Denied ?!

[Ed223]

Yes, just noticed it yesterday after work, was under board review in the morning. Applied 1/2.

[s0beit]

This is seeming more like 'shall-may-kinda-maybe issue' for crook county citizens

 

Is this really going to take more court cases? Getting real tired of this BS

[Ed223]

So funny being denied in my home state, while just last year I renewed my non-res permits for FL and UT. I have got to get out of Chicago/Cook Co.

[Jwg43]

In general, I think an appeal to the circuit court is probably a better option than appealing to the Director. First (with due respect to the Director), it is probably an exercise in futility to appeal something to the same agency that has denied you in the first place. As well, under the law, there is no time frame in which the Director needs to make a decision. If you file under the administrative review act, at least you will have the ability to control the pace of the process somewhat. As well, you will have a neutral fact finder looking at the case. I don't see an advantage in spending the time going through an administrative process when you can go through the same judicial process that you would go through after taking an appeal to the Director.

[operator45]

Dammit i don't want to hear others being denied! Sorry guys, fight the good fight i might be there with you!

[Ed223]

I just want to see this letter, is my time for appeal running out starting yesterday, who knows?

[Timothy87]

I just want to see this letter, is my time for appeal running out starting yesterday, who knows?

 

Exactly!! I want to see it, but it is very irritating knowing the fight ahead. I believe I won't be alone in this fight

[jkdkaliman101]

Ed, Timothy- there was no explanation on your app? Some have said that they seen the reason for denial when they logged in to view their app. That may have been for ISP denials only though.

[bobapunk]

wait didn't someone post earlier today that ISP tole them the board has not reviewed any applicants yet ? If that is true how can it be denied?

 

 

ISP can deny at any time.

 

yes but once denied don't they go to the board for review? and doesn't it typically say under board review? The fat lady hasn't sung until the board upholds the denial and if the boards have not reviewed anything then why would they mark his different?

 

Not quite my understanding... If an applicant is denied, they have the option of filing an appeal with the board.

 

The "under board review" status referred to applications that received an LEO objection, AFAIK.

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[Timothy87]

Ed, Timothy- there was no explanation on your app? Some have said that they seen the reason for denial when they logged in to view their app. That may have been for ISP denials only though.

 

No explanation at all.

The instructor who gave the class is a coworkers friend, I talked to him and he even said that it was weird that there was no explanation

[Dr. Rat]

ok having said all that, which course of action do you think best for an applicant denied by the board should take? An appeal to the director of state police or the circuit court? Is it a "roll of the dice" Either way or would one prove more beneficial than the other? Are you an an attorney? Seems like you have an intimate understanding of appeal procedure and would make a good resource for any one of us that may find ourselves in this very situation.

 

You can only appeal to the Director if the ISP denied you. If it was the Board, it needs to go to the circuit court.

[Jwg43]

Actually, the function of the Board is to rule upon objections made either by the State Police or law enforcement and then inform ISP whether an applicant is eligible or not. The Board does not make the final approval or denial, that is a function of ISP. The Board's only function is to rule on the validity of an objection. If ISP denies your application, there is no ability under the act to take that denial to the Review Board. Your only options are to appeal the denial to the Director of State Police or seek judicial review.

[gpsgreek]

My friends I'm back and still alive.

 

did some more checking with LEO friends and they don't understand. I have not received the dreaded email (as promised when statuses changed) or any mail today.. I am guessing I will get whatever in the next day or two hopefully. I have already begun trying to figure out what has triggered this so I can retaliate but without knowing what I was flagged for.

 

Thank you for all the support and I will keep all of you posted on what this is about. I know we are all taking each others word when it comes to what our background is but I assure you and any LE agent watching this that I have not been arrested for anything including traffic violations ever. I will not look for a lawyer to pay at this point because this may be a stupid mistake/oversight on the LE agents and ISP. Someone said that the Board has not looked over any apps then that should mean that I was denied for something dumb.

 

This thread was started for all of us to vent and post their experiences with this status change. Im glad to see that so many of you are not in the same boat as myself and am sad to see all of you that are. I do believe that we will prevail and we are the guinea pigs for the State. Keep talking and we will figure this out together.

 

Keep the faith.

