In this post, I'll cover the CBA's ratings of Appellate Court candidates. In posts later this evening, I'll put up posts regarding the CBA's ratings in countywide and subcircuit races.
The CBA considers eight factors in evaluating judicial hopefuls, integrity, legal knowledge, legal ability, professional experience, judicial temperament, diligence, punctuality and health factors. The CBA says it has 200 members on its Judicial Evaluation Committee. JEC volunteers invest "thousands of volunteer attorney hours in this thorough, comprehensive and diverse peer review process."
That process includes a lengthy questionnaire in which judges or lawyers seeking ratings must disclose not only their friends but their adversaries -- and the CBA talks to all of them. Disciplinary records are examined and any mentions of the candidate in the press are scrutinized. Two JEC investigators are assigned to each candidate; they do a lot of the personal follow up and ultimately prepare comprehensive reports for consideration by a hearing panel.
Eighteen to 20 JEC members are typically assigned to hearing panels. Each member of the hearing panel would receive a copy of the investigators' report and the candidate's questionnaire and all supporting materials when the panel convenes. The panel could ask the candidates questions (the investigators and the panel chair may frequently take the lead) and the candidate is invited to make a statement at the end.
Ultimately, the panel votes on the candidates it has heard, deciding whether each candidate should be deemed Highly Qualified, Qualified, or Not Recommended. The Green Guide explains, "The JEC’s governing resolution provides that to be found 'Highly Qualified' the candidate must receive that rating on 80% of the ballots. To be found 'Qualified' the candidate must receive a favorable rating on 60% of the ballots. The failure of a candidate to receive 60 percent affirmative vote results in a finding of 'Not Recommended.'" Hearing panel members are invited to provide written comments on each "candidate's qualifications, areas worthy of commendation and areas of needed improvement." Ultimately, the hearing panel chair reviews and capsulizes the comments "in preparing the statement of reasons given in support of the Committee's finding." There is a review process, so that disappointed candidates can challenge any adverse findings.
The evaluation process is confidential; the statement of reasons is what the CBA shares with the candidates and the voting public.
To read more about the CBA's judicial evaluation process, see the Green Guide; meanwhile, herewith are the CBA's comments regarding candidates for the Appellate Court.
Gordon Vacancy
SHELDON (SHELLY) A. HARRIS (D) -- QUALIFIED
Justice Sheldon A. Harris is “Qualified” for the office of Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court. Justice Harris was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1966 and was engaged in private practice until 2000 when he was appointed a Circuit Court Judge. In 2010, Justice Harris was assigned to the Illinois Appellate Court. Justice Harris is hardworking, experienced, and well regarded for his knowledge of the law.
SUSAN KENNEDY SULLIVAN (D) -- NOT RECOMMENDED
Susan Kennedy Sullivan is “Not Recommended” for the office of Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court. Judge Sullivan was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1994 and was elected a Circuit Court Judge in 2010. Judge Sullivan is currently assigned to both Traffic Court and the Elder Law Division of the Circuit Court. Judge Sullivan has an excellent demeanor and temperament. However, Judge Sullivan’s judicial experience is limited and it was felt that more experience on the bench would better prepare her for service on the Illinois Appellate Court.
FREDDRENNA M. LYLE (D) -- QUALIFIED
Judge Freddrenna M. Lyle is “Qualified” for the office of Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court. Judge Lyle was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1980 and was appointed to the Circuit Court in 2011. Judge Lyle is currently assigned to the First Municipal District’s Traffic Center. Before her appointment to the bench, Judge Lyle served as a Chicago Alderman for 13 years and was engaged in the private practice of law. Her practice experience included both civil and criminal litigation, appellate practice, and transactional work. Judge Lyle is well regarded for her integrity and excellent demeanor.
Murphy Vacancy
DAVID ELLIS (D) -- QUALIFIED
David W. Ellis is “Qualified” for the office of Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court. Mr. Ellis was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1993 and has experience in complex commercial litigation, legislative drafting, and appellate practice. Mr. Ellis has excellent writing skills and has authored ethical opinions, briefs, and legal memoranda used in the legislative process. Mr. Ellis is well regarded for his knowledge of the law, analytical skills, and even temperament.
Steele Vacancy
SHARON ODEN JOHNSON (D) -- NOT RECOMMENDED
Judge Sharon Oden Johnson is “Not Recommended” for the office of Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court. Judge Johnson was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1996 and was elected to the Circuit Court in 2010. Judge Johnson is currently assigned to the Domestic Relations Division and hears parentage and child support cases. Judge Johnson is intelligent, motivated, and diligent. While the Committee was impressed with the quality of Judge Johnson’s work in her present assignment, more judicial experience, ideally in some other judicial assignments, is needed to better prepare her for service on the Appellate Court.
JOHN B. SIMON (D) -- HIGHLY QUALIFIED
Justice John B. Simon is “Highly Qualified” for the office of Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court. Justice Simon was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1967 and had a distinguished career in government and in private practice before being appointed to the Illinois Appellate Court in 2012. Justice Simon has a passion and enthusiasm for the law and brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to the Appellate Court. Justice Simon is hardworking, diligent, and committed to the justice system.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Anonymous comments are once again permitted on this blog but, for crying out loud, please be civil. Comment moderation remains in effect. The management reserves its right to refuse to publish comments.