Case law

Estate of Burton W. Kanter, Deceased, Joshua S. Kanter, and Naomi Kanter v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

337 F.3d 833 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 24, 2003

Facts The Bea Ritch Trusts (BRT) are a group of twenty-five trusts established in 1969 under one trust document. … Comm’r, 114 T.C. 333 , 2000 WL 626760 (2000), asserted in their original petitions that they qualified for innocent-spouse relief. Id. at 338. In King v.

Elsie Simer v. Richard J. Rios, Acting Director of Community Services Administration Community Services Administration

661 F.2d 655 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 7, 1981

First, the majority notes that identifying those who qualify for CIP aid “by no means is an easy or inexpensive task,” see p. 669 supra. … That is hardly an insurmountable obstacle, because CSA in administering the program had to identify applicants who qualified for aid.

United States v. Osyp Firishchak

468 F.3d 1015 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 20, 2006

Further, given the facts established at trial, the district court properly concluded that Firishchak’s UAP service constituted conduct contrary to human decency. D. … Assuming, arguendo, that plain error review applies, Firishchak has not established that any of his unsubstantiated grievances amount to a showing of plain error.

United States v. Oscar Gutierrez

760 F.3d 750 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 29, 2014

The first is that the offic- ers in this case acted in obvious disregard of established trespass principles. … As noted above, however, Supreme Court precedent clearly (if separately) permitted knock-and- talks and drug-dog sniffs, and our precedent clearly permit- ted lawfully present officers to conduct a dog sniff at the threshold

United States v. Edward L. Morris and Steven M. Gardner

80 F.3d 1151 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 1, 1996

The qualifying statements thus do not exhaust the capacity of the adequacy statement to mislead. … The district court therefore properly interpreted the meaning of “loss” under section 2F1.1 and did not clearly err in estimating the amount of that loss. B.

United States v. Bjorkman, Trevor

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 30, 2001

Before Apprendi this court repeatedly held that drug types and quantities are not "elements" of the offense established by sec.841. See, e.g., United States v. … Fearing’s counsel did not dispute that his drug operation was "relevant conduct," and he expressly conceded that his direction of Stafne was the kind of activity that would qualify as "management" or "supervision" under

Ron Harper, Kevin Perkins, William Elliot, and Robert McCoy v. City of Chicago Heights and the Chicago Heights Election Commission, Ron Harper, Kevin Perkins, William Elliot, and Robert McCoy v. Chicago Heights Park District, Cross-Appellee, and David Orr, Cook County Clerk

223 F.3d 593 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 28, 2000

Not everyone would agree, but we find the court's conclusion to be within the range of permissible inferences from this evidence, and hence not clearly erroneous. … Once a plaintiff qualifies for a fee award by meeting this threshold, "the degree of the plaintiff's overall success goes to the reasonableness of the award . . ., not to the availability of a fee award vel non."

Jefferson v. United States

546 F.3d 477 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 8, 2008

The court also found that Jefferson did not qualify for the “honorary member” exception of section 6672(e) because he was not serving in an honorary capacity at New Zion. … “When interpreting statutes, ‘we give words their plain meaning unless doing so would frustrate the overall purpose of the statutory scheme, lead to absurd results, or contravene clearly expressed legislative intent.’ ” Gillespie

Teledyne Wisconsin Motor v. Local 283, United Automobile, Aerospace, And Agricultural Implement Workers Of America, Uaw

530 F.2d 727 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 26, 1976

refusing to perform any work or to remain in any relation of employment; 24 'Labor dispute' is defined in § 13(c) of the Act to include 'any controversy concerning terms or conditions of employment' and the instant dispute is clearly … To avoid the jurisdictional bar, Teledyne urges that the provisions of § 4(a) are inapplicable in this case and that it qualifies for an exception thereto by virtue of the effect of various recent decisions interpreting that

United States v. John Walsh

723 F.3d 802 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 23, 2013

This finding is not clearly erroneous. … The defen- dants do not contend that a company which provides futures trading services fails to qualify as a “futures commission merchant.”

Mootye v. Dotson

73 F. App'x 161 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 29, 2003

The role of appellate review is to ensure that questions accurately, adequately and clearly state the relevant issues. Ambiguous, biased, misleading or confusing questions may warrant reversal. See id. … Mootye presented numerous claims to the jury, each with individualized damage calculations and affirmative defense considerations raised by the defendants concerning qualified immunity.

Perkins v. Waukesha National Bank

290 F.2d 912 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 26, 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]” 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: “ * * * No rule is better established

Arie Friedman v. City of Highland Park

784 F.3d 406 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 27, 2015

During  Prohibition  the  Thompson  subma‐ chine gun (the “Tommy gun”) was all too common in Chica‐ go, but that popularity didn’t give it a constitutional immun‐ ity  from  the  federal  prohibition  enacted  in  1934.  … Notably absent from this provision is any qualifying language: all forms of possession are summarily prohibited.

Tyra, Lemuel v. United States

270 F. App'x 410 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 12, 2008

Thus, we have rejected suggestions that we establish a right to counsel on discretionary appeals.”); Miller v. … (Exhibit E3 at 3) At his sentencing hearing, AUSA McGovern stated that he believed Tyra developed more contacts over ten years of dealing than he supplied. (5/19/05 Hr’g Tr. at 4) McGovern argued that Tyra’s did not qualify

United States v. Charles M. Raimondi, Jr.

159 F.3d 1095 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 4, 1998

Raimondi qualified for a two-point addition to his base offense level under § 2D1.1(b)(1) merely by possessing a weapon that was connected with the offense. The district court’s assessment that Mr. … As we noted above in footnote 8, § 2K2.1 is the general guideline that establishes levels of punishment for the unlawful possession of firearms.

Ch2m Hill, Inc. v. Alexis Herman, Secretary of Labor, and Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

192 F.3d 711 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 23, 1999

It defines an "established Federal standard” as "any operative occupational safety and health standard established by any agency of the United States and presently in effect.” See 29 U.S.C. § 652 (10). … In addition, the Secretary clearly spelled out in the regulations that the OSHA regulations apply to eveiy employer. See 29 C.F.R. § 1910.12 (a).

United Steel Paper v. NLRB

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 15, 2008

Instead, the employer may postpone rein- statement of these employees until positions become available for which they are qualified. Mackay Radio, 304 U.S. at 345-46. … The at-will disclaimer in the form, clearly the most significant piece of evidence that might have supported a contrary determination, was construed reasonably by the Board as not allowing Jones Plastic to terminate the replacements

United States v. Sromalski, David J.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 7, 2003

We defer to the court’s findings of fact unless they are clearly errone- ous. United States v. McGiffen, 267 F.3d 581, 586 (7th Cir. 2001). … The Eleventh Circuit has recently ruled that evidence of receiving and sending pornographic images is sufficient to qualify as “trafficking” for purposes of the cross refer- ence. See United States v.

Charles Hess v. Biomet, Inc.

105 F.4th 912 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 25, 2024

Accord- ing to Biomet, the agreement clearly limits long-term commis- sions to the primary category of product that the distributors sold during their tenure: reconstructive devices. … He insists that that phrase creates merely a geographic limitation by referencing the regions established for each respective distributor.

Stephen Ward v. Robert Oliver, M. Jordan, and F. Mussatto

19 F.3d 1436 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 4, 1994

Ward also argues in his brief that the district court erroneously concluded that the defendants were entitled to the defense of qualified immunity. … Because we have concluded that Ward has no legitimate claim of entitlement to access to the commissary, we need not reach the qualified immunity issue