Case law

United States v. Alviar

573 F.3d 526 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 23, 2009

Under immunity, Carlos Olivares testified he was a Latin King from 1989 through 2004. He stated that a Latin Kings enforcer carries out punishments within the gang and ensures gang members have firearms. … The evidence clearly established who was and who wasn’t a gang member and what gang they were affiliated with and the extent of the gang activity that related to the charged conspiracy.

United States v. George C. Hook

471 F.3d 766 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 13, 2006

Clearly, the statutory mandate for the DNA collection did not constitute an improper additional term. … Further, as set forth above, the DNA Act does not inflict punishment on those who are subject to it, as its purpose is to establish a national database of identifying information and to deter recidivism.

Winston v. United States Postal Service

585 F.2d 198 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 7, 1978

Nevertheless, we are satisfied that legislative history clearly demonstrates Congressional intent that nonpreference-eligible postal employees who are covered by a collective bargaining agreement are to be limited solely … Throughout the legislative history of both the House and Senate bills, the “fair hearing requirement” was similarly limited. 26 Moreover, the “fair hearing requirement” was, since its first appearance, qualified by the phrase

United States v. Wesley Bucey

876 F.2d 1297 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 13, 1989

If the language is unambiguous, ... it is to be regarded as conclusive unless there is a clearly expressed legislative intent to the contrary.” Dickerson v. … Relying on this legislative history, the court held that the defendants qualified as a “financial institution.”

Bank of America, Etc., of the Estate of Grace M. Sonnenschein v. Ruth M. Saville and Abbott Laboratories

416 F.2d 265 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 19, 1970

She signed the petition for appointment of conservators, she was appointed conservator of the person and qualified by affirmation. … Saville failed to overcome the presumption was not clearly erroneous.

United States v. Artez Lamont Rogers and Harrison R. King

89 F.3d 1326 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 17, 1996

While the proof used to establish these separate elements may in particular cases coalesce, proof of one does not necessarily establish the other. … Lopez is clearly distinguishable from the present case.

Standard Mutual Insurance Company v. Elodie L. Bailey, Charlotte A. Cook, Charles E. Cook and Christopher J. Cook

868 F.2d 893 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 17, 1989

Ordinary usage suggests no reason to suppose that the parties intended to qualify the exclusion by introducing a factor to which it makes no reference whatsoever —the theory underlying liability.” … Such is clearly not the law in Indiana. In American States Ins. Co. v. Aetna Life & Cas.

Currie v. Paper Converting MacHine Co.

202 F. App'x 120 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 11, 2006

that there can be no dispute among reasonable persons of impartial judgment that the plaintiff was clearly better qualified for the position at issue.” … But while this affidavit shows that Currie was an outstanding employee while he worked at O & E, it does not establish that he was “clearly better qualified” than the eight others.

Frank Rosenberg, Inc. v. Tazewell County

882 F.2d 1165 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 11, 1989

When a separate Rule 58 judgment has not been entered, however, this court may nevertheless hear the appeal if: "the district court clearly intended that the opinion and order from which an appeal was taken would represent … The individual defendants-appellees also ask this court to determine whether they enjoy absolute immunity. Appellees’ Br. at 18.

Computer Care, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Service Systems Enterprises, Inc. And Larry Aronson, Defendants-Appellants/cross-Appellees

982 F.2d 1063 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 20, 1992

by Computer Care in its service program ... involves trade secrets that are unique to Computer Care.” 761 F.Supp. at 1338 . *1072 Specifically, the court found that the following five elements of Computer Care’s system qualified … That is clearly not the law in this circuit.

Dorothy I. YUHAS and Nancy Anderson, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. LIBBEY-OWENS-FORD COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant

562 F.2d 496 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 28, 1977

This finding is not clearly erroneous and we affirm it on appeal. The court also rejected defendant’s assertion that the rule prevented situations which could undermine employee morale and efficiency. … Finally, a no-spouse rule eliminates the possibility of the already-employed marriage partner intervening in the hiring process on behalf of his or her spouse, to the detriment of the employer and any more qualified persons

Alfred B. Shapiro and Gregory J. Wentz v. Drug Enforcement Administration

721 F.2d 215 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 2, 1984

The Literal Requirements of FOIA Exemption 3 In order to qualify under FOIA Exemption 3, a statute must exempt specifically the requested information from disclosure, and either must “leave no discretion on the issue” of … disclosure, or must establish “particular criteria for withholding” or refer to “particular types of matters to be withheld.”

In Re Michael J. KRUEGER, Debtor-Appellant

192 F.3d 733 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 24, 1999

His plan qualifies for confirmation under that chapter if it satisfies the requirements set forth in § 1325(a) of the Code. … Clearly, Saverslak does not support Mr. Krueger's position. 4 . Mr.

Central States, Southeast And Southwest Pension Fund v. Personnel, Inc.

974 F.2d 789 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 20, 1992

There are two requirements to establish a "single employer": 1) the entities involved must be "trades or businesses," and 2) they must be under "common control." … Sporadic activity, a hobby, or an amusement diversion does not qualify. 20 Id. 480 U.S. at 35 , 107 S.Ct. at 987 (quoting Whipple v. Commissioner, 373 U.S. 193, 197 , 83 S.Ct. 1168, 1171 , 10 L.Ed.2d 288 (1963)).

Gant v. United States

627 F.3d 677 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 10, 2010

We note that a district court’s credibility findings are entitled to “exceptional deference” and should be over- turned only when they are clearly erroneous. Tezak v. United States, 256 F.3d 702, 715-16 (7th Cir. 2001). … A failure to establish either deficience or prejudice is fatal to Gant’s claim. Eddmonds v. Peters, 93 F.3d 1307, 1313 (7th Cir. 1996).

Bannon, Gloria v. Univ Chicago

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 1, 2007

However, Bannon has not established that she consid- ered her workplace to be subjectively offensive. … Argonne has submitted its policy on promotions which clearly shows that references are required for promotion to senior scientist.

Nate A. Lindell v. William Pollard

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 17, 2017

Still, the court concluded, the Waupun  defendants have qualified immunity because inmates do not have a clearly established  right to sort through contraband or mail it to anyone.   … Moreover, we see no reason to muddy the waters with  an unnecessary discussion of qualified immunity. 

United States v. Board of Education of Consolidated High School District 230

983 F.2d 790 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 7, 1993

Facts The Board is a governmental entity established under the laws of the State of Illinois that oversees three public high schools in District 230 in Cook County, Illinois. … A qualified teacher could withdraw sick leave days from the bank only for “prolonged and extended catastrophic illness” and could not withdraw days from the bank for “maternity benefits, elective surgery, illness of family

Barbara Castile v. Michael Astrue

617 F.3d 923 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 13, 2010

But he also found that it is not a qualifying disability. The ALJ explicitly noted that the evidence shows the claimant is obese. . . . … We find that the ALJ thoroughly examined the evi- dence and clearly articulated his findings; therefore, the district court did not err in upholding the ALJ’s credi- bility determinations. III.

United States v. Leahy, John J.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 4, 2006

Specifically, Chicago’s Purchasing Agent had to “establish a goal of awarding not less than 25% of the annual dollar value of all Contracts to qualified M.B.E.s and 5% of the annual dollar value of all Contracts to qualified … The district court did not clearly err when it refused to decrease Duff’s offense level.