{
  "id": 3639842,
  "name": "MELISSA HUTER, by her Mother and Next Friend, Barbara Huter, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CECIL L. EKMAN, Defendant-Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "Huter v. Ekman",
  "decision_date": "1985-10-23",
  "docket_number": "No. 84-0917",
  "first_page": "733",
  "last_page": "735",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "137 Ill. App. 3d 733"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "106 Ill. App. 3d 572",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3031173
      ],
      "year": 1980,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "574"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/106/0572-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "104 Ill. 2d 128",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        3147259
      ],
      "year": 1982,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/104/0128-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "118 Ill. App. 3d 319",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        5660371
      ],
      "year": 1984,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "323"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/118/0319-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "132 Ill. App. 3d 993",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3443710
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "1014"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/132/0993-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "467 So. 2d 305",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "So. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        7607099
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/so2d/467/0305-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "449 So. 2d 359",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "So. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        7616134
      ],
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/so2d/449/0359-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "335 N.W.2d 148",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.W.2d",
      "case_ids": [
        10669382
      ],
      "year": 1984,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nw2d/335/0148-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "311 N.W.2d 259",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.W.2d",
      "case_ids": [
        10679162
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nw2d/311/0259-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "604 F. Supp. 1078",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "F. Supp.",
      "case_ids": [
        5717251
      ],
      "year": 1981,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/f-supp/604/1078-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "145 Vt. 533",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Vt.",
      "case_ids": [
        4746024
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/vt/145/0533-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "691 P.2d 190",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "P.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "103 Wash. 2d 131",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Wash. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        1134161
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/wash-2d/103/0131-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "117 Wis. 2d 508",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Wis. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        8674962
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/wis-2d/117/0508-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "303 N.W.2d 424",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.W.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "411 Mich. 1",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Mich.",
      "case_ids": [
        1945902
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/mich/411/0001-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "413 N.E.2d 690",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "381 Mass. 507",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Mass.",
      "case_ids": [
        816156
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/mass/381/0507-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "11 A.L.R.4th 549",
      "category": "reporters:specialty",
      "reporter": "A.L.R. 4th",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1982,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "128 Ill. App. 3d 859",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3524504
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "868"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/128/0859-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "582 F. Supp. 938",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "F. Supp.",
      "case_ids": [
        3652868
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/f-supp/582/0938-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "105 Ill. App. 3d 350",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        5468480
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/105/0350-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "107 Ill. App. 3d 337",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3018722
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 1982,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "339"
        },
        {
          "page": "341"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/107/0337-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "119 Ill. App. 3d 983",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3630064
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1982,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "987"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/119/0985-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "91 Ill. App. 3d 568",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3150143
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "570"
        },
        {
          "page": "572"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/91/0568-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 421,
    "char_count": 6260,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.756,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.2496163602853657e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6097654728132799
    },
    "sha256": "666ac2f50eac75fc2af342ae96fbd2f91c4c7e2b8b6ba926382828fa689d3152",
    "simhash": "1:2f3a07aaad997cf9",
    "word_count": 1043
