Case law

Perez v. Transformer Manufacturers, Inc.

35 F. Supp. 3d 941 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 24, 2014

a genuine dispute as to whether he is a qualified individual with a disability. … Perez can use either the direct or indirect method of proof to establish retaliation. Id.

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.

Kuipers v. Drake Tower Apartments, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 6, 2025

Qualified individual To sustain an ADA accommodation claim, besides establishing that they have a disability, a plaintiff must show that he is "qualified," or in other words … Even if the Kuipers were able to establish that they were qualified individuals, the evidence shows, without any genuine factual dispute, that Drake Tower was still justified in rejecting masking-plus-testing as a reasonable

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).

United States Gypsum Co. v. United States

206 F. Supp. 744 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 6, 1962

The defendant maintains that expenditures for the mining of “new areas” cannot qualify under the regulation. (2) The plaintiff has failed to establish a prima facie case that the expenditures did not increase the value or … The air and escape hatch clearly added to the value of the mine in permitting operations to proceed in the area beyond the tracks.

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

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Consolidated Services Systems

777 F. Supp. 599 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 4, 1991

The trial judge’s selection of the appropriate variables required to determine a suitable pool for comparison purposes is generally a question of fact and is reversible only if clearly erroneous. … The EEOC’s anecdotal evidence simply establishes that Consolidated did not offer jobs to these four individuals.

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.

Gustafson v. Consumers Sales Agency, Inc.

414 Ill. 235 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1953

The extent to which section 42(3) has expanded the common-law concept of “aider by verdict,” when applied to objections to pleadings interposed for the first time on appeal, has not been clearly established. … states an established category of liability.

John A. by and Through Valerie A. v. Gill

565 F. Supp. 372 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 12, 1983

In Sosna , the Supreme Court established two exceptions to the mootness doctrine. … Defendant contends that Pennhurst and Rowley establish that the EAHCA was passed pursuant to Congress’ spending power and that the Act does not clearly condition the receipt of federal funds on the provision of such rights

Walker v. Woodward Governor Co.

631 F. Supp. 91 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 26, 1986

Dowling, 459 F.2d 190 (7th Cir.1972), defendant contends that at least in the Seventh Circuit a plaintiff may not establish a “conspiracy” for Section 1985(3) purposes between a corporate entity and its own supervisor-agents … Thus, the third Dombrowski exception is clearly inapplicable here. Neither does plaintiff specifically allege the personal, racial animus requisite to the first Dombrowski exception.

In re Estate of Poole

Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 3, 2002

By statutory design, if the mother can qualify as an eligible parent, a biological father could also qualify, despite the fact that he is not married to the mother. … In addition, he could establish a relationship with the child's mother and support the child by supporting the mother. In this case, it appears that Randy could qualify as an eligible parent.

Latham v. Board of Education

31 Ill. 2d 178 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jul 3, 1964

considering the validity of a legislative classification there is always a presumption that the General Assembly acted • conscientiously, and this court will not interfere with its judgment except where the classification is clearly … When referring to legislation the term ‘local’ means laws relating to a portion, only, of the territory of the State, and the term ‘special,’ laws which impose a particular burden or confer a special right, privilege or immunity

Metcalf v. Flamburis

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 5, 2020

Qualified Immunity Finally, Defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … his actions were unconstitutional in light of clearly established law?”

Heiden v. DNA Diagnostics Center, Inc.

396 Ill. App. 3d 135 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 9, 2009

of a cause of action also must qualify as a postjudgment motion. … Moreover, the “reconsideration” sought was not clearly identical to the “clarification” sought. Rather, the “reconsideration” and “clarification” were pleaded alternatively in the prayer for relief.

In Re UNR Industries, Inc.

74 B.R. 146 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 2, 1987

UNR maintains that under the government contract specification defense, 1 UNR is absolutely immune from any liability to the selected claimants. … Yet, a precedent established in a federal district court in Pennsylvania — a court well versed in the law of Pennsylvania which governs this motion — will be as valuable as one established by this court.

Van Campen v. International Business Machines Corp.

Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 13, 2001

Since 1989, Van Campen has suffered from an immune deficiency which caused him to be more susceptible to, and ill from, minor illnesses. … We find that the Commission's holdings that Van Campen was not handicapped under the Act and that he failed to make a prima facie case of handicap discrimination were not clearly erroneous.

Michon v. Officer Emily Campbell

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 10, 2019

Qualified Immunity Claim With regard to the qualified immunity claim, the right to medical care is clearly established. Paine at 506. … The Court need not determine whether the state created danger rule was clearly established under the facts of this case because the court found that there was no state created danger

Cervantes v. Perryman

954 F. Supp. 1257 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 10, 1997

Thus, even under *1265 the interpretation of the statute advanced by the Plaintiffs, they still do not qualify for the relief they seek. … The Court may not issue a writ of mandamus ordering a federal official to perform any function that the official is not clearly directed by law to perform. Save the Dunes Council v.