Case law

Board of Trustees v. Cook County College Teachers Union, Local 1600

74 Ill. 2d 412 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 26, 1979

be made in a manner that would equalize the extra-work opportunities for all qualified teachers. … Defendant, on the other hand, argues that the agreement clearly refers to “extra pay” in the computation of rotation points.

Vestrup v. Du Page County Election Commission

335 Ill. App. 3d 156 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 31, 2002

that, where a word or phrase is used in different sections of the same legislative act, a court presumes that the word or phrase is used with the same meaning throughout the act, unless a contrary legislative intent is clearly … However, in our view this use of “territorial area” merely was to underscore the necessity that the entire district or political subdivision voted as a unit in the last election for a party to qualify for the status of established

Stapleton v. Advocate Health Care Network

76 F. Supp. 3d 796 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 31, 2014

If the statute stopped there, then Advocate would clearly lose: Advocate established its plan, and therefore its plan was not established by a church. … Advocate would have this amendment signify that Congress also now intended for a plan simply maintained by any self-affiliated organization to qualify (without the *805 need for church establishment), Defs.’

Torry v. City Of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 20, 2018

Again, once Defendants invoked qualified immunity, it became Plaintiffs’ burden to show that Defendants violated a clearly established right. See al-Kidd, 563 U.S. at 735. … In any event, because Defendant Officers invoke qualified immunity, the burden again shifts to Plaintiffs to identify clearly established law violated by Defendants’ conduct.

Ienco v. Angarone

291 F. Supp. 2d 755 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 12, 2003

. § 1983 , lenco must establish that Defendants were acting under the color of state law when they deprived him of a federal right. Ienco, 286 F.3d at 997-98. … Because we find that the officers’ actions did not violate Ienco’s due-process rights under the Newsome test, we need not decide whether they are also entitled to qualified immunity. 6 The Clerk *764 is instructed to enter

P&S Grain, LLC v. County of Williamson, Illinois

Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 2, 2010

A lack of standing qualifies as such an affirmative matter. Wexler v. Wirtz Corp., 211 Ill. 2d 18, 22, 809 N.E.2d 1240, 1243 (2004). … Under the well-established test for standing, we find that the plaintiffs' claim of injury is distinct and palpable, in that it is based upon the imposition of a particular tax and is not vague or undefined.

People v. Lawson

86 Ill. App. 3d 376 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 26, 1980

He also asserted he remembered clearly the events of the evening, although he was intoxicated. … The record clearly does not justify such an inference being drawn from the evidence.

Redlin v. Village of Hanover Park

278 Ill. App. 3d 183 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 13, 1996

The Village bases its argument on section 3 — 102(a) of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act), which provides in part that the Village "has the duty to exercise ordinary care … Following Wagner, Thomas’ claim is not barred by section 3 — 102(a) of the Tort Immunity Act.

Harton v. City of Chicago Department of Public Works

301 Ill. App. 3d 378 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 12, 1998

He found that Hartón had established a prima facie case of discrimination, in response to which the City had articulated a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its actions, namely, that a more qualified candidate was … purpose of establishing damages.

Tenorio v. Village of Robbins

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 27, 2019

qualified immunity. … Police officers “are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at the time.”

Gunn v. Village of Bolingbrook

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 27, 2022

“Governmental actors performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from suits for damages ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … In order to counter the qualified immunity defense, Plaintiff “must show both (1) that the facts make out a constitutional violation, and (2) that the constitutional right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the official

Bailey v. Binyon

583 F. Supp. 923 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 30, 1984

That procedure has been adapted to discharge cases, in which a plaintiff may satisfy his initial burden by establishing: “(1) that the plaintiff was a member of a racial minority; (2) that he was qualified for the job he … If Defendants’ position were correct, the employer would be immune from liability under Title VII.

The People v. Walsh

322 Ill. 195 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1926

There is some question as to whether this payment was made by cash or by check, but it is clearly established that it was paid between July 14, 1920, and September 10, 1920. … An examination of the facts set forth clearly establishes the guilt of the plaintiffs in error Shields and Kane under the second and the third counts of the indictment and also under the ninth and tenth counts of the indictment

Godinez v. City Of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 30, 2019

“Governmental actors performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from suits for damages ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … …To overcome the defendant's invocation of qualified immunity, the plaintiffs must show both (1) that the facts make out a constitutional violation, and (2) that the constitutional right was ‘clearly established’ at the

Dobbey v. Baldwin

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 8, 2019

the alternative that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … They have waived their qualified immunity defense and, in any event, are not entitled to qualified immunity.

City of Joliet v. Tuohey

1 Ill. App. 483 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 15, 1877

Appellee was elected city collector for the city of Joliet, in March, 1874, and after qualifying entered upon the duties of his office. … The evidence clearly establishes the fact that the appellee retained as his compensation a much larger amount than he was entitled to.

Bartkowiak v. City of Aurora

102 N.E.3d 842 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 30, 2018

. ¶ 5 Defendant denied the material allegations and raised the affirmative defenses of contributory negligence and immunity under section 3-102 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort … Immunity Act) ( 745 ILCS 10/3-102 (West 2010) ). ¶ 6 Following discovery, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment under section 3-102 of the Tort Immunity Act.

People v. Earl

121 Ill. App. 3d 254 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 19, 1984

The statute in its present form clearly authorizes forfeitures of weapons used in the commission of all of these crimes. … Further evidence at the hearing on the defendant’s motion for return of weapons established that the 9-mm. pistol was stolen.

Kreith v. American Airlines, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 1, 2021

Here, the complaint falls short of establishing that the allegedly defamatory statements fall within a qualified privilege. … In other words, immunity under the ATSA contains the same “actual malice” exception as qualified privilege under Illinois law. Cf. id. at 246–47 (tracing that standard for purposes of ATSA immunity to N.Y.

McNeill v. City of Chicago

212 Ill. 481 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1904

, and was re-appointed biennially thereafter to the same office, and that in each instance he qualified and took upon himself the duties of the office. … this case went to trial, and in such case, although the petition might be in some substantial respects deficient, yet if it were answered as in the case at bar, and the allegations of the petition admitted and the proof clearly