Court Opinion

ID: 9742292
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:10:09.546032+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:30.637473
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE DUNN dissenting: I respectfully dissent. A good legal analysis is presented by the majority, but they reach the wrong conclusion. Although proximate cause is ordinarily a factual determination for the jury, where it is apparent from the undisputed facts that only one conclusion can be drawn, the question then becomes one for the court to resolve as a matter of law. (Lindenmier v. City of Rockford (1987), 156 Ill. App. 3d 76, 90.) Only one conclusion can be legitimately reached here. The trial court in my judgment correctly concluded from the undisputed facts that the conduct of the defendant was, as a matter of law, not the proximate cause of the injuries to the plaintiff. I would affirm.