Case law

Robert Bintz v. Daniel Bertrand

403 F.3d 859 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 7, 2005

Robert still could qualify for habe-as relief regarding the Haglund Admission if he could establish cause for the procedural. default or a fundamental miscarriage of justice. … To qualify for habeas relief, Robert must show that the state court proceedings adjudicating his claim “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal

Mary Ellen Byrne v. Board of Education, School of West Allis-West Milwaukee

979 F.2d 560 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 10, 1992

Therefore a plaintiff basing her claim upon the Act must establish that (1) she is an “individual with handicaps”; (2) she is “otherwise qualified”; (3) she is excluded from programs solely because of the handicap; and (4 … According to the appellant, the evidence established as a matter of law that she qualified as a “handicapped individual” and that she was fired because of that handicap.

National Fidelity Life Insurance Co. v. Joan Karaganis

811 F.2d 357 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 2, 1987

A motion for judgment on the pleadings may be granted only if the moving party clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that he or she is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. … Similarly, the law does not permit a covenant of immunity to be drawn that will protect a person against his own fraud; such a covenant is unenforceable because of public policy.

United States v. Joseph H. Fleischli

305 F.3d 643 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 23, 2002

Federal regulations provide that qualified manufacturers may “import and manufacture machine guns ... for use by dealers qualified under this part as samples as provided in paragraph (d) of this section.” 27 C.F.R. § 179.105 … In particular, the court referenced Application Note 2 and then noted: And here the government clearly established at trial that the defendant procured parts for illegal weapons and engaged in illegal weapons manufacture.

Keith Curtis v. Costco Wholesale Corporation

807 F.3d 215 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 24, 2015

In Shaffer, the evidence established the employer needed to downsize. … Curtis’s claim fails on the first element because he was not a qualified individual with a disability.

Harry Lawrence Williams, Sr. v. Gordon H. Faulkner

837 F.2d 304 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 12, 1988

To ensure that indigents have access to the courts, Congress enacted 28 U.S.C. § 1915 3 which established a system for in forma pauperis litigation. … One common example is a case in which it is clear that the defendants are immune from suit. See, e.g., Williams v. Goldsmith, 701 F.2d 603 (7th Cir.1983) (all defendants absolutely immune). 6 .

Bowman v. City Of Franklin

980 F.2d 1104 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 4, 1993

The mere fact that Zimmerman acted as consulting engineers on this project is insufficient to establish state action as "[a]cts of such private contractors do not become acts of the government by reason of their significant … Accepting as true the allegation that this assessment qualifies as state action to state a claim under § 1983, the Bowmans must additionally allege that defendants' conduct deprived them of a right secured by the Constitution

Ayesha Khan v. Midwestern University

879 F.3d 838 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 16, 2018

Prozi- aleck unequivocally stated, and Khan did not disagree (she could not, as it was clearly stated in two different e-mails) that it was not mathematically possible for her to pass his course. 7 In fact, what Khan alleges … R. 57-1 at 66, Page ID 260. 18 No. 17-1055 qualified student a chance to prove herself qualified going forward. Khan was unable to do so.

Entertainment Softwa v. Blagojevich, Rod

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 27, 2006

The Attorney General argues that the plaintiffs have only established a “general connection” between her duties and powers and the SEVGL but not the specific connection necessary to overcome sovereign immunity. … We need not spend time determining whether this is a compelling interest; it clearly is.7 See Ashcroft v.

Shawn Riley v. David Ewing

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 17, 2019

Ewing sought summary judgment on this claim on qualified‐immunity grounds. Qualified immunity shields government officials from suits for damages if they did not violate a clearly established federal right. … Because Ewing did not violate a clearly established federal right, qualified immunity bars this claim. See Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 236 (2009).

Timas v. Klaser

23 F. App'x 574 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 26, 2001

. § 1915A(b) and dismissed his claims for malicious prosecution and obstruction of justice after concluding that the defendants were immune from suit on various grounds. … But artful renaming could not cure the deficiency on which the district court initially dismissed — namely, that each defendant was protected by absolute or qualified immunity. See Ross v.

Douglas Power v. Phillip M. Summers

226 F.3d 815 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 5, 2000

Previous decisions have established that other Indiana state universities are state agencies for purposes of the Eleventh Amendment, Kashani v. Purdue University, 813 F.2d 843, 845 (7th Cir.1987); Shelton v. … Even if an adverse employment action within the meaning of the antidiscrimination statutes were required in a section 1983 case (and, to repeat, it is not), it would not follow that the denial of a raise would not qualify

United States v. Jose Sanchez-Galvez, Also Known as El-Gallo, Lozaro Rosario, and Juan Colon-Sanchez

33 F.3d 829 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 29, 1994

Zamora was given immunity in exchange for his testimony at trial. … Under these criteria, we find that the challenged remarks fall clearly within the range of permissible argument.

United States v. Traeger, Andrew

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 8, 2002

To establish a claim of ineffective assistance, the defendant must satisfy a two-prong test. … Clearly, robbery and attempted robbery are similar in character.

Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Worth Bullion Group, Inc.

717 F.3d 545 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 29, 2013

Appellants contend that Worth and Mintco qualify as “consumer finance in- stitutions” under this definition. … Clearly, Worth and Mintco are sellers, not financial institutions. This is, in fact, how they identify themselves—as a wholesaler and retailer of precious metals, respectively.

Valerie Cortez v. Cook Incorporated

27 F.4th 563 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 2, 2022

The district court held that Cortez had failed to establish fraudulent concealment. … But the holding of the court, that fraud‐ ulent concealment does not toll statutes of repose, was un‐ qualified.

Ltd Commodities, Inc. v. Igor G. Perederij and Beacon Data Processing Service Corporation

699 F.2d 404 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 8, 1983

Counsel for LTD clearly understood the conditions imposed by the Court and agreed to them on behalf of LTD. … and indisputable proposition of law that we can find Judge Shadur’s contrary holding to be clearly erroneous and an abuse of discretion.

Linda E. Dausch v. Reverend Greg Rykse, Knox Presbyterian Church, Chicago Presbytery, Also Known as Presbytery of Chicago

52 F.3d 1425 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 16, 1994

The motivation for maintaining those institutions is clearly rooted in the faith commitment of the sponsoring church. … A cleric does not immunize his or her actions simply because they are performed on the grounds of the church. A legal clinic on church grounds would, for instance, clearly be subject to state regulation.

Todd R. Chazen v. Matthew Marske

938 F.3d 851 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 9, 2019

In these cir- cumstances, where the government has conceded that Mathis is retroactive and Chazen was so clearly foreclosed by the law 22 No. 18-3268 of his circuit of conviction … Nov. 2, 2017) (holding that a Mathis claim is not cognizable under § 2241 because Mathis applied established law rather than announcing a “new” rule).

Locklin v. Day-Glo Color Corporation

429 F.2d 873 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 15, 1970

Rather the courts have been liberal in designing rules of proof with respect to the amount of damages when the fact of damage, as here, is clearly established, Howard Industries, Inc. v. … Otherwise "the more flagrant * * * the invasion of another's rights, the more certain and complete would be the invader's immunity." Id. at 832.