 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Williams v. Davenport6/30/1999
JUSTICE McBRIDE delivered the opinion of the court:
This appeal arises from a circuit court order finding the Illinois Department of Public Aid (Department) and defendant jointly and severally liable for attorney fees and costs of the appointed guardian ad litem in the instant paternity action. For the following reasons we reverse.
On August 8, 1995, plaintiff Rose Williams filed a complaint to determine whether Willie Davenport was the father of her child, Rasheed Williams. Pursuant to the Illinois Statutes enacted in compliance with Title IV-D of the Social Security Act and the current contract between the Illinois Department of Public Aid and the Cook County State's Attorney's office, plaintiff was represented by the Cook County State's Attorney's office. 42 U.S.C. ยง651 et seq. (1994). Upon defendant's motion, David Pasulka (Pasulka) was appointed as the guardian ad litem for the minor Rasheed Williams.After results of a DNA test disclosed that defendant was not the minor's biological father, the trial court ordered the Department and defendant jointly and severally liable for the attorney fees and costs of the guardian ad litem.
On appeal the Department argues that: (1) the trial court did not have jurisdiction over the Department as it was only a nominal party to this action; and (2) since the Court of Claims retains exclusive jurisdiction in determining whether the State is liable for the expenses of litigation, the court's decision requiring the Department to pay attorney fees should be considered void ab initio for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Because the second issue is dispositive of this appeal's outcome, we need not reach the merits of whether the State was in fact a nominal party to this action.
The Department argues that the Court of Claims Act (705 ILCS 505/8(a) (West 1996)), precluded the trial court from entering an order holding the State jointly and severally liable for the attorney fees and costs of the guardian ad litem. Pasulka responds by arguing the instant order falls outside the purview of the Court of Claims Act, because his function as guardian ad litem remains a State appropriated cost.
"Though our constitution of 1970 abolished sovereign immunity (Ill. Const. 1970, art. XIII, sec. 4) it was restored by the General Assembly, as the Constitution permitted." [Citations.] That enactment of the General Assembly provides that " xcept as provided in [an act] to create the Court of Claims * * * the State of Illinois shall not be made a defendant or party in any court." Smith v. Jones, 113 Ill. 2d 126, 130-31, 497 N.E.2d 738 (1986); see also City of Springfield v. Allphin, 74 Ill. 2d 117, 123, 384 N.E.2d 310 (1978); Department of Revenue v. Appellate Court, 67 Ill. 2d 392, 394, 367 N.E.2d 1302 (1977); 705 ILCS 505/8(a) (West 1996), formerly Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 127, par. 801.
The Court of Claims Act (705 ILCS 505/8(a) (West 1996)), provides:
"The court shall have exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine the following matters: all claims against the State founded upon any law of the State of Illinois or upon any regulation adopted thereunder by an executive or administrative officer or agency; provided, however, the court shall not have jurisdiction (i) to hear or determine claims arising under the Workers' Compensation Act or the Workers' Occupational Diseases Act, or claims for expenses in civil litigation *." 705 ILCS 505/8(a) (West 1996); see also Griffin v. Fluellen, 283 Ill. App. 3d 1078, 1083, 670 N.E.2d 845 (1996) (holding that absent the express consent of the State, unless suit is brought under the Court of Claims Act, the doctrine of sovereign immunity applies and the State o
Page 1 2 3 4 Illinois Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|