Case law

Boyce v. Fairman

24 F. Supp. 2d 880 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 29, 1998

They argue that as public employees, they were covered by the Illinois Tort Immunity Act, Chapter 745 ILCS 10/1-101 et. seq., and thus were able to avail themselves of the immunities and defenses therein. … Also, Defendants' qualified immunity argument cannot be entertained herein, as it was first, inappropriately, raised in Defendants’ Reply brief. 7 .

Ballin Drugs, Inc. v. Department of Registration & Education

166 Ill. App. 3d 520 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 16, 1988

The statute clearly lists six guidelines which a pharmacist “shall” consider in determining whether to dispense a controlled substance. … Plaintiffs argued that Graber was not yet qualified as an expert and should be ex-eluded.

Murphy v. Siddiqui

District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 22, 2024

Qualified Immunity Crain claims that she is also entitled to summary judgment under a theory of qualified immunity, even if she was deliberately indifferent. … A state official such as Crain is protected by qualified immunity unless Murphy shows “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of

Illini Media Co. v. Department of Revenue

279 Ill. App. 3d 432 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 19, 1996

We find the educational use was clearly established by the record. … If only the identifiable portion of a property is used for an exempt purpose, while the rest of the property is used primarily for a nonexempt purpose (or not at all), only the portion used for the exempt purpose qualifies

Schlencker v. Risley

4 Ill. 483 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1842

In some instances the granting or refusing a motion for a new trial, is a matter of sound discretion with the judge, while in others, the question must be determined by well known and firmly established principles of law. … The jury have tried the case on its merits, and have rendered a verdict which may be clearly comprehended and easily understood, and by which no one will doubt that they intended to convey the fact to the Court, that they

Wheaton v. Suwana - Corrected Opinion

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 11, 2005

Who Deducts and/or Pays for Insurance, Social Security, and Taxes The evidence in this case clearly established that insurance, social security, and taxes were all either funded or deducted by Union County Hospital on behalf … Additionally, the court noted that immunity from suit that arises from the expiration of a statute of limitation is a valuable substantive right.

Ogden Building & Loan Ass'n v. Mensch

196 Ill. 554 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 16, 1902

The authorities very clearly lay down the rule that evidence offered to impeach a certificate of this character must fully and clearly satisfy the court that the certificate of the officer is false and fraudulent, and even … a preponderance of evidence less than sufficient to establish a moral certainty to that effect is not sufficient.”

The PEOPLE v. Noble

42 Ill. 2d 425 · Illinois Supreme Court · May 28, 1969

While the evidence on the issue of defendant’s sanity at the time of the shooting is conflicting, it cannot be said that the State failed in its obligation to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant was sane. … That argument is specious, for it is apparent from the colloquy between the court and counsel that any discussion between counsel and defendant must wait until “After he leaves the stand”— and we think that phrase clearly

Giegoldt v. Condell Medical Center

Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 4, 2002

Generally, however, a hospital's failure to provide adequate restraints, including bed rails, can only be established by expert medical testimony. Therefore, these cases are treated as medical malpractice cases. … It appears at one point that the trial judge read section 2--622 aloud to clearly show what the statute required.

People v. Barham

Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 1, 2003

Although it is clear that establishing excessive speed was a critical element of the State's proof of the crime, it offered no evidence to establish the speed limit. … The conclusion was immune from testing through cross-examination. The testimony regarding the rate of elimination of alcohol was inadmissible, and the court's conclusion was improper.

Altman v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVS.

666 F. Supp. 2d 918 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 28, 2009

To establish a violation of the ADA, an employee must show: “1) that she is disabled; 2) that sbo is otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodation; and 3) that … Defendants assert that they are entitled to summary judgment on this claim as it is barred by sovereign immunity.

People v. Morris

148 Ill. App. 3d 471 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 5, 1986

As Officer Kocher approached on foot, he was able to see clearly defendant’s face. Defendant dropped the items he was carrying and proceeded to run back towards Main Street. … Defendant argues that Harper was available to the prosecution for cross-examination because the prosecution could have granted Harper immunity or continued defendant’s case until the case against Harper was finalized.

Travaglini v. Ingalls Health System

Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 24, 2009

BACKGROUND The following facts were established at trial. … In fact, the jury clearly concluded that the decedent was not monitored while he was eating, despite a history of choking while eating.

Teece v. Boyle

345 Ill. App. 88 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 20, 1951

He thereafter qualified and entered upon the.duties of that office and received federal recognition of his appointment as Major General of the Line. … Federal recognition with commission in the National Guard of the United States is established as a requirement for holding commission in the active National Guard of the State of Illinois; the commission of an officer in

Pliakos v. Illinois Liquor Control Commission

12 Ill. App. 2d 170 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 8, 1957

Standing alone, the paragraph clearly gave the State Commission authority to revoke as well as to issue licenses to retailers. … Although pursued by thousands, the business is not protected by the organic law and is not one of the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States. The traffic therein is permissive only. Saladino v.

People Ex Rel. Lindberg v. Memorial Consultants, Inc.

50 Ill. App. 3d 1005 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jul 29, 1977

As the cited authorities indicate, the statutory construction urged by defendant would emasculate the act and defeat the clearly expressed legislative intent to regulate all prepaid burial contracts. … Liberty implies only the absence of arbitrary restraint, not immunity from reasonable regulations and prohibitions imposed in the interests of the community. [Citations.]

Velez v. City of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 30, 2023

Because Velez has enough evidence of constitutional- rights violations, (fabricating evidence and withholding exculpatory evidence), and those rights were clearly established in 2001, qualified immunity does not apply to … Because fabrication of evidence violates “clearly estab- lished constitutional rights,” qualified immunity does not apply to Goldish.

Clay v. Williams

District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 31, 2020

“Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense, and once raised, the plaintiff bears the burden of defeating it by showing: (1) the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established … Here, Clay failed to meet his burden to defeat a qualified immunity defense.

Beathard v. Lyons

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Aug 11, 2022

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that Lyons and Spack are entitled to qualified immunity because state employees who are sued in their individual capacities “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.’”

Mahan v. Marion Police Pension Board

2023 IL App (5th) 210426 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 3, 2023

Mahan indicated that if he did not regain feeling in his hand, he did not intend to further qualify with a firearm each year. … Mixed questions of law and fact are reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard. Wade, 226 Ill. 2d at 505.