40 Cited authorities

Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police
491 U.S. 58 (1989) Cited 24,142 times
Holding that official capacity state officer suits for prospective injunctive relief are suits against a "person" under § 1983 even though a "State" is not a "person" under that statute
Anderson v. Creighton
483 U.S. 635 (1987) Cited 15,422 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that an officer is entitled to qualified immunity if "a reasonable officer could have believed" that the search was lawful "in light of clearly established law and the information the searching officers possessed"
Malley v. Briggs
475 U.S. 335 (1986) Cited 9,216 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that a reasonably well-trained officer who would have known that his affidavit failed to establish probable cause and that he shouldn't have applied for a warrant violates an arrestee's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizures and does not enjoy qualified immunity when he arrests someone based on the warrant he nonetheless procured from a judicial officer
Imbler v. Pachtman
424 U.S. 409 (1976) Cited 10,604 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding prosecutors absolutely immune from damages liability for having knowingly presented perjured witness testimony against criminal defendants, observing that the "veracity of witnesses in criminal cases frequently is subject to doubt before and after they testify . . . . If prosecutors were hampered in exercising their judgment as to the use of such witnesses by concern about resulting personal liability, [they often would refrain from calling such witnesses and hence] the triers of fact in criminal cases often would be denied relevant evidence"
Buckley v. Fitzsimmons
509 U.S. 259 (1993) Cited 4,098 times
Holding absolute prosecutorial immunity extends to "making false or defamatory statements during, and related to, judicial proceedings"
Tamayo v. Blagojevich
526 F.3d 1074 (7th Cir. 2008) Cited 3,005 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that a senior administrator who testified before a legislative committee with oversight of her agency was "discharging the responsibilities of her office, not appearing as 'Jane Q. Public.' "
E.E.O.C. v. Concentra Health
496 F.3d 773 (7th Cir. 2007) Cited 2,734 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a plaintiff alleging retaliation under Title VII "must provide some specific description" of the protected activity
Barr v. Matteo
360 U.S. 564 (1959) Cited 1,058 times
Holding — prior to enactment of Westfall Act — executive officers enjoyed absolute immunity from liability for damages under common law of defamation if they acted within "outer perimeter" of their authority
Jacobs v. City of Chicago
215 F.3d 758 (7th Cir. 2000) Cited 659 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding rule was clearly established
Strauss v. City of Chicago
760 F.2d 765 (7th Cir. 1985) Cited 573 times
Holding that complaints of unconstitutional activity standing alone do not establish pattern for section 1983 liability
Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights
42 U.S.C. § 1983 Cited 486,856 times 688 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 345,885 times 922 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 1988 - Proceedings in vindication of civil rights
42 U.S.C. § 1988 Cited 21,790 times 43 Legal Analyses
Finding that 28 U.S.C. § 1920 defines the term "costs" as used in Rule 54(d) and enumerates the expenses that a federal court may tax as a cost under the discretionary authority granted in Rule 54(d)
Section 705 ILCS 505/8 - Court of Claims Jurisdiction; Deliberation Periods
705 ILCS 505/8 Cited 507 times 1 Legal Analyses
Allowing claims under Illinois state law to be brought against the State in its court of claims
Section 745 ILCS 5/1
745 ILCS 5/1 Cited 298 times 3 Legal Analyses
Stating that "the State of Illinois shall not be made a defendant or party in any court" with the exception of, among others, suits brought under "the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act"

Brooks v. Madigan et al

40 Cited authorities

Holding that official capacity state officer suits for prospective injunctive relief are suits against a "person" under § 1983 even though a "State" is not a "person" under that statute

Holding that an officer is entitled to qualified immunity if "a reasonable officer could have believed" that the search was lawful "in light of clearly established law and the information the searching officers possessed"

Holding absolute prosecutorial immunity extends to "making false or defamatory statements during, and related to, judicial proceedings"

Holding that a senior administrator who testified before a legislative committee with oversight of her agency was "discharging the responsibilities of her office, not appearing as 'Jane Q. Public.' "

Holding that a plaintiff alleging retaliation under Title VII "must provide some specific description" of the protected activity

Holding — prior to enactment of Westfall Act — executive officers enjoyed absolute immunity from liability for damages under common law of defamation if they acted within "outer perimeter" of their authority

Holding rule was clearly established

Holding that complaints of unconstitutional activity standing alone do not establish pattern for section 1983 liability

Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Finding that 28 U.S.C. § 1920 defines the term "costs" as used in Rule 54(d) and enumerates the expenses that a federal court may tax as a cost under the discretionary authority granted in Rule 54(d)

Allowing claims under Illinois state law to be brought against the State in its court of claims

Stating that "the State of Illinois shall not be made a defendant or party in any court" with the exception of, among others, suits brought under "the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act"