Case law

Julio de Lima Silva v. State of Wisconsin, Department

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 22, 2019

Qualified immunity protects an official from money dam- ages “unless a plaintiff pleads facts showing (1) that the offi- cial violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the … And if a jury draws that inference, it is of course true that Champagne’s actions would violate clearly established law.

United States v. Lawrence Bursten and Solomon Seidel

560 F.2d 779 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 15, 1977

Lesniak testified pursuant to a grant of immunity embodied in a plea agreement, wherein he pleaded guilty to charges of conspiracy and income tax evasion in connection with his acceptance of bribes on an unrelated project … We note that this assertion is clearly negatived by the record, which demonstrates that the East Chicago office of ECDC was established as a matter of convenience after the inception of the bribery *784 scheme.

United States v. Larry D. Hall

165 F.3d 1095 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 16, 1999

Thus, we conclude that these factors clearly support the district court’s conclusion that the proffered hearsay testimony lacked “trustworthiness.” … We, of course, would object to the testimony, and I think the case law clearly supports us -on that.” .

Estate of Kenneth E. Starkey v. United States

223 F.3d 694 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 17, 2000

The entire amount transferred to a trust for the benefit of a qualified charity is deductible. … The will’s codicil clearly states that Mr. Starkey intended to set up a charitable trust, and the IRS acknowledges that this was indeed his intent.

Estate of William A. Miller v. Helen Marberry

847 F.3d 425 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 30, 2017

In the context of determining whether there is a violation of a clearly established right to overcome qualified immunity, purpose rather than knowledge is required to impose ... liability on the subordinate for unconstitutional

Edward Joseph X. Chapman v. Richard Kleindienst

507 F.2d 1246 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 16, 1974

Defendants have argued here that Chapman may not maintain his damage action because of the doctrine of “official immunity.” … Such was clearly not the basis of Judge Foreman’s actions. 8 .

United States v. Maurice Harrison

431 F.3d 1007 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 12, 2005

Although we affirm the conviction, we order a limited remand for further proceedings on Harrison’s sentence under the procedure established in United States v. … The District Court’s Finding that Harrison Did Not Qualify for Acceptance of Responsibility We also find that the district court did not clearly err by finding that Harrison did not qualify for a downward adjustment

Shannon v. Shannon

965 F.2d 542 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 24, 1992

Clearly, hospital care, while serving the public, is not the exclusive prerogative of the State. Additionally, the Court in Garcia v. … . §§ 201 et seq.), held that drawing “the boundaries of state regulatory immunity in terms of 'traditional government function’ is not only unworkable but is also inconsistent with established principles of federal-ism_”

United States v. Baldev R. Bhutani and Alra Laboratories, Incorporated

266 F.3d 661 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 12, 2001

Thus, by simply replacing “(j)” with “(k),” § 331(e) again clearly subjected violators to the same criminal penalties as they had been for more than two decades prior to 1984 for failing to establish or maintain records. … While the plain language of the FDCA clearly prohibited the failure to establish or maintain records, criminal penalties were not clearly imposed.

Brown v. Smith

827 F.3d 609 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 28, 2016

Moreover, during 2012, Brown made 63 trips over 187 days as he worked to establish his business. … So the district court did not clearly err in concluding that Brown had mitigated his damages. III. CONCLUSION The judgment of the district court is Affirmed. .

United States v. Marco Damico

99 F.3d 1431 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 8, 1996

Following that directive, this court has affirmed section 924(c)(1) convictions in the post -Bailey era where “the uneontested actions of a defendant clearly fit the definition of ‘carry,’ ” even if they may not also qualify … See generally U.S.S.G. § 3D1.2 (establishing grouping rules for related counts).

Craig Steffen v. Patrick R. Donahoe

680 F.3d 738 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 21, 2012

This Circuit’s pre-Amendment jurisprudence clearly indicated that (continued...) … Finally, Steffen does not qualify as substantially limited in the major life activity of working.

Cohen v. Illinois Institute of Technology

524 F.2d 818 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 28, 1975

discrimination, she has no remedy under either Title VII of the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 4 or the Illinois Fair Employment Practices Act, 5 although the victim of comparable discrimination occurring today would clearly … The first is clearly stated in the statute: the defendants must have acted ‘under color of state law.7 The second inheres in the nature of plaintiffs protected rights: he may not be deprived ‘of any rights, privileges, or

John A. Werner & W & D Services, Inc., Cross-Appellees v. Xerox Corporation, Cross-Appellant

732 F.2d 580 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 18, 1984

In March and November, 1979, Xerox ordered two additional machines, even though the first had not yet been qualified as meeting Xerox’s specifications. … We will overturn an award of damages only if it is clearly erroneous.

Joseph M. Conley v. Village of Bedford Park

215 F.3d 703 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 31, 2000

At the same time, he appears to admit that Paul Miraldi, the maintenance worker who was promoted, was qualified for the job. See R.14 at 3. 6 Furthermore, Mr. … In Erickson , the court held that the ADA did not " 'enforce' the Fourteenth Amendment,” and therefore, like the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, did not validly abrogate Eleventh Amendment immunity. 207 F.3d at 952

Carletos E. Hardamon v. United States

319 F.3d 943 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 14, 2003

Finally, Hardamon’s attorney attempted to discredit Blackmon’s testimony by establishing that the government gave her immunity from prosecution and that she had never actually seen Har-damon sell drugs. 4. … Finally, Smith admitted that he received immunity for his testimony and that Joseph Trotter had local drug sources long before Trotter met Hardamon. 5.

Riley, Samuel v. Blagojevich, Rod R.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 23, 2005

Eve denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss, which asserted qualified immunity (and so the denial, though interlocutory, was an appealable order), and they appeal. … To what extent can he rely on the doctrine of qualified immunity to shield him from the consequences of such a disagreement?

United States v. Williams, Kevin

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 19, 2000

Powell was a childhood friend of Williams who testified under a grant of immunity as part of a plea agreement with the government. … Larry Austin, who had been charged with conspiring with Powell, testified under a grant of immunity that he saw Williams sell crack.

Ramon Clark v. Jody Reed

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 28, 2019

Second, he ruled that Reed was entitled to qualified immunity on Clark’s retaliation claim because it was not clearly established that a threat to file a grievance was protected speech. … Qualified immunity insulates government officials from suits for damages when their conduct did not violate specifically defined federal rights that were clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Manilal v. Patel v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Sharda M. Patel v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

811 F.2d 377 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 3, 1987

However, in the present case the unauthorized employment clearly was not the only adverse matter of record. … Although the Board did not do so, Matter of Khan could clearly have been otherwise distinguished from the instant case.