Case law

United States v. Li Xin Wu

668 F.3d 882 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 28, 2011

The phrase “tries to help” may not as clearly evoke intent as the words “desire to help.” … The district court’s determination that Wu had not been granted use immunity was not clearly erroneous.

Campbell v. City of Chicago

823 F.2d 1182 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 15, 1987

The City argued, inter alia, that it was immune from liability under the "state action" exception to the antitrust laws, and the cab companies asserted that they were immune under the Noerr-Pennington doctrine. … The plaintiffs request an injunction to prohibit the City from enforcing the license number limit, and to issue a taxi license to any qualified applicant. Campbell I, 577 F.Supp. at 1171 .

Sandra Thomas v. United States of America

189 F.3d 662 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 7, 1999

Although Indian tribes possess sovereign immunity, they, like the states, are also free to waive their immunity. Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49, 58 , 98 S.Ct. 1670 , 56 L.Ed.2d 106 (1978); cf. … See 25 C.F.R. § 81.22 (“[A]ny qualified voter . .. may challenge the election results.... ”).

Aczel v. United States

232 F. 652 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 3, 1916

C.) 9 Fed. 80 , involved an indictment for unlawfully preventing a qualified voter from exercising the right to vote. The person whose vote was refused was described as “a qualified voter.” … And this reasoning in the last-cited case clearly distinguishes Wiley v. Sinkler, 179 U. S. 58 , 21 Sup. Ct. 17, 45 L. Ed. 84 , on which counsel for plaintiffs in error apparently place much reliance.

Mark Mittelstadt v. Sonny Perdue

913 F.3d 626 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 15, 2019

Mittelstadt’s APA claim challenging the Secretary’s decision denying reenrollment seeks “relief other than money damages,” and is “therefore within the waiver of sovereign immunity in section 702.” … As part of the Food Security Act of 1985,21 Congress established the CRP.

Ronald D. Grimm v. David Churchill, David Stephens, and Glenn Miller

932 F.2d 674 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 16, 1991

Chicago, 856 F.2d 985, 994 (7th Cir.1988) (stating that an identification given by a “lucid” victim would establish probable cause). This rule decides this ease. … The District Court held in the alternative that summary judgment was appropriate because the defendant police officers had qualified immunity from suit on the facts presented. We do not decide this issue.

John K. MacIver Institute for v. Francis Schmitz

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 21, 2018

 ‘clearly established’ at  the  time  of  the  challenged  conduct.”  … There is no serious dispute  that MacIver’s  interpreta‐ tion of the SCA was not “clearly established” at the time de‐ fendants’ warrants were issued.  

Charles HUGHES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jesse BROWN, Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, Defendant-Appellee

20 F.3d 745 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 31, 1994

Plaintiff merely argues the facts in an attempt to establish that he was the most qualified person for the AHHO and CHAF positions. … Since Plaintiffs factual arguments have already been heard and rejected by the fact-finder at trial, and because nothing in the record establishes the district court’s judgment as clearly erroneous, we must affirm. 1 .

Dean Patterson v. Stephen A. Portch

853 F.2d 1399 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 3, 1988

The main issue in Patterson’s appeal is Fort’s qualified immunity, and is not an issue in Portch’s appeal. There is overlap between the appeals, of course, but that is not enough. … against a public official unless the conduct giving rise to the claim of damages violated a principle of law clearly established at the time he acted, see, e.g., Anderson v.

Derek Kramer v. William Pollard

497 F. App'x 639 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 5, 2012

Qualified immunity protects government officials from facing suits for damages when their actions do not violate clearly established constitutional or statutory rights. See Harlow v. … Once a defendant asserts a qualified- immunity defense, the plaintiff has the burden to establish that the defendant’s action violated a clearly established right. See Estate of Escobedo v.

Erickson, Melinda v. Bd Governors State

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 27, 2000

The ADA does not establish anything like the regulatory scheme for handguns at issue in Printz. … /1 The extent of the protection from suit that results from a finding of sovereign immunity is also an important question, because, at least in certain contexts, sovereign immunity is qualified rather than absolute.

John Mack v. Michael O'leary, John Lee Lipscomb-Bey v. Howard A. Peters III

80 F.3d 1175 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 8, 1997

In support of the judge’s ruling, the defendants ask us to distinguish between a substantial burden and a mere inconvenience, and they argue that what Mack alleges is clearly the latter. … The defendants do not raise a defense of qualified immunity.

Ronald D. Dawson v. New York Life Insurance Company and Nylife Securities, Inc.

135 F.3d 1158 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 18, 1998

Dawson asserts that the statements are entitled to only a qualified privilege, meaning that New York Life enjoys immunity from a defamation suit unless it made the statements recklessly. … Dawson may also prove abuse of the privilege by establishing that New York Life engaged in any reckless act that shows a disregard of his rights.

United States v. Philip Hollinger

553 F.2d 535 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 3, 1977

The record clearly establishes that the second conference was primarily concerned with review of the defense-tendered instructions. … It has long been established that a district judge has no discretion to deny a request by the United States Attorney that a witness be granted immunity, so long as the request is proper in form.

Brenda Jones v. Brent York

34 F.4th 550 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 16, 2022

On appeal, she explains, “when York signed the crim- inal complaint, he violated [her] clearly established Fourth Amendment constitutional right to be free from legal process without probable cause.” … Id. at 326; see also Canen, 847 F.3d 407 at 415 (“It is long-established that wit- nesses enjoy absolute immunity.”); Stinson v.

Barbara Tully v. Paul Okeson

78 F.4th 377 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 15, 2023

Specifically, “[i]t hits onerous procedural requirements which effectively handicap exercise of the franchise by those claiming the constitutional immunity.” … Any material requirement imposed upon the federal voter solely because of his refusal to waive the consti- tutional immunity subverts the effectiveness of the Twenty- fourth Amendment and must fall under its ban.” Id.

Sweeney, Charles E. v. Carter, Steve

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 15, 2004

Because no such right has been clearly established by the United States Supreme Court, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of Sweeney’s petition. … Indeed, as far as we can tell, the Supreme Court has not mentioned effective assistance of counsel (in the Strickland sense) and the Fifth Amendment in the same breath, let alone set forth a clearly established right to that

Happel v. Walmart Stores, Inc.

602 F.3d 820 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 19, 2010

Nor [was] he qualified to testify regarding hypoxia, hyper- capnia, hyperventilation, asthma, or lung problems.” The court noted that Dr. … Indeed, one of the articles directly contradicts his theory, stating “the association between stressful life experiences and changes in immune func- tion do not establish a causal link between stress, im- mune function, and

Citadel Securities LLC v. Chicago Board Options Exchange

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 11, 2015

Defendants correctly note that immunity is a different is‐ sue  than  administrative  exhaustion.  The  question  of  SRO  immunity is focused on the nature of defendants’ action.  … Plaintiffs have not clearly shown that the SEC’s adminis‐ trative procedure is futile or inadequate to prevent irrepara‐ ble  injury. 

Joseph Rossi v. City of Chicago

790 F.3d 729 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 22, 2015

The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants because Rossi had not demonstrated that the defendants violated a clearly established constitutional right as is required to prevail on a § 1983 claim. … For this reason, Rossi failed to establish a violation of his constitutional right to judicial access and Mathews is shielded from liability by qualified immunity. B.