JUSTICE SPOTLIGHT: Bob Dorigo Jones, author, "Remove Child Before Folding: The 101 Stupidest, Silliest and Wackiest Warning Labels Ever"
This is the first in what we hope will be a regular series of Q&A;'s with policy and opinion leaders who are making a difference in the fight for common sense lawsuit reforms. This week, we had the opportunity to interview Bob Dorigo Jones, president of Michigan Lawsuit Abuse Watch (M-LAW). Bob is the brainchild behind M-LAW's annual "Wacky Warning Label Contest," which garners major national media coverage each year. This year, he released "Remove Child Before Folding, The 101 Stupidest, Silliest and Wackiest Warning Labels Ever" - a hilarious new book based on M-LAW’s annual warning label contest. Q: How long have you been doing this contest?
BDJ: M-LAW’s Wacky Warning Label Contest started in 1997. The first year, the contest winners were selected by the host of a new afternoon radio program on WJR, AM-760 in Detroit: Mitch Albom (the same Mitch Albom who went on to author three of the bestselling books of the past decade including Tuesdays With Morrie). For the past six years, the winners have been selected by the audience of the popular Radio Hall of Fame personality, Dick Purtan, on WOMC 104.3 FM in Detroit from a list compiled by M-LAW.<
Q: What was the impetus to start doing it?
BDJ: M-LAW started the Wacky Warning Label Contest because we thought we could use humor as a hook to engage the media and the public in a more serious debate about how excessive litigation is harming our society. People love reading about these wacky warnings, and they want to hear the stories behind them and about loony lawsuits.
However, most people tune out conversation about tort reform either because it’s confusing or they’re too busy to listen. We use the media attention from the contest to increase awareness about how groups like the Girl Scouts and Little League are hurt by high litigation costs, and about how consumers ultimately pay for lawsuit abuse.
Most people want to learn more about the need for legal reform when they understand it’s a family and community problem, not just an issue for insurance and tobacco companies and big corporations.
Q: How many contest entries do you get in a given year? How do you choose the ones that you publicize - or that went into the book?
BDJ: An average of 150-200 people from around the United States send M-LAW wacky warning labels each year. For the contest, we choose labels that give consumers obvious, common sense advice or warnings and that were likely placed on products in response to a lawsuit or because of a concern about lawsuits. We do not accept warnings that warn against a risk that isn’t common knowledge. A warning on a fishing lure with huge hooks on it that says, “Harmful if swallowed,” qualifies, whereas a warning on a box of PMS Midol that says, “Do not use if you have an enlarged prostate,” doesn’t. The Midol warning may be funny, but the risk of prostate damage from using the product isn’t common knowledge.
Q: The Wacky Warning Labels contest gets a lot of attention- and garners a lot of laughs from the public. On the other hand -doesn't the fact that there are so many of these warning labels each and every year say something about our culture?
BDJ: Yes, that’s exactly why we sponsor the contest. Product makers have to constantly look over their shoulder for the next lawsuit in our society, even if they haven’t done anything wrong. In a nation where someone can dunk a ball while playing basketball, catch their teeth in the net, then sue the company that makes the nets and walk away from the lawsuit with $50,000, there is something very wrong with the courts. That someone would file such a frivolous lawsuit says something about our culture, but the fact that a judge didn’t dismiss it and penalize the person who filed it says something, too. We want to change that and put common sense and personal responsibility back to work in the civil justice system.
Q: Do you think there's a disconnect in the public between seeing these labels as outrageous ...and understanding the underlying reason we have so many of these labels?
BDJ: Yes, but many people are so busy with their jobs, family and other things that they don’t have time to stop and consider the fact that these labels are all around us because of the constant threat of lawsuits facing manufacturers. However, that is changing because of our contest and the efforts of others involved in legal reform.
Q: Other than their sheer comic nature - what is the real cost to society of these wacky warning labels?
BDJ: As fear of litigation continues to make these kinds of warning labels necessary, and as labels become longer and more absurd, there is a real concern that fewer people actually read them. After all, why spend the time reading warnings about risks that are common sense? Therefore, the personal injury lawyers who say they are protecting consumers by filing frivolous lawsuits that lead to these kinds of warnings are actually hurting public safety efforts in the long run. That is the real cost to consumers.
Q: Have you ever been threatened with lawsuits by any of the wacky label "offenders"?
BDJ: Banish the thought! No. Actually, M-LAW has been thanked by some of the product makers for using the contest to highlight the erratic nature of the legal system that forces them to put these kinds of warnings on their products. They understand that we hold this contest to educate the public. We’re not making fun of the manufacturers; we’re highlighting a broken legal system. If more people in our society understand that litigation is such a problem that the maker of a wood router has to put a warning on its product saying, “This product is not intended for use as a dental drill,” legal reform is more likely to happen. When that time comes, wacky warning labels won’t be necessary.
Q: In terms of media coverage, Web site hits, etc. ... what is the "return on investment" of M-LAW doing this project?
BDJ: M-LAW simply could not afford to buy the kind of media coverage generated by the Wacky Warning Label Contest. Aside from the cash prizes, there is very little cost. In addition to the public education value, the contest has created opportunities for M-LAW to work with other groups like the American Justice Partnership and Common Good on projects that will provide benefits to families and communities. This contest has opened a lot of doors for our small organization, and we’re working hard to make the best use of these opportunities.
Q: On your Web site, you have a button people can click if they are a"Lawsuit Abuse Victim." Has this been effective in finding real victims of lawsuit abuse?
BDJ: Absolutely! As I mentioned above, one of the benefits of the contest is that it opens new doors and allows us to partner with other efforts, and the American Justice Parntership’s Victims Project is a great example of that. In a two-day span after M-LAW announced the results of our contest this January, our website was visited by more than 100,000 people. Many of those people shared stories with us about how they were victimized by lawsuit abuse, and we will be using these stories with the AJP to help policymakers understand that common sense legal reform is needed.
Q: M-LAW has recently been heavily involved in the fight to protect Michigan's FDA defense law. How is that fight progressing? How might that effort spill over into a broader effort by the trial bar?
BDJ: Michigan’s FDA defense law provides reasonable protection from lawsuits for those who make the medicines that help make us healthy or keep us healthy. The personal injury lawyers argue our society would be better off with contingency-fee lawyers filing more lawsuits against an already beleaguered industry. We disagree very strongly with that and believe recent lawsuits based on junk science illustrate the need for tough laws in this area.
The FDA is extremely careful about approving medicine, so much so that some patients who don’t have time to wait for the FDA’s lengthy approval process to run its course go to other countries for medicines and treatments.
As a father and a husband, health care is one of my top concerns, and the last thing I want to hear if someone in my family becomes ill is that the medicine they need isn’t available because a pharmaceutical company decided to halt research due to fear of lawsuits or because litigation costs robbed them of needed investment money. That happens today, but if more states had a law like Michigan’s, which provides protection for drugmakers - and penalties if a company defrauds the FDA - we would all be better off.
Many political pundits believe the personal injury lawyers’ efforts to repeal this law will meet with more success in the next two years because so many of the new Democratic House Majority’s campaign victories were heavily financed by members of the Michigan Trial Lawyers Association. We are hopeful that reason will prevail, and we are working with groups like the Manhattan Institute to educate policymakers about the benefits of the current law.
Q: Looking more broadly at the national and state-based effort to enact meaningful legal reforms ... there has been significant media devoted recently to the notion that the trial bar may be losing the legal reform battle. Do you think this is true or false? In your opinion, when will the fight for legal reform truly be won?
BDJ: Those who support legal reform are definitely making progress, but I think we have a long, long way to go before we can say the trial bar is losing the battle. There has been incremental progress in certain areas of the law, but businesses, medical professionals, community groups and others in most parts of the country are still very vulnerable to a paralyzing meritless lawsuit at any given point in time. If we were to go around the country and ask those who are most vulnerable to being sued if they feel like they’ve beaten the trial bar, I believe we would hear a resounding “No.”
However, I believe the trial bar is losing the American public because the public is becoming more aware that we - as a nation - are not better off for living in the most lawsuit-plagued society on earth. We pay more for products and services, we lose out on some innovative consumer products, and the constant threat of a lawsuit is discouraging volunteers from becoming involved in certain things. The problem is that the trial bar spends millions of dollars to help elect judges and lawmakers who are sympathetic to their views. Until reformers can match their clout either through public education, funding support or other proactive means, the road to reform will be a long one.
Seriously, we are very pleased that one of the largest publishers in the world, Warner Books, published this book and that it will introduce a whole new audience to the wackiness of our legal system and the need for reform. After reading the book, you won’t know whether to laugh or cry about the state of America’s legal system.
This inexpensive book is available at all major bookstores and can purchased online by clicking here.
It’s the perfect gift for any consumer, business person, lawyer, doctor, professional, grandparent and student. Did we leave anyone out? We should also mention that all the royalties from the book go to support non-partisan efforts to restore fairness and reliability to the courts.
See pictures of the outrageous labels that won this year’s contest and enter a label to win the $500 grand prize by going to our website at: http://wackywarnings.com/
Q: Thank you.
BDJ: Thank you for the opportunity, especially considering our Detroit Tigers unseated your White Sox as the American League Champions last year. Glad you don’t hold a grudge against a Detroit guy! Of course, the White Sox actually won the World Series when they got there, so we know how good you are!
The first announcement of candidacy for 2008 was made in Illinois last week and no, it did not involve Sen. Barack Obama. His may come this week.
What happened last week was an announcement by a newly-appointed Appellate Justice in the Fifth Judicial District who indicated as his appointment was announced that he would seek election to a full term in 2008. There's nothing unusual about that and we'll comment on that race a little lower in this commentary.
Several judicial vacancies have been filled recently, the latest by the Supreme Court at the recommendation of Justice Lloyd Karmeier. Within the past few weeks, the Court also has filled three vacancies in the Third Judicial District, confirming judges nominated by Justice Thomas Kilbride.
The Illinois Constitution gives the Supreme Court the authority to fill vacancies created in all Illinois courts (including the Supreme Court itself). Traditionally, vacancies in the appellate and circuit courts are filled when the Supreme Court accepts the recommendation of the justice who was elected from the district in which the vacancy occurs.
It's not the worst system of filling judicial vacancies, but it's not the best either.
In fact, Illinois' system of selecting judges -- including filling vacancies -- is in need of major repair.
Presently, we are one of 14 states that select judges through partisan elections. In Illinois, judges get on the ballot the same way candidates for state representative or county sheriff get on the ballot. They circulate nominating petitions to compete in the partisan primary elections and the winners of the primaries (Democrat vs. Republican) square off in a general election. The judicial part of the ballot is at the bottom and is frequently ignored -- in part, most likely, because people know little about the candidates and we no longer have straight-ticket voting in Illinois.
Because we treat judges as politicians for election/selection purposes, and because Illinois has virtually no limits or restrictions on political campaign contributions, the cost of judicial elections has been creeping up.
"Creeping" is an understatement. The cost of judicial elections in some areas and for some judicial positions has been soaring.
In the last two judicial election cycles, Illinois set what are considered to be national records for (1) the most expensive Supreme Court race (Karmeier vs. Maag in 2004); (2) the most expensive Appellate Court race (Stewart vs. McGlynn in 2006); and (3) the most expensive Circuit Court (trial court) race (Hylla vs. Weber in 2006).
At the risk of appearing biased (we'll take the risk), we'll put the blame for the escalation of costs squarely on the shoulders of the plaintiffs' bar.
For years, trial lawyers have been the largest -- in some races the only -- significant campaign contributors. It made sense for several reasons, including the fact that the trial lawyers have so much at stake in who is wearing the black robes and because they generally have plenty of money to invest in their hand-picked candidates.
And by controlling -- or at least strongly influencing -- the election process, they have been able to influence (control?) the court room process.
The serious escalation in judicial election spending, at least in Illinois, came when the business community and doctors and common citizens decided they didn't like what was happening in court rooms so they chose to get involved, including financially.
There's a news commentary from the Southern Illinoisan this weekend calling for campaign finance reform. It specifically refers to the 2004 Supreme Court race.
There also is an editorial from the Bloomington Pantagraph calling for campaign spending limits.
But the editorial commentary this past weekend that is most significant was in the Belleville News-Democrat commenting on the appointment of Judge James Wexstten of Mt. Vernon to the Fifth District Appellate Court.
By all reasonable standards, Judge Wexstten has been an excellent judge. He has been elected chief judge by his peers, he has served as president of the Illinois Judges Association, and he was overwhelmingly retained (73%) by the voters in the Second Circuit last November.
The News-Democrat commended Justice Lloyd Karmeier, a Republican, for selecting Judge Wexstten, a Democrat, to fill the vacancy and Wexstten announced that he does plan to seek a full term, which means he may face a Democrat primary challenge.