[Dr. Rat]

Actually, the function of the Board is to rule upon objections made either by the State Police or law enforcement and then inform ISP whether an applicant is eligible or not. The Board does not make the final approval or denial, that is a function of ISP. The Board's only function is to rule on the validity of an objection. If ISP denies your application, there is no ability under the act to take that denial to the Review Board. Your only options are to appeal the denial to the Director of State Police or seek judicial review.

 

That seems to be correct, although the ISP doesn't seem to have the ability to approve an application once the board has upheld an objection. Section 87 even states "unless the denial was made by the Concealed Carry Licensing Review Board".

[jkdkaliman101]

Actually, the function of the Board is to rule upon objections made either by the State Police or law enforcement and then inform ISP whether an applicant is eligible or not. The Board does not make the final approval or denial, that is a function of ISP. The Board's only function is to rule on the validity of an objection. If ISP denies your application, there is no ability under the act to take that denial to the Review Board. Your only options are to appeal the denial to the Director of State Police or seek judicial review.

interesting, I thought the board ruled on whether someone was a danger to themselves or others based on LE's objection and the low preponderance of evidence standard. Or is that saying the same thing you said a little differently? Eligible= preponderance of evidence doesn't support the applicant being a threat, ineligible= preponderance of evidence does support the accusation that an applicant is Potential threat?

 

Seems it would be a little more involved than that. .no?

[Don Gwinn]

People keep apologizing for their posts here, but this thread has been handled very well so far. It's obviously going to be one of those Forever Threads, but that can't be helped.

[Jwg43]

It does all get a little confusing. The applicable section of the act says:

 

"If the Board determines by a preponderance of the evidence that the applicant poses a danger to himself or herself or others, or is a threat to public safety, then the Board shall affirm the objection of the law enforcement agency or the Department and shall notify the Department that the applicant is ineligible for a license. If the Board does not determine by a preponderance of the evidence that the applicant poses a danger to himself or herself or others, or is a threat to public safety, then the Board shall notify the Department that the applicant is eligible for a license."

 

You are spot on, in that a Board finding of eligibility would require a finding by the Board that the applicant did not pose a danger to himself or others.

[Jwg43]

Dr. Rat, I think you are correct. If the Board finds that you are ineligible for a license, I don't see any provision for ISP to approve it, over the Board's finding. At that point, I believe ISP must deny the application and your recourse is to take it into circuit court or appeal to the Director.

[1700715]

It's not final until you get a letter from ISP stating grounds for the denial And if you truly are denied Then you can appeal to the director; unless you were denied by the board, in which case you may petition the court in the county you reside. (judicial review) and if you appeal to the director, and he does not grant the appeal, then you can petition the court for judicial review. Let's remember one thing . The Constitution is the law . This is why we finally have carry conceal!! A denial is a violation of your 2nd and 14th Amendment rights . Don't worry as long as you are not a violent felon if you are denied and you appeal you will win .

[jkdkaliman101]

It would seem that specific criteria must be in place. I can't see them going on intuition alone. They must weigh in number of arrests, time since last arrest, type of charges and dispositions. I wonder what else gets taken into consideration. I'm curious to know what the benchmark is. .. I'm confident I'm not the only one curious ;-/

[RockerXX]

It would seem that specific criteria must be in place. I can't see them going on intuition alone. They must weigh in number of arrests, time since last arrest, type of charges and dispositions. I wonder what else gets taken into consideration. I'm curious to know what the benchmark is. .. I'm confident I'm not the only one curious ;-/

 

On the whim of the politically appointed board and whatever rules them make up as they go, I highly doubt we will ever see any criteria standards, instead more likely to hear a lot of "Because we said so"...

 

The only reason for denial is supposed to be

 

If the Board determines by a preponderance of the evidence that the applicant poses a danger to himself or herself or others, or is a threat to public safety, then the Board shall affirm the objection of the law enforcement agency or the Department

 

But, apparently if the denials that are being reported are true it appears that, that bar is set incredibly low with no due diligence on their part...

[Redlin]

Go to the IL Register here..http://www.handgunla...nFOIDandCHL.pdf ..scroll down to p.2341,sec. 1231.70 explains the objection process ..p.2342,sec.1231.80 explains the role of the review board..p.2348,sec1231.170 explains the appeal process . I know some of you are familiar with this already,but some of us are not.

