ILCS » Chapter 425 · Act 25

425 ILCS 25/9f

Duties owed to fire fighters

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(425 ILCS 25/9f)
    Sec. 9f. Duties owed to fire fighters. The owner or occupier of the premises and his or her agents owe fire fighters who are on the premises in the performance of their official duties conducting fire investigations or inspections or responding to fire alarms or actual fires on the premises a duty of reasonable care in the maintenance of the premises according to applicable fire safety codes, regulations, ordinances, and generally applicable safety standards, including any decisions by the Illinois courts. The owner or occupier of the premises and his or her agents are not relieved of the duty of reasonable care if the fire fighter is injured due to the lack of maintenance of the premises in the course of responding to a fire, false alarm, or his or her inspection or investigation of the premises.
    This Section applies to all causes of action that have accrued, will accrue, or are currently pending before a court of competent jurisdiction, including courts of review.
(Source: P.A. 101-82, eff. 1-1-20.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2004–2025 · leading case: Lazenby v. Mark's Construction, Inc.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lazenby v. Mark's Construction, Inc. (2010) ill · cites it 4× “The issues presented in this appeal are: (1) whether section 9f of the Fire Investigation Act (Act) (425 ILCS 25/9f (West 2004)) applied retroactively to Decker’s claims; and (2) whether the trial court erred in failing to enter a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (judgment n.”
Randich v. Pirtano Const. Co., Inc. (2004) illappct · cites it 8× “July 22, 2003 (adding 425 ILCS 25/9f)). Section 9f provides: "The owner or occupier of the premises and his or her agents owe fire fighters who are on the premises in the performance of their official duties conducting fire investigations or inspections or responding to fire…”
Perry v. Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (2018) ill “' " (quoting 425 ILCS 25/9f (West 2004) ) ); Doe A. , 234 Ill.”
Perry v. Department of Financial & Professional Regulation (2018) ill “’ ” (quoting 425 ILCS 25/9f (West 2004))); Doe A., 234 Ill.”
Rusch v. Leonard (2010) illappct “The owner or occupier of the premises and his or her agents are not relieved of the duty of reasonable care if the fire fighter is injured due to the lack of maintenance of the premises in the course of responding to a fire, false alarm, or his or her inspection or investigation…”
White v. The Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity and Benefit Fund of the City of Chicago (2014) illappct “2d 83, 95 (2010) (quoting 425 ILCS 25/9f (West 2004)); see Doe A., 234 Ill.”
White v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity and Benefit Fund (2014) illappct “2d 83, 95 (2010) (quoting 425 ILCS 25/9f (West 2004)); see Doe A., 234 Ill.”
Vokac v. Berwyn Police Pension Fund (2025) illappct “2d 83, 95 (2010) (quoting 425 ILCS 25/9f (West 2004)). The Board could have included similar temporal language when adopting section 723, but it did not.”
Randich v. Pirtano Construction Co. (Replaces opinion filed 7/29/03) (2004) illappct · cites it 5× “July 22, 2003 (adding 425 ILCS 25/9f)). Section 9f provides: "The owner or occupier of the premises and his or her agents owe fire fighters who are on the premises in the performance of their official duties conducting fire investigations or inspections or responding to fire…”
Lazenby v. Mark's Construction (2010) ill · cites it 4× “The issues presented in this appeal are: (1) whether section 9f of the Fire Investigation Act (Act) (425 ILCS 25/9f (West 2004)) applied retroactively to Decker’s claims; and (2) whether the trial court erred in failing to enter a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (judgment n.”
Jackson v. Urban Investment Property Services (2005) illappct “” 425 ILCS 25/9f (West 2004). Plaintiff claims that the legislature, with this amendment, has rejected the fire fighter’s rule.”
Rusch v. Leonard (2010) illappct · cites it 2× “July 22, 2003 (adding 425 ILCS 25/9f)). Section 9f provides: "The owner or occupier of the premises and his or her agents owe fire fighters who are on the premises in the performance of their official duties conducting fire investigations or inspections or responding to fire…”
Show all 16 citing cases →
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.