Dist. Ct. erred in dismissing for lack of jurisdiction plaintiff’s section 1983 action, alleging that section 1025/15 of Illinois Unclaimed Property Act, 765 ILCS 1025/15, which denied property owners any interest or other return on their money on property returned to them by State under said Act, violates Takings Clause of 5th Amendment, where Dist. Ct. based its ruling on Williamson County, 473 US 172, since plaintiffs had not previously sought relief in state court prior to filing instant action. Williamson County does not support instant jurisdictional ruling or requirement that plaintiff seek relief in state court prior to filing instant action, especially where seeking relief in state court would be futile given fact that, under Illinois case law, plaintiff would likely lose where section 1025/15 had been found to be valid. Moreover, plaintiff would likely prevail in federal court, where 7th Cir. had previously found with respect to similar Indiana statute in Cerajeski, 735 F.3d 577, that state may not take custody of property and retain income that property earns when returning property to owner. However, plaintiff could not proceed under section 1983, since: (1) defendant (Ill. State Treasurer) was sued in his official capacity; (2) lawsuit against Treasurer is really lawsuit against Illinois; and (3) state is not “person” that is suable under section 1983.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Unclaimed Property Act