[Dr. Rat]

Dr. Rat, I think you are correct. If the Board finds that you are ineligible for a license, I don't see any provision for ISP to approve it, over the Board's finding. At that point, I believe ISP must deny the application and your recourse is to take it into circuit court or appeal to the Director.

 

Well, Section 87 points out that if the Board upholds the objection, the only recourse is to the circuit court. I think an appeal to the Director is only allowed if the ISP denies without Board involvement.

[Bacon!]

Go to the IL Register here..http://www.handgunla...nFOIDandCHL.pdf ..scroll down to p.2341,sec. 1231.70 explains the objection process ..p.2342,sec.1231.80 explains the role of the review board..p.2348,sec1231.170 explains the appeal process . I know some of you are familiar with this already,but some of us are not.

Thanks

[bobapunk]

So, I am trying to get a better understanding of the role of the CCLRB (Concealed Carry License Review Board) and the appeals process.

 

It seems as if there are 2 ways for an application to get to the CCLRB.

 

Either, LEO Objection

 

Or, through the appeals process.

 

The appeals process route is ONLY available if the ISP denied you and that denial was NOT based upon a determination of the CCLRB.

 

So, it would appear that if an application goes "under board review" because of an LEO objection and is subsequently denied, your only route of appeal is via the circuit court in the county of the applicant's residence.

 

It is also interesting to note 430 ILCS 66/20(e) which states:

 

(e) In considering an objection of a law enforcement agency or the Department, the Board shall review the materials received with the objection from the law enforcement agency or the Department. By a vote of at least 4 commissioners, the Board may request additional information from the law enforcement agency, Department, or the applicant, or the testimony of the law enforcement agency, Department, or the applicant. The Board may require that the applicant submit electronic fingerprints to the Department for an updated background check where the Board determines it lacks sufficient information to determine eligibility. The Board may only consider information submitted by the Department, a law enforcement agency, or the applicant. The Board shall review each objection and determine by a majority of commissioners whether an applicant is eligible for a license.

 

So, per the law, the applicant can only address the CCLRB/Objection upon the CCLRB's request.

 

Per the posts I have been reading the past few days, I assume that the CCLRB has not requested any additional information/testimony/fingerprints from any of the applicants who have been denied after being "under board review".

 

It seems like a number of court cases will be forming soon...

 

Is there a time limit/statute of limitation on petitioning the circuit court?

 

430 ILCS 66/87( b.)

( b.) All final administrative decisions of the Department or the Concealed Carry Licensing Review Board under this Act shall be subject to judicial review under the provisions of the Administrative Review Law. The term "administrative decision" is defined as in Section 3-101 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

 

(735 ILCS 5/Art. III heading) ARTICLE III ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

 

 

(735 ILCS 5/3-101) (from Ch. 110, par. 3-101)

Sec. 3-101. Definitions. For the purpose of this Act:

"Administrative agency" means a person, body of persons, group, officer, board, bureau, commission or department (other than a court or judge) of the State, or of any political subdivision of the State or municipal corporation in the State, having power under law to make administrative decisions.

