Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
9,632 results
1.72s
United States v. Roger S. Baskes
687 F.2d 165 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 4, 1981
Clearly neither Aden nor McPartlin requires substantial evidence. Baskes also misreads D’Andrea and Allied Asphalt Paving Co. … Goldstandt, an unindicted co-conspirator who testified under a grant of immunity, explained that he could insure that the trusts would consistently realize a gain while the taxpayers consistently suffered a loss by entering
Cited 30 timesPublishedGregory Kozlowski v. Gregory Van Rybroek
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 4, 2019
Kozlowski cannot demonstrate that the defendants violated a clearly established federal right. … Government officials receive qualified immunity from damages when their “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known”—the right must be defined
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedAunt Mid, Inc. v. Fjell-Oranje Lines
458 F.2d 712 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 19, 1972
Although the sea was clearly less than boiling hot, the defendants’ ships equally *714 clearly delivered cabbages far less than fit for kings. 2 Therefrom arose this lawsuit. … The defendants contend that under the applicable law, a shipper, as a condition precedent to recovery, must establish the good order and condition of the goods shipped.
Cited 22 timesPublished635 F.3d 995 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 24, 2011
In the grand jury context, it is well established that while a defendant must always be truthful, he can always invoke his Fifth Amendment rights. … The very unusual order has features of a subpoena duces tecum, but certainly doesn’t qualify for that process. See Fed. R. Crim.P. 17.
Cited 8 timesPublishedUnited States v. Pedro Ramirez
94 F.3d 1095 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 4, 1996
We believe that the court came to a reasonable conclusion that was not clearly erroneous. … Burnett, 66 F.3d 137, 141 (7th Cir.1995) (defendant bears burden of establishing minor participant status to warrant downward departure).
Cited 72 timesPublishedHall v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
469 F.3d 590 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 9, 2006
Hall then moved to amend his complaint to add Conrail as a defendant, but by that time the statute of limitations had run and any claim against Conrail was time-barred unless it qualified for "relation back" under Rule 15 … But having a contractual right to seek indemnification is not the same as being immune from a suit altogether.
Cited 94 timesPublishedLishou Wang v. Loretta E. Lynch
804 F.3d 855 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 26, 2015
The Board upheld the IJ’s decision, finding the adverse credibility determination not clearly erroneous. … Under § 1101(a)(42), if Wang’s wife were forcibly steri- lized or forced to have an abortion, she could establish per se persecution on account of political opinion. See Chen v.
Cited 5 timesPublishedRoy Sargeant v. Aracelie Barfield
87 F.4th 358 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 28, 2023
Bivens offers an effective remedy where federal agents violate clearly established constitutional law. It’s not a perfect remedy, nor is it the only deterrent against abuse of power and authority by federal agents. … Bivens claims can fail for many reasons, in- cluding the defense of qualified immunity. Also, apart from Bivens claims, discipline by supervisors and, in egregious cases, even criminal prosecution can help deter abuses.
Cited 42 timesPublishedEarl Wittmer, Earl Craig Cox, and James Jeffers v. Howard A. Peters, III
87 F.3d 916 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 2, 1996
They claim that the black man who was made a lieutenant was less qualified than they and received the appointment only because of his race. … But he rejected the plaintiffs’ claim for damages, on the ground that the defendants had qualified immunity; and he denied the plaintiffs’ request for injunctive relief on the ground that they had not established a causal
Cited 67 timesPublishedIllinois Health Care Ass'n v. Illinois Department of Public Health
879 F.2d 286 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 18, 1989
The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' complaint based on lack of standing, sovereign immunity and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. … be constitutional if the leg *290 islature had merely taken the trouble to articulate its purposes more clearly.
Cited 35 timesPublished717 F.2d 372 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 21, 1983
The Deputy Administrator concluded that the rehabilitation center was not a special care unit because “the type of care [rendered by the center was] not comparable to traditional established special care units where patients … The uncontroverted facts, as found by the PRRB and adopted by the Secretary, clearly demonstrate a level of care consonant with that provided in recognized special care units.
Cited 11 timesPublished180 F.2d 742 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 23, 1950
by transients in order to qualify as a "hotel” under the Act. … have some transient residents to qualify for decontrol.
Cited 5 timesPublished518 F.3d 497 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 3, 2008
The Illinois statute under which Negrete was convicted, 720 ILCS 5/24-1.1(a), is clearly the state law counterpart to § 922(g)(1). … Thus, the Board’s decision two years later to overturn Vasquez-Muniz I was hardly the “abrupt departure from well established practice” that Negrete would have us believe. Id.
Cited 28 timesPublished329 F. App'x 660 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 14, 2009
Moreover, the government clearly argued the participation of Ghost, Disco, and Black in the conspiracy throughout the course of the trial. … Hardimon maintains that the conviction doesn’t qualify as a “prior” conviction because, he contends, insufficient evidence established that he participated in the conspiracy after his conviction in January 2006.
Cited 5 timesPublishedTomeca Denwiddie v. Stephen Mueller
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 31, 2019
Because the officers did not establish that qualified immunity applies based on the facts as Denwiddie pleaded them, we vacate the judgment and remand for further proceedings. … ” their defense that they had not violated any clearly established law.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedFreedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Bugher
249 F.3d 606 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 27, 2001
The Establishment Clause, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion," U.S. const. amend. … Therefore, until the Supreme Court has clearly overruled Nyquist, we must apply its holding, which "directly controls" this case. See Agostini, 521 U.S. at 237.
Cited 10 timesPublishedUnited States v. Kurt W. McDonald
22 F.3d 139 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 13, 1994
Facts In April of 1990 Timmy Taylor established a counterfeit printing operation in his print shop in Elkhart, Indiana. Taylor and Jeffrey Easton procured equipment for the operation. … If two permissible views exist, the fact-finder’s choice between them cannot be clearly erroneous. Id.
Cited 73 timesPublished844 F.2d 1326 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 26, 1988
He asserts that the Act and its history clearly reveal that Congress would not have intended to prevent a disabled individual from obtaining a disability freeze merely because he initially received child’s disability benefits … In the case at bar, Congress did not clearly elucidate a specific intent as to whether a recipient of child’s disability benefits whose period of disability is interrupted by a period of gainful employment should qualify
Cited 14 timesPublished502 F.2d 715 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 28, 1974
Clearly, the government did not sustain that burden. … procedure for the establishment of tolerances. 21 U.S.C. 348.
Cited 15 timesPublished708 F.3d 905 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 26, 2013
As a result, the decisions below were not “contrary to” clearly established law. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); see also Cone, 535 U.S. at 694. … For all these reasons, we find 3 To the extent that the principles of Rompilla were established in 2001, they are clearly distinguishable from this case.
Cited 84 timesPublished
Ask Donna