In Monti v. Silver Cross Hospital, 262 Ill. App. 3d 503, 637 N.E.2d 427, 201 Ill. Dec. 838 (1994), the plaintiff patient was taken, unconscious, to the defendant hospital by emergency personnel and was later accompanied by her husband, who spent the majority of that day at the hospital with her. When the plaintiff sued the hospital for negligent care of a doctor working there as an independent contractor, the trial court granted summary judgment for the hospital. That decision was later reversed and remanded, as the Monti court focused on the fact that the plaintiff was unconscious at the time of transport and what effect this had on the reliance element in a suit seeking to enforce vicarious liability. In this vein, the Monti court concluded that it should not matter if the patient is conscious or unconscious, and found that, on the particular circumstances before it, a question of fact existed regarding apparent agency since those responsible for the patient's care (the emergency personnel and her husband) relied on the hospital's ability to provide necessary services.See Monti, 262 Ill. App. 3d at 507-08 ("neither logic nor equity would be served by drawing a distinction between conscious and unconscious patients, allowing the former to recover on a theory of vicarious liability but not the latter).