Case law

Walker v. Brookhart

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

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 … “It is well- established that suits against government officials in their official capacity are suits against the governmental entity of which the officer is an agent.” Ames v. Randle, 933 F.Supp.2d 1028, 1038 (N.D.

Sharples v. Pritzker

District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 30, 2023

Plaintiff’s original complaint was dismissed for multiple reasons, including failure to state a claim and the immunity of various defendants. (Doc. 18). … Plaintiff was clearly warned that if he wished to file an amended pleading, he would need to narrow the scope of the claims presented to clearly identify a claim or subset of related claims against a defendant or related

Legette v. Warden FCI-Greenville

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

The Supreme Court clearly established in Teague v. … (“Because one cannot commit Hobbs Act robbery without using or threatening physical force, we held that Hobbs Act robbery qualifies as a predicate for a crime-of-violence conviction.”)

Heartwood, Inc. v. United States Forest Service

73 F. Supp. 2d 962 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 28, 1999

NEPA established a national policy of protecting the environment as a way of promoting human health. 42 U.S.C. § 4321 . B. … and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be— (A) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (B) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity

Brown v. Riding

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 4, 2021

Any portion of a complaint that is legally frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or asks for money damages from a defendant who is immune from such relief must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). … This includes an organized complaint that clearly summarizes each claim. He must simply identify the defendant(s) who were responsible for each constitutional deprivation.

Griffin

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jan 21, 2026

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 … The RA also prohibits discrimination against qualified individuals based on a physical or mental disability. See 29 U.S.C. §§ 794-94e.

Saleh v. Tillerson

293 F. Supp. 3d 419 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Feb 26, 2018

That doctrine reflects the principle "that a consular officer's decision to deny a visa is immune from judicial review." 5 Am. Acad. of Religion v. Napolitano, 573 F.3d 115 , 123 (2d Cir. 2009). … But the materials on which the Government relies do not establish this.

Gregory v. Pronai Therapeutics Inc.

297 F. Supp. 3d 372 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 13, 2018

At the outset, some challenged statements in this category are clearly protected as forward-looking statements. … The opinion statements in question were explicitly qualified and conditional.

Youngblood v. Williams

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Aug 20, 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). … This claim typically arises when an inmate is a qualified individual with a disability and is denied access to a program or activity because of the disability. Jaros v. Ill.

Pitts v. Willis

District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 17, 2021

may be granted, or requests money damages from a defendant who by law is immune from such relief must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). … Pitts’s pleadings demonstrate an ability to construct coherent sentences and communicate clearly with the Court.

Sealy v. Partain

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 18, 2024

The Court agrees with Sealy on this issue—collateral estoppel does not bar Sealy’s suit because the issue in the instant matter is clearly distinguishable from that adjudicated in state court. … The Defendants also raise the argument that the Illinois Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act, 745 Ill. Comp.

Benzinger v. Nysarc, Inc.

385 F. Supp. 3d 224 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jun 21, 2019

To summarize this case is to distinguish it, inasmuch as the defendant in Vakharia clearly had the power to prevent a contract between the plaintiff and others. … The rights, privileges, and immunities that § 1985(3) vindicates must be found elsewhere[.]" United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of Am. v.

Toy v. Pritzker

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 7, 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). … A TRO may issue without notice only if (A) specific facts in an affidavit or a verified complaint clearly show that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the movant before the adverse party can

In re Aratana Therapeutics Inc. Sec. Litig.

315 F. Supp. 3d 737 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jun 11, 2018

But as *765 noted, a mere desire to reduce debt outlays, without more, is insufficient to establish motive. … The risk that ultimately materialized-in which the CVM requested additional information about a contract manufacturer-was clearly encompassed by defendants' cautionary disclosures.

Fulford v. Prisoner Review Board

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jan 3, 2022

He alleges his constitutional rights were infringed when he was not given a low bunk permit although his medical conditions qualified him for one. … To state an equal protection claim, a plaintiff must establish that a state actor has purposely treated him differently than persons of another race. Id.

Walls v. Jeffreys

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Apr 22, 2022

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 … Walls states that Benton “clearly didn’t investigate the grievance” and denied the grievance without contacting Dixon to make sure that his medical issues had been resolved.

Hollis v. Hughes

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jun 30, 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 … The Equal Protection Clause and the Establishment Clause prohibit the defendant from treating members of some religious faiths more favorably than others without a secular reason. See Cruz v.

Boclair v. Jeffreys

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Apr 14, 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 second requirement is a subjective element – establishing a defendant’s culpable state of mind, which is deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of serious harm to the inmate from those conditions.

Mauter v. Siddiqui

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

Typically, Rule 59(e) motions are granted upon a showing of either newly discovered evidence not previously available or evidence in the record that clearly establishes a manifest error of law or fact. Sigsworth v. … The documents obtained from the ARB clearly indicate that the grievance was received on April 17, 2018 (see Doc. 46-1 at 16).

Patterson v. Life Insurance Company of North America

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 9, 2021

The Court denied the motion to dismiss on the grounds that Honeywell had not established as a matter of law that Patterson had not stated a claim to STD benefits under ERISA. I. … Here, the Court has clearly misapprehended the nature of Honeywell’s STD benefit plan and erroneously treated it as an employee welfare or benefit plan governed by ERISA.