By Professor Robert J Romano, JD, LLM, St. John’s University, Senior Writer
In an opinion filed by the Supreme Court for the State of Illinois on March 8, 2024, the Court upheld the Appellate Court’s finding that the defendants in the matter of M.U., a minor child, by and through her parents Kelly U. and Nick U. v. Team Illinois Hockey Club, Inc., et al., were subject to section 5-102(A) of the Illinois Human Rights Act, an Act which disallows discrimination against a person with a disability when it comes to the full use and equal enjoyment of a public place. As part of its ruling, the Court remanded the case back to the circuit court for further proceedings consistent with its findings regarding said section 5-103(A).[1]
By way of background, the named defendant, Team Illinois Hockey Club, Inc., is a not-for-profit corporation that operates youth hockey teams affiliated with both AHAI and USA Hockey, Inc., and offers a variety of activities and public services including clinics, workouts, lunches and dinners, coaching, and opportunities for young athletes to compete in hockey games and tournaments. For all these activities and services, Team Illinois leases and operates the Seven Bridges Ice Arena in Woodridge, Illinois, a facility that includes ice rinks, locker rooms, training facilities, concessions, offices for Team Illinois, and other associated facilities. (Note: Seven Bridges Ice Arena is open to the public). For all times relevant to this matter, Larry Pedrie was the hockey director and primary executive for Team Illinois, as well as the coach for the Team Illinois Girls 14U team.
A second defendant, AHAI, the Illinois affiliate of USA Hockey, is also an Illinois not-for-profit corporation that regulates and controls youth hockey leagues, teams, and activities throughout the state of Illinois, including Team Illinois. For all times relevant to this matter, Mike Mullaly was on the board of directors for AHAI, while also being the central district director for USA Hockey.
In 2019, the plaintiff, M.U., registered to play hockey for the Team Illinois Girls 14U team. After registering, M.U. and her mother informed the team’s coach, Larry Pedrie, that M.U. was currently being treated for anxiety, depression, and suicidal thoughts, but that M.U. “had the support of mental health professionals and expressed that hockey was an important and supportive aspect of her life.” After this conversation, M.U. participated in a practice session with her team. The following day, Coach Pedrie spoke with Mike Mullaly about M.U.’s mental health and according to the plaintiff’s complaint, Pedrie and Mullaly “agreed to banish M.U. from Team Illinois until she was able to participate 100% in Team Illinois activities.”[2] As a result of this conversation, Pedrie informed M.U.’s parents that as of November 14, 2019 their daughter was banned from all Team Illinois activities and that she was not allowed to return until she was fully recovered. In addition, and astoundingly, Pedrie told M.U.’s parents that their child was “cut off” from team communications and prohibited from contacting any of her Team Illinois teammates. Pedrie then, and yes there is more, sent an e-mail to the other players’ families instructing them not to have contact with M.U. in person or by phone, text, or social media.[3] In the e-mail it stated that M.U. had been removed “from any involvement and or communication with our team and her teammates” until she was back to “the positive, happy, smiling kid that we all know she is.”[4]
As a result of Pedrie’s and Mullaly’s actions, M.U.’s parents filed a civil complaint in the state of Illinois Circuit Court for unlawful disability discrimination claiming that the defendants violated the Illinois Human Rights Act, 775 ILCS 5/1-101 et seq., by banning their daughter from participating in Team Illinoispractices, workouts, and games that were being held at theSeven Bridges Ice Arena because of her disability.
As expected, the defendants moved to dismiss the complaint, contending that M.U. failed to state a claim because she was not denied access to a “place of public accommodation.” Interestingly, the Circuit Court agreed and dismissed M.U.’s complaint with prejudice. The Appellate Court, however, reversed, and remanded. Subsequently, the Supreme Court granted the defendants’ petition for leave to appeal to consider this case of first impression regarding the language of the Human Rights Act.
In analyzing the Illinois Human Rights Act, the Supreme Court began with the rules surrounding statutory construction, explaining that its primary goal is to “ascertain and effectuate the intent of the legislature.”[5] Here, the Court determined that the legislature’s objectives were explicit, wherein the goal of the Act was to secure “freedom from discrimination” for individuals with physical or mental disabilities and that this freedom included “the availability of public accommodations.”[6] The Court went on to conclude that the plain language in section 5-102(A) was clear and unambiguous and that Seven Bridges Ice Arena was a “place of public accommodation”. The Court then found that since M.U.’s alleged that it was because of her disability that Team Illinois “segregated, isolated, and excluded” her from participating in programs, events, and activities at Seven Bridges Ice Arena and, such exclusion denied her the fullness and enjoyment of a place of public accommodation, that her complaint was sufficient to subject the defendants to section 5-102(A) of the Illinois Human Rights Act.
The Court noted that the defendants challenged its findings by arguing that M.U. was not barred from the entire facility, only those portions of Seven Bridges Ice Arena used by Team Illinoisand that she could still enter the facility to watch games, take skating lessons, eat at the restaurant, or skate during free skate. The Court, however, was unpersuaded by this very weak and spineless argument, and correctly pointed out that the Illinois Human Rights Act does not differentiate between “portions” of a place of public accommodation that are subject to the Act and “portions” that are not.[7]
[1] 2024 IL 128935 M.U. a Minor, By and Through Her Parents Kelly U. and Nick U. Appellee, v. Team Illinois Hockey Club, Inc. et al., Appellants.
[2] Id. at p. 3.
[3] Id. at p. 3.
[4] Id. at p. 3.
[5] Id. at p. 8.
[6] Id.
[7] Id. at p. 16.
