Showing posts with label 2014 Retention Election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2014 Retention Election. Show all posts

Monday, November 17, 2014

Lesbian and Gay Bar Association President pens open letter to Gov.-elect Rauner about Mr. Rauner's retention ballot choices

Ed. note -- The following letter is reprinted without comment; one apparent typo was corrected with the author's permission. The author of the letter, LAGBAC President John Litchfield, is an attorney at Foley & Lardner LLP.

Photo of Mr. Rauner voting on Election Day,
taken from the Glenview News website.
Dear Mr. Rauner,

A photo of you published on November 5, 2014 with your completed ballot indicates that you voted "No" on every judicial candidate for retention to the Cook County bench, according to Republican Judge James G. Riley's letter to the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin (published on November 10, 2014, and enclosed here for your reference). I, too, saw the photograph referenced by Judge Riley, and am disappointed to see that it confrrms his account.

This means you voted not to retain even the stars of the bench, the leaders and stand-outs, the innovators and those working to bring peace and resolution to families in our communities. Judges, perhaps more so than any of the elected officials in our state, have a direct and lasting impact on the lives of Illinoisans on a daily basis - whether it be petitioners in bankruptcy, divorce court, or child custody, or defendants in criminal cases or eviction proceedings. The issues our judiciary grapples with are deeply personal to the citizens of our state who deserve only the best on the bench.

Judge Riley's letter is correct: the 2014 class of retention candidates enjoyed better bar ratings than most previous classes; no 2014 candidate received less than 50% "Yes" recommendations from rating bar associations; and only eight of 73 had any "No" recommendations at all. Prior classes of retention candidates have usually featured at least one or two with 100% negative bar ratings.

One reason that I am conversant with these statistics is that I have been privy to the judicial evaluations process for more than four years as President of the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago, and over nine years as a member. Our members, and the members of many other bar associations, spend hundreds of hours a year evaluating judicial candidates by reviewing detailed candidate questionnaires, seeking feedback from practitioners familiar with the candidates' practices, and conducting live interviews all in an effort to educate the electorate on the otherwise confusing process of electing judges.

Every retention cycle, roughly 20% of the Cook County electorate vote "No" on every judicial candidate up for retention. While an unfortunate reality in our electoral process, our elected leaders should not encourage this action by their own example. It is simply irresponsible to do so.

There are a number of viable alternatives you could have explored. Let me address a few.

First, you could have taken an opportunity to speak out on long ballots that are confusing to voters, and maybe ever lent support to efforts to make voter information more widely available.

Second, with a little information, you could have addressed the possibility of raising the bar for retention from 60% to 65% or even 70% to improve the chances of removing poor performers from the bench - or at least creating the threat of job loss to inspire effort at better performance.

Third, you could have waded into the debate about whether judges should be elected at all, perhaps joining with politicians in other states in efforts to roll back existing voting opportunities, or better yet, working with legislators in Springfield to establish improvements to Illinois' system of electing judges.

Or, fourth, you could have just not cast votes in those races and pled ignorance.

But instead of these and other responsible alternatives, your vote risked chaos and the wholesale loss of a set of professionals who, for the most part, perform extraordinary service for the people of Cook County. Your decision to vote "no" on each and every judicial candidate demonstrates contempt for the judiciary, the volunteer attorney evaluators, and the electorate itself. I invite you to engage the Illinois bar to explain your vote. Perhaps you have thoughts about how the bar can work with the state to improve our judicial election process, and we would welcome your leadership on this issue. The system is far from perfect - but an irresponsible vote by the now-leader of Illinois only serves to exacerbate any problems, and sets a bad example of how to fix them.

Thank you for your time and attention. I am available and willing to discuss any of this if you are so inclined.

Sincerely yours,

John L. Litchfield, Esq.
President, the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago

Tuesday, November 04, 2014

All retention judges appear likely to be retained

The Chicago Board of Elections website lists each retention race separately on election night; Cook County Clerk David Orr's website provides a list of the retention judge results. So this is extremely unofficial, but after 'cherry picking' results in City counts of judges who were somewhat controversial for one reason or another, and comparing these with the County results, it looks like all the retention judges will survive tonight.

It also looks like no judge will get an 80% 'yes' vote, and very few will get more than 75%. Most seem to be in the range of 70-75%.

Judge Thomas E. Flanagan, the one judge singled out for a "no" vote by the Chicago Bar Association, has a combined 72.6% "yes" vote at this point, with over 75% of the City vote counted and roughly 88% of the County vote in.

Judge Annie O'Donnell, the one judge singled out for a "no" vote by the Chicago Council of Lawyers, has a combined favorable vote of just over 70%.

The County Clerk's office reports a 40.15% voter turnout; the Chicago Board of Elections is reporting turnout of 35.10% of the City's registered voters.

Monday, November 03, 2014

Resources for voters looking to navigate the Cook County judicial retention ballot tomorrow

Yes, there are a lot of judges seeking retention (more than 70, including one elected Justice of the Appellate Court). That's a lot of judges. Even President Obama reportedly complained about the length of the retention ballot when he voted early.

But there are resources for voters looking for information or guidance concerning the retention judges.

Some of these prior posts on FWIW may be hepful:
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.

Other voter resources. The retention judges also have their own website. You will find there a linked list of all jurists seeking retention. As of October 18, many of those links provided biographical information, pictures or .pdf resumes. To wit:
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."

The ICJL gave "Highly Recommended" ratings to four Cook County Circuit Court judges, Gregory Wojkowski, Themis Karzenis, Lewis Nixon, and Donna Cooper. Justice Thomas Hoffman received a "Recommended" rating from the ICJL in his bid to be retained on the Illinois Appellate Court.