"Administrative decision" or "decision" means any decision, order or determination of any administrative agency rendered in a particular case, which affects the legal rights, duties or privileges of parties and which terminates the proceedings before the administrative agency. In all cases in which a statute or a rule of the administrative agency requires or permits an application for a rehearing or other method of administrative review to be filed within a specified time (as distinguished from a statute which permits the application for rehearing or administrative review to be filed at any time before judgment by the administrative agency against the applicant or within a specified time after the entry of such judgment), and an application for such rehearing or review is made, no administrative decision of such agency shall be final as to the party applying therefor until such rehearing or review is had or denied. However, if the particular statute permits an application for rehearing or other method of administrative review to be filed with the administrative agency for an indefinite period of time after the administrative decision has been rendered (such as permitting such application to be filed at any time before judgment by the administrative agency against the applicant or within a specified time after the entry of such judgment), then the authorization for the filing of such application for rehearing or review shall not postpone the time when the administrative decision as to which such application shall be filed would otherwise become final, but the filing of the application for rehearing or review with the administrative agency in this type of case shall constitute the commencement of a new proceeding before such agency, and the decision rendered in order to dispose of such rehearing or other review proceeding shall constitute a new and independent administrative decision. If such new and independent decision consists merely of the denial of the application for rehearing or other method of administrative review, the record upon judicial review of such decision shall be limited to the application for rehearing or other review and the order or decision denying such application and shall not include the record of proceedings had before the rendering of the administrative decision as to which the application for rehearing or other administrative review shall have been filed unless the suit for judicial review is commenced within the time in which it would be authorized by this Act to have been commenced if no application for rehearing or other method of administrative review had been filed. On the other hand, if the rehearing or other administrative review is granted by the administrative agency, then the record on judicial review of the resulting administrative decision rendered pursuant to the rehearing or other administrative review may consist not only of the record of proceedings had before the administrative agency in such rehearing or other administrative review proceeding, but also of the record of proceedings had before such administrative agency prior to its rendering of the administrative decision as to which the rehearing or other administrative review shall have been granted. The term "administrative decision" or "decision" does not mean or include rules, regulations, standards, or statements of policy of general application issued by an administrative agency to implement, interpret, or make specific the legislation enforced or administered by it unless such a rule, regulation, standard or statement of policy is involved in a proceeding before the agency and its applicability or validity is in issue in such proceeding, nor does it mean or include regulations concerning the internal management of the agency not affecting private rights or interests.

(Source: P.A. 92-651, eff. 7-11-02.)

 

 

 

(735 ILCS 5/3-102) (from Ch. 110, par. 3-102)

Sec. 3-102. Scope of Article. Article III of this Act shall apply to and govern every action to review judicially a final decision of any administrative agency where the Act creating or conferring power on such agency, by express reference, adopts the provisions of Article III of this Act or its predecessor, the Administrative Review Act. This Article shall be known as the "Administrative Review Law". In all such cases, any other statutory, equitable or common law mode of review of decisions of administrative agencies heretofore available shall not hereafter be employed.

Unless review is sought of an administrative decision within the time and in the manner herein provided, the parties to the proceeding before the administrative agency shall be barred from obtaining judicial review of such administrative decision. In an action to review any final decision of any administrative agency brought under Article III, if a judgment is reversed or entered against the plaintiff, or the action is voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff, or the action is dismissed for want of prosecution, or the action is dismissed by a United States District Court for lack of jurisdiction, neither the plaintiff nor his or her heirs, executors, or administrators may commence a new action within one year or within the remaining period of limitation, whichever is greater. All proceedings in the court for revision of such final decision shall terminate upon the date of the entry of any Order under either Section 2-1009 or Section 13-217. Such Order shall cause the final administrative decision of any administrative agency to become immediately enforceable. If under the terms of the Act governing the procedure before an administrative agency an administrative decision has become final because of the failure to file any document in the nature of objections, protests, petition for hearing or application for administrative review within the time allowed by such Act, such decision shall not be subject to judicial review hereunder excepting only for the purpose of questioning the jurisdiction of the administrative agency over the person or subject matter.

(Source: P.A. 88-1.)

 

 

(735 ILCS 5/3-103) (from Ch. 110, par. 3-103)

Sec. 3-103. Commencement of action. Every action to review a final administrative decision shall be commenced by the filing of a complaint and the issuance of summons within 35 days from the date that a copy of the decision sought to be reviewed was served upon the party affected by the decision, except that in municipalities with a population of 500,000 or less a complaint filed within the time limit established by this Section may be subsequently amended to add a police chief or a fire chief in cases brought under the Illinois Municipal Code's provisions providing for the discipline of fire fighters and police officers.

The method of service of the decision shall be as provided in the Act governing the procedure before the administrative agency, but if no method is provided, a decision shall be deemed to have been served either when a copy of the decision is personally delivered or when a copy of the decision is deposited in the United States mail, in a sealed envelope or package, with postage prepaid, addressed to the party affected by the decision at his or her last known residence or place of business.

The form of the summons and the issuance of alias summons shall be according to rules of the Supreme Court.

This amendatory Act of 1993 applies to all cases involving discipline of fire fighters and police officers pending on its effective date and to all cases filed on or after its effective date.

