If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov.

,'-' ...... ' ~. . ,.' ;". .. ". , ,:,

i I I 1 f t I

I This microfiche was produced from documents received for "I inclusion in the NCJRS data base; Since NCJRS cannot exercise ! control over the physical condition of the d~cuments submitted, I the individual frame quality will vary. The resolution chart on, t this frame may be used to ev"luate .the ·document quality. I I ! I \ 2 5 ,I 1.0 11111 .

I 2.0 1.1 A ------II' 1.8 DECADE OF 111111.25 .11111 (4 111111.6 PROGRESS

MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART NATIONAL'SOREAU OF STANDARDS-1963-A

I ISTRATIVE OFFICE I . Microfilming procedures used to create this fiche comply wit'h i I. .~ the standards set forth in 41CFR 101-11.504 OF THE

Points of view or opinions 'stated in this document are lLLINOIS COURTS those of the authorls] and do not represent the offic,ja~ '. posi~io~ or policies of the U.S. 0 epartment o.f Justice.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION' NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFERENCE' SERVICE WAS!1'fNGTON, D.C. 20531

112/8/75 \

_:""t. :,<'.:, I I' ~t(i~ I ~" •••• "'.;::'f~~ I /1":{\\£ _Sl1P~~,.~

) Ii/~~ -. ~... ~ I

':. ~ , ~, ~\\ V .~ ...... \...... ~ :~ - , c::>: I :~ , ~: I :• .L:::... .,..,...... • •• ~.t. , . 1a.:J.• , ~ r :" .~: ~ ' .. . .. ~ .• - •. ~\. STATE OF ILLINOIS ••:11 ~•••• AUG.26,1818 .e.·-

"'Q~... ••• -~*~,...... - e .-.- 8 .- ~;;;ij;'."'~ A -"'-,.---.... ~ DECADE OF PFIQO,RESS

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE

OF THE

ILLINOIS COURTS 4,

1973 ,",) ANNUAL REPORT r __ ..._ _. , to the SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS """; ,t ~.\· ! -, , , , · ·• I ·• " ·, m · "'-.

The Supreme Court Building Springfield, Illinois

'1f"'(~$1,;("")(!i 1".>o!."":.! ~J "'oJ,,?r~..;,.~~ ... ·... "" '" ",yJi,:I!""~ ~.~ '" >f. w: /1<"" ,..~ ... ~ ""M~.,.lit,/o<_;';~,,",.t" lI'.-,"" "'-l!"._'/<~ tt"= ~w.." ~ .. ~ ";.'\'!:!'! lJ:I.V "If 'i ~:f T_~," ~ ,,';; ""'':o'''''~.'''''!oo:. t" .... "'.-'." ~ ... '" '':'_'" V.oJ ~~.~.~ 'Jt_~:!'! ~~_ ·~Y"'::'.,,," .... :... ~,,'"!."'tJ!o\l"-):.+_.... "t!~"1~?~:~ ;".':{'"!",, ...... ,~~:'-': "'::"'>~~~_

JUSTICES OF THE ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT

The Chief Justice Walter V. Schaefer Robert C. Underwood Thomas E. Kluczynski 1951 1962 1966 Charles H. Davis Joseph H. Goldenhersh Daniel P. Ward 1970 Howard C. Ryan 1970 1966 (1955-1960) 1970 1 1 I ! ! TABLE OF CONTENTS

Letter of Transmittal by Roy O. Gulley ...... 7 !:; In Memoriam ...... 9 Report of the Administrative Director ...... 11 'Introduction ...... 12 Judicial Retirements ...... , ...... 12 The Illinois Constitution of 1970 ...... , ...... , ...... , ...... 13 a. Chart on Channel of Appeal ...... , . 14 b. 1970 judicial Article ...... 15 Legislation Affecting the Courts ...... , ...... 19 New Procedures for Registration and Discipline of Attorneys ...... ,., ...... 21 Chart on Organization of Attorney Registration and Disciplinary System ...... 24 Activities of The Judiciary ...... , ...... 25 a. Supreme Court ...... 25 b. Annual Report of .the Supreme Court ...... 31 c. Chart on Judicial Salary Structure ...... , ...... , ...... 35 d. Appellate Court...... , ...... 36 Chart on Cases Filed and Disposed of ...... 38 e. Circuit Courts ...... 40 Graph on Average Delay ...... 42 Chart on C9-ses Begun and Terminated ...... , ...... , 43 f. Judicial Elections ...... , ...... 44 g. Federal Court Decisions Affecting Illinois Judges ...... 44 h. Courts Commission ...... 45 i. Judicial Conference ...... 46 j. Conference of Chief Circuit Judges ...... 51 The Administrative Office ...... 55 a. Introduction ...... , ...... 55 b. Fiscal ...... 55 Chart on Organization and Duties of the Accounting Division ...... 59 Chart on State Appropriations ...... 60 c. Teller of Elections ...... 58 d. Secretariat ...... " .. , ...... , ...... 61 e. Judicial Statistics ...... , ...... , .. , .. , ...... , .... ,', ...... , ...... 62 f. Administrative Secretaries Conference " ...... , . , ...... 32 g. Court Administration Internship Program ...... , , ...... , .... , ...... , ...... , .. , .. 62 h. Recordkeeping ...... , ...... , ...... 63 Map on Implementation of Recordkeeping Order ...... 64 i. Official Court Reporters ...... , ...... ,. 65 j. Judicial Visitation Programs to Penal Institutions ...... , ...... 66 k. Legislation ...... , ...... , .. 66 I. Judicial Economic Statements ...... , .. , , ..... , ...... 66 m. Impartial Medical Expert Rule ...... , . , ... , . , .. , ...... , ...... , ...... 66 Chart on 1973 Statistical Summary ..... , ...... , ... , ...... , ...... 67 Chart on Cummulative Statistical Summary ...... , ...... , .. , 68 n. Representation by Supervised Senior Law Students .. , ...... , ...... , ...... , ..... 69 Chart on Use of Rule 711 ...... , ...... , ...... " ... , .... , .. 69 o. Public Information and Publications ...... , .. , ...... 70 p. Membership in Organizations ...... , .. , ...... 70 q. Other Duties ...... 71 Conclusion ...... , ... 71 1973 Caseloads, Statistical Records and Judicial Officers ...... , ..... , .... , .... , ... 73 The Supreme Court of Illinois ...... , . , ...... , ... , ...... 74 a. Map of Judicial Districts ...... , ...... 74 b. Justices of the Supreme Court ...... ' ...... 75 c. Cases Decided with Full Opinions ...... ,., ...... ,., ...... ,.". 76 d. Petitions for Rehearing ...... , ...... , . , ...... , , .. 77 e. Petitions for Leave to Appeal ...... , .. 78 f. Motions Disposed of ...... 79

5

,,/1 , 1 ! t

The Appellate Court of Illinois...... 80 a. Judges of the Appellate Court ...... 80 b. The Trend of Cases...... 81 c. Cases Disposed of...... 82 d. Time Lapse, Between Date of Filing and Date of Disposition...... 83 e. Time Lapse Between Date Briefs Were Filed and Date of Disposition .. '...... 84 f. Abstract Summary of Number of Writtr3n Opinions...... 85 The Circuit Courts of Illinois ...... 86 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE II.LINOIS COURTS a. Map of Judicial ,Circuits ...... 86 b. Judicial Officers of the Circuit Court...... 87 c. Ratio of Caseload per Judge ...... 97 Roy O. GULLEY d. Number of Cases Begun and Terminated ...... , 98 DIRE:CTOR e. The Trend of All Cases, Number of Law Jury Verdicts, Time Lapse Between Date SUPRE:ME: COURT BUILDING 30 NORTH MICHIGAN AVENUE: CHICAGO 60602 of Filing and Date of Verdict, and Average Delay in Reaching Verdict ...... 124 SPRINGFIELD 62706 f. Disposition of Defendants Charged with Felonies ...... ············ 128 g. Sentences Imposed on Defendants Charged with Felonies ...... 132 Statistical Report on the Circuit Court of Cook County ...... 138 Appendix ...... 155 To The Honorable Chief Justice and Justices of the Supreme Court

I tender herewith the annual report of the Administrative Office for calendar year 1973. It has been a year of many accomplishments for the entire State judicial system and for the Administrative Office. The Supreme Court, through the Chief Justice, continues to delegate its administra­ tive authority to enable us to assist the Chief Justice in his adminis­

(Printed by Authority of the State of illinois) trative responsibilities. (62214-2500-12-74) Our completely unified court system has permitted us to be truly flexible in order to avert a crisis in the disposition of cases. The circuit courts continue to dispose of large numbers of cases be­ caus~ our judges have resolved to attain a fair degree of currency, and they are putting forth the necessary additional effort and sacrifice by working more diligently and by accepting assignments to high volume circuits. The Appellate Court continues to make substantial progress in the timely disposition of appeals, and based on this yearls statistical data, it would appear that the Appellate Court is achieving the desired goal of currency. I would be remiss if I failed to recognize the staff of the Administrative Office. While it would be inappropriate to single out any one individual for recognition since each and every employee is a dedicated public servant who serves the Supreme Court and the Administrative Office with sincere devotion and fidelity, events occurred during 1973 which urge , commendation of staff. In selecting personnel to manage the newly created Attorney Registration and Disciplinary System, the Supreme Court appointed three employees from the Administrative Office: Carl H. Rolewick, deputy director of the Administrative Office, was appointed administrator of the system; John M. Oswald, assistant director, was appointed as assistant administrator; and Mary Skaljak, administrative assistant, was selected to fill a similar position in the system. To fill the vacancies created by the appointments, I elevated William M. Madden to deputy director in charge of the Chicago office and 7 6 Karen Reynertson to administrative assistant. In addition, two attorneys were employed in Chicago as assistant directors: Lester A. Bonaguro and David F. Rolewick. For the Springfield office I employed W. Stephen Swinney to assist in the installation of the recordkeeping system in the various clerks ' offices. During 1973, the Chicago office was remodeled and expanded to accommodate the new personnel and to provide the necessaY'Y space for executing the additional duties which the Court has assigned to the office. In spite of the period of employee transition and remodeling of quarters, the Administrative Office continued to perform its responsibilities with ~ minimum of disruption. Acknowledgment of the staff of the Administrative IN MEMORIAM Office is in order for carrying out their duties during 1973 in th8 highly professional manner which the Supreme Court expects from its personnel. Supreme Court Justices Ray I. Klingbiel (retired) January 18, 1973 This report is a factual representation of the operation of Jesse L. Simpson (retired) May 7, 1973 the Illinois judicial system during 1973, and it is an indicator of the future requirements of our judicial system. Appellate Court Judges Arthur J. Murphy (retired), First District March 9, 1973 Respectfully, Ulysses S. Schwartz (retired), First District December 3, 1973 Circuit Court Judges c1MA o.~. Stephen B. Adsit (retired), 11th Circuit September 14, 1973 -...... J - - ~oy O. Gulley Arthur V. Essington (retired), 17th Circuit August 4, 1973 Henry Ferguson (retired), Cook County February 20, 1973 Harry I. Hannah, 5th Circuit May 20, 1973 Samuel Heller (retired), Cook County November 20, 1973 Warren J. Hickey, Cook County May 12, 1973 Francis T. McCurrie (retired), Cook County May 21, 1973 James O. Monroe, Jr., 3rd Circuit June 7, 1973 William B. Phillips, 15th Circuit February 27, 1973 Charles G. Seidel, 16th Circuit February 22, 1973 Walter A. Yoder (retired), 11th Circuit Sentember 24, 1973 Associate Judges Maurice W. Lee, Cook County August 28, 1973 Burton H. Palmer, Cook County September 17, 1973 Chester P. Winsor (retired), "'3th Circuit November 14, 1973

8 9 ------~?~------~------'----

REPORT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR

HON. ROY O. GULLEY

11

i , I ... . ; I • : • .. ,. .. ",..

THE ILLINOIS CONSTITUTION OF 1970 The Illinois court system underwent extensive and Section 4. The Supreme Court's discretionary and TO THE HONORABLE CHIEF JUDICIAL RETIREMENTS revolutionary change on January 1, 1964 when the mandatory original and appellate jurisdiction is set amended judicial Article of the 1870 Constitution be­ out. JUSTICE AND JUSTICES OF THE A total of fifteen Illinois judges retired during 1973. SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS came effective. With the adoption of the 1970 Consti­ Section 5. The organization of the Appellate Court Several judges retired due to age and failing health, tution, the judicial structure and court operation were is explained. ' This is· the sixth annual report of your Administra­ yet others left the bench to pursue other vocational refined, but the basic salutary changes brought about Section 6. The Appellate Court's jurisdiction is es­ tive Office which I have had the honor of presenting and avocational endeavors, including returning to the by tlie 1964 Judicial Article were retained virtually in­ tablished. All final judgments of the circuit court are to you. The report is a narrative and statistical recor­ more lucrative practice of law. tact in Article VI of the new Constitution. appealable as a matter of right. dation of the significant historical and recent develop­ The traumatic and dynamic transformation from a Section 7. The State is divided into judicial cir­ ments which affect the courts and judges of the State Appellate Court Judge complex judicial system of yesteryear to a simple, cuits. Each county must have at least one circuit of Illinois. Particular emphasis has been placed on Mel Abrahamson, 2nd District modern and efficient court organization of today, ob­ judge unless changed by law. The circuit judges evolvements occurring in calen@ar year 1973. September 30, 1973 jectively viewed, was the most far-reaching and con­ select one from their number to be chief judge who In the 1973 report, we have retained the section structive reform in the history of state constitutional shall have general administrative authority over his on the Judicial Article of the 1970 Constitution, and Circuit Court Judges efforts to establish an up-to-date and productive sys­ court, subject to the authority of the Supreme we have devoted particular attention to the new Su­ Stephen B. Adsit, 11 th Circuit tem for the administration of justice. Illinois pioneered Court. preme Court rules governing attorney registration September 1, 1973 the unified trial court structure, and because of its Section 8. The circuit court judges appoint associ­ and discipline. We have also augmented the narra­ William M. Barth, Cook County highly successful implementation, the Illinois court ate judges as provided by Supreme Court rule. tive portion of the report with graphs which should in­ August 31, 1973 system is a model which every state in the Union is Section 9. The jurisdiction of the circuit court ex­ crease the understanding of those readers who are Paul R. Durr, 8th Circuit attempting to emulate. In describing the Illinois uni­ tends to all justiciable matters. All cases are filed not intimately familiar with the Illinois court system. August 31, 1973 fied court system as compared to other court sys­ in the circuit court, and every· judge of that court This report to you is a permanent record of the Wesley A. Eberle, 15th Circuit tems, the American Judicature Society matter of possesi::>os the full jurisdiction of the circuit court. events which have transpired this year in the State December 4, 1973 factly stated in its March 1973 journal, Judicature This is the heart of the unified trial court system. courts and in the Administrative Office. Because the Francis T. McCurrie, Cook County (Vol. 56, No.8, at page 323),. that "Illinois, of course, Section 10. The terms of office for all judges are Illinois court structure is an· acknowledged model March 19, 1973 has the model [court] system admired by most court stated. system, distribution of the report extends beyond the Albert S. O'Sullivan, 17th Circult experts." Section 11. Every judge must be a U.S. citizen, li­ boundaries of Illinois. Thousands of copies are re­ December 31, 1973 The 1964 Judicial Article and the 1970 Constitution censed attorney and a resident of the unit which quested and sent outside of this State: court admin­ Daniel A. Roberts, Cook County turned the judicial system around, making it possible selects him. istratorsin all states; most law schools in the nation; July 31; 1973 for the judicial branch of government to more effi­ Section 12. Supreme, Appellate and circuit court constituTIonal convention::. i:i:ld citizens' groups study­ Sigmund J. Stefanowicz, Cook County ciently and justly serve the people. Illinois innovated judges are initially selected in partisan elections; ing court reform in other states; judges, lawyers and December 16, 1973 the unified trial court system; and the people, lawyers thereafter, each judge is retained in office if he re­ other court-related personnel in IIlmois and else­ and judges made it work beyond their expectations. ceives a 60% favorable vote in an uncontested re­ where; and others, including students, legislators and Associate Judges The State became a judicial laboratory, and the great tention election. The Supreme Court may appoint researchers. The news media and libraries also Robert W. Boyd, 12th Circuit experiment proved beyond a doubt that the concept lawyers to fill judicial vacancies occurring between maintain files of the reports for study and research December 31, 1973 of a unified trial court was workable. The outstanding elections. . projects. Paul G. Ceaser, Cook County reputation of the Illinois court system and its judges Section 13. The Supreme Court must adopt rules The report for 1973 encompasses a description of December 31, 1973 was reaffirmed by the electorate when the 1964 Judi­ of conduct for judges. Supreme Court Rules 61 the courts' activities, the roster of the State's judicial Eugene T. Daly, 19th Circuit cial Article was almost totally retained in the 1970 through 71 establish standards of judicial conduct. personnel and statistical data on all courts; and in August 31, 1973 Constitution. The minor refinements in the present Section 14. Judges are paid a salary by the addition, the report records the following significant Lester Jankowski, Cook County Judicial Article will provide Illinois with an even more State, and fee officers are not allowed in the judi­ developments: October i, 1973 sound judicial system than in previous years. cial system. Deaths and retirements of judges Roy W. Strawn, 3rd Circuit In our reports of 1970 and 1971, the saga of the il­ Section 15. The General Assembly is empowered Summary of the Judicial Article of the 1970 Consti­ August 31, 1973 linois court system was told in detail. What is pre­ to provide for the retirement of judges at a pre­ tution John F. Twomey, 5th Circuit sented below will highlight the Significant provisions scribed age. Retired judges may be recalled to ju­ Synopsis of legislation affecting the courts December 31, 1913 of the present Judicial Article. The chart on channel dicial service. The Judicial Inquiry Board is Description of the attorney registration and disci­ of appeal and the Judicial Article of the 1970 Consti­ authorized to investigate and file complaints plinary system tution, which immediately follow, will be helpful in un­ against judges. The Courts Commission adjudi­ Activities of the judiciary derstanding the Illinois court structure. cates charges filed against judges by the Board. The Administrative Office-Duties and Accomplish­ In summary form, the 1970 Judicial Article pro- Section 16. The Supreme Court is vested with ments vides: general administrative and supervisory authority Section 1. The judicial power is vested in the Su­ over all courts, and appoints the administrative di­ preme Court, the Appellate Court and the circuit rector to assist the Chief Justice in his duties. The courts. This grant of power has its greatest impact Supreme Court may assign judges temporarily to in the simpliCity of the constitutional judicial struc­ any court. ture and the firm establishment of a three-level Section 17. An annual judicial conference is court structure. created to consider the work of the courts and to Section 2. The State is divided in five judicial dis­ suggest improvements in the administration of jus­ tricts for the selection of Supreme and Appellate tice. Court judges. Section 18. The Supreme and Appellate Courts Section 3. The Supreme Court consists of seven appoint the clerks of their respective courts. Circuit judges, four of whom are necessary for a decision, court clerks are selected as provided by law. and one of whom is selected by his fellow judges Section 19. The state's attorneys are elected in as the Chief Justice. each county; however, one state's attorney may be elected to serve more than one county. 13 12 CONSTITUTION OF 1970 ARTICLE VI-THE JUDICIARY

Section 1. Courts tutes a quorum and the concurrence of a majority of The judicial power is vested in a Supreme Court, the division is necessary for a decision. There shall an Appellate Court and Circuit Courts. be at least one division in each Judicial District and each division shall sit at times and placeq. -prescribed Section 2. Judicial Districts by rules of the Supreme Court. The State is divided into five Judicial Districts for the selection of Supreme and Appellate Court Section 6. Appellate Court­ Judges. The First Judicial District consists of Cook Jurisdiction County. The remainder of the State shall be divided Appeals from final judgments of a Circuit Court are by law into four Judicial Districts of substantially a matter of right to the Appellate Court in the Judicial equal population, each of which shall be compact District in which the Circuit Court is located except in and composed of contiguous counties. cases appealable directly to the Supreme Court and except that after a trial on the merits in a criminal Section 3. Supreme Court­ case, there shall be no appeal from a judgment of Organization acquittal. The Supreme Court may provide by rule for The Supreme Court shall consist of seven judges. appeals to the Appellate Court from other than final Three shall be selected from the First Judicial District judgments of Circuit Courts. The Appellate Court and one from each of the other Judicial Districts. may exercise original jurisdiction when necessary to Four Judges constitute a quorum and the concur­ the complete determination of any case on review. rence of four is necessary for a decision. Supreme The Appellate Court shall have such powers of direct Court Judges shall select, a Chief Justice from their review of administrative action as provided by law. number to serve for a term of three years. Section 7. Judicial Circu!ts CHANNEL OF APPEALS PRIOR TO 1964 Section 4. Supreme Court­ (a) The State shall be divided into Judicial Circuits Jurisdiction consisting of one or more counties. The First Judicial District shall constitute a Judicial Circuit. The Judicial (a) The Supreme Court may exercise original ju­ Circuits within the other Judicial Districts shall be as risdiction in cases relating to revenue, mandamus, provided by law. Circuits composed of more than one prohibition or habeas corpus and as may be neces­ county shall be compact and of contiguous counties. sary to the complete determination of any case on The General Assembly by law may provide for the review. division of a circuit for the purpose of selection of (b) Appeals from judgments of Circuit Courts im­ Circuit Judges and for the selection of Circuit Judges posing a sentence of death shall be directly to the from the circuit at large. Supreme Court as a matter of right. The Supreme (b) Each judicial Circuit shall have one Circuit Court shall provide by rule for direct appeal in other Court with such number of Circuit Judges as provid­ cases. ed by law. Unless otherwise provided by law, there Circuit Court (c) Appeals from the Appellate Court to the Su­ shall be at least one Circuit Judge from each county. preme Court are a matter of right if a question under In the First Judicial District, unless otherwise provid­ Circuit and the Constitution of the United States or of this State ed by law, Cook County, Chicago, and the area out­ Associate Judges arises for the first time in and as a result of the ac­ side Chicago shall be separate units for the selection tion of the Appellate Court, or if a division of the Ap­ of Circuit Judges, with at least twelve chosen at large pellate Court certifies that a case decided by it from the area outside Chicago and at least thirty-six involves a question of such importance that the case chosen at large from Chicago. should be decided by the Supreme Court. The Su­ (c) Circuit Judges in each circuit shall select by preme Court may provide by rule for appeals from secret ballot a Chief Judge from their number to CHANNEL OF APPEAL TODAY the Appellate Court in other cases. serve at their pleasure. Subject to the authority of the Supreme Court, the Chief Judge shall have general Section 5. Appellate Court­ administrative authority over his court, including au­ Organization thority to provide for divisions, general or specialized, The number of Appellate Judges to be selected and for appropriate times and places of holding court. from each Judicial District shall be provided by law. The Supreme Court shall prescribe by rule the num­ ber of Appellate divisions in each judicial District. Section 8. Associate Judges Each Appellate division shall have at least three Each Circuit Court shall have such number of As­ judges. Assignments to divisions shall be made by sociate Judges as provided by law. Associate Judges ~'he Supreme Court. A majority of a division co~sti- shall be appointed by the Circuit Judges in each cir- 14 15 cuit as the Supreme Court shall provide by rule. In nate Judges shall serve until the vacancy is filled at preme Court to judicial service for which he shall re­ the First Judicial District, unless otherwise provided (f) The concurrence of three members of the the second general or judicial election following such ceive the applicable compensation in lieu of by law, at least one-fourth of the Associate Judges Commission shall be necessary for a decision. The appointment. retirement benefits. A retired Associate Judge may shall be appointed from, and reside, outside Chicago. decision of the Commission shall be final. (d) Not less than six months before the general be assigned only as an Associate Judge. The Supreme Court shall provide by rule for matters (g) The Commission shall adopt rules governing election preceding the expiration of his term of office, (b) A Judicial Inquiry Board is created. The Su­ to be assigned to Associate Judges. its procedures and shall have power to issue sub­ a Supreme, Appellate or Circuit Judge who has been preme Court shall select two Circuit Judges as mem­ elected to that office may file in the office of the Sec­ poenas. The General Assembly shall provide by law bers and the Governor shall appoint four persons for the expenses of the Commission. Section 9. Circuit Courts­ retary of State a declaration of candidacy to succeed who are not lawyers and three lawyers as members Jurisdjction himself. The Secretary of State, not less than 63 of the Board. No more than two of the lawyers and days before the election, shall certify the Judge's Circuit Courts shall have original jurisdiction of all two of the non-lawyers appointed by the Governor Section i 6. Administration candidacy to the proper election officials. The names shall be members of the same political party. The justiciable matters except when the Supreme Court General administrative and supervisory authority of Judges seeking retention shall be submitted to the terms of Board members shall be four years. A va­ has original and exclusive jurisdiction relating to re­ over all courts is vested in the Supreme Court and electors, separately and without party designation, on cancy on the Board shall be filled for a full term in districting of the General Assembly and to the ability shall be exercised by the Chief Justice in accordance the sole question whether each Judge shall be re­ the manner the original appointment was made. No of the Governor to serve or resume office. Circuit tFlined in office for another term. The retention elec­ with its rules. The Supreme Court shall appoirlt an Courts shall have such power to review administra­ member may serve on the Board more than eight tions shall be conducted at general elections in the years. administrative director and staff, who shall serve at tive action as provided by law. its pleasure, to assist the Chief Justice in his duties. appropriate Judicial District, for Supreme and Appel­ (c) The Board shall be convened permanently, The Supreme Court may assign a Judge temporarily late Judges, and in the circuit for Circuit Judges. The with authority to conduct investigations, receive or Section 10. Terms Of Office to any court and an Associate Judge to serve tempo­ affirmative vote of three-fifths of the electors voting initiate complaints concerning a Judge or Associate rarily as an Associate Judge on any Circuit Court. The terms of office of Supreme and Appellate on the question shall elect the Judge to the office for Judge, and file complaints with the Courts Commis­ The Supreme Court shall provide by rule for expedi­ Court Judges shall be ten years; of Circuit Judges, a term commencing on the first Monday in December sion. The Board shall not file a complaint unless five tious and inexpensive appeals. six years; and of Associate Judges, four years. following his election. members believe that a reasonable basis exists (1) (e) A law reducing the number of Appellate or Cir­ to charge the Judge or Associate Judge with willful Section 17. Judicial Conference cuit .Judges shall be without prejudice to the right of misconduct in office, persistent failure to perform his Section 11. Eligibility For Office the Judges affected to seek retention in offiCe. A re­ duties, or other conduct that is prejudicial to the ad­ The Supreme Court shall provide by rule for an duction shall become effective when a vacancy oc­ ministration of justice or that brings the judicial office annual judicial conference to consider the work of the No person shall be eligible to be a Judge or Asso­ curs in the affected unit. ciate Judge unless he is a United States citizen; a li­ into disrepute, or (2) to charge that the Judge or As­ courts and to suggest improvements in the adminis­ censed attorney-at-law of this State, and a resident sociate Judge is physically or mentally unable to per­ tration of justice and shall report thereon annually in of the unit which selects him. No change in the Section 13. Prohibited Activities form his duties. All proceedings of the Board shall be writing to the General Assembly not later than Janu­ boundaries of a unit shall affect the tenure in office of confidential except the filing of a complaint with the ary 31. a Judge or Associate Judge incumbent at the time of (a) The Supreme Court shall adopt rules of con­ Courts Commission. The Board shall prosecute the such change. duct for Judges and Associate Judges. complaint. Section 18. Clerks Of Courts (b) Judges and Associate Judges shall devote full (d) The Board shall adopt rules governing its pro­ time to judicial duties. They shall not practice law, cedures. It shall have subpoena power and authority (a) The Supreme Court and the Appellate Court Section 12. Election And Retention hold a position of profit, hold office under the United to appoint and direct its staff. Members of the Board Judges of each judicial District, respectively, shall States or this State or unit of local government or appoint a clerk and other non-judicial officers for their (a) Supreme, Appellate and Circuit Judges shall who are not Judges shall receive per diem compen­ school district or in a political party. Service in the Court or District. be nominated at primary elections or by petition. sation and necessary expenses; members who are State militia or armed forces of the United States for (b) The General Assembly shall provide by law for Judges shall be elected at general or judicial elec­ Judges shall receive necessary expenses only. The periods of time permitted by rule of the Supreme the election, or for the appointment by Circuit tions as the General Assembly shall provide by law. General Assembly by law shall appropriate funds for Court shall not disqualify a person from serving as a Judges, of clerks and other non-judicial officers of A person eligible for the office of Judge may cause the operation of the Board. Judge or Associate Judge. the Circuit Courts and for their terms of office and re­ his name to appear on the ballot as a candidate for (e) A Courts Commission is created consisting of moval for cause. Judge at the primary and at the general or judicial one Supreme Court Judge selected by that Court, who shall be its chairman, two Appellate Court (c) The salaries of clerks and other non-judicial of­ elections by submitting petitions. The General As­ Section ,4. Judicial Salaries And ficers shall be as provided by law. Judges selected by that Court, and two Circuit sembly shall prescribe by law the requirements for Expenses-Fee Officers Eliminated petitions. Judges selected by the Supreme Court. The Com­ mission shall be convened permanently to hear com­ Section 19. State's Attorneys­ (b) The office of a Judge shall be vacant upon his Judges shall receive salaries provided by law Selection, Salary death, resigrtation, retirement, removal, or upon the which shall not be diminished to take effect during plaints filed by the Judicial Inquiry Board. The conclusion of his term without retention in office. their terms of office. All salaries and such expenses Commission shall have authority after notice and A State's Attorney shall be elected in each county Whenever an additional Appellate or Circuit Judge is as may be provided by law shall be paid by the public hearing (1) to rElmove from office, suspend in 1972 and every fourth year thereafter for a four authorized by law, the office shall be filled in the State, except that Appellate, Circuit and Associate without pay, censure or reprimand a Judge or Asso­ year term. One State's Attorney may be elected to manner provided for filling a vacancy in that office. Judges shall receive such additional compensation ciate Judge for willful misconduct in office, persistent serve two or more counties if the governing boards (c) A vacancy occurring in the office of Supreme, from counties within their district or circuit as may be failure to perform his duties, or other conduct that is of such counties so provide and a majority of the Appellate or Circuit Judge shall be filled as the Gen­ provided by law. There shall be no fee officers in the prejudicial to the administration of justice or that electors of each county voting on the issue approve. eral Assembly may provide by law. In the absence of judicial system. brings the judicial office into disrepute, or (2) to sus­ A person shall not be eligible for the office of State's a law, vacancies may be filled by appointment by the pend, with or without pay, or retire a Judge or Asso­ Attorney unless he is a United States citizen and e li­ Supreme Court. A person appointed to fill a vacancy ciate Judge who is phYSically or mentally unable to censed attorney-at-law of this State. His salary shall perform his duties. 60 or more days prior to the next primary election to Section 15. Retirement-Discipline be provided by law. nominate Judges shall serve until the vacancy is (a) The General Assembly may provide by law for filled for a term at the next general or judicial elec­ the retirement of Judges and Associate Judges at a tion. A person appointed to fill a vacancy less than prescribed age. Any retired Judge or Associate I 60 days prior to the next primary election to nomi- Judge, with his consent, may be assigned by the Su- L 16 f 17 1 I r LEGISLATION AFFECTING THE COURTS 1973

During the 1973 special sessions of the 77th Gen­ dren and Family Services, as custodian of a minor eral Assembly and the regular sessions of the 78th who has been adjudicated by a neglected or depen­ General Assembly, numerous bills affecting the prac­ dent minor, under the Juvenile Court Act, of all tice' of law, criminal and juvenile justice, the operation stages of any hearing or proceeding wherein the of the court system and court personnel were intro­ custody or status of the minor may be changed. (Ch. duced. Summaries of some of the more significant 37, § 701-20) bills enacted into law are set out below, References SB-132 (PA 78-522) repeals the present provi­ are to III.Rev.Stat., ch. __, § __. However, before sions of Section 2 of the Dead Man's Act and substi­ attending to the new laws, it is important to note tutes new provisions which (1) limit the bar of the some legislation, which would have vitally affected statute to conversations with the deceased or incom­ the court system, that ultimately failed to pass the petent person and to any event which took place in General Assembly. his presence; (2) expressly permits testimony com­ Senate Joint Resolution 23 (SJR-23) passed the petent under Section 3 of the Act and facts relating General Assembly on June 25, .1973 and would have to the heirship of a decedent; (3) defines an incom­ placed on the ballot in the November 1974 general petent person as one who is adjudged by the court in election the following proposition: Article VI, Section the action to be unable to testify. by reason of mental 12( d) of the 1970 Constitution would be amended by illness, mental retardation or deterioration; (4) ex­ deleting that section from the Constitution. Section cludes from the definition of an interested person one 12(d) provides that a judge, once elected to his of­ who is interested solely as a fiduciary; and (5) per­ fice, may continue to serve in that office upon expira­ mits the survivor to testify to rebut any witness called tion of the term to whIch he was elected, provided by the protected party. (Ch. 51, § 2) that he files a declaration of candidacy to succeed SB-345 (PA 78-531) amends the definition of himself (to be retained in office) and further provided "parent" in the Juvenile Court Act, and provides for he receives a 60(% affirmative popular vote at the notice to the putative father in adoption cases and for general election. That is, SJR-23 would have re­ his declaration or disclaimer of paternity. (Ch. 37, §§ quired an elected judge to run in a partisan, contest­ 701-14 and 705-9.4) ed election to remain in office upon expiration of the SB-1133 (PA 78-550) eliminates the requirement term to which he was initially elected. If adopted by for the examination of witnesses other than the plain­ the electorate, SJR-23 would have returned the judi­ tiff, where the complaint is taken as confessed in di­ ciary to the pre-1964 days of contested elections vorce proceedings. (Ch. 40, § 9) when a judge's term in office had expired. HB-18 (PA 78-921) provides that in any case in A vigorous campaign to urge the General Assembly which a defendant is convicted of murder, falling into to withdraw SJR-23, pursuant to Article XIV, Section a category requiring imposition of capital punishment, 2(a) of the Constitution, was waged by present and the State shall seek imposition of the death penalty. former elected public officials, the bar associations, It provides that after there has been a finding of individual lawyers, citizen and civic groups, and seg­ guilty the trial judge shall, before entering sentence, ments of the news media. When the General Assem­ notify the chief judge of the circuit court to assign bly reconvened in the fall of 1973, SJR-50 was three judges to hear evidence and determine wheth­ offered. That resolution provided that SJR-23 would er the case requires imposition of the death penalty. be withdrawn. On November 27, 1973, after adoption The Act also sets out the procedures to be followed by the General Assembly, SJR-50 was filed in the after such determination. (Ch. 38, §§ 9.1 and Secretary of State's office and accordingly, the reten­ 1005-5-3) tion provision of the Constitution remains intact. HB-129 (PA 78-201) changes the limitation on ac­ Several other joint resolutions to amend the Con­ tions brought under the Local Governmental and stitution in regard to the manner in which judges are Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act from 1 initially selected and retained in office were intro­ year to 2 years. It also changes the notice require­ duced in the 78th Geneial Assembly; however, the ment to within one year of the accrual of the cause resolutions failed to pass out of the originating of action, and it permits service thereof by registered house. See SJR-18, HJR Const. Amend. No.5, HJR or certified mail in lieu of personal service. (Ch. 85, Const. Amend. No. 18, and HJR Const. Amend. No. §§ 8-101 and 8-102) 24. HB-373 (PA 78-255) combines multiple forms of sections amended two or more times by the 77th Changes in Substantive and General Assembly. Where the last amendment of a Procedural Law section incorporated all previous amendments, it identifies the Public Act on which to rely. It conforms SB-32 (PA 78-594) requires that adequate notice two sections to decisions by the Illinois Supreme be given to current foster parents and the agency Court in Carey v. Elrod, 49 1II.2d 464, 275 N.E.2d designated, by the court or the Department of Chil- 367 (1971), and Stein v. Howlett, 52 1I1.2d 570, 289 19

I d NEW PROCEDURES FOR REGISTRATION N.E.2d 409 (1972), and restores the section on unin­ single county circuits, and 'ior personal service of sured motorists repealed by the no-fault bill held un­ summons in single county circuits. (Ch. 78, §§ 9, 9.1, AND DISCIPLINE OF ATTORNEYS constitutional in Grace v. Howlett, 51 1I1.2d 478, 283 10, 10.1, ii, 11.1 and 32) N.E.2d 474 (1972). (Ch. 46, § 23-23; Ch. 73, § 755a; SB-535 (PA 78-356) requires clerks of the circuit The Illinois Supreme Court historically has had the (a) Making I ules for disciplinary proceedings; (b) Ch. 127, § 604 A-106) court to notify the Department of Law Enforcement of power to regulate the practice of law in this State (In Supervising the activities of the administrator ()f the HB-417 (PA 78-665) amends various provisions of all felony convictions. (Ch. 38, § 83-8.1) re Day, 181 III. '73, 54 N.E. 646 (1899)), and has up­ disciplinary system; (c) Authorizing the administra­ the Civil Practice Act to coordinate them with the Su­ SB-1180 (PA 78-552) provides for a 30 day exten­ held 'its inherent power to discipline attorneys, In re tor to employ staff; (d) Appointing lawyers to serve preme Court Rules. (Ch. 110, §§ 21, 64, 67, 68.1, sion to file statements of economic interests, for per­ Teitelbaum, 13 1I1.2d 586, 150 N.E.2d 873 (1958). In as commissioners; (e) Collecting and administering 68.3, 72, 73, 81 and 83) sons who, within 10 days before or after the final the exercise of those powers, the Supreme Court a disciplinary fund and filing annually with the Su­ HB-527 (PA 78-264) permits proof of heirship by filing date, file a declaration of intention to defer the adopted rules governing the procedures to be em­ preme Court an accounting of monies received affidavit. (Ch. 3, § 57) filing of such statement. It also provides for a 30 day ployed where allegations are made that attorneys' and disbursed; and (f) Submitting an annual report HB-865 (PA 78-602) assures minors subject to the grace period, after the effective date of the bill, for practices tend to defeat the administration of justice to the Supreme Court evaluating the disciplinary Juvenile Court Act of all fundamental rights of adults, the filing of statements of economic interests which or to bring the courts and the legal profession into system and making recommendations thereon. and it provides for a number of other significant sub­ were due before that date. (Ch. 127, § 604A-105) disrepute. Rule 752-Provides that the Supreme Court ap­ stantive and procedural changes in the Act. (Ch. 37, HB-719 (PA 78-273) amends the Illinois Vehicle Prior to 1973, Supreme Court Rules 751 and 752 point an administrator of the disciplinary system to §§ 701-2, 703-6, 704-2 and 705-8) Code to provide, in counties other than Cook, that set out the procedures for disciplining attorneys. serve at the Court's pleasure as the principal exec­ HB-1086 (PA 78-939) amends and adds to the when police officers of municipalities issue tickets Briefly, the rules provided: (a) T.he Illinois State Bar utive officer of the system. Subject to the supervi­ Unified Code of Corrections. It contains significant under the provisions of the Illinois Vehicle Code or Association's Board of Governors and its committee sion of the commission, the administrator shall: (a) amendments to the sentencing provisions. In particu­ municipal ordinances which regulate the ownership, on grievances and The Chicago Bar Association's On his own motion, on the recommendation of an lar, § 1005-6-3(d) was amended to permit sentences use or operation of vehicles, that such citation shall Board of Managers and its committee on grievances inquiry board or at the instance of an aggrieved of up to 6 months imprisonment as a condition of also include a notice to the accused that if he intends were apPOinted as commissioners of the Supreme party, investigate the conduct of attorneys which probation. (Ch. 38, § 1005-6-3(d) ) to plead not guilty or, in addition, demand a trial by Court and were empowered to make investigations, tends to defeat the administration of justice or to HB-1089 (PA 78-940) amends the act creating the jury, he should notify the clerk of the court. (Ch. receive, inquire into and take .proof concerning com­ bring the courts or the legal profession into disre­ Department of Children and Family Services to make 95 1/2, § 16-106) plaints against attorneys; (b) Complaints against at­ pute; (b) Assist the inquiry boards in their investi­ it clear that delinquents, who are minors less than 13 HB-767 (PA 78-558) increases from 3 to 4 the torneys were signed by the person aggrieved or by gations and prosecute disciplinary cases before years of age, committed to it shall be accepted for number of Appellate Court judges to be elected in certain members of the bar associations; (c) The the hearing boards, the review board and the care without a requirement for the Department's ap­ each downstate judicial district. (Ch. 37, § 25) clerk of the Supreme Court noticed the respondent Court; (c) Employ necessary investigative, clerical proval. (Ch. 23, § 5005) HB-782 (PA 78-666) makes the salaries of all as­ attorney concerning the pendency of the complaint and legal personnel and discharge such personnel HB-1395 (PA 78-287) provides that in replevin sociate judges the same, at $23,500 per year, to be and issued writs of subpoena; (d) Hearings were whose performance is unsatisfactory to him; and cases there must be notice L the defendant and a paid out of the State treasury, and provides for an held before the commissioners or committees, and if (d) Maintain records, make reports and perform hearing prior to issuance of a writ of replevin, to con­ additional salary of $4,500 per year in Cook and Du­ any action by the Supreme Court was recommended, such other dutif.ls as may be prescribed by the form with the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Fuentes Page counties. (Ch. 53, § 3.3) the appropriate governing board of the bar associa­ commission. v. Shevin, 92 S. Ct. 1983 (1972). (Ch. 119, §§ 1,4, HB-1138 (PA 78-784) permits judges to file a no­ tions reported to the Supreme Court conclusions of Rule 753-Establishes inquiry, hearing and review 7, 12 and 21) tice, before January 1, 1974, rescinding their deci­ fact and law concerning the complaint; and (e) The boards, provides for membership of said boards sion not to participate in the judges retirement matter was then docketed and set down for a dispo­ and sets out procedures and jurisdiction of said Changes Affecting Courts system. (Ch. 1081/2, §§ 18-121, 18-123, and sition hearing by the Supreme Court. If an attorney's boards. The members of the inquiry and hearing and Judges 18-125.1) name was stricken from the rolls of attorneys, he divisions of the disciplinary committees of the State HB-1304 (PA '78-805) permits any judge in office could apply for reinstatement upon the rolls, pursuant and Chicago Bar Associations are appointed as SB-6 (PA 77-2nd SS-6) raises the annual salary of on June 30, 1973, who reaches age 70, to complete to the procedures enumerated in Rule 752. commissioners of the Court to serve on the inquiry judges of the Illinois Supreme Court from $40,000 to his unexpired term in order to fulfill the minimum re­ In 1971, the Illinois State Bar and Chicago Bar As­ and hearing boards. $42,500; of Appellate Court judges from $37,500 to quirement under the judges retirement system. (Ch. sociations filed in the Supreme Court a joint petition (a) There are two inquiry boards, each com­ $40,000; of circuit court judges from $27,500 to 37, § 23.72) and report requesting changes in Rules 751 and 752 posed of at least 10 members, for disciplin­ $30,000, with judges in Cook and DuPage counties HB-1653 (PA 78-792) amends the Election Code and citing deficiencies in the disciplinary process. ary matters arising in Cook County and receiving an additional $7,500 to be paid by the to make it clear that judges are to be elected at the The petition suggested the need for a professional, downstate. The boards are responsible for county. (Ch. 53, §§ 3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3) November 1974 general election. (Ch. 46, § 2-7.2) fUll-time staff to investigate complaints, with said staff investigating matters referred to them by the SB-8 (PA 77-2nd SS-8) increases the salary of the HB-1866 (PA 78-910) extends to judges in service and its operations being financed by all members of administrator and may initiate their own in­ clerk of Supreme Court from $20,000 to $25,000 I:~lr on July 1, 1972, rather than judges in service on July the legal profession. The Chicago Council of Lawyers vestigations or refer matters to the adminis­ year. (Ch. 53, § 28. '1) 1, 1969, the privilege of establishing service credit in also filed a petition requesting a change in the disci­ trator for investig.ation. The boards, or SB-9 (PA 77-2nd SS-9) increases the salary of the judges retirement system for periods of service plinary system. After more than a year of study and panels thereof composed of at least five clerks of the Appellate Court as follows: first judicial before January 1, 1964 as a justice of the peace, po­ conSUltation with the bar associations in and out of members, after investigation and consider­ district, from $20,000 to $23,000; all other districts, lice magistrate, master in chancery or civil referee in the State, the Supreme Court adopted a comprehen­ ation, shall dispose of matters before them from $18,000 to $21,000. (Ch. 37, § 27) the Municipal Court of Chicago. (Ch. 108112, § sive set of rules, effective February 1 and April 1, by vote; however, a complai'lt must be voted SB-105 (PA 78-520) provides for summoning 18-112) 1973 which not only provide for discipline procedures only upon the affirmative vote of a majority grand and petit jurors by certified me:il, in other than but also require registration of attorneys licensed to of a board, but in no event shall a complaint I practice in Illinois. In summary form, the rules pro­ be voted by less than four panel members. 1 vide: A voted complaint shall be prepared by the l Rule 751-Creates the Attorney Registration Com­ administrator and filed with a hearing board. r mission which is the administrative supervisor of (b) There are two hearing boards, each com­ disciplinary proceedings affecting Illinois lawyers. posed of at least 21 members, for diSCiplin­ The five member, unsalaried commission is ap­ ary matters arising in Cook County and pointed by the Supreme Court and is charged with: downstate. The duties of the hearing panels 21 20 I I , I l! 7 I of the hearing boards are to conduct hear­ who are admitted but do not practice, reside in or ings on filed complaints and on referred peti­ are employed in Illinois. ing matter. The rule also provides that the clerk of Attorney Registration Commission and Carl H. Ro­ tions, to make findings of fact and The administrator is required to maintain, and the Supreme Court shall notify certain State and lewick, former deputy director of the Administrative conclusions of fact and law, and to make file a copy thereof, with the clerk of the Supreme Federal judicial officers of an attorney's disbar­ Office of the Illinois Courts, as administrator. The ad­ recommendations for discipline, dismissal or Court, a current master roll of attorneys who have ment suspension or transfer to inactive status. Ad­ ministrator retained the fUll-time services of eleven non-disciplinary suspension. The hearing paid, or are exempt from, the annual registration ditio~allY, the rules make prOVisions for the manner persons to staff his office, among whom were: John panels, composed of at least three mem­ fee. An attorney whose name does not appear on of service of process and for reinstatement. Pro­ M. Oswald, former assistant director of the Adminis­ bers, by the concurrence of a majority, shall the roll is not entitled to practice law. ceedings before the disciplinary boards shall be trator Office, as assistant administrator and chief in­ decid,9 matters before them. Notice and Rule 757, 758, 759 and 760-Set out procedures private and confidential unless the respondent at­ vestigator; and John Dixon, retfred circuit court judge, hearin~l are proviqed for and proceedings for transferring an attorney to inactive status be­ torney requests that they be made public. as assistant administrator and chief counsel. are conducted according to the practice in cause he has been declared by a court to be men­ In creating the Attorney Registration and Disciplin­ During 1973, the commission established two of­ civil cases as modified by commission rules. tally incompetent, in need of mental treatment, has ary Commission, the Supreme Court's primary .objec­ fices for the system, one in Chicago and the other in The standard of proof shall be clear and been involuntarily committed to a hospital on such tive was to eliminate unnecessary delay In the Springfield. The commission also adopted a set of convincing evidence. grounds or because of mental infirmity, mental dis­ processing of complaints against attorneys. The regulations concerning the operation and procedures (c) There is a nine member review board ap­ order or addiction to drugs or intoxicants. The rules Court was cognizant that the public, court system, of the system. The following facts regarding the op­ pointed by the Court. This board reviews the also provide that any attorney so disabled may be bar and the respondent have a vital interest in an eration of the registration and disciplinary system for reports of the hearing boards where action ordered by the Suprem0 Court upon motion to be early and just determination Of. any charg~ which 1973 have been published: (1) There are 26,056 at­ by the Court is recommended and in all oth­ mentally or physically examined by a physiCian. At­ bears upon the fitness of an attorney to practice law. torneys licensed to practice law in Illinois; (2) Over er cases upon application of the administra­ torneys transferred to inactive status may be rein­ During the formative, organizational period of the $378,000 in registration fees have been collected; tor after service of a hearing board report. stated to active status. registration and disciplinary system-February 1 to and (3) 1616 investigative files were opened. The respondent attorney, in whose case the Rule 761-Makes provisions for procedures to be December 31, 1973-the Supreme Court appointed, The chart following on page 24 illustrates, in sum­ hearing board report recommends action by followed upon an attorney's conviction of certain among others, two highly qualified persons to man­ mary form, the organizational procedures of the at­ the Court, and the administrator may file ex­ crimes. The administrator may file a complaint with age the system: Justin A. Sta~ley as chairman of the torney registration and disciplinary system. ceptions to the report.. The review board may the Supreme Court, with a certified copy of the approve or reject the hearing board's find­ conviction judgment, where an attorney has been ings and may approve, reject or modify the convicted by any court of: (1) theft or any offense recommendations, may remand the proceed­ involving fraud; (2) forgery; (3) extortion; (4) brib­ ings for further action or dismiss the pro­ ery; (5) perjury; or (6) an attempt, solicitation or ceedings. The standard of review relating to conspiracy to do any of the foregoing. The Su­ the sufficiency of the evidence shall be preme Court may suspend said attorney and pro­ whether the hearing board's findings are vide for a further hearing before a hearing board to supported by clear and convincing evidence. determine whether the crime warrants additional Where the review board concludes that dis­ discipline. ciplinary action is required, the board's re­ Rules 762 and 763-Establish procedures for dis­ port is transmitted to the Supreme Court. barment on consent and for reciprocal disciplinary The respondent attorney is notified of the fil­ action. An attorney who is charged with miscon­ ing of the report with the Court, and he may duct and who is under investigation or has charges file exceptions thereto. pending against him before any of the disciplinary Rules 754 and 755-Empower the inquiry and boards, may mOVe in the Supreme Court to have hearing boards to take and transcribe the evidence his name stricken from the roll of attorneys. The of witnesses and require the Supreme Court clerk administrator prepares a statement of charges and to issue subpoenas upon request of the boards. the movant attorney files an affidavit with the Court The inquiry, hearing and review boards may call to stating that he has received a copy of the state­ their assistance other attorneys and may make ment, that his motion is freely and voluntarily made rules and regulations concerning procedures be­ and that he understands the nature and conse­ fore the respective boards. quences of his motion. Rule 756-Requires that every attorney admitted An attorney licensed in Illinois and in another f to practice law in Illinois pay an annual registration state who is disciplined in the sister state may be fee to the commission, sets out exemptions to pay­ subject to the same discipline in Illinois upon proof r ing the fee and provides for penalties for nonpay­ of the order of the sister state impOSing the disci­ ment. pline. Hearing procedures regarding the foreign or­ r Attorneys admitted to the bar for less than one der are provided for, and the administrator may year pay no fee; those admitted more than one but elect to institute independent disciplinary proceed­ f less than five years pay a $10 fee per year; and ings against any attorney based on his conduct in those admitted for more than five years, pay a $20 another state. fee per year. Attorneys exempt from paying the fee I Rules 764, 765, 766, 767 and 76B-Provide that 1 include those in the U.S. military service, those li­ an attorney who is disbarred, suspended or trans­ i censed to practice law for more than 50 years, ferred to inactive status must notify his clients that those having attained 75 years of age, or those he cannot continue to represent them in any pend-

22 231 .~--~------~====~~------\--I------~""""""""""".. ~ ...... ______t !

