CA7 (Posner) on I-864, Duty to Mitigate: Liu v. Mund

"Mund refused to provide the  support  specified in the federal  affidavit,  on the ground that his ex-wife wasn’t looking for work.  So she filed the present suit, in federal district court  in Wisconsin, seeking that  support  and contending that failure to mitigate damages is not a defense to the support obligation created by the affidavit. ... The district judge held that Liu was not  entitled to support pursuant to the I-864 affidavit during the 160-day period after she had filed her motion for summary judgment, because she hadn’t actively sought work during that period. The finding that she hadn’t sought work is well supported; the only substantial issue presented by  her appeal, and the only one we discuss, is whether in a suit to enforce the obligation of support created by the federal affidavit the plaintiff has a legal duty to mitigate damages. ... In sum, we can’t see much benefit to imposing a duty to mitigate on a sponsored immigrant. ... The judgment of the district court is reversed so far as concerns the court’s imposition of a duty of mitigation, and otherwise is affirmed." - Liu v. Mund, July 12, 2012.