Case law

Emery, Gillian v. Gallo, Frank

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 20, 2009

Gallo, therefore, was very clearly related to the award of the Sanibel Property. By November 2004, Mr. Gallo had complied with the order by transferring his interest in the Sanibel Property to Ms. Emery; however, Ms. … Since she has not established a prima facie case for slander of title in this bankruptcy action, she certainly cannot establish a right to attorneys’ fees on the basis of this litigation.

Ndonyi, Pauline v. Holder, Eric H.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 2, 2008

These incidents clearly represent a “punish- ment or . . . infliction of harm . . . that this country does not recognize as legitimate.” Boci v. Gonzales, 473 F.3d 762, 766 (7th Cir. 2007). … This circuit and several other circuits have adopted the doctrine of “mixed motives,” “ ‘which recognizes that an individual may qualify for asylum if his or her persecutors have more than one motive as long as one of the

Perkins v. Waukesha National Bank

290 F.2d 912 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 29, 1961

Perkins, by trust agreement made August 3, 1932, which transferred to the Waukesha Bank, as trustee, a portfolio of assets, including some properties which did not qualify as legal trust investments under the Wisconsin Statutes … The Court's italics]" 31 In the opinion of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin in Ludington (at page 239 of 111 Wis., at page 580 of 86 N.W.) quoted by appellant in his brief, the Court there said: 32 "* * * No rule is better established

Larry G. Solles v. Thomas R. Israel

868 F.2d 242 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 8, 1989

Treuthardt was subsequently granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for her testimony. Drenning and Solles were tried jointly. … The resulting testimony, that the hair from the ski mask was inconsistent with Drenning’s hair, was potentially very helpful to the defense, since the defense expert was outstandingly qualified and completely overshadowed

Magnus Electronics, Inc. v. Masco Corp.

871 F.2d 626 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 22, 1989

No. 1, 620 F.2d 1220 , 1227 (7th Cir.1980) (district court awards attorney fees but appellate court reverses because of government immunity). … A district judge, once the grounds for sanctions have been established, may impose various costs and expenses upon the attorney.

United States of America Ex Rel. Alexander Little v. John J. Twomey, Warden

477 F.2d 767 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 19, 1973

As a result, an important link in establishing the defense of insanity was lost.” No source, in the record or elsewhere, is stated in the brief. … Prejudice to him seems scarcely clearly demonstrated other than in a general sense. On these facts, it is our opinion that the delay was not such as to deprive Little of his right to a speedy trial.

Juan Suarez v. W.M. Barr & Company, Incorpora

842 F.3d 513 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 22, 2016

However,  a  genuine  factual  issue  exists  as  to  whether Juan’s basement qualifies as such an area.  … Water‐based  Goof  Off  was  clearly  cost‐effective,  since  it  was  being  manufactured  and  distributed  widely. 

Standard Scale & Supply Co. v. Cropp Concrete MacHinery Co.

6 F.2d 447 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 15, 1925

If the- first ground is sustained, the chancellor, either directly or through the master, might well appoint and qualify a competent and disinterested accountant to cure the defendant's? … Use of an excessive valuation for the purpose of allowing the value of the use in reduction of defendant’s profits is clearly unprejudieial to it.

Christian Legal Society v. Walker

453 F.3d 853 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 10, 2006

SIU has created a speech forum for student organizations and has bestowed certain benefits on those who are qualified to enter the forum. … For example, the reviewing court does not give the normal deference to matters of witness credibility, nor does the usual "clearly erroneous" standard of review cabin the examination of the facts. Id.

Paul J. Hoffman v. McA Inc.

144 F.3d 1117 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 5, 1998

Standing alone, however, these statements are insufficient to establish pretext. See id. … As a collective, the comments do not establish that MCA is lying about its reason to fire Hoffman.