And the editorial suggests that may be Wexstten's biggest problem because he is viewed as a moderate and has been supported by -- heaven forbid -- the Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL).
Another news item included favorable comments from new Appellate Justice Bruce Stewart and the spokesperson for Illinois Democratic Party Chairman Michael Madigan so perhaps common sense might prevail.
The ICJL and JUSTPAC, our political action committee, won't take positions on 2008 elections until 2008 but the prospect that a highly qualified judge may have political problems in a partisan primary election is a strong argument for Illinois to stop electing judges and enact one of several systems of "merit selection" that many states use.
The solution to cutting spending in partisan judicial elections is (1) don't have partisan elections and (2) don't even have elections.
Judges should be appointed. If Illinois voters say "yes" to the call for a Constitutional Convention next year, that could be the most important reason.
Take Our Message of Fairness to Your Friends, Family and Colleagues
Lawsuit reform is about fairness. It's about protecting Illinois employers, workers and consumers. It's about creating a legal system with a level playing field - instead of one that is imbalanced heavily in favor of opportunistic trial lawyers.
Help spread the word about the need to end lawsuit abuse in Illinois. Please view our new ad ... and then share it with your friends and colleagues by filling out the form below.
Bipartisanship Rules the Day ... Wexstten Appointed to 5th Apellate Court
Breaking with precedent, Republican state Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier has appointed Democrat Circuit Judge James M. Wexstten of Mt. Vernon to the 5th Appellate Court. Judge Wexstten fills the seat that was left open after the death of Justice Terrence Hopkins last year.
Historically, the court has taken the cue of the sitting Supreme Court judge when appointing judges to lower courts in his or her district. And almost as much a part of that tradition is the typical routine of Supreme Court judges recommending members of their own party.
The bitterness of elections past has centered largely on Metro East courts and the issue of court reform and medical malpractice litigation. Pro-business groups have put millions of dollars behind Republican candidates and lawyers and Democratic groups have tried to answer.
That might not be a factor in 2008, as Wexstten has previously been endorsed in races by the Illinois Civil Justice League, a pro-business, pro-court reform group.
"We've had two rounds of highly partisan races recently," said Ed Murnane, Civil Justice League president. "Perhaps this one in 2008 will be off the table. The fact is we have endorsed him in the past and we like what we've seen."
Cook County Judge Throws Out Hospital Suit on Med Mal Reforms
Crain's Chicago Business reports that a Cook County judge has "thrown out a request from the hospital industry to declare Illinois’" 2005 medical liability reform law constitutional."
Circuit Judge Robert Lopez Cepero on Tuesday dismissed the unusual legal maneuver by the state’s hospital lobby, which had hoped to secure a decision from the judge - and eventually from the Illinois Supreme Court - backing the validity of the state’s $1-million limit on jury awards for pain and suffering, which took effect in 2005.
Illinois legislators got an early start on 2007 yesterday when they convened in Springfield to deal with leftovers from 2006, most notably the contentious issue of electricity rate hikes. Sunday, the House of Representatives voted to freeze electric rates. It is doubtful if the Senate will go along.
On Wednesday, the business of the new General Assembly begins and, although the schedule is light until February, in part because of the renovation of the State Capitol, there is a lot to do.
Unfortunately, the new General Assembly does not appear to be carrying a civil justice reform banner. The Democratic sweep of state-wide offices in Illinois was accompanied by Democratic gains in the General Assembly and Democrats have not been civil justice reform advocates in Illinois.
Except when the stakes are high, as they were in 2005 when Illinois passed medical malpractice reform.
They are equally as high in 2007. The challenge for reform advocates is to convince legislators that just as a doctor/hospital/access to health care crisis was serious and politically threatening in 2005, the threat to job growth, economic development and erasing Illinois' image as a hostile judicial environment are politically important this year.
Here are a few -- not all --of the significant civil justice reforms that the General Assembly will be asked to address in 2007.
COMMON SENSE VENUE FOR LAWSUITS: Lawsuits should be filed in the appropriate judicial venue. For years, Illinois has been a "magnet" lawsuit state and some counties, particularly Madison, St. Clair and Cook have been viewed as plaintiff friendly. It is not unreasonable -- nor does it deny plaintiffs access to justice -- to require that lawsuits be filed in court houses that make sense. To their credit, Madison County judges are implementing changes to accomplish that.
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT REFORM: Illinois is one of many states that needs to put a stop to unsound litigation based on alleged consumer protection act violations that do not involve an injury, loss or any actual damages. The notorious Philip Morris case in Madison County was one such case -- thrown out in part because there were no damages or losses.
As a report by the Manhattan Institute and American Tort Reform Association indicated last year:
"There's nothing rational about letting shameless lawyers shake down nail salon owners with inflated claims of unsanitary conditions when the same bottle of nail polish was used for multiple customers, and there's nothing rational about a multimillion-dollar class action filed against the maker of Listerine for making assertions about its effectiveness as compared to flossing when not a single plaintiff suffered a demonstrable injury. Yet these and thousands of economy-sapping cases like them could become routine if state legislatures and courts don't act decisively to keep such litigation from becoming the next big thing."
EXPERT WITNESS/EXPERT EVIDENCE: The asbestos/silicosis lawsuit bonanza has underscored the importance of eliminating "junk science" and bogus and crooked expert witnesses from court rooms. Because Illinois is one of the major litigation centers in the U.S., our exposure to fraud is greater than most other states.
FULL AND FAIR NON-ECONOMIC DAMAGE REFORM: Illinois legislators realized in 2005 that limits on non-economic damages made sense in medical liability cases. The same limits should be applied in all personal injury claims. No limits should be established on economic or actual losses but "pain and suffering" awards should be limited. In addition, defendants' wealth or degree of wrong-doing should not be a factor in determining non-economic damages.
JURY SERVICE REFORM: For several years, ICJL has been working to improve the jury system in Illinois by making it less burdensome for qualified jurors to serve and by eliminating excessive demands on employers of prospective jurors.
The new General Assembly is going to flex its muscles and the plaintiffs' bar already has made it clear that it views its mission as a "crusade" to block reform.
In her most recent commentary, the president of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association made it clear:
"In addition to deflecting half-truths and advocating for our clients, the trial lawyers in our Association must remain committed to fighting back legislative proposals that deny access to the civil justice system. I also intend to make sure ITLA is pro-active in its efforts to improve the quality of life for victims and those who survive the loss of a loved one."
Our task in 2007 also is to strive to improve the quality of life for our loved ones in Illinois by improving the job market, by improving access to health care, by reducing needless time and costs of misguided litigation.
Many of our legislators are going to need some educating.
The Washington Post reports that the current U.S. Supreme Court is continuing a decades-long trend of declining caseload.
The justices went on a relative shopping spree when they returned from their holiday break, on Friday, agreeing to hear seven additional cases before this year's term ends. Before that they had accepted only 60 petitions, as opposed to 80 at this point last year.
Even a caseload in the 80s would have been considered extraordinarily skimpy 20 years ago. In William H. Rehnquist's first term as chief justice in 1986, the court disposed of 175 cases. That had dwindled to 82 cases last year after Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. took over.
Roberts himself said during his 2005 confirmation hearings that the court should be doing more.
"They hear about half the number of cases they did 25 years ago," Roberts testified. "There may be good reasons for that that I'll learn if I am confirmed. But just looking at it from the outside, I think they could contribute more to the clarity and uniformity of the law by taking more cases."
- Researchers Claim Lawsuits Stymie Medical Science - Madigan Faces Likely Legal Challenges On Judges' Residency Rules - New Yorker Files First Asbestos Case Of '07 in Madison County - Carmen Goodman Appointed To Will County Subcircuit Judgeship - Lawyer's Defamation Suit Dismissed, For Now - Lakin Lawsuit Sent To Madison County
Jury Still Out on Impact of Madison County Judicial Reforms
by Ed Murnane
This morning's St. Louis Post Dispatch reports that "there's a growing sense that the stigma - true or false - of a court (Madison County) overflowing with litigation is fading."
What's the real story?
While the jury -- literally and figuratively -- is still out on the real impact of the "reforms" in the Madison County judicial system, the perception is positive and as in politics, perception is sometimes reality.
We're not yet sure how significant the changes enacted in Madison County (and Bond County) will really be. But we do know that Chief Judge Ann Callis and her colleagues, especially John Knight and Charles Romani, would like to get out from under the "judicial hellhole" label. If they're going to do it by taking small steps, so be it. At least the steps are in the right direction.
The reduction in lawsuits in Madison County is not totally the result of the reforms. Federal legislation, Illinois Supreme Court decisions last year, and continued pressure by reform advocates such as the Illinois Civil Justice League are the primary causes.
But Judge Callis appears to be sincere in her desire to have Madison County viewed as -- and really be -- a fair judicial environment.
- Lawsuit Filings Continue To Fall In Madison, St. Clair Counties - Require Risk-utility Test In Strict Product Liability Claim, Justices Asked - Supreme Court Appoints Mangieri To Ninth Circuit Vacancy - Ruling OKs Steering Cases Away From Judge - Punitives Slashed In Cop's Lawsuit - Did SIU Profs Cheat On State Ethics Exam?
A warning label on a washing machine at a laundromat that warns, "Do not put any person in this washer."
A deserved mention goes to the third place winner, who failed to win the lottery, but received a $100 prize for the wacky warning on the Super Lotto Ticket: "Do Not Iron."
Good advice, but maybe not quite as good as the winner of the eigth annual awards: the flushable toilet brush label that reads "Don't use for personal heigene."
Check out all of M-LAW's winning label's at www.wackywarnings.com. And don't forget the new book, which would obviously be a great Groundhog's Day gift.
We will be launching a new Illinois court opinion tracking service. Starting today, the service will be accessible via a link in the right navigation columnn of this blog.
Latest opinions filed in the Illinois Supreme and Appellate Courts, the U.S. Supreme Court, and the U.S. 7th Circuit Court will be updated several times daily.
For now (until we get the link up in the left column) the service - provided by PinHawk - is available here.
- Residency Rule For Judges Void: A.G. Madigan - Judge Is Biased, State's Attorney Says - Wrangling Threatens Paxil Settlement - 25 Applicants File For Will County Judge Slot - U.S. Appeals Court Keeps Tap Closed On Diet Coke Suit - Steptoe Opens Chicago Office With Gardner Carton Lawyers
Let's see, the New Year ... (Happy New Year, by the way) ... the New Year is about 24 hours old, maybe 36 or 40 depending upon when you read this, and we haven't seen one news item in Illinois about asbestos, class actions, inappropriate venues or judicial impropriety or questionable practices.
Oops ... strike that last one.
As you'll read below in some of the news items and editorials saved for your enjoyment while we took a break, you'll discover that judges, judicial conduct, questionable political connections and questionable judicial AND political connections are on the front pages, and on the editorial pages.
The judicial circus that seemed to be based in Madison County for years has moved south, to St. Clair County.
It has been said that people get the government they deserve. That certainly applies to the judiciary too and St. Clair County residents -- at least the voting residents -- had the chance to make some changes in the judiciary two months ago but chose not to do so.
Almost 75% of the voters voted to retain a chief judge who is currently not acting as chief judge because he was involved in a motor vehicle accident in which alcohol may have played a part. He wasn't driving but a fellow judge -- who had been unopposed in his November election (78,000 voted for him) was driving and has been charged with driving under the influence.
The temporary chief judge appointed as "special prosecutor" a politically-connected lawyer and friend who himself had pleaded guilty to a DUI charge -- and had been found not guilty on a second charge.
We're not using names here; you can read them in the news accounts. We've been subpoenaed and sued (twice) in the Metro East area, including most recently (perhaps) in St. Clair County. So we're not going to write anything that can be read elsewhere.
But we hope the Belleville News-Democrat keeps the bright spotlight on St. Clair County judges and we encourage the St. Louis Post-Dispatch to turn up the heat. Both papers have large readership in St. Clair and they can help disinfect the Courthouse.
We'd also like to hear an expression of concern -- if not outrage -- from one prominent St. Clair County attorney who happens to be the current president of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association.
Thanks to the Holiday break, there are quite a few headlines today: - Madison Judge To Hear Young's Case - Too Close For Comfort - Poor Choice For Prosecutor - Patchett Has Ties To Lakin Class Action Club - St. Louis Judge's Outspoken Book Causing Controversy - Illinois Doctors' Insurance Rates Actually Drop - Suits Filed In Law Office Killings - New Year Brings A Raft Of New Laws For Illinois - Mandatory Arbitration Starts This Year In Madison County - Job Loss Significant In 2006 - A Trial Lawyer By Any Other Name ... - Lawyers By Day, Rockers By Night - The Former Magnificent Seven - Suit Against CNN Host Goes To Federal Court - Apple Discloses Lawsuits Over iPod-iTunes Link, Laptop Failure - Judge Upholds Casino Lawsuit - Madison Record Calls Judge Callis 'Person of the Year' - Editorial: Time To Reform ‘Judicial Hellholes’ - Roberts Blasts Inadequate Pay For Judges - Ryan Files Suit To Get Back Part Of Pension
The Courier News ran with this story this week. So much for the trial bar's contention that the last year's medical liability reforms won't have a positive effect on med mal premiums:
Illinois doctors are getting some relief from medical malpractice insurance premiums that can top $100,000.