Here is the complete ICJL list of Cook County Circuit Court judges as published this morning in its daily newsletter:
Assigned to the Appellate Court:
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
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:
  • 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

FOP urges "no" vote on retention bid of Judge Anita Rivkin-Carothers

I saw it first on the often profane but usually informative police blog, Second City Cop. In addition to urging a "no" vote on all retention judges, in the linked October 31 post the proprietor or proprietors of Second City Cop singled out Judge Anita Rivkin-Carothers. It turns out that Chicago Lodge 7 of the Fraternal Order of Police (hardly an ally of Second City Cop) put up a post encouraging votes against Judge Rivkin-Carothers on October 30. From the FOP post:
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”.

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.
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:
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 Rivkin-Carothers was also rated recommended for retention by the Illinois Civil Justice League.

Monday, October 27, 2014

Cook County Bar Association releases judicial candidate ratings

The Cook County Bar Association is a member of the Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening, so regular FWIW readers have already seen the candidate ratings it has issued in both contested and retention elections.

However, for those who may not have previously seen the Alliance retention grids or other, prior posts on the largely uncontested elections for current judicial vacancies, the CCBA ratings may be of interest.

There are only two contests in elections for judicial vacancies and these just happen to be the only two races in which the CCBA has issued "Not Recommended" ratings. In the race for the 12th Subcircuit vacancy, Republican James Pieczonka was rated "Not Recommended." His opponent, Judge James L. Kaplan is rated "Recommended." In the race for the 4th Subcircuit Billik vacancy, the Republican candidate, Ian Brenson, was "Not Evaluated" while the Democratic nominee, Assistant State's Attorney John J. Mahoney was rated "Not Recommended." Two persons who are uncontested in their bids for their respective countywide vacancies, both of them judges appointed to the bench by the Illinois Supreme Court, were rated "Highly Recommended" by the CCBA. These are Judges Cynthia Y. Cobbs and Andrea Michele Buford.

On the retention ballot, the CCBA urges a "no" vote for only three judges. These are Themis N. Karnezis, Ann O’Donnell, and Laura Marie Sullivan. With the exception of a couple of judges who were not evaluated by the CCBA, the CCBA urges a "yes" vote on all other retention candidates, including Appellate Court Justice Thomas Hoffman, seeking another term on the Appellate Court and Judge Thomas E. Flanagan, the one judge not recommended by the Chicago Bar Association. (Judge Flanagan was recommended for retention by each of the other Alliance bar groups as well.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information about the retention ballot, you may wish to see these posts:
Voters in the far north suburban 12th Subcircuit or far west suburban 4th Subcircuit may also find these posts helpful:

Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Welcome early voters!

Welcome early voters! Of course, if you didn't also vote in the Democratic Primary (with very limited exceptions) it is far too late to have any influence on who will be elected to the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court or to the Cook County Circuit Court: The winners of nearly all of the Democratic primary races -- in all of the countywide races and nearly all of the Circuit Court races -- are unopposed. We'll come back to these races eventually.

But, first, early voters, let's look at where you can still exercise your franchise in a meaningful manner. You can vote for (or against) the over 70 judges (including one elected Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court) who are seeking retention.

If you think that's a lot of judges to keep track of, you are in good company. According to Michael Sneed's column in this morning's Chicago Sun-Times, President Obama himself complained about the length of the retention ballot when he voted early yesterday. Sneed quoted the President as saying, "You gotta shorten the ballot! Two many judges! Seventeen pages of names! You are killing me!"

Clearly, POTUS does not read this blog. (Apparently the Sun-Times has laid off the last of its copy editors as well.)

But there are resources for voters looking for information or guidance concerning the retention judges. The retention judges themselves have their own website. You will find there a linked list of all jurists seeking retention. As of Saturday morning, many of those links provided biographical information, pictures or .pdf resumes. To wit:
You may find some these prior posts here on FWIW to be helpful as well:
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.

The Illinois Civil Justice League has today released its ratings of Cook County retention hopefuls 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."

The ICJL gave "Highly Recommended" ratings to four Cook County Circuit Court judges, Gregory Wojkowski, Themis Karzenis, Lewis Nixon, and Donna Cooper. Justice Thomas Hoffman received a "Recommended" rating from the ICJL in his bid to be retained on the Illinois Appellate Court.

Here is the complete ICJL list of Cook County Circuit Court judges as published this morning in its daily newsletter:
Assigned to the Appellate Court:
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
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:
  • 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
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.

But -- and this is where we came in -- most of you won't have any say in who gets elected to the bench for the first time. I told that you that, with just a few exceptions, the winners of the Democratic primaries, countywide and subcircuit, are unopposed for election.

Here are the exceptions:

In the 13th Subcircuit, no Democrat filed. Thus, John Curry, the Republican candidate is unopposed.

In the 12th Subcircuit, Democrat James Kaplan is opposed by Republican James Paul Pieczonka.

In the 4th Subcircuit, Democrat John J. Mahoney is opposed by Republican Ian Brenson in the race for the Billik vacancy.

These prior FWIW posts may be helpful to voters in the far north suburban 12th Subcircuit or far west suburban 4th Subcircuit:

Saturday, October 18, 2014

Retention Judges: The default vote is "yes"

Judicial retention elections seem strange to many voters. The over 70 Circuit Court judges (and one elected Justice of the Appellate Court) that are up for retention in Cook County this year do not run against anyone; the candidate's name is on the ballot in the form of a question that comes down to this: Should Judge X remain a judge? Or should Judge X look for work elsewhere come December?

If Judge X receives at least a 60% "yes" vote, he or she keeps the job.

Past results suggest that the current class of judges have excellent prospects for success in this retention election; the last time any Cook County judges failed to achieve a 60% yes vote was in 1990, when seven judges were removed (though one was simultaneously elected to the Appellate Court).

