EMS Act immunity in Illinois

2020Broad Construction of EMS Act Immunity ¶ 83 The appellate court did not discuss our broad construction of EMS Act immunity in American National Bank, 192 Ill. 2d 274 , and Abruzzo, 231 Ill. 2d 324 .

2008In American National Bank & Trust Co. v. City of Chicago, 192 Ill. 2d 274 (2000), this court interpreted a previous version of the EMS Act immunity provision.

2025See, e.g., Abruzzo v. City of Park Ridge, 231 Ill. 2d 324, 346-48 (2008) (finding in a case where the immunity provisions of the EMS Act and the immunity provisions of the Tort Immunity Act (not the same provisions of the Tort Immunity Act cited in the present case) both potentially applied, that the immunity provisions of the EMS Act governed under the factual circumstances involved).

2020Broad Construction of EMS Act Immunity ¶ 83 The appellate court did not discuss our broad construction of EMS Act immunity in American National Bank, 192 Ill. 2d 274 , and Abruzzo, 231 Ill. 2d 324 .

2014Defendant argued that there was no conflict between the Tort Immunity Act and the EMS Act because the former applies to “pretreatment activities while the EMS Act only provides immunity once treatment has begun.” Abruzzo, 374 Ill.

2008The City observes that the term “life support services” has been changed to “emergency or non-emergency medical services.” As noted by the appellate court, however, the amended statute is at least as broad as the prior version. 374 Ill.

2012People v. Marshall, 242 Ill.2d 285, 297 , 351 Ill.Dec. 172 , 950 N.E.2d 668 (2011).

2012People v. Marshall, 242 Ill.2d 285, 297 , 351 Ill.Dec. 172 , 950 N.E.2d 668 (2011).

2012The EMS Act "protects *1079 paramedics and emergency medical technicians from claims of mere negligence." Meck v. Paramedic Services of Illinois, 296 Ill.App.3d 720, 725 , 231 Ill.

2012The EMS Act "protects *1079 paramedics and emergency medical technicians from claims of mere negligence." Meck v. Paramedic Services of Illinois, 296 Ill.App.3d 720, 725 , 231 Ill.

2020The fact that EMS Act immunity applies to this case is neither absurd nor impossible to understand. “ ‘The threat of impending liability either in tort or by way of contribution is detrimental to the ability of medical personnel to effectively perform their duties.’ ” Wilkins, 2013 IL 114310, ¶ 25 (quoting Brock v. Anderson Road Associates, 301 Ill.

2020See Kozak v. Retirement Board of the Firemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund, 95 Ill. 2d 211, 220 (1983). ¶ 111 The responsibility for the justice or wisdom of legislation rests upon the legislature.

2020Our broad construction of the immunity provision in American National Bank to include preparatory conduct integral to providing emergency treatment continues to be supported by the EMS Act’s comprehensive scope.” Id. at 341 . ¶ 97 Also, in Wilkins, we discussed Abruzzo and recognized “the broad scope of the EMS Act, as well as the broad language in the immunity provision.” Wilkins, 2013 IL 114310, ¶ 30 . - 26 - ¶ 98 Thus, our case law has established that, absent willful and wanton misconduct, the EMS Act provides immunity for acts and omissions that occur during preparatory conduct integral t

2020The fact that EMS Act immunity applies to this case is neither absurd nor impossible to understand. “ ‘The threat of impending liability either in tort or by way of contribution is detrimental to the ability of medical personnel to effectively perform their duties.’ ” Wilkins, 2013 IL 114310, ¶ 25 (quoting Brock v. Anderson Road Associates, 301 Ill.