Michael J. Tardy, director of the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts, announced his retirement effective August 1, 2017, following a sterling 40-plus year career with the Judicial Branch. Tardy was named acting director in September 2011 and was officially appointed as director in January 2012.

"Throughout his long career, Mike has been an invaluable asset to the Supreme Court. An innovative administrator, a gifted leader, and a skillful diplomat, Mike has helped steer the Third Branch of Illinois government through some of its most difficult challenges. During a period of budgetary uncertainty, social change and rapid technological innovation, Mike has been instrumental in insuring that the judicial system remains available to all who need its protections," said Chief Justice Lloyd A. Karmeier. "He has overseen the implementation of statewide electronic filing and the introduction of new measures to improve pretrial release practices. He has helped place Illinois at the forefront of initiatives to improve access to justice, and his contributions have been critical to our implementation of new measures to insure that Illinois judges receive the best possible training and education."

Director Tardy served in both clinical and administrative positions within the Illinois judicial branch for the past 41 years. He initially worked for the Circuit Court of Cook County Social Service Department, a court agency charged with providing community-based supervision for adult misdemeanor and DUI offenders in Cook County. In his 13 years with the Cook County department, he started as a case worker and worked his way to district supervisor, managing three offices and a staff of 40.

Leading appellate attorneys review the Illinois Supreme Court opinions handed down Thursday, May 18. The cases are Better Government Ass'n v. Illinois High School Ass'n, In re Estate of Shelton, Ferris, Thompson & Zweig, Ltd v. Esposito, Chultem v. Ticor Title Insurance Co., and People v. Veach.

The Illinois Supreme Court hosted 'Law School for Legislators' on May 9, 2017, with all seven Supreme Court Justices and leadership and new members of the Illinois House of Representatives and Senate in attendance.

The event, held at the Illinois Supreme Court Building in Springfield, was intended to familiarize the legislative branch with court operations and to foster dialogue of communication, cooperation and coordination between the legislative and judicial branches.

Chief Justice Lloyd A. Karmeier, Justice Rita B. Garman, AOIC Director Michael J. Tardy addressed the attendees and spoke on topics including the role of the Supreme Court and its relation to the legislative branch and how cases are initiated and proceed through the Illinois Courts. The Justices took comments and questions at a reception following the program.

The legislators who attended were Senate President John Cullerton, Senator Tom Rooney, Representative Melissa Conyears-Ervin, Rep. Randy Frese, Rep. LaToya Greenwood, Rep Brad Halbrook, Rep. Michael Halpin, Rep. Theresa Mah, Rep. David Olsen,  Rep. Lindsay Parkhurst, Rep. Dave Severin and Rep. Daniel Swanson.

A leading appellate attorney reviews the Illinois Supreme Court opinion handed down Thursday, April 20. The case is People v. Way. 

People v. Way

By Kerry J. Bryson, Office of the State Appellate Defender

Ida Way was driving a vehicle when she crossed into oncoming traffic and struck another vehicle head-on, causing injuries to the driver of that vehicle as well as a passenger in her own car. Subsequent forensic testing revealed the presence of cannabis metabolite in Way's urine. She was charged with aggravated DUI based upon her having "any amount" of a drug, substance, or compound in her urine.

Way sought to defend against the charge by introducing evidence that a sudden, unforeseeable medical condition that caused her to lose consciousness was the proximate cause of the accident. She offered that her passenger would testify that she lost consciousness, three eyewitnesses would testify that they saw her shortly before the accident and she did not appear impaired, and her doctor would testify that it was possible that her loss of consciousness was due to her low blood pressure. The trial court rejected her request, concluding that the statute was one of strict liability "as to the accident." The appellate court looked to the law of proximate cause in civil cases and held that Way should have been permitted to present medical evidence.