Case law

Carr v. Koch

355 Ill. Dec. 758 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 28, 2011

The standards are not a state curriculum, but their "purpose is to clearly define essential knowledge and skills that students should have as a result of their schooling." … However, "[s]chool districts are not required to exert a minimum Operating Tax Rate in order to qualify for assistance under this Section." 105 ILCS 5/18-8.05(A)(4) (West 2010).

Ellis v. City of Chicago

272 F. Supp. 2d 729 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 8, 2003

Although Plaintiff has alleged the requisite constitutional torts to establish municipal liability under § 1983, she has shown no liberty or property interest in her employment sufficient to establish a due process violation … Clearly then, the City’s act of discharging Ellis was a discretionary decision. Therefore, the City is immune from suit under the Tort Immunity Act.

Tousis v. Billiot

District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 12, 2022

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages in situations in which their conduct does not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right.” … Also, the disputes of material facts in this case preclude qualified immunity because a reasonable jury could find that Agent Billiot violated a clearly established right.

Department of Revenue v. Appellate Court

67 Ill. 2d 392 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 20, 1977

(Though our constitution of 1970 abolished sovereign immunity (Ill. Const. 1970, art. … This immunity of the State from the assessment of costs, unless there is legislative authorization, was succinctly stated long ago in People v.

Jordan v. Bonano

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 24, 2022

Moreover, in order to obtain the protection of qualified immunity, an official must not violate a clearly established right. … established, qualified immunity does not apply.”).

Balentine v. Union Mortgage Co.

795 F. Supp. 266 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 30, 1992

The Court agrees with Skopbank that it qualified as a “foreign state” at the time this lawsuit was filed. … The policy arguments raised by plaintiffs with respect to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1602 et seq., are simply irrelevant once the Court has concluded that Skopbank qualifies as a “foreign state” under

Godair v. Metro East Sanitary District

2021 IL App (5th) 200160 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 17, 2021

Act (Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/1-101 et seq. … We find that the plaintiff has failed to establish that the district owed her a duty.

Grimes v. Saikley

388 Ill. App. 3d 802 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 10, 2009

With respect to count II, the court stated the complaint did not establish the necessary elements. … Griesheimer (1982), 92 Ill. 2d 13 , 440 N.E.2d 96 , the supreme court established the standard for pleading the liability of attorneys to nonclients in legal[,]malpractice actions.

Elfayer v. City of Chicago

325 Ill. App. 3d 1076 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 14, 2001

Therefore, were a duty owed, plaintiff failed to establish a breach by defendant. C. … Tort Immunity Act Having reached the foregoing conclusions, we need not consider application of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/1 — 101 et seq.

Pearson v. Zehr

138 Ill. 48 · Illinois Supreme Court · May 11, 1891

The statute does not afford, and does not purport to afford, immunity to the commissioners, or to their agents and servants, in the event they slay live stock which has been negligently or erroneously determined by the board … and have had an extensive practical experience with such animals, and with some particular disease to which they are subject, and ample opportunity to observe and know the characteristics and symptoms of such disease, are qualified

Ozik v. Gramins

279 Ill. Dec. 68 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 27, 2003

Plaintiff responds that willful and wanton conduct is an established exception to the public duty rule and to the immunities granted to municipalities and their employees by the Tort Immunity Act. … The court noted that section 2 — 202 of the Tort Immunity Act applied to the facts because “in responding to the domestic dispute at the [man’s] residence, [the officers] were clearly involved ‘in the execution or enforcement

Thompson v. COOK CTY. FOREST PRESERVE DIST.

231 Ill. App. 3d 88 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 19, 1992

He stated that crosswalks are intended to funnel large groups of pedestrians from one clearly defined point to another. … The court rejected defendant's claim that 3-104(a) immunized it from liability. Initially, we note that neither the Janssen nor DiOrio court determined that the Act established a duty to warn.

Zdeb v. Baxter International, Inc.

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 26, 1998

The marketplace for disposable infusers is well established and profitable. During the 1980s and currently, Baxter's I.V. … If Baxter concludes that the complaint establishes a qualified privilege, a denial of the allegation negating justification is all that is required of it.

LaFlamboy v. Landek

587 F. Supp. 2d 914 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 20, 2008

Nor has Cainkar established an entitlement to qualified immunity as to Count II. … “Qualified immunity is a defense available to government officials performing discretionary functions that affords them protection from civil liability.” Lee v.

Nelson v. Union Wire Rope Corp.

31 Ill. 2d 69 · Illinois Supreme Court · Mar 18, 1964

As opposed to this, McClain was a trained and practicing safety engineer, and as a qualified elevator inspector was fully aware of the relationship between cable wear and proper sheaves and of the only sure and safe way to … Considering the record as a whole, we cannot say as a matter of law, that the evidence fails to establish a reasonable basis from which the jury could arrive at the conelusion that defendant was guilty of negligence which

Murrhee v. Principi

364 F. Supp. 2d 782 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Apr 14, 2005

Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity Under the doctrine of sovereign immunity, the United States may not be sued without its consent. Hercules, Inc. v. … United States, 852 F.2d 1469 , 1471 n. 3 (7th Cir.1988) (“Section 211(a) clearly precludes our review of the Administrator’s decision to set benefits and disability levels”) (Marozsan I).

Mellenthin v. The County of McDonough

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

Alternatively, they argue that Schmalshof is entitled to qualified immunity “because there is no clearly established federal law that precluded [his] actions.” Id. at 2. … But it concludes that she has failed to meet her burden of establishing that Schmalshof violated clearly established law. Plaintiff’s argument as to qualified immunity is short and confusing. See Resp. Mot.

Victims of Hungarian Holocaust v. Hungarian State Railways

798 F. Supp. 2d 934 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 8, 2011

DISCUSSION HSR argues that this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because it is immune to liability under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). … Immunity Under FSIA HSR argues that it is an instrumentality of a foreign state and is immune to liability under FSIA, which generally makes a foreign state (or an agency or instrumentality of a foreign state) “immune from

Jafari v. Islamic Republic of Iran

539 F. Supp. 209 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 23, 1982

Such reliance seems clearly ill-founded: (1) Section 1605(a)(1) withdraws immunity if “the foreign state has waived its immunity either explicitly or by implication .... ” Iran has not done that, for its August 15, 1955 Treaty … Only one immunity section (Art.

Watford v. Ellis

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 16, 2019

In determining whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, the Court must consider whether the official’s conduct violated a constitutional right and whether the right in question was clearly established. … Defendants are, therefore, entitled to qualified immunity.