For those interested in write-in candidates....

FWIW readers have followed the story of Judge Maryam Ahmad's struggle to be a write-in candidate for the Hopkins vacancy in the 1st Subcircuit.

According to Cook County Clerk David Orr's website and the Chicago Board of Elections website, Judge Ahmad is the only recognized write-in candidate for any Cook County judicial vacancy. If you write in anybody else's name in any judicial race, that vote won't count (see this 2012 post for an explanation as to why this is so).

But if you've clicked the link on either the Clerk's website or the City's, you've seen a long list of names of candidates for President and Vice President (only presidential candidates are shown on the City list).

Who are these people?

About the only thing I could find out about Joann Breivogel is that she claims affiliation with the Republican Party of Illinois. I couldn't find anything out about Jonathan Lee, Kevin P. McKee, or David G. Stack at all. Roy Wayne Tyree apparently got three write-in votes in 2012; he seems to have run as a write-in candidate in 1992 as well. But I couldn't find out anything substantive about who he is or what he stands for. But your write-in votes for any of these candidates would count in Cook County.

Other write-in candidates have tried to get their message to We the People.

Darrell Castle (pictured at right) and Scott Bradley are the standard-bearers for the Constitution Party.

Duff Cooper Smith A.K.A "Coop Smith" doesn't have a running mate. On his website, Smith says he'd let Congress choose his Vice President for him. He writes, "It is urgent for all of us that feel uncomfortable with the nominees of the major parties to consolidate our votes around Gary, Gill and myself, Coop Smith." I'm guessing that "Gary" is Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party candidate (the Tribune's choice for President, if you'll recall). But who is Gill? I couldn't figure it out.

Ben Hartnell, a high school history teacher and the candidate of the Harty Party, is campaigning to "Make America Bearded Again." His campaign website is electthebeard.com. Hartnell's running mate, Dave Marshall, is also his cousin.

Tom Hoefling's campaign website describes him as "a long-time national conservative political activist, writer, publisher, organizer, and consultant. He is known primarily for his pro-life work and his defense of traditional marriage." Hoefling and running mate Steve Shulin, a conservative activist from South Carolina, are the candidates of America's Party.

According to an October 24 post by Ben Casselman on FiveThirtyEight.com, Laurence Kotlikoff "is a Harvard-trained economist, a Boston University professor and, yes, a candidate for president." The linked article says Kotlikoff is actually on the ballot in Colorado and Louisiana. His running mate is UCLA Professor Edward Leamer. Leamer is not a listed write-in candidate.

Kotlinkoff's campaign website is kotlikoff2016.com. Among other things, Kotlikoff says, "Traditional banking is unsafe at any speed." He promotes the Purple Financial Plan "to fix the financial system from scratch." Kotlinkoff describes his plan as "a 'show me' banking system that can't fail, even if Uncle Sam defaults, and is remarkably simple to implement." He claims that "[p]rominent economists and policymakers, including Bank of England Governor, Mervyn King, and former U.S. Secretary of Treasury and U.S. Secretary of State, George Shultz, have either strongly endorsed the plan or urged its careful consideration."

Joseph A. Moldonado is the name one would have to write in in order to vote for Joe Exotic, a private zookeeper from Oklahoma, whose campaign website is joeexotic2016.com.

The lion is not Moldonado's running mate; Douglas Keith Terranova is. Only Mr. Moldonado is listed as a write-in candidate, however.

If the Washington Post may be believed, Evan McMullin has a chance to carry the State of Utah. The Post describes McMullin as "is a 40-year-old Mormon who spent a decade at the CIA and later became the policy director for the House Republican Conference." His running mate (not listed as a write-in candidate here) is Mindy Finn. McMullin's campaign website is evanmcmullin.com.

Laio Morris has a campaign website describing her as a "write-in candidate for President of the Un-United States of America." She posts a more detailed biography on a campaign Facebook page.

Morris's platform calls for abolition "of the credit system (equifax, transunion, experian)" and for elimination of individual debt ("wipe all credit clean"). Her "Project Fresh Start" proposes "supplemental income" of $5,000 a month "for those who are working, in school, has a business/wants a business, disabled or handicapped--certifications in consumer counseling, budgeting, investments and money management required."

Matthew Roberts' stated goal as a presidential candidate is to bring "None of the Above" as an option to the ballot in every election. He had hoped to be listed as Matthew "None of the Above" Roberts in as many states as possible -- but, as FWIW has previously reported, Illinois law does not allow a candidate to use a slogan as a ballot nickname (Lar "America First" Daly couldn't run under that name under current law). But you can find out about Roberts' NOTA campaign by visiting his campaign website, noneoftheabove.vote.

Write-in votes for Roberts will be counted in suburban Cook County, but not in the City of Chicago: Roberts did not file a write-in declaration with the Chicago Board of Elections.

Similarly, write-in votes for Marshall Roy Schoenke and his running mate, James Creighton Mitchell, Jr., will count in the Cook County suburbs, but not in the City of Chicago. Schoenke and Mitchell bill themselves as "common men for an uncommon time" on their campaign website. Schoenke is a Lake County, Illinois native and lives in Lake Villa. Mitchell lives in Lindenhurst, Illinois.

Phillip Seeberg is a Naperville resident. On his Facebook campaign page, Seeberg writes, "I don’t feel that I can vote for either Trump or Clinton, so I decided to vote for myself." Votes for Seeberg will count outside of Chicago, but any votes he gets in Chicago will not be counted. An article in the Naperville Sun (from which the accompanying photograph is taken) notes Seeberg "has self-funded his campaign with only $40, and refuses money from special interests, including his parents, because he said he doesn't want the hassle of filing paperwork."

Write-in votes for James T. Struck are also valid only in suburban Cook County, not in the City of Chicago. It may not matter in his case, as he is, according to his website, already "copresident."

Mary A. Vann filed nominating petitions as the presidential candidate of the Human Rights Party. But a challenge to her petitions knocked her off the ballot. She's a declared write-in in both the City and suburbs.

Write-in votes for Demetra Jefferson Wysinger's presidential bid will count in the City of Chicago but not in suburban Cook County. Her campaign website identifies her as "the virtuous woman."

Cherunda Fox is also a City-only presidential candidate. Based in Detroit, Fox describes herself on her campaign website, as an African-American and American Indian.

----------------------------------------------------------------
For information about how to make sure your write-in vote counts, visit this page on the Cook County Clerk's website.

Here's what a good political commercial might look like

From Texas, with humor. I don't know whether Mr. Daugherty is a Republican or Democrat. But not once does he accuse anyone of being in favor of (pick one) arming the criminally insane; bankrupting the State; pandering to criminals; hating women; selling out to Iran; or being a captive, toady, or alter ego of Speaker Madigan or Governor Rauner.

Not one scary-shadow-face of the guy's opponent, whoever he or she might be. No ominous music.

There have been two reasonably nice ads in the Illinois Comptroller's race, one each for Mendoza and Munger. Maybe there were others -- but they are lost in the surging sludge of vicious attack ads. In my opinion.

Maybe this little gem is just a piece of flotsam in a sea of toxic commercials in this candidate's home market, too.

But I hope not.

I hope this commercial represents a step back from the brink.

And I hope it finds imitators here.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks to Ken Levine for posting this ad last evening.

Fundraiser Thursday evening for Judge Ketki "Kay" Steffen

Supporters of Judge Ketki "Kay" Steffen's bid to hold the seat to which she's been appointed in the 13th Judicial Subcircuit are planning a fundraiser for their candidate on Thursday, October 27, from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m., at Newland & Newland LLP, 121 S. Wilke Rd., Suite 301, Arlington Heights, Illinois.

The event is hosted by Stephen Newland, Gary Newland and Donald Cosley. Event sponsors are John Russo, Hon. James Etchinham (ret.), Dave Corbet, Ernest Blomquist, Mark Uteg, Larry Cohen, and the Ahmad Law Firm.

