Court Opinion

ID: 9521601
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 02:08:33.773586+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:59.570733
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE WOLFSON, specially concurring: The majority concludes “[a]n increased risk of future harm standing alone is insufficient to support an award of damages under the theories of strict product liability, negligence [citation], and willful and wanton misconduct.” 342 Ill. App. 3d at 101. Dillon v. Evanston Hospital, 199 Ill. 2d 483 (2002), holds that increased risk of future harm is a present injury. The supreme court was not asked to decide and did not decide whether any other injury was required before a jury could be instructed on increased risk of harm. Nor are we required to decide the issue in this case since plaintiffs specifically disclaim any interest in it. I would leave it for another day, when the issue would be fully briefed.