ACTIVITIES OF THE JUDICIAFlY CHART ON GENERAL ORGANIZATIONAL PROCEDURES OF THE ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY SYSTEM

The Supreme Court board of trustees of the Judges Retirement System. Furthermore, the Court selects committees, as the The Illinois Supreme Court is the pinnacle of the need arises, to study and suggest amendments in Attorney Registration Commission Administrahr three-tier Illinois court structure, and it is, by its con­ substantive and procedural lawi for example, during 1 stitutional nature, the final arbiter in this State of liti­ 1973, the Court appOinted a seven member commit­ \ gation which it, hears by mandatory or discretionary tee on clerks to recommend to the Supreme Court \ appeal or in original actions. appropriate legislation and rule changes which are \ Pursuant to statute, the Court holds five terms necessary to implement the provisions of the 1970 Review Board I each year during the months' of January, March, '--______-l', \ Constitution and which would improve the efficiency , \ May, September and November. During the 1973 and effectiveness of the operations of the several terms, the Court sat a total of 63 days. When the clerks' offices throughout the State. \ • Court is not in session, each justice is preparing his The Supreme Court, pursuant to the Constitution, " " assigned opinions. At each term, the Court issues Investigate and selects one of its members as Chief Justice. Com­ opinions, holds conferences. on drafts of proposed " Prosecute Complaint mencing January 1, 1973, the Court selected Robert opinions, hears oral arguments, rules on motions, / C. Underwood as Chief Justice for a three year term. / ~-~/~------~ considers modifications to the Supreme Court rules, This is Justice Underwood's second consecutive and meets with the Administrative Director to discuss / / three year term as Chief Justice. / / budgetary requirements and to consider other admin­ / / istratiVe matters. The primary reas'.:m, of course, that the Supreme Inquiry Boards / Court exists is to render decisions which require ad­ / When in session, the justices reside in the Su­ / preme Court Building at Springfield. In addition, the judication by the court of last resort. During 1973, the / Court meets regularly in its Chicago quarters in the seven justices of the Court delivered 207 full opin­ t Civic Center. Once each year the Court hears oral ions which affected every citizen of Illinois to some arguments at the University of Chicago Law School degree; filed 16 memorandum opinions; ruled on 46 L_c_o_m_p_l_ai_nt_----.Jr and at the Urbana-Champaign campus of the Univer­ petitions for rehearing; decided 555 petitions for sity of Illinois College of Law. The sessions at the leave to appeal, a 19.4% increase over last year law school present an invaluable opportunity for law (about 20% of the petitions were allowed); and dis­ school students to observe the highest State court in posed of 570 other motions. The Court additionally action. received 974 new filings as compared tCl 879 filings Besides deciding cases and administering and su­ in 1972, a 9.8% increase. Many of the new filings in­ pervising the entire judicial system in accordance cluded petitions from inmates at the State penitentia­ with its constitutional mandate, the Supreme Court ries praying for modifications of sentences to has multifarious duties which are weighty, yet less conform to the new Unified Code of Corrections. prominent than its more publicized opinions. For ex­ By the very nature of the type of litigation which ample, the Court approves, after preparation by the th'e Supreme Court hears, many of its opinions deal Administrative Direc'lor, the annual budget for the with issues which are particularly germane to Illinois; State's courts; employs two law clerks ';or each jus­ however, since Illinois is one of the major and lead­ tice who assi~t in researching the law and preparing ing jurisdictions in the United States, it is not uncom­ legal memoranda; selects a marshal who attends mon that sister states and the federal courts cite the each term of Court and lJerforms such other duties, Illinois Supreme Court opinions as authority in their at the direction of the Court, which are usually per­ jurisdictions. Some of the Court's most significant formed by the sheriffs to the trial courts, and in that opinions in 1973 follow. regard, the Court appointed, effective July 1, 1973, ~ Interpretation of the Constitution. In Oak Park Fed­ William G. Lyons as marshal; and appoints tile Su­ eral Savings and Loan Association v. Village of preme Court librarian who is charged with keeping Oak Park, 54 II1.2d 200, 296 N.E.2d 344 (three the library in current condition and preserving all justices dissenting), the Supreme Court interpreted books and documents in the library. In addition the the "home rule" article of the Constitution and held Court appoints the Appellate Defender and two' per­ that a home rule unit's power to levy taxes to pro­ sons to the Appellate Defender Commission; a mem­ vide special services is not self-executing. "[The ber of the board of commissioners of the Illinois Village] cannot, without enabling legislation adopt­ ~efende\' Project and the Court has designated Wil­ ed by the General Assembly, create a special ser­ ham M. Madden, deputy director of the Administrative vice area or impose taxes or issue bonds to Office as its appointee; and judicial members of the provide special services ... It .~. 25 24

3 1".' i

Board of Education v. Bakalis, 54 11I.2d 448, 299 izes the Pollution Control Board to order the issu­ rule power or function" and that said collection is omitted]. Further, section 5(c) requires the General N.E.2d 737, the Supreme Court affirmed the trial ance of bonds to abate a nuisance. The Board has not one of the "powers and functions of county Assembly, when abolishing the ad valorem per­ court's decision that the education article of the authority to order abatement of pollution practices; government which pertain to its government and sonal property taxes, to concurrently therewith and Constitution does not prohibit school boards from however, it is the polluter's obligation to raise affairs within the contemplation of section 6 of arti­ thereafter replace all revenue lost by units of local providing the same transportation along its rsgular funds to abate the pollution by the issuance of cle VII." government and school districts by imposing school routes for nonpublic school pupils as it pro­ bonds. Lflke Shore Auto Parts Co. v. Korzen, 54 1I1.2d statewide taxes solely on those classes relieved of vides for its public school pupils. In the lenothy • Divorce. In Mogged v. Mogged, 55 1I1.2d 221, 302 237, 296 N.E.2d 342 (one justice partially dissent­ the burden of the taxes abolished." opinion, the Court ruled that the statute requ~ing N.E.2d 293 (two justices dissenting), the Court re­ ing), determined the type of ownership of personal Consolidated Distilled Products, Inc. v. Mahin, bussing of non public school pupils "was enacted versed the trial court's decree awarding both par­ property which would subject that property to the 56 1I1.2d 110, 306 N.E.2d 465, attacked the validity for the secular legislative purpose of protecting the ties a divorce on grounds of mental cruelty. The personal property tax. The Supreme Court held at of statutes which imposed a privilege tax upon the health and safety of children traveling to and from question presented to the Supreme Court was 49111.2d 137, 273 N.E.2d 592 (1971), that the con­ distributors of wine made from Illinois grapes at a nonpublic schools; that the primary effect of the whether the doctrine of recrimination should be stitutional amendment prohibiting ad valorem taxa­ lower rate than that imposed upon the distributors statute neither advances nor inhibits religion; that abolished or modified in Illinois. The Court held tion of personal property owned by a natural of wine made from grapes or other fruits grown any beneiit to the parochial school or church con­ that public policy questions relating to recrimina­ person Qr by two or more natural persons as joint outside of Illinois. The Court upheld the constitu­ trolling it is incidental and that the statute does not tion are "appropriately within the province of the tenants or tenants in common was invalid. On a tionality of the statutes holding that the fine distinc­ foster an excessive government entanglement with legislature, and that, if there is to be a change in writ of certiorari granted by the U.S. Supreme tion between a tax imposed on the importation of religion." the law of this State on this matter, it is for the leg­ Court, 409 U.S. 1103, 93 S.Ct. 1001, that Court foreign liquor and a tax imposed on the importer People ex reI. Hanrahan v. Beck, 54 1I1.2d 561, islature and not the courts to bring about that reversed. The Illinois Supreme Court decided that engaged in the business of selling such liquor is 30i N.E.2d 281 (one justice dissenting), presented change." the personal property remaining subject to taxation sufficient to sustain the statute. the issue whether the Cook County Board, pursu­ Gill v. Gill, 56 1I1.2d 139, 306 N.E.2d 281 (three included such categories of ownership as partner­ .. Quasi-Criminal Litigation. In the ever-changing law ant to its home rule powers, had authority to sup­ justices dissenting), adjudicated that defendant ships, professional associations and service corpo­ of procedures to be employed in the trial of ordi­ plant an existing statute which assigned certain was obligated to reimburse plaintiff $13,500.00 for rations, joint ventures and limited partnerships. nance violation cases, the Supreme Court decided functions to the county clerk. The Supreme Court monies expended over a 13 year period following Titus v. Texas Company, 55 1I1.2d 437, 303 two cases which clarified the trial procedures in :'\ decided that the Constitution' permits a home rule the divorce to support his child. The Court ap­ N.E.2d 361, upheld the statute which imposed a cases that are "criminal in nature but civil in form." county to validly transfer the powers, duties and proved the statement that "when a divorce decree tax on the privilege of operating a motor vehicle In City of Danville v. Hartshorn, 53 1I1.2d 399, 292 functions of certain county officers, notwithstanding provides for the custody of a child but is silent as (motor boat) on the waters of the State at a speci­ N.E.2d 382, the Court ruled that th~ defendant has a statute enacted prior to the adoption of the 1970 to the question of child support, a mother may fied rate per gallon of gasoline used, but did not a statutory right to trial by jury and that the discov­ Constitution. maintain an action against her former husband for impose such a tax on the users ot'marine diesel ery provision of the civil practice act may be in­ Blase v. State, 55 1I1.2d 94, 302 N.E.2d 46, pro­ moneys expended by her after the decree to sup­ fuel. The Court held that the "statutory classifica­ voked at the discretion of the trial court. In City of vided the Supreme Court with the opportunity to port the child." tion is not unreasonable. The legislature could Chicago v. Wisniewski, 54 1I1.2d 149, 295 N.E.2d 453, the COU,rt held thnt while the speedy trial stat­ interpret the funding clause of the education arti­ • Tax and Bonds. The City of Chicago under its have intended to tax those boaters for whose cle: "The State has the primary responsibility for fi­ home rule powers enacted an ordinance providing benefit the State's boating program is primarily de­ ute is not to be applied literally to prosecutions for ordinance -violation cases, a 17 month delay be­ nancing the system of public education." After for a 15¢ tax on the privilege of parking a vehicle signed. It could have concluded that a tax on the fore defendant's tria; was excessive. reviewing the record of proceedings of the Consti­ in a parking lot. The Supreme Court in Jacobs v. marine use of diesel fuel would produce little reve­ tutional Convention, the Court reasoned that the City of Chicago, 53 1I1.2d 42;, 292 N.E.2d 401, nue ... " • Criminal. In People v. Crowell, 53 1I1.2d 447, 292 N.E.2d 721, the Supreme Court provided that "a clause "was [not] i:ltendep to impose a specific ruled that the tax ordinance, which provided that Rozner v. Korshak, 55 11I.2d 430, 303 N.E.2d violation of the conditions of probation must be obligation on the General Assembly. Rather its the ultimate incidence of and liability for the tax 389, decreed that home rule units can impose a proved by a preponderance of the evidence." This 11 purpose was to state a commitment, a purpnse, a was to be borne by the person seeking the privi­ tax on automobiles, based on horsepower. The standard is now incorporated by legislation into the goaL" lege of occupying the parking space and which re­ Constitution prohibits the use of the police power statutes. People ex reI. Klinger v. Howlett, 56 1I1.2d 1, 305 quired the operator of the parking lot to collect and to produce revenue; however, the city ordinance is N.E.2d 129 (two justices dissenting), adjudged that remit the tax, was not invalid as an attempt by the a taxing measure and is a proper exercise of the People v. Zuniga, 53 1I1.2d 550, 293 N.E.2d 595, a legislative plan to provide indirect financial assis­ city to exercise the restrictive power to license for home rule power to tax. reiterated the Court's previous interpretations of tance to non public education was constitutionally revenue but, rather, constituted a tax enacted pur­ Elk Grove Engineering Co. v. Korzen, 55 11I.2d the speedy trial statute, viz., a delay occasioned impermissible. The Court determined that the Illi­ suant to the home rule power to tax. ~93, 304 N.E.2d 65 (one justice dissenting), af­ by the defendant is a waiver of the right to be tried nois Constitution's impositions of restrictions con­ Dick's Vending Service, Inc. v. Department of firmed the trial court's ruling that statutes exempt­ within 120 days after he is taken into custody and cerning the establishment of religion are identical Revenue, 53 1I1.2d 375, 293 N.E.2d 129 (three jus­ ing certain classes from payment of the ad the statute will not apply to discharge the defen­ to those contained in the Federal Constitution. The tices dissenting), resolved that the Illinois cigarette valorem personal property tax were unconstitution­ dant until a new 120 day period has elapsed. I' standards enunciated by the U.S. Supreme Court use tax is a tax upon the consumer and that por­ al. The Supreme Court decided that "the provi­ People v. Frey, 54 1I1.2d 28, 294 N.E.2d 257, in­ I sions of section 5(c) [of article IX of the 1970 terpreted the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe in int~rpreting the First Amendment are to be mea­ tion of the sales receipts attributable to the collec­ I Constitution] constitute a mandate to the General v. Wade, __ U.S. __, 93 S.Ct. 705, as it ap­ sured against the Illinois statutes in question. The tion of said tax should not be included within the r Court concluded the plan failed to reflect a clearly plaintiff's gross receipts which are subject to the Assembly to abolish all ,ad valorem taxes on per­ plied to Illinois' abortion statute. The Court held I sonal property on or before January 1, 1979; that { secular legislative purpose, to have a primary ef­ retailers' occupation tax. that the statutes did not meet the standards set I· fect that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and Bridgman v. t

26 27

'------= ... -. ~ =-='~='=~===:"'::=:"'::'="--=""=""---=""':::..:.:"'-="=-=--~~------"'------'--- People v. Warr, 54 1I1.2d 487, 298 N.E.2d 164, a 1I1.2d 461, 303 N.E.2d 364, Bell was granted by I very significant opinion, held that misdemeanants the Commission a telephone rate increase of (one justice dissenting), dealt with the issue of third party since the defendant breached no duty I may have the benefit of the Post-Conviction Hear­ $44,562,000.00. The Commission considered, inter whether the manufacturer of a truck was liable in owed to plaintiff. ing Act to remedy alleged denial of constitutional alia, in awarding the increase charitable contribu­ common law negligence for alleged defective de­ • Appeals. In People v. Brown, 54 1I1.2d 25, 294 rights. The Court stated that "we direct, in exercise tions and dues in trade and social clubs paid by sign of the truck where said design may have N.E.2d 267 (one justice dissenting), reversed the of our supervisory jurisdiction, that until otherwise Bell. The Supreme Court decreed that the "al­ caused the death of plaintiff's deceased spouse Appellate Court's dismissal of defendant's appeal. provided by rule of this court or by statute a defen­ lowance of such contributions as operating expen­ who' collided with said truck. The Court ruled that The Supreme Court held that although the defen­ I dant convicted of a misdemeanor who asserts that ses for purposes of ratemaking constitutes an "the foreseeability rule ... is [not] intended to bring dant did not file a petition for leave to file a late in the proceedings which resulted in his conviction involuntary assessment on [Bell's] patrons, and we within the ambit of the defendant's duty every con­ notice of appeal, the Appellate Court abused its I there was a substantial denial of his constitutional question the propriety of Bell's being permitted to sequence which might possibly occur .... Although discretion in dismissinglhe appeal since defendant rights may institute a proceeding in the nature of a thus dispense largesse at their expense. We hold, the injury complained of may have been, in a wag not advised by the trial court of the time peri­ proceeding under the Post-Conviction Hearing therefore, that such expenditures are not operating sense, foreseeable, we do not consider that the al­ od in which to file a notice of appeal, since the I" Act." expenses cognizable for the purposes of ratemak­ leged defective design created an unreasonable case had been briefed and argued in the Appellate People v. Ray, 54 1I1.2d 377, 297 N.E.2d 168, ing ... and [we] hold that expenditures for dues to danger or an unr"las,onable risk of injury." Court and since the dismissal occurred more than r emphasized that using convictions for impeach­ civic, social and athletic clubs are not operating Adkins v. Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Rail­ two years after defendant filed a late notice of ap­ ment purposes under the guidelines set out in expenses to be considered in the fixing of rates." road Co., 54 1I1.2d 511, 301 N.E.2d 729 (one jus­ peal. People v. Montgomery, 47 1I1.2d 510, 268 N.E.2d In Illinois - Indiana Cable Television Association tice dissenting), held that the dOGtrine of forum non In two cases dealing with the applicability of 695, applies to trials subsequent to Montgomery. v. Illinois Commerce Commission, 55 1I1.2d 205, conveniens would apply where injury occurred in lesser sentences under the Unified Code of Cor­ "We consider it clearly important that the use of 302 N.E.2d 334, the Court was presented an issue Iowa, where the decedent was a resident of Michi­ r..;lctions to defendants sentenced under prior law, convictions for impeachment purposes should be of first impression: Whether the words "telephone gan, where the only connection IIHnois had with the Supreme Court held in People v. Harvey, 53 governed in future trials by the 10 year limit ... " or telegraph" as used in the statute conferring ju­ the suit was that the defendant did business in IIli~ 111.20585, 294 N.E.2d 269, and People v. Chupich, People v. Sarelli, 55 1I1.2d 169, 302 N.E.2d 317, risdiction on the Commission encompass cable nois, and where there was a 18.5 month delay be­ 53 1I1.2d 572, 295 N.E.2d 1, that the lesser sen­ decided the issue of whether the holding invalid of television. The Court reasoned that the legislature tween date of filing and date of verdict in Rock tences provided in the Code apply to defendants a statute upon which a conviction rests requires did not by its enactments authorize the Commis­ Island County (citing the Annual Report of the Ad­ who were convicted prior to its effective date of vacation of the judgment when the issue of its sion to regulate the operation of cable television ministrative Office). January 1, 1973 and who have not reached the constitutionality is raised for the first time in a and that it is for the legislature, not the Commis­ Reese v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad sentencing stage or a final adjudication. post-conviction proceeding. The Supreme Court .sion, to expand the Commission's jurisdiction to Co., 55 1I1.2d 356, 303 N.E. 2d 332 (three justices People ex rei. Ward v. Moran, 54 1I1.2d 552, 301 held that "considerations of justice and fairness re­ the entire public telecommunications field. dissenting), sanctioned the use of "loan receipt N.E.2d 300, resulted in the Supreme Court enter­ quire reversal of a conviction obtained under an • Civil. In Blanton v. Denniston, 54 11I.2d 1, 294 agreements." Plaintiff brought sua against the rail­ ing a supervisory order to the Appellate Court. The invalid procedural provision, even though ques­ N.E.2d 283, the Court held that the defendant was road and the Koehring Co., and the railroad coun­ Supreme Court ruled that Rule 615 "was not in­ tioned for the first time in a post-conviction pro­ not entitled to a directed verdict on the basis of ter-claimed against Koehring for indemnity. Prior to tended to grant a court of review the authority to ceeding ... " plaintiff's opening statement where a jury determi­ the trial, plaintiff and the railroad contracted reduce a penitentiary sentence to probation." People v. Steska/, 55 1I1.2d 157, 302 N.E.2d nation was necessary on the question of contribu­ whereby the railroad loaned plaintiff a sum of Bohn Aluminum & Brass Co. v. Barker, 55 1I1.2d 321, reversed the trial court's ruling that obscene I' tory negligence. money which was to be repaid by plaintiff from any 177, 303 N.E.2d 1 (two justices dissenting), decid­ ! materials, illegally seized from the defendant, who Wessel v. Carmi Elks Home, Inc., 54 1I1.2d 127, judgment in favor of plaintiff against Koehring. The ed that "whether the order is captioned as a pre­ was charged but not convicted of Violating the ob­ 295 N.E.2d 718 (one justice dissenting), resolved railroad was then dismissed from the suit. The Su­ liminary injunction or a temporary restraining order, scenity statute, are contraband and must be de­ a question which had bE.'iBn decided by the Appel­ preme Court held that the "salutary effects of the it constitutes a restraint upon the defendant which stroyed. The Court reasoned that to allow "a late Court with conflicting results, to wit: Whether loan agreement" outweigh the policy of denying is essentially injunctive in character," and where forfeiture under such circumstances would permit I one who may incur dramshop liability because of contribution between joint tort feasors. .the defendant moved to vacate the orper and the ! the State an opportunity to vindicate its allegation the sale or gift of intoY-icating liquors to a third par­ Chrisafogeorgis v. Brandenberg, 55 1I1.2d 368, motion was denied, the order was appealable. that defendant committed a criminal of­ ty has the right to seek indemnification from the 304 N.E.2d 88 (thred justices dissenting), plowed • Estates and Trusts. In Montgomery v. Michaels, 54 r fense .... We hold that ... articles may be de­ latter whose activity is alleged to be the primary or new ground in Illinois by holding that there can be 1I1.2d 532, 301 N.E.2d 465, the Court held that a stroyed only as a consequence of a successful active cause of the damages. The Court conclud­ recovery under the Wrongful Death Act for the "Totten Trust" is sufficiently testamentary in nature criminal prosecution for violation of the obscenity ed that "those who may incur liability ... may not wrongful death of a viable child or "fetus born dead that by analogy the statutory policy of permitting a I statute." seek indemnity from one who, being in an intoxi­ as a result of injuries negligently inflicted en ventre surviving spouse to renounce under decedent's People v. Lentz, 55 1I1.2d 517, 304 N.E.2d 278, cated condition, committed a tortious act which sa mere. will and share in the proceeds of such estate is reasoned that where the State does not record the gives rise to the dramshop action." Barnes v. Washington, 56 1I1.2d 22, 305 N.E.2d applicable to such trust to the same extent as to proceedings of the grand jury and defendant files Watson v. Fischbach, 54 1I1.2d 498, 301 N.E.2d 535 (two justices dissenting), reversed the Appel­ an estate passing under a will. Such a trust cannot a motion to produce the transcript of the grand ju­ 303, held that remarriage of the plaintiff surviving late Court's general ruling that a mentally incom­ defeat the surviving spouse's statutory share in the ry testimony, then the indictment should not be spouse does not affect the damages recoverable pete nt ad u It s ho u I d oe a fto rd ed the sam e estate of the deceased spouse. dismissed for failure to produce since the State for the wrongful death of the deceased spouse. protection as a child of tender years and held that In re Estate of Baxter, 56 11I.2d 223, 306 N.E.2d has no duty to record said testimony. The Court amplified that "prospective jurors may the standards of care owed by a landowner to a 304 (one justice dissenting), the Supreme Court e Commerce Commission Cases. In two particularly be told by the judge that a plaintiff has remarried. child may be applicable to a mentally incompetent decreed that a certificate of deposit payable in the I important cases, the Supreme Court decided Beyond this point, however, we believe defendants adult, depending on the factual basis of each case. alternative to deceased and two others as joint I whether certain expenses could be considered in have no legitimate interest in exploring .... Beyond Boyd v. Racine Currency Exchange, Inc., 56 tenants created a joint tenancy which did not re­ fixing the rates for a telephone utility and whether the voir dire, questions, comments or argument re­ 1I1.2d 95, 306 N.E.2d 39 (one justice dissenting), quire an underlying signed agreement between the cable television is within the jurisdiction of the illi­ lating to the remarriage will, ordinarily, be improp­ adjudged that where a business invitee plaintiff joint tenants. nois Commerce Commission. In Illinois Bell Tele­ er." was injured by a third party in the commission of a • Industrial Commission Cases. In County of Cook phone Co. v. Illinois Commerce Commission, 55 Mieher v. Brown, 54 1I1.2d 539, 301 N.E.2d 307 criminal act against defendant, the defendant is v. Industrial Commission, 55 11I.2d 540, 304 N.E.2d not liable to plaintiff for the injuries caused by the 616, the Supreme Court held that juvenile proba-

{ 28 I 29 , I , 1( H Harold A, Siegan - Cook County Circuit Court The organization of the Illinois Judicial Conference tion officers appointed by the circuit court are em­ several cases surfaced, e.g., election matters, requir­ Jack I. Sperling - Cook County Circuit Court is established by Supreme Court Rule 41.1 That rule ployees of the county and are therefore eligible for ing expeditious rulings in the public interest, which John J. Sullivan - First DiS)trict Appellate Court was revised on July 1, 1971, to bring it into conformi­ workmen's compensation benefits. the Court heard on an emergency basis; and illness­ Daniel J. White - Cook County Circuit Court ty with the Constitution of 1970. The conference 1/ Landlord-Tenant. In Peoria Housing Authority v. es among members of the Court affected opinion It should be observed that .of the thirty-three ap­ each year provides a number of seminars and con­ Sanders; 54 1I1.2d 478, 298 N.E.2d 173 (one jus­ writing. However, tile Court was very involved with pointments, fifteen appointees were sitting judges tinuing judicial education prograrns,2 including visita­ tice dissenting), the Supreme Court stated that several cases, as noted above, which required inter­ who were elevated to higher judgeships. Thus, it can tions by judges, in cooperation with the Director of "when an action for possession is based upon pretation of the 1970 Constitution, particularly in the be stated that where the Supreme Court discerned the Department of Corrections, to various penal insti­ nonpayment of rent, the question whether the de­ "home rule," education and tax articles. Substantial outstanding performance by sitting judges, then tutions. Conference study committees are active fendant owes rent to t~e plaintiff is germane, attention was also given to the administrative prob­ these well qualified jurists were selected to fill vacant throughout the year and include the Juvenile Prob­ whether or not the plaintiff seeks judgment for the lems of the court system and to filling judicial vacan­ judgeships which carry greater responsibility in the lems Committee, Committee on Probation and nu­ rent. .. " cies. Considerable consideration was also directed to judicial system. ..' ". merous others. • Juveniles. In People v. Owen, 54 11l.2d 104, 295 the necessary amendments to the Supreme Court What has been detailed here is' representative of N.E.2d 455, the Supreme Court held that the Ju­ rules which created the Attorney Registration and the manifold responsibilities and duties exercised by venile Court Act does not authorize the circuit Disciplinary Commission. The only changes in the the Illinois Supreme Court in 1973. Some of the oth­ General Recommendations Concerning court "to establish detailed procedures for the care rules of the Supreme Court during 1973 were related er business handled by the Court included hearing The Administration Of Justice and discipline of its wards while committed to an to the new commission. and adjudicating disciplinary proceedings against at­ In Illinois institution under the supervision of the Department Briefly mentioned supra was another responsibility torneys; admitting 1712 lawyers to the Illinois bar; of Corrections .... If the juvenile division of the of the Supreme Court: The power of the Court to fill appointing special committees to study particular le­ Defender Services court of each county in Illinois were to undertake judicial vacancies in absence of a law enacted by the gal problems and receiving reports thereon; main­ to prescribe specific procedures to be used in legislature. This grant of constilutional authority en­ taining close liaison with the executive committee of In recent years we have seen a steady expansion treating and disciplining its wards, the divergence ables the Court to select and appoint lawyers and the Illinois Judicial Conference and Conference of of the right to court-appointed counsel in criminal of thought among the several courts as to what judges of the highest caliber and qualifications to the Chief Circuit Judges; making appearances before the cases. In Argersinger v. Hamlin,3 the United States constitutes correct treatment and discipline of its circuit and appellate benches where vacancies exist State and local bar associations; appointing mem­ Supreme Court rejected distinctions between felony wards could make it impossible to operate an insti­ by reason of death or resignation; it allows the Court bers of the bar to the committee on character and fit­ and misdemeanor or petty offenses and held that no tution." to maintain the judicial system at full strength to hear ness which passes on the "moral character and person may be imprisoned as a result of a criminal People v. Norwood, 54 11l.2d 253, 296 N.E.2d the torrent of litigation being filed in the Illinois courts. general fitness to practice law" of applicants seeking prosecution in which he was not afforded the oppor­ 852, ruled that the statutes are not to be construed The Court has wisely and prudently exercised its admission to the bar; and appointing the administra­ tunity to be represented by counsel. as prohibiting access to the records of juvenile de­ appointment power by selecting the following attor­ tor of the attorney registration and disciplinary sys­ A study to determine the need for defender ser­ linquents when those records are sought in order neys and sitting judges to fill vacancies. tem as well as members of the State board of law vices in Illinois is presently being conducted by the il­ to impeach credibility of the juvenile as a witness David R. Babb - 17th Judicial Circuit examiners. linois Defender Project, pursuant to a grant from the by showing a possible motive for testifying falsely. Frank W. Barbaro - Cook County Circuit Court I1 The Illinois Supreme Court, and its individual jus­ Illinois Law Enforcement Commission. This study will People v. McCalvin, 55 11l.2d 161, 302 N.E.2d Robert C. Buckley - Cook County Circuit Court tices, has achieved national recognition for its schol­ L be completed in early 1974. It would be imprudent tD [c~ 342, upheld the then provision of the Juvenile Thomas M. Burke - 5th Judicial Circuit arly and well-reasoned opinions, and the Court's attempt to antiCipate the specific findings the final re­ Court Act that provided, except as otherwise pro­ William T. Caisley - 11 th Judicial Circuit faithful discharge of its duties, and in particular the port will contain. However, it can safely be stated !. vided, no boy under 17 years of age or girl under Henry H. Caldwell - 19th Judicial Circuit execution of its general and supervisory authority that trial level defender services in Illinois need to be 18 years of age at the time of the alleged offense Robert E. Cherry - Cook County CircLlit Court over the Illinois courts, has earned the respect and increased substantially. may be prosecuted under the criminal law. The Daniel P. Coman - Cook County Circuit Court admiration of the public, court administrators, lawyers The establishm£nt of the office of State Appellate f Court held that the statutory scheme did not vio­ Thomas R. Doran - 19th Judicial Circuit and judges throughout the United States. Defender4 in 1972 was a major step toward meeting late the equal protection clause since it was not Edward J. Egan - First District Appellate Court the need for representation of defendants on appeal discrimination based on sex alone. Thomas R. Flood - 13th Judicial Circuit in this State, but the trial level defense of indigent • Other cases. During the year, the Supreme Court Robert C. Gill - 17th Judicial Circuit 1973 Annual Report of the persons charged with crime does not meet the also rendered opinions relating to State employ­ William J. Gleason - 19th Judicial Circuit Supreme Court to the standards required by Argersinger, supra. At the ees, elections, declaratory judgments, habeas cor­ Albert E. Hallett - First District Appellate Court General Assembly present time, providing public defender services at pus, contempt, contracts, prohibition, many Moses W. Harrison, II - 3rd Judicial Circuit the trial level is the responsibility of the various coun­ Industrial Commission (workmen's compensation) Allen Hartman - Cook County Circuit Court [Chief Justice Robert C. Underwood on behalf of the ties.s A public defender office must be established in I. Supreme Court, submitted the following report on the orders, criminal matters, civil cases, and other liti­ Warren J. Hickey - Cook County Circuit Court counties of 35,000 or more inhabitants6 and may be activities of the Illinois court system during 1973 to gation which required review by the State's highest John J. Hoban - 20th Judicial Circuit established in counties of less than 35,000 inhabit­ the General Assembly.] court. William V. Hopf - 18th Judicial Circuit ants.7 Most of the 102 counties in Illinois do not have The Supreme Court's disposition of cases by full Glenn T. Johnson - First District Appellate Court Introduction public defender services. Of the 44 counties which opinion was less in 1973 than in the prece(ling year Alfred Y. Kirkland - 16th Judicial Circuit have public defender offices, extremely few have full­ for several reasons: The substantial increase in~he Everett E. Laughlin - 15th Judicial Circuit This report is submitted by the Supreme Court in time offices. number of petitions for leave to appeal required sig­ Richard F. LeFevour - Cook County Circuit Court accordance with section 17 of article VI of the Illinois It is anticipated that the Illinois Defender Project's nificant reflection on the part of the justices, not only F. Lawrence Lenz - 15th Judicial Circuit Constitution of 1970 which states: "The Supreme study will contain recommendations concerning the because of the numerical gain in petitions filed but Benjamin Mackoff - Cook County Circuit Court S. Court shall provide by rule for an annual judicial con­ various methods by which Illinois can meet its re~ also because most of the Court's dispositions by full Frederick P. Patton - 14th Judicial Circuit ference to consider the work of the courts and to sponsibility to provide defender services at the trial opinion airse from cases where the Court allows peti­ Alfred L. Pezman - 8th ,)~Idicial Circuit suggest improvements in the administration of justice level. The precise manner in which Illinois responds tion for leave to appeal, and therefore, the Court is Joseph Schneider - Cook County Circuit Court ana shall report thereon annually in writing to the to the constitutional requirements to provide counsel selective in allowing petitions in cases which present Glenn K. Seidenfeld - Second District Appellate General Assembly not later than January 31." to indigent defendants will, of course, initially be de- issues that need resolution by the Supreme Court; Court

31 30 cided by the General Assembly. However, the ade­ As a practical matter, it is important to the adminis­ Prior to 1965, only 67 downstate circuit judges and for a court reporter in every case. quacy of defender services, whatever the tration of justice that a judicial officer be reasonably 45 judges in Cook County had court reporters who Our Court has budgeted $10,000 for the coming organizational structure, will be determined ultimately available within a given geographical area on rela­ were paid by the State. There were 134 court report­ fiscal year to develop programs to recruit and train by the courts. Any system adopted should: (1) Pro­ tively short notice'. Requiring that each county be en­ ers serving various county, probate, city or municipal official court reporters. A recent survey conducted by vide for the services of a fUll-time public defender or­ titled to elect a resident circuit judge is one method courts who were paid by the political subdivision an independent consultant revealed that little or no ganization, possibly supplemented by pa.rticipation of (but certainly not the best method) of insuring the which. they served. In smaller counties, reporters effort is being made to recruit court reporter candi­ the private bar; (2) provide the indigent defendant availability of a judge in every geographical area. were paid on a per diem basis and some worked dates at the high school level. Where those efforts with assurance that his publicly appointed counsel The requirement that there be at least one judge for only a few days a month. are being made, the teachers and counselors are not has the same professional independence before the each county was mandated by the previous Judicial In 1965, all reporters formerly paid by a county or well-informed concerning reporting career prospects, courts as private counsel; and (3) provide investiga­ Article-the legislature had no alternative in the mat­ city, etc., were placed on the State payroll. However, and the recruiting messages are "blurred and distort­ tory, expert, and other supporting services necessary ter.12 However, in 1970 the Constitutional Convention, only those court reporters who could thereafter quali­ ed and not always realistic or honest." It appears, for an effective defense. at the request of a Judicial Conference committee, fy by passing an examination 17 conducted by the Ad­ therefore, that the business colleges are not reaching Restructuring Of the nlinois State Bar Association, the Chicago Bar ministrative Office of the Illinois Courts were retained most prospective reporter trainees and misinforming Association and many private groups amended the as State employees. those who are reached about the true nature of the Judicial Selection Districts constitution 13 to give the General Assembly the au­ Since the first court reporter proficiency tests were court reporting profession and its potential as a re­ The basic geographical unit of the Illinois trial thority to modify that requirement. administered in 1966, the Administrative Office has warding, th'Ough strenuous, career. Because we face courts is the judicial circuit. While judicial circuits are In its report, the Committee on the Judiciary of the offered a continuing series of proficiency tests in a serious nfaed for qualified reporters, the Court feels co-extensive with the boundaries of one or more Constitutional Convention said: Normal and Chicago, in which persons have attempt­ obliged to take positive steps to improve the methods contiguous counties,e the county itself is not the sig­ "Counties generally need not fear that they will ed to qualify either for appointment as official court by which reporter candidates are, recruited both for nificant unit. lose their circuit judge by such authorization to the reporters or for advancement 'to a higher official pay training and, subsequently, as candidates for ap­ Through the exercise of the chief judges' power to General Assembly. It is unthinkable that the As­ level. Unfortunately, relatively few candidates demon­ pointment to official reporting positions. assign judges within the circuit and the Supreme sembly will not be responsive to the public's need strate the ability to pass these tests, despite the fact for judicial service. The granted authority should Court's power to assign judges to serve where need­ that the tests are considered ohly moderately difficult Salaries ed,9 without concern for the area from which they and would be exercised only in those limited few by professional reporters. While the number of official were originally selected, the influence of county instances of small counties having an insufficient reporters in Cook County has been increased from When an Illinois lawyer becomes a judge, he does boundaries on the organization and operation of the volume of judicial business, and would be subject 54 in 1966 to 175 in 1973, the majority of judges in so despite the fact that he knows he will thereby suf­ circuit courts has been greatly diminished. to a continuing legislative review. Cook County still must rely on litigants to provide pri­ fer a financial loss. A competent practicing lawyer in Section 19 of article VI of our constitution provides "In these small counties which may not have its vate reporters to keep the verbatim record or, in Illinois can anticipate a substantially higher annual in­ that a State's Attorney may be elected to serve two resident circuit judge, the judicial business would some cases, must proceed to trial with no reporter come and substantially greater tax advantages than or more counties. The General Assembly has imple­ be handled by other circuit judges of the same ju­ present. do our judges. Our judges are subject to the most re­ mented that provision by setting up specific proce­ dicial circuit, as well, generally, by its associate cir­ In People v. Seals,le the Appellate Court for the strictive ethical and financial regulations 20 of any dures.lO In addition, the General Assembly has cuit judge."14 First District reversed a theft conviction and remand­ judges in the United States. An Illinois judge may not provided by law that counties may join together for We recommend that the General Assembly consid­ ed for a new trial because a "bystander's record" assume any active role in the management of any the purpose of hiring a public defender to serve two er consolidating two or more counties, which have failed to provide enough detail of what occurred to business, he may not serve as an officer or director or more contiguous counties within any circuit. 11 small populations, within anyone circuit into one enable the Appellate Court to properly review alleged of any for-profit corporation,2l and he may not accept These provisions offer express recognition of the fact "division of [tile] circuit for the purpose of selection errors at trial. Where a colorable need for a complete any compensation of any kind for any service per­ that some counties are simply not big enough or of circuit judges" and provide for the selection of one transcript is shown, the State bears the burden of formed by him, except that compensation which is busy enough to warrant the exclusive services of a judge to serve that geographical division. 15 By doing showing that something less will suffice. See Mayer provided by law for the performance of his judicial State's Attorney or a public defender. In the same so, the General Assembly could, as existing judge­ v. City of Chicago. 19 In the Seals case, supra, and in duties. The sole exception to these prohibitions is vein, the Court suggests to the General Assembly ships expire, allocate additional judgeships to the many similar cases, nothing less than a verbatim that a judge may accept reasonable compensation that not every county in Illinois is big enough or busy high popUlation, high volume counties throughout the transcript will suffice. for lecturing, teaching, writing or similar activities. 22 enough to warrant a resident circuit judge. State without effecting any real increase in the num­ Nevertheless, the critical shortage of qualified ap­ The clear consequence of these highly restrictive The provision that there be one circuit judge from ber of sitting judges, but reallocating them on a more plicants for the position of official court reporter has, prOVisions is that most judges must support their each county is a troublesome anachronism which, rational basis. thusfar, made it impossible for our Court to fill the family solely from the salary provided by statute,23 quite candidly, simply reflects political considerations Shortage Of pressing need exemplified by the Seals case, supra. and that salary has not even kept pace with the in­ at the time of the 1962 Judicial Article referendum. Because of the shortage of qualified reporters, the creased cost of living over the past few years. During For the smallest counties, one associate judge on a Qualified Court Reporters Supreme Court has been unable to fill as many posi­ this past year alone, the United States Department of part-time basis would usually be adequate to handle The Illinois Constitution is unique in providing that tions as needed. Labor advised tha.t the cost of living index has in­ the routine business of the court. There is little merit every court in this State is a court of record. 16 Our In order to meet the immediate needs raised by creased by 7.9 percent,24 and the economic predic­ to a requirement that a county having a population of system is hailed universally as a model of court or­ Mayer, supra, our Administrative Director is reviewing tors for the coming years indicate that this inflation less than 5,000 persons be required, or even permit­ ganization for it allows prompt access to a reviewing all possible methods of preserving testimony and will continue. ted, to elect a resident circuit judge to handle its court, no matter how humble the litigants or how preparing verbatim transcripts or other suitable rec­ Circuit judges of Illinois receive an annual State business. There is clearly not enough business to "insignificant" the issues. ords on appeal. But the Court will also need funds salary of $38,000. That salary is less, in every county 1" keep him busy in his own county; and assiglning him However, when we abolished justices of the peace with which to preserve a strong and well-trained above 80,000, than the salary of the State's Attorney out of his county to serve in other counties or other and police magistrates, we dramatically increased cadre of court reporters and to supplement our exist­ who practices before him and who may, in addition circuits is inconvenient for the judge being assigned our need for court reporters or alternative means for ing staffs in all parts of the State. Realistic appraisals to his salary, augment his income by outside activi­ and expensive for the people of the State of Illinois keeping a verbatim record of all trial court proceed·, of the operation of our courts has convinced our Ad­ ties other than practicing law. 25 A review of salaries who must pay the additional travel and Iivin£1 expen­ ings; for review in all cases is now on the record and ministrative Director that electronic recording will not, payable to other State employees shows that over ses while the judge is serving on assignment. not by trial de novo in "minor" cases. in the forseeable future, be an adequate substitute 350 employees of various code departments of the

32 33

, ">q~~-=~=~.~.==.~",,",,=-:::::;.::;:·===~==='--_--=-·iiiii"'"_··-·iiiii""iiii"-"· ______f' l' !

State may receive salaries which equal or, in many past several years; however, additional improve­ cases, exceed salaries paid to the judges of our cir­ ments can be made without substantial cost to the JUDICIAL SALARY STRUCTURE cuit courts. Judges must have a high level of training taxpayers. and experience to ascend the bench and to bear the House Bill 1137 (which was assigned to an Interim December 31, 1973 I heavy decision-making responsibility. Their salaries Study Calendar during the 1973 Session of the Gen­ should reflect a more adequate recognition of the eral Assembly) and Senate Bill 641 (which was as­ responsibilities they bear. [The chart following the signed to the Committee on Pensions and Chief Justice's report at page 35 illustrates the judi­ Personnel) would provide that after 20 years of con­ I cial salary structure as of December 31, 1973.] tributing to the retirement system, a judge couid elect r Since court personnel olher than the judges have to freeze his ultimate benefits and cease paying into F Supreme Court been the recipients of annual increases in compen­ the retirement fund. sation approximating the annual decline in purchas­ It has been recommended that the average salary f $42,500 ing power of the dollar, it is only fair that judges for the last two years of judicial service be consid­ i receive similar consideration. ered as the base upon which retirement benefits will ~------.------.--- It is imperative, in our judgment, to provide, as a be calculated rather than the last four years of ser­ I l minimum, a salary increase coupled with some auto­ vice. The present requirement has resulted in some matic method by which the salaries of judges can be judges, who probably should retire, continuing to I adjusted annually to reflect cost of living increases. serve beyond the time that they are able to perform i Many formulae could be proposed, but the General their duties in an efficient manner in order to secure Appellate Court Assembl~v may well wish to devise its own method of the retirement benefits of an increase in salary. ! calculating automatic increases so that judges will The present period of vesting should be reduced $40,000 not be paying 1975 expenses from salaries which from; 0 years to 8 years. Both the General Assembly have steadily eroded during .the past decade. Retirement System27 and the State Employees' Re­ We commend to the General Assembly's consider­ tirement System28 provide for vesting after 8 years of II. ation the report of the Governmental Salary Commis­ service. Many lawyers who enter the judiciary do so I sion regarding judicial salaries submitted last year; after they have established themselves as successful the reports of the Illinois State and Chicago Bar As­ practicing attorneys, and, of these, many are be­ I sociations on the same subject; and the fact that the tween the ages of 50 and 60 years when they be­ Circuit Court j judges of Illinois rank progressively lower each year come judges. Under the 1970 Constitution, associate in the comparative tables of compensation of state judges of the circuit court are appointed for four-year ! I court judges. terms,29 and reducing the period of vesting from 10 r The effect of this inadequate salary structure is years to 8 years would coincide with two completed COOK COUNTY & DOWNSTATE DUPAGE COUNTY ( rapidly becoming evident in the unwillingness of terms for associate judges. r competent lawyers to accept appointment to the \ bench and in the resignation of competent judges in I f order to return to law practice. Its inevitable result, if Clerks Of Court ! . continued, will be a steady deterioration in the quality t~ Circuit Judges Circuit Judges of the judiciary of Illinois. In September of 1973, our Court appointed a com­ i mittee30 to review existing laws and rules as they ap­ $37,500 $30,000 Pensions ply to clerks of court and to recommend changes which might be necessary to implement the. provi­ Associate Judges Associate Judges At present a judge who fully participates in the sions of the 1970 Constitution, and which might oth­ $28,000 $23,500 Judges Retirement System pays 11 % of his annual erwise improve the efficiency and effectiveness of income into the program.26 A downstate circuit judge the several clerks' offices. has $3,300 of his annual salary automatically taken The most obvious area of change, of course, is from his check and paid into the retirement system. that which makes the office of Supreme Court clerk We are informed that payment of federal income tax and clerk of the sl9veral Appellate Court Districts ap­ on that amount might be deferred at no substantial pointive rather than elective.31 detriment to the retirement system or cost to the That committee has filed its report with our Court. State, if the State were to pay that $3,300 directly in­ When the Court has had an opportunity to review the to the retirement fund. report in detail, we expect to forward appropriate rec­ The General Assembly has effected many im­ ommendations for statutory revisions to the Judicial provements in the judicial retirement system over the Advisory Council through our Administrative Director .

