Local Government Law

Plaintiff appealed from the trial court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendants on the plaintiff’s complaint seeking to enforce compliance with a request for records under the Freedom of Information Act. Plaintiff had sought documents relating to a fatal hit-and-run collision and the defendants had denied the request under several provisions of the law, including that the requested body camera video footage was not subject to disclosure and that additional records were exempt because their disclosure would interfere with a pending or anticipated law enforcement proceeding. On appeal, plaintiff argued that the affidavit of a police officer was not sufficient to establish that disclosure of the records would interfere with law enforcement proceedings. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the defendants sufficiently demonstrated through the affidavit that the records were exempt from disclosure in their entirety and that defendants had no duty to provide redacted versions of the documents. (LAVIN and COBBS, concurring)

Plaintiff sought administrative review of a decision of the Board of Trustees of the Bolingbrook Police Pension Fund which held that compensation for plaintiff’s police pension and retiree insurance contributions did not constitute pensionable benefits under the Illinois Pension Code. The circuit court reversed the board’s decision and the board appealed. The appellate court affirmed the circuit court, finding that the pension and retiree insurance pick-up payments that plaintiff received were pensionable salary under the Illinois Pension Code. (BRENNAN and PETERSON, concurring)

Plaintiff filed a class action complaint against defendant challenging the constitutionality of defendant’s impoundment ordinance, which requires violators to pay an administrative processing fee when their vehicle is used in the commission of certain offenses. The trial court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss and to strike plaintiff’s third amended complaint and plaintiff appealed. On appeal, plaintiff argued that the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint because the defendant’s administrative fee was not rationally related to a legislative purpose, that the ordinance violated his substantive due process rights, and that the voluntary payment doctrine did not bar him from seeking a refund of the fees he paid. The appellate court found plaintiff’s arguments unpersuasive and affirmed, explaining in part that plaintiff failed to establish that the ordinance implicated a fundamental right because the challenge involved only the deprivation of property interests. (MOORE and SHOLAR, concurring)

Defendant appealed from two orders of the circuit court entering summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The trial court ordered that the board of the defendant, an Illinois airport authority, be increased from seven to eight commissioners with the additional commissioner to be appointed by the plaintiff, an Illinois municipal corporation. Defendant argued on appeal that the ruling violated the language of the Airport Authorities Act, which it argued required the municipality to be located “wholly within” the authority to be entitled to appoint a commissioner. The appellate court agreed and reversed and remanded. (STEIGMANN and LANNERD, concurring)