Newspapers weigh in on Cook County judicial retention ballot

The Chicago Tribune made its Cook County Circuit Court judicial recommendations in its October 9, 2010 editions, but I wanted to see whether the Chicago Sun-Times made different recommendations and report on them together.

The Sun-Times weighed in this morning, and both papers are urging a "no" vote on the retention bids of three Cook County Circuit Court judges.

The judges singled out by both papers for "no" votes are Dorothy F. Jones, Jim Ryan, and Susan Jeanine McDunn. (The Tribune, but not the Sun-Times, also recommended a "no" vote on William D. O'Neal. The Tribune's retention recommendations tracked those made by the Chicago Bar Association.)

Judge Dorothy F. Jones

The Tribune states, "Judge Dorothy Jones has been on the bench for 18 years, but hasn't improved with time. She shows her contempt for the public by refusing to be evaluated by local bar associations, which give a professional assessment for voters' use. The bar groups have found that Jones has very poor legal skills and acts unprofessionally on the bench."

The Sun-Times says, "Dorothy Jones' arrogant claim to fame every six years is to be the only judge who refuses to even submit her credentials to the bar groups for evaluation. But, then, perhaps she is well aware she would never make the grade."

The Chicago Bar Association's evaluation on Judge Jones reads as follows:

DOROTHY F. JONES.................NOT RECOMMENDED
The candidate declined to participate in the Judicial Evaluation Committee (JEC) screening process and, therefore,according to The Chicago Bar Association's governing resolution for the JEC, is automatically found NOT RECOMMENDED.

The Chicago Council of Lawyers stated:

Hon. Dorothy Jones – Not Recommended
Judge Dorothy Jones refused to participate in the evaluation process. The Council finds her Not Recommended for retention.

Because Judge Jones chose not to participate in any bar evaluation process, she was rated not qualified or not recommended by each of the bar associations announcing ratings.

The new Judicial Performance Commission of Cook County also urges a "no" vote on Judge Jones. The JPC evaluation states:

The Judicial Performance Commission does not recommend Judge Dorothy F. Jones for retention.

Biography: Dorothy Jones graduated from DePaul University College of Law and was admitted to practice in 1979.

Judge Dorothy Jones was elected to the Circuit Court in 1992. She is currently assigned to a primarily pro se call in the First Municipal District. Prior to election, she was an assistant public defender in Cook County.

Summary: The Commission found predominantly unfavorable impressions of Judge Jones in the legal community. The investigation revealed a lack of clarity and consistency in her decisions, as well as questions about her temperament and ability to manage the courtroom. Although Judge Jones has a reputation for honesty and efficiency, the Commission does not feel those qualities outweigh the deficiencies of performance, temperament and management found in the investigation.

The Judicial Performance Commission does not recommend Judge Dorothy F. Jones for retention.

Judge Jones was invited to respond to questionnaires from the Chicago Tribune and the Illinois Civil Justice League. She did not respond to either. As of this writing, Judge Jones has also not submitted anything to the Cook County Retention Judges website.

Judge Jim Ryan

The Tribune says, "Shortly after Judge Jim Ryan was elected, he refused to answer questions in a deposition that was part of an investigation into alleged beatings of inmates at Cook County Jail. Ryan had been a top aide and legal adviser to former Sheriff Michael Sheahan. A judge asserting his constitutional right against self-incrimination shows, we suppose, at least passing knowledge of the law. But it sure doesn't inspire confidence. The Council of Lawyers says it has found "certain misstatements and omissions" from Ryan about his judicial assignment. Some lawyers report his courtroom behavior is "an embarrassment."

The Sun-Times stated:

James J. Ryan has similar deficiencies [to Judge Jones]. The CBA says Ryan "does not possess the requisite legal knowledge, ability and temperament" to be a judge. The Chicago Council of Lawyers, commenting on the real reason Ryan was pulled from an assignment in the Bridgeview courthouse, writes, "He can be short-tempered on the bench, and some [lawyers] have characterized his judicial behavior as an embarrassment."

