Boucher v. 111 East Chestnut Condominium Association, Inc.
Chicago, Cook · IL · Illinois Appellate Court, First District
MIXED · hearings
What happened
After a fine hearing, Boucher was fined $500 by 111 East Chestnut Condominium Association, paid, and sued the association and directors for Condominium Property Act and fiduciary violations tied to hearing notice, withheld evidence/recording, and speech about management. The Cook County circuit court dismissed or granted summary judgment for defendants. The Illinois Appellate Court, First District, largely reversed and remanded, holding § 18.4(l) requires notice covering charges actually considered and an opportunity to be heard; evidence could support findings of uncharged misconduct reliance, fiduciary breaches regarding hearing evidence/recording, and speech penalties in tension with § 18.4(h). Summary judgment was affirmed only for three directors who did not participate in withholding the hearing recording.
What the court (or agency) held
Section 18.4(l) requires notice and an opportunity to be heard before fines; notice must cover the charges the board actually considers. Evidence could support findings that the board relied on uncharged misconduct, withheld hearing evidence and recording in ways that breached fiduciary candor duties, and penalized speech about management in tension with section 18.4(h). The court reversed and remanded for further proceedings, affirming summary judgment only for three directors who did not participate in withholding the hearing recording. MIXED/remand—not a final money judgment for Boucher.
Why this matters for members
This result is MIXED — a partial win, not a clean sweep on every claim. Illinois condo fine hearings require meaningful notice of the charges actually at issue and an opportunity to be heard; withholding hearing evidence/recordings and punishing management criticism can support Act and fiduciary claims.
What the member did
Requested a hearing, sought the underlying evidence and hearing recording, paid under protest, and sued on notice/hearing, records, speech, and fiduciary theories.
What did not work
Not a final money judgment for Boucher on remand; three non-participating directors kept summary judgment.
Questions for the board
- Does our fine notice list every charge the board may consider at the hearing?
- Do we provide the owner the evidence and any hearing recording relied upon?
- Are fines ever used in response to owner speech about management?
Questions for a lawyer
- Did notice and hearing comply with § 18.4(l) for the charges actually decided?
- What fiduciary theories apply to withheld hearing evidence or recordings?
- How do § 18.4(h) speech protections interact with the fine rationale?
Citation
Boucher v. 111 East Chestnut Condominium Association, Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 162233; 117 N.E.3d 1123 (2018-06-14). Illinois Appellate Court, First District. Outcome chip: MIXED. Flags: MIXED, remand. Source: https://www.illinoiscourts.gov/Resources/565423c2-a15f-4cb7-9b3d-1691738a1b48/1162233.pdf
_General information, not legal advice. Outcomes turn on facts and current law._
General information, not legal advice. Outcomes turn on facts and current law.