Collins v. Bartlett Park District
997 N.E.2d 821
Ill. App. Ct.2013Background
- Collins sued Bartlett Park District for whistleblower retaliation under 740 ILCS 174/20 and for retaliatory discharge; trial court dismissed both claims under 735 ILCS 5/2-615, which the appellate court partially affirmed and partially reversed.
- Villa Olivia ski facility is governed by the Carnival-Amusement Safety Act (Safety Act) and related ANSI safety standards under 56 Ill. Admin. Code 6000, adopted to regulate ski-lift safety.
- Plaintiff discovered a defective chair lift on Dec 26, 2010 and drafted a memo describing the condition, alleging ANSI Code violations (4.1.3.3.2, 4.1.3.3.3, 4.1.4.3.1).
- Plaintiff implemented a temporary safety measure (load only two passengers per every other chair) and reported the issue to his supervisor, Carlson.
- Fletcher and Carlson decided to operate the lift at full capacity despite the defect; Collins was excluded from safety decisions and terminated on Jan 24, 2011; the appellate court affirmed the whistleblower dismissal but reversed and remanded on retaliatory discharge.
- The court remanded for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiff stated a whistleblower claim under 740 ILCS 174/20 | Collins contends he refused to participate in illegal activity by directing reduced loads and reporting violations. | Bartlett argues plaintiff did not actually refuse to participate in the illegal activity. | Whistleblower claim properly dismissed. |
| Whether plaintiff stated a retaliatory discharge claim with a clear public policy | Public policy in Safety Act and ANSI Code makes discharge for reporting safety violations unlawful. | Discharge based on insubordination, not public policy; policy too general. | Public policy identified; issue for trier of fact; order of remand on this claim stands. |
| Whether Tort Immunity Act grants immunity to the District for retaliatory discharge | Sections 2-201 and 2-109 do not immunize for retaliatory discharge. | Immunity applies, shielding the District from liability. | 2-201 and 2-109 do not provide immunity for retaliatory discharge; dismissal not proper at 2-615 stage; remand appropriate. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sardiga v. Northern Trust Co., 409 Ill. App. 3d 56 (2011) (refusal requirement for §20 whistleblower claim; not a mere complaint)
- Turner v. Memorial Medical Center, 233 Ill. 2d 494 (2009) (public policy must be clear and specific; retaliation fact questions for jury)
- Smith v. Waukegan Park District, 231 Ill. 2d 111 (2008) ( Tort Immunity Act not immunize employer in retaliatory discharge)
- Carty v. Suter Co., 371 Ill. App. 3d 784 (2007) (public safety/public health policy supports whistleblowing protections)
- Mitee Racers, Inc. v. Carnival-Amusement Safety Board, 152 Ill. App. 3d 812 (1987) (Safety Act broad authority to regulate amusement rides for public safety)
- Hartlein v. Illinois Power Co., 151 Ill. 2d 142 (1992) (retaliatory discharge doctrine limits to clear public policy)