Retiree Update from Attorney Clint Krislov
Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 12:34 pmFrom: Clint
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 9:45 AM
Subject: Retiree Update--Great News!! Illinois Supreme Court reverses lower court holding that the "benefits of participation" clause only protects "pensions"
Dear Retirees,
We haven’t completed our reading of the case, (it’s attached to this email),
But here’s the conclusion of the Kanerva decision rendered just this morning on the state retirees’ healthcare case:
For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the State’s provision of health insurance premium subsidies for retirees is a benefit of membership in a pension or retirement system within the meaning of article XIII, section 5, of the Illinois Constitution, and the General Assembly was precluded from diminishing or impairing that benefit for those employees, annuitants, and survivors whose rights were governed by the version of section 10 of the Group Insurance Act that was in effect prior to the enactment of Public Act 97-695. Accordingly, the circuit court erred in dismissing plaintiffs’ claims that Public Act 97-695 is void and unenforceable under article XIII, section 5.
¶ 58 Our holding that plaintiffs are entitled to proceed on their pension protection clause claims obviates the need to address the sufficiency of their remaining claims. Because plaintiffs have obtained all the relief that they seek, any comment on their other claims would be advisory and in conflict with traditional principles of judicial restraint. See In re Alfred H.H., 233 Ill. 2d 345, 351 (2009) (recognizing that Illinois courts generally do not consider issues where the outcome will not be affected, regardless of how those issues are decided).
¶ 59
The judgment of the circuit court of Sangamon County is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
This is terrific for us, we’ll bring this to the federal court of appeals, and ask to now let us proceed ahead!
Happy Fourth of July!
I love this holiday, because, to me, it is the essential story of freedom.
Today’s decision similarly may restore some of our concerns that the system needs to be repeatedly pressed, like all of us, to comply with the law.
We’ll have more after we’ve reviewed the case further, but I wanted you all to learn of this great development as soon as possible.
Finally, we’d appreciate your considering new contributions to the cause, since we’ll be now proceeding ahead, and you can be certain the City administration will continue to fight us.
Clint Krislov
Krislov & Associates, Ltd.
Civic Opera Building, Suite 1300
20 North Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Telephone: 312-606-0500
Facsimile: 312-606-0207
Website: www.krislovlaw.com
Email: clint@krislovlaw.com
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 9:45 AM
Subject: Retiree Update--Great News!! Illinois Supreme Court reverses lower court holding that the "benefits of participation" clause only protects "pensions"
Dear Retirees,
We haven’t completed our reading of the case, (it’s attached to this email),
But here’s the conclusion of the Kanerva decision rendered just this morning on the state retirees’ healthcare case:
For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the State’s provision of health insurance premium subsidies for retirees is a benefit of membership in a pension or retirement system within the meaning of article XIII, section 5, of the Illinois Constitution, and the General Assembly was precluded from diminishing or impairing that benefit for those employees, annuitants, and survivors whose rights were governed by the version of section 10 of the Group Insurance Act that was in effect prior to the enactment of Public Act 97-695. Accordingly, the circuit court erred in dismissing plaintiffs’ claims that Public Act 97-695 is void and unenforceable under article XIII, section 5.
¶ 58 Our holding that plaintiffs are entitled to proceed on their pension protection clause claims obviates the need to address the sufficiency of their remaining claims. Because plaintiffs have obtained all the relief that they seek, any comment on their other claims would be advisory and in conflict with traditional principles of judicial restraint. See In re Alfred H.H., 233 Ill. 2d 345, 351 (2009) (recognizing that Illinois courts generally do not consider issues where the outcome will not be affected, regardless of how those issues are decided).
¶ 59
The judgment of the circuit court of Sangamon County is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
This is terrific for us, we’ll bring this to the federal court of appeals, and ask to now let us proceed ahead!
Happy Fourth of July!
I love this holiday, because, to me, it is the essential story of freedom.
Today’s decision similarly may restore some of our concerns that the system needs to be repeatedly pressed, like all of us, to comply with the law.
We’ll have more after we’ve reviewed the case further, but I wanted you all to learn of this great development as soon as possible.
Finally, we’d appreciate your considering new contributions to the cause, since we’ll be now proceeding ahead, and you can be certain the City administration will continue to fight us.
Clint Krislov
Krislov & Associates, Ltd.
Civic Opera Building, Suite 1300
20 North Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Telephone: 312-606-0500
Facsimile: 312-606-0207
Website: www.krislovlaw.com
Email: clint@krislovlaw.com