Case law

Michael Alan Gadsby v. Norwalk Furniture Corporation

71 F.3d 1324 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 29, 1996

Far from including such express language, this Contract clearly mandates a complete end to the relationship upon termination by either party. … The McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting analysis requires that a plaintiff initially establish a prima facie case.

Harrell, Rodney v. USPS

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 19, 2005

(USA) Ltd., 540 U.S. 736, 744 (2004) (“While Congress waived the immunity of the Postal Service, Congress did not strip it of its governmental status.”). … The rights established by the FMLA can be enforced through civil actions.

Jeffrey Michels v. United States Olympic Committee

741 F.2d 155 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 16, 1984

Michels qualified as an alternate on the twelve-member team. Later in May, the IWF conducted a proceeding in Italy to consider Michels’ claims, but sustained his suspension. … United States Olympic Committee, 492 F.Supp. 1181 (D.D.C.), aff'd without opinion, 701 F.2d 221 (D.C.Cir.1980), the district court held that the Act did not establish a cause of action for athletes who sought to enjoin the

United States v. Adrian Collins

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 11, 2015

The district judge made no clear error in con‐ cluding  withdrawal of Collins’ plea was unwarranted, or  in  finding Collins did  not qualify for an acceptance of respon‐ sibility adjustment.  … His statement that his first counsel had failed  to  discuss  the  case  with  him  was  unsworn,  and  the  district  judge  in  any  event  found  his  behavior  (e.g.,  pretending  his  fiancée was a nurse) had established

United States v. Alfonso Rodriguez-Cardenas

362 F.3d 958 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 31, 2004

(n.3(A)); see Corral, 324 F.3d at 874 , and so Rodriguez-Cardenas, as the proponent of the reduction, was required to establish that he played a much smaller role than Gutierrez, Corral, 324 F.3d at 874 . … Therefore the court did not clearly err because it reasoned that the role played by Rodriguez-Cardenas was no less significant than that of Gutierrez. See Corral, 324 F.3d at 874 .

Royal Business Machines, Inc. v. Lorraine Corp.

633 F.2d 34 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 7, 1980

The *48 district court’s finding that Booher’s revocation of acceptance of the RBC I machines was reasonable in time is clearly erroneous. … Findings Number 3 and the cost of supplies aspect of Number 4 qualify as representations of fact while they do not qualify as express warranties because in a fraud action, unlike a breach of warranty action, there is no requirement

Brown v. Watters

599 F.3d 602 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 19, 2010

Brown had not established cause and prejudice to excuse the default. … We evaluate the record to discern only whether the state court’s adjudica- tion of the claim (1) “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme

United States ex rel. Treat Bros. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.

986 F.2d 1110 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 23, 1993

Second, Blinderman contends that the court's award of approximately $17,000 to Treat for its work on Change Order AD was clearly erroneous. … The court further found that Major Ayers was qualified to give opinion testimony under either Federal Rule of Evidence 701 6 or 702. 7 “The decision whether to admit evidence is a matter ‘peculiarly within the competence

Cohen v. Ayers

596 F.2d 733 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 16, 1979

Thus, the plans clearly permit the Board to re-option cancelled shares. … Therefore, the possibility of waste — giving added value without any consideration — is clearly present.

Shelton v. Thomson

148 F.2d 1 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 2, 1945

He asserts that a court may add no other qualifying phrase to the instruction such as the one which the court here eliminated. … It was a case where an enlightened verdict was possible only when the jury was clearly instructed on the highly disputed, yet determinative issue in the case.

Kersting, James v. Wal-mart Stores Inc

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 18, 2001

./1 To establish disability discrimination, Kersting must show all three of the following elements: (1) that he is disabled within the meaning of the ADA, (2) that he is qualified to perform the essential functions of his … Clearly, Wal-Mart satisfied its statutory duty when it tailored Kersting’s Class II job to accommodate his disability.

United States v. Lee, Kenneth

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 11, 2009

Although the spas’ rent clearly does not qualify as “proceeds,” the question of whether the spas’ advertising expenses qualify is more difficult in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Santos. … It is well established that circumstantial evidence is sufficient to establish membership in the conspiracy. See, e.g., United States v.

United States v. Nell Scott, United States of America v. Ronald Scott

784 F.2d 787 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 26, 1986

Expert testimony established that some, but not all, of these checks contained fingerprints and/or handwriting of Nell and/or Ronald Scott. … Scott violated the spousal *793 immunity privilege. However, that privilege was not available in this case.

Elijah Moore v. Al C. Parke, Warden, Indiana State Prison

148 F.3d 705 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 19, 1998

sufficiency of evidence claim on habitual offender count should be addressed on the merits despite petitioner’s failure to raise issue on direct appeal because such “ ‘blatant violations of basic and elementary principles’ ” qualifies … State, 525 N.E.2d 1238 , 1241 n. 1 (Ind.1988) (excusing petitioner’s failure to raise sufficiency claim on direct review because “[w]here the record of the habitual offender proceeding clearly shows inadequate proof with

Goldwasser, Richard v. Ameritech Corp

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 25, 2000

As consumers and direct purchasers from Ameritech, they argue, they clearly have standing to bring this suit under decisions such as Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. … If that inquiry reveals a conflict between the antitrust laws and the 1996 Act, we would need to reach the question of implied immunity; if it shows instead that the two laws are reconcilable, immunity is beside the point

Ric-Wil Co. v. E. B. Kaiser Co.

179 F.2d 401 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 1, 1950

Second, the court below, on oral and documentary proof, made detailed findings of fact which are, under Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., binding on thjs court unless clearly erroneous. … We doubt, however, the soundness of the statement in paragraph 9 "that defendant’s expert witness Kellogg was not qualified to testify either as to the legal effect or the engineering aspects of patents because he was not

Man v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

69 F.3d 835 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 7, 1995

Sec. 1158 (a) to grant asylum if the applicant qualifies as a refugee under 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1101 (a)(42)(A). … In fact, the INS clearly raised this issue in its brief to the BIA and specifically requested that the BIA take notice of the changed circumstances.

Ann Bell v. Albertson Companies, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 7, 2020

They also often establish requirements for how the product must be made or sold. … Defendants make much of the word “clearly” in Beardsall and Williams, which they argue suggests that an ingredient la- bel can cure a misleading statement so long as the statement is not clearly misleading.

Reliance Insurance Company v. Al E. & C., Limited

539 F.2d 1101 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 8, 1976

The evidence clearly indicates that the use of the choker hitch upon the lifting trunnions caused the cable to shear. … Finally, expert testimony clearly established that the use of the choked hitch was the proximate cause of the cable split.

United States v. Walter Pritchard

773 F.2d 873 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 20, 1985

In addition to the order forms, the government introduced computer printout invoices to establish the misrepresentation to Edmund. … The fact that one person is not prosecuted for his possible criminal conduct does not immunize another for engaging in the same or similar conduct. We Affirm on all counts. 1 .