But that doesn't mean that judges have no reason to take retention elections seriously. It is a fact that at least two out of 10 voters will mark "no" on every single judge, no matter how qualified. In the 2012 retention election, for example, out of the roughly 60 jurists on the retention ballot, no one received an 80% "yes" vote. Appellate Court Justice James Fitzgerald Smith received a 79.81% "yes" vote and four Circuit Court judges -- Patricia Banks, Maureen Elizabeth Connors (who was simultaneously elected to the Appellate Court in 2012), Mary Colleen Roberts, and Diane M. Shelley received "yes" votes from more than 79% of the voters.

Thus, the stars of the newspapers' editorials, the individuals rated most highly qualified by all the various bar groups, can still expect to be rejected by 20% or more of the voters. Those inclined to 'throw the rascals out' will vote the retention ballot no matter what. Can we safely assume that the just-say-nay voters will number no more than 20 or 25% of the retention voters? As a lot of people learned first-hand with their IRAs in recent years, past results are not a guarantee of future performance.

But wholesale removal of judges in Cook County would not be in the public's best interests.

We have many very good, hard-working, scholarly judges in Cook County. All of the judges on the 2014 retention ballot are recommended by some of the bar associations that screen judicial candidates; the vast majority have been recommended by each each and every one of the bar groups. Here's a linked list of the posts I've put up about the bar association ratings:
For more information about Cook County judges on the retention ballot, see the 2014 Cook County Retention Judges Website.

I mean to express no opinion about whether any particular judge should or should not be retained -- but I do submit that the default vote on the judicial retention ballot, in the absence of a good reason to vote otherwise, should be "yes."

Friday, October 10, 2014

Alliance issues revised ratings in 4th Subcircuit, one retention race

The Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening has announced revised ratings in the contested 4th Subcircuit race between Ian Brenson and John J. Mahoney. FWIW readers will recall that the ISBA modified its rating of candidate Brenson earlier this week.

Here is the revised 'key' issued by the Alliance:


(Clicking on images here may increase their size or clarity depending on the device on which you are viewing this post.)

This is the new Alliance 'grid' in the race for the Billik vacancy in the 4th Subcircuit.


Brenson was formerly rated "Not Recommended" by every Alliance bar group. The ISBA, as you will note from the grid, is an Alliance member. Brenson was rated "Qualified" by the Chicago Bar Association. The Alliance ratings for John J. Mahoney remain those ratings issued for the March primary; Brenson was not a candidate in the March primary.

The Alliance also announced that the Hellenic Bar Association changed its recommendation on the retention of Judge Joan Powell from "No" to "Yes." Here (with my graphic abilities stretched to the breaking point) is the revised Alliance 'grid line' for Judge Powell.


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).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related: Council, Alliance ratings in the two contested Cook County judicial elections

Alliance releases, or re-releases, ratings in races for Cook County judicial vacancies

Alliance retention "grids" issued



Monday, October 06, 2014

IVI-IPO makes endorsements in some (but not all) Cook County judicial races

Updated and corrected 10/6/14

The Independent Voters of Illinois - Independent Precinct Organization has posted its endorsements for the November election. That's a link to the IVI-IPO's endorsement page in the preceding sentence.

The IVI-IPO made an endorsement in one of Cook County's two contested judicial races, choosing Judge James Kaplan over James Paul Pieczonka in the race for the Jordan vacancy in the far north suburban 12th Subcircuit.

The IVI-IPO has also singled out several Circuit Court judges seeking retention as worthy of 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:
  • 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
By my county, nine of the judges on the IVI-IPO's list of favorites are among the 16 rated "Well Qualified" for retention by the Chicago Council of Lawyers. These are Judges Clayton J. Crane, James P. Flannery Jr., Marilyn F. Johnson. Marjorie C. Laws, Sebastian Thomas Patti, and William Lacy and Appellate Court Justices Michael B. Hyman, Mary Anne Mason, and Robert E. Gordon. (Hyman, Mason and Gordon are all Circuit Court judges serving on the Appellate Court pursuant to Supreme Court assignment. They must stand for retention, however, as Circuit Court judges.)

Wednesday, October 01, 2014

Judge Pamela Loza interviewed on NTNM



Judge Pamela Loza, a candidate for retention in the upcoming November election, is a guest on this week's edition of Avy Meyers' North Town News Magazine and her interview has now been posted online.

Judge Loza's interview airs Thursday, October 2 on CAN-TV at 7:30 p.m., and again on Friday, October 3 at 2:30 p.m. It also airs on a number of cable systems in the suburbs between October 2 and 6. 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.

The website for the entire retention class may be found at CookCountyJudges.com.

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

CCL rates one judge Not Qualified for retention, but it's not the same judge singled out by the CBA

Continuing with a look at the release today of the Alliance retention ratings (the Chicago Council of Lawyers is an Alliance member) -- scroll down or click here for the complete Alliance "grids" on judicial retention candidates.

The Chicago Council of Lawyers rated 72 of the 73 Circuit Court judges seeking retention on the November ballot as Qualified (or better). Only one judge was singled out by the CCL as Not Qualified. This was Judge Ann O'Donnell, of whom the Council stated:
Judge Ann O’Donnell --- Not Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Ann Louise O’Donnell served as an Assistant Cook County Public Defender between 1987 and 1995. She was a solo practitioner focusing on criminal defense matters between 1995 and 2008. She was elected to the bench in 2008. She currently presides over the Preliminary Hearing Call. Her past assignments include serving as a floating judge in misdemeanor and felony branch courts. Lawyers report that she has the legal ability and knowledge necessary for her current assignment. Many lawyers, however criticize her judicial temperament as being unduly flip, sarcastic and rude. Judge O’Donnell was criticized by some lawyers for a recent practice (within the past year) of refusing to appoint an Assistant Public Defender to a number of indigent defendants in the belief that family members should have been paying for a private lawyer. She was doing this while failing to conduct a required indigency hearing – defendants were not being asked to complete the asset and liability form provided by the Circuit Court. More egregiously, she required certain of those defendants to return to her courtroom the next day with a private attorney, and continued to order these defendants to return each and every day until they were represented by private counsel. This sometimes went on for weeks, and was described by many as an abusive practice. Chief Judge Evans has now issued a General Order requiring an indigency determination before an Assistant Public Defender can be appointed or denied.
(I believe this link will take the reader to the Order referred to above.)

