Case law

Sandefur v. Village of Hanover Park

862 F. Supp. 2d 840 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 25, 2012

employees who make reasonable errors in applying even clearly established law.” … The defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

Willis v. Bell

726 F. Supp. 1118 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 4, 1989

Even if a constitutional violation did occur, Kukulka and O’Connor are entitled to qualified immunity. … Bobbitt, 881 F.2d 510, 511 (7th Cir.1989) has recently reconfirmed the principle that qualified immunity protects a public official from damages liability whenever the official’s conduct does not violate “clearly established

Hyland v. United Air Lines, Inc.

254 F. Supp. 367 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 26, 1966

The CAB clearly has jurisdiction over seniority integration, among other labor matters, when it approves an airline merger. Oling v. Air Line Pilots Ass’n, 346 F.2d 270, 274-275 (7th Cir. 1965). … Kahn did; he did it thoroughly, properly and well and his award is consequently final, binding and immune to attack here.

Stevens v. Tillman

568 F. Supp. 289 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 8, 1983

. .Because of this qualified privilege, defendants argue, Stevens must plead malice and she has not done so. … Plaintiffs allegations in Count II are clearly sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.

Hampton v. City of Chicago

349 F. Supp. 2d 1075 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 7, 2004

Podlesak’s conduct thus entitles him to absolute immunity rather than exposes him to liability- Plaintiff argues that Podlesak was an investigator and is therefore entitled to only qualified immunity. … If Podlesak had engaged in these investigative acts (which according to plaintiff he did not), then the case for qualified as opposed to absolute immunity would be stronger.

United States v. Equipment Acquisition Resources, Inc.

485 B.R. 586 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 4, 2013

The bankruptcy court held that § 106(a)(l)’s plain language, which used the terms “immunity,” “sovereign immunity,” and “abrogate,” “clearly and unambiguously communicate congressional intent to abolish the government’s immunity … But § 106(a)(1) establishes that sovereign immunity is completely abolished “with respect to ... Section! ] • • • 544.” It simply does not matter how a sovereign immunity defense is invoked against EAR’S claim.

Mohr v. Chicago School Reform Board of Trustees of Board of Education of City of Chicago

155 F. Supp. 2d 923 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 6, 2001

Clark and Jernigan reargue their qualified immunity claims that I rejected in their summary judgment motion. … A defendant raising a claim of qualified immunity argues “that, in the circumstances presented, the price of public employment should not include liability for civil damages when the law is not clearly established.”

Anderson v. Bd. of Educ. of Chicago

169 F. Supp. 2d 864 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 15, 2001

entities via the Tort Immunity Act. … Plaintiff also does not contest that section 2-102 of the Tort Immunity Act clearly and unambiguously states that local public entities are not liable for puni *872 tive damages.

Langster v. Schweiker

565 F. Supp. 407 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 29, 1983

Sovereign immunity and the various officer immunities offer separate protections that protect separate interests. … Moreover, even if requiring them to defend respondent’s suit might inhibit their efforts to perform their official duties, the qualified immunity accorded them under Butz v.

Mims v. City Of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 12, 2024

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are “entitled to qualified immunity on all of Plaintiff’s Constitutional claims because their conduct did not violate clearly … Concealment of Evidence According to Mims, the officers should not receive qualified immunity on the Brady claim because “[i]t has been clearly established for decades that police

Kristofek v. Village of Orland Hills

63 F. Supp. 3d 853 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 7, 2014

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that Scully is protected from liability by qualified immunity. When a governmental actor performs “discretionary functions” that actor is protected by qualified immunity. … clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

Edwards v. TWO UNKNOWN MALE CHIC. POLICE OFFICERS

623 F. Supp. 2d 940 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 8, 2009

Qualified Immunity Government actors performing discretionary functions enjoy qualified immunity and are shielded from liability for civil damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … "An officer conducting a search is entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show that the search violated constitutional rights." Marion v.

Watson v. Cain

846 F. Supp. 621 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 4, 1993

Whether an official is protected by qualified immunity turns upon the objective *632 legal reasonableness of the action, in light of legal rules clearly established at the time the action was taken. … Defendants’ interference with Watson’s privileged legal mail thus violated clearly established constitutional law. Accordingly, the court finds that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity in this ease.

Guerrero v. Piotrowski

67 F. Supp. 3d 963 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 16, 2014

F.3d at 828 , nor need the Court address whether Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. … Dist., 295 F.3d 701 , 714 n. 14 (7th Cir.2002) (not addressing qualified immunity because complaint did not state a constitutional violation).

McCraven v. City of Chicago

109 F. Supp. 2d 935 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 11, 2000

Because he was not qualified for the position of probationary police officer with the CPD, Plaintiff fails to establish the second and third elements of his prima facie case. … Given the Court's ruling that summary judgment is warranted, it need not address Defendants' after acquired evidence or qualified immunity arguments.

Clark v. City of Chicago

595 F. Supp. 482 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 5, 1984

03 , 31 Ill.Dec. 914, 919-20 , 394 N.E.2d 1291, 1296-97 (1st Dist.1979) (conduct amounting to a “constitutional tort,” though defendant escaped liability because it had been neither knowing nor malicious in violating any clearly-established … That provision does not afford qualified immunity from liability for all acts or omissions of a public employee while on duty, but only for those connected with the actual execution or enforcement of a law. Arnolt v.

Dunlop v. Colgan

687 F. Supp. 406 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 13, 1988

The record in this case, however, provides no support for Dunlop’s agency theory; and the Braught exception only applies to cases involving clearly established agency relationships. … Obviously, qualified immunity cannot insulate the Board members from Dunlop’s claim of intentional discrimination.

Allendate Mutual Insurance v. Bull Data Sys., Inc.

145 F.R.D. 84 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 10, 1992

Accordingly, even if litigation is imminent, there is no work product immunity for documents prepared in the ordinary course of business rather than for litigation purposes. … That is to say, the mere fact that a discovery opponent anticipates litigation does not qualify an “in-house” document as work product. Janicker v. George Washington University, 94 F.R.D. 648, 650 (D.C.D.C.1982).

Wallace Ex Rel. Wallace v. Batavia School District 101

870 F. Supp. 222 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 21, 1994

In the alternative, the § 1983 claim against Cliffe would have to be dismissed because Cliffe is entitled to qualified immunity. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, a public official performing discretionary functions is protected against suit from damages unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established statutory or constitutional

Evain v. Conlisk

364 F. Supp. 1188 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 13, 1973

This Court has recently considered the doctrine of municipal immunity and the immunity of supervisory personnel in Boyd v. Adams, No. 73 C 403, 364 F.Supp. 1180 , decided on June 29,1973. … The allegation, however, must fail, for it does not establish a violation or deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.