Tickets are $50 apiece (tickets are $25 each for government employees). Sponsorships are also available (Bronze - $100, Silver -$250, Gold - $500).

For more information about the event, or to reserve tickets, email rsteffen@steffenlaw.net.

Walls closing in on Rhonda Crawford. What should the sanction be?

FWIW readers following the Rhonda Crawford saga will recall David Thomas's article in the October 14 Law Bulletin about the ARDC petitioning the Illinois Supreme Court, seeking "a rule for Respondent, Rhonda Crawford, to show cause why she should not be suspended until further order of the Court or suspend Respondent on the Court's own motion, and restrain and enjoin Respondent from taking the judicial oath of office or assuming the office of judge, or take such other action as this Court deems just, for having engaged in conduct which threatens irreparable harm to the public, the legal profession and to the orderly administration of justice."

I probably wasn't the only reader who didn't immediately understand that the petition that ARDC filed in the Supreme Court was different from the ARDC Complaint filed against Crawford on October 7. Thomas's linked Law Bulletin article mines the Supreme Court petition in some detail -- and, as damning as the ARDC Complaint may appear, the ARDC's Supreme Court petition is much, much worse. (Mr. Thomas was kind enough to share a copy of the Petition with me.)

And---although I didn't get a chance to post anything during the week---the drumbeat against Crawford continued to grow louder and louder as the week went on. I was able to keep up, more or less, on Twitter:

Tribune reports indictment of Rhonda Crawford #CookCountyJudicial https://t.co/bob9C9AEL1

— Jack Leyhane (@JackLeyhane) October 20, 2016

Law Bulletin has more on Rhonda Crawford indictment #CookCountyJudicial crawford - 10-20-16 https://t.co/IfMFrlLTwq

— Jack Leyhane (@JackLeyhane) October 20, 2016

Debra Cassens Weiss has updated coverage on the ABA Journal website.

Last night on WGN-TV, I saw election attorney Burt Odelson (who is representing Crawford's write-in opponent, Judge Maryam Ahmad) stating that he has also filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking to knock Crawford off the ballot.

For public consumption at least, despite her indictment, Crawford is insisting that she's not going anywhere. If she is not forced off the ballot (as she would be if the Supreme Court suspends her license), Crawford is almost certain to win election on November 8.

If I was advising Ms. Crawford---and, as you might expect, no one has asked---I'd be urging negotiation. I'd be looking for a soft landing. The price would undoubtedly be high---withdrawing her candidacy---but, at the moment Crawford's license and even her liberty is arguably at stake.

No one---no one outside Crawford's defense team, anyway---is defending what Rhonda Crawford seems to have done in Judge Valarie Turner's Markham courtroom this past August. Putting on a judge's robe and deciding even the most insignificant of cases was a special kind of stupid thing to do.

In a story posted last evening, the AP's Michael Tarm quotes Crawford's campaign as saying that Crawford is "'a pawn' in a behind-the-scenes play by 'Democratic Machine politics' to disenfranchise voters" in the 1st Judicial Subcircuit.

Please. There may be a great many sins of omission and commission to lay at the feet of local Democratic Party leaders, but if anyone has disenfranchised voters in the 1st Subcircuit, it is Crawford herself. It is her own conduct that may yet force her off the ballot; if she stays on the ballot, and is elected by default, she will be unable to serve, at least for the foreseeable future, and quite possibly ever. Either way, the community's judicial choice will be frustrated -- and neither Chairman Berrios, nor President Preckwinkle, nor Speaker Madigan will own a particle of blame.

So many FWIW readers would have traded one or more body parts to have been in Rhonda Crawford's shoes before this incident. I can't help but think that a lot of the anger, maybe even fury, directed at Ms. Crawford is attributable to this. How could she do this? How could anyone think this was OK? It is not just the politicians who have closed ranks against Ms. Crawford; it is the larger legal establishment. (And Ms. Crawford had already forfeited the opportunity to make friends with the legal-powers-that-be by refusing to participate in the evaluation process.)

But in determining the appropriate punishment, is our anger at Crawford's actions causing us to demand punishments that are disproportionate to the real harm caused? Of course, just as Ms. Crawford's ballot status is her negotiating chit, jail time is a pretty strong negotiating chit for those wishing Crawford would just go away.

I hope Ms. Crawford's lawyers are talking to anyone they can.

Gerald V. Cleary appointed to Suriano vacancy in 10th Subcircuit

The Illinois Supreme Court appointed Judge Gerald V. Cleary to fill the 10th Subcircuit vacancy created by the pending retirement of Judge Donald J. Suriano (corrected order here).

The appointment, which was made on the recommendation of Justice Mary Jane Theis (click here for press release), is effective November 3 and will terminate December 3, 2018.

Judge Cleary currently serves pursuant to an earlier appointment, to the countywide Walsh vacancy, that will be filled in December by Patrick Joseph Powers. Cleary filed for that vacancy, but withdrew in December 2015, after his nominating petitions were challenged. Cleary previously sought a 10th Subcircuit vacancy in 2008.

FWIW readers will recall that Justice Theis announced the Burke vacancy in the 10th Subcircuit; the Burke vacancy was subsequently filled with the appointment of Stephanie Saltouros. No separate screening committee was convoked for the Suriano vacancy, as the Supreme Court acknowledged in yesterday's press release: "Justice Theis recommended Judge Cleary's appointment after candidates were reviewed by bar associations and a special judicial screening committee for a previous 10th Subcircuit vacancy."

Judge Suriano was elected from the 10th Subcircuit in 1996. He was slated that year, after two unsuccessful, unslated runs in 1992 and 1994.

On the passing of Ed McElroy and George Collins

Ed McElroy, who died recently at the age of 91, was an advisor to a great number of judicial candidates over the years, walking them around, as the phrase goes, introducing them to helpful persons. Some won, some lost, but, from what I was able to observe in the last few years, even those who didn't win were better off, in terms of credibility for future races, than before they'd been taken under his tutelage.

Obviously I did not have any contact with Mr. McElroy when I was running for judge. I didn't even know such people existed. But I met Mr. McElroy a few years back, through Avy Meyers, who always sang McElroy's praises. After that, on those few times I called Mr. McElroy about this candidate or that vacancy, he was quick to return my calls and answer my questions. As a blogger-and-or-amateur-journalist, I can offer no greater praise.

But that's hardly an appropriate sendoff, so I'll link instead to Neil Steinberg's affectionate farewell. In case you missed it.

Ed McElroy was not a lawyer. George Collins, on the other hand, was a lawyer's lawyer, as the Law Bulletin said in it's headline over Patricia Manson's October 17 tribute.

According to Manson's linked article (subscription required), Mr. Collins had an extensive civil and criminal practice, representing "banks, schools, businesses and individuals." But it was his skill in professional disciplinary cases that vaulted Collins to the pinnacle of the profession.

The lawyer or judge in a disciplinary jam was well-advised to seek assistance from Mr. Collins. ARDC Chief Counsel James J. Grogan is quoted in Manson's article as calling Collins a "giant," noting that he "was probably the most prolific" lawyer in terms of the number of ARDC cases he took on. I happened to be talking to Grogan last Monday, before Manson's article came out, and our conversation turned to Collins' passing (I'd not yet heard). While I hadn't contacted Grogan in connection with this blog, I don't believe I'm violating any rules of journalistic etiquette to note that Grogan spoke eloquently of the respect and admiration that he and his colleagues had for Mr. Collins.

Mr. Collins's last trial, according to Manson's article, was before the Courts Commission in February (the Beatriz Santiago trial). He was representing Rhonda Crawford at the time of his death.

An excerpt from Manson's tribute seems the best way to close out this post:

Collins was among the recipients last month of the CBA’s Justice John Paul Stevens Award, which honors Chicago attorneys and judges who have shown the same public service and integrity Stevens showed in his legal career.

In accepting the award, Collins did not talk about himself, his law partners said, but focused his remarks on Stevens.

