Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersilnd

6,132 results

0.45s

  • Viero v. Bufano

    901 F. Supp. 1387 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 28, 1995

    Immunity Búfano and Little also seek dismissal on qualified immunity grounds. … That is enough to strip them of any putative qualified immunity because, as Hamilton v.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Narducci v. Village of Bellwood

    444 F. Supp. 2d 924 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 11, 2006

    If such a violation has taken place, the court must determine whether that right was “clearly established” (id). … Clearly Established Law Once a constitutional violation has been identified, the dispositive question for a qualified immunity defense is whether the law was “clearly established” when the official acted, such that a reasonable

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Houston v. Partee

    776 F. Supp. 1309 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 6, 1991

    Now the other defendants named in the Fifth Amended Complaint — four police officers (collectively the “Officers”) — have moved to be dismissed on immunity grounds, this time under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Instead the question is whether the plaintiff had a clearly established right against that defendant, who had a correspondingly clearly established duty not to infringe that right.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Ruffino v. Sheahan

    61 F. Supp. 2d 764 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 10, 1999

    The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in their individual capacities if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … A plaintiff must show that a constitutional violation occurred and that the applicable constitutional standards were clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. Erwin v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Connor v. Foster

    833 F. Supp. 727 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 1, 1993

    Public officials are immune from liability for monetary damages under § 1983 if their conduct did not violate clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. Harlow v. … Qualified immunity, of course, bars only Con-nor's claim for damages.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Jones v. Banks

    892 F. Supp. 988 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 24, 1995

    Qualified Immunity Banks’ second argument, that he is entitled to summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity, is equally unavailing. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions ... are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Chavez v. Illinois State Police

    27 F. Supp. 2d 1053 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 5, 1998

    To overcome a qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff must clear two separate hurdles. The plaintiff must show, first, that the right is, in fact, a clearly established right, Apostol v. … In the interests of completeness, the court will consider the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis and will assume, arguendo, that the plaintiffs have established that “freedom of movement” is a clearly established

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Marshall v. Walker

    958 F. Supp. 359 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 27, 1997

    Qualified immunity applies “if a reasonable officer could have believed [plaintiffs arrest] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the [arresting] officers possessed.” Hunter v. … Qualified immunity analysis is a two-step inquiry: whether the law was clearly established and, if so, whether the conduct was objectively reasonable. Eversole, 59 F.3d at 717 ; Biddle v.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Mendez v. City of Chicago

    District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 20, 2024

    violated his Fourth Amendment right or that they violated a clearly established right. … Davis, 878 F.3d 226, 234 (7th Cir. 2017) (finding that case that was decided four months after events in question could not clearly establish any rights for the purposes of qualified immunity); Reynolds v.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Bell v. Marseilles Elementary School

    160 F. Supp. 2d 883 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 29, 2001

    “A qualified immunity analysis entails a purely objective inquiry to determine whether, at the time of the alleged illegal act, the right asserted by the plaintiff was clearly established in the particular factual context … Board of Educ., 894 F.Supp. 386, 390 (D.Kan.1995) (the law regarding student strip searches is clearly established); Konop, 26 F.Supp.2d at 1196 (denying qualified immunity because “the holding in T.L.O. is not, in any way

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Lanigan v. Village of East Hazel Crest

    913 F. Supp. 1202 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 26, 1996

    “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials ... from damages unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” Elder v. … Additionally, the doctrine of qualified immunity shields all three officers because their conduct was not unreasonable in light of clearly established law at that time.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Stokes v. City of Chicago

    744 F. Supp. 183 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 24, 1990

    The standard for granting qualified immunity is well-established. … It is clearly established that the fourth amendment requires truthful factual showing sufficient to constitute probable cause. Franks v.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • McLaughlin v. CASLER

    634 F. Supp. 2d 881 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 8, 2009

    to qualified immunity. … with due process, and (3) the undisputed facts establish that Casler and Fritz are entitled to qualified immunity.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Sledd v. Lindsay

    864 F. Supp. 819 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 30, 1994

    It is a well settled tenet that under the judicially created doctrine of qualified immunity, public officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from civil damages unless their conduct violates a clearly established … “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials ... from damages unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” Elder v.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Sparing v. Village of Olympia Fields

    77 F. Supp. 2d 891 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 13, 1999

    Although qualified immunity is a defense, the plaintiff has the burden of establishing that the defendant violated a clearly established constitutional right. See Spiegel, 196 F.3d 717, 722 . 2. … If a § 1983 plaintiff establishes a constitutional violation, the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, unless the plaintiff also demonstrates that the law “was so ‘clearly established’ that ‘a reasonable official

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Maes v. Folberg

    504 F. Supp. 2d 339 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 27, 2007

    Once a qualified immunity defense is raised, it is plaintiffs burden to establish that her constitutional right was clearly established. Boyd v. Owen, 481 F.3d 520, 527 (7th Cir.2007) (internal citations omitted). … by qualified immunity.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Jasinski v. Glencoe Department of Public Safety

    836 F. Supp. 2d 753 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 2, 2011

    In determining whether a public official is protected by qualified immunity, I consider “whether a constitutional right has been violated,” and “whether the right was clearly established at the time the official acted.” … The defendants did not argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiffs’ excessive force claim.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Hebein Ex Rel. Berman v. Young

    37 F. Supp. 2d 1035 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 25, 1998

    Qualified immunity does not apply. … Because defendants do not raise an issue as to clearly established law, qualified immunity as to this claim need not be further considered at this time.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Regalado v. City of Chicago

    40 F. Supp. 2d 1009 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 2, 1999

    Finally, Officers contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate any clearly established right possessed by Regalado. … To overcome the defense of qualified immunity, Regalado must show that the officials violated “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known” (Harlow v.

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Woods v. Aldworth

    561 F. Supp. 891 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 4, 1983

    Aldworth does not contend that the constitutional rights at issue here were not clearly established during the period in question. Instead, relying on Procunier v. … When Procunier was decided, the standard for qualified immunity included both a subjective and an objective component.

    Cited 5 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.