Harris v. One Hope United
2013 IL App (1st) 131152
Ill. App. Ct.2014Background
- One Hope United (One Hope) contracted with DCFS to provide family preservation services; seven-month-old Marshana Philpot died while in the program.
- The Cook County Public Guardian sued One Hope, an employee, and the mother for wrongful death, alleging One Hope failed to protect Marshana and should not have returned her to her mother.
- During discovery, One Hope’s executive director disclosed a “Priority Review” (internal quality-review) report about Marshana’s case; One Hope refused to produce it claiming the self-critical analysis privilege.
- The trial court ordered production of the priority review report and found the privilege inapplicable; when One Hope’s counsel persisted to obtain appellate review, the court entered a nominal "friendly contempt" citation against the law firm ($1/day).
- On appeal, the court considered whether Illinois recognizes a self-critical analysis privilege and whether the contempt citation was proper.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Illinois recognizes a self-critical analysis privilege that shields internal review reports from discovery | Privilege not recognized; report is discoverable because it may contain admissible or lead-to evidence | One Hope: internal review reports are protected to promote candid internal investigations and should be privileged | Illinois courts decline to recognize the self-critical analysis privilege; report is discoverable (order to produce affirmed) |
| Whether the contempt citation against One Hope’s law firm was proper | Contempt justified because counsel refused to comply with the discovery order | Counsel acted in good faith to secure appellate review; contempt was "friendly" and nominal | Contempt order vacated because counsel showed good-faith refusal to secure appellate resolution |
Key Cases Cited
- Bredice v. Doctors Hosp., 50 F.R.D. 249 (D.D.C. 1970) (origin of the self-critical analysis privilege in medical peer-review context)
- Rockford Benevolent & Protective Ass’n v. Morrissey, 398 Ill. App. 3d 145 (Ill. App. Ct. 2010) (declined to create self-critical analysis privilege under FOIA)
- People v. Campobello, 348 Ill. App. 3d 619 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004) (refused to recognize privilege shielding diocesan records; establishing privilege is legislative function)
- People ex rel. Birkett v. City of Chicago, 184 Ill. 2d 521 (Ill. 1998) (privileges disfavored; creation/extension of privileges better left to legislature)
- Dufour v. Mobil Oil Corp., 301 Ill. App. 3d 156 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998) (procedure for testing discovery orders on appeal via contempt citation)
- Reda v. Advocate Health Care, 199 Ill. 2d 47 (Ill. 2002) (when contempt for discovery violation is appealed, underlying discovery order is reviewable)