Case law

Ronald M. Carpenter, Jr. v. Timothy Douma

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 28, 2016

Second, even if that motion had been timely, it still would  not qualify as reasonable diligence.  … As  such, most of these circumstances, taken alone, do not qualify  as “extraordinary.” 

Atlanta Gas Light Company v. Navigators Insurance Company

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 22, 2026

And an insurer’s denial of a claim (even if incor- rect) is not sufficient, on its own, to establish a breach of the duty to exercise good faith. … The next day, another counsel for USIC, David Helms, chimed in writing, “Here, the operative complaints filed against AGL quite clearly are based solely upon AGL’s conduct.

Ricardo Lara-Ruiz v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

241 F.3d 934 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 6, 2001

"The *947 power to expel or exclude aliens [is] a fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the Government’s political departments,” which is “largely immune from judicial control.” Fiallo v. … If he could demonstrate that the certain equitable considerations qualify him for “readmission,” then he could be granted a waiver of inadmissibility, thereby evading removal.

United States v. Montgomery

555 F.3d 623 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 13, 2009

Heiser made this statement based on his knowledge of Montgomery’s criminal history, but as with the statement in the roll call room, he apparently did not know that Montgomery would qualify as an Armed Career Criminal and … The statement is slightly ambiguous but because the finding is not clearly erroneous, we will not disturb this finding on appeal. 2 .

Arthur S. ANDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BAXTER HEALTHCARE CORP., Defendant-Appellee

13 F.3d 1120 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 11, 1994

Rather, he states either that no person was at fault or that the incidents did not clearly fall within Anderson’s area of responsibility. … Baxter argues that Anderson failed to establish a prima facie case because he was not qualified for his position at the time of his discharge, thus failing to meet element number three of the McDonnell Douglas prima facie

Larry R. Adkins and Sondra Adkins v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

875 F.2d 137 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 18, 1989

The concluding paragraph of the opinion was: The district court’s findings that Rogers did not participate in the sale of unregistered securities are not clearly erroneous. … Further, the district court’s findings that Rogers did not make material misrepresentations are not clearly erroneous. It is clear that the Adkins cannot claim res judicata.

Gira H. PATEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee

105 F.3d 365 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 28, 1997

According to Allstate, Patel had failed to establish a prima facie case of national origin discrimination because there was no evidence presented establishing that similarly situated American-born employees received better … However, the substance of the alleged conversation between Shah and Kraft (what they were allegedly arguing about) would clearly be inadmissible as hearsay evidence, i.e., an out-of-court statement "offered in evidence to

National Labor Relations Board v. Clinton Electronics Corporation

284 F.3d 731 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 25, 2002

The statement,,made in a casual conversation on the factory floor, is not clearly a threat of job loss; it is an expression of a personal opinion. … To establish anti-union animus the Board must establish that the employee was engaged in union activities, that the employer knew of the activities, that the employer harbored animus toward union activities, and that there

Wendell P. Tyler v. Marvin T. Runyon, Jr., Postmaster General, United States Postal Service

70 F.3d 458 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 14, 1995

Thus, we will assume that he was eligible and qualified for the position of window clerk. … In order to establish a prima facie case of discrimination, a plaintiff must prove that he belonged to a class of persons protected by the Rehabilitation Act, that he applied for and was qualified for the job in question,

Charles Middleton, Sr. v. City of Chicago

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 24, 2009

No. 103-158, at 70.3 Congress expressed no desire for USERRA claims to be immune from § 1658(a)’s limitations period. … Ass’n, 541 U.S. at 252, and it is well established that a court should not apply a newly enacted statutory pro- vision retroactively unless Congress has clearly mandated such an extension, see Hughes Aircraft Co. v.

Teamsters Local 282 Pension Trust Fund v. Anthony G. Angelos

839 F.2d 366 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 28, 1988

At any rate, he did not think that he was qualified to express an opinion with relation to the financial statements of Bankcorporation and the Bank. … This meager “investigation” was not a reasonable one for these trustees in making such a loan. 3 These facts clearly establish, as a matter of law, that the Fund did not act with ordinary prudence in making this loan.

Bellino v. Peters

530 F.3d 543 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 19, 2008

On appeal, however, it’s unnecessary to pass on whether Bellino was a “qualified individual with a disability.” … But Bellino cannot establish his prima facie case because he has not pointed to a single similarly situated individual.

Lineback v. Spurlino Materials, LLC

546 F.3d 491 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 8, 2008

Spurlino’s arguments, however, show only that there may be an alternative view of the evidence presented to the district court; they do not establish that the district court’s view of the evidence was clearly erroneous. … On this appeal, we *503 are asked only to determine whether the district court clearly erred when it concluded that the Regional Director’s evidence was sufficient to establish a “better than negligible” chance of success

United States v. Jessica Arong O'Brien

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 13, 2020

The indictment plainly alleged that the scheme to defraud affected Citibank, which O’Brien does not dispute qualified as a financial institution. … Reyn- olds, 189 F.3d 521, 525–26 (7th Cir. 1999) (affirming conviction and finding sufficient evidence of materiality “[b]ecause [de- fendant]’s false statements regarding his financial condition could clearly influence a

James Reilly v. Will County Sheriff's Office

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 25, 2025

In declining to set aside the judgment, the court found that Reilly had failed to clearly establish that the court committed a manifest error of law or fact, or that newly discovered evidence precluded en- try of judgment … Relief under Rule 59(e) is generally reserved for “extraor- dinary cases,” Runnion, 786 F.3d at 521, and for a motion to be successful, the movant must clearly establish: “(1) that the court committed a manifest error of

United States v. Kurt Scheuneman

712 F.3d 372 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 5, 2013

These instructions clearly stated that the jurors needed to find that Scheuneman had a tax deficiency outstanding on April 15 of the year following 2003 and 2004 in order to convict him on Counts 1 and 2. … In any event, Scheuneman has not established that a plain error occurred. III.

Grossbaum v. Indianapolis-Marion County Building Authority

63 F.3d 581 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 15, 1995

Although the parties do not discuss them, the other three factors are clearly present. … In Rosenberger, as in Lamb's Chapel, the excluded group would have been qualified as an organization had it not had an underlying religious outlook.

United States v. Edward Howard and Thomas Cusack

774 F.2d 838 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 8, 1985

Even assuming that count three is defective in some sense, it is clearly not so defective as to require reversal under this standard. B. … precinct established section 1973i(c) violation).

United States v. Robert Stephenson

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 17, 2009

The DEA agent who testified at Stephenson’s sen- tencing hearing qualified as another expert in the field. … In this case, the evidence clearly indicates Stephenson sold crack cocaine. Stephenson admitted that he was a crack cocaine dealer in Evanston.

Dayna Scruggs v. Garst Seed Company

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 20, 2009

As the district court recognized, however, Scruggs clearly knew about Fogleman, as he was one of the persons who interviewed her for the Research Assistant position. … A plaintiff pro- ceeding under the indirect method establishes a prima facie case by establishing the same first two elements, as well as that: (3) she was meeting her employer’s legiti- mate expectations; and (4) she was