III. Argument.A. Plaintiff plainly has standing.
’s standing to bring this action is unassailable.
As a resident and citizen of Cook County, Plaintiff has standing to seek mandamus and declaratory relief to remedy the refusal of aCook County public official to carry out his legal duties.
People ex rel. Newdelman v. Swank
,131 Ill. App. 2d 73, 75 (1st Dist. 1970);
People ex rel. Gamber v. Board of Supervisorsof the County of Gallatin
, 294 Ill. 579, 582 (1920);
People ex rel. Faulkner v. Harris
, 203 Ill.272, 277 (1903);
Hill v. Butler
, 107 Ill. App. 3d 721, 725 (4th Dist. 1982). As the Court in
People ex rel. Newdelman
“Even though citizens may not have any legal rights directly
affected by the failure of public officials to carry out their legal duties, nevertheless such personsas members of the public ha
ve the right to insist that public officials carry out their legal duties.”
. Defendant is a Cook County public official who refuses to comply with his legal duties.Plaintiff can sue him to insist that he does so.
Greer v. Illinois Housing Development Authority
, 122 Ill. 2d 462 (1988) didthe Court purport to overturn at least eighty-five years of precedent holding that the residents andcitizens of Illinois have standing to sue state and local public officials in Illinois who refuse tocarry out their legal duties.
People ex rel. Faulkner
The mere fact that
and the other cases cited by Plaintiff were decided before
does not mean that
overturned all of these earlier cases. The Court in
did not explicitly or evenimplicitly overturn them.
simply addressed a different theory of standing.In
, homeowners living near the site of a proposed
housing project for “very low
income” tenants challenged a decision by the
Illinois Housing Development Authority
(“IHDA”)to provide funding for the project and the agency’s approval of a tenant