. ,

34 i 35 I 1 . j . ! I ' - wi Ii

Footnotes 17 IILRev.Stat. 1971, ch. 37, §657. • Executive Committee-The presiding judges shall 18 14 IIl.App.3d 413, 302 N.E.2d 701 (1973). cases of which 129 were more than two years old, 1 III. Rev. Stat. 1971, ch, 110A, §41. 19 constitute the executive committee of the Appellate and had 1462 cases pending; during 1970, the Ap­ 2 See the annual reports of the Administrative Office of the Illinois 404 U.S. 189, 92 S.Ct. 410, 30 L.Ed.2d 372 (1971). 20 III.Rev.Stat. 19'11, ch. 110A, §61 et seq. Court. pellate Court disposed of 1496 cases (1079 cases by Courts and of the illinois Judicial Conference for a detailed ex­ • First District Executive Committee-The First Dis­ planation of judicial education programs. 21 IILRev.Stat. 1971, ch, 110A, §63. full opinion) of which 351 were more than two years 3407 U.S. 25, 92 S.Ct. 2006, 32 L.Ed.2d 530 (1972). See Peo­ 22111.Rev.Stat. 1971, ch, 110A, §65. trict Executive Committee shall be composed of old, but 1856 appeals were filed, and 2261 cases pte v. Coleman, 52 11I.2d 470, 288 N.E.2d 396 (1972), and Peo­ 23 III.Rev.Stat., 1973 Supp., ch, 53, §§3, 3.1 and 3.2 provide that five members, one from each division, and shall judges of the Supreme Court shall receive $42,500 annually. were pending on December 31, 1970. In 1971, the pte v. Morrissey, 52 11I.2d 418, 288 N.E.2d 397 (1972) which have general administrative authority. Appellate Court disposed of 1944 cases (1410 cases implement Argersinger. judges of the Appellate Court $40,000, and circuit court judge~. $30,000. The latter in Cook and DuPage Counties receive an The heart of the Appellate Court is its jurisdiction; 4 I1I.Rev.Stat., 1972 Supp., ch, 38, §208-1 et seq. by full opinion) of which 370 cases were more than 5 III.Rev.Stat. 1971, ch, 34, §5601 et seq. additional $7,500 county supplement. Public Act 78-666. and the form, which has been described above, that two years old, received 2499 new cases, and had 6 III.Rev.Stat. 1971, ch, 34, §5601. amending ch. 53, §3.3, provides that associate judges shall re the Appellate Court takes is secondary to its power 2816 cases pending as of December 31, 1971. Dur­ ceive $23,500 annually; however, in Cook and DuPage Coun­ 7111. Rev.Stat. 1971, ch, 34, §5601.1. to ilear cases. Section 6 of Article VI of the 1970 ing 1972, the Court disposed of 2526 cases (1763 8 III.Const. 1970, art. VI, §7(a). ties associate judges receive an additional $4,500 county supplement. Constitution spells out the jurisdiction of the Appel­ cases by full opinion) of which 340 cases were more 9 III.Const. 1970, art, VI, §§7(c), 15(a), 16. 24 Preliminary estimate. The U.S. Departm&nt of Labor in its final late Court: every final judgment (and in some cases, 10 III.Rev.Stat., 1972 Supp., ch, 14, §21. than two years old, received 3020 new cases, and 11 II1.Rev.Stat. 1971, ch. 34, §5601.2. report demonstrated that the cost of living index increased by nonfinal judgments) of the circuit court is appealable had 3310 cases pending at the close of 1972. 12 III.Const. 1870, amend art. VI, nearly 9% dUring 1973. as a matter of right to the Appellate Court, except §a. 25111.Re·v.8tat., 1972 Supp., ch. 53, §§17, 22a. The year 1973 has produced statistics which seem 13 III.Const. 1970, art. VI, §7(b); III.Rev.Stat., 1972 Supp., ch, 37, those cases appealable directly to the Supreme to indicate that the Appellate Court Is. on its way to §72.41-1 et seq. 26I1LRev.Stat. 1971, ch. 108-1/2, §18-101 et seq. 27 III.Rev.Stat. 1971, ch. 108-1/2, §2-119. Court and except in criminal cases where the ac­ 14 Record of Proceedings, Sixth Illinois Constitutional Convention, dispOSing of cases in more timely fashion and reduc­ vol. VI, pages 990 and 991. 28 m.Rev.Stat. 1971, ch. 108-1/2, §14-148. cused has been acquitted after a trial on the merits. ing the number of cases pending. In 1973, tni;'. Ap­ 15111.Const. 1970, art. VI, §7(a). 29 Ili.Const. 1970, art. VI, §10. It is interesting to observe that Illinois is only one pellate Court disposed of 2958 cases (2037 by full 16111.Const. 1970, art. VI, §9. 30 Supreme Court order M.R. 1541. of a few states that provides for appeal as a matter 31 III.Const. 1970, art. VI, §18. opinion) of which 277 cases were more than two of constitutional right in the intermediate court of re­ years old, received 3044 new cases, and had 3396 view. Furthermore, the Constit.ution in Article VI, Sec­ cases pending as of December 31, 1973. Comparing tion 16 directs that the Supreme Court implement the the pertinent statistics for 1971 and 1973 reveals the right of appeal by promulgating rules "for expeditious progress being made in the Appellate Court's dispo­ and inexpensive appeals" to the Supreme and Ap­ sition of cases: The judges of the Appellate Court pellate Courts. Thus, it may be fairly stated that an disposed of 52.2% more cases in 1973 than in 1971, aggrieved litigant, who disagrees with the decision of with a 44.5% increase in the number of cases dis­ the circuit court, can appeal the judgment to the Ap­ posed of by full opinion; yet, there was an increase pellate Court. This right of appeal applies equally to of 21.8% in cases filed in 1973 as compared to the defendant who is adjudged guilty of violating a 1971, and there was 20.6% more cases pending at Tht~ Appellate Court The Constitution (there are only a handful of states traffic ordinance, as well as to the plaintiff who has which constitutionally provide for an intermediate ap­ the end of 1973 than in 1971. Every year since 1964, lost a $1,000,000 personal injury lawsuit. In addition, the Appellate Court as a whole has lost ground in The Illinois Appellate Court is the intermediate pellate court) provides that the Appellate Court and a litigant has a right to appeal from a decision of the court of review of this State. Its foundation and or­ its judges (a) be elected for ten-year terms; (b) be currency, i.e., more cases pending on January 1 than Appellate Court to the Supreme Court if the Appel­ on December 31 of each year; however, the increase ganization are set forth in Section 5 of the Judicial elected from the same five judicial Districts as the late Court issues a certificate of importance or a Article which provides that judges of the Appellate justices of the Supreme Court; (c) each district have in the 1973 inventory was only 86 cases over the in­ question arises under the Federal or State Constitu­ ventory at the end of 1972. Court are to be elected from the five Judicial Districts at least three judges; (d) a concurrence of a majority tions for the first time as a result of the action of the in such numbers as determined by the legislature, is necessary for a decision; and (e) mandates the Appellate Court. The Appellate Court judges are disposing of more and ,more cases each year. For example, one judge except that each division within the Appellate Court Supreme Court to exercise its rule-making authority Generally, Article III and Article VI of the Supreme authored 83 full opinions (including two specially districts must have at least three judges. Presently, to structure the divisions of the Appellate Court. Court rules govern the mechanics of appellate proce­ concurring and six dissents) in 1973. However, the there are thirty-four elected judgeships in the Appel­ Pursuant to Section 5 of Article VI, the Supreme dure in civil and criminal cases. Of particular note, is caseload continues to grow in striking proportions. In late Court: The First District (Cook County) has five Court has adopted Rule 22, which establishes the or­ Rule 335 which controls direct appeals from adminis­ addition to the trend of increased filings, 21 cases divisions consisting of 18 judges, and the Second ganization of the Appellate Court. The rule makes trative actions to the Appellate Court. Section 6 of were transferred to the Appellate Court from the s~­ through the Fifth Districts each has one division of the following provisions. Article VI of the Constitution states that the "Appel­ four judges; however, the additional judgeship in • Divisions-The Appellate Court shall sit in divi­ preme Court, and many cases which would have late Court shall have such powers of diJect review of been heard in the Supreme Court prior to July 1, each of the four downstate districts created by stat­ sions of three judges. The First District shall have administrative action as provided by law." Effective ute (PA 78-558, effective October 1, 1973) is pres­ five divisions and shall sit in Chicago; the Second 1971, are now filed in the Appellate Court because July 1, 1970, the legis!ature enacted into law the En­ the 1970 Constitution has lessened the Supreme ently vacant. through the Fifth Districts shall each have one divi­ vironmental Protection Act which provides that orders Prior to the adoption of the 1964 Judicial Article sion, and shall respectively sit in Elgin, Ottawa, Court's mandatory appellate jurisdiction. As men­ of the Pollution Control Board are directly appealable tioned supra, the Appellate Court is also required to and the 1970 Constitution, the creation of an Appel­ Springfield and Mount Vernon. The Appellate to the Appellate Court. In its essence, Rule 335 is late Court was authorized by the 1870 Constitution; Court in each district shall be in session through­ directly review. orders of the Pollution Control Board. not dissimilar to the procedures for reviewing admin­ To attain a more reasonable degree of currency in however, its establishment was left to the legislature. out the year, and each division shall sit periodically istrative actions in the circuit court. By law, the legislature provided that the Supreme as its judicial business requires. the Appellate Court, appropriate and innovative mea­ The independent observer will discern that the sures have been and will continue to be employed. Court appoint sitting circuit judges, and in the case of • Assignments-The Supreme Court shall assign broad jurisdictional base of the Appellate Court is Cook County, Superior Court judges, to man the four judges to the various divisions. But still the volume of business in the Appellate probable cause to project that it has a massive c,ase­ Court presents new challenges to the principle that appellate court districts and that the appointees could • Decisions-Three judges must participate in the load (see chart at page 38). On December 31, decision of every case, and the concurrence of justice delayed is justice denied. Using the years not receive compensation beyond their circuit judges' 1964, a full year after the 1964 Judicial Article was salaries. After 1964, the constitutional structure of the two shall be necessary to a decision. 1965 and 1973 as examples, the Appellate Court effective, the Appellate Court had 859 cases pend­ judges disposed of 228.7% more cases in 1973 than Appellate Court was substantially altered, and its ori­ • Presiding Judge-The judges of each division ing, and only 2 cases which were disposed of were gin and establishment were conferred with constitu­ shall select one of their number to serve for one in 1965; however, there were 127.5% more appeals more than two years old; three years later, 1967, the filed in 1973 than in 1965, and tbe percentage of tional dignity. year as presiding judge. Court received 1402 new filings, disposed of 1310 36 cases pending at the end of 1973 was 161.6% great- 37 r

er than in 1965. Cognizant of the ne€l{j to achieve r. trative review, etc.; the nature of the case, e.g., currency in the Appellate Court, action has been and I'.' w;1I be taken by the Appellate Court it$e'f, by the Su­ personal injury or contract suit; and such other pleme Court and by the legislature. SClme notewor­ matters as in the Judgment of the court are neces­ thy measures employed thus far are l:s follows: sary for an understanding of the case; and shall (1) Increase the number of ApPellate Court thereupon, with a minimum of discussion, affirm, judgeship!;). The 77th Geneml Assembly indicating that the affirmance is in compliance with o f~uthorized this rUle." g- the selection of three additional jUdgeships in the (1) First District. This brings the total number of elect­ (3) Assign judges to the Appellate Court. PUr!1U­ ed judgeships up to 18 in that district. Because no ant to Section 16 of Article VI, the Supreme Court contested judicial elections have been held since "may assign a judge temporarily to any court." November 1970 (the next judicial election will be During 1973, thirty-eight circuit judges (not neces­ November 1974), the new judgeships have not sarily all different judges) were temporarily as­ been filitiu by election; however, the Supreme signed to the Appellate Court and/or Appellate o judges (not necessarily all different judges) to Ap­ l­ 0_ Court, pursuant to Article VI, Section 12(b) of the CC to pellate Court districts other than districts where C\l Constitution, has filled the positions by appoint­ o::> ment. they are permanently serving. Additionally, nine u The 78th General Assembly authorized the se­ circuit judges were relieved of their circuit court du­ UJ lection of one additional judge~hip for each of the ties and fully assigned to the Appellate Court: ~ • four downstate districts. PA 78-558 creates the First District-Edward J. Egan (until ..J February 15, 1973) ..J four positions which will be filled at the November UJ 1974 general election. . Robert J. Downing 0- o 0- g- (2) Curtail the number of full opinions where ap­ James J. Mejda

39 Court rules governing appeals. In summary, the re­ The mammoth caseload of the Appellate Court judges of their respective circuits. Supreme Court port recommended: (a) The creation of a central continues to increase; however, the flexibility permit­ Rule 39 ~s~ablishes the procedures for nominating the Ci.rcuit ~ourt of Cook County has employed research department composed of attorneys ted by the Constitution should ameliorate the press­ and appointing lawyers who have applied for the po­ many Innovative .ideas to prevent his court from be­ whose duties would include preparing a prehearing ing caseload of the Appellate Court. Retired judges s!tio~ ~f associate judge .. It should be noted here that coming ~Iogged In the morass of litigation. With the of the Supreme Court and its Adminis­ report for each case appealed to the Appellate and sitting judges on the circuit court level will con­ ?'r?UI~ J~dges and a~so~late judges possess the full co~perat~on Court, preparing and publishing a weekly cumula­ tinue to be assigned to the Appellate Court, and the Jurrsdlctlon ~f the CirCUit court. Circuit judges are trative Dlrec~or, ~hief Judge John S. Boyle has re­ tive digest of opinions for each case decided in the Supreme and Appellate Courts will seek new means elect?d for six-year terms, and associate judges are s~rv,ed the .tlde. I,n. the delay of disposition of cases Within certain diVISions of the circuit court (see graph Supreme or Appellate Courts, and publishing a di­ to alleviate caseload problems. appol~te~ f?r four-year terms (Article VI, Section 10). at page 42). gest of issues for each 'issue presented to the The CirCUit Judges pursuant to Section 7 of Article VI courts of review but not yet decided; (b) The ap­ The Circuit Courts ~elect .by se?ret ballot. from their own number a chief This a~cor:nplishment in significant part is due to pOintment of a director of research who would be a The main nerve center of the Illinois court system !ud~e In their respective circuits. Subject to the au­ the. cons.tlt,utlonal authority of the Supreme Court to lawyer and responsible for the supervision and ad­ is the circuit court which, is the court of first impres­ Ihorrty of th~ .Supr~me Court, the chief judge has ~sslgn sitting and retired judges from other circuits ministration of the research department; and (c) sion, the trial court, for virtually all litigation. There general ad~lnrstratlve authority over his court. I~t~ those circuits which are in need of additional ju­ The creation of the position of chief judge of the are only three broad areas where the circuit court ~eowaphlcally, there are 21 judicial circuits in Illi­ diCial manpowe~,. Acti~g on behalf of the Supreme Appellate Court who would serve as the adminis­ cannot or may not exercise its jurisdiction: (1) The nOIs v:'hlc~ are c.omposed of one or more counties. C?ourt,. th~ Administrative Director assigned 104 sit­ trative coordinator of ~he Appellate Court. Supreme Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction One CI~cult. contains over 5,000,000 people while an­ tl~g clrc~lt and associate judges (not necessarily all I', The Supreme Court took the report of the Com­ in cas'!s involving legislative redistricting and the other Clr?~lt ha~ le~s than 150,000 people. The Sec­ d!ffer.ent Judges) and 1 retired circuit judge from other mittee under advisement in 1972, and this year the ability of the Governor to serve in office; (2) the Su­ ond Judl?lal CirCUit contains twelve counties, 4796 clrc~ts to the Cir~uit Court of Cook County for a total Court returned the report to the Committee with preme Court has discretionary original jurisqiction to sq~are mlle~ a~d 196,404 people in southern Illinois, of 1.;;52 days durrng 1973, Additionally, the Director the recommendation that the Committee re-evalu­ hear cases relating to revenue, mandamus, prohibi­ ~hll~ t.he CircUit Court of Cook County, for example, aSSigned. 50 sitti~g circuit and associate judges (not ate and rear:"Ilyze the problems in the Appellate tion and habeas corpus; and (3) by statute, the Ap­ ~s wlthrn one county. and has nearly 5,500,000 people necessarrl~ all. different judges) and 6 retired circuit Court and submit revised recommendations. pellate Court directly reviews orders ;of the Pollution and associate Judges to the other 20 circuits for a to­ In a 954 squar~-mlle area. The diversity of Illinois' tal of 776 days. In 1972, the Supreme Court approved the crea­ Control Board. The grant of jurisdiction .to the circuit g~.ography a~d ~t~ people are reflected in the compo­ tion of an experimental research staff in the First court by Section 9 of Article VI of the Constitution - ~Itlon of the Judicial circuits; e.g., urban versus rural The Illinois unified trial court system has proven it­ Appellate Court District. The experiment is funded "Circuit Courts shall !lave original jurisdiction of all Industrr versus agriculture, densely versus spCiisely self to b~ the most effi~ient and modern court system by the Illinois Law Enforcement Commission, and justiciable matters ... " - is a simple concept which, Popul~.ed areas, ~tc. These differences are also mir­ yet deVised by mankind. The circuit courts have the National Center for State Courts is assisting in however, initially startles those who reside in multi­ r?re~ rn the quantity and types of litigation filed in the demon~trated the ability and potential, as the need the implementation of the project. The purpose of trial court jurisdictions in sister states. Once the con­ circuit courts. ~ay arrse, to effectively and justly dispose of a mas­ the project is to expedite the consideration and cept of a single trial court with unlimited jurisdiction is .It staggers the imagination when one is confronted ~I~e number of cases within a reasonable time after disposition of cases appealed to the First District developed, it is understandably accepted as a model WI~h the fa.ct that ?ver 3,000,000 cases were filed or filing, ~h~ volume of cases which are filed or rein­ I~ppellate Court by screening routine cases and to emulate. reinstated In the Circuit 'courts in 1973. That is a ratio sta~ed IS Immense; e,g., 2,250,233 cases were filed i.;omposing memoranda which are suitable to assist Illinois, which pioneered the unified trial court (and ?f m.or~ than one case filed for every three persons durrng 19.64, but 3,066,160 cases were filed during 'the Appellate Court judges in arriving at per curiam while other states have tried, they have not succeed­ In illinOIS. Yet, because of the elastiCity and flexibility 1973, an Incr~as.e of ~e~rly 5% over 1972 (see chart I~pinions. The project has been in full operation for ed in providing for such a court), had a galaxy of trial of the ?our.t system, 2,895,348 cases were terminat­ at page 43), It IS anticipated that the circuit courts more than a year, and the statistical data con­ COUitS prior to '1964. There were hundreds and ed, which IS n:ore than 4,874 cases disposed of by ~an ~nd. will ~eet ~he challenge and continue to de­ tained elsewhere in this report seems to indicate hundreds of courts with limited, special, parallel and liver ,lus.tlce With fairness and dispatch to the citizens each of the ~(ate's 594 judges. While the sale pur­ of illinOIS. ' that the experiment is, in part, responsible for the oVElrlapping jurisdictions. For example, Cook County pose ?~ creatrng the unified trial court system was to increased number of dispositions in the First Dis­ hael 208 courts in 1962: Circuit court, Superior court, expedltlous.ly and justly protect the liberties and guar­ A typical example of how the circuit courts seek to trict. It is anticipated that the Supreme Court will Family court, Criminal court, Probate court, County a.ntee the. rrghts of Illinois citizens, an ancillary finan­ serve the peopl? is illustrated by General Order seek State funding of the project from the General court, Chicago Municipal court, 23 city, village, town Cial benefl.t h~s accrued to the taxpayers by virtue of 72-8(M), en.te.red rn 1972 by Judge Eugene L. Wach­ Assembly in its judicial appropriation bills. In addi­ and municipal courts, 75 justice of the peace courts, the o~gamza~l?n ?f the circuit court and its efficient OW~kl, preSiding judge of the First Municipal District tinn, some of the other Appellate Court districts are and 103 police magistrate courts. The Judicial Article handling of litigation. It is estimated that the circuit (~h.lcago) of .the Circuit Court of Cook County. (A investigating the feasibility of developing similar re­ of 1964, which was continued nearly in toto in the courts of Illinois have generated in recent years slr:'lilar order IS in effect in the 17th Judicial Circuit, search projects. 19'70 Constitution, completely and totally abolishEld about $50,000,000 per year in fines, costs and other Winnebago County.) A study of small claims indicat­ Still another approach to expediting cases in the all of the State's trial courts of first impreSSion and in court related revenue. ~d .that many individuals often cannot economically Justify the employment of a lawyer to prosecute a Appellate Court which is bein(~ examined by indi­ their stead created the circuit court which is the onlv .. ,Th.e volu,me, of litigation varies substantially from vidual members of that Court is the application of trial court in Illinois. Virtually. all causes of action are CIlCUlt ~o circuit ~ue in part to the concentration of small claim. Accordingly, Judge Wachowski entered modern technology to assist the judges. Begin filed, litigated, and adjudicated in the circuit court, population,. State Institutions and in~7ustry, For exam­ the ~eneral Order to establish a pro se small claims probed are the possible uses of audio-visual and an appeal from a judgment of the circuit court is ~~, the Elght~ Judicial Circuit recorded less than section of the ?ou~t to provide substantial justice be­ equipment, computer capabilities, and other auto­ filed in the Supreme Court or, as in most instances, c-·ooo newly filed cases during 1973, but the Circuit tw~en the parties In a forum where litigants can ob­ mated and semi-automated systems. in the Appellate Court. A judge of the circuit court of Cook County received over 2,000,000 new t a ~ n .a ~ rom pta n din e x pen s i ve h ear i n g and f~ourt adjudication of their claim. In conclusion, it can be obsElrved that the Illinois has no power to review the decision of another cir­ ~"ngs, Because Cook, County has approximately Appellate Court is a constitutionally based intermedi­ cuit court judge. CIne-half of the State's population, numerous high­ Th~ lllin~is cir?uit courts are also investigating and ate court of review which possesses expansive pow­ The circuit courts are comprised of 594 judges ~a~s and streets, and is one of the world's leading e.xperrmentln~ With novel, modern technology to pro­ er of review from judgments of the circuit court and who are designated as circuit judges and associate husrness centers, the Circuit Court of Cook County v~de the ~ublic, lawyers and litigants with more effi­ from orders of the Pollution Control Board. The con­ judges. The former are initially elected either on a as a greater volume of cases than any other single cient services. In the Tenth Judicial Circuit (Peoria stitutional right to appeal and Ithe jurisdiction of the circuit-wide basis or from the county where they re­ ~~urt syster:n i.n. the ?ountry, and it has the largest County) and in the Circuit Court of Cook County Appellate Court to hear most appeals enhanGes the side; in the case of the Circuit Court of Cook County, mber of !u.dlcl~1 officers working under one head. courtr~oms where traffic Violation cases are heard importance of the Appellate Court and makes it the circuit judges are elected in the entire county, in the Not s~rprr~lng IS the difficulty of maintaining and in ~re uSing the cathode ray tube (CRT) to retrieve driv­ final arbiter in the vast majority of cases which it city of Chicago, or outside of Chicago. The associate s?m~ sl~uatlon.s, achieving currency in high volu~e Ing records from the Springfield office of the Secre­ decides. . judges are appointed on a merit basis by the circuit CirCUits, In particular Cook County. The chief judge of tary of State. YVhere a traffic offender is adjudged gUilty of a traffiC offense, the judge, prior to imposi- 40 41

----- ==-'=~'-"",,""----.-... ------.------...~,;:,:"~_,~";;:'~ __ ,,,,-~:.-,.,...~. "..-... , __ :...-:.-"'"__ ~'rH __ "':"_~ --.. -~.,,--~.-"--,"---~-.- ".".,-,-,,~------

(T) '

o 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,250,000

1964*

1965

1966

1967

1968

1969

1970

1971

1972

1973

*Number of terminations unavailable

i=:----:=::__ ~ "--. ~------JE----Jr---(3 --- --~---~-) =- =- <:) Q) ro is.. co ::::l :s co ro :::l :::l :::l Q) o ~ --:> --:> r~ ~ a (f) z ~)(~ I.l.. ~ « \ .!-., I.l.. :2 « ~ --:> --:> <: o AVERAGE DELAY IN MONTHS

70

60

50

40

30 GRAPH PLOTTING AVERAGE ELAPSED TIME BETWEEN DATE OF FILING AND DATE OF VERDICT

IN THE C\I LAW DIVISION (LAW JURY TRIAL SECTION), CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY V J BETWEEN JANUARY, 1972 and DECEMBER, 1973 C'

20 I;

'. t· t\ I' I !

tion of the sentence, can input the offender's driver's concerned, as the foregoing in a small part illus­ In reversing the circuit court, the U.S. Supreme Court plaint with the Courts Commission." The Board is license number and in a matter of seconds, the mon­ trates, not only with performing their official duties admonished " ... recognition of the need for a proper composed of nine members, seven of whom are ap­ itor in the courtroom will display the offender's previ­ but also with providing the court system with auto­ balance in the concurrent operation of federal and pOinted by the Governor, and two circuit judges ap­ ous record of traffic offenses of which he was mated devices where appropriate to assist the judges state courts counsels restraint against the issuance pointed by the Supreme Court. The Court has convicted. in the efficient and just management of the judicial of injunctions against state officers engaged in the appointed Judge Walter P. Dahl of Cook County and Several circuit courts are utilizing electronic data process. Yet, mechanization of the court is but one administration of the State's criminal laws .... A fed­ Judge John T. Reardon of Quincy to the Board. processing equipment to track the flow of cases factor in the dispensing of justice. In the doing of jus­ eral court should not intervene to establish the basis The Judicial Inquiry Board reports it had received through the court system. The degree of sophistica­ tice, to paraphrase a justice of the Illinois . Supreme for future intervention that would be so intrusive and 150 complaints about judges during the period July tion for which data processing is used ranges from Court, the judge has no mean duties, and, In a prop­ unworkable. . . . [The court of appeals] miscon­ 1971 through June 1973, and of that number, 124 providing case history in felony cases, daily disposi­ er sense, no case in which a judge presides is of ueived the underlying basis for withholding federal files were closed because "the Board determined tion reports, indices, etc. in the Circuit Court of Cook greater importance thafl another. equitable relief wher; the normal course of criminal that a reasonable basis did not exist to conduct fur~ County to pending indictments in the Thirteenth Judi­ proceedings in the state courts would otherwise be ther investigations or to file a complaint with the cial Circuit (LaSalle County). Other circuit courts em­ Judicial Elections disrupted. " Courts Commission." The Board has found, just as ploying data processing are: Seventh Judicial Circuit During 1973 there were not any elections to fill ju­ In Johnson v. Scott (E.D. III. 1973, No. 71-47), the fOimer courts commission did, that the vast ma­ (Sangamon County); Tenth Judicial Circuit (Peoria dicial vacancies since judicial elections are not held plaintiff-downstate judges attacked the provision in jority of complaints are filed by "persons who have <":'ounty); Twelfth Judicial Circuit (Will County); Six­ in odd numbered years. Section 12 (a), Article VI of the Illinois Constitution which authorized the General had a disappointing experience in the courts or have teenth Judicial Circuit (Kane County); Seventeenth the Constitution provides that "Supreme, Appellate Assembly to allow counties to supplement judges' lost a case." Judicial Circuit (Winnebago County); Eighteenth Judi­ and circuit judges shall be nominated at primary salaries. The General Assembly authorized a county During 1973, six formal complaints were filed by cial Circuit (DuPage County); Nineteenth Judicial Cir­ elections or by petition. Judges shall be elected at supplement, in addition to the salary paid by the the Board with the Courts Commission, and another cuit (Lake County); and the Twentieth Judicial Circuit general or judicial elections as the General Assembly State, for judges in certain counties, and the plaintiffs complaint filed in 1972 was carried over into 1973. (St. Clair County). The Third and Ninth Judicial Cir­ shall provide by law." alleged that the county paid supplement violated the These first cases are significant to the Board and cuits (Madison and Knox counties, respectively) have The General Assembly passed legislation in 1971 equal protection clause. The three judge federal the Commission in that precedents will be created started preliminary planning to acquire data process­ making the primary election law applicable to judicial court held that "[there] is nothing invidious about and procedures established. Of course, these early ing services. elections; however, the Governor vetoed the bill. The permitting local governmental units to experiment cases will be the first matters to come before the Some other developments where scientific technol­ legislature overrode the veto in January of 1972, but with different levels of compensation for their person­ Commission strictly in its new adjudicatory posture. ogy is being applied to the court system include: since the time had already passed for filing in the nel. . . . We do not believe the equal protection The Commission, upon a finding against a respon­ (1) Electronically supported (inciliding video­ March 1972 primary, judicial candidates were fore­ clause authorizes us to impose a requirement of ter­ dent judge and after a public hearing, may discipline recording) model courtrooms in the McDonough closed from seeking election. Thus, there will not be ritorial uniformity with respect to the compensation of the judge by removal from office, suspension with or County courthouse (9th Circuit) and in the criminal contested judicial elections in Illinois until 1974. Illinois judges." without pay, retirement, censure or reprimand. court building in Chicago (criminal division of the The Illinois Constitution provides that a Supreme, The 1973 activities of the Illinois Courts Commis­ Cook County Circuit Court); Appellate and circuit judge who has been elected to The Courts Commission sion were: (2) Experimentation with "picture phone" in Cook that office may upon expiration of his term of office (1) Complaint 72-CC-1 alleged that a certain County in which defendants charged with criminal file a declaration of candidacy to succeed himself. A Prior to the effective date of the 1970 Constitution, judge in the Eighth Judicial Circuit, Calhoun Coun­ offenses in outlying police district stations are tele­ judge who so files "runs on his record" and without the sole method of redressing grievances against ty, violated the Judicial Article of the Constitution vised to the courtroom where judges set bond. The opposition. A 60% affirmative vote of the electors judges was to file a complaint with the courts com­ and the Supreme .Court rules on standards of judi­ defendant makes his appearance for the bond set­ voting on the question is required for the judge to re­ mission. The commission would investigate, prose­ cial conduct in that he did not devote full-time to ting via "picturephone" telecast without leaving the tain his office. In November of 1974, it is anticipated cute and adjudicate to determine whether a judge his judicial duties, that he engaged in the practice police station; that about forty judges will seek to be retained. should be diSCiplined. The courts commission as es­ of law, that the judge failed to recuse himself in (3) Issuing of warrants by computer to offenders tablished under the 1964 Judicial Article subsisted for cases where one of the attorneys of record was who have failed to pay parking violation fines. Federal Court Decisions 7-1/2 years, January 1,1964 to July 1, 1971; and the judge's business partner, that he operated a Tracking of the delinquent parking violator has re­ Affecting Illinois Judges during that time, the commission received 922 com­ land title company in the county, and that he filed sulted in the collection of hundreds of thousands of plaints about the conduct or disability of judicial offi­ a false statement of economic interest with the dollars in fines in Cook County; Two important federal cases with issues involving cers. Many of the complaints were from prisoners Secretary of State. (4) Employment of trial court administrators. federal court interference with the State judicial pro­ and disgruntled litigants; however, each complaint On August 1, 1973, the Commission entered an The Third and Nineteenth Judicial Circuits are in cess and attacking the county salary supplement to was thoroughly investigated. Those complaints hav­ order which found that most of the allegations consultation with the Administrative Office concern­ some Illinois judges were decided during 1973. ing merit were brought to the attention of the com­ were "sustained by clear and convincing evi­ ing the use of full-time circuit court administrators In O'Shea v. Littleton, 94 S. Ct. 669, and its com­ mission by its secretary. The confidentiality dence," and ordered the respondent judge "sus­ to assist the chief judge with his administrative du­ panion case, Spomer v. Littleton, 94 S. Ct. 685, the r\':quirement before the formal filing of the complaint pended without pay for a period of one year." The ties. Several other circuit courts have also ex­ U.S. Supreme Court held that federal courts should With the commission was an effective fulcrum to in­ judge subsequently resigned. pressed interest in securing the services of a trial not anticipatorily intervene in state court judicial pro­ .Juce judges, who were found to be physically or (2) Complaint 7'3-CC-1 charged that a Cook court administrator. ceedings. Illinois Judges O'Shea and Spomer wem r'ontally disabled or guilty of serious judicial impro­ County associate judge had brought the judicial of­ The judges of the circuit courts and the judges of alleged to have racially discriminated against minoriti :,.Iety, to retire or resign from the bench. The courts fice into disrepute by abusive conduct toward two the Appellate Court are also bringing the courtroom groups in granting bail and sentencing in criminal '·~·rnmission was an effective but unobserved body citizens. The respondent judge was alleged to experience to the future lawyers of .Illinois. For exam­ cases. The federal district court dismissed the com­ l:;,lt truly served the best interests of the public and have threatened the citizens by displaying a hand­ ple, the University of Illinois College of Law sponsors plaint but was reversed by the federal circuit court of I"S judges. gun contrary to law and using profane language a trial advoc,'ilcy program wherein Illinois jurists act appeals (468 F. 2d 389 (7th Cir.)) which held that the Now, Section 15 of Article VI of the 1970 Constitu­ during an altercation which happened not in the as trial judges in the mock-trial setting. Once a year, Illinois state judges in their official capacities were tion provides that the Judicial Inquiry Board "shall be course of the respondent's duties. the criminc~J division of the Circuit Court of Cook not immune from injunction and that the federal dis- ! cunvened permanently, with authority to conduct in­ The Commission ruled on June 29, 1973 that County conducts the trial of a felony case at North­ trict court had the power to fashion an appropriate "I vestigations, receive or initiate complaints concerning the allegations were "sustained by clear and con­ western University School of Law. remedy to require Illinois judges to administer bail ,~ a .Judge or Associate Judge, and file complaints with vincing evidence," and ordered the respondent The judges: of the Illinois circuit courts are vitally and impose sentences without racial discrimination. i the Courts Commission ... All proceedings of the judge "su~:;pended without pay for a period of four Board shall be confidential except the filing of a com- months." 44 ,I 45 u .,_, ~____ o,_.~_=~~_a~~=_=."=~.====ea_~_~~,~ "~M======~ ______""""""""" ______------(3) Complaint 73-CC-2 st.ated that a Cook stitutional obligation to maintain the confidentiality (c) Executive Committee. The Supreme Court long been an innovative leader in continuing judicial County circuit judge was "physically or rnentally of all complaints until such time as a formal shall appoint an executive committee to assist it in education. Many years before judicial education was unable to perform his duties as a judge" and par­ charge, if warranted, is filed against a judge. A conducting the Judicial Conference. fashionable, the Illinois Judicial Conference and its ticular facts were all.eged to evidence his inability. working knowledge of the judicial p~ocess will be (1) The committee shall consist of six judges predecessor conference were bringing judges togeth­ Before a Commission hearing could be held, the imperative for the Board members If they are to from Cook County, the First Judicial Dis­ er from every corner of the State to discuss and de­ judge resigned, and the Commission dismissed the distinguish between imprope.r jud~cial ~on.d~ct as trict, and six judges from the other judicial velop recent case law and legislation which affected complaint on April 10, 1973. opposed to mere dissatlsfactlo~ with a ludlc.lal .r~l­ districts outside Cook County. A designat­ the courts. (4) Complaint 73-CC-3 alleged that a Cook ing or opinion. While a potential threat to judlcl~1 ed Justice of the Supreme Court shall be While in recent years, the executive committee has County circuit judge accepted favors, arranged by independence has been created, I trust that w.11I an ex officio member of the committee. emphasized judicial education, there has been much an attorney, who frequently litigated cas.es before never become a reality. That independence can, In Members shall be appointed for a term of discussion and contemplation by the members of that three years. the judge in a legal representative capacity as well fact, be enhanced if the Board performs its d~ties committee regarding the Conference's obligation "to as a party litigant, from a merchant who w~s or in a responsible, impartial and nonsensatlonal (2) Each year the Supreme Court shall desig­ suggest improvements in the administration of jus­ had been a party in litigation heard by the judge manner." nate one of the members of the committee tice." In early 1973, the executive committee appoint­ and who was or had been represented by said Under the Constitution, the Supreme Court ap'" to act as chairman. ed a subcommittee to re-evaluate the duties and attorney. points one of its justices as chairman of the Commis~ (3) The committee shall meet at such time fUnction of the Conference. The subcommittee con­ On December 18, 1973, the Commission held sion and two circuit court judges, and the Appellate and such place as may be necessary, or sisted of Judge Daniel J. McNamara, chairman; that the allegations were "sustained by clear and Court selects two of its judges as commissioners. at the call of the Supreme Court. Judges Harold R. Clark and Mel R. ,)iganti as mem­ convincing evidence" and ordered the respondent The present commissioners are Justice Walter V. (4) The committee shall recommend to the bers; and Administrative Director Roy O. Gulley, ex "suspended without pay for a period of two· Schaefer, chairman, Judge Edward C. Eberspacher Supreme Court the appointment of such officio. After months of indepth study of the internal months." and Judge John J. Stamos (both from the Appellate other committees as are necessary to fur­ operation of the Judicial Conference and of judicial (5) Complaint 73-CC-4 charged a Cook County Court), Judge Robert J. Dunne and Judge Seely P. ther the objectives of the conference. conferences in other states, the subcommittee pre­ circuit judge with violating the Supreme Court rules Forbes (both from the circuit court.). R~y ~. Gulley, (5) At least 60 days prior to the date on which sented a comprehensive report to the executive com­ on standards of judicial conduct by finding defen­ the Administrative Director, is the Commission secre­ the Judicial Conferen'ce is to be held the mittee. That committee approved the report and dants in three cases "guilty . . . before [he] had tary. committee shall submit to the Supreme transmitted it to the Supreme Court for its consider­ heard the evidence in full and given the defen­ What the future holds for the judges of Illinois re­ Court a suggested agenda for the annual ation. In late 1973, the Supreme Court endorsed the dants an opportunity to argue their cause by coun­ lating to the regulation of the judiciary is difficult to meeting. recommendations contained in the report sel." perceive. The overwhelming majority of judicial offi­ (d) Meetings of Conference. The conference The report urged the Conference to establish study The Commission has set this case down for cers are men and women of high integrity, honesty, shall meet at least once each year at a place and committees to investigate and analyze problem areas hearing in February 1974. . virtue and self-discipline for hard work and devotion on a date to be designated by the Supreme Court. of the law and make recommendations thereon for (6) Complaint 73-CC-5 alleged that a certain to their judicial duties. Judges are human beings. with (e) Secretary. The Administrative Office of the il­ specific legislation and rule changes in substantive judge in the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Ford County, the same virtues and failings of other profeSSional linois Courts shall be secretary of the conference." and procedural law. Additionally suggested was that The Judicial Conference membership includes all improperly interfered with the attorney-cl~e~t r~I~­ people; but because they are public servants, they the Conference conduct regional civil and criminal elected judicial officers in the State; i.e., Supreme tionship, willfully and improperly abused his judlc~al are rightly held to a high degree of trust an~ .confl­ law seminars to permit the judiciary to study in detail office atternpted to usurp the authority of the cir­ dence. It remains to be seen whether the JudiCial In­ Court justices, Appellate Court judges and circuit particular segments of the law while spending a mini­ cuit j~dges and chief judge by promulgating certain quiry Board will ·perform, as the Chief Justice stated, court judges. From this pool of judges, the Supreme mum of time off the bench. administrative orders, and acted in an intemper­ "its duties in a responsible, impartial and nonsensa­ Court designates six judges from Cook County and In brief the report recommended: ate and abusive manner to the chief judge, law­ tional manner." However, the Illinois Courts Commis­ six judges outside Cook County as members of the "(1) Continuation of the annual Judicial Confer­ yers, witnesses and litigants. sion stands ready to perform its constitutional executive committee. As of December 31, 1973, the ence, including lectures and seminar topics. This case will be heard by the Commission in function with fidelity and impartiality. executive committee consisted of Appellate Court However, the primary function of the Confer­ June 1974. Judges Jay J. Alloy (3rd District), Henry W. Dieringer ence should be to consider the work of the (7) Complaint 73-CC-6 charged a certain judge (1st District), and Daniel J. McNamara (1st District); courts and to suggest improvements in the in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Stephenson Coun­ The Judicial Conference and circuit court Judges Nicholas J. Bua (Cook administration of justice, as developed by ty, with conduct that brings the judicial office into The Illinois Constitution provides in Section 17 of County), Joseph J. Butler (Cook County), Harold R. study committees; disrepute in that the respondent on several occa­ Article VI that there shall be "an annual judicial con­ Clark (3rd Circuit), Frederick S. Green (6th Circuit), (2) Creation of study committees to explore, ana­ Mel R. Jiganti (Cook County), Peyton H. Kunce (1 st sions was operating a motor vehicl~ while under ference to consider the work of the courts and to lyze and report on problem areas in the ad­ Circuit), Daniel J. Roberts (9th Circuit), Rodney A. the influence of alcohol. suggest improvements in the administration ~f jus­ ministration of justice, and to make In February 1974 this matter will be heard by tice." Supreme Court Rule 41 implements Section 17 Sr:ott (6th Circuit), and Eugene L. Wachowski (Cook recommendations thereon; the Commission. by establishing membership in the Conference, County). Supreme Court Justice Thomas E. Kluczyn­ (3) Establishment of continuing educational semi­ ski is the liaison officer to the executive committee. The powers of the Board and the application of creating an executive committee to assist .th~ Court nars throughout the State in appropriate areas that power has caused some concern. Chief Justice in conducting the Conference, and appointing the The Supreme Court appointed Judge McNamara as of civil and criminal law; and chairman and Judge Green as vice-chairman. Robert C. Underwood commented on the concern in Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts as secre­ (4) Staff support to effectuate the work of the The executive committee meets regularly every a recent law review article, 47 Notre Dame Lawyer tary of the Conference. The text of the rule foll~~S. study committees, and to assist in the organi­ month except during July and August and discusses, 247: "RULE 41. (a) Duties. There shall be a JudiCial zation of the seminars." "While the creation of the Judicial Inquiry Board Conference to consider the business and the prob­ studies, and makes recommendations relating to the The executive committee expects to implement the was opposed by the members of the Supreme lems pertaining to the administration of justice in business of the courts. In recent years, the Judicial report, commencing in 1974. Court as unnecessary, and as creating a potential this State, and to make recommendations for its Conference has devoted considerable time to contin­ On September 5, 1973, the JUdicial Conference uing judicial education in the form of planning semi­ threat to the independencE of the judicial branch of improvement. convened its twentieth annual meeting and seminar. nars; however, a constant concern of the Conference government, I am sure that the members .to be ~p­ (b) Membership. The judges of the Supreme The 351 judges from the Supreme, Appellate and cir­ and its executive committee is the improvement of pointed will be selected with care and Will be Sin­ Court, the judges of the Appellate Court, and the cuit courts, who had gathered together for the three the administration of justice through legislation, rule cere, conscientious individuals, aware of the judges of the circuit courts shall be members of day meeting, heard lectures and investigated current changes, and procedural modifications. Illinois has seriousness of their responsibilities. It is their con- the conference. developments in the law. Supreme Court Justice

46 47 Thomas E. Kluczynski, liaison officer to the e)(flcutive tent. Nevertheless, many of our counties are to be so gives us confidence that other problems facing ... , a question for which I have no answer: Are committee, opened the Conference with a discerning commended for their efforts to improve the court our courts can be dealt with and that we can we in America today asking too much of our judi­ and informative address which set the theme of the facilities even without federal assistance .... Many achieve justice with dispatch throughout the sys­ cial system? As I said, life used to be different in Conference and suggested innovative action on the of our counties have been unable or unwilling to tem." the courts. The courts were there, and they were part of judges to resolve crucial problems facing the commit adequate resources to improve the physi­ In discussing the Supreme Court's supervisory au­ almost totally pre-occupied with resolVing two-party judiciary. In his remarks, Justice Kluczynski empha­ cal facilities in which our courts must operate and thority.as a tool to be used to improve the manage­ litigation, constitutional and statutory interpretation, sized a variety of topics of concern to the the federal government has been hesitant to allow ment of the court system, Justice Kluczynski and criminal law problems. Now the courts, you romarked: judiciary:Continuing judicial education; Application of grant money to be used for construction. But until the judges, are thrust daily into large questions of federal grant funds to the cot1rt system; Reducing the and unless the resources are forthcoming either "Since 1964, our Court has had 'general admin­ public policy and new forms of litigation that affect time in disposition of cases; Use of the Supreme from the counties, the State or the federal .govern­ istrative authority over all courts ... ' Under section very, very broad groups of people. of article VI of the Constitution our Court Court's supervisory authority; and Attorney discipline. ment an essential part of our program to Improve 16 1970 Justice Kluczynski reminded the conferees that the administration of justice will not be adequately has now also been given 'supervisory authority over all courts .... ' In its April report to * '" * judges must become immersed in judicial education: dealt with." 10, 1970 "At the same time that you are being thrust into the Illinois Constitutional Convention, the Commit­ " ... Alt~lough the primary purpose of the annual Commenting on how cooperation among the judi· social arenas, we have the other problems with Conference is to review and recommend improve­ ciary can solve complex problems which face the tee on the Judiciary recommended that supervisory which you are familiar, the ones you deal with ev­ ments in the administration of justice, the seminars court system, Justice Kluczynski directed the confer­ authority be added to our Court's administrative ery day: CrOWded calendars in metropolitan areas authority 'to emphasize the urgency and impor­ also provide us with an opportunity to increase our ees' attention to the continuing substantial reduction and too many civil and criminal cases for some legal knowledge and judicial skills. The annual in delay between date of filing and date of verdict in tance of the general administrative authority ... ' in courts to cope with. You have the concept of bar­ seminars for circuit judges and associate judges, cases in the Law DiVision of the Circuit Court of the Supreme Court. The Committee on the Judi­ gaining in the criminal courts. Many of you, more the new judge seminar and specialized regional Cook County: ciary of the 1970 Constitutional Convention com­ familiar than I, know that system of justice. We seminars in criminal law have been very success­ ". . . Delay in the trial of law jury cases in the mented that vesting supervisory authority in the have the problem of continuance after continu­ ful. Judges, no less than the attorneys who prac­ Circuit Court of Cook County has long been one of Supreme Court would 'strengthen the concept of ance; the effect this has on the witnesses, on you, tice before them or the 'members of other the most serious and most highly publicized prob­ an effective centralized administration of the judi­ on the lawyer, on justice, and on the physical facil­ cial system.' orofessions, must continue to learn. The perfor­ lems in the operation of the Illinois courts. Cook ities. How many of you have the kind of physical mance of a trial judge depends on what he brings County had long been charged with having had the "Since July 1, 1971, our Court has invoked its facilities that you really need in order to do the to the bench, what he absorbs after 11e ascends it worst civil law jury backlog in the nation. I think we supervisory authority on many occasions. Depend­ kind of job that is expected of you? Some of you and how well he applies his knowledge, training can take some pride in the fact that Illinois now ing upon the nature of the case, our Court has en­ do. I have seen your courtrooms around the State, and personal qualities. The vast increase in litiga­ has less delay than three other major jurisdictions. tered supervisory orders in two broad areas: First, I have walked and jeeped for two years through tion, the criminal law explosion and the growing Cook County, as of the end of 1972 suffered a de­ where the order was directed to a specific judge. the communities of Illinois, and some courtrooms Second, where the order was directed to the circuit and changing complexities of the law have led to lay of 49.8 months. Phiiadelphia has a delay of 53 I are good, but a lot of them are not. I wondered national recognition of the need for a comprehen­ months, Boston has a delay of 51 months and the . or Appellate Court to carry out a policy laid down time and time again as I went into the courtrooms: sive program of judicial education within each Bronx has a delay of 52.2 months. Almost equally by our Court. The latter instance shows our willing­ How could you render justice in that kind of state." important, when we look at the overall problem, is ness to use our supervisory authority to carry out cramped surroundings? Continuing, Justice Kluczynski discussed some the fact that of 20 jurisdictions reporting delays of general policy and provide for effective centralized "Let me specifically say that I believe our State administration of the court system." uses and possible uses of federal grant funds. He 30 months or more, 13 are now suffering greater can be proud of the progress that we have made mentioned that federal funds have been used for re­ delay than they did 10 years ago. Only 6 have, In conclusion, Justice Kluczynski observed that the in some of the areas that I have mentioned. I think gional criminal law seminars for . Illinois Judges and over the last decade, reduced the time it takes to Supreme Court had adopted new rules regarding at­ we are way ahead of some of the states in the for the experimental defender proJect, which matured get a jury verdict in their jurisdiction. Cook C?unty torney misconduct: Union, thanks to some very outstanding people, into the Illinois Appellate Defender, a State agency, stands out as one of those having accomplished "Every lawyer and judge in Illinois shares in the many of them here, who have worked on this and which provides counsel to indigent defendants the greatest reduction since 1962. Cook County responsibility of maintaining high professional problem. This kind of conference, the Administra­ on appeal. The Justice also noted that funds are has shaved a full one and one half years off the standards in our community, and judges in their tive Office, and the hard work that a lot of people needed for courthouse construction and renovation: delay between the date on which a case is filed particularly sensitive position of public trust are ob­ are putting into making the judicial system work "[The Supreme Court is] looking forv.:ard to find­ and the date of verdict. As recently as January 1, ligated to participate in the work of maintaining better are examples of progress. But we have a high professional responsibility. Judges are in a ing some way in which federal f.~~dlng ?an be 1971, a litigant in the Law Division would wait an long way to go, and I am sure that you would used to build or remodel court faCilities which are average of over 5 years for a jury verdict. Today, unique position to observe violations of the Code agree with me on that." outdated or inadequate. In a recent report, [the while the wait is still too long, it has been reduced of Professional Responsibility, actions which bring In concluding, the Governor noted that there is a ter­ committee on criminal justice programs] character­ to an average of 44.5 months as of May 1973. the courts or profession into disrepute, and espe­ rific onslaught on a judge's time and that modern ized the courtroom facilities used for some criminal Cially the first signs of physical or mental disability technology may be of some help in conserving judi­ cases in Cook County as 'obsolete' and 'grossly which may impair an attorney's ability to properly cial time; however, he admonished: inadequate' and stated that these conditions repre­ * * * represent a client. We all realiZe that these prob­ "Let us not turn our judges, our judicial system, sent 'the most serious problem confronting the ad­ "The Illinois court system has achieved interna­ lems are sensitive, but I can assure you that they into administrative robots as we try to modernize ministration of the criminal courts in Cook County.' tional prominence because of its simplicity, eff!­ can be discussed at your convenience on a per­ the system. I would like to suggest something that Judges from downstate indicate t~at they ha~e ciency and flexibility. We can be proud of the fact sonal basis with a professional member of the staff I think on which every judge here agrees with me. similar problems in their own counties. Many tnal that our court system is among the most modern, tif the office of [the] Attorney Registration [and That is, that justice requires thoughtfuln.ess. courtrooms are poorly lighted, poorly ventilated, most effiCiently organized in the country. Unlike Disciplinary Commission]." Judges must have time: Time to reflect; time to and badly maintained. Accoustical problems are so mMy other major jurisdictions our system has The Honorable Daniel Walker, Governor of the read; time for quiet discussions with your col­ serious that hearing is difficult without loud speaker demonstrated its ability to cope with the difficult State of Illinois, in the main address to the assem­ leagues. Yes, time to take a brief or a law book systems. Staff quarters are crowded, conference problem of delay. While the civil law jury backlog bled judges, delivered thought-provoking observa­ and walk out in the court yard and sit under a tree tions on the problems with which the judiciary must and do some quiet reflection as you study a brief rooms are not available, parking and othl'ilr service continues to be a matter for concern, the steady deal: facilities for judges, jurors, witnesses, attorneys, progress made in recent years has given us rea­ of a case. Time to sit in your library and let some court staff and visitors are inadequate or non-exis- son to believe that the backlog will be beaten. It al- " ... 1 would like to raise with you this question of the precedents seep into your mind. If we come

48 49 nI l I \ to the time when every judge has to rely on his law our State as evidenced by the interest from other f l II. Family Law. Discussion of amendments to the cluding recent amendments; and the dispositional clerks to do all of his research, and if we come to states. Juvenile Court Act, adoption and custody, and phase of the juvenile court hearing. Seminars have a time when a judge does not have time to sit in "Next week I will be in New York City to talk divorce. tentatively been scheduled for three locations during the library and think as he reads, then I think we with the Citizens Committee on the Reorganization III. Sentencing, Probation and Corrections. Analy­ 1974. have come to a time that bornes ill to our judicia" of the New York Courts and to explain to them sis of the sentencing provisions of the new In addition to the considerable time devoted to ju­ how we accomplished unification of the judicial Unified Code of Corrections and study of Illi­ ry." I 1 dicial education and to the previously mentioned The educational portion of the ConferE)nce offered six system in Illinois. Today New York is where we nois' probation system. study on the fUnction of the Judicial Conference the topics of which any three could be selected by the were way back in 1963. It has been the success of IV. Lecture on Individual Rights Under the 1970 t , executive committee spent long hours studying prob­ judges. Each topic was presented three times simul" the unified court system in Illinois which has Constitution. Exploration of the right to remedy lems which face the judicial system. Some of the taneously with every other topic, except the lecture caused concerned citizens in New York to con­ and justice, to a healthy environment, to priva­ committee's decisions are highlighted here: on evidence which was only presented once. Four clude that they should consider unification of the cy and various provisions prohibiting discrimi­ (1) Recommended that the Supreme Court au­ nation. topics were presented in seminar format while the re­ court system. Since imitation is the sincerest form thorize appointment of a Conference commit­ maining two topics were discussed by lecture. The of flattery, I think that all of you should be gratified V. Recent Developments in the Law. Study of tee to study the law of evidence and make executve committee established the following Confer" that your story is attracting such interest through­ the implied consent act and the impact of recommendations thereon. ence committees to research and conduct the semi­ out the nation." Fuentes v. She vin , 407 U.S. 67, on Illinois (2) Approved attendance of Illinois Judges at vari­ law. nar: Supreme Court Justice Daniel P. Ward delivered ous in and out of state educational programs. I. Evidence Lecture. In depth analysis of the pro­ the main address to the assembled associate judges. VI. Evidence Lecture. Competency of witnesses, (3) Authorized the juvenile problems committee posed federal rules of evidence and compari­ His poignant remarks received an excellent reception qualification of witnesses, limitations on direct to establish liaison with the commission on son of the proposed rules to Illinois law of from the judges: and cross examination, and impeachment and children. rehabilitation. evidence. "I think that the development of the associate (4) Heard reports on pending legislation which II. Criminal Law Lecture. Discussion of significant judgeship in the judicial structure of our State has VII. Criminal Law Lecture. In depth study of recent affected judges and court procedures. opinions on criminal law and procedure decid­ truly been one of the most significant develop­ developments in the law of search and sei­ (5) Discussed the approach the judiciary should zure. ed by the U.S. Supreme Court at its October ments in our judiciary in modern times. It would be take where a lawyer publicly announces that 1972 term. a truism to point out to you that the greatest num­ The third educational program for judges was a he is about to file an unfounded complaint III. Sentencing. Comprehensive study of the effect ber of cases handled by judges in Illinois are Ilan­ series of regional seminars on criminal law. The ex­ against a judge with the Judicial Inquiry of the new Unified Code of Corrections on died by associate judges. And it is interesting to ecutive committee appointed a committee on criminal Board in apparent violation of the spirit of the sentencing procedures. observe that it is estimated, considering the num­ law seminars for Illinois judges, chaired by Judge confidentiality requirement of the Constitution. IV. Torts. Development of recent case law decid­ ber of cases which were in the case load in 1971, Richard Mills, to plan and obtain the necessary funds (6) Approved proposed amendments to Supreme ing questions relating to products liability and that 98 percent of those matters were capable of to conduct the seminars. The committee developed a Court Rules 201 and 214, drafted by execu­ the structural work act. assignment to and disposition by associate judges. program and requested the Supreme Court commit­ tive committee members, Judges Bua and Ji­ V. Function of the Trial Judge. Problem oriented The associate judges by and large are the ones tee on criminal justice programs to apply for a grant ganti, and transmitted same to the Court for approach to common situations faced by trial whom the public knows in greater numbers. of funds from the Illinois Law Enforcement Commis­ its consideration. judges, e.g., dealing with motions for continu­ sion. That grant and subsequent grants have been (7) Received a report on the problem of multiple ance, contempt situations, attorney misconduct approved, and five regional seminars were held in attacks-direct and collateral-on guilty judg­ and managing court calendars. * * * 1971 and 1972. During 1973, three additional semi" ments in criminal cases. VI. Trial Judge and the Record on Appeal. Explo­ nars took place: Mt. Vernon on January 5 and 6; (8) Accepted reports which emanated from the ration of methods which the trial judge could "The Supreme Court has not been unaware, of Rockford on November 9 and 10; and Champaign on 1972 associate judge seminar committees employ to reduce errors on appeal, discussion course, of the splendid work that is being done December 14 and 15. Another seminar is planned for and made specific recommendations to im­ of Supreme Court rules governing appeals and throughout our State by the associate judges. In Mt. Vernon in March 1974. The subject matter of the prove the administration of justice by new acceptance of guilty pleas in criminal cases. part this is reflected by the fact that eighteen as so" regional seminars included motions in criminal cases legislation or court rules. The second educational seminar for Illinois judges ciate judges have been the subject of appoint" guilty pleas under Supreme Court Rules 401 and (9) HearcJ a report that the Supreme Court had was held on March 7, 8 and 9, 1973 in Chicago for ments by the Supreme Court in the exercise of its 402, sentencing under the Code of Corrections iden­ authorized an increase in the judiCial mileage, the appointed judiciary, i.e., the associate judges. appointment authority." tification evidence problems, and jury selectio~ prob­ housing and meal allowances. The executive committee appointed a coordinating The coordinating committee selected the following lems in criminal cases. The committee is also in the (10) Appointed a committee to plan and organize committee, chaired by Judge Glenn K. Seidenfeld committees to research and present topics at the process of drafting a criminal law benchbook which regional seminars on civil law topics to be and Judge Charles P. Horan, to organize and plan seminar. Each topic was presented twice, except thl3 will Guntain checklists, forms and readily available presented in 1974. Judge Paul C. Verticchio the seminar. A total of 244 judges was assembled for lectures on evidence and criminal law. These lec" roference materials on the various stages of criminal was appointed as chairman of the committee. the three day seminar. tures were attended by all of the conferees, and fol" c?ur~ proce.edings. The benchbook is expected to be It is anticipated that the Illinois Judicial Confer­ The Director of the Administrative Office, Roy O. lowing each lecture, the judges divided into small distributed 111 late 1974. Each seminar was limited to enc~, with the guidance of the Supreme Court, will Gulley, welcomed the conferees on behalf of the Su­ groups to discuss the content of the lectures. los~~ than 40 judge participants, and from all indica" continue to grow in stature and provide the judiciary preme Court, and he stressed the significance of the I. Function of the Trial Judge. The innovative IIOIlS, the seminars were very successful. of this State with continued leadership in judicial edu­ unified court system in Illinois: approach to presenting this topic was through Decause of the enthUsiastic response to the crimi­ cation and in suggesting recommendations to im­ "I have been asked to appear all over the Unit" the medium of videotape. The committee used i nnl law regional seminars, the executive committee prove the administration of justice. ed States to explain our [court] system. The fea­ videotaped enactments of a modern traffic ,i WIth the approval of the Supreme Court requested a ture which has consistently drawn the most interest court statement, statement to veniremen, want of funds through the committee on criminal jus­ and which commands the most respect is our as­ Plea and arraignment procedures and a bail ! tice programs to conduct a series of regional semi­ sociate judge operation. This class of judicial offi­ hearing. "Stop"action" techniques were used i nars on juvenile law and procedure. The juvenile The Conference of cer in any court system i'3 the one that sets the for some of the scenarios, playing them f prO~lems committee (Judge Richard F. Scholz, Jr., Chief Circuit Judges standard and gives the impressions that create the through completely once and then breaking ! chalrf!1an) of the Conference is in the process of Subject only to the Supreme Court, the chief judge image of the judiciary in a state. I think that we them into small segments for discussion pur" I ; planning and developing a program on juvenile court of each Judicial Circuit has the power and responsi­ have made great strides in improving that image in poses. l.l procedures; overview of the Juvenile Court Act, in- bility to administer his circuit. As the day to day man- 50 I ! 51 U """'''I'-'!:'"~~~.,...... --...==~------.~ ...... ------.. _------_ .. 11 1 '·1

