Case law

Glickman v. Maine-Niles Association of Special Recreation

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 24, 2020

That is, this Fourth Amendment claim still must be dismissed unless Plaintiff’s “constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” … It was clearly established law, the Snell court reasoned, that the social workers could not rely on such information.

Spearman Industries, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance

138 F. Supp. 2d 1088 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 10, 2001

Here, Diederich’s testimony is clearly pertinent to this case and will assist the trier of fact with its analysis of what caused the damage to the roof. … Thus,' clearly a genuine issue of material fact exists — namely, the actual cause of damage to the roof. Accordingly, the court denies St.

Bello v. Village of Skokie

151 F. Supp. 3d 849 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 31, 2015

Because immunity is an affirmative defense,"the burden is on *866 the defendants to establish that the TIA bars liability, and the Act is “strictly construed Against the public entities involved.” Van Meter v. … Third, they argue that the Tort Immunity Act immunizes the Village from liability undér IMLOAA.

Schiessle v. Stephens

525 F. Supp. 763 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 30, 1981

It will suffice if the challenged activity was clearly within the legislative intent. … The court went on to note, however, that an official’s ultra vires or bad faith actions may vitiate the immunity defense.

Makowski v. United States

27 F. Supp. 3d 901 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 18, 2014

Makowski argues that he has established a threat of imminent injury. … Makowski might be able to establish standing to seek an injunction against future immigration detainers or to require DHS to correct his records. See, e.g., Morales v. Chadbourne, C.A.

Kavanagh v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines

566 F. Supp. 242 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 20, 1983

Consequently, Count I of plaintiff’s complaint invokes this court’s jurisdiction pursuant to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1602-11 , and 28 U.S.C. § 1330 . … The issue before this court, therefore, is narrow: can plaintiff, based on these pleadings, prove some set of facts establishing that his discharge was in violation of a clearly mandated public policy?

Johnson v. Cermack

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 2, 2022

. § 1983 alleging violations of constitutional rights, qualified immunity shields an official from liability for civil damages, provided that the illegality of the official's conduct was not clearly established at the time … A prison official is immune from suit if the constitutional right at issue was not clearly established at the time of the 9 Defendants argue that Dr.

Sawmill Products, Inc. v. TOWN OF CICERO, ETC.

477 F. Supp. 636 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 26, 1979

Although a corporation is not a “citizen” within the meaning of the privileges and immunities clause, Hague v. … As to most of the defendants, the complaint clearly states the legal basis for the action as well as the facts which support the claims.

Tevlin v. Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago

237 F. Supp. 2d 895 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 18, 2002

In that light, each of Tevlin’s claims that he was clearly more qualified than Odoucha is sought to be met by District’s advancement of other contentions. As District would have it: 1. … In that latter respect it cannot fairly be said that Tevlin failed the prima facie requirement of being “clearly more qualified” in Mills terms. 5 But even were that not so, Mills, 171 F.3d at 457 (internal quotation marks

Kaplan v. Lehman Brothers

250 F. Supp. 562 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 25, 1966

No action was taken to outlaw the long-established practice. … to geyer wire conneetions to in. jure a non-member competitor would not serye the purposes of seeurities regulationS; there remained no poücy of secu. ritieg controI to exclude the application of the antitrust laws or to immunize

CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATES CORPORATION v. United States

350 F. Supp. 726 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 25, 1972

As to the first “unless” clause, the United States taxpayer could not possibly establish that a transaction qualified as a tax-free reorganization without first getting an advance ruling under § 367 that the foreign corporation … The taxpayer’s quotation (emphasis supplied in the following) from the McDonald article is clearly taken out of context.

Johnson v. City Of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 28, 2021

Qualified immunity shields officers from civil liability stemming from discretionary functions so long as their conduct did not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable person … To survive a qualified immunity defense at this stage, the complaint must plausibly allege that the Officers violated Johnson’s clearly established rights by arresting him without probable cause.

United States v. Isaacs

351 F. Supp. 1323 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 28, 1972

The Government promptly filed a motion to quash the subpoena on the grounds that (1) the subpoena is overly broad and fails *1326 to establish evidentiary relevance and (2) some of the documents contained therein are immune … The statute clearly defines procedures and plainly indicates the circumstances for their application.” Palermo v. United States, supra, at 349, 79 S.Ct. at 1222 .

Alvarez v. Wilson

600 F. Supp. 706 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 11, 1985

Congress established that procedure to address internal military matters. … We believe that the potential for disruption of “the unique disciplinary structure of the military establishment,” Chappell v.

Molner v. United States

175 F. Supp. 271 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 22, 1959

If it qualifies, plaintiffs are entitled to judgment in the amount of $4,648.55, plus statutory interest thereon from July 23, 1954, and costs of this suit; if it does not qualify, defendant is entitled to judgment and plaintiffs … The decision in Rensenhouse clearly supports plaintiffs’ case. The statutes of' both Michigan and Illinois are fundamentally the same.

Council 31, American Federation of State Employees v. Ward

771 F. Supp. 247 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 30, 1991

a disparate impact race discrimination claim; (5) Title VII does not authorize “legal relief;” and (6) defendant Ward is immune from damages under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … In Griggs the Court held that a plaintiff did not necessarily have to prove intentional discrimination in order to establish that an employer violated Title VII.

Alexander v. Northeastern Illinois University

586 F. Supp. 2d 905 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 23, 2008

It explicitly establishes the procedure for challenging an alleged unfair labor practice. See 115 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/15; id. 5/16. … As Alexander’s complaint does not clearly delineate claims or counts, the court is unclear what could be stricken.

Faulkner v. City Of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 4, 2023

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Defendants argue that Detectives Ryan and Scherr are entitled to qualified immunity because their assessments of probable cause, even if mistaken, were reasonable.11 They argue that it is not contrary to clearly established

Sosa

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 1, 2025

THE INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS ARE ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY. … Qualified immunity “protects 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

Appel v. LaSalle County State's Attorney Felony Enforcement Unit

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 4, 2019

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … be entitled to qualified immunity on any Section 1983 claims based on that misconduct, as Plaintiffs have not shown that it was clearly established that Defendants’ conduct was unauthorized.