Willie Pearl Burrell Trust v. City of Kankakee
56 N.E.3d 1046
Ill. App. Ct.2016Background
- In 2006 the City of Kankakee petitioned to demolish a building at 411 N. Harrison, gave public notice, and recorded a lis pendens; the trial court granted the petition by default.
- In December 2007 the Willie Pearl Burrell Trust purchased the property from Kankakee County.
- In March 2011 the City issued a demolition permit under the 2006 proceedings.
- In March 2012 the Trust discovered the planned demolition, asked the City to postpone, and the City demolished the building that day.
- The Trust sued in August 2013 claiming it had not been notified of the demolition and seeking damages; both parties moved for summary judgment.
- The trial court granted the City’s motion and denied the Trust’s motion; the Trust appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether material factual disputes preclude summary judgment | Delay and City knowledge of owner create factual issues | No disputed material facts; Trust had constructive notice via lis pendens | No genuine issue; summary judgment for City affirmed |
| Whether City failed to follow required procedure when obtaining the 2006 demolition order | The demolition order/procedure was deficient and invalid | The 2006 order was final and unchallenged; collateral attack not permitted | Trust cannot collaterally attack the unappealed 2006 order on this claim |
| Whether the City was required to notify subsequent purchasers beyond filing lis pendens | City should have personally notified Trust given City’s knowledge | Lis pendens provides constructive notice to subsequent purchasers; no duty to locate buyers | Lis pendens sufficient as a matter of law; City had constructive notice effect |
| Whether delay between order and demolition violated the Municipal Code | Delay (5½ years) violated the Code and invalidates the action | No statutory timing requirement; delay does not negate lis pendens notice or order | Delay alone does not render City’s actions unlawful or negate notice |
Key Cases Cited
- Malone v. Cosentino, 99 Ill. 2d 29 (courts will not permit collateral attack on separate final judgment)
- Seymour v. Collins, 2015 IL 118432 (standard of review for summary judgment is de novo)
- Golden Rule Insurance Co. v. Schwartz, 203 Ill. 2d 456 (summary judgment principles)
- Security Savings & Loan Ass’n v. Hofmann, 181 Ill. App. 3d 419 (lis pendens gives notice to subsequent purchasers)
- JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Bank of America, 2015 IL App (1st) 140428 (lis pendens binds subsequent acquirers as if they were original parties)