Case law

Lappe v. Parker Bros. Division of General Mills Fun Groups, Inc.

575 F. Supp. 44 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 28, 1983

Under the doctrine of pendent jurisdiction, United Mine Workers v. … For the purpose of the motion, the Court will consider board games as the relevant sub-market even though, under the "cross-elasticity of demand” test of United States v.

Etshokin v. Texasgulf, Inc.

612 F. Supp. 1220 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 3, 1985

They cite Chiarella v. … See Case & Co., Inc. v. Board of Trade of City of Chicago, 523 F.2d 355, 361 (7th Cir.1975). Plaintiffs’ counsel have half-heartedly argued that the summaries “are not necessarily correct.”

Wright

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 9, 2026

Knox v. Curtis, 771 Fed. App’x 656, 658 n.2 (7th Cir. 2019) (quoting Albiero v. City of Kankakee, 122 F.3d 417, 419 (7th Cir. 1997); Smith v. … D.C. v. Wesby, 583 U.S. 48, 63 (2018) (quoting Ashcroft v. Al-Kidd, 536 U.S. 731, 741 (2011)).

Franco v. Thrush

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 4, 2024

VI, section 9; Castleberry, 43 N.E.3d at 938-39; Brown, 49 N.E.3d at 1006. … People v. Whitfield, 840 N.E.2d 658 (Ill. 2005); People v. Brown, 695 N.E.2d 1374 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998); People v. Ford, 18 N.E.3d 88 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014); People v. Jackson, 974 N.E.2d 855 (Ill. App.

Gracia v. SigmaTron International, Inc.

244 F. Supp. 3d 762 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 21, 2017

It manufactures circuit board assemblies. Id. ¶ 6. Plaintiff began her employment at Sig-maTron in 1999. Id. ¶ 5. … [and] led the Board to conclude that [plaintiff] is not satisfactorily performing her duties or. carrying out the policies of the Board’ ” could be reasonably construed as assessing plaintiffs failure to perform well in the

Ezell v. City of Chicago

70 F. Supp. 3d 871 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 29, 2014

See Ezell v. … See Brown v. Entm’t Merchs.

Gregory King v. Elementary School District 159

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 10, 2018

In her response, Plaintiff identifies Perkins as “the President of the Board of Education,” but neither party identifies the exact position held by Brown, Owens, or Johnson. (Resp. to Mot. to Dismiss (“Resp.”) (Dkt. … Board members.

Wisconsin Central Ltd. v. Shannon

516 F. Supp. 2d 917 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 21, 2007

Premcor USA, Inc. v. Amer. … See id.; see also Fry v.

Terry v. Atlas Van Lines, Inc.

679 F. Supp. 1467 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 20, 1986

Defendants cite the holding of Dombrowski v. … See accord Girard v. 94th Street & Fifth Avenue Corp., 530 F.2d 66, 71 (2d Cir.1976), cert. denied 425 U.S. 974 , 96 S.Ct. 2173 , 48 L.Ed.2d 798 (1976) (affirming summary judgment in favor of a corporation and its board of

Shapo v. O'SHAUGHNESSY

246 F. Supp. 2d 935 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 27, 2002

As Supervisory Agent, the government employee could force any Board member to resign unilaterally. The Supervisory Agent also had the power to recommend a replacement Board member, who the Board was compelled to elect. … The Seventh Circuit’s decision in Schacht v. Brown, 711 F.2d 1343 (7th Cir.1983) is directly on point and shows that the Liquidator’s injury allegations are sufficient.

Holstein v. UAL Corp.

662 F. Supp. 153 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 9, 1987

See Panter v. … On the other hand, if the board approves a proposed merger or similar transaction with a friendly acquiror, presumably the board also would redeem the Rights before they became exercisable.

Confederation of Police v. City of Chicago

481 F. Supp. 566 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 2, 1980

See Vorbeck v. … Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 577 , 92 S.Ct. 2701, 2709 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972).

Woodroffe v. Village of Park Forest

107 F. Supp. 906 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 16, 1952

Approximately two or three years ago, the petitioner was persuaded to vote in a Park Forest school board election. … O’Hair v. Wilson, 124 111. 351, 16 N.E. 256 . The petitioner’s motion for summary judgment is sustained.

Air Line Pilots Ass'n International v. United Air Lines, Inc.

637 F. Supp. 215 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 15, 1986

If a controversy is minor, the parties must submit the dispute to the System Board of Adjustment if negotiations fail. Local 553, 695 F.2d at 675 ; International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. … Such a test is necessary to protect the jurisdiction of the appropriate arbitration board and to promote the purposes of the RLA. See generally Union Pacific Railroad Co. v.

Benson v. United States

969 F. Supp. 1129 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 7, 1997

The courts have found that parole board members, in deciding to grant, deny, or revoke parole, “ ‘act in a quasi-judicial capacity, as an arm of the sentencing judge.’” Id. (quoting Sellars v. … See Wilson v. Kelkhoff, 86 F.3d 1438, 1444 (7th Cir.1996); Walker v. Prisoner Review Board, 769 F.2d 396, 398 (7th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1065 , 106 S.Ct. 817 , 88 L.Ed.2d 791 (1986).

Reich v. Local 134, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

829 F. Supp. 1011 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 13, 1993

Celotex Corp. v. … The complainants adequately followed procedures for filing a protest with the local Election Board. Cf. Donovan v.

Berg v. BCS Financial Corp.

372 F. Supp. 2d 1080 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 6, 2005

The Board opted to promote Ryan. (Id. at ¶ 31.) … determination at the next board meeting.

Butler v. Pfister

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 6, 2019

Camplin v. Wexford Institutional, 2015 WL 9871635 at *2 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 21, 2015) (citing Dole v. Chandler, 438 F.3d 804, 808 (7th Cir. 2006)). … In Brengettcy v.

Venson v. Pork

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 4, 2024

The Administrative Review Board ultimately denied the claims against the prison officials in the grievance. (Pl. Resp. to Def. SOF ¶ 22.) This lawsuit followed. … Santiago v. Walls, 599 F.3d 749, 758 (7th Cir. 2010) (citing Brown v.

Poole Bros. v. Marshall-Jackson Co.

161 F. 752 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 22, 1908

Hubbell v. United States, 179 U. S. 77 , 21 Sup. Ct. 24, 45 L. Ed. 95 ; Computing Scale Co. v. Automatic Scale Co., 204 U. S. 609 , 27 Sup. Ct. 307, 51 L. Ed. 645 ; Syracuse R. T. Co. v. Haywood Bros. & Wakefield Co. … This is not denied and must result in placing the Brown device in the prior art.