Case law

Doe v. Calumet City

161 Ill. 2d 374 · Illinois Supreme Court · Aug 4, 1994

This common law protection afforded municipalities became embodied in statutory immunities granted under the Tort Immunity Act. … Ct. 2689 , 2694 n.3), section 1983 establishes a cause of action for "the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws” by any person acting "under color of any statute, ordinance

Feltmeier v. Feltmeier

Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 18, 2003

In addition to the three issues certified for review, the court addressed an immunity issue raised by Robert on appeal. … However, in this case, brought after the parties were divorced, “there is clearly no marital harmony remaining to be preserved.” Henriksen , 622 A.2d at 1139 .

Griffin v. Willoughby

Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 15, 2006

Plaintiff's position is clearly based on Currie v. … Paszkowski clearly establishes that section 8-101 of the Tort Immunity Act applies to plaintiff's action.

Bodine v. State

35 Ill. Ct. Cl. 777 · Court of Claims of Illinois · Mar 18, 1983

It is also well established that service of the notice on either the Attorney General or the clerk of the Court but not both will not suffice in meeting the requirements of the statute. (See Byrne v. … Our supreme court has stated however, that this governmental immunity is qualified and that estoppel may be invoked against a governmental body iff certain instances.” ( 90 Ill. App. 3d 410, 414 .)

Davis v. Grinspoon

212 Ill. App. 3d 282 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 22, 1991

Rather it deals with spousal immunity. Conversely, in Meece v. Holland Furnace Co. (1933), 269 Ill. … Plaintiff further argues that the doctrine should not apply in a suit brought against the parent’s employer, because the public policy considerations which led to the establishment of the subject doctrine do not apply in

Finwall v. City of Chicago

490 F. Supp. 2d 918 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 16, 2007

for his trial testimony, and (3) the detectives have qualified immunity. … However, qualified immunity does not shield officers from claims that they fabricated evidence. See Wallace, 440 F.3d at 429 .

Almaraz v. HALEAS

602 F. Supp. 2d 920 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 9, 2008

Also, this does not appear to be a case that will involve the type of legal issues that could result in a qualified immunity defense. … That is not the type of conduct for which qualified immunity would apply.

Green v. Chicago Board of Education

Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 22, 2011

Section 4-102 of the Act states, in relevant part: “Neither a local public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to establish a police department or otherwise provide police … Section 4-102 of the Act does not contain the same qualifying language as section 3-108 of the Act.

Squires v. Grundy County

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 31, 2025

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are immune from damages under the doctrine of qualified immunity because Squires failed to state a claim for … Qualified immunity “‘shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established . . . constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’”

In Re Silver

109 F. Supp. 200 · District Court, E.D. Illinois · May 1, 1953

Prior to the Bankruptcy Act of 1938 a creditor with a provable claim, though unliquidated, could qualify as a petitioning creditor. … The Corporation may assert such *206 rights, privileges, and immunities in any suit, action, or. proceeding.” 31 U.S.C.A. Ch. 6, § 191, Debts Due by, or to, the United States, provides: “Priority established.

Weems v. Pierce

534 F. Supp. 740 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Mar 24, 1982

compelling Southwest Development Company (Southwest) and certain officers of the Illinois Housing Development Authority (HDA) to contract with HUD to provide rent supplement or alternative rent subsidy payments on behalf of qualified … However, this general obligation, clearly in furtherance of Congressional goals, does not answer the question of whether a particular project must be a part thereof.

Hale v. Lefkow

239 F. Supp. 2d 842 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jan 15, 2003

Clearly, the answer is “no.” Since the originating matter was based in trademark law, the Lanham Act clearly provided Judge Lefkow with subject matter jurisdiction over the originating suit. … This is clearly such a case. Accordingly, since Judge Lefkow has satisfied the two prongs of the judicial immunity test, the Court finds Judge Lefkow is entitled to absolute judicial immunity.

Smith v. Bd. of Election Com'rs for City of Chicago

587 F. Supp. 1136 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 9, 1984

Thus, an injunction in the instant case would clearly comport with the public interest. … Immunity Finally, the City Board asserts that defendants are entitled to absolute judicial immunity, and that this Court thus lacks jurisdiction over the present matter under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 .

Estate of Luis Vasquez, Jr. v. Barton

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 30, 2024

The Court turns next to the second consideration for qualified immunity: whether the constitutional right at issue was clearly established on July 8, 2019. Purvis, 614 F.3d at 717. … Accordingly, the same material disputes of fact identified previously preclude applying qualified immunity based on the clearly-established prong.

Smith-Silk v. Prenzler

2013 IL App (5th) 120546 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 24, 2013

Clair County defendants filed a motion to dismiss in which they argued they were immune from prosecution pursuant to section 2-203 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity … site custody exchange fund fee as established by the county ordinance.

Brandt v. Keller

413 Ill. 503 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 20, 1952

Nevertheless, it is clearly established that a wife may sue her husband in a contract action under the act of 1874. (Thomas v. Mueller, 106 Ill. 36 .) … The statute cannot be construed to abrogate a husband’s common-law immunity from suit by his wife for contract purposes, and be construed to perpetuate his immunity for another purpose.

Success Tool & Manufacturing Co. v. United States Department of Treasury (In Re Success Tool & Manufacturing Co.)

62 B.R. 221 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 27, 1986

injunction could be maintained only if it is apparent on the basis of the information available to the government at the time of the suit, under the most liberal view of the law and facts, that the United States could not establish … The enactment of the Bankruptcy Code did not constitute a guarantee that all persons who seek reorganization protection under the Code will qualify for it.

Jackson v. Chicago Firefighters Union

160 Ill. App. 3d 975 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 8, 1987

Just as article IV of the Tort Immunity Act specifically provides immunity to police personnel, article V of the Act specifically provides immunity to fire fighters for the “failure to establish a fire department or *** to … Clearly, the defendants at bar were not responsible for the fire to the Ridgeway premises. Instead, similar to the situations in Galuszynski and Marvin, plaintiffs at bar merely sought protection which was not provided.

Brookhart

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Aug 28, 2026

Qualified Immunity To the extent Plaintiff seeks damages, Defendants are otherwise entitled to qualified immunity. … “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

Goodwin v. McHenry County Sheriff's Department Merit Commission

250 Ill. Dec. 420 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 24, 2000

The trial court initially granted defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint, holding that it was time-barred under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS … Additionally, they were not approved or otherwise qualified by the Merit Commission and so do not qualify for the positions of merited deputy.