The Chicago Bar Association did find Judge O'Donnell "Qualified" for retention. The CBA noted:
ANNIE O’DONNELL --- QUALIFIED
Judge Annie O’Donnell is “QUALIFIED” for retention as a Circuit Court Judge. Judge O’Donnell was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1987. Judge O’Donnell served as an Assistant Public Defender and was engaged in private practice as a criminal defense lawyer before her election to the bench in 2008. Judge O’Donnell is currently assigned to a preliminary felony hearing call in a branch court. Judge O’Donnell is well regarded by the lawyers who appear in her court for her knowledge of the law, diligence, and fine temperament.
Alliance members other than the Council were split in their evaluations of Judge O'Donnell. The Black Women Lawyers' Association, Cook County Bar Association, Decalogue Society of Lawyers and the Illinois State Bar Association all agreed with the Council in recommending against O'Donnell's retention. However, the Women's Bar Association of Illinois, the Puerto Rican Bar Association, the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago, the Hispanic Lawyers Association of Illinois, the Hellenic Bar Association, and the Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Chicago Area all advise a "yes" vote for Judge O'Donnell.

FWIW readers will remember that the Chicago Bar Association came out in favor of retaining all but one Cook County Circuit Court judge seeking retention this year. The one jurist singled out was Judge Thomas Flanagan. However, the Chicago Council of Lawyers rated Judge Flanagan "Qualified" for retention:
Judge Thomas E. Flanagan --- Qualified
Thomas E. Flanagan has been a judge since his election in 1984. He has been assigned to the Law Division for most of his judicial career. Judge Flanagan hears civil jury cases at the Daley Center. Judge Flanagan is considered to have good legal ability. He is respected as a solid jurist with good temperament and case management skills. The Council finds him Qualified for retention.
Every other Alliance member has also urged a "Yes" vote for Judge Flanagan.

In my post last week about the CBA ratings, I mentioned that Judge Laura Sullivan had received a favorable rating from the CBA despite the controversy that erupted when a law professor was taken into custody in her courtroom while taking notes. The law professor later wrote about this experience in the Chicago Tribune and I wrote about the story in this post.

The Chicago Council of Lawyers has joined the CBA in recommending Judge Sullivan's retention. The CCL states:
Judge Laura Marie Sullivan --- Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Laura Sullivan served as an Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney as both a trial attorney and as a supervisor. Judge Sullivan is currently sitting at the First Municipal District, where she presides over bond hearings. She was first elected to the bench in 2002. Judge Sullivan’s previous judicial assignments included the Traffic Court, Felony Preliminary Hearing Section, and Misdemeanor Section in the First Municipal District, and the Domestic Violence Division. Judge Sullivan is considered to have good legal ability and knowledge of the law. She is reported to be well prepared and hard working. Judge Sullivan has been criticized in the press on two separate occasions. While these incidents give the Council pause, on balance the Council finds her Qualified for retention.
Five Alliance members do urge a "No" vote on Judge Sullivan, however. These are the BWLA, the CCBA, the DSL, the ISBA and the LAGBAC. Five Alliance members besides the Council recommend a "Yes" vote for Judge Sullivan. These are the AABA, the HBA, the HLAI, the PRBA, and the WBAI.

Judges O'Donnell and Sullivan received the most negative ratings from Alliance members. Most Alliance members rated nearly all retention candidates positively. The Alliance member giving out the most negative ratings to retention candidates was the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago, but LAGBAC rated 67 of 73 retention candidates positively.

Chicago Council of Lawyers finds 18 retention candidates "Well Qualified" for retention; the Council rates Judge Michael Toomin "Highly Qualified"

The Chicago Council of Lawyers has issued explanations for its ratings of Cook County judges seeking retention in November. The Council's complete ratings will be available shortly on VoteforJudges.org; the Council's ratings of retention candidates, stripped down to their Yes-No essence, can be viewed, along with those of all the other Alliance members, in the post below.

Nearly all of the 70-plus jurists seeking retention in Cook County were rated Qualified or better by the Council. The CCL found only one judge, Judge Ann O'Donnell, "Not Qualified" for retention. We will return to this in a separate post.

The big news here, however, at least in my reading, is that, not only did the Council find so many judges seeking retention to be Qualified, but that the Council bestowed "Well Qualified" ratings on 18 retention candidates.

