Court Opinion

ID: 9716106
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 06:27:06.636223+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:41.831991
License: Public Domain

PRESIDING JUSTICE SCHMIDT, dissenting: The majority hangs its hat on Department of Illinois Disabled American Veterans to support its conclusion. I believe that Department of Illinois Disabled American Veterans, even if correctly decided, is not authoritative, since it dealt with the right to hold office in a private corporation as opposed to the right of elected officials to hold public office. If the majority is correct, we could now have dozens or hundreds of private attorneys general filing declaratory judgment actions to challenge the right of any elected official to hold office. Under the common law, quo warranto was the exclusive method of challenging a public official’s right to act. It was then codified. It seems clear from the quo warranto statute that the legislature intended to limit the ability of private individuals to file suit challenging the right of one to hold public office. There can be no doubt that the statute requires a would-be private plaintiff to jump through enough hoops to fatigue an Olympic gymnast. The intent is clear. If all of this can be avoided by simply filing a declaratory judgment action, the quo warranto statute is meaningless. It would seem that both the common law and the quo warranto statute were born of the commonsense recognition that it is not in the public interest to allow individuals, without restriction, to file lawsuits challenging the authority of public officials to act. Such lawsuits, in sufficient number, could easily paralyze or bankrupt a unit of government. Any suit challenging the right of an elected public official to act must be brought in quo warranto. See People ex rel. Turner v. Lewis, 104 Ill. App. 3d 75, 432 N.E.2d 665 (1982); People ex rel. Freeport Fire Protection District v. City of Freeport, 90 Ill. App. 3d 112, 412 N.E.2d 718 (1980). I would affirm the trial court. I, therefore, respectfully dissent.