ISMIE Mutual, the state's largest malpractice insurer, says premiums dropped an average of 5.2 percent this year and likely will hold steady or drop again next year.
But the premiums, which have prompted some doctors to leave the state, remain too high, said Dr. Harold Jensen, ISMIE chairman.
"The surge may have subsided, but the effects of the flood haven't gone away," Jensen said.
Bottom line - the trial bar's attempt to overturn these vital reforms would have a direct negative impact on quality and affordability of Illinois health care.
Overlawyered.com. is posting a month-by-month compendium of "Best of 2006" headlines, quips, quotes and other interesting stories related to legal reform/lawsuit abuse. So far, they're up to June. We've pulled the "Best of" from Illinois so far:
"Anonymous" writes the following comment regarding our last post:
Congress should seek to hold negligent wrongdoers accountable. Yet this act does just the opposite: it places obstacles to accountability by providing fewer incentives for companies to keep their products safe and their actions fair and by creating mechanisms to delay and ultimately deny justice to injured consumers.
The bill calls for increased judicial scrutiny of "coupon settlements" in which plaintiffs sometimes receive only low-value coupons in compensation for their injuries, as well as settlements in which plaintiff class members suffer a net financial loss.
We need a congress suportive of the people, not the lobbyists retained by corporate interests to ensure a class action bill favorable to their interests, according to Public Citizen.
I'm not too sure I understand where you're going with your comment, anon. First, your second paragraph is correct. The bill does have increased scrutiny of coupon settlements, where alleged victims only receive coupons (or pennies on the dollar) while the plaintiffs' lawyers get millions.
Your first paragraph, however, is off base. The Class Action Fairness Act doesn't restrict anybody's access to the courthouse, nor does it deny justice to anybody. Basically, the bill moves major class action lawsuits from state courts to federal courts.
The bill was supported on a very bipartisan basis. Democrats - including Senator Christopher Dodd, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Tom Carper and Rep. Melissa Bean (among many others) - supported the bill. In addition, more than 100 newspapers across the country (including the Chicago Tribune) editorialized in support of the bill.
You write that Congress should "hold negligent wrongdoers accountable." I would agree. I would also add that there is a big difference between criminal negligence and accidental negligence. I would also add that we should have a tort system that isn't strongly imbalanced in favor of a select group of opportunistic trial lawyers.
AEI's Ted Frank has an interesting post at Point of Law about Barack Obama and the trial bar. Bottom line: does Obama's voting history show that he will side with the trial lawyers or with reformers on key civil justice reform votes:
In one of his first votes, Obama voted for the eminently sensible Class Action Fairness Act. This hypothetically annoys the litigation lobby (though they can be expected to support Edwards in 2008) and the cast of usual suspects who opposed the bill; one can also find various members of the lunatic left thoughtlessly buying the litigation lobby hype that this minor procedural reform protecting against abusive forum shopping by the plaintiffs' bar had much larger consequences, and thus expressing outrage against Obama for voting for it.
So Obama may have annoyed the lunatic left with his vote for CAFA. As a reform supporter, I'm far from convinced that this makes him someone willing to cross the plaintiffs' bar. Eighteen other Democrats also voted for CAFA. CAFA would have passed the previous Congress, except for its unfortunate timing arising just as Edwards had been named the vice-presidential nominee; Democrats fell into line and filibustered the bill to avoid having a civil justice reform pass at the same time, which might remind people of Edwards's unsavory means of acquiring his fortune on the backs of pregnant mothers and obstetricians. Obama didn't participate in the negotiations to get Democratic support, and he voted for every Democratic attempt to eviscerate the bill with amendments. Obama didn't break with the Democrats on any seriously contested tort reform measures: he filibustered medical malpractice reform, and was one of the votes to kill the asbestos reform bill (which effectively failed by one vote). Obama claimed to support medical malpractice reform in his Senate campaign (or, at least, made pro-reform swing voters think that he did), but, then, so did Kerry and Edwards in their 2004 presidential campaign.
Hood last year sued State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., Allstate Property & Casualty Insurance Co., Mississippi Farm Bureau Insurance Co., United Services Automobile Association and Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. for allegedly failing to pay billions of dollars in damages to policyholders hit by the storm.
Hood recently told the Associated Press that settlement agreements with the negotiating insurers would erase the suit "without the expense and time of litigation." He declined to name which insurers are in negotiations but he urged other to join the talks.
St. Clair County Judge to Hear DUI Case Against Madison County Judge
The Chicago Tribune reports that the Illinois Supreme Court has appointed an associate judge from Madison County to hear the DUI case against St. Clair County Judge Patrick Young.
Janet Heflin will preside over the traffic case involving St. Clair County Judge Patrick Young, who was charged with DUI after a Dec. 3 wreck in Belleville.
Heflin, 40, was criticized earlier this year when she allowed an Alton lawyer convicted twice of drunken driving to receive court supervision, despite a state law limiting supervision in such cases to once in a lifetime. Heflin has said that she was unaware of the prior matter.
Heflin declined on Wednesday to discuss Young's case or her appointment to it.
Belleville police say Young was driving a sport utility vehicle also occupied by St. Clair County Chief Judge Jan Fiss when the vehicle veered into the path of a pickup truck, injuring that driver.
Young, 58, was charged with drunken driving after refusing a sobriety test. Fiss, 64, who police say was seen dumping out a beer and trying to hide a beer can, was not charged.
Jordan 'Look-Alike' Lawsuit Makes FoxSports.com List of Weirdest Sports Moments
It's that time of year ... time for "best of" and "year in review" lists.
FoxSports.com has come out with its list of the "Weirdest Sports Moments of 2006" ... and one of the year's wackiest lawsuits has made the list:
Allen Heckard filed an $832 million lawsuit against Michael Jordan and Nike's Phil Knight (for defamation, permanent injury, emotional pain and suffering), claiming that he'd been incorrectly identified as His Airness almost every day for the last 15 years and that the case of really mistaken identity "makes it very uncomfortable" for him.
Personally, I think it might make Michael Jordan "very uncomfortable" if he was being mistaken for Allen Heckard. It's a bit harder to understand how Heckard suffered anything approximating "emotional pain and suffering" when his pickup-game teammates think arguably the most recognizable athlete on the planet shrunk six inches and is looking for some action at the local YMCA.
Texas Federal Court Ruling Restricts Direct Links to Webcasts
PaidContent.org posts on a court ruling that could have a severe impact on blogging (and probably new media, generally) as we know it. What ramifications would this ruling have on bloggers linking to any Web site that relies on ad revenue? I can't imagine this ruling holding up in higher court, but you never know. The courts are sailing in uncharted waters on this one:
A federal judge in Texas has ruled that it is unlawful to provide a hyperlink to a Webcast if the copyright owner objects to it, reports News.com. The lawsuit was against an aggregation website Supercrosslive.com, which was linking directly to the video/audio webcasts on Supercrossonline.com, which has the official rights for “Supercross” motorcycle racing events. SFX Motor Sports, a Texas company that owns the official site, contended that fans who go to its own website will see the names and logos of sponsors, but direct links to webcasts won’t bring up the sponsors.
Judge Cuts Texas Vioxx Award by $24 Million Associated Press reports:
A judge in a Texas widow's lawsuit over the Merck & Co. drug Vioxx reduced a $32 million jury award to about $7.75 million Thursday, citing the state's caps on punitive damages.
The state jury in April found Merck liable for the death of Leonel Garza, a 71-year-old man who had a fatal heart attack within a month of taking the since-withdrawn painkiller. The company was ordered to pay $7 million in non-economic compensatory damages and $25 million in punitive damages.
But Judge Alex Garza ordered the punitive damage reduced as required by state law, which caps punitive damages at twice the amount of economic damages and as much as $750,000 on top of non-economic damages. The jury awarded no economic damages, so Merck was ordered to pay the most the Garza family could receive under state law.
- Federal Judge Panel Says Issue Ads OK During Election Season - Court Reinstates Exception To Hearsay Rule - Human Error, Metra Blamed In 2005 Crash - Justices Revive Lawyer's Defamation Suit - Mistrust Of Madison County Muffs Mutual Funds Cases - Chicago Murder Total Tops 2005 Mark
The Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission has filed a complaint against well-known Madison County lawyer L. Thomas Lakin, accusing him of sexual misconduct with two boys.
The allegations are similar to those made against Lakin by the two males and a girl in a pending civil lawsuit. Lakin's attorneys have strongly denied the allegations and have accused the minors' families of trying to extort $50 million. Joseph Tighe, Lakin's attorney in the licensure matter, could not be reached for comment.
The ARDC complaint could result in Lakin being reprimanded or having his law license suspended or revoked.
The complaint accuses Lakin of having sex in 2005 with one of the boys and masturbating while watching the boy have sex with a minor girl and two women. The complaint also accuses Lakin of providing cocaine to the girl. In addition, the complaint accuses Lakin of having sexual contact in the 1990s with the boy's older brother, who is an adult now but was a minor at the time.
Judge Gives Milberg-Weiss an Early 'Hanukkah Present'
The Wall Street Journal Law Blog reports today on the six-month anniversary of "Milberg Weiss’s indictment for allegedly sharing legal fees with class-action clients."
U.S. District Judge D. Brock Hornby marked the occassion by removing Milberg as a lead counsel in an antitrust class action:
Judge Hornby raised questions about Milberg’s future, writing that the indictment against Milberg seeks “hundreds of millions” in criminal forfeitures and that many Milberg partners have since left the firm. “I cannot predict what the criminal proceedings will do to the ultimate viability of the firm,” the judge wrote. “It is better to restructure the leadership of class counsel now before this civil litigation or the criminal case is further along.”
The ruling certainly doesn’t make the firm’s future “any easier,” says Melvyn Weiss, the head of Milberg. The judge “gave us a Hanukkah present,” he adds. “He couldn’t have waited until next year?” On a more serious note, Mr. Weiss says the firm has invested three years in the case, along with $2.3 million in fees and expenses. “That represents a learning curve that someone will now have to pick up.” He says the firm will file a motion to recoup its fees and expenses, and that the ruling does not pose a serious risk to the firm’s financial health. Judge Hornby “is not an expert on the future of my firm,” Mr. Weiss says. “Courts all over the country are keeping us in as lead counsel and even appointing us as lead counsel.”
The reaction from the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association (and their allies) to last week’s announcement of the 2006 "judicial hellholes" was predictable. In fact, I was called for comment on the "reaction," even before the American Tort Reform Foundation’s report was made public. ITLA and their big brother, the American Association for Justice, didn’t need to see the report before attacking it.
And that is not surprising.
Since THEY are one of the primary reasons three Illinois counties are included in the list of six hellholes, it makes sense that they’d be unhappy to be blamed for the poor quality of justice. (Of course, judges have to assume some responsibility but without the trial lawyers’ and their creativity, the problems would not be of "hellhole" magnitude.
It’s too close to Christmas to get into a fire and brimstone (in keeping with the "hellhole" theme) reaction to ITLA’s reaction.
But here are a few observations.
* According to the U.S. Census Bureau, there are 3,141 counties in the United States. Do the trial lawyers think ATRA picked these three in Illinois because they don’t like Illinois? (If that’s the case, I’m offended since I’m a life-long resident of Illinois AND I happen to be on the ATRA board of directors (but not involved in the "hellholes" project)).
* Is it simply a coincidence that ATRA’s identification of three Illinois counties as the worst in the country parallels the Harris International Poll conducted for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that states Illinois has one of the most hostile legal environments in the United States? Or perhaps Illinois looks bad from different perspectives because it IS bad?
* Did ITLA and their allies have a similar reaction to another report issued last week that described the "virtually unabated loss of good-paying jobs in manufacturing (in Illinois)?" The report entitled "The State of Working Illinois 2006" said “between July 1990 and July 2005, the total number of manufacturing jobs in Illinois dropped by 24.6 percent. This represented a loss of over 225,800 jobs during the 15-year period, or about 15,000 manufacturing jobs per year. Moreover, just under three-quarters of this decline (162,400 jobs) was in durable goods manufacturing, long the mainstay of the state's economy."
* Does ITLA think excessive lawsuits and a high cost of litigation (see points above) have anything to do with a declining job base?