I. !I I I ager of the circuit court, the chief judge is bargaining be eliminated over a five-year period. The ! neW appearance date will be set, so both the violator tor felt that funding for trial level court administration i immediately responsible for operating his circuit court Conference did not take an oflk:ial position on the i and the arresting officer can be present to try the shOUld be through the Administrative Office to insure in sucll a manner that the ends of justice on the trial standards, but there was a consensus that the effort case on its merits, on a date convenient to both. uniform fiscal, personnel and policy controls through court level are fully satisfied. of the commission of the National Conference to es­ Mr. Richard Dunn, chairman of the Judioial Inquiry the central administrative authority of the State sys­ The State's 21 chief circuit judges first met in late tablish what it considered to be desirable standl)lrds B,lard, was a guest of the Conference at its meeting tem. With the approval of the Supreme Court, the Di­ 1963 in anticipation of the transition from the system was undertaken without sufficient input from judges in Champaign on September 28, 1973, and he ex­ rector will submit an application for funding for of multiple trial courts, which then existed in Illinois, of the state courts. p~.~ined the operation of the Judicial Inquiry Board. experimental programs in trial court administration to to the unified trial courts which would begin to oper­ Provisions of the Unified Code of Corrections Mr Dunn pointed out that a majority of the members be conducted in the 3rd and 19th Judicial Circuits ate on January 1, 1964. The-chief judges have met which affect the administration of circuit courts were c; the Judicial Inquiry Board felt that the chief judge during 1974. regularly since then as the Conference of Chief Cir­ also considered on several occasions. Chief Judge tr IS a unique responsibility in the area of judicial con­ Other 1973 highlights of the Conference of Chief cuit Judges, and the regular meetings of the Confer­ John T. Reardon (,f the 8th Judicial Circuit raised the (,1t'(:1. Each chief judge, according to Mr. Dunn, Circuit Judges include: Unanimous approval to sup­ ence present invaluable opportunities for the chief problem of "expunging" criminal records after a sat­ s;,;')uld monitor the conduct and performance of the port legislation to increase the salaries of the ad­ judges to discuss problems common to the adminis­ isfactory pre-adjudication probation period. The Can­ jU"'Jes of his circuit. It appears to be the position of ministrative secretaries to the chief judges, and the tration of the circuits. The Conference of Chief Circuit nabis Control Act provides that certain first offendel,'s til:! Board that each chief judge has an affirmative election of John S. Boyle, chief Judge of the Circuit Judges is a standing committee of the Illinois Su­ who are found guilty or who plead guilty to certain vi­ rniiponsibility to cooperate with the Judicial Inquiry Court of Cook County, as its chairman. The Confer­ preme Court. It develops and proposes uniform cir­ olations of that Act may be placed on probation with­ BOJrd to assure that any judge, who may be guilty of ence also selected Chief Judge Jacob Berkowitz of cuit court rules and policies and, where appropriate, out a guilty judgment (III. Rev. Stat. 1973, ch. 56-1/2, misconduct or who may be infirm or unable to carry the 5th Judicial Circuit to serve as vice-chairman: advocates legislation and Supreme Court rules de­ §710). The court can defer the proceedings and if the out the responsibilities of his office, is brought to the and, in accordance with its by-laws, Chief Judge Vic­ signed to effectuate a high degree of uniform man­ person satisfactorily fulfills the conditions of proba­ attention of the Judicial Inquiry Board so that appro­ tor N. Cardosi, 12th Judicial Circuit, to serve as the agement in the circuit courts. The Administrative tion, the court may discharge the person and dismiss priate action may be taken. third member of the Conference's executive commit­ Office is secretary to the Conference and, during cal­ the proceedings. A finding of guilty, without an adju­ Two judicial circuits during 1973 sought funding to tee, a position which otherwise would be filled by endar year 1973, Justice Thomas E. Kluczynski dication, will not (according to that statute) be staff an office of trial court executive or trial court ad­ Chief Judge Boyle, ex officio, in his capacity as chief served as liaison between the' Supreme Court and deemed a conviction for any purposes-despite the ministrator. The chief judges of the 3rd Judicial Cir­ judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County. However, the Conference. plea or finding of gUilty. The chief judges were con­ cuit and the 19th Judicial Circuit planned to obtain because he was elected chairman, the executive During 1973, the Conference met six times. Early cerned that this provision could cause recordkeeping federal funding to sponsor an experimental program committee position was vacant and to be filled by p, in 1973 the Conference commissioned Mr. William and other administrative problems. in trial court administration. The Administrative Direc- vote of the membership. Bohn, then an employee of the Illinois Law Enforce­ The chief judges dealt with the prohibition agains~ ment Commission, to undertake a research project to putting minors under 16 years of age in jail (III. Rev. define the powers and responsibilities of chief circuit Stat. 1973, ch. 37, §702-8(1) ). Many smaller coun- judges. Mr. Bohn undertook, by interviews and study ties have no detention facilities for juveniles, and in of the position of chief judge, to analyze the adminis­ some cases, it is necessary to transport juveniles trative responsibilities related to the operation of the many miles to find suitable detention facilities in circuit courts in this State. His objective was to put which to hold minors during the pendancy of pro- into perspective the powers and responsibilities of ceedings. It was concluded that the statute which the chief judge of a judicial circuit in relation to per­ causes this very' troublesome administrative problem sonnel administration, budgeting, probation services, was enacted by the General Assembly with full un- the operation of the court reporter system, relation­ derstanding of the potential consequences. The chief ships with the circuit clerks and the county boards judges considered what could be done with those mi- and other matters of concern to the chief judges. The nors between 14 and 16 years of age who previously first draft of Mr. Bohn's manual was submitted to the could be kept in "jail" facilities but must now be kept Conference late in 1973 and met with general ap­ elsewhere. An official of the Department of Correc- proval from the chief judges. A subcommittee of the tions issued an advisory opinion to the 7th Judicial Conference was appOInted to study Mr. Bohn's pro­ Circuit wherein he stated that if the probation depart- posals in depth and make recommendations con­ ment provides full-time social workers to supervise cerning specific guidelines for administration of the juveniles being held in a physically separated part of office of the chief judge. the county jail, then tlie county would not be in viola- The Illinois State Bar Association's Section on Pro­ tion of the statute. Generally, the chief judges be- bate Law presented to the Conference, for consider­ lieved that efforts must be made, and 'funds must te ation and approval, uniform circuit court probate provided, to create either regional or county deten- i i rUles. Mr. Austin Fleming, chairman of the section on tion facilities to accommodate this requirement of the probate law appeared before the Conference to ask Juvenile Court Act. that each chief judge return to his individual circuit, The Conference also approved a request by the call a meeting of circuit judges and consider adoption Department of Conservation to recommend that S~J­ of the uniform probate rules. Several circuits have preme Court Rule 505 be amended to allow enforc~­ adopted the probate rules in whole or in substantial ment officers of the Department of Conservation 10 part. issue the notices provided for in that rule. If the rec- During the year, the Conference of Chief Circuit ommendation is accepted by the Supreme Court, Judges concerned itself with the Criminal Justice conservation enforcement personnel will not need to Standards, promulgated in 1972 at the National Con­ be present in court on the date set for the first ap- I I ference on Criminal Justice in Washington, D.C. The pearance of a violator. The violator will be able to " I most controversial recommendation was that all plea notify the court if he intends to plead not guilty and a ,-1l I I I I 52 1 [ 53 1 I

,...... ,,·:r·,.... ______'"""======-- ______•••••• U ______•__ _ -. - i \

THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE

Introduction ary system; John M. Oswald, assistant director, was appointed assistant administrator of the same sys­ The predecessor to the present Administrative .Of­ tem; and Mary Skaljak, administrative assistant, was fic& of the IIlino)s Courts was a statutory creature mto employed in a similar capacity in the office of attor­ which the General Assembly breathed life in 1959. ney registration. To fill these vacancies, Director Gul­ TI1~) entity was known as the Court Administrator's ley made the following appointments: William M. QIHce, and it so existed until 1964. The office in Madden, deputy director responsible for the daily op­ thG£'i8 past years was chiefly concerned with studying eration of the Chicago office; Lester A. Bonaguro, at­ ca~;.eloads to determine the needs of particular courts torney and former employee of the Illinois Law for assistance and to provide a statistical background Enforcement Commission, as assistant director, Chi­ for further studies. cago; David F. Rolewick, former law clerk to Su­ The 1964 Judicial Article directed that the "Su­ preme Court Justice Daniel P. Ward, as assistant preme Court shall appoint an administrative director director; Karen Reynertson as administrative assis­ and staff, who shall serve at its pleasure, to assist tant, Chicago; and W. Stephen Swinney was em­ the Chief Justice in his administrative duties." That ployed in Springfield to assist Jerry B. Gott, assistant verbiage was retained, virtually intact, by Section 16, director, with installation of the uniform recordkeeping Article VI of the 1970 Constitution. Thus, the fledgling system in the various circuit court clerks' offices. administrator's office of 1959 was continued and The many duties performed by this office are not conferred with constitutional dignity in 1964 and in all easily reducible to writing; however, some of the 1970. Two Illinois constitutional commentators, more prominent functions of this office are summa­ Messrs. Braden and Cohn, in analyzing this section rized below. Generally, the Constitution provides for have stated that "only five [states] have a constitu­ the obligations of the Administrative Office as direct­ tional office similar to the administrative director pro­ ed by the Chief Justice; yet by Supreme Court order vided by Illinois ... ", and the authors noted that the or rule or by legislative enactments, the office has constitutional grant of administrative power to the Su­ been delegated specific functions. Additionally, the preme Court as exercised by the Chief Justice office has assumed other duties relating to the courts through the Administrative Director is an excellent by necessity or by default or for the simplistic reason "mechanism for a coordinated and efficient adminis­ thatthis office is the "logical place" to execute a giv­ tration of the judicial system." Braden and Cohn, The en responsibility. I/Iinois Constitution: An Annotated and Comparative Analysis, at page 335. Fiscal During the fifteen years that it has been in exis­ tence, the Administrative Office has matured from in­ An integral part of the structure of the Administra­ fancy to adulthood, and correspondingly it has taken tive Office is the accounting division which adminis­ on and has been assigned by the Supreme Court ters monies appropriated by the legislature to the greater duties and responsibilities. The growth of the judicial system. Monthly reports are submitted to the office has been carefully nurtured by a succession of Supreme Court reflecting the expenditures of funds highly qualified and distinguished lawyers: Henry P. for salaries, travel for judges and court reporters, Chandler, former administrator of the federal court transcript fees, and general operational costs. The system; Albert J. Harno, former dean of the Universi­ division is supervised by Jeanne Meeks of the ty of Illinois College of Law; Hon. John C. Fitzgerald, Springfield office. now a circuit judge, former dean of the School of At the close of calendar year 1973, the Administra­ Law of !-oyola University, Chicago; John W. Freels, tive Office completed ten years as a constitutional now a special assistcmt Attorney General, former entity. The growth and successful operation of the of­ general counsel of the Illinois Central Railroad. The present Director is Roy O. Gulley, former chief judge fice fmm January 1, 1964 through December 31, of the Second Judicial Circuit. 1973 is in large part reflected in the modus operandi Today, the Administrative Office has more than a of the accounting division. score of employees who serve the Supreme Court In anticipation of the effectiveness of the 1964 Ju­ and supervise the activities of the judges of all the dicial Article, the Supreme Court appointed a super­ courts in the State and court-related personnel. In visor of the newly qreated accounting division on addition to the Director, the office employs six per­ October 1, 1963. The new division had the initial re­ sons (four of whom are lawyers) on a managerial or sponsibility for establishing new records as well as supervisory level, with the balance of employees accounting procedures which was a task of gargan­ serving in various supporting capacities. tuan proportions. Ledgers were set up, an internal During 1973, several persOr'ifle! Qhanges occurred control system for all appropriations was devised, in the Administrative Office: Carl H. Rolewick, deputy and procedures were developed for auditing and pro­ director, was appointed by the Supreme Court as ad­ cessing vouchers relevant to the appropriations ministrator of the attorney registration and disciplin- which were the responsibility of the Supreme Court. 55 ), ;

rI.'.'.·...·.·.' .. · tel 1\ There were many forms to be designed, correspon­ The payrolls were prepared after having catego­ I j budgets, that is, two budgets within a biennium in­ \>1 All budget forms, object code forms, back-up dence to be answered, a filing system to be orga­ rized the respective classifications of the old system f ~ stead of one within the same period. Since the ac­ sheets, written justifications, etc., are arranged in nized and summarized monthly reports to the to the three-tier structure. The completion of the Jan­ counting division is the monitor of funds allocated to book form. The preparation of the budget is a promi­ I I, Supreme Court to be organized. The accounting divi­ uary 1964 payroll was a momentous occasion; this the Supreme Court, it may be helpful to outline the nent part of the work of the accounting division. It is sion began processing vouchers that had accumulat­ payroll implemented the new Judicial Article and was ) procedures preparatory to completing the budget a herculean task which requires much overtime in or­ ed since July 1, 1963, which were for the operational the forerunner of payrolls carrying thousands of war­ fonl1s which are submitted to the Bureau of the Bud­ der to keep abreast with the daily demands of busi­ costs of the Administrative Office, the travel expen­ r rants to be issued to the judiciary in the future. got each year. ses of all judges and court reporters, as well as tran­ I i ness which must be executed in an efficient manner I ,( There is a short intervening period from the begin­ scription fees for court repeJrters. Additionally, the When the Judicial Article was adopted by the 72nd in the accounting division. In addition thereto, there if ning of each fiscal year (July 1) until the time when judicial and related personnel payrolls were calculat­ General Assembly in 1961 for popular vote in 1962. ! j are other duties relevant to the budget. The forego­ ed, changes were made, the necessary internal con­ and during the intervening period before the referen­ I I new projections for the forthcoming year are com­ ing for the most part is but a minipanorama of the trols were documented and, finally, payrolls were dum, one of the chief criticisms of the new judicial i menced. Preparatory to the budget conferences con­ duties performed in preparing budgetary matters in system was the assumption that the cost would be r ducted by the Administrative Office, which are held typed for issuance of warrants. I the accounting division. The January 1964 payroll-the first payroll under prohibitive. Those who advanced that argument during the month of October each year with the pre­ In addition to the already established accounts, the provisions of the new Judicial Article-was indic­ pointed out the number of judicial personnel who i siding justice of each Appellate Court district, statisti­ there are other ac(;ounts which were added to the ative of some of the important changes in the judicial would be paid by the State and the various other ex­ I cal material is forwarded for the purpose of aiding accounting division. The Supreme Court appointed a system, i.e., the unified court structure. The Judicial penses to be assumed by the State. The probability the presiding justice in calculating and prOjecting the committee on criminal justice programs which has re­ Article provided for a Supreme Court, an Appellate of these expenses became evident from a mere funds required for the forthcoming fiscal year. The quested and has been granted awards from the Illi­ Court and circuit courts (circuit and associate judges reading of the proposed Article itself since it provided day of conferences, each budgetary item is reviewed nois Law Enforcement Commission for the and magistrates). However, there was not a central the State would assume the salaries of all judges. and adjustments are made so that the requests establishment of an office to handle other court-relat­ source to determine the names and addresses of po­ This would include the 36 judges of the Municipal which are presented are justified as the estimated ed federally funded projects. All vouchers for those lice magistrates and justices of .the peace who were Court of Chicago, whose salaries had previously funds required for the operation of the Appellate federal grants are processed in the accounting divi­ now to be paid out of State appropriations. The Ad­ been borne entirely by the City of Chicago. It would Court. Subsequently, all the requests received from sion, as well as all records retained and reports fur­ ministrative Office undertook a massive mailing to also include prospective higher salaries for all munic­ each of the presiding justices are computed in the nished to the Illinois Law Enforcement Commission political subdivisions, and based on the responses, a ipal, city, town and village court judges. It would ad­ accounting division using the internal control records on a monthly basis. certified list of police magistrates and justices of the ditionally include the new office of magistrate whose as a basis for evaluating requests, adding or reduc­ Additionally, duties created by statute which pro­ peace was compiled. From that list, salaries were entire salary· would be paid by the State. Many other ing funds where necessary, and, finally, recommend­ vides insurance for all State employees, falls within paid to the above judicial officers until their terms expenses, some probable and many imaginary, were ing approval. the division. Each employee's record must be pe­ expired. also suggested as indicative of the high cost which The new budget must be finalized and delivered in rused monthly to establish ages which affect insur­ To clarify the changes in classification of judges might be expected under the new system if adopted. December of each year. In reality then, this means ance rates. Accordingly, changes in rates under the new unified court system, the following in­ It is true that the State has assumed a large finan­ there are three months of expenditures of the current automatically dictate adjustments on the payrolls. Al­ formation is offered: The functions of the justice of cial burden which was previously borne by the coun­ fiscal year underway when those current figures cou­ so, requests for handling of insurance claims must the peace courts, police magistrate courts, city, vil­ ties or cities. Some of the financing resulted from the pled with past expenditures and experiences in each be handled in the division. There are detailed insur­ lage and incorporated town courts, municipal courts, Article itself and some from legislation adopted both area over the years are compared and reviewed and ance reports which cover transactions exercised in county courts, probate courts, the Superior Court of before and after its effective date. During the past the estimated projections are calculated I for the the various options contained in the types of health Cook County, the Criminal Court of Cook County, ten years, the additional cost to the State most cer­ forthcoming fiscal year. After much detailed' compila­ and fife insurance for which each member has sub­ and Municipal Court of Chicago were transferred to tainly represents a direct savings to the counties and tion, the projected budget for the Supreme Court and scribed. These intricate reports are furnished to the the circuit courts. Police magistrates and justices of municipalities. The counties and muniCipalities are allied appropriations, which cover the period of July 1 Insurance Commission on a semi-monthly and the peace became magistrates of the several circuit not only realizing an annual savings but are also re­ through June 30 of any given year, are submitted to monthly basis. courts, the downstate county and probate judges be­ ceiving monies from fines and costs which have re­ the Bureau of the Budget and finally to the General Monthly reports are submitted to members of the came associate judges of the circuit court, the judges sulted from the unified court system. Assembly. Supreme Court reflecting the expenditures of funds of the Municipal Court of Chicago became associate The installation of the new associate judges pay The accounting division prepares the necessary for salaries, travel expenses for judges and court re­ judges of the circuit court, and in Cook County, the scale in 1967 increased the duties of the accounting legislation, and the supervisor appears with the Di­ porters, transcription fees, Judicial Conference, etc., judges of the Superior Court, the County Court, and division. At the same time, the Supreme Court deoid·, rector before the appropriations committees of the and general operational costs of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice of the Municipal Court of Chicago be­ ed that its account, as well as the account of the Ju­ General Assembly to obtain passage of the neces­ Administrative Office, and all five Appellate Court dis­ came circuit judges. The judicial Article required that dicial Conference, be transferred to the accounting sary bills to provide funds for the operation of the tricts. As previously stated, annual State budgets salaries of all judges were to be paid by the State, division on July 1, 1967. Implementing the SupremE' court system. The budget forms represent the antici­ with individually itemized written justifications are and provisions were made for the circuit and associ­ Court decision made for a smoother operation as pat(ld funds which will be needed to operate the judi­ prepared which include salaries for judicial and relat­ ate judges and magistrates of Cook County to re­ well as providing for ready access to budget matters cial system in the State. Each appropriation is ed personnel, as well as all ordinary and contingent ceive additional compensation from Cook County. On which were necessary by way of preparation to final­ perused and carefully computed using as a barome­ expenses for the Administrative Office, Appellate and Janaury 1, 1964, there were seven Supreme Court izing requests and justifications to the General As­ ter expenditures of the past, current, and the antici­ Supreme Courts and allied accounts. Justices, 139 circuit judges, 204 associate judges, sembly. pated costs for that period. Each line item within the All vouchers submitted are thoroughly checked 1'10 magistrates in Cook County and 591 downstate When the 76th General Assembly convened, an total budget is calculated as nearly as possible on against vendor records to avoid duplicate payment. judges. The former police magistrates and justices of important change in State government occurred, i.e., the exact amounts required for the operation of the Each voucher must be audited according to the ad­ the peace, known as magistrates, were permitted to changing State financing from biennium to annual court system. Requests in each of the line items in ministrative standards set within the office. Any dis­ continue to perform their non-judiCial functions for the budgeting. The implementation of this new system e~ch of the appropriations are qualified with a suc­ crepancy concerning a voucher is corrected by remainder of their respective terms. has doubled the amount of time required to prepare Cinct written explanation which accompanies the correspondence or returned for adjustment. There completed budget forms. are many accounting procedures executed before a 56 57 r:

voucher is ready for processing for payment. The ac­ monthly entries in posting ledgers for each employee counting division processes approximately 15,000 with an accumulative balance. The payroll for judicial vouchers per annum. Included in this figure are and related personnel totals approximately vouchers for judges' and court reporters' travel ex­ $2,160,793.00 monthly. penses as well as transcription fee vouchers. Each of The flow chart on page 59 describes in greater the travel vouchers is checked for proper charges for detail the duties of the accounting division. The ac­ mileage, lodging and food, and receipts and signa­ counting division is audited each year by a battery of tures. Transcription fees are audited pursuant to the outside auditors who examine the accounting proce­ number of pages, and they' are checked against dures, internal controls, and al/ ledgers. Thus far, no previous vouchers to avoid duplicate payment. Exclu­ sive of the above figures are the ·payrolls. recommendations for changes in procedures have been made by the outside auditors. This has been The payroll section computes all deductions affect­ accomplished through hard work, tight controls, and ing warrants such as federal and State withholding constant perusal. The accounting division's system tax, judicial and State employees' retirement, bonds, has been described by certified public accountants and State employees' insurance. This section adds who have made perpetual audits, as well as by the OJ ,!!! :; new employees to respective payrolls, deletes resig­ 8ureau of the Budget, as the model accounting sys­ Cl nees, retired and deceased personnel, calculates all tem in the State. salaries for approximately 1300 judicial and related The fiscal note below covering the period of July 1, \ personnel on a semi and monthly basis. Other pay­ 1963 through June 30, 1974 depicts the specific ap­ \ roll functions of the accounting division are to main­ propriations and expenditures for the judicial system \ tain payroll controls, registers and ledgers, and make in the State of Illinois. \ ------f\ \ 1\ \ I \ \ 1 \ \ FISCAL NOTE I \ \ U) I \ \ JUDICIAL AND RELATED PERSONNEL wi -1- \ \ July 1, 1963 through June 30, 1974 1 \ , ~I \. zl ~ Period Appropriation Expended 01 / (in millions (in millions ~I / of dollars) of dollars) 01 / Of / 1 / July 1, 1963 - June 30, 1965 73rd Biennium ...... $16.3 $14.7 / 1 I July 1, 1965 - June 30, 1967 74th Biennium ...... $27.4 $24.5 1 I July 1, 1961' - June 30, 1969 75th Biennium " ...... $35.0 $32.7 1/ July 1, 1969 June 30, 1970 76th G. A. 1st Half ...... $23.1 $20.1 ------jI July 1, 1970 - June 30, 1971 76th G. A. - 2nd Half ...... $23.4 $21.0 July 1, 1971 - June 30, 1972 77th G. A. - 1st Half ...... $27.6 $23.3 July 1, 1972 - June 30, 1973 77th G. A. - 2nd Half ...... $27.8 $26.0 July 1, 1973 - June 30, 1974 78th G. A. - 1st Half ...... $29.2

A pOint of great interest is that the projected cost of administering the judicial system for fiscal year 1974 was .4% of the total expenditure (see chart on page 60).

Teller of Elections the chief judge files with the Director a statement The Director acts as a teller of judicial elections in supporting the circuit's need for an additional associ­ two areas. By agreement of the circuit judges, sever­ ate judge, and the Director then makes a recommen .. al circuits have the Administrative Office mail out bal­ dation to the Supreme Court which may allocate an lots and tabulate the votes in elections to select the additional associate judge to the circuit. The "per­ chief judge of the circuit. missive" associate judgeships are in addition to Supreme Court Rule 39 provides that a vacancy in those authorized under the population formula, and the office of associate judge shall be filled by an the Supreme Court can authorize new associate elective process among the circuit judges. In general, judgeships in those circuits where litigation is particu­ the number of associate judges each circuit may larly heavy. have is determined by population (one associate Once a vacancy exists in the ranks of associate judge for every 35,000 inhabitants in the circuit or judge, whether by death, resignation or authorization fraction thereof) and by need. In the latter instance, of additional associate judges, the chief judge notifies

58 59 STATE OF ILLINOIS the bar of the circuit that a vacancy exists and that it Commission. He performs the duties ordinarily per­ will be filled by the circuit judges. Any Illinois licensed formed by circuit court clerks, preserves the rec­ Appropriated funds for Fiscal Year 1974 - in millions of dollars $7,575.0 atltJrney may apply for the position by completing an ords, and prepares subpoenas returnable before application and filing it with the chief judge and the the Commission. Dllr,:ctor. The names of the applicants are certified to (4) Administrative Committee of the Appellate th" Director, who then places the names on a ballot Court. The Office arranges meetings, assists in wl:i.~h is mailed to the circuit judges. The Director drafting proposed rUle changes, and provides re­ ttl:,;,llates the ballots and certifies the results to the search assistance. chH judge, maintaining the secrecy of the ballots. (5) Supreme Court Committee on Clerks. By or­ Tr l , , applicant receiving the majority of votes is then der of the Supreme Court, the Administrative Of­ dE:clared appointed to the associate judge vacancy. fice is secretariat to this committee which is During 1973, the Director certified that the follow­ charged with recommending "appropriate legisla­ inG persons had been selected as associate judges: tion and rule changes which are necessary to im­ • Third Circuit - Clayton R. Williams plement the provisions of the 1970 Illinois • Sixth Circuit - Worthy B. Kranz Constitution and which would improve the efficien­ o Seventh Circuit - Dennis L. Schwartz cy and effectiveness of the operations of the sev­ INVESTING IN EDUCATION • Eleventh Circuit - William D. DeCardy eral clerks' offices throughout the State." $2,409.0 • Twelfth Circuit - John F. Michela (6) Juvenile Problems Committee of the Judicial 32% .. Nineteenth Circuit - Harry D. Hartel and Conference. The Juvenile Problems Committee is Richard C. Kelly a standing committee of the Illinois Judicial Confer­ o Cook County - Jerome T. Burke, Peter Costa, ence, and in addition to the Administrative Office Robert E. Cusack, Aubrey F. acting as secretary, the committee utilizes a staff Kaplan, Benjamin E. Novo­ member of the Supreme Court committee on crimi­ \ l selsky and Michael F. Ziatnik nal justice programs in the area of juvenile proba­ tion. During 1973, the committee developed plans for Secretariat a series of regional seminars on juvenile justice, to The dictionary defines secretariat as an "office en­ be held in the spring of 1974, reviewed and re­ vised several of the uniform court forms used in ju­ trusted with administrative duties, maintaining rec­ venile proceedings; appointed a subcommittee to ords, and overseeing or performing secretarial investigate the feasibility of developing uniform duties." That definition is inadequate and incomplete \ insofar as it applies to the Administrative Office act­ rules for juvenile proceedings; and drafted uniform I. forms for social history and probation reports which ./ TRANSPORTATION ing as secretary to a host of committees and confer­ await final consideration by the committee. $1,851.0 ences. For in addition to arranging meetings, 24% recording minutes and keeping records, the office With the consent of the executive committee of acts as a fact finding body, does research, conducts the Judicial Conference, the Juvenile Problems surveys and apprises judges of recent developments Committee has maintained a close working rela­ tionship with the Commission on Children and has INCOME SUPPORT in procedural and substantive law. Some of the com­ mittees served by the Administrative Office are: expressed to the commission, the committee's $922.0 reaction to legislative proposals affecting children 12% (1) Illinois JUdicial Conference. Rule 41 desig­ nates the Administrative Office as secretary to the and the juvenile justice system. During 1973, the ALL Conference. The office handles all details for the committee advised the commission of its support OTHER PURPOSES regular meetings of the executive committee, in­ for efforts to have Illinois participate in the inter­ $1,242.0 cluding research, drafting of minutes, preparing state compact on the placement of children. Addi­ 17% agendas, arranging meetings and assisting the tional items on which the committee's advice was chairman with his correspondence. The office im­ sought included rights of a putative father under p!ements plans to conduct the annual meeting of the Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act; juvenile deten­ ~he Conference and the Associate Judge Seminar tion facilities; and guardian's reports. :::1d validates expense accounts. Also, the office (7) The Judicial Conference's Committee on :.(:rvices the coordinating committee and the sub­ Probation in Illinois. The Committee on Probation t ....)mmittees which research topics for the semi­ is a standing committee of the JUdicial Conference r,drs. and is staffed by the Administrative Office and the (2) Conference of Chief Circuit Judges. The of­ Supreme Court committee on criminal justice pro­ !ice prepares agendas, arranges meetings, assists grams. The committee was created in 1967 to til draWng proposed traffice rule amendments, study, evaluate and make recommendations con- I maintains close liaison with the chairman, and pre­ . cerning the operation and organization of probation *The cost of administering the Judicial System is .4 of 1 per cent of the total State Budget for fiscal year 1974. I'j pares a synopsis of bills introduced in the General services in Illinois. The committee's review of pro­ Assembly. bation revealed that in many circuits probation ser­ (3) Courts Commission. The Director, pursuant vices are generally not adequate and that steps I to Rule 2 of Rules of Procedure of the Commis­ should be taken to improve the organization and t sion, is the secretary in all proceedings before the administration of probation; upgrade personnel; 60 I . 61 'i U; ------1 I I provide adequate salary levels; provide training; stalled. Illinois, in addition, conditionally agreed ! which might be employed in the court system, Prof. be uniformly employed by the clerk's office in each reduce the size of caseloads per officer; and es~ during 1973 to participate in a nationwide experimen­ I Flango concluded that a "promising remedy to the of the 102 counties. That committee was comprised tablish standards and adopt uniform procedures. tal program, which is funded by a federal grant, to [ problem of [court] congestion is to free judges for of lawyers, judges, clerks of courts, court administra­ During 1973, improvement of probation services develop a model judicial statistical information sys­ ! m,'.Idng judicial decisions by utilizing court executives tors, certified public accountants, and land title ex­ was the subject of several studies and proposed tem. Under the auspices of Project SEARCH, the to accomplish administrative taSks." perts, each possessing particular experience or legislation. There is no disagreement over the program has as its purpose "to perform a require­ An academic and clinical program was designed knowledge essential to the work of the committee. need to improve probation. However, whether pro~ ments analysis and design effort for the development for graduate stUdents wherein they would pursue a This committee later became the Supreme Court bation should continue to be supervised by the ju­ of a statewide judicial statistics and information sys­ C('lUfSe of study which would prepare them for a ca­ committee on recordkeeping in the cirCUit courts and diciary' and whether it should be organized and tem," and will seek "to establish minimum judicial ror!! as court administrators. The intent of the pro­ funded at the state or local level continue to be data elements required and to design and document gr.enth Judicial Circuit; and Boone County in the a federally funded program in which the Administra- . SeI!Clnteenth Judicial Circuit. With the addition of live Office will conduct an experimental program to use a computer to assist in the translation of court the:,:) counties, the recordkeeping system is now in reporters' stenographic machine notes, to automati­ OpW:ltion in 53 counties. Circuits in which the system cally produce typewritten English transcripts. A grant is in effect in each county are the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 8th, from the Illinois Law Enforcement Commission which and 9th. The remaining downstate counties continue will make this experiment possible has been ap­ to maintain their records in accordance with the stat­ proved. However, no contract has yet been issued. utory provisions until such time as the recordkeeping The contractors have not thus far been able to per­ syst(~m provided by the Supreme Court's order be­ fect the programs to a point that the Director feels comes effective in each of these counties by admin­ the program is mature enough to warrant costly ex­ istrative directive. perimentation. It is hoped that during the year 1974 The recordkeeping system, which has attracted the experiment will proceed as originally planned. nationwide interest, is a sound, practical, efficient The Supreme Court approved inclusion in the Ad­ and economical approach to managing the courts; ministrative Office's 1974 fiscal year budget $10,000 to be used for programs aimed at recruiting court re­ and the system will be further improved and refined porters. The Administrative Office will create pro­ as its use becomes more commonplace. grams to entice qualified young people to enter ~he field of court reporting and, to do so, plans to deSIgn Official Court Reporters recruitment brochures, counselling packets, etc. to be Since January 1, 1966: all official court reporters in distributed to high schools and junior colleges throughout the State. the State have been paid by the Administrative Ot­ fiee. By statute, court reporters are qualified by test­ In addition, in a project funded through the Su­ ing their profficiency in reducing the spoken word to preme Court's committee on criminal justice pro­ writfng. The tests are devised by the Administrative grams, a management consultant has undertaken a Office and are consistent with accepted minimum study of problems relating to the training and t,iring standards promulgated by the court reporting profes­ of offiCial court reporters. The report of this consul­ sion. The tests are administered by the Administra­ tant will be important to the Administrative OffiCE) as it tive Office at least twice each year. To date, 1,710 begins outlining its own projects, reporters have attempted to qualify either for appoint­ A court reporter's salary increase became effective ment as official court reporters or for advancement to October 1, 1973. As soon as the Governor signed a higher official pay level. . the pay bill, the Director communicated with the Co~t The proficiency tests are composed of three parts: of Living Council in Washington, D.C. to ascertain "A", "B", and "C". The "A" test requires the greatest the amount of the rttise that might be put into effect, proficiency, while the other two are less demanding. without Violating the Cost of Living Council's guide­ lines. The Cost of Living Council eventually autho­ Each test consists of a "Q & A II section and a legal opinion section (the former being on a two-voice ba­ rized 100% of the raises proposed under the new sis) which are dictated by professional instructors. No salary schedule beginning December 1, 1973. In ad­ official court reporter may remain in the system un­ dition, the Cost of Living Council authorized up to less he eventually passes at least one part of the 50% of the proposed raises for the period from Octo­ test. Those who have performed satisfactorily in the ber 1, 1973 to December 1, 1973. A deficiency ap­ test may be appointed by the circuit court as official propriation in an amount necessary to meet the court reporters. additional expenditures for court reporters' salaries Recordkeeping order in was prepared, introduced and approved. The CQurt effect as of December 31, The Supreme Court determines the number of l court reporters in each circuit, and the Court may al­ reporters were paid appropriate increases retroac­ I locate additional court reporters upon a showing of tively to October 1, 1973. Accounting procedures not tully The maximum court reporter salary is now $16,000 implemented as of December 31, 1973 need. The statute sets out criteria by which the need for court reporters in the circuits is measured. The per year. In addition, court reporters may sell tran­ I Administrative Director can recommend to the Su­ scripts at rates approved by the Supreme ~ourt in it,S Recordkeeping order expected to I· order issued on September 29, 1972. The Job of offi­ become effective by December 31, 1974 preme Court allocation of additional court reporters o t when a need is shown. As of December 31, 1973, cial court reporter of the State of Illinois is attractiVe I there were 362 official court reporters in Illinois, of enough in both pay and status to attract fully-quali­ whom 20 were on a part-time basis. fied people interested in public service; The Ad~inis­ During 1973, a total of seven court reporter profi­ trative Office will undertab an extensIve recrUitment ciency examinations were administered-three in campaign during 1974 in an effort to alleviate the I shortage of qualified reporters. llli Chicago and four at Illinois State University at Nor- 64 65 I -

co *0> Judicial Visitation Programs to legislation which may affect the courts or its person­ co co Penal Institutions nel. The Director also frequently appears before the judiciary committees of the House and Senate to tes­ Events which have occurred in the first years of tify on bills affecting court procedure and the number this decade have catapulted the condition of the na~ 'OUl of judicial officers required to maintain currency in • - Q) E ~~'Ero tional and state prisons to the forefront of public con~ "'" Q) ~ X the disposition of litigation. - o.°W cern. Indeed, probing questions have been raised by ,...~~O> The Administrative Office has developed a sound 0.1;>') the general public and governmental officials as to working relationship with the legislature and the Gov­ the objectives and purposes' of incarceration. ernor's office, and the office operates as a clearing No person has a greater responsibility and burden house for information between the judicial branch of of determining whether a convicted defendant will be government and the legislative and executive imprisoned than the sentencing judge. It is he who branclles. This flow of information and data is CO(l~ must decide whether the convicted defendant will stantly maintained and updated, and the Director IS lose his freedom by imprisonment In making that de~ in close comrnunication with the Supreme Court, ap­ cision the judge considers many factors including the prising the justices of the status of legislation. feasibility of rehabilitation, reintegration of the defen~ In addition, the Administrative Office prepares a dant into society and the best forum to accomplish synopsis of bills affecting the judiciary which are these objectives. pending in the General Assembly. The bills are Recognizing that judges must be familiar with the tracked and their progress is reported to the Su­ State's penal system and programs, the Director of preme Court. At the conclusion of each regular ses­ -Q)roc the Administrative Office and the Director of the illi­ C::'u sion of the legislature, the Administrative Office )j} '6 I;>') -Q) nois Department of Corrections formulated plans for sends to the judiciary, a synopsis of key bills which $:,:;: organized visits by judges to the various correctional have passed the legislature and have been enacted facilities. During 1971, two programs were conduct­ into law or are awaiting the Governor's approval. ed, and in 1972 two more programs were held. On November 16, 1973, a visit was arranged at State­ Judicial Economic Statements ville Penitentiary at Joliet. Thirty-three judges attend­ ed the program. The Administrative Director is directed in Supreme The program ran for a full day, and the judges Court Rule 68 to be custodian of certain statements were given access to institutional buildings, inclUding which every judge is required to file. , 1--. ~15; vocational workshops, cell~houses and isolation The rule provides that Ita judge shall file annually ",0,... 0 0 ~ units. The judges freely mixed and conversed with with the Director ... (1) a sealed, verified, written 60l -.c:. stat~"':ient of economic interests and relationships of Q) inmates. The visit ended with a question and answer %­ 0.0 ·8 Ol OE is in the process of being decentralized and reorgan­ Commission. The unsealed statements may be re­ <:( $ .2 roo ized by the application of modern bUsiness tech­ vealed to any party in a case where specific informa­ u,... -C\IUl • °Q) c::r-- tion is requested as to whether the presiding judge or c 3:0> niques. It was noted that the reorganization is in part >­ OW due to greater judicial intervention into prison admin­ members of his immediate family had a financial in­ (!) , a c>­ terest in the outcome of the case or in the corpora­ ~Ol istration, and this has lessened administrative discre­ roO.- tion or business which was a party to the case. 015 tion by prison authorities. The intervention has 60l resulted in new rehabilitation programs with greater emphasis on "assessment" of the inmate's abilities Impartial Medical Expert Rule rather than on "diagnosis or cause" of the inmate's The Administrative Office is charged with adminis­ conduct which resulted in imprisonment. tering Supreme Court Rule 215(d). The statistical ~ The judges also participated in a panel discussion summary on page 67 provides a profile of the U'3e ( with inmates and prison administrators in which there of Rule 215(d) in the circuit courts of Illinois duri:19 was a lively and candid exchange of opinions regard­ 1973. The 1972 report on Rule 215(d) explained that ing the philosophy and practices of the criminal fus­ in 1972, for the first time, impartial medical expects tice system. were utilized in divorce cases and child custody m.H­ ters extensively. In 1973 judges hearing child custo­ Legislation dy matters have increased their use of Rule 215(d). Uro~E (1) )( In addition to appearing before the appropriation While the number of 21S{d) orders entered in 1973 OlW Ill ... haS dropped 11 below the 1972 total, the number of ... Q) committees of the legislature regarding the judicial !lia. budget of the State, the Director regularly appears orders entered in child custody matters has in­ <:( before the judicial Advisory Council of the legisla­ creased by three. ture. The Director's advice is sought on proposed The reason for the decrease in the number of im-

66 67 ------

/"- r:'.' I ,. J "~I . J::LC) f reimburse examining experts. The total number of Ol"O E ~ .... Arizona State University 1 ~.9 .g ! ex,tninations increased from 133 in 1972 to 172 in .0 . II that some examinations for these orders will occur in Temple University 0>, 1 >- I--- ( Q 1974. This distinction explains why "specialties re- University of Colorado 1 a: I -e "0' ."J / quired" for orders entered in 1973 do not correlate University of Kansas « C") 1 :E I'"- ~ en Z I with the "specialties required-exams actually per- University of Kentucky 1 :5 ,.. Cil t c formed" section. University of MarylCind ::J '-0 1 C/) ~ I (I) EC\J In downstate Illinois, there remains a problem of University of Virginia 1 ..J .0 c 8 engaging adequate numbers of qualified specialists :: (/) _Ol I, University of Wisconsin 1 « E 0 ctl c (,) (\) "0 E in the IME program. Because no member of the IlIi- .0.: co C'u u Q5~<:") i= (\) co ~ nois State Medical Society's Expert Panel was avail- C/) l!! -w C co i-- "0"0' £;2 able, two orders for impartial medical examination j:: .!!l(t) 600 Cii 'iii had to be vacated. « .2 u I- 0 1-- c C/) I'"- .~ ctl 550 tn Cil c () ,... 0 >. Representation LIJ Ci5 Cl By Supervised aM 0 500 > >- 0 467 j:: ... "0 '0 .... Senior Law Students ra . 25% or one out of four graduates who sat for the c 250 .l!l JC\J lilt-- 0 1973 Illinois bar examination . :J E ~"O' J ~ The comparative chart (below) indicates Cl rapid in- 200 0 , ~ Q l!! .E c>. ~ crea~~e in the use of Rule 711 in the first four years 150 coOl ~~,- 06 and then a leveling off in the last year. Although it (t) "0 .... £g "iii r--- 0 0 canr~ot be stated with certainty, this leveling off may 100 ~ () Ol indir.::te that the maximum number of readily avail- (J') c:- 50 .!l! ablE: positions in authorized agencies has been at- Ol III '8 tain~·:.:,l. 2 ~ c 0 ~ () (/) <{ .;::U Th~ number of temporarily licensed law students ~C\I Cl Cl.. -ctl .... c ana Il-]eir law schools for 1973 are as follows: .~ '6 :J In Chicago-Kent (7 mos.) (!J 'i3 9'1 £ U 'iversity of Illinois 81 Agencies with which temporarily licensed students D(~Paul University 57 were associated during 1973 are as follows: en , N'~rthwestern University 49 "0 c ,~ l!! .2 mc>. 'lii U!~iversity of Chicago 45 ~ ~"O '@ "0 .2l ctlw c:c 'E o E Public Agencies £~ .g c- en co :::l Ol ()~ Loyola University (Chicago) 0 ~ -c C .- :J 40 .l!lw 0 >.- ~ OlXoE ~ § ~ E'O EW<{5 g;,~ ~ U .S ~Ol ~ St. Louis University 31 County State's Attorneys' Offices (j ctl "- 77 ~~ <{ E"O E x.r . -~ I

State Appellate Defender 14 nations are constantly visiting the office and the the Unified Code of Corrections. The CounCil is (16) Board of CommiSSioners of the illinOis De­ Illinois Department of Children courts throughout the State. An important function of llOW engaged in preparing legislation which would fender Project. and Familv Services 4 the office is to discuss the court system with the visI­ rreate a statewide probation system to be adminis­ Cook County Department of Public Aid 1 tors and arrange visits to courthouses and interviews iAred by the Administrative Office. Other Duties of the Administrative Office Cirellit Court of Cook County, with judges. The Director, or his assistants, is asked (2) The Director by appointment of the Governor First Municipal District, Planning to address civic groups, bar associations, legislative i; a commissioner (until March 1973) of the Illinois Some of the other duties of the office which the Di­ Department commissions, and court reform organizations to tE"l/ [,;.'.w Enforcement Commission. This is the State rector and his assistants perform are summarized Public Administrator of Conk County the Illinois story regarding the operation of the unified ...ency which oversees the allocation of federal below: Public Guardian and Conservator of trial court. Some of the organizations which were ad­ I ~·.,lds authorized by the Crime Control Act of 1973. (A) Suggest amendments to Supreme Court Cook County 1 dressed in 1973 were: Chicago South Chamber ')f I (3) The Governor's Traffic Safety Coordinating rules and recommend legislation where appropri­ University of Illinois College of Law 1 Commerce; Galesburg Rotary Club; Illinois Confe:'­ (. ,mmittee. By statute, the Director is a member of ate. ence of Women Leaders for Traffic Safety; Sangil­ ! 11;:·, committee. .(B) Keep the judiciary informed of current legis­ mon State Uni'Jersity; Maryland State Bm I Private Agencies f (4) The Conference of State Court Administra­ latIon, rule changes and decisions emanating from Association; Judiciary Subcommittee of the Missouri I te,s. The Director additionally serves as chairman the federal and State courts of review. Cook County Legal Assistance Foundation 32 House of Representatives; Citizens Conference of of the Conference's executive board. (C) Advise the State Board of Elections and Mandel Legal Aid Clinie 31 1 Kentucky; Citizens Conference of New York Couris; I (5) The Director serves on the Board of Direc­ Governor's office of judicial vacancies created by Northwestern University Legal McDonough County Courthouse Dedication; and the I tors of the American Judicature SOCiety. death, retirement, or resignation. Assistance Clinic 24 National Conference of Judicial Disability and Re­ (6) Council of State Governments. (D) Reply to correspondence from inmates at Land of Lincoln Legal Aid Bureau 21 ! moval Commissions. ! (7) By order of the Supreme Court, the Director the State penitentiaries. . Chicago Volunteer Legal Services The Administrative Office publishes and/or distrib­ is an ex officio member of the Supreme Court (E) Act as a repository of rules adopted by the Foundation 15 utes several books or pamphlets which are available i Committee on Criminal Justice Programs. This Appellate and the circuit courts, pursuant to Su­ DePaul University Law Clinic 12 to the public. These publications can be obtained by I committee has an executive secretary and staff preme Court Rule 21. Woodlawn Criminal Defense Services 11 contacting the Springfield or Chicago office. and is funded by the Illinois Law Enforcement (F) Meet formally with the Supreme Court during Legal Assistance Foundation of Chicago 10 (1) A Short History of the Illinois Judicial System I Commission. It is charged with studying and pro­ each of its five terms and more frequently if neces­ Legal Aid Bureau of Chicago 8 (2) Manual on Recordkeeping I posing recommendations in the area of criminal sary. These administrative sessions are guided by Illinois Migrant Legal Assistance Project 7 (3) Annual Report of the Administrative Office and juvenile justice. an agenda prepared by the Director, and they Civil Legal Aid Clinic of the (4) Annual Report of the Judicial Conference (8) The Institute of Judicial Administration. serve to keep the Court informed of recent devel­ Foundation for the New Business Ethic 4 (5) Article V of the Supreme Court Rules relating (9) National Association of Trial Court Adminis­ opments in the court system and provide guidance Northwest Neighborhood Legal Services 3 to trial court proceedings in traffic cases trators. to the Director as to the action he should take re­ Uptown Legal Services 3 (6) A series of handbooks for jurors in grand jury I (10) American, Illinois State and Chicago Bar garding administrative problems. Cook County Special Bail Project 2 proceedings, in criminal cases and in civil Associations and the Chicago Council of Lawyers. . (G) Arrange for judges to attend judicial educa­ Legal Aid Services of Rock Island cases (11) Uniform Circuit Court Rules Committee of tion programs Dutside of Illinois; e.g., National Col­ County 2 (7) A pamphlet relating the history of the Su­ I. i the State Bar Association. lege of the State Judiciary. Civil Legal Aid Project 1 preme Court Building in Springfield (12) Judicial Administration Section of the State (H) Arrange for the State Attorney General to Community Legal Counsel Office 1 ,·1'j.. (8) Illinois Supreme Court Rules i Bar Association. represent judges who are named as defendants in Lawndale Leg,al Aid Clinic 1 1 (9) Interim Report: Experimental Video-Taping of I 4 (13) National advisory committee on video tape law suits. Many of these cases are filed in the fed­ Legal Referral Bureau of Lake County 1 Courtroom Proceedings in the courts. eral. and State courts by inmates of the State peni­ North Lawndale Economic Development (11)) Rules of Procedure of the Illinois Courts '. 1 (14) The Illinois Parole, Probation and Correc­ tentiary system and by other disgruntled litigants. Corp. ,t Commission 1 tional ASSOCiation. (/) Act as liaison between the judiciary and the Rock Island County Legal Referral I (11) Chief Circuit Judge's Manual On Guidelines i ~ (15) Probation Services Council of Illinois. State code departments, boards and commissions. Bureau 1 I , For the Administration Of Circuit Courts (draft University of Illinois Clinic 1 11 form only; printed version will not be available I j until late 1974) Public Information and Publications (12) Benchbook (Criminal Cases) for IIlin.)is Judges (partially completed; full printed WH­ CONCLUSION One of the time consuming duties of the Adminis­ sion expected to be available in late 1974) trative Office is its contact with the public, organiza­ (13) Reading and Reference Materials used at A' ~~is report clearly illustrates, 1973 was a busy Therefore, we foresee substantial demands being II and 'wtful year, particularly for the Supreme Court tions interested in the Illinois court system and the seminars and conferences sponsored by:he I made upon the Administrative Office to assist the news media. People constantly telephone, write or Judicial Conference. and tie Administrative Office. Much was accom­ Chief Justice in his administrative duties. I plisr;, j in. the form of administering the court system, appear at the office to inquire about specific litigation I. I, illinOis has what we firmly believe to be the sound­ or about the general organization of the judicial sys­ Membership in Organizations she~< 0rdlng legislation through the General Assem­ est court structure in the nation. We have the basic tem. It is the policy of the Administrative Office to \,. ?Iy, .• ,ld eXE;cuting new and old duties in the Admin­ implements to permit the judiciary and the Adminis..: supply each inquirer with a complete answer to The Administrative Office, Director and/or his as­ Ii Istm·.' '9 Office. We anticipate that the Court will trative Office to make great progress in the efficient 1 questions which he may ask about the Illinois courts. sistants maintain membership or are participant£ in conk:ue to .b~ occupied in the coming years with administration of jl,Jstice. Our praises have been sung The office is of the firm belief that it must be oriented the following organizations: 1 i qUebi!OnS ariSing under. the 1970 Constitution which many times by judges, lawyers and court administra­ to serve the public. This philosophy has enhanced (1) The Director is a member of the Council On reqw'13 adjudication by the State's highest court. Be­ tors throughout this nation. In such an environment it the reputation of the Administrative Office in Illinois The Diagnosis And Evaluation Of Criminal Defen­ ! { caUSG the Court's mandatory appellate jurisdiction is is not uncommon for human nature to relax to t b~sk and in sister states. dants. The Council is a creature of the legislature, i not as burdensome under the new Constitution as it in the glory, and to rest on its laurels. We a're deter­ Because the Illinois courts are a model among ju­ ,~ was un~er the 1964 Judicial Article, we believe the and one of its purposes is to draft a correctional I j mined that Illinois will continue to push ahead. dicial systems, citizens, judges, lawyers and court code for Illinois. A major portion of the Council's ~ourt WIll be able to devote sl)bstantially more of its We are resolute in our determination that the Su­ administrators from the other states and from foreign work was completed with the enactment into law of I j tIme to administration of the entire judicial system. t preme Court, with the assistance of its Administrative 70 t , I 71 \' t 4' Office, will be in the forefront of resolving administra~ legislative branch and judicial branch of State gov­ tive problems as they arise as well as planning for ernment. For instance, questions are increasingly the future needs of the Illinois judiciary and its citi­ being asked in Illinois as to whether the State's obli­ zenry. Solutions must be found to eliminate the offi­ gation to finance the courts extends to the circuit cial court reporter shortage, to adequately fund the court level; whether the legislature should fully fund judicial system to meet its present and future needs, the operation of the probation system and the opera­ to provide for a more effective utilization of probation tion of the circuit court clerks' offices; or whether officers, and to construct new-court facilities and re­ State funding is desirable for constructing and main­ furbish antiquated courthouses. Efforts must continue taining county courthouses. While these issues are to accelerate the disposition of cases on appeal, to being examined, there are soluble problems which amplify the statistical process particularly in criminal should, perhaps, be addressed promptly since they and juvenile proceedings, to expand judicial educa~ will affect long-range planning. The 1970 Constitution tion, and to support a more effective vehicle for pre­ mandates that the four downstate judicial districts bf· senting researched recommendations to the of "substantially equal population." Based on thE! Supreme Court and General Assembly for the im­ 1970 federal census, the downstate districts fail to provement of the administraiion of justice. satisfy the constitutional provision. If the districts are It is a highly valued tradition and obligation for the reapportioned, it seems likely that the judicial circuits judges of Illinois to look to the Supreme Court for will also be realigned. Until the legislature acts on leadership and guidance. Custom dictates that opin­ this issue, it will be difficult for the judicial department ions of the Supreme Court are the law, and the pre­ to make recommendations to the General Assembly 1973 cepts enunciated in those opinions are to be regarding the judicial and court-related personnel implemented by the courts. This type of leadership, needed at the circuit level and regarding State fund­ of course, is extremely important, but by its limited ing of the entire operation of the circuit courts. nature, it is probably not the most acceptable manner With the help of t.he legislative and executive CASE LOADS to resolve administrative problems which do not lend branches of government, we believe the judicial themselves to the formal judicial process. Sound branch can and will provide Illinois with a court sys­ management necessarily infers decision-making tem which will more efficiently and justly serve the within a reasonable time frame. Problems must be requirements and best interests of its citizens. AND identified and solved before they become a crisis. The alternative to aggressive judicial administration is passivity and a shrinking of the public's confidence in Respectfully submitted, STATISTICAL RECORDS the court system. Thf) intricacies and delicate balance between the branches of government is a considerable factor to be dealt with where legislation is needed to fulfill the Roy O. Gulley requirements of the judicial system. Sufficient State DIRECTOR funding to operate the State court system has been a ADMINISTRATIVE Of!FICE OF characteristic example of differences of opinion in the THE ILLINOIS COURTS JUDICIAL OFFICERS OF THE I I STATE OF ILLINOIS i f ,"I I

r

72 73 SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS

FIRST DISTRICT Walter V. Schaefer Chicago, Illinois Thomas E. Kluczynski Chicago, Illinois Daniel P. Ward Chicago, Illinois

SECOND DISTRICT Charles H. Davis j Rockford, Illinois

THIRD DISTRICT Howard C. Ryan I Tonica, Illinois I II. FOURTH DISTRICT r Robert C. Underwood* Bloomington, Illinois

I FIFTH DISTRICT Joseph H. Goldenhersh r ' E. St. Louis, Illinois

,,,;.! I II ~·. i " i * Chief Justice 1I I I i

J I L ; 1 t [ i \1 THE JUDICIAL DISTRICTS OF ILLINOIS I ! SUPREME AND APPELLATE COURTS k1, j

!I ! } ! 74 . .tI ,j 75 ., , .. ' "'-, i i I I

< ~

"en SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS NUMBER OF CASES DECIDED WITH FULL OPINIONS 1950-1973

375- 362 350-

325-

300-

275-

250-

225-

200-

175-

150-

125-

100-

75-

50-

25-

0- -1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 *Not included is a total of 16 Memorandum Opinions filed.

