Case law

Magill v. Lyons (In Re Lyons)

118 B.R. 634 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Aug 28, 1990

Moreover, the settlor of a spendthrift trust may not establish the trust for his own benefit. In re Silldorff, 96 B.R. at 864 . … A state employee has too much power over his interest in SERS for the plan to qualify as a spendthrift trust.

Beaman v. Souk

863 F. Supp. 2d 752 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Mar 26, 2012

In their Motion to Dismiss, Defendants devote all of their efforts to establishing that there is no “malicious motive” exception in the Illinois prosecutorial immunity analysis. … Indeed, the allegations reveal that these Defendant’s [sic] are entitled to qualified immunity. (Doc. 48 at 19-20). Thus, the Court did not engage in the qualified immunity analysis as a mere thought exercise.

Varner v. Illinois State University

972 F. Supp. 458 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jul 30, 1997

. 3 Accordingly, the Court finds that Congress clearly intended to abrogate the States’ sovereign immunity from suit through the Equal Pay Act, and the portion of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss which requests dismissal of … To determine who qualifies as a respondent, one has no recourse but to look to § 2000e-5(b), which defines “respondent” as, inter alia, an “employer.” ...

Juici-Rich Products, Inc. v. Lowe

735 F. Supp. 1387 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Apr 23, 1990

Lowe further contends that in any event his actions are not subject to § 1983 sanctions because he is entitled to qualified immunity, since his conduct did not violate any clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … to deflect Lowe’s qualified immunity argument.

Malone v. Schenk

638 F. Supp. 423 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Dec 2, 1985

However, Justice O’Connor noted in her concurring opinion that such liability would be possible if an agency relationship could be established. … Clearly then, under section 1981, Theodore Schenk is liable for the acts of his employee, Robert Schenk.

Dawson v. Brown

81 F. Supp. 3d 670 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Feb 27, 2015

Additionally, Warnisher and Brown contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity. A. … Qualified immunity (1) A public official may is protected by qualified immunity from liability for reasonable mistakes made in the performance of his or her duties. See Findlay v.

Pardo v. Hosier

611 F. Supp. 693 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jun 14, 1985

Until this threshhold immunity question is resolved, discovery should not be allowed. *699 If the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably competent public official should … good faith immunity defense.

Olendzki v. Rossi

838 F. Supp. 2d 771 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jan 19, 2012

“Generally, qualified immunity protects government agents from liability when their actions do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Even if she was mistaken, Sudbrink is still entitled to qualified immunity. a.

Fluker v. County of Kankakee

945 F. Supp. 2d 972 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · May 10, 2013

Qualified immunity shields government officials "from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … clearly established rights.”

Bartley v. U.S. Department of the Army

221 F. Supp. 2d 934 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Aug 7, 2002

Because Plaintiffs filed their complaints on Form 7279-R which clearly states at the top that it implements AR 600-22, which establishes the Military Discrimination Complaint System, they were processed as such. … Although the Seventh Circuit has established that Title VII abrogates eleventh amendment immunity, Varner v.

Culp v. Madigan

270 F. Supp. 3d 1038 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Sep 18, 2017

Immunities of Citizens in the several States.” … However, precedent clearly establishes that a rational-basis review is never applied in the Second Amendment context. In addition, several courts have used the term “reasonable” when applying intermediate scrutiny.

Tennessee Student Assistance Corp. v. Glover

263 B.R. 588 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jun 21, 2001

This court first addresses the question of whether Congress clearly abrogated State sovereign immunity under § 106. … “The language of new § 106(a), entitled ‘Waiver of sovereign immunity,’ would seem to confirm ... that Congress has now clearly abrogated state sovereign immunity from suit in federal court.”

Button v. Kibby-Brown

970 F. Supp. 649 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jul 10, 1997

Consequently, the Court found it premature to determine whether qualified immunity applied. … ANALYSIS Defendants claim they are entitled to a directed verdict both substantively and based on qualified immunity.

United States v. Bryant

905 F. Supp. 2d 877 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Nov 15, 2012

Nominally, Defendant qualified for a sentence of mandatory life in prison. … With both state and federal immunity agreements established, Defendant admitted during interviews in January and February 2010 that he had been involved in the homicide and provided recorded statements implicating himself

Estate of Wells v. Bureau County

723 F. Supp. 2d 1061 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jul 2, 2010

Here, Plaintiffs assume, but make no effort to factually establish, that Wells was a qualified individual with a disability. … Given the status of the law set forth above, the Court cannot find that Defendants' conduct violated any of Wells' clearly established constitutional rights, and they would also be entitled to qualified immunity on the §

Walters v. Village of Colfax

466 F. Supp. 2d 1046 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Dec 11, 2006

Defendants also claim absolute legislative immunity, or in the alternative, qualified immunity, for Milton and Baker. … This argument may present some dispute of material fact; however, the Court need not address it, nor the argument that defendants Milton and Baker are protected by absolute or qualified immunity, because Walters’ had no protectable

Van Houdnos v. Evans

627 F. Supp. 476 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jan 21, 1986

The qualifications of the six finalists clearly exceeded Plaintiff’s. Evans forwarded his compilation of rankings to his superior, Assistant Director Basil Hedrick. … They all knew of Evans’ preference that a man fill the position, yet they all ranked women among the most qualified applicants.

Arkebauer v. Kiley

751 F. Supp. 783 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Nov 30, 1990

The circuit court clearly recognizes the benefit of promises of immunity: Promises of immunity are important weapons in the fight against large-scale criminal enterprises; the government often snares big fish with information … The Illinois circuit and appellate courts clearly found that Arkebauer was promised immunity by both the Macon County assistant State's Attorney and by agents of the Illinois State Police. People v.

Whitlow v. Martin

719 F. Supp. 2d 983 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jun 15, 2010

A defendant is entitled to qualified immunity to a § 1983 claim unless the plaintiff can show that the defendant: (1) violated the plaintiffs rights; and (2) controlling authority existed at the time that clearly established … If the jury believes the Plaintiffs’ version of the evidence, there is no qualified immunity.

Woods v. Campbell

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Sep 30, 2025

To overcome a qualified immunity defense, “a plaintiff must show the deprivation of a constitutional right, and must also show that the right was clearly established at the time of the violation.” Walker v. … Rather, public officials lose their qualified immunity status only if the plaintiff can show the violation of a clearly established Constitutional right. Id.; Kraushaar v.