer could change the final dollar amount in civil cases where juries award money for pain, suffering, or similar harms. For example, a plaintiff who wins after years of litigation could receive more if prejudgment interest is allowed.
What is the dispute in Pesavento v. Bolden?
The petition asks whether courts should bar prejudgment interest on noneconomic damages like pain and suffering and loss of a normal life.
Who could feel the impact of this case?
People suing for injuries, police or cities defending lawsuits, and insurers could all be affected because the rule can change total damages.
What happens next in Pesavento v. Bolden?
The justices must decide whether to grant certiorari. Oral argument is not scheduled, and no decision window is available yet.
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Jul 23, 2026
- Method
- Methodology