Case law

International Aerobatics Club Chapter 1 v. City of Morris

76 F. Supp. 3d 767 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 22, 2014

Finally, the individual defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. 1. … Qualified Immunity The individual defendants also maintain that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Awalt v. Marketti

74 F. Supp. 3d 909 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 24, 2014

A “plaintiff seeking to defeat a defense of qualified immunity must establish two things: first, that she has alleged a deprivation of a constitutional right; and second, that the right in question was ‘clearly established … Qualified Immunity Dr. Cullinan and Nurse Clauson also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Russell v. Hertz Corp.

139 Ill. App. 3d 11 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 10, 1985

In the present case, plaintiffs failed to establish a sufficient factual basis to support their claim. … The Avis agreement clearly includes a tax on the cost of collision damage waiver.

Thomas v. Ramos

918 F. Supp. 228 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 21, 1996

Ramos does, however, contend that he is entitled to qualified immunity from suit. As the defendant has offered no challenge to the merits, we address directly the issue of qualified immunity. … “clearly established” at the time the alleged deprivation occurred.

Spalding v. City of Chicago

186 F. Supp. 3d 884 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 11, 2016

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability when their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … To remove the shield of qualified immunity from the defendant officers, the constitutional right that they allegedly violated must at the time of the violation have been clearly established “in a particularized sense” and

Hamilton v. Gavin

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 22, 2023

“Incarcerated people have a clearly established right to be free from physical harm inflicted by others in the institution.” Kemp v. Fulton Cnty., 27 F.4th 491, 494 (7th Cir. 2022) (citing Farmer v. … Qualified immunity protects a government official from liability for actions which do “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Thompson v. Board of Educ. of the City of Chicago

711 F. Supp. 394 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 21, 1989

as to defeat the individual defendants’ claims to qualified immunity. … In those cases involving the “balancing of competing interests,” the standard may be “clearly established” under Harlow , but its application is so fact dependent that the “law” can rarely be “clearly established.”

Barnes v. Chicago Housing Authority

326 Ill. App. 3d 710 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 3, 2001

Specifically, section 1437r of the Housing Act provides: “A resident management corporation that qualifies under this section *** shall enter into a contract with the public housing agency establishing the respective management … “The party who challenges a statute’s constitutionality bears the heavy burden of clearly establishing the violation alleged.” Rose v. Pucinski, 321 Ill. App. 3d 92, 96 (2001).

Jacobeit v. Rich Township High School District 227

673 F. Supp. 2d 653 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 25, 2009

District 227 and Rainey next contend that Rainey is entitled to qualified immunity. The law is clear that “qualified immunity questions should be resolved at the earliest possible stage of litigation.” Anderson v. … were “clearly established” at the time in question.

Rouei v. Village of Skokie

61 F. Supp. 3d 765 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 28, 2014

whether that constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” … In his opening brief, Groberski did not argue the second part of the qualified immunity test. Specifically, he did not argue that the governing constitutional standard was not clearly established. See Defs.’

Deere v. Chapman

25 Ill. 610 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1861

He also contends,' that if there be room for construction, such a statute as this, giving new rights and immunities, and of doubtful policy, ought not, thereby, to be extended beyond the plain import of the terms used, and … There may be an absolute ownership, and a qualified ownership of both descriptions of property, and the one is as fully recognized as the other.

Verser v. Elyea

113 F. Supp. 2d 1211 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 27, 2000

Page and Snyder claim they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity should be granted when the official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. Harlow v.

James v. Ogilvie

310 F. Supp. 661 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 20, 1970

Clearly, public officials are not immune from suit when they allegedly violate the civil rights of citizens. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees v. … The right of a skilled, qualified worker not to be excluded from membership in a labor organization because of his race or skin color is a firm, established statutory right under federal law, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-l, and under

Leslie v. Doyle

896 F. Supp. 771 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 10, 1995

At the time that Doyle acted (which is the relevant date for qualified immunity purposes), it had clearly been established that placing an inmate into segregative custody for no reason violated the inmate's constitutional … It has only been afterward, through the Sandin decision, that what had previously been thought to be clearly established has been ruled otherwise — and that sequence is not the stuff of which a qualified immunity defense

Bakalis v. Board of Trustees of Community College District No. 504

948 F. Supp. 729 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 13, 1996

The individual defendants further argue that they are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity, contending that in light of the rule of necessity, it was not clearly established that any bias on their part violated Dr … See id. at 322-23 (governmental officials are accorded qualified immunity if their conduct did not “violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known”) (citation

Sandholm v. Kuecker

2012 IL 111443 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 20, 2012

The legislative history of the Act further supports our conclusion that the legislature intended to target only meritless, retaliatory SLAPPs and did not intend to establish a new absolute or qualified privilege … In light of the severe penalties imposed on a plaintiff under the Act, we will not read into the statute an intent to establish a new, qualified privilege absent an explicit statement of such intent. ¶ 52

Roddy v. Catto

143 Ill. App. 3d 176 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 15, 1986

Ct. 1213 (qualified immunity established for police officers sued under section 1983 for false arrest).) … liability under the rule of qualified immunity in Briggs.

Hess v. Flores

408 Ill. App. 3d 631 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 31, 2011

Furthermore, plaintiffs argument that section 2—202 of the Tort Immunity Act limits this immunity is clearly no longer tenable. … The court held that this argument was “mere semantics designed to avoid a clearly applicable immunity” and accepting such a position could render section 4—106(b) a nullity. Id. at 11.

Wren v. Jones

457 F. Supp. 234 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Aug 21, 1978

These defenses concern qualified immunity and good faith. … They have been unable to establish any basis for qualified immunity. They must be held liable for compensatory damages and attorneys’ fees.

Salaita v. Kennedy

118 F. Supp. 3d 1068 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 6, 2015

Qualified Immunity Lastly, the University argues that the individual Defendants are all entitled to qualified immunity to the extent that they are sued in their individual capacities. … “The doctrine of 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