McFatridge v. Madigan
2011 IL App (4th) 100936
Ill. App. Ct.2011Background
- McFatridge, Edgar County State’s Attorney (1980-1991), prosecuted Steidl and Whitlock for murder; Steidl later released after habeas relief and Whitlock after post-conviction relief.
- Steidl and Whitlock filed civil rights complaints against McFatridge and Edgar County, seeking damages including defense costs.
- McFatridge sought indemnification/defense funding from the Attorney General under 5 ILCS 350/2 for the Steidl and Whitlock actions.
- Attorney General denied representation and funding in 2005 and 2009 based on allegations of intentional, wilful, or wanton misconduct.
- In 2010, McFatridge requested payment of defense costs; in August 2010 he filed a mandamus action seeking payment of reasonable litigation expenses.
- Trial court dismissed the mandamus complaint; appellate court reversed, holding the Second Paragraph of 2(b) creates a right to reimbursement for elected officials absent a reasonableness/choice issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope of 2(b) for elected officials | 2(b) requires payment of fees regardless of AG discretion for elected officials. | 2(b) grants discretion; mandamus cannot control discretion. | Second paragraph creates a clear right to payment as incurred, with reasonableness review by AG. |
| Statute of limitations | Limitations clock starts when denial was issued (Aug 19, 2010). | Limitations accrual could be 2005 denial or other dates; may bar claims. | Accrual occurred in August 2010; mandamus filed within five years; not time-barred. |
| Sovereign immunity | Mandamus seeks to compel a non-discretionary duty to pay; not an action against the State. | Sovereign immunity may bar actions against the State. | Sovereign immunity does not bar a mandamus to compel payment when AG has no discretion outside listed limits. |
| Status of McFatridge as an elected official | McFatridge remains an elected State’s Attorney; entitled to 2(b) protections. | Not an elected official? (arguments addressed but rejected). | McFatridge qualifies as an elected State’s Attorney; second paragraph applies. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ford v. Walker, 377 Ill. App. 3d 1120 (2007) (mandamus requires clear right and duty; discretion limitations)
- Turner-El v. West, 349 Ill. App. 3d 475 (2004) (mandamus cannot control discretionary acts)
- Beretta U.S.A. Corp. v. City of Chicago, 213 Ill. 2d 351 (2004) (standards for de novo review of 2-615/2-619 dismissals)
- Marshall v. Burger King Corp., 222 Ill. 2d 422 (2006) (section 2-615 standard; pleading sufficiency)
- Senn Park Nursing Center v. Miller, 104 Ill. 2d 169 (1984) (sovereign immunity; action to compel official to act is not against state)
- In re Lawrence M., 172 Ill. 2d 523 (1996) (sovereign immunity; payment of funds incidental to lawful duties)
- Knolls Condominium Ass’n v. Harms, 202 Ill. 2d 450 (2002) (prefer specific provisions over general ones in a statute)
- Kraft, Inc. v. Edgar, 138 Ill. 2d 178 (1990) (read statute as a whole; avoid superfluous language)
- Albee v. City of Bloomington, 365 Ill. App. 3d 526 (2006) (statutory interpretation; plain language governs when unambiguous)
- O’Casek v. Children’s Home & Aid Society of Illinois, 229 Ill. 2d 421 (2008) (limits of interpretation; legislative intent; aid for understanding statute)
- Ehley (People v. Ehley), 381 Ill. App. 3d 937 (2008) (statutory interpretation; plain language and ambiguity analysis)