Case law

Adler v. Northern Hotel Co.

80 F. Supp. 776 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 28, 1948

However, if the Winshire Arms Apartment Hotel fails to qualify as one of the types of establishments embraced in the scope of the term, it becomes unnecessary for the Court to determine whether the Expediter’s interpretation … Clearly, it should have available continuously some accommodations for guests.

Burlet v. Baldwin

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 3, 2020

Qualified immunity applies when an official’s conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” White v. Pauly, 137 S. … Whether Taylor and Baldwin violated this clearly established right depends on the existence of an alternative motivation—a disputed factual question.

State of Minnesota ex rel. Gulley v. Caldwell

198 Ill. App. 3d 91 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 1, 1990

Beverly Pohl testified for the plaintiff as a qualified expert witness in the area of genetic blood testing to establish paternity. … Defendant has not shown that the verdict of the jury was clearly erroneous, and we will not reverse on that basis.

Advincula v. United Blood Services

Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 19, 1996

We find that information in ABRA's brief that provides background to the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) crisis essentially appears within the record on appeal and within the parties' briefs. … Curran, Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) Associated with Transfusions, 310 New Eng. J. Med. 69, 70 (1984); Kozop, 663 F. Supp. at 1052 .

Employers Insurance of Wausau a Mutual Co. v. Bush

791 F. Supp. 1314 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 16, 1992

Absolute Immunity to State-Law Claims Defendants argue that they are absolutely immune to the state-law claims (i.e., state-tort claims and state-constitutional claims) asserted against them in their individual capacities … Finally, the individual defendants are shielded from the constitutional claims described above under the doctrine of qualified immunity.

People v. Johnson

2011 IL 111817 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 1, 2011

. ¶ 11 Section 5-4-3(k)(1) establishes a State Offender DNA Identification System Fund (Fund), “a special fund in the State Treasury.” 730 ILCS 5/5-4-3(k)(1) (West 2008). … App. 3d at 919). ¶ 19 Marshall establishes, first, that the DNA analysis charge clearly is compensatory.

Laffoon v. Bell & Zoller Coal Co.

27 Ill. App. 3d 472 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 21, 1975

Industrial Com., 57 Ill.2d 113 , our supreme court reiterated the established principle of law that a contract of employment cannot exist without the consent of both parties, saying at page 119: "It is not possible for a … Clearly, the legislature did not intend to give "statutory employers" a bonus by virtue of section 1(a)(3) as the majority holds. The interpretation invites total emasculation of the Structural Work Act.

In Re Ocean Bank

481 F. Supp. 2d 892 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 16, 2007

Further, despite the lack of any credential or experience that would qualify him to say so, Mr. … Connelly refers to here as “we,” but Ocean Bank has not established that he is qualified to offer testimony on the meaning of the law.

People v. Miller

20 Ill. App. 3d 1061 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 3, 1974

Whether one not qualified as an expert may given an opinion on the identity of fingerprints. b. Whether the court erred in admitting hearsay to establish the identity of the fingerprints in People’s Exhibit #3. c. … Whether the trial court committed plain error in admitting into evidence a police booking card which clearly indicated prior criminal activity by the defendant. 3.

Concerned Citizens & Property Owners v. Illinois Commerce Comm'n

2018 IL App (5th) 150551 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 19, 2018

. ¶ 11 In response, GBX and the Commission argue that “the definition of ‘public utility’ clearly applies to new entrants.” … Id. ¶¶ 48, 51. ¶ 19 Here, GBX similarly fails to establish that it was a public utility at the time it filed its application with the Commission.

C.G.

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 9, 2026

Finally, Ford and Van Treese invoke the defense of qualified immunity, arguing that the rights implicated in C.G.’s First Amendment retaliation claim were not clearly established. … Because Plaintiffs points to no cases that show C.G.’s First Amendment rights were clearly established under these circumstances, the court finds Ford and Van Treese are entitled to qualified immunity.

Fullilove v. City Of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 5, 2024

immunity. … If there was even “arguable probable cause,” the Officers would be entitled to qualified immunity. Abbott v.

People v. Adams

198 Ill. App. 3d 74 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 5, 1990

As such, the registration requirement at issue here clearly serves a legitimate governmental purpose. … In doing so, we are mindful that legislative enactments carry a strong presumption of constitutionality, and the party challenging the statute has the burden of clearly establishing its invalidity. (People v.

Northern Trust Co. v. Continental Illinois National Bank & Trust Co.

43 Ill. App. 3d 169 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 13, 1976

The Chicago Foundation was, in fact, a qualified charitable organization under section 501(c)(3). … Here, the trustees clearly exercised their discretion by nominating various charities for grants.

People v. C.B.

308 Ill. App. 3d 227 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 19, 1999

The State contends that section 2 — 18 (4) (a) of the Juvenile Court Act is immune from the requirement that writings speak for themselves based upon language contained in the statute that states, “All other circumstances … We cannot say that the opposite conclusion is clearly evident from the record or that the trial court’s conclusion is unreasonable, arbitrary, and not based on the evidence presented.

Jackson v. Joliet Police Department, The

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 29, 2020

Qualified Immunity To establish qualified immunity, a defendant must show that his conduct did not violate a clearly established constitutional right. See Lovett v. … Rosado and Perona argue that there is no clearly established constitutional right to be free from a retaliatory or improper investigation.

Salaymeh v. St. Vincent Memorial Hospital Corp.

706 F. Supp. 643 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Feb 22, 1989

Immunity Defendant asserts that it is entitled to summary judgment based on an Illinois statute which provides immunity for hospitals and individuals against civil liability for their actions in the peer review process. … In conclusion, we are clearly persuaded that Defendant must prevail.

Sardiga v. Northern Trust Company

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.

Distaola v. Department of Registration & Education

72 Ill. App. 3d 977 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 5, 1979

It is well established that an injunction is an extraordinary remedy which is not granted as a matter of course but is granted only after plaintiff establishes the existence of a lawful right, irreparable harm and inadequate … In Schwarz the court held that testimony given under a grant of immunity in a criminal prosecution was admissible in disbarment proceedings.

Downie v. Klincar

759 F. Supp. 425 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 20, 1991

The fourth guarantee clearly establishes that some right to confrontation exists, but the qualifying “good cause” language reflects the flexibility that marks these proceedings and suggests that the confrontation requirement … Indeed, police reports are explicitly excluded from the Rule 803(8) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which establishes an exception from the hearsay rule for public records and reports.