Case law

19 Fair empl.prac.cas. 177, 19 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 8987 Anna Marie Taylor, Cross-Appellant v. Philips Industries, Inc., Cross-Appellee

593 F.2d 783 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 26, 1979

There was no evidence that Tomlin was any more qualified or had any more seniority than Taylor. There was evidence that several male employees, including Tomlin, had taken extended medical leaves without being replaced. … This statement should be expanded so that the parties are clearly advised of their respective rights and liabilities.

Pop, Rodica v. INS

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 2, 2001

We need not travel very far down the road suggested by either claim, however, because Judge Fujimoto found that Pop did not meet her burden of establishing past persecution (at all) because her claim was not credible./5 An … The written transcript clearly reveals inconsistencies in Pop’s testimony. Further evidence in the record supports Judge Fujimoto’s determination.

22 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1362, 24 Wage & Hour Cas. (Bn 728, 23 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 30,897, 23 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 31,024 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Kenosha Unified School District No. 1

620 F.2d 1220 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 9, 1980

Given this evidence from the time survey sheets and testimony that the duties of the two jobs differed and accounted for significant portions of the custodians' jobs, the district court's judgment is not clearly erroneous … The qualified immunity accorded Government officers acting in good faith similarly protects the Commission attorneys from having to pay the award without reimbursement from the United States. Scheuer v.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Autozone, Inc.

630 F.3d 635 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 30, 2010

The court concluded that the EEOC was there- fore unable to establish a failure-to-accommodate claim during the relevant time, and granted AutoZone’s motion on that claim. … Relying on our discus- sion in Brunker, AutoZone asserts that because a broken leg, appendicitis, or isolated bouts of depression did not qualify as disabilities, Shepherd’s episodic flare-ups should not qualify either.

United States v. Andry

666 F. App'x 550 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 23, 2016

The evidence also established that there were more than five participants in the entire scheme. … Similarly, the district court’s finding that the scheme involved five or more individuals and that Andry supervised at least one individual was not clearly erroneous. For these and the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM.

Ardale Calvin v. James B. Conlisk, Jr., Etc.

520 F.2d 1 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 3, 1975

. § 1983 , to redress alleged deprivations under color of law of rights, privileges and immunities secured by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments. 1 The plaintiffs are seven individuals, the Afro-American … The individual plaintiffs are legally competent and are represented by well-qualified and competent counsel.”

United States v. Robert D. Hunter

145 F.3d 946 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 28, 1998

Hunter contends that Murphy was not qualified to offer an opinion on the conversion ratios of powder cocaine to crack. … The district court’s conservative calculations, along with Lieutenant Murphy’s experience in this field, persuade us that the 157-gram determination is not clearly erroneous.

American Deposit Corporation v. Schacht

84 F.3d 834 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 13, 1996

The Retirement CD is structured such that the purchaser qualifies for special tax treatment by the Internal Revenue Service. … See supra p. 843 ("Barnett Bank demonstrates that the Bank Act possesses no unique immunity from the McCarran-Ferguson Act."). Yet Barnett Bank contains no such message or suggestion.

Chester H. Borowski v. Depuy, Inc., a Division of Boehringer Mannheim Co., and Stephen Bales, Chester H. Borowski v. Depuy, Inc., a Division of Boehringer Mannheim Co., and Stephen Bales, Appeal of Mitchell A. Kramer & Associates

850 F.2d 297 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 17, 1988

This Court recognized such a qualified privilege in George A. Fuller Co. v. … Id. at 1333 (quoting Avins, Liability for Inducing A Corporation to Breach its Contract, 43 Cornell L.Q. 55, 59 (1957)). 22 For Bales to lose this qualified immunity from suit, Borowski had to prove that Bales induced the

United States v. Darin D. Gilliam

255 F.3d 428 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 28, 2001

We conclude that Gilliam cannot establish the first requirement necessary for finding of plain error; namely, that the district court committed any error. … Furthermore, at the time Gilliam did enter his plea of guilt, the district court clearly explained the consequences of the career offender status and the impact it would have if he agreed to plea.

Schneiker, Susan A. v. Fortis Insurance Co

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 6, 2000

Specifically, Local Rule 6.05(b) requires the non-moving party to submit "[a] specific response to the movant’s proposed findings of fact, clearly delineating only those findings to which it is asserted that a genuine issue … she was qualified for the job).

United States v. Quintanilla, Miguel

302 F.3d 679 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 27, 2002

The defendants’ first argument on appeal with respect to this testimony is that the district court erred in qualifying Agents Kress and Styron as experts. … Thus, like in Allen, the district court properly qualified the agents as experts and did not abuse its discretion in admitting their testimony.

Shanahan v. City of Chicago

82 F.3d 776 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 6, 1996

He believed they were not qualified to perform the highly skilled work on fire apparatus. … The court clearly did not abuse its discretion. First, the form of the request--a passing reference in a footnote of his response to defendants' motion for summary judgment--was improper.

Ethyl Corporation v. United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio-Clc and Local No. 7441, United Steelworkers of America, Afl-Cio-Clc

768 F.2d 180 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 22, 1985

Section 301 of the Taft-Hartley Act does not establish standards for the review of arbitration awards. It does not mention arbitration. … But all this just amounts to saying that the arbitrator may have been wrong, maybe even clearly wrong; it does not show that he was doing something other than interpreting the contract. See *186 Meyers v.

American National Fire Insurance v. Rose Acre Farms, Inc.

107 F.3d 451 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 12, 1997

The evidence established that ANFIC had not done so because it believed the existing exclusion excluded the Beechcraft, the position it continues to argue on appeal. … In such a construction, the following qualifying phrase modifies the clause which precedes the conjunction as well as the clause following the conjunction. Id. See also State v.

Kurek v. Pleasure Driveway And Park District Of Peoria

557 F.2d 580 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 11, 1977

district court based its dismissal of this claim on the following finding of Illinois Circuit Court Judge Iben in the Park District's damages lawsuit against the golf professionals: 50 (T)he reason for their termination clearly … Other courts nevertheless have utilized the single-word shorthand references of "exemption" or "immunity." 6 Mr.

Waltham Precision Instrument Company, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission

327 F.2d 427 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 8, 1964

The watches were rep *429 resented as being manufactured in their entirety in the United States by the well known and long established Waltham Watch Company, when in fact tlmy were made up of watch movements manufactured … The fact that the patent granted on the Resevoil device described the stones as jewels granted no immunity against misrepresentations in advertisements. Decker v.

Kampinen v. Martinez

102 F. App'x 492 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 18, 2004

Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 228-29 , 112 S.Ct. 534 , 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991) (qualified immunity standard’s allowance for reasonable error “is nowhere more important than when the specter of Presidential assassination is raised” … With regard to the legality of her arrest for criminal trespass, Kampinen *497 seems to disagree that the undisputed evidence established probable cause.

David Minnick v. Dan Winkleski

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 21, 2021

Richardson, 996 F.3d 469, 477 (7th Cir. 2021) (“This ambiguity is not enough to demonstrate that the court applied a standard contrary to clearly established federal law.”) (internal quotation marks omitted). … By applying the clearly stronger standard, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals did not apply a test that was contrary to clearly established law.

United States of America and Eunice Mathews v. Bank of Farmington

166 F.3d 853 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 20, 1999

Clearly, however, not all disclosure to a public official is public disclosure. … To qualify under the original source provision solely by putting things together one has to be doing more than simple arithmetic.