Todd a. Rawls v. State of Illinois

OPINION

SPRAGUE, J.

Claimant, Todd Rawls, is an independent owner-operator of a semi-trailer truck from which he earns his income hauling various loads from point to point throughout the United States pursuant to terms of a lease with a trucking company, which at the time of the incident in question was Heniff Transportation Systems in Joliet, Illinois. Claimant filed this action alleging that his commercial driver’s license was improperly suspended by the Office of the Secretary of State. In its Pre-Trial Summary Position, Respondent agreed that the license suspension was improper, but disputed that Claimant is entitled to damages totaling $15,440.98 as claimed in Claimant's Complaint.

The following facts were drawn from admissions of facts in Respondent's Pre-Trial Summary Position as well as the testimony and other submissions at a trial of this matter on December 4, 2019.

Respondent in its Pre-Trial Summary Position admitted liability generally and the following specific facts as alleged in Claimant's Complaint.

1. On November 7, 2013, the Office of the Secretary of State erroneously placed a safety responsibility suspension on Claimant's driver’s license without prior notice or an opportunity to be heard, in violation of Claimant's due process rights. Guerrero v. Ryan, 272 Ill. App. 3d 945, 948 (1st Dist. 1995).

2. On November 9, 2013, (a Saturday), Claimant was issued a traffic citation in Streetsboro, Ohio, for operating a vehicle with an expired driver’s license.

3. The Ohio traffic citation commanded Claimant to appear in person at municipal court located in Ravenna, Ohio on November 12, 2013.

4. On November 25, 2013, the Office of the Secretary of State notified Claimant that his license had been erroneously suspended effective November 7, 2013 and that he was now (November 25, 2013) in compliance with all applicable laws regarding his license.

5. On November 26, 2013, the Ohio traffic court case against Claimant was dismissed on motion of the prosecution.

[*109] Claimant was one mile from his delivery address on November 9, 2013, when he was stopped for a routine commercial vehicle inspection in Streetsboro, Ohio. To his shock, the Streetsboro officer informed him that his driver’s license had been suspended by the State of Illinois on November 7, 2013. The letter from the Illinois Secretary of State advising Claimant of the November 7 suspension was dated November 12 and Claimant did not receive it until November 14, 2013. Claimant was immediately issued a citation and his truck and its load were impounded on November 9, 2013; as Monday, November 11, was a court holiday, Claimant was assigned a court appearance in Streetsboro on the following Tuesday, November 12.

With his only available transportation and his belongings impounded, Claimant had to pay for three nights’ hotel stay (Claimant's Exhibit 9) and purchase meals, clothing and other personal items (Claimant's Exhibits 2). He also had to pay a traffic fine and court costs based upon his citation (Claimant's Exhibit 5); purchase a bus ticket home (Claimant's Exhibit 2); pay towing and storage charges for his truck and trailer (Claimant's Exhibit 3); pay taxi fares to and from his hotel and to the Streetsboro bus station (Claimant's Exhibit 4); pay to fax a copy of the Illinois Secretary of State’s November 25, 2013, letter to the Streetsboro municipal court (Claimant's Exhibit 6) and rent a car to return to Streetsboro to reclaim his truck after the traffic citation and impoundment order were dismissed following receipt of the Illinois Secretary of State’s November 25, 2013 letter (Claimant's Exhibit 7).

After reclaiming his truck and its load on November 26, 2013, Claimant belatedly completed his delivery; however, after returning to the Heniff terminal his lease was terminated on December 2, 2013 as a result of the late delivery (Claimant's Exhibit 11). Claimant was thereafter unemployed until he was able to resume working under a new lease agreement with Girton Propane Service, Clay Center, Kansas on January 22, 2014 (Claimant's Exhibit 13).

Damages resulting from procedural due process violations cannot be presumed and actual injury as well as its causal connection to the violation must be proven. Super-Dawg Drive-In, Inc. v. City of Chicago, 162 Ill. App. 3d 860, 865 (1st Dist. 1987). During trial, counsel for Respondent admitted that certain of the amounts claimed were reasonably incurred by Claimant and proximately caused by the erroneous license suspension (Record p. 76). Those items included the towing and storage charges of $1,085.00 (Claimant's Exhibit 3); the taxi fares totaling $90.00 (Claimant's Exhibit 4); the fine and court costs paid for the traffic offense of $122.00 (Claimant's Exhibit 5); the $2.39 cost of the fax to send the Secretary of State’s exculpatory November 25 letter to the Streetsboro municipal court (Claimant's Exhibit 6); the cost of the rental car for Claimant's return to Streetsboro to recover his truck of $229.62 (Claimant's Exhibit 7); and the hotel charges of $267.81 (Claimant's Exhibit 9) (Record pp. 50- 51).

