Grako v. Bill Walsh Chevrolet-Cadillac, Inc.

• Docket Number: Appeal No. 3-22-0324
• Decision Date: 13 October 2023
• Citation: 229 N.E.3d 869
• Parties: Kim GRAKO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BILL WALSH CHEVROLET-CADILLAC, INC., d/b/a Bill Walsh Automotive Group; William K. Walsh; and Kevin Schultz, Defendants (Bill Walsh Chevrolet-Cadillac, Inc. d/b/a Bill Walsh Automotive Group, and William K. Walsh, Defendants-Appellees).
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

229 N.E.3d 869

2023 IL App (3d) 220324

Kim GRAKO, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.BILL WALSH CHEVROLET-CADILLAC, INC., d/b/a Bill Walsh Automotive Group; William K. Walsh; and Kevin Schultz, Defendants

(Bill Walsh Chevrolet-Cadillac, Inc. d/b/a Bill Walsh Automotive Group, and William K. Walsh, Defendants-Appellees).

Appeal No. 3-22-0324

Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District.

Filed October 13, 2023

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, La Salle County, Illinois, CircuitNo. 19-L-74, Honorable Troy D. Holland, Judge, Presiding.

Christopher Jahnke, of Frankfort Law Group, of Frankfort, for appellant.

Timothy B. Cantlin, of The Cantlin Law Firm, of Ottawa, for appellees.

OPINION

JUSTICE ALBRECHTdelivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

¶ 1Plaintiff, Kim Grako, filed a two-count amended complaint seeking relief against defendants, William K. Walsh and Bill Walsh Chevrolet-Cadillac, Inc., for tortious interference with prospective economic advantage.Plaintiff alleged that Walsh leveraged his status as a client of her former employer to secure her termination.Following deposition practice, the circuit court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment pursuant to section 2-1005(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure(Code)735 ILCS 5/2-1005(c)(West 2022)).For the reasons that follow, we reverse and remand the cause for further proceedings.

¶ 2 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 3 As tortious interference claims require, this matter involves no fewer than three relevant actors.Grako alleges that she was fired from her former employer, Ramza Insurance Group, Inc.(Ramza Insurance), due to the purported interference of Walsh, a client of Ramza Insurance.

¶ 4 Grako began working at Ramza Insurance on October 25, 2016.Ramza Insurance is a full-service insurer, primarily offering policies to public entity businesses, including public schools, with offices located in Streator and Ottawa, Illinois.Several individuals worked in Ramza Insurance’s Ottawa office during the time span pertinent to this lawsuit, including Christine Allen, a secretary; Kevin Schultz, an independent contractor; and Craig Ramza Jr., president of the company.Linda Hays, vice president of Ramza Insurance, and Grako worked at one of Ramza Insurance’s Streator offices.

¶ 5 Based on the pleadings and depositions within the record, Grako filed for bankruptcy protection pursuant to federal law under Chapter 13 in November 2017.In June 2018, Grako returned a vehicle purchased from Bill Walsh Chevrolet-Cadillac, Inc., and discharged the associated debt.

¶ 6 The record reveals that Walsh had several personal insurance policies with Ramza Insurance.It also indicates that Bill Walsh Chevrolet-Cadillac, Inc., bore the financial brunt of Grako’s bankruptcy discharge of her vehicle.Walsh, an agent of Bill Walsh Chevrolet-Cadillac, Inc., learned of the discharge in early November 2018.To Walsh’s displeasure, the process of repossessing Grako’s vehicle was at his expense.On November 7, he texted Grako, "R u kidding me after all I’ve done for you?"After exchanging texts the following day on the financial burden to retrieve the vehicle, Walsh concluded his conversation with Grako by stating: "We are pulling all of our business from ramza tomorrow."

¶ 7 Around this time, Walsh communicated his discontentment with Grako to his friend Schultz.Schultz chronicled their conversation in a string of text messages to Allen, serving as an intermediary messenger between the displeased Ramza Insurance client and Ramza Insurance employees.According to Schultz, Walsh asked whether Grako worked at Ramza Insurance.Schultz’s message also included the following:

"We have MAJOR [expletive] problems!!!MAJOR!!Walsh is going to pull ALL their business is [sic][Grako] works for us.She stuffed them For over $15,000!!!![Walsh] has been texting me all night and I just replied ***.He is like MAJOR LEAGUE p*** ***.This is NOT NOT NOT good."

¶ 8 Allen later forwarded these messages to Hays, who was Grako’s supervisor.Allen and Hays engaged in their own text conversation on the topic.Allen explained that Walsh was extremely unhappy with Grako and did "not want to be supporting where she works."Hays replied, "I’m sure [Schultz] will be all over Craig [Ramza Jr.] with that in the morning, unless he’s already texting him."Allen also provided the financial implications of what Walsh’s departure would cause for the company, recounting the policies that he had with Ramza Insurance at that time.

