Case law

Sardiga v. Northern Trust Co.

409 Ill. App. 3d 56 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 15, 2011

In order to prevail under the Act, it is the plaintiff who must establish that his employer retaliated against him for his refusal to participate in a qualifying activity. 740 ILCS 174/20 (West 2004). … The record does not clearly establish that Hines misrepresented or concealed material facts or that he knew at the time he made the representations that they were untrue.

Anderson v. First American Group of Companies

353 Ill. App. 3d 403 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 8, 2004

of law as applied to the established facts is or is not violated. … We believe that plaintiff qualifies as an “employee” under the Fee Act.

Hamlin v. United States Express Co.

107 Ill. 443 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 1, 1883

But this doctrine has no application to a case where a life estate is clearly given to the first taker. (Welsch v. Belleville Savings Bank, supra.) … So reading it, the words, “during her ,natural life, ” must be understood as annexed to and qualifying the first clause.

Barnes v. Gibbons

2021 IL App (5th) 190415-U · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 26, 2021

¶ 29 Furthermore, government officials, such as Gibbons, sued in their individual capacities for civil rights violations can be entitled to either qualified or absolute immunity from damages. Filarsky v. … If prosecutors are not acting in their role as an advocate, qualified immunity can apply to activities such as acting as a complaining witness or providing a supporting affidavit to establish probable cause for an arrest

Estate of James Iler, by Joseph Jones, Administrator, et al. v. Macoupin County, et al.

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Nov 14, 2025

Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … The Right was Clearly Established The clearly established prong of the qualified immunity analysis ensures that a government official is held liable only when the contours of the right allegedly violated

Corbet v. The County of Lake

2016 IL App (2d) 160035 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 23, 2016

¶5 Here, the City’s motion argued, the depositions of plaintiff and other people established that the bike path was a “riding trail.” … We adhere to our statement in McElroy that a “trail” need not be wholly unimproved to qualify under section 3- 107(b).

McDonald v. Chicago Daily News Publishing Co.

252 Ill. App. 61 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 27, 1929

This is an action of libel in which the declaration of one count charges as the gravamen of the offense that at the time of the publication the plaintiff was a duly licensed and qualified attorney at law, and also a “special … He could not be financially damaged because there is no law establishing such office or providing for any emolument therein, The article counted upon in the declaration is not lihelous per se, and to maintain an action for

Penman v. Board of Trustees of Illinois Eastern Community Colleges

94 Ill. App. 3d 139 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 3, 1981

However, being classified as a full-time teacher or administrator, according to section 3 — 32, only qualifies the individual as a teacher or administrator for tenure consideration under whatever policy the board may establish … Illinois law clearly establishes that only a full-time teacher may qualify for contractual continued service. (Edwards v. Board of Education (1980), 84 Ill. App. 3d 374,376 , 405 N.E.2d 478,480 .)

Cress v. Recreation Services, Inc.

341 Ill. App. 3d 149 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 7, 2003

An “employee welfare benefit plan” is: “any plan, fund, or program *** established or maintained by an employer or by an employee organization, or by both, to the extent that such plan, fund, or program was established or … These clearly are allegations that Donovan harmed RSI.

West Side Organization Health Services Corp. v. Thompson

73 Ill. App. 3d 179 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 31, 1979

However, defendants contend that because WSO has no guarantee that it would have received the *100,000 withheld, it cannot establish any concrete injury resulting from defendants’ refusal to expend that money. … A well-recognized exception to the statutory bar of sovereign immunity under the Court of Claims Act (Ill. Rev.

Louise v. Department of Labor

90 Ill. App. 3d 410 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 12, 1980

The Act clearly grants defendants the authority to hear the class of cases to which plaintiff’s matter belongs; the department therefore had subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiff’s cause. … Our supreme court has stated however, that this governmental immunity is qualified and that estoppel may be invoked against a governmental body in certain instances.

Sutton

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 18, 2025

However, if the complaint’s well-pleaded allegations, taken as true, do not “state a claim of violation of clearly established law,” a court may dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) based on qualified immunity. Hanson v. … More specifically, J.L. clearly establishes conditions under which an anonymous call is insufficient for reasonable suspicion.

Smith v. De-Los-Santos

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 26, 2021

Qualified Immunity The Defendants next argue that they are qualifiedly immune from liability for failure to protect. … Furthermore, the Defendants take an overly narrow approach to the qualified immunity analysis. In Sinn v.

Van Dyke v. Illinois Department of Children and Family Services

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 29, 2018

A defendant is not entitled to qualified immunity where (1) the defendant violated the plaintiff’s statutory or constitutional rights and (2) the statutory or constitutional right at issue was “clearly established” at … 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.

Shopping Delite, Inc v. City of Bellevile

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Aug 29, 2024

Qualified Immunity In their final argument, defendants asserted that summary judgment was proper as to Blakeslee because she was protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity … Qualified immunity is designed to shield government agents “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Donaldson v. Illinois State Board of Education

730 F. Supp. 1456 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Feb 15, 1990

The Illinois State Board of Education is an agency of the state and is therefore absolutely immune from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Gleason v. … Therefore, Governors State University does not qualify as a common public school. Nor does Plaintiffs service as a school board member qualify as supervising within the meaning of the statute.

Bervid v. Alvarez

647 F. Supp. 2d 1006 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 20, 2009

of “highly qualified” in every category. … Defendants also argue that in any event, qualified immunity shields them from liability for the putative violation and that the complaint fails to plead that the individual defendants acted with the requisite intent to deprive

People v. King

2020 IL 123926 · Illinois Supreme Court · Feb 5, 2021

Safarik testified that he also conducts “equivocal death evaluations” in cases where the “manner of death is not well established.” … We hold that the State did. ¶ 52 The applicable law is well established.

Nelson v. Union Wire Rope Corp.

39 Ill. App. 2d 73 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 30, 1963

Fault on the part of Auchter is not an ultimate issue in this case. * It is the contention of Archer, however, that the record clearly establishes that Auchter failer to assemble the hoist as directed by Archer’s blueprints … It overlooks, in our opinion, the reason behind the established rule, the reverse of which would not necessarily follow.

City of Shelbyville v. Shelbyville Restorium, Inc.

96 Ill. 2d 457 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 17, 1983

Long delays by the government in instituting suit, of course, cause harm to the defendant and are in the interest of no one; however, we are unwilling to change a well-established rule of law so as to leave citizens who have … I believe that, in abolishing local government's immunity from suit, the framers of the 1970 Constitution clearly *468 intended that the sovereign and citizens be on equal footing.