Articles From J.A. Sebastian | Illinois State Bar Association

Summer of 2004: Legislation of note By J.A. Sebastian Bench and Bar, October 2004 During the month of July 2004, while the Governor and legislators debated the state's budget, several legislative proposals became effective and their enactment into law may be of interest to members of the bench and bar. The

When does Section 3-103(2) of the Administrative Review Law create a right to amend a complaint for administrative review: Smida provides the three conditions By J.A. Sebastian Administrative Law, October 2004 The Second District Appellate Court recently considered when a party should be allowed leave to amend a complaint for administrative review if a plaintiff fails, initially, to comply with section 3-107(a) of the Administrative Review Law by not naming a party of record.

Dues are due (and due and due. . .) By J.A. Sebastian Labor and Employment Law, August 2004 Public Act 93-853 (House Bill 4374) signed into law August 2, 2004, amends the Illinois Public Relations Act, Section 6(f), (5 ILCS 315/6(f)), to require employers to continue to collect union dues even after the collective bargaining agreement has ended.

Cases of note By Richard Posner, Alfred M. Swanson, Jr., George S. Miller, Barbara Crowder, Michael Kiley, Philip Lading, & J.A. Sebastian Bench and Bar, January 2004 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. No. 01 C 6329-Joan Humphrey Lefkow, Judge.

Reasonable, not perfect, competence of counsel: Yarborough v. Gentry By J.A. Sebastian General Practice, Solo, and Small Firm, December 2003 In a succinct and instructive decision, the United States Supreme Court held, in a per curiam decision, in Yarborough v. Gentry, that the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees reasonable, not perfect, competence in counsel, on petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

It’s in the mail: The clock is ticking! By J.A. Sebastian General Practice, Solo, and Small Firm, November 2003 The Illinois Supreme Court has clarified Section 3-103 of the Illinois Administrative Review Law (“ARL”) (735 ILCS 5/3-101 through 3-113), holding that the 35-day period for filing a complaint of an administrative agency decision starts when the decision is mailed, not when the decision is received in Nudell v. Forest Preserve Dist. of Cook County.

Petition for review filed on 42nd day held timely under Illinois Administrative Review Law By J.A. Sebastian Administrative Law, August 2003 The appellate court recently reconsidered and reversed its earlier dismissal of a direct review of an administrative order in Moren v. Illinois Dep't of Human Rights, No. 1-01-2080, slip op.

Legislative update: It’s technical, but new law makes it easier to collect old judgements By J.A. Sebastian General Practice, Solo, and Small Firm, January 2003 Public Act 92-817 (S.B. 39) approved and effective August 21, 2002, adds a new provision to the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure at 735 ILCS 5/2-1602, entitled "Revival of judgment."

Appeal strikes out: Veazey v. Doherty By J.A. Sebastian Administrative Law, April 2002 Whether construed as a jurisdictional defect, or viewed as nonjurisdictional, dismissal of an action to review a final decision of an administrative agency may result unless the complaint for review complies with the procedural requirements of the Illinois Administrative Review Law (735 ILCS 5/3-101 through 3-113).

Illinois’ continuum between the manifest weight standard and de novo review continues … By J.A. Sebastian Administrative Law, November 2001 This article summarizes five of the recent Illinois decisions that consider the judicial review continuum.

Reflections from a chair By J.A. Sebastian Administrative Law, November 2001 As immediate past chair of the Administrative Law Section Council, I am honored to recognize the extraordinary contributions of our newsletter editor and join in congratulating Paul Freehling for his 30th year as the section's one and only newsletter editor.

Administrative review law and necessary parties: who must be named By J.A. Sebastian Administrative Law, August 2001 After the state denied Darryl Veazey benefits under the Illinois Unemployment Insurance Act, the Cook County circuit court denied administrative review of the state agency's decision because the complaint failed to name the agency's Board of Review.

The A, B, and C of an ALJ decision: Gilchrist v. Human Rights Commission, No.1-99-1054, decided March 27, 2000 By J.A. Sebastian Administrative Law, July 2000 In Gilchrist v. Human Rights Commission, the First District Appellate Court held, sua sponte, that the Illinois Human Rights Commission (the "Commission") exceeded its statutory authority when it (1) entered an order that allowed an administrative law judge ("ALJ") to issue a written decision on a matter that the ALJ had not personally presided over, and (2) accepted, in its entirety, the "recommended order and decision" of that ALJ.

Finnerty v. Personnel Board of the City of Chicago, et al. By J.A. Sebastian Administrative Law, August 1999 The facts, in sum, concern an employee who was absent without leave. The legal issue relates to the quantum of evidence necessary for the manifest weight of the evidence standard.

The Lockett “minefield” By J.A. Sebastian Administrative Law, May 1999 Three cases are reviewed below. Each case addresses an aspect of the Administrative Review Law (ARL) of interest to practitioners.

Spot an error in your article? Contact Celeste Niemann at cniemann@isba.org. For information on obtaining a copy of an article, visit the ISBA Newsletters page.

Select a Different Author