BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD R <E
CLERK'S
C E i
OFFICE
V E D
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, )
MAY 3 0 2006
Complainant,
)
Pollution
STATE OF
Control
ILLINOIS
Board
vs.
)
PCB No . 04-207
(Enforcement - Land)
EDWARD PRUIM and ROBERT PRUIM, )
Respondents.
)
Complainant,
)
vs.
)
INC .,
)
Respondent .
)
NOTICE OF FILING
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
COMMUNITY LANDFILL COMPANY,
TO: Christopher Grant
Bradley Halloran
Environmental Bureau
Hearing Officer
Assistant Attorney General
Illinois Pollution Control Board
188 West Randolph Street
100 West Randolph
20th Floor
Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Mark A. LaRose
Clarissa C
. Grayson
LAROSE & BOSCO, LTD
.
Attorney No
. 37346
200 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2810
Chicago, Illinois 60610
(312) 642-4414
PCB No . 97-193
(Enforcement - Land)
(consolidated)
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE
that on MAY 30, 2006, the undersigned filed an original and
nine copies of
RESPONDENT ROBERT PRUIM'S AND EDWARD PRUIM'S MOTION
FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD'S
ORDER DATED APRIL
20, 2006 with Ms
. Dorothy Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution
Control Board, 100 West Randolph Street, Suite 11-500, Chicago, Illinois 60601, a copy of
which is attached and hereby served upon you
.
dx.~
10"'A
One of the Attorneys for Responden
THIS FILING IS SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
.
EDWARD PRUIM and ROBERT PRUIM, )
Respondents .
)
RESPONDENTS EDWARD PRUIM'S and ROBERT PRUIM'S
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL
BOARD'S ORDER DATED APRIL 20, 2006
Respondents EDWARD PRUIM and ROBERT PRUIM (jointly "the Pruims"), by and
through their attorneys, LaRose & Bosco, Ltd ., and pursuant to 35 I11 .Adm. Code 101 .520(b),
hereby move the Illinois Pollution Control Board ("the Board") for reconsideration of its Order
dated April 20, 2006, and in support thereof, state as follows :
1 .
This motion is timely filed pursuant to 35 II1 .Adm. Code 101 .520(a), which
allows a motion for reconsideration to be filed within 35 days after receipt of the Order, which
the Respondents received on April 25, 2006 . 1
1 The Respondents raise only limited issues in this motion for reconsideration, but contest all of the adverse rulings
made by the Board in its April 20, 2006 Order
. The Respondents do not waive and expressly reserve the right to file
an appeal in the Appellate Court of all of the matters adverse to the Respondents contained in the Board's April 20,
2006 Order
.
1
PEOPLE OF THE
BEFORE
STATE
THE
OF ILLINOIS,ILLINOIS )POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
RECEIVED
CLERK'S OFFICE
Complainant,
MAY 3 0 2006
)
Pollution O
Control
vs.
Board
)
PCB 97-193
(Enforcement - Land)
COMMUNITY LANDFILL COMPANY, )
(consolidated)
INC.,
)
Respondent.
)
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
)
Complainant,
)
vs.
)
PCB 04-207
(Enforcement - Land)
6 .
For summary judgment purposes, the nonmoving party must present bona fide
evidence that a question of a material fact exists, and it cannot hide behind equivocations or
general denials or assertions . Koukoulomatis v . Disco Wheels, Inc ., 127 I11.App.3d 95, 101 (1st
Dist . 1984) . Here, Mr. Pelnarsh's deposition only generally shows that he referred occasionally
to the main office or to the Pruims, and only for those issues not regularly handled at the landfill
site
. This deposition does not present any question of fact as to the Pruims's lack of personal
involvement or active participation in the daily operations of the landfill at all . A conclusion that
this deposition implies such involvement by the Pruims requires an inferential leap that is
insufficient to survive summary judgment
.
7 .
The Pruims's affidavits state that they do not have sufficient knowledge as to the
truth or falsity of Counts I - III, V - X, and XII - XIX of the Complainant's complaint. These
statements are entirely consistent with the Pruims's Motions for Summary Judgment
. If the
Pruims did actively participate in CLC's daily operations, then they would have knowledge of
these counts . However, the Pruims's lack of knowledge as to these counts shows their
lack of
personal involvement or active participation in the very matters alleged . These affidavits do not
present any questions of fact as to the Pruims's lack of personal or active involvement in CLC's
daily operations .
8.
When a movant for summary judgment supplies facts that are not contradicted,
the opposing party cannot rely solely on the pleadings to raise issues of material fact
. Kelman v .
Univ. of Chicago, 166 III .App.3d 137,141 (2nd Dist. 1988) ; Golden v. Marshall Field & Co .,
134 III .App.3d 100, 101-02 (1st Dist . 1985)
. If the nonmovant does not present counter-
affidavits or other evidence to contradict the facts in the movant's affidavit, then courts will take
the affidavit supporting summary judgment as true, notwithstanding any contrary averments in
3
11 .
Finally, the managerial duties alleged in Counts IV, V, XVII, and XIX present no
questions of fact as to the Pruims's personal involvement or active participation in CLC's day-to-
day operations . The Pruims's duties to make financial assurance and permit decisions invoke
their roles as corporate officers ; they do not involve participation in the daily operations of the
landfill . Further, the Pruims's affidavits show that they lack knowledge of these very counts,
which shows a lack of personal involvement or active participation in those alleged violations .
The Complainant improperly relies solely on the allegations of their pleadings to contradict this
fact, and presents no other evidence to the contrary . Therefore, no question of fact exists as to
the absence of the Pruims's personal liability in the allegations of Counts IV, V, XVII, and XIX
.
WHEREFORE, the Respondents EDWARD PRUIM and ROBERT PRUIM respectfully
request that the Illinois Pollution Control Board reconsider its denial of summary judgment
against the Respondents, by finding that no genuine issue of material fact exists as to the
Respondents' lack of personal liability .
Respectfully submitted,
Attorney for Edward Pruim & Robert Pruim
Mark A. LaRose
Clarissa C . Grayson
LAROSE & BOSCO, LTD.
200 North LaSalle Street
Suite 2810
Chicago, Illinois 60601
(312)642-4414
5
Mark A. LaRose
Clarissa C
. Grayson
LAROSE & BOSCO, LTD
Attorney No . 37346
200 North LaSalle Street
Suite 2810
Chicago, Illinois 60610
(312) 642-4414
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Clarissa C
. Grayson, an attorney, hereby certify that I served copies of the foregoing
RESPONDENT ROBERT
PRUIM'S AND EDWARD
PRUIM'S MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION OF THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD'S ORDER
DATED APRIL
20, 2006 by placing the same in first-class, postage, prepaid envelopes and
depositing same in the U .S
. Mail Box located at 200 North LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois, this
30`h day of May 2006, addressed as follows :
Christopher Grant
Environmental Bureau
Assistant Attorney General
188 West Randolph Street
20th Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Bradley Halloran
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph
Suite 11-500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
II,
One of the Attorneys for Respondent
