IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEP AR1MENT - CHANCERY DMSION. ) ) No. CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Transcription

1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEP AR1MENT - CHANCERY DMSION THORNMEADOW PARTNERS, LP, an Illinois limited partnership, on behalf of itself and all other individuals and entities similarly situated, 1t6CH,062r68 CALENDAR/ROOn 06 1 I ME 0 0 : (:loq Plaintiff, vs. No. icla ss iaction NORTHSHORE UNIVERSITY HEAL Til SYSTEM, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, and DAVID ORR, in his capacity as COOK COUNTY CLERK and MARIA PAPPAS, in her capacity as COOK COUNTY TREASURER, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Defendants. CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT! -:;: ('" ' ::ol -,1 fin iii ;,c ==~i >,.,, -<.. ~~I ~;:n, :z :..., ~ c. :<~~ N ::: :.--~_'... C./"CJ.. Now comes Plaintiff, TIIORNMEADOWPARTNERS, LP, anlllinois limited,. ;:-: - 0 partnership, (hereinafter "Thornmeadow'' or "Plaintiff" on behalf of itself and all other individuals and entities similarly situated, by and through its attorneys, LARRY D. DRURY, LID. and alleges against Defendant, NORTIISHORE UNIVERSITY HEAL Til SYSTEM, (hereinafter "Defendant Northshore", on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, (hereinafter "Defendant Hospital Class", and DAVID ORR, in his capacity as COOK COUNTY CLERK, (hereinafter ''Defendant Clerk" and MARIA PAPPAS, in her capacity as COOK COUNTY TREASURER, (hereinafter ''Defendant Treasurer", on behalf of themselves ' 1

2 and all others similarly situated, (hereinafter "Defendant County Class'' as follows: NATURE OF THE CASE 1. The Defendant Hospital Class is comprised of hospital organizations and/or their agents and representatives in the State of lllinois who own property and file for an exemption for the payment of real estate taxes claiming they are entitled to a charitable exemption under Section of the Illinois Property Tax Code. On January 5, 2016, the Illinois Appellate Court in the case of The Carle Foundation v. Cunningham Township; Dan Stebbins, in his Official Capacity as Cunningham Township Assessor, et al IL App (4th found that Section was unconstitutional. 2. The Defendant County Class is comprised of units of county government responsible for, among other things, calculating the tax rate and levy, and receiving and distributing property tax payments throughout the State of lllinois. 3. Plaintiff seeks relief on behalf of itself and all other real estate taxpayers in the State of lllinois from 2014 to the date of judgment herein who paid real estate taxes to the Defendant Treasurer and the Defendant County Class based upon amounts which included charitable real estate tax exemptions to the Defendant Northshore, and the Defendant Hospital Class under Section of the lllinois Property Tax Code which were unconstitutional. 4. Plaintiff avers that Defendant Northshore represents a class of all hospital organizations and/or their agents and representatives, doing business in the State oflllinois from 2014 to the date of judgment herein, who applied for and received charitable tax exemptions under Section of the lllinois Property Tax Code. 5. Plaintiff avers that the Defendant Treasurer and Defendant Clerk represent a class of all units of county government that are responsible for, among other things, calculating the tax 2

3 rate and levy, and receiving and distributing property tax payments throughout the State of Illinois from 2014 to the date of judgment herein. PARTIES JURISDICTION AND VENUE 6. Plaintiff, Thommeadow is an lllinois limited partnership and at all times relevant hereto was a property owner paying real estate taxes for 4828 West Dakin Street, Chicago, Cook County, Illinois. 7. Defendant, Northshore, is an Dlinois corporation doing business throughout illinois with its principal place of business at 2650 Ridge Avenue, Evanston, illinois who applied for and received a charitable tax exemption under Section of the lllinois Property Tax Code. 8. Defendant Clerk is a unit of Cook County government with its principal place of business at 69 West Washington, Suite 500, Chicago, Illinois whose responsibilities include, but are not limited to, applying the state equalization factor, calculating the tax rate needed to produce the amount of revenues each taxing district may levy legally, apportioning the levy among the properties in a taxing district according to their equalized assessed valuations ("EA V s" so that tax bills can be computed, abates taxes as directed by taxing districts and prepares books for the Defendant Treasurer. 9. Defendant Treasurer is a unit of Cook County government with its principal place of business at 118 North Clark Street, Room 112, Chicago, illinois whose responsibilities include but are not limited to, preparing tax bills, receiving property tax payments from property owners, and distributing taxes to local government taxing districts. 10. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-209 in that all Defendants transact business and committed the acts and conduct relating to the matters 3

