Chief Judge John T. Elsner has announced that the Court is accepting applications to fill a vacancy for the Office of Associate Judge of the 18th Judicial Circuit Court, DuPage County. This vacancy is the result of the retirement of Associate Judge Thomas C. Dudgeon.
Applications will be accepted until 5 p.m. on July 31, 2014.
Our panel of leading appellate attorneys review Thursday's Illinois Supreme Court opinions in the civil cases People ex rel. Madigan v. Burge and Kanerva v. Weems.
By Michael T. Reagan, Law Offices of Michael T. Reagan, Ottawa
People ex rel. Madigan v. Burge, which involves great public interest because of the alleged actions of defendant while supervisor of the Violent Crimes Unit detectives of an area for the Chicago Police Department, ends, as it began in the circuit court, with the conclusion that the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to consider this case. The reasoning and judgment of the circuit court were affirmed; the appellate court was reversed.
In 1997 Jon Burge applied for and received pension benefits from the policemen’s benefit fund. In 2003, a federal civil rights lawsuit was filed by a plaintiff who alleged that he was tortured and abused by officers under Burge’s command. In answers to written interrogatories in that suit, Burge denied under oath having knowledge of, or participating in, the torture or abuse of persons in custody of the Chicago Police Dept. In 2010, Burge was convicted of felonies for making false answers to interrogatories.
Asked and Answered
By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Q. I am a partner in a 16 attorney firm located in Baltimore, Maryland. Our clients are primarily business firms. I am the chair of our three member marketing committee which was formed three years ago. Our firm is increasing our commitment to marketing and have increased our budget over the past three years. However, we are not sure what we should be spending our money on. Your suggestions would be appreciated.
A. Hopefully, you have developed a marketing plan and a marketing budget tied to the specific objectives outlined in the plan. Here are a few general guidelines, tips, and best practices:
When the Illinois Supreme Court in March struck down the state's eavesdropping law as overly broad and thus unconstitutional, lawmakers were under pressure to quickly draft a new law to protect the privacy interests of citizens whose conversations may now be recorded without their consent.
Just before the General Assembly recessed in May, the Senate passed a new eavesdropping law (HB 4283), but the House adjourned before taking action on a Senate amendment.
The definition of private conversation under the Senate's amendment of HB 4283 is any communication between two or more persons intended to be of a private nature under circumstances "reasonably justifying that expectation."
The Senate amendment, however, contains exemptions that allow police officers, with permission from prosecutors, to record conversations as part of felony criminal investigations without a judicial warrant. Baker and representatives from the American Civil Liberties Union object to those exemptions, and they are likely to be the subject of continued debate when the General Assembly reconvenes. Find out more on the July Illinois Bar Journal. The implications of not having an eavesdropping law in place are nicely summarized by John Roska of the Land of Lincoln Legal Assistance Foundation in the Champaign News-Gazette.
Q. Do I need to get my client’s informed consent to have another lawyer (not in my firm) attend a routine status conference because I’ve got a scheduling conflict?
A. RPC 1.2(e) provides that a lawyer can’t delegate to another lawyer not in that lawyer’s firm the responsibility for performing work for the client without the client’s informed consent. Comment [14] to that Rule clarifies that it is designed to prevent a lawyer from transferring “complete or substantial responsibility” of a matter to another lawyer. The Comment goes on to say it is not intended to “prevent lawyers from engaging lawyers outside of their firm to stand in for discrete events in situations such as personal emergencies, illness, or schedule conflicts.” For further insight on the increasing use of “coverage attorneys” see this month’s Illinois Bar Journal.
ISBA Director of Legislative Affairs Jim Covington reviews legislation in Springfield of interest to ISBA members. In this episode he covers Township government (Public Act 98-653), Workers’ Compensation Act (Public Act 98-633), UM/UIM insurance (House Bill 5575), Independent examination in mental health proceedings (Senate Bill 3532), Local Records Act (House Bill 5623) and Condominiums and common-interest communities (House Bill 5322). More information on each bill is available below the video.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2071 proposes revisions of Circuit Rules 3, 10, 11, 22, 26.1, 28, 34, 45 and 46. Written comments on the proposed rule changes should be sent by August 1, 2014, to:
Comments can also be made via e-mail at: USCA7_Clerk@ca7.uscourts.gov
Asked and Answered
By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC
Q. Another attorney and I are planning on starting a law practice together. He has a larger book of business and 10 years more experience. Initially he will have a 60 percent ownership interest and I will have 40 percent. Compensation will be determined based upon these ownership percentages. How do you suggest we structure our decision-making and governance?
The Illinois Supreme Court announced on Monday an increase in the annual registration fee for attorneys practicing in Illinois. The increased funds will be directed to the regulatory body that disciplines attorneys and the Supreme Court Commission established to increase civility among lawyers.
Under amended Supreme Court Rule 756, the annual registration fee will increase from $342 to $382. That amounts to an increase of 11 cents per day for attorneys who are in active status for more than three years. The $40 increase will be remitted to the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (ARDC), which will receive $30; and the Commission on Professionalism, which will receive $10.
Is substitute service of process valid if it's on the defendant's father, in the defendant's driveway? You can make a good argument that the answer is "yes." Find out more in the June Illinois Bar Journal.