Doe v. Coe
2017 IL App (2d) 160875
Ill. App. Ct.2017Background
- Jane Doe (a minor) and her parents sued several United Church of Christ (UCC) entities, alleging negligence in hiring, supervision, and retention of Chad Coe, who allegedly groomed and sexually assaulted Jane while youth pastor at the First Congregational Church of Dundee (FCC).
- Plaintiffs alleged Coe committed sexual acts on FCC property; defendants on appeal are UCC national and regional bodies (UCC, UCC Board, General Synod, Illinois Conference, Fox Valley Association).
- Defendants moved to dismiss under sections 2-615 and 2-619, submitting affidavits from two UCC leaders (Morales and Dorhauer) asserting the UCC’s congregational, autonomous structure and that Coe was an FCC employee only.
- Plaintiffs argued the affidavits violated Illinois Supreme Court Rule 191(a) because the affiants cited the UCC Constitution and Bylaws but did not attach sworn/certified copies; defendants later attached those documents to their reply.
- The trial court relied on the affidavits and dismissed plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice; the appellate court reversed, holding the affidavits failed Rule 191(a)’s attached-papers requirement and could not be considered on the section 2-619 showing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether affidavits complied with Ill. S. Ct. R. 191(a) (attached-papers requirement) | Affiants relied on UCC Constitution and Bylaws but did not attach sworn/certified copies; therefore affidavits are defective | Affiants had personal knowledge independent of the documents; documents were later in the record so dismissal was proper | Court held affidavits were fatally deficient under Rule 191(a); attachments required and no exception allowed |
| Whether defendants were employers such that they could be liable for Coe’s acts | Plaintiffs alleged defendants had responsibility for hiring/supervision; factual issue exists | Affidavits attempted to prove defendants had no hiring/disciplinary authority (autonomy of local churches) | Court refused to consider those affidavit-based facts for 2-619 dismissal because affidavits failed Rule 191(a); remanded for further proceedings |
| Whether dismissal was proper under section 2-619 based on affidavits | N/A (argued affidavits invalid) | Section 2-619 dismissal appropriate because affidavits established absence of employment relationship | Court reversed the 2-619 dismissal because affidavits noncompliant; no alternative basis for affirmance shown by defendants |
| Whether section 2-615 legal-sufficiency attack independently supports dismissal | Plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded negligence claims (breach, knowledge) | Defendants argued plaintiffs failed to allege that defendants knew or should have known of Coe’s unfitness | Appellate court found defendants did not adequately brief or support 2-615 argument; cannot affirm on that ground |
Key Cases Cited
- Robidoux v. Oliphant, 201 Ill. 2d 324 (Ill. 2002) (interpreting Rule 191(a) to require strict compliance with the attached-papers requirement)
- Ultsch v. Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund, 226 Ill. 2d 169 (Ill. 2007) (explaining standard for resolution on motions when factual disputes prevent dismissal)
- Van Horne v. Muller, 185 Ill. 2d 299 (Ill. 1999) (cited regarding negligence-law principles relied on by defendants)
- Preze v. Borden Chemical, Inc., 336 Ill. App. 3d 52 (Ill. App. Ct.) (reinforcing that failure to attach documents required by Rule 191(a) is fatal)
- Otis Elevator Co. v. American Surety Co., 314 Ill. App. 479 (Ill. App. Ct. 1942) (older appellate decision on substantial compliance with prior rule; distinguished and not followed by this court)