Case law

County of Cook v. Illinois Labor Relations Board Local Panel

347 Ill. App. 3d 538 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 17, 2004

Any new employee shall have six (6) months from date of hire to establish actual residency with Cook County. Section 4. … As the petitioners have pointed out, this language goes on to qualify that “those residency requirements shall not allow residency outside of Illinois.” 5 ILCS 315/14(i) (West 2000).

Young v. The City of Joliet

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 11, 2025

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violates a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … To be “clearly established,” a right must be one that any reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates the right.

Unterschuetz v. City of Chicago

346 Ill. App. 3d 65 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 22, 2004

Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/2 — 109 (West 2000)). … under sections 2 — 109 and 2 — 201 of the Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/2 — 109, 2 — 201 (West 2000)).

Townsend v. Gaydosh

197 Ill. App. 3d 339 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 19, 1990

The fact defendant was employed as a highway maintenance man for DOT and operated State-owned equipment at the time of the accident was established by an affidavit accompanying the defendant’s motion to dismiss. … In Creamer, however, the fact pattern is decidedly different, since the Creamer defendants’ actions were clearly beyond what the State employer assigned them to do, while this defendant was clearly doing what his work assignment

Mooneyham

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Apr 30, 2026

Counts I and II: Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that shields government officials from trial for civil damages where their conduct does not violate clearly … (2) whether the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct.

Unzicker v. Kraft Food Ingredients Corp.

203 Ill. 2d 64 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 21, 2002

The potential for tort liability exists until the defense is established. … Additionally, the legislation amended the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/1 — 101 et seq. (West 2000)) to expand the scope of immunities provided to local public entities.

United States v. Kolb

161 B.R. 30 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 9, 1993

The government next argues that it has not waived its immunity to be sued for an award of attorney’s fees. … Moreover, with regard to the government’s claim that some of Kolb’s costs should not qualify as court costs under section 7430(c)(2), the court agrees with the bankruptcy court’s interpretation of section 7430(c)(1), which

Newell v. City of Elgin

34 Ill. App. 3d 719 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 6, 1976

In 1965 the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act was enacted (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1973, ch. 85, pars. 1 — 101 et seq.). It eliminated sovereign immunity except as therein specified. … That count clearly alleges sufficient facts to state a cause of action against the individual officers and thereby against Hanover Park.

In Re CA

236 Ill. App. 3d 594 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 15, 1992

It can cause susceptibility to multiple types of infections, infections that persons with a normal immune response would not be susceptible to." Dr. … Both, however, had clearly expressed their desire (while still competent) that they not be kept alive artificially or allowed to linger.

McWilliams v. Dettore

387 Ill. App. 3d 833 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 20, 2009

The plaintiffs were given two opportunities to establish the foundational requirements to qualify Dr. Gomez. The second opportunity came after Dr. Joyce’s motion in limine challenging Dr. … While the dissent contends the familiarity prong showing was established, unlike in Silverstein, neither the plaintiffs nor the dissent quotes Dr. Gomez’s “precise testimony” that in their judgment qualifies Dr.

Platinum Partners Value Arbitrage Fund, Ltd. Partnership v. Chicago Board Options Exchange

2018 IL App (1st) 171316 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 24, 2018

With respect to Tait, Knabjian explained that he received a warning because “he didn’t provide the qualifying information that says each one is handled on a case-by-case basis so, essentially, [he] didn’t adhere … The defendant may meet its burden of proof either by affirmatively showing that some element of the case must be resolved in its favor or by establishing the absence of evidence to support the nonmovant’s case

Esker v. Lutz

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Jul 27, 2021

He further claims that he is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate a “clearly established” law (Id., pp. 17-18). … In establishing the second prong in the qualified immunity analysis, a plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the constitutional right was “clearly established”. Ashcroft v.

People ex rel. Smith v. Common Council

84 Ill. 157 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1876

amendatory thereof, in force February 16, 1859, that one judge should be elected by the qualified electors of the two cities, for both courts. … The person so elected was to hold his office until his successor should he elected and qualified.

Swanigan v. Trotter

645 F. Supp. 2d 656 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 4, 2009

violated clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … As previously set forth, qualified immunity operates to shield officials who perform discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

State v. United States Army Corps of Engineers

911 F. Supp. 2d 739 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 3, 2012

It is the plaintiffs’ burden to allege facts that, taken as true, establish that the agency has taken final action. Id. Here, the facts they allege are sufficient only to establish the counter-proposition. … But the complaint, and the plaintiffs' briefs, clearly indicate that the plaintiffs are not satisfied merely with an accelerated GLMRIS timeline. Supp. Resp. (Dkt. 240).

Griffin v. Fluellen

283 Ill. App. 3d 1078 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 20, 1996

Moreover, plaintiff asserted that no evidence has been offered which is sufficient to establish that defendant was a state employee. … Plaintiff next contends that even if defendant was a state employee at the time of the occurrence, the circuit court would still have jurisdiction over this claim, where there exists abundant case law which clearly shows

Dyson v. City of Calumet City

306 F. Supp. 3d 1028 · District Court, E.D. Illinois · Jan 23, 2018

As Dyson impliedly admits by abandoning this argument in her opposition brief, neither qualifies as property in this case. … No defendant has asserted a claim of qualified or absolute immunity.

Abrego v. Guevara

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 29, 2024

“Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for damages unless they violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.” See Garcia v. … Courts can decide motions to dismiss based on qualified immunity when the issue turns on whether the law was clearly established at a particular point in time.

Hernandez v. Kirksey

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 19, 1999

Section 4-102 of the Tort Immunity Act provides in pertinent part: “Neither a local public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to establish a police department or otherwise provide police protection service … App. 3d 639, 642 , 606 N.E.2d 273 (1992) ("reviewing court is entitled to have issues clearly defined with pertinent authority cited and cohesive arguments presented.")

Keglovitz v. Illinois Department Of Children And Family Services

District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 20, 2025

Last, the defendants argue that this case should be dismissed on qualified immunity grounds. (R. 16 at 12.) … Qualified immunity exists to protect public officials from suit unless they violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right. Doxtator v. O'Brien, 39 F.4th 852, 863 (7th Cir. 2022).