ILCS » Chapter 745 · Act 10
Illinois Compiled Statutes

745 ILCS 10/2-302 (2026)

If any claim or action is instituted against an employee of a local public entity based on an injury allegedly arising out of an act or omission occurring within the scope of his employment as such employee, the entity may elect to do any one or more of the following:         (a) appear and defend against the claim or action;         (b) indemnify the employee or former employee for his     court costs or reasonable attorney's fees, or both, incurred in the defense of such claim or action;         (c) pay, or indemnify the employee or former employee     for a judgment based on such claim or action; or         (d) pay, or indemnify the employee or former employee     for, a compromise or settlement of such a claim or action

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(745 ILCS 10/2-302) (from Ch. 85, par. 2-302)
    Sec. 2-302. If any claim or action is instituted against an employee of a local public entity based on an injury allegedly arising out of an act or omission occurring within the scope of his employment as such employee, the entity may elect to do any one or more of the following:
        (a) appear and defend against the claim or action;
        (b) indemnify the employee or former employee for his
    
court costs or reasonable attorney's fees, or both, incurred in the defense of such claim or action;
        (c) pay, or indemnify the employee or former employee
    
for a judgment based on such claim or action; or
        (d) pay, or indemnify the employee or former employee
    
for, a compromise or settlement of such a claim or action.
    It is hereby declared to be the public policy of this State, however, that no local public entity may elect to indemnify an employee for any portion of a judgment representing an award of punitive or exemplary damages.
    If an employee of a local public entity is a defendant in any criminal action arising out of or incidental to the performance of his or her duties, the local public entity shall not provide representation for the employee in that criminal action. However, the local public entity may reimburse the employee for reasonable defense costs only if the criminal action was instituted against the employee based upon an act or omission of that employee arising out of and directly related to the lawful exercise of his or her official duty or under color of his or her authority and that action is dismissed or results in a final disposition in favor of that employee.
    The provisions of indemnification, as set forth above, shall be justifiably refused by the local public entity if it is determined that there exists a current insurance policy or a contract, by virtue of which the employee is entitled to a defense of the action in question.
    Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit a local public entity from providing representation to an employee who is a witness in a criminal matter arising out of that employee's employment with the local government entity.
(Source: P.A. 99-461, eff. 1-1-17.)


 
    (745 ILCS 10/Art. III heading)
ARTICLE III--IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY FOR INJURY OCCURRING IN THE USE OF
PUBLIC PROPERTY

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2001–2026 · leading case: Am. Saf. Cas. Ins. v. City of Waukegan, 776 F. Supp. 2d 670 (N.D. Ill. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Am. Saf. Cas. Ins. v. City of Waukegan, 776 F. Supp. 2d 670 (N.D. Ill. 2011). “745 ILCS 10/2-302 (emphasis added). The second, Section 9-102, states: A local public entity is empowered and directed to pay any tort judgment or settlement for compensatory damages (and may pay any associate attorney’s fees and costs) for which it or an employee while acting…”
Mohr v. Chicago Sch. Reform Bd. of Trs. of Bd. of Educ. of City of Chicago, 155 F. Supp. 2d 923 (N.D. Ill. 2001). “745 ILCS 10/2-302(d). However, the Seventh Circuit did not comment on the availability, or lack of it, of indemnity for punitive damages in Lawson .”
Edmond v. City of Chicago, The (N.D. Ill. 2018). “SAC at 59 (citing 745 ILCS 10/2-302). D. Examples of The Named Plaintiffs’ Allegations The named plaintiffs work or worked for the Water Department during the noted time periods: Derrick Edmond (1985–2017); Eddie Cooper, Jr.”
Peters v. City of Palatine (N.D. Ill. 2019). “57 at 12-13 (citing 745 ILCS 10/2-109; 745 ILCS 10/2-302; 65 ILCS 5/1-4-6).) Peters responds that because a reasonable jury could find that defendants violated her rights, the Village and School District are not entitled to dismissal.”
Rockwood v. Pettinger (N.D. Ill. 2024). “745 ILCS 10/2-302; 110 ILCS 805/3-29. And, under Seventh Circuit law, plaintiffs can simply add an indemnification claim in their complaint to ensure recovery of compensatory damages.”
Sillas v. Meyers (S.D. Ill. 2024). “Sillas cites to 745 ILCS 10/2-302, but that statute simply allows for a local entity to appear and defend on behalf of an employee of a local public entity.”
Estrada (S.D. Ill. 2025). “Claims 7, 8 Claim 7 is a state law claim under 745 ILCS 10/2-302 for indemnification of Defendants Dr.”
James (C.D. Ill. 2026). “See 745 ILCS 10/2-302 (local government entity can choose to indemnify its employees acting within the scope of their employment for compensatory damages).”
— 745 ILCS 10/2-302(d) — 1 case
Mohr v. Chicago Sch. Reform Bd. of Trs. of Bd. of Educ. of City of Chicago, 155 F. Supp. 2d 923 (N.D. Ill. 2001). “745 ILCS 10/2-302(d). However, the Seventh Circuit did not comment on the availability, or lack of it, of indemnity for punitive damages in Lawson .”
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.