4 complained ofherein in the County of Cook, State oflllinois. 11. Venue is proper pursuant to 735 ICLS 5/2-101 because all Defendants transact continuous business in the County of Cook, State of lllinois and because the conduct giving rise to this Complaint occurred in the County of Cook, State of lllinois. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 12. That from January 1, 2014 to date, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class have and will continue to pay real estate taxes to the Defendant Treasurer and the Defendant County Class based upon amounts which include charitable real estate tax exemptions to Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class under Section of the Illinois Property Tax Code, which are unconstitutional. 13. As a result of Defendant Northshore's and the Defendant Hospital Class' reduction and/or nonpayment of real estate taxes as a result of the exemption under Section ofthe Illinois Property Tax Code Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class have and will suffer damages to their detriment by paying inflated real estate taxes to the Defendant Treasurer and the Defendant County Class. CLASS ALLEGATIONS 14. Plaintiff seeks relief on behalf of itself and all other real estate taxpayers in the State oflllinois from 2014 to the date of judgment herein who paid real estate taxes to the Defendant Treasurer and the Defendant County Class based upon amounts which included charitable real estate tax exemptions to Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class, under Section of the illinois Property Tax Code which were unconstitutional. 15. Plaintiff avers that Defendant Northshore represents a class of all hospital organizations and/or their agents and representatives, doing business in the State of Illinois from 4

5 2014 to the date of judgment herein, who applied for and received a charitable tax exemption under Section of the lllinois Property Tax Code. 16. Plaintiff avers that the Defendant Treasurer and the Defendant Clerk represent a class of all units of county government that calculate the tax rate and levy, and receive and distribute property tax payments throughout the State oflllinois from 2014 to the date of judgment herein. 17. The Classes are so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable, as both the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class and the Defendant Classes include hundreds or thousands of taxpayers, hospitals and units of county government. 18. Questions of fact or law are common to all Classes and predominate over any question affecting only individual members, including, for example, as follows: A. Whether the Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class received charitable tax exemptions under Section of the lllinois Property Tax Code; B. Whether the Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class have been unjustly enriched; C. Whether the Defendants and the Defendant Classes are required to pay damages and/or restitution; D. Whether Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class misused public funds; E. Whether the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class are entitled to declaratory judgment; and F. Whether the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class are entitled to injunctive relief. 19. Plaintiff's claims are typical of the claims of the other members of the Plaintiff 5

6 Class. 20. The defenses of each of the Defendant Classes will be typical of the defenses of the members of each of the Defendant Classes. 21. Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interest of the Class and has no interests that are antagonistic to, or that irreconcilably conflict, with those of other members of the Plaintiff Class. All Plaintiff Class members will receive proper, efficient and appropriate protection by the represen,tative party. Additionally, Plaintiff's attorneys are competent, qualified and experienced to prosecute the action on behalf of the Plaintiff Class. 22. Defendant Northshore will fairly and adequateiy protect the interests of the Defendant Hospital Class and has no interests that are antagonistic to, or that irreconcilably conflict, with those of other members of the Defendant Hospital Class. All Defendant Hospital Class members will receive proper, efficient and appropriate protection by the representative party. Additionally, Defendant Northshore will retain counsel who is competent, qualified and experienced to defend the action on behalf of the Defendant Hospital Class. 23. The Defendant Clerk and Defendant Treasurer will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Defendant County Class and have no interests that are antagonistic to, or that irreconcilably conflict, with those of other members of the Defendant County Class. All Defendant County Class members will receive proper, efficient and appropriate protection by the representatives. Additionally, the Defendant Clerk and Defendant Treasurer will retain counsel who is competent, qualified and experienced to defend the action on behalf of the Defendant County Class. 24. A class action is superior to all other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of Plaintiff' and the Plaintiff Class members' claims against the Defendants and the 6

7 Defendant Classes. 25. Certification of a Plaintiff and Defendant class action to resolve this matter will reduce the possibility of repetitious litigation involving potentially thousands of class me:rnbers. COUNT I UNJUST ENRICHMENT (Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class 26. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 25 above, as and for paragraphs 1 through 25 of this Count I as if though fully set forth herein. 27. Plaintiff and Plaintiff Class have paid and will continue to pay real estate taxes to Defendant Treasurer and the Defendant County Class based upon amounts which included unconstitutional charitable real estate tax exemptions to Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class, under Section15-86 of the illinois Property Tax Code, which are unconstitutional. 28. Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class have and will receive substantial windfalls and will be unjustly enriched if they are able to retain the tax benefits which they obtained as a result of the charitable real estate tax exemptions which were unconstitutional. 29. The circumstances described herein demonstrate that Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class have unjustly retained a benefit to the Plaintiff's and the Class' detriment, and that Defendant Northshore's and the Defendant Hospital Class' retention of the benefit violates the fundamental principles of justice, equity and good conscience. 30. Based upon the above, Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class should be required to make restitution to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class by refunding and/or 7