Moreover, the Council singled out Judge Michael Philip Toomin as "Highly Qualified" for retention. Of Judge Toomin, the Council stated:
Judge Michael Philip Toomin --- Highly Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Michael Toomin was in private practice. He also served as an Assistant Public Defender for Cook County. Judge Toomin is currently sitting at the Juvenile Justice Division as a Presiding Judge. He was elected to the First Municipal District in 1980. His previous judicial assignments included the Appellate Court of Illinois, the Criminal Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County, and the Second Municipal District of the Circuit Court of Cook County. Judge Toomin authored “Second Degree Murder and Attempted Murder: CLEAR’s Efforts to Maneuver the Slippery Slope” for the John Marshall Law Review. Judge Toomin is widely respected as an excellent judge and administrator. He has very good legal ability and temperament – both on the bench and as an administrator off the bench. He is praised for being exceptionally hard-working. As a judge, his rulings are considered well-reasoned and decisive. The Council finds him Highly Qualified for retention.
The Council rated Justice Thomas E. Hoffman, the one elected Appellate Court Justice seeking retention this year, "Well Qualified." Of Justice Hoffman, the CCL said:
Justice Thomas E. Hoffman --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Justice Thomas Hoffman worked as an Assistant Corporation Counsel for the Chicago Department of Law and as an attorney in the private sector. Currently Justice dge Hoffman serves on the Illinois Appellate Court for the First District, where he has worked since 1993. Prior to joining the Appellate Court in 1993, Justice Hoffman served in the Law Division. Justice Hoffman is highly praised for his excellent knowledge of the law and for the quality of his written opinions. He is respected as a mentor for other judges. He is also praised for his work ethic – he is described generally as being always well-prepared. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention to the Appellate Court.
Here are the Council's explanations for the "Well Qualified" ratings it bestowed on 16 other Circuit Court judges seeking retention:
Judge Andrew Berman --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Andrew Berman was an Assistant Cook County Public Defender from 1979 to 1996. Beforehand, he was an assistant appellate defender for four years. Judge Berman has been assigned since 2007 to the Juvenile Justice Division. Judge Berman has also served in the Chancery Division. Judge Berman is considered to have very good legal ability and is widely respected for his legal knowledge. He serves as a mentor to other judges and serves as the acting Presiding Judge when Presiding Judge Toomin is unavailable. He is especially praised for his professionalism. His temperament is considered to be excellent and he is praised for the way he manages his courtroom. His rulings are considered to be well-reasoned and he spends the necessary time explaining his rulings to the parties appearing before him. He is active in court reform efforts. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Eileen Brewer --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Eileen Brewer was the Chief Counsel to County Board President, John H. Stroger. From 1988 to 1994, Judge Brewer served as the Assistant Corporation Counsel for the City of Chicago. Before that, she worked for a year as an associate attorney at Jenner & Block. Judge Brewer was elected to the bench in 2002 and is currently sitting as a motion judge in the Law Division. She spent much of her judicial career in the Domestic Relations Division. Judge Brewer is considered to have very good legal ability and temperament. Practitioners report that she has successfully made the transition from the Domestic Relations Division to the motion call in the Law Division. She is praised for her court management skills and is reported fair to all parties. The Council finds her Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Clayton J. Crane --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Clayton J. Crane was in private practice. He has also served as an Assistant State’s Attorney for Cook County. Judge Crane is currently sitting at the Criminal Division. He was first assigned to the Criminal Division in 1998. Judge Crane is praised as an excellent jurist by both prosecutors and defense counsel. He is considered to be fair to all parties, and to have very good legal ability and temperament. He has been involved in the development of specialty courts and other reform efforts in the Criminal Division. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Candace J. Fabri --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Candace J. Fabri was in private practice. She also served as an Assistant United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois for nine years. Judge Fabri has taught at Loyola University School of Law and clerked for a district judge in the Northern District of Illinois. Judge Fabri has been sitting at the Child Protection Division of the Juvenile Court since 1996. She is also presiding judge for the Family Treatment Court, where a judge, the lawyers, addiction specialists work with families where drug addiction has prevented reunification of a family. Judge Fabri is considered to have very good legal ability. She is praised for the quality and timeliness of her evidentiary rulings. Many respondents praised her opinions as “excellent” and “painstakingly thorough.” She is also praised for her ability to handle a high volume courtroom. During this current evaluation, all respondents described her temperament as “very professional”, “low key”, “respectful” and/or “effective.” Some respondents noted that she can be sharp with lawyers and caseworkers she believes are not prepared. She is often described as caring deeply for children and parents appearing in her courtroom. The Council finds her Well Qualified for retention.

Judge James P. Flannery Jr. --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, James P. Flannery worked as assistant corporation counsel in municipal and federal litigation for the City of Chicago until 1980, when he was hired as an associate attorney for Murphy, Preston & Jaffe. Judge Flannery worked in corporate, real estate, and labor law for two years before establishing a general practice as an associate at John T. Mitchell & associates. In 1984 Flannery worked as a solo practitioner maintaining his general practice before being hired as chief assistant attorney general where he was assigned to the Land Acquisition division in 1985.

Judge Flannery’s current assignment is Presiding Judge of the Law Division, where he has served since January, 2014 and supervised approximately 50 judges in the Law Division. His administrative duties include handling assignment and motion calls, as well as hearing contested motions involving the Law Jury section, Motion section, Commercial section, Tax and Miscellaneous section, and Individual calendar section of the Law Division of the Circuit Court. Previous judicial assignments include an assignment to the Law Division, Jury Section in 1997, where he presided over jury trials primarily involving personal injury and commercial cases. Before that, Judge Flannery spent 5 years assigned to the Criminal Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County where he heard every type of felony case,
including death penalty cases, with as many as 300 cases on his docket at any given time.

Judge Flannery is considered to have very good legal ability and an excellent knowledge of the law. He is praised for his legal analysis of often complex issues and is reported to serve as a mentor to many other judges. He is also praised for his fairness and integrity – some respondents noted that he is willing to reconsider a ruling if sufficiently persuaded. He has an excellent demeanor and many respondents noted that he treats all parties fairly while having a calm yet effective temperament. He is reported to be exceptionally hard-working and many respondents noted that he is always prepared for court proceedings. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Rodolfo Garcia --- Well Qualified
Justice Rodolfo Garcia was appointed to the Illinois Appellate Court in 2003 and served there until 2012. He is now assigned to the Chancery Division. He was elected to the Circuit Court in 1996. From 1983 to 1996, Judge Garcia worked as a sole practitioner with concentrations in criminal defense and immigration. From 1981 to 1983, he worked as an Assistant Illinois Attorney General in the Criminal Appeals Division. In March 2011, he was appointed to fill the elected spot of retiring Appellate Court Judge Michael J. Gallagher.

As an Appellate Court Judge, Judge Garcia was praised for being well-prepared for oral argument and for issuing well-reasoned, well-written opinions. As a trial judge, he is considered to have very good legal ability and temperament. The Council found him Well Qualified for the Appellate Court during the 2012 primary election. He is also an excellent trial judge. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention to the Circuit Court.

