Illinois Supreme Court To Consider FOIA, Due Process, Custody Hearings and Red Light Camera Ordinances as First Chicago Term Ends


On Wednesday morning, the Illinois Supreme Court allowed petitions for review in a long list of new civil cases, setting up interesting battles in the coming months over public works projects, the state Freedom of Information Act, an assortment of constitutional issues and the City of Chicago’s Red Light Camera Ordinance. We will begin our detailed previews of each case in a few days, after our reports on the September civil oral arguments conclude. The cases and issues presented are:

  • Lake County Grading Company, LLC v. The Village of Antioch, No. 115805 – Issue Presented: Did the Public Construction Bond Act govern the claim of the plaintiff subcontractor for breach of contract against the defendant village on a third party beneficiary theory?
  • Garlick v. Madigan, No. 115909 – Issue Presented: May the Attorney General decline, in response to a private individual’s request for information pursuant to the Illinois Freedom of Information Act, to provide the information in a specific electronic and tabulated format, when a newspaper’s request that information be provided in a specific format was accommodated?
  • The Estate of Perry C. Powell v. John C. Wunsch, P.C., Nos. 115997 & 116009 – Issues Presented: (1) Did the plaintiffs state a cause of action for negligence arising from the defendants’ allegedly negligent failure to seek supervision of a wrongful death settlement by the probate court when the Wrongful Death Act only requires such supervision for settlements over $5,000? (2) Did the plaintiffs state a cause of action for negligence with respect to the defendants’ allegedly negligent failure to seek the appointment of a guardian for plaintiff in order to protect his interest in the settlement?
  • People ex rel. Madigan v. Illinois Commerce Commission, No. 116005 – Issue Presented: Did the Illinois Commerce Commission’s approval of a volume-balancing adjustment rider rate design violate the rules against retroactive rulemaking or single-issue rulemaking?
  • Consiglio v. The Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, Nos. 116023, 116163, 116190 – Issue Presented: Do the Health Care Worker Self-Referral Act’s provisions allowing permanent summary revocation of health care workers’ licenses following certain criminal convictions deprive the plaintiffs of substantive due process, violate the double jeopardy and ex post facto clauses and offend separation of powers?
  • Keating v. City of Chicago, No. 116054 – Issues Presented: (1) Is the red light camera ordinance enacted by the City of Chicago invalid on the grounds that it is in excess of the City’s home rule authority? (2) Was the state enabling act authorizing red light camera ordinances in certain counties unconstitutional special or local legislation?
  • WISAM 1, Inc. v. Illinois Liquor Control Commission, No. 116173 – Issues Presented: (1) Did the process by which the Illinois Liquor Control Commissioner revoked the plaintiff’s liquor license constitute a deprivation of due process? (2) Was the Liquor Commission’s finding that the licensee violated Section 3-28 of the ordinances of the City of Peoria – the grounds for revocation – against the manifest weight of the evidence?
  • Nelson v. The County of Kendall, No. 116303 – Issue Presented: Is the State’s Attorney’s Office a “public body” subject to the Illinois Freedom of Information Act?
  • BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP v. Mitchell, No. 116311 – Issue Presented: Did the defendant in a foreclosure case waive objections to personal jurisdiction by failing to raise those objections in compliance with Section 2-301 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 15-1505.6 of the Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Law?
  • In re Marriage of Tiballi, No. 116319 – Issue Presented: May the fees of a psychologist appointed by the court in a child custody dispute pursuant to the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act be taxed as costs upon petitioner’s voluntary dismissal of his petition to modify custody?
  • Goldfine v. Barack, Ferrazzano, Kirschbaum and Perlman, No. 116362 – Issues Presented: (1) Did the plaintiffs state a claim for a violation of the Illinois Securities Law and for legal malpractice arising out of the defendant’s purported failure to preserve plaintiffs’ cause of action for a securities violation? (2) If so, how are mandatory statutory damages calculated under the Securities Law?


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Sedgwick LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Sedgwick LLP on:

Popular Topics
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.