Case law

In Re US

572 F.3d 301 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 10, 2009

This participation was clearly violative of the specific prohibition in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure that forbids the court from becoming involved in plea negotiations. See Fed. … The Judge's view of the future course of this prosecution clearly was favorable to the defendant. [13] See United States v.

Annie Lee Hudson v. The Chicago Teachers Union Local No. 1

743 F.2d 1187 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 24, 1984

Second, the Board of Education argues that it has a good-faith immunity from suit. … There are clearly less restrictive alternatives for the union. See Ellis v. Brotherhood of Railway, Airline & Steamship Clerks, --- U.S. ----, 104 S.Ct. 1883, 1890 , 80 L.Ed.2d 428 (1984).

Jelke v. United States

255 F. 264 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 2, 1918

Many violations of the oleomargarine law are clearly shown. … Participation in these violations by salesmen of the Jelke Company, including the plaintiffs in error, is likewise clearly established, but the proof of the unlawful combination — the conspiracy charged — rests solely upon

Gregory Smith v. Jalate Hunt

707 F.3d 803 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 14, 2013

Evidence, however, does not need to be relevant to each and every claim to qualify as “relevant” for purposes of admissibility. … Closing Argument The defendants’ attorney clearly made an improper statement in his closing argument.

United States v. Joseph Alfred Tanner

471 F.2d 128 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 24, 1972

Clearly, the Government has some discretion in making this determination. Thus, in Cohen v. … We agree, then, that the offenses charged in Count IV fail to qualify for federal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 1363 .

Price, Joseph v. Jones, Eddie

617 F.3d 947 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 13, 2010

Price argues that his motion under Illinois Statute 725 ILCS 5/116-3 qualifies as “other collateral review.” In United States v. … The court did not require the defendant to re-file his request for DNA testing as a § 116-3 motion because his request clearly met the § 116-3 criteria. Id.

United States v. Ernest D. Shields

789 F.3d 733 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 15, 2015

Shields did not establish that his statements following his arrest were involuntary. Mr. … Shields attempts to place the burden of proving whether a prior conviction qualifies under the ACCA on the Government. Mr.

Mattson, Thomas v. Caterpillar Inc

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 4, 2004

If we were to adopt Mattson’s arguments, it would encourage the abuse of Title VII and the proceedings that it establishes. Our holding is in accord with Johnson v. … The Supreme Court therefore concluded that the plaintiff’s complaint did not qualify as protected activity under Title VII.

Mountain Crest SRL, LLC v. Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV

937 F.3d 1067 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 5, 2019

Listings can be removed if the beer does not meet sales quotas established by BRI. No. 18-2327 7 different types of stores. … To the extent that Mountain Crest seeks relief under this section predicated solely on the six-pack rule, the act of state doctrine clearly precludes the action.

Richard Graber v. David Clarke, Jr.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 18, 2014

As to issues of fact, this court defers to a district court’s findings and will uphold such findings unless clearly erroneous. Id.  … We  now  turn  to  whether  Clarke’s  hostile  meeting  with Graber qualified as an adverse employment action. 

Max Raskin, Robert H. Gollmar, Intervening-Plaintiff-Appellant v. J. Dennis Moran, Ken Timpel, and Charles P. Smith

684 F.2d 472 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 9, 1982

The supremacy clause itself clearly resolves that conflict in favor of the federal law. See McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 436 , 4 L.Ed. 579 (1819). … Kalo Brick & Tile Co., 450 U.S. 311, 317 , 101 S.Ct. 1124, 1129 , 67 L.Ed.2d 258 (1981), those means are not immune from supremacy clause analysis when they are specifically directed at offsetting the exact equivalent of

Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Service

577 F.3d 816 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 18, 2009

The state clearly does not relieve itself of its responsibility to provide medical care solely on account of the venue where those services are rendered. See Conner v. … McKnight, 521 U.S. 399, 412-13 , 117 S.Ct. 2100 , 138 L.Ed.2d 540 (1997) *832 (holding that private prison guards were not entitled to assert the defense of qualified immunity, but leaving open the question of whether the

United States v. Albert Garza, United States of America v. Howard Zumberge, United States of America v. Lawrence Caldwell

664 F.2d 135 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 2, 1981

The witnesses appellants presented clearly established that appellants had acted as peace negotiators and that their lives, as a result, were endangered. … Other defense witnesses already had established that appellants were in danger. Evidence of the murders probably would have confused the jurors and, in any event, was clearly cumulative.

Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund v. Scofbp, LLC

668 F.3d 873 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 27, 2011

Although the MPPAA does not define “trade or busi- ness,” this court has adopted the test established in Com- missioner v. … Appellees argue that Groetzinger is inapplicable here because MCRI and MCOF were established as limited liability companies. That argument finds support in some case law.

United States v. Jeremy Wilson and Joseph Guarino

169 F.3d 418 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 17, 1999

In this case, the complaint itself established that John Doe appeared before the court to attest to the facts presented in the complaint. … When the sentencing court reminded him that a defendant must demonstrate clearly a recognition and affirmative acceptance of personal responsibility for all his criminal conduct, as § 3El.l(a) requires, Mr.

United States v. J.P. Stadtmueller

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

Salahuddin that it now believed he did qualify as an armed career criminal. Mr. Salahuddin then moved to withdraw his plea, which the Govern- ment opposed. Judge Clevert granted Mr. … The Judge’s view of the future course of this prosecu- tion clearly was favorable to the defendant. 13 See United States v.

Dean Patterson v. Stephen A. Portch

915 F.2d 1575 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 9, 1990

The resolution of the issue depends on whether, in 1979 when the act occurred, the law was "clearly established" that "constructive resignation" is a form of involuntary termination that entitles the employee to a hearing … Yet we took some pages to reach this conclusion, which was not compelled by precedent, not obvious on the basis of precedent, and, in short, not "clearly established," at the time of the incident (although it would be now

United States v. J.P. Stadtmueller

572 F.3d 301 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 10, 2009

Salahuddin  would  not qualify as an armed career criminal and therefore would not be subject to  the  fifteen‐year  mandatory  minimum  sentence.    See  18  U.S.C.  § 924(e)(1).   … The Judge’s view of the future course of this prosecution clearly was favorable to the defendant. 13   See United States v. 

Jane Doe 1 v. Steven Sloan

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 14, 2026

Even if they had, the district judge found that any such right was not clearly established, meaning that qual- ified immunity would shield Sheriff Sloan and Deputy Bent from liability.

William R. Lee Irrevocable Tru v. Lester L. Lee

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 3, 2018

Other Indiana statutes establishing exclusive remedies specify the exclusivity in the text. See, e.g., Ind. … Lester’s proposed immunity would encourage and reward post- merger “trickery, evasion, procrastination, spoliation, botheration,” 5 shell games, and fourberies. Lester’s proposed immunity makes no sense.