The changes to this Section made by this amendatory Act of the 95th General Assembly apply to all actions filed on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 95th General Assembly.

(Source: P.A. 95-831, eff. 8-14-08.)

 

 

(735 ILCS 5/3-104) (from Ch. 110, par. 3-104)

Sec. 3-104. Jurisdiction and venue. Jurisdiction to review final administrative decisions is vested in the Circuit Courts, except as to a final order of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board in which case jurisdiction to review a final order is vested in the Appellate Court of a judicial district in which the Board maintains an office. If the venue of the action to review a final administrative decision is expressly prescribed in the particular statute under authority of which the decision was made, such venue shall control, but if the venue is not so prescribed, an action to review a final administrative decision may be commenced in the Circuit Court of any county in which (1) any part of the hearing or proceeding culminating in the decision of the administrative agency was held, or (2) any part of the subject matter involved is situated, or (3) any part of the transaction which gave rise to the proceedings before the agency occurred. The court first acquiring jurisdiction of any action to review a final administrative decision shall have and retain jurisdiction of the action until final disposition of the action.

(Source: P.A. 88-1.)

 

 

(735 ILCS 5/3-105) (from Ch. 110, par. 3-105)

Sec. 3-105. Service of summons. Summons issued in any action to review the final administrative decision of any administrative agency shall be served by registered or certified mail on the administrative agency and on each of the other defendants except in the case of a review of a final administrative decision of the regional board of school trustees, regional superintendent of schools, or State Superintendent of Education, as the case may be, when a committee of 10 has been designated as provided in Section 7-6 of the School Code, and in such case only the administrative agency involved and each of the committee of 10 shall be served. The method of service shall be as provided in the Act governing the procedure before the administrative agency, but if no method is provided, summons shall be deemed to have been served either when a copy of the summons is personally delivered or when a copy of the decision is deposited in the United States mail, in a sealed envelope or package, with postage prepaid, addressed to the party affected by the decision at his or her last known residence or place of business. The form of the summons and the issuance of alias summons shall be according to rules of the Supreme Court. No action for administrative review shall be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based upon the failure to serve summons on an employee, agent, or member of an administrative agency, board, committee, or government entity, acting in his or her official capacity, where the administrative agency, board, committee, or government entity has been served as provided in this Section. Service on the director or agency head, in his or her official capacity, shall be deemed service on the administrative agency, board, committee, or government entity. No action for administrative review shall be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based upon the failure to serve summons on an administrative agency, board, committee, or government entity, acting, where the director or agency head, in his or her official capacity, has been served as provided in this Section. Service on the administrative agency shall be made by the clerk of the court by sending a copy of the summons addressed to the agency at its main office in the State. The clerk of the court shall also mail a copy of the summons to each of the other defendants, addressed to the last known place of residence or principal place of business of each such defendant. The plaintiff shall, by affidavit filed with the complaint, designate the last known address of each defendant upon whom service shall be made. The certificate of the clerk of the court that he or she has served such summons in pursuance of this Section shall be evidence that he or she has done so.

The changes to this Section made by this amendatory Act of the 95th General Assembly apply to all actions filed on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 95th General Assembly.

(Source: P.A. 95-831, eff. 8-14-08.)

 

 

(735 ILCS 5/3-106) (from Ch. 110, par. 3-106)

Sec. 3-106. Appearance of defendants. In any action to review any final decision of any administrative agency, the agency shall appear by filing an answer consisting of a record of the proceedings had before it, or a written motion in the cause or a written appearance. All other defendants desiring to appear shall appear by filing a written appearance. Every appearance shall be filed within the time fixed by rule of the Supreme Court, and shall state with particularity an address where service of notices or papers may be made upon the defendant so appearing, or his or her attorney.

(Source: P.A. 88-1.)

 

 

(735 ILCS 5/3-107) (from Ch. 110, par. 3-107)

Sec. 3-107. Defendants.