Based upon the evidence adduced at trial, the Court finds that $444.39 of the charges for meals, fuel and incidentals indicated in Claimant's Exhibit 2 are reasonable and were proximately caused by the erroneous license suspension. The Court finds that $797.49 of the noted charges in Claimant's Exhibit 2 are duplicative of charges contained in Claimant's Exhibits 7, 8 and 9 and are excluded from consideration under Exhibit 2.

[*110] The Court further finds that $163.19 of the $172.89 charges for food and supplies indicated on the November 10, 2013, Walmart receipt (Claimant's Exhibit 8) are reasonable and proximately caused by the erroneous license suspension, the exclusion being the $9.90 charge for Coors Light beer plus $0.70 sales tax. The Court denies reimbursement for the charges of $91.29 contained in the November 5, 2013 Walmart receipt on Exhibit 8 based upon Claimant's testimony that they were mistakenly included.

Finally, the Court finds that the termination of Claimant's lease with Heniff was proximately caused by the delay in his Streetsboro delivery, as documented by the comment by Heniff management at the top of Claimant's Employee Separation Checklist from Heniff, “Chose to terminate the lease due to an issue with driver’s license. Driver was unable to deliver on time, causing a huge issue with Heniff’s customer relationship.” (Claimant's Exhibit 11). The late delivery in turn was proximately caused by the impoundment of Claimant's truck on November 9, 2013 as a direct result of the erroneous license suspension of his license. Claimant was unemployed for 51 days, from December 2, 2013 until his first assignment under his new Girton lease on January 22, 2014. During the term of Claimant's operation under his Heniff lease, he worked an average of six days out of every seven due to required Department of Transportation breaks, which would equate to 44 work days out of the 51 days Claimant was unemployed. As this Court recognized in Guffey v. State, 40 Ct. Cl. 179 (1987), averaging of daily income is appropriate to determine lost income when a claimant is paid on a basis that varies over time, such as by weight or by the load. Claimant's lease with Heniff lasted 18 weeks, during which he earned $31,579.16 and worked an average of 6 days per week or 108 days over the 18-week period. As set forth in Claimant's Exhibit 1, Claimant's average daily income for the 108 days worked for Heniff was $292.40 ($31,579.16/108 days). Multiplying this daily average by the 44 days Claimant would have worked had his lease not been terminated by Heniff yields $12,865.60 as a total calculated lost income.

Adding the amounts set forth above for towing ($1,085.00), taxi fares (90.00), traffic offense fine and costs ($122.00), fax cost ($2.39), rental car ($229.62), hotel charges ($287.81), meals, fuel and expenses from Claimant's Exhibit 2 ($444.39), charges for food and supplies from Exhibit 8 ($163.19), and lost income ($12,865.60), produces a total of reasonably incurred expenses proximately caused by the erroneous license suspension of $15,270.00.

Claimant also sought interest and reimbursement for expenses of $33.99 for copies of documents required to be filed in this case (Claimant's Exhibit 10); however, the Court does not have jurisdiction to award either interest or litigation costs absent a specific statute allowing the Court to do so, the situation in this case. Parker v. State, 52 Ill. Ct. Cl. 378 (2000).

Finally, Claimant requested punitive damages; however, this Court held in Brown v. Southern Illinois University, 47 Ill. Ct. Cl. 335, 338-340 (1994) that in order for the Court of Claims to award punitive damages, a statute must authorize the Court of Claims to do so. As the Court of Claims Act, 705 ILCS 505/1 et seq does not specifically authorize the Court of Claims to award punitive damages and Claimant has cited no other statutory authority for a punitive damage award, the Court cannot award punitive damages in this matter. Brown, supra; Garimella v. The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, 50 Ill. Ct. Cl. 350, 355 (1996).

[*111] Therefore, and for the reasons above stated. IT IS ORDERED that Claimant be awarded $15,270.00 as the final disposition of this matter.