{
  "id": 3451785,
  "name": "IDA E. LeSANCHE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORTH SUBURBAN MASS TRANSIT DISTRICT, a/k/a Nortran, et al., Defendants-Appellees",
  "name_abbreviation": "LeSanche v. North Suburban Mass Transit District",
  "decision_date": "1985-12-26",
  "docket_number": "No. 83\u2014669",
  "first_page": "394",
  "last_page": "395",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "142 Ill. App. 3d 394"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 218,
    "char_count": 3394,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.776,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.375049770086047e-08,
      "percentile": 0.481818824186275
    },
    "sha256": "058e040dc4b336f6c6ab5c35f3b914d8a9878a13ce18780e9774a3c1eb8290e4",
    "simhash": "1:63a0b54cf0855075",
    "word_count": 563
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:12:38.085084+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "IDA E. LeSANCHE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORTH SUBURBAN MASS TRANSIT DISTRICT, a/k/a Nortran, et al., Defendants-Appellees."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE McMORROW\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nIda LeSanche (plaintiff) appeals from the order of the Cook County trial court which dismissed her complaint against the North Suburban Mass Transit District (Nortran) and Carlos Gonzalez-Marmol (Gonzalez-Marmol) for personal injuries she allegedly sustained while a passenger on a bus owned by Nortran and driven by Gonzalez-Marmol. The trial court dismissed the complaint pursuant to defendants\u2019 motion under section 2 \u2014 619 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 110, par. 2 \u2014 619) on the ground that the plaintiff had failed to show that notice of her claim had been given to the defendants within the one-year statutory time limit of section 8 \u2014 102 of the Illinois Local Government and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (the Tort Immunity Act) (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 85, par. 8 \u2014 102). We affirm.\nThe sole question presented for our review is whether Nortran is a \u201clocal public entity\u201d within the purview of the Tort Immunity Act for the purposes of the requirement that a plaintiff provide Nortran with notice of a claim against it within one year of the occurrence of the incident upon which the claim is based. Based upon the following analysis, we determine that the one-year notice requirement of the Tort Immunity Act applies to Nortran.\nIt is undisputed between the parties that Nortran is a local mass transit district duly formed pursuant to the Local Mass Transit District Act. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. lll2/3, par. 351 et seq.) Section 3 of that Act specifically provides in pertinent part that a \u201cDistrict created pursuant to this Act shall be a municipal corporation ***.\u201d (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. lll2/s, par. 353.) The Local Mass Transit District Act makes no reference to a requirement of notice to a transit district for the purposes of instituting a claim against the district.\nThe Illinois Tort Immunity Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 85, par. 1 \u2014 101 et seq.) provides that \u201c[w]ithin 1 year from the date that an injury or cause of action *** was received or accrued, any person who is about to commence any civil action for damages on account of such injury against a local public entity *** must serve *** a written notice on *** the entity.\u201d (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 85, par. 8 \u2014 102.) The Tort Immunity Act specifically defines the term \u201clocal public entity\u201d to \u201c[include] a *** municipal corporation.\u201d Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 85, par. 1 \u2014 206.\nNortran, as a local mass transit district, is a \u201cmunicipal corporation\u201d (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. lll2/3, par. 353) and consequently a \u201clocal public entity\u201d under the Tort Immunity Act. (See Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 85, par. 1 \u2014 206.) As such, it was a governmental entity to which notice was required to be given pursuant to section 8\u2014 102 of that Act. As a result, we find plaintiff\u2019s allegation of error insufficient ground to reverse the order of the trial court.\nFor the reasons stated, the order of the trial court is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nJOHNSON and LINN, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE McMORROW"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Norman E. Wilson, of Chicago, for appellant.",
      "Leo K. Mitchell and George J. Brown, both of Chicago, for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "IDA E. LeSANCHE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORTH SUBURBAN MASS TRANSIT DISTRICT, a/k/a Nortran, et al., Defendants-Appellees.\nFirst District (4th Division)\nNo. 83\u2014669\nOpinion filed December 26, 1985.\nRehearing denied May 1, 1986.\nNorman E. Wilson, of Chicago, for appellant.\nLeo K. Mitchell and George J. Brown, both of Chicago, for appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0394-01",
  "first_page_order": 416,
  "last_page_order": 417
}