
The Illinois Supreme Court first appointed Judge Kaplan to the bench in 2010. Most recently, Judge Kaplan was the Democratic nominee for judge in the far north suburban 12th Judicial Subcircuit. His most recent appointment terminated December 1.
Cases, controversies, the occasional water-cooler rant, and news about Cook County judges and judicial elections Feel free to browse here or on page two of this blog.
![]() |
Anthony E. Simpkins |
![]() |
Maryam Ahmad |
![]() |
Photo of Mr. Rauner voting on Election Day, taken from the Glenview News website. |
The Park Ridge residents who made personal or representative appearances at the zoning board hearing lived in the immediate vicinity of the plaintiffs' property. They were more than disinterested witnesses; they actively maintained a position opposed to the plaintiffs'. Their interest in the outcome of the hearing was substantial. They did not seek administrative review of the board's decision because the decision was favorable to them. Their interest became jeopardized a second time when the plaintiffs challenged the decision in the circuit court; yet they were neither notified of the suit nor made defendants. They were thus deprived of the opportunity of protecting their interest -- the monetary value of their homes and the aesthetic level of their neighborhood -- in court.I don't see that case as saying the persons opposing the zoning were necessary parties because they were opposed to it, but rather that they were necessary parties because, as neighbors, they had an interest in the zoning determination, whether they were for it or against it. I suppose, upon consideration of Mr. White's piece, the real legal question will be, in this case, if the neighbors are even arguably necessary parties, whether the suit against them is sufficiently "retaliatory and meritless" to overcome the burden shifting provisions of Section 20 of the Citizen Participation Act, 735 ILCS 110/20.
The plaintiffs' complaint for administrative review was fatally defective because it did not name all parties of record as defendants. The requirement of paragraph 271, chapter 110, Ill. Rev. Stat. 1967, is both mandatory and jurisdictional; it was not waived by the defendants' failure to raise this objection in the trial court.
From my Monday-morning-quarterback armchair I will note that it would have been prudent to have a paragraph in the complaint saying something like "the Neighbor Defendants are named solely as required by Illinois law as potential parties of record to the administrative hearing, and no relief is sought specifically from them." It also would have been prudent to have an advance media strategy when this hit; a furor about SLAPPs was predictable. Nobody's perfect.The probabilities are that one of these 22 defendants may be looking for a new mortgage, or selling their house, or seeking financing for a business venture during the pendency of this lawsuit. The developer's suit against them will show up in the course of the lender's investigation. In a gentler time, a disclaimer such as Mr. White suggests might have been sufficient to soothe the ruffled feathers of a nervous would-be lender. It might even work in the world we live in today. It sure would be worth a try -- and it surely would be helpful to a court determining, if it ever comes to this point, whether a party was acting in good faith in naming defendants as it did.
The locus in quo (from Google Maps) |
This Act applies to any motion to dispose of a claim in a judicial proceeding on the grounds that the claim is based on, relates to, or is in response to any act or acts of the moving party in furtherance of the moving party's rights of petition, speech, association, or to otherwise participate in government.A party who succeeds in knocking out what is often referred to as a SLAPP suit (for "Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation" in government) can recover attorney's fees and costs under Section 25 of the Act, 735 ILCS 110/25.
Acts in furtherance of the constitutional rights to petition, speech, association, and participation in government are immune from liability, regardless of intent or purpose, except when not genuinely aimed at procuring favorable government action, result, or outcome.
(a) On the filing of any motion as described in Section 15 [735 ILCS 110/15], a hearing and decision on the motion must occur within 90 days after notice of the motion is given to the respondent. An appellate court shall expedite any appeal or other writ, whether interlocutory or not, from a trial court order denying that motion or from a trial court's failure to rule on that motion within 90 days after that trial court order or failure to rule.This is a burden shifting provision. Typically, on a motion to dismiss, all well-pleaded facts in a complaint are assumed to be true. Here, though, the party responding to the motion must come forward with "clear and convincing evidence that the acts of the moving party are not immunized" by the Citizen Participation Act. But the Illinois Supreme Court has held that the burden does not shift unless and until the movants meet their "initial burden of proving that plaintiff's lawsuit was solely 'based on, relate[d] to, or in response to' their acts in furtherance of their rights of petition, speech or association, or to participate in government." Sandholm v. Kuecker, 2012 IL 111443, ¶56. In Samoylovich v. Montesdeoca, 2014 IL App (1st) 121545, the Appellate Court interpreted Sandholm as requiring that a movant under the Citizen Participation Act prove that the suit against him or her is "retaliatory and meritless" before the burden shift of Section 20 can be properly invoked. Of course, persons sued merely for testifying against a proposed zoning change at a zoning hearing might just clear that initial hurdle without breaking a sweat.
