apparent agency doctrine in Illinois

2025An individual who seeks care from a hospital itself, as opposed to care from his or her personal physician, accepts care from the hospital in reliance upon the fact that complete emergency room care—from blood testing to radiological readings to the endless medical support services—will be provided by the hospital through its staff.’ ” Gilbert, 156 Ill. 2d at 525 -26 (quoting Pamperin, 423 N.W.2d at 857 ). ¶ 246 In York, the Illinois Supreme Court reaffirmed this precise point, writing as follows: “With respect to the third element of an apparent agency claim against a hospital, Gilbert establ

2025An individual who seeks care from a hospital itself, as opposed to care from his or her personal physician, accepts care from the hospital in reliance upon the fact that complete emergency room care—from blood testing to radiological readings to the endless medical support services—will be provided by the hospital through its staff.’ ” Gilbert, 156 Ill. 2d at 525 -26 (quoting Pamperin, 423 N.W.2d at 857 ). ¶ 246 In York, the Illinois Supreme Court reaffirmed this precise point, writing as follows: “With respect to the third element of an apparent agency claim against a hospital, Gilbert establ

2022In other words, “if [the] plaintiff was placed on notice of the independent contractor status of these doctors, ‘it would be unreasonable’ for her to assume that they were employed by [the] defendant and, thus, she could not sustain an apparent agency claim against defendant.” Wallace, 389 Ill.

2020App. 3d 1081, 1087 , 907 N.E.2d 490, 495 (2009) (stating, “if [the] plaintiff was placed on notice of the independent contractor status of [her] doctors, it would be unreasonable for her to assume that they were employed by [the] defendant and, thus, she could not sustain an apparent agency claim against [the] defendant” (internal quotation marks omitted)). ¶ 27 Several of our appellate court decisions have upheld summary judgment in favor of defendant hospitals based on the plaintiffs’ signing of consent forms containing independent contractor disclosures.

2024Mizyed v. Palos Community Hospital, 2016 IL App (1st) 142790, ¶ 42 . ¶ 27 The “justifiable reliance” element of an apparent agency claim, on the other hand, is satisfied if the plaintiff relies upon the hospital to provide complete emergency room care, instead of a specific physician.

2016Also by way of example, in Mizyed v. Palos Community Hospital, 2016 IL App (1st) 142790, ¶¶ 23-25, 36 , neither the physician who rendered the treatment at issue nor the independent medical group that employed her were named in the plaintiff’s medical negligence lawsuit, which alleged that the hospital was vicariously liable for the physician’s negligence under the doctrine of actual and apparent agency. ¶ 45 As noted by plaintiffs, the apparent agency instruction in the Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions, Civil, supports that a principal may be sued even where the apparent agent is not.

2006The O'Banner court observed that, under the traditional formulation of the apparent agency doctrine, a showing of detrimental reliance on the part of the plaintiff was required: "a principle can be held vicariously liable in tort for injury caused by the negligent acts of his apparent agent if the injury would not have occurred but for the injured party's justifiable reliance on the apparent agency." O'Banner, 173 Ill.2d at 213 , 218 Ill.Dec. 910 , 670 N.E.2d 632 .

2006The O’Banner court observed that, under the traditional formulation of the apparent agency doctrine, a showing of detrimental reliance on the part of the plaintiff was required: “a principle can be held vicariously liable in tort for injury caused by the negligent acts of his apparent agent if the injury would not have occurred but for the injured party’s justifiable reliance on the apparent agency.” O’Banner, 173 Ill. 2d at 213 .

2025An individual who seeks care from a hospital itself, as opposed to care from his or her personal physician, accepts care from the hospital in reliance upon the fact that complete emergency room care—from blood testing to radiological readings to the endless medical support services—will be provided by the hospital through its staff.’ ” Gilbert, 156 Ill. 2d at 525 -26 (quoting Pamperin, 423 N.W.2d at 857 ). ¶ 246 In York, the Illinois Supreme Court reaffirmed this precise point, writing as follows: “With respect to the third element of an apparent agency claim against a hospital, Gilbert establ

2025An individual who seeks care from a hospital itself, as opposed to care from his or her personal physician, accepts care from the hospital in reliance upon the fact that complete emergency room care—from blood testing to radiological readings to the endless medical support services—will be provided by the hospital through its staff.’ ” Gilbert, 156 Ill. 2d at 525 -26 (quoting Pamperin, 423 N.W.2d at 857 ). ¶ 246 In York, the Illinois Supreme Court reaffirmed this precise point, writing as follows: “With respect to the third element of an apparent agency claim against a hospital, Gilbert establ

2021See also Bosch v. NorthShore University Health System, 2019 IL App (1st) 190070, ¶ 87 , 155 N.E.3d 486 (stating that under the doctrine of apparent agency, “the purported agent does not possess actual authority to act on behalf of the principal, but the principal, by some manifestation to a third party or the public, has ‘cloaked’ the agent in such a way to give the reasonable impression that the agent has actual authority” (emphasis in original)); Perez v. St.

