Chicago Title Land Trust Company v. County of Will
117 N.E.3d 1111
Ill. App. Ct.2018Background
- Henry E. James (owner) sought to invalidate the Village of Bolingbrook’s May 10, 2016 involuntary annexation of his two parcels in unincorporated Will County.
- Bolingbrook had earlier (March 8, 2016) enacted a voluntary annexation ordinance for a 5.12-acre Commonwealth Edison (ComEd) parcel and signed a written annexation agreement with ComEd that limited Village taxation/regulation and allowed for expedited disconnection.
- The Village admitted the ComEd annexation created contiguity enabling involuntary annexation of the James property under 65 ILCS 5/7-1-13 (wholly bounded requirement).
- James objected before the involuntary annexation, alleging the ComEd annexation was a sham engineered by the Village to manufacture contiguity and so violated the annexation statute and public policy; he filed a quo warranto action after annexation.
- Trial court granted summary judgment for the Village; the appellate majority reversed, holding the ComEd annexation was both a sham and premature (conditions precedent not satisfied), so the May 10 involuntary annexation was invalid.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May the court consider pre-annexation conduct to evaluate annexation validity? | James: Yes — evidence of Village-instigated subterfuge before the ordinance can invalidate annexation. | Bolingbrook: No — review should be limited to compliance on the face of the ordinance (per Bull Valley). | Held: Court may consider pre-annexation circumstances; historical subterfuge is relevant. |
| Was the ComEd voluntary annexation a sham used to create contiguity for forced annexation? | James: The record shows the Village solicited ComEd, drafted terms, and ComEd only agreed as an accommodation; agreement terms (no taxes/regulation; right to disconnect) confirm sham. | Bolingbrook: ComEd voluntarily petitioned; municipal encouragement is legally irrelevant if procedures were followed. | Held: The annexation was a sham/subterfuge designed to reach James’s land and thus cannot be used to establish contiguity. |
| Was the ComEd annexation premature because conditions precedent in the annexation agreement ran until June 30, 2016? | James: Section 2B made ComEd’s obligations contingent until June 30, so March 8 ordinance was ineffective. | Bolingbrook: Conditions could be satisfied earlier at ComEd’s discretion; ComEd did not object, so ordinance was effective. | Held: The agreement’s conditions made the March 8 annexation premature and therefore a nullity. |
| Remedy: Effect on the May 10 involuntary annexation of James’s parcels | James: Without valid ComEd annexation, James property was not wholly bounded on May 10; involuntary annexation is invalid. | Bolingbrook: Contiguity existed and procedural steps were followed; annexation valid. | Held: Because ComEd annexation is treated as null (sham and premature), James’s property was not wholly bounded on May 10; ordinance 16-047 is a nullity — reverse and remand with directions to enter judgment for James. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of East St. Louis v. Touchette, 14 Ill. 2d 243 (statewide principle that annexation power must follow statutory scheme and objections to petitions may address matters going to validity)
- In re Petition to Annex Certain Real Estate to the City of Joliet, 144 Ill. 2d 284 (courts may examine conveyances and surrounding circumstances to detect manipulation of annexation statute)
- In re Petition for Annexation to the Village of Bull Valley, 392 Ill. App. 3d 577 (municipal encouragement of a voluntary petition does not by itself render it invalid)
- In re Petition of the Village of Kildeer to Annex Certain Territory, 124 Ill. 2d 533 (cannot circumvent annexation statute by doing indirectly what is forbidden directly)
- People ex rel. Village of Forest View v. Village of Lyons, 218 Ill. App. 3d 159 (strip/corridor annexations and other subterfuge scrutinized)
- La Salle National Trust, N.A. v. Village of Mettawa, 249 Ill. App. 3d 550 (public policy considerations regarding disconnection and municipal boundaries)