The Council found 74 of the 78 Cook County jurists seeking retention to be qualified to continue their judicial careers. Twelve of these 74 were rated "Well Qualifed" by the CCL, as FWIW reported earlier today.
Four judges, however, were rated Not Qualified for retention by the CCL. These are, in ballot order:
Hon. Kathy M. Flanagan
Hon. Kathy M. Flanagan was admitted to the Illinois bar in 1979. She was elected to the Circuit Court in 1988 and, since 2010, has been Supervising Judge of the Law Division, Motion Section. Her previous judicial assignment was in the Domestic Relations Division. Prior to becoming a judge, she was in private practice.
Judge Flanagan is nearly universally praised among practitioners for her punctuality, diligence, and legal knowledge. One respondent described her knowledge of civil procedure as “encyclopedic.”
The most significant concerns about Judge Flanagan relate to her judicial temperament and carryover from prior evaluations. While a minority of those interviewed support her and simply observe that she is stricter than other judges while managing her courtroom effectively and efficiently, a majority of those interviewed report that they have observed Judge Flanagan acting temperamentally, unprofessionally, and impatiently, with some noting that her behavior has become more erratic recently. She reportedly does not allow attorneys to argue their positions fully; refuses to accept case management orders that take into account unique circumstances of particular cases; schedules trials without regard to attorneys’ existing trial conflicts; imposes unduly severe consequences for failure to comply with rules; and, in general, lacks flexibility for matters outside of attorneys’ control.
While Judge Flanagan may have a well-intentioned desire to move cases along and clear backlogs within the Law Division, its manifestation as impatience, unprofessionalism, and disrespect to attorneys is a serious concern to the Council. This is particularly so given that these concerns have been raised for years, but Judge Flanagan does not appear to have successfully addressed them.
On balance, the Council finds her Not Qualified for retention to the Circuit Court.
Hon. Lisa A. Marino
Hon. Lisa Ann Marino was admitted to the Illinois bar in 1988. She was elected in 2012 and, since 2016, has been assigned to the First Municipal District as well as the Mortgage Foreclosure Section of the Chancery Court. Previously, she served in the Juvenile Justice Division. Prior to becoming a judge, she was a solo practitioner and an Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney.
Many respondents raised concerns about Judge Marino’s legal ability, character, temperament, and diligence. These reports vary significantly from the investigation conducted in 2018, when Judge Marino was comparatively newer to her assignment in the Housing Section, and the Council found her qualified for retention. Complaints include repeated legal errors, anti-defendant bias, shouting from the bench, unpreparedness, and arriving late to the bench or taking excessive time to make decisions.
Given the breadth and volume of these concerns, the Council finds her Not Qualified for retention to the Circuit Court.
Hon. Ieshia Eshale Gray
Hon. Ieshia Eschale Gray was admitted to the Illinois Bar in 2002. She was elected to the bench in 2018 and, since 2022, has been assigned to Sixth Municipal District in Markham. Judge Gray presides over the new Sauk Village Restorative Justice Community Court. She previously served in the Fourth Municipal District. Prior to becoming a judge, she was an Assistant Public Defender and a Court Coordinator in the Civil Protection Division.
Judge Gray receives praise for her legal knowledge and ability, as well as her sensitivity to diversity issues and her efficient courtroom management when on the bench. However, some concerns were expressed about her work ethic in connection with the timing of her days off. While some practitioners report that Judge Gray has a good temperament and is impartial, a majority expressed serious concerns about these matters, with many noting that they would take a substitution of judge if assigned to her in the future. Several attorneys have suggested that Judge Gray personalized matters and treated them punitively after they presented positions with which she disagreed.
On balance, the Council finds Judge Gray Not Qualified for retention.
Hon. Shannon P. O’Malley
Hon. Shannon P. O’Malley was admitted to the bar under the name Phillip Spiwak in 1992; he changed his name in 2012. He was elected to the bench in 2018 and, since 2019, has been assigned to the Child Protection Division. He previously served in the First Municipal District. Prior to becoming a judge, he was in private practice.
Judge O’Malley’s legal knowledge and ability are considered average, although a minority of respondents felt it was below average with many attorneys questioning his ability to make well-reasoned decisions. Judge O’Malley is considered sensitive to bias and respectful to everyone, particularly the minors in his courtroom. However, there are many complaints about his courtroom management, which has not improved in his years on the bench. Delays in his courtroom can mean that a child remains in a group home, psychiatric hospital, or other placement longer than necessary.
The Council finds him Not Qualified for retention to the Circuit Court.
IMHO, the Council has been kind to these 4 and kinder still to many others up for retention that could easily be designated "Not Qualified"
ReplyDelete