Plaintiffs, Isaac Monts, by his parents and naturalguardians, Robert and Judy Monts, appeal the order of the trialcourt granting defendant's, Illinois High School Association's(IHSA), motion for summary judgment. The trial court found thatIHSA's rules and bylaws were not vague or ambiguous and that IHSAexercised its power consistent with those rules and bylaws. Therefore, the trial court held that no material facts remainedin dispute and, as a matter of law, IHSA's decision that arecruiting violation had occurred was upheld. We reverse andremand.

Isaac Monts was a renowned quarterback, having setvarious school and state records while playing football atStreator Woodland High School (Streator). Sometime during the2001-02 school year, the Montses learned that Coach Aubrey, thefootball coach at Streator, was resigning and would not becoaching during the 2002-03 school year, Isaac's senior year. Coach Aubrey asked the Montses if they would like for him toapproach Coach Peterson, the football coach at Pontiac HighSchool (Pontiac), about the possibility of Isaac playing footballat Pontiac during his senior year. The Montses gave Coach Aubreypermission to contact Coach Peterson. Coach Peterson told CoachAubrey to have the Montses contact him. Robert Monts contactedCoach Peterson, and the two scheduled a dinner meeting to discussthe possibility of Isaac's transfer to Pontiac. The meeting washeld at a local restaurant on March 26, 2002. During the meeting, Coach Peterson played a videotape entitled "The Perfect Fan"for the family. Coach Peterson selected that particular tape inresponse to Judy Monts's concern that her son would be "just anumber" at a larger school like Pontiac. The Montses did notmake the decision to transfer to Pontiac until after the meetingwith Coach Peterson. During the summer of 2002, Isaac attendedPontiac's football and basketball summer camps.

IHSA received a complaint from Streator that Pontiacrecruited Isaac to play football. IHSA conducted an investigation into the allegation. IHSA's executive director found thatCoach Peterson wrongfully recruited Isaac using "undue influence"in violation of IHSA's bylaws 3.071 and 3.073, which state inrelevant part as follows:

"3.071 Recruitment of students or attempted recruitment of students for athleticpurposes is prohibited, regardless of theirresidence.

3.073 It shall also be a violation ofthis rule to induce or attempt to induce orencourage any prospective student to attendany member school for the purpose of participating in athletics even when specialremuneration or inducement is not given.

No member school and no one acting onbehalf of any member school shall give anyspeech or give any slide, film[,] or tapepresentation or distribute any written material which states or implies that a memberschool's athletic program is better than theathletic program of any other member schoolor that it would be more advantageous for anyprospective student-athlete to participate inathletics at that member school as opposed toany other school."

Due to the violations found, IHSA ruled Coach Petersonineligible to coach at any IHSA member school for a period of oneyear beginning August 28, 2002, and Isaac permanently ineligibleto participate in interscholastic activities at Pontiac. Thepunishment imposed was pursuant to IHSA bylaw 6.010, which statesin relevant part:

"Persons found guilty of exercisingundue influence to secure or retain the attendance of a student at a member schoolshall be ineligible to coach at an IHSA member school for one year. Sanctions shallalso be imposed against the school represented by such persons.

Students whose high school attendance isfound to have been affected by undue influence to secure or retain the student at amember school shall be permanently ineligibleat that school."

IHSA's bylaws define "undue influence" as "any influence exerted by school personnel upon a prospective student or aprospective student's family related to athletic participation,potential, or accomplishment." The Montses appealed the executive director's decision to the board of directors (Board),before whom a hearing was held on September 9, 2002. The Montsesrequested that the hearing be reported by a certified courtreporter; however, the Board denied their request. Due to theBoard's arbitrary denial of the Montses' request, we are withoutthe privilege of reviewing the testimony presented at the hearing. We now have to rely upon the notes of the executive secretary, the pleadings, and affidavits filed by both parties as theyappear in the record.

IHSA's Board affirmed the executive director's decision. The Montses requested that the Board reconsider itsruling. The Board did so, allowing the Montses' attorney toargue before it, and again affirmed the executive director'sdecision. The Montses then filed a three-count complaint in theMcLean County circuit court. Count I sought specific performanceof the contract to permit Isaac to participate in athletics atPontiac. Count II sought a declaratory judgment as to thearbitrariness of the relevant IHSA bylaws and definition of"undue influence." Count III alleged that the Montses weredenied due process of law as required by article I, section 2, ofthe Illinois Constitution (Ill. Const. 1970, art. I,