(b) Discovery shall be suspended pending a decision on the motion. However, discovery may be taken, upon leave of court for good cause shown, on the issue of whether the movants (sic) acts are not immunized from, or are not in furtherance of acts immunized from, liability by this Act.
(c) The court shall grant the motion and dismiss the judicial claim unless the court finds that the responding party has produced clear and convincing evidence that the acts of the moving party are not immunized from, or are not in furtherance of acts immunized from, liability by this Act.
To summarize, the one judge singled out as unworthy of retention by the Chicago Bar Association, Judge Thomas E. Flanagan, was deemed "qualified" by the Chicago Council of Lawyers and each of the other member bar associations of the Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening. The Chicago Council of Lawyers found only one judge not qualified, Judge Annie O'Donnell. The Chicago Tribune follows the lead of the Chicago Council of Lawyers on the retention ballot, urging a "no" vote only on Judge O'Donnell. Several of the Alliance groups rated one or more judges as not qualified for retention (the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago urges six "no" votes, the most of any Alliance group -- see the "grids" post) but any judge rated not qualified by one or more Alliance groups was rated qualified by the CBA. The majority of judges on the retention ballot are rated qualified by each and every evaluating bar group.
- Chicago Bar Association releases ratings for Cook County judges seeking retention;
- Alliance retention "grids" issued;
- Chicago Council of Lawyers finds 18 retention candidates "Well Qualified" for retention; the Council rates Judge Michael Toomin "Highly Qualified"; and
- CCL rates one judge Not Qualified for retention, but it's not the same judge singled out by the CBA.
The Illinois Civil Justice League released its ratings of Cook County retention hopefuls on October 21 on its IllinoisJudges.net site. The ICJL rated retention candidates as Highly Recommended, Recommended, No Position, or Not Recommended. According to ICJL President Ed Murnane, the "No Position" rating was assigned to candidates or judges "who did not return our questionnaire and/or their candidacy left us insufficient information to assign a rating." The ICJL rated candidates "Not Recommended" if, in the opinion of that organization, there were "questions about the integrity, impartiality, fairness, or conduct of the candidate, judge, or their campaign." According to Murnane, judges earned a "Recommended" rating if they "demonstrated a satisfactory level of competency in regards to their legal and/or judicial careers, and/or who have demonstrated their commitment to educating the voters about their background, experience and viewpoints on the judicial system." The "Highly Recommended" rating was reserved, according to Murnane, for "judges who have demonstrated a high level of competency based on those criteria."
- Edward A. Arce
- Janet Adams Brosnahan
- James Brown
- Eileen O'Neill Burke
- Anna Helen Demacopoulos
- Donna L. Cooper
- Peter A. Felice
- James Patrick Flannery
- Rodolfo (Rudy) Garcia
- Robert E. Gordon
- Michael B. Hyman
- Themis N. Karzenis
- Diana L. Kenworthy
- Maureen Ward Kirby
- William G. Lacy
- Thomas J. Lipscomb
- Cassandra Lewis
- Pamela Elizabeth Loza
- Veronica B. Mathein
- Sheila McGinnis
- Lewis Nixon
- Sebastian Patti
- Edmund Ponce de Leon
- Jackie Marie Portman
- James L. Rhodes
- Dominique C. Ross
- Kristyna Colleen Ryan
- Patrick J. Sherlock
- Donald J. Suriano
- Shelley Lynn Sutker-Dermer
- Sandra Tristano
- Valarie E. Turner
- Debra B. Walker
Assigned to the Appellate Court:The IVI-IPO has also recommended several Circuit Court judges seeking retention for a "yes" vote. The IVI-IPO has not announced that it opposes any judicial retention bid; it has merely endorsed some, but not all, of the Circuit Court judges seeking retention. The retention candidates singled out by the IVI-IPO are:
Michael Hyman – Recommended
Robert Gordon – No Position
Mary Anne Mason – No Position
Assigned to the Law Division:
Joan Powell – Recommended
Eileen [O'Neill] Burke – Recommended
Patrick Sherlock – Not Recommended
Eileen Brewer – No Position
James O’Hara – Not Recommended
Margaret Brennan – Not Recommended
Janet Brosnahan – Recommended
Lynn Egan – Recommended
Gregory Wojkowski – Highly Recommended
James Flannery – No Position
Thomas Lipscomb – Recommended
Themis Karnezis – Highly Recommended
Thomas Flanagan – No Position
Assigned to the Chancery Division:
