Case law

Gary Millbrook v. Ibp, Inc.

280 F.3d 1169 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 20, 2002

None of [plaintiffs] proffered evidence established that she was more qualified than [the other candidate], let alone so clearly more qualified for the position than [plaintiff] that a reasonable juror could infer discriminatory … that she was clearly more qualified for the position than [the selected candidate, the plaintiff] did not meet her burden of establishing that [the employer’s] proffered reason for denying her the promotion was a pretext

United States v. Consolidated Packaging Corporation

575 F.2d 117 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 13, 1978

Once the prima facie case of the conspiracy had been established by proof aliunde, the hearsay evidence of the Hencel memoranda became admissible to more clearly illuminate the conspiracy’s internal workings and extent. … Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 6001-6003 , he had been granted immunity.

People Who Care v. Rockford Board of Education

68 F.3d 172 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 12, 1995

This circuit has established four factors to be considered in determining if a motion to intervene is timely. … O’Brien must first establish how long he knew or should have known of his interest in this case.

Zych v. Unidentified, Wrecked & Abandoned Vessel, Believed to be the "Seabird"

941 F.2d 525 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 21, 1991

However, Section 6(b) qualifies Section 6(a)(3), not Section 6(a)(1) or (2). … As used in the context of the law of finds, embed-dedness is a factual question to be established by evidence. See Chance v.

Fairley, Roger v. Fermaint, Evan

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 20, 2006

It was clearly established long before the events of which plaintiffs complain that state actors may not assault witnesses in federal litigation. … Defendants are entitled to immu- nity if their “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

Graham v. Sauk Prairie Police Commission

915 F.2d 1085 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 3, 1990

between intentional and nonintentional torts in determining whether a public official or em *1090 ployee qualifies for indemnification. … Clearly, these procedures do not directly violate any constitutional guarantees.

Ortiz v. City of Chicago

656 F.3d 523 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 25, 2011

They argue that the uncertainty over whether the “deliberate indifference” or “objectively unreasonable” standard governs the medical care claim entitles them to qualified immunity. … We therefore conclude that the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. IV Finally, we address Ortiz’s Gerstein claim.

Kristin A. Greenawalt v. Indiana Department of Corrections, William K. Kromann, and Kathy J. Lisby

397 F.3d 587 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 14, 2005

had not been clearly established in the case law when she brought the suit. … established when this suit was filed.

Beischel v. Stone Bank School District

362 F.3d 430 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 28, 2004

The defendants, except for Kathy Rosenheimer, were denied qualified immunity on that claim. … Even though there is no final judgment in the case, the defendants have appealed both the decision denying qualified immunity and the decision on the merits.

Johnson v. Pelker

891 F.2d 136 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 18, 1989

immunity. … They argue that their conduct did not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. But see Jamison-Bey v.

United States v. Richard Eugene Long

511 F.2d 878 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 6, 1975

of the transcript of state grand jury proceedings wherein the defendant had testified under a state grant of immunity. … See as to such use immunity Kastigar v. United States, 1972, 406 U.S. 441 , 92 S.Ct. 1653 , 32 L.Ed.2d 212 .

Five Points Road v. Johanns, Mike

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 8, 2008

The review of agency determinations by the NAD clearly meets the definition of an adjudication, the first criterion. … Congress need only “clearly indicate its intent to trigger the formal, on-the-record hearing provisions of the APA.”

Autotech Technologies LP v. Integral Research & Development Corp.

499 F.3d 737 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2007

The FSIA codified this practice by establishing a general principle of immunity for foreign sovereigns from execution of judgments: “[T]he property in the United States of a foreign state shall be immune from attachment! … No reasonable fact-finder could conclude that this statement clearly and convincingly showed that Integral was admitting that it was engaged in prohibited sales.

Hatcher v. Board of Trustees of Southern Illinois University

829 F.3d 531 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 14, 2016

better qualified for the position at issue. … Hatch-er’s tenure vote was more divided than her comparators, so she cannot argue she was clearly better qualified for the position at issue.

Johnson v. Dossey

515 F.3d 778 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 12, 2008

Clearly the amended complaint sufficiently alleges a Brady violation. … He may claim, as can the other investigators, a qualified, but not an absolute, immunity. Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259 , 113 S.Ct. 2606 , 125 L.Ed.2d 209 (1993).

Richard Mazanec v. North Judson-San Pierre School Corporation

798 F.2d 230 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 14, 1986

Mazanec entered into a dialogue with Marilyn Mabry, the State Attendance Officer, concerning the requirements for the establishment of a home school. The focus of these conversations was Mrs. … The district court found that all the defendants had immunity from damages and the plaintiffs do not appeal the issue of immunity with respect to the prosecuting attorney or *235 Marilyn Mabry, the state attendance officer

William Avery v. City of Milwaukee

847 F.3d 433 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 30, 2017

Here, the detec- tives testified about Avery’s “confession” and authenticated their false reports memorializing it; the reports were then Brady claims stand, affirming the denial of qualified immunity. Id. at 751– 52. … Abbey, 263 F.3d 1070, 1074– 75 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc) (“[T]here is a clearly established constitution- al due process right not to be subjected to criminal charges on the basis of false evidence that was deliberately fabricated

Driebel, Robert J. v. City of Milwaukee

298 F.3d 622 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 29, 2002

Thus, we ■reject Chief Jones’s defense of qualified immunity. … “Qualified immunity shields from liability government officials who are performing discretionary functions in the course of duty to the extent that their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

United States v. Schwartz

562 F.2d 427 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 19, 1977

a state prosecution interferes with that immunity. … In Dombrowski , as the Younger Court pointed out, special circumstances of prosecutorial harassment and bad faith established the kind of irreparable injury to the exercise of First Amendment rights that authorized federal

Martha Louise Piggee v. Carl Sandburg College

464 F.3d 667 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 19, 2006

This argument implicates the defendants’ qualified immunity argument. See Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 , 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001). … established.”