Case law

Frank Buttitta v. City of Chicago

9 F.3d 1198 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 15, 1993

In the employment context, “[pjroperty interests exist when an employer’s discretion is clearly limited so that the employee cannot be denied employment unless specific conditions are met.” Colburn v. … to duty injuries and illnesses, as established by the board.

Edward A. COX, III, Petitioner, v. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION, Respondent

138 F.3d 268 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 4, 1998

Section 8a(2)(D) requires conviction of a felony, so clearly the relevant behavior is already criminal Section 8a(2)(E), while not requiring conviction, requires that the person be- found to have violated certain statutes … The Commission did not afford significant weight to the testimony of the witnesses because none of the witnesses was qualified as experts in rehabilitation. See Cox II, 1997 WL 20733 , at *9.

United States v. Lautaro Cea

963 F.2d 1027 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 14, 1992

A sentencing court’s conclusion as to the amount of cocaine involved in an offense is a factual finding, reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard. United States v. Buggs, 904 F.2d 1070, 1078 (7th Cir.1990). … Though he only received small sums of money for his assistance in arranging the sales, Brick did not qualify as a “minor participant” because he had played a key role in the scheme.

unempl.ins.rep. Cch 21,698 Juvena Jenkins v. William M. Bowling, Director, Illinois Department of Labor, Defendants

691 F.2d 1225 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 1, 1982

Less evidence is necessary to establish misconduct than to convict of crime, so that fewer guilty people slip through the mesh of 602 A than of 602 B. … But we do point out that the district court’s suggestion that the held in abeyance proviso violates a “presumption of innocence” found in the due process clause is clearly wrong, see Bell v.

Dixie Dairy Company, a Corporation v. City of Chicago, a Municipal Corporation

538 F.2d 1303 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 2, 1976

The District Court’s finding that the reason for this is the duplicative inspection requirement imposed by the Chicago ordinance is not clearly erroneous. III. … Indeed, the evidence establishes that the Chicago Board of Health has adopted, as a matter of practice, the PMO standards and has urged the Chicago City Council to formally enact those standards into law.”

United States v. Danny Smith and Harry D. Lowe

308 F.3d 726 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 16, 2002

Nevertheless, we need not squarely address this issue because Lowe’s substantive argument on severance clearly fails on the merits. … The district *747 court’s ruling on the § 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement was not clearly erroneous. U. Lowe’s criminal history points.

Lewis, Debra L. v. School District 70

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 17, 2008

The FMLA establishes two categories of protections for employees. … Lewis clearly had been acting as a husband and not as an attorney, Mr. Jones’ state- ment still would be privileged under Illinois precedent.

K & I Construction v. Chicago & Northeast

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 26, 2001

CommunicationsWorkers, 475 U.S. 643, 649 (1986) ("Unless the parties clearly and unmistakably provide otherwise, the question of whether the parties agreed to arbitrate is to be decided by the court, not the arbitrator.") … 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.

Patricia D. Rush v. McDonald Corporation, Sharon Funston, and William R. Rose

966 F.2d 1104 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 29, 1992

Corp., 948 F.2d 332 , 336 (7th Cir.1991) (under ADEA) for the proposition that "whether one is qualified may change from time to time. … The fact that an individual may have been qualified in the past does not mean that he is qualified at a later time.”

Shell, Gregory v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 23, 2006

As Shell has failed to show that DEA agents in any way restrained his liberty, he has not established an illegal seizure for Fourth Amendment purposes. … The Title III application and warrant clearly described the place to be searched and the conversations that were to be intercepted, thus identifying, for both the reviewing judge and for the police, the precise location of

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Margaret Christ, Individually and as Guardian Ad Litem for Kelly Christ, Jeffrey Christ, and Anthony Christ, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Melba Christ, and Margaret Christ, Individually and as Guardian Ad Litem for Kelly Christ, Jeffrey Christ, and Anthony Christ

979 F.2d 575 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 17, 1992

Thus, "a state divorce decree ... must give way to clearly conflicting federal enactments." … We agree that in spite of the total collapse of the marriage the defendant technically qualifies as the widow of the insured within the meaning of the statute."

LP Larson, Jr., Co. v. William Wrigley, Jr., Co.

20 F.2d 830 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 2, 1927

The facts leading to these adjudications, together, with quotations from those opinions here applicable, and the propositions there and here in controversy, are clearly and sufficiently set forth in Judge Wilkerson’s opinion … The more flagrant, and therefore the more effective, the invasion of another’s rights, the more certain and complete would be the invader’s immunity.

John Powers v. The Chicago Transit Authority

890 F.2d 1355 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 11, 1989

While attorney-client privileged documents are not always immune from discovery, the district court gave no would admit the Hughes memorandum if it found that the CTA had not waived its attorney-client privilege. … The district judge clearly articulated his reasons for not employing exclusion as a sanction. 5 The court determined that exclusion of the memo would not give Powers strong enough of an incentive to reveal the identity of

Matthew King v. Hendricks County Commissioner

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 31, 2020

In light of our ruling on the merits, we have no need to address Hays’s back-up assertion that he was en- titled to qualified immunity. … As discussed above, King has not established facts suffi- cient to allow a fact-finder to conclude that Hays’s use of deadly force violated Bradley’s Fourth Amendment rights.

Rodolph Lanaghan v. Darryl Koch

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2018

The undisputed facts establish that Lana‐ ghan faced severe physical limitations during the 14‐day pe‐ riod at issue here.  … The defendants have not met their burden of establish‐ ing that a remedy was available to Lanaghan that he failed to  exhaust.  

Susan Grashoff v. Frederick Payne

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 18, 2023

Applying the framework established in United States v. … Grashoff clearly does.

United States v. Sami Natour

700 F.3d 962 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 9, 2012

Natour clearly engaged in conduct that fell within the Guideline. … Although we find no error in the inclusion of these phones, we still must determine if the estimate itself is clearly erroneous.

Sobieski, Paul v. IN Harbor Steamship

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

Well-established precedent applies the common law principle that an employer may be vicariously liable for its employee’s negligence (or intentional tort) committed within the course or scope of employment—that is, committed … Instead, Barrett’s altruistic tractioning of necks clearly falls within that category of acts commonly held to be outside the scope of employment—those “undertaken by an employee for a private purpose and having no causal

Havoco of America, Ltd., a Delaware Corporation, Cross-Appellee v. Sumitomo Corporation of America, and Elmer C. Hill, Cross-Appellee

971 F.2d 1332 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 9, 1992

Also, each letter of credit clearly states on its face that it is effective for one month only. … In this case, Havoco established at trial that the fraudulent acts of Hill and R. & F Coal left it with no choice but to assign the TVA contract to R & F Coal.

Reynolds v. CB Sports Bar, Inc.

623 F.3d 1143 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 22, 2010

The Dramshop Act, however, does not give a bar complete immunity from being sued for tortious conduct; the Act only preempts actions based on the provision of alcohol. … Therefore, CB Sports clearly had a duty to protect her from foreseeable criminal attacks by third parties while she was inside the bar.