Shortly after he was elected to the bench six years ago, Ryan was questioned by lawyers about whether, as a top aide to his second-cousin Sheriff Michael Sheahan, he had helped deep-six an investigation into an alleged mass-beating of prisoners at the County Jail. Ryan, invoking his 5th Amendment protection against self-incrimination, refused to answer most questions.

The Chicago Bar Association evaluation stated:

JIM RYAN..................................NOT RECOMMENDED
Judge Jim Ryan is “Not Recommended” for retention as a Circuit Court Judge. Judge Ryan was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1992 and was elected to the Circuit Court in 2004. Judge Ryan does not possess the requisite legal knowledge, ability, and temperament to serve as a Circuit Court Judge.

The Chicago Council of Lawyers initially recommended Judge Ryan's retention, but subsequently changed its position:

Hon. James J. Ryan – Not Qualified

Judge James J. Ryan was admitted to practice in 1992 and was elected to the bench in 2004 after refusing to be evaluated by the Council. Before taking the bench, Judge Ryan was an Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney from 1993 to 1995 and was the Director of Operations and General Counsel for the Cook County Sheriff’s Office from 1995 to 2004. From 2004 to 2006 he sat in Traffic Court after which he was assigned to the courthouse in Bridgeview, where he presided over traffic and domestic violence cases. He currently hears felony preliminary hearings. His judicial career has mostly involved less complex matters.

While many praise Judge Ryan's ability to manage his voluminous court call, many others report that he can be short-tempered on the bench, and some have characterized his judicial behavior as an embarrassment. In addition, the Council has uncovered certain misstatements and omissions in Judge Ryan’s evaluation material with respect to the circumstances surrounding his assignment in Bridgeview and his transfer to his current assignment. These misstatements and omissions raise concerns for the Council regarding the candidate's judgment, his candor, and his respect for the judicial screening process. Subsequent investigation of these matters did not allay the Council’s concerns. The Council finds him Not Qualified for retention.

Judge Ryan did secure positive ratings from the Asian American Bar Association (AABA), Black Women Lawyers' Association of Greater Chicago (BWLA), Cook County Bar Association (CCBA), Decalogue Society of Lawyers (DSL), Hispanic Lawyers of Illinois (HLAI), Puerto Rican Bar Association (PRBA), and Women's Bar Association of Illinois (WBAI). The Judicial Performance Commission of Cook County also recommended Judge Ryan's retention. Three other Alliance members made negative recommendations, namely, the Hellenic Bar Association (HBA), Illinois State Bar Association (ISBA) and Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago (LAGBAC).

Judge Ryan also did not respond to either the Tribune questionnaire or the ICJL questionnaire. Judge Ryan has also not submitted anything, at least as of the present time, to the Cook County Retention Judges website.

Judge Susan Jeanine McDunn

The Chicago Tribune writes, "The Illinois Appellate Court several years ago said Judge Susan Jeanine McDunn had 'disgraced the judiciary and the people of Illinois.' McDunn tried to sidetrack two adoptions by lesbian parents, putting her personal beliefs above the law. She hasn't had such a notorious professional lapse since then. But she's still a poor judge and richly deserves to be removed."

The Sun-Times also writes about this incident in recommending a "no" vote:

Susan Jeanine McDunn has been rebuked by an Illinois Appellate Court for conduct that, the court says, "disgraced the judiciary and the people of Illinois." Her offense was overruling an order by her presiding judge in an effort to derail an uncontested adoption by lesbian parents. The Chicago Council of Lawyers called her failure to follow adoption law ''unacceptable" and "well beyond the pale of appropriate judicial conduct." The council says McDunn continues to display an "inappropriate temperament" on the bench. The Chicago Bar Association concluded she "does not possess the requisite legal knowledge and ability" to serve as a judge.

The Chicago Bar Association evaluation reads:

SUSAN JEANINE MCDUNN.......NOT RECOMMENDED
Judge Susan Jeanine McDunn is “Not Recommended” for retention as a Circuit Court Judge. Judge McDunn was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1980 and has served as a judge since 1993. Since 2007, Judge McDunn has served in the Law Division and is considered a hard worker. However, Judge McDunn does not possess the requisite legal knowledge and ability to serve as a Circuit Court Judge.