Friends and colleagues said Collins always focused on others.

Collins fought hard for his clients, but never stepped over the line, [CBA President Daniel M.] Kotin said.

“He was one of the greatest gentlemen that I ever met as a practicing lawyer,” he said.

“If all of us could conduct ourselves and practice law as George did, I think we could have a much more amiable, cooperative, kinder and nicer profession.”

Thomas William Flannigan campaign website launched

A campaign website has been launched for Thomas William Flannigan, Republican candidate for the Kazmierski, Jr. vacancy in the 12th Subcircuit. That's a link to the site in the preceding sentence; a link has also been added to the blog Sidebar.

Flannigan's website stresses that he accepts no campaign donations -- but, the site notes, "contributions of time will be eagerly accepted. We need help sending out a campaign mailing, posting yard signs and other activities. If you would like to help please email us at Passport@prodigy.net."

According to his campaign website, Flannigan is "one of a handful of American attorneys who speak Japanese fluently," and he has leveraged this skill into a niche practice advising American companies looking to do business in Japan or with Japanese companies. Before opening this practice, in 1993, according to this campaign website, Flannigan worked for a number of firms in Chicago and Tokyo, starting in 1985. Earlier in his career, Flannigan was a law clerk to Illinois Supreme Court Justice William G. Clark. Flannigan has been licensed as an attorney in Illinois since 1983. He is married to Circuit Court Judge Ellen Flannigan.

Dr. Klumpp ponts out trend about numbers of judicial candidates; what does this portend for 2018?

A frequent and generous contributor to this blog over the years, Albert J. Klumpp, Ph.D., wrote in after seeing a comment on a prior post about the likely signature requirements for 2018 judicial hopefuls.

The comment, from this blog's most prolific commenter---Anonymous---notes that, because of the large voter turnout in the March Primary this year, signature requirements for judicial wannabees in 2018 are likely to be greatly increased. An excerpt:

The countywide signature requirement will be 3-4 times higher given the record turnout in 2016 due to the Clinton/Sanders contest. Some estimate it to be in the 6,500 to 7,000 range. In contrast, the signature requirement for 2016 was the lowest in recent history because of the pathetic 16% countywide turnout of 2014 attributable to the lame Governor's race. While many of the countywide candidates in 2016 submitted around 10,000 signatures, most of the non-slated candidates would have likely been tossed off the ballot if the anticipated 2018 requirement had been applied because most (if not all) did not have 6,500 GOOD signatures. Those professional circulators might net you 2,000-3,000 good signatures out of 10,000, but NOT 6,500. And even if the professionals start circulating all day from August to November, 20,000 legitimate GOOD signatures are hard to get and will cost you $20,000-$30,000 because they know they can charge a premium.

The "real action" in 2018, Anonymous opines, will be in the subcircuits, with their lower signature requirements.

Dr. Klumpp wrote that the comment prompted him "to look into something I've been putting off doing for a while. I had gotten the impression that in recent years the number of candidates running for judge has been declining noticeably. So I dug through all of my historical records and calculated the numbers of candidates per vacancy in every year since the current structure of judicial primaries began in 1974." He then put together this chart:

"Over the last few election cycles," Dr. Klumpp concludes, "the lack of competitiveness in seeking judgeships has been nearing Machine-era levels." What is particularly baffling about these numbers, Klumpp adds, is that they include all candidates for every Cook County judicial vacancy except for the Supreme Court -- including all subcircuits after 1992 and city only or suburbs only prior thereto. In every election cycle I've covered here, there are some races that seem to attract a daunting number of candidates (though not all make it to the ballot) -- but FWIW readers know there are a great many uncontested races, even in the subcircuits.

Dr. Klumpp says he has no explanation as to why the number of candidates per vacancy is dropping. I suppose the increase in required signatures in the subcircuits a few years back may have scared off some, but the signature requirements to qualify for the ballot in a subcircuit have always been (and remain) considerably less than the requirements for countywide hopefuls.

The discrepancy should be particularly large in 2018: I don't know about the precise numbers suggested by the commenter, but I've no doubt that there will be a higher signature threshold for countywide Democratic judicial candidates. Even though the signature requirements would be much lower, I likewise doubt that there will be a sudden uptick in the number of Republican countywide judicial hopefuls. The Republican Party may or may not join the Whigs on the dustbin of history, a victim of Donald J. Trump, but, whatever happens, or doesn't, to the Republican Party this November, it is extremely unlikely to lead to a Republican revival in the County of Cook.

But these may not be the only options for wannabee judges in 2018.

Philip O'Connor's op-ed in last Tuesday's Tribune suggests that Republicans disgusted with Trump might still come to the aid of their party by voting for the Green Party presidential candidate, Dr. Jill Stein. Enough votes for Stein, see, and the Green Party might become an "established political party" -- able to field candidates with relative ease in 2018, thereby potentially diluting the Democratic vote, and thereby---*gulp*---helping reelect Gov. Bruce Rauner.

Crazy?

Certainly -- but 2016 is a crazy year: Gary "Aleppo" Johnson, the Libertarian candidate for President, is the Tribune's choice over both Trump and Hillary Clinton. Enough voters might choose Johnson and thereby make the Libertarians an established political party for 2018, too. (O'Connor assumes that the Tribune's endorsement alone may make this happen; of course, that may be why the Tribune chose to run his op-ed.)

Can you imagine Cook County judicial wannabees filing as Greens or Libertarians for countywide races in 2018? Well, it's easier to imagine than the Republicans fielding a Cook County slate, isn't it?

And don't say it can't happen. Arguably similar things have happened before: The Solidarity Party became an established political party, for a little while, anyway, after the LaRouchies hijacked the 1986 Democratic Primary. And, for a while there, there was a Harold Washington Party....

There will probably be plenty of business for election attorneys in 2018 -- maybe even enough to significantly boost the number of candidates per judicial vacancy in 2018.

Marguerite Quinn interviewed on NTNM

Judge Marguerite Anne Quinn, Democratic candidate for the Kazmierski, Jr. vacancy in the 12th Subcircuit, was a recent guest on Avy Meyers' North Town News Magazine program and her interview has been posted online.

NTNM airs Thursdays on CAN-TV at 7:30 p.m., and again on Fridays at 2:30 p.m. NTNM also airs on a number of suburban cable systems on Mondays. Check your local listings for air times. Meanwhile, with the permission of NTNM host and moderator Avy Meyers and his entire technical crew Sonny Hersh, you can watch the interview here.

Janet Mahoney interviewed on NTNM

Janet Cronin Mahoney, Democratic candidate for the Mathein vacancy in the 12th Subcircuit, was a recent guest on Avy Meyers' North Town News Magazine program and her interview has been posted online.

NTNM airs Thursdays on CAN-TV at 7:30 p.m., and again on Fridays at 2:30 p.m. NTNM also airs on a number of suburban cable systems on Mondays. Check your local listings for air times. Meanwhile, with the permission of NTNM host and moderator Avy Meyers and his entire technical crew Sonny Hersh, you can watch the interview here.

Tribune endorses Demorcrats, Republicans and a write-in in judicial races

Earlier this week, the Chicago Tribune announced its endorsements for contested judicial elections and for the retention ballot.

I acknowledge the possibility that I'm a bit oversensitive -- but I thought I detected a degree of snark in the Tribune's comments about the retention election. After first urging readers to look at bar evaluations for the retention candidates, the editorial writer continued:

Typically, the bar groups identify a handful of egregiously incompetent judges. This year the Chicago Bar Association rated all 58 circuit court judges standing for retention "qualified." There are a smattering of negative ratings from the other groups -- the Council of Lawyers recommends a "no" vote on three -- but only one judge earned two negatives from among 12 bar groups. We asked around and could not find cause to single out any judge. If only this were the norm.

We asked around and could not find cause to single out any judge? Because... we really wanted to single out somebody? Because we hate to say anything positive about the legal system?

