Case law

Davenport v. DeRobertis

653 F. Supp. 649 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 30, 1987

IL Qualified. Immunity from Damages and the Application of the Eleventh Amendment Defendants contend that they are individually immune from monetary damages through the application of qualified immunity. … the law cannot be said to be clearly established.

Novick v. Staggers

913 F. Supp. 2d 606 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 20, 2012

Qualified Immunity The Court does not find much new ground trod by Plaintiff in his Motion in regards to the Court’s finding on qualified immunity. . … Analysis of qualified immunity involves two questions: (1) whether a constitutional right was violated using plaintiffs version of the facts, and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time. Surita v.

Hagan v. Quinn

838 F. Supp. 2d 805 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jan 19, 2012

The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials who perform discretionary functions from liability for civil damages so long as their actions do not violate clearly established constitutional rights. … To defeat qualified immunity, a plaintiff must demonstrate (1) the defendant’s conduct violated the plaintiffs constitutional rights and (2) the violated right was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct

Rusinowski v. Village of Hillside

835 F. Supp. 2d 641 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 29, 2011

Qualified Immunity State officials with discretionary or policymaking authority are protected from some constitutional claims by the doctrine of qualified immunity. Jacobs v. … Thus, a court must determine whether the facts actually alleged clearly establish a qualified immunity defense. Id.

Pierce v. Commonfields of Cahokia Public Water District

897 F. Supp. 2d 743 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 20, 2012

In Defendants’ Answer, they raise the defense of qualified immunity as well as reiterate the defense in the present motion for summary judgment. … Thus, legislative immunity does not bar a § 1983 claim against Commonfields, nor is Commonfields entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs claim. 3.

Farnsworth v. Tribune Company

43 Ill. 2d 286 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 26, 1969

Medical quackery is an area of critical public concern which clearly qualifies under the Butts test as a subject “ ‘about which information is needed or appropriate to enable the members of society to cope with the exigencies … This conclusion is supported by preNew York Times cases which established a qualified privilege for publications concerning public health and medical quackery. Brinkley v.

Kinslow v. Duckins

244 F. Supp. 3d 771 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 20, 2016

Qualified Immunity Finally, even assuming the officers lacked probable cause for Kinslow’s arrest, they are entitled to qualified immunity with respect to his his false arrest claim. … right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

Nichol v. Stass

192 Ill. 2d 233 · Illinois Supreme Court · Aug 10, 2000

Nor is state employment established, for purposes of sovereign immunity, through the State Employee Indemnification Act. … It would be anomalous to grant a qualified immunity to educators and biological parents but to deny immunity entirely to foster parents, who, in their relationships with their foster children, share many important similarities

Catberro v. Naperville School District No. 203

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.

Speagle v. Ferguson

852 F. Supp. 2d 1096 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Mar 27, 2012

Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 , 129 S.Ct. 808 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (“Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official’s conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right.”). II. … Count II is based on an alleged decision — the decision to charge Plaintiff allegedly without probable cause — that clearly falls under the shield of absolute immunity. See, e.g., Smith v.

Myers v. Hasara

51 F. Supp. 2d 919 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jun 8, 1999

liability based upon the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields government officials who are performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights

Neal v. City of Harvey, Ill.

1 F. Supp. 2d 849 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 30, 1998

Section 1983 & Qualified Immunity 1 Mr. … Qualified immunity protects government *854 employees from liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Wilkosz v. Wilkosz

124 Ill. App. 3d 904 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 6, 1984

Nonetheless, the court held, she was unemancipated and did qualify as a resident of the parents’ household. … App. 577 , which established the principle that a parent is immune from recovery for injuries sustained in the exercise of family rights.

Antia v. Thurman

914 F. Supp. 256 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 11, 1996

immunity because Antia cannot prove that he violated a clearly established constitutional right. … She cites no authority for this proposition, however, and cannot show that this right was “clearly established.”

Daniels v. Kieser

446 F. Supp. 1160 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 22, 1978

In balancing the policies between a qualified and an absolute immunity, the Court was concerned with the prosecutor’s duty to exercise his best judgment both in deciding which suits to bring and in conducting them in court … Kieser defenseless, as he still has available to him the good faith defense of the qualified immunity available to public officials. See Wood v.

Markowski v. Edgar

726 F. Supp. 1128 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 15, 1989

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY The Magistrate’s analysis of the immunity issue is as follows: The Secretary contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity from damages here because there is no “clearly established” case law that … The Harlow test was created to permit resolution of the issue of qualified immunity on summary judgment, recognizing that officials who do not violate clearly established law are entitled to immunity from a suit for damages

Sato v. Tabor

579 F. Supp. 1170 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 18, 1983

This qualified good faith immunity has both an objective and subjective element. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). … The doctrine of qualified, good faith immunity protects the defendant United States since the actions of IRS officials in filing the Notice of Federal Tax Lien do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Harms v. Godinez

829 F. Supp. 259 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 29, 1993

Qualified Immunity Even if we were to hold otherwise, however, the Defendants would not be liable for money damages in the present case. … The Seventh Circuit has developed a two-step analysis in qualified immunity cases.

Brown v. Knapp

156 F. Supp. 2d 732 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 29, 2001

Qualified immunity will protect an officer who reasonably, but mistakenly, believes that probable cause existed. Burns v. Reed, 44 F.3d 524, 529 (7th Cir.1995). … Moreover, issues of fact also exist as to whether Officer Knapp is entitled to qualified immunity on this claim, as mentioned above.

Max v. Paladino

656 F. Supp. 937 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 13, 1987

Second, a rule that government officials are immune from suit under § 1983 whenever they do not intend to violate a person’s civil rights would conflict with the doctrine of qualified immunity established in Harlow v. … ’ ” for which federal officials may only claim qualified immunity.