Civil engineers' duty of care defined by contractual obligationBy Helen W. GunnarssonMarch 2011Lawpulse, Page 118Where the contract provided for "replacement" of a bridge deck, the defendant engineer had no duty to make improvements that might have saved lives, the high court said.
Exceptions to open and obvious danger rule not on point for shopper injured on store propertyFebruary 2011Illinois Law Update, Page 72On December 2, 2010, the Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District, upheld a decision of the Circuit Court of Tazewell County, finding no genuine issue of material fact as to whether the distraction or the deliberate-encounter exception to the open and obvious danger rule applied in the present case.
Dramshop Act does not block respondeat superior claim for employee drunk drivingNovember 2010Illinois Law Update, Page 564On August 18, 2010, the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, overturned a grant of summary judgment by the Circuit Court of Cook County, finding that the Dramshop Act does not preempt claims based on legal theories independent from the defendant's provision of alcohol.
Sports Injuries: High Liability Standard for NonparticipantsBy Ray RossiApril 2010Article, Page 200In Illinois, nonparticipants (e.g., coaches and refs) in sporting events who cause injuries are liable only if their misconduct is at least willful and wanton.
Clarifications made to the contact sports exception to negligence claimsMarch 2010Illinois Law Update, Page 128On December 31, 2009, the Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District, reversed and remanded the decision of the Circuit Court of Du Page County, which found that the contact sports exception to ordinary negligence claims applied to a trainer of an amateur hockey team.
Power company has a duty to respond to a downed power line with due careNovember 2009Illinois Law Update, Page 552On August 27, 2009, the Illinois Appellate Court, Fourth District, reversed and remanded the grant of summary judgment by the Circuit Court of Cook County in favor of the defendant power company, finding that there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendant breached its duty to the plaintiff to respond to a downed power line with due care.
CTA notice requirement eliminatedBy Helen W. GunnarssonJuly 2009Lawpulse, Page 330Plaintiff’s lawyers are cheering the removal of a notice requirement they say functioned “as a shield against unsuspecting plaintiffs” with legitimate claims against the CTA.
Evidence is insufficient to prove negligence if the conclusion is merely possibleJune 2009Illinois Law Update, Page 284On April 1, 2009, the Illinois Appellate Court, Third District, affirmed the judgment of the Circuit Court of Will County which granted summary judgment for the defendants after concluding that no genuine issue of material fact existed to establish negligence on the part of the defendants.
Victory for defendants in asbestos caseBy Helen W. GunnarssonJune 2009Lawpulse, Page 278The Illinois Supreme Court allows defendants in asbestos cases to introduce evidence that someone else's negligence was the sole proximate cause of a plaintiff's injuries.
Plaintiff failed to prove reliance element of voluntary undertaking theoryFebruary 2009Illinois Law Update, Page 70On December 2, 2008, the Illinois Appellate Court, Third District, affirmed the judgment of the Circuit Court of Rock Island County granting summary judgment for the defendant in a negligence action.
The Broad Duty to Protect Patrons from Harm: Marshall v Burger KingBy Courtney Dashiell LorentzOctober 2008Article, Page 524The Illinois Supreme Court ruled that a restaurant owner has a duty to protect its patrons from an out-of-control car. So where does a premises owner's duty to the public end?
A veterinary standard of careBy Helen W. GunnarssonJuly 2008Lawpulse, Page 334The court makes explicit that veterinarians are "skilled" practitioners of a "profession or trade" and thus owe a duty of care.
Use of Leased Land Act. PA 095-0603April 2008Illinois Law Update, Page 180The General Assembly has created the State of Illinois Recreational Use of Leased Land Act.
No duty to warn, Illinois high court holdsBy Helen W. GunnarssonNovember 2007Lawpulse, Page 570The court reaffirms the rule that Party A has no duty to warn Party B about a threat posed by Party C unless there's a special relationship between A and B.
Admitted negligent acts properly presented to jury when relevant and necessary to plaintiff's caseAugust 2007Illinois Law Update, Page 404On June 7, 2007, the Illinois Appellate Court, Fifth District, affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court of Jackson County allowing Michael Rath to present evidence of Carbondale Nursing and Rehabilitation Center's negligence despite the nursing home's admission of certain acts of negligence.
No duty to third parties for injuries resulting from theft of vehicle on private propertyApril 2007Illinois Law Update, Page 176On February 8, 2007, the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court of Cook County granting summary judgment to defendants Budget Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc. (Budget) and Ranger Security (Ranger).
No governmental immunity for hazardous recreational activityBy Helen W. GunnarssonApril 2007Lawpulse, Page 170The tort immunity act offers no blanket immunity for trampolining and other hazardous recreational activities, the high court rules.
No per se liability exception to the risk-utility test when dangers are open and obviousApril 2007Illinois Law Update, Page 176On February 16, 2007, the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, reversing the Circuit Court of Cook County's order of summary judgment for defendant Scripto-Tokai Corporation (Scripto).
Land Surveyor Liability to Third Parties in IllinoisBy Richard F. BalesMarch 2007Article, Page 136The land surveyor made a mistake - what are the damages? The defenses? Who can recover? This article explores those questions from the plaintiffs' and defense perspectives.
Campground operator has no duty to warn of naturally accumulating walnutsJuly 2006Illinois Law Update, Page 334On April 19, 2006, the Illinois Appellate Court, Third District, affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court of Whiteside County, granting summary judgment to the defendant campground owner because she had neither a duty to keep the campground clear of fallen walnuts nor a duty to warn patrons of the danger posed by such walnuts.
Railroad operator liable for injury to frequent trespasserMay 2006Illinois Law Update, Page 230On March 10, 2006, the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, answered two certified questions posed by the Circuit Court of Cook County, regarding the liability of a railroad company to a trespasser.
