Raymond Heyde v. Gary Pittenger
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 501
7th Cir.2011Background
- Heyde, trustee of the Raymond R.S. Heyde Revocable Trust, owns Illinois property and sues eight local officials (BOR members and county assessors) under §1983 for equal protection violations related to property tax assessments.
- BOR repeatedly increased or declined to reduce assessments challenged by Heyde from 2004–2007, including a dramatic 2006 jump based on misperceived square footage; Heyde later obtained a 2009 PTAB decision reducing the 2005 assessment.
- Heyde delayed inspections for several years, limiting BOR’s ability to review the property, but eventually allowed access for an updated measurement; the BOR provided notices and hearings as required by Illinois law.
- Heyde appealed BOR decisions to the PTAB and then sought administrative review in state court; he also filed federal §1983 action in July 2007 naming BOR members and county Assessors.
- The district court granted the BOR’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion based on absolute immunity and dismissed the Assessors’ claims without prejudice on comity grounds, ruling Heyde should exhaust state remedies before proceeding in federal court; Heyde appeals.
- This Court addresses whether the BOR members are absolutely immune, whether the state processes require exhaustion (comity) to bar federal claims, and related matters including Rule 59(e) denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether BOR members have absolute immunity for §1983 claims. | Heyde argues immunity does not extend to investigatory actions. | BOR members perform quasi-judicial duties; immunity applies. | BOR members are entitled to absolute immunity. |
| Whether the Assessors’ claims are barred by comity for lack of exhaustion. | Heyde can proceed in federal court despite pending state appeals. | State tax-review system requires exhaustion before federal action. | District court correctly dismissed Assessors' claims without prejudice under comity. |
| Whether the district court correctly dismissed on comity grounds rather than addressing qualified immunity. | District court should have addressed potential qualified immunity. | Comity disposal forecloses reaching qualified immunity. | Qualified-immunity issue not reached due to comity-based dismissal. |
| Whether the McNary/Scott Air Force/Levy line of cases bars federal §1983 challenges to state tax systems. | Heyde argues distinctions from McNary allow federal review. | McNary controls; comity bars federal action until state remedies exhausted. | McNary controls; review barred pending exhaustion of state remedies. |
| Whether the Rule 59(e) motion was abused given the immunity ruling. | Heyde sought reconsideration of the immunity decision. | No manifest error shown; reconsideration denied appropriately. | No abuse of discretion; Rule 59(e) denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478 (1978) (factors for quasi-judicial immunity and adjudicatory function)
- Reed v. Village of Shorewood, 704 F.2d 943 (7th Cir. 1983) (judicial capacity when adjudicating; right to notice and hearing; written record)
- Tobin for Governor v. Illinois State Board of Elections, 268 F.3d 517 (7th Cir. 2001) (Butz factors; protection from harassment; independent judgment)
- Wilson v. Kelkhoff, 86 F.3d 1438 (7th Cir. 1996) (absolute immunity extends beyond prosecutors/judges; functional approach)
- Crenshaw v. Baynerd, 180 F.3d 866 (7th Cir. 1999) (adjudicatory capacity supports immunity of commissions/boards)
- Scott Air Force Base Properties, LLC v. County of St. Clair, 548 F.3d 516 (7th Cir. 2008) (Illinois tax system can be challenged in state process; comity applies)
- Levy v. Pappas, 510 F.3d 755 (7th Cir. 2007) (comity bars §1983 when state tax system singles out plaintiff)
- McNary, 454 U.S. 100 (1981) (comity bars federal suits challenging validity of state tax systems; exhaustion required)
- Rosewell v. LaSalle National Bank, 450 U.S. 503 (1981) (speedy and efficient remedies; Illinois delays considered but acceptable under McNary (distinguishable))
- Hartman v. Moore, 547 U.S. 250 (2006) (no immunity for prosecutorial acts in investigatory capacity)
- Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478 (1978) ((duplicate entry to emphasize factors))