2021See also Bosch v. NorthShore University Health System, 2019 IL App (1st) 190070, ¶ 87 , 155 N.E.3d 486 (stating that under the doctrine of apparent agency, “the purported agent does not - 24 - possess actual authority to act on behalf of the principal, but the principal, by some manifestation to a third party or the public, has ‘cloaked’ the agent in such a way to give the reasonable impression that the agent has actual authority” (emphasis in original)); Perez v. St.

2021Alexius Medical Center, 2020 IL App (1st) 181887, ¶ 81 (“Under the doctrine of apparent agency, when a physician is not an employee of the hospital but is an independent contractor, a hospital may be held liable for a physician’s negligence.”). ¶ 107 In addition, the Restatement (Second) of Agency states the following: “One who represents that another is his servant or other agent and thereby causes a third person justifiably to rely upon the care or skill of such apparent agent is subject to liability to the third person for harm caused by the lack of care or skill of the one appearing to be

2021Alexius Medical Center, 2020 IL App (1st) 181887, ¶ 81 (“Under the doctrine of apparent agency, when a physician is not an employee of the hospital but is an independent contractor, a hospital may be held liable for a physician’s negligence.”). ¶ 107 In addition, the Restatement (Second) of Agency states the following: “One who represents that another is his servant or other agent and thereby causes a third person justifiably to rely upon the care or skill of such apparent agent is subject to liability to the third person for harm caused by the lack of care or skill of the one appearing to be

2016Our court has stated that the “focus” of the “holding out” element is “whether or not ‘the patient knows, or should have known, that the physician is an independent contractor.’ ” (Emphasis added.) Lamb-Rosenfeldt, 2012 IL App (1st) 101558, ¶ 26 (quoting Gilbert, 156 Ill. 2d at 524 ).

2016Our court has stated that the "focus" of the "holding out" element is "whether or not 'the patient knows, or should have known, that the physician is an independent contractor.' " (Emphasis added.) Lamb- Rosenfeldt, 2012 IL App (1st) 101558, ¶ 26 (quoting Gilbert, 156 Ill. 2d at 524 ).

2011DeLuna, 185 Ill. 2d at 582 , 708 N.E.2d at 348 (holding that it would be “particularly unfair” to permit the hospital to avoid liability merely because of the doctor’s fortuity in obtaining an involuntary dismissal, where that dismissal did not otherwise absolve the doctor of fault).

2011DeLuna, 185 Ill. 2d at 582 , 708 N.E.2d at 348 (holding that it would be “particularly unfair” to permit the hospital to avoid liability merely because of the doctor’s fortuity in obtaining an involuntary dismissal, where that dismissal did not otherwise absolve the doctor of fault).

2017App. 3d 720 , 727, 228 Ill.Dec. 34 , 688 N.E.2d 732 (1997). ¶ 74 In short, the legal rule adopted by the majority in this case is that hospitals are liable for medical negligence committed by unrelated, independent agents when the elements of the doctrine of apparent agency, as set forth in Gilbert , are satisfied.

2017App. 3d 720 , 727, 228 Ill.Dec. 34 , 688 N.E.2d 732 (1997). ¶ 74 In short, the legal rule adopted by the majority in this case is that hospitals are liable for medical negligence committed by unrelated, independent agents when the elements of the doctrine of apparent agency, as set forth in Gilbert , are satisfied.

2016Accordingly, “the reliance element of a plaintiff’s apparent agency claim is satisfied if the plaintiff reasonably relies upon a hospital to provide medical care, rather than upon a specific physician.” Spiegelman, 392 Ill.

2016Accordingly, “the reliance element of a plaintiff’s apparent agency claim is satisfied if the plaintiff reasonably relies upon a hospital to provide medical care, rather than upon a specific physician.” Spiegelman, 392 Ill.

2006According to Rush, Butkiewicz v. Loyola University Medical Center, 311 Ill.App.3d 508 , 244 Ill.Dec. 149 , 724 N.E.2d 1037 (2000), and James v. Ingalls Memorial Hospital, 299 Ill.App.3d 627 , 233 Ill.Dec. 564 , 701 N.E.2d 207 (1998), properly analyzed the element of reliance in an apparent agency claim arising in the context of a medical malpractice action.

2006According to Rush, Butkiewicz v. Loyola University Medical Center, 311 Ill.App.3d 508 , 244 Ill.Dec. 149 , 724 N.E.2d 1037 (2000), and James v. Ingalls Memorial Hospital, 299 Ill.App.3d 627 , 233 Ill.Dec. 564 , 701 N.E.2d 207 (1998), properly analyzed the element of reliance in an apparent agency claim arising in the context of a medical malpractice action.

2023See Petrovich v. Share Health Plan of Illinois, Inc., 188 Ill. 2d 17, 32 (1999); Hammer v. Barth, 2016 IL App (1st) 143066, ¶ 22 .

2021See Stewart v. Jones, 318 Ill.