Rushton v. The Department of Corrections
123 N.E.3d 1171
Ill. App. Ct.2019Background
- Wexford Health Sources contracted with the Illinois Department of Corrections to provide medical care to inmates.
- After the 2012 death of inmate Alfonso Franco, Wexford entered a confidential settlement with his estate in August 2015.
- Plaintiffs (Bruce Rushton and the Illinois Times) submitted a FOIA request seeking settlement agreements related to Franco’s death, including Wexford’s agreement.
- Wexford refused to provide an unredacted agreement to the Department; the Department provided plaintiffs a redacted copy and later stated it did not possess an unredacted version.
- Plaintiffs sued the Department in April 2017 seeking release of the unredacted agreement; Wexford intervened and moved for summary judgment, arguing the agreement did not “directly relate” to a governmental function under FOIA §7(2).
- The trial court granted Wexford’s motion; the appellate court reversed, holding the settlement directly related to a governmental function and remanded for consideration of possible redactions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Wexford’s confidential settlement is a “public record” under FOIA §7(2) (i.e., "directly relates" to a governmental function) | The settlement directly relates because it arises from Wexford’s provision of medical care to an inmate and thus concerns a governmental function | The settlement does not "directly relate" to a governmental function and thus is not subject to FOIA §7(2) | Reversed: settlement directly relates to a governmental function and falls within FOIA §7(2) given Wexford contracted to provide inmate medical care |
| Whether court should decide redactions if agreement is a public record | The agreement, if public, should be disclosed with only permissible FOIA redactions | Wexford preserved redaction arguments alternatively; Department previously produced a redacted copy | Remanded: trial court must consider, on remand, whether and what portions may be redacted under FOIA |
Key Cases Cited
- Better Government Ass’n v. Illinois High School Ass’n, 89 N.E.3d 376 (2017) (purpose of §7(2) is to preserve transparency when government functions are privatized)
- Chicago Tribune v. College of Du Page, 79 N.E.3d 694 (2017) (whether something is a governmental function is a fact-specific inquiry)
- People v. Manning, 371 Ill. App. 3d 457 (2007) (private contractors providing inmate medical care relate to constitutional duties of prison officials)
- City of Champaign v. Madigan, 992 N.E.2d 629 (2013) (FOIA should be liberally construed to promote disclosure)