RICHARD MEDDER & SALLY MEDDER, Claimants, v. THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.
Case summary
Claimants alleged tortious interference with lease contracts by the Illinois Department of Transportation, seeking lost rent and utility costs. The court dismissed the claim, finding no bad faith by IDOT and following the precedent in Buetow v. State.
Cases cited: Buetow v. State (1992), 44 Ill. Ct. Cl. 93
AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.
Headnotes
- ROLAND W. BURRIS, Attorney General (CAROL J. BARLOW, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent.
- C ONTRACTS -intentional interference with lease contracts-no bad faith-claim dismissed. In a claim by property owners alleging that the State
- Department of Transportation interfered with their month-to-month lease contracts and caused tenants to terminate leases prematurely by notifying them of the State’s future acquisition of the property, the action was dismissed, since although the State did not actually acquire the property until six months after the tenants had moved, there was no bad faith on the State’s part in following notification procedures established by State and Federal law.
OPINION
SOMMER, C.J.
This claim comes before us on the Respondent’s motion to dismiss. Oral argument was held before the full Court on November 9, 1993.
The Claimants owned two residential properties which they were renting on month-to-month leases.
In May of 1986 the Illinois Department of Transportation sent notices to the tenants. These notices stated that the Department of Transportation would be acquiring the properties. The notices stated that construction work would begin on or about June 30, 1986. The notices also stated that the tenants would not be required to move before 90 days; and when they were to vacate they would be sent a 30-day notice. In fact, the tenants moved in June; while the property was not finally taken until December of 1986.
The Claimants are alleging tortious interference with the lease contracts by the Department of Transportation. The Claimants seek damages of lost rent from June to December and utility costs incurred by them.
The Court previously has decided an identical claim (Buetow v. State (1992), 44 Ill. Ct. Cl. 93.) The same notices were sent in Buetow; and the property was not acquired until about six months after the tenants had moved. The only difference between the Buetow claim and the present one is that the Buetow claim concerned a 33-unit apartment building.
[*292] The claim in Buetow was denied because, “The record does not support a finding of a lack of good faith on the part of IDOT.” Buetow at 95.
One element of proof necessary for establishing an intentional interference with a contract is that the breach be unjustified or in bad faith. We find no bad faith on the part of the Department of Transportation in this claim. The Department simply followed the procedures established by State and Federal law and regulations.
Though the parties in the present claim did not cite Buetow and concerned themselves whether a contract really existed between the Claimants and the tenants, we find that this Court’s ruling in Buetow is controlling.
It is therefore ordered that the Respondent’s motion to dismiss is granted; and that this claim is dismissed.