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:48:08.242422+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "MELISSA HUTER, by her Mother and Next Friend, Barbara Huter, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CECIL L. EKMAN, Defendant-Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE LINDBERG\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nPlaintiff, Melissa Huter, by her mother and next friend, Barbara Huter, appeals from the judgment of the circuit court of Kane County which granted, with prejudice, the motion to dismiss of defendant, Cecil L. Ekman, pursuant to section 2 \u2014 615 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 110, par. 2 \u2014 615), on the ground that, under Illinois common law, there is no cause of action for loss of parental consortium. Plaintiff also appeals the trial court\u2019s order which denied her motion to stay proceedings pending appeal. This case had been consolidated with plaintiff\u2019s father\u2019s action for his personal injuries. Plaintiff, a minor child, complained that she suffered the loss of consortium of her father, including the deprivation of parental guidance, moral instruction, education, companionship, support, maintenance, and other services, due to the permanent, but not fatal, injuries he received as a result of defendant\u2019s alleged negligent conduct.\nPlaintiff raises three issues on appeal that: (1) plaintiff was denied equal protection of the law by the trial court\u2019s refusal to recognize a cause of action for loss of parental consortium; (2) plaintiff was denied due process of law by the trial court\u2019s refusal to recognize a cause of action for loss of parental consortium; and (3) the Illinois courts should recognize a cause of action for loss of parental consortium when a parent is permanently injured by a third person\u2019s negligent conduct. We affirm the judgment of the circuit court.\nThis appeal presents the issue of whether Illinois should recognize a cause of action by a minor child for the loss of parental consortium, including, among other things, guidance, moral instruction, companionship, and support, against a third party who negligently injured that parent. This issue was addressed and resolved against plaintiff in Koskela v. Martin (1980), 91 Ill. App. 3d 568. In following cases, the appellate court continued to refuse to recognize such a cause of action (Block v. Pielet Brothers Scrap & Metal, Inc. (1983) , 119 Ill. App. 3d 983; Mueller v. Hellrung Construction Co. (1982), 107 Ill. App. 3d 337; McNeil v. Diffenbaugh (1982), 105 Ill. App. 3d 350; see also Estate of Davis v. Hazen (C.D. Ill. 1983), 582 F. Supp. 938), although a cause of action now exists for parental loss of a minor child\u2019s society and companionship (Dymek v. Nyquist (1984) , 128 Ill. App. 3d 859, 868). The basis for this refusal is the\nbelief that this cause of action, like wrongful death (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 70, par. 1 et seq.) actions, should be provided, if at all by the legislature. (Block v. Pielet Brothers Scrap & Metal, Inc. (1983), 119 Ill. App. 3d 983, 987; Koskela v. Martin (1980), 91 Ill. App. 3d 568, 570.) The courts have reasoned that the legislature is in a better position to weigh the benefits of the proposed cause of action against other societal concerns. (Mueller v. Hellrung Construction Co. (1982), 107 Ill. App. 3d 337, 339. See generally Annot., 11 A.L.R.4th 549 (1982).) The appellate court also has determined that a minor child is not denied equal protection of the law by the failure to recognize a cause of action for loss of parental consortium. Mueller v. Hellrung Construction Co. (1982), 107 Ill. App. 3d 337, 341.\nOf the other jurisdictions which have considered the issue as to whether a minor child may recover for the loss of parental consortium of an injured parent, nearly all have concluded that no such cause of action exists. (See Annot., 11 A.L.R.4th 549 (1982).) It appears that at least five States recognize the cause of action: Massachusetts (Ferriter v. Daniel O\u2019Connell\u2019s Sons, Inc. (1980), 381 Mass. 507, 413 N.E.2d 690), Michigan (Berger v. Weber (1981), 411 Mich. 1, 303 N.W.2d 424), Wisconsin (Theama v. City of Kenosha (1984), 117 Wis. 2d 508, 344 N.W.2d 513), Washington (Ueland v. Reynolds Metals Co. (1984), 103 Wash. 2d 131, 691 P.2d 190), and Vermont (Hay v. Medical Center Hospital (1985), 145 Vt. 533, 496 A.2d 939). Although the Colorado Supreme. Court has not addressed the issue, the Federal district court in Colorado has recognized that such a cause of action exists under Colorado law. (Reighley v. International Playtex, Inc. (D. Colo. 1985), 604 F. Supp. 1078.) Two other States, Iowa and Florida, have retreated from their earlier acknowledgment of the cause of action. Weitl v. Moes (Iowa 1981), 311 N.W.2d 259, overruled by Audubon-Exira Ready Mix, Inc. v. Illinois Central Gulf R.R. Co. (Iowa 1983), 335 N.W.2d 148; Rosen v. Zorzos (Fla. App. 1984), 449 So. 2d 359, rev\u2019d (Fla. 1985), 467 So. 2d 305.\nIn the present case, the plaintiff urges this court to expand Illinois law by recognizing a cause of action by a minor child for loss of the consortium of an injured parent. We agree with the other districts of the appellate court which have considered the issue that this expansion of existing law would be made, if at all, by the legislature.\nArticle I, section 12, of the Illinois Constitution provides that every person shall find a certain remedy in the laws for all injuries and wrongs received (Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, sec. 12); it does not mandate the creation of a new cause of action. This section has been construed as an expression of philosophy which was not meant to have a substantive effect on Illinois law. Schlenz v. Castle (1985), 132 Ill. App. 3d 993, 1014; Ostergren v. Forest Preserve District (1983), 118 Ill. App. 3d 319, 323, rev\u2019d on other grounds (1984), 104 Ill. 2d 128; Favata v. Rosenberg (1982), 106 Ill. App. 3d 572, 574; Koskela v. Martin (1980), 91 Ill. App. 3d 568, 572.\nWe decline to recognize a common law cause of action for loss of parental consortium by a minor child against a third person who negligently injured that parent. The judgment of the circuit court of Kane County is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nHOPF and UNYERZAGT, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE LINDBERG"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Weisz & Weisz, of Woodstock, for appellant.",
      "Stephen A. Rehfeldt, of Wylie, Wheaton & Associates, P.C., of Wheaton, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "MELISSA HUTER, by her Mother and Next Friend, Barbara Huter, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CECIL L. EKMAN, Defendant-Appellee.\nSecond District\nNo. 84 \u2014 0917\nOpinion filed October 23, 1985.\nWeisz & Weisz, of Woodstock, for appellant.\nStephen A. Rehfeldt, of Wylie, Wheaton & Associates, P.C., of Wheaton, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0733-01",
  "first_page_order": 755,
  "last_page_order": 757
}