Case law

United Automobile, Aerospace, & Agricultural Implement Workers v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

350 F. Supp. 522 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 20, 1972

The complaint further alleges: In so establishing Area 43 the defendants isolated or segregated the bulk of the Negro population of Chicago and established for those persons substantially higher automobile insurance rates … Plaintiffs urge that the three cases cited hereinabove, inter alia, clearly demonstrate that there is no requirement of exhaustion of remedies in suits brought under the Civil Rights Acts.

Sansone v. Donahoe

98 F. Supp. 3d 946 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 14, 2015

Standard of Review Every Rule 56 movant bears the burden of establishing the absence of any genuine issue of material fact (Celotex Corp. v. … On that premise Sansone was not a “qualified individual” who was entitled at that point to a reasonable accommodation.

Perez v. Transformer Manufacturers, Inc.

35 F. Supp. 3d 941 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 24, 2014

a genuine dispute as to whether he is a qualified individual with a disability. … Perez can use either the direct or indirect method of proof to establish retaliation. Id.

Walker v. Woodward Governor Co.

631 F. Supp. 91 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 26, 1986

Dowling, 459 F.2d 190 (7th Cir.1972), defendant contends that at least in the Seventh Circuit a plaintiff may not establish a “conspiracy” for Section 1985(3) purposes between a corporate entity and its own supervisor-agents … Thus, the third Dombrowski exception is clearly inapplicable here. Neither does plaintiff specifically allege the personal, racial animus requisite to the first Dombrowski exception.

In Re UNR Industries, Inc.

74 B.R. 146 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 2, 1987

UNR maintains that under the government contract specification defense, 1 UNR is absolutely immune from any liability to the selected claimants. … Yet, a precedent established in a federal district court in Pennsylvania — a court well versed in the law of Pennsylvania which governs this motion — will be as valuable as one established by this court.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Consolidated Services Systems

777 F. Supp. 599 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 4, 1991

The trial judge’s selection of the appropriate variables required to determine a suitable pool for comparison purposes is generally a question of fact and is reversible only if clearly erroneous. … The EEOC’s anecdotal evidence simply establishes that Consolidated did not offer jobs to these four individuals.

Kuipers v. Drake Tower Apartments, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 6, 2025

Qualified individual To sustain an ADA accommodation claim, besides establishing that they have a disability, a plaintiff must show that he is "qualified," or in other words … Even if the Kuipers were able to establish that they were qualified individuals, the evidence shows, without any genuine factual dispute, that Drake Tower was still justified in rejecting masking-plus-testing as a reasonable

McCullough v. Heckler

583 F. Supp. 934 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 30, 1984

“Severity” as a Requirement of Disability “Severity” is an element that must be shown to establish a disability and entitle a claimant to social security benefits. … That is of course an insupportable finding as to McCullough: It clearly is not supported by substantial evidence.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Staffmark Investment LLC

67 F. Supp. 3d 885 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 4, 2014

Mota’s statement can only establish Mota’s state of mind, not Sony’s. b. … Qualified to Perform Essential Services The ADA only protects a “qualified individual with a disability.” 29 C.F.R. app. § 1630.2(m).

Hernandez v. Chase Bank USA, N.A.

429 F. Supp. 2d 983 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 2, 2006

Regardless of whether the facts of Cole are analogous to those before me, the test set forth in Cole is clearly relevant to this case. The Murray opinion supports, rather than contradicts, this conclusion. … The decision in Murray forecloses any arguments that actual damages need to be established for a willful violation of the FCRA.

Uetricht v. Chicago Parking Meters, LLC

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 24, 2022

"For a legal dispute to qualify as a genuine case or controversy, at least one plaintiff must have standing to sue." Id. … State action immunity The state action immunity doctrine shields state action from federal antitrust liability if the challenged conduct is "clearly articulated and affirmatively

Glass v. Village of Maywood

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 30, 2024

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that the Defendant Officers are entitled to qualified immunity for Plaintiff’s Section 1983 claims. … “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

Eumana v. Gomanji

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 17, 2025

immunity. … Alternatively, Defendants contend that Dart is shielded by the doctrine of qualified immunity. Id.

Adamczyk v. Lever Brothers Co.

33 F. Supp. 2d 679 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 27, 1998

An employer’s unfunded provision for severance benefits can qualify as a welfare benefit plan under ERISA. Young v. … Clearly, the last three elements are satisfied.

Daveri Development Group, LLC v. Village of Wheeling

934 F. Supp. 2d 987 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 21, 2013

The minutes of the Board’s July 16, 2012, meeting clearly establish that the Board was aware that PhilHaven’s tenants would be mentally disabled. (Pis.’ Ex. A-6, 7/16/12 Board Meeting Minutes at 3-5.) … In order to be a tenant at PhilHaven, each applicant must establish that he or she has a mental disability, is able to live independently, and satisfies other qualifying background characteristics. (Pl.’s Ex.

McCook Metals L.L.C. v. Alcoa Inc.

192 F.R.D. 242 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 2, 2000

As such, the burden is on the party seeking the privilege to establish all the elements. White, 950 F.2d at 430 . … Alcoa bears the burden of establishing an attorney-client privilege for each and every country for which it claims the privilege.

Albarran v. Dart

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 17, 2024

Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability for damages in the performance of his duties unless the official violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person … Dec. 27, 2020) (finding Dart entitled to qualified immunity); Ross v. Russell, Case No. 7:20-cv-000774, 2022 WL 767093, *14 (W.D.

Ruehman v. Village of Palos Park

842 F. Supp. 1043 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 21, 1994

Puerto Rico Aqueduct applies to Eleventh Amendment immunity the reasoning of Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985), as to interlocutory appeals of denials of qualified immunity. … Even without further rulings in this case on the merits of the claims against Pucinski, there may, now or in the future, be clearly established law so that individual damages claims against Clerk’s office personnel can be

Cooper v. The City of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 20, 2018

The doctrine of qualified immunity provides a defense in a section 1983 suit for damages where, among other things, the right the officer is claimed to have violated was not a "clearly established constitutional right. … The Court concludes Clyne cannot invoke qualified immunity based on exigent circumstances, as it was clearly established that criminal damage to property is not the sort of conduct that gives rise to exigent circumstances

Fairley v. Andrews

430 F. Supp. 2d 786 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 4, 2006

As Judge Castillo explained in denying Defendants’ qualified immunity claim, a “reasonable person in Defendants’ posi *797 tion would have known that retaliating and harassing someone because of something they said or wanted … Judge Castillo already ruled that Defendants did not establish qualified immunity because Plaintiffs’ right to free speech under the circumstances was clearly established. Fairley v.