Case law

VEACH OIL COMPANY v. Ogilvie

22 Ill. App. 3d 233 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 12, 1974

In order to qualify for injunctive relief, the proponent must show that it is sustaining or is about to sustain an injury which would be irreparable (uncompensable) by money damages alone. … sovereign immunity.

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 police protection … Clearly, a 9-1-1 system cannot meet the needs of the communities it serves if its operators must rely on distressed callers to provide them with exact street addresses.

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. 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.

Midwest Bank & Trust Co. v. Village of Lakewood

113 Ill. App. 3d 962 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 8, 1983

Defendants contended that immunities established by the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (111. Rev. … With regard to the damages portion of the complaint, defendants’ motion was based upon the statutory immunities established in the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (hereinafter cited as the

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.

Watson v. Cain

846 F. Supp. 621 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · May 4, 1993

Whether an official is protected by qualified immunity turns upon the objective *632 legal reasonableness of the action, in light of legal rules clearly established at the time the action was taken. … Defendants’ interference with Watson’s privileged legal mail thus violated clearly established constitutional law. Accordingly, the court finds that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity in this ease.

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.”

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

Jastram v. Lake Villa School District 41

192 Ill. App. 3d 599 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 27, 1989

Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment alleging that a school district is liable only for willful and wanton misconduct and that the undisputed facts in this case do not establish willful and wanton misconduct. … App. 3d 434 ; however, the facts do not clearly establish who, if anyone, was charged with supervising the plaintiff in that case. Inasmuch as- the case is unclear on this point, we cannot rely on it.

Guerrero v. Piotrowski

67 F. Supp. 3d 963 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 16, 2014

F.3d at 828 , nor need the Court address whether Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. … Dist., 295 F.3d 701 , 714 n. 14 (7th Cir.2002) (not addressing qualified immunity because complaint did not state a constitutional violation).

McCraven v. City of Chicago

109 F. Supp. 2d 935 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 11, 2000

Because he was not qualified for the position of probationary police officer with the CPD, Plaintiff fails to establish the second and third elements of his prima facie case. … Given the Court's ruling that summary judgment is warranted, it need not address Defendants' after acquired evidence or qualified immunity arguments.

Farmer v. McClure

172 Ill. App. 3d 246 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 28, 1988

Plaintiff was hired as a DOC apprehensions specialist on December 17, 1984, after achieving a “well qualified” score on his examination. … Injunctive relief is appropriate where a lawful right is certain and clearly ascertainable and when irreparable harm and an inadequate remedy at law are established. (Distaola v.

Alvernest Mills v. County of Winnebago

104 Ill. App. 2d 366 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 13, 1969

, clearly evidences, not only their knowledge of the existing statute, but their intent with relation to acts of sheriffs and their deputies in the performance of their duties. … O’Connor, 19 Ill2d 337, 340, 167 NE2d 188 (1960), still the General Assembly has the right to enact legislation establishing total immunity or partial immunity if it does so within the framework of our Constitution.

Hollis v. State Employees' Retirement System of Illinois (In Re Brenda Groves)

120 B.R. 956 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 23, 1990

In determining whether sovereign immunity constitutes a bar to these proceedings, the first question that must be addressed is whether SERS is covered by the state’s Eleventh Amendment immunity. … This trustee does not have to establish the existence of a debt owed by the state to the debtor to recover as the trustee did in his § 542(b) action in Hoffman .

Housewright v. City of LaHarpe

51 Ill. 2d 357 · Illinois Supreme Court · Mar 30, 1972

Clearly, it is unreasonable to suppose that such a result was intended by the legislature.” ( 104 Ill.App.2d 285, 293 .) We do not agree with this interpretation. … Defenses, established elsewhere in the Act, apply to all municipalities whether they are uninsured and depend upon statutory immunity or whether they have procured insurance.

Clark v. City of Chicago

595 F. Supp. 482 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 5, 1984

03 , 31 Ill.Dec. 914, 919-20 , 394 N.E.2d 1291, 1296-97 (1st Dist.1979) (conduct amounting to a “constitutional tort,” though defendant escaped liability because it had been neither knowing nor malicious in violating any clearly-established … That provision does not afford qualified immunity from liability for all acts or omissions of a public employee while on duty, but only for those connected with the actual execution or enforcement of a law. Arnolt v.

Hernandez v. Lifeline Ambulance, LLC

450 Ill. Dec. 131 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 18, 2020

However, even assuming the plain language of the EMS Act is not sufficiently clear to immunize defendants, my conclusion is confirmed by the broad construction of the EMS Act’s immunity provision established … - 26 - ¶ 98 Thus, our case law has established that, absent willful and wanton misconduct, the EMS Act provides immunity for acts and omissions that occur

Leetaru v. The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois

2015 IL 117485 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jul 1, 2015

That is something they clearly have authority to do in furtherance of the University’s educational mission. … Immunity from suit in the circuit courts is established by the Immunity Act, not the Court of Claims Act. See, e.g., Brandon v. Bonell, 368 Ill.

Dunlop v. Colgan

687 F. Supp. 406 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 13, 1988

The record in this case, however, provides no support for Dunlop’s agency theory; and the Braught exception only applies to cases involving clearly established agency relationships. … Obviously, qualified immunity cannot insulate the Board members from Dunlop’s claim of intentional discrimination.