Illinois Supreme Court to Hear Chicago Red Light Camera Suit
October 1, 2013
The Illinois Supreme Court has agreed to hear the Firm’s class action case challenging the validity of red light cameras in Chicago. The case, filed by Simmons Hanly Conroy shareholder Derek Brandt on behalf of seven motorists in 2010, had previously been dismissed by the lower courts.
The red light camera case was one of 14 civil and nine criminal cases the Supreme Court has agreed to hear in the coming months. It rejected 441 other cases.
Excerpts from local news coverage of the Chicago red light camera case is linked below.
- Right Light Camera Case Goes to Illinois Supreme Court – theNewspaper.com
Simmons Hanly Conroy filed its petition to be heard by the Supreme Court in May. The lawsuit, Keating vs. City of Chicago, claimed the city lacked the authority to establish its red light camera program when it was first created in 2003 because the General Assembly had not yet passed a law allowing that type of automated traffic enforcement in Illinois.
- Red light camera suit not dead yet – Chicago Daily Law Bulletin
Mired in controversy since its inception more than a decade ago, the (Chicago’s red light) camera law is being challenged — by a group of seven motorists caught by red light cameras — on the grounds that it violates state laws preventing cities from enacting their own regulations of moving vehicles.
- Illinois Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Chicago Red Light Camera Case – DNAinfo Chicago
John Bowman, spokesman for the National Motorists Association, a group that opposed automated traffic enforcement, told DNAinfo Chicago that the organization is pleased Illinois’ high court has decided to take the case.
“It seems like the appellate court that rejected the original class action suit had to engage in some pretty twisted logic to come to its ruling, such as its observation that the cameras don’t actually record moving violations since they only capture still images,” Bowman said. “We hope the Illinois Supreme Court engages in some common-sense collective thinking when considering the facts of the case.”