Case law

Coleman v. Labor & Industry Review Commission

860 F.3d 461 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 16, 2017

It noted that “[w]hen Congress directly incorporates language with an established legal meaning into a statute, we may infer that Congress intended the language to take on its established meaning.” Id. … In Roell , for example, “Roell and Garibay clearly implied their consent by their decision to appear before the Magistrate Judge, without expressing any reservation, after being notified of their right to refuse and after

Parmelee Transportation Company, a Delaware Corporation v. John L. Keeshin, in the Matter of Criminal Contempt of Thomas C. McConnell

294 F.2d 310 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 5, 1961

This being true, it follows that the presence of that element must clearly be shown in every case where the power to punish for contempt is exerted — ■ * * •» ” This case was cited with approval in In re Michael, 326 U.S. … The whole theory for holding respondent immune from his conduct in representing his client in good faith is satisfied when he is permitted to make a record in a respectful manner in the trial court for use in a court of review

Peabody Coal Company & Old Republic Insurance Company v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor

778 F.2d 358 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 2, 1985

Lenyo clearly and unhesitantly stated that it would. Peabody also claims that Dr. Lenyo’s opinion is “incredible as a matter of law.” We do not agree. … Even were the AU to have applied the last-job test to Huber’s claims she could clearly have refused to limit consideration to the KW Dart.

Bayview-Lofberg's, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee

905 F.2d 142 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 11, 1990

DISCUSSION An action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 has two elements. (1) The action must have been under color of state law, and (2) the action complained of must have deprived a person of rights, privileges or immunities … “To have a property interest in a benefit, a person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire for it. He must have more than a unilateral expectation of it.

Hanson v. Espy

8 F.3d 469 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 22, 1993

It is an “established proposition that an agency’s construction of its own regulations is entitled to substantial deference.” Lyng v. … However, we agree with the Secretary that the administrative record clearly shows otherwise. Christian Hanson told Mr.

United States v. Ronald J. Smith, James J. Marren, and Gerald T. Louison

995 F.2d 662 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 12, 1993

The challenge the defendants present is an all too familiar one for which we have several clearly established legal principles to guide our inquiry. … Norris did not enter his appearance until after the witness to whom Norris had granted immunity testified.

Chicago Teachers Union Local v. Chicago Board of Education

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 29, 2011

In the employment context, a property interest exists “when an employer’s discretion is clearly limited so that the employee cannot be denied employment unless specific conditions are met.” Buttitta v. … Upon notice of removal, the teacher receives a list of all unencumbered vacant positions for which he or she is qualified.

Green Bay & Western Railroad v. United States

644 F.2d 1217 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 23, 1981

It was certainly not designed to immunize ConRail from the increased competition in the industry envisioned by the 4R Act. … That Act, which is discussed in greater detail later in this opinion, established the U.S.

Ahuja v. Danzig

14 F. App'x 653 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 10, 2001

not hiring Ahuja - that Rettinger was more qualified. … he was more qualified.

United States v. All Assets and Equipment of West Side Building Corp., Appeal of Clara Penny and West Side Building Corp., Claimants-Appellants

58 F.3d 1181 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 29, 1995

First, it clearly could have been raised earlier, in response to the motion for summary judgment. Second, Mrs. … Yet the complaint clearly itemized vehicles and real estate among the property.

Eli Peritz v. Liberty Loan Corporation

523 F.2d 349 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 30, 1975

Our jurisdiction in this interlocutory appeal is thus limited to those orders which qualify as “final orders” under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and any additional orders or questions directly related to and underlying these appealable … first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed.” 404 U.S. at 106 , 92 S.Ct. at 355 .

United States v. Mansa Baptist

759 F.3d 690 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 17, 2014

Matter of Yanez-Garcia, 23 I&N Dec. 390, 398 (BIA 2002) (holding that felony posses- sion qualifies as an aggravated felony); Fernandez v. … But the stipulated removal order clearly outlined Baptist’s right to appeal.

Texas Co. v. Chicago & Alton R.

117 F.2d 210 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 14, 1940

We cannot agree that the qualified discharge of the receivers terminated all jurisdiction over the receivers. … The Illinois Supreme Court has clearly indicated that under the Public Utilities Act the present Commerce Commission does not have the power to set aside previously prescribed reasonable maximum rates and establish a new

United States v. Schnell

353 F. App'x 12 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 12, 2009

Accordingly, the court reasoned, Indiana law did not speak to Schnell’s contention that he did not have a qualifying conviction. … In addition, Schnell has neither sought nor received the restoration of his civil rights through the procedure established in 18 U.S.C. § 925 (c).

Martin Hoffman v. Justin Wilks

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 16, 2019

Brown holds that personnel who implement Illinois’s pro- gram are entitled to qualified immunity because no federal court has held that the Illi- nois approach violates the Constitution, so they have not violated clearly … established law.

Martin Hoffman v. Justin Wilks

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 16, 2019

Brown holds that personnel who implement Illinois’s pro- gram are entitled to qualified immunity because no federal court has held that the Illi- nois approach violates the Constitution, so they have not violated clearly … established law.

United States v. Michael A. Strozier, Also Known as M. Kirt Strozier

981 F.2d 281 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 4, 1992

(n.2), in that he withdrew only $36,000 of the $405,000 he deposited, and thus qualified for a 3 level reduction under § 2Xl.l(b)(l) because he was guilty of only attempting to defraud Fidelity of the full $405,000. … The defendant completed his defrauding of Fidelity when he set up the two fraudulent accounts; what he did not get around to completing was inflicting on Fidelity all the loss his actions clearly indicate he planned.

United States v. James P. Walton

255 F.3d 437 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 28, 2001

When the district court asked, “[cjounsel, is the sole issue here whether or not you have to have more than one [qualifying image]? … In so holding, the Court relied on prior precedent which established that common law offenses against the state, the person, property, or public morals “presume a scienter requirement in the absence of express contrary [Congressional

Breneisen v. Motorola, Inc.

656 F.3d 701 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 2, 2011

At the end of that leave, his entitlement to twelve weeks of leave per year for a qualifying condition had been exhausted. … This language clearly establishes that costs and fees are ancillary to the merits of a claim, not part of the claim itself.

Harper & Row Publishers, Inc. v. Honorable Bernard M. Decker, United States District Judge

423 F.2d 487 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 4, 1970

In any event we do not find the existence of personal attorney-client relationships so clearly established that mandamus is appropriate to compel the district court to recognize the privilege which would arise therefrom. … Indeed, the qualified privilege might even attach to a document prepared under the supervision of the attorney even though not drafted by the attorney himself. Alltmont v.