* The report (by a coalition of groups including the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability, the Illinois Department of Employment Security, Northern Illinois University's Regional Development Institute and a number of labor unions and community groups) also said this: "... the percentage decline in the number of manufacturing jobs in Illinois has been higher than both the national and regional average. The loss of those good-paying manufacturing jobs (which pay an average of about $660 weekly) cannot be offset by growth in service sector jobs, which pay about $524 a week. Those lower average weekly wages generally translate to less consumer spending, a less robust economy and a greater demand for government and human services."
* Does ITLA think Madison County Chief Judge Ann Callis is wrong to be enacting procedural reforms in her circuit to improve the judicial environment in Madison County?
* If Illinois is losing about 15,000 manufacturing jobs per year, how many plaintiff attorney jobs are being lost? ITLA claims membership of "over 2,000 members." How many are being lost every year, or has the number of plaintiff’s attorneys been growing?
There were a few bright spots in the ATRA report:
1. Illinois only had three counties (of 102 in the state) on the list. The ENTIRE State of West Virginia ranked at the top.
2. Madison County is acknowledged to be improving. Anyone who pays attention to Illinois knows that’s true and Judge Callis and her colleagues deserve credit.
3. The Illinois Supreme Court is considered a "point of light" for several rulings that have been handed down. That’s also an accurate assessment.
U.S. Tort Costs Continue to Rise ... Just Not As Quickly The annual Tillinghast Towers-Perrin study on U.S. tort costs is out and -- surprise, surprise -- the cost of the tort system has risen again.
According to this year's study, "U.S. tort costs totaled $261 billion in 2005, which is approximately $880 per person and $4 less per person than in 2004. The growth rate of tort costs in 2005 was 0.5%, which is significantly lower than the growth rate of 5.7% in 2004 and 5.5% in 2003. The $1.1 billion increase over tort costs in 2004 is the smallest since 1997."
The business community will - and should - use this data to show how its spotlight on lawsuit abuse has had a very positive effect. The trial bar will use this data as "proof" that the lawsuit problem has subsided.
They're both right. The fact is, the business community has been extremely successful in raising public awareness of the problems with lawsuit abuse.
The proof? How about the American Trial Lawyers Association (ATLA) changing their name to the "American Association of Justice?"
Comical Response from Trial Lawyers on Hellholes Report Here is a snippet from the comical response from the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association (ITLA) on the 2006 Judicial Hellholes Report from the American Tort Reform Association:
The American Tort Reform Association (ATRA) - a front group for big business - released its annual “judicial hellhole” report today. What this report demonstrates is that these corporate special interests do not like the fact that the judicial system in Illinois does not always give them a “free pass” when engage in anti-consumer behavior or make products that injure and kill people.
This coming from a group whose public approval ratings are so low that they had to change their name so it didn't include the phrase "trial lawyers"...
The trial lawyers might lament the business community's "annual" report ... but the public laments their states annually being dragged through the mud because of the poor economic climates the trial lawyers have caused.
If you recall...ITLA chief Judy Cates is the same person who called for a "crusade" against the business community in October ...
ICJL Statement on Hellholes Report Ed Murnane, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL) released the following statement today about the release of the American Tort Reform Association's 2006 Judicial Hellholes report:
It is very disturbing - and embarrassing - that Illinois once again dominates the “judicial hellholes” list of the American Tort Reform Association.
Not one of our neighboring states is included on the list. That means Michigan and Missouri and Wisconsin and Iowa and Indiana and Kentucky, as well as more distant neighbors Ohio and Minnesota, are viewed as having a less hostile judicial environment - or a fair judicial environment.
We have seen what our hostile environment means to doctors and hospitals and the number of manufacturing jobs lost to Illinois in recent years shows what it means to the business community. We have seen insurers under constant assault.
While the Illinois Supreme Court has taken positive steps toward restoring an image of fairness and common sense to Illinois, there is still a long way to go and local jurisdictions, especially Cook and St. Clair Counties, are troubling. We are hopeful - but cautiously - that some of the initial reforms proposed and enacted in Madison County are both permanent and only the beginning.
The American Tort Reform Association (ATRA) again released their annual Judicial Hellholes® report. And, once again, three Illinois counties receive this dubious distinction.
Guess which Illinois counties are Hellholes?
No big surprise here ... Cook, Madison and St. Clair counties.
On a bright note, ATRA declared that Madison County has moved from the worst-of-the-worst to "purgatory" due to a recent decline in lawsuit filings, including class action and asbestos lawsuits.
A trial lawyer by any another name, Part II Well, the whitewash is official. The Association of Trial Lawyers of America has official made the switch: their name is now the American Association of Justice.
Below is an excerpt from AAJ President Lewis Eidson's letter to his membership:
Our new name - the American Association for Justice - more accurately reflects our role as advocates for justice. It will further allow us to reframe the debate in the court of public opinion - just like we do every day in the courtroom.
Whether this name change will reflect a change in philosophy from the plaintiffs' bar remains to be seen. One thing is for sure: trial lawyers have damaged their own reputations among the public. And it's going to take much more than a simple name change to repair that damage.
What if it was a car load of kids coming home from a Sunday evening church school event and the car was hit by an intoxicated driver coming home from the St. Louis Rams football game? And they all died?
Fortunately they didn’t. No one did. And there was not a car load of kids. So that part of the story is fiction.
But what is not fiction is the part of the story - and police reports - that say two St. Clair County judges, including the chief judge, were returning from last Sunday’s St. Louis Rams football game and the driver, new Judge Patrick Young collided with the car driven by Abel Muhammad. Abel Muhammad was taken to the hospital.
The police officer who responded, and others who provided support, all indicated that a strong smell of alcohol was present. Judge Young refused to take a field sobriety test and has been charged with driving while under the influence of alcohol. According to police reports, Chief Judge Jan Fiss (who was in the car) was seen with an open can of Bud Light beer, which he emptied and then tried to conceal the empty can before throwing it away.
Judges are human beings and all human beings make mistakes.
But judges are - and should be - held to a higher standard, a much higher standard.
Judges have unique and unequaled power and authority. They are empowered to send people to prison for life, or to death. They are empowered to break up families - to take children away from parents, to decide whether adoptive parents are better than natural parents, and turn life upside down for families, including young children. Judges can enact or approve verdicts that destroy businesses while making lawyers extremely rich.
It is not unreasonable to expect - to demand - judges to be held to that higher standard.
They ought to minimally be held to a standard that says you don’t break the law. They ought to minimally be held to a standard that says you exercise common sense at all times. They ought to minimally be held to a standard that says you don’t try to skirt the law by concealing evidence.
When they don’t they ought to be removed.
The police reports in St. Clair County last weekend suggest that two judges ought to be removed because they have failed to meet the first responsibility of their position: good judgment.
This is not about politics, about Democrats or Republicans. This is not about tort reform, not about asbestos law suits, not about trial lawyers. It’s about judgment - the single most important quality that we expect of judges - maybe that’s why they have the title?
Illinois has a former government who exercised poor judgment and he’s waiting to begin a prison term.
When public officials who are paid with our taxes, who are entrusted with our lives and safety, who are considered the arbiters of right and wrong … when they fail us, there is no other choice but that they be replaced. There ARE good men and women who would fulfill the job with honor, integrity and good judgment.
What if Abel Muhammad had a car load of kids, and what if they all died?
Indicted Milberg Weiss Partner Bolts Firm Steven Schulman - partner at Milberg Weiss Bershard & Schulman - reportedly resigned on Friday after being indicted in may for "mishandling class action suits." This is the latest chapter in the Milberg Weiss saga, which has seen the firm indicted for alleged kickbacks to plaintiffs in shareholder lawsuits.
If convicted, Mr. Schulman would likely be disbarred. He has pleaded not guilty on all counts and plans to "vigorously fight" the indictments.
The Milberg case has become the poster-child for tort reform. Milberg Weiss made a name for itself in its aggressive pursuit of securities fraud class action claims, but the indictment charges that the firm was fleecing the very shareholders its suits claimed to protect. The government's case alleges that the firm took in fees in excess of $200 million from about 150 cases the indictment deemed suspicious.
One reason the tort bar files so many frivolous lawsuits is that there have been very few penalties for its legal abuses. So congratulations are due to a Texas judge who last week ordered class-action kingpin Bill Lerach to pay up for his latest wretched excess.
Federal Judge Melinda Harmon's good deed came at the end of a high-profile suit against Alliance Capital. She dismissed the case in summary fashion and invoked a little-used legal rule that requires the Lerach firm to pay Alliance's legal fees. While the plaintiffs might have had cause for filing the suit, the judge said, by the end of discovery it was clear "the continuance of the claim against Alliance was at that point without merit" and so the Lerach firm must pay for dragging Alliance past that point.
We'd call that justice, with the caveat that Judge Harmon is probably too generous in saying Mr. Lerach had a reason to sue in the first place. The suit was a Lerach Special, a novel attempt to pry money from a company only tangentially involved with the Enron debacle. An Alliance executive, Frank Savage, had served on Enron's board from 1999 to 2001. During his Enron tenure, he'd signed a registration statement for a bond issue that included false financial statements. Mr. Lerach's elastic legal theory was that Alliance had put Mr. Savage on the Enron board, and thus the company was liable for his actions.
American Lawyer Magazine Highlights ICJL's Efforts
The most recent issue of The American Lawyer highlights the efforts of ICJL and our partners. As you can see, the article provides great evidence that our efforts are having profound effects on Illinois' legal climate - specifically our expanded efforts in the voter education arena over the past several years:
"Nobody had [previously] paid too much attention to the judiciary," says Edward Murnane of one such group, the Illinois Civil Justice League. "We realized we needed to expand our sphere of activity."
Five of the seven justices now serving on the Illinois Supreme Court received the support of the Illinois Civil Justice League, including the justice who holds the seat reserved for Illinois's notoriously plaintiffs-friendly southern counties. He prevailed against the trial lawyer-backed candidate in the most expensive state judicial contest in U.S. history in 2004; between them, the candidates raised an estimated $9 million. Nationwide, according to Governing magazine, spending in state judicial elections has exploded in the last decade, jumping 61 percent from 1998 to 2000 alone; in 2004 the average cost of winning a judicial seat was $650,000.
The impact of the dual judicial-and-legislative attack has been profound. ... In Illinois, where Democrats in state government have stalled tort reform laws, the new supreme court issued a series of pro-business rulings, overturning a $10 billion verdict against Philip Morris USA Inc. and acting to restrict class actions and out-of-state filings.
"I don't want to take credit," says Murnane of the Illinois Civil Justice League. "But I definitely think our activities and the involvement we've had, helping good people get on the court, [meant] we were able to break the stranglehold. We helped the court become more independent."
Illinois still has a ways to go before Madison County sheds its image as a "judicial hellhole" where juries award outlandish judgments in questionable cases.
However, a major step was taken recently when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an Illinois Supreme Court ruling that tossed out a $10 billion verdict against Philip Morris USA.
The lawsuit on behalf of smokers of "light" cigarettes claimed they were misled into thinking "light" cigarettes were less harmful than regular ones. However, the state Supreme Court tossed out the lower court judgment last December, noting that Philip Morris had followed federal guidelines in using the "light" and "low tar" labels. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the ruling to stand without comment.
The huge judgment was not an isolated incident in the plaintiffs' paradise of Madison and St. Clair counties.
Madison has been on the American Tort Reform Association's list of "judicial hellholes" every years since its first report in 2002.
A new report will be released later this month. Despite some improvements, Madison County is likely to be on it again.
We share the hope of Ed Murnane, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League, that the ruling will dampen enthusiasm for filing class-action lawsuits in southwest Illinois.
Consumer protection lawsuits have strayed from their intended purpose. Rather than provide assistance to ordinary people who are duped by a seller's fraudulent conduct into making a purchase, today, consumer protection laws are the new tool-of-choice of plaintiffs' lawyers and special interest groups. The potent combination of a vague definition of illegal conduct (unfair or deceptive), availability of large monetary awards and attorneys' fees, and lax proof requirements and class certification standards make them particularly attractive to lawyers. Special interest groups have come to view consumer protection statutes as a means to achieve regulatory objectives through the courts that they could not obtain through the legislative or regulatory process because they lack public support-a fundamentally undemocratic result. Courts and legislatures can and should restore the consumer-to-consumer protection laws. They can do so by ensuring that those who lose money because they were deceived are made whole, while eliminating the lawyer and interest group-generated lawsuits that are brought for profit and politics.
Cueto files defamation lawsuit against "critics" ... and, perhaps, Ed Murnane (?)
The Belleville News-Democrat today reports on lawsuit by disbarred Madison County plaintiffs' attorney Amiel Cueto. According to the story, Cueto is "alleging that published statements in the Belleville News-Democrat and The Madison-St. Clair Record invaded his privacy and cast him in a false light:
Cueto, who is representing himself, filed a two-count lawsuit against Tom Muskopf, of Belleville, for a letter published Nov. 9, 2005 in the News-Democrat. Cueto is seeking damages of $75,000 on each of the counts.
