Case law

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.

United States v. John McLaughlin

760 F.3d 699 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 29, 2014

The PSR indicated that the court “shall impose a fine in all cases, except where the defendant establishes that he is unable to pay and is not likely to become able to pay any fine,” citing guidelines section 5E1.2(a). … The court was clearly aware that it was free to reject the guidelines sentence; the court in fact sentenced McLaughlin twenty-one months below the low end of the guidelines range.

Elizabeth Perry v. Local Lodge 2569 of the International Association of MacHinists and Aerospace Workers

708 F.2d 1258 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 31, 1983

The merits of the Union’s argument were clearly left open by the Supreme Court in Abood. … That case, however, was concerned with congressional intent in granting sovereign immunity under the Sherman Act. See id., 102 S.Ct. at 842 .

Francisco A. Romero Arrazabal v. Loretta E. Lynch

822 F.3d 961 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 4, 2016

Arrazabal appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals, but it upheld the immigration judge’s determination as not clearly erroneous. … Its description of one company’s deci- sion to hire 30 former gang members does not establish that throughout El Salvador (a country of more than 6 million people), all “those who truly want to leave the gang and who are

United States v. Brown, Bradley C.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 10, 2002

But the statute goes on to provide that a robbery shall not qualify as a serious violent felony "if the defendant establishes by clear and convincing evidence" that (again, so far as bears on this case) he did not use a " … Ore gon, 343 U.S. 790, 798 (1952), and even more clearly therefore it can be as in this case the lesser burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence. Apprendi v.

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

Anthony Dewalt v. Lamark Carter, Correctional Officer Young, Carol Biester

224 F.3d 607 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 11, 2000

In Preiser , the Court clearly limited its holding to actions involving the “heart” of habeas — the fact or duration of imprisonment. … DeWalt qualifies as the kind of de minimis use of force that does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Compare Lunsford v.

Tyler Kirk v. Clark Equipment Company

991 F.3d 865 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 25, 2021

The evidence highlighted by the Kirks thus does not clearly support the reliability of Pacheco’s opinion that the Loader was unreasonably dangerous when equipped with a sixty-two-inch bucket. … We concluded that if “it takes expert evidence to establish a complex product’s unreasona- ble dangerousness through a risk-utility approach, it also takes expert evidence to establish a complex product’s unrea- sonable dangerousness

William Allen Spencer v. Bumyong Lee, M.D., and St. Elizabeth Hospital

864 F.2d 1376 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 3, 1989

The tradition that establishes a core of exclusive governmental functions does not reach back so far. But history is relevant. … So we ask, is there a tradition of treating civil commitment of the mentally disturbed as a governmental function and, if so, how well established is it? The brief and argument of Mr.

Ronnie Famous v. Larry Fuchs

38 F.4th 625 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 29, 2022

The court noted that, although the medical records established that Mr. … This subsidiary observation by the court therefore has no support in the record and is clearly erroneous.

Malloy v. Chicago Rapid Transit Co.

93 F.2d 832 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 10, 1937

Was the.firm named by trustee to serve as counsel for trustee qualified to so act? … Expe'fience has abundantly established this to be so. Much depends upon the status, the standing and the character of the trustee and his counsel.

Canvas Fabricators, Inc. v. William E. Hooper & Sons Co.

199 F.2d 485 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 27, 1952

The rule is firmly established in Illinois that a foreign corporation whose activities are limited solely to solicitation of interstate business in that State is not amenable to process. Bull & Co. v. Boston & Maine R. … General Motors Acceptance Corp., 298 U.S. 178 , 56 S.Ct. 780 , 80 L.Ed. 1135 , which clearly demonstrates that the burden is upon the party who invokes the jurisdiction of a Federal court.

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.

United States v. Thomas E. Silverstein, Adolph Reynosa, Clayton A. Fountain, and Edgar Hevle

732 F.2d 1338 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 26, 1984

To qualify for membership in the Aryan Brotherhood you must “make bones.” As one prisoner explained, “In effect what it means is you will kill somebody. They distinguish the weed [sic] from the shaft [sic]. … Evidence that the judge was not required to ignore created a strong inference that Matthews’ statements were totally fabricated — which would be no surprise in view of his de facto immunity from being punished for either

Alioto v. Town of Lisbon

651 F.3d 715 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 7, 2011

They also contended that, as to any con- stitutional claims Alioto was making, Musche was entitled to qualified immunity and that there was no basis for imputing Section 1983 liability to the town under Monell v. … The district court did not did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Alioto failed to establish good cause for modifying the scheduling order.

United States v. Richard W. Novak and Hugo Leon

870 F.2d 1345 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 29, 1989

The tape of the Novak conversation with the informant Zaffino clearly established that Novak intended to transport cocaine from Miami to Milwaukee. … A joint trial was clearly appropriate.

Padula v. Leimbach

656 F.3d 595 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2011

Notably, the district court found no Fourth Amendment violation, so it declined to decide whether qualified immunity ap- plied. That issue is not raised on appeal. … 9 Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986) (“[Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56] mandates the entry of summary judgment . . . against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish

In the Matter of Maurice G. CROSSWHITE, Debtor-Appellee. Appeal of Terry Crosswhite GINTER

148 F.3d 879 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 22, 1998

In her view, Congress clearly intended such debts to be nondis-ehargeable unless the debtor, not the non-debtor, proved otherwise, and the record clearly shows that the debtor did not accomplish such a showing. … Crosswhite, compounded its earlier failure to place upon him the ultimate burden of qualifying for the exception.

Mungai v. Illinois Department of Human Services

42 F. App'x 884 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 29, 2002

Id.; “The fact that an individual may have been qualified in the past does not mean that he is qualified at a later time.” Karazanos v. Navistar International Transp. … These instances indicate quite clearly that Mungai was not meeting his employers legitimate performance expectations, and Mungai’s reference to an “employee of the month award” given by an unknown entity using unknown criteria

Consolidated Indiana Coal Co. v. National Bituminous Coal Commission

103 F.2d 124 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 13, 1939

Thus, the language just quoted clearly distinguishes that case from the present one. … We do not understand, however, that we are bound to accept the conclusions based upon such facts, but whether so or not, we have no hesitation in holding that the facts, as found, clearly establish that petitioner was acting