On Oct. 8, 2024, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a court may not grant summary judgment if there is a genuine issue of material fact.
On June 4, 2024, the Fourth District of the Illinois Appellate Court held there is no personal jurisdiction if an entity’s sole contact with Illinois is that a third party sells the entity’s products there.
On May 30, 2024, the Second District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that school districts are immune from tort claims but not breach-of-settlement claims.
On April 9, 2024, the Second District of the Illinois Appellate Court held businesses have a duty to protect invitees from the foreseeable negligent acts of third parties.
On Jan. 25, 2024, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to apparent agency when a hospital patient does not know their physician is an independent contractor.
On Nov. 1, 2023, the Third District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act provides absolute immunity for the failure to provide adequate police protection.
On July 14, 2023, the Fourth District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a statute allowing for prejudgment interest does not violate the Illinois Constitution.
On March 23, 2023, the Third District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a dissolved corporation not originally named as a defendant in a lawsuit is not precluded from being added after the five-year postdissolution period expires, under section 12.80 of the Business Corporation Act of 1983 (Act).
On Jan. 10, 2023, the Second District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that refusal to allow a bar to amend an answer to include an affirmative defense constituted an abuse of discretion.
On Oct. 28, 2022, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court reversed a grant of summary judgment where the court found disputed issues as to a police officer’s entitlement of civil immunity under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (“Act”).
On Sept. 7, 2022, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that owners of a rooming house did not owe a duty of care to a renter who was attacked by a fellow renter in a shared area of the rooming house.
On Sept. 22, 2022, the Illinois Supreme Court held that the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) did not owe a duty of care to a trespasser struck by one of its trains.
On July 15, 2022, the Fourth District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that the open-and-obvious doctrine only applies when a condition on the land causes a plaintiff’s injury.
On June 16, 2022, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that the Village of Lincolnwood owed no duty of care to bicyclists on residential streets under the Tort Immunity Act.
On May 19, the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the Illinois Appellate Court’s decision imposing a legal duty on a fitness center to use an automated external defibrillator (AED) on patrons suffering a cardiac event.
On April 21, the Illinois Supreme Court held that police officers and their municipal employers did not have immunity under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act because the individual chased by the officer was not an escaped or escaping prisoner.
The 2021 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Ford Motor Company and its sprouting Illinois caselaw clarifying the “arising from” prong of specific personal jurisdiction.
There are exceptions to the rule against admissibility of subsequent remedial measures besides proving ownership or control, showing feasibility of alternative design, or to impeach.
On Aug. 9, 2021, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court affirmed a circuit court’s judgment that the City of Chicago did not owe a duty to the plaintiff to maintain a service path.
On Dec. 9, 2020, the Fifth District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that the Tort Immunity Act provides comprehensive immunity to 911 dispatchers and local governments that recklessly fail to provide police service.
On Oct. 6, 2020, the Third District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that closing a public street for a recreational event a few days a year may not be enough to alter the street’s character under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act.
On May 21, 2020, the Illinois Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court by holding that plaintiffs who do not suffer an economic loss cannot maintain a tort action based on a claim that solely alleges an economic injury.
The Illinois Supreme Court considered the issue of whether a defendant sufficiently established immunity under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act.
