Case law

Long v. Friesland

178 Ill. App. 3d 42 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 20, 1988

expert witnesses who are qualified to define a given standard. … Clearly, the cutting of brush alongside township roads is a ministerial act, as is maintaining the roadway at a width of 16 feet.

Morrison v. Forest Preserve District of Cook County

155 Ill. App. 3d 687 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 23, 1987

The District moved to dismiss count IV on the grounds that it was barred by certain provisions of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act) (Ill. Rev. … It is well established that a cause of action should be dismissed on the pleadings only where it clearly appears that no set of facts could be proved which would entitle the plaintiff to recover. (Fitzgerald v.

Jiotis v. The Burr Ridge Park District

2014 IL App (2d) 121293 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 10, 2014

Therefore, even if Pacanowski’s affidavit affirmatively established his immunity from liability under the Tort Immunity Act, the question of whether John Doe is liable, not liable, or immune from liability remains … For defendants’ affirmative defense to succeed, they would have to put forward affidavits or the like tending to establish - 14 -  that John Doe is immune from

Starcevich v. City of Farmington

110 Ill. App. 3d 1074 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 13, 1982

Clearly, the statutory period in Illinois does not begin running only at completion of a defendant city’s construction. 1 The plain language of the Tort Immunity Act permits plaintiff to bring his cause of action within two … Nor do we find a factual basis to establish nonliability of any of the defendant city’s employees (Ill. Rev.

Kirnbauer v. Cook County Forest Preserve District

215 Ill. App. 3d 1013 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 17, 1991

Our review of the record here establishes that no material facts were in dispute, as shown by the legal documents and other evidence before the court, and that the question of interpretation of the Tort Immunity Act is a … In the present case, the warranty deed of record clearly establishes that defendant owns realty known as the Tampier Slough Forest Preserve and the southern boundary as the southern section of line 31, which lies in the center

TTX CO. v. Whitley

295 Ill. App. 3d 548 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Mar 13, 1998

Defendants asserted that TTX did not qualify for the single-factor formula because it did not transport passengers or freight. … The issue before the circuit court was whether TTX qualified as a transportation company under section 304(d).

Evans v. Page

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 18, 2003

Section 202 of the ADA provides as follows: "Subject to the provisions of this subchapter, no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the … Although Congress properly and clearly expressed its intent to do so, it acted on the basis of an inadequate record and imposed a remedy that is neither congruent nor proportional to the problem it identified."

Madison v. City of Chicago

2017 IL App (1st) 160195 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 6, 2017

making no distinction between the first sentence of section 2-101 and the second sentence that lists specific types of claims; our supreme court viewed the claim before it as “excluded” from the Act and did not qualify … To accomplish this, the 2003 amendment used the identical language used in section 13-212(a) of the Code, establishing a two-year limitations period for medical malpractice claims against physicians or

Blakemore v. Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago

2025 IL App (1st) 240985 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 23, 2025

Department makes no representation that Vendor, an independent contractor, will qualify or be eligible for indemnification under said Act. … the state, implicating sovereign immunity.

Ryan v. Glen Ellyn Raintree Condominium Ass'n

2014 IL App (2d) 130682 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 27, 2014

And it would amount to a presumption by this Court that the legislature intended to abrogate the common law, where such intent was not clearly or plainly expressed.” … Instead, section 2 eliminates (subject to the “willful or wanton” qualifier) liability for “acts or omissions” in snow and ice removal efforts, i.e., for activity or passivity in such efforts.

Risner v. City of Chicago

150 Ill. App. 3d 827 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 12, 1986

On appeal, plaintiff contends that the trial court’s judgment was based on its erroneous determination that the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Governmental Tort Immunity Act) (Ill. Rev. … Clearly, in Palladini, the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff.

Application of Du Page County Collector

243 Ill. App. 3d 823 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 13, 1993

The collector contends that this Tort Immunity Act language clearly places liability insurance taxes outside the limitations of section 25.05. … Thus the question before us is whether language in the Tort Immunity Act clearly and expressly excluded liability taxes from the section 25.05 limitation.

Arteman v. Clinton Community Unit School District No. 15

317 Ill. App. 3d 453 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 22, 2000

App. 3d at 809 , 704 N.E.2d at 424 (in which this court concluded that a park district coach’s decisions regarding what equipment and safety precautions were needed during tumbling maneuvers qualified “as the making of policy … The court further explained that the “public policy considerations in authorizing, and indeed encouraging, teachers to have broad discretion and latitude in the former situation quite clearly do not apply” where the issue

Donovan v. VILLAGE OF OHIO

397 Ill. App. 3d 844 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jan 11, 2010

This qualified immunity is codified in section 15.1 of the Emergency Telephone System Act (ETS Act), which reads: “No public agency, public safety agency, emergency telephone system board, or unit of local government assuming … As the Illinois Supreme Court has explained: “The distinction between an immunity and a duty is crucial, because only if a duty is found is the issue of whether an immunity or defense is available to the governmental entity

Abruzzo v. City of Park Ridge

2013 IL App (1st) 122360 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 24, 2014

Franzen recalled that once it was established that Joseph was okay Franzen told everyone they were leaving. … - 13 -  alleged immunity is based.

Larsen v. Provena Hospitals

2015 IL App (4th) 140255 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 15, 2015

Thus, by its plain language, the legislature clearly intended that the Whistleblower Act would apply to physicians who satisfied the statutory definition of employee. … See 105 ILCS 5/14A-30 (West 2010) (explaining the funding available through the Illinois Board of Education for qualified programs focused on the education of gifted and talented children).

Prakash v. Parulekar

2020 IL App (1st) 191819 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 30, 2020

The clear language of the Act establishes that it was not intended to protect those who commit tortious acts and then seek refuge in the immunity conferred by the Act. … We find that defendant has failed to establish that plaintiff’s IIED claim was meritless and retaliatory.

Both v. Collins

339 Ill. App. 437 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 21, 1950

The instruction is clearly bad and we see no alternative to deciding that the giving of the instruction was reversible error. In aid of a new trial, we think we should decide a vital question of law presented to us. … Presently in Illinois the doctrine of immunity of public corporations in performance of governmental functions except when liability is imposed by statute is well established. Taylor v. Berwyn, 372 Ill. 124, 128 .

Mastandrea v. Chicago Park District

259 Ill. App. 3d 897 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Apr 15, 1994

The Tort Immunity Act, as it existed at the time of plaintiff’s accident in 1984, clearly provided that by obtaining insurance, a local public entity waived immunities otherwise available to it. (Ill. Rev. … Through Smith’s testimony, plaintiff sought to establish the profits plaintiff lost from real estate development activities for the two years following his accident.

Welch v. Illinois Supreme Court

Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 4, 2001

As Welch’s employer, Justice Heiple is protected by a qualified privilege. See Vajda v. Arthur Andersen & Co. , 253 Ill. App. 3d 345, 358-59 (1993). … It is well established that a breach of contract claim against the State is a present claim for relief barred by sovereign immunity. See, e.g. , Smith v. Jones , 113 Ill. 2d 126, 132-33 (1986).