Case law

Moran v. City of Chicago

286 Ill. App. 3d 746 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 5, 1997

immunity. … In view of our finding that the plaintiff has failed to sufficiently plead his section 1983 claim, we need not discuss the issue of qualified immunity. 7 In his appellant’s brief, the plaintiff asks this court to order the

Jones v. Morris

769 F. Supp. 274 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 29, 1989

“Qualified immunity” also insulates them from that prospect. Harlow v. … To be sure, a deliberate failure to cure a known life threat (for example) was a “clearly established” Eighth Amendment violation in 1981.

Serrano v. Chicago Board of Education

257 Ill. App. 3d 888 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 26, 1994

Furthermore, the plaintiff must then establish that (1) the scaffold or device was unsafe; (2) the unsafe condition caused the plaintiff’s injury; (3) the defendant was in charge of the work at the time of the injury; and … If we were to adopt such a broad reading of section 3 — 108(a), the term 'activity’ would engender activities clearly beyond what have been typically and historically regarded as governmental functions.

In Re Factor VIII or IX Concentrate Blood Products Litigation

25 F. Supp. 2d 837 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 10, 1998

It also contends that the First Amendment offers a qualified privilege because NHF publications reported on issues of public concern. … Both arguments are unsupported by precedent and are clearly at odds with the plain meaning of Cohen . 8 . At least one stale has decided that negligence is insufficient. See Virelli v.

State Building Venture v. O'Donnell

239 Ill. 2d 151 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 18, 2010

Here, the State Lawsuit Immunity Act clearly and unambiguously provides that the “State of Illinois shall not be made a defendant or party in any court,” except as provided in the Court of Claims Act. … According to CMS, the fact that SBV sued the Director of CMS, in the Director’s official capacity, further establishes that SBV seeks relief from the state.

Leetaru v. Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

2014 IL App (4th) 130465 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 1, 2014

“The purpose of the statutory provisions establishing sovereign immunity is to protect the State from interference with the performance of governmental functions and to *** protect State funds.” … Rather, he is complaining about the manner in which they are carrying out their clearly authorized duties.

Flaim v. State of Illinois, Department of Corrections

30 Ill. Ct. Cl. 635 · Court of Claims of Illinois · Jun 11, 1975

Ct. 1347 , indicates clearly, we believe, that the assertion of sovereign immunity by a State is not offensive to any provision of the Constitution of the United States.” … It is well-established law in Illinois that public officials are immune from liability for performing discretionary functions. The rationale for such immunity was best expressed by Judge Learned Hand in Gregoire v.

People v. Sims

2025 IL App (4th) 250148 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 17, 2025

The court found the “legislative intent of [section 5 of the Act] is clearly safety and not prosecution.” … ¶ 25 In this case, the elements to establish immunity under section 5(c)(2) are undisputed.

Cooney v. Magnabosco

407 Ill. App. 3d 264 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 10, 2011

If it is established that such person has violated or is violating the injunction, the court may punish the offender for contempt of court. … Again, “ ‘[sjhorthand reporter’ means a person who is technically qualified and certified under this Act to practice shorthand reporting.” 225 ILCS 415/4(5) (West 2008).

Bozek v. Bank of America, N.A.

455 Ill. Dec. 402 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 22, 2021

Ill. 1995). ¶ 44 And that was quite clearly the impression of Judge Blakey in summarily disposing of the removal petition. … Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 553-54 (1967) (“Few doctrines were more solidly established at common law than the immunity of judges from liability for damages for acts committed within their judicial jurisdiction

Schultz v. St. Clair County

2020 IL App (5th) 190256 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 9, 2020

.” ¶ 11 Section 4-102 of the Tort Immunity Act provides: “Neither a local public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to establish a police department or otherwise provide … Section 10 provides for the establishment of “uniform technical and operational standards for all 9-1-1 systems in Illinois.”

Sandefur v. Village of Hanover Park

862 F. Supp. 2d 840 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 25, 2012

employees who make reasonable errors in applying even clearly established law.” … The defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

R & V Pine Tree, Inc. v. Village of Forest Park

947 F. Supp. 342 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 11, 1996

Where the Corporation cannot demonstrate that the official’s conduct violated a clearly established right, the officials are entitled to qualified immunity. Williams v. … The question is whether the Corporation has alleged deprivation of a clearly established constitutional right. The answer is “no.”

Dempsey v. Johnson

2016 IL App (1st) 153377 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 22, 2017

Act (Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/1-101 et seq. … limit an immunity to cover only negligence.”

Blair v. Walker

64 Ill. 2d 1 · Illinois Supreme Court · May 28, 1976

A qualified privilege, however, is conditional upon the good faith and reasonable behavior of the defendant. Prosser, Handbook of the Law of Torts, secs. 114, 115 (4th ed. 1971). … Matteo, the Supreme Court traced the historical development of the principle of absolute immunity.

Willis v. Bell

726 F. Supp. 1118 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 4, 1989

Even if a constitutional violation did occur, Kukulka and O’Connor are entitled to qualified immunity. … Bobbitt, 881 F.2d 510, 511 (7th Cir.1989) has recently reconfirmed the principle that qualified immunity protects a public official from damages liability whenever the official’s conduct does not violate “clearly established

People v. JACOBAZZI

398 Ill. App. 3d 890 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 17, 2010

We are not convinced that the qualifier stated in Wilson is a definitive part of the law-of-the-case doctrine. … The qualifier is not enforced to the letter even among the courts that subscribe to it.

Hanania v. Loren-Maltese

56 F. Supp. 2d 1010 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 12, 1999

The claims of political corruption clearly are related to matters of public concern. The disclosure of crime is a matter of great public concern. Gorman v. Robinson, 977 F.2d 350, 355 (7th Cir.1992). … One is immunity. We see no basis for qualified immunity. Retaliatory harassment and deprivation of employment in 1996 and 1997 violated clearly-established rights. Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Madsen v. Park City

6 F. Supp. 2d 938 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 29, 1998

But even if the 89-404 amendment is considered to have always been invalid, qualified immunity would. still protect the individual defendants from damages liability because it was not clearly established in 1996 that Public … Even if the Seventh Circuit were to follow Neff instead of Abbott , the individual defendants would be qualifiedly immune from damages liability because, in 1996, it was not clearly established in the Seventh Circuit that

Mohr v. Chicago School Reform Board of Trustees of Board of Education of City of Chicago

155 F. Supp. 2d 923 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 6, 2001

Clark and Jernigan reargue their qualified immunity claims that I rejected in their summary judgment motion. … A defendant raising a claim of qualified immunity argues “that, in the circumstances presented, the price of public employment should not include liability for civil damages when the law is not clearly established.”