Case law

Komutanon v. Coler

702 F. Supp. 1406 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 29, 1988

The qualified immunity defendant alleges is not a jurisdictional bar, but rather an affirmative defense. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 815 , 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2736 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). … The court need only find, as it does, that the issues of Illiois law raised are not clearly settled, and that if plaintiff prevails in the Circuit Court of Cook County on the questions of Illinois law, he may well receive

Grasse v. Dealer's Transport Co.

412 Ill. 179 · Illinois Supreme Court · Mar 20, 1952

It is not the purpose of section 29 to give blanket immunity to any class of tort-feasors. … Hence, eliminating this immunity cannot necessitate invalidating the entire act.

People v. Carter

2019 IL App (1st) 170803 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 4, 2021

The record establishes that Officer Luzadder encountered defendant after an unknown caller placed two separate 911 calls. … As we explained in Schmidt, “by using the word ‘other’ after listing 14 specific felonies [in the forcible felony definition], the legislature clearly intended the residual category to refer

STATE FARM MUT. AUTO. v. Du Page County

352 Ill. Dec. 891 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 16, 2011

The court, explaining the purpose behind the immunity waiver rule, stated that, in the case of commercial insurance, "the immunity is waived since government funds are no longer in jeopardy and immunity would inure to the … Thus, the village had not waived its immunities from the plaintiff's lawsuit.

Bouto v. Guevara

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

To reiterate, 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 … al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731, 741–42 (2011) (a district court’s “footnoted dictum” did not clearly establish the law for purposes of qualified immunity).

Kawaguchi v. Gainer

Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 16, 2005

(footnote: 3) Effinger did not say Trooper Gainer was driving something other than a clearly marked police car. Trooper Gainer was apparently injured in the accident. … Moreover, here, unlike in Currie , the undisputed evidence establishes that Trooper Gainer was responding to an emergency.

Eldridge v. Challenging Law Enforcement Official, The

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 30, 2018

When a defendant claims qualified immunity, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving that her allegedly violated constitutional right was “clearly established” in a “particularized sense.” Lewis v. … Because the Seventh Circuit found the defendant not liable on the merits, it declined to decide whether it was clearly established, for qualified immunity purposes, that the ISP “as a whole took too long.” Id.

People v. Cazaux

119 Ill. App. 2d 11 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 30, 1969

Defendant’s first contention is that the evidence clearly shows entrapment. … He also asked whether the court would grant immunity to a defense witness.

Bass v. Sgt. A. Dakuras

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 29, 2023

Dakuras is protected by qualified immunity unless he violated clearly established law. Taylor, 10 F.4th at 806. … Because Dakuras did not violate clearly established law, he is entitled to qualified immunity on Bass’s excessive force claim.

DiBenedetto v. Flora Tp.

219 Ill. App. 3d 1091 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 18, 1991

The Tort Immunity Act adopted the general principle that local governmental units may be liable in tort but placed limits on such liability with an extensive list of immunities based on specific governmental functions. … We note that, although defendant in this case has not raised the issue of immunity in its appellate brief, it apparently argued before the trial court that section 3 — 105(a) of the Tort Immunity Act (Ill. Rev.

Hwang v. Board of Education for Oak Park and River Forest High School District 200

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 26, 2025

Qualified Immunity The individual defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity regarding Count I. (Dkt. 16 at 9-11.) … Qualified immunity shields government actors from liability if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Pearson v.

Ploski v. City Of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 26, 2019

Because there is no clearly established law supporting the federal theory of liability, Medenica is entitled to qualified immunity on Count I. … The doctrine of qualified immunity protects public officials performing discretionary functions against suits for damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a

Healy v. Vaupel

133 Ill. 2d 295 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 17, 1990

App. 3d 702 would clearly decide this case for Defendants. However, in Madden v Kuehn, 56 Ill. App. 3d 997 the 2nd District has ruled to the contrary. … App. 3d 702 (discussing sovereign immunity and public official immunity); Hoffman v. Yack (1978), 57 Ill.

Smith v. Portwood

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 28, 2022

Qualified immunity Defendants argue they are not liable based on the doctrine of qualified immunity. … The district court also concluded that defendants were not shielded by qualified immunity as to the clearly established requirement without discussing an analogous case identifying the right.

Parks Ex Rel. Parks v. Pavkovic

557 F. Supp. 1280 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 28, 1983

The Court recognized that the cases which established a fourteenth amendment right to education on behalf of handicapped children and “the principles that they established are the principles which, to a significant extent … ISBE clearly qualifies as the state educational agency. See 20 U.S.C. § 1401 (7) (1976). 13 . The comment is instructive.

Yarem v. Duda

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 22, 2024

Officers are entitled to qualified immunity against excessive force claims when their conduct does not violate a clearly established constitutional right. Tousis v. Billiot, 84 F.4th 692, 697 (7th Cir. 2023). … Defendants raised the defense of qualified immunity, so it is incumbent on Yarem to point to a clearly established right that Duda violated. See Fosnight v. Jones, 41 F.4th 916, 924 (7th Cir. 2022).

Morales v. United States

26 F. Supp. 3d 716 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 27, 2013

The Court finds that neither of Petitioner’s proposed arguments are “both obvious and clearly stronger” than the issues his counsel raised on appeal. See id.; Lee, 328 F.3d at 900-01 . … Because Petitioner has failed to establish that his appellate counsel was ineffective, no good cause exists for his failure to raise this issue on direct appeal.

Emery v. NE ILL. REGIONAL COMMUTER RR

880 N.E.2d 1002 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 30, 2007

Act (Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/1-101 et seq. … Defendant Metra alternatively contends that even if we were to adopt the tort of compelled self-defamation, *1009 it would be immune from liability under the Tort Immunity Act.

Nicor Gas Company v. Village of Wilmette

379 Ill. App. 3d 925 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 29, 2008

to immunity" under section 2-201 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Act), and that it was immune from liability under section 3-102 of the same. … The court also found the Village did not meet its burden under section 2-201 of the Act and had failed to establish that immunity applies.

Archview Investments, Inc. v. City of Collinsville

223 Ill. App. 3d 24 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 12, 1991

. §1983 (1988)), (2) that defendants, city council members, should not have been granted qualified immunity by the circuit court, (3) that the administrative decision of the city council is against the manifest weight of … A finding cannot be adjudged against the manifest weight of the evidence unless an opposite conclusion is clearly evidenced from the record. Rolando v. School Directors of District No. 125 (1976), 44 Ill.