In promulgating the no-dog nile, the Board considered several factors, including that the building (the John Hancock Center) is located in a densely populated area where recreational space for dogs is scarce. Further, the Board was concerned that two dogs had recently fought in the building, resulting in the death of one of the pets. The Board had previously tried less restrictive rules regarding pets, but the rules had not proven workable. Finally, the rule did not require existing owners to remove the dogs from the building; it only prohibited new dogs.
After initially upholding the trial court, the Appellate Court reversed~ itself after a rehearing. The court first determined that under Illinois law, the Board had the authority to make reasonable rules banning pets from the building. The cou it went on to hold the no-dog rule was a reasonable exercise of the Board's power to make rules for the association.