Case law

United States v. American National Bank & Trust Co. of Chicago

443 F. Supp. 167 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 17, 1977

It is fundamental that the United States may be sued only to the extent that it has waived its sovereign immunity. This immunity extends to counterclaims and cross-claims. United States v. … The success of this program clearly depends on the rights and obligations of the various parties, including the supervisor and guarantor, HUD.

Steinbach v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

393 Ill. App. 3d 490 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 16, 2009

immunity because erecting the steel cable did not qualify as a policy decision, design plan, inspection or traffic control device. … The facts establish, when considered in a light most favorable to the Plaintiff, that Section 3 — 102(a) of Illinois’ Governmental Tort Immunity Act (‘Immunity Act’) applies herein for the following reasons: a.

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.

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

Williams v. Haleighs Hope, Inc

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Feb 24, 2023

Generally, qualified immunity protects government officials performing discretionary functions from suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless their conduct violated clearly established law … But as made clear above, that is not the only method to show a violation of clearly established law. “[B]inding precedent is not necessary to clearly establish a right.”

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.

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.

Robinson

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 10, 2025

“When evaluating a qualified immunity defense, courts ask whether ‘(1) [the officials] violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time … At the motion to dismiss stage, dismissal “is appropriate based on qualified immunity only when the plaintiffs’ well-pleaded allegations, taken as true, do not ‘state a claim of violation of clearly established law.’”

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.

Kemeny v. Skorch

22 Ill. App. 2d 160 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 23, 1959

Timmons, 61 So.2d 426 (Fla.) concerns both the attorney-client privilege and a policy-oriented provisional immunity. … Having decided that the matter is not privileged but is nevertheless immune to pre-trial discovery by virtue of the rule, we ordinarily should regard our judicial function fulfilled.

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.

Rooding v. Peters

864 F. Supp. 732 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 17, 1994

As to Rooding’s request for money damages, Peters contends he is protected by qualified immunity. … Therefore, qualified immunity does not protect Peters from Rooding’s claim for money damages. However, Rooding’s claim for money damages cannot include prisoners.

Illinois Commerce Commission v. Salamie

54 Ill. App. 3d 465 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 20, 1977

It also asked the court to establish guidelines respecting the scope of his testimony and the production of the documents. … its claim of immunity.

Coleman v. Frierson

618 F. Supp. 1280 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 30, 1985

immunity in the first instance). … Whatever might have been established in the course of a trial on the merits, the facts deemed established for purposes of the damages trial leave no doubt that Smith and Frier- *1284 son acted maliciously.

Held v. Decatur Memorial Hospital

16 F. Supp. 2d 975 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Aug 10, 1998

The burden of establishing the contrary rests upon the party asserting jurisdiction. Kokkonen, 511 U.S. at 377 , 114 S.Ct. 1673 . Plaintiff contends that this court has jurisdiction based upon the Act. … The Act provides statutory immunity from damage liability for those persons engaged in qualified professional peer review. 42 U.S.C. §§ 11111 (a), 11112(a); Addis, 88 F.3d at 485 .

Dist. Attorney of N.Y. Cnty. v. Republic of the Phil.

307 F. Supp. 3d 171 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 29, 2018

It does not establish that the seed money for substantially all of Mr. and Mrs. Marcos's vast wealth came from the Yamashita Treasure. Nor does Buckley's testimony establish as much. … waiver of sovereign immunity.

Better Government Ass'n v. Metropolitan Pier & Exposition Authority

2020 IL App (1st) 190697 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 30, 2020

NPI established in its bylaws that all its operations fulfill functions assigned to MPEA by statute. See Baudin v. City of Crystal Lake, 192 Ill. App. 3d 530, 534- 35 (1989). … The assertion of tort -7-  immunity does not amount to an admission of fact.

Better Government Ass'n v. Metropolitan Pier & Exposition Authority

2020 IL App (1st) 190697 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 30, 2020

¶ 14 The parties agreed that NPI met the definition of “public body” only if it qualified as a “subsidiary bod[y]” of MPEA. … ¶ 37 BGA argues that NPI’s assertions of tort immunity in other lawsuits count as admissions of government control.

Kapernekas v. Village of Stone Park

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 9, 2019

“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 reasonable … Kapernekas’s failure to establish the first prong of the qualified immunity test is fatal to his Fourth Amendment claim, we further note that he has also not met his burden to show that he had a “clearly established” right