Case Citation | Cates v. Cates, 156 Ill. 2d 76, 619 N.E.2d 715 (1993). | Procedural History | The plaintiff filed suit in the Circuit Court, where she lost on summary judgment. The appellate court refused to affirm the trial court's grant of summary judgment. The Supreme court granted leave to appeal. | Issue | Whether parent-child tort immunity barred Plaintiff’s action against her defendant father, for negligent operation of an automobile. | Answer | No | Holding | The parent-child tort immunity does not bar Plaintiff’s action against her defendant father, for negligent operation of an automobile. | Brief Statement of Facts | On June 9, 1985, four-year-old Heather Cates rode in her father, Timothy Cates’, automobile. Timothy Cates, was exercising his visitation privileges as Heather's noncustodial parent. Timothy Cates’ car collided with another automobile near an intersection of two state highways. The driver of the other vehicle died in the collision, and Heather Cates sustained serious injuries.Heather Cates filed a negligence action through her mother and next friend, Nancy Cates Schmittling against her father, Timothy Cates, for compensation for her injuries. | Rationale | Illinois courts have carved out and established five exceptions to parent child tort immunity. Parental immunity has failed as a defense in the following intrafamilial lawsuits: (1) actions arising from willful and deliberate conduct; (2) actions involving conduct by the defendant that is outside the family purpose; (3) actions alleging the breach of a duty owed to the general public; (4) actions where death has dissolved the family relationship; and. (5) third-party contribution actions against a negligent parent.Of the five exceptions, the Supreme Court focused primarily on the family purpose exception. The legal standard established in the seminal case on the family