Case law

United States v. Darif, Anouar

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 3, 2006

She asserted her Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination, was offered immunity to testify, and accepted immunity. … The district court reasoned: Clearly, Defendant and Ms.

United States v. Wilson

715 F.2d 1164 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 9, 1984

First, defendants claim that the establishment of C.W.' … Thus, we hold that the district court properly denied defendants' request to order use immunity for certain witnesses, and that there was no abuse of discretion in the government's decision not to confer immunity. IX.

Dr. Thaddeus Malak v. Associated Physicians, Inc.

784 F.2d 277 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 24, 1986

The fact that Dennis involved judicial immunity does not detract at all from this conclusion. … , 101 S.Ct. at 186 , so that clearly the conduct of a private defendant remains state action when the public defendants are not immune from damage liability.

Michael Johnson v. Susan Prentice

29 F.4th 895 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 31, 2022

The record clearly establishes that he suffered from serious mental illness predating his transfer to Pontiac and remained seriously mentally ill during the extended time he spent in solitary confinement, cycling between … Prison officials cannot immunize their yard restrictions from consti- tutional inquiry by staying within a 90-day limit.

United States v. Leon Smallwood

188 F.3d 905 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 26, 1999

(Id.) 2 These findings were not clearly erroneous. Therefore, the district court correctly denied Smallwood’s motion to suppress. See United States v. … Accordingly, the district court did not clearly err when it denied Smallwood’s motion to dismiss the venire.

United States v. Anthony T. Centracchio, Thomas R. Tucker, Robert S. Urbinati, and Robert D. Natale

265 F.3d 518 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 4, 2001

Even if the plea allocution qualifies as a statement against penal interest, the defendants argue that its admission would violate the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. … Skidmore, 254 F.3d 635, 638 (7th Cir.2001), and we review a trial court’s determination that the government has proved these three elements under a clearly erroneous standard. Stephenson, 53 F.3d at 842.

NZEVE v. Holder

582 F.3d 678 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 17, 2009

Lorraine Mapepa, Nzeve’s wife, would qualify as a derivative beneficiary of any relief granted to Nzeve. … Furthermore, the record in this case clearly establishes that the IJ understood the standard of proof required to establish asylum eligibility and distinguished that standard from the higher standard required for withholding

Miguel Rosiles-Camarena v. Eric Holder, Jr.

735 F.3d 534 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 21, 2013

The   Board   thinks   it   unacceptable   to   have   one   IJ   assert   that   conditions   in   Mexico   are   horrible,   while   another   deems   them   fine,   and   to   have   both   conclu-­‐‑ sions  immune  to … When   a   decision   de-­‐‑ pends   on   the   characteristics   of   non-­‐‑litigants,   however,   and   establishes  a  rule  with  broad  scope,  the  appellate  role  can  be   more  substantial.  

Woodruff v. Mason

542 F.3d 545 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 5, 2008

The cycle-breaking rule does not apply when the scope of a post-review survey is broadened (as federal regulations clearly allow). … Because there was no constitutional violation in this case, we do not reach the issue of qualified immunity or absolute immunity. See Hildebrandt v.

David R. Webb Company, Incorporated v. National Labor Relations Board

888 F.2d 501 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 7, 1989

The narrowness of our review of NLRB decisions is well-established in this circuit. … Our holding does not immunize employees from discipline who are reinstated to positions not the substantial equivalent of their pre-strike positions.

United States v. Edwin Alvarez

914 F.2d 915 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 27, 1990

The findings of the district court on this question are factual and will not be overturned unless clearly erroneous. See United States v. Durrive, 902 F.2d 1221 (7th Cir.1990). … Congress clearly considered firearms in the hands of historically violent criminals to be a grave crime and intended to deal harshly with such offenders.

United States v. Robert Neal Allen

798 F.2d 985 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 1, 1986

To qualify as statements that could be used to impeach Stoneking at trial, the defendant must establish that these statements were signed or otherwise approved by Stoneking. … See also majority opinion at 996 noting that “investigators’ reports, such as FBI agents’ reports, so clearly fall within the language of the Jencks Act ... that defense counsel need not establish that the report is signed

Destiny Hoffman v. Susan Knoebel

894 F.3d 836 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 3, 2018

To establish liability under Monell, the plaintiffs must show that an official govern- ment policy or custom “is responsible for the deprivation of rights.” Thomas v. Cook Cnty. … Knoebel and Snelling respond that the lack of state-law authority does not make a seizure unreasonable, and in the alternative, they assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

United States v. LaSalle National Bank

554 F.2d 302 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 11, 1977

Although those cases establish that a taxpayer is clearly the “focus” of aicriminal investigation when the matter is assigned to the Intelligence Division of the Internal Revenue Service, they do not reflect in our reading … They found it unnecessary to advance the argument because of their view that the evidence in this case clearly established that the special agent’s investigation encompassed a civil aspect.

Bogi Miller v. Lionel A. Smith, and Kevin Brower

220 F.3d 491 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 10, 2000

Miller agrees that Kolar and its progeny establish such a presumption, but he argues that he rebutted it. … immunity— a defense available solely to officials facing § 1983 suits in their individual capacities.

Schaefer-LaRose v. Eli Lilly & Co.

679 F.3d 560 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 8, 2012

Schaefer-LaRose qualified as an exempt administrative employee. … The records clearly demonstrate that the repre- sentatives receive extensive skills training, particularly on sales techniques.

Robert R. Zinser v. Melvin C. Rose

868 F.2d 938 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 15, 1989

While joint activity that is part of petitioning the government is generally immune from antitrust prosecution, that immunity does not apply where the apparently legal petitioning activity is “a mere sham to cover what is … Maricopa County is a horizontal conspiracy case, involving members’ agreements establishing maximum fees for physicians belonging to two medical societies.

Nicolette Anne Butler v. Encyclopedia Brittanica, Inc., a New York Corporation, and Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States, and Anthony J. Cotini, Nicolette Anne Butler v. Encyclopedia Brittanica, Inc., a New York Corporation

41 F.3d 285 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 20, 1994

As the company points out, Articles VI through X of the plan are intended to establish the retirement benefits that are available and the persons who qualify for such benefits while Article XI, entitled "Retirement Settlement … Encyclopedia Brittanica's plan clearly satisfies these requirements for the QJSA in section 11.3.

United States v. Benny R. Wicks

132 F.3d 383 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 22, 1997

Wicks argues that this provision violates his rights under the due process clause because it places the burden of qualifying for this exception, once the government has met its burden of establishing the existence of the … The Supreme Court has clearly rejected such a rule, in McMillan v.

United States v. Francisco Corral-Ibarra and Roberto Herrera

25 F.3d 430 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 23, 1994

McEwen immediately entered into a cooperation agreement with the federal Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”), the terms of which granted him immunity. … We find that an entrapment defense, if pleaded in good faith, also may possibly qualify. See United States v. Fleener, 900 F.2d 914, 918 (6th Cir.1990).