Lewis Nixon – Highly Recommended
Kathleen Kennedy – Recommended
Rodolfo Garcia – No Position
Assigned to the Probate Division:
Mary Ellen Coghlan – Recommended
Ann Collins-Dole – Recommended
Kathleen McGury – Recommended
John Fleming – Recommended
James Riley – Recommended
Assigned to the County Division:
Edmund Ponce de Leon – Recommended
Margarita Kulys Hoffman – Recommended
Assigned to the Domestic Violence Division:
Diana Kenworthy – Recommended
Ursula Walowski – Recommended
Sebastian Patti – Recommended
Assigned to the Domestic Relations Division:
Debra Walker – Recommended
Raul Vega – Recommended
Assigned to the Criminal Division:
Diane Gordon Cannon – Recommended
William Lacy – Recommended
Clayton Crane – Recommended
Kenneth Wadas – Recommended
Evelyn Clay – Recommended
Thomas Byrne – Recommended
Rickey Jones – Recommended
Mauricio Araujo – Recommended
Assigned to the Juvenile Justice Division:
Donna Cooper – Highly Recommended
Assigned to the First Municipal District:
Anita Rivkin-Carothers – Recommended
Jackie Portman – Recommended
Assigned to the Second Municipal District:
Shelley Sutker-Dermer – Recommended
Assigned to the Fourth Municipal District:
Kristyna Ryan – Recommended
Assigned to the Fifth Municipal District:
Patrick Rogers – Recommended
Peter Felice – Recommended
Assigned to the Sixth Municipal District:
James Rhodes – Recommended
Anna Demacopoulos – Recommended
Frank Zelzinski – Recommended
- Ann Collins Dole
- Anna H. Demacopoulos
- Clayton J. Crane
- Debra Walker
- Diana Kenworthy
- Donna Cooper
- Edmund Ponce de Leon
- Edward A. Arce
- Eileen Brewer
- Eileen O'Neill Burke
- Evelyn B. Clay
- Jackie Marie Portman
- James P. Flannery, Jr.
- James Rhodes
- Kathleen Kennedy
- Kathleen McGury
- Kenneth J. Wadas
- Kristyna C. Ryan
- Lewis Nixon
- Lynn M. Egan
- Marilyn F. Johnson
- Marjorie C. Laws
- Mary Anne Mason
- Mauricio Araujo
- Michael B. Hyman
- Raul Vega
- Rickey Jones
- Robert E. Gordon
- Sebastian Thomas Patti
- Thomas J. Lipscomb
- Ursula Walowski
- William Lacy
When you vote on November 4th, you will see a Judge that must not be re-elected. You may know her as Anita Rivkin-Carothers and she is known as the “Gang Lawyer”.The bar associations have made a more favorable assessment of Judge Rivkin-Carothers' qualifications for retention. Judge Rivkin-Carothers has been rated "Qualified" for retention by the Chicago Bar Association. The CBA states:
Anita Rivkin-Carothers defended cop-killer Murray Blue years ago, who murdered Officer Daniel Doffyn and injured Officer Milan “Mike” Bubalo. Rivkin-Carothers said during opening statements that she intends to prove that Doffyn was accidentally shot by his partner during a frantic moment of gunfire. Rivkin-Carothers went on to say that after the shooting, investigators, including the chief administrator of the police department’s Office of Professional Standards, got together and filed a false report in which they blamed Blue.
Ballistics reports showed the bullets that struck Doffyn came from Blue’s Tec-9 automatic machine pistol.
She remains openly hostile to officers who come before her.
Judge Anita Rivkin-Carothers is “QUALIFIED” for retention as a Circuit Court Judge. Judge Rivkin-Carothers was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1985. Judge Rivkin-Carothers served as an Assistant Cook County Public Defender from 1985-1987 before entering private practice. Judge Rivkin-Carothers was appointed to the Circuit Court in 2007 and elected a Circuit Court Judge in 2008 and is currently assigned to a trial call in the First Municipal District. Judge Rivkin-Carothers has a fine demeanor and is well regarded by the lawyers who appear before her.The Chicago Council of Lawyers has also rated Judge Rivkin-Carothers as "Qualified" for retention. The Council states:
Prior to becoming a judge, Anita Rivkin-Carothers was in private practice between 1987 and 2007 doing complex criminal defense litigation.. She also for several years as an Assistant Cook County Public Defender in the felony trial division. Judge Rivkin-Carothers is currently sitting at the First Municipal District where she presides over bodily injury and property damage jury trials. Judge Rivkin-Carothers is considered to have good legal ability. She is praised for her temperament and for being respectful of all parties appearing before her. She is reportedly fair to parties and is knowledgeable about the law. The Council finds her Qualified for retention.Each of the other member bar associations of the Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening has found Judge Rivkin-Carothers qualified for retention as well.
