A state appeals court in Springfield has ended a lawsuit that could have proven to be politically embarrassing to Gov. JB Pritzker, saying Pritzker’s political ally Attorney General Kwame Raoul has "virtually unfettered" ability to shut down any action that someone seeks to bring on behalf of the state, even if the decision may appear to have political implications.
On July 28, a three-justice panel of the Illinois Fourth District Appellate Court upheld a lower court's decision to dismiss the lawsuit brought by Emily Fox, director of the Illinois State Police's Merit Board.
The lawsuit was filed as a so-called qui tam action, which is filed by an individual in an attempt to recover money on behalf of the state government from someone who is accused of defrauding the state.
Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul
The lawsuit was brought against former ISP Merit Board employee Jenny Thornley.
In the lawsuit, Fox asserts Thornley defrauded the state out of nearly $500,000 in wages based on falsified timesheets and later in improper workers' compensation, approved under allegedly fraudulent circumstances by high-ranking officials in the Pritzker administration.
However, Raoul moved quickly to intervene in the case and push for the case to be dismissed before it could proceed to discovery and perhaps a trial.
Despite objections from Fox and her attorneys, a Sangamon County judge in Springfield sided with Raoul, finding the Attorney General had the power under the law to end the lawsuit, if he wished.
Fox appealed, but the justices of the Fourth District also sided with Raoul.
"Fox’s complaint and briefing makes clear that her issue is with the governor’s office and not with the State—particularly the attorney general, who represents the State in these proceedings," the justices wrote.
"Fox’s complaint is replete with accusations of corruption, political intrigue, and fraud at the highest levels of Illinois government—chiefly, allegations that Governor Pritzker and his wife tampered with investigations of Thornley, allowing her to enrich herself at the Illinois taxpayers’ expense.
"Indeed, the core of this appeal appears not to be Thornley’s conduct or the law regarding qui tam actions but a grand conspiracy to cover up the 'truth,' as Fox put it in her objection to the State’s motion to dismiss.
"We decline Fox’s invitation to speculate and, instead, decide this case based solely on the evidence in the record and the applicable law."
The appellate proceedings arise as part of a larger group of legal actions and allegations dating back to 2019.
At that time, Fox allegedly first uncovered evidence that Thornley, who then worked as the chief fiscal officer and director of personnel, was allegedly falsifying her timesheets to get paid for overtime she allegedly never worked.
According to court documents in Fox’s case and others, Thornley allegedly forged the signature of former Merit Board Director Jack Garcia and his predecessor to secure the alleged illicit unearned overtime pay.
Fox also allegedly uncovered evidence Thornley allegedly also lied about her college education on her resume, which allowed her to get the job and receive higher pay.
Fox took that information to Garcia, who allegedly investigated further and was about to take the information to police.
However, according to court documents, Thornley then allegedly falsely accused Garcia of sexual assault and appealed to Gov. Pritzker and his wife, M.K. Pritzker, for help. According to court documents, Fox and Garcia both assert Thornley allegedly threatened Garcia, telling him he “did not know who he was messing with,” and warned him “the Governor’s Office would get involved if Garcia did not back off.”
Thornley had worked on Pritzker’s 2018 campaign for governor, and has been identified as a personal friend of M.K. Pritzker.
Thornley’s accusations against Garcia were later determined to be false in later investigations by the Illinois State Police and attorneys hired by the Merit Board from the firm of McGuirewoods. The McGuirewoods inquiry further substantiated the fraud, theft and forgery accusations against Thornley.
Garcia was initially removed from his post, but later restored following the investigations. Thornley was then terminated and Garcia reinstated.
However, Garcia would be permanently removed under a law Pritzker signed forbidding anyone who had previously worked for the ISP from also serving as Merit Board director. Critics called that legislation a targeted political hit job, intended as retribution against Garcia.
Nonetheless, Thornley sued Garcia in federal court over the alleged sexual assault. Garcia countersued, accusing her of defamation.
In early July, a federal judge granted Garcia an abrupt win in those cases, awarding a so-called default judgment to Garcia after Thornley appeared to abandon the case.
However, early in the process, Thornley also filed a worker’s compensation claim, seeking monthly payments for injuries she claimed she suffered, based on the apparently false sexual assault allegations against Garcia.
The allegedly bogus claim was allegedly pushed through by Anne Spillane, Pritzker’s general counsel, according to Fox's filing.
According to Fox’s court filings, Thornley allegedly falsely claimed on her worker’s comp application that she was an employee of the governor’s office. She further listed Pritzker as her direct supervisor, and included his personal cell phone number as his contact information.
Fox estimated Thornley allegedly pocketed another $70,000 in fraudulent worker’s comp pay, allegedly as a result of the alleged intervention from the governor’s office.
In all, Fox estimated Thornley pocketed more than $500,000 from taxpayers, allegedly thanks to the protection of the governor’s office.
Fox said state investigatory agencies to which she presented her evidence against Thornley, including Raoul's office, refused to take up the matter.
She then filed her qui tam action, seeking to force Thornley to repay the alleged fraud.
In response, however, Raoul sought to quickly end the case, and deny Fox the chance to press the matter further in court. He said his office believes the case would be a waste of the state’s “limited prosecutorial resources." Instead, Raoul said he believes it is sufficient to allow local prosecutors to bring criminal charges against Thornley.
Fox fired back in court, saying Raoul should not be allowed to use the state law to help the governor allegedly cover up the alleged fraud and effort to protect his family friend, and spare the governor embarrassment in court.
Raoul, however, said Fox has never provided proof to back the assertion his office has sought to end Fox’s case on behalf of the governor, an assertion he calls mere “speculation.”
Instead, he asserts he is acting under the power granted to his office by law to decide as the sole legal representative of the state which cases to allow to proceed and which ones to end. He said he is only required to demonstrate his decision to end such fraud cases are not based on “bad faith.”
Judges at both the county court level and on appeal agreed.
They further echoed Raoul's assertion that Fox had not presented enough evidence to back her claims of political intrigue and corruption in the case, particularly against Raoul.
"The State’s reasons" for dismissing the case "are neither arbitrary nor unreasonable," the justices wrote.
Therefore, they said, Raoul did not act in "bad faith" and was acting within his power under the law to pull the plug on Fox's lawsuit.
The decision was authored by Justice Robert J. Steigmann. Justices John W. Turner and Thomas M. Harris concurred.
Fox is represented in the case by attorneys Robert M. Andalman and Diana Gurler, of the firm of A&G Law, of Chicago.