Nelson v. County of Kendall
990 N.E.2d 1237
Ill. App. Ct.2013Background
- Nelson filed two FOIA actions seeking emails from January 2010 (No. 10-MR-143 against Kendall County and No. 11-MR-146 against the State’s Attorney).
- The actions sought injunctive relief under section 11(a) of the Illinois FOIA to compel disclosure of responsive emails.
- The trial court dismissed with prejudice, holding Kendall County could not be compelled to produce emails generated by the State’s Attorney’s office and that the State’s Attorney is not a “public body.”
- On appeal, Nelson challenges only the determination that the State’s Attorney is not a “public body” under FOIA; the county ruling is not contested.
- The issue is one of first impression; whether the State’s Attorney constitutes a “public body” subject to FOIA.
- The court ultimately concludes the State’s Attorney is not a “public body” under FOIA because the office is established in the judicial article of the Illinois Constitution, and the Act excludes judicial bodies.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the State’s Attorney is a 'public body' under FOIA | Nelson (plaintiff) argues the State’s Attorney should be subject under a functional approach to branch classification. | State’s Attorney argues the office is not a public body because FOIA excludes judicial bodies. | State’s Attorney is not a 'public body'. |
| Does placement of the State’s Attorney in the judicial article affect FOIA applicability | Nelson contends functional considerations could treat the office as public. | State’s Attorney relies on the constitutional placement and case law to argue exclusion from FOIA. | Constitutional placement supports exclusion from FOIA; no basis to include. |
Key Cases Cited
- Copley Press, Inc. v. Administrative Office of the Courts, 271 Ill. App. 3d 548 (1995) (judiciary not within FOIA public body)
- Newman v. Brown, 394 Ill. App. 3d 602 (2009) (rejected the functional approach; circuit clerk status discussion grounded in constitutional placement)
- Ingemunson v. Hedges, 133 Ill. 2d 364 (1990) (functional approach discussed; salary provision context)
- Suria v. Daley, 112 Ill. 2d 26 (1986) (separation-of-powers concerns; executive vs. prosecutorial functions)
- Moran v. Moran, 94 Ill. 2d 41 (1983) (separation-of-powers concerns; prosecutorial functions)
- Drury v. County of McLean, 89 Ill.2d 417 (1982) (clerk status as non-judicial officer; constitutional context)
- Southern Illinois v. Illinois Department of Public Health, 218 Ill.2d 390 (2006) (statutory interpretation of FOIA)