Monson v. City of Danville

Plaintiff sued City for failure to repair a sidewalk defect, after she tripped and fell on an uneven seam in a sidewalk. Section 3-102(a) of Tort Immunity Act does not confer immunity, and thus cannot override or supersede the immunities set forth in Sections 2-109 and 2-201 of Act. City did not meet its burden to prove it is entitled to discretionary immunity under Sections 2-109 and 2-201 of the Act as a matter of law, and thus City is not entitled to summary judgment based on its claim of discretionary immunity. Genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether sidewalk defect was de minimis. (KARMEIER, GARMAN, and NEVILLE, concurring; THOMAS, KILBRIDE, and THEIS, specially concurring.)