ILCS » Chapter 225 · Act 60
Illinois Compiled Statutes

225 ILCS 60/5 (2026)

Because the candid and conscientious evaluation of clinical practices is essential to the provision of adequate health care, it is the policy of this State to encourage peer review by health care providers

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(225 ILCS 60/5) (from Ch. 111, par. 4400-5)
    (Section scheduled to be repealed on January 1, 2027)
    Sec. 5. Because the candid and conscientious evaluation of clinical practices is essential to the provision of adequate health care, it is the policy of this State to encourage peer review by health care providers. Therefore, while serving upon any committee whose purpose, directly or indirectly, is internal quality control or medical study to reduce morbidity or mortality, or for improving patient care or physician services within a hospital duly licensed under the Hospital Licensing Act, or within a professional association of persons licensed under this Act, or the improving or benefiting of patient care and treatment whether within a hospital or not, or for the purpose of professional discipline, any person serving on such committee, and any person providing service to such committees, shall not be liable for civil damages as a result of their acts, omissions, decisions, or any other conduct in connection with their duties on such committees, except those involving wilful or wanton misconduct.
    Information considered shall be afforded the same status as is information concerning medical studies by Part 21 of Article VIII of the "Code of Civil Procedure", as now or hereafter amended.
(Source: P.A. 85-1209.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1996–2016 · leading case: Tabora v. Gottlieb Mem'l Hosp., 664 N.E.2d 267 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tabora v. Gottlieb Mem'l Hosp., 664 N.E.2d 267 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). · cites it 2× “4400 — 5 (now 225 ILCS 60/5 (West 1992))) barred these claims.”
Garibaldi v. Applebaum, 704 N.E.2d 698 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999). · cites it 3× “They cite four sources for such immunity: (1) the common law doctrine of limited judicial review; (2) the Illinois Hospital Licensing Act (210 ILCS 85/10.”
Kopolovic v. Shah, 2012 IL App (2d) 110383 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “2 (West 2010)); and the Medical Practice Act of 1987 (now codified at 225 ILCS 60/5 (West 2010)). The latter two statutes expressly provide for civil immunity, stating that no individual covered by the statutes shall be liable for civil damages.”
Garibaldi v. Applebaum (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). · cites it 3× “They cite four sources for such immunity: (1) the common law doctrine of limited judicial review; (2) the Illinois Hospital Licensing Act (210 ILCS 85/10.”
Parungao v. Cmty. Health Sys., Inc., 192 F. Supp. 3d 935 (N.D. Ill. 2016). “2) and § 60/5 of the Medical Practices Act (225 ILCS 60/5); and that plaintiffs signed release of liability forms barred plaintiff from pursuing the defamation per se claim.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.