Austin Gardens, LLC v. City of Chicago Department of Administrative Hearings
96 N.E.3d 367
Ill. App. Ct.2018Background
- The City filed two separate enforcement actions against Austin Gardens for building-code violations: a 2005 circuit-court action and a 2013 DOAH administrative action that overlapped in some alleged ordinance violations.
- Austin Gardens did not appear at DOAH hearings in June and August 2013; an ALJ entered a default judgment on August 27, 2013, assessing fines and costs and notifying Austin Gardens it had 21 days from mailing to move to set aside the default.
- In April 2014 the parties settled the circuit-court case by an Agreed Order for $2,000; that order did not reference the DOAH default judgment.
- Austin Gardens discovered the DOAH default later and filed a motion to vacate on December 5, 2014 (well after the 21-day period). At a December 19, 2014 DOAH hearing, the ALJ denied the motion as to Austin Gardens but dismissed individual members from personal liability.
- Austin Gardens sought administrative review in circuit court; the circuit court affirmed the DOAH decision but reduced the default judgment by $2,000 for duplicative violations. Austin Gardens appealed to the appellate court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DOAH had jurisdiction to consider Austin Gardens’ late motion to vacate the August 2013 default judgment | Austin Gardens argued the DOAH could decide the motion and that res judicata barred the DOAH action because the circuit-court settlement covered the same violations | City argued section 2-14-108(a) of the Chicago Municipal Code required a petition within 21 days to set aside a default, and untimely petitions deprive DOAH of jurisdiction | Held: The 21-day filing requirement is jurisdictional; DOAH lacked authority to consider the December 2014 motion, so its December 19, 2014 order is void |
| Whether the 21-day filing requirement is directory or mandatory | Austin Gardens contended the provision was directory and did not strip DOAH of jurisdiction | City maintained the provision limits parties’ ability to invoke DOAH review and is jurisdictional | Held: The 21-day limit governs when a party may obtain DOAH review and is not merely directory; it limits DOAH’s authority |
| Whether res judicata barred the DOAH action | Austin Gardens argued the circuit-court final judgment on related violations precluded DOAH proceedings on the same facts | City argued res judicata was inapplicable and alternatively that DOAH lacked jurisdiction for untimeliness | Held: Court did not reach merits of res judicata because DOAH lacked jurisdiction to hear the late motion; the agency decision is void |
| Proper remedy and effect on circuit-court review | Austin Gardens sought vacatur of the default and relief on review | City preserved partial concession (did not challenge circuit court’s $2,000 reduction) | Held: Both the DOAH order and the circuit court judgment (which reviewed a void DOAH order) are vacated; appellate court limited to deciding whether DOAH had authority to act |
Key Cases Cited
- Robinson v. Human Rights Comm’n, 201 Ill. App. 3d 722 (Ill. App. Ct.) (lack of jurisdiction before an administrative agency may be raised at any time)
- Cooper v. Department of Children & Family Services, 234 Ill. App. 3d 474 (Ill. App. Ct.) (distinguishing directory vs. mandatory timing provisions for agency action)
- Kyles v. Maryville Academy, 359 Ill. App. 3d 423 (Ill. App. Ct.) (circuit court’s review is limited when an agency decision is void for lack of jurisdiction)
- In re James W., 2014 IL 114483 (Ill.) (discussing the presumption that procedural commands to officials are directory and when that presumption may be overcome)