~r~------~

SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS NUMBER OF PETITIONS FOR REHEARING 1950-1973

110- 108

100-

90-

80-

70-

60-

50-

40-

30-

20-

10-

0- 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 " ". I

600- SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS NUMBER OF PETITIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL -.j co 575- 1950-1973 550-

5~5-

500-

475- 450-

425-

400- 375-

350-

325-

300-

275-

250-

225-

200- "j 175-

150- 125-

100-

75- 50-

25-

0-

-~-----~~. t. ~

SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS ;.,.,UMBER OF MOTIONS DISPOSED OF 1950-1973 1700-

1600- 1644

1500-

1400-

1300-

1200-

1100-

1000-

900-

800-

700-

600-

500-

400-

300-

200-

100-

0- -.j 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 co APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THE TREND OF CASES iN THE APPELLATE COURT DURING 1973

(May 1, 1973) "'< • No. of Cases Gain or Loss Disposed of In Currency No. of Cases No. of Cases No. of Cases During 1973 No. of Cases FIRST DISTRICT SECOND DISTRICT Pending Flied Outing Disposed of With Full Pending First Division William L. Guild, Presiding Justice Appellate District 1-1-73 197311< During 1973 Opinions 12-31-73 Gain Loss Mel Abrahamson --. Joseph Burke, Presiding Justice Civil...... 887 711 764 521 834 53 Thomas J. Moran - Edward J. Egan t &~3t •••••• t •••• /, •• I • \ Glenn K. Seidenfeld (assigned 687 . Mayer Goldberg Criminal. 1,081 743 969 855 226 - from the 19th Judicial Circuit) . " ~ Albert E. Hallett Civil ..... 191 231 148 108 274 - 83 THIRD DISTRICT ~;i>.cond ...... Second Division Criminal. 185 224 128 89 281 96 Jay J. Alloy, Presiding Justice ",,""' John J. Stamos, Presiding Justice Walter Dixon Civil ..... 84 128 138 104 74 10 Robert J. Downing (assigned from - Albert Scott (assigned Third ...... the Circuit Court of Cook County) Criminal. from the 9th Judicial Circuit) 163 209 166 133 206 - 43 John C. Hayes - Allan L. Stouder Geurge N. Leighton Civil ..... 126 176 131 83 171 - 45 Fourth ...... /---> FOURTH DISTRICT Criminal. 254 194 216 137 232 22 Third Division James C. Craven, Presiding Justice John T. Dempsey, Presiding Justice Civil ..... 146 170 138 90 178 32 Leland Simkins (assigned from - Thomas A. McGloon Fifth ...... the 11 th Judicial Circuit) Criminal. 193 258 160 85 291 98 Daniel J. McNamara " - Samuel O. Smith Ulysses S. Schwartz (retired­ Harold Trapp Civil ..... 1,434 1,416 1,319 906 1,531 - 97 serving by assignment) Total ...... Criminal. 1,876 1,628 1,639 1,131 1,865 11 - Fourth Division FIFTH DISTRICT I' Edward C. Eberspacher, Presiding Justice *Includes 21 cases transferred from the Supreme Court to the five Appellate Court Districts. Henry L. Burman, Presiding Justice Caswell J. Crebs Thaddeus V. Adesko Charles E. Jones (assigned from Henry W. Dieringer the 2nd Judicial Circuit) Glenn T. Johnson George J. Moran Fifth Division Joseph J. Drucker, Presiding Justice Robert E. English Francis S. Lorenz I John J. Sullivan

1 \ , ! \ j l I

80 81 I!

,~------>~------CASES DISPOSED OF IN THE APPELLATE COURT IN 1973 TIME LAPSE BETWEEN DA"rE OF FILING AND DATE OF - - DISPOSITION OF C/\SES DECIDED IN THE Affirmed Disposed of iJismissed APPELLATE COURT DURING 1973 in without with - - Appellate District Affirmed Ii Reversed Part Modified Opinicd Opinion Tota.i - - Time Elapsed Civil ...... 170 7 243 13 764 295 36 Under 6-12 1-1 1/2 11/2-2 2-3 OVer First ...... , -- Appellate District 6 Mos. Mos. Years Years Years 3 Years

.~. Criminal ... 463 193 35 64 209 5 96;) , ..., - Civil ...... 88 171 209 159 113 24 Civil ...... 60 34 9 3 39 3 14J Fust ...... Second ...... - Criminal ... 108 268 319 170 85 19 Criminal ... 62 16 6 6 37 1 123 - - Civil ...... 25 22 94 6 0 0 Civil ...... 63 31 8 1 34 1 133 Second ...... Third ...... - Criminal ... 19 53 52 5 0 0 Criminal ... 60 44 4 23 33 2 166 --- - Civil ..... " 46 76 14 2 0 0 Civil ...... 50 21 8 0 48 4 131 Third ...... Fourth ...... Criminal ... 38 57 63 5 3 0 Criminal ... 77 26 32 0 79 2 216 -- Civil .... 36 35 44 12 4 0 Civil ...... 51 30 5 1 49 2 138 Fourth ...... Fifth ...... Criminal ... 50 58 63 34 11 0 Criminal ... 38 36 3 6 76 1 160 C,ivil ...... 34 38 37 20 6 3. Civil ...... 519 286 66 12 413 23 1,319 Fifth ...... - Total ...... Criminal ... 59 36 36 20 7 2 Crirninal ... 700 315 80 99 434 11 1,639 ,- -... - .- Civil ...... 229 342 398 199 123 27 Total ...... Criminal ... 2.74 472 533 234 106 21

82 83 .. >41; r'J U TIME LAPSE BETWEEN DATE BRIEFS WERE FILED AND ABSTRACT SUMMARY OF THE NUMBER OF OPINIONS DATE OF DISPOSITION OF CASES DECIDED IN q WRITTEN BY JUDGES OF THE APPELLATE COURT THE APPELLATE COURT DURING 1973 II DURING 1973 -' - Time Elapsed -'- '·.1,. TYPE OF OPINION - 1 I Under 6-12 1-11/2 11/2-2 2-3 Over Appellate Specially Supplemental Appellate District 6 Mos. Mos. Years Years Years 3 '(eari, l District Majority Memorandum Concurring Dissenting (non-add) Total - r _r.o Civil 218 191 86 21 4 1 I, ...... ! F';t District .. , .. , , 1,112* 2 4 14 16 1,132 First ...... , ...... _.. Criminal ... 466 180 30 8 3 0. 11 I S:· ::ond District .... 196* 0 1 7 8 204 -. Civil 2 0 11 ...... 49 70 26 0 <' Third District .. , ... 237 0 4 20 0 261 Second ...... 1.1 ----.- Criminal ... 69 52 8 0 0 0 Fourth District ..... 220 0 ,III 1 18 1 239 Civil 72 ...... 28 0 0 0 0 Fifth District...... 165* 10 2 11 2 i88 Third ...... !I Criminal ... 0 i J 68 15 0 0 0 t 1 Total .... , ... , .. 1,930 12 12 70 27 2,024 i 1 Civil . \ .... 63 48 20 0 0 0 I \ * Includes 251 per curiam opinions in First District, 1 in Second District and 8 in Fifth District. Fourth ...... !I ii Criminal ... 129 75 12 0 0 0 l,,,.! Civil ...... 50 39 19 2 3 0 rI Fifth ...... I j Criminal ... 83 28 9 9 1 0 i

Civil ...... 452 376 151 25 7 1 Total ...... I Criminal ... 815 350 59 17 4 0 I ! I") I I"!I I I !

I

I:,i !I \ I\,1 !

III j ,! II II 84 I I 85 ~ ______dl ______r CIRCUIT COURT JUDICIAL OFFICERS OF THE STATE (April 1, 1973) COOK COUNTY Circuit Judges John S. Boyle, Chief Judge Earl Arkiss James' H. Felt Marvin E. Aspen LA SALL[ George Fiedler James M. Bailey John C. Fitzgerald Frank W. Barbaro Richard J. Fitzgerald Charles R. Barrett Thomas H. Fitzgerald Thomas W. Barrett Philip A. Fleischman Norman C. Barry Herbert R. Friedlund William M. Barth Louis B. Garippo Raymond K. Berg James A. Geocaris L. Sheldon Brown James A. Geroulis Abraham W. Brussell Louis J. Giliberto Nicholas J; Bua Richard A. Harewnod Robert C. Buckley Edward F. Healy Felix M. Buoscio John F. Hechinger Joseph J. Butler Jacques F. Heilingoetter David A. Canel Joseph B. Hermes Archibald J. Carey, Jr. Harry G. Hershenson David Cerda Warren J. Hickey Robert E. Cherry George A. Higgins Nathan M. Cohen Reginald J. Holzer Robert J. Collins Charles P. Horan Harry G. Comerford Robert L. Hunter Daniel A. Covelli Harry A. Iseberg James D. Crosson Mel R. Jiganti Wilbert F. Crowley Mark E. Jones Walter P. Dahl Sidney A. Jones, Jr. William V. Daly William 8. Kane Russell R. DeBow Nathan J. Kaplan Francis T. Delaney Anthony J. Kogut George E. Dolezal Norman A. Korfist Thomas C. Donovan Walter J. Kowalski Robert J. Downing (assigned to Franklin I. Kral Appellate Court - 1st District) Alvin J. Kvistad Raymond P. Drymalski Irving Landesman Arthur L. Dunne David Lefkovits Robert J. Dunne Robert E. McAuliffe Norman N. Eiger THE JUDICIAL CIRCUITS OF ILLINOIS Helen F. McGillicuddy Irving W. Eiserman John P. McGury Herbert A. Ellis Frank B. Machala Paul F. Elward Benjamin S. Mackoff Samuel B. Epstein Robert L. Massey Saul A. Epton Nicholas J. Matkovic Hyman Feldman Robert A. Meier, III

86 87 James J. Mejda Joseph A. Solan Richard H. Jorzak F. Emmett Morrissey Pasquale A. Sorrentino Marvin J. Peters Benjamin J. Kanter Frank R. Petrone James E. Murphy Jack I. Sperling Wallace I. Kargman James C. Murray Harry S. Stark James P. Piragine Helen J. Kelleher Bernard A. Polikoff Gordon B. Nash Sigmund J. Stefanowicz John J. Kelley, Jr. Benjamin Nelson Earl E. Strayhorn Simon S. Porter Irving Kipnis Francis X. Poynton Irving R. Normafl James E. Strunck Marilyn R. Komosa Donald J. O'Brien Chester .J. Strzalka Seymour S. Price Edwin Kretske John F. Reynolds Wayne W. Olson Harolo W. Sullivan Albert H. LaPlante Margaret G. O'Malley Robert J. Sulski Emanuel A. Rissman Maurice W. Lee Allen F. Rosin William F. Patterson Fred G. Suria, Jr. Richard F. LeFevour John E. Pavlik Vincent W. Tondryk Joseph A. Salerno Reuben J. Liffshin Richard L. Samuels Edward E. Plusdrak Raymond Trafelet "Iohn J. Limperis Maurice D. Pompey Eugene L. Wachowski George M. Schatz David Linn Harry A. Schrier Albert S. Porter Harold G. Ward Frank S. Loverde Joseph A. Power Alfonse F. Wells Joseph R. Schwab a Martin G. Luken Anthonv J. Scotillo Daniel A. Roberts Kenneth R. Wendt James Maher, Jr. Philip Romiti Louis A. Wexler Samuei Shamberg John M. Murphy David J. Shields Thomas D. Rosenberg Daniel J. White Erwin L. Martay Daniel J. Ryan William Sylvester White Harold A. Siegan John H. McCollom Frank M. Siracusa Edith S. Sampson Frank J. Wilson John J. McDonnell Raymond S. Sarnow Kenneth E. Wilson Jerome C. Siad William J. McGah, Jr. Raymond C. Sodini George J. Schaller Minor K. Wilson Dwight McKay Joseph Schneider Joseph Wosik Milton H. Solomon Anthony J. Mentone Robert C. Springsguth Ben Schwartz Arthur V. Zelezinski Joseph W. Mioduski Anton A. Smigiel Adam N. Stillo Anthony S. Montelione James N. Sullivan Joseph C. Mooney Robert A. Sweeney Associate Judges John J. Moran John F. Thornton John W. Navin Alvin A. Turner Charles A. Alfano Nathan Engelstein Earl J. Neal Thomas M. Walsh Peter Bakakos Carl F. Faust James L. Oakey, Jr. Lionel J. Berc William F. Fitzpatrick James M. Walton Paul A. O'Malley Jack A. Welfeld Nicholas J. Bohling John M. Flaherty John A. Ouska Anthony J. Bosco John Gannon Willie Mae Whiting Burton H. Palmer James A. Zafiratos John M. Breen, Jr. Lawrence Genesen William E. Peterson Martin F. Brodkin Paul F. Gerrity George J. Zimmerman Thomas R. Casey, Jr. Joseph R. Gill Thomas P. Cawley Francis W. Glowacki FIRST CIRCUIT Paul G. Ceaser Meyer H. Goldstein Circuit Judges Irwin Cohen Ben Gorenstein Cornelius J. Collins Myron T. Gomberg John H. Clayton, Chief Judge James A. Condon James L. Griffin Robert H. Chase Robert B. Porter Francis X. Connell Jacob S. Guthman Stewart Cluster Everett Prosser Richard K. Cooper Arthur N. Hamilton Peyton H. Kunce Paul D. Reese Ronald J. Crane Edwin C. Hatfield William A. Lewis Richard E. Richman John J. Crowley John J. Hogan Harry L. McCabe Dorothy W. Spomer Robert J. Dempsey Louis J. Hyde Jack C. Morris R. Gerald Trampe Russell J. Dolce Thomas J. Janczy George Oros John T. Duffy Rudolph L. Janega George B. Duggan Lester JankOWski Associate Judges Charles J. Durham Robert F. Jerrick Michael P. O'Shea Ben Edelstein Eddie C. Johnson Robert W. Schwartz 88 89 1"

SECOND CIRCUIT Associate Judge Circuit Judges Robert M. Wa,shburn Henry Lewis, Chief Judge FIFTH CIRCUIT Philip B. Benefiel Clarence E. Partee Circuit Judges John D. Daily Randell S. Quindry Jacob Berkowitz, Chief Judge William G. Eovaldi Wilburn Bruce Saxe Caslon K. Bennett James Kent Robinson Don AI Foster Alvin Lacy Williams Harry I. Hannah William J. Sunderman Charles Woodrow Frailey Carrie LaRoe Winter Carl A. Lund James R. Watson F. P. Hanagan Harry L. Ziegler frank J. Meyer Paul M. Wright A. Hanby Jones Ralph S. Pearman Charles E. Jones (assigned to Appellate Court) Associate Judges Lawrence T. Allen, Jr. Richard E. Scott Thomas Michael Burke John F. Twomey Associate Judges Matthew Andrew Jurczak Roland J. DeMarco Charles L. Quindry Charles Deneen Matthews SIXTH CIRCUIT Circuit Judges Birch E. Morgan, Chief Judge THIRD CIRCUIT William C. Calvin Rodney A. Scott Circuit Judges Frank J. Gollings James M. Sherrick Frederick S. Green John P. Shonkwiler Fred P. Schuman, Chief Judge Roger H. Little Creed D. Tucker Joseph J. Barr John Gitchoff Donald W. Morthland Albert G. Webber, III William L. Beatty James. O. Monroe, Jr. Joseph C. Munch Harold R. Clark Victor J. Mosele John L. DeLaurenti Associate Judges Henry Lester Brinkoetter James R. Palmer John L. Davis George Richard Skillman Associate Judges Wilbur A. Flessner Andrew Stf3cyk Sarah McAllister Lumpp Thomas R. Gibbons A. Andreas Matoesian Arthur L. Greenwood Harry R. Mondhink SEVENTH CIRCUIT Merlin Gerald Hiscott Roy W. Strawn William E. Johnson Doane Kent Trone Circuit Judges Howard Lee White, Chief Judge J. Waldo Ackerman George P. Coutrakon FOURTH CIRCUIT Jack A. Alfeld Simon L. Friedman Harvey Beam Byron E. ~,och Circuit Judges Francis J. Bergen Paul C. VI~rticchio George W. Kasserman, Jr., Chief Judge William D. Conway John B. Wright Daniel H. Dailey James E. McMackin, Jr. William A. Ginos Gail E. McWard Associate Judges Arthur G. Henken Jack M. Michaelree Richard J. Cadagin Charles J. Ryan Paul M. Hickman Robert J. Sanders Eugene O. Duban Dennis L. Schwartz Raymond O. Horn BilIJ. Slater Imy J. Feuer Gordon D. Seator George R. Kelly E. Harold Wineland Jerry S. Rhodes

90 91 ., ., r--- EIGHTH CIRCUIT I! Circuit Judges ELEVENTH CIRCUIT John T. Reardon, Chief Judge .I Circuit Judges Cecil J. Burrows Fred W. Reither Wendell E. Oliver, Chief Judge Paul R. Durr Richard F. Scholz I Stephen Adsit John T. McCullough Edward D. Turner Keith E. Campbell Lyle E. Lipe . 1 Leland Simkins (assigned Richard Mills Ernest H. Utter I Wilton Erlenborn to Appellate Court) J. Ross Pool Guy R. Williams ! Samuel Glenn Harrod, III Wayne C. Townley, Jr. I George Kaye Associate Judges I leo J. Altmix Alfred L. Pezman f Associate Judges Owen D. Lierman Virgil W. Timpe ! William T. Caisley Ivan Dean Johnson luther H, Dearborn Darrell H. Reno William 0, DeCardy Robert Leo Thornton NINTH CIRCUIT Circuit Judges Daniel J. Roberts, Chief Judge TWELFTH CIRCUIT Ezra J. Clark Gale A. Mathers Circuit Judges U.S. Collins Francis P. Murphy Victor N. Cardosi, Chief Judge John W. Gorby Albert Scott (assigned Patrick M. Burns David E. Oram Earle A. Kloster to Appellate Court) Wayne P. Dyer Michael A. Grenic Scott I. Klukos Keith F. Scott Robert E. Higgins Angelo F. Pistilli Robert J. Immel Thomas W. Vinson Associate Judges G. Durbin Ranney Jack R. Kirkpatrick Associate Judges Lewis D. Murphy William K. Richardson Russell A. Myers Keith Sanderson Roger A. Benson Louis K. Fontenot Robert W. Boyd John F. Gnadinger Robert R. Buchar John C. lang Charles P. Connor John F. Michela TENTH CIRCUIT Emil Dilorenzo John Verklan Circuit Judges Thomas P. Faulkner Ivan L. Yontz, Chief Judge Richard E. Eagleton Albert Pucci Edward E. Haugens John E. Richards THIRTEENTH CIRCUIT James D. Heiple Calvin R. Stone Circuit ,Judges Charles M. Wilson Robert E. Hunt Thomas R. Clydesdale, Chief Judge Charles W. Iben William P. Denny Robert W. Malmquist Thomas R. Flood John S. Massieon Associate Judges Leonard Hoffman W. J. Wimbiscus Robert A. Coney William John Reardon CarlO. Davies John D. Sullivan Arthur H. Gross John A. Whitney Associate Judges Espey C. Williamson John A. Holtzman John J. Clinch, Jr. C. Howard Wampler William H. Young David C. McCarthy Herman Ritter Robert G. Wren Wendell LeRoy Thompson John D. Zwanzig 92 93 I 1 [ FOURTEENTH CIRCUIT i i Circuit Judges Dan H. McNeal) Chief Judge

Robert M. Bell Paul E. Rink Ir ! Charles H. Carlstrom Charles J. Smith I Robert J. Horberg Conway l. Spanton Wilbur S. Johnson Richard Stengel I Frederick P. Patton l. l. Winn John Louis Poole Associate Judges Joseph G. Carpentier Jay M. Hanson Walter E. Clark Ivan Lovaas John B. Cunningham Edwin Clare Malone John R. Erhart Henry W. McNeal FIFTEENTH CIRCUIT

Circuit Judges I . ) James E. Bales, Chief Judge Eric S. DeMar Robert D. Law Wesley A. Eberle John l. Moore I Thomas E. Hornsby John W. Rapp, Jr. Associate Judges Alan W. Cargerman Dexter A. Knowlton I James R. Hansgen James M. Thorp i Martin D. Hill SIXTEENTH CIRCUIT Circuit Judges I John A. Krause) Chief Judge Ernest W. Akemann John S. Petersen James E. Boyle Paul WI Schnake Neil E. Mahoney Robert J. Sears Rex F. Meilinger Carl A. Swanson, Jr. John S. Page Associate Judges Donald T. Anderson William H. Ellsworth Thomas J. Burke Joseph T. Suhler James W. Cadwell Carlyle Whipple Thomas S. Cliffe SEVENTEENTN CIRCUIT Circuit Judges Albert S. O'Sullivan, Chief Judge David R. 8abb John C. Layng Seely P. Forbes William R. Nash 94 John S. Ghent, Jr. John E. Sype Associate Judges John T. Beynon Michael R. Morrison Robert A. Blodgett John W. Nielsen Edwin John Kotche Alford R. Penniman Robert Elwood Leake

EIGHTEENTH CIRCUIT Circuit Judges LeRoy L. Rechenmacher, Chief Judge Edwin L. Douglas Philip F. Locke Bruce R. Fawell George W. Unverzagt William V. Hopf Alfred E. Woodward Associate Judges William E. Black Gordon Moffett George Borovic, Jr. Robert A. Nolan George Herbert Bunge Charles R. Norgle, Sr. Richard L. Calkins Jack T. Parish James E. Fitzgerald Lester P. Reiff Marvin E. Johnson George B. VanVleck Helen C. Kinney Blair Varnes NINETEENTH CIRCUIT Circuit Judges Lloyd A. VanDeusen, Chief Judge Henry H. Caldwell John J. Kaufman James H. Cooney Charles S. Parker LaVerne A. Dixon Glenn K. Seidenfeld (assigned Fred H. Geiger to Appellate Court) William J. Gleason Harry D. Strouse Associate Judges Thomas F. Baker Bernard J. Juron Leonard Brody Paul J. Kilkelly Eugene T. Daly Robert K. McQueen Thomas R. Doran Alvin I. Singer Warren Fox Robert J. Smart John L. Hughes

TWENTIETH CIRCUIT Circuit Judges Richard T. Carter, Chief Judge Robert Bastien Robert L. Gagen Carl H. Becker James Wendell Gray Joseph F. Cunningham John J. Hoban Harold O. Farmer Alvin H. Maeys, Jr. William P. Fleming Francis E. Maxwell

95 I Associate Judges RATIO OF CASELOAD PER JUDGE IN THE CIRCUIT COURTS OF ILLINOIS DURING 1973 Anthony A. Bloemer Ora Polk , .. David W. Costello Robert B. Rutledge, Jr. Number John T. Fiedler George H. Sansom Population Total of Circuit Robert J. Saunders Number (1970 Area Number of Judges, Average No. Barney E. Johnston of Federal (Square Cases Flied Associate of Cases per James F. Wheatley Billy Jones -_. Circuit Counties Census) Miles) During 1973 Judges Judge Cook ...... , . " ...... 1 5,492,369 954 2,043,994 253 8079 1:.:t ...... •...... •...... •...... •.. 9 191,873 3,242 31,503 16 1969 2r,d ...... 12 199,194 4,796 24,909 18 1384 3;d ...... 2 264,946 1,114 44,976 16 2811 41.11 •.....•.... '" .•••.•.•.•...•..... 9 226,934 5,425 31,642 14 2260 5th ...... 5 192,441 2,885 28,991 15 1933 6th ...... 6 353,035 ~l,178 58,898 19 3100 7th ...... , 6 283,668 3,485 42,826 18 2379 8th ...... '" '" .. " ..... 8 149,507 3,918 21,236 15 1416 9th ...... 6 193,514 3,904 30,432 16 1902 10th ...... 5 339,786 2,129 55,122 20 2756 11th ...... 5 223,011 3,853 47,962 15 3197 12th ...... 3 380,280 2,647 73,196 20 3660 13th ...... 3 176,485 2,453 28,872 13 2221 14th ...... 4 300,122 2,492 61,063 20 3053 15th ...... 5 170,717 3,136 30,106 12 2509 16th ...... 3 349.033 1,472 84,412 17 4965 17th ...... " ...... : ... 2 272,063 803 84,578 14 6041 18th ...... 1 491,882 331 91,820 21 4372 19th ...... 2 494,193 1,068 98,498 21 4690 20th ...... " .. 5 368,923 2,652 51,124 21 2434 Downstate Total ...... 101 5,621,607 54,983 1,022,166 341 2998 State Total ...... 102 11,113,976 55,937 3,066,160 594 5161

97 96 :1 NUMBER OF CASES BEGUN AND TERMINAn , THE CIACUIT COURT 1973 1 < ::=..:::- c-" (/) ',f (/J c.: (/) ::l(/J 0 c.: o Q) .2 C (/) Law Over Law $15,000 Q).- n; .2 (/) >. c 1 nl Q) § c.:'O 'I OJ (/) U._ - c $15,000 nl Q) ...... ·cu criCi nlo and Under ii3 :5 Q;J ; -l C E .9- 0. >. E E .l!l en; e:-..= u =E u .... u " j ," Q) ='iij nl- U OJ nl C 2?Q) ~ 0 .- 0 :z: C nl C Q nl :Em c~ l 0 '0 nl- .0 (/)0 Non- Non- .!!l o x §o §I: 'E ", (/) :05 c,- Cii .!: a: 'E nl .~ ro 'Qi EO e .... ~ 0> Circuit County Jury Jury Jury Jury 0 :2 w .... I- :2 :2 c' u. LL ~ Cf) 0.. 0 ~ 0 ~ County .- I L-... Circuit 1st ..... Alexander ...... Begun •.... '" 14 i 1 27 6 33 1 9 - 13 12 1 24 ::6 54 435 34 40 120 2,151 122 3,213 ...... Begun · ...... Alexander . ... 1st ''\ . " Reinstated .... ------

Johnson ...... Begun ...... 5 4 2 12 2 3 - 3 - - 33 8 - 16 45 42 14 - 707 12 908 ...... Begun ...... Johnson Reinstated .. , . ------· . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... ------1 +1 ------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 5 4 2 12 2 3 - 3 - - 33 8 - 15 46 42 14 - 707 12 908 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 6 3 3 12 6 3 2 5 - - 23 7 - 17 52 42 13 2 653 6 855 · .... Terminated

Massac ...... Begun ...... 8 1 2 24 6 8 - 20 2 - 91 23 20 60 186 128 29 92 1,101 30 1,831 ...... Begun · .. , . , ..... Massac Reinstated .... -- - 1 ------2 2 - - -- - 5 . . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... ------7 +7 ------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 8 1 2 25 6 8 - 20 2 -- 91 23 20 55 195 128 29 92 1,101 30 1,836 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 10 - 1 26 3 7 1 26 - - 83 27 42 66 251 114 31 83 1,076 27 1,874 · .. , . Terminated

--~"'.,,~ Pope ...... , ...... Begun ...... 1 3 - 9 - 3 --. 4 - - 19 5 9 7 66 20 17 - 164 28 355 ... , ..... Begun ...... Pope Reinstated .... ------· , . .. Reinstated Transferred .... ------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 1 3 - 9 - 3 - 4 - - 19 5 9 7 66 20 17 - 164 28 355 ..... Net Added Terminated. " . - 2 1 9 2 4 - 1 - - 17 3 4 4 48 20 17 - 161 28 321 · .... Terminated - Pulaski ...... Begun ...... 3 1 1 11 4 3 1 4 1 2 35 15 9 32 246 62 17 34 1,806 37 2,324 ., ...... Begun ...... Pulaski - - Reinstated '" . ------· , ... Reinstated Transferred .... ------3 +3 ------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 3 1 1 11 4 3 1 4 1 2 35 15 9 29 249 62 17 34 1,806 37 2,324 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 1 1 1 11 3 2 1 10 - - 36 10 8 25 243 62 17 31 1,801 34 2,297 · .... Terminated

Saline ...... , Begun ...... 28 10 5 93 19 15 - 25 - 13 172 39 63 84 343 267 86 139 1,743 3,144 ...... Begun ...... , ..... Saline - - - Reinstated '" . ------· . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... ------. ------· .... Transferred Net Added ... , 28 10 5 93 19 15 - 25 - 13 172 39 \'3 84 343 267 86 139 1,743 - 3,144 ..... Net Added Terminated. , .. 30 7 5 91 24 7 1 36 - 13 172 39 :;·7 74 289 266 69 115 1,684 - 2,989 · .... Terminated - -" Union ... , ...... Begun ...... 11 9 - 34 17 7 4 4 - 852 86 19 .3 57 135 132 45 117 1,698 29 3,281 ...... Begun ...... Union Reinstated .. , . ------.------· . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... ------".~ .- -3 +3 ------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 11 9 - 34 17 7 4 4 - 852 86 19 • '5 54 138 132 45 117 1,698 29 3,281 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 13 2 3 37 7 2 -- - 857 78 4 5 28 90 102 15 71 1,625 16 2,955 · .... Terminated - f- . -58 Williamson ...... Begun ...... I 54 '12 10 97 44 16 2 24 7 2 : 40 ~9 146 397 691 111 183 4,868 63 7,184 ...... Begun ...... Williamson Reinstated .... 6 - 2 4 1 - - - 2 - 7 - .- 9 1 - - - - - 32 · .... Reinstated -3 -,' Transferred .... - - +3 ------1 +1 - - - - - • .q• •• Transferred Net Added .... 60 12 15 98 45 16 2 24 9 2 '47 58 ;:8 154 399 691 111 183 4,868 63 7,216 ..... Net Added Terminated. '" 69 9 29 128 48 27 6 34 6 2 . 01 87 ;~O 165 308 704 120 142 4,810 55 7,170 · .... Terminated 1-.. -259 1st ..... Circuit Totals ...... Begun ...... 181 67 43 457 138 105 27 143 10 882 1, 47 260 634 2,266 1,972 509 2,238 19,735 393 31,466 ...... , Begun ... " Circuit Totals .... 1st Reinstated .... 6 - 2 5 1 - -- 2 - 7 - - 11 3 - - - - - 37 · . , .. Reinstated Transferred .... - - +3 -3 ------19 +19 ------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 187 67 48 459 139 105 27 143 12 882 1,iS4 259 260 626 2,288 1,972 509 2,238 19,735 393 31,503 , .... Net Added 274 Terminated .... 215 46 53 500 146 83 25 143 6 888 1,15 9 - 213 614 2,034 1,963 467 2,314 19,276 351 30,770 · .... Terminated

98 99 ,( i1

NUMBER OF CASES BEGUN AND TERMINAll ?\N THE CIRCUIT COURT 1973

(fl , , (fl C d ::1(fl .Q '} (fl Law Over o 0) >-. Law $15,000 0).- c co i 0 C $15,000 C: c"O (00 c (fl and Under w row +-' 'co :5 m .QCIl u C E .9- 0. II) 0) CIl 0) is -c =E u ~ u .91 u.- ro 0 C g? 0 .- 0 :mm "- E E 0) c- 2::.;::: (1) ~O) >- Non- Non- x 0 2:: 'c 0) C1l~ 0) m .c .!!? a: o 50 ~:z: 0) c ='cu co .S! 'E ro > 0 "0 m- .0 c .Q (flo Circuit County Jury Jury Jury Jury 0 :2 w 'E > (fl Co- Cii I- :2 :2 Q ctl ::1 Qi EO 0 '0> ~ ...., LL 0> u.. ~ (f) 0: 0 ~ 0 o 2nd .... Crawford 0 • 0 o ••• 0 " Begun .•.... 0 •• 2 6 3 40 20 9 1 11 9 162- I- County Circuit Reinstated .... - - 36 30 27 273 236 103 119 1,110 ------16 2,213 •••• 0· •• - - Begun . ... , ... Crawford '" 2nd Transferred .... +1 -1 +2 -2 ------• 0 •• Reinstated Net Added .... - -2 +2 - 3 5 5 38 20 9 1 11 - 9 ·62 ------o .•. Transferred 36 30 25 275 236 Terminated .... 9 3 4 33 7 8 1 8 - 9 .68 103 119 1,110 16 2,213 .... Net Added 40 18 11 221 217 .- 82 84 1,077 15 2,015 · ... Terminated Edwards .. 0 •••••••• Begun 0 •• 0 •••• 1 8 - 8 2 - 4 9 1 19 - r- 12 12 7 45 106 41 Reinstated '" . ------4 540 42 861 .. Begun -- - - ..... •• 0 ••••• 0 Edwards Transferred .... +1 -1 ------· . .. Fleinstated - - -2 +2 Net Added. 0 0 0 2 7 - 8 2 - 4 9 - 1 19 ------· ... Transferred 12 12 5 47 106 Terminated .... 2 2 - 14 3 3 1 9 - 1 21 41 4 540 42 861 .... Net Added 9 3 6 29 108 47 3 551 42 854 o ••• Terminated Franklin 0 ••• 0 •••• 0 0 Begun ...... 43 9 6 61 29 9 34 2 4 224 52 28 72 395 Reinstated '" - - - 405 112 187 2,843 90 . ------4,605 • 0 0 ••• 0" Begun •••••••• 0 - -- - 2 Franklin Transferred .... ------2 · ... Reinstated Net Added .... 43 9 6 61 29 9 - 34 2 4 224 - - -8 +8 - - - - • , •• 0 52 28 - - Transferred Terminated .... 31 9 8 62 25 13 - 20 2 211 64 405 405 112 187 2,843 90 - 4,607 • 0 0 •• Net Added 33 8 67 387 345 88 179 2,635 73 4,196 · .... Terminated Gallatin ...... , .. Begun ...... 4 2 - 18 8 5 2 5 1 48 Reinstated .... - - - 6 6 9 120 161 39 170 786 ------9 1,399 " 0 •••••• Begun - - "" o. 0 0 ••• Gallatin 0 • - Transferred .. ------· . . .. Reinstated ,- -1 - - Net Added .... 4 2 18 8 5 2 J 1 48 - - +1 ------• ••• 0 Transferred 6 6 8 121 - Terminated 0 •• 0 6 3 2 23 1 3 - - - - 38 161 39 170 786 9 1,399 ..... Net Added 6 5 31 159 138 17 150 733 9 1,324 .... , Terminated Hamilton ., ...... Begun .. 0 ••••• 4 2 - 23 9 1 - 1 - 3 35 8 5 12 Reinstated .... ------50 67 45 17 673 11 966 - ...... Begun •••••.•• o. Hamilton 0 0 - Transferred .. ------1 - - - 1 · . . .. Reinstated - - -5 +5 Net Added o' o' 4 2 - 23 9 1 - 1 - 3 35 ------· .... Transferred 8 5 7 55 0 • 0 0 67 46 Terminated 5 2 2 22 7 1 - 1 - 3 46 17 673 11 967 ••• o. Net Added 9 15 14 65 58 37 16 677 10 990 · .... Terminated Hardin ... , ...... Begun .. 0 o. o. 0 3 1 1 6 3 1 - 5 -- 1 25 Reinstated .... 1 6 7 35 97 16 6 205 ------7 426 ••• 0 ••••• Begun - - - - •••••• 0 •••• 0 - , : - Hardin Transferred 0 • 0 • ------· .. " Reinstated Net Added .... 3 1 1 6 3 1 5 1 25 ------· .... Transferred - - 1 6 7 - Terminated .... 2 - - 2 6 1 - 6 - - 29 35 97 16 6 205 7 426 ..... NeLAdded 1 17 9 51 80 3 6 191 6 410 • •• 0 0 Terminated Jefferson ..... 0 • 0 •• Begun .... 0 0 o. 31 17 11 141 28 16 2 9 1 56 232 38 57 Reinstated , 85 176 362 120 52 1,860 .. . - - - 1 - 15 39 3,333 o. 0 •••••• - - - - - Begun • 0 ••• o. " - 3 Jefferson 0 - 5 1 Transferred ... +1 -1 +3 -2 ------25 · •• o. Reinstated - - - - ,- -4 Net Added .... 32 16 14 139 29 16 2 9 1 56 247 - +4 -1 - - - - - · .... Transferred 38 57 84 180 366 Terminated 0 ••• 29 7 12 108 12 12 4 2 1 38 215 121 52 1,860 39 3,358 ..... Net Added 33 31 129 - 208 285 131 38 1,798 37 3,130 '" .. Terminated Lawrence ...... • · Begun .•...... 3 3 1 18 17 5 - 9 - 2 86 26 Reinstated 2 28 34 193 174 81 217 1,571 26 .... - - 8 2,494 • 0 ------...... Begun ••• 0 ••••• Lawrence 1 Transferred ... 0 ------11 • •• 0 0 Reinstated - -6 Net Added ... 0 3 3 1 20 - '- +6 - 17 5 - 9 - 2 94 - - - - - o 0 •• 0 Transferred 26 28 29 199 Terminated. 0 •• 5 1 174- 81 217 1,571 4 13 4 4 12 1 77 26 2,505 0 •••• Net Added - - 24 19 19 208 168 62 170 1,381 27 2,199 .- 1-...... • Terminated Richland ...... 0 · Begun ..... 0', 6 20 4 23 12 4 1 26 - 10 72 -30 46 Reinstated - 30 356 168 48 18 1,429 33 2,336 '" ------...... Begun 0 •••••••• 0 Richland . - '- Transferred .... ------3 - - - 3 .. . .. Reinstated - - -1 - Net Added .. o. 6 20 4 23 12 4 1 26 - 10 72 - - +1 ------· .... Transferred 30 46 29 Terminated .... 10 12 2 24 13 4 - 48 7 12 70 357 171 48 18 1,429 33 2,339 ..... Net Added 66 32 33 347 351 4E: 12 1,180 33 2,302 · .... Terminated Wabash. 0 •••••• o' · Begun ..., .... 0 - 5 2 40 10 8 2 26 - 5 -71 20 24 95 Reinstated .... - - 267 232 55 154 751 14 1,781 ...... Begun ------••••• 0 •••• Wabash Transferred .... ------· .... Reinstated - - - - -3 Net Added. 0 •• +3 - 5 2 40 10 8 2 26 - 5 71 20 ------· .... Transferred Terminated ..•. 24 92 270 232 55 154 1 1 - 9 2 1 - 11 - 3 48 5 751 14 1,781 ..... Net Added 5 79 192 138 45 147 - 617 15 1,3~? . , .. 0 Terminated

100 101 j I J NUMBER OF GASES BEGUN AND TER -~ THE CIRCUIT COURT 1973 ;::0.;..- _.

(f) I i I I i (f) C 1 (f) :J (f) .2 0 i j (f) C CLI Law OVer Law $15,000 Q).-o C c Cii (\) Q) C .2 (f) $15,000 C c'O Q) I/) -c and Under Q) (\) Q) -'co roo £ ..91 u.Q (\)o . u C E <1l >, E E Q) c- =E .§' e- -ro (,) >- C Q) (\).!!! C ~Q) ~ 0 .- 0 E Q) Q) c = Oro 'Cii t.) c:=Q) (\) (\) (5 .0 '0 (\)- .0 cO Non- Non- .~ x §o I > If) 1/)0 .c a: 'Eo ro m > E ;J EO !E Co- Circuit ro Qi 'E?> (\) ro County Jury Jury Jury Jury 0 :2 w I- :2 ::2 t5 u. ., u. ~ CJ) e ... 0> CL 0 I- () ;§ '- -" County Wayne ...... Begun .~ ...... 10 3 - 20 14 5 1 29 - 7 ';7 -24 :9 29 144 683 Circuil 43 20 863 25 2,006 Reinstated .... ------•..... ". Begun ." ...... Wayne Transferred .... ------4 +4 - - - · ... , Reinstated Net Added .... - - - - · .... Transferred 10 3 - 20 14 5 1 29 - 7 37 24 i9 25 148 683 43 20 - Terminated .... :9 863 25 2,006 ..... Net Added 3 3 1 25 10 5 1 24 3 - 18 24 30 181 544 92 18 - 835 22 1,908 · .... Terminated White ...... Begun .. , .... , 10 3 30 14 14 1 4 2 2 1'~2 27 :i0 52 147 - 177 89 119 1,569 34 Reinstated .... ------1 .- - 2,446 . .... , •.. Begun .•...... White ------1 0 - · ... , Reinstated Transferred ... ------Net Added .... 10 3 14 27 ::10 52 -- - - · •... Transferred - 30 14 1 4 2 2 123 147 177 89 119 1,569 Terminated .... 34 2,447 ...•. Net Added 2 3 2 24 11 11 - 6 3 1 149 19 6 32 88 136 103 106 -- 1,41 f) 32 2,153 · .... Terminated 2nd., .. Circuit Totals ... 0 •• 0 ••• ' •• Begun. 117 79 28 428 166 77 14 168 5 101 1,163 280 291 459 2,201 2,868 7~2 1,083 14,200 346 24,866 . •..... ,. Begun Reinstated , ... - - - 2 1 -- -- _. 24 - - 4 2 8 2 •••• 0 Circuit Totals ... 2nd - - - 43 · .... Reinstated Transferred ... , +3 -3 +5 -4 ------. - - - -36 +36 -1 - - - - · .... Transferred Net Added .... 120 76 33 426 167 77 14 168 5 10'/ 1,'/87 280 291 427 2,239 2,875 794 1,083 - 14,200 346 24,909 ..... Net Added Terminated, .. , 105 46 37 359 101 66 7 147 14 70 1,140 269 178 460 2,136 2,568 753 929 13,094 321 22,800 · .... Terminated

0_ Bond ... __ 3rd, ...... Begun o. 0 •• ' •• 5 1 13 21 7 3 - 8 3 67 15 33 15 143 161 - 64 17 903 23 1,502 Reinstated .... - - 19 - - - 2 • 0 •••• ' •• Begun ...... Bond ------~ 21 Transferred .... ------· . . .. Reinstated • 0 ••• Net Added 0 0 • , 5 1 13 21 7 3 - 8 3 86 15 33 15 143 - - Transferred - 163 64 17 903 23 1,523 0 •••• Terminated 0 ••• 3 ' 15 8 Net Added 1 3 3 ,- 3 - 6 - 2 80 33 17 140 138 27 15 - 825 20 1,339 · .... Terminated Madison. _.... " ... 530' 0 Begun., ...... 544 266 313 234 170 82 209 2 351 1,701 623 442 1,062 2,938 7,300 669 3,936 21,967 97 43,436 ...... , Begun Reinstated . 0 •• 6 - 8 2 - 1 ------...... Madison 3rd ------17 ... Transferred ... 0 +39 -38 +68 -69 ------., - -48 +48 - · . . .. Reinstated - - - - 0- · .... Transferred Net Added . 0 •• 589 228 389 463 234' 171 82 209 2 351 1,701 623 442 1,014 2,986 - 7,300 669 3,936 21,967 97 43,453 0 407 ..... Net Added Terminated ... 713 153 374 476 370 270 98 - 1 403 1,717 404 938 2,765 10,903 620 3,776 21,924 88 46,400 · .... Terminated 3rd. __ ,_ - Circuit Tolals " _... Begun .... ,., . 549 267 326 551 241 173 82 217 2 354 1,768 638 475 1,077 3,081 7,461 733 3,953 22,870 120 44,938 ...... Begun Reinstated 0 ••• 6 - 8 2 1 19 - ..... Circuit Totals " 3rd ------2 - - 38 . Transferred .... +39 -38 +68 -69 ------48 +48 - - - · . . .. Reinstated - - - · .... Transferred 0 638 - Net Added ... 594 229 402 484 241 174 82 217 2 354 1,787 475 1,029 3,129 7,463 733 3,953 - - 415 22,870 120 44,976 · .... Net Added Terminated .... 716 154 377 491 373 273 98 6 1 405 1,797 437 95~ 2,905 11,041 647 3,791 22,749 108 47,739 · .... Terminated

4th ..... Christian ...... Begun ... 0 •••• 9 7 4 91 14 8 - 30 1 134 44 38 94 226 409 - 242 6 3,055 56 4,468 ...... Begun Reinstated .... 1 2 1 4 - - --- 37 - 1 82 ,- ...... , . Christian ... 4th - - - - - 128 · .... Reinstated Transferred .... +4 -4 +7 -7 ------"- -14 +14 - - - 44 - - - - · .... Transferred Net Added .... 14 5 12 88 14 8 - 30 1 - 171 38 81 240 491 242 6 33 3,055 56 4,596 . .... Net Added Terminated .... 10 4 5 69 5 7 - 28 7 3 141 :;4 83 210 460 148 5 .. 2,890 54 4,196 " '" Terminated Clay ...... · Begun ...... 7 2 4 50 22 6 4 9 3 63 29 ::9 48 223 - 247 90 42 1,031 20 1,929 Reinstated .... 2 3 - ...... Begun ...... '" .. Clay ------5 ~.'- - · . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... ------9 +9 ------· .... Transferred Net,Added .... 7 2 6 53 22 6 4 9 3 63 29 ~:j 39 232 - -- - 247 90 42 1,031 20 1,934 Terminated ... _ 7 1 25 15 ..... Net Added 6 49 28 5 4 28 - 11 67 25 198 376 104 39 936 t-- 20 1,944 · .... Terminated .- 19 0 ••••••••• 0 --- Clinton. · Begun ...... 19 13 - 8 26 7 4 3 9 - 6 52 42 202 155 129 48 1,206 Reinstated .... ------.- - 139 2,087 ...... Begun ..•.•••..•. Clinton ------· . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... ------"------19 ------· , , , . Transferred Net Added ... 0 13 - 8 26 7 4 3 9 6 52 19 42 202 155 - 10 129 48 1,206 139 2,087 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 41 - 15 4 4 -- -- 1 48 1 19 76 87 - 77 53 1,115 141 1,692 · .... Terminated .- 16 Effingham ...... · Begun .. : .. '" 14 7 1 28 14 8 4 16 108 51 26 519 - 2 234 132 66 4,113 28 5,387 Reinstated .... ------1 ...... Begun ...... Effingham ------1 · .. " Reinstated Transferred .... - +1 - -~. -1 ------16------· . , .. Transferred Net Added .... 14 7 1 29 14 8 4 16 2 108 51 26 520 233 - - - 13 132 66 4,113 28 5,388 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 14 4 , 2 63 8 4 3 26 - 1 103 43 43 587 197 127 - - 39 4,021 27 5,325 .•.•. Terminated

