Case law

Davis v. Baldwin

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Aug 21, 2025

It is well-established that the Ex parte Young exception to Eleventh Amendment immunity permits injunctive relief against state officials “when there is an ongoing or threatened violation of federal law.” Vickery v. … And, in this instance, Congress clearly knew how, but chose not to “clearly command” in the PLRA that courts could not impose prospective relieve when the violation was only threatened and not actively ongoing.

Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 25, 2023

Plaintiff is also correct regarding the sufficiency of the VE’s explanation regarding the basis for her job incidence data.4 The ALJ had the burden to establish that there are a significant number of jobs in the national … The ALJ then adopted the VE’s testimony, ignoring the fact that the VE did not describe her methodology or clearly identify the source of her job incidence data.

Lawhorn v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc.

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

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 from such relief … Furthermore, Plaintiff’s allegations against these defendants are insufficient to establish personal involvement in a constitutional deprivation.

Brown

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 15, 2025

Any portion of a complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or asks for money damages from a defendant who by law is immune from such relief must be dismissed … If there was a formal policy that hindered his access to medications it may be actionable against Wexford, but simply naming a policy in a few words without clearly describing it is insufficient.

In re Queen Elizabeth Realty Corp.

586 B.R. 95 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 8, 2018

SMS argued that Queen Elizabeth had not met its burden to establish the unreasonable delay or lack of diligence by SMS needed to assert its laches defense and, further, that Queen Elizabeth had failed to show that it would … In general, a creditor's counsel's inattention to a known bar date or other deadline will not qualify as excusable neglect.

Hammond

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 27, 2026

To establish a violation of Title II of the ADA, plaintiffs must prove they are a “qualified individual with a disability,” and that they were denied “the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public … A motion to strike should not be granted unless the relevant language in the Amended Complaint has no possible relation to the controversy and is clearly prejudicial. See Wilkins, 736 F.

Serio v. Brown

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Nov 13, 2023

Any portion of a complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or asks for money damages from a defendant who by law is immune from such relief must be dismissed … July 26, 2022) (finding that a medical permit did not establish a serious medical need, and could not, without more, establish deliberate indifference based on a second-floor housing assignment).

Fuller v. IRS

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jan 5, 2021

must dismiss any complaint if the allegation of poverty is untrue or if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … Co., 698 F.3d 587, 598 (7th Cir. 2012) (“To prevail on a Rule 59(e) motion to amend judgment, a party must clearly establish (1) that the court committed a manifest error of law or fact, or (2) that newly discovered evidence

Healthcare Distribution Alliance v. Zucker

353 F. Supp. 3d 235 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Dec 19, 2018

SpecGx further relates, and New York does not dispute, that the ratable share payment per qualifying MME exceeds the average manufacturer price (or "AMP") of several generic opioids covered by the OSA. ( Id. at 10-11). … In short, a challenge to the pass-through prohibition is clearly not barred by the TIA. b.

Starr Indem. & Liab. Co. v. Brightstar Corp.

388 F. Supp. 3d 304 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jul 12, 2019

Starr states in its briefing that "[t]he date(s) on which the Loss occurred has not been established." Pl. Mem. at 17. … In light of these circumstances, and in light of the fact that the parties had a clearly established course of performance for adding a new warehouse location to the Policy, detailed in Section III.B.3.b above, no reasonable

Howard v. St. Clair County, Illinois

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jun 19, 2020

Plaintiff claims that no charges were brought against him at the time, and he was denied a prompt preliminary hearing to establish probable cause. (Id. at 8). … To the extent he seeks relief for violations of his federal constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiff’s claims are clearly time-barred.

Clean Coal Techs., Inc. v. Leidos, Inc.

377 F. Supp. 3d 303 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 28, 2019

Elements of this dispute clearly existed prior to the stipulation, but were not raised in the New York State Action. … Here, CCTI clearly alleges that Leidos acted in numerous ways to frustrate the Services Agreement on its own and not at the direction of Dr. Paul.

Castillo-lara v. King

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jun 14, 2024

Nevertheless, a court can deny a qualified plaintiff leave to file in forma pauperis or can dismiss a case if the action is clearly frivolous or malicious or fails to state a claim. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) & (ii). … The Rooker-Feldman doctrine, established in the cases Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923), and District of Columbia Court of Appeals v.

Galindez v. Ahmed

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jul 24, 2020

Any portion of the Complaint that is legally frivolous or 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). … To establish deliberate indifference to a serious medical need, a prisoner must show that he or she has a medical need that is “sufficiently serious.” Gutierrez v. Peters, 111 F.3d 1364, 1369 (7th Cir. 1997).

Weis v. Shipley

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 19, 2022

The allegations clearly show that Plaintiff brought suit well beyond the applicable two- year limitations period. … Consequently, Plaintiff has pleaded himself out of court by setting forth facts that establish that his claim is time-barred.

Mosher v. Koebel Reed

District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 22, 2024

Under Section 1915(e)(2), the Court must screen the Amended Complaint 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 … As the Seventh Circuit recently explained, while “the natural temptation for losing parties to keep fighting and to look for new forums” is understandable, “it is well established that federal district and circuit courts

Hardimon v. SCF Lewis and Clark Fleeting LLC

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Apr 13, 2022

a stay of discovery is not Page 5 of 8 warranted in this instance as the motion to dismiss does not raise a “dispositive threshold issue,” such as standing or qualified … immunity.

Chahta v. Bureau of Indian Affairs

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jan 14, 2022

frivolous or malicious, must state a claim on which relief may be granted, and may not seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). … (emphasis added) Finally, even if Plaintiff could establish a justiciable claim here, it is not clear that he could pursue these claims on behalf of all members of the Nu’Yudah Tribe.

Suqin Zhu v. Hakkasan NYC LLC

291 F. Supp. 3d 378 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Nov 28, 2017

Even if Defendants' secretary told Plaintiffs to sign immediately, that would not suffice to establish procedural unconscionability. … The latter qualifies the confidentiality clause's prohibition on disclosure with the phrase, "unless otherwise required by law." ( Id. ).

Miller v. Mercuria Energy Trading, Inc.

291 F. Supp. 3d 509 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 5, 2018

The Separation Agreement clearly identifies the ULA Articles of Association. … The plaintiff "must make allegations establishing jurisdiction with some 'factual specificity' and cannot establish jurisdiction through conclusory assertions alone." Cont'l Indus. Grp. v.