Justice Robert E. Gordon --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Robert Gordon spent 5 years working as an Associate Partner doing Insurance Defense work at Gordon & Brustin, followed by 10 years as a Partner and Insurance Defense litigator for Gordon Brustin. He then spent another 5 years as a Partner at Gordon, Schaefer, & Gordon, Ltd. where he represented both plaintiffs and defendants in litigation. Gordon then became President of Gordon & Gordon, Ltd. where he spent 15 years in General Litigation.

Justice Gordon is currently a Circuit Court judge sitting by appointment by the Illinois Supreme Court to the Illinois Appellate Court, First District since 2005. Justice Gordon is presiding judge of the Fifth Division and was previously presiding judge of the Sixth Division. Prior judicial assignments also included presiding over jury cases as a Jury trial Judge in the Law Division at Richard Daley Center, and presiding as a Jury Trial judge in the Municipal Division. He reports that he is currently working on a textbook on evidence which has yet to be published. Additionally Judge Gordon is a member of the
Appellate Court Administrative Committee.

Justice Gordon is considered to be a highly knowledgeable Appellate Court Justice who is praised for the quality of his written opinions and for the quality of his questioning during oral argument. He is considered to be exceptionally hard-working and prepared. He was also praised as an excellent trial judge before 2005. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention to the Circuit Court.

Justice Michael Hyman --- Well Qualified
Justice Hyman was assigned to the First Judicial District of the Illinois Appellate Court effective January 2013. He was appointed to the Circuit Court in 2006 after being respected private sector practitioner since 1979. Justice Hyman is a former president of the Chicago Bar Association and the Decalogue Society of Lawyers, and former chair of the Bench and bar Section of the Illinois State Bar Association. He has published numerous articles on legal issues. As a trial judge, Justice Hyman was reported to have very good legal ability and temperament. He was praised for the quality of his written opinions and for his ability to thoughtfully bring about fair settlements. He was and continues to be well-respected for his dedication to improving the judicial system. As an Appellate Court Justice, he continues to be praised for his work ethic and for the quality of his written opinions. He is reported to be well-prepared. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention to the Circuit Court.

Judge Marilyn Johnson --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Marilyn Johnson worked as a staff attorney for the Legal Assistance Foundation in Chicago providing civil representation of indigent clients. She then worked for a year is Chief Assistant Corporation Counsel for the City of Chicago, Department of Law, followed by nine years as Deputy Corporation Counsel in the same department. Between November 1994 and December 1995 Johnson worked as General Counsel for the Chicago Housing Authority, before becoming General Counsel for the Chicago Board of Education. In March, 2003 she began working as Chief of Staff for the Illinois State Toll highway Authority in a managerial/administrative capacity until 2006.

Judge Johnson is assigned to the Child Protection Division of the Cook County Court, where she has served since 2006. Judge Johnson is widely praised for being a hard-working jurist who is very knowledgeable. She has very good legal ability, as demonstrated by both her performance as a judges and in the wide array of professional positions she held before becoming a judge. She is praised for combining her legal knowledge with common sense – a combination praised by practitioners. Her opinions are considered well-reasoned. The Council finds her Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Themis Karnezis --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Themis Karnezis worked as a lawyer in criminal, workers’ compensation and real estate tax matters. He then served as an Associate Judge and, later as a Circuit Judge. From 1983 to 1998 he was assigned to the Criminal Division. He then went to the Law Division, and became the Presiding Judge of the Fourth Municipal District in 1999. He was appointed to the Illinois Appellate Court in 2002 and served there until 2012. Judge Karnezis then served as Supervising Judge at the Traffic Center. In 2014, he was transferred to the Law Division. Judge Karnezis has been regarded as one of the Circuit Court’s best trial judges and was considered an excellent Appellate Justice, as well. He has outstanding legal knowledge, integrity, temperament, and diligence. He serves as a mentor to practitioners and to other judges. Some lawyers are reporting that recently Judge Karnezis has been having difficulty with stamina, but the Council notes that for most of his career Judge Karnezis has been an outstanding jurist. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention based on the totality of his career.

Judge William G. Lacy --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, William G. Lacy spent six and a half years as an Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney, two years as an associate doing personal injury defense work for Fidelity National Law Group, and nearly five years as a partner at Tressler LLP doing insurance defense work. He was elected to the bench in 1996. Currently, Judge Lacy is assigned to the Criminal Division, Courtroom 604 where he has served since 2001. His previous judicial duties include an initial assignment to the 1st Municipal District, followed by three years as an evening narcotics judge, before being assigned as a back-up judge in the criminal division. Judge Lacy is considered to have good legal ability and exhibits a professional demeanor on the bench. He is respectful of all parties. He is praised for his decisiveness and is well regarded as a jurist. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Marjorie Laws --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Marjorie Laws worked as an Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney. She did criminal litigation in the Public Interest Bureau doing Child Support Enforcement and Consumer Fraud cases; she worked as a trial assistant in the First Municipal District, followed by six years in the Felony Trial Division. Earlier in her career Judge Laws was a title examiner for the Chicago Title and Trust Company and was a partner at Cunningham and Cunningham where her practice primarily engaged in civil litigation with an emphasis on corporate, real estate, and domestic relations law.

Judge Laws is currently the Presiding Judge of the Sixth Municipal District. Her previous judicial duties include eight years assigned to the Criminal Division at 26th and California handling a felony caseload. Before becoming a presiding judge she spent several years assigned to the First Municipal District and to the Juvenile Justice Division. Judge Laws is considered to have very good legal ability and is respected as both a trial judge and as an administrator. As a judge, she is reported to be well prepared and to treat all parties fairly and respectfully. She is praised for her courtroom management skills. As an administrator, she has worked to improve the Sixth Municipal District, including working to improve the quality of the judiciary. She has worked to establish programs designed to improve access to justice. The Council finds her Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Pamela Loza --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Pamela Loza was a partner at Loza & Associates, Ltd., where handled mostly divorce and criminal cases in numerous counties in Illinois. She also spent time as partner at Cameron, Loza & Associates and Cameron, Loza and Walsh, P.C. from 1987-2002 and 1984-1987 respectively. As an associate at Marder & Seidler Ltd. she practiced in divorce and criminal court after four years working as a Cook County assistant state’s attorney.

