Find Court Cases > Go Back to List > Cooper v. Illinois State University

Cooper v. Illinois State University

Case Date: 06/11/2002
Court: 4th District Appellate
Docket No: 4-01-0644 Rel

NO. 4-01-0644

IN THE APPELLATE COURT

OF ILLINOIS

FOURTH DISTRICT

 

MARK ALAN COOPER, ) Appeal from 
              Plaintiff-Appellant, ) Circuit Court of
              v. ) McLean County

ILLINOIS STATE UNIVERSITY, a BodyPolitic; VICTOR JOHN  

 ) No. 99L194
BOSCHINI, JR.;JANET BREMNER; MARGARET HAEFNER; )
JOSEPH EBBESEN; CARL KASTEN; NANCYMASTERSON; )
PATRICIA McKENZIE; JAMESMYLES; BARBARA SCHEIBLING; )
NIRANGANSHAH; MYRON SIEGEL; WILLIAM SULASKI; )
GRETCHEN WINTER; WILLIE FOWLER; MILES McGREW; AMY )
MERSINGER; JAIME FLORES;NANCY FROELICH; DIANE )

Honorable
GLENN; JACKHUGGINS; and STAN OMMEN, ) G. Michael Prall,
           Defendants-Appellees ) Judge Presiding.

JUSTICE STEIGMANN delivered the opinion of the court:

In December 2000, plaintiff, Mark Alan Cooper, filed asecond-amended employment-discrimination complaint against hisformer employer, defendant Illinois State University (ISU). Healso named as defendants Victor John Boschini, Jr., the presidentof ISU; Janet Bremner, director of ISU's human resources department; Margaret Haefner, head of ISU's communications department;and the following members of ISU's board of trustees: JosephEbbesen, Carl Kasten, Nancy Masterson, Patricia McKenzie, JamesMyles, Barbara Scheibling, Nirangan Shah, Myron Siegel, WilliamSulaski, Gretchen Winter, Willie Fowler, Miles McGrew, AmyMersinger, Jaime Flores, Nancy Froelich, Diane Glenn, JackHuggins, and Stan Ommen. However, summonses were issued only todefendants ISU, Boschini, and Bremner (hereinafter defendants);thus, only those defendants appeared in the case.

In February 2001, defendants filed a motion to dismissCooper's second-amended complaint, pursuant to section 2-619(a)(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-619(a)(2) (West 2000)). Following a June 2001 hearing, the trialcourt granted defendants' motion upon finding that sovereignimmunity barred Cooper's complaint.

Cooper appeals, arguing that his cause of action is notbarred by sovereign immunity. We affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

Cooper's second-amended complaint alleged that defendants had violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of1967 (ADEA) (29 U.S.C.