Case law

United States v. Derrick Jarrett, Lawrence McCarroll Jeffrey Brock, Jamie J. Key, Dwight Anderson, Samir Hameen, and Judy McCarroll

133 F.3d 519 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 8, 1998

First, this figure established the appellants’ base offense levels under the Sentencing Guidelines. … The decision to prosecute results in expenditures and diversion of resources from other tasks rather than an immunity that safeguards governmental funds.

Prima Tek II, LLC v. Klerk's Plastic Industries, B.V.

525 F.3d 533 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 5, 2008

Thus, the district court did not commit any clear error in holding that the lace plant covers qualify as Upgrade B Plant Covers. … Morrison Knudsen Corp., 255 F.3d 397, 401 (7th Cir.2001) (“the party claiming the breach must establish the amount of damages'.

United States v. Larry Dennis

119 F.4th 1103 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 25, 2024

The govern- ment challenged this conclusion, arguing that pointing a handgun at a customer qualifies as a credible threat of vio- lence. … Here, Dennis cannot establish reliance.

United States v. Harry Koplin, United States of America v. Chicago Laundry Building Company, a Corporation, Harry Koplin and Sara Leah Steiner, United States of America v. Zephyr Laundry MacHinery Company, a Corporation, Harry Koplin and Sara Leah Steiner

227 F.2d 80 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 7, 1955

of the important motions was to dismiss the indictments and suppress evidence mainly on the ground that the indictments had been procured on evidence resulting from a voluntary disclosure made by Koplin on a promise of immunity … Without it, though he be not guilty, he faces the danger of conviction because he does not know how to establish his innocence." Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45, 69 , 53 S.Ct. 55, 64 , 77 L.Ed. 158 .

Wainscott, Jack v. Henry, William R.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 17, 2003

We evaluate whether No. 02-2479 5 an employee’s speech deserves First Amendment protec- tion under the two-part test established in Pickering v. … Whether the city is run in an efficient and effective manner is clearly an important matter of public concern.

National Labor Relations Board v. Sure-Tan, Inc., and Surak Leather Co.

672 F.2d 592 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 26, 1982

However, the Surak brothers’ subsequent letter of reprimand clearly constituted, as the ALJ found, an overreaction to this minor work dispute. … An alien’s illegal status under the INA does not, as Sure-Tan contends, immunize an employer’s constructive dismissal of an alien employee which is motivated by anti-union animus.

Szymanski, Evelyn v. Cook County

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 20, 2006

It must, however, be clearly adverse, not trivial. Szymanski’s claim rests entirely on what Dr. Raba did or said. … In short, we find that there is nothing in the record which establishes an adverse post-employment action taken by Cook County against Szymanski.

Yong-Qian Sun v. Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

473 F.3d 799 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 16, 2007

Sun was ‘reasonable’ in the sense that it was consistent with not only the current standards and past practices established by the MatSE department, but also with the guidelines and procedures established by the Provost for … Under this method, Sun must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing that: (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for tenure; (3) he was denied tenure; and (4) a similarly situated

Herron, Gary v. DaimlerChrysler Corp

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 3, 2004

Herron is clearly a member of a protected class. … However, even if he had established a prima facie case, he would still lose.

No. 14119

331 F.2d 547 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 14, 1964

Local Union No. 3, IBEW, 325 U.S. 797 at 808-810 , 65 S.Ct. 1533 at 1539 , 89 L.Ed. 1939 (1945), where the exemption was qualified, the court stating: 9 "* * * Congress never intended that unions could, consistently with … They are conditions of employment, and as such are clearly within the labor exemption of the Sherman Act. * * *" We cannot agree.

Eleanor Snyder, of the Estate of Leroy Liljedahl v. Bruton Smith

736 F.2d 409 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 3, 1984

Illinois cases establish that, to qualify as a transaction of business that establishes jurisdiction under the long-arm statute, an act 'by the nonresident defendant must give rise to the plaintiffs cause of action; in other … Turning to the facts of this case, we hold that Smith’s activities in Illinois are sufficient to qualify as a transaction of business that establishes jurisdiction under the long-arm statute.

United States v. Christ, Matthew

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 28, 2008

This exception, there- fore, “clearly does not require that the witness have personal knowledge of the entries in the records. … United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2L2.1(a) establishes a base offense level of 11 for the visa fraud crime of which Christ was convicted.

United States v. Robert D. Sutton, James H. Fleming, and Michael L. Brown

337 F.3d 792 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 23, 2003

We find nothing in the defendants’ arguments that would persuade us to overrule established circuit precedent. *797 B. … The aggregate transactions of banks, restaurants and retail stores, such as those robbed by the defendants, clearly meet that requirement. 3 .

A.D. v. Credit One Bank, N.A.

885 F.3d 1054 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 22, 2018

Rather, the term clearly foresees an Authorized User as playing a far more durable role in the account. … Credit One also argues that A.D. has waived any argu- ment that she does not qualify as an Authorized User under the terms of the agreement or that, as a minor, she has a right to disaffirm the contract.

United States v. Richard M. Mahkimetas

991 F.2d 379 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 13, 1993

Parduhn’s recitals of Patty’s out-of-court statements are of course inadmissible unless they are co-conspirator statements that qualify as nonhearsay under Fed. R.Evid. (“Rule”) 801(d)(2)(E). … No evidence has been presented to that effect, and it is clearly negated by the prospective nature of the statement that Parduhn ascribed to Patty (that on April 26 “she would have a deal set up”).

United States v. Marcus L. Harris

271 F.3d 690 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 6, 2001

These tapes, according to the prosecution’s theory, were of the utmost importance in establishing Harris’ guilt. … Young’s testimony regarding prior uncharged criminal drug activity qualified for admission under the three Ramirez scenarios.

Vicky Whetsel v. Network Property Services, LLC

246 F.3d 897 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 29, 2001

Of the three requirements for an employee to qualify for the executive exemption, the parties agree that Whetsel’s employment satisfied the supervisory and managerial aspects, and so the only issue is whether she was paid … The Secretary argues that this provision can aid an employer only if it first establishes that it objectively intended to pay its employees on a salary basis.

T.H.E. Insurance Company v. Trey Olson

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 17, 2022

Zdroik’s contribution is clearly em- braced by the final category of other persons assisting the dis- play, even if he could not be excluded under the first category of hired shooters. … In the insurance context, we have generally observed that “decisions about indemnity should be postponed until the underlying liability has been established.” Lear Corp. v. John- son Elec.

United States v. Stephens, Wayne

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2005

If that is what the majority proposes (that racially proportionate strikes are necessarily immune from Batson scrutiny), it is the majority that has endorsed an astound- ing proposition. … But courts must look beyond statistics and require litigants to carry their respective burdens under the Batson framework, or we risk paying lip service to clearly established caselaw and arguably set the stage for a rule

H F G Co. v. Pioneer Pub. Co.

162 F.2d 536 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 23, 1947

Caldwell, et al., 3 Cir., 120 F.2d 90 , at page 93, the court, in a situation similar to the instant one, stated: "It is established that this plaintiff was not a registered shareholder, at the time the action was begun. … Rule 23(b) of the Federal Rules of Procedure is clearly of procedural character. Its function is to endow a shareholder with the right to maintain a suit such as this.