Case law

Madeline Krasno v. Jennifer Mnookin

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 1, 2025

Finally, the court concluded that Krasno’s individual capacity claims failed be- cause the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. Krasno timely appealed. II. … Sovereign Immunity As confirmed by the Eleventh Amendment, states are sov- ereigns and are therefore immune from suit. Va. Off. for Prot. and Advoc. v. Stewart, 563 U.S. 247, 253 (2011).

Isiah Kitchen v. United States

227 F.3d 1014 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 14, 2000

Gramley, 915 F.2d 1128, 1137 (7th Cir.1990) (“Our cases establish that the right to appointed counsel extends to the first appeal of right, and no further.”). … Presumably, this "understanding” was some sort of immunity. 8 . The fact that defense counsel wanted to call Ms.

United States v. 2600 State Drugs, Inc., Edward Kravetz, Melburn Holtzman and Raymond Holtzman

235 F.2d 913 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 8, 1956

To ship these drugs in interstate commerce it was necessary for the manufacturer to qualify them pursuant to the requirements of Section 355 of the Act. … The court there said, at page 199 of 234 F.2d: “This established, by law in this section, there is required only resort to 21 U.S.C.A. § 331 (k), which denounces the offense of misbranding, and to Sec. 333, which fixes the

Madeline Krasno v. Jennifer Mnookin

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 1, 2025

Finally, the court concluded that Krasno’s individual capacity claims failed be- cause the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. Krasno timely appealed. II. … Sovereign Immunity As confirmed by the Eleventh Amendment, states are sov- ereigns and are therefore immune from suit. Va. Off. for Prot. and Advoc. v. Stewart, 563 U.S. 247, 253 (2011).

Mark Diak v. Dwyer, Costello & Knox, P.C., Terrance D. Knox, and John E. Dwyer

33 F.3d 809 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 26, 1994

Few DCK retirees received any benefits, and the benefits paid were clearly not calculated according to an established plan, but rather represented ad hoc arrangements with each individual. … Thus for tax purposes, it would appear that DCK acted as though it had an ERISA-qualified plan.

Stuart v. Local 727, International Brotherhood of Teamsters

771 F.3d 1014 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 14, 2014

The plaintiff clearly alleged acts of discrimination occur- ring within the 300-day period, but they were failures to re- fer the plaintiff for work on Movie/Trade Show Division driving jobs and the judge ruled that a failure … That decision establishes a strict rule that a Title VII suit can be based only on a discriminatory act that occurs within the 180- or 300-day period for filing a charge with the EEOC, and not an act that is merely related

Darlene Shidaker v. Paul N. Carlin, in His Capacity as Postmaster General (United States Postal Service)

782 F.2d 746 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 29, 1986

The lower court found that two of the men who were promoted were better qualified than Shidaker and that the other promotee was as qualified as Shidaker. … Santoro clearly was not required to act neutrally towards Shidaker while the hearing examiner reviewing Koenigs’ decision clearly was.

Cameron v. Civil Aeronautics Board

140 F.2d 482 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 4, 1944

Furthermore, it clearly appears from the record that petitioner was fully apprised of the charges against him. … It is so ordered. 1 Army Air Force Regulations provide that Air Force pilots are to comply with air traffic control procedures established by competent authority and that no pilot *485 shall perform acrobatics at any height

United States v. Carlos Rodriguez

975 F.2d 404 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 18, 1992

These statements clearly qualify as substantial proof of facts material to the proceeding. … In another context, we have written that “[f]act-intensive disputes, those whose resolution is unlikely to establish rules of future conduct, are reviewed under a deferential because the role of appellate courts in establishing

Clyde B. Williams v. Byran Bartow

481 F.3d 492 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 20, 2007

We conclude that the decision of the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin was not an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court law. … We cannot conclude that Blackledge and Thigpen clearly establish a different rule than that applied by the Wisconsin court.

United States v. Glenn Wellman

830 F.2d 1453 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 2, 1987

IV We next consider whether the evidence was sufficient to establish fraudulent intent on Wellman’s part. … Thus, allowing testimony of the latter of those specifications was clearly not error.

Roger O. La Batt and Robert Cook v. John J. Twomey, Rudolph L. Lucien v. Peter B. Bensinger and John J. Twomey, Holice P. Black v. John J. Twomey

513 F.2d 641 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 8, 1975

Discretion of prison authorities in this area is not wholly immune from judicial review. … Actual delivery to LaBatt of the drugs, however, is not established and is, clearly, critical to any claim of denial of medical services.

Man v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

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

The Attorney General is authorized by 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a) to grant asylum if the applicant qualifies as a refugee under 8 U.S.C. § 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.

Federal Savings & Loan Insurance v. Geisen

392 F.2d 900 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 7, 1968

Neither bad motive nor desire for personal gain is required to establish a knowing violation of a statute such as that here involved. Corsicana National Bank v. … Although reliance upon advice of counsel is an evidentiary factor which may be shown as tending to establish the existence of good faith (Uffelman v.

Sokaogon Chippewa Community v. Exxon Corporation, State of Wisconsin, Forest County

2 F.3d 219 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 20, 1993

The Indians’ notion of “property,” if indeed they can be said to have had one, differs greatly from that of the Western legal and political tradition, which views “property” in land in abstract terms, as a (qualified) legal … This is a perfectly intelligible interpretation of the treaty, but is it so clearly right as to dispense with the need for a trial?

United States v. Christopher Lloyd

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 12, 2026

“If the state offense sweeps more broadly than the generic federal of- fense, then the defendant does not qualify for the enhance- ment.” Id. … Garner, Reading Law 257 (2012) (“legislative restyling exercises,” such as “the nonsubstantive redrafting” of Federal Rules, do “not amend prior enactments unless [they] do[] so clearly”).

United States v. Ted Johnston

690 F.2d 638 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 1, 1982

Although I think the majority’s solution to the knotty problem presented by this case is well-intentioned, it must lead either to the effective nullification of a long and firmly established ethical rule or to an unwarranted … In light of these rather serious deficiencies in the majority’s proposed solution to the advocate-witness problem, I believe that the original panel’s solution was clearly preferable.

Paul Chaim Shlomo Fischer v. Magyar Allamvasutak Zrt.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 13, 2018

appeals an order denying a motion to reopen an action he and  other Hungarian Jews brought against an instrumentality of  the  Hungarian  government,  the  national  railway,  under  an  exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities … Our  2015  opinion  also  took  care  to  qualify  the  bounds  of  the  exhaustion  mandate:  “If  plaintiffs  attempt  to  bring  suit  in  Hungary and are blocked arbitrarily or unreasonably, United  States courts could

Johnnie Marie Sumpter v. James Degroote, Sheriff of Vanderburgh County, Indiana

552 F.2d 1206 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 1, 1977

In such cases, the societal price of immunizing a defendant whose guilt has already been sufficiently established by the evidence presented at trial is, to be sure, simply too high to countenance. … If the motion had then been granted or had the jury acquitted [the defendant], the Fifth Amendment would clearly prohibit a second attempt at prosecution.

Lori David v. Caterpillar, Incorporated

324 F.3d 851 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 17, 2003

evidence of pretext unless those differences are so favorable to the plaintiff that there can be no dispute among reasonable persons *862 of impartial judgment that the plaintiff was clearly better qualified for the position … David “that there can be no dispute among reasonable persons of impartial judgment that [she] was clearly better qualified” for the sergeant position. Id. However, Ms. David’s qualifications are not wholly irrelevant.