Judge James L. Kaplan is “Qualified” for the office of Circuit Court Judge. Judge Kaplan was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1971 and was appointed to the Circuit Court in 2010. Judge Kaplan is thoughtful, possesses a good demeanor, and has performed well on the bench.The Chicago Council of Lawyers says:
Judge James L. Kaplan was appointed to the Circuit Court in 2010. He was admitted to practice in 1971. Before becoming a Circuit Judge, he was senior partner with the law firm of Kaplan & Sorosky Ltd., and served as a judge on the Illinois Court of Claims. His practice primarily involved workers’ compensation matters. Judge Kaplan was considered to be a good lawyer with good legal ability and temperament. As a judge, he is reported to demonstrate a good temperament and ability to manage a courtroom. The Council finds Mr. Kaplan Qualified for the Circuit Court.Other Bar Association Evaluations:
Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Chicago Area | Qualified |
Black Women Lawyers’ Association of Greater Chicago | Recommended |
Cook County Bar Association | Recommended |
Decalogue Society of Lawyers | Recommended |
Hellenic Bar Association | Recommended |
Hispanic Lawyers Association of Illinois | Qualified |
Illinois State Bar Association | Qualified |
Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago | Recommended |
Puerto Rican Bar Association of Illinois | Recommended |
Women’s Bar Association of Illinois | Recommended |
James Pieczonka is “Not Recommended” for the office of Circuit Court Judge. Mr. Pieczonka was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1983 and is currently a solo practitioner concentrating in Taxation, Real Estate and Condominium Law. Mr. Pieczonka’s practice and court experience is limited. Mr. Pieczonka held a real estate broker’s license from 2004-2007 and was actively involved as a broker during this period. The candidate owns a number of properties that are currently in foreclosure and is personally involved in several residual court actions. Mr. Pieczonka needs to gain additional practice experience and resolve these financial responsibility concerns before reapplying to serve as a Circuit Court Judge.The Chicago Council of Lawyers says:
James Paul Pieczonka was admitted to practice in 1983. He has spent most of his career as a sole practitioner doing both transactional work and litigation. In addition to his legal practice, he has been involved in real estate development matters. From 1985 to 1996, he also worked as an Administrative Law Judge for the Illinois Department of Revenue in the Hearings Division. Mr. Pieczonka has limited litigation experience. Some question his litigation skills. Much of his career has been related to transactional work and real estate development. The Council finds him Not Qualified for the Circuit Court.Other Bar Association Evaluations:
Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Chicago Area | Not Qualified |
Black Women Lawyers’ Association of Greater Chicago | Not Recommended |
Cook County Bar Association | Not Recommended |
Decalogue Society of Lawyers | Not Recommended |
Hellenic Bar Association | Not Recommended |
Hispanic Lawyers Association of Illinois | Qualified |
Illinois State Bar Association | Not Qualified |
Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago | Not Recommended |
Puerto Rican Bar Association of Illinois | Not Recommended |
Women’s Bar Association of Illinois | Not Recommended |
John J. Mahoney is “Highly Qualified” for the office of Circuit Court Judge. Mr. Mahoney was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1984 and is currently serving as Deputy Supervisor of the Public Corruption and Financial Crimes Unit of the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office. Mr. Mahoney has extensive criminal trial experience and has handled many complex cases. Mr. Mahoney is well regarded for his knowledge of the law, legal ability, fine demeanor, and temperament.The Chicago Council of Lawyers says:
