Real Estate Law

Court properly dismissed complaint with prejudice, as Plaintiff was unable to state a cause of action for an equitable mortgage, as Plaintiff stated that there was no written agreement subrogating him to the original mortgage on the property. Plaintiff does not meet requirements for contractual subrogation, as no evidence of an express agreement, and he did not record his lien. No debt, duty, or obligation is owed to Plaintiff, and thus he cannot state a cause of action for an equitable lien. (HOWSE and LAVIN, concurring.)

In 2003, Plaintiffs sold some parcels of land to Defendant Forest Preserve District. Along with other persons, total land sold to District was 531.8 acres. Eventually, the deeds were rerecorded and the restrictive covenant language removed. Plaintiffs filed complaint against District, and court properly dismissed complaint, as Plaintiffs lack standing. Plaintiffs are not successors to the interest of the Illinois Department of Natural Resources and its agreement with the Forest Preserve District. (BURKE and SPENCE, concurring.)

Owner of condo unit filed complaint alleging that condo board members and Association (HOA) violated the Condominium Property Act by fining him for expressing his opinions about condo management. Plaintiff adequately alleged that board members violated the Act by penalizing him for expressing his opinions. Plaintiff presented evidence that could support a finding that board members violated Act when denying his request for recording of disciplinary hearing, and that HOA and board members breached fiduciary duties in failing to disclose to Plaintiff the evidence against him. A plaintiff states a cause of action against HOA for violation of his right to free speech by alleging that association precluded him from expressing his political opinion or that HOA penalized him for expressing his opinions. (PUCINSKI, concurring; MASON, dissenting.)

An informal pathway behind a condo building, through and beyond a parking area to the rear entrance of the building is not a “sidewalk” under the Snow and Ice Removal Act’s immunity provision for removal of snow or ice from a “sidewalk”. A “sidewalk”, within meaning of the Act, is limited to the municipal right-of-way, the part of the public street reserved for pedestrian use that abuts private residential property. (BURKE and GORDON, concurring.)

Court properly denied Defendant's motion to seal her eviction court file. Plain language of Section 9-121(b) of Eviction Act, which allows for discretionary sealing of court file, requires court to render findings as to 3 distinct elements where determination of the 1st element must be made in consideration of whether the case when pending had a sufficient legal and factual basis. (LAMPKIN and ROCHFORD, concurring.)