Case law

McCreery Angus Farms v. American Angus Ass'n

379 F. Supp. 1008 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 6, 1974

To qualify for this exception it would have to be shown that: “(1) There is a legislative mandate for self-regulation ‘or otherwise’. … The Plaintiffs are to have no greater or lesser rights, privileges, immunities or responsibilities than any other member of the Association in good standing except as provided therein.

Dyjak v. Schulte

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 30, 2022

violated was clearly established. … Defendants claim that they are entitled to qualified immunity. (Doc. 119, p. 22).

Lower E. Side People's Fed. Credit Union v. Trump

289 F. Supp. 3d 568 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Feb 1, 2018

Alternatively, "an organization can 'have standing in its own right to seek judicial relief from injury to itself and to vindicate whatever rights and immunities the association itself may enjoy.' " Id. … No. 37) at 37) The cases cited by Plaintiff are clearly distinguishable, however. In United States v. Storer Broad. Co. , for example, "[t]he process of rulemaking was complete."

Patten v. Dodson

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 26, 2023

immunity grounds. … Had the Court concluded that Plaintiffs suffered a constitutional violation, Defendants would be entitled to qualified immunity.

Brooks v. Merck & Co., Inc.

443 F. Supp. 2d 994 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jul 31, 2006

Thus, the learned intermediary doctrine clearly is an issue that goes not to the Court’s jurisdiction but to the merits of Plaintiff’s claims for relief. See Bertrand v. … In this case, a ruling that Walgreens is immune from liability would be binding under the law-of-the-case doctrine as to the liability of Merck as well.

Gutierrez v. Baldwin

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Dec 30, 2022

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields “government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Therefore, Brookman, Hart, and Spiller are not entitled to summary judgment on their qualified immunity defense to Count 1.

Next Generation Tech., Inc. v. Johnson

328 F. Supp. 3d 252 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 29, 2017

The AAO found that NGT had failed to prove that the proposed position qualified as a "specialty occupation" and that NGT had paid Deo the required wage, and had failed to establish that a "credible offer of H-1B caliber employment … Flores , 557 U.S. 433 , 446, 129 S.Ct. 2579 , 174 L.Ed.2d 406 (2009) (citing Vill. of Arlington Heights for the proposition that the Court need not reach the issue of standing for one petitioner when the other petitioner "clearly

Gill v. Sullivan

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 15, 2023

Defendants Johnson, Rush, and Shane Smith are also not entitled to qualified immunity at this time. … To overcome a defense of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must demonstrate “(1) that the [defendant’s] conduct violated his constitutional rights, and (2) that the violated right was clearly established at the time of the

Cruz v. State of Illinois

District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 17, 2022

Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statuary or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … The Court also found the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity because the delay in assisting the inmate “ran afoul” of the inmate’s clearly established rights under the Eighth Amendment.

Kuntz v. Illinois Central Railroad

469 F. Supp. 2d 586 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jan 5, 2007

The standard concerning removal of actions from state court to federal court is equally well established. … “[A] right or immunity created by the Constitution or laws of the United *596 States must be an element, and an essential one, of the plaintiffs cause of action.”

Hughes v. Twenty-First Century Fox, Inc.

304 F. Supp. 3d 429 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Apr 24, 2018

"An individual must be clearly identifiable in an allegedly defamatory statement to support a claim for defamation." Algarin v. Town of Wallkill , 421 F.3d 137 , 139 (2d Cir. 2005). … Here, the Complaint does not clearly allege that Hughes suffered economic, emotional, and reputational damage from the publication of Defendants' statement to the National Enquirer.

Watford v. Harner

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Feb 25, 2022

Qualified Immunity “Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are liable for civil damages ... … In evaluating a qualified immunity defense at summary judgment, the court considers (1) whether the facts, taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, show that the official violated a clearly established right

Burlington Truck Lines, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission

194 F. Supp. 31 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Apr 27, 1961

This principle is clearly enunciated in Interstate Commerce Commission v. Union Pacific R. R. … It argues that the record clearly establishes the inadequacy of existing motor service for the movement of traffic to and from the establishments of a substantial portion of the shipping public of Nebraska, and that such

Anderson v. Hackett

646 F. Supp. 2d 1041 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jul 30, 2009

Here, the statute establishes that an action may qualify for the local controversy exception in two ways. … Clearly, then, one need not be a “primary” defendant in order to be a “significant” defendant. Cerro’s argument conflates the two.

Presidential Candidate Number P60005535 also known as Ronald Satish Emrit and Presidential Committee/Political Action Committee/Separate Segregated Fund Number C00569897 doing business as United Emrits of America v. US Patent and Trademark Office et al.

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Dec 9, 2025

A court can deny a qualified plaintiff leave to file IFP or can dismiss a case if the action is clearly frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or is a claim for money damages against an immune defendant. 28 … As stated in the Complaint, however, these theories are unsupported by mathematical proof or the established principles of any recognized scientific discipline.

Gaddis v. Zanotti

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 30, 2020

Sovereign Immunity and Prosecutorial Immunity Defendant first challenges Gaddis’s complaint as barred by sovereign immunity and prosecutorial immunity. … As such, prosecutorial immunity extends to Zanotti in this action and bars recovery of money damages. Like sovereign immunity, prosecutorial immunity does not bar claims for prospective relief against Zanotti.

United States v. Bishawi

186 F. Supp. 2d 889 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Feb 25, 2002

Bishawi contends that the jurors’ testimony clearly establishes that Judge Riley had ex parte communications with some, if not all, of the jurors in this case. … On the other hand, the Government argues that the jurors’ testimony and the court personnel’s affidavits clearly establish that Bishawi is not entitled to a new trial.

Hoskins v. Eovaldi

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 22, 2020

immunity so long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Defendants make only a general qualified immunity argument, asserting that: (1) Defendants did not violate Plaintiff’s rights; and (2) they are entitled to qualified immunity. The Court disagrees.

Bradley v. Dennison

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 31, 2021

Whether All Defendants are Entitled to Qualified Immunity Government officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability for civil damages if their conduct does not violate clearly … clearly established at the time of the violation.

Reese v. Trost

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 22, 2020

Trost’s argument of qualified immunity. However, the Court notes the Seventh Circuit has found that qualified immunity does not apply to private medical personnel in prisons. See Petties v. … Illinois Dep’t of Corrections, 746 F.3d 782, 794 (7th Cir. 2014)), and even if Moldenhauer was entitled to such immunity, his conduct in ignoring and failing to treat Plaintiff’s complaints violates clearly established