(a) Except as provided in subsection ( b.) or (c.), in any action to review any final decision of an administrative agency, the administrative agency and all persons, other than the plaintiff, who were parties of record to the proceedings before the administrative agency shall be made defendants. The method of service of the decision shall be as provided in the Act governing the procedure before the administrative agency, but if no method is provided, a decision shall be deemed to have been served either when a copy of the decision is personally delivered or when a copy of the decision is deposited in the United States mail, in a sealed envelope or package, with postage prepaid, addressed to the party affected by the decision at his or her last known residence or place of business. The form of the summons and the issuance of alias summons shall be according to rules of the Supreme Court.

No action for administrative review shall be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based upon the failure to name an employee, agent, or member, who acted in his or her official capacity, of an administrative agency, board, committee, or government entity, where the administrative agency, board, committee, or government entity, has been named as a defendant as provided in this Section. Naming the director or agency head, in his or her official capacity, shall be deemed to include as defendant the administrative agency, board, committee, or government entity that the named defendants direct or head. No action for administrative review shall be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based upon the failure to name an administrative agency, board, committee, or government entity, where the director or agency head, in his or her official capacity, has been named as a defendant as provided in this Section.

If, during the course of a review action, the court determines that an agency or a party of record to the administrative proceedings was not made a defendant as required by the preceding paragraph, then the court shall grant the plaintiff 35 days from the date of the determination in which to name and serve the unnamed agency or party as a defendant. The court shall permit the newly served defendant to participate in the proceedings to the extent the interests of justice may require.

(b.) With respect to actions to review decisions of a zoning board of appeals in a municipality with a population of 500,000 or more inhabitants under Division 13 of Article 11 of the Illinois Municipal Code, "parties of record" means only the zoning board of appeals and applicants before the zoning board of appeals. The plaintiff shall send a notice of filing of the action by certified mail to each other person who appeared before and submitted oral testimony or written statements to the zoning board of appeals with respect to the decision appealed from. The notice shall be mailed within 2 days of the filing of the action. The notice shall state the caption of the action, the court in which the action is filed, and the names of the plaintiff in the action and the applicant to the zoning board of appeals. The notice shall inform the person of his or her right to intervene. Each person who appeared before and submitted oral testimony or written statements to the zoning board of appeals with respect to the decision appealed from shall have a right to intervene as a defendant in the action upon application made to the court within 30 days of the mailing of the notice.

© With respect to actions to review decisions of a hearing officer or a county zoning board of appeals under Division 5-12 of Article 5 of the Counties Code, "parties of record" means only the hearing officer or the zoning board of appeals and applicants before the hearing officer or the zoning board of appeals. The plaintiff shall send a notice of filing of the action by certified mail to each other person who appeared before and submitted oral testimony or written statements to the hearing officer or the zoning board of appeals with respect to the decision appealed from. The notice shall be mailed within 2 days of the filing of the action. The notice shall state the caption of the action, the court in which the action is filed, and the name of the plaintiff in the action and the applicant to the hearing officer or the zoning board of appeals. The notice shall inform the person of his or her right to intervene. Each person who appeared before and submitted oral testimony or written statements to the hearing officer or the zoning board of appeals with respect to the decision appealed from shall have a right to intervene as a defendant in the action upon application made to the court within 30 days of the mailing of the notice. This subsection © applies to zoning proceedings commenced on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 95th General Assembly.

(d) The changes to this Section made by this amendatory Act of the 95th General Assembly apply to all actions filed on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 95th General Assembly.

(Source: P.A. 95-321, eff. 8-21-07; 95-831, eff. 8-14-08.)

 

 

(735 ILCS 5/3-108) (from Ch. 110, par. 3-108)

Sec. 3-108. Pleadings and record on review.

(a) Complaint. The complaint shall contain a statement of the decision or part of the decision sought to be reviewed. It shall specify whether the transcript of evidence, if any, or what portion thereof, shall be filed by the agency as part of the record. Upon motion of any defendant, or upon its own motion, the court may require of the plaintiff a specification of the errors relied upon for reversal.

(b.) Answer. Except as herein otherwise provided, the administrative agency shall file an answer which shall consist of the original or a certified copy of the entire record of proceedings under review, including such evidence as may have been heard by it and the findings and decisions made by it. By order of court or by stipulation of all parties to the review, the record may be shortened by the elimination of any portion thereof. If the complaint specifies that none or only a part of the transcript of evidence shall be filed as part of the answer and if the administrative agency or any other defendant objects thereto, the court shall hear the parties upon this question and make a finding as to whether all, or if less than all, what parts of the transcript shall be included in the answer. No pleadings other than as herein enumerated shall be filed by any party unless required by the court.