John J. Mahoney was admitted to practice in 1984. He serves as an Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney, and currently is the Supervisor of the Public Corruption and Financial Crimes Unit in the Special Prosecutions Bureau. He also supervises the Money Laundering Unit, the Intellectual Crimes Unit, the Mortgage Fraud Unit, and the soon to be formed Insurance Fraud Unit. His former positions include being a lead prosecutor in the Felony Trial Division. Between 1991 and 1997 he was a lawyer with the Peoples Energy Corporation, Office of the General Counsel, practicing before the Illinois Commerce Commission as well as in a variety of divisions of the Circuit Court of Cook County. Mr. Mahoney has had a wide variety of litigation experience in highly complex matters. He has also handled 20 appellate cases as principal counsel. His answers to the judicial evaluation matters were thoughtful. Mr. Mahoney is considered to have very good legal ability with a professional demeanor. He is especially praised for both his litigation skills and his skill at supervising complex litigation. He is the coauthor of the Illinois statute known as the Illinois Financial Crime Law. The Council finds him Well Qualified for the Circuit Court.Other Bar Association Evaluations:
Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Chicago Area | Qualified |
Black Women Lawyers’ Association of Greater Chicago | Recommended |
Cook County Bar Association | Not Recommended |
Decalogue Society of Lawyers | Highly Recommended |
Hellenic Bar Association | Recommended |
Hispanic Lawyers Association of Illinois | Highly Qualified |
Illinois State Bar Association | Highly Qualified |
Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago | Recommended |
Puerto Rican Bar Association of Illinois | Highly Recommended |
Women’s Bar Association of Illinois | Recommended |
Ian Brenson is “Qualified” for the office of Circuit Court Judge. Mr. Brenson was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1989 and is a sole practitioner concentrating in general litigation, business law, and appellate practice. While Mr. Brenson has limited jury trial experience, he possesses the requisite legal knowledge, temperament, and ability to serve as a Circuit Court Judge.The Chicago Council of Lawyers says:
Ian Brenson did not participate in the March 2014 Primary Election, but will appear on the ballot in the November 2014 general election. The Council did not evaluate him for the Circuit Court.Other Bar Association Evaluations:
Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Chicago Area | Not Rated |
Black Women Lawyers’ Association of Greater Chicago | Not Evaluated |
Cook County Bar Association | Not Evaluated |
Decalogue Society of Lawyers | Not Evaluated |
Hellenic Bar Association | Not Rated |
Hispanic Lawyers Association of Illinois | Not Rated |
Illinois State Bar Association | Not Rated |
Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago | Not Evaluated |
Puerto Rican Bar Association of Illinois | Not Rated |
Women’s Bar Association of Illinois | Not Rated |
Voters in the far north suburban 12th Subcircuit or far west suburban 4th Subcircuit may also find these posts helpful:
- Chicago Bar Association releases ratings for Cook County judges seeking retention;
- Alliance retention "grids" issued;
- Chicago Council of Lawyers finds 18 retention candidates "Well Qualified" for retention; the Council rates Judge Michael Toomin "Highly Qualified"; and
- CCL rates one judge Not Qualified for retention, but it's not the same judge singled out by the CBA.
- CBA ratings in "contested" Cook County judicial races on the November ballot,
- Council, Alliance ratings in the two contested Cook County judicial elections,
- ISBA modifies rating of Republican candidate in 4th Subcircuit contest , and
- Alliance issues revised ratings in 4th Subcircuit, one retention race
You may find some these prior posts here on FWIW to be helpful as well:
- Edward A. Arce
- Janet Adams Brosnahan
- James Brown
- Eileen O'Neill Burke
- Anna Helen Demacopoulos
- Donna L. Cooper
- Peter A. Felice
- James Patrick Flannery
- Rodolfo (Rudy) Garcia
- Robert E. Gordon
- Michael B. Hyman
- Themis N. Karzenis
- Diana L. Kenworthy
- Maureen Ward Kirby
- William G. Lacy
- Thomas J. Lipscomb
- Cassandra Lewis
- Pamela Elizabeth Loza
- Veronica B. Mathein
- Sheila McGinnis
- Lewis Nixon
- Sebastian Patti
- Edmund Ponce de Leon
- Jackie Marie Portman
- James L. Rhodes
- Dominique C. Ross
- Kristyna Colleen Ryan
- Patrick J. Sherlock
- Donald J. Suriano
- Shelley Lynn Sutker-Dermer
- Sandra Tristano
- Valarie E. Turner
- Debra B. Walker
The Chicago Tribune follows the lead of the Chicago Council of Lawyers on the retention ballot, urging a no vote only on Judge Annie O'Donnell.
- Chicago Bar Association releases ratings for Cook County judges seeking retention;
- Alliance retention "grids" issued;
- Chicago Council of Lawyers finds 18 retention candidates "Well Qualified" for retention; the Council rates Judge Michael Toomin "Highly Qualified"; and
- CCL rates one judge Not Qualified for retention, but it's not the same judge singled out by the CBA.
