Case law

Savarirayan v. English

45 Ill. App. 3d 105 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 20, 1977

The doctrine of absolute immunity surrounding Federal officials was reconfirmed and clearly delineated in Barr v. Matteo (1959), 360 U.S. 564 , 3 L. Ed. 2d 1434 , 79 S. Ct. 1335 . … English and Taylor were consulting urologists of many years experience and service to the hospital; they were recognized specialists in their field, and uniquely qualified to observe and evaluate the quality of Dr.

Hatcher v. Cheng

63 F. Supp. 3d 893 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Aug 7, 2014

Furthermore, Cheng is entitled to qualified immunity because Hatcher has not alleged that Cheng has violated a clearly established right. … Similar to Count 3, the Court also concludes that Kempf-Leonard is entitled to qualified immunity because Hatcher has not alleged that Cheng violated a clearly established right and has not come forward with a clearly analogous

Perez v. Lane

794 F. Supp. 286 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Mar 19, 1992

Officials cannot receive qualified immunity if their conduct violates clearly established constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. Conner v. … That Hispanics are protected from discrimination under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is clearly established, and a reasonable person would have known this.

Mooney v. Ill. Educ. Ass'n

372 F. Supp. 3d 690 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Apr 11, 2019

and its officials are shielded by the veil of qualified immunity. … But these special policy concerns also made qualified immunity improper for municipal corporations.

Catberro v. Naperville School District No. 203

250 Ill. Dec. 654 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 2, 2000

To qualify for the immunity provided by this section, an employee must hold a position involving either the determination of policy or the exercise of discretion. … The district responds that the teacher’s acts of choosing the rope and poles and having the students jump over the rope were clearly discretionary.

Schor v. Daley

563 F. Supp. 2d 893 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 30, 2008

a constitutional right; [and] (2) whether that constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” … The Tort Immunity Act shields the Defendant officers from liability for the state law false arrest claim for the same reasons that they are entitled to qualified immunity from the federal false arrest claim.

Montanez v. Guevara

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

This holding is based on the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis—whether a constitutional violation was alleged—and not the second— whether the right was clearly established at the time of violation. … The qualified immunity defense focuses instead on whether the official defendant’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. (emphasis in original)); Fields II, 740 F.3d at 1114.

Guy v. State of Illinois

958 F. Supp. 1300 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 14, 1997

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Defendants Pack and Nader contend that dismissal of plaintiffs § 1983 claim against them is warranted on the basis that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … The determination of whether defendants are entitled to qualified immunity often involves factual issues regarding defendants’ conduct, and therefore, “it is rarely appropriate to address the question of qualified immunity

Munoz v. Rivera

169 F. Supp. 3d 815 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 23, 2015

Finally, plaintiff argues that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity because the due process right he claims defendants violated was well established at the time of their alleged conduct. II. … And in Fields II, the court “made clear that fabricating evidence, including witness testimony, violates a clearly established constitutional right, such that qualified immunity does not shield the manufacturers of such evidence

People v. Edward T.

343 Ill. App. 3d 778 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 15, 2003

In response, the State argues that the trial corut erred in qualifying Dr. Zun as an expert witness. Dr. … Zun should not have been qualified as an expert witness in pediatric medicine.

Brandt v. Board of Educ. of City of Chicago

420 F. Supp. 2d 921 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 13, 2006

Qualified Immunity Nevertheless, the individual Defendants assert that the doctrine of qualified immunity protects them from this lawsuit. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “[i]f the law did not put the [public official] on notice that his conduct would be clearly unlawful, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is appropriate.”

E & E Construction Co. v. Illinois

674 F. Supp. 269 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 26, 1987

And even if they do not, the classifications must still withstand “rational basis” scrutiny- Qualified Immunity Each Individual Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity from damages unless her or his actions in enforcing … the Act violated a clearly established right (Harlow v.

Larue v. Fairman

780 F. Supp. 1190 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 6, 1991

Whether an official is protected by qualified immunity turns upon the objective legal reasonableness of the action, in light of legal rules clearly established at the time the action was taken. … In support of their claim of qualified immunity, defendants contend the following: a) it is not clearly established that plaintiff has a right [to] legal counsel and law materials; b) it is not clearly established that plaintiff

Serrano v. Guevara

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

This holding is based on the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis—whether a constitutional violation was alleged—and not the second— whether the right was clearly established at the time of violation. … The qualified immunity defense focuses instead on whether the official defendant’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. (emphasis in original)); Fields II, 740 F.3d at 1114.

El Ranchito, Inc. v. City of Harvey

207 F. Supp. 2d 814 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 26, 2002

To overcome a defense of qualified immunity, the plaintiff must first allege the deprivation of an actual constitutional right, and second, show that the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … In support of their claim of qualified immunity, defendants argue that the law was at least not clearly established that the police defendants could not make a protective sweep of El Ranchito to protect the inspector.

Lavery v. Department of Financial & Professional Regulation

2023 IL App (1st) 220900 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 25, 2023

Lavery qualified as a therapist under the Act. He concluded, however, that Mr. Lavery had failed to meet his burden of establishing that the withheld documents fell within the statutory privilege. … Unlike in Taylor, a recognized exception to sovereign immunity—the prospective injunctive relief exception—clearly applies here.

Washington v. City of Evanston

Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 19, 2002

Kloempken's immunity from civil liability pursuant to the EMS Act and then consider St. Francis Hospital's immunity. In 1996, St. … Francis Hospital's SOPs or the established guidelines for breech delivery. The record shows that Dr.

Doe 20 v. Board of Education of the Community Unit School District No. 5

680 F. Supp. 2d 957 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jan 11, 2010

person could have believed that it would not violate clearly established rights.’ ” Gonzalez v. … The Court further believes that the right violated was clearly established.

Steinbrecher v. Oswego Police Officer Dickey

138 F. Supp. 2d 1103 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 13, 2001

Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability for civil damages “ ‘[if] their conduct does not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ” Wollin v. … standards were clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Thompson v. Village of Monee

110 F. Supp. 3d 826 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 17, 2015

Namely, Thompson has not met the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis because he has failed to show that the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. … Sangamon Cnty., 705 F.3d 706, 731 (7th Cir.2013) (In order to establish defeat a qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff is required to produce a case “clearly establishing] [the right] in a particularized sense, rather