Block v. Office of the Illinois Secretary of State
988 N.E.2d 718
Ill. App. Ct.2013Background
- Jeffrey Block, a former employee of the Secretary of State's police force, alleged retaliation under the Ethics Act for whistleblowing in Sept. 2006 and was discharged in July 2007.
- He filed count I (Aug. 13, 2010) alleging the Secretary violated 5 ILCS 430/15-10 by terminating him for reporting unethical/unlawful acts.
- At discharge time, §15-25 was unclear whether remedies were in circuit court or Court of Claims; in 2009, §15-25 was amended to state that circuit courts have jurisdiction to hear cases under the Ethics Act.
- The Secretary moved to dismiss on sovereign immunity, collateral estoppel, and lack of jurisdiction; the circuit court dismissed count I for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, based on sovereign immunity.
- The appellate court held that the amendments to the Immunity Act and the Ethics Act together waived sovereign immunity for Ethics Act claims and allowed circuit court jurisdiction, reversing and remanding for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Ethics Act waives sovereign immunity for circuit court jurisdiction | Block argues the Ethics Act amendment implicitly waives immunity | Pippin argues no waiver absent explicit language | Waiver exists; circuit court has jurisdiction |
| Whether the 2009 amendment to §15-25 clarifies jurisdiction without changing original law | Amendment clarifies that circuit courts hear Ethics Act cases | Amendment changes the law, not merely clarifies | Amendment clarifies the intent; does not negate earlier ambiguity, but confirms circuit-court jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Special Education of Walker, 131 Ill. 2d 300 (1989) (verbal provisions require explicit waiver to defeat immunity)
- O’Connor v. A&P Enterprises, 81 Ill. 2d 260 (1980) (amendments can reveal legislative intent regarding scope of immunity)
- Lieberman v. Department of Transportation, 201 Ill. 2d 300 (2002) (interpretation of amendments and statutory harmony)
- Department of Transportation v. East Side Development, L.L.C., 384 Ill. App. 3d 295 (2008) (statutory construction and harmonization principles)
- Khan v. BDO Seidman, LLP, 404 Ill. App. 3d 892 (2010) (de novo review on jurisdictional issues)