Currently Judge Loza is supervising judge in the Parentage/Child Support Enforcement Department of the Domestic Relations Division. She is responsible for day to day operation of the department and its numerous personnel, and has her own daily status and trial calls. Previous judicial service includes a year as a judge in traffic court and four years as a trial judge in the domestic relations division from 2009 - 2012. Judge Loza is considered to have very good legal ability and is described as being very knowledgeable about the law. Most lawyers say she has good temperament – exhibiting patience that respondents tell us is necessary in her current assignment. She is praised for being able to manage a high volume courtroom. She is considered to be well-prepared and is respectful of the parties before her. She has participated in major efforts to bring about systemic reform of the Domestic Relations Division. The Council finds her Well Qualified for the Circuit Court.

Judge Patricia Martin --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Patricia Martin was a career Assistant Cook County Public Defender. She was elected to the bench in 1996. She served in the Child Protection Division through July 1998, when she was transferred to the Law Division. She returned to the Child Protection Division as Presiding Judge in January 2000. She has been instrumental in creating new approaches to juvenile justice. She teaches and lectures extensively on representation of minorities in foster care, educational outcomes for children in foster care, and mediation in child protection cases. Respondents with experience with Judge Martin as a trial judge reported that she has a very good grasp of the law and that she controlled the courtroom well. Respondents with knowledge of her abilities as a presiding judge praised her administrative abilities and many praised her innovations and her training of judges. The Council finds her Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Mary Ann Mason --- Well Qualified
Justice Mary Anne Mason was appointed to the Illinois Appellate Court in July 2013. She was appointed to the Circuit by the Illinois Supreme Court in 2000, and was elected to the Circuit Court in 2002. After serving in the Traffic Division, she served for two years in the Juvenile Justice Section. From July 2003 to July 2013 she was assigned to the Chancery Division presiding over cases involving injunctive relief, declaratory judgments, administrative reviews, partnership and corporate disputes, trust construction, and restrictive covenants. Before taking the bench, she worked in the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office and worked for Kevin M. Forde, Ltd (now the Forde Law Offices) doing commercial litigation and appeals. Before going on the bench, she had extensive experience in complex litigation and appellate matters.

Justice Mason has been hearing cases as an Appellate Justice for about a year. Lawyers report generally that she is well-prepared and is active during oral argument. Respondents who have received written opinions say her opinions are well-reasoned and well-written. As a judge in the Chancery Division, she was reported to have very good legal ability and temperament. Many respondents commented on their impression that she understood even complex issues. Off the bench, Justice Mason has lectured widely on issues considered in the Chancery Division. She reports that she prepares materials for the Judicial Conference. She also reports that as chair of the Illinois Supreme Court Committee on Discovery Procedures, she participated in preparing a report to the Illinois Supreme Court “regarding the status of e-discovery rules nationwide.” The Council finds her Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Sebastian Patti --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Sebastian Thomas Patti was Assistant Regional Counsel at the US Environmental Protection Agency and practiced federal civil environmental enforcement litigation from 1979-1995. Judge Patti is currently the presiding judge of the Domestic Violence Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County. Judge Patti previously sat at the Chancery Division from 2010 to 2011, and then as appointed to the First Division Appellate Court from 2009 to 2010. He served as the supervising judge of the Housing Court between 1999 and 2009. Judge Patti was first appointed to the bench by the Illinois Supreme Court in 1995. Judge Patti is considered to have very good legal ability and a dedication to improving the administration of justice. He is considered to be exceptionally knowledgeable about the law and has an excellent temperament. He serves as a mentor to other judges. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention.

Judge Shelley Sutker-Dermer --- Well Qualified
Prior to becoming a judge, Shelley Sutker-Dermer served as an Assistant Cook County State’s Attorney. Judge Sutker-Dermer is currently the Presiding Judge of the Second Municipal District. Judge Sutker-Dermer was appointed to the bench in 1995 and was elected in 1996. Judge Sutker-Dermer is considered to have very good legal ability and is well respected by respondents as doing an excellent job as Presiding Judge. She is part of the new judges training program, as well as other court reform initiatives. Lawyers report that it is their perception that the Skokie Courthouse (Second Municipal District) runs efficiently. She also has a court call and is praised for her temperament and her courtroom management. The Council finds her Well Qualified for retention.

Alliance retention "grids" issued

Updated 10/18/14

The Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening has issued its ratings for the one Appellate Court justice and the seventy-plus Cook County Circuit Court judges seeking retention in November. This "key" will assist the reader in understanding the ratings.


FWIW will break down some of these ratings in future posts. However, for the present, herewith the Alliance retention "grids." (These are in ballot order.)

Please note that, as FWIW reported on October 10, the HBA has changed its recommendation on Judge Joan Powell from "No" to "Yes."

Clicking on any image may enlarge it or sharpen its focus depending on the device on which you are viewing this.

The Alliance has also released, or re-released, its evaluations of candidates seeking election to judicial vacancies in November. This will also be covered in a separate post.

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.

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

Chicago Bar Association releases ratings for Cook County judges seeking retention

The Chicago Bar Association has released its evaluations of all 73 judges seeking retention on the November ballot, finding all but one qualified for retention. (The link in the preceding sentence will take you to a page on the CBA website from which you can print or download the entire CBA Green Guide for November 2014 Election or the CBA's Pocket Guide.)