Assigned to the Appellate Court:The IVI-IPO has also recommended several Circuit Court judges seeking retention for a "yes" vote. The IVI-IPO has not announced that it opposes any judicial retention bid; it has merely endorsed some, but not all, of the Circuit Court judges seeking retention. The retention candidates singled out by the IVI-IPO are:
Michael Hyman – Recommended
Robert Gordon – No Position
Mary Anne Mason – No Position
Assigned to the Law Division:
Joan Powell – Recommended
Eileen [O'Neill] Burke – Recommended
Patrick Sherlock – Not Recommended
Eileen Brewer – No Position
James O’Hara – Not Recommended
Margaret Brennan – Not Recommended
Janet Brosnahan – Recommended
Lynn Egan – Recommended
Gregory Wojkowski – Highly Recommended
James Flannery – No Position
Thomas Lipscomb – Recommended
Themis Karnezis – Highly Recommended
Thomas Flanagan – No Position
Assigned to the Chancery Division:
Lewis Nixon – Highly Recommended
Kathleen Kennedy – Recommended
Rodolfo Garcia – No Position
Assigned to the Probate Division:
Mary Ellen Coghlan – Recommended
Ann Collins-Dole – Recommended
Kathleen McGury – Recommended
John Fleming – Recommended
James Riley – Recommended
Assigned to the County Division:
Edmund Ponce de Leon – Recommended
Margarita Kulys Hoffman – Recommended
Assigned to the Domestic Violence Division:
Diana Kenworthy – Recommended
Ursula Walowski – Recommended
Sebastian Patti – Recommended
Assigned to the Domestic Relations Division:
Debra Walker – Recommended
Raul Vega – Recommended
Assigned to the Criminal Division:
Diane Gordon Cannon – Recommended
William Lacy – Recommended
Clayton Crane – Recommended
Kenneth Wadas – Recommended
Evelyn Clay – Recommended
Thomas Byrne – Recommended
Rickey Jones – Recommended
Mauricio Araujo – Recommended
Assigned to the Juvenile Justice Division:
Donna Cooper – Highly Recommended
Assigned to the First Municipal District:
Anita Rivkin-Carothers – Recommended
Jackie Portman – Recommended
Assigned to the Second Municipal District:
Shelley Sutker-Dermer – Recommended
Assigned to the Fourth Municipal District:
Kristyna Ryan – Recommended
Assigned to the Fifth Municipal District:
Patrick Rogers – Recommended
Peter Felice – Recommended
Assigned to the Sixth Municipal District:
James Rhodes – Recommended
Anna Demacopoulos – Recommended
Frank Zelzinski – Recommended
So -- early voters -- you have some resources with which to make informed decisions on the judicial retention ballot, even if the retention ballot is, like this post, rather long.
- Ann Collins Dole
- Anna H. Demacopoulos
- Clayton J. Crane
- Debra Walker
- Diana Kenworthy
- Donna Cooper
- Edmund Ponce de Leon
- Edward A. Arce
- Eileen Brewer
- Eileen O'Neill Burke
- Evelyn B. Clay
- Jackie Marie Portman
- James P. Flannery, Jr.
- James Rhodes
- Kathleen Kennedy
- Kathleen McGury
- Kenneth J. Wadas
- Kristyna C. Ryan
- Lewis Nixon
- Lynn M. Egan
- Marilyn F. Johnson
- Marjorie C. Laws
- Mary Anne Mason
- Mauricio Araujo
- Michael B. Hyman
- Raul Vega
- Rickey Jones
- Robert E. Gordon
- Sebastian Thomas Patti
- Thomas J. Lipscomb
- Ursula Walowski
- William Lacy
- CBA ratings in "contested" Cook County judicial races on the November ballot,
- Council, Alliance ratings in the two contested Cook County judicial elections,
- ISBA modifies rating of Republican candidate in 4th Subcircuit contest , and
- Alliance issues revised ratings in 4th Subcircuit, one retention race
For more information about Cook County judges on the retention ballot, see the 2014 Cook County Retention Judges Website.
- Chicago Bar Association releases ratings for Cook County judges seeking retention;
- Alliance retention "grids" issued;
- Chicago Council of Lawyers finds 18 retention candidates "Well Qualified" for retention; the Council rates Judge Michael Toomin "Highly Qualified"; and
- CCL rates one judge Not Qualified for retention, but it's not the same judge singled out by the CBA.