Judicial Rulings

Illinois Supreme Court

Was there no remedy for candidate Howlett?

A 1976 complaint by then Secy. of State and gubernatorial candidate Michael J. Howlett, in an effort to clear his name before an election, should have been dismissed. So said the Illinois Supreme Court in a November 1977 opinion that reversed the ruling of a Cook County judge, who had ruled in September 1976 that allegations against Howlett were unfounded.

The decision in Howlett v. Scott came after a report from the Illinois Attorney General's Office was issued alleging that Howlett was guilty of a conflict of interest. The report said that Howlett had a conflict in working as a $15,000 a year consultant for the Sun Steel Corporation while serving as chairman of a state board responsible for removing abandoned autos from streets and salvaging them.

Howlett brought a complaint against the attorney general after the primary election, asking that the Circuit Court of Cook County make a declaratory judgment on the merits of the charges against him. The court then issued such a judgment prior to the general election. It said that the allegations against Howlett were unfounded.

After that judgment, Atty. Gen. William J. Scott appealed the decision. The Supreme Court finally ruled that Howlett's action "was brought prematurely." It explained that the preelection report, written by a former Supreme Court justice, was not actually a legal "justiciable case." It said that the finding of a conflict of interest in the attorney general's office report was based upon two "new applications of equitable principles" then on appeal. In other words, the attorney general had called the secretary of state guilty of a conflict of interest, but he had done so without making legal charges.

Moreover, the Supreme Court said, "the status of [Howlett's] conduct could not have been determined with certainty...any judgment entered would at best have been an advisory opinion, and Illinois judges have no authority to issue advisory opinions."

Despite all this, the court ruling acknowledged that "political campaigns frequently subject candidates to criticisms which cannot be adequately, if at all, answered within the available time limitations."

How, then, was Howlett to have gone about clearing his name prior to the general election? He was running, after all, for the highest elective office in the state. He had been accused of official misconduct by an official report of the Attorney General's Office, the highest executive legal advisor in state government.

The Supreme Court said Howlett took the wrong course of action. "The prejudice to a candidate for public office which may result from charges of improper conduct, and the candidate's inability to secure a final determination of the propriety of those charges prior to the election in which he is a candidate, may well be unavoidable in our system of government," the court said.

Public Aid regulation voided

The Illinois Department of Public Aid's "no supplementation" policy covering persons confined to private institutions was declared void by the state Supreme Court last November. The court ruled void a department regulation restricting supplemental aid to persons in private institutions, unless those institutions accept department money as "payment in full" for inmate services and care. It said the policy was "counter to the [Public Aid] statute" (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1971, ch. 23, sec. 1-1 et seq.) added that to allow supplementation did not seem to jeopardize the receipt of federal matching funds, as claimed by the department (Lawrie v. The Department of Public Aid).

Farmland assessment by use

In a December decision, Hoffman v.

30/ February 1978/ Illinois Issues

Clark, the Illinois Supreme Court upheld an act that allows for lower tax assessments of farmland. The act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1973, ch. 120, secs. 20a-l through 20a-3) lets owners of farm property have their land assessed according to its value for agricultural use, rather than its value for sale or other purposes.

The effect of the law was to lower taxes on farm property and encourage farmers to stay on their land. The decision overturned a DuPage County Circuit Court ruling that declared the tax break law unconstitutional, on grounds that it violated equal protection and due process clauses of the state and federal constitutions.

A section of the act in question provides for a three-year back tax to be paid when farmland is sold, with assessment based upon the market value of the land, rather than the farm use value. A 5 per cent interest charge would then be added to the back tax bill. Justice Howard C. Ryan issued the majority opinion, with Justice Robert C. Underwood and Chief Justice Daniel P. Ward dissenting.

Auto 'design defect'

In Buehler v. Whalen the state supreme court ruled that a 1971 flaming auto smashup was the result of driver negligence, but injuries resulted from a "design defect." The court ruled that a 1966 Ford Fairlane burst into flames, burning the driver because of the vulnerability of the (gas) tank to impact and the risk of fire spreading into the passenger compartment." But the court also affirmed that the driver who caused the accident must share liability damage costs with the Ford Motor Company. "We have here a classic case of concurrent tort-feasors whose separate acts combine to produce a single individual injury," the court said, Finally, the opinion condemned the conduct of the trial attorney for Ford. "It [counsel] gave false answers to interrogatories under oath. It secreted evidence damaging to its case," the court wrote.

Search warrant

The Illinois Supreme Court ruled that Rock Island police acted legally in arresting a burglary suspect on drug charges after they entered his apartment and searched it without a signed warrant. The court upheld the power of a search warrant obtained in Illinois on the authority of an arrest warrant issued in Iowa, even though the Illinois warrant did not specify correctly the location or purpose of the search. "Although the mere failure of police to announce their authority and purpose does not per se violate the Constitution, it may influence whether subsequent entry to arrest or search is constitutionally reasonable," the court explained in Illinois v. Wolgemuth.

Challenge Chicago Med School admission requirements

The court held in Steinberg v. Chicago Medical School that an applicant had the right to bring suit against a medical school on charges that the school failed to live up to its admissions criteria. The court said that Robert I. Steinberg was justified in bringing suit on fraud statutes on the basis of his claim that he was rejected from medical school because his family did not make large contributions to the school. Steinberg said that it was an unstated requirement of the school that an applicant have a large financial grant pledged in his or her behalf. The opinion noted that "In 1973, at least 78 out of 91 students had contributions made in their behalves totalling $3,749,000. The pledges varied in amounts from $10,000 to $100,000 and averaged $48,064."

Shared liability for injury

The court set a precedent in three monetary damage suits ruled on last December, when it said that legal liability for injury may be shared. The main test case involved a minor, Rita Rae Skinner, who was injured at work by an injection molding machine. The court said that the responsibility for her injury should be shared between the manufacturer of the machine and the plastic company that employed the girl. Skinner v. Reed-Prentice was a departure from earlier case law, under which only the manufacturer of the machinery would have had to pay. 

31 / February 1978 / Illinois Issues