Blumenthal v. Brewer
2016 IL 118781
| Ill. | 2017Background
- Jane Blumenthal filed for partition of a jointly owned Chicago residence after ending a long-term, marriage-like same-sex relationship with Eileen Brewer; Brewer counterclaimed seeking various equitable remedies to equalize assets.
- Brewer’s counterclaim contained five counts: four (I, II, IV, V) sought equitable relief regarding division/valuation of the home (constructive trust, equitable division, credits, quantum meruit); Count III sought a constructive trust or restitution tied to funds from a joint account used to buy Blumenthal’s interest in a medical practice (GSN).
- The circuit court dismissed Brewer’s entire counterclaim under Hewitt v. Hewitt, which bars common-law property claims by knowingly unmarried cohabitants when claims are rooted in a marriage-like relationship; the dismissal was certified under Rule 304(a) and appealed.
- The appellate court rejected Hewitt as outdated and reinstated Brewer’s counterclaim; this court granted leave to appeal and consolidated briefing from amici supporting Brewer.
- While the appeal proceeded, the partition trial continued; the circuit court finally valued and divided the home, Brewer bought out Blumenthal’s share, and no appeal was taken from that final partition judgment.
- This Court affirmed the circuit court: it held the appellate court lacked jurisdiction to revive counts I, II, IV, and V and that those counts are moot/res judicata in light of the final partition; it also rejected Count III (constructive trust/restoration) as barred by Hewitt and by statutory limitations on transfer of medical practice interests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Brewer) | Defendant's Argument (Blumenthal) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appealability of dismissal under Rule 304(a) for counts I, II, IV, V | Rule 304(a) certification made dismissal final and appealable | The dismissal was not final because those counts were part of the same controversy as the partition | Dismissal of counts I, II, IV, V was not appealable under Rule 304(a); appellate court lacked jurisdiction |
| Effect of partition trial and final judgment on those equitable counts | Reinstatement should allow further proceedings on valuation/allocation theories | Final partition judgment resolved home value and distribution; reinstatement would be moot or impermissibly relitigate | Counts I, II, IV, V rendered moot / barred by res judicata and law-of-the-case doctrines; no relief possible |
| Viability of Count III (constructive trust or restitution for contribution to medical practice) | Joint funds bought Blumenthal’s GSN interest; unjust enrichment/restitution or constructive trust appropriate | Constructive trust impossible (statutes bar transfer to nonphysician); Hewitt bars restitution claims rooted in marriage-like relationship | Constructive trust unavailable due to Medical Corporation / Medical Practice Acts; restitution claim barred under Hewitt because purchase was dependent on the marriage-like relationship |
| Constitutional challenge (Due Process / Equal Protection) to application of Hewitt | Hewitt irrationally penalizes intimate relationships, especially same-sex partners who could not marry historically | Hewitt effectuates legislative policy forbidding creation of marriage-like rights absent marriage; rational basis exists | Rejected: Hewitt application does not violate due process/equal protection; balancing of domestic-relations public policy is for legislature |
Key Cases Cited
- Hewitt v. Hewitt, 77 Ill. 2d 49 (Ill. 1979) (establishes rule barring common-law property claims by knowingly unmarried cohabitants where claims are rooted in a marriage-like relationship)
- Price v. Philip Morris, Inc., 2015 IL 117687 (Ill. 2015) (lower courts are bound by Illinois Supreme Court precedent and may not overrule it)
- River Park, Inc. v. City of Highland Park, 184 Ill. 2d 290 (Ill. 1998) (res judicata bars subsequent suits arising from same group of operative facts)
- Spafford v. Coats, 118 Ill. App. 3d 566 (Ill. App. Ct. 1983) (distinguishes Hewitt where plaintiff furnished substantially all consideration for property and claim was independent of cohabitation)
- Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (U.S. 2015) (same-sex couples have the constitutional right to marry; recognized the continuing centrality of marriage)