In retention elections the CBA dispenses with the rating of 'Highly Qualified,' a rating it sometimes bestows on judicial candidates seeking election. The CBA's choice of using rating of only 'Qualified' or 'Not Recommended' in these races is consistent with the nature and purpose of the retention ballot, an up or down, 1 or 0, yes or no vote. Judges must receive a 60% (plus 1) yes vote to be retained in office.

Only one Appellate Court justice, Justice Thomas E. Hoffman, is up for retention in 2014 (although there are a few Circuit Court judges currently assigned to the Appellate Court who are also on the retention ballot). The CBA stated, with regard to Justice Hoffman:
THOMAS E. HOFFMAN --- QUALIFIED
Justice Thomas E. Hoffman is “QUALIFIED” for retention as an Appellate Court Justice. Justice Hoffman was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1971 and was appointed to the Illinois Appellate Court in 1993. Justice Hoffman was elected to the Illinois Appellate Court in 1994 and is the Presiding Justice of the First Division of the Illinois Appellate Court, 1st District. Justice Hoffman is highly regarded for his knowledge of the law, work ethic, and legal ability. Justice Hoffman is always well prepared for oral arguments and brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to the Illinois Appellate Court. In addition to Justice Hoffman’s Appellate Court caseload, in 2000 he was appointed to serve on the Appellate Court’s Workers’ Compensation Division to decide appeals in Workers’ Compensation cases.
The one Circuit Court judge rated 'Not Recommended' by the CBA is Law Division Judge Thomas E. Flanagan. Of Judge Flanagan, the CBA stated,
THOMAS E. FLANAGAN --- NOT RECOMMENDED
Judge Thomas E. Flanagan is “NOT RECOMMENDED” for retention as a Circuit Court Judge. Judge Flanagan was admitted to practice in Illinois in 1965 and was elected to the Circuit Court in 1984. Judge Flanagan is currently assigned to the Law Division and serves in the trial section. Judge Flanagan has had a distinguished judicial career and enjoys a fine reputation for his integrity. However, lawyers who have appeared before Judge Flanagan have expressed concerns about the judge’s ability to make decisions in a timely manner on motions and complex issues and to efficiently and effectively manage a trial call.
Every other Circuit Court judge seeking retention in 2014 is rated 'Qualified' by the Chicago Bar Association. Persons downloading the Green Guide will see that some 'Qualified' ratings are more glowing than others, but the good news for the public is that, at least in the opinion of the CBA, nearly every single judge seeking retention is worthy of being kept in office.

I don't want to cherry-pick ratings for particular candidates in this post. But, in June, I wrote about a judge who was criticized in a Tribune op-ed after a law professor taking notes in her courtroom was briefly taken into custody by Sheriff's deputies. Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans subsequently entered a general administrative order expressly allowing the taking of notes in Cook County courtrooms, at least under most circumstances. I mentioned at the time that the judge in question would be up for retention this year and that, before forming opinions based on only one newspaper article, it might be helpful to see what the various bar ratings groups made of the incident. This is what the CBA had to say about Judge Laura Marie Sullivan:
LAURA MARIE SULLIVAN --- QUALIFIED
Judge Laura Marie Sullivan is “QUALIFIED” for retention as a Circuit Court Judge. Judge Sullivan was admitted to practice law in Illinois in 1988 and was elected to the Circuit Court in 2002. Judge Sullivan is assigned to Central Bond Court which sets bonds for defendants in the Criminal Justice System. Judge Sullivan is hardworking and well regarded for her knowledge of the law and well-reasoned, thoughtful decisions in a difficult assignment. The judge has been the subject of unwarranted and unjustified criticism and should be retained.
The CBA has also released (or in all but one case, re-released) its ratings on judicial candidates seeking election to the bench. I will do a separate post on those ratings soon.

When the Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening releases its ratings on Cook County retention candidates, FWIW will cover those as well.

Tuesday, September 09, 2014

Scenes from last night's reception for the 2014 retention judges

Preston Bradley Hall was jammed for last night's reception honoring judges seeking retention in Cook County. Retired Appellate Court Justice Marvin H. Leavitt, the Co-Chair of the Lawyers Committee of the Committee for Retention of Judges in Cook County, the reception's sponsor, said he was pleased with the turnout, which he estimated to be similar to previous reception events.

Many of the retention judges were sporting flashing blue buttons. Shown here are two of the retention candidates, Judge Ann Collins Dole (center) and Judge Donna L. Cooper (right).

A good many other sitting judges came out to support their colleagues' retention bids. Associate Judges Franklin U. Valderrama and Alfredo Maldonado were among these.


Judge Alfred M. Swanson, Jr. was present to support his colleagues seeking retention.


Also supporting their colleagues were Judges Edward M. Maloney and Patrick T. Rogers.



Judge Kay M. Hanlon also turned out to support the cause; she is shown here with her husband, attorney James E. Hanlon, Jr.

The proceeds of this reception are used to support the retention bids of all the Cook County judges seeking retention this year.

Saturday, September 06, 2014

Two Cook County retention candidates withdraw from November ballot

Cook County Judges Vanessa A. Hopkins and Noreen Love have asked to have their names removed from the November election ballot.

Judge Hopkins was elected to the bench in 1996 from the 1st Subcircuit. Judge Love was elected to a countywide vacancy in 2002.

Update on IllinoisJudges.net questionnaire responses by Cook County judges seeking retention


The Illinois Civil Justice League has updated its IllinoisJudges.net page for the upcoming November election. While the primary focus of this blog is Cook County, the ICJL covers judicial races across the entire state. Collar county and Downstate voters will want to visit IllinoisJudges.net to check for election and retention candidate responses from their own jurisdiction.

But, meanwhile, here's a list of Cook County judges seeking retention this year who have responded to the ICJL questionnaires as of this morning. Clicking on any name will take you to that judge's response.
This page of the ICJL website shows all judicial retention candidates statewide. Check on that link for updated ICJL questionnaire responses from Cook County judges (and for responses from judicial retention candidates outside Cook County).