Case law

Bader v. United Airlines, Inc.

113 F. Supp. 3d 981 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 9, 2015

Finally, even if the AQP clearly requires I/Es to be line-qualified, United has not explained why the FTEPA preempts plaintiffs’ claim that the line-qualification requirement violated their rights when plaintiffs are I/Es … As explained above, United has not established that it is compelled by law to require its I/Es to be line-qualified.

Liggins v. City of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 9, 2021

The Haliw court held that what must be “clearly established” for purposes of qualified immunity is the availability of a defense to conspiracy liability: the intracorporate conspiracy doctrine. Haliw v. City of S. … Defendants have not argued that the constitutional rights actually at issue in this case were not clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity.

Lyberger v. Snider

District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 14, 2021

Qualified Immunity Officers are also afforded the extra layer of protection of qualified immunity. Thayer v. Chiczerski, 705 F.3d 237, 247 (7th Cir. 2012). … Qualified immunity is immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability. Pearson, 555 U.S. at 237.

Powell v. Simon

District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 14, 2019

violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … As such, Leahy cannot establish a constitutional violation, providing the IDNR Defendants with qualified immunity from Leahy’s § 1983 claims.

USX Corp. v. White

Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 1, 2004

If a company qualifies for use of this method, it is required to do so. … Sections 11.50(a)(1) and (a)(2) clearly indicate that the legislature intended that a single surviving corporation remain after a statutory merger.

In Re Automotive Professionals, Inc.

370 B.R. 161 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 12, 2007

It argues that the State has sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution from such orders and that the Director is considered the State for purposes of sovereign immunity. … The court need not decide whether the Director stands in the shoes of the State for purposes of sovereign immunity because the State has no such immunity. In Central Virginia Community College v.

Reese v. Doe

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Mar 7, 2023

right, and (2) the asserted right was clearly established at the time of the violation. … Further, Plaintiff has made no showing that his right to be free from the force used by Defendant in this case was clearly established at the time of the incident.

Conner v. Ofreneo

257 Ill. App. 3d 427 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 30, 1993

Ofreneo also stated that Karla’s history was within normal limits, although he did testify that he did not write down her prior immunizations, illnesses or allergies. … Additionally, an expert’s admission that he is not qualified may lead to a finding that the witness, in fact, is not qualified. Landers v. Ghosh (1986), 143 Ill. App. 3d 94 , 491 N.E.2d 950 .

Norris v. National Union Fire Insurance

368 Ill. App. 3d 576 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 17, 2006

While the majority recognized Jones had clearly marked an X in the space for rejecting uninsured motorist coverage, it concluded Jones could not make an informed choice to accept or reject since the offer was not made in … It happened in Stallman where the court decided to reconsider the parent-child tort immunity rule. Stallman, 152 Ill. App. 3d at 689 .

Coley v. Bradshaw & Range Funeral Home, P.C.

2020 IL App (2d) 190627 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 21, 2020

Therefore, Bradshaw clearly knew that it had an obligation to make reasonable efforts to locate Coley under section 5 of the Remains Act (id. § 5), which it did not do. … CONCLUSION ¶ 46 Section 45 of the Remains Act entitled Bradshaw to immunity from Coley’s negligence claim because Bradshaw sufficiently established that it carried out the instructions of North, who represented

Central Illinois Light Co. v. Department of Revenue

Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 7, 2003

CILCO asserted that the coal qualified as part of a pollution control facility, which is specifically exempted under the Act. … However, the administrative law judge clearly stated that her decision was not based on the regulation.

People v. Clifton

342 Ill. App. 3d 696 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 4, 2003

Detective Richardson clearly qualifies as an expert. He testified at trial that he had been a Chicago police officer for 27 years and a gang specialist for 18. … Accordingly, consistent with established precedent, we believe that Richardson’s evidence qualified as expert testimony.

Taylor v. Huntley

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 22, 2019

As a final matter, the defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … ‘The Court accordingly rejects the defendants’ arguments concerning qualified immunity.

Scofield v. Board of Education

411 Ill. 11 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 23, 1952

The defendants argue that when all of the provisions of article 5A are read together, in conjunction with certain provisions of the Election Code, the legislative intent and plan is clearly discernible as to qualifying age … A strong presumption exists in favor of the validity of enactments of the legislature, but where an act of the General Assembly or section thereof has no generally accepted body of precedents, no established set of standards

Doellman v. Warner & Swasey Co.

147 Ill. App. 3d 842 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 23, 1986

The injury referenced in the above passage is clearly that incurred by plaintiff. … Although not sued in tort, appellee herein clearly qualified as a party potentially “liable in tort” for Christopher’s death. (See Doyle v. Rhodes (1984), 101 Ill. 2d 1 , 461 N.E.2d 382 .)

Koeffler v. Koeffler

185 Ill. 261 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1900

Steiner, except in so far as the same is qualified by the words of the proviso, and we think the words of the proviso do qualify the estate granted and reduce it below that of a fee simple estate; but this reduction below … property as full and as complete as if he had granted the same to her in fee simple absolute, without condition, limitation, restriction or qualification, and also had given her the power of disposition by will, and it was clearly

Tramblay v. Hyde Park State Bank

336 Ill. 80 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1929

Whether any promise of immunity was made by the bank if the notes were given is not clear, but in all the opinions it is treated as if that was understood between the parties. … perfectly clear that both she and Kronmeyer were influenced by the understanding, which was clearly to be implied, that if the matter was adjusted satisfactorily Kronmeyer would not have to go to jail or be prosecuted. *

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

Shoreline Towers Condominium Association v. Gassman

404 Ill. App. 3d 1013 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 30, 2010

not in furtherance of acts immunized from, liability by this Act.” 735 ILCS 110/20(c) (West 2008). … We disagree, as the Act does not require a lawsuit be filed while protected conduct is ongoing in order to qualify as a SLAPP suit.

Kirwan v. Lincolnshire-Riverwoods Fire Protection District

285 Ill. Dec. 380 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 24, 2004

On March 7, 2001, decedent experienced an allergic reaction to walnuts while at Bar Louie, an establishment in Riverwoods. At 9:26 p.m. a 9-1-1 call was placed. … Taking plaintiffs well-pleaded facts as true, we cannot say that it clearly appears that plaintiff would not be entitled to relief under any set of facts.