In the letter, Muskopf wrote that Cueto, his former client Thomas Venezia and others had "somehow got control of the electronic version of the decades-old punch-board scam," according to the lawsuit, which Cueto filed Nov. 8.
Venezia, a former client of Cueto's, went to prison after being convicted on racketeering charges related to his $48 million video-poker and strip-club operation. Venezia shot to death his female roommate and himself in July 2005.
Cueto contends Muskopf's statement is "defamatory per se," and he wrote it with "intentional or reckless disregard for the truth," according to Cueto's lawsuit. He also contends that Muskopf acted with intentional disregard for the truth when he stated in the same letter: "The only way Cueto will ever tell the truth about his conspirators is if he outlives them, or undergoes testosterone treatment," according to Cueto's lawsuit.
Cueto is also suing The Record ... and, perhaps, Ed Murnane, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League (although the name is misspelled and Ed is not affiliated with The Record):
Also on Nov. 8, Cueto filed suit against The Record and against a man named Ed Murname, for remarks contained in an editorial published Jan. 30 entitled "Pulling Strings?"
The editorial stated Cueto was spotted "at a meeting of St. Clair County judges at Belleville's Washington Street Grille on Jan. 19," Cueto alleged in his lawsuit.
Cueto denied taking part in such a meeting. He called the statement "highly offensive to a reasonable person" and "defamatory per se, in that it accused Amiel Cueto of a criminal conspiracy to commit official misconduct..." according to his lawsuit.
Ed Murnane, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League, said he believes Cueto has mixed up his name with someone else's since "Murname" is so similar-sounding to his own.
'New' Madison County Judicial System Will Get Early Tests
by Ed Murnane
It won't take long for the judicial system in Madison County to demonstrate how serious it is about "reform."
Flash back one month: the campaign ads and web site of Third Circuit District Judges Ann Callis, Charles Romani and John Knight proclaimed they should be retained in office because they were "reforming our courts."
Votes retained them overwhelmingly -- Chief Judge Callis received 73% "yes" votes -- so it's equally overwhelmingly clear that voters in Madison and Bond Counties want reform. (Note: The Third Circuit includes Madison and Bond Counties but Madison County is dominant with a population of 264,000, or more than 93% of the total while Bond has a population of 18,000.)
Now, as new terms are about to begin, Judge Callis faces some challenges that will be much tougher than her retention campaign.
How, for example, will she structure the court. Judge-elect David Hylla will replace outgoing Judge Don Weber. Weber, a former prosecutor, was assigned to the civil division, an assignment that generated its own storm clouds as plaintiffs' attorney (and Madison County has its share) did everything they could to get off Weber's docket.
Will Callis put Hylla, a plaintiffs' attorney who specialized in asbestos litigation, in the civil division? While there has been a decline in asbestos litigation filing in Madison County in recent years, there has been a surge of new filings in the past 60 days, sparked by the SimmonsCooper law firm which coincidentally was one of Hylla's major campaign contributors.
Callis could put Judge-elect Barbara Crowder in the civil division, avoiding the obvious conflict that Hylla would create. Crowder is an experienced associate judge and knows how the system operates. She would not be the lightning rod that Hylla already is.
A second test for the chief judge will be replacing Crowder as an associate judge. Associates are elected by the other judges -- all of whom will be Democrats when Weber packs up his chambers.
The judges elected a Republican, Steve Stobbs, earlier this year but that was smack in the middle of the retention campaign and skeptics aren't convinced that Stobbs would have been selected if the spotlight was not as intense on the Madison County judiciary. The Belleville News-Democrat offers this report in a news item printed below:
Chief Judge Ann Callis, who was up for retention in November, touted Stobbs' appointment on her campaign Web site. And in a press release sent out by the chief judge's office after Stobbs' appointment, Stobbs described his selection for the bench as a sign that the judicial circuit was "entering a new, bipartisan era of change that will restore a sense of fairness and balance to our judicial system."
So the spotlight on Madison county's judicial system is not going to be turned off anytime soon. In fact, it's going to be turned up a notch or two.
And once again, it won't only be Madison County attracting the attention. Sometime soon, Justice Lloyd Karmeier will make a recommendation to the Illinois Supreme Court for a replacement for Justice Terrence Hopkins on the Fifth District Appellate Court. Hopkins died in October and Karmeier's recommendation will serve until the next General Election in 2008.
Whoever is selected is expected to be a candidate in 2008 and with the early (March 18, 2008) Illinois Primary Elections, it means nominating petitions will be due one year from this week.
The trial of Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP, a prominent class-action law firm, and two of its top partners, will get under way here Jan. 8, 2008, a federal judge said at a hearing Monday.
The setting of the trial date came amid further questions from defense lawyers about whether government prosecutors would file additional indictments, a subject that has been a sticking point in setting a firm trial date.
Prosecutors had been aiming for a trial date in October 2007, while defendants were seeking a February 2008 setting.
In May, a federal grand jury here indicted the firm on fraud charges. According to the 20-count indictment, the firm paid plaintiffs millions of dollars in exchange for filing more than 150 lawsuits. Two of the firm's top partners, Steven Schulman and David Bershad, also were charged with participating in the alleged kickback scheme.
Pink slips have been handed to two East Coast law firms that made hefty political donations to Gov. Blagojevich and were placed on a preferred list for Illinois pension work. This month's vote by the state Teachers' Retirement System to overhaul the way it hires lawyers for class-action cases followed a Chicago Sun-Times report in September.
In May, TRS cut ties with New York-based Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman, another law firm on the preferred list. That action came in response to Milberg Weiss being indicted by federal prosecutors in California, who alleged the firm fraudulently provided kickbacks to plaintiffs in its cases.
A day after the indictment, Blagojevich returned a $10,000 contribution his campaign got from Milberg Weiss, records show. He has not returned another $40,000 from Melvyn Weiss and other lawyers in the firm. Weiss paid $5,000 toward lodging, meals and entertainment for Blagojevich and others with him during the December 2003 trip to New York.
Do Madison County Plaintiffs' Attorneys Think Voters 'Rolled the Welcome Mat Back Out for Them'?
The Belleville News-Democrat editorial board today writes about the overall declining number of asbestos lawsuit filings in Madison County, the "one-time magnet for asbetsos lawsuits."
According to the News-Democrat, "so far this year, 287 asbestos cases have been filed - on pace to be down for the third straight year and a far cry from the 953 cases filed in 2003."
But, as the editorial continues, there is some cause for alarm:
As impressive as those numbers are, the number 41 has us a little concerned. That's the number of asbestos cases filed in a two-week period following the Nov. 7 election. It's double the 20 cases filed in the two weeks prior to the election. At the higher rate, the year's total would be 1,066 cases.
St. Louis attorney Bob Ramsey, who filed some of the cases, said there is no connection between the increased filings and the election. Still, you have to wonder whether the plaintiffs' attorneys think Madison County voters rolled the welcome mat back out for them.
The notoriety of Madison County being labeled a national "judicial hellhole" combined with the surprise election of a Republican in the Democratic dominated Supreme Court district are two of the reasons asbestos filings have declined. But this election, county voters returned to electing Democratic judges, the preferred party of the plaintiffs' attorneys. Ditto for voters in the St. Clair County and the 5th District Court of Appeals races.
U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in Phlip Morris Case "Closes Chapter on One of the Sorry Situations" from Madison County
ICJL President Ed Murnane was quoted in this week's Associated Press story regarding the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to "let stand a ruling that dismissed a $10.1 billion verdict against Philip Morris USA, ending a case that became a windfall for the county where it originated but helped feed its reputation as a 'judicial hellhole.'"
In its order Monday, the nation's high court upheld without comment last year's Illinois Supreme Court ruling throwing out the massive fraud judgment against Philip Morris USA, a unit of New York-based Altria Group Inc., in a class-action lawsuit involving "light" cigarettes.
"This closes a chapter on one of the sorry situations that came out of Madison County," said Ed Murnane, the Illinois Civil Justice League's president. "The book is back on the shelf, almost like (the lawsuit) never happened."
The southwest Illinois county, just east of St. Louis has become known as a place where lawyers from across the country file cases hoping for big payouts in cases involving everything from asbestos exposure to medical malpractice. Some plaintiffs have been awarded tens of millions of dollars.
For years, the Belleville News-Democrat has been one of the -- if not THE -- top newspapers reporting on the problems with the court system and the players in Southern Illinois. For those who don't know, Belleville is the county seat of St.Clair County, just south of Madison County and just across the Mississippi River from St. Louis.
The News-Democrat and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch are the dominant publications in the "Metro East," the communities in the St. Louis Metropolitan area that are east of the Mississippi, i.e. in Illinois.
(Residents of the "Metro East" live in Illinois but watch St. Louis television, shop in St. Louis for the big stuff and they are Cardinals fans. They love nothing more than to beat the Cubs, or for the Rams to beat the Bears, although the football rivalry is not nearly the rivalry that the Cardinals-Cubs rivalry is, mainly because St. Louis football teams have been transplants who seem to stay awhile and move to greener pastures. That includes the former St. Louis Cardinals football team -- once the Chicago Cardinals and now the Arizona Cardinals. It also includes the St. Louis Rams, most recently the Los Angeles Rams, but previously the Cleveland Rams.)
The News-Democrat watches the court system in St. Clair and Madison Counties and because it doesn't have to fuss with most of the stuff going on across the river, it can study, concentrate, and understand what's happening in St. Clair and Madison Counties, and all of Illinois (although the News-Democrat would not pretend to be experts on Illinois north of Springfield, perhaps not even north of Bond or Montgomery or Jersey or Christian Counties.)
But because the News-Democrat has focused so intently on what is happening in the courts in Southern Illinois, and because the News-Democrat has observed the medical malpractice problem in Southern Illinois as no other news media, and because the News-Democrat has monitored class action lawsuits and asbestos lawsuits and all the other excesses caused by a reckless legal system, the newspaper and its editors have a level of credibility and respect that no other major media sources in Illinois have earned.
And yesterday, once again, the Belleville News-Democrat has offered its sound opinion that reform is needed in Illinois, with the next step being a finding that the 2005 Medical Malpractice reform legislation be declared constitutional by the Illinois Supreme Court.
***
AND WHILE THE BELLEVILLE NEWS-DEMOCRAT offers sage commentary, the president of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association offers a strange and personal attack on those (including ICJL, U.S. Chamber and others) who supported judicial candidates who lost earlier this month.
Judy Cates (of St. Clair County, by the way, and well-known by the Belleville News-Democrat), describes losing judicial candidates as "ships lost in the perfect storm."
Cates made it clear that ITLA = Democrats. While some of my ITLA friends don't agree with that, Cates leaves no doubt in her unusual opening paragraph:
"Happy Days Are Here Again!"
Election Day in southern Illinois, throughout our State, and across the country brought "good news" for Democrats. Every judicial candidate substantially backed by Ed Murnane and his special interest groups went down in defeat, like ships lost in the perfect storm. Down in defeat went the Republican Party and Chamber of Commerce, which spent approximately $2.1 million dollars in an effort to buy the 5th District Appellate Court seat held by Stephen McGlynn. With the victory by Democrat Vicki Wright, down in defeat went the candidate chosen by the Republicans to run in the 3rd District Appellate Court race. Moreover, and most notably, in the "judicial hellhole" of "trial lawyers," every Democratic candidate for Circuit Judge won retention or claimed victory in their respective contested races.
We have no idea why Cates singled us out but her vitriolic commentary tells a lot about her, and about ITLA under her leadership, and about the challenges we have ahead.
Illinois State Medical Society Statement Regarding Announcement of Challenge to Medical Liability Reform Law
Following is the statement of Peter E. Eupierre, M.D., president, Illinois State Medical Society, in response to the announcement of the challenge to Illinois' medical liability reform law:
Illinois trial lawyers have struck again, and predictably so. Their desperate attempts to undermine Illinois' new malpractice reforms are a move to preserve the status quo that ultimately benefits plaintiff attorneys. If this rollback succeeds, it will drive doctors from the state and medical care costs will skyrocket. In the end, patients' access to medical care will suffer.
The Illinois State Medical Society strongly stands by the constitutionality of these reforms and the state's urgent need to preserve them. Balance and fairness in our state's medical litigation system are integral to ensuring patient access to core medical care services throughout Illinois.
Since the law's enactment last year, ISMS expected personal injury lawyers would target it for a high profile constitutional fight. While we cannot speak to the specifics of the case filed today, we remain confident that caps on non-economic damage awards, as well as the array of accompanying reforms enacted as part of the package, will pass constitutional muster.
