Education Law

Board of Education of Woodland Community Consolidated School District 50 v. Illinois State Board of Education

Board of Education of Woodland Community Consolidated School District 50 v. Illinois State Board of Education
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Schools
Citation
Case Number: 
2018 IL App (1st) 162900
Decision Date: 
Friday, March 23, 2018
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 6th Div,
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
HOFFMAN

Over objection of two School Districts, State Board of Education authorized creation of a charter school in 1998, entitling it to enroll students residing within boundaries of School Districts. Court properly granted joint motion for summary judgment in declaratory judgment action filed by School Districts. Based on language of Section 27A-11(a) of Charter Schools Law, pupils attending a charter school located within local school district in which they reside cannot be excluded from a determination of the actual number of pupils in attendance in that district for purposes of calculating district's average daily attendance, which is the denominator of formula used to determine district's per capita tuition cost set forth in section 18-3 of School Code, which establishes minimum and maximum to be deducted from funds otherwise due to School Districts and paid to charter school. (CUNNINGHAM and CONNORS, concurring.)

Board of Education of Waukegan Community Unit School District 60 v. Illinois State Charter School Commission

Board of Education of Waukegan Community Unit School District 60 v. Illinois State Charter School Commission
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Schools
Citation
Case Number: 
2018 IL App (1st) 162084
Decision Date: 
Thursday, January 25, 2018
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 4th Div,
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
BURKE

School District denied Defendant's application to open a charter school in Waukegan. Illinois State Charter School Commission concluded that Defendant's proposal was in compliance with requirements of Charter Schools Law and in best interest of students the school was designed to serve. School district filed complaint for administrative review; court affirmed Commission's decision. Commission properly found that Defendant had proposed a sufficient education program for its Waukegan campus and for ELL, special education, and at-risk students students. Commission properly analyzed best interest factor, and its conclusion that Defendant's proposal was in best interest of students the school was designed to serve was not clearly erroneous. School district, as a school board, cannot assert due process claims against the Commission, which is an entity of the state. (GORDON and ELLIS, concurring.)

Elliott v. Bd. of School Trustees of Madison Consolidated Schools

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Elliott v. Bd. of School Trustees of Madison Consolidated Schools
Civil Court
Contracts Clause
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 16-4168
Decision Date: 
December 4, 2017
Federal District: 
S.D. Ind., Indianapolis Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting plaintiff-tenured teacher’s motion for summary judgment in section 1983 action alleging that 2012 Indiana statute that allowed defendant to lay off plaintiff instead of non-tenured teachers violated Contract Clause of U.S. Constitution, where U.S. Supreme Ct. in Brand, 303 U.S. 95, previously found that 1927 Indiana teacher tenure statute created contractual rights protected by Contracts Clause. Indiana courts had previously held that school district must retain qualified tenured teachers over non-tenured teachers, and Dist. Ct. could properly find that 2012 statute violated Contract Clause when applied retroactively to plaintiff who had obtained tenure prior to enactment of 2012 statute, where: (1) Indiana teacher tenure law created enforceable contract that did not allow defendant to lay off any teacher it pleased during reduction in force; (2) 2012 statute impaired plaintiff’s contract with defendant; and (3) instant impairment was substantial. Fact that annual teacher contract could change salary and hours did not allow defendant to change degree of job security for tenured teachers.

Public Act 100-478

Topic: 
Adult dependent child

(Andersson, R-Geneva; Schimpf, R-Murphysboro) amends statutory awards from a decedent's estate to an "adult dependent child."

(1) It creates a separate statutory award for adult dependent child for at least $5,000, but it gives the court discretion to award whatever sum it deems reasonable or agreed upon by the surviving spouse and representative of the decedent's estate or affiant under a small-estate affidavit.

(2) It links the statute to the adult child's financial dependency on the decedent family member.

(3) It creates a process to make the statute work more effectively by requiring the adult child, adult child's agent or guardian, or other adult on behalf of the adult child to provide written notice to the representative or affiant asserting the adult dependent child's financial dependency on the decedent after receipt of a probate notice advising them of this potential award.

Effective June 1, 2018.

View Full Text of Legislation

Public Act 100-212

Topic: 
Illinois Administrative Procedure Act

(Barickman, R-Bloomington; Andersson, R-Geneva) ensures that the appeals by citizens in administrative review actions are not thrown out of court for a scrivener's error that is called a "misnomer."

(1) It requires that final administrative orders list all of the parties of record together with their last known address of record. The final order must also include whether there are any agency rules requiring a motion for reconsideration as a part of obtaining a reviewable final administrative decision and, if so, the citation to the rule.

