Case law

Robert W. Hadley v. County of Du Page

715 F.2d 1238 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 30, 1983

F.R.Civ.P. 56(c). * * * * * * “The party moving for summary judgment has the burden of clearly establishing the non-existence of any genuine issue of fact that is material to a judgment in his favor. … Hadley misconstrues Chairman Knuepfer’s use of this qualifying phrase.

Emmel v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Chicago

95 F.3d 627 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 12, 1996

Once the plaintiff has established such a case, an inference of discrimination exists and the burden of production shifts to the defendant employer to “clearly set forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence, reasons … Enamel asked “[W]as I qualified for any of these positions?” to which Walsh replied “You are the only other one qualified.”

Charles v. Daley

846 F.2d 1057 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 22, 1988

With respect to the litigation underlying the instant appeal, the plaintiffs certainly qualify as prevailing parties under the Hensley test. … A party found not to have been defeated by plaintiffs, either because of the type of legal immunity at work in Graham or because liability on the merits could not be established, is, by the express language of section 1988

Carol BRILL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LANTE CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee

119 F.3d 1266 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 8, 1997

She (or he) does this by establishing the well-known prima facie ease, which was meant to be flexible and to fit the facts of virtually any type of claim. Texas Dep’t of Community Affairs v. … that were promoted had similar or lesser qualifications for the job, or, in other words, they were not more qualified than she.

Argyropoulos v. City of Alton

539 F.3d 724 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 26, 2008

Ar-gyropoulos’s sexual harassment complaint clearly constitutes a statutorily protected activity, and her termination qualifies as a materially adverse action. … Co., 276 F.3d 345, 359 (7th Cir.2002) (“[A]n employee’s complaint of harassment does not immunize her from being subsequently disciplined or terminated for inappropriate workplace behavior.”).

United States v. Curb

626 F.3d 921 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 16, 2010

The government asserted that Curb qualified for the “manager or supervisor” enhancement pursuant to Section 3B1.1(b) of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. … This court has previously held that “[m]iddlemen are not, of course, immune from application of § 3B1.1.” United States v. Brown, 944 F.2d 1377, 1381 (7th Cir. 1991).

Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Forsyth Energy, Inc.

666 F.2d 1104 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 11, 1981

A coal mine operator was required to secure the payment of benefits for which it might be found liable by purchasing an approved policy of insurance or by qualifying as a self insurer with the Department of Labor. … As stated previously, the Act mandates that operators carry insurance or qualify as a self-insurer for those claims they might be liable for.

Murdock v. Dorethy

846 F.3d 203 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 3, 2017

We must first -set forth the “clearly established Federal law” at issue. … Petitioner has failed to .demonstrate that the decision of the Illinois Supreme Court involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law or an unreasonable determination of the facts.

United States v. Brian Fenner

142 F.4th 510 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 1, 2025

Most of it was clearly proper, summarizing the con- tent of voluminous financial documents and communications from and between Fenner and Birkley. … We have never held that a statement short of express acceptance of liability is immune from a Bruton challenge. See United States v.

Clark v. Chrysler Corp.

673 F.2d 921 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 5, 1982

To establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment under Title VII,- she had to establish: (1) that she belongs to a racial minority; (2) that she applied for and *930 was qualified for the job for which the employer … Given these factual findings, the appellant clearly failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. . [9] Regarding the appellant’s claim that Chrysler retaliated against her for the filing of her EEOC charge and

Pozzie v. United States Department Of Housing And Urban Development

48 F.3d 1026 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 24, 1995

This is clearly not what Congress intended. The real purpose of the program is to "provide relief to qualified applicants." Ferrell v. Pierce, 785 F.2d 1372 , 1379-80 n. 6 (7th Cir.1986); see also Miasel v. … The record establishes that Pozzie's employer gave her numerous warnings about arriving late for work and working unauthorized overtime.

United States v. Reid Simpson

995 F.2d 109 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 28, 1993

Around the time American got wind of Simpson’s fraud, Simpson began to make efforts to re-establish his alleged contact with Greene. … The district court’s finding that Simpson did not accept responsibility for his acts is a factual determination that we uphold unless it is clearly erroneous. 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (d); United States v.

Domenic Diiulio v. Board of Fire and Police Commissioners of the City of Northlake

682 F.2d 666 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 30, 1982

The only other affidavit submitted by plaintiffs was one from an individual who asserted that he is qualified in psychology and has expertise in analyzing promotional tests for policemen. … Plaintiffs’ affidavits clearly do not raise a genuine issue as to this sole material issue. V For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. 1 .

Production Tool Corporation and Manuel Aguilar v. Employment and Training Administration, United States Department of Labor, Kenall Manufacturing Company and Blanca Fabian v. Employment and Training Administration, United States Department of Labor

688 F.2d 1161 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 20, 1982

The provision at issue requires documentation which "clearly shows" that: 5 (9)(i) The employer has advertised and is still advertising the job opportunity without success in such media as newspapers of general circulation … In particular, the Secretary has found it a difficult task to establish that an available worker is "willing." See, e.g., Ratnayake v. Mack, 499 F.2d 1207, 1213 (8th Cir. 1974).

Roger WAITE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee

819 F.2d 1356 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 1, 1987

Instead, listing 1.13 clearly requires the imposition of a series of surgical procedures to restore major function of the extremity. … In his findings, however, the ALT stated, "The medical evidence establishes that the claimant has a loss of motor and sensory function of the left arm, but he does not have an impairment, or a combination of impairments listed

Rodney Harrell v. United States Postal Service

415 F.3d 700 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 19, 2005

] the important societal interest in assisting families, by establishing a minimum labor standard for leave. … The rights established by the FMLA can be enforced through civil actions.

United States v. Carl Hach and Francis Hach

162 F.3d 937 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 9, 1998

Based on this finding, it was not clearly erroneous to impose a $20,000 fine. III. … The record shows however, that Sajenko clearly stated how much cocaine he sold the defendants.

Christopher P. Bohus v. Board of Election Commissioners

447 F.2d 821 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 5, 1971

The plaintiff’s evidence showing the discriminatory nature of this practice was, in my view, clearly sufficient to establish a prima facie case; the plaintiff’s proof was not substantially controverted. … To put one party automatically first on the ballot cannot qualify as a permissible classification. In Snowden v.

United States v. Paul T. Wigoda

521 F.2d 1221 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 20, 1975

Sufficiency of the Evidence In a somewhat half-hearted way, defendant contends that his motions for a judgment of acquittal should have been granted on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to establish his guilt … Thus the district court’s decision that the full report need not be revealed under the Jencks Act was not “clearly erroneous.” United States v. O’Brien, 444 F.2d 1082, 1087 (7th Cir. 1971).

Veeder v. United States

252 F. 414 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 9, 1918

This limitation was clearly observed in the act in question. … By exclusion, therefore, papers and documents which afford evidence that a felony has been committed, but which were not the means of committing it, are immune from seizure. *419 Applying these principles to Mclsaac’s affidavit