More To Thomas Verdict Than Victory For Chief Justice?
by Ed Murnane
The ICJL endorsed then-Appellate Judge Bob Thomas when he ran for Supreme Court Justice in the 2000 General Election. Thomas survived a difficult three-way Republican primary that included appointed Justice Louis Rathje and Circuit Court Judge Bonnie Wheaton. While we preferred the equally experienced but more conservative Wheaton in the primary (Thomas and Wheaton both joined the bench in 1988), we had no problem supporting Thomas over class action trial lawyer and criminal defense lawyer Larry Drury of Highland Park in the General Election.
Justice Thomas' performance as a Supreme Court justice has generally been good although he has not participated in some recent major cases that have come before the Supreme Court. He was not a part of the Court's deliberation on last year's Gridley vs. State Farm case, nor was he a part of the process in the Price vs. Philip Morris case, which overturned the $10.1 billion Madison County bench verdict against Philip Morris, one of the first of the so-called "lights cigarette" cases.
Thomas' non-participation in the Philip Morris case was believed to be the result of the fact that he was being represented by trial lawyer Joseph Power in his own (Thomas') libel case against a Kane County Chronicle report. Power was brought into the Philip Morris case late and Philip Morris attorneys, including former Illinois Governor James Thompson, argued that Power's participation in the case would require Justice Thomas to recuse himself.
Whether that was the only or primary reason for Thomas' non-participation is not known but it didn't matter since the Court overturned the Philip Morris decision 4-2.
But the discussion here is not as much about Thomas as it is about Joseph Power, and specifically about what Power said about the Kane County jury verdict last week in Thomas' libel lawsuit against Kane County Chronicle writer Bill Page. And it's about who Joe Power is and who and what he represents.
According to a post-verdict report in the Daily Herald, Power said the verdict in the Thomas case should give newspapers pause,
... but it also will cut down on false negative campaign ads by special interest groups. Power said because judges cannot defend themselves by talking about pending cases or raising money during non-election periods, it is important they have protections against libel such as ads that paint them as soft on crime.
No one will disagree that judges deserve protection from unfounded claims, whether via newspaper commentaries or political campaign ads.
But judges are not above criticism -- and should not be -- and as long as judges are elected in a partisan political process in Illinois, they and their records are going to be subject to analysis, criticism ... and even attack ads.
We don't consider Power's comments as threatening -- and political campaign conduct was not a factor in the Thomas case -- but for Power to inject that issue as a way of saying the case was more that Thomas vs. Gates should be of concern, and it is.
Joe Power is one of the most powerful (even his name fits) plaintiffs' attorneys in Illinois, and probably nationally. A former president of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association, he is the lead partner in the law firm Power, Rogers and Smith. The firm specializes in personal injury and wrongful death claims.
It also specializes in pouring big money into political campaigns. According to the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, the firm and its partners contributed $1.521 million to candidates in Illinois. Ninety-four percent went to Democrats.
The firm has won more than 200 verdicts of at least $1 million on behalf of clients. There have been numerous high profile cases, including the case on behalf of the Willis family against staff of former Governor George Ryan. Eventually, that case led to Ryan's conviction and his upcoming jail sentence.
If he meant his comments as a warning that free political speech and commentary will not be tolerated, there could be some real battles ahead.
*
(Two side notes: The Thomas-Power relationship does not suggest a "tilt" toward the plaintiffs' bar by Chief Justice Thomas. Thomas and Power were classmates at the University of Notre Dame, graduating together in 1974 with majors in government studies. Both received law degrees at Loyola University. However, as evidenced in the Philip Morris case, the Thomas-Power relationship COULD get in the way of Thomas' participation on critical cases coming before the Illinois Supreme Court.
(Second note: Power was president of ITLA in 1992-93, during the creation of the Illinois Civil Justice League and the first ITLA-ICJL "debate" involved Power and this writer on April 28, 1993, in a live television program on Chicagoland TV. He has always been pleasant.)
WSJ Law Blog reports that "An Illinois judge overseeing a shareholders’ suit against Boeing has delayed approval of the settlement because she wants the named plaintiffs to be interviewed under oath to find out how they became plaintiffs. She also wants to know when they bought Boeing stock and how much they owned."
The lawyers involved in a suit filed by shareholders over Boeing Co.'s procurement scandals thought the 3-year-old case was coming to an end this summer. They had reached a proposed settlement that the judge said was fair, and the plaintiffs' lawyers were going to share a lucrative pot of nearly $12 million in legal fees.
But not so fast, the judge said.
That potential settlement has been delayed until at least December, as Cook County Circuit Judge Nancy Arnold reviews testimony of the six plaintiffs in the case, all of whom are retirees who own small amounts of Boeing stock.
In an extraordinary ruling that came after the settlement had been sent to the court for approval, Arnold ordered the stockholders to appear in court to be interviewed under oath by an independent monitor. Arnold wanted to know how they became plaintiffs in the case. She also wanted to know when the plaintiffs bought Boeing stock and how much they owned.
There were no allegations of inappropriate behavior by the plaintiffs that led to the order. Rather, the judge's suspicions were aroused this summer after one of the plaintiffs' law firms, Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman, was indicted on federal charges of paying kickbacks to people to serve as plaintiffs in class-action lawsuits, just weeks before a settlement was proposed in the Boeing case.
The day after the Nov. 7 election, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce announced a poll showing that Americans want the new Congress to continue to reform the lawsuit system. And the Association of Trial Lawyers of America announced that candidates who supported the civil justice system won, and the "vast majority" of those who attacked the system and trial lawyers lost.
Of the two organizations, guess which one will have to knock harder on the doors of a Democratic-controlled Congress?
So-called tort reform is just one of a number of legal agenda issues likely to be placed on the back burner or to undergo redefinition when the new Congress begins in January.
Election Night Survey Reveals Public Support for Legal Reform Still Strong
A national survey conducted on Election Night reveals strong national public support for civil justice reform - despite the election results.
The survey was conducted for the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform by Public Opinion Strategies among 800 people who voted on November 7. The margine of error for the survey is +/- 3.5 percent.
"In an increasingly polarized electorate, very few issues command this much bipartisan support," said pollster Bill McInturff, a partner at Public Opinion Strategies.
Here are some excerpts from the survey results, which can be viewed in full by clicking here.
The survey shows that 85 percent of the people who voted in the mid-term election think frivolous lawsuits are a serious problem, and 86 percent say the next Congress should continue to reform the lawsuit system. Three-quarters of those who say they are strong Democrats regard frivolous lawsuits as a problem.
The voters who most helped shape the newly elected Congress say action on legal reform will affect the way they will vote in the future. Among swing voters - people who call themselves political independents and those who have only a weak affiliation to a political party - 63 percent say they will have a more favorable impression of Democrats in Congress if their agenda includes reforms to end lawsuit abuse.
The survey also shows that 81 percent of all respondents think there are too many lawsuits filed in America, raising the price of everyday goods and services, and 84 percent think the number of lawsuits clogs up the court system, making it harder for truly injured people to get justice.
No doubt about it: last week’s judicial elections in Illinois were a setback to the reform movement - but they were no where near a roll back and are easily explained. In fact, the outcome helps sets the stage for even more significant - and statewide - elections in 2008.
I was quoted in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on Thursday:
"I hope (this election) does not give undue encouragement to the plaintiffs' attorneys who have a pretty tight grip on the courts in Southern Illinois right now," said Ed Murnane, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League. "My advice to them, 'Don't read too much into this.'"
There is no doubt - there should be no doubt - in anyone’s mind that Tuesday’s election in Illinois and elsewhere was more about the big “R” and President Bush than it was about local issues, including continuing to move our court system in the right direction. Iraq was more important to voters than either Mt. Vernon or Edwardsville.
In fact, to some extent in Illinois we may have been victims of our own success. The fervor of 2004 wasn’t there this year and in part that was because of what happened in 2004 and has taken place since.
As examples: much of the attention on the 2004 election in Southern Illinois was the result of a medical malpractice insurance crisis - and following the election (and because of the election) reforms have been enacted. In addition, much of the 2004 attention was focused on the judicial system in Madison County and following the election (and again, because of the election) local judges are enacting reforms that can improve the system.
So the passion of 2004 was not there, even though the elections of 2006 were important extensions - continuations - of the reform movement. Voters, fickle creatures that they are, decided there were other priorities.
But some good has come out of this judicial election and will carry forward into 2008 and beyond.
First, there is the issue of financing of judicial elections. We are one of the major players in that arena and I can tell you we would prefer not to be finding and spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and competing with trial lawyers who can (and do) write six figure checks each day of the week. Illinois has attracted attention as the site of three of the most expensive (1) Supreme Court; (2) Appellate Court; and (3) Circuit Court races in U.S. history.
There are ways to change that and we have some ideas, suggested here a few weeks ago. Although not an official authorized ICJL proposal, we are willing to talk about potential reforms to the system of electing and financing judicial selection in Illinois . We’re meeting wit Cindy Canary of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform next week, just before Thanksgiving, to start some dialogue. While Ms. Canary is a pleasant person whom I met for the first time only a few weeks ago, she and her organization are heavily tied to and funded by trial lawyer interests and other influences, such as George Soros and Michael Moore so the discussions are not guaranteed to go anywhere. But it’s a start.
A second benefit of this year’s judicial election is the fact that some winners were so heavily funded by trial lawyers that it will be difficult for them to do anything without a bright - even intense - spotlight on them. David Hylla, who defeated Judge Don Weber in Madison County last week, is a plaintiff’s attorney and made no attempt to suggest that he would be anything but a plaintiff-friendly judge on the bench. He’ll be on the bench beginning next month and the whole world will be watching.
Same thing with Judge Bruce Stewart who moves on to the Fifth District Appellate Court in December. Although not a practicing plaintiff’s attorney himself (he’s been a judge for 11 years), he was their guy and was heavily funded by them. He’ll be under a bright light as he takes his seat in Mt. Vernon.
A third positive from 2004 has been identifying judicial candidates who didn’t win this year but who definitely should be encouraged to seek judicial office in the future. In fact, they should be high on the list for appointment when vacancies come along, as they always do. Three such candidates are Associate Judge Michael Powers of Will County , who sought the Third District Appellate seat; Attorney Paul Evans of St. Clair County, who took on Judge Lloyd Cueto; and Judge William Norton of Randolph County , an appointee of Justice Lloyd Karmeier who was not successful.
There were other good candidates but these three stand out.
And there will be yet another round of judicial elections in 2008.
One of them will be on familiar turf - another battle for the Appellate Court in the Fifth District may take center stage again. Because of the death of Justice Terrence Hopkins last month, Justice Karmeier will have another appellate seat to fill - with an election in 2008 to make it permanent. Depending upon whom Karmeier selects - there are good candidates in both parties - the Fifth District Appellate court could actually be more moderate than it was before the 2006 Election. Hopkins was very plaintiff-friendly. If the appointment to fill the vacancy is a moderate, it then almost comes to a situation in which Stewart has replaced Hopkins and the new appointee would replace McGlynn. Assuming the new appointee is no worse than a moderate, it could be a fairer and balanced court, at least for the next two years.
And in two years, the term of Justice Richard Goldenhersh is up for retention. Goldenhersh is the most hostile member of the Fifth District court and will certainly be the target of a “Vote NO” effort if he decides to seek retention (assuming he’s eligible).
If Goldenhersh does not seek retention and the seat becomes an open election, there is no way trial lawyers would be able to slate anyone who would be worse than Goldenhersh so there would be a good chance that the Court would move even more slightly to the center.
There are other interesting challenges brewing for 2008. One Supreme Court race will be on the ballot - the First District seat currently held by Justice Anne Burke. She should win easily.
In addition to Goldenhersh’s seat, there are seven other Appellate Court seats expiring, including the seat of former trial lawyer Sue Myersough in the Fourth District. Myerscough ran against Justice Rita Garman in the Fourth District Supreme Court race in 2002.
In the Fifth District, Appellate Justice Steven Spomer of Alexander County, faces retention to his Circuit Court seat. He was appointed to the Appellate Court but must be a sitting Circuit Court judge to be eligible and he must be retained in 2008.
There also will be interesting retention questions in the Third Circuit. Madison County Judges Nicholas Byron and Edward Ferguson are on the schedule. There is no doubt that there will be massive campaigns against them or their designated successors.
So 2008 will be another challenging year for judicial reform in Illinois.
And there are two added wrinkles.
Because of last year’s successful court challenge over the conflict between the Illinois Constitution and statute over the required date for judges to announce their retention plans, there will have to be some resolution and some modification to the system.
The second is this: Illinois voters will be asked in 2008 if there should be a Constitutional Convention. If Illinois really wants to change the way judges are selected, a Constitutional Convention and change to Article VI (the Judicial Article) is the way to do it. It’s not an easy way - there is none - but it is the way.
