Case law

David Feldman v. Olin Corporation

692 F.3d 748 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 27, 2012

There is no dispute that Olin failed to offer Feldman those positions as a reasonable accommodation, and so we take that as established. … The Supreme Court has specifically said that Rule 4(a)(2) does not “permit[] a notice of appeal from a clearly inter- locutory decision—such as a discovery ruling or a sanc- tion order under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of

Corley v. Rosewood Care Center, Inc. of Peoria

388 F.3d 990 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 13, 2004

Contrary to the advertising regarding continuing care, the contract provided that Rosewood was not qualified to accept Medicaid patients and there was no guarantee that it would be qualified in the future. … Contrary to Rosewood’s ad- vertising, the Peoria home was never qualified to accept Medicaid patients.

Marshall & Ilsley Corporation v. John G. Heimann, Comptroller of the Currency of the United States

652 F.2d 685 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 19, 1981

The original complaint alleged that the Comptroller’s approval of the establishment of a branch of First Bank in Milwaukee violated the applicable statutes which limit the establishment of branches by national banks. … Thus, none of the plaintiffs could have qualified under § 221.04(l)(j)l to acquire Midland as a branch.

United States v. Febus, Roberto

218 F.3d 784 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 14, 2000

And we will uphold the district court’s findings about whether the defendant has provided a fair and just reason unless they are clearly erroneous. Schilling, 142 F.3d at 398. … But we have already established that plea agreements are not "a thing of value" under the statute, and this claim fails. Condon, 170 F.3d at 689.

Deering v. Reich

183 F.3d 645 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 1, 1999

Considering both issues in the context of an officer's claim of qualified immunity from suit, we said that an officer may use deadly force "only to seize a fleeing felon who has committed a violent crime or who presents an … Her testimony could not have more clearly violated the stipulation.

Belinda Dupuy, Pilar Berman, Norman Berman v. Bryan Samuels, Director, Illinois Department of Children and Family Services

423 F.3d 714 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 9, 2005

preliminary injunction to provide pre-deprivation process to “career entrants,” directing district court to modify injunction accordingly and instructing district court to define more precisely the class of persons who qualify … The Eighth Circuit did not refer to § 1988 or cite the standards that the Supreme Court had established for determining prevailing party status.

Kenneth Eaglin v. Clarence Faust, Ronnie Williams, and Karen Schau, 2

129 F.3d 119 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 15, 1997

We also note that the issue of qualified immunity remains open and may need to be addressed by the district court if it finds that a constitutional right exists. See Siegert v. … Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 232 (1991) ("A necessary concomitant to the determination of whether the constitutional right asserted by a plaintiff is 'clearly established' at the time the defendant acted is the determination of

Chicago District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund v. K & I Construction Inc.

270 F.3d 1060 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 23, 2001

Communications Workers, 475 U.S. 643, 649 , 106 S.Ct. 1415 , 89 L.Ed.2d 648 (1986) (“Unless the parties clearly and unmistakably provide otherwise, the question of whether the parties agreed to arbitrate is to be decided … Given that it was K&I’s burden to prove the reasonableness of its position in light of the contract as a whole, this failure alone strikes a serious blow against its effort to qualify for a Boys Markets injunction.

Young v. Handwork (Two Cases)

179 F.2d 70 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 10, 1950

Joslyn in said trust estates are not property within the meaning of Section 70 of the Bankruptcy Act,” is clearly erroneous. … Bankruptcy proceedings constantly modify and affect the property rights established by state law.”

Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen v. Burlington Northern Railroad Company

829 F.2d 617 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 15, 1987

We also are not deciding that the "addition of a drug screen to [a] routine urinalysis phase of an established medical examination program is a minor dispute." Id. at 1024. … Here, the district court found that the consent of the employees made the testing voluntary and this finding is not clearly erroneous.

Laurel A. Johnson v. University Of Wisconsin-Eau Claire

70 F.3d 469 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 15, 1995

Patricia Duyfhuizen was the only person qualified to teach the 425 book editing course and had received the "excellent" rating. … Although Johnson never clearly asserted what constitutional or statutory provision her Sec. 1983 retaliation claim was based upon, the district court interpreted her claim as being brought under the First Amendment.

Sanghvi, Pravin v. Lakeshore Health

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 3, 2001

Sanghvi has not produced any direct evidence of discrimination since Triana’s query clearly is not an admission. … Sanghvi were offering the same price, $250,000, WWC’s offer was clearly preferable from the defendant’s perspective. Dr.

U.S. Freightways Corp., F.K.A. Tnt Freightways Corp., and Subsidiaries v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

270 F.3d 1137 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 6, 2001

First, it questioned whether such rule was, in fact, well established in the case law. … The Commissioner argued before the Tax Court that Freightways’ method of accounting did not clearly reflect its income.

Marion HealthCare, LLC. v. Becton Dickinson & Company

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 5, 2020

Even that exception, however, has been interpreted narrowly, as the Court demonstrated when it found that a public utility’s prices, by law passed on to final consumers, did not qualify. See Kansas v. … A contrary rule that looked behind the conspiracy to the role each member played would render upstream antitrust violators effectively immune from suit through the simple expedient of conspiring with a middleman or distributor

Peoples Gas, Light And Coke Company v. United States Postal Service

658 F.2d 1182 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 18, 1981

It is our view that these two statutes serve to remove any barrier that might otherwise exist by reason of the doctrine of sovereign immunity. … Morton, 405 U.S. at 737 , 92 S.Ct. at 1367 , for the proposition that satisfaction of the injury in fact test qualifies a plaintiff to assert a protected public interest, is misplaced.

Hope Clinic v. Ryan

195 F.3d 857 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 26, 1999

These statutes are written entirely in terms that have been difficult to pin down, such as “under color of any law” and “rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution ... of the United States” … Unela-borated avowals do not demonstrate that a finding of fact reached after a trial is clearly erroneous.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Ilona of Hungary, Incorporated

97 F.3d 204 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 2, 1996

. *208 Ilona generally hires manicurists, estheti-cians, and masseuses who were trained in Europe, as it believes that European-trained service personnel are more qualified than their domestically-trained counterparts. … The district court’s findings on these matters are supported by the evidence and are not clearly erroneous.

Pennington v. Doherty

110 F.3d 502 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 4, 1997

II DISCUSSION A. 1. 13 Because this is an appeal in a case that we remanded in Pennington I, it is governed by the law of the case established in that first appeal. … Co., 54 F.3d 379, 382 (7th Cir.1995) (stating that mixed questions of law and fact set aside on appeal only if clearly erroneous); Bierman, 2 F.3d at 1432 (noting that the clearly erroneous standard is well established in

United States v. Anthony Garrett

45 F.3d 1135 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 25, 1995

With regard to the ten day period established by the magistrate for filing of pretrial motions, Garrett cannot mount a successful challenge since such a period is clearly excludable from Speedy Trial Act calculations in this … Career Offender Enhancement At sentencing, the district court found that Garrett qualified for a career offender enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 since (1) he was at least eighteen years old upon commission of the instant

BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee—Cross-Appellant, v. Walter JACOBSON and CBS, Inc., Defendants-Appellants—Cross-Appellees

827 F.2d 1119 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 16, 1987

The defendants appear to realize that the literary and social context does not automatically immunize the entire broadcast as opinion because they concede that “not ... every statement in the broadcast is automatically immune … The court concluded that “[Brown & Williamson] clearly did not prove any actual damages....” Id.