Case law

Hamilton v. Thezan

710 F. Supp. 220 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 9, 1989

Qualified Immunity Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity if “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known” (Harlow v. … They are entitled to qualified immunity.

Kumar v. Chicago Housing Authority

862 F. Supp. 213 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 25, 1994

A staté official is immune from civil damages if *216 his or her actions are “objectively reasonable,”, i.e., if his or her conduct “ ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Qualified immunity shields the arresting officer from suit if “a reasonable officer could have believed [the plaintiffs arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the [arresting] officers

Bogosian v. Board of Education of Community Unit School District 200

73 F. Supp. 2d 949 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 29, 1999

Bogosian cannot establish the elements of an Illinois state tortious interference with contractual relations claim. … The defendants argue that the teachers’ statements were not tortious because they were protected by some (1) absolute or (2) qualified privilege or (3) the state Tort Immunity Act, and were in any event (4) admittedly true

Saffold v. City of Calumet Park

47 F. Supp. 2d 927 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 30, 1999

Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982), a public official is entitled to qualified immunity as long as "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … In this case, there can be no doubt that Saffold had a clearly established constitutional right to be free from arrest without probable cause.

Williams v. Brown

269 F. Supp. 2d 987 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 1, 2003

If the jury accepts the plaintiffs’ version of what occurred, qualified immunity would not protect the officers; the need for individualized suspicion prior to a search for weapons has been clearly established doctrine for … “Qualified immunity protects public officials from civil suit based on their discretionary functions except where such conduct violated ‘clearly established’ federal law.” Burns v. Reed, 44 F.3d 524, 526 (7th Cir.1995).

Milazzo v. O'CONNELL

925 F. Supp. 1331 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 26, 1996

Qualified Immunity The final argument to be addressed is the defendants’ contention that they are entitled to qualified immunity from suit. … Government officials sued in their individual capacities are entitled to qualified immunity “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

In Re Application of the County Collector of the County of Winnebago

918 F. Supp. 235 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 26, 1996

Clearly, the relief requested has components of both traditional injunctive and compensatory relief. … The Romano case only establishes that the immunity under the Tort Immunity Act is unavailable to a defendant against which a plaintiff seeks to obtain injunctive relief.

Richardson v. Miles

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 21, 2025

Government officials like the Cook County correctional officers here are protected by qualified immunity “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … right; and [2] whether the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the officer’s alleged misconduct.”

Miller v. Lewis

381 F. Supp. 2d 773 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 9, 2005

“Police officers are entitled to qualified immunity for actions taken during a stop or arrest insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … Because of the Court's disposition on prong one of the qualified immunity analysis, the Court need not engage in the second prong — determining whether the supposed rule violated was clearly established at a meaningful degree

House v. Nelson

210 F. Supp. 2d 993 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 10, 2002

Defendant Nelson moves to dismiss on the ground of qualified immunity, claiming that his conduct did not violate clearly-established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … Rather, the issue is whether or not it is clearly established that a Department of *994 Corrections investigator could not constitutionally require a parolee to take a lie detector test.

Knox v. Genison

726 F. Supp. 195 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 1, 1989

Briggs, 475 U.S. 335 , 106 S.Ct. 1092 , 89 L.Ed.2d 271 (1986)) properly contrasts the Imbler-directed absolute immunity for prosecutors engaged in their prosecutorial functions with the merely “qualified immunity [that] provides … immunity defense if he procures false identification by unlawful means ..., for such activity violates clearly established constitutional principles.

Michalowski v. Rutherford

82 F. Supp. 3d 775 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 6, 2015

that right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … on qualified immunity.

Harden v. Peck

686 F. Supp. 1254 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 11, 1988

Peck: Qualified Immunity The plaintiffs argue that Peck is not entitled to qualified immunity for two reasons: first, because no reasonably competent police officer in Peck’s position would have concluded that the factual … We hold that the Peck is protected from suit by the doctrine of qualified immunity. B.

Doe v. Dolton Elementary School District No. 148

694 F. Supp. 440 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 23, 1988

Once a person’s immune system is weakened, he is susceptible to diseases which uninfected persons’ immune systems can easily fight off. Such diseases are labeled “opportunistic infections.” … Id. at 710 ; see also Ray, 666 F.Supp. at 1535 (“actual, ongoing injury to Plaintiffs ... clearly outweighs the potential harm to others____”).

Beaver v. Carey

426 F. Supp. 301 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 18, 1977

Public defenders, however, enjoy a qualified immunity for acts performed within the scope of their official duty. John v. Hurt, 489 F.2d 786 (7th Cir. 1973). … For the reasons stated above, the court concludes that this defendant is likewise immune. Clearly the state’s attorney was also exercising duties within the scope of his normal function. Imbler v.

Ortiz v. Town of Cicero, Illinois

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 11, 2022

Indianapolis Fire Dept., 578 F.3d 559, 566 (7th Cir. 2009) (recognizing a “‘qualified’ constitutional right to the confidentiality of medical records and communications”). … Dunlap, 209 F.3d 944, 956 (7th Cir. 2000) (“[T]his Circuit has outlined a clearly established ‘substantial’ right in the confidentiality of medical information that can only be overcome by a sufficiently strong state interest

Walker v. Prisoner Review Board

594 F. Supp. 556 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 27, 1984

However, in Fatico the court explained that a parolee’s complaint must clearly establish that the erroneous information was in fact relied upon; otherwise, the reviewing court may only consider whether the parole candidate … On a motion for summary judgment, of course, the moving party has the burden of clearly establishing that "there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and [therefore he] is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.

United States v. Board of Educ. of City of Chicago

610 F. Supp. 695 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 23, 1985

The work-product immunity is qualified, like the deliberative-process privi *701 lege; it protects documents prepared by counsel in anticipation of litigation. See, e.g., Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(3). … Rizzo, 97 F.R.D. at 752 , involved only the deliberative process privilege and the work-product immunity, both of which are qualified. The attorney-client privilege was not a part of the case.

Cromley v. Bd. of Educ. of Lockport

699 F. Supp. 1283 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 1, 1988

Thus mandamus would be inappropriate here. 3.Qualified Immunity Harlow v. … Such immunity is *1293 available to individual defendants “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

American Kitchen Delights, Inc. v. City Of Harvey

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 2, 2025

Qualified Immunity Finally, the Court agrees with Defendants that qualified immunity for Mayor Clark is appropriate as to the Procedural Due Process claim. … But the Supreme Court has clearly held that the qualified immunity standard is objective, not subjective. Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 641 (1987); Crawford-El v.