Justia U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

Defendant drove from New Jersey to Illinois and met an undercover agent who loaded bags containing packages wrapped in tape into her car. On her return trip, DEA agents stopped defendant, questioned her about the bags, and seized them. Defendant was indicted for attempting to possess with intent to distribute over five kilograms of cocaine (21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1)). The undercover agent testified that the transaction developed out of an investigation into activities of a suspected broker for a Colombian drug-trafficking organization. An agent involved in the stop testified that defendant confessed that she understood the bags contained drugs. The Seventh Circuit affirmed. Testimony about investigation of the suspected broker was not hearsay; it was not offered for the truth of the matter asserted but to explain why the agent took the investigative steps that he did. In light of overwhelming evidence of guilt, the evidence was not prejudicial. The government did not introduce evidence that defendant was guilty of conspiracy in addition to or instead of attempt. Testimony about her confession was a routine and entirely permissible introduction of a non-hearsay admission by a party opponent.

Plaintiff, a natural gas supplier, and defendants, a natural gas distributor and its executive, had a written contract. The relationship unraveled in the face of a failed acquisition, several million dollars' worth of unpaid invoices, and frequent disputes over pricing, inflamed by allegations that natural gas suppliers were manipulating the indices on which natural gas price quotes are based. The district court granted plaintiff summary judgment and ultimately issued a Rule 54(b) judgment on contract and guaranty claims and rejecting counterclaims. The court awarded $8,929,449 in pre-judgment interest on top of its damages of $13,693,943. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, rejecting arguments concerning exclusion of an affidavit submitted by defendant, the alleged existence of additional oral contracts, an implied agreement to waive interest, and the sufficiency of evidence. Without something linking defendant's downfall to plaintiff's divulgence or inappropriate use of information in violation of the confidentiality agreement, there was no issue warranting trial on that claim. There was insufficient evidence of price discrimination in violation of the Robinson-Patman Act, 15 U.S.C. 13(a).

Following an anonymous tip, the FBI conducted surveillance of defendant and observed that he regularly transported about four people back and forth between his home and his restaurant. A consent search of the home revealed three people who were illegally present in the U.S. and a make-shift dormitory in the basement and garage. Defendant was convicted of two counts of illegally harboring or shielding illegal aliens (8 U.S.C. 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii)) and sentenced to 15 months of imprisonment and ordered to pay $10,000 in fines and forfeit his house. The Seventh Circuit affirmed. The district court rejected a motion to vacate (28 U.S.C. 2255), arguing ineffective counsel. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, rejecting arguments concerning proposal of an incorrect jury instruction; failure to object to video-taped testimony of prosecution witnesses; failure to ensure that a language barrier did not prevent communicating with defendant; and preventing defendant from testifying on his own behalf.

Plaintiff, who is white, worked with an African-American who was confrontational, rude, and disruptive in the workplace. Plaintiff claims that a 940-pound steel coil that fell on him, from a machine operated by the "workplace bully," was dropped purposefully because of his race. The district court entered summary judgment for the employer on a racially hostile work environment claim under 42 U.S.C. 1981, without considering plaintiff's response brief or exhibits, which were non-compliant with local rules. The Seventh Circuit affirmed. The district court acted within its discretion in enforcing its rules and deadlines. The record contained insufficient evidence for a jury to find that the co-worker's offensive conduct before the accident was severe or pervasive. While the injury was severe, no reasonable inference could be drawn that the coil was purposefully dropped because of race or that the employer was negligent in discovering the alleged racial harassment. The company had a reasonable procedure in place for detecting and correcting harassment, but plaintiff did not avail himself of that procedure.

Petitioner, convicted of robbery and forgery in state court, filed a state court motion challenging his sentence. The motion was denied, as was his request for appointed counsel. The federal district court rejected a habeas corpus petition and denied a certificate of appealability. The Seventh Circuit granted a COA to consider the unresolved, substantial constitutional issue of whether petitioner was entitled to counsel in the state proceeding. Whether the proceeding is characterized correctly as direct or collateral presents a necessary antecedent non-constitutional question.

The applicant sought disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income, claiming that she is disabled by bipolar disorder and numerous physical impairments. The Social Security Administration denied the application; a magistrate judge affirmed. The Seventh Circuit vacated and remanded. The ALJ erred in discounting the testimony of the treating physician and in finding that the applicant exaggerated her difficulties.