Land of Lincoln Legal Aid, a non-profit organization that provides free legal services to low-income individuals in central and southern Illinois, is seeking a staff attorney at the Northern Regional Office in Springfield.
The position includes representing senior citizens in civil cases and transactional matters involving critical legal needs in a 12-county service area. It also requires travel to senior centers on a regular basis and participation in community legal education and outreach.
On September 9, 2019, Illinois lawyer Charlene Marsh was found guilty of indirect criminal contempt for engaging in the unauthorized practice of law by holding herself out as a lawyer and preparing pleadings in federal court on behalf of a pro se litigant. Ms. Marsh charged the client approximately $23,000 for 68 hours of legal research and document preparation. Ms. Marsh was ordered to pay $23,000 in restitution, $500 in court costs, sentenced to two years’ probation, and permanently enjoined from engaging in any further acts of the unauthorized practice of law. The case is ARDC v. Charlene Marsh, No. 17 MC1-600052 (September 9, 2019)
The Illinois Supreme Court has amended Rule 767, which pertains to reinstatement petitions for lawyers who have been disbarred or suspended.
The changes go into effect Jan. 1, 2020.
The amended Rule clarifies what attorneys must include in a petition for reinstatement.
Two articles in September’s Illinois Bar Journal explore the pros and cons of communicating with clients via texting, Facebook, and other digital and online tools. In the first article, ISBA members from a recent ISBA Central discussion thread debate best communication practices. In the second, Affinity Consulting’s Cyara Hotopp lists the do’s and don’ts of texting clients. The respective articles are available online:
Attorneys Barry Hines and Andrew White discuss the two major types of Illinois farm leases.
The Illinois Supreme Court handed down four opinions on Thursday, September 19. In Accettura v. Vacationland, Inc., the court clarified the distinction between rejection and revocation of acceptance for purposes of the Illinois version of the Uniform Commercial Code. In Carmichael v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., the court provided instruction on what is a proper counterclaim under section 2-608 of the Code of Civil Procedure and explained that a counterclaim is an independent, substantive cause of action that seeks affirmative relief and must stand or fall on its own merits. In People v. Custer, the court considered whether to extend the procedures established in Krankel and its progeny to proceedings commenced under the Post-Conviction Hearing Act and declined to do so. In People v. Smith, the court upheld the convictions of two defendants for aggravated battery of a senior citizen.
The Illinois Supreme Court on September 17 amended Rules 610, 613, 901, and 1101. All changes are effective immediately.
Amended Rule 610 alters the requirements for information to be included in motions for extension of time in criminal cases.
The Illinois Supreme Court announced the filing of lawyer disciplinary orders on Sept. 16, 2019. Sanctions were imposed because the lawyers engaged in professional misconduct by violating state ethics law.
While it has long been recognized that there is a separation of powers under the Illinois Condominium Property Act between condominium boards and unit owners, condominium boards have possessed almost all of the decision-making authority under the Act, including deciding rule violations. But, according to Ellis Levin in his September 2019 Illinois Bar Journal article, “Power to the Condo Unit Owner,” that power has shifted in Boucher v. 111 East Chestnut Condominium Association. In Boucher (Justice Neville’s final appellate opinion before joining the Illinois Supreme Court), the balance of power has shifted from condominium officers and boards to unit owners when unit owners protest rule violations and request meeting records.
Attorney Howard Ankin discusses section 8(d)(1) claims, which involve people who cannot go back to work for a former employer and have questions about potential earnings.