© Record after remandment. If the cause is remanded to the administrative agency and a review shall thereafter be sought of the administrative decision, the original and supplemental record, or so much thereof as shall be determined by court order or the stipulation of all the parties, shall constitute the record on review.

(Source: P.A. 88-1.)

 

So, if I understand this correctly, one who is denied by action of the CCLRB only has 35 days to petition their local circuit court? That seems like a very short amount of time...

 

Dang smiley faces...

[Dr. Rat]

So, I am trying to get a better understanding of the role of the CCLRB (Concealed Carry License Review Board) and the appeals process.

 

It seems as if there are 2 ways for an application to get to the CCLRB.

 

Either, LEO Objection

 

Or, through the appeals process.

 

The appeals process route is ONLY available if the ISP denied you and that denial was NOT based upon a determination of the CCLRB.

 

As far as I can see, if the ISP denies an application, it can only be appealed to the Director, not to the Board, which is only involved in evaluating local LEO objections.

 

Per the posts I have been reading the past few days, I assume that the CCLRB has not requested any additional information/testimony/fingerprints from any of the applicants who have been denied after being "under board review".

 

There's still the question of whether the Board has even met yet. I don't think we've had any real evidence one way or another.

[Redlin]

 

So, if I understand this correctly, one who is denied by action of the CCLRB only has 35 days to petition their local circuit court? That seems like a very short amount of time...

 

Dang smiley faces...

735 ILCS 5/3-103) (from Ch. 110, par. 3-103)

Sec. 3-103. Commencement of action. Every action to review a final administrative decision shall be commenced by the filing of a complaint and the issuance of summons within 35 days from the date that a copy of the decision sought to be reviewed was served upon the party affected by the decision,..35 days from when you receive the letter of denial it seems to say.

[Jwg43]

Bobapunk, you are correct. The time is exceptionally short. The 35 day timeline comes out of the Administrative Review Act and the courts are strict on following that timeline, as it is a jurisdictional prerequisite. As well, some case law holds that you need to not only file a complaint for administrative review within that time frame, but serve a copy on the administrative agency as well. I've had a number of clients who have come into my office over the years with fairly good administrative appeals, but beyond the 35 day timeframe. At that point, no matter the merits of your appeal, you are stuck with that decision. That's why it is so important to move on these things as soon as possible. It is simply unreasonable to walk into an attorney's office on day 34 (or even day 30), and expect that a complaint for administrative review can be filed timely. These appeals are extremely technical, and you're only going to have one chance to get the complaint right. The best thing to do is contact an attorney as soon as you know that you've been denied. It's better to seek counsel too early, than to seek it too late and be barred from your appeal.

[Dr. Rat]

Bobapunk, you are correct. The time is exceptionally short. The 35 day timeline comes out of the Administrative Review Act and the courts are strict on following that timeline, as it is a jurisdictional prerequisite. As well, some case law holds that you need to not only file a complaint for administrative review within that time frame, but serve a copy on the administrative agency as well. I've had a number of clients who have come into my office over the years with fairly good administrative appeals, but beyond the 35 day timeframe. At that point, no matter the merits of your appeal, you are stuck with that decision. That's why it is so important to move on these things as soon as possible. It is simply unreasonable to walk into an attorney's office on day 34 (or even day 30), and expect that a complaint for administrative review can be filed timely. These appeals are extremely technical, and you're only going to have one chance to get the complaint right. The best thing to do is contact an attorney as soon as you know that you've been denied. It's better to seek counsel too early, than to seek it too late and be barred from your appeal.

 

Maybe when someone finally gets an official denial letter outlining the ISP's interpretation of the appeal process, we can get all this info into a sticky. This time frame issue seems very important - and I think is going to be unexpected for a lot of people.

[MSDojo]

Any lawyers about know if this is the form to request judicial review in Cook Co? It looks like it will do, but a few things (Village of..) need to be modified on it. If anyone has a template, I have a student who would be VERY grateful if it was shared.