Case law

United States v. National Bank

554 F.2d 302 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 11, 1977

Although those cases establish that a taxpayer is clearly the "focus" of aicriminal investigation when the matter is assigned to the Intelligence Division of the Internal Revenue Service, they do not reflect in our reading … They found it unnecessary to advance the argument because of their view that the evidence in this case clearly established that the special agent's investigation encompassed a civil aspect

Craig J. LaCROSSE, Petitioner, v. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION, Respondent

137 F.3d 925 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 24, 1998

While recognizing that evidence of the absence of wrongful conduct can be instructive, the Commission clearly stated that such evidence is not determinative on the issue. … The Commission noted that LaCrosse did not attempt to qualify any of his character witnesses as experts on the issue of rehabilitation. See id.

Alexander v. Missouri State Life Ins.

68 F.2d 1 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 15, 1933

E. 698, 700 , the Illinois rule pertinent to the question now before us was quite clearly stated. … The reason given for permitting a properly qualified witness to give his opinion as to what did produce certain results or consequences, and not what might have produced them, is that the fact to bo established is, what did

Cowherd v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development

827 F.2d 40 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 22, 1987

HUD financed a rehabilitation of the project (renamed Stonekey II), and attached rent subsidies to the project, under which the agency paid 40% of the rent of each qualified tenant. … In this case, HUD’s sale of Stonekey II was clearly within the statutory scope of its authority.

White Eagle Cooperat v. Vilsack, Thomas J.

553 F.3d 467 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 12, 2009

The record clearly establishes a basis as noted above for amending the order on an interim basis and the opportunity to file written exceptions to the proposed amended order remains. 70 Fed. … We have held that non-pooled milk does not qualify as milk purchased from producers.

Sam T. Coston v. Plitt Theatres, Inc.

831 F.2d 1321 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 28, 1987

Therefore there was significant, if not overwhelming, evidence that Coston’s work was competent and that he was qualified to remain as a district manager. … There was conflicting evidence on this point and thus these findings are not clearly erroneous in light of support within the record.

Donald Wilson v. Lori Adams

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 23, 2018

To  prove  such  a  claim,  he  6  No. 16‐1889  needed to establish that he suffered from “an objectively seri‐ ous medical condition” and that the “defendant was deliber … CONCLUSION  Because we conclude the grant of summary judgment was  appropriate,  we  do  not  consider  the  defendants’  arguments  regarding qualified immunity.  The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

United States v. Urfer, Bonnie L.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 26, 2002

If unreasonable advice of counsel could automatically excuse criminal behavior, criminals would have a straight and sure path to immunity. … "A judge may, and generally should, block the introduction of evidence supporting a proposed defense unless all of its elements can be established." United States v. Haynes, 143 F.3d 1089, 1090 (7th Cir. 1998).

United States v. Jeffrey D'AmbrosiA and Duane Pede

313 F.3d 987 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 16, 2002

There can, of course, be more than one person who qualifies as a leader or organizer of a criminal association or conspiracy. … Here, there is no question that the defendants’ operation of a multi-jurisdictional offshore sports bookmaking empire is clearly relevant in assessing their role in the tax conspiracy.

Frances Louise Ross v. Inter-Ocean Insurance Company

693 F.2d 659 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 18, 1982

This is defined as a condition that produces symptoms which would indicate to a qualified physician (1) that it had probably begun and manifested itself before the policy was issued and (2) that an ordinarily prudent person … But where it is obvious to the defendant that even if the plaintiff can establish liability he cannot obtain a judgment for more than $10,000, exclusive of interest and costs, then the defendant cannot remove the case; and

The Home Insurance Company v. The Chicago And Northwestern Transportation Company

56 F.3d 763 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 23, 1995

The plain meaning of the phrase "if any unit is destroyed ... from any cause whatever" clearly encompasses the accident in this case. … The parties did not submit any relevant custom or usage of the trade to establish a latent ambiguity.

Vickie L. Postma v. Paul Revere Life Insurance Company, a Massachusetts Corporation, Cross-Appellee

223 F.3d 533 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 7, 2000

Postma was still an employee (although on medical leave at the time), CPG established or maintained the benefit plan. The court’s finding that CPG maintained its benefit plan for its employees is not clearly erroneous. … Postma clearly made less than 80% of her prior income because she did not work at all.

Bodine v. Elkhart County Election Board

788 F.2d 1270 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 21, 1986

Clearly the cards would be highly relevant evidence of manipulation of vote totals. … It would only establish that a true section 1983 action, which plaintiff failed to allege, existed.

Darrel Smith v. Denise Bray

681 F.3d 888 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 24, 2012

In making this threat, Bianchetta clearly implied that he intended to work with Bray to retaliate against Smith. … Moss, 412 F.3d 836, 843 (7th Cir. 2005) (in § 1983 dis- crimination suit, affirming denial of qualified immunity to university dean who “completely ignore[d] each of the complaints” about discrimination the plaintiff had

United States v. Larry D. Hall

93 F.3d 1337 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 28, 1996

Second, the court must also determine whether the witness called is properly qualified to give the testimony sought. Graham, § 6641 at 242-44. … (The evidence of stalking, of course, was well documented and clearly admissible to show intent, preparation, or plan under Rule 404(b).)

Thomas Adams v. Richard Catrambone and Great Lakes Building Materials, Inc.

359 F.3d 858 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 19, 2004

But, in relevant part, that is not what Glass says: The dismissal of the statutory claim was clearly correct. The act “applies to all employers and employees in this State.” 820 ILCS 115/1. … After considering the authorities discussed above, we hold what Glass implied and what the language of the statute makes plain: nonresidents of Illinois who work in that state for an in-state employer may qualify as employees

United States v. James Oliver Hocking

860 F.2d 769 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 6, 1988

], received $1,000 cash from, I believe the name to be, Lawrence LaGioia, in return for assistance in pre-qualifying LaGioia for state contracts. … Poole, 806 F.2d 853 (9th Cir.1986) (“The determination whether a defendant was subjected to custodial interrogation is essentially factual, and is reviewable under the ‘clearly erroneous’ standard.”), amending, United States

Swanson ex rel. Peoria Service Co. v. American Consumer Industries, Inc.

517 F.2d 555 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 29, 1975

They do not qualify as ordinary “taxable costs” either at common law or by statute. 1 Meddaugh v. Wilson, 151 *560 U.S. 333, 347 , 14 S.Ct. 356 , 38 L.Ed. 183 (1894); Sprague v. Ticonic Nat. … The District Court’s acceptance of these facts for the basis of the decision on the question of fees, and the determination as to the appropriate hourly rates were not clearly erroneous.

United States v. Paibool Wetwattana

94 F.3d 280 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 22, 1996

The defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that he is entitled to the one-level reduction under § 3E1.1(b)(2). See, e.g., United States v. Francis, 39 F.3d 803, 807 (7th Cir.1994); United States v. … Application Note Six to § 3E1.1 reveals that “[i]n general, the conduct qualifying for a decrease in offense level under [sec. 3E1.1(b)(2) ] will occur particularly early in the ease.”

Zamora-Mallari, Erne v. Mukasey, Michael B.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 24, 2008

Similarly, the Board in Blake did not establish a new rule of law, but rather applied the previously well-established comparability standard in a different factual context.4 4 The petitioners all maintain on appeal that … That is especially true given that the precise meaning of the term “moral turpitude” is not clearly established. We also find the Fifth Circuit’s reasoning in Avilez-Granados, 481 F.3d 869, persuasive.