(2) It prohibits an action for administrative review to be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based on the misnomer of any agency that is properly served with summons issued in the action within the applicable time limits. It also prohibits dismissal for failure to perfectly name an agent if a timely action of administrative review has been filed that identifies the final administrative decision under review and makes a good faith effort to properly name the administrative agency.

(3) It allows a court to correct misnomers for an erroneous identification of the administrative agency that was made in good faith.

Effective August 18, 2017.

View Full Text of Legislation

Cheng v. Ford

Cheng v. Ford
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Sovereign Immunity
Citation
Case Number: 
2017 IL App (5th) 160274
Decision Date: 
Wednesday, August 9, 2017
District: 
5th Dist.
Division/County: 
Jackson Co.
Holding: 
Certified questions answered; remanded.
Justice: 
WELCH

Two associate professors at SIU Carbondale (SIUC) filed complaint for money damages for alleged tortious interference by SIUC's interim provost and vice chancellor of academic affairs.  Under State Lawsuit Immunity Act, Defendant is entitled to sovereign immunity from Plaintiffs' tort claim seeking money damages in circuit court, and Court of Claims has exclusive jurisdiction over such claims under Court of Claims Act. (CATES and OVERSTREET, concurring.)

Senate Bill 584

Topic: 
Illinois Administrative Procedure Act

(Barickman, R-Bloomington; Andersson, R-Geneva) ensures that the appeals by citizens in administrative review actions are not thrown out of court for a scrivener’s error that is called a “misnomer.” Senate Bill 584 amends the Administrative Procedure Act and the Administrative Review Law to provide a means for correcting good-faith failures to perfectly name necessary parties in actions for administrative review. The proposed legislation would do several things to resolve this problem.

Requires that final administrative orders list all of the parties of record together with their last known address of record. The final order must also include whether there are any agency rules requiring a motion for reconsideration as a part of obtaining a reviewable final administrative decision and, if so, the citation to the rule.  

Prohibits an action for administrative review to be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based on the misnomer of any agency that is properly served with summons issued in the action within the applicable time limits. It also prohibits dismissal for failure to perfectly name an agent if a timely action of administrative review has been filed that identifies the final administrative decision under review and makes a good faith effort to properly name the administrative agency.

Allows a court to correct misnomers for an erroneous identification of the administrative agency that was made in good faith.

Passed both chambers; effective on the Governor’s signature.  

View Full Text of Legislation

Whitacker v. Kenosha Unified School Dist. No. 1

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Whitacker v. Kenosha Unified School Dist. No. 1
Civil Court
School Law
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 16-3522
Decision Date: 
May 30, 2017
Federal District: 
E. D. Wisc.
Holding: 
Affirmed

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting plaintiff-17-year-old transgender student’s motion seeking issuance of preliminary injunction in action alleging that defendant-school board’s refusal to allow plaintiff to use boy’s restroom violated Title IX and Equal Protection Clause under 14th Amendment, where said refusal was based on plaintiff’s transgender status, and where defendant believed that plaintiff’s mere presence in boy’s restroom would invade privacy rights of his male classmates. Plaintiff could properly assert viable cause of action under Title IX, even though his transgender status was not specifically mentioned as protected classification in said Act, where plaintiff successfully demonstrated likelihood of success based on sex-stereotyping theory. Moreover, because defendant’s policy is based on sex, applicable standard of review was heightened scrutiny and not rational basis, and defendant failed to provide genuine and exceedingly persuasive justification for its policy/belief, especially where plaintiff had used boy’s restroom for six months without incident until teacher reported plaintiff’s use of said bathroom. Also, for purposes of issuance of preliminary injunction, plaintiff showed that harms to him in terms of medical ramifications arising out of defendant’s refusal to allow him use of boy’s restroom outweighed any perceived harm to student population and their privacy interests.

Haag v. The Board of Education of Streator Elementary School District 44

Haag v. The Board of Education of Streator Elementary School District 44
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
School Code
Citation
Case Number: 
2017 IL App (3d) 150643
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, May 9, 2017
District: 
3d Dist.
Division/County: 
La Salle Co.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
HOLDRIDGE

Plaintiffs, educational support personnel (ESP) employed by School Board, filed declaratory judgment action against Board, seeking reinstatement to full-time positions and payment of back pay and benefits. Board had "honorably discharged" Plaintiffs from full-time work and offered to re-hire each as a part-time employee. ESPs are "at-will" employees. School Code provides tenure rights to full-time employment only to certified teachers, and not ESP nor any other category of employees. (LYTTON and O'BRIEN, concurring.)