Wilful and Wanton Conduct - Park District
Under section 3-106 of the Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/3-106) Neither a public entitiy nor a public employee is liable for an injury where the liability is abased 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 . . . unless such local entity or public employee is guilty of wilful and wanton conduct proximately causing such injury.
In the case of Steven Tagliere v. Western Springs Park District, the plaintiff alleged his 7 year old daughter suffered a broken ankle while playing on a defective seessaw at a park owned by the Western Springs Park District.www.wsparks.org He further alleged that the seesaw was visibly defective and the park district's failure to discover the defects during routine inspection, and make the repairs, amounted to wilful and wanton conduct.
The Trial and Appellate courts did not see it that way. The courts explained that the defendant's failure to discover the defect, even after repeated inspections, did not constitute actual or deliberate intention to cause harm or showed an utter indifference to or conscious disregard for the safety of others. The defendant's actions may have been negligent but did not rise to the level of wilful and wanton. As such, the defendants motion for summary judgment was granted and the case was dismissed.
