Gallaher v. Hasbrouk
2013 IL App (1st) 122969
Ill. App. Ct.2014Background
- Victoria Gallaher, an Illinois EMS Lead Instructor, faced administrative proceedings by the Illinois Department of Public Health to suspend/revoke her Lead Instructor approval for alleged failures to obtain site/system approvals and for supervision of nonstandard pediatric techniques.
- In 2008 the local EMS System placed Gallaher on probation; she later submitted a plan of correction after the Department requested one, but the Department filed a notice of intent to suspend in 2008 without responding to her plan.
- An ALJ recommended dismissal of the 2008 notice with leave to re-file under the EMS Code plan-of-correction provisions; the Department director adopted that recommendation in a 2010 order that dismissed the notice but expressly allowed refiling.
- The Illinois legislature amended 210 ILCS 50/3.130 (the EMS Act) to retitle it “Facility, system, and equipment violations; Plans of Correction,” and the Department revised the companion administrative rule to clarify plans of correction apply to entities/equipment, not individuals.
- The Department refiled in 2011 under the instructor-specific statute 210 ILCS 50/3.65(b)(7) (which authorizes suspension/revocation of EMS Lead Instructors after a hearing); Gallaher sought declaratory and injunctive relief in circuit court arguing the plan-of-correction procedures (statute and rule) were required and that collateral estoppel/res judicata barred refiling.
- The circuit court held Gallaher need not exhaust administrative remedies to raise an agency-authority challenge but granted summary judgment to the Department: section 3.130/515.160 apply to facilities/systems/equipment, not individuals, and the 2010 order was not a final judgment for preclusion purposes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Gallaher had to exhaust administrative remedies before judicial review | Gallaher: exhaustion not required because she challenges agency authority to apply plan-of-correction to individuals | Dept.: Gallaher must exhaust administrative remedies before court intervention | Court: Exhaustion not required where plaintiff challenges statutory authority (judicial question) — Gallaher may proceed to court |
| Whether 210 ILCS 50/3.130 (and 77 Ill. Adm. Code 515.160) requires a plan of correction before disciplining an individual lead instructor | Gallaher: §3.130 historically applied to "violations" generally and therefore to individuals; she is part of EMS system personnel so covered | Dept.: Amendments and text/context limit §3.130 to facilities, systems, and equipment; instructor discipline governed by §3.65 | Court: §3.130 unambiguously applies to facilities/systems/equipment, not individuals; Department need not impose a plan of correction before proceeding under §3.65 |
| Whether the Department was precluded by res judicata or collateral estoppel from refiling after the 2010 Director order | Gallaher: 2010 "FINAL ORDER" resolved plan-of-correction issue and bars refiling | Dept.: 2010 order dismissed with leave to refile; not a final judgment | Court: 2010 order was not a final adjudication on the merits (dismissal with leave to refile); res judicata/collateral estoppel do not apply |
| Whether summary judgment for Dept. was improper because factual disputes remained about alleged probation violations and merits of charges | Gallaher: summary judgment inappropriate; merits and factual issues (e.g., violation of probation) remain | Dept.: statutory interpretation and scope issues dispose of the case; plan-of-correction not required | Court: On issues before the court, statutory interpretation resolved in Dept.'s favor; Gallaher's other factual defenses raised below were either waived on appeal or belong in administrative proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Beahringer v. Page, 204 Ill. 2d 363 (Ill. 2003) (exhaustion of administrative remedies principle)
- Castaneda v. Illinois Human Rights Comm’n, 132 Ill. 2d 304 (Ill. 1989) (administrative-exhaustion requirement for judicial review)
- Landfill, Inc. v. Pollution Control Board, 74 Ill. 2d 541 (Ill. 1979) (judicial review appropriate where agency’s statutory authority is challenged)
- Emerald Casino, Inc. v. Illinois Gaming Board, 346 Ill. App. 3d 18 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004) (agencies do not decide pure questions of statutory scope of their authority)
- County of Knox ex rel. Masterson v. The Highlands, L.L.C., 188 Ill. 2d 546 (Ill. 1999) (exception to exhaustion where agency authority is disputed)