scope of governmental immunity (Illinois) · Go Syfert
← Illinois issues

scope of governmental immunity in Illinois

5 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2003 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Illinois courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Village of Bloomingdale v. CDG Enterprises, Inc. green
ill · 2001
2 sentences

2003We further note that the supreme court, in discussing the scope of governmental immunity under the Immunity Act, stated that "[t]he legislature has recognized exceptions to its grants of immunity and enumerated these exceptions in the plain language of the Act." CDG Enterprises, *1097 196 Ill.2d at 494-95 , 256 Ill.Dec. 848 , 752 N.E.2d 1090 .

2003We further note that the supreme court, in discussing the scope of governmental immunity under the Immunity Act, stated that “[t]he legislature has recognized exceptions to its grants of immunity and enumerated these exceptions in the plain language of the Act.” CDG Enterprises, 196 Ill. 2d at 494-95 .

32003–2003
Calloway v. Kinkelaar green
ill · 1995
2 sentences

1998Like the defendants in Leone, the defendants in Calloway v. Kinkelaar, 168 Ill. 2d 312 (1995), contended, for the first time on appeal, that the operation of the special duty doctrine as an exception to immunities granted under the Tort Immunity Act was an unconstitutional infringement on the power of the legislature to define the scope of governmental immunity.

1998Like the defendants in Leone, the defendants in Calloway v. Kinkelaar, 168 Ill.2d 312 , 213 Ill.Dec. 675 , 659 N.E.2d 1322 (1995), contended, for the first time on appeal, that the operation of the special duty doctrine as an exception to immunities granted under the Tort Immunity Act was an unconstitutional infringement on the power of the legislature to define the scope of governmental immunity.

21998–1998

Where else courts name it

MI 29 (1978–2025) TX 13 (1994–2025) CT 11 (1998–2021) UT 7 (1989–2016) CA 5 (1976–2014) IL 5 (1998–2003) PA 4 (1968–2026) WI 3 (2010–2013) NY 2 (1988–1989) IN 2 (2009–2010) MD 2 (1998–1998)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check