102 103 1 I '1 I ~ • NUMBER OF CASES BEGUN AND TERMINATE! IN THE CIRCUIT COURT 1973 - /I) I I I /I) i I I I I e: ~ :;) /I) .Q 0 00) ! /I) c Law Over Law $15,000 0).- Ci1 ',<1 c:: >. c"o e: ro 0) e: $15,000 ~. ~'(ij £) Q) /I) ~~ and Under 0) ro 0) ruo $ u.Q C(lo . u =E e: E >. E E 0) e:- c ·fr e- ru-ai 25 .::- c: 0) C(l$ c:~ 2l 0) ~ 0 .- 0 -Q) ... 0) c: ='(ii Ci1 u OJ ro Non- Non- ro 0 0 '0 ro- e: 0 (1)(5 .~ a: 'Eo >< §o I ::. 'E > /I) n .c m :;) '03 0 E '"iii Circuit County Jury Jury Jury Jury 0 Ol EO E> ro c·- ::2 w ~ 2 2 CS U. 'J u.. ~ C/) ...... 0> 0- 0 f- 0 .- ~ County Circuil Fayette ...... " " ,. Begun ..' ..... , 4 10 1 55 17 13 4 2 ?4 r- 35 53 19 164 209 130 6 2,808 Reinstated .... ------66 3,680 ...... Begun ...... Fayette Transferred .... ------7 +7 -- - - - · . . .. Reinstated Net Added .... ------· .... Transferred 4 10 1 55 17 13 - 4 2 14 29 35 46 171 209 130 - - - - 6 2,808 66 3,680 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 13 3 47 14 10 - 7 1 (34 26 34 36 162 171 202 - - 5 2,941 67 3,803 · .... Terminated

Jasper .. ", , < ••• ~ • Begun ...... 9 2 -"'- 1 1 19 9 7 8 1 1 ;11 14 17 6 47 48 66 5 Reinstated .... - -. 428 9 719 '" '" ... Begu.n ...... Jasper ------Transferred .... +2 ,·2 ------,- - -1 +1 -- -- - · . . .. Reinstated ------~ - - · .... Transferred Net Added ... 3 7 1 19 9 2 7 8 1 1 ~1 14 17 5 48 48 66 - 5 428 9 719 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 4 7 2 18 9 1 5 1 1 16 8 3 5 35 40 32 -- 5 414 8 61t) · .... Terminated Marion ..... , ...... Begun ...... 21 12 9 78 16 25 1 15 1 52 278 103 123 83 451 376 183 381 3,924 19 6,151 Reinstated .... - - 2 ------1 ...... Begun ...... Marion ------....0- Transferred .... +2 ··2 ------3 +3 - 3 . . . .. Reinstated - - - - - · .... Transferred Net Added .... 23 10 9 80 16 25 1 15 1 52 278 103 123 81 454 376 183 - 381 3,924 19 6,154 ..... Net Added , Terminated .... 40 11 11 184 23 25 4 27 45 286 114 115 89 662 341 125 -- 322 3,670 20 6,114 ....• Terminated Montgomery " ..... Begun ...... 22 8 3 62 19 11 1 138 46 51 4 - - 83 543 399 179 112 2,868 Reinstated .... ------45 4,594 ...... Begun Montgomery ------· . . .. Reinstated . Transferred .... ------4 +4 ------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 22 8 3 62 4 19 - 11 - 1 138 46 51 79 547 399 - 1'9 112 2,868 45 4,694 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 14 4 7 30 10 16 17 14 - 1 '125 40 22 62 479 222 141 102 2,562 35 3,903 · .... Terminated Shelby ...... ,., ... Begun ...... 3 4 1 22 6 4 4 30 -- 76 19 15 16 397 154 138 , 55 1,304 230 2.478 ...... Begun Reinstated .. , . 1 - 1 2 2 -- - - _. 2 - 4 ...... , " Shelby ------12 · . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... ------4 +4 ------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 4 4 2 24 8 4 4 30 -- 78 19 15 12 405 154 138 -- 55 1,304 230 2.490 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 10 10 3 65 15 16 2 43 - 87 36 6 13 353 305 285 - 42 1,097 201 2,589 · .... Terminated 4th. . '" . Circuit Totals ... , , . Begun ...... 94 59 32 431 109 89 23 132 5 65 944 319 378 451 2,772 2,231 1,289 721 20,737 612 31.493 ...... Begun Reinstated .... 2 2 4 11 2 - - - - - 39 - -- 2 5 82 ... " Circuit Totals . ... 4th -- - - - 149 , . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... +8 -8 +? -6 ------42 +42 -1 Net Added .... 104 -- - - - · .... Transferred 53 4:3 436 111 89 23 132 5 65 983 3W 378 411 2,819 2,312 1,289 721 - Terminated .. , . 20,737 612 31,642 ..... Net Added 153 44 51 529 116 84 30 178 9 63 937 305 273 375 2,762 2,199 1,241 612 19,646 573 30,180 '" .. Terminated I 5th ..... Clark,.", ... ,., ... Begun .. ,." .. 7 1 30 16 6 3 31 67 33 '- 6 - - - 146 270 92 78 2,160 45 2,991 ...... Begun ..... , ...... Clark Reinstated .... 1 ------1 - .... 5th Transferrad .... ------,- - - - 2 .. , .. Reinstated ------· .... Transferred Net Added ... , 8 - 1 30 16 6 3 31 -- 67 33 6 146 -- -- - 271 92 78 2,160 45 2,993 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 9 7 1 25 20 8 3 37 -- 60 37 3 156 246 .- - 85 77 2,097 46 2,917 ..... Terminated Coles ...... Begun ...... 18 113 35 13 110 29 18 2 6 - 3 ~~02 53 121 466 549 352 481 Reinstated .... ------2,757 37 5.465 ...... Begun ...... Coles ------· .. " Reinstated Transferred .... ------22 +22 - - 113 '------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 35 18 13 110 29 18 2 6 3 302 53 99 488 549 - - 352 481 2,757 37 5.465 .. " . Net Added Terminated .... 31 14 5 116 26 16 - 6 1 - .~91 98 ;-;5 94 402 699 .- 231 481 2,757 37 5,360 · .... Terminated Cumberland ...... Begun ...... 2 7 9 1 30 3 ------13 118 35 50 - 677 Reinstated .... ------945 ...... • Begun ...... Cumberl!lnd ------• .. " Reinstated Transferred .... ------1 +1 ------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 2 - - 7 9 1 - - 30 3 12 119 ------35 50 - 677 945 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 1 - - 2 - 1 4 1 - 1 29 3 2 13 99 - - 38 38 - 626 - 858 · .... Terminated Edgar ...... Begun ... '..... 13 3 44 5 4 23 2 1 129- 35 63 - - 72 262 254 134 2 1,287 Reinstated .... - - - - 1 - - - - - 27 2,350 ..... Begun .., " ...... Edgar Transferred •... ------'I ...•. Reinstated ------7 +7 Net Added •... 13 3 44 6 4 23 2 1 129 35 ------· •... Transferred - - 53 66 269 254 134 1,287 Terminated .... 6 3 12 106 18 2 27 2,351 ..... Net Added - 33 6 3 22 -- 15 28 248 191 - - 318 2 1,286 27 2,324 ..... Terminated - 104 105 ,l ,.~

!t NUMBER OF CASES BEGUN AND TERMINATal~ THE CIRCUIT COURT 1973

Ul I I i I i Ul e -- :::l Ul 0 ~ Cll 0 Law Over Law $15,000 oCll._ e >- e ~ c: Ul $15,000 e"O ~'(ij ..c: (\l 09 Ul and Under (lj Cll roo Cll C/) w§ -c: Iii e E (t. uo_ (\l 0 u =E .§- e- --ai t' ~ Cll e- C :!? 0 .- 0 $Cll .. >- E oS 2::;:: (lj ~ Cll ~ 'c c Cll n; til..!!! Non- Non- o x ~, Cll =C1l c: 0 Clltll ..c: .<.!l a: 'E (\l §o ai::r: 0 "0 .D UlO 'E > Ul ~ Co- iii Circuit County Jury Jury Jury Jury 0 2 w t- 2 2 c l\! ....,:::l Qi E0 e '5>... (\l u. u. ~ en a.. a 0> " t= 0 ~ Vermilion ...... Begun.:...... 69 22 41 258 53 35 17 155 88 6:;3- County Circuit 1 192 211 1,010 1.089 Reinstated .... 1 1 207 344 2,502 10,150 137 17,214 ------3 4 5 9 - · ...... " Begun • • 0 • 0 • 0 • • Vermilion Transferred .... +1 -1 +3 -2 -- - , - -- - - 23 · . . .. Reinstat.ed ------7 +7 -1 Net Added .... 70 21 44 257 54 35 17 155 1 88 6;,3 - - - -' • 0 •• 0 Transferred 210 i96 209 1.026 1,088 - Terminated .... 75 22 37 177 49 45 344 2,502 10.150 137 17.237 ..... Net Added 3 119 1 81 6'8 168 195 177 886 807 317 2,407 10.169 147 16,500 --- - • '" 0 Terminated 5th .. , .. Circuit Totals ...... Begun ...... 126 43 C),5 449 112 64 45 - 194 1 92 1,1';1 ~~98 423 391 2.002 2.197 972 3.063 17,031 246 Reinstated .... 1 1 2 28/965 • 0 0 •••••• Begun t, ••• ------3 4 5 9 1 .. Circuit Tolals ' .... 5th Transferred .... +1 -I +3 -2 - - - - 26 · .... Reinstated ------.- - -37 +37 - -1 ~ Net Added .... 128 42 58 448 114 64 45 194 1 92 1.11)1 - - -- · .... Transferred 394 i02 391 2,048 2.197 972 - Terminated .... 122 46 43 353 101 73 22 185 2 82 1.11)4 3.063 17.0~11 246 28.991 ..... Net Added 324 267 315 1,791 1.981 989 2.967 16,935 257 27,959 · .... Terminated 6th ..... Champaign ...... Begun ...... 175 67 4 572 122 55 2 16 83 - -- 93d 229 225 923 1,300 2,187 Reinstated .... 583 2.591 14,969 4 25.043 2 ------1 ...... Begun ...... Champaign ' .... 6th Transferred .... -' ------3 .... , Reinstated ------; -167 +167 Net Added .... 177 67 4 572 122 55 2 16 83 936 - - - - - · .... Transferred - 229 225 757 1,467 2.187 583 - Terminated .... 139 17 23 404 80 34 1 2 50 808 2,591 14,969 4 25,046 · . , .. Net Added - 195 167 612 1,386 1.614 33$ 1,975 14,898 7 22,750 · .... Terminated DeWitt .. " ...... ~egun , , , •. , .. 8 7 4 21 17 9 -- 9 1 6 85 35 30 71 244 338 113 57 1,553 Reinstated .... 1 7 2,615 • ••• 0 •••• Begun ------1 1 ...... DeWitt -- Transferred .... ------3 ..... Reinstated ------'- -8 +8 Net Added .... 8 8 4 21 17 9 9 1 6 85 - - - - - · .... Transferred -- 35 30 64 25" 338 -- Terminated .... 12 3 29 1 18 1 113 57 1.553 7 2.618 ..... Net Added - 11 -- 4 97 29 35 79 257 - 349 139 69 1.303 7 2,443 · .... Terminated Douglas ...... Begun ...... 11 1 53 10 6 -- 3 25 - 2 71 29 7 29 175 309 90 1,671 56 2,548 Reinstated .... ------•• 0 •••• o' Begun .. , ..... " douglas Transferred .... -,'o. ------· . . .. Reinstated ------Net Added .... 11 -- 1 53 10 3 6 25 "- 2 71 ------· .... Transfen'ed 2~ 7 29 175 309 90 Terminated .... 10 2 53 5 3 4/ 24 2 53 - 1,671 56 2,048 ..... Net Added -- - 23 13 24 300 300 111 6 1/798 54 2,785 . .... Terminated Macon ...... Begun ...... 88 20 23 538 75 28 4 10 . 23 31 805 - 165 393 409 2.164 Reinstated .... 2,831 448 1,104 15,416 91 24,666 ...... Begun ------.- -.------•• 0 ••••••••• Macon Transferred .... ------..------· . . .. Reinstated Net Added .... 88 20 23 538 75 28 4 fO 23 31 805 ------· .... Transferred 165 393 409 2.164 2,831 -- -- Terminated .... 101 17 22 496 47 448 1,104 15,416 91 24,666 ..... Net Added 22 2 7 10 54 830 49 300 282 1.676 2,541 338 901 13.169 87 20.951 ..... Terminated Moultrie ...... Begun ...... 3 3 40 5 2 -- -- 6 1 1 41 11 7 22 Reinstated .... 87 205 99 4 926 253 1.716 ...... Begun ------8 •••••• 0 •• 0 Moultrie ------~ - -- 2 Transferred .... ~ 10 ------~ - -- -- · .. " Reinstated ------6 +6 - Net Added .... 3 3 -- 40 5 2 -- 6 1 1 49 11 ------· .... Transferred 7 16 93 205 101 4 926 253 Terminated. '" 4 3 39 1 4 1 9 1 41 1.726 0 •••• Net Added -- -- 8 93 295 100 4 955 256 1.828 · .... Terminated Piatt ...... · Begun ...... 7 2 5 16 10 12 1 3 79 118 170 264 83 26 1,390 60 2.293 • 0 ••••••• Reinstated .... ------~l~ -- -- ..- - ~4~ 16 Begun • 0 •••••••••••• Piatt Transferred .... -- - 1 ------1 ... o. Reinstated ------1 +1 Net Added .•.. 7 2 5 16 10 9 5 12 1 3 79 ------• •• 0 • Transferred 17 16 117 171 265 83 26 1,390 60 2,294 ••• 0. NElt Added Terminated .••. 6 2 10 15 9 6 -- 7 1 1 69 13 13 31 157 226 68 24 1.399 56 2,113 - 1-...... Terminated 6th .... . Circuit Totals ••... · Begun ..•..... 292 99 37 1.240 239 106 17 78 26 126 2.d17 -486 ;)78 -.0".,.." 1,572 4.140 6,134 1,416 3.782 35,925 Reinstated .... 2 1 8 471 58,881 •••• 00 ••• Begun - - -- .. , .' Circuit Totals '" 0 .6th ------2 1 1 2 Transferred .... ------17 • 0 0 •• Reinstated - -- - -. ------182 +182 Net Added •... 294 100 37 1.240 23f.l 106 17 78 26 126 2.')25 486 ------· .... Transferred 1378 1/392 4,323 6,135 1,418 3,782 35,925 Terminated, .. 0 272 39 60 1,036 153 70 8 67 12 1.1398 471 58.898 · .... Net Added 112 319 532 1,036 3,869 5,325 1,094 2.979 33.522 467 52.870 ..... Terminated - - ..... \O\!,_~ 7th" .. . Greene ... 0 ••••••• · Begun ... ; .... 5 - 1 39 6 1 -- 5 3 85 12 26 Reinstated .... -- 9 92 157 97 9 797 2 1.346 ...... Begun - .- - -- 2 •• 0 •••••••• Greene ... 7th ------~ 1 0 •• - - • ••• 0 Transferred. ------3 Reinstated Net Addad .. o' - - -- o •••• Transferred 5 - ~ 39 6 1 5 - 3 87 12 26 ------JliJ - 9 92 157 98 9 797 2 1,349 Terminated .•.. 3 11 23 3 119 ..... Net Added _~_. 1 28 -- -- - _25 14 45 262 54 102 4 628 2 1,327 .•.•. Terminated 1-- 106 107

" j I I -j 1 i 1 - NUMBER OF CASES BEGUN AND TERMINATE~iIN 2HE CIRCUIT COURT 1973 i ~==r===~====fj==~~=====rI====rl====~I~====~J====~J====~r======~======r======C/l ij (f) C/l e .,g ::J (f) .Q " C/l c: OJ o Law Over Law $15,000 , e ru ; B QJ5 g~ $15,000 c:"O ~'Ctl .c: t . and Under Qj co , >,C ID 2 0 t) wCO c: ~'- fE (f) 0 ro .c: .!!l a: 'E §u ~I > ell ::J Qi .'!.l t E 'E co § :> - co e Circuit pounty Jury Jury Jury Jury U 2 w I- 2 2 6 LL ""'J U. ::a C/) a.. 0 ~" LO '- -. --1-_.-\--- \.J r- County Circuit Jersey ...... Begun .. ~ ... " 18 2 14 69 14 - - 1 - 3 94 3_~ 41 52 224 ·~1:~~!t-~8~77t--~1~~1~,2~9~1~~33~~~2,~1~33~.-..-.- ..-.-.-.~Be-g-U-n+.-.- ..--.-.- ..-.- ..-.~Je~r~se~y~--~~ Reinstated .... ------. . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... ------. - - - -- .. ~ . ~ rransferred Ne.t Added .... 18 2 14 69 14 - - 1 - 3 'l4 31 41 52 Terminated .... { 14 8 5 76 14 -- - 12 - 1 108 10 42 33 ~~6 ~~~ ~~ .2 ~ :~~~ ~~ ~:6~~ :: : : : ~:r~~~:~ - '------~---r--~r---~--~---+----~--~----~------r--______-,~ __ __ Macoupin ...... Begun ...... 30 22 -~ 89 28 5 - 169 - - 1'12 :_7 I 76 ~ 476 451 266 198 2,053 15 4,1/4 ...... R' : Bet gtUdn ...... Macoupin Reinstated .... ------Transferred .... - - - _ 5 _ = = - - .. . .. ems a e ------37 76 62 4-~5 - -- ..... Transferred Net Added .... 30 22 - 89 28 £) - 169 - - 192 Terminated .... 38 12 3 88 17 5 11 72 - - 191 31 05 55 45~ i~1 ~~~ ~ ~~ ~:~~~ ~ ~ ~:i~6 ::::: ~~~n~:~ Morgan ...... Begun ...... 10 6 3 81 12 14 69 46 87 8 33 1 236 190 281 405 189 89 3,108 4,869 ...... Begun " ...... Morgan Reinstated .... - - - 1 ------99 100 " . .. Reinstated Transferred .... -5 +5 ------..... Transferred 69 46 82 286 Net Added·.... 10 6 3 82 12 8 14 33 1 236 190 504 189 89 3,108 4,969 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 56 76 80 390 19 1 ~ 5 123 7 5 - 15 2 236 172 487 181 56 3,009 4,931 ..... Terminaled Sangamon ...... Begun ...... 169 54 336 247 1,249 1,591 3,534 - 732 180 139 91 100 - 124 1,118 558 75 19,297 42 29,636 ...... Begun ...... Sangamon Reinstated .... ------... " Reinstated Transferred .... - - -35 +35 ------..... Transferred -,- 336 247 1,214 1,626 Net Added .... 169 54 - 732 180 139 91 100 124 1,118 3,534 558 75 19,297 42 29,636 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 916 231 1,065 1,576 127 34 4 1,035 230 153 30 114 - 106 1,313 3,584 561 42 19,120 38 30,279 ..... Terminated Scott ...... Begun ...... 1 2 1 13 17 5 38 131 2 - - 12 - 1 16 40 264 21 564 ...... Begun ...... Scott Reinstated .... ------. - -- 1 1 ..... Reinstated Transferred .... - -3 ------+3 - ..... Transferred Net AddEld .... 17 2 41 1 2 1 13 2 - - 12 - 1 16 131 41 264 21 565 ..... Net Added 14 4 35 Terminated .... - - 1 22 3 - - 13 - - 17 116 38 244 12 519 ..... Terminated

7th ..... Circuit Totals ...... Begun ...... 233 86 19 1,023 242 153 105 320 1 367 1,695 502 436 1,469 2,7Q2 4,8361,237 - 372 26,810 114 Reinstated 42,722 .. , . '" .. Begun .... Circuit Totals .... 7th .... - - - 1 - - - - .- - 2 99 2 - 104 . . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... - -48 +48 ------..... Transferred Net Added .... 502 436 1,421 2,750 233 86 19 1024 242 153 105 320 1 367 1,697 4,935 1,239 372 26,810 114 42,826 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 1,052 428 1,282 2,981 201 68 19 1,372 271 174 41 249 ~ 346 1,920 4,884 1,126 242 26,196 104 42,958 ..... Terminated 8th. _ .. Adams ...... Begun ...... 35 15 17 143 33 81 158 188 351 634 49 11 14 - 9 401 406 1,490 5,833 38 9,906 ...... Begun ...... Adams .... 8th Reinstated .... ------5 1 - 6 ... " Reinstated Transferred .... - -27 +27 +7 ··6 +5 -6 ------..... Transferred - 81 158 161 Net Added .... 42 9 22 '137 33 49 11 14 - 9 A01 378 639 407 1,490 5,833 38 9,912 ..... Net Added 77 135 135 Terminated .... 51 8 19 135 25 39 - 10 - - 330 390 999 502 1,378 5,670 37 9,940 ..... Terminated Brown ...... Begun ...... 1 5 11 41 122 - 2 14 5 2 - 9 - - 9 59 34 496 19 830 ...... Begun .. , ...... Brown Reinstated , ~ .. . ------2 - ..... Reinstated Transferred .... - - - - _. ~ - - - - - 5 +2 ------..... Transferred Net Added .... - 1 2 14 5 2 9 - - 9 11 39 124 59 34 1 496 19 830 ..... Net Added ...... - 2 14 Terminated .... 2 2 14 3 4 - 7 - - 7 34 106 59 26 2 503 17 802 ..... Terminated :1 Icalhoun ...... Begun ...... --;i-:;:-t--=-r-:-::::-t-----=+~-__j_--=-~---:-t---+---_f---_f..--2 13 29 120 7 28 - 591 26 - - - 8 1 5 -- 1 1 19 851 ...... Begun ...... Calhoun Reinstated .... ------5 1 - 2 8 ..... Reinstated -1 +1 Transferred .... - - +1 -1 ------..... Transferred Net Added .... - - 1 7 1 5 - - 1 1 24 2 13 29 121 9 28 - 591 26 859 ..... Net Added Terminated •... 1 1 - 14 2 9 - 2 1 1 19 :! ~ 12 28 136 18 17 - 581 18 872 : .... Terminated - i -;::-r:-::-l-:-:::--:-t-~:-t--t_-I---r__+--+----i_---....:--_I_-- Cass ...... Begun ... : .... 4 3 1 15 5 11 - 8 i 1 70 'l 23 21 36 154 204 81 39 1,348 20 2,045 ...... Begun ...... Cass Reinstated '" . - - - 1 -- - .,- -- - _~l ------1 ..... Reinstated Transferred .... ------~j 23 21 -3 +3 ------..... Transferred Net Added .... 4 3 1 16 5 11 - 8 1 1 70 ::1 2.7 19 33 157 204 81 39 1,348 20 2,046 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 5 1 2 15 10 9 - 13 1 1 59 j---__ ~ __ L-_3_1~ __1_4_4-L __ 2~2~9_L~7~0~~3~5_L~1~,2=9~2_L~2=0~ __1~,9~8~3~.~.~.~ ..~T~e~rm~i~na~t~edjL ______L- _____ ;!

108 l t 109 f 1 . .! NUMBER OF CASES BEGUN AND TERMINATer\N THE CIRCUIT COURT 1973

( en i - en c: ! tn 0 :Jo en(\) I 0 en C Law Over Law $15,000 (\),- c: ~ .~. c: .Q (J) c:'O .c til tn (j) is -c: $15,000 and Under ~ til (\) -'iii "ffio (\) u.- roo (!) C E Ql 2 E c:- >.- U =E .% e- -~ ~, { E 2 . ,- 0 ~(\) >- >- (\) tIl~ Ciiro c: ~ (\) ~o .. 'c c: ::: 'iii til c: 0 .~ Non- til >< C'l (!) 0 '0 tIl- .0 eno "ffi Non- .c .~ a: 'E Cl ro §o ~I ~:-~ E > en EO c:.- i III :J Ui e 'E> ~.... 0> Circuit County Jury Jury Jury Jury 0 :2 UJ f- :2 :2 cl u. -:> LL ~ (f) D- o f- 0 ~ County Circuit "- ] 3 2 38 5 9 6 1 63 " Mason ..... I.·, .. , Begun .. -...... 11 ,; 28 21 51 312 137 112 60 1,061 49 1,974 ...... Begun ... , ..... , .. Mason j ••• - - .- Reinstated 1 ------1 - - - 2 . . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... +1 -1 ------t - - -4 +4 - - - - - · .... Transferred 6 1 (;:3 "1 - Net Added .... 13 2 2 38 5 9 - - ., 28 21 47 316 137 113 60 - 49 1,976 ..... Net Added Terminated .. , . 8 3 1 39 10 9 - 12 - 1 t2 42 24 44 332 123 101 109 - .. 1,104 48 2,092 · .... Terminated 29 7 1 1 7 43 - Menard ...... Begun ...... 7 2 - - - 10 13 18 132 141 63 - 761 17 1,257 ...... Begun ...... Menard Reinstated '" . 2 ------5 - - - - 7 ..... Reinstated -1 .. Transferred .... - - +1 - '------1 +1 ------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 9 2 1 28 7 1 1 7 - - 48 10 13 17 133 146 63 - 761 17 1,264 ..... Net Added {~7 Terminated .... 7 - - 22 I 6 - - 15 - - 16 21 18 136 187 60 - 766 12 1,313 · .... Terminated

~ 21 2 94 Pike .. , ...... , ... Begun ...... 6 9 4 45 7 (;$ 5 - 19 47 44 182 225 90 38 2,397 77 3,321 ...... Begun .. , ...... , ... Pike - 5 Reinstated .... ------5 .. . .. Reinstated Transferred .... +1 -1 +1 -1 ------1 +1 ------· .... Transferred Net Addep .... 7 8 5 44 7 9 5 21 2 - 99 19 47 43 183 225 90 38 2,397 77 3,326 ..... Net Added 2 Terminated .... 5 3 6 46 12 9 1 26 - 107 21 48 43 203 214 66 36 2,447 64 3,359 · .... Terminated 6 1 33 Schuyler ..... , ..... Begun.,., .... 8 - 2 9 2 2 - - 5 6 6 36 35 50 5 783 34 1,023 ...... , .. Begun ..... , .... Schuyler Reinstated .... ------· .. " Reinstated Transferred .... ------· .... Transferre~ Net Added, ... 8 - 2 9 2 2 - 6 - 1 33 5 6 6 36 35 50 5 783 34 1,023 ..... Net Adde 4 6 1 33 Terminated .... 5 - - 9 - - - 5 3 16 30 35 59 5 779 32 1,022 '" .. Terminated 301 65 88 17 71 4 13 742 8th ..... Circuit Totals, ..... Begun ...... 71 33 28 173 290 413 1,409 1,442 864 1,633 13,270 280 21,207 ...... Begun ..... Circuit Totals . ... 8th Reinstated .... 3 1 - 10 ------1 - - 1 - 12 2 - - - 29 · . . .. Reinstated -9 - Transferred .... +9 -8 +8 ------39 +39 ------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 83 25 36 293 65 88 17 71 4 13 752 173 290 375 1,448 1,454 866 1,633 13,270 280 21,236 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 84 18 28 294 72 79 1 91 4 4 684 202 276 349 1,477 1,864 901 1,565 ,.- 13,142 248 21,383 · .... Terminated Begun ...... 41 6 11 84 18 5 4 18 1 219 9th ..... Fulton ...... - 41 32 77 355 464 222 264 2,806 95 4,763 ..... , ... Begun ...... ,. Fulton 1 1 .... 9th Reinstated , ... ------1 - - - - 3 . . . .. Reinstated -1 -3 - Transferred .... +1 +3 ------17 +17 ------· ...'. Transferred 14 82 18 6 4 18 1 219 Net Added .... 42 5 - 41 32 60 372 465 222 264 2,806 95 4,766 ..... Net Added 15 80 22 9 4 23 1 220 Terminated .... 55 3 - 38 29 57 395 472 200 269 2,535 98 4,625 · ... , Terminated 45 7 13 5 3 87 Hancock ...... Begun ...... 8 8 2 - - 38 44 38 243 256 167 147 1,629 14 2,754 ...... Begun ...... Hancock 2 Reinstated .... ------3 - - - 5 ..... Reinstated Transferred .... ------' ------6 +6 ------· .... Transferred 5 3 39 Net Added .... 8 8 2 45 7 13 - - 38 44 32 249 256 170 147 1,629 14 2,759 ..... Net Added 10 3 83 Terminated .... 8 2 6 40 12 1 5 - 32 55 34 247 291 175 145 1,603 19 2,771 · .... Terminated - -'" 10 4 _. 3 ,13 19 Henderson, ... , .... Begun ...... 2 1 1 24 - - 5 28 103 156 54 34 794 129 1 ,410 ...... Begun ...... Henderson 2 5 - .- Reinstated .... -- 5 ------12 · . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... ------4 +4 - - - · .... Transferred 13 - - - Net Added .... 2 1 6 26 15 - - 4 - 3 19 5 24 107 156 54 34 794 129 1,422 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 9 2 1 26 10 1 12 - - 14 16 2 - - 10 117 133 42 38 781 118 1,362 · .... Terminated 145 22 9 168 .t)5 91 Knox .•.•...... Begun .•...... 49 8 12 28 - - 114 166 619 1,098 306 970 7,378 75 11,753 ...... Begun .. , ...... Knox 1 Reinstated ,.,. -- - 1 ------2 2 - - - 6 . . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... +4 -4 +11 -11 ------40 +40 - - · .... Transferred - 168 4:)6 91 - -- - Net Added ..•. 53 4 23 135 28 22 - 9 - !14 126 659 1,100 308 970 7,378 75 11,759 .... , Net Added 16 3 169 433 101 Terminated .... 14 6 132 21 21 2 - 86 134 688 1,140 267 934 7,267 70 11,564 · .... Terminated - r- McDonough, ...... 10 13 7 62 9 59 29 173 -32 . Begun ....' .... - - - 8 72 291 208 150 515 4,034 95 5,767 ...... Begun ... , '" McDonough Reinstated •. ,. ------· . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... ------· .... Transferred 29 173 32------Net Added .... 10 13 7 62 9 59 - - - 8 72 291 208 150 515 4,034 95 5,767 ..... Net Added Terminated .•.. 19 11 12 69 5 56 2 8 - - 194 34 2 - (,'9. 299 174 391 388 3,496 55 5,274 · .... Terminated

110 111 ,------'------~----

NUMBER OF' CASES BEGUN AND TERMINATE~ !I~ THE CIRCUIT COURT 1973 , , i i i I I - (fl (fl e ~ e :l(fl 0 0 (fl e (fl o Q) Q) C .2 Law $15,000 QJ,- CIl ~c Law Over e (fl CIl 0 >- e-o -~CIl 0 .c III u.2 $15,000 and Under (J3 CIl III -'iii 2 Q) e~ >.- , .9- Q. QJ >- E ,~ CIl.!!! run; u ==E ~E u ~ -=cB u ~ 'c c: III =CIl co C 0 ,~ 2QJ III CIl- (flo e ~ Q) e 0 .- 0 0 -0 .0 co Non- CIl x a;I 0 'E > (fl U '0> 1ii c·- Non- .c .lfl a: 'Eo CIl §u > (\) :l "iii E e 0> Jury Jllry Jury Jury u ~ w t- ~ ~ B LL "? u.. ~ en a. 0 1= U ~ County Circuit Circuit Countv 29 63 33 293 286 134 50 Warren, ...... Begun.:...... 14 3 2 84 15 2 - 8 - - 99 -' 2,787 48 3,950 , .. " ... , Begun ' ..... , .... Warren 9 Reinstated .... ------'------9 , . , .' Reinstated -3 +3 Transferred .... ------, ... , Transferred 63 30 296 286 143 Net Added .... 14 3 2 84 15 2 - 8 - - 99 29 50 2,787 48 3,959 ... ,' Net Added 1 3 69 13 3 - 6 ·2 - 108 35 38 52 308 259 119 52 2,722 49 3,851 · . , . , Terminait) ... Terminated .... 12 .- 175 250 266 414 1,904 2,468 1,033 1,980 19,428 30,397 ...... Begun Circuit Totals 9th ..... Circuit Totals ...... Begun ..... , .. 124 39 35 444 87 101 4 73 - '1.1'! 6 456 ...... ". 9th ~ 3 14 Reinstated .... - - 5 4 5 1 - - - - 3 ------35 , ... , Reinstated -70 +70 Transferred .... +5 -5 +14 -14 ------, . , .. Transferred 250 266 344 1,974 2,471 1,047 1,980 Net Added .... 129 34 54 434 92 102 4 73 - 175 1,119 19,428 456 30,432 ,.',. Net Added 212 346 2,054 2,469 1,194 1,826 Terminated .... 117 25 53 416 81 102 9 57 2 173 1,142 856 18,504 409 29,447 , .. , . Terminated 3 41 17 3 29 74 115 74 71 567 45 1,092 '., ... ',. Begun .,."., .. , Marshall ... 10th 10th ... . Marshall ..... , .. , .. Begun ...... 3 3 - 15 7 1 - 24 - Reinstated ., ------, ... , Reinstated .. - -6 +6 Transferred .... ------· .... Transferred - 17 3 23 80 115 74 Net Added, .. ,. 3 3 - 15 7 1 - 24 - 3 41 71 567 45 1,092 ., ... Net Added 13 14 79 164 62 1 Terminated .... 14 2 - 18 8 2 - 17 - - 41 - 620 46 1,101 , . , , . Terminated 322 1,431 433 495 966 2,637 3,904 818 1,352 21,630 37 35,857 .. ,,'.,., Begun .... ' .... , .. Peoria Peoria ...... " .... Begun., ...... 436 80 56 628 138 187 15 292 - - - · . , " Reinstated Reinstated .. , . ------70 +70 - Transferred .... ------, . , .. Transferred 433 495 896 2,707 3,904 818 1,352 Net Added .... 436 80 56 628 138 187 15 292 - 322 1,431 21,630 37 35,857 , '. , . Net Added 393 605 542 1,872 3,455 632 1,128 Terminated .... 411 37 83 532 243 146 17 197 - 268 1,555 21,859 38 34,013 ... ,. Terminated

15 4 1 2 - - 14 8 1 27 10 46 23 - 410 37 607 ,., .. ', .. Begun ..... ' ..... Putnam Putnam , .. ~ . , ..... Begun ...... 5 4 ------, , , ., Reinstated , Reinstated t •• ~ ------.- -3 +3 Transferred .... ------· ... ,Transferred 8 1 24 13 46 23 607 Net Added .... 5 4 - 15 4 1 - 2 - - 14 - 410 37 .. ,., Net Added 6 1 2 17 47 23 Terminated .... 8 1 - 9 4 - 1 5 - - 26 - 371 37 558 , , . , . Terminated 15 7 6 1 45 76 63 8 213 16 464 ...... , Begun Stark ...... Begun., ..... , - 2 2 3 2 - - 2 2 1 .. " .... ,' .. ' Stark 1 - 1 2 .. , ., Reinstated Reinstated ------'" . -2 +2 Transferred .. , , +1 -1 ------· , , .. Transferred 7 6 -1 48 76 63 8 466 ., .. , Net Added Net Added ... , 1 1 2 3 2 - - 2 2 1 16 213 16 15 6 3 4 77 74 52 9 210 20 491 , , , , , Terminated Terminated. '" 4 4 1 3 3 - 1 2 2 1 694 202 147 196 702 938 442 1,253 11,656 234 17,096 ... ,., ... Begun .. ,'.,.',. Tazewell Tazewell ...... Begun, ... " .. 157 14 25 275 45 61 4 51 - - 3 - - - 4 ..... Reinstated Reinstated .. " - - - 1 ------+2 Transferred. , . , +2 -1 +6 -7 ------2 ------· .... Transferred 202 147 194 704 938 442 1,253 17,100 Net Added,.,. 159 13 31 269 45 61 4 51 - - 697 11,656 234 , , , , . N(~t Added 172 114 150 717 936 389 1,129 11,468 16,631 Terminated, ... 195 12 47 252 54 50 9 29 - - 685 223 · , ... Te,minated 326 2,j95 667 652 1,219 3,468 5,079 1,420 2,684 34,476 369 55,116 ..... , ... Begun Circuit Totals ., ,10th 10th .... Circuit Totals. , .... Begun ...... , , 601 103 83 936 19C 250 19 371 2 ..... _. 4 - - 1 - - - - 6 .. , .. Reinstated Reinstated , ... - - 1 ------83 +83 - - , ' , . ,Transferred Transferred. , . , +3 -2 +6 -7 ------667 652 1,136 3,552 5,079 1,420 2,684 34,476 369 55,122 .. ,., Net Added Net Added, ... 604 101 89 930 196 250 19 371 2 326 2,199 2,322 590 723 712 2,762 4,676 1,158 2,267 34,528 364 52,794 , , . , , Terminated Terminated, .. , 632 56 131 814 312 198 28 250 2 269 - 23 1 53 7 38 123 95 109 47 1,564 49 2,167 ., .. , ... ' Begun . .- ...... " Ford ... 11 th 11th .... Ford .. , .. ,.,.,., . , Begun ...... 10 2 - 30 9 5 1 1 - - · , , .. Reinstated Reinstated .... ------21 +21 · . , . ' Transferred Transferred .... ------53 23 7 17 144 95 109 47 1,564 49 2,167 ... ,. "'et Added Net Added., .. 10 2 - 30 9 5 1 1 - 1 52 32 6 14 141 89 187 37 1,529 36 2,186 , .. , . Terminated Terminated. , , . 15 4 4 22 9 4 1 3 - 1 208 74 84 149 771 460 278 79 5,736 53 8,148 ... " .... Begun , ..... , , . Livingston Livingston ...... Begun ... :" .. 31 8 1 98 22 31 15 24 - 26 -- · .. ,. Reinstated Reinstated ------.... - -34 +34 · ... ,Transferred Transferred .... ------208 74 84 115 805 460 278 79 5,736 53 8,148 ".,' Net Added Net Added ... , 31 8 1 98 22 31 15 24 - 26 175 57 52 157 830 397 174 28 5,372 30 7,554 · ... , Terminated Terminated .... 21 10 2 93 14 40 35 28 - 39 - .-

113 112 ~-~ - -~ ---~-'~-----'----.,..------. ---~~ ------J t ! NUMBER OF CASES BEGUN AND TERMINATtt ;IN THE CIRCUIT COURT 1973 1 , , - i (/) (/) C ~ ::J (/) 0 .Q I C (/) c Law Over Law $15,000 g.~ ro .Q (/) c ro tJ} ro -c >. c"o .c ro u.-5 roo $15,000 and Under Qj ell ro -'iii roo .9l E E ro c- u C E .Q. a. CJ > I 'c >. lil$ =E u ~';' --1€ u ;:: ! C ro 'iii Cil u c:=ro lil c ~ 0 .- 0 .l:Jro (/) ~ Non- Non- .~ a: o >< §o al:r: :. ::J 'Qi EO 0 ~~ c·- $ .c 'E ell -:> u. '- ~ 0> Circuit County Jury Jury Jury Jury 0 :2 w I- :2 :2 C:i ~ en a. 0 I- 0 ~ County Circuit 43 98 198 Logan ...... , ..... Begun ...... 23 6 2 145 19 10 3 37 - 1 176 648 152 30 5,043 12 6,682 - 2 1 . .. , ..... Begun ...... , ..... Logan Reinstated .... 2 1 ------6 - - - - 12 · . , .. Reinstated - -4 +4 - - Transferred .... +1 -1 +3 -3 ------"------· .... Transferred 36 43 96 203 648 Net Added .... 26 6 5 142 19 10 3 37 - 1 182 152 30 5,043 12 6,694 ..... Net Added 34 35 71 216 566 Terminated .... 30 6 2 160 20 14 25 42 - 1 1~S 182 27 4,829 10 6,448 .•... Terminated

.~ -'132~ 92 128 1,895 1,907 McLean .. , ...... Begun ...... 113 20 37 321 52 25 30 103 3 1 5t.1 615 1,015 19,961 31 27,022 ...... Begun - 19 99 86 ...... McLean Reinstated .... 14 - 3 23 5 - 1 --- ~9 - - 11 98 388 · . . .. Reinstated -10 - -3 +3 -1 - Transferred .... +10 +18 -17 ------"------· .... Transferred 132 92 144 1,997 1,992 - Net Added .... 137 10 58 327 57 25 31 103 3 1 5;'0 615 1,026 20,058 31 27,410 . .... Net Added 149 94 130 1,831 1,912 Terminated .... 128 13 49 305 44 24 47 84 4 - 586 627 988 20,241 27 27,283 · .... Terminated

~ 31 30 77 219 110 Woodford ...... Begun ... , ... , 19 24 5 70 9 1 1 7 - 136 183 9 2,527 22 3,480 ...... Begun - 1 1 5 1 30 , ...... Woodford Reinstated .... - 8 - 5 5 --- - - 2 5 - - - 63 · .... Reinstated -- -21 +21 Transferred .... +1 -1 ------· .... Transferred 32 31 61 241 140 - Net Added, .... 20 31 5 75 14 1 1 7 -- 138 188 9 2,527 22 3,543 ..... Net Added 28 28 64 241 150 Terminated ••.• 23 29 5 74 14 1 2 8 -- 138 245 11 2,618 29 3,708 · ... , Terminated ~ 296 256 11th .... Circuit Totals ...... Begun ...... 196 60 45 664 111 72 50 172 3 29 1,114 490 3,207 3,220 1,337 1,180 34,831 167 47,499 ., ...... Begun i •••• 1 1 26 101 116 Circuit Totals , .. 11th Reinstated ...• 16 9 3 28 10 - 1 -- - 37 5 11 98 - 463 · . . .. Reinstated - -83 +83 -1 Transferred .... +12 , -12 +21 -20 ------· .... Transferred 291 257 433 3,391 3,335 - Net Added .... 224 57 69 672 121 72 51 172 3 29 1,151 1,342 1,191 34,929 167 47,962 ..... Net Added 300 215 436 3,259 3,114 Terminated .... 217 62 62 654 101 83 10 165 4 41 1,129 1,415 1,091 34,589 132 47,179 ..... Terminated 42 12th .... Iroquois ...... " Begun ...... 14 2 23 53 14 12 1 7 2 4 99 52 125 473 245 221 8 5,168 .- - - 180 6,745 .., ...... Begun ..... , .... Iroquois ... 12th Reinstated .... 3 - 1 ------4 .. , .. Reinstated - - -4 +4 Transferred .... ------· .... Transferred 42 52 121 477 Net Added .... 17 2 24 53 14 12 1 7 2 4 99 245 221 8 5,168 180 6,749 . .... Net Added 43 37 120 458 296 Terminated .... 31 3 16 88 22 10 - 20 2 8 105 235 6 5,140 154 6,794 · ... , Terminated 185 122 145 Kankakee ...... Begun ...... 55 63 12 422 42 97 2 151 - 102 607 838 1,370 292 525 14,283 358 19,671 ...... Begun 21 43 ... , ..... Kankakee Reinstated .... 1 2 1 42 4 1 2 2 - 10 36 27 6 1 - 199 - - - - · . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... +10 -10 +35 -35 ------· .... Transferred 206 165 172 844 Net Added .... 66 55 48 429 46 98 4 153 - 112 643 1,371 292 525 14,283 358 19,870 ..... Net Added 208 162 167 862 Terminated .... 114 32 16 493 40 159 4 143 - 114 738 1,324 253 537 14,073 394 19,833 · .... Terminated 234 409 330 Will ...... Begun ...... 259 235 30 1,060 299 243 23 111 8 133 1,299 1,491 3,493 464 2,254 33,158 473 46,006 ... , ..... Begun 2 4 2 ...... Will Reinstated .... 11 5 14 55 5 1 - 3 -- 5 - 203 1 23 236 r1 571 · .. " Reinstated ~ -35 Transferred .... +126 -122 +72 -71 ------+35 -5 - - - - - · .... Transferred 236 409 299 1,528 Net Added .... 396 118 116 1,044 304 244 23 114 8 133 1,304 3,691 465 2,277 33,394 474 46,577 ..... Net Added 616 207 315 1,411 Terminated .... 482 78 85 916 162 212 7 85 10 137 1,239 3,487 444 2,297 32,287 455 44,932 · .... Terminated - - 12th .... 461 583 600 2,802 5,108 Circuit Totals ...... Begun ...... 328 300 65 1,535 355 352 26 269 10 :239 2,005 977 2,787 52,609 1,011 72,422 ...... Begun . . . .. Circuit Totals 23 43 31 8 ... 12th Reinstated .... 15 7 16 97 9 2 2 5 - 10 41 204 1 23 236 1 774 · . . .. Reinstated -39 +39 -5 Transferred .... +136 -132 +107 -106 ------· .... Transferred - 4B4 326 592 2,849 - Net Added .... 479 175 188 1,526 364 354 28 274 10 249 2,0.:/6 5,307 978 2,810 52,845 1,012 73,196 ..... Net Added 867 406 602 Terminated .... 627 113 117 1,497 224 381 11 248 12 259 2,0,32 2,731 5,107 932 2,840 51,500 1,003 71,559 ..... Terminated - .- 13th ... . Bureau ...... ,. Begun .. , ..... 41 50 62 415 283 190 119 35 12 4 97 18 47 3 29 1 - 1:32 5,751 72 7,411 ...... Begun ...... Bureau - 1 5 2 ... 13th Reinstated .... - 1 - - 2 ----- 3 - - - - 14 · . . .. Reinstated -21 +21 - Transferred ... , +2 -2 +5 -5 ------· .... Transferred 41 51 4~ 441 Net Added •.•• 37 11 9 92 20 47 3 29 1 - 135 285 190 119 5,751 72 7,425 ..... Net Added 38 44 32 416 273 Terminated, '" 37 9 2 95 22 44 2 29 1 - 1'33 209 124 5,896 66 7,502 · , ... Terminated - 35 Grundy ...... Begun .. ,'.. , .. 54 72 439 285 90 148 32 36 5 39 15 11 3 23 1 - 165 2,871 151 4,475 ...... Begun ...... Grundy - 4 Reinstated .... - - 1 ------5 · . . .. Reinstated - - -21 +21 Transferred .... +16 -16 +1 -1 ------· .... Transferred - 35 54 51 460 289 Net Added .... 48 20 7 38 15 11 3 23 1 - 165 90 148 2,871 151 4,480 ..... Net Added _. 31 30 37 399 Terminated .• , . 53 15 9 51 -- 18 13 8 28 1 192 271 106 127 2,801 148 4,338 · .... Terminated