Juan Barragan-Ojeda v. Jeff Sessions

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 5, 2017

So  I  don’t  see  that  you  qualify  to  remain in the United States under the law.[9]  The IJ then continued an oral decision in which he noted  that Mr.  … Gonzales, 422 F.3d 529, 538–39 (7th Cir. 2005)  (holding  that  the  IJ  violated  the  alien’s  right  to  due  process  in  part  by  “questioning [that] clearly assume[d] the role of counsel for the Govern‐ ment”).  21

National Can Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board

374 F.2d 796 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 8, 1967

Swift Co., Inc., 302 F.2d 342, 346 , which clearly is not in point. In our view, the Board’s argument on this important point is fallacious. … Graczyk as author of the demand letter was better qualified than any other person to state the class of employees *802 included in the unit which he had proposed.

Mayoza v. Heinold Commodities, Inc.

871 F.2d 672 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 29, 1989

Regardless of the precise relevance of the appellant’s physical condition, the appellant’s thrust is that his fragile heart condition, as allegedly communicated to his broker, Leo Croley, “clearly indicate^] Mayoza’s intent … We also hold that the theory was much too speculative to qualify for admission to prove motive, plan or absence of mistake under Rule 404(b). IV.

Magnus Electronics, Inc. v. Masco Corporation Of Indiana

871 F.2d 626 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 22, 1989

We have previously stated that in determining whether the sanctioned attorney violated Rule 11 we will review questions of fact using a clearly erroneous standard but will examine questions of law de novo. Beeman v. … No. 1, 620 F.2d 1220 , 1227 (7th Cir.1980) (district court awards attorney fees but appellate court reverses because of government immunity).

Nor-Am Agricultural Products, Inc. v. Hardin

435 F.2d 1133 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 15, 1970

It is not contended by the Department that the administrative action taken by the Secretary pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 135 et seq., is immune from judicial scrutiny. … a defendant from the necessity of a trial to establish the fact” (at p. 52, 58 S.Ct. at p. 464 ).

United States v. D'Ambrosia, Jeffrey

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 16, 2002

There can, of course, be more than one person who qualifies as a leader or organizer of a criminal association or conspiracy. … See § 3B1.1, cmt. 4 (“There can, of course, be more than one person who qualifies as a leader or organizer of a criminal association or conspiracy.”). Cf.

Weeks v. Bareco Oil Co.

125 F.2d 84 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 22, 1941

This doctrine is clearly recognized by subdivision (a) of the rule under discussion.” … We are clearly convinced that the court properly vacated the injunction which it first granted.

United States v. Moore, Percy E.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 13, 2005

However, Moore fails to explain how the SSA records would have established that he was mentally incapable of understanding the coded drug language. … Thus, the district court did not clearly err in determining that Moore was competent to be sentenced. III.

David K. Guenther v. Mark Holmgreen and City of Black River Falls

738 F.2d 879 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 12, 1984

In litigating his claims at the preliminary hearing, Guenther was clearly not faced with the harsh dilemma the defendant faced in Simmons . … Further, neither the United States Supreme Court nor the Wisconsin Supreme Court has decided how the Simmons rule of testimonial immunity may apply to pre-trial hearings other than a suppression hearing — such as an arraignment

Americana Healthcare Corporation v. Richard Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Turtle Creek Convalescent Centers, Inc. D/B/A Northside Healthcare Center v. Richard Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Care Inns, Inc., D/B/A Clarksville Healthcare Center v. Robert F. Smith, Acting Administrator, Donald L. Blinzinger, Administrator of Indiana State Dept. Of Public Welfare, and the Indiana Dept. Of Public Welfare, Care Inns, Inc., D/B/A Clarksville Healthcare Center v. Richard Schweiker, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, Laura Hathaway, D/B/A R. N. Nursing Home, and Judy Carrothers v. Richard Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human Services

688 F.2d 1072 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 8, 1982

Id. at 1019 . 72 When the performance of official duty calls for a construction of governing law, the (federal) officer's interpretation will not be disturbed by a writ of mandamus unless it is clearly wrong and his official … Moreover, there certainly is no reason to think judges or juries are better qualified than appropriate professionals in making such decisions. See Parham v. J.