But, like I said, I'm probably oversensitive.

In the races for the only five contested Cook County judicial vacancies, the Tribune recommends three Democrats and two Republicans. In the 13th Subcircuit, the Tribune recommends Judge Ketki "Kay" Steffen, the Democrat. In the 12th, the Tribune prefers Republicans James Leonard Allegretti and Steven A. Kozicki and Democrats Marguerite Quinn and Carrie Hamilton. Marguerite Quinn is an associate judge; Carrie Hamilton currently serves on the Circuit Court pursuant to Supreme Court appointment.

And interestingly, if perhaps unusually, the Tribune has nothing bad to say about any of the judicial candidates in 12 or 13.

But, do not despair, gentle reader. The Tribune has not gone soft.

The editorial begins with the stunning revelation that Republicans don't field candidates in most judicial races, "so the contests are generally decided in the [Democratic] primary." Captain Obvious has joined the Tribune editorial board. As revelations go, this one is surely on the order of Captain Renault's astounding 'discovery' in Casablanca as he closes Rick's Cafe, "I am shocked -- shocked -- to find that gambling is going on in here!"

For a "lesson in what's wrong with how Cook County's judges are chosen," the Tribune zeroes in on the Hopkins vacancy in the 1st Subcircuit, where Democratic nominee Rhonda Crawford was, until recently, unopposed. Recently, of course, Judge Maryam Ahmad (who lost a bid to hold her appointment to the 1st Subcircuit Brim vacancy in the March Primary) won a court battle to become a write-in candidate against Ms. Crawford. And the Tribune endorses Ahmad.

Of course, in none of the 27 other uncontested judicial races is the nominee accused of pretending to be a judge without waiting for the formality of an election or the administration of the oath of office. So why is l'affaire Crawford illustrative of "what's wrong with how Cook County's judges are chosen" instead of an aberration?

Also, as events later in the week would show, Mother Tribune's stern disapproval may be the least of Ms. Crawford's problems....

Carrie Hamilton interviewed on NTNM

Judge Carrie Hamilton, Democratic candidate for the Tristano vacancy in the 12th Subcircuit, was a recent guest on Avy Meyers' North Town News Magazine program and her interview has been posted online.

NTNM airs Thursdays on CAN-TV at 7:30 p.m., and again on Fridays at 2:30 p.m. NTNM also airs on a number of suburban cable systems on Mondays. Check your local listings for air times. Meanwhile, with the permission of NTNM host and moderator Avy Meyers and his entire technical crew Sonny Hersh, you can watch the interview here.

David Studenroth interviewed on NTNM

David Studenroth, Republican candidate for the Tristano vacancy in the 12th Subcircuit, was a recent guest on Avy Meyers' North Town News Magazine program and his interview has been posted online.

NTNM airs Thursdays on CAN-TV at 7:30 p.m., and again on Fridays at 2:30 p.m. NTNM also airs on a number of suburban cable systems on Mondays. Check your local listings for air times. Meanwhile, with the permission of NTNM host and moderator Avy Meyers and his entire technical crew Sonny Hersh, you can watch the interview here.

October 25 fundraiser for 1st Subcircuit write-in candidate planned

Supporters of Judge Maryam Ahmad's write-in candidacy for the Hopkins vacancy in the 1st Subcircuit have planned an October 25 fundraiser for their candidate, from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m., at Truth Italian Restaurant, 56 E. Pershing Rd.

Tickets for the event are $150 each, and sponsorships are available ($500 - Sponsor, $1,000 - Silver Sponsor, $2,500 - Gold Sponsor). Listed as co-sponsors of the event are St. Sen. Donne E. Trotter, Ald. Roderick Sawyer, Ald. Michelle Harris, Ald. David Moore, St. Rep. Elgie Sims, St. Rep Marcus Evans, Ms. Stephanie Coleman, Commissioner Howard Medley (Ret), Atty. Luke Casson, Atty. John Fotopoulos, Atty. Matthew Hurst, Atty. Burton Odelson, Dr. Phyllis Hayes, Dr. Angelia Roberts Watkins, Ms. Crystal Brown Black, Mr. Harold Davis, Mr. Leonard Noble, Ms. Peytyn Wilborn, and Mr. Craig Wimberly.

For more information about the event, or to reserve a ticket, email electjudgemaryamahmad@gmail.com.

Alliance of Illinois Judges plans Fall Cocktail Reception on October 25

The Alliance of Illinois Judges is planning a cocktail reception at GRK Greek Kitchen + Bar, 400 S. Wells St., on Tuesday, October 25, from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. Tickets are $25 each (payable at the door) but reservations are requested by October 21. The admission price includes "hearty apps and drinks." To reserve a spot, click on this link (which will take you to an evite page).

Organizers characterize this as the group's "inaugural" cocktail reception, with a view toward making it an annual one. Any proceeds from the event will be earmarked for an undergrad internship, allowing an undergrad to intern with a judge for a semester with pay.

Steven Kozicki interviewed on NTNM

Steven A. Kozicki, Republican candidate for the "A" vacancy in the 12th Subcircuit, was a recent guest on Avy Meyers' North Town News Magazine program and his interview has been posted online.

NTNM airs Thursdays on CAN-TV at 7:30 p.m., and again on Fridays at 2:30 p.m. NTNM also airs on a number of suburban cable systems on Mondays. Check your local listings for air times. Meanwhile, with the permission of NTNM host and moderator Avy Meyers and his entire technical crew Sonny Hersh, you can watch the interview here.

James Allegretti interviewed on NTNM

James Leonard Allegretti, Republican candidate for the Mathein vacancy in the 12th Subcircuit, was a recent guest on Avy Meyers' North Town News Magazine program and his interview has been posted online.

NTNM airs Thursdays on CAN-TV at 7:30 p.m., and again on Fridays at 2:30 p.m. NTNM also airs on a number of suburban cable systems on Mondays. Check your local listings for air times. Meanwhile, with the permission of NTNM host and moderator Avy Meyers and his entire technical crew Sonny Hersh, you can watch the interview here.

James E. Hanlon, Jr. interviewed on NTNM

James Edward Hanlon, Jr., Democratic candidate for the "A" vacancy in the 12th Subcircuit, was a recent guest on Avy Meyers' North Town News Magazine program and his interview has been posted online.

NTNM airs Thursdays on CAN-TV at 7:30 p.m., and again on Fridays at 2:30 p.m. NTNM also airs on a number of suburban cable systems on Mondays. Check your local listings for air times. Meanwhile, with the permission of NTNM host and moderator Avy Meyers and his entire technical crew Sonny Hersh, you can watch the interview here.

Guest Post: Up with Down-Ballot

I present a guest post this morning from Susana Darwin, Co-Chair of the Judicial Evaluation Committee of the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago and an Executive Committee Member of the Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening.

If you are excited about the top-of-the-ballot races in the November election, please don’t forget to cast informed votes in down-ballot races, like those for the judiciary.

IN THE ALTERNATIVE …

If you can’t bring yourself to vote one way or another in the top-of-the-ballot races, you can take comfort in the difference your vote can make in down-ballot races.

In either case, please see http://tinyurl.com/judgesgen2016-1 for recommendations for Cook County judicial races from the Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening.

A candidate for retention must win 60%+1 votes to remain in office, so the question for 2016 is: how does a voter cast a principled vote on judicial candidates?

In 2016, no sitting Cook County judge or appellate court justice earned universal or even majority “NO” retention recommendations from the eleven groups that comprise the Alliance.

In fact, five bar groups – the Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Chicago Area, the Decalogue Society of Lawyers, the Hispanic Lawyers Association of Illinois, the Puerto Rican Bar Association of Illinois, and the Women’s Bar Association of Illinois – recommend YES votes for ALL retention candidates.

Given the ratings of those five bar groups, a voter could credibly vote YES on all retention candidates.

