Case law

United States v. Ronald T. Schaefer

291 F.3d 932 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 28, 2002

Peterson, 101 *938 F.3d 375, 385 (5th Cir.1996) (“For conduct to be considered ‘relevant conduct’ for the purpose of establishing one’s offense level that conduct must be criminal.”); United States v. … The court emphasized that the dismissed counts “clearly alleged offenses that are subject to prosecution under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1344 and 1346.” Id.

United States v. Jeffrey Stevens

453 F.3d 963 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 17, 2006

As to both weapons, Stevens argues there was insufficient evidence to establish that he possessed them. Possession may be either actual or constructive, exclusive or joint. United States v. … Stevens properly concedes the law is clearly against him. In Almendarez-Torres v.

Souleye Abdoulaye v. Eric Holder, Jr.

721 F.3d 485 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 1, 2013

It then concluded that the IJ’s factual findings that Abdoulaye was both involved in planning the mutiny and aware that the plans included a plot to seize the governor were not clearly erroneous. … B Nor are we persuaded that Abdoulaye met his burden of establishing that he would likely be tortured if returned to Niger.

United States v. Keenan Ferrell

816 F.3d 433 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 4, 2015

that the district court barred as hearsay, * Of the Northern District of Indiana, sitting by designation. 2 No. 14-2915 rejecting Ferrell’s argument that they qualified … In sum, Hall’s testimony that Woods’s job involved documenta- tion does not clearly indicate the trustworthiness of Woods’s statement.

Fryer, Eddie L. v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 2, 2001

Fryer’s case is clearly distinguished from that of Old Chief. As the record indicates, Fryer objected to stating the offense but did not offer to stipulate. … The district court made a good faith interpretation of existing precedent during Fryer’s trial and did not proceed in a manner contrary to or which was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined

Bank v. Rauland Corp.

146 F.2d 19 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 20, 1944

Such finding should be disturbed only if unsupported by substantial evidence, or if otherwise clearly wrong. In Procter & Gamble v. … This is clearly indicated by some of defendants’ subsequent conduct to which we shall presently refer, although some of such conduct indicates quite the contrary.

Allen Bennett v. Donald Gaetz

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 21, 2010

Fortunately, Bennett’s July 21 motion, titled “Motion to Reconsider or in the Alternative Motion for Leave to File Notice of Appeal and Request for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis,” qualified as a timely notice of appeal … We may grant habeas relief only if the Illinois courts’ adjudication of Bennett’s claim “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of

United States v. James E. Dvorak

115 F.3d 1339 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 7, 1997

According to the Government’s version of the scheme submitted at sentencing (which Dvorak did not dispute), over 300 individuals were rated as qualified and received jobs despite having failed to pass the qualifying merit … It is obvious from the record that the fraudulent hiring scheme crime is clearly a separate and distinct criminal violation from that of Dvorak’s previous bribery and tax evasion offenses.

Nancie Cloe v. City of Indianapolis

712 F.3d 1171 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 9, 2013

In order to establish a prima facie case of failure to ac- commodate under the ADA, “a plaintiff must show that: (1) she is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) the employer was aware of her disability; and (3) the … Either way, the record clearly indicates that discovery did not close until after the City moved for summary judgment.

Katie Arsberry v. State of Illinois

244 F.3d 558 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 19, 2001

The individual defendants have qualified immunity from the damages claims, given the novelty of the suit. … The cases that establish this proposition are old, but that is only because it’s been a long time since anyone thought to make the argument.

Bathusi Musa v. Loretta Lynch

813 F.3d 1019 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 19, 2016

Still,  Musa  bears  a  high  burden  to  establish  eligibility  for  withholding  of  removal:  she  must  show  a  clear  probability  of  persecution  if  removed  to  Botswana.  See  Borovsky  v.  … Facts determined by the immigra‐ tion  judge  …  shall  be  reviewed  only  to  determine  whether  the  findings  of  the  immigration  judge  are  clearly  errone‐ ous.”). 

Arthur R. Weir and Quikbrik Company of Chicago, Inc. v. Chicago Plastering Institute, Defendants,-Appellees

272 F.2d 883 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 23, 1959

Any person or firm desiring to become plastering contractors and employ members of Local No. 5 must qualify according to the following rules: They must be examined by our Examining Board and prove that they know the fundamentals … The record clearly establishes that plaintiffs were unable to secure union plasterers.

72 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 1811, 69 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 44,303 Karen M. Emmel v. Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Chicago, Also Known as Hondo, Incorporated

95 F.3d 627 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 12, 1996

Once the plaintiff has established such a case, an inference of discrimination exists and the burden of production shifts to the defendant employer to "clearly set forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence, reasons … Emmel asked "[W]as I qualified for any of these positions?" to which Walsh replied "You are the only other one qualified."

Thornton v. Barnes

890 F.2d 1380 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 4, 1989

Clearly, a factual or legal error may alone be sufficient to establish that the court “abused its discretion” in making its final determination. 782 F.2d at 1437 . … Roth, the basic criteria for the recognition of a property interest have been well established: To have a property interest in a benefit, a person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire for it.

T. S. v. Heart of CarDon, LLC

43 F.4th 737 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 5, 2022

Is the intended-beneficiary limitation on private suits dis- cerned by Simpson in the Rehabilitation Act more akin to a statute of limitations or a waiver of sovereign immunity? … “Clearly,” the Court said, “this language limits the ban on dis- crimination to the specific program that receives federal funds.” Consol. Rail Corp. v. Darrone, 465 U.S. 624, 636 (1984).

TKK USA, Inc. v. Safety National Casualty Corp.

727 F.3d 782 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 21, 2013

Put simply, “the potential for [common law] tort liability exists until the defense is established.” Doyle v. Rhodes, 101 Ill.2d 1 , 77 Ill.Dec. 759 , 461 N.E.2d 382, 387 (1984). … In Doyle , the Illinois Supreme Court had to determine if the fact that the employee’s potential negligence claim against the employer would be barred by the WCA’s exclusivity provision meant that the employer was immune

Demiko McCaster v. Darden Restaurants, Inc.

845 F.3d 794 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 5, 2017

Clark did not qualify because she worked part-time. … But establishing those violations (if there were any) would not involve any classwide proof.

Germill Murdock v. Stephanie Dorethy

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 3, 2017

We must first set forth the “clearly established Federal law” at issue.  … Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the decision of the Illinois Supreme Court involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law or an unreasonable determi‐ nation of the facts. 

Donna Hylin, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Donald Hylin, Deceased v. United States

715 F.2d 1206 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 23, 1983

Plaintiff appeals from the district court’s finding with respect to both theories, arguing that the evidence clearly establishes negligence and proximate cause. … As the action is recognized by the State of Illinois against private individuals, the PTCA’s limited waiver of sovereign immunity applies and the United States may be held liable for similarly negligent post-inspection actions

Alyce Couch v. United States

694 F.3d 852 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 5, 2012

In such cases of borrowed employees, both employ- 8 No. 12-1107 ers enjoy immunity from tort liability. … establishes the contrary.” 335 N.E.2d at 436.