Case law

Estate of Adam Brown v. Timothy Thomas

771 F.3d 1001 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 13, 2014

Even if we thought Secor may have been exceeding proper constitutional bounds in leading the search given his appearance, he would still be entitled to qualified immunity, 8 … In addi- tion, ‘[w]e have repeatedly told courts ... not to define clearly established law at a high level of generality,’ since doing so avoids the crucial question whether the official acted reason- ably in the particular

David Camm v. Stanley Faith

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 10, 2019

After briefly addressing principles of qualified and abso- lute immunity, the judge took up the merits of the malicious- prosecution claim. … Likewise, it has long been clearly established that Brady obligations extend not just to prosecutors but also to investigators. See Beaman v.

Pearson v. Furnco Construction Co.

563 F.2d 815 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 25, 1977

The gist of plaintiffs’ claim against Furnco is, as already indicated, that Furnco’s awareness of plaintiffs’ desire for employment, assuming plaintiffs are qualified, established, prima facie, that Furnco discriminated on … Sovereign immunity is also claimed.

DeKalb County v. Federal Housing Finance Agency

741 F.3d 795 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 23, 2013

The appellees reply that  “all”  means  “all”  (unless  explicitly  qualified,  as  by  “all  ex‐ cept,”  which  is  what  the  Fannie  Mae  statute  does  with  real  property  taxation).  … But if it does, that would make no difference; for Fannie  is not invoking the implied constitutional immunity created  by McCulloch but rather an express statutory immunity. 

Taylor v. Edgar

52 F. App'x 825 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 25, 2002

But those rules establish no more than eligibility for such placement, and eligibility by itself does not confer an entitlement. Id. at 213 . … We note, however, that we do not agree with the district court’s conclusion that Taylor’s lawsuit qualifies as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (g).

Iberia Hampton, Administratrix, Etc. Verlina Brewer, Etc., and Deborah Johnson v. The City of Chicago, Cook County, Illinois and Edward v. Hanrahan, Fannie Mae Clark, Administratrix of the Estate of Mark Clark, Deceased v. The City of Chicago, and Edward v. Hanrahan

484 F.2d 602 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 24, 1973

7 "Few doctrines were more solidly established at common law than the immunity of judges from liability for damages for acts committed within their judicial jurisdiction, as this Court recognized when it adopted the doctrine … The alleged conduct of Assistant State's Attorneys Sorosky and Meltreger clearly exceeded the scope of their quasi-judicial immunity.

Neomi Hernandez v. Jack O'malley, Individually and in His Capacity as State's Attorney of Cook County, Illinois, and Chris Orozco

98 F.3d 293 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 21, 1996

Until the right in question has been “clearly established,” courts do not demand that public officials dig into their pockets. Harlow ¶. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). … A regimen of case-by-case balancing makes it hard to dismiss complaints and simultaneously makes it hard to show that the right in question was “clearly established.”

James Newsome v. John McCabe and Raymond McNally

260 F.3d 824 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 14, 2001

Defendants’ petition for rehearing contends that it was not clearly established, when they acted, that the state’s constitutional duty to avoid concealing materially exculpatory evidence ever imposed any obligations on police … Such proof would demonstrate that defendants violated clearly established rights — for the due process clause imposes obligations on all state actors, and not just on prosecutors.

Davis, James E. v. Streekstra, Byron

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 7, 2000

United States, 431 U.S. 651 (1977), absolute or qualified immunity from suit, see Helstoski v. Meanor, 442 U.S. 500 (1979); Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982); Mitchell v. … Exhaustion requirements do not create absolute (or even qualified) rights to be free from litigation.

Charleston v. Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

741 F.3d 769 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 20, 2013

It also found, as an  alternate  ground  for  its  decision  on  his  substantive  due  process  claim,  that  qualified  immunity  barred  Charleston’s  suit  on  that  claim  against  the university officials in their individual … Thus, we                                                    3 Actually, the substantive due process portion of Charleston’s complaint  states only that he has a “clearly established” right to this education, but  his brief

United States v. Max Rubin

243 F.2d 900 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Apr 30, 1957

Under the regulation> 10 Fed.Reg., 12849, ownership of 50% by ve^eran js a qualifying status-. … To say that he is immune from any penalty for the second purchase because he has already paid a penalty for making use of the certificate, is to our way of thinking, absurd.

Cherry, Kelly v. Univ WI System

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Sep 7, 2001

There is no indication in Garrett that the Court established a new, bright-line rule that Congress’ attempt to abrogate immunity from a federal statute is invalid if the statute lacks specific findings that the States had … Nor is the Board immune from Cherry’s Title IX claim because Congress clearly and unambiguously manifested its intent to condition the Board’s receipt of Title IX funds on its waiver of immunity, and in accepting such funding

Hayes, Floyd K. v. Snyder, Donald N.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 9, 2008

Because Hayes had “failed to establish the violation of a federal right,” the court found, he could not defeat the defendants’ claims for qualified immunity. On appeal, Dr. … Hamby has not presented an alternative argument to support a finding of qualified immunity.

Tatalovich v. City of Superior

904 F.2d 1135 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jun 7, 1990

As the trial court explained in its summary judgment decision: “These procedures require that the party opposing the [summary judgment] clearly identify which of the mov-ant’s proposed factual findings the opposing party … Thus, as a result of Tatalo-vich’s failure to present facts necessary to establish this exception to the rule of governmental immunity, we hold that the entry of summary judgment in favor of the City was proper.

John T. Henry and Evelyn I. Henry v. Farmer City State Bank, an Illinois Banking Corporation, Defendants

808 F.2d 1228 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Dec 29, 1986

The district court dismissed the suit, finding it “clearly barred by well-established principles of res judicata.” Id. at 198 . … To allow the Henrys now to raise their fraud claims to challenge the validity of the second mortgage and thereby establish a RICO violation would clearly undermine the judgments of foreclosure entered against the Henrys by

People Who Care v. Rockford Board Of Education

68 F.3d 172 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Oct 12, 1995

This circuit has established four factors to be considered in determining if a motion to intervene is timely. … Connery, 863 F.2d 551 (7th Cir.1988). 11 O'Brien must first establish how long he knew or should have known of his interest in this case.

United States v. Gordon C. Peterson

550 F.2d 379 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jan 20, 1977

The court made it clear that Peterson was being granted nothing by the court, including any protection or immunity from any applicable state or federal law, and particularly those with respect to the unauthorized practice … established upon the record, amply supported by evidence, and sufficient to sustain the conviction . . ?”

Lois Frolova v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

761 F.2d 370 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 1, 1985

See Maritime Int’l Nominees Establishment v. … See also Maritime Int'l Nominees Establishment v.

Zych v. Unidentified Wrecked And Abandoned Vessel

941 F.2d 525 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 21, 1991

within them or including a thing falling clearly without. … However, Section 6(b) qualifies Section 6(a)(3), not Section 6(a)(1) or (2).

Deen, Jerry L. v. Darosa, Timothy

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 8, 2005

In the No. 04-2072 5 alternative, the court held that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity insofar as Deen had not shown he had a clearly established right … There is also no need to consider the defendants’ claims of qualified immunity. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.