Case law

Carter v. Rosenbeck

214 F. Supp. 2d 889 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Aug 12, 2002

Williamson and Borklund maintain that even if their entry was unconstitutional and the arrest was made without probable cause, they are protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity as Plaintiffs have failed to present … a closely analogous case that would indicate the officers’ conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.

People v. Kirkley

60 Ill. App. 3d 746 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 2, 1978

While I am not convinced that the Illinois constitutional provision for a prompt preliminary hearing impliedly provides an absolute grant of immunity from prosecution as a sanction for its violation, I am convinced that the … implementing section 7 of article I of the 1970 Illinois Constitution is not only inherently within our power, but mandated by the facts of this case and the failure of the legislature to act in response to an urgent and clearly

Kyle v. City of Oak Forest

637 F. Supp. 980 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 20, 1986

Plaintiffs allege that the evidence presented at trial clearly establishes that Mayor Malecky did not reappoint plaintiffs because plaintiffs opposed Mayor Malecky and actively supported his opponent in the 1985 Oak Forest … Absent a property interest, Ulloa is not entitled to the privileges and immunities secured by the Fourteenth Amendment.

Lancaster v. Jeffrey Galion, Inc.

77 Ill. App. 3d 819 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 1, 1979

This, then, is clearly not a case like Struthers v. Jack Baulos, Inc. (1977), 52 Ill. … Although it is true that the plaintiff did not establish this “requirement” it does not appear to us to be an essential element of a cause of action for strict liability in tort.

Hubbard v. Sherman Hospital

292 Ill. App. 3d 148 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 26, 1997

Malachinski did not testify to sufficient experience to qualify him as a surgical expert. Northern Trust, 213 Ill. App. 3d at 407 , again provides guidance. Dr. … A verdict against the manifest weight of the evidence is one that is "palpably erroneous and wholly unwarranted, is clearly the result of passion or prejudice, or appears to be arbitrary, unreasonable, and not based on the

Mack v. City of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 25, 2023

Qualified immunity “protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … To defeat qualified immunity, Mack must demonstrate that the right which the defendants allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of their conduct. See Finkley, 10 F.4th at 737 (quoting Jewett v.

Defrees v. Brydon

275 Ill. 530 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1916

To construe them otherwise would require not only that we ignore the clearly expressed intention of the testator as disclosed by this latter clause, but also that we wholly disregard the well established rules of law above … of the testator to limit or qualify the estate devised.

Crowley v. The Board of Education of the City of Chicago

2014 IL App (1st) 130727 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 19, 2014

That presumption was clearly overcome by the evidence. … App. 3d 339 (2002) (upholding residency requirement against privileges and immunities challenge).

Ford Motor Co. v. Chicago Department of Revenue

2014 IL App (1st) 130597 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 29, 2014

The ordinance plainly and clearly specifies that the tax is triggered by dispensing fuel into a vehicle’s fuel tank, which Ford Motor Company routinely and repeatedly did. … Ford Motor Company was not entitled to the first exemption it claimed. ¶ 17 Similarly, in order to qualify for the third exemption, Ford Motor Company would have to establish that (1) it did not “use” the vehicle

Escarraz v. Escarraz

15 Ill. App. 2d 262 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 22, 1957

The foregoing evidence establishes clearly that the partners entered into the alleged contract and that its material terms were definite and certain. … Here the chancellor taxed the costs in accordance with the recommendations of the master, who knew the interests and the temper of the parties and who was better qualified than anyone else to appraise the respective positions

In re Marriage of Hendry

Appellate Court of Illinois · May 12, 2011

Loree sought a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) to enforce the MSA. … However, nothing on page 16 of the document at issue established that Michael was vested and nothing established that Michael knew that he was vested.

People v. Hasselbring

21 N.E.3d 762 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 24, 2014

Clearly, Piat’s injuries are of the type contemplated by the Vehicle Code and the supreme court. … We note the jury’s question asked only whether benzoylecgonine qualified as a substance.

Claudy v. Commonwealth Edison Co.

255 Ill. App. 3d 714 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 18, 1993

Clearly, the court has jurisdiction on this issue.” … The court held that the Minnesota rule, which was established in Lambertson v.

Adorno v. Nitzkin

828 F. Supp. 42 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 3, 1993

The Supreme Court has recognized that Congress adopted such a broad preemption provision in order to establish a comprehensive and exclusive scheme of federal regulation of employee benefit plans. Pilot Life Ins. Co. v. … The Fifth Circuit held in Perkins: While ERISA clearly preempts claims of bad faith as against insurance companies for improper processing of a claim for benefits under an employee benefit plan, Pilot Life, and while ERISA

Pryor v. Cajda

662 F. Supp. 1114 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 23, 1987

The defendants confuse the doctrine of “exhaustion of state remedies” with the rule that where the defendants are not acting pursuant to an established state procedure, a procedural due process claim does not lie if the plaintiff … It is true as a general proposition that a claim for malicious prosecution is insufficient to state a § 1983 claim unless the corresponding factual circumstances clearly implicate the deprivation of a constitutionally-protected

Cesena v. Du Page County

201 Ill. App. 3d 96 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 17, 1990

In Portash, the defendant was granted immunity to testify before a grand jury. Thereafter, he was charged with a criminal offense. … Fawell contends that Portash supports his position because the statute in the case at bar also contains an immunity clause.

Estate of Davis v. Hazen

582 F. Supp. 938 · District Court, C.D. Illinois · Jul 7, 1983

Moreover, the Court noted that reckless misconduct would dissipate a defendant’s qualified immunity. Id. … The supreme court in Elliott clearly felt that Kaiserman had been erroneously decided.

Gowdy v. Richter

20 Ill. App. 3d 514 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 20, 1974

Since the evidence adduced at trial clearly showed that a certificate for 200 shares of stock had been issued to Mr. and Mrs. … The statute clearly reads that liability is established if either of the findings is correct.

Bartholome v. Phillips

311 Ill. 600 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 14, 1924

In a qualified sense that is correct, but, especially in a will contest, the bare statement of the rule without any qualification is misleading. … All the law governing the issue tried could be stated much more clearly in a few instructions than in a large number.

Manzanares

District Court, C.D. Illinois · Apr 24, 2026

Finally, Defendants argue that Oslanzi is entitled to qualified immunity, asserting that “the videos show [Manzanares] was resisting removal from the vehicle and disobeyed . . . commands to exit the vehicle,” and so, “ … [a]bsent case law at the time that would establish beyond debate that this was a constitutional violation,” it was not clearly established that Oslanzi’s actions violated Manzanares’s constitutional rights.