However, respondent canceled, stating that Zh. C. had a doctor’s appointment. At some point, respondent had also informed Sanders that she was currently living with a friend, not at the Phillips Street home. On January 6, 2020, respondent came to Sanders’s office unannounced. Respondent had Zh. C. with her. Sanders spoke with Zh. C. in private.
Supreme Court of Illinois. December 1, 1994. Rehearing Denied January 30, 1995. ... In this attorney discipline case, respondent, Francis M. Discipio, concedes that he violated the Code of Professional Responsibility (the Code) when he improperly divided his legal fees with Jerome Ruther, a disbarred attorney. ... 1948. Most of his practice has ...
6. & 7. 73-CC-5 Filed November 19, 1973 and 74 CC-4 Filed May 7, 1974: George Kaye, Circuit Judge, 11th Circuit, Ford County . The Complaints alleged that Respondent 1) Interfered with attorney-client relationship; 2) Refused to sign decrees; 3) Usurped authority of Chief Judge; 4) Abused attorneys and litigants; 5) Received money to convene special jury; 6) Filed false …
Full Text of Opinion. OCTOBER TERM, 1999. Syllabus. ILLINOIS v. WARDLOW. CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS. No. 98-1036. Argued November 2, 1999-Decided January 12,2000. Respondent Wardlow fled upon seeing a caravan of police vehicles converge on an area of Chicago known for heavy narcotics trafficking.
The Complaint alleged that Respondent directed and permitted a court clerk to conduct part or all of the court calls on two days and enter orders disposing of matters on the calls; failed and refused to consider relevant evidence; acknowledged that procedures he followed and substantive legal principles he applied were contrary to determined law; gave judgments for plaintiffs where defendants were not present and where a careful examination would dictate otherwise; gave judgments for plaintiffs who presented no evidence; granted judgment for plaintiff in a case that had been settled; and by not explaining a ruling he misled parties.
The Complaint alleged that Respondent embarrassed and ridiculed a young attorney and misrepresented to the Judicial Inquiry Board that there had been two sidebar conversations with the young attorney prior to the alleged embarrassment and ridicule.
The Complaint alleged that Respondent assumed an active role in the management of a business and received compensation therefor in 1971 and 1972, and attempted to conceal the receipt of this compensation in his 1972 Federal income tax return.
The Complaint alleged that Respondent improperly employed the bail system as a means of punishing defendants in prostitution-loitering cases and had a prejudiced attitude towards such defendants and their attorneys, as evidenced by his setting excessive bail, continuing motions to reduce bail until the case was set for trial and excluding a defense attorney from his courtroom.
The Complaint alleged that Respondent ordered male defendants to have their hair cut as short as his and additionally ordered those who were probationers to surrender their driver's license to the court to be issued in lieu thereof a card identifying them as probationers; and committed a defendant to jail without bail on a bailable offense; directed defendants charged with alcohol violations to pick up cans and bottles beside the road.
The Complaint alleged that Respondent found a spectator in his courtroom guilty of criminal contempt for wearing a T-shirt with the words "Bitch Bitch Bitch," without affording her an effective hearing and without her being represented by counsel or having an adequate opportunity to defend herself, and sentenced her to three days in jail, which she served.
The Complaint alleged that on September 5, 1977, in the presence of a group of third party witnesses, who knew that Respondent was a judicial officer, he sought to and did interfere with the performance and fulfillment of a police officer's duties and responsibilities. Having unsuccessfully sought to dissuade the officer from performing certain duties involving the issuance of traffic citations to two youths (one youth being his son), he became angry and thereafter verbally abused and physically assaulted the officer in the presence of such third party witnesses. Following these occurrences all relevant parties assembled at a police facility. At that location and based on apologies, assertions of professional embarrassment and indications of the likelihood of sanctions being imposed on him should criminal charges be filed against him for his misconduct, he sought to compromise the filing of such charges. Despite such efforts, he was criminally charged and later acquitted of such charges.
In court cases, you can either represent yourself or be represented by a lawyer.
In 1839, the Illinois Supreme Court said the Attorney Act protects the public “against the practices of those who might seduce their confidence and induce them to trust the latter in the management of important interests.”. The court thought that the public was vulnerable to “the mistakes, the ignorance and unskillfulness of pretenders.”.
A default judgment occurs in Illinois civil cases when the Defendant has been properly served with a complaint and summons and has failed to file an answer to the complaint by the first court date or to appear in court for the first court date.
Although a default judgment is enforceable like a judgment entered after a trial, unlike a judgment that is entered after a trial a default judgment may be vacated. When a default judgment is vacated, this means that the judgment is essentially nullified and the case proceeds from the point at which the default judgment occurred as if the default judgment had never been entered.
When a default judgment is vacated, this means that the judgment is essentially nullified and the case proceeds from the point at which the default judgment occurred as if the default judgment had never been entered.
After the defendant has appeared or after the time for the defendant has appeared has expired, the plaintiff may ask the court to enter summary judgment, sometimes called judgment on the pleadings, by showing there is no genuine issue of material fact and therefore the plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The plaintiff may seek this relief as to some or all of its claims. A defendant may also, at any time, move for a judgment in his favor as to all or any part of the relief sought. 735 ILCS 5/2-1005 . See also Ill. Sup. Ct. Rule 191.
Service by publication is authorized in claims affecting property or status within the jurisdiction of the court, including an action to obtain the specific performance, reformation, or rescission of a contract for the conveyance of land , and where the defendant resides out of state or cannot be found on due inquiry , and after notice has been sent to the defendant’s last known address. 735 ILCS 5/2-206. The defendant may be defaulted after 3 successive weekly publications in a newspaper published in the county in which the action is pending. 735 ILCS 5/2-207. Service by publication is also allowed in eviction actions under certain circumstances. 735 ILCS 5/9-107, constructive service.
If service is improper, the defendant must file a motion to quash service of process before filing any other pleading, except for a motion for extension of time. The motion must be supported by an affidavit unless the facts that constitute the basis for the objection are apparent from the papers on file. This motion is made only to object to jurisdiction over the person.
When the defendant must file a written answer to the complaint, then the answer must be filed within a specified period, which is determined by the type of case . The defendant's answer may be due as early as the date for the filing of the appearance, or it may be due 10 days after the deadline for filing the appearance, or it may be due by a date set, or extended by the judge. Ill. Sup. Ct. Rule 181. A party who appears without having been served with a summons is required to plead within the same time as if served with a summons on the day he appears. Ill. Sup. Ct. Rule 13b.#N#In the answer, the defendant must admit or deny or state insufficient knowledge to either admit or deny to each statement in the complaint. Every allegation not explicitly denied is deemed admitted. If the defendant states that he or she has insufficient knowledge to any portion of the complaint, the defendant must attach an affidavit as to the truth of that statement. 735 ILCS 5/2-610.
The defendant may raise new matter by way of a defense in the Answer, known as an Affirmative Defense. An example might be Statute of Limitations. The Affirmative Defense should also have a prayer for relief. If the defendant raises a new matter in an Affirmative Defense, the plaintiff must reply. 735 ILCS 5/2-602.
Statute of limitations, Discharge in bankruptcy, Satisfied or released judgment, Statute of frauds, Defendant is a minor or under other disability, and. Claim barred by other affirmative matter, e.g., claims for rent where rent abated.
Rule 131. All pleadings shall be signed and addressed by a party or an attorney representing the party. Signatures indicate that the pleading has been made in good faith and that the pleading is not designed for any improper purpose. Abuse of this rule is grounds for court sanctions.