Murray v. Chicago Youth Center

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding as a matter of law that the complaint alleged sufficient facts of the defendants’ willful and wanton conduct to create a jury question
• reversing summary judgment for the defendant, where there was a material factual - 11 - 2021 IL App (2d
• interpreting section 3-109(c)(2) of the Act as providing an exception to section 3-109 immunity for willful and wanton conduct
• allowing students to use a mini-trampoline without following safety guidelines was “well known” to be associated with a risk of spinal cord injuries
• rejecting defendants’ arguments that the 1986 amendments to the Tort Immunity Act—when section 1-210 was enacted—imposed a heightened willful and wanton standard, which we note was decided after Floyd
• reversing summary judgment for defendants, where there was a genuine issue of material fact on the question of defendants’ willful and wanton conduct when evidence demonstrated it was well known mini- trampolines are associated with risk of spinal cord injuries

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).