{ "id": 3163130, "name": "JOHN J. GORDON et al., Appellants, v. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Appellee", "name_abbreviation": "Gordon v. Department of Transportation", "decision_date": "1983-12-01", "docket_number": "No. 57751", "first_page": "44", "last_page": "48", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "99 Ill. 2d 44" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ill.", "id": 8772, "name": "Illinois Supreme Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 29, "name_long": "Illinois", "name": "Ill." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "15 DePaul L. Rev. 340", "category": "journals:journal", "reporter": "DePaul L. Rev.", "year": 1966, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "342-44" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "72 Ill. 2d 485", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. 2d", "case_ids": [ 5442657 ], "year": 1966, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "489" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-2d/72/0485-01" ] }, { "cite": "96 Ill. 2d 265", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. 2d", "case_ids": [ 3113697 ], "year": 1978, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "268-69" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-2d/96/0265-01" ] }, { "cite": "93 Ill. 2d 397", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. 2d", "case_ids": [ 3102806 ], "pin_cites": [ { "page": "407" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-2d/93/0397-01" ] }, { "cite": "109 Ill. App. 3d 1071", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d", "case_ids": [ 5450638 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-app-3d/109/1071-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 358, "char_count": 5413, "ocr_confidence": 0.757, "pagerank": { "raw": 2.0704656327731998e-07, "percentile": 0.757675447487479 }, "sha256": "22cdef76f3570b0fca2f8b2ab77b514110d83e3276fa603dcd320487ec268f0a", "simhash": "1:fb77eef39067acf2", "word_count": 901 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:32:07.109630+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "JOHN J. GORDON et al., Appellants, v. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Appellee." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "JUSTICE CLARK\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nPlaintiffs, John J. Gordon, John F. Gordon, and Savanna State Bank, filed suit against defendant, the Department of Transportation of the State of Illinois, to obtain a writ of mandamus compelling the defendant to commence condemnation proceedings concerning property allegedly owned by plaintiffs John J. Gordon and John F. Gordon and mortgaged to Savanna State Bank. On May 20, 1980, the defendant filed a motion to strike that was denied by the trial court. The subject matter of the lawsuit was a parcel of land adjacent to John J. Gordon\u2019s restaurant that was needed by the State to construct a public road. The circuit court of Carroll County granted the requested writ of mandamus, and the State appealed. The appellate court reversed the circuit court (109 Ill. App. 3d 1071), and we granted the plaintiffs\u2019 petition for leave to appeal (87 Ill. 2d R. 315(a)).\nJohn J. Gordon purchased a restaurant known as Meeker\u2019s Seafood Inn on July 14, 1956. The property is located south of Savanna, Illinois, near Illinois Route 84, and had been used to operate a restaurant since 1942. Gordon continued to operate the restaurant until March 6, 1972, when the restaurant was sold on contract to Gary Harmsen. Harmsen defaulted, and the Savanna State Bank instituted foreclosure proceedings in 1976. Gordon remained the owner of the property, and the Savanna State Bank had a security interest in the property at the time of the lawsuit to compel eminent domain proceedings.\nA blacktopped parking lot was located immediately adjacent to the restaurant, and the description in the 1956 deed to Gordon did not include the portion of the parking lot claimed by Gordon and the State of Illinois. In 1977, the Department of Transportation of the State of Illinois was constructing a new bridge across the Plum River near Savanna, and the northern approach to this bridge passed through the parking lot next to Gordon\u2019s restaurant. The record title owner of the disputed parking lot was Oskar Skaien, who quitclaimed his interest to the State of Illinois in order to facilitate the building of the new bridge.\nThe Gordons claim ownership of the parking lot by adverse possession. The State claims ownership based on the 1977 conveyance from Skaien or by common law dedication. The trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, reasoning that John J. Gordon and his predecessors had adversely possessed the disputed property since 1942, and issued a writ of mandamus compelling the State to commence condemnation proceedings.\nWe agree with the appellate court\u2019s reversal of the circuit court, since the circuit court was without jurisdiction in this case. The action should have been brought in the Court of Claims, because the State of Illinois was the real party in interest in the lawsuit. Sections 8(a) and (b) of the Court of Claims Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 37, pars. 439.8(a), (b)) provide, in pertinent part:\n\u201cThe court shall have exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine the following matters:\n(a) All claims against the state founded upon any law of the State of Illinois, or upon any regulation thereunder * * *\n(b) All claims against the state founded upon any contract entered into with the State of Illinois.\u201d\nSection 4 of article XIII of the Illinois Constitution of 1970 provides:\n\u201cExcept as the General Assembly may provide by law, sovereign immunity in this State is abolished.\u201d\nSection 1 of \u201cAn Act in relation to immunity for the State of Illinois\u201d (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 127, par. 801) provides:\n\u201cExcept as provided in \u2018An Act to create the Court of Claims, to prescribe its powers and duties, and to repeal An Act herein named\u2019, filed July 17, 1945, as amended, the State of Illinois shall not be made a defendant or party in any court.\u201d\nIn the case at bar, the State of Hlinois has title to the disputed property. Since the State acquired the property by quitclaim deed, it is clear that the Court of Claims, and not the circuit court, had jurisdiction. It is the legislature\u2019s task to codify public policy; we refrain from undertaking such impermissible judicial legislation. (S. J. Groves & Sons Co. v. State (1982), 93 Ill. 2d 397, 407.) We need not reach the question of whether a different result would obtain if the State were not the actual owner of the property. (See also Granite City Moose Lodge No. 272 v. Kramer (1983), 96 Ill. 2d 265, 268-69; Sass v. Kramer (1978), 72 Ill. 2d 485, 489; Comment, State Immunity in Illinois: The Court of Claims, 15 DePaul L. Rev. 340, 342-44 (1966).\nSince the issue of jurisdiction is dispositive, we need not reach the question of whether plaintiff acquired title to the disputed property by adverse possession. Here, the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to consider plaintiff\u2019s complaint for a writ of mandamus to compel eminent domain proceedings.\nWe therefore conclude that the appellate court properly reversed the order of the circuit court that issued the writ of mandamus.\nJudgment affirmed.", "type": "majority", "author": "JUSTICE CLARK" } ], "attorneys": [ "William A. Kelly, of Nack, Richardson & Kelly, of Galena, for appellant.", "Neil F. Hartigan, Attorney General, of Springfield (Roy E. Frazier, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, and Karl Yost, Special Assistant Attorney General, of Chicago, of counsel), for appellee." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "(No. 57751.\nJOHN J. GORDON et al., Appellants, v. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Appellee.\nOpinion filed December 1, 1983.\nWilliam A. Kelly, of Nack, Richardson & Kelly, of Galena, for appellant.\nNeil F. Hartigan, Attorney General, of Springfield (Roy E. Frazier, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, and Karl Yost, Special Assistant Attorney General, of Chicago, of counsel), for appellee." }, "file_name": "0044-01", "first_page_order": 56, "last_page_order": 60 }