By contrast, research shows that over the years, 20% of voters cast NO votes on ALL candidates. Every judicial candidate before voters in November has been on the bench for at least six years, some for many more years than that. Many have earned the respect of their colleagues and the lawyers and litigants who appear before them, and the experience they have developed while serving the public should not be lightly discounted.

Alternatives to voting ALL YES or ALL NO include:
—voting in alignment with the particular bar group or groups you know and trust
—voting NO on any candidate who has more than one NO rating from any bar group (Lynch)
—voting NO on any candidate who has any NO rating from any bar group (Solganick, Maki, Ford, Lynch, Dunford, Bernstein, Malone, Coleman, Ramos)

In the last two scenarios, whether to cast YES votes for other candidates depends on the voter’s wish to affect the total number of votes a candidate gets, and therefore, how close to the required 60%+1 to remain in office. Not casting a YES vote for a particular candidate shrinks the total number of votes that candidate tallies and empowers all-NO voters’ votes.

Cast an informed vote!

Diana Embil appointed to 15th Subcircuit vacancy

In an order entered yesterday, the Illinois Supreme Court appointed Diana L. Embil to a 15th Subcircuit vacancy created by the retirement of Judge George F. Scully, Jr. (Scully, a former State Representative, was appointed to the bench in 2009 and elected in 2010). Embil's appointment is effective Thursday, October 13; it will terminate on December 2, 2018.

This will be Embil's second tour of duty on the Circuit Court bench. She was first appointed to a 15th Subcircuit vacancy in early 2013, but lost her bid to hold that seat by a very narrow margin in the 2014 Primary.

Licensed in Illinois since 1988, Embil has served as a law clerk to the late Appellate Court Justice R. Eugene Pincham and to Supreme Court Justice Charles Freeman.

Currently, according to her LinkedIn page (from which this photograph is taken), Embil was serving on the Character & Fitness Committee of Board of Bar Admissions of Illinois Supreme Court. She previously served as an Associate Regional Counsel with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and as a member of the Minimum Continuing Legal Education of the Illinois Supreme Court. She has also worked for Jones, Ware & Grenard and as a staff attorney with the Chicago Public Schools.

Shoffner fundraiser canceled

The October 27 fundraiser for Judge Robin D. Shoffner has been canceled, according to email received.

A number of readers commented that a judicial candidate can not raise funds for the 2018 Primary until some time closer to the 2018 Primary (see, Supreme Court Rule 67(B)(2)).

I didn't know that... but, then, I'm neither an election lawyer nor a candidate.

Of course, as my ever-vigilant readers know, judicial candidates can not solicit campaign funds themselves; this is to be left in the hands of "committees of responsible persons." The committees should educate themselves on the distinctions between fundraising for campaigns generally and fundraising for judicial campaigns... but it is evident here that plans were advanced before committee members were properly educated.

This no doubt embarrasses the candidate, but it should not necessarily reflect badly on the candidate herself.

I am not privy to the specifics in this case, certainly, but I have discussed the philosophy of fundraising generally over the years with a number of judicial candidates. Some candidates want to be completely insulated from any knowledge of how campaign funds are generated, or from whom. Others insist on being intimately involved, the thought being that the candidate can help identify any inappropriate, improper, or questionable donors or donations. Still another group tries to stake out a middle ground, relying on their committees to spot problem donors or donations, and bring questions about these to the candidate, but otherwise trying to stay largely above the fray. In all of these cases, candidates have told me they are trying to ensure, to the extent possible, that their independence can not be called into question.

The one lesson I think we can draw from this unfortunate situation is that campaign committees need to have direct access to a candidate's election lawyer.

Alliance 'grids' for contested Cook County judicial elections

There aren't many, but there are some, all on the northern edge of Cook County, one in the northwest suburban 13th Subcircuit, and four in the north suburban 12th Subcircuit.

In all other case where vacancies are being filled, with one possible exception which I'll come to in a moment (hey, we're lawyers, there's almost always at least a possible exception), the outcomes were determined in the primary: No Republicans ran for any countywide vacancy. No Republicans ran for any subcircuit vacancies either, except these in 12 and 13.

Without further preface, then, the Alliance grids in contested judicial elections (depending on the device on which you're viewing this, clicking on the image will enlarge the image or enhance its focus):

OK, so I promised a possible exception.

In the 1st Subcircuit, in the race to fill the Hopkins vacancy, there is a controversial Democratic nominee, Rhonda Crawford (if you don't already know about the controversy, this post may provide a good starting point) and a write-in candidate who is also a sitting judge (sitting by appointment in the 1st Subcircuit Brim vacancy, a vacancy she was unable to hold during the primary). So the Alliance has released a 'grid' here too:

In contested elections, voters will see both names on the ballot for each contested race. In this case, however, 1st Subcircuit voters will only see Ms. Crawford's name; they would have to write in Judge Ahmad in order for that vote to count.

And for those who might not have been looking at this race previously, Ms. Crawford's unanimous 'not recommended' ratings do not stem from any alleged impersonation of a judge this past summer; rather, they relate to her non-participation in the Alliance screening process prior to the March Primary.

The Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening is comprised of the Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Chicago Area (AABA), Black Women Lawyers Association of Greater Chicago (BWLA), Chicago Council of Lawyers (CCL), Cook County Bar Association (CCBA), Decalogue Society of Lawyers (DSL), Hellenic Bar Association (HBA), Hispanic Lawyers Association of Illinois (HLAI), Illinois State Bar Association (ISBA), Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago (LAGBAC), Puerto Rican Bar Association of Illinois (PRBA), and Women’s Bar Association of Illinois (WBAI) working collaboratively to improve the process of screening judicial candidates in Cook County, Illinois.

More things the blogger missed

Wednesday's announcement about the appointment of Kent A. Delgado to a 6th Subcircuit vacancy triggered a good question -- and exposed a few omissions by yours truly.

According to multiple sources, Delgado's appointment is at the recommendation of Justice Anne M. Burke. The appointment is to a vacancy created by the very recent retirement of Judge Gloria Chevere. No screening committee had been empaneled with respect to this vacancy, at least publicly (in contrast, for example, to the screening committee announced just this week by Justice Burke for a 13th Subcircuit vacancy).

In January, Justice Burke announced a 6th Subcircuit vacancy (stand down, kids, applications for this one closed in February), and this vacancy remains unfilled. Thus, the good question: Why would Justice Burke fill the later-opening vacancy immediately, when she had a screening committee in place to fill an earlier vacancy in the same subcircuit? I don't know the answer to that question, but if I can get an answer I can report I will do so.

In any event, I missed Justice Burke's announcement when it came out.

Well, it was the height of the primary season---a busy time on the blog -- and I always have to keep up with my day job. My malpractice insurer gets very concerned if I let my practice drift too long. And I'm reasonably certain that neither courts nor clients would find the need to update this blog as a good and sufficient excuse for missing deadlines. So, yes, I miss stuff.

As it turns out, that wasn't the only announcement I missed.

In February Justice Mary Jane Theis announced both a countywide opening and a 13th Subcircuit vacancy. The countywide vacancy was subsequently filled by the appointment of Judge Claire J. Quish (I didn't miss that announcement) but I believe this 13th Subcircuit vacancy remains open.

I think that about brings me up to date... we resume regular programming now.

Kent A. Delgado appointed to 6th Subcircuit vacancy

The Illinois Supreme Court today appointed Kent A. Delgado to a 6th Subcircuit vacancy created by the retirement of Judge Gloria Chevere.

The appointment is effective January 4, 2017 and terminates on December 3, 2018.

According to the ARDC, Delgado presently operates the Law Office of Kent A. Delgado. He has been licensed in Illinois since 1996.

Delgado was a candidate for a 6th Subcircuit vacancy in 2012, withdrawing shortly before the primary that year. He was an Assistant State's Attorney from 1996 to 2007 and subsequently a principal in the firm of Delgado and Tiernan, PC, handling criminal defense, probate, and immigration matters.