So 2006, maybe a setback, does not mean there won’t be plenty of opportunities to continue the reform movement in 2008. We plan to be ready.
Perhaps the most disheartening aspect of Madison County Round II -- a.k.a. the judicial elections in Southern Illinois two years after the historic Karmeier-Maag race -- is the likelihood that Madison County Round III is only two years away....
That long-term forecast is likely to be reality because of the recent death of Illinois Appellate Judge Terrence Hopkins, who served on the Fifth District Appellate Court, based in Mount Vernon. That’s the same court where Gordon Maag served and where present Appellate Justice Stephen McGlynn is fighting to hold off Maag’s pals and win the seat for the next ten years.
It does not get easy in Southern Illinois.
But enough about the future (maybe a bit more later). The present is here and we're into the final critical days -- yikes, it's really only hours -- to learn if the success of 2004 will be repeated in 2006. At this stage in 2004 -- three days out -- we were virtually certain that Lloyd Karmeier was going to be elected to the Illinois Supreme Court.
Today, it is not as certain that Justice Steve McGlynn will hold on to the Appellate seat he was appointed to by Karmeier.
As in 2004, the dollars are huge and costly television ads have been competing with ads for statewide candidates. Since Southern Illinois is primarily served by non-Illinois television markets, voters in Missouri, Kentucky, and Indiana are once again learning about Illinois judicial candidates, just as Illinoisans are learning about governors and senators from strange places.
Here's the situation: Steve McGlynn, a St. Clair County lawyer, was appointed to the Appellate Court by Justice Lloyd Karmeier to fill the vacancy created by the ouster of Appellate Judge Gordon Maag. (The appointment authority is one of the best aspects of being a Supreme Court justice.) According to the law and the process, McGlynn served until the next election (that's this year) and then has to seek a full ten-year term. Judicial elections in Illinois are partisan so the Republican McGlynn is looking to the same traditional Republican sources for financial support. And the Democratic challenger, a Saline County judge named Bruce Stewart, is looking to the same traditional sources that Southern Illinois Democrats always look to: organized labor and plaintiffs' attorneys. Did we mention plaintiffs' attorneys?
Stewart has a few things going for him that McGlynn does not. He has been a trial judge for the past ten years, while McGlynn has been practicing law. And he is from Saline County in the very southern reaches of the state (almost to Kentucky) while McGlynn is from St. Clair County -- the junior partner of the despicable "Madison and St. Clair Counties" axis.
It was not happenstance that a non-Madison-St. Clair candidate was selected by the still-powerful plaintiffs' lawyers. They can read tea leaves, as well as public sentiment and voter instincts, so they selected a non-Madison-St. Clair candidate, especially after Justice Karmeier selected McGlynn of St. Clair County, even if McGlynn has nothing to do with the problems of St. Clair County.
Both sides have pumped thousands of dollars into the fray, although on a slightly smaller scale than the 2004 festivities. Most of the Karmeier supporters (ourselves included) have contributed heavily to McGlynn and the plaintiffs' lawyers are solidly with Stewart.
Adding to the mix in 2006 is a handful of other judicial elections that all revolve around the same issue, i.e. fixing what's wrong in Madison and St. Clair counties (if there is anything wrong, a question answered firmly in the negative by the establishment forces).
One of the critical and entertaining second tier elections is for a circuit court (trial court) seat in Madison County. Justice Karmeier appointed a former Madison County state's attorney to fill the vacancy and seek a full term this year. The Democrat-trial lawyer establishment picked a prominent local asbestos lawyer as their candidate. Republican Donald Weber and Democrat David Hylla are setting spending records for an Illinois circuit court seat, as are McGlynn and Stewart at the appellate court level.
One Madison County plaintiffs' firm, SimmonsCooper, already has contributed more than $160,000 to Hylla's campaign. Weber has no such sugar-daddy (we're helping as much as we can) and is being vastly outspent. But if Weber is able to remind voters in Madison County that the same dark forces they fought in 2004 -- and defeated -- are back again, he can win.
Another interesting Madison County battle is the fight for "retention" being waged by three sitting judges who must win the approval of 60 percent of the voters to stay on the bench. The three, including Chief Judge Ann Callis, a former plaintiffs' attorney and daughter of one of the legends in Madison County, Lance Callis, have promised reforms in the courthouse. They have acknowledged problems and mistakes and actually seem to be sincere. Our political action committee decided not to take a stand -- recommending neither a "vote yes" nor a "vote no." We'll let the local voters decide if they think the trend is in the right direction.
Just south of Madison County, in St. Clair County, a circuit court race of a different kind is taking place. Judge Lloyd Cueto decided he could not get the 60 percent needed to be retained so he is running in a contested race for his own seat. Although not as closely tied to the plaintiffs' lawyers in Madison County, Cueto is none-the-less friendly to them and reform-minded activists want him out. He is being challenged by a relatively unknown but courageous lawyer named Paul Evans, who doesn't have a lot of money but looks like he could pull it off. We are doing everything we can to help him.
There are 100 other counties in Illinois -- Madison and St. Clair are not the only two. We have a large one named Cook County with a fairly major city as its county seat. There are more than 80 judicial candidates running in Cook, mostly from Chicago but some from the suburbs, and we are watching them closely.
But somehow, none of it ever seems as interesting and significant as what happens in Madison and St. Clair Counties. And after the ink dries on this year’s ballots, they’ll be lining up and raising bucks for the 2008 installment: Madison County Round III.
About Money, 'Going Negative,' Illinois Bar Association
by Ed Murnane
A little bit on a few topics...
Money: Almost half the news stories about the election contest in the Fifth Appellate district are about the money that is being contributed and spent. Already, the election is being described as the "most expensive appellate court race ever," following only by two years the "most expensive judicial election ever."
There is no doubt a lot of money is being spent. We have a good vantage point to see it come and go.
But what most, if not all, of the news coverage fails to mention is the fact that prior to 2000, almost all of the money going into many judicial campaigns came from the checkbooks of lawyers -- primarily plaintiffs' lawyers -- and the election results reflected that. Certainly that was the case in plaintiff-friendly venues such as Cook, Madison and St. Clair counties.
It's only been since piles of trial lawyer money helped Supreme Court Justice Thomas Kilbride win his upset election in 2000 that the "non-trial-lawyer" community began to mobilize.
In 2002, the good guys helped Justice Rita Garman defeat trial lawyer-backed (and former trial lawyer herself) Susan Myerscough in the Fourth District. Similarly, the 2004 Supreme Court race was another banner day for the check-book producers as trial lawyer money piled up on the side of former trial lawyer Gordon Maag while non-trial lawyers, i.e. other lawyers, doctors, business owners, every-day citizens kicked in to help the winner, Justice Lloyd Karmeier.
The hypocrisy of the cries from "reformers" who say too much money is being spent and the process is getting out of whack is that most of them are heavily supported by -- you guessed it -- trial lawyers.
Foremost among them is the Illinois Campaign for Political reform, which the ICJL showed last year to be closely tied to, and heavily funded by, liberal organizations including several trial lawyer front groups.
The real anguish over judicial campaign spending is because the "non-trial-lawyer" folks are starting to flex their muscle.
"Going Negative." It's obvious that political campaigns have taken a turn to the negative side, more evident this year than in the past. Illinois voters (and television viewers) must be wondering how our state ever elected a scoundrel like Judy Baar Topinka as treasurer. A voter who saw any of Rod Blagojevich's TV spots since last March (... and how could you not? ...) has seen a multi-million dollar effort to discredit Topinka and if the latest polls are indicative, the Blagojevich hit machine appears to have worked.
More interesting has been the whining that has come out of the Bruce Stewart campaign in Southern Illinois directed toward supporters of Justice Steve McGlynn, including the Illinois Civil Justice League's political action committee, JUSTPAC. What have we said and done? We reported that Stewart is heavily funded by the trial lawyers. In another TV spot, we reported that Stewart and Madison County trial lawyer David Hylla had received hundreds of thousands of dollars from trial lawyers. In both cases, it was and is the truth, which can be verified in State Board of Elections records, the local news media -- or even through the printed materials of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform.
Stewart, by the way, insists his campaign is not "negative," even though a radio spot on the Stewart web site suggested that Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier picked McGlynn for the appellate court as "a reward for being the political boss of St. Clair County Republicans." Stewart acknowledged that there might have been a negative tone to the radio spot and his campaign removed it, but only after the ICJL complained to him
Finally, the Illinois State Bar Association: In 2004, ISBA was talked into creating a "committee on tone and conduct" for supreme and appellate court races. It was created at the urging of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform and in fact, appointed an ICPR person to the committee. Apart from playing a major role in an anti-Karmeier movie that was produced following the 2004 election, there was no indication that the ISBA committee accomplished anything.
But the committee is back in action this year and when the McGlynn campaign complained about the attack on Justice Karmeier (and on Justice McGlynn) by the Stewart campaign, the committee took no action because the ad apparently had been removed from the Stewart web site. There was no admonition to the Stewart campaign that such attacks on a sitting Illinois Supreme Court justice were out of order.
Their most recent conduct is not surprising, in light of the effort made last winter to make sure McGlynn did not get a more favorable rating than Stewart.
In 2004, ISBA members (including many plaintiffs' attorneys) were shocked and chagrined that Lloyd Karmeier received a higher ISBA rating than Gordon Maag.
This year, in apparent nervousness that there would be a repeat of 2004, ISBA actually sent two mail solicitations to Southern Illinois lawyers, encouraging them to participate in the candidate evaluation poll. When the first mailing did not produce the anticipated or desired result, a second mailing was sent -- just in Southern Illinois -- to get larger participation.
And it worked, and it resulted in a remarkably lower evaluation for McGlynn than for Stewart, even though the vast majority of lawyers participating had never encountered McGlynn in a courtroom. For that matter, most had not encountered Stewart, either, but they learned that he was the choice of ITLA and obviously was the choice of ISBA.
The result of the survey? This is what we reported in our Commentary on February 27:
We've written twice within the past few weeks that there were some rumblings that the plaintiffs' lawyers were putting the word out among their ranks to make sure they participate in the poll and cast their ballots for the right candidates -- their candidates.
A few weeks back, it seems there was even some concern that ballots were not being received so ISBA sent a notice to members in Southern Illinois that another mailing was going to be launched.
So it was not surprising to anyone that two judges appointed by Justice Karmeier to fill vacancies -- Appellate Justice Stephen P. McGlynn and Madison County Circuit Justice Don W. Weber -- received unusually low scores -- suspiciously low scores.
But the low scores for McGlynn and Weber are not as suspicious when the numbers are analyzed. In the appellate poll, for example, there was an increase of 26% in the number of voters in 2006 over 2004. The actual number of lawyers receiving ballots, according to the ISBA's own numbers, increased by only 5% so "lawyer growth" would not account for the increase.
Seems strange that there would be a higher percentage of lawyers voting in an election year with NO Supreme Court race than in one with a very high profile contest for the highest court in the state -- a contest that only comes around once every ten years. Appellate races are more frequent: there was one last year, there will be another one in 2008.
ISBA doesn't tell candidates who submitted ballots and they're certainly not going to tell us but it is safe to say (... ok, to assume ...) that much of the increase was the result of the rumored push to get plaintiffs' attorneys to pan McGlynn and Weber and boost their opponents.
The result of the ISBA maneuvering is that Bruce Stewart had a favorable bar association rating and Steve McGlynn did not. In judicial elections, where voters know less about candidates than they do about candidates for other offices, the bar association rating can be an important credential -- but it shouldn't be if it is issued under false or political circumstances.
The point of all of this is that the Illinois State Bar Association is too closely tied to the plaintiffs' lawyers in Illinois, and too willing to do their bidding. We met Irene Bahr, new president of ISBA at a recent forum in Bloomington and she made it clear that she is "not a trial lawyer." But she has a stable-full of plaintiffs' attorneys who exercise an inordinate amount of control over what should be the state's premier legal organization.
Final Week Promises Trial Lawyer Money Splurge, Attacks
by Ed Murnane
The final days before every election are tense but in Illinois judicial contests, they are very predictable.
The Illinois Trial Lawyers Association, following their leader, Judy Cates of St. Clair County, are vowing a "Crusade for Civil Justice." In her most recent comments in the ITLA online newsletter, Cates announced that, "we are active today in the election process. Many of our members have committed themselves to participate in the "get out the vote" campaign. During this election season, ITLA members will work the polls, make telephone calls and urge family, friends and clients to vote.
It remains to be seen how many ITLA members will "work the polls" but it is certain they will dig deeply into their pocket books and check books to control election outcomes.
Two Illinois judicial races are at the top of their list. Both, not surprisingly, involve Madison County.
