Case law

Glenstone Homeowners Ass'n v. State

48 Ill. Ct. Cl. 388 · Court of Claims of Illinois · May 13, 1996

First, “dedicated to and accepted” is clearly used in its real estate context. … This is clearly an express contract claim, not an implied contract claim.

Willis v. United States

600 F. Supp. 1407 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 11, 1985

“It long as been established, of course, that the United States, as sovereign, ‘is immune from suit save as it consents to be sued ... and the terms of its consent to be sued in any court define that court’s jurisdiction … United States, 532 F.2d 850, 852 (2d Cir.1976), that the fifth amendment does not clearly contemplate redress in the form of damage suits directly against the government.

Matchett v. Chicago Bar Ass'n

125 Ill. App. 3d 1004 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 17, 1984

In addition, Matchett asked for a declaratory judgment against the CBA, stating that, aside from the age criterion, he had been found qualified or well qualified. … and supporting facts sufficient to establish the “actual malice” necessary to overcome the privilege.

Adams v. Board of Trustees of the Teachers' Retirement System

407 Ill. App. 3d 592 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 18, 2011

Lacking consideration, the amount of money that is subject to the agreement does not qualify as salary under TRS’ salary rule.” … The Board found monies paid to Adams “subject to the agreement [did] not qualify as salary under [the Administrative Code].”

Williams v. City of Evanston

Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 28, 2007

from liability under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/1-101 et seq. … Tort Immunity Act

Epps v. Dart

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

First, Defendants seek a stay of discovery because Defendant Dart may have qualified immunity. … Dart may raise his qualified immunity defense at a later stage based on a more complete record, but there is currently no pending motion asserting a qualified immunity defense.

Goodknight v. Piraino

197 Ill. App. 3d 319 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 19, 1990

Further, while the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act) (Ill. Rev. … Stat. 1987, ch. 85, par. 3 — 102) provides liability for a public entity, and it may be arguable that the defendants are liable under the Tort Immunity Act, the Tort Immunity Act simply codifies the common law duty of a local

Alter v. Starbucks

Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 10, 2006

In holding that sovereign immunity did not shield the State-employed physician from immunity, the Kiersch court stated, "[T]he duty plaintiff alleges that defendant breached in this case arose independently of her State … This language clearly indicates that the Agreement was not intended to make the University liable for all matters arising out of its operation of the Starbucks store.

Montano v. City of Chicago

308 Ill. App. 3d 618 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 26, 1999

Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/3 — 104 (West 1994)) and struck paragraph 7(d) from the complaint. … On January 16, 1998, the City filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting that the City was immune from liability pursuant to section 3 — 102(a) of the Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/3 — 102(a) (West 1994)).

Coalition for Political Honesty v. State Board of Elections

83 Ill. 2d 236 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 1, 1980

While the General Assembly is authorized to establish the “procedure for determining the validity and sufficiency of a petition” (Ill. Const. 1970, art. … Our more recent opinions, however, clearly establish that it is only separate and unrelated questions which cannot be combined in a single proposition. Village of Deerfield v.

Komel v. Commonwealth Edison Co.

56 Ill. App. 3d 967 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 28, 1977

Freeman brought the latter under Edison’s, control since his failure to comply with policies established by Dr. Mehn, simply put, would subject him to discharge. … Clearly, Dr. Freeman was an Edison employee whose treatment of plaintiff was in his course of employment as a staff physician.

People Ex Rel. Krich v. Hurley

16 Ill. App. 2d 503 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 18, 1958

We think that the public policy of Illinois against falsehood is clearly implied in the civil and criminal statutes against fraud, libel, false pretenses and the like. … The court held in effect that where the false statement of qualification (a qualification established by the commission and not by statute or ordinance) is not relied on by the commission and does not induce it to permit

Dixon Fruit Co. v. State

22 Ill. Ct. Cl. 271 · Court of Claims of Illinois · Mar 16, 1956

Stats., (1933 State Bar Association Edition), and the doctrine of governmental immunity was in full effect. … Since the 1945 amendment to the Court of Claims Act, the doctrine of governmental immunity is no longer applied to claims against the state.

People v. Wilson

208 Ill. Dec. 716 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 3, 1995

And that is clearly collateral to the issue in the case. … It has nothing to do with the issue of immunity ***.”

In re Jackson

290 F. Supp. 872 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 18, 1968

This authority is believed to exist quite clearly under Section 658 and Section 2(a) (15) of the Bankruptcy Act ( 11 U.S.C. §§ 1058 and 11(a) (15)). … The power to issue an injunction when necessary to prevent the defeat or impairment of its jurisdiction is, therefore, inherent in a court of bankruptcy, as it is in a duly established court of equity.”

Zonta v. Village of Bensenville

167 Ill. App. 3d 354 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 23, 1988

We agree with the parties that the correct standard of care in this case is imposed by section 3 — 102 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Ill. Rev. … However, once such right is clearly established, summary judgment should be granted. (Lorek v. Hollenkamp (1986), 144 Ill. App. 3d 1100, 1103 , 495 N.E.2d 679 .) In Kimbrough v. Jewel Cos. (1981), 92 Ill.

Peterson v. State

37 Ill. Ct. Cl. 104 · Court of Claims of Illinois · Jul 27, 1984

No evidence was ever presented to establish the proper design and maintenance standards for highways as they existed in 1962. … On the other hand, while Respondent’s negligence is established, it is further established that decedent was not exercising reasonable care for his own safety and was thus guilty of contributory negligence.

Haligas v. City Of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 3, 2024

Qualified immunity “protects public officials from liability for damages if their actions did not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Fleming v. … would not violate clearly established rights.’”

Smith v. General Paving Company

24 Ill. App. 3d 858 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 27, 1974

This principle of non-liability is based on the theory that the contractor is entitled to share the immunity of the public body for such incidental injuries “where he is not guilty of negligence.” (See § 135, at 1008.) … It is our conclusion, therefore, that the trial court clearly erred in dismissing Counts, I, II, and III on the ground that none of them mentioned the government contract.

Diedrich v. Wright

550 F. Supp. 805 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 7, 1982

Judged by these standards defendants’ arguments fall far short of establishing that plaintiff assumed the risk of her accident. … Although the release intimates in general terms that defendants are to be held harmless from any and all claims, this phrase is qualified by the more specific terminology which precedes it.