Case law

United States v. Maurice Collins

924 F.3d 436 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 14, 2019

No. 18‐2149 7 thus, he did not qualify for safety‐valve relief.8 After sentenc‐ ing Mr. … Collins had not established his eligibility because his explanations were not credible. This conclusion was not clearly erroneous. It was a difficult decision on disputed facts.

Glebocki v. City of Chicago

32 F. App'x 149 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 19, 2002

Accordingly, we first inquire whether Glebocki actually established a prima facie case of national origin discrimination. … The City does not contest that Glebocki’s Polish national origin qualifies as a protected class, or that he suffered an adverse action when he was fired.

Cisneros v. Lynch

834 F.3d 857 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 25, 2016

This is a regulation formally promulgated through statutory authority, and so it qualifies for Chevron deference. … See Taylor v. *865 United States, 495 U.S. 575 , 110 S.Ct. 2143 , 109 L.Ed.2d 607 (1990) (establishing a categorical approach to classify state crimes); Shepard v.

In Re Burlington Northern, Inc. Employment Practices Litigation. Appeal of Paul C. Sprenger, Lead Counsel-Appellants. Appeal of William E. McBride Appeal of American Train Dispatchers Association, Afl-Cio, Defendants

810 F.2d 601 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 23, 1987

Immunity from liability. The unions argue that under the rule of Northwest Airlines v. … We therefore cannot find the unions immune from liability for a portion of the prevailing party's attorneys fees. 36 B. The Rule 59(e) motion.

United States v. Charles J. Spears, Also Known as "Blackie," and Donald Meeks, United States of America v. Kim Curran

965 F.2d 262 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 9, 1992

It’s clearly established, I believe, that the defendant did distribute cocaine to Kim Curran on at least one occasion where it was resold, the June 21st incident. … We know about the Donald Meeks matter and I think he clearly qualifies under that. There is evidence in the record regarding Casey and Remillard relying on him as a source and that they used the drugs to resell.

Derrick Searcy v. Danny D. Jaimet, Warden, Hill Correctional Center

332 F.3d 1081 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 23, 2003

The Supreme Court has stated that only “the holdings, as opposed to the dicta,” of that Court’s deci *1088 sions qualify as “clearly established Federal law” for purposes of AEDPA. Williams v. … The state court’s application of clearly established law must be objectively unreasonable.” Lockyer v.

Lineback v. Irving Ready-Mix, Inc.

653 F.3d 566 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 5, 2011

This conclusion was clearly correct. … If the employer does not qualify under section 8(f), then the union was entitled to a rebuttable presumption that a majority of drivers still supported it as the exclusive collective bargaining representative pursuant to

Blue v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance

698 F.3d 587 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 18, 2012

To qualify for LTD benefits, in contrast, he needed to show that he was prevented from doing “any occupation or work for which he was or could become qualified by training, education or experience.” … To prevail on a Rule 59(e) motion to amend judgment, a party must “clearly establish” (1) that the court com- mitted a manifest error of law or fact, or (2) that newly discovered evidence precluded entry of judgment.

Leahy v. Board of Trustees of Community College District No. 508

912 F.2d 917 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 7, 1990

In an attempt to establish the requisite “state action,” Leahy contended that both the Union and City Colleges were established under the laws of the State of Illinois; that City Colleges delegated its “discretionary authority … Leahy has clearly failed to allege any willful participation by the Union in any “joint” action.

United States v. Palumbo Brothers, Inc.

145 F.3d 850 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 12, 1998

Therefore, to establish a criminal violation of RICO, the government must first establish a defendant's predicate acts. … of a RICO offense that must be clearly and specifically established in the indictment. 109 The United States' second argument asserts that the indictment sufficiently demonstrates the continuity of Ferrarini's predicate acts

United States v. Briscoe

896 F.2d 1476 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 26, 1990

As noted above, the government clearly established Shittu’s familiarity with the voices of Disu, Ajibade and Davies. … The evidence clearly establishes that these defendants were aware of the fact that Shittu and Ogundipe had other suppliers, such as Taiwo and Agbabs.

Boczar v. Kingen

6 F. App'x 471 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 1, 2001

constitutional claims when she challenges the district court’s determination that the Boezars could not claim damages under the Indiana Constitution because the individual members of the MSPC were entitled to absolute judicial immunity … But the Boczars misunderstand the nature of the clearly erroneous standard of review.

United States v. Christopher Jansen

884 F.3d 649 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 7, 2018

To be sure, that Steinback was hired to negotiate a plea does not immunize him from a charge of providing ineffective counsel. … This deter- mination was not clearly erroneous.

Gregorio F. Vargas v. Ronald B. Swan

854 F.2d 1028 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 4, 1988

The nature of the release, that it is conditional and revocable if the terms of the parole are violated, makes it sufficiently confining to qualify as custody. See Justices of Boston Mun. Court v. … Vargas clearly argues that the record on the issue is incomplete, and if it is later documented that he is longer on parole, the nature of the immigration proceedings may change from that of exclusion to that of deportation

United States v. Carrera, David

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 3, 2001

In order to establish entitlement to this reduction, a defendant must show by a preponderance of the evidence that he: "(1) clearly recognized and accepted responsibility for his conduct; (2) timely notified authorities of … Ed. 2d 1035 (1999) (finding that sec. 841(b) (1)(C) establishes a minimum of three years of supervised release and a maximum of life).

Gina PIRAINO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL ORIENTATION RESOURCES, INC., Defendant-Appellee

84 F.3d 270 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 21, 1996

IOR did so, Piraino continues, either by crafting its leave of absence policy so that she could not qualify, or by implementing its policy to accomplish her discharge, or both. … A jury could find that her call to Perlman in early January 1991 asking whether she needed to submit a written notice for a leave indicated clearly that she did not believe she had voluntarily resigned.

Sakajust Scott v. Randall Hepp

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 10, 2023

Standard of Review Under AEDPA, habeas relief is only warranted if the state court’s decision “was contrary to, or involved an unreasona- ble application of, clearly established Federal law, as deter- mined by the Supreme … That alone forestalls habeas relief, as there was no clearly established federal law for the Wisconsin court to contradict or unreasonably apply. See Harrington v.

Andrew Walker v. Glen Trammel

4 F.3d 998 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 1, 1993

Summary judgment in favor of Trammel was appropriate in this case because the record establishes that Trammel was entitled to qualified immunity. 8 In determining whether a government official is entitled to qualified immunity … and (2) were the constitutional standards clearly established at the time in question? Hill v. Shelander, No. 92-2058, slip op. at 5-6 (7th Cir. Apr. 30, 1993).

Barbara McGill v. Board of Education of Pekin Elementary School District No. 108 of Tazewell County, Illinois

602 F.2d 774 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 23, 1979

Thus Pickering can be read as establishing that two limits on a teacher’s right to speak out may be permissible. … Likewise, there was testimony that plaintiff was not making the other teachers upset, that she was highly qualified, and that there were no complaints about the way she conducted her class.

Milwaukee Branch of the N.A.A.C.P. v. Tommy Thompson, Governor of Wisconsin, and Wisconsin Association of Trial Judges, Intervenors-Appellees

116 F.3d 1194 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 3, 1997

So we must accept the district court’s characterization unless it is clearly erroneous. … Taking the figures at face value, as the parties do, leads straight to the conclusion that the district court’s findings are not clearly erroneous.