Greene v. Wood River Trust
2013 WL 5773348
Ill. App. Ct.2013Background
- Greene slipped on an icy walkway near a residence she leased from Wood River Trust and related entities on Feb. 12, 2010.
- She sued for negligence, alleging multiple maintenance-related failures contributing to the dangerous condition.
- Defendants moved to dismiss under the Snow and Ice Removal Act (Act) immunity provisions.
- The trial court dismissed negligence but allowed amendments to plead willful and wanton misconduct; subsequent amendments were also dismissed.
- On appeal, Greene challenges Act immunity for defective-construction/maintenance-caused ice, the willful/wanton dismissals, and denial of extra discovery time; the court remands on negligence counts while affirming some dismissals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the Snow and Ice Removal Act immunize negligence claims where ice is caused by defective construction or maintenance? | Greene contends Act does not apply to defects. | Defendants argue Act immunizes claims unless willful/wanton. | Act does not provide immunity for ice caused by defective construction or maintenance. |
| Were counts II, IV, VI, VIII (willful and wanton) properly dismissed? | Greene asserts willful/wanton allegations suffice. | Defendants contend the allegations do not show deliberate harm or conscious disregard. | Yes, those willful/wanton counts were properly dismissed. |
| Did the trial court abuse its discretion by denying more time to locate supporting witnesses? | Greene sought additional discovery time. | No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed. | |
| Should the negligence counts be reinstated on remand? | Greene seeks reinstatement of negligence counts I, III, V, VII. | Defendants rely on prior dismissal under the Act. | Counts I, III, V, VII reinstated and remanded for answer. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lacey v. Village of Palatine, 232 Ill. 2d 349 (2009) (de novo review of 2-619 dismissal standard applied)
- McLean v. Rockford Country Club, 352 Ill. App. 3d 229 (2004) (premises defendant’s construction/maintenance can create duty for unnatural ice)
- Gallagher v. Union Square Condominium Homeowner’s Ass’n, 397 Ill. App. 3d 1037 (2010) (Act does not immunize injuries on driveways; sidewalk focus; removal context)
- Pikovsky v. 8440-8460 North Skokie Boulevard Condominium Ass’n, 2011 IL App (1st) 103742 (2011) (plaintiff fell due to snow removal mounds; Act barred where removal efforts caused the ice)
- Doe-3 v. McLean County Unit Dist. No. 5 Bd. of Dirs., 2012 IL 112479 (2012) (willful/wanton elements require deliberate harm or conscious disregard)
- Ries v. City of Chicago, 242 Ill. 2d 205 (2011) (statutory interpretation guiding plain-language approach)
- Adams v. Northern Illinois Gas Co., 211 Ill. 2d 32 (2004) (construction of derogation of common law; strict reading against immunity)
- Callahan v. Edgewater Care & Rehabilitation Center, Inc., 374 Ill. App. 3d 630 (2007) (repeal/implied preemption of common law requires clear expression)
- Van Meter v. Darien Park District, 207 Ill. 2d 359 (2003) (derogation of common law must be construed strictly)
- Ordman v. Dacon Management Corp., 261 Ill. App. 3d 275 (1994) (common-law duty for unnatural ice depends on construction/maintenance)