114 115 NUMBER OF CASES BEGUN AND TERM\\NATEO IN THE CIRCUIT COURT 1973 - I I I I I i I C '" .Q'" :J '"ClJ a'" Law Over Law $15,000 oClJ._ e (J) c >. e $15,000 e-a -~ ell ClJ § .Q '" and Under Qj ell ClJ ~'ca ell 0 ..c: ClJ (.J._ {iie C E Q;< 2 e- u =E --'@ (j >. E E'" ClJ cg e ClJ l!:!o '3".- e-0 !9 ClJ ... ::- 'c c ClJ ='ttj eIl..!!1 Non- Non- ell 8 x c . .9 .0 "'0 .2: :l ClJ c·- zg Circuit County Jury Jury Jury Jury 0 :2 w :2 ~ m ..., '" EO e :0> ~ ~ Cl u. u. ~ (J) CL (5 0> . ~ 0 ~ County LaSalle ...... Begun ... : ... , 162 40 14 259 65 35 12 40 Circuit 2 14 62'~ -"215 128 135 1,640 2,014 438 1,580 Reinstated .... 5 - 1 ------9,446 98 16,961 ,., ...... Begun , . , .. , . , .. , LaSalle ------6 , .. " Reinstated Transferred .... ------12 +12 ------· , . , , Transferred Net Added .... 167 40 15 259 65 35 12 40 2 14 62< 215 128 123 1,652 2,014 - 438 1,580 9,446 98 16,967 , ... , Net Added Terminated .... 157 122 22 155 42 26 26 24 - 13 52! 147 114 92 1,512 2,923 ,. 551 1,414 9,275 131 17,270 , . , , , Terminated 13th." , Circuit Total$ •..... Begun, ...... 229 88 23 395 98 93 18 92 4 14 971 -'291 232 269 2,494 2,582 718 1,847 18,068 321 28,847 · . , . , ... , Begun •• t •• Reinstated .... 5 1 2 - 2 - - - -- .~ 1 5 Circuit Totals , .. 13th - - 6 - - - 25 , . , ., Reinstated Transferred, ... +18 -18 +6 -6 ------., - - -54 +54 - -- Net Added .... 252 71 31 389 - - - .- - , , , , . Transferred 100 93 18 92 4 14 974 291 233 215 2,553 2,588 718 1,847 Terminated .... 247 18,068 321 28,872 · . , .. Net Added 146 33 301 82 83 36 81 2 13 879 216 188 161 2,327 3,467 866 1,665 17,972 345 29,110 · .... Terminated 14th .... - Henry ... , ..... '" . Begun ...... 22 7 5 85 25 32 7 7 - 7 208 90 57 50 372 385 248 416 7,416 54 9,493 , , .... , , . Begun Reinstated , .. , ------· ... , , , . , . '.' Henry .. , 14th Transferred. , .. - - - - - · .. " Reinstated ------21 +21 - '- Net Added ... , 22 7 5 85 25 32 7 - - - - · ... ,Transferred 7 - 7 208 90 57 29 393 385 248 416 Terminated, , .. 7,416 54 9,493 , . , .. Net Added 26 4 7 79 23 32 5 20 - 7 199 64 59' 33 379 397 201 365 7,405 58 9,363 , , ... Terminated Mercer ..•. , . , .. , , , Begun " .. , . , . 7 1 2 23 11 3 - 3 - 4 82 20 20 41 121 125 110 10 Reinstated .,., ------1,233 59 1,875 .. , ..... , Begun · , . , . , ... " Mercer ------, . , " Reinstated Transferred, .. , ------7 +7 ------· .... Transferred Net Added .. ,. 7 1 2 23 11 3 - 3 - 4 82 20 20 34 128 125 - 110 10 1,233 59 1,875 , .... Net Added Terminated .... 12 - 1 36 8 6 - 2 - 4 79 15 5 22 120 129 85 7 1,129 63 1,723 · , , .. Terminated Rock Island ...... Begun , ... , , , . 158 60 27 473 149 58 12 169 345 1,208 326 213 521 - 3,012 3,019 635 849 30,039 '122 41,395 Reinstated ",. 17 2 11 1 13 - - 1 - 14 60 19 65 17 10 """'" Begun · , ... , ,Rock Island 2 1 1 7 241 , , . " Reinstated Transferred. , . , +11 -10 +30 -31 ------19 +19 - Net Added , . , , 186 52 68 443 162 ------, .. , , Transferred 58 12 170 - 359 1,268 345 278 519 3,041 3,021 636 850 Terminated. , , , 30,046 122 41,636 · .. , , Net Added 138 30 97 391 134 66 14 152 - 359 1,213 704 257 532 3,118 3,840 573 765 30,034 117 42,534 · , ... Terminated Whiteside." .. , .... Begun ...... 18 12 3 115 24 35 1 34 5 362 159 133 - 249 1,053 461 268 54 4,922 150 8,058 Reinstated .... ------1 - - ...... , Begun · , • , .... , Whiteside Transferred. , .. ------1 ,.... Reinstated ------5 +5 - Net Added .. , . - - - - , .... Transferred 18 12 3 115 24 35 1 34 - 5 363 159 133 244 1,058 461 - 268 54 4,922 150 8,059 · .. , . Net Added Terminated, , .. 56 13 14 121 30 35 3 35 - 6 312 162 141 249 921 471 191 47 4,953 154 7,914 , ... , Terminated 14th., , . Circuit Totals ...... Begun, ..... , . 205 80 37 696 209 128 20 213 - 361 1,860 595 423 861 4,558 3,990 1,261 1,32, 43,610 385 60,821 " .... , .. Begun Reinstated "., 17 2 11 1 13 - - 1 - 14 61 19 65 17 10 ..... Circuit Totals ... 14th 2 1 1 7 - 242 , .. " Reinstated Transferred, , .. + 11 -10 +30 -31 ------52 - - - +52 - - - - - · .. , . Transferred Net Added .... 233 72 78 666 222 128 20 214 - 375 1,921 614 488 826 4,620 - 3,992 1,262 1,330 43,617 385 61,063 . ... Net Added Terminated .... 232 47 11 9 627 195 139 22 209 - 376 1,803 945 462 836 4,538 4,837 1,050 1.184 43,521 392 61,534 · .... Terminated ... ~- 15th, .. , Carroll ...... Begun,., ..... 7 3 2 65 10 7 8 'I 7 86 25 21 - 28 240 167 78 86 1,763 89 2,693 Reinstated .... - - - - - 1 ------, .... , , , . Begun ... , .. , , ... ,Carroll , .. 15th - - - - - 3 - 4 "'" Reinstated Tra'~£ferred, .. , ------..- -7 ------+7 - - - , ... , Transferred Ne-i' Added .... 7 3 2 65 10 8 - 8 1 7 86 25 21 21 - - - 247 167 78 89 1,763 89 2,697 · . , . , Net Added t Terminated ... , 8 5 3 63 11 10 - 10 1 7 B3 43 83 14 250 168 69 159 1,775 88 2,850 · ... , Terminated Jo-Oaviess ...... Begun .. , ..... 7 9 i 52 12 - 1 40 8 71 17 25 46 259 203 - 110 410 2,987 486 4,744 · , .... , . , Begun ...... Jo-Oaviess Reinstated ." - - - 3 - - - -- 1 12 1 1 2 ------20 · . , '. Reinstated Transferred .... - - +2 -2 - - - - - .- - -6 - - +6 - - - - - · .... Transferred Net Added ... , 7 9 3 53 12 - 1 40 9 133 18 26 42 265 -- - 203 110 410 2,987 486 4,764 " . " Net Added Terminated .... 10 6 7 28 7 2 1 32 - 9 61 15 20 24 257 217 117 399 2,941 487 4,640 · .... Terminated Lee., ...... Begun " , . : , .. 21 66 3 86 30 16 51 23 1"/5 66 73 210 - - 972 270 154 45 5,099 103 7,463 , . , , , .. , , Begun Reinstated ",. - - 1 3 - - 2 - - - 2 3 1 ...... Lee - 1 1 2 - - 16 , . , .. Reinstated Transferred. , , . +6 -4 +5 -7 - - - -18 ------+18 , .. , . Transferred Net ,l\dded .... 27 62 9 82 30 16 2 51 23 177- 66 76 ------193 991 271 156 45 5,099 103 7,479 Terminated., .' 28 58 6 64 31 9 ..... Net Added 19 23 50 - 15 171 2 53 166 883 256 221 43 4,890 99 7,155 ... ,. Terminated - 116 117 NUMBER OF CASES BEGUN AND TERMINATEo IN THE CIRCUIT COURT 1973 - t/l (1) c: :;:J (1) .Q ~ o Q) 0 (1) c: Law Over Law $15,000 Q).- e: til !, c: >. e:'O roo ..c co Q) § ~~ $15,000 and Under C1l Q) .... ·co (l) Q) Cii e: f Q) u.- co 0 , u E .§- e- -~ l.) \ §[ e:- C:!.;: =E E Q) >. E (\ll!! Q) (\l e: ~Q) ~ 0 .- 0 Z. ~ c: Q) =(\l (\l .~ (\l x §I Q) '0 (\l- e:0 (1)o Non- Non- .~ a: o (\l §o f I '0 .a ro ..c 'E 'E > (1) EO ~ e:.- Jury Jury ,Jury Jury 0 :2 w l- :2 :2 c:: \ ...,::J Qi e 'E> 0> Circuit County ... J: i LL ~ (f) 0.. 0 t= 0 ;§ County Circuit 2 13 17 26;\ --~ Ogle ...... •...... Begun ... ~ .... 32 17 9 179 38 15 BB , 76 209 1,368 477 193 3 3,685 221 6,910 ...... Begun j I ...... Ogle Reinslated .... - 2 - 1 - 1 - - - - - l - - - 1 - - - - 8 ..... Reinstated -1 -1 - - - -. I Transferred .... +1 +1 ------29 +29 ------· .... Transferred 33 18 10 179 38 16 2 13 - 17 27' 88 76 180 1,397 478 193 Net Added .... , 3 3,685 221 6,918 ..... Net Added 19 25 11 150 35 15 4 7 - 17 263 141 141 1,510 453 174 Terminated .... 117 ! 3 3,433 229 6,747 ..... Terminated - -: 43 5 15 9 283 1 Stephenson ...... Begun ...... 15 10 1 70 - 129 I 48 191 597 662 263 500 5,346 62 8,199 •...... Begun · ...... Stephenson - ... ' .. Reinstated .... ------! - - - 22 - 27 49 " . Reinstated .,', ... - - - . Transferred .... +1 -1 +1 -1 ------17 +17 - - .- · .... Transferred 9 23j - - - - Net Added .... 16 9 2 69 43 5 - 15 - 129 48 174 614 662 285 500 5,373 62 8,248 ..... Net Added 7 93 37 - 2 -- 245 T erminaled .... 21 11 - - 81 24 157 693 544 272 450 5,141 82 7,860 , .... Terminated 133 43 3 127 1 64 833 15th .... Circuit Totals ...... Begun ...... 82 '105 16 452 325 243 684 3,436 1,779 798 1,044 18,880 961 30,009 ...... Begun · .... Circuit Totals ... 15th- 2 1 17 Reinstated .... - 2 1 7 - 2 - - 1 4 3 1 2 24 3 27 - 97 · . . •. Reinstated -11 - ~77 Transferred .... +8 -6 +9 ------+77 - -- - - · .... Transferred 45 5 127 1 65 850 - - Net Added .... 90 101 26 448 133 326 247 610 3,514 1,781 822 1,047 18,907 961 30,106 · " .. Net Added 28 101 1 48 823 Terminated .... 86 105 34 398 121 46 335 321 502 3,593 1,638 853 1,054 18,180 985 29,252 · .. , . Terminated 22 53 48 2 17 310 16th .... DeKalb ...... Begun ...... 46 33 13 179 39 102 80 238 1,404 694 217 310 8,083 36 1;1,926 ...... Begun ...... DeKalb ... 16th 1 1 - '15 Reinstated .... 4 2 1 1 - - - 10 38 - - 1 - - -- 74 · .... Reinstated Transferred .... +12 -10 +12 -1 i ------7 +7 -3 -- · .... Transferred 49 2 17 325 - - - Net Added .... 62 25 26 169 39 23 53 112 118 231 1,411 692 217 3iU 8,083 36 12,000 ..... Net Added 1 19 329 Terminated .... 46 17 27 166 43 24 24 71 105 88 217 1,441 649 215 338 7,514 36 11,370 · .... Terminated 560 6 704 1,710 Kane ...... Begun .... , ... 319 152 75 1,121 220 127 3 406 521 852 4,656 11,396 604 1,943 42,524 134 68,033 ..... ,.,. Begun ...... Kane 3 1 30 Reinstated .... 20 7 5 22 11 5 1 - 8 2 6 -, 133 - - -- 254 · .. " Relns.'ated Transferred .... ------1 +1 - · . , .. Transferred 563 7 704 1,740 ------Net Added .... 339 159 80 1,143 231 132 4 414 523 857 4,657 11,529 604 1,943 42,524 134 68,287 · , ... Net Added 669 1,652 T erminaled .... 278 164 67 1,01'7 '190 103 16 486 5 380 410 810 4,527 10,828 556 1,891 43,223 134 67,406 ..... Terminated

23 15 3 66 24 3 3 2 2 9 145 47 55 56 231 137 99 53 3,076 Kendall ...... Begun ...... - 76 4,125 ....•.... Begun ...... Kendall . Reinstated .... ------· . , ,. Reinstated Transferred .... +7 -6 +4 -4 .------4 +4 -1 · .. , . Transferred 145 ------Net Added .... 30 9 7 62 24 3 3 2 2 9 47 55 52 235 136 99 53 3,076 76 4,125 ..... Net Added 133 Terminated .... 18 10 7 54 15 5 - - 1 9 28 43 39 146 120 89 43 2,674 65 3,499 · .... Terminated 610 10 730 2,165 . Circuit Tolals ...... Begun ...... •. 388 200 91 ,366 283 152 59 555 656 1,146 6,291 12,227 920 2,306 53,683 246 84,084 ...... Begun · . . .. Circuit Totals ... 16th 16th ... 45 Reinstated ... , 24 9 6 23 11 6 1 4 1 - 18 40 6 - 134 - - -- 328 · •... Reinstated Transferred .... +19 -16 +16 -15 ------12 +12 -4 · . , . , Transferred 2,210 ------Net Added .... 431 193 113 ,374 294 158 60 614 11 730 573 696 1,140 6,303 12,357 920 2,306 53,683 246 84,412 ..... Net Added 2,1 1 4 Terminated .... 342 191 101 ,237 248 132 40 557 7 697 513 541 1,066 6,114 11,597 860 2,272 53,411 235 82,275 · ...• Terminated .- -l- 7 2 1 9 2~'8 17th ... . Boone ...... •.... . Begun ...... 11 7 2 68 23 - 80 32 34 439 308 104 634 4,273 29 6,301 ...... •.• .Begun ...... Boone ... 17th ~ - - - Reinstated ••. , ------; ------· . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... ------6 +6 ; .... Transferred - - 28 ------Net Added .... 11 7 2 68 23 7 - 2 1 9 80 32 28 445 308 104 634 4,273 29 6,301 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 22 6 3 73 21 6 3 2 1 - 3-8 B3 29 18 422 433 151 637 4,291 26 6,585 · .... Terminated .- - 71 625 1,8 6 -, Winnebago ...... , Begun ...... 248 52 52 958 328 185 49 714 612 1,173 3,300 8,788 831 4,053 54,135 185 78,225 ...... Begun ...... Winnebago 6 3 - 4 Reinstated .... 3 1 1 5 - - - 8 , 10 1 3 7 - - - - 52 · • . .. Reinstated Transferred ••.. +3 -3 +8 -8 ------158 +158 · .... Transferred 1,8 '0 ------Net Added .... 254 50 61 955 334 188 49 71 - 625 722 ; 622 1,016 ~A61 8,795 831 4,053 54,135 185 78,277 · . , .• Net Added 1,9 '4 Terminated .•.. 225 60 48 829 271 113 7 75 - 602 671 i 591 586 3,282 9,020 533 4,053 48,493 185 71,6'18 .... _Terminated ,--, .~ - 634 2.1 i4 I i 7th .... Circuit Totals ...... Begun , .. ,', ... 259 59 54 ,026 351 192 49 73 1 794 I 644 1,207 3,739 9,096 935 4,687 58,408 214 84,526 .•...... Begun · • . .. Circuit Totals ... 17th 3 1 1 5 6 3 - - - 4 1 3 7 52 Reinstated ... , - .- 8 I 10 -- - -'.- · . . •• Reinstated Transferred .... +3 -3 +8 -8 - - - - -164 f +164 · . , •. Transferred -- 2,108 ------Net Added .... 265 57 63 r,023 357 195 49 73 1 1334 654 1,044 3,906 9,103 935 4,687 58,408 214 8~l,578 ... _. Net Added 2,332 8021 Terminated •..• 247 66 51 902 292 119 10 77 1 ~02 2,54 620 604 3,704 9,453 684 4,690 52,784 211 78,203 ..••• Terminated ~-

118 119 NUMBER OF CASES BEGUN ANO TERMINATtD IN THE CIRCUIT COURT 1973 , (/) I i ::JIJ) ~ o OJ 0 Law Over Law $15,000 OJ._ .~(\j l c IJ) c C >, .Q If) , $15,000 c"C til OJ and Under ... (\j OJ ..... ·ro rna £: OJ IJ) § -c OJ C E ill 2 u .~ . til 0 u =E .8- e- -ro I,) >, E E C- c: OJ OJ ~o .- 0 !!lOJ "- 2:- '2 2 tIl.i!l c: '';:: (,) c: OJ ='(ij til U OJ til Non- Non- til 0: ~ §o §I OJ 0 '0 C'(!- .t::: .~ 'Eo til '> 'g > UJ .a ~ (/)'0 (\l Qj C,- ro Circuit County Jury Jury Jury Jmy 0 2 w l- 2 2 ::l EO 2 ~~ til 6 u. "') LL ~ CI) 0> a.. 0 ~ 0 ~ 18th .... DuPage ...... Begun .. : ..... 487 374 138 1,775 327 ~ County Circuit 300 25 1,124 22 2,2:,3 610 458 1,778 4,863 Reinstated .... 9 2 3,743 763 12.171 60,580 91,771 3 17 4 - - - - - 5 - 9 - _. - ...... Begun ...... DuPage . .. .18th Transferred .... +194 ·-193 +94 -95 - .. - - - - 49 · .. " Reinstated ------·442 +442 - - Net Added .... 690 183 235 1,697 331 300 25 1,124 - 22 2,2:':8 ------· .... Transferred 610 458 1,345 5,305 3,743 763 12,171 Terminated .... 649 200 147 1,076 270 243 21 898 3 2,1·l8 60,580 91,820 ..... Net Added - 490 305 1,000 4,853 3,477 605 - ,,- 9,952 60,467 - 86,804 · .... Terminated 18th ... , Circuit Totals ...... Begun ...... 487 374 138 1,775 327 300 25 1,124 22 - 2,2~l3 610 458 1,778 4,863 3,743 Reinstated .. ,. 9 2 3 17 763 12,171 60,580 91,771 4 - - - - - 5 - - 9 - - ...... Begun ..... Circuit T0luls .. . .18th Transferred, , .. -1-194 f-193 +94 -95 - - - - - 49 · . . .. Reinstated ------.. 442 +442 - - Net Added .... 690 133 235 1,697 331 300 25 1,124 22 2,2~~8 - - - - · .... Transferred - 610 458 1,345 5,305 3,743 763 - Terminated .... 649 200 147 1,076 270 243 21 898 3 2,148 12,171 60,580 - 91,820 .. ... Net Added - 490 305 1,000 4,853 3,477 605 9,952 60,467 - 86,804 · .. , . Terminated 19th .... Lake ...... , .. Begun ... ,., .. 413 249 59 1,524 376 184 29 236 21 123 2,143 564 578 181 Reinstated '.,. 4,314 8,679 1,350 5,635 50,150 4 4 2 5 1 1 - 1 - - - - 352 77,160 ... , ..... Begun ...... Lake . .. 19th Transferred .... +9 -9 +3 -·2 ------18 · .... Reinstated ------.- - ·1 Net Added" 426 244 64 1,527 377 185 29 237 21 123 2,143 ------· .... Transferred 564 578 181 4,314 8,678 1,350 5,635 - Terminated .. ' 541 270 79 1,260 349 158 22 138 11 129 2,301 50,150 352 77,178 ..... Net Added 521 468 198 4,412 8,337 1,398 5,354 50,396 345 76,687 · .... Terminated McHenry ...... Begun,., ..... 123 14 18 501 95 44 8 34 6 628 - 215 166 245 1,528 1,604 355 920 Reinstated .... 1 ------14,748 67 21,319 ...... Begun ...... , ... McHenry Transferred .... - - - - - 1 ..... Reinstated ------11 t 11 - - - Net Added .... 124 14 18 501 95 44 8 34 6 628 ------· .... Transferred - 215 166 234 1,539 1,604 355 - - Terminated .... 226 17 22 424 128 50 3 3'1 7 846 920 14,748 67 21,320 ..... Net Added - 160 129 230 1,210 1,516 464 746 13,608 67 19,890 · .... Terminated 19th ... , Circuit Totals ...... Begun ...... 536 263 77 2,025 471 228 37 270 27 123 2,771 779 744 426 Reinstated .... 5,842 10,283 1,705 6,555 64,898 419 5 4 2 5 1 1 - 1 - - - - - 98,479 ...... Begun ..... Circuit Totals .... 19th Transferred .... +9 -9 +3 -2 ------19 · . . .. Reinstated ------. 11 f 11 1 - Net Added .... 550 258 82 2,028 472 229 37 271 27 123 2,771- - - - - · .... Transferred 779 744 415 5,853 10.282 1,705 - Terminated .... 767 287 101 1,684 477 208 25 175 18 129 3,147 6,555 64,898 419 98,498 ..... Net Added 681 597 428 5,622 9,853 1,862 6,100 64,004 412 96,577 · .... Terminated 20th ... . Monroe ...... " Begun ...... 8 8 - 17 7 11 1 4 - 53 15 - - 13 201 96 118 1 1.409 Reinstated .... ------7 1,969 ...... Begun ...... , ... Monroe , .. 20th Transferred .. , . +2 -2 +3 -2 ------· .... Reinstated ------1 +1 1 - - Net Added .... 10 6 3 15 7 11 1 4 53 - - - - · .... Transferred - - 15 - 12 202 95 118 1 1.409 7 Terminated .... 12 3 6 16 9 11 4 3 49 12 1,969 ..... Net Added - - - 12 201 102 110 _. 1;393 6 1,949 I ..... Terminated Perry ...... Begun ...... 15 9 I 5 41 21 7 - 13 89 29 - - 5 25 78 104 119 85 1,274 9 Reinstated "" - 7 7 ,1 1.928 ...... Begun , ...... , ..... Perry ------i 1 Transferred .... I ,2 ·2 - - - 3 - - - 19 ... . Reinstated ------5 +5 Net Added .. 17 7 5 - - - - · .... Transferred 48 21 7 - 13 - - 96 29 5 21 84 - - - - Terminated ... , 13 7 8 104 122 85 1,274 9 1,91\.7 ..... Net Added 58 12 7 - 6 - - 117 19 5 30 79 .- 95 98 88 1,244 9 1,896 · .... Terminated Randolph ...... · Begun .... , ... 12 6 7 19 74 1 17 224 117 64 - - 12 60 182 275 163 2,208 42 Reinslated .... 1 ------1 1 - 3.483 ., ...... Begun ...... Randolph .J: Trar-,;terred .... ------3 ..... Reinstflled ------5 ( t)5 Net .L\dded .... 13 6 7 19 74 1 17 224 ; 18 - - - - - · .... Transferred - - 65 12 55 187 275- 163 - Terminated .... 25 10 5 - 2,208 42 3,486 ..... Net Added 14 - 64 1 15 221 '13 65 10 43 202 - 225 102 - 2,189 34 3,337 · . '" Terminated SI. Clair ...... , .. - · Begun ...... 623 82 160 859 306 196 31 321 3 1.891 1,050 688 - 434 2.369 6,197 696 2.876 23,434 2 42,218 Reinstated .... 12 3 16 13 5 5 ..- "- •...... " Begun ...... , ... St. Clair ------54 Transferred .... +34 ··11 +57 -79 '- - - - · . . .. Reinstated ------·39 +39 . 1 Net Added .... 669 74 233 - -. - - · .... Transferred 793 31t 201 31 321 3 - 1.;;91 1,050 688 395 2,408 - - - Terminated .... 527 42 6.196 696 2.876 23,434 2 42,272 ..... Net Added 535 893 115 142 20 936 5 - 1,[\27 742 534 352 - 2.200 4,989 583 2,394 21,294 2 38,132 ..... Terminated Washington ...... · Begun ... : •... 9 4 1 9 2 4 a 3 32 8 - - 3 11 37 108 112 1,091 7 1,449 Reinstated .... ~ - ...... Begun ...... Washington ------1 Transferred .... +1 -1 ------. - 1 ..... Reinstated ------.- - _. Net Added .... 10 3 1 9 2 4 - ~ 3 3 2 -8 - - - - · .... Transferred a 3 11 38 108 112 1,091 Terminated .... 3 1 6 6 2 2 11 4 2B _ 9 - 7 1,450 ..... Net Added - - 9 14 39 122 86 - 1,140 7 1,489 · •... Terminated ._- 120 121 NUMBER OF CASES BEGUN AND TERMINATED IN THE CIRCUIT COURT 1973

I I I I If) - I I I I If) C ~ ::J If) ,Q 0 o Ol C (J) C Law Over Law $15,000 Ol.- C .Q If) . >- 1::'0 -~ CtS Ol .... co 0 .c Ol If) § -c: $15,000 and Under Q) co Ol ..... 'ro u._ CtSo C E --'@ III .!!1 E c- u =E .§- 8- u ]to >- E .8 CtS.!!! ~+= C ~ 0 .- 0 ,S (J) U (tJ :J qj E 0 :6~.... ~ c:.- ro Circuit County Jury Jury Jury Jury Q ::z ~ ::z ::z is u. '"? U. C/) ... 0> JJ/ ~ a.. 0 ~ () ;§ - County Circuit 20th .... Circuit Totals ...... Beguh ...... 667 109 173 945 336 292 33 363 3 227 2,182 1,166 708 543 2,857 6,780 1,208 2,962 29,416 67 5i ,047 ~ ...... Begun ..... Circuit Totals Reinstated .... 13 3 16 20 5 5 - - - 8 1 - 1 2 3 .... 20th - - - - 77 · .. " Reinstated Transferred .... +39 -16 +60 -81 ------50 +50 -2 ------· .... Transferred Net Added .... 719 96 249 884 341 297 33 363 3 227 2,190 1,167 708 494 2,919 6,778 1,211 2,962 29,416 67 51,124 ..... Net Added Terminated .... 580 63 554 987 142 226 27 971 5 225 2,134 847 558 451 2,721 5,533 979 .- 2,482 27,260 58 46,803 ..... Terminated Downstate Totals .. Begun ...... 5,765 2,513 1,405 17,139 4,269 3,058 673 5,080 115 4,944 ~2,186 9,837 8.971 16,135 66,044 95,496 20,887 58,377 659,464 7,198 1,019,556 ...... Begun Reinstated ... , 127 43 80 231 72 21 6 11 3 25 ~:37 74 168 119 151 679 56 .. Downstate Totals 38 368 1 2,610 · . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... +517 -480 +468 -489 ------r1,588 +1,588 -16 - - - - - · .... Transferred Net Added .. , . 6,409 2.076 1.953 16,881 4,341 ~~,O79 679 5,091 118 4,969 ~2.f'23 9,911 9,139 14,666 67,783 96,159 20,943 - 58,415 659,832 7,199 1,022,166 ..... Net Added Terminated. " . 6,611 1,822 2,171 15,527 3,878 2,862 599 4,855 104 4,805 P2,(;94 9,954 7,752 12,530 '64,233 97,046 19,676 52,822 .- 641,280 6,975 988,196 · .... Termin~ted Cook., ...... , Begun, ... , ... 2,919 15,063 7,056 73,307 13,499 10)1,091 169 100,909 41 3,868 29,226 4,260 21,292 6,092 388,871 IC) 79,971 10,523 (e) 1,274,426 (e) 2,032,589 Reinstated .... 1,552 689 1,710 1,428 3 1 - 3,365 - 216 1,674 ...... Begun ...... Cook - - - - 767 - (e) (e) Transferred •... +10,869 10,869 +1,794 -1,782 - 11,405 · . . .. Reinstated -. ------(bl (d) -12 (e) - - (e) · .... Transferred Net Added, ... 15,340 4,889 10,560 72,953 13,502 1,098 169 104,274 41 3,868 29,226 4,260 21,508 7,766 388,871 80,726 10,523 (el - 1,274,426 (e) 2,043,994 , .... Net Added Terminated. , .. 15,763 4,612 1(l,876 75,287 11,175 696 85 90,137 26 $',845 29,537 3.S90 23,058 7,114 312,249 79,972 9,777 ie) ! 1,229,053 (e) 1,907,152 ..... Terminated 1_. State Totals ...... Begun .. " .... 8,684 17,576 8,461 90,446 17,768 4,155 842 105,989 156[8,812 ~1.412 14,097 30,263 20,227 454,915 175,467 1 31,410 58,377 1,933,890 7,198 3,052,145 .... , .... Begun Reinstated "" 1 ,679 732 1,790 1,659 75 22 6 3,376 3 25 337 74 384 1J93 151 1,446 56 ...... State Totals f 38 368 1 14,015 · . . .. Reinstated Transferred .... +11,386 11,349 rr2,262 -2,271 - - ! -1,594 +1,588 -28 - - - - - · .... Transferred Net Added . , .. 21,749 6,959 12,513 89,834 17,843 4,177 848 109,365 15~ 18,837 61,749 I 14,171 30,647 22,432 458,242 176,885 31,466 58,415 1,934,258 7,199 3,066,160 ..... Net Added Terminated, ... 22,374 6,434 13,047 90,814 15,053 3,558 684 94,992 130 8,650 62,231 I13,844 30,810 19,644 376,482 177,018 29,453 , .I 52,822 1,870,333 6,975 2,895,348 · .... Terminated FOOTNOTES - The following notes ar~ .made fo~ the statistics of th~ Clreu~t Cou~t of ~ook Cou~~y: ~a) The chan~~ry categ.ory in~ ~Ieg.ory includes ordin~nce ?nd ~onservation violation cases, and (d) preliminary hearings in felony cases; and (e) In the ordinance eludes housing cases, e.g., cases reqUlnng appomtment of trustees In receivership dunng reh?blhtatlon or demohtlon ~f bUIldings, 'r'alion and conservatIon vlolalton categories reference should be made to footnote (c). (b) The felony category includes cases initiated as felonies but may have been reduced to misdemeanors; (c) The misdemeanor '1 I

122 123 ~ ..< I ! .,

THE TREND OF ALL CASES, THE NUMBER OF LAW-JURY CASE VERDICTS, TIME LAPSE BETWEEN DATE OF FILING AND DATE OF VERDICT AND THE AVERAGE DELAY (IN MONTHS) IN REACHING I\J 4>- VERDICT IN LAW-JURY CASES TRIED DURU..JG 1973

------Circuit County Total Cases Total Cases Currency Number 01 Number of Cases T,me lapse Average Begun or TermInated. law-Jury Cases Terminated by Time Reinstated Gam loss Terminated Verdict Which Under 1 Year 1'12 Years 2 Years 2'/2 Years 3 Years 3'12 Years Over Elapsed by Verdict Involve A Death 1 to to to to to to 4 {Months) or Year 11/z Years 2 Years 2'/2 Years 3 Years 3'{2 Years 4 Years Years Personal InjUry

lst. .... Alexander...... 3,213 2,895 - 318 1 1 ------1 72.3 Jackson...... 9,226 9,414 188 - 3 3 2 - - 1 - - - - 16.0 Johnson ...... 908 855 - 53 2 2 - - 1 1 - - - - 23.8 Massac ...... 1,836 1,874 38 - 1 1 - - 1 - - - -- 20.6 Pope ...... 355 321 - 34 0 ------Pulaski ...... 2,324 2,297 - 27 0 ------Saline...... 3,144 2,989 - 155 0 ------• - - - Union...... 3,281 2,955 - 326 3 2 - 1 - 1 - - - 1 32.6 Williamson...... 7,216 7,170 - 46 8 7 1 1 3 1 - - - 2 34.2 1st ..... Circuit Total...... 31,503 30,770 - 733 18 16 3 2 5 4 - - - 4 31.1

2nd .... Crawford...... 2,213 2,015 - 198 0 ------Edwards...... 861 854 - 7 0 ------Franklin ...... 4,607 4,196 - 411 3 2 2 1 ------9.9 Gallatin ...... , 1,399 1,324 - 75 0 ------Hamilton...... 967 990 23 - 0 ------Hardin...... 426 410 - 16 0 ------Jefferson...... 3,358 3,130 - 228 4 2 2 1 - 1 - - - - 13.1 Lawrence...... 2,505 2,199 - 306 0 ------Richland ....•..... 2,339 2,302 - 37 0 ------Wabash .... ,...... 1,781 1,319 - 462 1 1 - 1 ------17.5 Wayne...... 2,006 1,908 - 98 0 ------White ...... ,... 2,447 2,153 - 294 0 ------2nd .... Circuit Total ...... , 24,909 22,800 - 2,109 8 5 4 3 - 1 - - - - 12.5

3rd ..... Bond...... 1,523 1,339 - 184 6 4 3 2 1 - - - - - 13.6 Madison...... 43,453 46,400 2,947 - 75 64 2 4 13 14 20 12 8 2 31.5 3rd ..... Circuit Total...... 44,976 47,739 2,763 - 81 68 5 6 14 14 20 12 8 2 30.2

4th ..... Christian...... 4,596 4,196 - 400 1 1 - - 1 - - - - - 20.2 Clay...... 1,934 1,944 10 - 0 ------Clinton...... 2,087 1,692 - 395 0 ------Effingham ..... '" . 5,388 5,325 - 63 0 ------Fayette ...... 3,680 3,803 123 - 1 1 - 1 ------13.3 Jasper...... 719 614 - 105 3 2 1 - - - - - 1 1 36.3 Marion...... 6,154 6,114 - 40 5 2 - - 2 1 - - - 2 35.4 Montgomery...... 4,594 3,903 - 691 2 1 - -- 1 1 - - -- 26.2 Shelby.. • .... • .. .. 2,490 2,589 99 - 1 0 - - - 1 - - -- 25.3 4th ..... Circuit Total...... 31,642 30,180 - 1,462 13 7 1 1 4 3 - - 1 3 30.6

5th ..... Clark...... 2,993 2,917 - 76 0 ------Coles.. .. • ...... 5,465 5,360 - 105 4 4 1 1 2 - - - -- 16.5 Cumberland...... 945 858 - 87 0 ------Edgar...... 2,351 2,324 - 27 2 2 - 2 ------14.2 Vermillion...... 17,237 16,500 - 737 14 9 3 2 3 3 1 - 1 1 24.0 5th ..... Circuit Total...... 28,991 27,959 - 1,032 20 15 4 5 5 3 1 - 1 1 21.5 6th ..... Champaign...... 25,046 22,750 - 2,296 11 7 6 - 1 - 2 I - 2 - 20.9 DeW,tt ...... 2,618 2,443 - 175 3 3 - 2 - - - 1 - - 23.9 Douglas \ 2,548 2.785 237 - 1 1 - 1 - - . - - I - - 15.1 Macon...... 24,666 20,951 - 3,715 13 9 4 2 2 3 -' - - 2 23.1 Moultrie...... 1,726 1.828 102 - 0 ------' - - - - . Piatt...... 2.294 2.113 - 181 1 0 1 ------75 6\h '. .1 Circuit Tala' ...... 58.898 52.870 - 6.028 29 20 11 5 :3 :3 I 2 J 1 / 2 I 2 21:S THE TREND OF ALL CASES, THE NUMBER OF LAVV-.JURV CASE VERDICTS, TIME LAPSE BETVVEEN DATE OF FILING AND DATE OF VERDICT AND THE AVERAGE DELAY (IN MONTHS) IN REACHING VERDICT IN LAW-JURY CASES TRIED DURING 1973

-- _ .. -_. _ .. - Circuit County Total Cases Totar Cases Currency Number of Number 01 Cases Time Lapse Average Begun or Terminated Law-Jury Cases Terminated by Time Reinstated Gain Loss Terminated Verdict Which Under 1 Year 11/2 Years 2 Years 2'/2 Years 3 Years 3'/2 Years Over Elapsed by Verdict Involve A Death 1 to to to to to to· 4 (Months) or Year 1112 Years 2 Years 2'/2 Years 3 Years 3112 Years 4 Years Years Personal Injury

7th ..... Greene ...... 1,349 1,327 - 22 1 1 ------1 62.0 Jersey ...... 2,133 2,072 - 61 2 1 - 2 ------15.0 Macoupin ...... 4,174 3,830 - 344 4 3 1 1 1 - - 1 - - 20.8 Morgan ...... 4,969 4.931 - 38 1 1 - 1 ------15.8 Sangamon ...... 29,636 30,279 643 - 9 8 1 2 3 2 - - 1 - 21.6 Scott ...... 565 519 - 46 0 ------7th ..... Circuit Total ...... • 42,826 42,958 132 - 17 14 2 6 4 2 - 1 1 1 22.7 8th ..... Adams ...... 9,912 9,940 28 - 9 9 2 1 1 2 2 1 - - 24.1 Brown ...... 830 802 - 28 0 ------Calhoun ...... 859 872 13 - 0 ------Cass ...... 2,046 1,983 - 63 3 2 2 1 ------13.4 Mason ...... 1,976 2,092 116 - 1 1 - - 1 - -- - - 21.6 Menard ...... 1.264 1,313 49 - 0 ------Pike ...... 3,326 3,359 33 - 3 0 3 ------5.9 Schulyer ...... 1,023 1,022 - 1 0 ------8th ..... Circuit Total ..•.••. 21,236 21,383 147 - 16 12 7 2 2 2 2 1 - - 18.5 9th ..... Fulton ...... 4,766 4,625 - 141 5 4 - 2 2 - 1 - - - 20.8 Hancock ...... 2,759 2,771 12 - 1 1 1 ------9.7 Henderson ....•... 1,422 1,362 - 60 2 1 1 - - - 1 - - - 20.9 Knox ...... 11,759 11,564 - 195 ------McDonough ...•... 5,767 5,274 - 493 ~ 1 - 1 1 - 1 - - -- 22.4 Warren ...... 3,959 3,851 - 108 1 1 - - - - 1 - - - 34.7 9th ..... Circuit Total .. , .•.. 30,432 29,447 -- 985 12 8 2 3 3 - 4 - - - 21.5 10th .... Marshall ...... 1,092 1;101 g - 1 1 - 1 ------17.8 Peoria ...... 35,857 34,013 - 1,844 31 22 9 7 9 3 2 1 - - 17.8 Putnam ...... 607 558 - 49 0 ------Stark ...... 466 491 25 - 0 ------Tazewell ...... 17,100 16,631 - 469 21 15 6 11 3 1 - - - - 15.1 10th .... Circuit Total •...•.. 55,122 52,794 - 2,328 53 38 15 19 12 4 2 1 - - 16.7 11th .... Ford ...... 2,167 2,186 19 - 3 2 1 1 - - - - - 1 22.9 Livingston ...... 8,148 7,554 - 594 4 4 1 2 - - - - - 1 26.4 Logan ...... 6,694 6,448 - 246 5 5 1 2 1 - 1 - - - 19.2 McLean ...... 27,410 27,283 - 127 18 13 6 2 1 2 5 2 - - 23.1 WOOdford ...... 3,543 3,708 165 - 3 2 - 3 ------12.9 11th .... Circuit Total .•..... 47,962 47,179 - 783 33 26 9 10 2 2 6 2 - 2 21.9 12th .... Iroquois ...... 6,749 6,794 45 - 1 1 1 ------3.2 Kankakee ...... 19,870 19,833 - 37 8 7 - - - 4 4 - - - 30.3 Will ...... 46,577 44,932 - 1,645 22 14 4 2 1 1 - 1 3 10 41.7 12th .... Circuit Totoj ...... 73,196 71,559 - 1,637 31 22 5 2 1 5 4 1 3 10 37.6 13th .... Bureau ...... 7,425 7,502 77 - 7 6 - 1 3 3 - - - - 22.1 Grundy ...... 4,480 4,338 - 142 3 3 - 2 - 1 - - - - 19.7 LaSalle ...... 16,967 17,270 303 - 20 10 - 8 7 1 1 - - 3 25.6 13th .... Circuit Total •...... 28,872 29,110 238 - 30 19 - 11 10 5 1 - - 3 24.2 ,.j. I\) 14th ... Henry ...... 01 9.493 9,363 - 130 2 1 1 ------1 31.1 Mercer ...... 1,875 1,723 - 152 13 13 2 1 8 2 -- - - 19.5 Rock Island ...... 41,636 42,534 898 - 14 12 5 3 2 2 - 1 - 1 20.3 Whiteside ...... 8,059 7,914 - 145 2 1 1 1 ------11.7 14th .... Circuit Total ...... 61,063 61,534 471 - 31 27 9 5 10 4 1 - 2 20.1 --- - I --,

THE TREND OF ALL CASES, THE NUMBER OF LAW~JURY CASE VERDICTS, TIME LAPSE BETWEEN

~ tv DATE OF FILING AND DATE OF VERDICT AND THE AVERAGE DELAY (IN MONTHS) IN REACHING O'l VERDICT IN LAW-JURY CASES TRIED DURING 1973

Circuit County Total Cases Total Ccses Currency Number of Number of Cases Time Lapse Average Begun or Terminated Law-Jury Cases Terminated by Time Gain Loss Terminated Verdict Which Under 1 Year 1'12 Years 2 Years 21 /2 Years 3 Years 3 /2 Years Over Elapsed Reinstated ' by Verdict Involve A Death 1 to to to to to to 4 (Months) or '{ear 1'/2 Years 2 Years 2'12 Years 3 Years 3'/2 Years 4 Years Years Personal Injury

15th •.•• Carroll •.•••••...•• 2,697 2,850 153 - 0 ------Jo Daviess •..••.•• 4,764 4,640 - 124 2 2 - 2 ------15.0 Lee •...••....••... 7,479 7,155 - 324 2 1 2 ------10.9 Ogle •..•..•.•••••. 6,918 6,747 - 171 5 0 4 ------1 18.1 Stephenson .•.•... 8,248 7,860 - 388 5 4 2 1 1 1 - - - - 14.5 15th •••• Circuit Total .•. , ... 30,106 29,252 - 854 14 7 8 3 1 1 - - - 1 12.0 16th .... DeKalb ...•••.... , 12,000 11,370 - 630 5 3 2 - 1 - - - 2 - 25.6 Kane ...... 68,287 67,406 - 881 42 33 18 9 2 1 5 2 1 4 21.0 Kendal! ...... 4,125 3,499 - 626 3 1 - 1 - - 1 - 1 - 30.9 16th •••. Circuit Total...... 84,412 82,275 - 2,137 50 37 20 10 3 1 6 2 4 4 22.0 17th .... Boone ...... 6,301 6,585 284 - 1 1 - - - - - 1 - - 42.2 Winnebago ..•..... 78,277 71,618 - 6,659 30 20 10 5 5 4 1 1 2 2 23.3 17th .... Circuit Total...... 84,578 78,203 - 6,375 31 21 10 5 5 4 1 2 2 2 23.9 18th .... DuPage ...... 91,820 86,804 - 5,016 62 41 2 21 16 11 8 4 -- - 22.5 18th .... Circl>il Total...... 91,820 86,804 - 5,016 62 41 2 21 16 11 8 4 - - 22.5 19th .... Lake ...... 77,178 76,687 - 491 45 38 6 10 10 4 5 4 3 3 26.5 McHenry .' ...... 21,320 19,890 - 1,430 11 8 1 2 - 1 2 1 3 1 35.8 19th .... Circuit Total...... 98,498 96,577 - 1,921 56 46 7 12 10 5 7 5 6 4 28.3 20th .... Monroe ...... 1,969 1,949 - 20 6 4 1 3 2 - - - - - 16.1 Perry •..• _•...... 1,947 1,896 - 51 0 ------Randolph ...... 3.486 3,337 - 149 1 1 1 ------8.5 51. Clair ...... 42,272 38,132 - 4,140 62 44 2 4 22 12 7 8 2 5 29.3 Washington ...... 1,450 1,489 39 - 1 1 - - - - 1 - - - 34.6 20th .... Circuit Total...... 51,124 46,803 - 4,321 70 50 4 7 24 12 8 8 2 5 28.0 Cook ... Cook ...... 2,043,994 1,907,152 - 5,241* 975 N/A ------37.1 Cook ... Circuit Total •.•.••• 2,043,994 1,907,152 - 5,241* 975 N/A ------37.1 Downstate Totals •. 1,022,166 983,196 - 33,970 675 499 128 138 134 86 72 41 30 46 24.6 State Totals ...... 3,066,160 2,895,348 - 49,211 1,650 499 128 138 134 86 72 41 30 46 32.0 *This figure represents the difference between the number of cases pending at the start of calendar year 1973 and the end of calendar year 1973, including inventory adjustments.

'_~-...'-v-"""""""'~""''''' ~,-~ - .... -~.,.,""'--.~ ...... ~ •..,...... :~~~;::;~<~.~:~:?::~: ..~:" ~::."";... ".~ :!::.:.:;.":::.:.;f~ ::~ .:.. ;.".;-~" .:.: :,:..~:. .;.:, '--.-, ~.- .~ ~~' :.':"/.• ~.;. .. _<, ·'""~ .. -",:~~v".____ c,'"" ...... "-...,--'·_~._~ -I,.'"'~.~' ...... "...... ,'~.«v,.-' E._v . . J_ .. E ;:-..... , ?8'. DISPOSITION OF DEFENDANTS CHARGED WITH FELONIES' URING THE YEAR 1973 , ======~~======~~==~= NOT CONVICTED - CONVICTED Reduced or Dismissed Tried But Not Convicted Plea Of Gulily Convicted By Court Convicted By Jury Found Unfit. To Stand Trial Or To Tolal Acquitted Acquitted Class Class Class Class Class Number of Total Discharged at Olsmissed Dismissed Class Class Class Class Class Ctass Class Be Sexually Reduced To By By Convicted of Total 1 2 3 4 Murder 1 2 . Defendants Not Preliminary On Motion of On Mollon of Murdei 3 4 Murder 1 2 3 4 Dangerous County Circuit Defendant State Misdemeanor Court Jury Misdemeanor Convicted Circuit County Disposed of Convicted Hearing 2 9 5 2 ...... Alexander .... 1st 18 2 26 31 8 62 44 1 43 - - - - 2 .•.. , ...... Jackson 1st, . , , Alexander .. , . ... - 11 3 72 4 1 Jackson, ...... , . 213 140 - 1 125 - - ...... Johnson - 10 1 - 1 6 7 5 1 , ..••...... Massac ", ", 18 12 - Johnson .. - 10 1 15 1 74 59 48 - - ..•.....••.... Pope Massac ...... - - 1 1 3 4 Pope ...... 4 3 - - 3 - - - - ...... Pulaski 2 11 3 - - 9 6 24 .8 3 ...... Saline Pulaski ...... 29 20 4 - 41 33 2 31 - - - - 1 2 3 ...... •.•. Union Saline., ...... 74 - 6 5 33 27 1 3 18 5 - - - 1 17 35 9 1 ...... •. Williamson Union ...•...... 4 2 1 - 68 18 92 87 25 Williamson ...... 175 107 2 98 2 2 2 2 4 · ...... Circuit Totals .... 1st - 387 34 2 6 - 236 1st ..... Circuit Totals .... 682 445 7 9 4 1 ...... Crawford -6 ... 2nd 1 3 2 - - - 1 1 ...... Edwards \ 13 7 t 2nd. , ., Crawf('ld ...... 2 - 2 ..... 8 6 4 - - 7 6 4 ...... Franklin E:dwards , - - 8 -. - 17 2 1 Franklin...... 77 60 - 52 - ...... Gallatin - 33 5 - - 1 3 1 1 Gallatin ...... 42 39 - - 2 ...... Hamilton 24 22 17 5 - - - 3 2 ...... Hardin Hamilton .. - - - 5 13 Hardin ...... , . g 4 - 4 - - - 6 2 2 ...... Jefferson - 4 6 - 24 3 4 Jeifersor'l ... 132 106 8 19 69 - ...... •. Lawrence 6 1 1 8 7 3 Lawrence ..•.... 30 22 - 1 13 - 5 1 ...... Richland 1 16 7 4 Richland .... 34 18 2 4 11 - - - 11 4 9 10 10 ...... Wabash 16 3 6 1 - 56 3 3 Wabash ...... 82 26 - 7 •...... Wayne - 19 4 4 - 1 8 3 1 .•.•.•.....•.. White Wayne ... .. ,' 34 27 - - - 3 14 44 30 1 - 26 - - - 8 37 43 18 11 4 11 2 3 11 10 2 · ...... Circuit Totals ... 2nd White ." " .. 5 160 25 267 40 7 11 2nd Circuit Totals, ". 529 367 1~ .". 6 5 1 ...•...... •• Bond ..•.. 3rd 1 12 6 1 1 1 2 - - 14 93 73 11 3 15 4 3 2 ....•.. , .•.. Madison , ~ • > Bond ...... 18 3rd. ... 130 3 5 16 219 14 99 78 Madison., • 815 594 56 22 362 11 3 15 4 4 2 ....•.. Circuit Totals ..... 3rd 363 132 4 5 16 r::31 3rd .. ... Circuit Totals .... 833 600 57 ~3 13 12 1 ...... Christian .... 4th 2 29 70 41 - 2 25 12 - 3 7 2 ...... Clay 4th •. , .. Christian ...... 9 - - - 12 Clay ...... , 39 27 3 - 15 1 5 2 2 ...... Clinton 5 3 - - 9 2 2 12 Clinton ...... ,. 19 8 - - - 16 ...... , Effingham 43 27 27 - - - - 1 4 2 3 3 .. , .. , ...... ,Fayelte Effingham •..... , - - 7 1 1 - 14 Fayette ...... 41 27 18 1 ...... , ... Jasper - - 1 - 1 23 12 2 Jasper ...... 6 5 1 1 2 - - .•.•...••... , Marion 6 - 37 1 8 8 2 Marlon ..... · ... , 116 79 2 2 69 - - 3 · , ...... Montgomery 50 3 - - 1 23 1 1 Montgomery ..... 79 56 2 2 ' ...... Shelby - 8 3 - - 5 55 59 10 3 3 4 Shelby .. , .... , .. 17 15 4 - - 143 2 · ...... Circuit Totals .... 4th 219 41 4 3 1 4th ..... Circuit Totals .•.. 430 285 10 7 1 1 ...... Clark .... 5th - - 2 .. Clark. 3 1 - 1 - - 3 13 14 3 ...... Coles 5th - 25 2 34 2 Coles .. 114 80 11 3 39 - - 2 · ..•... , Cumberland 2 - 4 3 Cumberland ..... 14 10 - 8 - - ...... " Edgar - 11 2 - 3 12 38 35 - 22 - 42 25 16 2 5 2 6 6 3 ...... Vermillion Edgar .. "" - 9 9 6 1 117 228 108 11 7 65 18 57 42 20 2 5 2 6 6 3 · ...... Circuit Totals .... 5th Vermillion 47 9 10 1 160 . Circuit Totals .. ,. 397 234 22 10 135 5th 2 16 52 39 5 1 7 2 ...... Champaign ..... 6th 200 4 16 50 127 1 3 6 7 2 2 3 5 ...... OeWitt Champaign. 779 652 39 20 323 29 6th 37 8 - 3 6 ...... , .•• Douglas DeWitt, ... 87 58 7 6 - - 10 1 13 - - - 5 67 84 13 2 6 ...... •...• Macon Douglas. ,,', 24 13 - - 176 - 140 - 2 14 11 1 2 ...... Moultrie Macon .. , . . , 352 170 3 3 - 4 6 - 1 1 10 2 1 Moultrie. 14 11 - - - 14 ., .•...•.•.. , .. Piatt 1 16 5 - 1 - 3 24 130 148 22 2 3 3 6 2 8 4 3 7 · .....• Circuit Tolals . .... 6th Pialt. .. , '37 23 359 .. - 533 219 6 31 62 .. Circuit Totals .. 1,293 927 49 27 6th ... 1 -1 ...... ,Greene. .... 7th 44 - - 1 Greene ... .. 45 44 - - - - 1 ...... ••.•••. Jersey 7th, .. 35 - - - 3 11 12 3 ...... Macoupin Jersey. , .. ,." 36 35 - - - 8 29 1 16 5 - 1 1 8 1 1 ...•....•.•• Morgan Macoupln ,.' .... 60 31 - 12 54 6 - 2 92 45 6 57 12 23 ...... •.. $angamon , 85 73 1 10 - Morgan ... ' .... 89 118 18 23 ;137 Sangamon ...... 1,473 1,235 76 131 780 4 4 ...... , . Scott 7 3 3 - - - - 96 68 20 4 57 12 24 2 · .•.... Circuit Totals . .... 7th Scott .. , ...... - - 100 118 19 33 '84 Circuit Totals .•. 1,706 1,421 77 142 932 7th .. ." 3 19 17 3 44 ...... •..... Adams. .... 8th 61 27 3 - 1 9 6 ...... Brown Adams, . ... 162 118 9 18 - 16 8th 16 2 - - 1 ...... Calhoun Brown ...... , 36 20 2 - - 1 1 - 8 4 Calhoun ... , <.-. 29 28 4 - 2'3 - - 12 ...... Cass 21 4 - - 9 1 ...••••...•.. Mason , 38 26 1 - - Cass ' .. "" 11 36 1 - - - 2 8 ...... , Menard , , , 48 37 Mason ...... - - 4 1 10 31 21 9 7 - - 6 13 5 · .••.•.•••.••.. Pike Menard ... ,. , - 4 24 40 16 - 12 - - - 1 1 ...... Schuyler Pike ...... - 1 - 2 Schuyler 13 11 - - 10 - - 120 5 55 49 9 · .•...• Circuit Tolals .... 8th 186 44 4 8th, . Circuit Tolals ... 397 277 25 18 - - - ... 4 3 6 3 ...... Fullon ,.9th 20 1 - 17 76 59 - 38 - 15 2 5 3 4 ...... Hancock 9th ... .. Fulton ...... , - 8 1 - 1 Hancock ...... 41 26 - - 16 - 2 1 1 · .... ' .. , Henderson 14 12 8 4 - - 1 12 15 4 ...... , .... ,Knox Henderson ...... - - 44 34 184 150 3 16 87 - - - 7 S 12 14 ....•. McDonough Knox ...... 3 4 - 38 McDonough ..••. 68 30 2 4 17 - 16 1 1 12 2 ..... , ...... Warren 1 32 4 1 1 - 15 24 49 28 3 Circuit Totals .... 9th Warren ., 55 39 1 122 -.!. '!"'Ool'_,_ - 21 198 83 2 6 9th ..... Circuli Totals .•.• 438 316 5 - 129 128 1 l 1 1 DISPOSITION OF DEFENDANTS CHARGED WITH FELONIESl URING THE YEAR 1973 NOT CONVICTED -" Reduced or Dismissed Tried But Not Convicted CONVICTED ---P-fea Of Guilty . Total _. ConVicted By Court Convicted By Jury Found Unfit. Number of Total Discharged at Dismissed Dismissed Acquitted Acquitted I To Stand Delendanls Not Preliminary On Motion of On Motion of Reduced To By By Convicted of rOlal Class qlass Class Class Class - Trial Or To Circuit County Defendant State Court Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Disposed 01 Convicted Hearing Misdemeanor Jury Misdemeanor CO'lvicled Murd .. r 1 2 3 4 Murder Be Sexually 1 2 3 4 Murder 1 2 3 4 , -'- Dangerous County Circuit 10th ' Marshall .". 20 14 1 - 6 6 - - 1 '.-6 6 Peoria, ' 596 413 35 63 204 71 5 - - - . ,. ""-' - 35 113 I 17 69 68 14 2 - - - "" ... Marshall .. loth - - - - - 1 2 4 5 1 Pulnam...... 5 5 - - 4 1 ------...... Peoria Stark .. " .,.," 6 5 3 2 1 I ------...... Putnam ------1 - Tazewell 171 75 14 1 56 3 1 ')6 ------...... Stark - - 7 26 31 20 1 1 - - - - - 10th. ' Circuit Totals ... j'98 512 50 64 273 83 1 5 36 :S6 - - - 1 - 1 4 4 ...... Tazewell 24 101 99 34 3 1 - - - - - 2 1 2 5 g, ~. · ...... Circuit Totals - - '" 10th l1lh. . ,. Ford, . ." .. 35 35 - 1 12 20 - - 2 - '------~- livingston . ,." 196 163 9 2 35 2 -- - - 93 3 19 28 4 10 10 4 ------...•.... ""'" Ford ", ll1h Logan ...... 77 41 36 4 1 ------5 · . , •...... Livingston - - - - 36 1 4 14 8 4 2 - McLean 134 66 3 56 3 1 3 - - - - 1 - 2 ...... Logan - - ·'38 1 20 30 4 2 - - - Woodford .,. 85 63 1 42 20 - - - 3 1 1 2 4 ..... " - - - - 22 - 2 t., 14 2 ------'. McLean 11th Circuit Totafs ... 527 368 9 7 239 82 3 6 22 154 8 - - - - - "." . Woodford - 38 68 18 - - 6 5 1 2 ------2 6 - 5 ...... Circuit Tolals . 11th 12th. Iroquois ...... 119 107 5 4 74 12 3 - 9 11 - 2 1 5 2 - Kankakee 171 79 8 9 51 1 5 5 91 - - - '- - - - 1 - 1 ...... froquols ... 12th - - 8 41 13 22 - - 3 - 1 1 Will ...... , .. ,. 435 361 3 - 315 39 4 - 72 5 28 16 - - - 2 1 ...... Kankakee - - 6 - - 2 1 1 2 5 4 2 12th '" Circuit Totals. .. 725 547 16 13 440 52 5 12 9 174 2 .•...•..•... , ... Will 15 70 34 30 5 1 2 - - - - 3 5 4 3 2 4 1: , . , " Circuit Tolals , .. 12th 13th .. Bureau .. ,., . 53 41 - 18 21 2 - 12 5 6 ------1 Grundy 59 43 - - 20 22 - - 1 16 -5 4 7 ------I...... Bureau ... 13th LaSalle 112 79 61 14 2 ------...... Grundy - - - 2 32 2 8 16 5 - - - - 131h. I~ircuit Totals 224 ------1 1 ... ,., •.....• LaSalle 163 - - 99 57 - 4 3 60 - 7 17 29 5 ------2 - - 1 · ...... Circuit Totals .. . 13th 14th .. Henry ... ."., 65 44 - - 19 25 - - - 21 - 1 6 13 Mercer .... ' 28 21 1 15 !j ------1 . . . . 7 - - """" " " . Henry '" 14th ------6 1 ------Rock Islqnd ..... 442 274 - 1 200 65 3 5 - 166 9 59 67 15 ------. •...• , .• , ... Mercer - - - - 3 - 7 5 1 2 Whiteside ...... 278 211 14 - 166 28 - 1 2 67 1 2 16 23 18 - - ...... Rock Island 141h, ... Circuit Totqls .. , . 813 550 15 1 400 123 3 6 2 261 - - - - - 2 5 . •...... Whiteside 1 12 87 104 33 3 ------9 10 1 1 2 · ...... Circuit Tolals ... 14th 151h. ... Carroll ...... , 21 16 1 - 6 7 - 1 1 5 - - 3 1 - Jo Daviess ...... 22 15 8 7 ------1 ...... Carroll ... 15th - - - - - 7 - 3 4 - - - - Lee .. ,., ...... 194 155 6 128 19 2 39 ------...... , . Jo Daviess - - - 1 13 18 3 - - 2 Ogle. .... ' 161 130 11 B9 29 1 31 ------2 ., ...... Lee - - - 3 11 10 4 1 - - Stephenson ..... 174 ------1 1 139 14 - 104 19 - 1 1 34 5 3 20 2 - - - . •.•. " ...... Ogle 15th , Circuil Tolals . 572 455 32 335 I ------3 I 1 1 · ...... Stephenson - 81 - 5 2 116 9 33 53 9 1 ------1 3 5 2 1 . •.•... Circuit Totqls ... 15th 16tl1 DeKalb 224 176 5 139 7 11 4 10 48 1 - 9 15 6 16 - - - 1 Kane...... 724 546 72 7 320 13 8 11 115 175 1 6 ------, ...•....• ' .. DeKqlb ... 16th 57 60 9 - 1 16 9 4 5 - Kendall ... ,'.< •• 43 32 1 4 21 6 11 - - 7 3 ....•...... •.• Kane - - - - - 3 3 3 - 1 - 161h Circuit Totals .. , . 991 754 78 11 480 ~~6 19 - - - - 1 ...... Kehdall ". 15 125 234 2 15 75 69 28 1 16 9 ------1 5 5 8 - 3 ...... Circuit Totals ... 16th 171h. " Boone . .. 24 16 1 9 6 - - - - a - - 3 1 2 1 1 Winnebago. 796 543 43 5 332 1159 4 252------...... Boone ... 17th - - 2 12 108 74 8 3 2 5 1 15 6 - - 17th, · Circuit Totals .... 820 559 44 5 341 1155 4 260 - 5 11 1 ...... Winnebago - - 2 12 111 75 10 3 2 6 1 - - 16 6 5 11 - 1 · , . , . " Circuit Tolals ... 17th 18th DliPage .... .,'- 1,275 1,067 4 96 5'76 2 1 388 207 - 1 7 45 93 27 1 2 7 4 8 2 113th · Circuit Totals ... 1,275 1,067 4 96 5 3 1 i 1 , .. , . , .. , , . , DuPage ... 18th - 576 2 1 388 207 1 7 45 93 27 1 2 7 4 8 2 5 3 1 1 1 · , •.... Circuit Totals ... 18th

19th Lake. ' .. 232 96 21 5 38 7 2 13 10 131 - 1 4 48 36 19 3 10 McHenry .... 241 132 119 11 2 109 - - - - - 3 6 1 5 ., ...... ,., .... Lake ... 19th - - - - 10 16 62 12 1 2 2 19th Circuit Totals .... 473 - 1 1 2 ...... , McHenry 228 21 5 157 18 4 13 10 240 1 14 64 98 31 1 - - - - - 2 - 5 - 1 11 5 6 1 5 · .••• " Circuit Tolals ... 19th -. ~.~ ... 20th .. · Monroe f 1 '3, 2 - - - 1 8 1 5 1 1 Perry ...... 40 30 4 17 10 ------...... Monroe ... 20Ih "'- - 9 - - - - - 5 2 3 ------Randolph. 56 30 1 16 10 26 ------...... Perry - - 1 2 - - 12 10 4 - - - - - SI, Clair. .... 465 168 1 110 39 5 12 1 ,97 - - - - - · ...... Randolph - 3 37 143 50 45 - 7 1 - - - - Washington .. 14 5 1 3 1 9 - - - 3 2 1 4 1 - ...... SI. Clair '" - - - - - 2 2 4 1 - 20th. .. Circuit Totals .. 586 236 5 2 148 59 6 13 3 )~ 3 40 ------· , .•. , •.. Washington 167 67 54 - 7 1 3 2 1 4 - Cook Cook* ... , ..... , 7,529 2,315 1,903 330 82 5:14 - - 1 - · ••..•. Circuit lotals ... 20th Cook County ...... Cook* .. Cook (Tolal Pleas 4385) (Total 555) Totals 7,529 2,315 1.903 330 82 5;!1L- (Total 274) Cook County Downstate Totals 14,509 ...... Totals 10311 534 394 6.228 2,062 195 179 719 47~ 366 1,425 1,364 426 I: 4 73 85 49 30 34 99 72 83 28 41 Downstate Totals State Totals .... , 22,038 12,626 534 394 8,131 2,062 525 261 719 9·j71 Subtotal 7,985 - Subtotal 796 Subtotal 590 41 ...... State Totqls *See page 151 for tables on method of disposition and sentence imposed on defendants charged by indictment and information in Ihe Criminal Division of tha Circuil "1i1)1 Cook County.

