Reynolds v. Jimmy John's Enterprises, LLC
2013 IL App (4th) 120139
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2013Background
- Reynolds sued Jimmy John’s entities and JThree for injuries from a April 2010 motorcycle collision with Sawyer, a delivery driver.
- In Oct 2011 Reynolds filed a seven-count amended complaint alleging direct liability for negligent training (counts I–II) and negligent supervision (counts III–IV), plus implied authority, joint venture, and apparent authority (counts V–VII).
- Defendants moved to dismiss under 2-615 (2-615) and 2-619(a)(9); the trial court dismissed all seven counts with prejudice in Jan 2012.
- On appeal Reynolds argues Counts I–IV state direct negligence despite a vicarious liability action, citing a 15-minute delivery policy and a training manual lacking safe-delivery instructions; the court reverses in part and remands.
- The panel holds that combined 2-615/2-619.1 motions were improper, and that Reynolds should be allowed to amend Counts I–IV; Counts V–VII are forfeited for lack of challenge on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly dismissed Counts I–IV | Reynolds; direct negligence exists based on policy and training omissions | Jimmy John’s/JThree; no duty or training duties alleged | Partially reversed; Counts I–IV may proceed on remand |
| Whether the 2-615/2-619.1 hybrid motions were proper | Motion practice allowed amendment and proper pleading | Hybrid motion improper and confusing | Motion practice improper; remand to address properly or permit separate motions |
| Whether Reynolds pleaded a direct-negligence duty (training/supervision) | Allegations show foreseeability and duty to train under 15-minute policy | No duty shown; training/supervision not adequately pleaded | Sufficient to permit amendment; duty may attach depending on further facts |
| Whether 2-619(a)(9) is appropriate to contest facts outside the pleadings | Affirmative matter can defeat claim | Cannot rely on outside-facts to negate the pleadings | Not proper vehicle to contest plead facts; may be treated as summary judgment if appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- Howle v. Aqua Illinois, Inc., 2012 IL App (4th) 120207 (2012 IL App (4th)) (hybrid 2-615/2-619.1 motions not allowed; must specify grounds)
- Vancura v. Katris, 238 Ill. 2d 352 (2010) (elements of direct negligence and duty in employer-employee context)
- Smith v. Waukegan Park District, 231 Ill. 2d 111 (2008) (affirmative matter standard; not merely evidence against pleadings)