ILCS » Chapter 745 · Act 10
Illinois Compiled Statutes

745 ILCS 10/3-106 (2026)

Neither a local public entity nor a public employee is liable for an injury where the liability is based on the existence of a condition of any public property intended or permitted to be used for recreational purposes, including but not limited to parks, playgrounds, open areas, buildings or other enclosed recreational facilities, unless such local entity or public employee is guilty of willful and wanton conduct proximately causing such injury

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(745 ILCS 10/3-106) (from Ch. 85, par. 3-106)
    Sec. 3-106. Neither a local public entity nor a public employee is liable for an injury where the liability is based on the existence of a condition of any public property intended or permitted to be used for recreational purposes, including but not limited to parks, playgrounds, open areas, buildings or other enclosed recreational facilities, unless such local entity or public employee is guilty of willful and wanton conduct proximately causing such injury.
(Source: P.A. 84-1431.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 79 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1994–2024 · leading case: Cohen v. Chicago Park Dist., 2017 IL 121800 (Ill. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cohen v. Chicago Park Dist., 2017 IL 121800 (Ill. 2017). · cites it 4× “That provision grants absolute immunity to local public entities for injuries caused by a condition of a "road which provides access to fishing, hunting, or primitive camping, recreational, or scenic areas.”
Rexroad v. City of Springfield, 796 N.E.2d 1040 (Ill. 2003). · cites it 4× “The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the City and the school board, finding that the immunity of section 3-106 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/3-106 (West 1994)) precluded liability.”
Moore v. Chicago Park Dist., 2012 IL 112788 (Ill. 2012). · cites it 4× “) 745 ILCS 10/3-106 (West 2008). ¶ 11 In deciding the certified question, i.”
Capps v. Belleville Sch. Dist. No. 201, 730 N.E.2d 81 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). · cites it 6× “Whether an accessibility ramp leading into a school recreational facility is an integral part of said facility, thereby affording the School District the immunity of section 3-106 of the Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/3-106 (West 1998)). 2. Whether the School District's conduct…”
Thurman v. Champaign Park Dist., 2011 IL App (4th) 101024 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 2× “It argued it could not be held liable for plaintiffs’ claimed injuries because (1) section 3-106 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Act) (745 ILCS 10/3-106 (West 2008)) made it immune from liability for mere negligence claims that were…”
Dinelli v. Cnty. of Lake, 691 N.E.2d 394 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). · cites it 4× “The trial court found that the crosswalk had been intended for recreational use and therefore concluded that the County was immune from liability pursuant to section 3-106 of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (the Act) (745 ILCS 10/3-106 (West…”
Vill. of Bloomingdale v. CDG Enter., Inc., 752 N.E.2d 1090 (Ill. 2001). “745 ILCS 10/3-106 ( West 1998 ). The legislature has recognized exceptions to its grants of immunity and enumerated these exceptions in the plain language of the Act.”
Pomaro v. Cmty. Consol. Sch. Dist. 21, 662 N.E.2d 438 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995). · cites it 4× “" (745 ILCS 10/3-106 (West 1993).) The trial court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment (735 ILCS 5/2-1005 (West 1993)) and, on de novo review, we affirm.”
Barnett v. Zion Park Dist., 665 N.E.2d 808 (Ill. 1996). “y [construct] traffic control devices" (745 ILCS 10/3-104 (West 1992)) or the failure to "establish a fire department or otherwise provide fire protection" (745 ILCS 10/5-101 (West 1992)) cannot be fruitfully compared with a limited immunity for negligence based on the…”
Doe 20 v. Bd. of Educ. of the Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. No. 5, 680 F. Supp. 2d 957 (C.D. Ill. 2010). · cites it 2× “Burdinie was later overruled to the extent it suggested that a public entity could be liable under 745 ILCS 10/3-106 (governing public property used for recreation) for the willful and wanton conduct of a public employee that did not involve the condition of the property itself.”
Kayser v. Vill. of Warren, 707 N.E.2d 285 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999). · cites it 4× “(West 1996)), ruling that Kayser's claim was barred by the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/3-106 (West 1996)). We affirm.”
Doris Diamond v. Springfield Metro. Exposition Auditorium Auth., 44 F.3d 599 (7th Cir. 1995). · cites it 3× “Section 3-106 of the Tort Immunity Act provides immunity to local public entities against negligence claims arising from “the existence of a condition of any public property intended or permitted to be used for recreational purposes.”
Show all 79 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.