Case law

Bugg v. Int'l Union of Allied Industrial Workers

674 F.2d 595 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 18, 1982

Clearly it was out of time. … To establish a claim against the Company, the plaintiff was required to show: (1) that he belongs to a protected class; (2) that he was qualified for the job from which he was transferred; (3) that, despite his qualifications

United States v. Winbush

580 F.3d 503 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 1, 2009

Even if we accept his contention, however, the “Tennessee crack” would have qualified as related conduct. See U.S.S.G. § lB1.3(a)(2). … Winbush has not established that the district court clearly erred by assigning two points for his 1999 sentence.

Walter Rogers v. Thomas Israel

746 F.2d 1288 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 16, 1984

While none of the physicians he talked with were pathologists, there is nothing in the record that suggests that a pathologist is the only qualified physician to give an opinion on the issue or that he is better qualified … In the present case, the facts that were established at the state court hearing do not demonstrate that the "physicians" consulted by the trial counsel could not have been qualified as experts.

United States v. Deon Pugh

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 13, 2025

To that end, we emphasize that more than one person may qualify as a leader or organizer of conspiracy. U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1, cmt. n.4. … Likewise, the district court did not clearly err in finding Pugh exercised control over the conspiracy when he directed others.

King v. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System

898 F.2d 533 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 22, 1990

This logic clearly retains vitality: the equal protection clause does not prohibit all negative employment actions against women. … Nothing in the record, however, suggests that King was qualified for tenure renewal.

Pens. Plan Guide P 23923p Eileen D. Mlsna v. Unitel Communications, Inc.

91 F.3d 876 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 29, 1996

Thus Mlsna’s termination constituted a “qualifying event” for COBRA purposes, 29 U.S.C. § 1163 , entitling the Mlsnas to notice of their right to continue medical insurance and subjecting Unitel to substantial liability for … In addition, the evidence that certain Unitel customers later became Corporate Systems of America customers did not establish any impropriety on the part of Msna.

In the Matter of Grand Jury Proceedings Empanelled May 1988. Appeal of Dennis Freligh

894 F.2d 881 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 30, 1990

This suggestion derives color from the frequently repeated statement that "punishment may not be imposed in a civil contempt proceeding when it is clearly established that the alleged contemnor is unable to comply with the … But we do not want to encourage con-temnors to believe that it is easy to establish improper governmental purpose; it is not.

United States v. Robert S. Chappell

698 F.2d 308 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 10, 1983

This testimony was clearly admissible under FRE 801(d)(2)(D). … In any event, there clearly were adequate indicia of reliability surrounding Ricci’s testimony. He gave his statement under oath, *313 and it was recorded by a qualified court reporter.

United States v. Hollins

498 F.3d 622 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 17, 2007

Having credited Addison’s statements and testimony to the extent that they establish “that she did have a relationship with Mr. … Hollins now objects that the factual finding that he was a manager is clearly erroneous.

Howard, Laurie K. v. Lear Corp EEDS

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 12, 2000

To establish a prima facie case of failure to promote, Howard must show that (1) she is a member of a protected class; (2) she applied for, and was qualified for an open position; (3) she was rejected; and (4) the employer … Even were we to assume that Howard was qualified to be an HR manager, she fails to establish the second and fourth prongs.

Dillard v. Chicago Transit Authority

105 F. App'x 107 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 14, 2004

And none of the facts identified by Dillard on appeal establish either that he was qualified for the GMQA position or that he applied for the LMRM position. … The district court expressly addressed those conditions in its order, so Dillard’s claim that these facts were “ignored” is clearly incorrect.

Koutnik, Joseph D. v. Brown, Lebbeus

189 F. App'x 546 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 24, 2006

However we point out that the Supreme Court has limited the extension of absolute immunity in a similar context, affording only qualified immunity to prison discipline committee members. Cleavinger v. … For the reasons outlined in Cleavinger, Ray, Huibregtse, and Raemisch were entitled only to qualified immunity for their role in evaluating Koutnik’s complaint.

Sandra Remer, Parent of a Minor Son, M.R. v. Burlington Area School District, Larry Anderson, William C. Campbell

286 F.3d 1007 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 16, 2002

The district court further held that, even if a due process violation had occurred, the individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. … There was, however, ample evidence before the school board establishing M.R.’s participation in the conspiracy.

Israel v. United States Department of Agriculture

282 F.3d 521 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 8, 2002

First, the district court noted the doctrine of sovereign immunity would likely bar the use of estoppel in the present case. … The recapture provision clearly states that recapture is allowed at "the expiration date of the Agreement."

Bank of Sun Prairie v. Kentucky Department of Revenue

796 F.3d 667 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 31, 2015

It then establishes a presumption that any gasoline so loaded is for in-state delivery “unless the contrary is established by the dealer....” KY. REV. STAT. § 138.210(15)(a). … State sovereign immunity, as reflected by the Eleventh Amendment, does not bar Bulk’s claim.

United States v. Robert M. Warner

830 F.2d 651 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 14, 1987

The court concluded that “the record clearly establishes here that his nonpayment was wilful and contumacious and he made no good faith effort to obtain employment or to pay the costs.” … This finding is not clearly erroneous (though this may be too high a standard of proof to apply). Therefore, no Bearden infirmity exists.

United States v. Paulette Hammick, A/K/A Rosslyn Forrester, A/K/A Carolyn A. James

36 F.3d 594 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 22, 1994

ANALYSIS “[T]he clearly erroneous standard of review for findings of fact in the sentencing context is mandated by Congress.” United States v. … Indeed, it is well established that pleading guilty does not entitle a defendant to the reduction as a matter of right. U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, comment, (n. 3); see Panadero, 7 F.3d at 694 ; United States v.

McDonald v. United Air Lines, Inc.

745 F.2d 1081 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 28, 1984

The illegal discrimination embodied in the “no-marriage” rule has been established and is no longer at issue. … Rather, the defendant had the burden of proving that a candidate would not have been otherwise qualified or that there were no vacancies.

United States v. Dennis Birkley

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.

Salim v. Holder

728 F.3d 718 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 28, 2013

A probability of future persecution may be established by either one of two methods. … And the INS regulations clearly “contemplate the effect of group membership on an individual’s circumstances by enumerating the five statutory categories of withholding eligibility.” Kho v.