(Court opinion corrected 4/7/16.) Plaintiff, age 15 at time of incident, filed personal injury complaint against school district and P.E. teacher, alleging willful and wanton misconduct for failing to provide protective eyewear during floor hockey game during high school physical education class that resulted in Plaintiff's eye injury. Plaintiff presented sufficient evidence at trial of conscious disregard for safety of students playing floor hockey. P.E. teacher was fully aware that safety goggles were available, as they were stored in same box as safety balls (used instead of hockey pucks), and P.E. teacher and Plaintiff testified they had seen ball occasionally bounce in the air. A jury could conclude that these judgment calls were willful and wanton, court erred in granting Defendants' motion for directed verdict. No evidence that P.E. teacher balanced competing interests and made a judgment call as to what solution to best serve those interests in deciding not to require students to wear goggles.Thus, Defendants were not entitled to immunity under Section 2-201 of Tort Immunity Act. (PUCINSKI, concurring; MASON, dissenting.)
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Tort Immunity Act