Justice Burke announces 13th Subcircuit vacancy

According to a press release issued yesterday, Justice Anne M. Burke has announced an application process for filling the 13th Subcircuit vacancy created by the July resignation of Judge Jeffrey Lawrence.

Notice of the vacancy and details of the application process are posted on the Illinois Supreme Court's website at www.illinoiscourts.gov. From there, follow the instructions on the "Latest News" scroller announcing the Thirteenth Judicial Subcircuit of Cook County vacancy.

Applications for this vacancy will be screened by a special judicial screening committee chaired by retired Supreme Court Chief Justice Benjamin K. Miller. Justice Burke established this screening committee in 2006.

The deadline for applications is 4:00 p.m. on November 2, 2016. Completed applications should be submitted by mail to the Honorable Benjamin K. Miller, c/o Jenner & Block, 353 North Clark Street, 42nd Floor, Chicago, Illinois 60654. Yesterday's press release specifies that, to be eligible for consideration, an applicant for this vacancy must be a resident of the 13th Subcircuit (the far northwestern corner of the county).

Alliance 'fills in the blanks' on retention grids

The Alliance Bar groups have issued ratings for each of the judges seeking retention, offering "yes" or "no" recommendations on each retention candidate. When I posted these grids initially, over the weekend, there were still several 'holes' in the grid; they are now almost entirely complete.

(Depending on the device on which you're viewing this post, clicking on the images below will enlarge them, or sharpen their focus.)

The Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening is comprised of the Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Chicago Area (AABA), Black Women Lawyers Association of Greater Chicago (BWLA), Chicago Council of Lawyers (CCL), Cook County Bar Association (CCBA), Decalogue Society of Lawyers (DSL), Hellenic Bar Association (HBA), Hispanic Lawyers Association of Illinois (HLAI), Illinois State Bar Association (ISBA), Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago (LAGBAC), Puerto Rican Bar Association of Illinois (PRBA), and Women’s Bar Association of Illinois (WBAI) working collaboratively to improve the process of screening judicial candidates in Cook County, Illinois.

October 27 fundraiser set for Judge Robin D. Shoffner

I know, I know: The 2016 elections aren't over yet. But that doesn't mean that the 2018 primary season isn't already underway....

Supporters of Judge Robin D. Shoffner are planning a fundraiser for their candidate on Thursday, October 27, from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m., at the Bureau Bar, 75 E. 16th Street.

Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle and 3rd Ward Ald. and Committeeman Pat Dowell are listed as the hosts for the event. Tickets are $150 each, but sponsorships are available ($250 - $500 - $1,000). For more information about the event, or to reserve tickets, email info@craticshaffner.com.

Judge Shoffner currently serves pursuant to Supreme Court appointment in an 8th Subcircuit vacancy. She was initially appointed to fill a 5th Subcircuit vacancy but was unable to hold that seat in the March Primary.

Chicago Council of Lawyers rates 11 jurists "Well Qualified" for retention

In a post yesterday, I mentioned that the Chicago Council of Lawyers had given its top rating of "Highly Qualified" to two judges seeking retention this November, Cook County Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans and Judge Mary L. Mikva. I also mentioned that the CCL had bestowed a "Well Qualified" rating on 11 other jurists seeking retention, but did not quote the CCL report with regard to these jurists (click here for the complete CCL report).

I do so herewith.

The sole Appellate Court justice seeking retention, Justice Joy V. Cunningham, was rated "Well Qualified" by the CCL, which stated of her:

Judge Joy V. Cunningham was elected to the Illinois Appellate Court in 2006. She was elected as an Associate Judge in 1997 and served for three years before leaving the bench. From 2000 to 2006 she was Senior Vice President, General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary at Northwestern Memorial Healthcare. She served as Associate General Counsel for Loyola University from 1986 to 1996. Her legal career also included private practice and she served as a judicial law clerk to Glen Johnson of the Illinois Appellate Court. She is a past president of the Chicago Bar Association. She was a guest lecturer at Loyola University School of Law in 2008 and 2009. She does a considerable amount of teaching which requires extensive preparation of written materials which she provides to others in the judiciary in the context of seminars, conferences or reference materials. She has won numerous awards from 2005 to 2011.

Judge Cunningham was praised as a good practitioner and as a solid, hard-working jurist with good legal ability and temperament. As a trial judge she heard both civil and criminal law matters. As an Appellate Court Judge, she continues to be praised for her work ethic and temperament. She reportedly asks good questions during oral argument and writes well-reasoned opinions. The Council in 2006 found her Well Qualified for the Appellate Court, finds her Well Qualified for the Illinois Supreme Court, and finds her Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Charles Patrick Burns was one of 10 Circuit Court retention judges rated qualified by the CCL. Of Judge Burns, the Council stated:

Judge Burns was elected to the bench in 1998. He was an Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney before taking the bench. As of May 2007, Judge Burns has presided over a felony trial call as well as the R.A.P. Drug Court since July 2010.

Judge Burns has taught Graduate and Undergraduate classes at Lewis University on Justice, Law, and Public Safety studies, and has authored a number of published works, including as a Topic Writer with the Illinois Judicial Benchbook, as well as articles in the Illinois Bar Journal, the Duke University Journal of Law and Technology, and the Loyola University Chicago Law Journal.

Judge Burns is praised widely for his excellent grasp and application of the law. He is reported to handle both his regular felony call and the R.A.P. call with efficiency and he is praised for his devotion to the lives and rehabilitation of the defendants who come before him. The success of the RAP program is said by many to be the result of Judge Burns’ initiative and dedication. He has numerous published works dealing with his judicial role and he is praised for his work ethic as well as his courtroom management. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Paula Marie Daleo was also rated "Well Qualified" by the CCL:

Judge Daleo was elected to the Circuit Court in 2004 and presently serves in the Fourth Municipal District of the Circuit Court. Previously, she served in the First Municipal District. She was admitted to practice in 1978. Prior to her election to the bench, Judge Daleo was an Executive Assistant State’s Attorney and formerly Chief of the Special Prosecutions Bureau, as well as an Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney. She also has experience as a general practitioner.

Judge Daleo came to the bench after having extensive trial experience in complex matters. As a judge, she is widely praised for her legal knowledge and often supports her rulings with explanations. She is reported to be fair to all parties before her and that she applies the law correctly and evenly. She is reported to be especially hardworking and conscientious. She is reported to have an excellent temperament and is praised for her courtroom management skills. The Council finds her Well Qualified for retention.

Also receiving a "Well Qualified" rating was Judge Vincent Michael Gaughan:

Judge Vincent Gaughan was appointed to the bench by the Illinois Supreme Court in 1991 and was elected in 1994. He presently serves in the Criminal Division of the Circuit Court. Prior to his appointment to the bench, Judge Gaughan was a supervising Assistant Cook County Public Defender.

Judge Gaughn is widely praised for his legal ability and for being adept at handling some of the most complex cases in the criminal division. He is reported to have very good courtroom management skills. Many respondents say that he can be short tempered on the bench, but even those who complain about his temperament report that he is a very good trial judge. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention.

Judge John C. Griffin:

Judge Griffin was elected to the bench in 2010. He was in private practice before becoming a judge. He currently presides over a commercial calendar in the Law Division and also serves as Supervising Judge for the Commercial Section of the Law Division.

Judge Griffin is widely praised for his legal ability and for being exceptionally hard working. He completes his cases but is reported to be very good at listening to all the parties. He has received equally high praise in a variety of assignments . He possesses a very good temperament. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention.

Judge John Patrick Kirby:

Judge Kirby was elected to the bench in 1998. He was an Assistant Cook County
State’s Attorney before becoming a judge. He has served in the Criminal Division and is now sitting in the Law Division. Judge Kirby is a lecturer at DePaul University in Trial Advocacy I as well as a substitute lecturer in other courses. He also lectures high school and college classes that observe court procedures in the Daley Center.

