Case law

United States Ex. Rel. Humphrey v. Franklin-Williamson Human Services, Inc.

189 F. Supp. 2d 862 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 11, 2002

Some of FWHS’s indigent patients qualify for Medicaid assistance because their incomes and/or assets are below the threshold necessary to qualify for the Medicaid program. … Clearly, the word “reimburse” signifies a re payment for money already spent.

Buechel v. United States

646 F. Supp. 2d 1038 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jul 21, 2009

A copy of the written report, clearly identifying the plaintiff and the reasons for the reviewing health professional’s determination that a reasonable and meritorious cause for the filing of the action exists, must be attached … In applying the requirements of 735 ILCS 5/2-622(a), Illinois courts have announced that medical malpractice plaintiffs should be afforded every reasonable opportunity to establish their cases. Id. (citing Hansbrough v.

Stallings

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Dec 5, 2025

. § 1915(e)(2) and dismiss it if it is clearly frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or is a claim for money damages against an immune defendant. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); see also Hoskins v. … Avancez, 39 F.4th 424, 433 (7th Cir. 2022) (to state a claim for discrimination under the ADA, plaintiff must allege “(1) she is disabled; (2) she is otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions of the job with

Hoskins v. Swisher

District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 17, 2023

’s conduct unless: (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right; and (2) the unlawfulness of this conduct “was clearly established at the time.” … Therefore, the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity with respect to the claims asserted in Counts 1 and 2.

Iglesias v. True

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 22, 2021

granted on qualified immunity grounds. … right; and (2) whether that constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.’”

Prak v. Skaf

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jul 2, 2024

“Consequently, plaintiffs may not proceed unless they can establish that the United States has waived its sovereign immunity with respect to their claim.” Iowa Tribe Of Kan. & Neb. v. … Clearly, plaintiffs have failed to comply with the requirements under the QTA. As such, they have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Chevron Corp. v. Donziger

325 F. Supp. 3d 371 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jun 27, 2018

Good Cause Shown The Court may issue a protective order only if "good cause" is shown by the moving party. 56 " 'Good cause' is established when it is specifically demonstrated that disclosure will cause a clearly defined … Donziger Has Not Demonstrated a Clearly Defined Threat of Serious Injury Absent a Protective Order The burden was on Donziger to demonstrate-with competent evidence-a substantial risk of a clearly defined and serious injury

Brand v. Jeffreys

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Aug 7, 2023

qualified immunity, as they were acting in the course of their employment, limited by the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), barred by Heck v. … The Court finds that these defendants have established excusable neglect, prompt corrective action, and a meritorious defense to the Amended Complaint.

Easter

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Apr 13, 2026

Officers clearly knew the home identified in the warrant. Nothing in the Complaint suggests that the warrant was invalid. … Id. at 512 (“If a prosecutor plants evidence before someone is arrested, he enjoys only qualified immunity….

Green v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 7, 2023

Ritz has no claim for qualified immunity because qualified immunity does not apply to private medical personnel in prisons. … Ritz is shielded based on qualified immunity Defendant argues that Dr. Ritz is entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity (Doc. 67 at 19-20).

Oliver v. Butler

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Aug 4, 2020

immunity (Docs. 83, 84). … Because there was no constitutional violation, there is no need to analyze whether Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. See Holleman, 951 F.3d at 882.

Stoker

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 13, 2026

sovereign immunity. … The facts in the Complaint do not clearly establish that Defendants no longer “had the power to do something about [Parks’] condition,” just because Parks was transferred to SLU on August 4, 2023. See Wilson v.

Kalina v. United States

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 29, 2021

Roth became a deemed employee of the Department of Health and Human Services qualifying for FTCA malpractice coverage through SIHF. Id. at p. 7. Dr. Roth remained Mr. … A plaintiff must present expert testimony in order to establish these elements, as laypersons are generally not qualified to evaluate medical professional conduct. See Addison v.

Schneider v. Unknown Named Federal Employees

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Apr 7, 2025

The Court may dismiss a case and deny an otherwise qualified plaintiff leave to proceed IFP, if the action is clearly frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or is a claim for money damages against an immune defendant … By stating that an indefinite number of unknown people or agencies have harmed him without providing more information, all Plaintiff has done is establish that there is a “sheer possibility” that someone or entity in that

Perez v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp.

223 F. Supp. 3d 756 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Nov 30, 2016

The federal officer removal statute also ensures that the validity of any official immunity defense is tried in federal court. Id. (citing Rodas v. Seidlin, 656 F.3d 610, 617 (7th Cir. 2011)). … Second, Crane Co. has established that it acted under a federal officer.

In re Avaya Inc.

602 B.R. 445 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 6, 2019

This means that the estimation can be reversed only if it was based on "clearly erroneous factual findings or an incorrect legal standard." … SAE's arguments essentially call for the Court to reconsider the credibility of Avaya's qualified expert's unrebutted testimony.

Ladd

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Feb 3, 2026

The Court may dismiss a case or deny a party’s IFP application if the action is clearly frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks monetary damages from a defendant who is immune. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) … Prosecutors Featherstun and Kozuszek have absolute immunity for acts they took during criminal proceedings. Such immunity applies to actions within the scope of prosecutorial duties, Bianchi v.

Coffey v. United States

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jul 8, 2024

The Court may dismiss a case if it determines the action is clearly frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or is a claim for money damages against an immune defendant. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); see also Hoskins … Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 486 (1994) (finding no direct cause of action for damages against federal agency because of sovereign immunity).

Haas v. Group Health Plan, Inc.

875 F. Supp. 544 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Dec 27, 1994

Because the Court clearly possesses diversity jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction is not an issue. … In addition, if costs were determinative, employee plans would be exempt from nearly all state tort laws, and they clearly are not.

Richter v. Fortis Benefits Insurance

41 F. Supp. 2d 866 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 16, 1998

These provisions clearly confer discretion on the Plan Administrators. The proof of disability depends upon the items that Fortis requests from the person seeking benefits. … Upon receipt of the items, it is Fortis that determines whether the items establish that proof. “No magic words are required to confer discretion. See Donato, 19 F.3d at 379 .” Id. at 1020.