Case law

People v. Finkelstein

299 Ill. App. 363 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 28, 1939

he, ... on January 24,1938, ... as the duly qualified and acting Vice President and agent of said State Auto Finance Corporation, a corporation, one of the defendants herein, then and there had in his custody and possession … In that state of the record the broad language of section 9 clearly grants him immunity.

Hampton v. City of Chicago

349 F. Supp. 2d 1075 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 7, 2004

Podlesak’s conduct thus entitles him to absolute immunity rather than exposes him to liability- Plaintiff argues that Podlesak was an investigator and is therefore entitled to only qualified immunity. … If Podlesak had engaged in these investigative acts (which according to plaintiff he did not), then the case for qualified as opposed to absolute immunity would be stronger.

Mims v. City Of Chicago

District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 12, 2024

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are “entitled to qualified immunity on all of Plaintiff’s Constitutional claims because their conduct did not violate clearly … Concealment of Evidence According to Mims, the officers should not receive qualified immunity on the Brady claim because “[i]t has been clearly established for decades that police

Kristofek v. Village of Orland Hills

63 F. Supp. 3d 853 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 7, 2014

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that Scully is protected from liability by qualified immunity. When a governmental actor performs “discretionary functions” that actor is protected by qualified immunity. … clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

People v. Haleas

Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 13, 2010

Although Kastigar clearly prohibits the government from making any direct or indirect evidentiary use of immunized testimony, see Kastigar, 406 U.S. at 460, [32 L. Ed. 2d at 226,] 92 S. Ct. … This burden may be met by establishing that the witness was never exposed to North's immunized testimony, or that the allegedly tainted testimony contains no evidence not 'canned' by the prosecution before

Dockery v. Village of Steeleville

200 Ill. App. 3d 926 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 28, 1990

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 police protection service or, if police protection … Plaintiff argues that the Village’s voluntary assumption of crowd control and traffic management at an event held by a private entity (the American Legion Post) clearly falls outside the municipality’s duty to protect the

American Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. Tyler

2016 IL App (1st) 153502 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 9, 2017

. ¶ 17 In Village of Bloomingdale, our supreme court addressed whether a quasi-contract claim qualifies as a claim asserting a public entity’s liability “based on contract” and thus is excepted from the … immunity granted under the Act.

Wright Development Group, LLC v. Walsh

238 Ill. 2d 620 · Illinois Supreme Court · Oct 21, 2010

This is clearly immunized activity. According to the uncontroverted deposition testimony of Walsh and Hrycko, the statements regarding the building issues at 6030 N. … This clearly applies to Walsh’s statement to a reporter made during a public forum concerning proposed legislation targeting condominium conversions.

Williams v. City of Chi.

315 F. Supp. 3d 1060 · District Court, E.D. Illinois · Jun 1, 2018

Qualified Immunity For their part, the Officers argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity on the Fourteenth Amendment and the Fourth Amendment claims, solely based on argument that the contours of the claims were … not clearly established in 2011.

Rumbold v. Town of Bureau

221 Ill. App. 3d 222 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 31, 1991

What the Court left undecided, however, was whether a municipality was entitled to any type of qualified immunity. In Owen v. City of Independence (1980), 445 U.S. 622 , 63 L. Ed. 2d 673 , 100 S. … While denying that any type of immunity exists for municipalities, the Court reiterated that qualified immunity does exist for public officials who have acted in good faith.

Hyland v. United Air Lines, Inc.

254 F. Supp. 367 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 26, 1966

The CAB clearly has jurisdiction over seniority integration, among other labor matters, when it approves an airline merger. Oling v. Air Line Pilots Ass’n, 346 F.2d 270, 274-275 (7th Cir. 1965). … Kahn did; he did it thoroughly, properly and well and his award is consequently final, binding and immune to attack here.

Gubbe v. Catholic Diocese of Rockford

122 Ill. App. 2d 71 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 3, 1970

Moyle qualified the doctrine of charitable immunity by permitting recovery against non-trust funds of a charitable corporation, specifically an insurance policy. … It is interesting to note that the court ruled there that a cause of action was not stated under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act, and that to establish liability the teacher’s act or omission

Edwards v. TWO UNKNOWN MALE CHIC. POLICE OFFICERS

623 F. Supp. 2d 940 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 8, 2009

Qualified Immunity Government actors performing discretionary functions enjoy qualified immunity and are shielded from liability for civil damages if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … "An officer conducting a search is entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show that the search violated constitutional rights." Marion v.

Stevens v. Tillman

568 F. Supp. 289 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 8, 1983

. .Because of this qualified privilege, defendants argue, Stevens must plead malice and she has not done so. … Plaintiffs allegations in Count II are clearly sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.

Nickon v. City of Princeton

376 Ill. App. 3d 1095 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 24, 2007

Defendant contends the Medicare payment does not qualify as a collateral source under Illinois law. … Defendant’s instruction addressed statutory municipal immunity, as defined in section 3 — 102 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/3 — 102 (West 2002)) (Tort Immunity Act).

Holten v. Syncreon North America, Inc.

2019 IL App (2d) 180537 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Aug 22, 2019

Moreover, plaintiff contends, Android failed to establish the existence of a borrowed-employee relationship and thus was not entitled to immunity under the Act. ¶ 31 A. … ¶ 1. ¶ 45 In reversing, we rejected Exelon’s argument that it was entitled to immunity as the agent of ENS because Exelon failed to establish that ENS had any right to control Exelon.

Novak v. Rathnam

153 Ill. App. 3d 408 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 20, 1987

The court also determined that State-employed psychiatrists were only entitled to a qualified immunity and that the allegations of the complaint sufficiently demonstrated the psychiatrist’s grossly negligent acts. … of sovereign immunity.

Pree v. Hymbaugh

23 Ill. App. 2d 211 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 1, 1959

It is a well established rule that the question as to whether or not a plaintiff has been guilty of contributory negligence is a matter of fact for the jury to determine and becomes a question of law only w’'en the evidence … is so clearly insufficient to establish due care that all reasonable minds in the exercise of fair and honest judgment would reach the conclusion that there was contributory negligence.

Soedler v. Soedler

89 Ill. App. 3d 74 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 7, 1980

Keller (1952), 413 Ill. 503 , 109 N.E.2d 729 , amended the Married Woman’s Act so as to re-establish interspousal tort immunity. In Brandt v. … The constitutionality of the establishment of interspousal tort immunity was attacked in Heckendorn v.

Dent v. Constellation NewEnergy, Inc.

460 Ill. Dec. 706 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 21, 2022

In the alternative, respondents ask this court to find that a Rule 224 respondent may file a motion to dismiss under section 2-619 if affirmative matter is needed to establish the qualified privilege. … Once a defendant establishes a qualified privilege, however, a plaintiff must show “ ‘ “a direct intention to injure another, or *** a reckless disregard of [the defamed party’s] rights and of the consequences