My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
80-46 AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 59.1 REAL ESTATE BROKERS
COD
>
City Clerk
>
ORDINANCES
>
1980
>
80-46 AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 59.1 REAL ESTATE BROKERS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/21/2016 9:45:31 AM
Creation date
9/21/2016 9:45:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Resolution/Ordinance
Res Ord Num
80-46
Res Ord Title
AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 59.1 REAL ESTATE BROKERS
Approved Date
5/5/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
. _ <br /> TO: Illinois Municipal League DATE: January 9, 1980 <br /> FROM: Kathleen Field Orr, RE: Arquilla-DeHaan <br /> Park Forest Viliage Attorney Realtors v. Village <br /> and Donald J. Liebentritt, o Park Forest, <br /> Attorney . 79 L 25203 <br /> In an action filed November 9 , 1979 , Arquilla-DeHaan <br /> Realtors sought to have declared invalid Chapter 24-1/2 of the <br /> Park Forest Code of Ordinances . Chapter 24-1/2 is the Real Estate <br /> and Housing Practices ordinance of the Village which prohibits <br /> racial and other types of discrimination in real estate transactions . <br /> Arquilla is a real estate broker licensed by the State , <br /> and was a respondent in two complaints before the Park Forest Fair <br /> Housing Review Board. Those conlplaints alleged facts constituting <br /> a violation of Chapter 24-1/2 in that Arquilla discriminated in <br /> regard to real estate on the basis of race and color . <br /> Also a respondent in the Fair Housing Review Board com- <br /> pZaints was Al Odegard, an employee of Arquilla and a licensed <br /> broker . Odegard was granted leave to intervene as an additional <br /> plaintiff, and filed a pleading substantially similar to Arquilla ' s <br /> Complaint. <br /> The Plaintiffs challenged the validity of Chapter 24-1/2 <br /> on the grounds that it had been invalidated in toto by the Illinois <br /> Supreme Court' s decision in Andruss. v. City of Evanston, 68 I11. 2d <br /> 216, 369 N.E. 2d 1258, 12 Ill. Dec. 244 (1977) . Although the Andruss <br /> decision is popularly believed to be a case which simply held that " <br /> a municipality does not have the power to license real estate <br /> brokers, Arquilla argued that the Andruss court found that a muni- <br /> cipality had no power to regulate real estate brokers and salesmen <br /> in any manner whatsoever . Because Park Forest 's fair housing <br /> ordinance did "regulate" brokers and salesmen if enforced against <br /> them, Arquilla reasoned that even its non-licensing provisions <br /> were therefore invalid. Arquilla specifically relied upon a <br /> statement in the Andruss decision that " (t) he ordinances in question <br /> are void" , and the fact that Chapter 24-1/2 had been attached to <br /> the Andruss Complaint in its entirety . Also , the Supreme Court <br /> express�y affirmed the decision of trial court, which had held that <br /> "all local ordinances of Illinois Municipalities which purport to <br /> license and regulate real estate brokers are illegal, unenforceable <br /> and void . " <br /> Park Forest urged the validity and enforceability of the <br /> _, non-licensing provisions on two grounds . First, Justice Dooley, in <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.