Find Court Cases > Go Back to List > Gallik v. County of Lake

Gallik v. County of Lake

Case Date: 11/22/2002
Court: 2nd District Appellate
Docket No: 2-01-1387 Rel

No. 2--01--1387

IN THE

APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS

SECOND DISTRICT

WILLIAM P. GALLIK and
CHRISTINE E. MARTIN-GALLIK,

          Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

THE COUNTY OF LAKE; SUZI SCHMIDT
Indiv. and as Chairman of the
Lake County Board; JUDI MARTINI,
Indiv. and as Vice Chairman
of the Lake County Board;
LORETTA McCARLEY, BRENT PAXTON,
BONNIE THOMSON CARTER, LARRY
LEAFBLAD, AL WESTERMAN, ROBERT
SABONJIAN, PEGGY SHORTS, DIANA
O'KELLY, SANDY COLE, ANGELO
D. KYLE, JOHN SCHULIEN, AUDREY
NIXON, CAROL CALABRESA, MARY
BEATTIE, STEVENSON MOUNTSIER,
PAMELA O. NEWTON, MICHAEL
TALBETT, DAVID B. STOLMAN,
MARTHA MARKS, CAROL SPIELMAN, 
ROBERT BUHAI, Each Indiv. and 
as a Lake County Board Member;
and PHILIP ROVANG, Director, 
Lake County Planning,
Building, and Development, 

          Defendants-Appellees

(The Township of Cuba; David F.
Nelson, Cuba Township Supervisor;
the Cuba Township Road District,
Kermit Smiddy, Indiv. and as Cuba
Township Highway Commissioner;
and Thomas W. Gooch III, Indiv.
and as Acting Cuba Township Highway 
Commissioner, Defendants).

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) 		Appeal from the Circuit
Court of Lake County.



No. 01--MR--661






























Honorable
Stephen E. Walter,
Judge, Presiding.

JUSTICE O'MALLEY delivered the opinion of the court:

Plaintiffs, William P. Gallik and Christine E. Martin-Gallik,own real estate in an unincorporated portion of Lake County. Plaintiffs wished to construct a single-family residence on theirland. Owing to the fact that their land is partially located in afloodplain, in order to construct their home, plaintiffs wererequired to obtain a conditional use permit from defendant LakeCounty (County) so that they could fill in the floodplain. None ofthe agencies charged with overseeing such matters (Army Corps ofEngineers, Lake County Stormwater Management Agency, Lake CountyHealth Department, Lake County Planning and Development Department)voiced any objections to plaintiffs' plan to fill in the floodplainportion of their property and construct their residence.

As part of the approval process, plaintiffs were required tosubmit their application for a conditional use permit to the LakeCounty zoning board of appeals. After a hearing on plaintiffs'application, the zoning board of appeals recommended that it bedenied. Plaintiffs' application made its way to the Lake Countyboard for final action, and the board denied it.

On July 16, 2001, plaintiffs filed an eight-count complaintagainst the County, challenging the Lake County board's denial oftheir conditional use permit. Count I of the complaint soughtadministrative review (see 735 ILCS 5/3--101 et seq. (West 2000))of the Lake County board's denial of plaintiffs' application for aconditional use permit. The County filed a motion to dismiss and,after briefing, the trial court granted the County's motion anddismissed count I of the complaint. Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule308 (155 Ill. 2d R. 308), the trial court certified a question forappellate review and plaintiffs requested leave to appeal thecertified question. This court denied plaintiffs' application forleave to appeal. On April 3, 2002, our supreme court entered asupervisory order directing this court to consider plaintiffs'certified question.

The certified question we are called upon to answer is:

"Whether the Illinois Administrative Review Act, 735 ILCS