Case law

Smith v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Feb 14, 2025

. § 1915A, which requires this Court to dismiss any portion that is legally frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks money damages from an immune defendant. Id. … The Clerk’s Office is DIRECTED to ENTER the Court’s standard HIPAA-Qualified Protective Order; ADD the CURRENT WARDEN OF PINCKNEYVILLE CORRECTIONAL CENTER as a defendant, in an official capacity only, for

Thornton v. Jeffreys

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Nov 18, 2020

Any portion of a Complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or requests money damages from an immune defendant must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). … Plaintiff has not established that injunctive relief is necessary before the adverse party can be heard on the matter. As such, his request for a TRO will be denied.

Simmons v. Walker

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Nov 11, 2020

Any portion of the Complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or requests money damages from an immune defendant must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). … Two elements are required to establish a constitutional violation.

Kindle v. Kinkaid Reeds Conservation District

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jan 23, 2025

Under § 1915(e)(2), the Court must also screen the indigent plaintiff’s complaint and dismiss the complaint if it is clearly frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or is a claim for money damages against an immune … To establish liability in an official-capacity suit under § 1983, the plaintiff must show that the action performed under color of state law is linked to the entity’s policy or custom. Hill, 924 F.2d at 1372.

Vogel v. Merck & Co., Inc.

476 F. Supp. 2d 996 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 6, 2007

The party seeking removal has the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction. See Yount v. … dismissed in state court before removal on the grounds of sovereign immunity).

Alzheimer's Disease & Related Disorders Ass'n, Inc. v. Alzheimer's Found. of Am., Inc.

307 F. Supp. 3d 260 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Apr 20, 2018

After performing much of the same analysis the Court undertakes in this post-trial opinion, Judge Sweet concluded that "[t]he Association has failed to clearly establish the three most important factors in the preliminary … Robinson's calculation is clearly over-inclusive.

Brouwer v. Bliss Haven, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Apr 6, 2023

Likewise, none of the five documents are referenced clearly enough to be incorporated. … To successfully establish disability discrimination, a plaintiff must prove that “(1) she is disabled within the meaning of the ADA, (2) she is qualified to perform the essential functions of the job, either with or without

Clark v. Olin Corporation Winchester

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 20, 2024

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination based on a failure to promote in this case, Plaintiff must show (1) she is a member of a protected class, (2) she was qualified for the promotion, (3) she was denied the … better qualified.’ ” Hobbs v.

McKinney v. Franklin County Illinois

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 30, 2019

This is not to say that state law can answer the question for us by, for example, simply labeling as a state official an official who clearly makes county policy. … Additionally, the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (the "Tort Immunity Act") provides immunity to the extent that Plaintiff seeks to hold Defendants liable for failure to train Center staff

Gakuba v. Wampler

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 28, 2023

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 … However, Johnson “is entitled to absolute immunity in defending the government in civil litigation.” Agrawal v. Pallmeyer, 313 F. App’x 866, 867-68 (7th Cir. 2009) (citing Spear v. Town of W.

Prout v. Vladeck

316 F. Supp. 3d 784 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jun 10, 2018

Although it might be unusual for the kind of violation of the FMLA here alleged not to be willful (though Congress clearly contemplated that the two could be different and hence provided different statutes of limitations) … Compl. ¶ 107, they clearly have done at least $5,000 of work, see id. at ¶ 33 (describing letter Vladeck sent to defendants), ¶ 35 (describing conversation between Vladeck and Invesco official regarding Prout's requested

Ebrahimi

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jan 7, 2026

1915A.1 Under Section 1915A, any portion of a complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or requests money damages from a defendant who by law is immune … “To prevail on a First Amendment retaliation claim,” a plaintiff must establish “that (1) he engaged in activity protected by the First Amendment; (2) he suffered an adverse action that would likely deter First Amendment

Shabazz v. Issacs

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jan 12, 2024

. § 1915A, which requires the Court to dismiss any portion of the Complaint that is legally frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks money damages from an immune defendant. … Further, “[l]iability cannot be established based on an assumption that high-ranking officials should have known of a condition. Burks v. Raemisch, 555 F.3d 592, 593 (7th Cir. 2009).

Pernell v. Does 1-7

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 28, 2023

Kallas, 895 F. 3d 492, 499 (7th Cir. 2018) (in discussing qualified immunity, the Seventh Circuit held that “[p]rison officials have been on notice for years that leaving serious medical conditions, including gender … While not clearly pled, the Court will allow Plaintiff to proceed on her request for injunctive relief under the RA and in connection with her surviving Eighth Amendment claim, as specified in Count 1.

Wachter v. Meyers

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

Any portion of the Complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or requests money damages from an immune defendant must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). … The ADA confers rights on “qualified individual[s] with a disability” who are denied access to “services, programs, or activities of a public entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12132.

Padilla v. Wills

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jan 28, 2025

Any portion of the Complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or requests money damages from an immune defendant must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). … The Clerk of Court is further DIRECTED to ENTER the standard qualified protective order pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

Maltbia v. Loy

District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 23, 2024

Any portion of a Complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or requests money damages from an immune defendant must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). 1 The Court … Two elements are required to establish a violation of the Eighth Amendment’s cruel and unusual punishments clause.

Tyler

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Aug 7, 2026

The Complaint does not affirmatively establish that Plaintiff failed to file an administrative complaint. The Rule 12(b)(1) challenge is therefore DENIED. … And the allegation that IT&V data were “used in disclosures” to unspecified regulators does not support a reasonable inference that Plaintiff herself made a qualifying SEC submission. (Id. ¶ 10).

Williams v. State of Illinois

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

It is well- established that a complaint need not plead the legal theories that purportedly give rise to liability and damages. ACF 2006 Corp. v. Mark C. … 803 F.3d 304, 310 (7th Cir. 2015) (“[T]he personal involvement of senior jail officials . . . can be inferred at the motion to dismiss stage, where, as here, the plaintiff alleges ‘potentially systemic,’ as opposed to ‘clearly

Pace v. USP Marion

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jul 7, 2022

Plaintiff claims that inmates were intentionally exposed to COVID-19 in an effort by staff to establish herd immunity among the inmate population. … Because no other claims are stated against these defendants, the Clerk’s Office is DIRECTED to TERMINATE USP-MARION and FBOP as parties in CM/ECF and ENTER the standard qualified protective order pursuant