Legal Opinion

Ruehman v. Village of Palos Park

District Court, N.D. Illinois

Decided January 21, 1994No. 91 C 8355PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

HART, District Judge.

Plaintiffs in this case claimed that they were named in arrest warrants that have been quashed or recalled but are still listed as active on municipal and state computer data banks. The crux of plaintiffs’ federal claims are that plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment 1 or due process rights have been violated in that defendants have failed to adequately maintain the computer networks so as to prevent the arrest and detention of persons on warrants that are no longer valid. Plaintiffs originally sought to represent a class and requested both damages and…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. City of Canton v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Keith Ruehman and Alan Miller v. Michael Sheahan, Sheriff of Cook County, IllinoisCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
  2. Anderson v. CornejoDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2000
  3. United Air Lines, Inc. v. ALG, INC.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1996
  4. Charles J. Harris, Jr. v. City of Marion, IndianaCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
  5. Hvorcik v. SheahanDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1994

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API