Court Briefs                                                                        

Social hosts not liable
for alcohol-related injuries

Drinking alcohol causes drunkenness; serving it doesn't. This reasoning, plus more than 100 years of precedent, lay behind the Illinois Supreme Court's refusal to support civil penalties against adult social hosts who provided the alcohol that caused traffic accidents of minor drinkers.

The court reasoned that the legislature's enactment and ongoing revision of the Dramshop Act (which applies to vendors), plus its history of refusing to recognize civil penalties against social hosts, means that the legislature has pre-empted the field of alcohol-related liability.

The legislature has rejected bills that would have created civil liabilities parallel to the criminal penalties for serving alcohol. Since 1986 it has rejected six attempts to impose penalties on adults who serve minors. The court noted "a very limited form of social host liability" in the statutes: Adults are liable for injuries or damages if they provide a hotel or motel room in which minors drink.

Chief Justice Michael A. Bilandic wrote for the majority in Charles v Seigfried and Bzdek v Townsley (Docket Nos. 76617, 77438 cons.). Justice Mary Ann McMorrow, joined by Justice Moses W. Harrison II, dissented, arguing that all precedent decisions involved drunken adults and that the involvement of minors here requires judicial action. Bilandic wrote a point-by-point critique of her dissent.

Adopted can inherit

The adopted great-granddaughter of meat-packing magnate Louis F. Swift, who died in 1936, will finally get a share of his estate.

Swift's will set up several trust funds and provided that eventually their holdings be distributed to his "legal descendants." One of the funds benefitted Swift's daughter-in-law. On her death in 1968, it passed to her children. One-third went to the estate of her son Nathan, who predeceased her. His adopted daughter, Martha, was excluded from inheritance under the law at that time.

In a March 30 decision the Illinois Supreme Court cited 1989 changes in the state's probate law that require "positive language" to indicate exclusion of adopted family members. It said that the words "legal descendants" do not qualify. Martha Herriot Swift inherits.

Justice Moses W. Harrison II wrote for the majority in First National Bank of Chicago v King (Docket No. 77443). Justice James D. Heiple dissented, joined by Chief Justice Michael A. Bilandic and Justice Benjamin K. Miller. Heiple argued that the will's plain and ordinary language shows Swift's "actual intention to exclude adopteds," and he accused the majority of "writing a new will for Louis Swift."

Some teacher disputes not subject to arbitration

A ruling by the Illinois Supreme Court may cause unease among teachers who feel protected by collective bargaining agreements.

A Rockford teacher was involved in a "physical altercation" with his students. The school board ruled that he could avoid dismissal through a remediation program and issued a "notice to remedy." Upon completing remediation the teacher sought to have the notice removed from his records. When the board refused he filed a grievance and demand for arbitration under his union's collective bargaining agreement.

The arbitrator and, later, the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board ruled that the school board had violated "just cause" provisions of the agreement and ordered the notice removed. The Illinois Supreme Court reversed.

The court ruled that a collective bargaining provision in conflict with any statute cannot be the subject of an arbitration award.

The Educational Labor Relations Act forbids implementation of any contract provision that is in conflict with state statutes. The state School Code gives a school board power to dismiss for cause and to notify a teacher if there is a remedy. The court said that this makes a notice to remedy "an integral part of the statutory scheme" and thus "within the confines of the School Code's statutory removal process."

Chief Justice Michael A. Bilandic wrote the opinion in Board of Education of Rockford School District No. 205 v Educational Labor Relations Board (Docket No. 77003).