Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,132 results
1.48s
653 F. Supp. 2d 885 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 31, 2009
It is the “well established duty of the trial court to ensure that the claims of a pro se litigant are given a fair and meaningful consideration.” Palmer v. … She has not alleged, for example, that she is a “qualified individual,” or for what Chicago police program or activity she might be qualified. Id.
Cited 6 timesPublished332 F. Supp. 2d 1132 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 20, 2004
It is also worth observing that because State Officials' conduct plainly does not violate Snyder’s clearly established statutory or constitutional rights, State Officials are also shielded from liability by the umbrella of … qualified immunity (see, e.g., Pounds v.
Cited 3 timesPublishedIllinois Dunesland Preservation Society v. Illinois Department of Natural Resources
461 F. Supp. 2d 666 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 13, 2006
a party of its rights, privileges or immunities under § 1983. … It is therefore not clear whether the pamphlets the IDNR displayed qualify as "government speech." 5 .
Cited 2 timesPublished141 F. Supp. 2d 951 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 12, 2001
further that another highly reputable law firm that has appeared of record for another putative plaintiff or plaintiffs, having demonstrated excellent credentials in earlier securities class action litigation and being clearly … who or that already represent the person or group of persons that would otherwise appear to qualify as the “most adequate plaintiff” within the meaning of Subsection (a)(3)(B). .
Cited 1 timesPublishedTasner v. U. S. Industries, Inc.
379 F. Supp. 803 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 29, 1974
Defendant U.S.I. is a diversified company with major operations in Cook County and elsewhere in the state of Illinois, and is duly licensed and qualified to do business in the state of .Illinois. … It is clear to this Court that the defendants have failed in their burden of establishing their right to removal and the instant action should be remanded to the Illinois state courts.
Cited 6 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 2, 2020
Police officers are entitled to qualified immunity when a plaintiff fails to adequately allege facts that, if true, would constitute a violation of a clearly established statutory or constitutional right. Hanson v. … This road to liability is well-paved—clearly established—in several cases.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 25, 2025
claim because the Investigator Defendants are protected by absolute privilege, qualified privilege, and tort immunity under an Illinois tort immunity act. … But even if Defendants could successfully establish all five elements of qualified immunity as to Defendants McCarter, Washington, and Devogelvear, Plaintiff has met his burden to show that Defendant Ansted
Cited 0 timesUnknownNanda v. Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois
219 F. Supp. 2d 911 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 21, 2001
Frapwell, 160 F.3d 389, 395 (7th Cir.1998)) (“The Eleventh Amendment is no bar to Velasquez’s claim of national-origin discrimination [against Indiana University], a claim founded on a statute (Title VII) that is clearly … For the same reasons that the Courts of Appeals must follow controlling decisions from the Supreme Court, this court is bound to adhere to the precedents established by the Seventh Circuit. See Pickett v.
Cited 4 timesPublishedDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 10, 2020
“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … “When confronted with a claim for qualified immunity, [the court] must address two questions: whether the plaintiff’s allegations make out a deprivation of a constitutional right, and whether the right was clearly established
Cited 0 timesUnknown515 F. Supp. 983 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 13, 1981
As this Court and others have clearly stated, “a single instance of individual officers’ misconduct ... however reprehensible if true, does not indicate systematic, city-supported abuses of the nature to which Monell makes … Someone is surely at fault for failing to establish or execute appropriate procedures for preventing such serious malfunctionings in the administration of justice.
Overruled by City of Newport v. Fact Concerts, Inc., 453 U.S. 247 (1981)Cited 31 timesPublished684 F. Supp. 210 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 4, 1988
The record clearly indicates that Benda’s disorder has not seriously disrupted his daily life and social interaction. … To qualify for benefits under § 12.06, Benda would have to establish the existence of two of the same four factors that the AU has already found to be absent. See id. § 12.06(B).
Cited 1 timesPublishedJones v. Illinois Department of Rehabilitation Services
504 F. Supp. 1244 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 12, 1981
Furthermore, a state does not waive its sovereign immunity and consent to the bringing of a suit by accepting federal funds unless Congress intended to abrogate the immunity conferred by the eleventh amendment, i. e., unless … review of such determination in the United States Court of Appeals for the circuit in which the State is located.... 25 . 29 U.S.C. § 722 (d) provides in pertinent part: (1) The Director of any designated State unit shall establish
Cited 11 timesPublishedPena v. Chicago Police Department
District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 5, 2023
But the same factual disputes preclude summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … It has long been clearly established that the use of “significant force is unreasonable” if it is unprovoked or provoked only by passive resistance.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 5, 2023
But the same factual disputes preclude summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … It has long been clearly established that the use of “significant force is unreasonable” if it is unprovoked or provoked only by passive resistance.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · May 2, 2023
To overcome qualified immunity, the plaintiff must “first allege the deprivation of an actual constitutional right, and second, show that the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” … Badford are entitled to qualified immunity, it is the plaintiff’s “burden of showing that the constitutional right allegedly violated was clearly established” before the alleged wrongdoing. Casteel v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 30, 2020
Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” … was not clearly established.
Cited 0 timesUnknown469 F. Supp. 825 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 7, 1979
A massage establishment brought a civil suit in state court to prevent the enforcement of regulations governing its operations. … Second, the Graham case neither cites nor analyzes Hicks, the Supreme Court decision establishing the controlling principle. V. CONCLUSION The instant case is clearly within the Younger and Hicks line of cases.
Cited 5 timesPublished439 F. Supp. 873 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 26, 1977
He argues that dismissal for the exercise of first amendment rights is warranted only in specifically defined circumstances clearly not present here. Pickering v. … In addition, the court need not reach the immunity arguments which have been raised by the parties.
Cited 0 timesPublished598 F. Supp. 2d 854 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 23, 2009
Qualified immunity The Sheriff Defendants filed a second summary judgment motion contending they are entitled to qualified immunity. … "[I]t is well established that the qualified immunity doctrine does not apply to official capacity claims." Sanville v. McCaughtry, 266 F.3d 724 , 732 (7th Cir.2001) (quotation omitted).
Cited 0 timesPublishedWilson v. Illinois Central Railroad
147 F. Supp. 513 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 16, 1957
The defendant relies upon authorities holding that the Act does not confer upon the returning veteran immunity from layoffs or a reduction in force based upon seniority. Fishgold v. … Where the bar of the passage of time clearly appears upon the face of the complaint, the defense has been considered upon a motion to dismiss. See Berry v. Chrysler Corp., 6 Cir., 1945, 150 F.2d 1002 .
Cited 6 timesPublished
Ask Donna