¶ 9 After taking a day off to recuperate from a medical procedure, Grako reached out to Hays via text on Friday, November 9, 2018, to confide in her that she was a "nervous wreck" and to ask Hays whether she had spoken to Ramza Jr. or Allen.Hays responded that she could not speak with Grako at that time.Grako messaged Hays that evening, explaining that she could not access her personal Ramza Insurance account.She sent another message the following morning, asking whether she would be fired.Hays responded that they would have a discussion the following Monday.Per Hays, the decision to terminate Grako was still up in the air at this point.

¶ 10 Grako continued to message Hays requesting clarity on her job status.Frustrated that Grako was dictating the time and manner in which she and Hays would meet, Hays met with Grako at 9 a.m. on Saturday November 10, 2018, and terminated her employment at Ramza Insurance "based on her own attitude, [and] her own way of speaking to me."According to Hays, her termination had "nothing to do with" the Walsh incident.

¶ 11 In May 2019, Grako filed a single-count complaint against defendants, alleging tortious interference.In November 2019, defendants moved to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615(West 2018)), arguing in part that Grako failed to plead factual allegations sufficient to support her tortious interference claim.The court granted defendants’ motion without prejudice in December 2019.Grako then filed her first amended complaint on January 9, 2020, alleging Walsh tortiously interfered with her employment relationship, resulting in her termination.According to the pleading, Grako was informed that the reason for her termination was that she"p*** off a major client" and that the client had requested the same.She also alleged that in pursuance of her termination, Walsh acted as an agent of Bill Walsh Chevrolet-Cadillac, Inc.

¶ 12Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment and requested Illinois Supreme Court Rule 137(eff. Jan. 1, 2018) sanctions on December 22, 2021, relying upon the deposition testimonies of Hays, Schultz, and Ramza Jr.

¶ 13 Hays testified that, in her role as vice president, she had hiring and firing authority of Ramza Insurance employees.She had pursued Grako for employment based off of prior pleasurable interactions.Hays testified that she fired Grako based on her past employment history with Ramza Insurance and that it had nothing to do with the Walsh incident.Hays averred that Grako was at times disrespectful, pushy, and caused Hays stress.According to Hays, she had no plans to meet with Grako prior to the Walsh incident.

¶ 14 Schultz testified that, as an independent contractor for Ramza Insurance, he shares 50% of new property and casualty insurance commissions with the company.Ramza Insurance established a business agreement with Schultz around 2011.Based on Schultz’s estimation, the company’s share of commissions from his work exceeds $50,000 annually.Schultz de- scribed Walsh as a lifelong friend, someone who he has always called "Billy," Walsh was also one of Schultz’s clients.Although Schultz had no recollection of the specific conversation giving rise to the text exchange with Allen, he recalled that Walsh told Schultz if Grako was employed with Ramza Insurance "we’ve got an issue."In addition to his text conversation, Schultz spoke to Hays regarding the incident.¹According to Schultz, Walsh never requested that he terminate Grako’s employment.Similarly, he never requested Grako’s discharge nor was he in a position to do so.The proposition that Grako would be terminated from Walsh threatening to pull his insignificant amount of business from Ramza Insurance is "ludicrous."When asked why he acted impetuously in his texts to Allen, Schultz explained that he did not want to lose a friend’s business or anybody’s business.

¶ 15Craig Ramza Jr. testified that Walsh was a client of Ramza Insurance in November 2018.Walsh had anywhere from one to three personal insurance policies with Ramza Insurance.In the aftermath of the Walsh incident, Ramza Jr. testified that Walsh frequently called the Ramza Insurance offices, looking to speak with Grako.Ramza Insurance employees would inform him that she was not available.Walsh’s pattern of persistently calling the offices "put pressure on the rest of the agency."Ramza Jr. minimized the importance of Walsh as a personal client, describing him as a needle in the haystack and further providing that "I would never fire one of my employees simply based off a complaint from a customer."Ramza Jr. described situations where Grako was in a "certain mood" and would have profanityladen correspondences with clients and Ramza Insurance agents alike.As he summarized, Grako "was a good employee when she wanted to be, but just some of her actions and her reactions were not good representation" for Ramza Insurance.

¶ 16 After briefing, the court heard arguments on defendants’ motion on June 8, 2022, and took the matter under advisement.The circuit court issued a written order on July 19, 2022, granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment but denying their request for Rule 137 sanctions.The court found that there was no direct evidence that Walsh requested Grako’s termination from Ramza Insurance.There was also no direct evidence that Walsh was a "major client," as Grako alleged in her complaint.Finally, there was no...