Case law

Falk v. Perez

973 F. Supp. 2d 850 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 12, 2013

Subsequent Seventh Circuit precedent clearly applies the Iqbal standard to Section 1983 Monell claims and disregards conclusory statements in the pleading. … Moving Defendants further argue that Defendant Lewis is immune because the Illinois Tort Immunity Act establishes immunity for damages arising from lawful entry onto land. (R. 49, Defs.’ Mem. at 8.)

Mosley v. Klincar

711 F. Supp. 463 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 20, 1989

To determine whether a particular task qualifies as a quasi-judicial function entitled to absolute immunity, a court must analyze three factors: (1) the historical basis for the immunity in question; (2) the risk that the … First of all, the historical rationale underlying absolute immunity supports the prosecutors’ claim of immunity from Mosley’s lawsuit.

Price v. United States (In Re Price)

130 B.R. 259 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 1, 1991

subsections suffices to establish a waiver of the government’s sovereign immunity. … The Prices’ daim for fees qualifies as property of the estate, even though that claim arose after confirmation of the plan for discharge of their debts.

Oats, Sr. v. McHenry County Animal Control And Its Officers And Administration

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 15, 2024

from suit.1 Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, when an official’s conduct does not vi- olate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have been aware, that official is … Because Oats has not demonstrated the existence of a clearly established right that Enos violated, he is entitled to qualified immunity.

American Bonded Warehouse Corp. v. Compagnie Nationale Air France

653 F. Supp. 861 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 17, 1987

Initially, defendants argue they are entitled to immunity from suit under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1330 et seq. (“FSIA”). … Such allegations clearly set forth a cause of action based on commercial activity conducted by the defendants. Therefore, defendants are not entitled to jurisdictional immunity under the FSIA.

Richard Hoffman Corp. v. Integrated Building Systems Inc.

581 F. Supp. 367 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 15, 1984

Real Estate Board of New Orleans, Inc., 444 U.S. 232 , 100 S.Ct. 502 , 62 L.Ed.2d 441 (1980), the Supreme Court addressed the pleading requirements to establish an interstate commerce nexus: [t]o establish the jurisdictional … Hoffman contends that the Village has not acted pursuant to a clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed state policy and therefore is not entitled to antitrust immunity.

Sapienza v. Cook County Office of the Public Defender

128 F. Supp. 2d 563 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 23, 2001

In Johnson , the Illinois Supreme Court stated the following passage, which clearly illustrates that the Office of the PD should be considered an arm of the county: By statute, the office of public defender is created in … Sapienza was, indeed, more qualified for the position. 9 (See Pl.’s Ex. List, Exs. L-N.)

Bormes v. United States

638 F. Supp. 2d 958 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 24, 2009

The Government’s Motion to Dismiss The well-established doctrine of sovereign immunity protects the United States from suit except where Congress has “unequivocally expressed” a waiver of immunity. United States v. … These statutes have clearly and unambiguously waived the sovereign immunity of the United States. See Lane v.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Crowe Horwath LLP

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 25, 2018

If the agency fails to establish the privilege applies to the subpoenaed material, then it must produce the documents. … that at least some courts have held are “clearly protect[ed] from disclosure.” Principe v.

United States v. Pullman Construction Industries, Inc.

210 B.R. 302 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 10, 1997

Pullman has the burden to establish all elements of § 547(b) by a preponderance of the evidence. See 11 U.S.C. § 547 (g). … The Bankruptcy Code, however, does not expressly waive the United States’ sovereign immunity with regard to an award of prejudgment interest. WJM, Inc. v.

Scanlan v. US, STATE FARM INS. CO.

743 F. Supp. 2d 813 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 22, 2010

The Federal Quiet-Title Act Waives Sovereign Immunity Sovereign immunity bars actions against the United States except in cases where Congress has statutorily waived the immunity. See United States v. … A subrogation right qualifies as a “lien” within the meaning of § 2410(a). Courts often refer to subrogation rights as giving rise to an equitable lien. See, e.g., In re Reliable Mfg.

Watkins v. Illinois Department of Child & Family Services

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 26, 2025

It is well settled that government officials like the City and State defendants here are protected by qualified immunity “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985) (“Unless the plaintiff’s allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of

Cobb

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 28, 2026

In the alternative, at the very least, qualified immunity shields Sciame from liability. … Such officials receive qualified immunity unless: (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitu- tional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the 9

Richard J. Vinet v. David Chadek, et al.

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 27, 2026

immunity because his actions did not violate a clearly established constitutional right. … “A public official is entitled to qualified immunity from suit unless he violated a clearly established right.” Dockery v.

Finwall v. City of Chicago

490 F. Supp. 2d 918 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 16, 2007

for his trial testimony, and (3) the detectives have qualified immunity. … However, qualified immunity does not shield officers from claims that they fabricated evidence. See Wallace, 440 F.3d at 429 .

Almaraz v. HALEAS

602 F. Supp. 2d 920 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 9, 2008

Also, this does not appear to be a case that will involve the type of legal issues that could result in a qualified immunity defense. … That is not the type of conduct for which qualified immunity would apply.

Squires v. Grundy County

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 31, 2025

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are immune from damages under the doctrine of qualified immunity because Squires failed to state a claim for … Qualified immunity “‘shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established . . . constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’”

Smith v. Bd. of Election Com'rs for City of Chicago

587 F. Supp. 1136 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 9, 1984

Thus, an injunction in the instant case would clearly comport with the public interest. … Immunity Finally, the City Board asserts that defendants are entitled to absolute judicial immunity, and that this Court thus lacks jurisdiction over the present matter under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 .

Estate of Luis Vasquez, Jr. v. Barton

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

The Court turns next to the second consideration for qualified immunity: whether the constitutional right at issue was clearly established on July 8, 2019. Purvis, 614 F.3d at 717. … Accordingly, the same material disputes of fact identified previously preclude applying qualified immunity based on the clearly-established prong.

Success Tool & Manufacturing Co. v. United States Department of Treasury (In Re Success Tool & Manufacturing Co.)

62 B.R. 221 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 27, 1986

injunction could be maintained only if it is apparent on the basis of the information available to the government at the time of the suit, under the most liberal view of the law and facts, that the United States could not establish … The enactment of the Bankruptcy Code did not constitute a guarantee that all persons who seek reorganization protection under the Code will qualify for it.