Case law

Raymond Heyde v. Gary Pittenger

633 F.3d 512 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 11, 2011

In the alternative, they argued that they were protected by qualified immunity. The district judge found Heyde’s claims to be premature under principles of comity. … Our approach to determining whether an official is entitled to absolute immunity is well established; we apply a functional approach. Buckly v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259, 269 (1993).

Charles Reardon and Gregory Heinzel v. Gary Wroan, Ralph Ebert and Steve Ploense

811 F.2d 1025 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 29, 1987

III Qualified Immunity Defendants assert that even if the requirements of Llaguno were not met, they are nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity. … Therefore defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity at this stage of the proceedings.

United States v. Willard Jeffries

854 F.2d 254 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 11, 1988

[and] are immune from taxes[,] ... and no form 1023 was required.” Form 1023 is an IRS exemption form. … The jury was clearly told that if what the defendant did was a reasonable good faith misunderstanding of law, he should be found not guilty.

Tamayo, Jeannette v. Blagojevich, Rod R.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 27, 2008

allegations that anticipate and overcome a de- fense of qualified immunity.”). … Tamayo’s complaint as true, the defendants violated a clearly established constitu- No. 07-2975 29 tional right; therefore, a grant of qualified immunity is inappropriate at

Bass v. Wallenstein

769 F.2d 1173 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 30, 1985

or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known____ If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail____ Id. at 818-19 , 102 S.Ct. at 2738-39 . … The determination whether the law was clearly established at the time of the incident giving rise to the section 1983 action is for the court, not the jury.

Shaun J. Matz v. Rodney Klotka

769 F.3d 517 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 6, 2014

clearly established law. … Clark, 630 F.3d 677, 680 (7th Cir. 2011) (entitlement to qualified immunity turns on whether facts describe the violation of a clearly established constitutional right).

In re Air Crash Disaster Near Roselawn, Indiana On October 31, 1994

96 F.3d 932 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 19, 1996

Congress passed the FSIA in 1976 to establish statutory standards defining when foreign states and their instrumentalities may be sued in United States courts. … The right to jury trial had an established meaning at the framing of the Constitution that is preserved in the Seventh Amendment.

American Civil Liberties Union of Ill. v. Alvarez

679 F.3d 583 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 8, 2012

On the other hand, the Third Circuit resolved a similar qualified-immunity question differently in Kelly v. … This case does not, of course, raise a question of qualified immunity; we do not need to take sides in the circuit split in order to decide this case. .

Jacob Sampson v. Federal Republic of Germany and Claims Conference, Article 2 Fund

250 F.3d 1145 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 23, 2001

The Claims Conference administers the Hardship ■Fund, but its sole role is to determine whether the claimants meet the German guidelines — not to differentiate among qualified applicants in the amount of payment. … FSIA to grant immunity only if Congress clearly expressed such an intent.”).

Joseph L. Bailey v. Kevin C. Andrews

811 F.2d 366 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 22, 1987

Immunity Andrews also argues on appeal that he was entitled to either qualified or good faith immunity for his actions in arresting Bailey. The issue of immunity is one for the judge to decide. Llaguno v. … The district court refused to grant Andrews immunity. The Supreme Court described the standard for qualified or good faith immunity in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982).

Cornel J. Rosario v. Daniel R. Braw

670 F.3d 816 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 1, 2012

Rosario also preemptively argues that the officers are not entitled to qualified immunity. No. 11-2072 9 A. … Qualified Immunity Rosario also preemptively argues that the officers are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Doornbos v. City of Chicago

868 F.3d 572 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 18, 2017

Nonetheless we concluded the unlawfulness of that behavior had not been clearly established, so the officers were protected by-qualified immunity. See Catlin, 574 F.3d at 369 . … established” for qualified immunity purposes that plainclothes officers with a warrant had to identify themselves). .

John Lipsey v. United States

879 F.3d 249 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 4, 2018

The decision at issue here is not the choice as to whether to provide medical care; it is the determination as to which—among the qualified facilities—is most appropriate for a particular inmate. … Although the district court based its decision of immunity on § 4-105 of the Tort Immunity Act, with only a passing nod to immunity under §§ 6-105 and 6-106 as well, the plaintiff failed to assert any argument concerning

Walrath v. United States

35 F.3d 277 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 8, 1994

Because qualified immunity is generally deemed sufficient to protect a public official from vexatious litigation, "[t]he proponent of a claim to absolute immunity bears the burden of establishing the justification for such … But the alternative of qualifying a prosecutor's immunity would disserve the broader public interest." 424 U.S. at 427 , 96 S.Ct. at 993

Kincaid v. Rusk

670 F.2d 737 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 10, 1982

We also reverse with respect to the finding of qualified immunity for Sheriff Rusk in his denial of access to reading material. We award Kincaid nominal damages of one dollar. I. … We have reviewed the record and conclude that this finding is not clearly erroneous or an abuse of discretion. See Cruz v. Beto, 603 F.2d 1178, 1186 (5th Cir. 1979).

Kenneth Neiman v. Thomas M. Keane

232 F.3d 577 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 13, 2000

The officer procuring the warrant, however, enjoys not absolute but qualified immunity with respect to his actions in the application of the warrant. See Malley v. … Ward, 94 F.3d 1052, 1058 (7th Cir.1996) (citation and internal quotations omitted). *581 In this case, the record clearly shows that the detective investigated and relied on sufficient information to establish a reasonable

Jerome A. Crowder v. Page True, Earl Mayfield, Lieutenant, J.A. Seimen, Lieutenant

74 F.3d 812 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 24, 1996

The defendants then filed a motion for reconsideration of the court’s holding on the Fifth Amendment elaim and to clarify (or make) a ruling on their qualified immunity defense. … Because of our decision that no constitutional violation occurred, it is unnecessary for us to reach the question of whether the defendants were protected from civil prosecution by qualified immunity. See Buckley v.

Robert Holleman v. Dushan Zatecky

951 F.3d 873 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 6, 2020

The question for us today is whether that transfer violated Holleman’s clearly established right to be free from retaliation for protected First Amendment activity, such that his suit can overcome qualified immunity. … To overcome qualified immunity, the facts viewed in the light most favorable to Holleman must “show that the defendant[s] violated a constitutional right” and that “the right was clearly established at [that] time.”

Campbell v. City of Chicago

823 F.2d 1182 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 15, 1987

In this case, the City’s action in passing the 1963 ordinance was clearly authorized by the State of Illinois. … The fact that the Illinois courts have determined that ¶ 11-42-6 authorizes municipalities to regulate the number of cabs is clearly an important factor in determining that the conduct was foreseeable, and thus immune from

Mildred A. Belluomini, Individually and as Independent of the Estate of Harry Belluomini, Deceased v. United States

64 F.3d 299 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 26, 1995

If one does not qualify as a loaning employer under this provision, there is an alternative test. … Because we believe that GSSC qualifies as a statutory loaning employer, we need not address the second test.