Case law

Johnson v. Cermack

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 2, 2022

. § 1983 alleging violations of constitutional rights, qualified immunity shields an official from liability for civil damages, provided that the illegality of the official's conduct was not clearly established at the time … A prison official is immune from suit if the constitutional right at issue was not clearly established at the time of the 9 Defendants argue that Dr.

Glickman v. Maine-Niles Association of Special Recreation

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 24, 2020

That is, this Fourth Amendment claim still must be dismissed unless Plaintiff’s “constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” … It was clearly established law, the Snell court reasoned, that the social workers could not rely on such information.

People v. Smollett

2023 IL App (1st) 220322 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 1, 2023

Pursuant to Rule 301, Smollett qualified as a nonparty who could have appealed. … Consequently, Smollett cannot demonstrate that the trial court clearly or obviously erred, and therefore, he has not established plain error. See People v.

Williams v. State

49 Ill. Ct. Cl. 109 · Court of Claims of Illinois · Aug 28, 1996

In the present claim, the Claimant’s current condition is not clearly apparent from the diagnosis given by a medical specialist near the time of the injury. … Thus, Claimants counsel contends that $1,613.55 of the $2,000 award is subject to an attorneys lien and is therefore immunized from seizure to pay Claimants delinquent child support.

Tevlin v. Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago

237 F. Supp. 2d 895 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 18, 2002

In that light, each of Tevlin’s claims that he was clearly more qualified than Odoucha is sought to be met by District’s advancement of other contentions. As District would have it: 1. … In that latter respect it cannot fairly be said that Tevlin failed the prima facie requirement of being “clearly more qualified” in Mills terms. 5 But even were that not so, Mills, 171 F.3d at 457 (internal quotation marks

Hansen v. Caring Professionals, Inc.

286 Ill. App. 3d 797 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 20, 1997

Hospitals and other health care facilities contracted with Caring Professionals to obtain qualified nurses to fill temporary vacancies. … The Act does, however, clearly establish a negligent hiring claim by a health facility against the nurse agency. For that purpose, the referred nurse is an "employee” of the agency.

Illinois & Wisconsin Railroad v. Von Horn

18 Ill. 257 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1857

We do not deem it important to enter upon an analysis of the testimony, as it seems to us clearly to justify the finding of the jury. … This could not be, upon the supposition that they intended to testify fairly, if there was an established value to the kind of property.

Kaplan v. Lehman Brothers

250 F. Supp. 562 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 25, 1966

No action was taken to outlaw the long-established practice. … to geyer wire conneetions to in. jure a non-member competitor would not serye the purposes of seeurities regulationS; there remained no poücy of secu. ritieg controI to exclude the application of the antitrust laws or to immunize

Green v. Carlinville Community Unit School District No. 1

Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 28, 2008

Thus, we cannot determine whether the District would have immunity under the Tort Immunity Act. … To establish this claim of direct negligence, plaintiffs do not have to show that the attack was committed within the scope of employment.

Gall v. Stoll

259 Ill. 174 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 18, 1913

the facts in connection therewith; that if the facts were clearly established complainants would be'without standing in court. … The widow never qualified nor derived any authority from the court to act as executrix and to administer her deceased husband’s estate.

Nagib v. News-Sun

64 Ill. App. 3d 752 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 12, 1978

The negligence standard established in Troman, however, has a limitation which is directly appropriate to this case. … App. 3d 1030, 1036 , 367 N.E.2d 478, 483 ), and the allegation that defendants acted in total disregard of the truth of the statements made would not alone, even if established by the evidence, defeat the qualified privilege

Department of Transportation v. Harper

64 Ill. App. 3d 732 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 12, 1978

His ownership, regardless of his knowledge, qualifies him to testify.” ( 22 N.D. 544, 546 , 134 N.W. 749, 750 .) … In Lopez the court stated: “[I]t is well-established law that an owner of property is always competent to testify as to its value.

Johnson v. Core-Vent Corp.

264 Ill. App. 3d 833 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 29, 1993

The only exceptions stated in section 13 — 212(a) concern legal disability or fraudulent concealment, exceptions for which Core-Vent does not qualify. … Brush (1973), 53 Ill. 2d 405 , 292 N.E.2d 372 (Tort Immunity Act); Patsis v. Zion-Benton Township High School, No. 126 (1992), 234 Ill. App. 3d 232 , 599 N.E.2d 531 (Tort Immunity Act); Ogg, 121 Ill.

United States v. Isaacs

351 F. Supp. 1323 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 28, 1972

The Government promptly filed a motion to quash the subpoena on the grounds that (1) the subpoena is overly broad and fails *1326 to establish evidentiary relevance and (2) some of the documents contained therein are immune … The statute clearly defines procedures and plainly indicates the circumstances for their application.” Palermo v. United States, supra, at 349, 79 S.Ct. at 1222 .

Alvarez v. Wilson

600 F. Supp. 706 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 11, 1985

Congress established that procedure to address internal military matters. … We believe that the potential for disruption of “the unique disciplinary structure of the military establishment,” Chappell v.

Ransom v. Marrese

122 Ill. 2d 518 · Illinois Supreme Court · May 18, 1988

The Act establishes a procedure which must be followed in pursuing a malpractice claim against a health-care provider who qualifies as such under the Act. … If the language of the statute is clear and unambiguous, judicial interpretation is inappropriate and the courts will adopt the meaning the statute clearly expresses. (Town of Merrillville v.

Davis v. The City of Chicago

2014 IL App (1st) 122427 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 14, 2014

But the record clearly negates this assertion. … In defense, defendants asserted immunity under the Act.

Calvary Baptist Church v. Department of Revenue

285 Ill. Dec. 412 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 30, 2004

Accordingly, we will affirm the Department’s determination that Calvary is not entitled to an exemption unless that determination is clearly erroneous. “ ‘[A] finding is “clearly erroneous” when although there is evidence … The FARM is clearly used to allow Calvary’s members to pursue this aspect of their beliefs.

Scheller v. Health Care Service Corp.

138 Ill. App. 3d 219 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 3, 1985

The court in Bryce stated: “It is immediately apparent that the record before us does not contain sufficient proof to establish defendant’s guilt of retaliatory discharge. … The Maryland Court of Special Appeals in Beye said: “If an employer directly discharges an at-will employee in such manner as to make the discharge an abusive one under Adler, it would defy both reason and fairness to immunize

In Re Material Corp., Inc.

206 B.R. 933 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · May 20, 1996

Its sovereign immunity argument, as is relevant here, was that the limited waiver of sovereign immunity provided by 11 U.S.C. § 106 does not apply because the Debtor does not have a viable counterclaim against the United … Clearly, Mr. Kendall had apparent authority to consent to the IRS’ seizure. 5. Alternatively, Mr. Kew implicitly consented to the IRS’ entry to the premises and seizure of the corporate assets.