# Illinois Bell Telephone Co. v. Fair Employment Practices Commission

> Illinois Supreme Court · April 18, 1980 · 81 Ill. 2d 136

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6984435

## Case

- **Full name:** ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY v. THE FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES COMMISSION
- **Court:** Illinois Supreme Court
- **Decided:** April 18, 1980
- **Citations:** 81 Ill. 2d 136; 41 Ill. Dec. 41; 407 N.E.2d 539; 26 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 31,968; 30 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1781; 1980 Ill. LEXIS 346
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Goldenhersh
- **Judges:** Goldenhersh
- **Cited by:** 5 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6984435

## Opinion text

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE GOLDENHERSH, dissenting:
I dissent and would affirm the judgment of the appellate court. The majority opinion is based on the conclusion, unsupported by the record and contrary to the findings of the Fair Employment Practices Commission, that the plan covered only “sickness.” Although the plan is not contained in the record it is apparent that it has been construed to cover not only disability resulting from sickness, but also all periods of disability except those occasioned by pregnancy.
This case is clearly distinguishable from Winks v. Board of Education (1979), 78 Ill. 2d 128 . There the court was required to construe the term “temporary illness.” It is clear from Winks that “temporary incapacity” is broader than temporary illness, and is broad enough to encompass temporary incapacity caused by pregnancy and child birth.
Based on the record before us the plan should be construed to cover the temporary incapacity resulting from a normal pregnancy, and the refusal to grant benefits to these employees resulted in discrimination because of their sex.
MR. JUSTICE CLARK joins in this dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6984435. Public record. Not legal advice.