Case law

Wilbon v. Plovanich

67 F. Supp. 3d 927 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 9, 2014

Qualified Immunity: whether Defendants had arguable probable cause Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on the false arrest claims only. (Defs.’ Mem. at 8-9,14, 17-18.) … Plaintiffs accurately point out that Defendants have failed to raise, and thus waive, any argument as to the second prong of the qualified immunity test, namely, that the respective constitutional rights were not clearly

Yachnin v. Village of Libertyville

803 F. Supp. 2d 844 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 10, 2011

Qualified immunity protects officers performing discretionary functions from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights that a reasonable person would … Because it was clearly established that Illinois drivers had no right to refuse chemical testing in the DUI context, but the procedures to compel breath or blood samples were not clearly established, the Court finds that

O'Connor v. Smith

49 Ill. Ct. Cl. 153 · Court of Claims of Illinois · Mar 8, 1996

Claimant also disputes the applicability of qualified immunity, and finally argues that his allegations of malice are sufficient to support his libel claim even if qualified immunity is held applicable. … or individual citizens receive only qualified privilege under the constitutional immunity afforded by New York Times v.

Dirksen v. City of Springfield

842 F. Supp. 1117 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Feb 9, 1994

Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity from individual capacity § 1983 suits for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Plaintiff does not respond to the issue of qualified immunity raised by Defendant.

Martinez v. Sun

896 F. Supp. 2d 710 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 13, 2012

They argue that the undisputed facts establish that they did not participate in a constitutional violation and, in the alternative, they assert qualified immunity for their actions. A. … The Court went on to reject the guards’ claims of qualified immunity because “Coleman clearly established a right to a prompt appearance after arrest pursuant to a warrant.” Id. at 582 .

Covell v. MENKIS

574 F. Supp. 2d 874 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Aug 5, 2008

The Defendants also allege the ambiguity bolsters their claim they are entitled to qualified immunity since any lack of clarity would show that they did not violate any clearly established constitutional rights. … Fourth, the Defendants allege that qualified immunity is appropriate because it was not clearly established that the conduct in question violated Covell’s constitutional rights.

Cross v. City of Chicago

352 Ill. App. 3d 1 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 30, 2004

Plaintiff argues that the Tort Immunity Act and the Workers’ Compensation Act do not conflict and, when read together, clearly subject governmental bodies to liability for retaliatory discharge. … it contains a qualifier “[e]xcept as otherwise provided by Statute.”

Hanania v. Loren-Maltese

319 F. Supp. 2d 814 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 16, 2004

Qualified immunity applies to Loren-Maltese and the Trustees unless: “(1) the conduct alleged in the complaint sets forth a constitutional violation and (2) the constitutional standards were clearly established at the time … Though1 plaintiffs have supported their claim of a constitutional violation, Loren-Maltese and the Trustees may still be entitled to qualified immunity if the' constitutional standards were not clearly established at the

Chicago Miracle Temple Church, Inc. v. Fox

901 F. Supp. 1333 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 26, 1995

Qualified Immunity Absent the availability of absolute immunity, defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Government officials sued in their individual capacities are entitled to qualified immunity “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

Allumi v. Oswego Community Unit School District 308

2026 IL App (3d) 250108 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 20, 2026

¶ 18 In resolving this particular issue, we are called upon to interpret various statutory immunity provisions. The principles of statutory construction are well established. … Rather, the Krivitskie decision merely established that such an appeal may be allowed.

Carlson Ex Rel. Stuczynski v. Bremen High School

423 F. Supp. 2d 823 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 29, 2006

Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense which protects public officials from civil liability where their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … For this reason, Defendants are not afforded the benefit of the qualified immunity defense at this stage of the case. IV.

Wallace v. Smyth

Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 18, 2001

The court also relied on the legislature's grant of a limited form of parental immunity to teachers as support for the extension of a qualified form of parental immunity to foster parents. … 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

Harrison v. Hardin County Community Unit School District No. 1

197 Ill. 2d 466 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 18, 2001

The court found that this qualified as the making of policy under Harinek, and thus the coach’s actions were immunized under section 2—201 of the Act. Johnson, 301 Ill. App. 3d at 809-10 . … Under the principles set forth in Harinek, Brumley’s actions clearly qualify as the making of policy.

Pasiewicz v. Lake County Forest Preserve District

81 F. Supp. 2d 890 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 22, 1999

Defendants Hen-ning and Sandahl have moved to dismiss the claims against them, contending that the complaint establishes that they had probable cause to arrest Pasiewiez or at least that they are entitled to qualified immunity … Even if probable cause did not exist, the arresting officer is immune from suit if a reasonable officer could have believed the arrest to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the officer possessed

Cooney v. Casady

652 F. Supp. 2d 948 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 11, 2009

Absolute and Qualified Immunity Only defendant Casady asserts the defenses of absolute, or, in the alternative, qualified immunity. … Clearly she has.

Hilgendorf v. First Baptist Church of Danville

157 Ill. App. 3d 428 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 29, 1987

Plaintiff does not clearly indicate how we could disregard the precedent of Kobylanski in order to hold that parental immunity was not available to teachers. … In contending that the defendant school’s day-care program does not qualify for the immunity set forth in section 24 — 24, plaintiff relies on Possekel v. O’Donnell (1977), 51 Ill.

Perry v. Delaney

74 F. Supp. 2d 824 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Nov 12, 1999

of qualified immunity. … Even if they had shown clearly established law, it is clear that Delaney is protected by qualified immunity in this case. He sent a memorandum setting out the reported violations by Perry and Zezoff.

Stevens v. Umsted

921 F. Supp. 530 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Apr 1, 1996

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, "government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … [if] ‘[his] conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known,' ” he is immune from an action for civil damages.

Burge v. Exelon Generation Company, LLC

2015 IL App (2d) 141090 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 15, 2015

Plaintiffs assert that Wendt “may be qualified to testify that Defendant actually footed the bill for [Rick’s] benefits, but not that it was required to do so.” … The plaintiffs alleged that the employees who attempted to replace the valve were not qualified to do so.

Citizens for a Better Environment v. City of Chicago Heights

480 F. Supp. 188 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 15, 1979

Strickland provides that officials cloaked with a qualified immunity will be immune from damages under section 1983 unless the plaintiff to the action establishes that the defendant acted with either a malicious intent to … In any event, plaintiffs’ complaint states a claim for damages, whether or not a qualified immunity is extended to defendant.