Lee v. Illinois Department of Human Rights Comm’n
Key Takeaways
- 1 Petitioner's failure to name all parties of record in petition for review is fatal defect requiring dismissal under Rule 335(a).
- 2 Service on respondents does not substitute for mandatory requirement to name all parties of record in petition caption.
- 3 Relevant for administrative law practitioners handling Illinois Human Rights Act appeals and appellate procedure compliance.
Summary
Delores Lee filed an age discrimination charge with the Illinois Department of Human Rights against Fetch Package Delivery in December 2022. After the Department investigated and recommended dismissal for lack of substantial evidence, Lee sought review by the Illinois Human Rights Commission, which sustained the dismissal. Lee then filed a timely petition for review with the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District.
The sole issue on appeal was whether Lee's petition complied with Illinois Supreme Court Rule 335(a), which mandates that "the agency and all other parties of record shall be named respondents." Lee named only the Illinois Department of Human Rights Commission as the respondent, failing to name both the Illinois Department of Human Rights and Fetch Package Delivery—both parties of record in the administrative proceedings. The Commission had explicitly instructed Lee in its final order to name all three entities as respondents.
The appellate court dismissed the petition, holding that the failure to name all parties of record constitutes a fatal defect. The court emphasized that appellate jurisdiction over administrative decisions is special statutory jurisdiction requiring strict compliance with procedural rules as written. Service on a respondent under Rule 335(b) does not relieve a petitioner of the obligation to properly name all necessary parties in the petition caption.
Key Holdings
1. Illinois Supreme Court Rule 335(a) mandates that all parties of record in administrative proceedings must be named as respondents in a petition for review; failure to do so is a fatal defect justifying dismissal. 2. Service on a respondent under Rule 335(b) does not substitute for or satisfy the requirement to name all parties of record in the petition for review. 3. Appellate courts reviewing administrative decisions exercise special statutory jurisdiction and must strictly enforce supreme court rules as written. 4. When an administrative agency explicitly instructs a party regarding proper naming of respondents in an appeal, failure to comply results in dismissal.