The Illinois Supreme Court has announced its anticipated filing dates for January and February. Opinions are expected on Friday, January 25; Thursday, February 7; and Friday, February 22. Decisions on petitions for rehearing are expected on Monday, January 28th and decisions on petitions for leave to appeal are expected on Wednesday, January 30.
The Court made substantial progress in December with handing down decisions on cases heard during its September term. The remaining cases awaiting decisions from that term are:
Call of the Docket for September 19
- In re Estate of Boyar, No. 113655 – (1) Is the doctrine of election recognized with respect to trusts? (2) If so, should the doctrine be applied when the property accepted was allegedly nominal in value? For our preview of the case, see here. For our report on the oral argument, see here.
Call of the Docket for September 20
- Ferguson v. Patton, No. 112488 — (1) Does Section 2-56-040 of the Chicago Municipal Code authorize the Inspector General of the City of Chicago to hire private counsel to enforce subpoenas? (2) May the Inspector General sue the Corporation Counsel of Chicago to enforce subpoenas? For our preview of the case, see here. For our report on the oral argument, see here.
- The Hope Clinic for Women v. Adams, No. 112673 et seq. — Did the trial court properly dismiss an action challenging the constitutionality of the Illinois Parental Notice of Abortion Act, brought solely under state law, on the grounds that the plaintiffs’ equal protection and due process claims were barred by collateral estoppel, and the plaintiffs’ privacy claim was barred because Federal privacy law would require dismissal, and state privacy protections were interpreted in lockstep with Federal law? For our preview of the case, see here. For our report on the oral argument, see here.
Turning to the November term, the Court has five civil cases which might be decided in either January or February. They are:
Call of the Docket for November 15
- Griggsville-Perry Community Unit School District No. 4 v. Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board, No. 113721 et seq. – May an arbitrator apply “industrial common law” to find to find that a terminated employee had a right to a statement of specific acts or omissions allegedly justifying termination where the union contract at issue barred the arbitrator from modifying, nullifying, ignoring or adding to the terms of the contract? Our in-depth review of the facts and lower court rulings is here. Our pre-argument preview is here. Our report on the oral argument is here.
Call of the Docket for November 20
- State Bank of Cherry v. CGB Enterprises, Inc., No. 113836 — (1) Does the Federal Food Security Act of 1985, 7 U.S.C. § 1631(e), preempt the state UCC for purposes of security interests on crops? (2) If so, does the Act require strict or substantial compliance in order to effectively attach a security interest when crops are sold? Our pre-argument preview is here. Our report on the oral argument is here.
- Skokie Castings, Inc. v. Illinois Insurance Guaranty Fund, No. 113873 — Was a self-insuring employer’s claim for reimbursement for workers compensation benefits paid a claim for workers compensation exempt from the Fund’s $300,000 liability cap under 215 ILCS 5/537.2? (2) Was a self-insuring employer an "insurer" under the Act, meaning that it was obligated to continue paying benefits until it became insolvent, rather than seeking reimbursement from the Fund? Our in-depth review of the facts and lower court rulings is here. Our pre-argument preview is here. Our report on the oral argument is here.
- Poris v. Lake Holiday Property Owners Association, No. 113907 – (1) May a property association authorize private security officers to stop and detain persons on its property for speeding on association-owned roads? (2) May such an association place oscillating amber lights on vehicles used by its security department? (3) Where plaintiff was ordered by a security officer to remain in his vehicle while a citation for speeding on association-owned roads was prepared, did the plaintiff adequately plead the elements of false imprisonment? Our in-depth review of the facts and lower court rulings is here. Our pre-argument preview is here. Our report on the oral argument is here.
- Bjork v. O’Meara, No. 114044 – Does the six-month statute of limitations in the Probate Code, 755 ILCS 5/8-1, apply to a separate tort action for interference with testamentary expectancy which — if successful — would have the practical effect of invalidating the will? Our in-depth review of the facts and lower court rulings is here. Our pre-argument preview is here. Our report on the oral argument is here.