130 131 ------,-,- "",

SENTENCES IMPOSED ON DEF.: lDANTS CHARGED WITH FELONIES DURING THE YEAR 1973

~ VJ SENTI ICES f\) ~---r------.------.------r------.------Penodlc Imprisonment Penodic Imprisonment and Fine Periodic Imprisonment Death Imprisonment Implisonment and Rne (Dept of Corrections) (Dept. of Corrections) (Local Correctional Institution) Class IClass IClass Icrass I / Class IClass IClass IClass Circuit County Murder Murder! 1 2 3 4 Murder 1 2 3 4

1st J.\leXi:UIUer •. Jackson_ 2 I 1~1 I ~3 \-1 \-- 1-- I 21 2 Johnson . _.... _ 3 Massac 2 2 6 Pope ",_ Pulaski ...... 3 2 Saline ._, 1- Union ... , 6 I 71 Williamsor. 1 3 1 6 1 3 3 1 1st ' . . . . Circuit 3 7 23 21 4' 3 -. 15 4 2 2 3 1 2nd " .. Crawtoro .... , _ Edwards ...... ' .. Franklin ... _...... 4 3 Gallatin .... , ...... 1 1- Hamifton .. Hardin ...... 3 2 Jefferson ...... 1 2 2 LawrenCe ...... 1 3 2 Richland ...... 2 2 2 Wabash ...... 1 12 i'O Wayne ...... White ...... 1 1 1 2nd "'. Circuit Totals ...... 1 6 15 11 2 1= 12 11 2 3rd ..... Bond ...... 3 1 1- Madison ...... , .. . 21 24 26 3 3rd ••... Circuit Totals ...•.• 21 27 27 3 4th •..• , Christian , .. 10 9 c 2 Clay. 2 Clinton .. _ 2 1 Effingham ...... 1 1 Fayette ...... 1 5 2 Jasper ...... 1 I~ Marion ...... 6 2 Montgomery .••..•. 1 i 3 6 2 Shelby ..•.•..•...• 1 I 1 41h .•••. Circuit Totals •••..• 3 24 22 2 5 2 3

5th ..... Clark ...... 1 Coles ...... 2 1 3 Cumberland ...•... 2 Edgar ...... Vermilion .. , ...... 6 . 23 7 4 6 2 2 5th. _... Circuit Totals ... , .. 9 I 26 7 4 6 5 2

6th ..•.. ~ .. ~ .. .,.w" ...... _.. 3 20 I 19 11 4 2 2 DeWitt ...... 3 1 1 1- 1 Douglas ...... 1 Macon ...... 12 10 2 2 2 10 I 8 Moultrie ...... Piatt ...... 4 6th ..... Circuit Totals ...... 4 21 I 35 26 6 2 4 4 2 10 I 8 2 2

7th. _ _\Greene ...... Jersey 1 acoup;, •.. 2 5 Morgan .. 2 \ 79 Sangamon ...- 38 21 Scott _ -;,u.. c ...... , ... " ~- -. ---~- ."",:",_~,,,,,-- - -~ .. -- .. ~ 1- \_;; _3l 4 , --,--- l~ L ~ ~ " ~= i~ ~i~ I~J~ SENTENCES IMPOSED ON DEFENDANTS CHARGED VVITH FELONIES DURING THE YEAR 1973--Continued SENTENCES

rp;';~k:I~~;I;~-;~; and Fine Probation or Conditional Discharge ProbatIon or Conditional Discharge Probation or conditi~-;;;tDiSCha~~r '~-;;;;d Unfit To Be Sentenced (Local Correctional Ins/itution} With Periodic Imprisonment With Olher Discretionary Conditions With No Discretionary Condilions or Executed

CirCtlit County 'Class I Class IClass IClassl IClass IClass IClass I Class I IClass IClass IC/ass IClass Murder I 1 2 3 4 Murder 1 2 3 4 Murder 1 2 3 4 Class IClasslclasslclassl IClasslclaSslclasslclass I Tolal Murder 1 1 2 3 4 Murder 1 2 3 4 Sentences 1 sl .. IAlexander _ Jackson. _ 1 2 5 1 2 2 18 Johnson 2 ) 7 24 I 2 4 5 5 Massac _ 72 Pope 2 6 Pulaski 15 1 Saline 2 5 Union 9 Williamson 311~ 2 41 2 13 6 1st ICircuit Totals 2 5 19 6 4 2 3 8 37 48 10 68 2 9 110 9 (- 2nd Crawford 236 Edwards 4 6 Frani

Penodlc Impnsonment Penodrc Imprisonment and Fine PeriodIc l"1prisonment Deatn Impnsonment Imprisonment and FlOe (Dept of Corrections) (Dept. of Correclions) (Local Correctional Institution)

Class Class Class Circuit County Murder Murder 1 2 4 8th .... Adams,. 3 7 Brown, . .,..... B ,- Calhoun., .. Cass...... 73 Mason ...... ,..... 4 1 Menard ..... , 1 3 1 Pike.... 12 3 2 Schuyler , ... Bth •.. , .ICircuit Totals, ..... 4 28 15 3 .. 2 2 9th ..... !Fulton " ••...... 2 3 Hancock ...... 2 I 1 1 Henderson ...... 1 1 Knox ...... 8 7 1 McDonough ...•... 3 3 Warren .•..•.•. " 1 4 3 9Ih ...•.1 Circuit Totals, ... ,. 4 11 16 7 2 3 3

101h ... ,IMarshall .... , ..•.. 2 Peoria ••.....•.... 13 I 28 I 23 3 5 4 2 5 2 Putnam ...... Stark ...... Tazewell ...... 1 16 8 2 3 1 2 3 3 101h.. .(Circuit Totals ...... 14 44 31 5 8 2 4 4 4 3 7 2

11th .... IFord ...... Livingston ...... 1 2 1 3 LOGan ...... 1 6 6 4 2 2 Mclean ...... 1 10 9 1= !woodford ...... 1 1 4 1 11th ... .ICircuit Totals .•.•.. 2 4 19 20 9 2 2

12th .... !Iroquois ...... 2 1 Kankakee ...... 1 6 20 3 4 2 ,Will ...... 2 9 21 7 12th •••. ICircuit Totals .....• 3 17 42 10 4 2

13th .... IBureau ...... 6 3 Grundy ...... 5 5 LaSalle ...... 2 2 2 2 2 2 13th .... ICircuit Totals ...... 7 6 I 1(} 2 2 2 2

14th .... tHenry ...... " .. .. Mercer •. , ...... 3 Rock Island ...... 14 21 \16 Whiteside , .••••.. 4 7 3 3 14th •.. ,ICircui! Totals ..••.• 18 31 20 4

15th .... ICarroll ...... Jo Daviess ...... 3 2 ::: Lee ...... '1 1 8 9 Gg.'e ...... 2 3 1 2 Slephenson . . .. 5 7 1 1S!h ~ ~ ,,!,<~_f :; 1<} if',\ .. ... 2 _._~ .. L. 2 4

'. 0 "!aZ'WTtt'l Gt'rl1f"tkr! U'" -'1 .'ttY ,.! - .... '). "V"8 H'W -f 'j.,.- "'·~·HI·~·#jfrd ,"it ~ I'W~bti w'~''?td' >-" - "i .+, Jog ··rt.~arif! "," _"1 h .,->. MJ# --,,,,ubSil ~!;"'?"-x;;;;;j~~"':~:<'~"l""L'"

SENTENCES IMPOSED ON DEFENDANTS CHARGED WITH FELONIES DURING THE YEAR 1973-Continued ---,--'-----;-- ~ - ---,--_. --_.- SENTENCES ~~----~- --.~-~-~.~- - ~ .--.. ... '.- -- -""'-.-~-.

Periodic Imprisonment and Fine IPr~b;tion or Conditional Discharge IProbation or Conditional Discharge IProbation or Conditional DiSChargel Found Unfit To Be Sentenced (Local Correctional Ins:itution) I With Periodic Imprisonment With Oth"J Discretionary Conditions With No Discretionary Condrtrons or Executed

Circuli CCIJr,ty ~Class IClass IClass IClass! IClass I Class IClassIClassI ~Cla$S IClass I Class IClass Murderl 1 2 3 4 Murder 1 2 3 4 Murden 1 j 2 3 4 Murder Blh _•. .IAdams ...... 2 9 13 Brown ...... 4.;. 1 2 Calhm.!n 16 Cas~ ... 1 1 1 Mason ••• 2 12 Wtenard ...... 3 3 I~ 11 Pike ...... 2 1 10 Schuyler ...... 5 6 3 1 24 8fn .....ICircuit Totals ...... 1 9 6 2 12 25 4 2 120 9Ih .....IFuilon ...... 2 1 Hancock ...... , .. . 2 3 17 3 2 I 3 Henderson .. , ... .. 15 Knox ...... 2 McDonough .•.•... 4 8 4 7 2 10 12 34 Warren .•••....•.• 38 G"2.l •••• .I Circuit Totals ...... 1 3 2 2 9 H 25 20 16 2 5 122 10th .... {Marshall , ..•..•.•. 3 Peoria ...... 1 11 11 2 2 16 24 I 6 6 Putnam ...... SilO 4 183 Stark ...... f Tazewf"!! ...... 7 9 1 3 1 1 1 2 5 15 B 10th .... ICircuil Totals ...... 7 9 1 1 3 15 12 4 4 22 39 14 96 8 111 5 286 11th .... IFord ...... Livingston ...... , 7 8 Logan ...... 1 28 2 2 5 4 McLean ...... 1 36 2 2 11 23 4 Woodford ...... 3 68 2 2 6 1 11th .... I Circuit Totals ...... 2 22 5 6 20 42 10 7 154 12th ... .I Iroquois ...... 2 Kankakee. 4 4> 2 4 - ~ 1 16 4 16 11 \oVill ...... 1 4 2 3 2 1 7 91 12th ... .lCircuit Totals .•.... 7 61 2 2 2 3 3 3 6 6 2 2 23 10 20 72 7 5 6 174 t3th ... {Bureau ...... _.. . Grundy ...... 3 12 4 2 LaSalle ...... 16 5 10 3 13th .... 1Circuit Totals ...... 32 4 5 12 3 3 60 14th .... I Henry ...... 2 2 6 Mercer .. . 8 21 Rock Island . 3 1 2 2 15 7 Whiteside ...... 20 6 9 166 12 17 9 27 /33 14th .. .I Circuit Toiats ... .. 2 2 2 5 67 4 3 36 .t6 15 29 35 14 261 15th .. .ICarroll . 2 1 Jo Daviess ... 5 Lee. _ 1 2 3 7 Ogle .. 3 7 1 1 3Y 1 5 2 2 2 Stephenson ... 3 2 3 31 3 12 2 2 1= 15th .. ICircuit Totals. 1 34 C.:l 12 17 2 5 13 01 4 2 4 2 1= 116

f! -" UJ ANTS CHARGED WITH FELONIES DURING THE YEAR 1973 (j) SENTENCES ,

PeriodIc Imprisonment PeriodIc Imprisonment and Fine Periodic Imprisonment Death Imprisonment Imprisonment and Fine (Dept. of Corrections) (Dept of Corrections) (local Correctional Institution)

Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Circuit County Murder Murder 1 2 3 4 Murder 1 2 3 4 Murder 1 2 3 4 Murder 1 2 3 4 Murder 1 2 3 4

16th. · DeKalb .. , ... ,. - 1 3 2 ------1 1 16 1 Kane. - .. " ------10 20 ------Kendall ..... , .. - 1 - - 2 ------16th · ~ircuit Totals. - 2 3 2 2 ------1 10 20 16 1 ------1 17th .... Boone ...... - 1 ------f!vinnebago . - 17 19 38 23 2 ------3 1 ------1 1 - 17th .... Circuit Totals ..... - 18 19 38 23 2 ------3 1 ------. - 1 1 - 18tn. DuPage ...... - 4 7 28 24 13 - 1 ------1 18th. · Circuit .Toials ...... - 4 7 28 24 13 - 1 ------1 19th lake. - 1 13 19 9 1 ------,- - 1 1 McHenry., . ". - 2 5 5 2 ------2 3 ------19th .... Circuit Totals ...... - 3 18 24 11 1 - - - 2 3 - -- - 1 1 - - .' ------20th ... , r-"'onroe .' ... - - - 3 ------Perry. - - - , ------Randolph .... - - - 7 2 ------1 - S1. Clair .... - 5 24 36 15 5 ------1 ------1 1 Washington - - 2 - 2 ------20th · Circuit Totals ...... - 5 26 47 19 5 ------1 ------2 1

Cook .. , Cook ...... (Total 2.129) (Total Fine Only 13) Cook ... Circuit Totals.".,. Downstate Totals ...... 0 52 258 522 338 72 2 4 22 32 18 1 21 70 42 10 0 0 1 3 3 1 29 38 24 11

State Totals ...... Subtotal 3,371 Subtotal 91 1 21 70 42 10 0 0 1 3 3 1 29 28 24 11

SENTENCES IMPOSED ON DEFENDANTS CHARGED WITH FELONIES DURING THE YEAR 1973-Continued SENTENCES

Periodic Imprisonment and Fine Probation or Conditional Discharge (local Correctional Institution) Probation or Condiiional Discharge Probation or Conditional Discharge With PeriOdic Imprisonment With Other Discre!:::.Ii:;ry Conditions Found Unfit To Be. Sentenced With No Discretionary Conditions or Executed Class Class Class Class Class Class Circuit County Class Class Class Class Class Class Murder 1 2 3 4 Murder 1 Class Class Class Class Class 2 3 4 Murder 1 2 3 Class Class Class Total 4 Murder 1 2 3 4 Murder 16th ... , DeKalb ...... - - 1 2 3 4 Sentences - - - - - 2 2 Kane ...... - 1 - - 5 4 4 10 2 7 - - - - - 7 3 1 - 2 3 - - - - 48 Kendall ...... - - - - 27 34 1 - 24 23 - 16th .... - - - - - 2 - - - 6 - - - - 175 Circuit Totals ...... - 1 - - - 1 2 3 ------11 3 3 - 5 32 ------11 40 14 - 2 31 25 9 17th .... Boone ...... ------234 ------1 - - /Winnebago ...... - - - - - 2 2 2 - - 17th .... - - - - 15 4 - 1 12 ------8 Circuit Totals •..... - - - 23 3 - 1 46 38 4 - - - - - 16 4 - 1 14 - - - - - 252 - 25 5 - 1 46 38 4 18th .... DuPage ...... - - - - - 260 - -- - 4 - 3 18th .... Circuit Totals ...... - 14 8 6 - 2 5 30 - - - ,. 12 - 1 8 32 4 - - 3 14 8 6 - 2 5 - - - - - 207 30 12 - 1 8 32 4 19th .... lake ...... - - - - - 207 - - - 2 - - 1 20 13 McHenry ...... - 8 - - 10 13 5 ------1 2 - - 2 7 5 - .- - 19th .... Circuit Totals ...... - - - - 6 9 58 7 - - 131 - 2 - - 1 21 15 8 - - .- 2 5 - - - - 109 - 6 19 71 12 2 ._. - - - 9 10 - 240 20th .... Monroe ...... - 1_ ------Perry ...... - - - - - 1 - - 1 1 ------1 1 - - - 8 Randolph '" ...... ------4 2 3 ------10 SI. Clair ...... - - - - 3 7 4 - 2 - - - - - 3 5 4 1 ------26 Washington .•..... - - 15 111 33 36 - 1 ------297 20th .... Circuit Totals .•.... - - - - - 2 2 1 ------3 5 4 1 15 121 ------9 Cook ... 44 44 - 1 4 1 1 Cook ...... - - - - - 350 Cook ... Circuit Totals ...... (Total 226) DOwnstate Totals ...... (Total 2,122) 0 26 2.1 38 9 0 39 (Total 179*) (4669) 149 115 37 1 108 561 674 251 0 53 07 230 73 State Totals ...... 0 0 1 0 0 4,157 0 26 21 38 9 r Subtotal 566 1 108 561 674 251 Subtotal 2,685 Subtotal 180 8,826 "'Includes defendants committed as unfit to star.d trial a'ld as sexually dangerous.

UJ -...I COMMENTARY

co N c.o LO The Cook County Circuit Court during 1973 had a case load per judge of about 8100 cases, based on filings and '

Average Number of Cases o per Judge (based on C') YJaf Cases Filed or Reinstated 01"0 CO filings) ,S: C N f--. Cases Terminated "OW C 1873 ...... - Ol .... 2,044,000 r > a..« 8,100 1,907,000 t­ 1S72 1,952,000 CO 7,500 :z "0 LO 1,938,000 Ol o ::> ro C') 1~q1 c N 2,090,000 o 'E 8,500 2,034,000 u 1970 1,965,000 ~ 7,600 1,881,000 C') CO OC')c.oLO 1969 N o c.oLONO 1,936,000 LO LO LO(l)r--c.o 8,000 o ,... ONOr-­ 1,820,000 ,... N ,...r--coLO The above chart considers only filings and reinstatements, and the statistics therein do not reflect ancillary hear­ ings and post-termination matters. For example, substantial judge-time is required in the post-decree section of the Divorce Division and in hearings on habeas corpus and post-conviction. petitions in the Criminal Division. (l)(l)OOOO'OOO'OOO o o o '

"0 to reduce the elapsed time from date of filing to date of verdict in law jury cases terminated therein. The average ...... elapsed time in said cases (based on 270 verdicts during 1973) was 34 months. Of course, the average elapsed time .s(Il N(l)'

0 0' C') N N (Or-- ,...<:t N (l) c.om (l) C c.o ~ CO N (l) (l) LOO r--(l) N '

0> 1Oc.o CO LO r--N NN ',CJ) CJ) CJ) 1969 60.7 months r- (ii "iii 42.8 months al:§ -..J E .8 a .8« Ol.o .E .01- Chief Justice Robert C. Underwood remarked at the 1972 Judicial Conference" ... it would appear that the goal of CC :l :l :lo c: CI) CI) Cl)1- 24 mnnths average time lapse from date of filing to date of verdict is a realistic possibility within a reasonable time in o ~ .:;:: 0'- :- 1-- 0 the G:rcuit Court of Cook County." With continuing determination and spirit, it WOuld appear that the judges of the ~ ~ >- «Z Circuit Court can realize the goal of 24 months in law jury cases terminated b11 verdict. ESQ Ci3g CC ~ (j) g'iii '2:> x c ~ (Il:l (Il 0·- ..c 0 I-O~ OI

>- C 0: UJ UJ UJ ...J 0 UJ (.J ...J -< (.J 0: ~ Z UJ=:lx 'iii ...J !Xl Z zo:_ .s; -< ~ Z 0 OO=:lZI->- UJ O-(f)I-O:-(.JI-CI) -< > 0 ~ o¢:CI) (5 :r: a: > a: (.J a Il. ...,=:l (.J

138 139 "-."..... jl

..L ~o IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY

LAW DIVISION, COUNTY DEPARTMENT

AGE OF LAW CASES PENDING IN THE LAW DIVISION, COUNTY DEPARTMENT*

1965& During During During During During During During During Totals Earlier 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973

13,005 13,447 13,023 21,256 11,912 11,615 Law J Total Filed or Transferred In ..... ~ ~ 12,951 ~ 5,428 9,869 10,838 28,171** U Pending ...... 0 0 0 0 Q 2,036 Cases. R 100.0% 100.0% 84.4% 55.3% 17.2% 6.7% Over y % Terminated ...... ~ ~ 100.0% ~ 14,881 14,857 15,012 14,116 13,510 13,797 14,370 $15,000 Total Filed ...... · ~ ~ ,~- 582 ' 1,999 5,268 7,879** Non- Pending ...... 0 0 if}, 0 0 30 Jury ----- 95.7% 85.5% 63.3% % Terminated or Transferred out ~ 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 99.8% ~ --' ----- * Also see Appendix at page 155. ** Does not include 516 jury and 106 nonjury cases pending on Special Calendars (military, appeal, insurance liquidation and bankruptcy).

AVERAGE TIME INTERVAL BETWEEN DATE OF FILING AND DATE OF TERMINATION OF LAW JURY CASES IN THE LAW DIVISION, COUNTY DEPARTMENT

I Cases Terminated by Any Means, Including Verdict Cases Terminated by Verdict Months Elapsed Between nate of Filing and Months Elapsed Between Date of Filing and Date of Termination Total Number of Date of Verdict Total Number of Verdicts Reached Cases Terminated Maximum Minimum Average During the Period Maximum Minimum Average During the Period I '-_. I Figures to Complete This Analysis are Unavailable. 593 100.7 1.9 42.0 15,763 - --

I

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY LAW DIVISION, COUNTY DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS OF LAW JURY CASES PROCESSED BY THE TRIAL JUDGES OF THE LAW DIVISION, COUNTY DEPARTMENT COMPARISONS WITH PRECEDING YEARS

I Number of Law Jury Cases Number of Verdicts Ratio of Law Jury Trial Judges Contested Verdicts to Total Total Total Assigned Total Cases Substantially Substantially Added Terminated For Trial Total Contested Terminated Full-Time Part-Time

Number For December, 1973 ., ...... '.. 1,252 667 295 25 23 3.4 18 12 Average Per Month, 1973 . 1,279 1,313 467 47 47 3.6 25 6

Average Per Month, 1972 . 1,187 1,585 518 53 52 3.3 24 7 Average Per Month, 1971 . 1,228 1,521 429 65 60 3.9 26 7 Average Per Month, 1970 . 1,200 1,393 302 62 53 3.8 28 13 Average Per Month, 1969 . 1,345 1,474 398 62 50 3.5 33 18

...... ~

Ii, IN THE LAW DIVISION, COUNTY DEPARTMENT STATEMENT OF TOTAL LAW JURY CASES TERMINATED AS CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ANALYSIS OF LAW JURY TERMINATIONS REPORTED BY THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK DURING CALENDAR YEAR 1973 COUNTY, COUNTY DEPARTMENT, LAW DIVISION DURING CALENDAR YEAR 1973

(1) Age of Law Jury Cases Disposed of During the Period buring calendar year 1973, the Law Division of the County Department of the Circuit Court of Cook County . .. terminated 15763 Law Jury cases which were credited by the clerk as follows: 1965 and Earlier 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1. 173 \. To the Assignment Judge (Judge Butler*) ...... , ...... 3,948 Law-Jury Cases No ...... ;2 21 97 471 3,044 5,150 4,367 1,886 715 Disposed of During II. To the Motion Judges (Judges Brussell, Bua, Hallett, Jiganti and Schwartz) ...... 1,121 the Period %age ...... 0.1% 0.1% 0.6% 3.0% 19,3% 32.7% 27.7% 12.0% 5% III. To the Pre-Trial Judges (Judges Harewood, Iseberg, Jones, Landesman, Matkovic, Morrissey, Nash, Nelson and Stefanowicz) ...... , ...... , . 3,285

(2) Law Jury Cases Terminated During the Period IV. To the 24 Judges who participate in the Summer Pre-Trial Program as follows (JU' .. Jes Barry, Berg, Brown, Canel, Carey, Cherry, Crosson, Crowley, Ellis, Elward, Felt, T. H. Fitzgerald, Ger­ Terminations Credited by Clerk To Number of Terminations ou/is, Hei/ingoetter, Holzer, Kowalski, Lefkovits, Norman, Schaller, Sorrentino, Stark, Wells, Wil- Assignment Judge ...... , ...... , ...... 3,948 son and Wosik) ...... 1,770 Pre-Trial Judges* , ...... ,...... 5,055 V. To the Law Jury Trial Judges as follows: Motion Jydges ...... • ...... • ...... ----4------, . . . . . 1,121 Full-Time Trial Judges**...... 4,434 A) To the 27 Judges (Judges Barry, Berg, Brown, Canel, Carey, Crosson, Crowley, Ellis, Elward, Part-Time Trial Judges*** •...... 451 Felt, Fiedler, J. C. Fiizgerald, T. H. Fitzgerald, Geroulis, Heilingoetter, Hershenson, Holzer, Kowalski, Lefkovits, McAuliffe, Norman, Schaller, Sorrentino, Stark, Wells, M. K. Wilson and No Progress Call., ..... , , ...... , ...... ,.,...... 754 Wosik) whose service in the Law Jury Division was not substantially interrupted by other judi- TOTAL ...... ,...... 15,763 cial duties or illness during the entire period ...... , ...... 4,186

* Includes trial judges hearing summer pre-trials. B) To the 11 Judges (Judges Barth, Cherry, Collins, Daly, DeBow, Epton, Hickey, Jiganti, Mur­ ** Includes only Cook County judges who spent 75% or more of their time in the Law Division. ray, Roberts and K. E. Wilson) whose service in the Law Jury Division was limited by other Includes Cook County judges who spent less than 75% of their time in the Law Division and downstate judges who served *** judicial duties, assignments or illness during the entire period ...... in the Law Division on assignment. 546

C) To the 16 Judges (Judges Beam, Clark, Davis, Immel, Kasserman, Koch, Lipe, Mills, Murphy, (3) Maximum, minimum and average productivity of full-time trial judges and stages at which full-time trial judges termi­ Scott, Stengel, Thornton, Watson, C. M. Wilson, Young and Ziegler) on assignment from cir- nated law jury cases during the period cuits outside of Cook County ...... 153 Verdicts Cases Settled D) To the Status CailiNo Progress Call Judges (Judges Palmer, Jiganti and Iseberg) .... ,.,.,' 754 Total Law Jury Without During After Total Terminations ...... 15,763 Cases Use Selection Selection Terminated Contested Uncontested of Jury of ,Jury of Jur\l

1'9 22 "'Includes terminations by the pro tern assignment judges. Maximum* ...... •...... •...... 648 28 3 619 .- Minimum* ...... \ ... ; .. ~ ...... \ .... 69 2 0 39 0 2 ,- Average ...... 155.0 16.0 0.4 121.9 4.8 8.9

*Maximum and Minimum reported by any judge in each category not necessarily the same judge in each category.

142 143 '''~",

! ,I

-I»W!\) ...... (Jl .::. OS- -! ~~~R0~?~~~P~~90~?~-'(/) (/) . .::. ~Q.. 0 _ COc -! :::l 0. COOOCOO~"OCCOOOO~ 0. CO > 3~~~:::l00c~~~:::l:::l00~~C Plen r coco33O~~-mmcooo~~33en c- -, en o._--g--c ~ggCOCil--CO -!-!**_~~(/)~~-! __ enen** C -<~ co co co _·-·co 0 0 CO CO CO coco CO CO 0 ::0 lli:E o~Qn~RR ~~~~~Q~Q~- -<. -. L >3 co __ oom3 coco L -""c (/)~~oo.~~-~~~o.o.«mm~ .-i (') CD-< ~mQ-'~ ~PlgPl«~~~~~ :Dl>(J) ---J to:= -l-'~~_tO =:cocoo.o.»·· g - C wO :::lO~coooo'(J)~ Pl 3~ru~<'~ m ~QQ--~~ m rm~ (/) (!)(/):::J 3 q> : UlO'O'Ul(/)(!)CO ~ (!) :::l' -s'co:Q 3. UiUi~~(!) (!) 0 c- » Ul - • m"O ~!!!. (!). 0 0 3 3 a. C:O:o ~ c_: Q(jj(/)CO:::l ;1: ~~-'-'COO 0 Ul .. cn"<...... mO) :J~C -- g(J):o-n Ul co ~ p: ro5~5..§~ S" ~ =,,--1-1 0. s. CQ : §: ~: mCD g rmz o·co. aPl· -. mC/) ;::;: O»°m m :::lm' :::l. rom o' ~ 3: -. Q..ro :::l O:E-Ic- -l m. 0'0 ::T ~O:r:C m ;a.: ~g. -1-:00 O:::l -«0- 0> -'0 -(i5cQ L L- OOG)>r C ~L CZ:x: 0. ~c CD :0- -I"tI m -< -oz:o (J) ZomO 0 G)C 0 :::l OZS:m Orn >Ul »-I en r- NWW-"" PlO ~N N -J..0'l--'--'-..J IOZen' ...... ::-'(J) .... 0 IW-l'>-'--'--l'>())CD m 0 -l'>-l'>IDNID s. ll~ IDIDOID-l'> ...... {Jl (fJ_ !SOO~ en CUjj-nr 0 c L 0-1» en ..... N ...... ocz S:r::E 0: -0> a i\:l W Pl -< 9 -...jW -l'>O>WOCOO '< -Imc... m (fJ ~ 0 jg:xxxxxx O>---JOo>WUl-...jNN ;;;-- orC Q \Ii 0»:0 0 c:E-< 0 0 ..... :0 0 -'" -I 7':" c-O Z CPl9 0 -. '< 0 c "<008. -n C ....L...... L~mOl-..LCUW ..... OlO>UlN I OlUJ--&.~mO~w--L. :::l ,S'L CO OIDOID ..... ID -...jW-...jo>O>!\)COUl-l'> .... N-...j .... WQ1N '" C -< Il~ omo. 0 Plx(Q ,<0 co ~ S· Ul~ to !/)

_ '" ",-.-_ ,""''''' , rs5W1jf1!ifTWi!il~""fS-r 1'6WWWf"P -;-1 . ~*r->'j-?if§il .. w"y j-v'·'-r" '-p .-- '·~··w···"+"'''<:!- "';;;;JirtGJ"'~_k"~~';;-"""~r~""'nt--t' <'--'1""·~J-~~'i"''''''''':;'''~-~-·;;?''''-W''''' .. --....,.~~..,...-. _""Wl 9m-;P.jjF-r"·'''''-fA'''"~-'''''-S''-''-'"''J'">'-:'; '~~;:r;~"""'~"'I"""""'"'I~- ~~-r. ~ -~"'";:'- ."' ~~

AN ANALYSIS OF THE LAW JURY PRODUCT OF THE LAW JURY TRIAL JUDGES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, COUNTY DEPARTMENT, FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 1973 - AS REPORTED THROUGH THE MONTHLY REPORTS OF LAW JURY TRIAL JUDGES

The Monthly Reports Of The law Jury Trial Judges Of The County Department Of The Circuit Court Of Cook County, Indicate A Total Of 5161 Cases Processed And 4885 Cases Terminated. Subsections A, B & C Below Describe The Pro­ cessing Of These Cases, Classified According To The Amount Of Time A Judge Was Assigned To The County Depart­ ment, Law Division, Jury Section.

Settled Settled Settled Verdicts Total Law Total Law Total Total Judge Carendar fh Without During After Returned Jury Cases Jury Cases Jury I/Z Days In Days Avail- Use Of Selection Selection To Assign- Mistriars Terminated Processed '/2 Days Excess Of able for Jury Of Jury Of Jury Contested IUncontested men! Jucige Jury '/2 Days Assignment A. The Law Jury Record Of The 27 Law Jury Judges Whose Service in The Law Jury Trial Division Was Not Substantially Interrupted By Other Judicial Duties, Assignment Or Illness During The Period

TOTALS ...... •.... 3,374 130 239 433 10 203 31 4,186 4.420 4,686 6,915 11,595 Maximum ..•...... 619 19 22 28 3 47 4 648 648 273 425 496 Minimum ...... 39 0 2 2 0 0 0 69 73 71 111 384 Average ...... 124.9 4.8 B.9 16.0 0.4 7.5 1.1 155.0 163.7 173.5 256.1 429.4

B. The Law Jury Record Of The 11 Law Jury Judges Whose Service In The law Jury Trial Division Was Substantially Limited By Other Judicial Duties, Assignments Or Illness During The Period

TOTALS ...... 347 39 54 97 9 32 6 546 584 821 1,169 1,990 Maximum ...... , .....• 5B 15 17 21 4 12 2 105 119 202 235 360 Minimum ...... 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 8 1 10 10 Average .•...... •...... 31.5 3.5 4.9 8.8 O.B 2.9 0.5 49.6 53.1 74.6 106.3 180.9

C. The law Jury Record Of The 16 Judges On Assignment To The Circuit Court Of Cook County, Law Jury Division From Circuits Outside Of Cook County During The Period

TOTALS ...... 77 10 22 l 43 1 4 0 153 157 191 155 387 , Maximum ...... 10 2 2 4 1 2 0 15 15 30 21 40 Minimum '" ...... i 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 5 8 4 - 17 -r.. Average ...... 4.8 0.6 1.4 2.7 0.1 0.3 0 9.6 9.B 11.9 9.7 24.1 ------.::.01

[, '" IN 'fHE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY THE TREND OF CASES IN THE COUNTY DIVISION DIVORCE DIVISION, COUNTY DEPARTMENT CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY FOR THE PERIOD CALENDAR YEAR 1973 DISPOSITION OF DIVORCE CASES DURING CALENDAR YEAR 1973 ~------"'------r------r-____ ~ ______~ ______~ ______~ Pending at Pending Type of Case Trans­ Term­ at I Start Filed ferred inated ~'-'----~------~------~----~------r------+- End ~ PART I cA) TAX (Subtotal) ...... , ...... (10,911) (26,011) 0 (15,083) ______(21,839) (1) Special Assessments TOTAL DIVORCE CASES TERMINATED 1 a. Chicago ... , ... , ... , ...... ,., .. ,.,. 402 146 101 447 I b. Suburban.,., ...... ,., .... , ...... ,...... 386 65 12 439 29,537 (2) Tax Deeds...... 1,541 1,344 1,369 1,516 J (3) Scavenger Tax Deeds .• " ...... , ...... ,.".,... 26 153 109 70 I (4) Inheritance Tax Petitions .• , ... " .. ".,.",...... 4,932 8,780 8,134 5,578 j (5) Inheritance Tax Reassessments ...... ,...... 62 45 0 107 I (6) Tax Refund Petitions .. ,...... 118 ' 30 2 146 PART (( }' (7) Tax Objections...... 3,378 14.655 4.618 13,415 L (8) Condemnations (in conjunction with special DECREES assessments) ..... , ...... " .. ,...... 27 8 0 35 J!:!L Other ...... , ...... ,.;....';"1-~,==3;:;:9:----+-=-=7,=,,8::,:"5--+_--=-_+-:-::-=7,=,3~8_-f-_=8=,-6--1 (8) ADOPTIONS (Subtotal) ...... ,...... (706) (2,935) 0 (2.786) (855) TOTAL DECREES ...... , ... "., ...... , . , ...... •...... , . , , , , •..... , ...... 21,418 , (1) Related ...... "...... ~~51 1480 1,318 413 .' (2) Agency ...... ,...... 130 960 932 158 1. Divorce., ...... , •... , •... , .. ".,."., •...... , .. , ...... 21,034 ~~(~31)~Pr~iv~a~te~~PI~ac~e~m~e~n~t~.. ~.~ ..~.~.~ .. ~.~..~.~ ..~ . .;..... ~ . .;.....~.~ ..~,~.~ .. ~ . .;... .. ~.+- __3~25~_~~~49~5~~~ __~~~5~3~6 __+- __~2~8~4~ (C) MENTAL HEALTH (Subtotai) ...... (i5) (3,868) 0 (3.845) (38) 2. Separate Maintenance •.•... ,." ..... , . , .. , ...•...... , . , , .. , , ...... 128 (1) Commitment Petitions I a. Adults...... 15 3.781 3.766 30 3. Annulment . , ..• , ...... , ...... , . " L..-.______256 -' b. Minors .. ,...... 0 82 74 8 (2) Restoration Petitions a. Adults...... 0 3 3 0 b. Minors ....•...... •...... 0 0 0 0 PART 1(( (3) Discharge Petitions a. Adults...... 0 2 2 0 CASES DISMISSED b. Minors ...... 0 0 0 0 (D) MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (Subtotal) ...... (66) (41) 0 (26) (81) TOTAL DiSMiSSALS ...... , .. " ...... •...... •...... 8,119 (1) Petitions to Organize...... 3 6 2 7 (2) Petitions to Annex. Disconnect and Dissolve...... 34 18 9 43 1. Divorce ...... •...... , . , , , . , , .. , .. 8,119 (3) Local Options and PropOsitions ...... •...... , 17 5 9 13 (4) Election Matters...... 12 12 6 18 2, Separate Maintenance ...... , ...... •...... •... , . , ...... •...... o (E) RECIPROCAL NON SUPPORT...... 3,164 1,191 0 972 3,383 (F) MARRIAGE OF MINORS .. • ...... 15 134 0 132 17 3. Annulment ...... , ..... , ... , ...... , . o GRAND TOTAL...... 14,877 34,180 o 22,844 26,213

146 147 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY JUVENILE DIVISION, COUNty DEPARTMENT PROBATE DIVISION, COUNTY DEPARTMENT STATI5TICAt REPORT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1973 STATISTICAL HEPORT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1973 CASES BEGUN AND TERMINATED IN THE PROBATE DIVISION Children ref,tHed to the County Department, Juvenile Division

Conservatorshif:s Total Decedent E:states Guardianships Victim of Reactivated 7,978* 1,797 748 10,523 Delinquent or Victim of Number of Cases Begun ...... ; ...... Delinquents Dependents Truants Criminal Offense Neglect Other Cases Total 1,427 1,072 9,777 Number of Cases Terminated ...... 7,278* 15,983 235 3,719 0 2,326 223. 0 22,486 * Includes SUPP!8mental Proceedings Petitions: 110 filed and 129 terminated. Supplemental Proceedings Petitions are pro­ ceedings concerning contracts to make a will, construction of wills and the appointment of testamentary trustees during Initial action taken on cases referred to the County Department , Juvenile Division the period of administration. Adjusted Social Investigation Ordered Petition Recommended Total

159 51 22,276 22,486 INVENTORIES FILED, FEES COLLECTI2D AND WILLS FILED IN THE PROBATE DIVISION IN 1973 PART I Cases adjusted in the County Department, Juvenile Division INVENTORIES FILED AND VALUE THEREOF "4 Minors in I Need of Inventories Dependents Delinquents SuperVision Mental Deficients Others Total Number Value Kind of Property By the Probation Staff ...... 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,121 $720,204,357.64 Personal By the Complaint Unit Staff •...•..•.... 153 0 0 0 0 153 2,379 $ 82,531,705.00 Real Estate TOTAL ...... •...... 153 0 0 0 0 153 $802,736,062.64 TOTALS 9,500

Nature of petitions disposed of in the County Department_. , Juvenile Divic:jon. PART II FEES COLLECTED (NET) BY THE CLERK Guardian Appointed Guardian Petitions Continued Cases with Right to Consent Appointed Institutional Dismissed Generally Closed to Adoption with Right to Place Probation Commitments Total $768,177.71 23,058 35,416 12,512 559 2,329 2,416 2,203 78,493 PART III WILLS FILED AND PROBATED

Filed Probated %Probateo 13,124 5,236 39.90%

149 148 ------._------,------

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY CRIMINAL DIVISION, COUNTY DEPARTMENT CRIMINAL DIVISION, COUNTY DEPARTMENT

Method of Disposition of Defendants Table of Criminal Offenses Commenced by Indictment and Information J In The Criminal Division During 1973 Charged By Indictment and Information ,-- In The Criminal Division During 1973 Number of I, ,,- I Disposed of Disposition of Defendants By Not Convicted onvicted CHARGED OFFENSE Indictments Defendant:" . & Informations - Guilty Plea o 4,385 4 4 Attempted-- Arson ...... ' ...... 72 330 555 Burglary ...... '" ...... 57 1 Controlled Substance (acquisition of) ...... 1 ! Jury Trial ...... " ...... , 82 274 2 2 I· Escape ...... ·.······································· . 2 Stricken Off Wi~h Leave to Reinstate ...... 1,559 I<:dnapping ...... 2 43 f Murder (including assault) ...... 37 Nolle Prosequi ...... 219 27 Rape ...... , .... , .. , .... , ..... , ...... ' ...... , . 27 ! 148 Robbery ...... , ...... ' ...... " ., ...... 120 Other Discharge ...... •...... 125 33 40 Theft ...... , ...... TOTALS ...... , ...•...... 2,315 5,214 37 42 Commission of- Arson ...... , ...... 341 Bail Jumping ...... 337 392 I Battery (including aggravated battery) ...... 346 I 46 Bribery ... " ...... -' ...... 46 Disposition of Defendants 1,093 Burglary (including possession of burglary tools) ...... : ...... 882 Sentenced In The Criminal Division During 1973 2 2 I Child Abandonment ...... 1 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5 I 4 Dis osition of Defendants By Criminal Damage to Property ...... ·.·················· 1 Cruelty to Children ...... 1 Indictment/Information Actual De endants 5 Deceptive Practices ...... 4 1 orrectlons ...... :' ...... 2,414 2,045 29 Deviate Sexual Assault ...... 19 8 8 99 84 Escape ...... •... ············································· . 2 Explosives (possession of) ...... 2 32 Probation with: Forgery ...... , ...... '" ...... " ...... 32 I 3 3 ). Conditions, but not jail ...... 2,156 2,122 Gambling ...... ···································· . 2 ! Illegal Voting ...... , ...... ' ...... , ...... 2 1 13 Some jail time ...... 241 226 Incest (including aggravated incest) ..... , ...... 13 35 Indecent Uberties ...... '... . 35 Pay Fine ...... , ...... 16 13 35 Intimidation . , ...... 29 20 Kidnapping ...... 20 Committed to Department of Mental Health ...... 223 179 74 76 Manslaughter {voluntary & involuntary}...... 5,149 4,669 5 6 TOTALS ...... Mob Action ...... ····································· 7 Motor Vehicle Act Violation ...... 7 565 Murder ...... •... , ., ...... , ...... , .. 474 \ Narcotic, Cannabis & Controlled Substances Violations 1· 933 ! (including sale, possession, delivery, manufacture) ...... 866 Writs Filed and Disposed Of 21 Obscenity. " ...... , ...... , ...... 5 In The Criminal Division During 1973 9 Official Misconduct ...... 9 7 Perjury ...... 5 Post-Conviction Habeas Corpus 263 298 Rape ...... ···.········································· . 2,027 j N/A Robbery (including armed robbery) ...... 1 ,519 Number of Writs Filed ...... N/A 16 16 Stolen tluto (possession of) ...... r Number of Writs Disposed of ...... 333 248 Theft (includes grand theft, theft of auto, theft 730 by deception, theft from person) ...... 564 5 5 rj. Unlawful Restraint ...... · ... ······························ 152 r Unlawful Use of Weapons ....•...... 145 30 50 Miscellaneous Offenses ...... ~ ...... - 6,092 7,347 I TOTAL ...... · ... ······················································ .- \ I I

I 151 TREND OF ALL CASES IN THE MUNICIPAL DEPARTMENT, CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ~ (0 l() OJ OJ N (D I'- :l N (0 ~ N 0 0 (0 DURING CALENDAR YEAR 1973 ...,, en ..- ..- ,... N Ln_ C c:i ,... ,'-...... - 0 ..- ..- (D ~ Z Inventory en,.... Pending t5 .,... OJ l() Pending 'C (D 0 .,f .,f ,...en co 0 Ln '

1,669 +730 9,252 9,288 13,859 36 - ~ Law Disl. 1 ..... 13,89S 6,853 :l ,... ', Ordinance 280,807 0 0 280,807 230,470 - - - 'c co ', Dist. 2-6 ", 434,024 0 0 .... ' "0 2 ~ C ** Adjusted by + 70 after physical inventory, « ...,:J "0 , 0 0 0 (\j 0 0 (\j ***Adjustcd by +41 after physical inventory in District 5. W '0 .c: C u 2 I'- 0 ro ro (D 2 ~ ,...OJ "0 (() ..., w E OJ w .0 a. ,,2 ...... '0 WOO ro ....

• ,0;"

154 155 ,,1------,]r------

APPENDIX (Continued) I MUNICIPAL DEPARTMENT CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY !l CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS: YEAR-END AGE OF PENDING LAW JURY CASES !, ,i 11 Between Between Between Between lj - One and Two and Three and Four and Five Years Up to One Two Years Three Years Four Years Five Years Old and II Year Ending Dec. 31 Year Old Old Old Old Old Older Total II 10,524 7,289 3,435 2,166 1,757 383 25,654 !I 1966 ...... 41.4% 28.4% 13.4% 8.4% 6.9% 1.5% 100.0% !l

6,277 5,134 2,543 1,693 1,530 645 17,822 IIr, 1967 ...... 35.2% 28.8% 14.3% 9.5% 8,6% 3.6% 100.0% t! l'{ l 5,910 5,227 3,392 2,207 147 0 16,883 II 1968 ...... ,t 1, 35.0% 31.0% 20.1% 13.1% .8% .0% 100.0% II

6,310 5,086 2,730 880 70 0 15,076 1I\", 1969 . .' ...... ! ' 41.9% 33.7% 18.1% 5.8% .5% .0% 100.0% II 6,966 5,580 3,123 855 550 408 17,482 II 1970 ...... ! l 39.9% 31,9% 17.9% 4.9% 3.1% 2.3% 100.0% 6,669 5,762 3,306 854 409 72 17,072 iIII 1971 " ...... 39.1% 33.7% 19.4% 5.0% 2.4% 0.4% 100.0% II,j

5,728 6,126 2,749 389 129 6 15,127 II 1972 ...... , ... , .... , ... 37.9% 40.5% 18.2% 2.5% 0.8% 0.1% 100.0% II

6,233 4,962 2,873 626 129 46 14,869 II 1973 ...... I! 41.9% 33.4% 19.3% 4.2% 0.9% 0.3% 100.0% - II !! I'I! II I I I' Ij ItII

I I 156