Manago v. The County of Cook, 92 N.E.3d 412

Background

Akeem Manago (injured at age 12) was treated at John H. Stroger, Jr., Hospital; the hospital (via Cook County) filed a Health Care Services Lien Act (Lien Act) notice for $79,572.53.
The minor (later shown in caption as Akeem Manago and April Pritchett) sued defendants for negligence; the second amended complaint alleged Pritchett had incurred medical expenses but did not plead a separate claim for those expenses.
After trial the court awarded the plaintiff damages but declined to award medical expenses; the trial court then struck, dismissed, and extinguished the hospital’s statutory lien.
The appellate court initially reinstated the lien (Manago I), then after supplemental briefing reversed and affirmed extinguishment (Manago II), reasoning that (a) a parent’s exclusive right to recover medical expenses under the Family Expense Act meant no lien could attach absent assignment, and (b) the Lien Act applies only to recoveries for medical expenses.
The Illinois Supreme Court granted leave, analyzed the Lien Act and the Family Expense Act under traditional statutory-construction rules, and reversed the appellate and circuit courts, holding the hospital was entitled to a lien and remanding for further proceedings.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a Lien Act lien may attach to a tort recovery secured by or on behalf of a minor	Manago: lien cannot attach where minor did not (and could not) recover medical expenses and parents’ exclusive right to medical-expense claims prevents lien absent assignment	County/Hospital: Lien Act’s plain text grants lien on “all claims and causes of action of the injured person” and attaches to recoveries secured by or on behalf of the injured person, regardless of age or whether medical expenses were separately awarded	Held: Lien Act’s plain, unambiguous language allows a lien to attach to a minor’s recovery; reversed and remanded.
Whether the Lien Act requires an express award of medical expenses before a lien can attach	Manago: lien limited to recoveries for medical expenses, so absent an award of medical expenses there can be no lien	County/Hospital: statute does not condition lien on an award of medical expenses; it attaches to verdicts, judgments, awards, settlements, or compromises secured by/for the injured person	Held: No such condition exists in the statute; the appellate court erred in reading that limitation into the Lien Act.
Whether the Family Expense Act precludes or limits application of the Lien Act (i.e., conflict between the statutes)	Manago: parental exclusivity over medical-expense claims under the Family Expense Act means the Lien Act cannot reach a minor’s recovery absent parental assignment	County/Hospital: statutes are not in conflict; both can operate independently and provide alternative remedies to creditors; court must apply plain text	Held: No inherent conflict; statutes can coexist; court applied plain language of the Lien Act without importing limits from the Family Expense Act.

Key Cases Cited

Cooper v. Ill. Cent. R.R. Co., 125 Ill. 2d 363 (Ill.) (describing lien as creating property interest in plaintiff’s recovery)
McVey v. M.L.K. Enterprises, LLC, 2015 IL 118143 (Ill.) (refusing to read attorney-fee deduction into Lien Act where statute’s language is unambiguous)
Wendling v. Southern Illinois Hospital Services, 242 Ill. 2d 261 (Ill.) (Lien Act precedent discussed in McVey)
Graul v. Adrian, 32 Ill. 2d 345 (Ill.) (parent’s right to recover child’s medical/funeral expenses under Family Expense Act)
Enloe v. (In re Estate of Enloe), 109 Ill. App. 3d 1089 (Ill. App.) (holding Lien Act and Family Expense Act offer alternative remedies and can coexist)
Bibby v. Meyer, 60 Ill. App. 2d 156 (Ill. App.) (minor cannot prove medical-expense claim that legally belongs to parent)
Kennedy v. Kiss, 89 Ill. App. 3d 890 (Ill. App.) (assignment of parent’s medical-expense claim subjects minor to defenses available against parent)