Montgomery Ward v. Warehouse, Mail Order

7 Citing cases

  1. Autocar, LLC v. Volvo Trucks North America, Inc.

    No. 05 C 6824 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 1, 2006)

    A controversy appropriate for judicial determination is one that is "definite and concrete, touching the legal relations of parties having adverse legal interests." Montgomery Ward Co., Inc. v. Warehouse, Mail Order, Office, Technical and Professional Employees Union, 911 F. Supp. 1094, 1104 (N.D. Ill. 1995). In order to present a "case" or "controversy", "[a] declaration of rights as they stand must be sought, not on rights which may arise in the future, . . . there must be an actual controversy over an issue not a desire for an abstract declaration of the law."

  2. Gehrt v. University of Ill. at Urbana-Champaign

    974 F. Supp. 1178 (C.D. Ill. 1997)   Cited 8 times
    Holding that Congress enacted the EPA pursuant to § 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment

    Rule 12(b)(1) requires that an action be dismissed if the court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of the suit. Montgomery Ward Co. v. Warehouse, Mail Order, Office, Technical Professional Employees Union, Local 743, 911 F. Supp. 1094, 1099 (N.D.Ill. 1995). When ruling on a motion to dismiss based upon a claim of sovereign immunity or lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the court must accept as true all well-pleaded factual allegations and draw reasonable inferences in favor of plaintiff.

  3. Digiore v. State of Ill.

    962 F. Supp. 1064 (N.D. Ill. 1997)   Cited 16 times
    Suggesting possibility on basis that Seminole Tribe impliedly embraced Justice Scalia's dissenting position in Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co., 491 U.S. 1, 43-44, that Congress can no more use its Article I power to invite state waivers of immunity than it can directly abrogate the immunity, but rejecting implied waiver contention on more narrow grounds

    Rule 12(b)(1) requires that an action be dismissed if the court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of the suit. Montgomery Ward Co., Inc. v. Warehouse, Mail Order, Office, Technical Professional Employees Union, Local 743, 911 F. Supp. 1094, 1099 (N.D.Ill. 1995). In the absence of evidence raising a fact question as to jurisdiction, the Court's inquiry is limited.

  4. Pelfresne v. Village of Rosemont

    952 F. Supp. 589 (N.D. Ill. 1997)   Cited 4 times

    All well-pleaded facts will be taken as true, and all inferences are made in favor of the plaintiff. Montgomery Ward v. Warehouse Mail Order, Office, Technical and Professional Employees Union, 911 F. Supp. 1094, 1099 (N.D.Ill. 1995). Dismissal is proper only if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief. Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 101-02, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957).

  5. Newell Co. v. Lee.

    950 F. Supp. 864 (N.D. Ill. 1997)   Cited 7 times
    Denying motion to transfer

    All well-pleaded facts will be taken as true, and all inferences are made in favor of the plaintiff. Montgomery Ward v. Warehouse Mail Order, Office, Technical and Professional Employees Union, 911 F. Supp. 1094, 1099 (N.D.Ill. 1995). Dismissal is proper only if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief. Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 101-02, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957).

  6. Union Pacific R. Co. v. Village of S. Barrington

    958 F. Supp. 1285 (N.D. Ill. 1997)   Cited 20 times
    Adopting and citing Butitta

    All well-pleaded facts will be taken as true, and all inferences are made in favor of the plaintiff. Montgomery Ward v. Warehouse Mail Order, Office, Technical and Professional Employees Union 911 F. Supp. 1094, 1099 (N.D.Ill. 1995). Dismissal is proper only if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief.

  7. Chisholm v. Foothill Capital Corp.

    940 F. Supp. 1273 (N.D. Ill. 1996)   Cited 52 times
    Finding pleading sufficient where plaintiff alleged defendant notified a potential employer plaintiff was terminated for "double dealing"

    All well-pleaded facts will be taken as true, and all inferences are made in favor of the plaintiff. Montgomery Ward v. Warehouse Mail Order, Office, Technical and Professional Employees Union, 911 F. Supp. 1094, 1099 (N.D.Ill. 1995). Dismissal is proper only if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief.