Plaintiff was struck by a vehicle as she crossed a city street and filed suit against the city and its electric utility claiming street lights were not functioning. Defendants moved to dismiss the case because plaintiff was outside of the crosswalk, and therefore, not an intended user of the street. The trial court dismissed the complaint.

The Fourth District affirmed. Plaintiff failed to plead specific facts establishing a duty owed to her by the city. Further, the utility owed no duty for failing to provide illumination where plaintiff was not an intended user of the city street because she crossed in mid-block. Peters v. Riggs, 2015 IL App (4th) 140043.