Legal Opinion

Pouk v. Village of Romeoville

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided October 29, 2010No. 3-09-1008PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Lytton

Plaintiff, Marie Pouk, filed a complaint against the Village of Romeoville, alleging willful and wanton conduct. The Village filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that it was immune from liability pursuant to the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Act) (745 ILCS 10/1 — 101 et seq. (West 2006)). The trial court granted the motion. We affirm.

On May 9, 2008, plaintiff’s daughter, Christine Jungkans, was driving north on Hale Avenue in the Village. After stopping at a stop sign at the intersection of Hale Avenue and 135th Street, Jungkans proceeded to make a left turn…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Fitzpatrick v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Lacey v. Village of PalatineIllinois Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Ware v. The City of ChicagoAppellate Court of Illinois · 2007
  4. Anthony v. City of ChicagoAppellate Court of Illinois · 2008
  5. Bowler v. City of ChicagoAppellate Court of Illinois · 2007

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Hess v. FloresAppellate Court of Illinois · 2011
  2. Payne v. The City of ChicagoAppellate Court of Illinois · 2014
  3. Payne v. City of ChicagoAppellate Court of Illinois · 2014
  4. Donovan v. Communit Unit School District 303Appellate Court of Illinois · 2015
  5. Nourse v. The City of ChicagoAppellate Court of Illinois · 2017

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API