Republican challenger to Will County sheriff wins federal appeal over retaliation lawsuit

A federal appeals court has ruled a Republican challenger to the Will County sheriff can renew his claims that he was denied a promotion to sergeant because he ran against the sheriff.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision on Tuesday that sided with Will County Sheriff’s Deputy Jim Reilly, who appealed the dismissal of his 2023 lawsuit against Will County Sheriff Mike Kelley.

The court’s opinion was delivered by 7th Circuit Judge Nancy Maldonado, who was nominated by former U.S. President Joe Biden last year to serve on the appeals court.

Reilly was twice defeated by Kelley, a Democrat, in the race for Will County sheriff in 2018 and 2022.

Following Reilly’s second defeat, he filed a lawsuit that claimed Kelley publicly admitted he passed Reilly up for a promotion to sergeant because he ran against him in 2018.

Kelley’s attorneys have contended Reilly’s “nonpromotion” was not politically motivated.

Kelley’s attorneys argued Reilly filed his lawsuit after the two-year deadline.

The last time Reilly could have been passed up for a promotion was in 2019 and he had until 2021 to file his lawsuit, according to Kelley’s attorneys.

U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman agreed and dismissed Reilly’s lawsuit.

But Gettleman also took the “unusual step” of simultaneously entering a final judgment in favor of Kelley, which prevented Reilly from filing an amended lawsuit, according to Maldonado.

Nevertheless, Reilly filed his motion that requested Gettleman allow him to file an amended lawsuit to demonstrate his claims are timely.

Yet Gettleman dismissed that motion.

Maldonado said Gettleman mistakenly used a tougher legal standard than necessary when he dismissed Reilly’s motion to file an amended lawsuit.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals found Reilly’s proposed amended lawsuit states a “plausible claim.”

Maldonado said Kelley’s argument that Reilly should have “suspected a potential constitutional violation” when he was not chosen for promotion is “viable.”

“But so is Reilly’s argument that he did not have sufficient information to bring his lawsuit at the time,” Maldonado said.

Based on the “limited factual record,” the appeals court cannot conclude that Reilly was on “sufficient notice that he may have suffered a constitutional injury,” Maldonado said.

The appeals court decision on Tuesday does not prevent Kelley from renewing his own argument that Reilly exceeded the deadline to file his lawsuit.