Case law

Victor R. Brown v. Daniel LaVoie

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 23, 2024

LaVoie was entitled to qualified immunity. This was so, the court said, because in light of Snipes, Brown had no clearly established right to an anesthetic. … “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their con- duct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitu- tional rights of which a reasonable person

Jack Weit v. Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago

641 F.2d 457 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 13, 1981

Midwest was established, they argue, solely to assure an efficient compatible system. … While the tendency to suggest an emotional decision is one basis for exclusion of evidence under Rule 403, it is clearly not the only one.

Montano v. City of Chicago

535 F.3d 558 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 23, 2008

At the very least, this is enough to confer qualified immunity, a defense Zalewski successfully pursued on summary judgment. See Purtell v. Mason, 527 F.3d 615, 621 (7th Cir.2008). … Five officers (Zalewski, Predis, Skol, Maresso, and Tamez) were also granted summary judgment based on their qualified immunity from plaintiff Yesenia Mendez's false-arrest and excessive-force claims, and the false-arrest

United States of America,plaintiff-Appellee v. Gordon Thornton, Garrick Jackson, Kirk Reynolds, and Michael Harris

197 F.3d 241 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 18, 1999

Many of the documents, such as utility bills, merchandise receipts, and business cards, were sufficiently distinctive to qualify as self-authenticating under Rule 901(b)(4). … An established method of payment, a standardized transaction, and a demonstrated level of mutual trust also are indicia of a conspiracy. Id.

William J. Phillips and Dorothy R. Phillips v. Hunter Trails Community Association

685 F.2d 184 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 7, 1982

They clearly made that showing. Then the burden shifted to the defendant to articulate nonracial reasons for its actions. Id. at 1039 . The Association — equally clearly — did not succeed. … It seeks to clothe itself in absolute immunity under the following syllogism. City of Newport v.

United States v. Molasky

118 F.2d 128 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 2, 1941

We think this case is clearly distinguishable and has very little, if any, application to the instant situation. … Thus the question was directly in issue and the Government had the burden of establishing the affirmative.

Milazzo v. O'Connell

151 F.3d 587 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 29, 1998

immunity under Count II. … Consequently the court refused to hold that defendants had qualified immunity under Count II of the original complaint. We affirmed. 108 F.3d 129 .

Urbania v. Central States Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund

421 F.3d 580 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 31, 2005

The plan clearly defines Credited Service Years and Vested Service Years, and it defines them quite differently. … was clearly before that reviewing body.

Curtis Walker v. Dan Cromwell

140 F.4th 878 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 16, 2025

Under AEDPA, clearly established fed- eral law “refers to the holdings … of [the Supreme] Court’s decisions as of the time of the relevant state-court decision.” Garcia v. … Particularly relevant here, when we try to determine what constitutes clearly established law, we look beyond “the four corners of a rule announced in a single case.

In re County Collector of the County of Winnebago

96 F.3d 890 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 16, 1996

(the “Tort Immunity Act”). … The party seeking removal has the burden of establishing the jurisdiction of the district court, Wellness Community-National v.

Michigan v. United States Army Corps of Engineers

667 F.3d 765 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 24, 2011

The first concerns the sovereign immunity of the United States. … And all sides agree that if invasive carp were to achieve a sustainable population in the Great Lakes, the environmental and economic impact would qualify as an unreasonable interference with a public right.

Albedyll v. Wisconsin Porcelain Co. Revised Retirement Plan

947 F.2d 246 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 22, 1991

will ordinarily qualify under the excusable neglect rubric. … One function of ERISA is to establish clearly when rights shift from participants to employers, and permitting an 11.04 exception here would circumvent this clear purpose.

Carlos Colon, Cross-Appellant v. Lieutenant Bruce Schneider, Cross-Appellee

899 F.2d 660 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 13, 1990

At the close of the evidence, defense counsel moved for directed verdict, arguing that Lieutenant Schneider was entitled to qualified immunity 13 and that the plaintiff had failed to establish a constitutionally *665 protected … Lieutenant Schneider has not raised his claim that he is entitled to qualified immunity on appeal. 14 . All references in this opinion to the Supreme Court pertain to the United States Supreme Court. 15 .

Pit Row, Inc. v. Costco Wholesale Corporation

101 F.4th 493 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 30, 2024

Costco qualifies for this exception only if it was: (1) matching prices simultaneously offered by a direct competitor, (2) compliant with the Act’s notification re- quirement, and (3) price-matching in good faith. … They thus have failed to establish causation, which is an essential element of their claim.

Jerald Davis v. Union National Bank and William Owens, Individually

46 F.3d 24 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 28, 1994

The District Court dismissed the claim against Owens on grounds of qualified immunity, and this court affirmed. The District Court then granted the Bank’s motion for summary judgment, and Davis appealed. … While the Supreme Court has not established a test for finding state action in a malicious prosecution case, this court has. See Gramenos v.

United States v. Teddy R. Crouch

528 F.2d 625 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 18, 1976

However, because we are convinced, on the basis of the record, that many of the issues herein presented are clearly without merit, this opinion will discuss only those matters which have impressed the panel as being substantial … On the other hand, appellee claims that the evidence established that all of the appellants herein were members of a large-scale, open-ended conspiracy to steal from shipments passing through the Terminal Railroad Association

Barbara Ann Collignon and Marc Collignon, of the Estate of Jonathan Collignon v. Milwaukee County, Grace Downing, Joseph Lofy

163 F.3d 982 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 12, 1999

Downing’s treatment of Jonathan did not violate his constitutional rights, we need not consider for purposes of her qualified immunity from suit whether her conduct violated a right clearly established at the time. … When the Shorewood police temporarily took Jonathan into custody, he was clearly not a pre-trial detainee.

Joseph Denan v. TransUnion LLC

959 F.3d 290 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 11, 2020

1519 Here, plaintiffs contend not only that Trans Union had a duty to verify plaintiffs’ debt liability, but that Trans Union “knew or recklessly ignored” that their loans “are void and uncollectible as a matter of clearly … established law.”

United States v. David Lanzotti and Connie L. Hughes

205 F.3d 951 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 15, 2000

In this case, the instructions clearly informed the jury correctly about aiding and abetting and no error occurred. B. … Rule 702 establishes two admissibility requirements for expert testimony: (1) the expert must be qualified, and (2) the subject matter of the expert’s testimony must consist of specialized knowledge that will be helpful or

Terrence Buchanan v. Keith Kelly

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 10, 2014

We agree with the district court that the undisputed facts show that at each stage  of  the  stop,  Kelly  did  not  violate  clearly  established  law.  He  is  entitled  to  qualified  immunity.  … Thus,  at  each  stage  of  the  detention,  Kelly=s  actions  did  not  violate  Buchanan=s  clearly  established  constitutional  rights.  Kelly  is  entitled  to  qualified  immunity.