Case law

William M. Joslin, Sr. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

424 F.2d 1223 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 17, 1970

qualify for deduction by taxpayer under Section 215 of the Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 215 . … In this case, the agreement itself clearly intended that the establishment of the decree and the incorporation of the agreement into the decree should be conditions precedent to the creation of any obligation to make the

Friends of Milwaukee's Rivers v. Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerag

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 13, 2009

The court rejected this letter as hearsay that did not qualify for the public records exception under Fed. R. Evid. 803(8). … Burney’s testimony was therefore not clearly erroneous.

United States v. Carter

573 F.3d 418 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 20, 2009

Carter counters that neither circumstance qualifies as an intervening event. … At any rate, this argument is no help to Carter since he has never tried to establish a Fourth Amendment interest in the May Street apartment where he was arrested.

Overseas Development Disc Corp. v. Sangamo Construction Co.

840 F.2d 1319 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 12, 1988

We inform the parties that we find each of the district court’s findings of fact to be not clearly erroneous, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a), and we adopt and affirm those findings in full. … But as stated by Omar Najeeb, a Chicago lawyer qualified as an expert in Kuwaiti law, “[o]f paramount importance [to a Kuwaiti court] would be the accomplishment of the task that was performed....”

United States v. Lua-Guizar

656 F.3d 563 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 26, 2011

A procedural error occurs, for example, when the district court fails to calculate the proper guidelines range, treats the guide- lines as mandatory, bases its sentence on clearly er- roneous facts, fails adequately to consider … perceived fast-track “disparity” must promptly plead guilty, agree to the factual basis proffered by the government, execute an en- forceable waiver of specific rights before or during the plea colloquy, establish

United States v. Royel Page

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 18, 2024

It also provided other instructions on when a defendant qualifies—and does not qualify—as a member of a conspiracy. … This means sometimes, even where the evidence clearly establishes knowledge, it still falls short of proving intent. Id. Direct Sales took pains to distinguish the analysis of knowledge from that of intent.

Bricklayers Local 21 of Illinois Apprenticeship & Training Program v. Banner Restoration, Inc.

385 F.3d 761 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 22, 2004

See Spurgin-Dienst, 359 F.3d at 453. 4 Banner characterizes this factual finding of the district court as clearly erroneous. … As our colleagues in 7 (...continued) final agreement that has been negotiated certainly qualifies as conclusive evidence that the employer intended to be bound”).

Benders v. Bellows and Bellows

515 F.3d 757 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 12, 2008

Bellows acknowledged in his affidavit, whatever B & B decided in May, Benders would have been a “qualifying employee”'—and thus eligible for the December 2003 contribution—if not for her change in status. … While Benders clearly had an economic interest in reporting the matter, the evidence shows that she also held a good-faith belief that what B & B was doing was not lawful.

Tpo, Incorporated v. Hon. Thomas R. McMillen

460 F.2d 348 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 28, 1972

S. magistrate; (2) all magistrates be attorneys unless it is impossible to find a qualified attorney; (3) other minimum qualifications be established to insure independence and disinterest; (4) the anachronistic fee system … “Second, the subsection clearly prohibits assignments or delegations to magistrates that are inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States.

Atlantic States Legal Foundation, Inc. v. Stroh Die Casting Co.

116 F.3d 814 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 17, 1997

Under Gwaltney , Stroh simply does not qualify as an “ongoing violator.” 2 IV. … This court clearly recognized this in Citizens for a Better Environment v. Steel Co., 90 F.3d 1237 (7th Cir.1996).

United States v. Johnson, Bobby D.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 19, 2003

Self- incriminating statements such as Johnson’s, which was clearly against his penal interest, “have long been consid- ered reliable enough for use at trial . . . , so we cannot say that they are too unreliable for use at … “It is well-established that simply a prepon- derance of the evidence is all that is required for a factual finding under the Sentencing Guidelines.” United States v.

United States v. Cleophus C. Lewin, United States of America v. Thomas F. Connon and John Janow

467 F.2d 1132 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 8, 1972

Although conceding that the legislative debate about the provision clearly revealed that Congress’ intent was not to make criminals of civic-minded persons, he argues that the statute itself fails to make any distinction … Justice Jackson in Michelson, at 478, 69 S.Ct. at 219 , is compatible with the Wig-more view set out above: “[T]he witness must qualify to give an opinion by showing such acquaintance with the defendant, the community in

Edward James Matzker, Jr. v. Raymond Herr, Sheriff, Richard A. Schaab, Lt. And Mary Pearsall, Corrections Officer

748 F.2d 1142 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 7, 1984

The record reflects that the defendants in the instant case, while acting as law enforcement officials, were clearly acting under color of state law. State Bank v. Camic, 712 F.2d 1140, 1143 (7th Cir.1983). … Of course, this determination is best left to a qualified physician or surgeon. . Chapter 9 Ill.Adm.Reg. 209.

Diamond Shamrock Corporation v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company

466 F.2d 722 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 16, 1972

The use of such summaries where documents and records are voluminous is well established. … That places the business interruption summaries clearly within the ambit of our decision in In re Shelley Furniture, Inc., 283 F.2d 540 (7th Cir. 1960).

Shakman v. Democratic Organization of Cook County

919 F.2d 455 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 30, 1990

Since the office of the State’s Attorney is an actual party to the lawsuit, the State’s Attorney is clearly “interested in the proceedings” within the meaning of § 6. … Congress has established that appeal is permissible only on entry of a final judgment.

Wisconsin Resources Protection v. Flambeau Mining Company

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 15, 2013

it  possessed  a qualifying permit for purposes of the CWA. … Rather, plaintiffs have established only that Flambeau knew that it no longer held a separate WPDES permit. 

Phyllis MERRIWEATHER, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FAMILY DOLLAR STORES OF INDIANA, INC. Defendant-Appellant

103 F.3d 576 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 26, 1996

Waak testified that Merriweather was qualified for the floor supervisor position, and that he considered Merriweather a satisfactory employee who presented no problems on the sales floor or in dealing with customers. … Because the finding is not clearly erroneous, we refuse to second-guess the trial court on appeal.

Isaiah Brady v. Randy Pfister

711 F.3d 818 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 1, 2013

established Federal law as determined by the Supreme Court.” … On the other hand, if it is the claim as a whole that qualifies (or not) for treatment under Section 2254(d)(1), then the standard of review would remain consistent for both elements.

National Labor Relations Board v. Knuth Brothers, Inc.

537 F.2d 950 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 8, 1976

Section 7, however, does not immunize an employee from discharge for acts of disloyalty or misconduct merely because those acts were associated with protected activity. NLRB v. … Popovitch’s conduct was clearly far beyond the scope of duties for which he was paid, and thus he must be held to have been aware that he was meddling in his Employer’s business affairs without authorization.

Procopio v. Johnson

994 F.2d 325 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 6, 1993

Section 1983 provides a federal cause of action for "the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and [federal] laws." 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . . … Though the Procopios do not clearly differentiate their contention that they can sue directly under the AACWA through section 1983 from their contention that the AACWA serves as a source for the Procopios' liberty interest