8 crediting, with interest, all tax benefits received, for each applicable year, as a result of the unconstitutional charitable real estate tax exemptions. COUNTD RESTITUTION (All Defendants and Defendant Classes 31. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 25 above, as and for paragraphs 1 through 25 of this Count II as if though fully set forth herein. 32. Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class have paid and will continue to pay real estate taxes ~ to Defendant Treasurer and the Defendant County Class based upon amounts which included charitable real estate tax exemptions to Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class, under Section of the illinois Property Tax Code Based upon the above, all Defendants and Defendant Classes should be required to make restitution to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class by refunding and/or crediting, with interest, all tax benefits received, for each applicable year, as a result of the unconstitutional charitable real estate tax exemptions. COUNT ill MISUSE OF PUBLIC FUNDS (Defendant Nortbsbore and the Defendant Hospital Class 34. Plaintiffrealleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 25 above, as and for paragraphs 1 through 25 of this Count ill as if though fully set forth herein. 35. Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class misused public funds in that they received charitable real estate tax exemptions under Section of the Illinois Property Tax Code that were unconstitutional. 8

9 36. As a direct result of the Defendant Northshore's and the Defendant Hospital Class' acts, conduct, and exemptions, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class incurred inflated real estate taxes which are their funds and for which, as applicable, they had personal liability to replenish the public treasury for the deficiency caused by the Defendant Northshore's and the Defendant Hospital Class' misappropriation as alleged herein. 37. Based upon the above, Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class should be required to make restitution to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class by refunding and/or crediting, with interest, all tax benefits received, for each applicable year, as a result of the unconstitutional charitable real estate tax exemptions. COUNT IV DECLARATORY JUDGMENT (All Defendants and Defendant Classes 38. Plaintiffrealleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 25 above, as and for paragraphs 1 through 25 of this Count IV as if though fully set forth herein. 39. Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class have substantial legal interest in the events described herein and deserve to have the following: A. A declaration that Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class received charitable real estate tax exemptions under Section of the Illinois Property Tax Code that were unconstitutional. B. A declaration that the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class are entitled to damages and that all Defendants and Defendant Classes should be required to make restitution to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class by refunding and/or crediting, with interest, all tax benefits received for each applicable year, as a result of the 9

10 unconstitutional charitable real estate tax exemptions. C. Defendants and the Defendant Classes have interests adverse to Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class and, in fact, Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class have benefitted from their receiving the unconstitutional charitable real estate tax exemptions as alleged herein, at Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff Class' expense, so that an actual case or controversy exists between the parties. 40. The Court can resolve this dispute by declaring the rights of the parties with respect to the unconstitutional charitable real estate tax exemptions. COUNTV INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (All Defendants and Defendant Classes 41. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 25 above, as and for paragraphs 1 through 25 of this Count Vas if though fully set forth herein. 42. Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class have no adequate remedy at law to restrain Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class from their conduct of receiving unconstitutional charitable real estate tax exemptions. 43. Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class will suffer irreparable harm and injury from Defendant Northshore's and the Defendant Hospital Class' conduct of receiving unconstitutional charitable real estate tax deductions and, if they are no so restrained, requiring the entry of a temporary restraining order and a preliminary/permanent injunction. 44. Pursuant to Section of the Injunction Act (735 ILCS , and based upon the facts and circumstances alleged herein, Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class should be restrained by a temporary restraining order, preliminary and/or 10

11 permanent injunction from continuing their conduct of claiming and receiving the charitable real estate tax exemptions. 45. Pursuant to Section 11~102 of the Injunction Act (735 ILCS, Section 5/11~102, Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class pray for the entry of a preliminary and permanent mandatory injunction directing the Defendants and the Defendant Classes, as applicable, and their agents and/or representatives to refund and/or credit, with interest, all tax benefits received, for each applicable year, as a result of the unconstitutional charitable real estate tax exemptions. 46. Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class are likely to succeed on the merits and the hardships are balanced in their favor. 47. For good cause shown, bond should be waived. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class pray that this Honorable Court enter an order as follows: A. Certifying the Plaintiff and Defendant Classes defined herein; B. Appointing Plaintiff's attorneys as the attorneys for the Plaintiff Class herein; C. Declaring that Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class received unconstitutional charitable real estate tax exemptions; D. Ordering that all Defendants and Defendant Classes pay damages and/or make restitution to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class by refunding and/or crediting, with interest, all tax benefits received, for each applicable year, as a result of the unconstitutional charitable real estate tax exemptions; E. Finding that Defendant Northshore and the Defendant Hospital Class have been 11

12 unjustly enriched; F. Finding that Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class are entitled to injunctive relief; G. Finding that Defendant Northshore and Defendant Hospital Class have misused public funds; ' H. Finding that the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class are entitled to declaratory judgment; I. Awarding reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, and an incentive award for the. Plaintiff Class representative; and J. Awarding such other legal and equitable relief as the Court deems appropriate. THORNMEADOW PARTNERS LP, on behalf of themselves and all othe similarly situated, LARRY D. DRURY LARRY D. DRURY, LTD. 100 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2200 Cbicago,IL / Attorney No