Judge Kirby is considered to be knowledgeable in a variety of areas of law with considerable judicial experience in both civil and criminal law matters. He is reported to have very good temperament and enjoys a reputation of being fair to all sides. He is praised for being well-prepared. In the criminal division, he received praise for his dedication to using alternative sentencing in cases where the defendants are nonviolent. He was personally involved in developing a cyber high school as an alternative sentence for youthful offenders. Upon the awarding of a high school diploma, Judge Kirby entered a motion to vacate the judgment. He implemented a special program for defendants who are veterans, and he has personally sought to find alternative treatment programs to become part of his sentencing. He earns high respect as a jurist in both civil and criminal divisions. The Council finds him Well Qualified for
retention.

Judge Geary Wayne Kull:

Judge Kull was appointed to the bench by the Illinois Supreme Court in 2009 and was elected in 2010. Before becoming a judge he served as an Assistant Cook County Public Defender and was in private practice doing criminal defense work. He is assigned to the Fourth Municipal District hearing felony cases.

Judge Kull is widely praised for his knowledge of the law and for his courtroom management skills. He is described as being courteous and professional, although he presides over a heavy court call. He is praised for being well-prepared and he is reported to issue well-reasoned decisions in a timely fashion. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Bertina Lampkin is on the ballot twice this November. She is unopposed in her bid for election to the Appellate Court, where she presently sits pursuant to assignment by the Illinois Supreme Court. She is also on the retention ballot because every Circuit Court judge, even those assigned to the Appellate Court, must seek retention every six years. The Council found her "Well Qualified" in both races:

Hon. Bertina Lampkin was admitted to practice in 1974 and was elected to the Circuit Court in 1992. As a lawyer, she had extensive litigation experience in both complex trial and appellate court matters as an Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney. She also has experience trying civil cases as an attorney with the Chicago Department of Law. Justice Lampkin was appointed to the Illinois Appellate Court in 2009.

As a trial judge, she heard criminal law matters at the Courthouse at 26th and California, and at that time was reported to be a very good, hardworking jurist who was praised for her writing skills. When the Council found her qualified for the Appellate Court in 2009, her written evaluation materials included approximately 100 opinions from cases she heard at 26th street, including findings on post-conviction petitions and motions to quash and suppress. She has served as the chair of the Supreme Court criminal pattern jury instructions committee. In that position, she was responsible for writing the new death penalty instructions and the instructions for specific specialized jury verdict required by the Apprendi case. She has taught in the area of death penalty litigation.

As an Appellate Court judge, Justice Lampkin has demonstrated that she meets – and exceeds the higher standards that the Council uses in evaluating candidates for the Appellate Court. In the 2013 judicial evaluation, lawyers report that Justice Lampkin has exceptional command of substantive law, as well as procedural rules. She is praised for being hardworking and her written opinions are considered to be well-reasoned. She is an active participant in oral arguments and is reported to have good temperament. The Council finds Judge Lampkin Well Qualified for the Appellate Court and Well Qualified for retention to the Circuit Court.

The Council also found Judge Thomas V. Lyons "Well Qualified" for retention:

Judge Lyons was appointed to the bench in 2008 and was elected in 2010. He had served as an Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney. He is currently assigned to the Law Division where he presides over jury trials.

Attorneys praise Judge Lyons’ legal ability and his temperament. They describe him as having a good grasp on even complex issues and he is said to treat all parties with respect. He shows patience on the bench but maintains control of the courtroom. Lawyers report that he reads all relevant materials and demonstrates the ability to communicate effectively with the jury. Lawyers often describe him as an excellent judge. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Raymond William Mitchell:

Judge Mitchell was appointed to the bench by the Illinois Supreme Court in 2008 and was elected in 2010. He presides over an Individual Commercial Calendar for the Law Division. Judge Mitchell has co-authored a Traffic Court Bench Book.

Judge Mitchell is considered to have very good legal ability. He is reported to be knowledgeable and to issue well reasoned opinions in a timely fashion. He has a professional demeanor, and is reported to be fair to all parties. He enjoys a reputation of being well prepared and holding lawyers to a high standard. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Kathleen Mary Pantle:

Judge Pantle was elected to the bench in 1998. She is a former Cook County Public Defender. She has been assigned to the Juvenile Justice Division and the Felony Trial Division. In January 2007, she was reassigned to the Chancery Division, where she has remained since, presiding over equitable matters, contract actions, class actions, administrative review actions, property disputes, partnership disputes, and general commercial litigation. Judge Pantle coached the DePaul University College of Law Trial Team through spring 2012, and is the author of an article entitled “Defending Illinois Criminal Cases” in Arrest, Search, and Seizure.

Judge Pantle is widely praised as a capable judge with very good legal ability. She is praised for well reasoned opinions issued in a timely fashion, for being well prepared, and for being knowledgeable. She is reported to be fair to all parties and has a professional demeanor. The Council finds her Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Edward Washington, II:

Judge Washington was appointed to the bench by the Illinois Supreme Court in 2002 and was elected to the bench in 2004. He is currently hearing jury trials in the Law Division. Prior to becoming a judge, he was a partner with two law firms doing complex regulatory litigation and government relations work. He has also served as a division chief with the Illinois Attorney General’s Office and as an administrative law judge with the Illinois Commerce Commission. He has also served as a senior attorney with MCI Telecommunications. He is currently hearing jury trials in the Law Division. Judge Washington has taught as Visiting Faculty at Harvard Law School since January of 2014.

Judge Washington is respected as a well prepared jurist who is fair to all parties. He is considered to have very good legal ability. He is praised for his temperament and his diligence. He brought to the trial bench a variety of experiences in complex litigation matters and is considered to have excellent court management skills. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention.

Hanlon fundraiser October 5 in Prospect Heights

Supporters of James E. Hanlon, Jr.'s bid for the "A" vacancy in the 12th Judicial Subcircuit are planning a fundraiser for their candidate on Wednesday, October 5, from 5:00 to 7:30 p.m., at Rocky Vander's, 698 N. Milwaukee Ave. in Prospect Heights.

Tickets for the event are $75 each. Sponsorships are available (Friend - $150, Amicus - $250, Advocate - $500, or Co-Sponsor - $1,000). For more information about the event, or to confirm your attendance, email rsvphanlonforjudge@gmail.com.

Three judges rated "Not Qualified" by Chicago Council of Lawyers; other bar groups find differently

Three Circuit Court judges seeking retention this November have been found "Not Qualified" by the Chicago Council of Lawyers. These are Judges Bonita Coleman, Nicholas R. Ford, and Daniel Joseph Lynch.

Judge Bonita Coleman

The Council states, with regard to Judge Coleman:

Judge Coleman was elected to the bench in 2010. She was in private practice before becoming a judge. She is currently assigned to the Domestic Relations Division in Markham.

Judge Coleman is reported to be professional and courteous on the bench. The Council is concerned that many lawyers question Judge Coleman’s knowledge of the law, although most respondents note that she does the necessary research to rule. There was a mixed response as to whether she is fair to both men and women who appear before her. Some believe she favors male parties, but others say she is fair and seeks a just outcome. The Council must balance the totality of the positive and negative comments we heard about Judge Coleman’s judicial performance. On balance, the Council finds her Not Qualified for retention.

The Chicago Bar Association rated Judge Coleman "Qualified" for retention:

Judge Bonita Coleman is “Qualified” for retention as a Circuit Court Judge. Judge Coleman was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1992 and was elected to the Circuit Court in 2010. Judge Coleman is assigned the Domestic Relations Division and presides over a high volume call involving many pro se litigants. Judge Coleman is thoughtful, patient, and thorough in explaining the judicial process to pro se litigants. Judge Coleman is well regarded for her legal knowledge, judicial experience, and excellent demeanor.

