Find Legal Information

Docket No. 96755-Agenda 13-May 2004.

JAMES H. CANEL, Appellee, v. JUDY BAAR TOPINKA et al., Appellants.

Opinion filed October 7, 2004.
 

JUSTICE FREEMAN delivered the opinion of the court:

In this appeal, defendants argue that, pursuant to section 15 ofthe Uniform Disposition of Unclaimed Property Act (765 ILCS1025/15 (West 1998)), the state is entitled to retain dividends issuedon shares of stock which were presumed abandoned and delivered tothe state. Plaintiff argues the dividends are private property whichmust be returned to the property owner along with the shares ofstock. The appellate court determined that the dividends were theprivate property of plaintiff, and remanded to the circuit court ofCook County for a determination of just compensation. 342 Ill. App.3d 65. This appeal followed. 134 Ill. 2d R. 317.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff, James H. Canel, was the owner of 288 shares of stockof Patrick Industries, Inc. Harris Bank was the holder of the stock, asdefined in the Uniform Disposition of Unclaimed Property Act (Act)(765 ILCS 1025/1 et seq. (West 1998), now 765 ILCS 1025/0.05 etseq. (West 2002)). In December 1998, Harris Bank delivered thestock to defendant Mitchell Murdock, the Director of FinancialInstitutions, as property presumed abandoned under the Act. See 765ILCS 1025/11 (West 1998).⁽¹⁾ Defendant Murdock is presently thedirector of the Unclaimed Property Division of the office of theTreasurer of the State of Illinois.

Plaintiff learned of the remittance of the stock to the Departmentof Financial Institutions in January 1999. Thereafter, on April 9, 1999,plaintiff submitted a claim to defendant Murdock for the return of thestock along with any dividends or other accruals that had been issuedduring the time the Department of Financial Institutions held thestock. On August 31, 1999, plaintiff completed a form prescribed bythe State Treasurer, defendant Judy Baar Topinka, for the return ofhis property. The Treasurer returned the stock, but refused to returnthe dividends issued on the stock.⁽²⁾

On September 11, 2000, plaintiff filed a class action on behalf ofhimself and others similarly situated. In the complaint, plaintiffdescribed defendant Topinka as being charged with supervising andadministering the Unclaimed Property Division of the office of theIllinois Treasurer. Plaintiff alleged that defendant Murdock is chargedwith administering the Unclaimed Property Division, includingdisposition of all property that is remitted to the Division and paymentof all approved claims for return of such property. All counts of thecomplaint pertained to both defendants.

Plaintiff alleged that numerous persons and entities own privateproperty deemed abandoned and held by the Treasurer as custodian.Plaintiff further alleged that it is defendants' policy and practice not toreturn dividends, interest and accruals earned on the property to theproperty owners upon application. Instead, defendants retain thedividends, interest and accruals earned on the property for use by thestate. In count I of the complaint, plaintiff maintained that by retainingthe dividends, interest and other accruals earned on the property andusing them for state purposes, defendants violate article I, section 15,of the Constitution of 1970 (Ill. Const. 1970, art. I,