The Chicago Council of Lawyers states:

Hon. Susan J. McDunn -- Not Qualified
Judge Susan McDunn was elected to the bench in 1992. She is currently assigned to the Law Division. Previously, she was in the County Division and the First Municipal District. Judge McDunn was admitted to practice in 1980. Prior to election, she was in private practice.

Judge McDunn is considered to have adequate legal ability. Judge McDunn was found Not Qualified for retention in 2004, having been publicly rebuked by the Illinois Appellate Court for judicial conduct the court says, “disgraced the judiciary and the people of Illinois.” The Council found her behavior in failing to follow Illinois adoption law based on her personal beliefs to be “unacceptable and fall well beyond the pale of appropriate judicial conduct.” The Council believes this behavior alone disqualifies Judge McDunn, but an evaluation conducted for the 2010 retention election revealed that many lawyers believe she has difficulty handling complex matters that come before her and that she demonstrates an inappropriate temperament. The Council finds her Not Qualified for retention.

The Judicial Performance Commission also recommends a "no" vote on Judge McDunn:

The Judicial Performance Commission does not recommend Judge Susan J. McDunn for retention.

Biography: Susan J. McDunn graduated from DePaul University College of Law and was admitted to practice in 1980.

Judge McDunn was elected to the bench in 1992 and seated in 1993. She is currently assigned to the Law Division. Previously, she was in the County Division and the First Municipal District. Prior to election, she was in private practice.

Summary: Judge McDunn appears attentive to proceedings and is punctual for court. However, the Commission notes significant concerns about her ability to handle difficult, complex matters. She is described as unwilling to reconsider rulings when presented with additional case law and demonstrates an inappropriate temperament. The Commission received reports of the judge losing her temper and appearing unable to control her courtroom.

In an adoption case in 1999, Judge McDunn was rebuked by the Appellate Court for judicial conduct that the court said “disgraced the judiciary and people of Illinois.”

Although the Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board concluded that Judge McDunn did not make statements against persons based upon their sexual orientation, her actions demonstrated a lack of respect for the law. There is no indication that Judge McDunn has rehabilitated her performance. Moreover, the Commission received comments from some lawyers that in light of this event, Judge McDunn does not command the respect of the legal community.

The Judicial Performance Commission does not recommend Judge Susan J. McDunn for retention.

Judge McDunn received "yes" recommendations from the Black Women Lawyers' Association of Greater Chicago (BWLA), the Cook County Bar Association (CCBA), the Hellenic Bar Association (HBA), and the Women's Bar Association of Illinois (WBAI). However, the Asian American Bar Association (AABA), the Decalogue Society of Lawyers (DSL), the Hispanic Lawyers of Illinois (HLAI), the Illinois State Bar Association (ISBA), the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago (LAGBAC), and the Puerto Rican Bar Association of Illinois (PRBA) all recommended "no" votes.

Judge McDunn did respond to the Tribune questionnaire and the ICJL questionnaire. Her complete responses to both questionnaires are available by following the links in the preceding sentence. In both responses, Judge McDunn presents her response on the adoption case that features so prominently in her negative evaluations. She told the ICJL that she is proud of the actions she took in these cases, stating, in part:

These cases involved adoption petitions filed by lesbian couples. In these cases, I ordered that full evidentiary hearings be held to determine whether the adoptions would be in the best interest of the children as was required by then-existing, controlling law. In these highly controversial and sensitive cases, I followed the law and upheld the rights of these children under very difficult circumstances, and despite strong opposition and pressure to do otherwise. The Illinois Courts Commission, a constitutionally created body which included an Illinois Supreme Court Justice and two long-standing Illinois Appellate Court Justices, said that I "conscientiously [applied] existing law to an unresolved question: what impact does the sexual orientation of the petitioners have on the child's best interests?" It noted that judicial canons "required [me] to uphold the independence of the judiciary and to remain unswayed by partisan interests, public clamor or fear of criticism, and stated that I fulfilled my "mandated duty of placing the best interests of the children above all others."

Judge McDunn also has submitted information for the Cook County Retention Judges website which is available from the link in this sentence.