The Illinois State Bar Association has issued narrative explanations of its ratings on judges seeking retention. The ISBA states, with regard to Judge Coleman:

Hon. Bonita Coleman was admitted to the Illinois Bar in 1992. She was in private practice concentrating in family law, criminal defense and probate before being elected to the Circuit Court of Cook County in 2010. She is currently assigned to the Domestic Relations Division in the Sixth District (Markham).

Judge Coleman is praised for her temperament and patience with the many pro se litigants who appear before her. Some attorneys have expressed concerns that while she works hard, cases do not always proceed in a timely manner. In addition, attorneys’ opinions on the depth of her legal knowledge were not uniformly positive, although she is considered to be a hard worker who will always research a question of law and who thinks it is important to get things right.

For the 2016 General Election, the Illinois State Bar Association finds Hon. Bonita Coleman Qualified
for retention as a judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County.

In addition to the favorable rating from the ISBA, Judge Coleman also received favorable ratings from all of the other Alliance bar groups except the Chicago Council of Lawyers.

Judge Nicholas R. Ford

With regard to Judge Ford, the Chicago Council of Lawyers states:

Judge Ford was appointed to the bench in December 1997, and was elected in 1998. Since 2002, he has been assigned to the Criminal Division of the Circuit Court. Judge Ford was admitted to practice in 1988. He was an Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney throughout his career as an attorney.

Judge Ford is considered to have good legal ability and he is regarded as hardworking. In 2010 his demeanor drew some criticism for impatience and inappropriate remarks, but respondents in the current evaluation praise his temperament as being both patient and in control of the courtroom.

But two decisions handed down by the Illinois Appellate Court since 2010 raise serious concerns about Judge Ford’s ability to decide cases in an impartial manner. In People v. Jackson, the Appellate Court reversed and remanded a first degree murder conviction rendered by Judge Ford at a bench trial, holding he “abandoned [his] role as a neutral and impartial arbiter of fact by adopting a prosecutorial role when questioning [the] defendant’s expert witness and by relying on matters based on prior private knowledge” that were outside the record, thereby undermining the defendant’s right to a fair trial. And in People v. Pace, another first degree murder case, the Appellate Court vacated an aggregate 100 year sentence imposed by Judge Ford upon a 16-year-old defendant, finding that Ford considered and “placed significant emphasis” on impermissible factors during sentencing, including the defendant’s choice to remain silent during the sentencing hearing, Judge Ford’s personal views, and evidence not located in the record. “It is noteworthy,” continued the Appellate Court, “that the portion of the record in which [Judge Ford] announced [his] sentence goes on for 16 pages. At least four of those pages were devoted solely to [Judge Ford] discussing [his] personal feelings about gang violence; other large portions see the judge discussing the victims and stating that he was aligned with them.” In both Jackson and Pace, the Appellate Court remanded the matters to the Circuit Court with instructions to reassign the cases to a different judge.

Judicial impartiality is a foundational component of our legal system. Deviation from this principle not only deprives litigants of due process, but also undermines public confidence in the courts. On balance, the Council finds Judge Ford Not Qualified for retention.

The Chicago Bar Association and the Illinois State Bar Association reached a different conclusion.

The CBA stated, with regard to Judge Ford:

Judge Nicholas Ford is “Qualified” for retention as a Circuit Court Judge. Judge Ford was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1988 and has served as a judge since 1998. Judge Ford is currently assigned to the Criminal Court and is well regarded for his knowledge of criminal law, judicial experience, and ability to effectively manage a high volume court.

The ISBA reports,

Hon. Nicholas R. Ford was admitted to the Illinois Bar in 1988. He was an assistant state’s attorney until 1998 when he was first appointed, then elected, to the Circuit Court of Cook County. He has been assigned to the Criminal Division since 2003 after first spending time in First Municipal. He has done some volunteer work.

Judge Ford is considered to have excellent legal knowledge and ability. He runs a tight, but not unfair, courtroom. He has handled some high-profile cases, and is generally considered to have good demeanor and is a hard worker who is always prepared. Concerns have been raised over a couple of Appellate Court decisions which have criticized some questions and rulings as showing bias toward the State by taking into account the defendant choosing not to exercise his right of allocution, and for the tone and manner in which he asked questions of an expert witness for the defense.
For the 2016 General Election, the Illinois State Bar Association finds Hon. Nicholas R. Ford Qualified for retention as a judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County

As with Judge Coleman, the negative rating from the Council was the only one received by Judge Ford for this election. All of the other Alliance bar groups recommended Judge Ford's retention.

Judge Daniel Joseph Lynch

The Council stated, with regard to Judge Lynch:

Judge Lynch was elected to the bench in 1998. He is presently assigned to the Law Division. He is a former Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney.

Judge Lynch is widely respected for his knowledge of the law and procedure. He is considered to be well prepared and is reported to be adept at handling long, complex trials. Some respondents complained that he can, on occasion, be short tempered on the bench. Most say that he has a good temperament. The Council is concerned, however, that Judge Lynch on several occasions has reached beyond his immediate role as judge in a particular matter to engage in legal acts that seem to be outside his normal course of deciding a case before him. These matters include seeking or having sought to have the attorneys prosecuted for fraud or obstruction. In another matter, the judge unsuccessfully sought to have the Cook County State’s Attorney prosecute one of the parties before him. These unorthodox uses of judicial discretion, including criminal contempt charges, are troubling to the Council. On balance, the Council finds Judge Lynch to be Not Qualified for retention.

The Illinois State Bar Association also recommends against Judge Lynch's retention:

Hon. Daniel Joseph Lynch was admitted to the Illinois Bar in 1988. He worked as an assistant state’s attorney until his election to the Circuit Court of Cook County in 1998. He was retained in 2004 and 2010. He is currently assigned to the Law Division, Jury Section. He is involved in community activities.

Judge Lynch is generally considered to have excellent legal knowledge and even-keeled, although there were isolated reports of temperament issues. Since last being retained, Judge Lynch has been involved in several cases which have called into question his judicial judgment, including a case within the last year where the Illinois Supreme Court ordered his removal and reassignment of that case to another judge.

For the 2016 General Election, the Illinois State Bar Association finds Hon. Daniel Joseph Lynch Not Qualified for retention as a judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County.

The Chicago Bar Association, on the other hand, reached a different conclusion:

Judge Daniel J. Lynch is “Qualified” for retention as a Circuit Court Judge. Judge Lynch was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1988 and was elected to the Circuit Court in 1998. Judge Lynch is currently assigned to the Law Division’s Jury Section. Judge Lynch has presided over many complex cases, some of which have been the subject of media attention. Judge Lynch is diligent and well regarded for his knowledge of the law, judicial ability, and dedication to the justice system.

All of the Alliance bar groups except the CCL and ISBA (and except for the Cook County Bar Association which has so far issued no rating) have recommended a "yes" vote on Judge Lynch's retention.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The complete CBA "Green Guide," showing all of its ratings of judicial candidates on the November ballot, may be accessed by clicking here. The complete report of the Chicago Council of Lawyers may be found at this link, while the complete narrative reports prepared by the Illinois State Bar Association for Cook County judicial candidates can be found here.

Alliance ratings of retention judges released

The Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening is comprised of the Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Chicago Area (AABA), Black Women Lawyers Association of Greater Chicago (BWLA), Chicago Council of Lawyers (CCL), Cook County Bar Association (CCBA), Decalogue Society of Lawyers (DSL), Hellenic Bar Association (HBA), Hispanic Lawyers Association of Illinois (HLAI), Illinois State Bar Association (ISBA), Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago (LAGBAC), Puerto Rican Bar Association of Illinois (PRBA), and Women’s Bar Association of Illinois (WBAI) working collaboratively to improve the process of screening judicial candidates in Cook County, Illinois.

The Alliance Bar groups have issued ratings for each of the judges seeking retention, offering "yes" or "no" recommendations on each retention candidate. The grids that follow are mostly complete; when updated grids are issued, I'll post them.

(Depending on the device on which you're viewing this post, clicking on the images below will enlarge them, or sharpen their focus.)