ITLA members have already put more than $600,000 into the Fifth District Appellate contest and the Madison County circuit court race. In the Circuit Court race, one ITLA member, asbestos champion SimmonsCooper, has poured $160,000 into the campaign of fellow asbestos lawyer, David Hylla. Hylla is working to unseat Donald Weber, former Madison County prosecutor and an appointee of Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier.
As of last Monday, October 23, Hylla's campaign had received $466,751 in contributions and $345,994 of that was from plaintiffs' lawyers -- 88.3%!
Hylla has even received an $850 contribution from one of his asbestos clients.
By contrast, Weber's campaign had collected less than $150,000 since the beginning of the year.
Hylla's campaign has been using extensive direct mail and it is likely that there will be a surge of television advertising -- most of it negative -- during he final eight days.
The question will be whether the voters of Madison County -- who rose up against the trial lawyer control of the courts in 2004 -- will follow their instincts and not be swayed by Judy Cates and David Hylla and their "crusade."
More attacks and more heavy trial lawyer spending are expected in the Fifth Appellate district where Karmeier appointee Justice Steve McGlynn appears to be doing well against Democratic challenger Judge Bruce Stewart.
Stewart has launched a negative campaign -- even attacking Justice Karmeier's appointment of McGlynn as a "reward" for McGlynn's political service. In fact, McGlynn was appointed by the full Illinois Supreme Court upon Karmeier's recommendation, but the recommendation was made after a review process by a bi-partisan screening panel.
Stewart's campaign also has begun a "dirty tricks" campaign, creating a bogus website with the address: www.citizensformcglynn.com.
The site directs visitors to the Stewart website. The address for the site was purchased by John Rekowski who is Stewart's communications chair.
In Central Illinois, there is certain to be a similar trial lawyer-backed effort to stop the momentum of the Michael Powers campaign for the Third Appellate District seat. Powers campaign appears to be doing well but this is the district in which Illinois Democratic Party Chairman Michael Madigan dumped several hundred thousands of dollars late in the 2000 judicial campaign to win a Supreme Court seat for Justice Thomas Kilbride.
Powers' opponent, Associate Judge Vicki Wright, has received a flurry of contributions within the last few days, including several from teachers' unions and big time trial lawyers. On one day a week ago, she reported contributions from ITLA President Judy Cates and from Chicago powerhouse plaintiffs' firm, Power Rogers and Smith.
So it is clear that plaintiffs' lawyers have their sights set on these three races and a surge of money and continued dirty tricks in the final week could mean the difference.
IllinoisJudges.net Gives Voters Opportunity to 'Judge' the Judges
by Ed Murnane
According to a University of Illinois - Springfield survey of voters, more than half of voters who choose not to vote in judicial elections do so because of lack of information about the candidates. Indeed, judicial candidates appear at the bottom of ballots and are often overlooked by voters. However, their location on the ballot is not reflective of their importance in the governmental policy process.
In an effort to assist voters, the Illinois Civil Justice League has launched IllinoisJudges.net to provide a central point for information on judicial candidates and retention. Now in its fourth election cycle, IllinoisJudges.net has provided information to hundreds of thousands of voters.
"Voters, especially in Southern Illinois, have learned about the importance of judicial elections," said Ed Murnane, President of the Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL). "The impact our courts have on the local economy, healthcare and freedoms of individual citizens is greater than any other part of our government. This website provides non-partisan information about the candidates, including how to find the campaign websites, campaign financing data and answers to judicial issue surveys."
IllinoisJudges.net allows voters to find the candidates by choosing their own county or their own judicial circuit. Each judicial candidate also has received a questionnaire from the Illinois Civil Justice League and the answers provided to that questionnaire are republished on the website. First launched in 2000, the website is now in its fourth election cycle and has logged hundreds of thousands of hits.
"All candidates get an equal opportunity to participate," said Murnane. "We invite all candidates to submit a biography, we link to their financial reports and each candidate's individual website, they can choose to answer our judicial survey, and we include not only our own endorsements - but endorsements from other media entities and organizations."
Murnane said that the ICJL is currently working on sending information requests to judges standing for retention in November.
"Voters and media organizations need to know that there's a one-stop source of information regarding judicial elections and retentions," said Murnane. "IllinoisJudges.net is objective, voters can find information about the candidates in their 'own words', and can find out how to link to the individual candidate websites for even more information."
Manhattan Institute releases 'Trial Lawyers, Inc.: Illinois'
by Ed Murnane
The Manhattan Institute, a respected, non-partisan think-tank, today released Trial Lawyers, Inc: Illinois, a report examining the “workings” of the trial lawyer industry in the state of Illinois. In addition to outlining the state’s most influential trial lawyers (who, not coincidentally, are also the state’s most influential political contributors), the report also shows the drastic negative impact their lawsuit abuse is having on Illinois.
Just take a look at a few of the alarming facts in this report:
Relative to the size of its economy, Illinois has more lawyers than any American state except New York and Massachusetts. Tort costs for medical-malpractice liability are a greater share of Illinois’ economy than of any state’s save New York’s. Illinois’ companies fare little better than its doctors: its corporations’ self-insured liability costs are third-highest in the nation. Little wonder, then, that for each of the last three years, corporate attorneys and general counsels have ranked Illinois’ litigation climate 44th or worse among the 50 states.
Trial Lawyers, Inc. has prospered in Illinois by developing lucrative “lines of business” that parallel its national case portfolio: medical malpractice, whose liability costs have sent doctors scurrying out of the state; class actions, which have made the judges of Madison County infamous; and asbestos, the nation’s longest-running-and horribly corrupt-mass tort. Illinois courts have made fortunes not only for the state’s own tort kings but also for lawyers nationwide who have sought out the Prairie State’s “magic jurisdictions,” those county courts where judges are elected with “verdict money” funneled to their campaigns by the plaintiffs’ bar. For although Illinois’ litigation business is broad-based in terms of caseload, it is narrowly focused in geography: these select courts-including Madison and St. Clair Counties, east of St. Louis, and Chicago’s Cook County-attract cases from around the state and nation hoping to cash in on the venues’ trademark jackpot justice.
Our Choices In Judicial Races Madison, St. Clair Counties Take Center Stage
by Ed Murnane
Today the ICJL is announcing our final round of judicial candidate endorsements. The full list is available here.
The candidates we have endorsed are judges or judicial hopefuls whom we believe will help continue (or restore) fairness to the court system in Illinois . We didn’t pay attention to political affiliation in contested races (although some candidates obviously did, as we had lower Democratic response than Republican response to our questionnaire this year).
Without overstating the ICJL’s importance or influence, we must say there has been no question asked of us more frequently than "What are you going to do with the Madison County judges?"
And the answer is ... we are not making a recommendation. Nor are we making a recommendation in the retention election of St. Clair Chief Judge Jan Fiss.
**
The ICJL gave careful consideration to the retention of Judges Callis, Romani and Knight in the Third District (Madison and Bond Counties). The three judges responded to our judicial candidate questionnaire and we spent an hour with them in Judge Romani’s chambers. They answered all of our questions and, frankly, seemed sincere and were convincing on many issues.
But they do have a judicial track record and we’re not sure their answers - as honest and earnest as they were - are sufficient for us to say that we want Judges Callis, Romani and Knight to be retained for another six years.
The issues are really these:
- These judges have been part of a broken system for the past six years; what have they done, if anything, to try to correct it? In their defense, none of the three were part of the civil court system in Madison County . Knight is in Bond County and Callis and Romani have been in the criminal court system so they don’t have big blockbuster cases or verdicts or rulings for opponents to point to.
- Yet all of the judges in the Third Circuit work together and meet periodically and all of them were certainly aware of what was going on - and what was being reported not only by local media but by national media - and not a word of dissent was heard.
- When we met, Judge Callis said she had proposed changes in the system but her comments were ignored. She didn’t elaborate on what changes and when she had proposed them.
- In our meeting, we mentioned a few - only a few of many - incidents that embarrassed the Madison County judicial system in recent years: Judge Byron "banning" a former U.S. Attorney General from Madison County; the subpoenas issued to national and state leaders in the civil justice reform movement; the lawsuit against St. Louis Post-Dispatch columnist Bill McClellan; the Judge George Moran retirement under embarrassing circumstances; the Tom Lakin story; the Gordon Maag lawsuit against organizations that had opposed his candidacy in 2004. They agreed that each of these incidents was troublesome but no concern was ever expressed publicly.
We realize judges can't control what's being done outside their courtrooms but the Madison County judges have had very close relationships with the local lawyers and there is no indication any expression of concern has been made.
- Earlier this year, a fund-raiser for their campaign was held and the committee leaders included several of the most hostile elements of the anti-reform movement. One of the names on the committee invitation was that of George Machino, president of the Madison County Federation of Labor. He was listed as the treasurer of the "Justice For All Pac," a trial lawyer front group that dumped more than $500,000 into the Maag campaign in 2004. Most of the funding came from the SimmonsCooper Law Firm and from Randy Bono. This year, he’s helping raise money for Judges Callis, Knight and Romani. (Machino, by the way, called for a federal investigation of the Illinois Civil Justice League in 2004).
- So these three judges who are running as "reformers" are still closely tied to the forces that have given Madison County the image ( ... more than an image, a reality ... ) of a "judicial hellhole."
To their credit, they have enacted some modest reforms and they assured - emphatically by Judge Callis - that the reforms would not be rolled back after the election. They also assured in the meeting, and in subsequent e-mail exchanges, that the judges would meet with the business or medical communities to discuss and resolve any problems.
The changes they have implemented supposedly were agreed to unanimously by all the judges in the Third Circuit - and that would include Judge Byron - but there are rumblings that Byron is not happy that he has been removed as chief of the civil division and that his unhappiness has extended to some prominent plaintiffs’ attorneys, including Randy Bono and Steve Tillery. There has been some speculation that forces close to Bono and maybe to Tillery were responsible for negative phone calls concerning Callis recently.
There is a lot of opposition to these judges in Madison County . "Vote No" signs are very visible. Encouraged by the defeat of Gordon Maag in 2004, there is hope that opponents of the trio can get 40% of the vote to dump them and let the replacements be selected by Justice Karmeier.
That’s a tempting prospect. Should residents of Madison (and Bond) counties keep these three in office, or should they let Justice Karmeier find three replacements?
Although we have been urged by many, including many allies, to join the "vote no" movement, we’re not going to do it. For one thing, the local forces don’t need our participation. They are well-enough organized to get the voters mobilized, if that’s what the voters want to do.
A second reason is that we don’t want to divert attention or resources from the important task of electing current Karmeier appointees: Stephen McGlynn to the Appellate Court and Donald Weber to the Madison County Circuit Court.
And a third reason: there are enough people whose judgment we respect in Madison County who are supporting the three judges that the decision is not as clear-cut as it might seem.
A fourth reason: we’ve looked the three of them in the eye, heard their message, and we’ll give them the benefit of the doubt.
But we are not recommending a "yes" vote. That’s a decision Madison and Bond County voters must make. Our endorsement would be used as "proof" that everything is fine now.
The Illinois Civil Justice League endorsed Illinois judicial candidates for the first time in 1998. Our entrance into the judicial election process was -- we admit -- a direct response to the 1997 decision by the Illinois Supreme Court to overturn the Civil Justice Reform Amendments of 1995.
The decision was not a "sore loser" action -- but instead was an admission that very few interests in Illinois -- other than various lawyer groups -- were paying attention to the election of judges (and the process of electing judges).
Because "tort reform" in Illinois has been viewed as a Republican issue (it's not, it's a taxpayer and small business and health care issue), the ICJL might have been expected to support only Republican judges or judicial candidates.
That hasn't been the case, however. Surprisingly, the ICJL has endorsed more Democratic candidates for judge, including Democratic judges seeking retention.
The primary reason for the Democrat edge has been the fact that very few Republicans run for judge in Cook County which is easily the dominant judicial jurisdiction in the state. While some Illinois counties may have two or three judicial elections on the ballot, it is not unusual for Cook County voters to have more than 80 candidates to consider.
Democrat judicial candidates and judges have been and still are among the best in Illinois. Among those ICJL has endorsed include former Supreme Court Justice Mary Ann McMorrow (even after she wrote the opinion negating the Civil Justice Reform Amendments of 1995), current Justice Thomas Fitzgerald and current Cook County Appellate candidate Joy Cunningham.
In our first round of endorsements in 2006, several prominent Democrat judges were included. Among them is one of our favorite judges, James Wexstten of Mount Vernon, and a prominent St. Clair County Democrat, Milton S. Wharton.
Later this week, we will announce our final round of judicial endorsements and it is unlikely that any announcement has been anticipated as much as this year's.
The reason: Madison and St. Clair counties.
Four judges who are seeking retention in the two counties are seeking ICJL support and there are vocal -- and credible -- forces urging "vote yes" recommendations and "vote no" recommendations.
In St. Clair County, Chief Judge Jan Fiss is on the ballot and in Madison County, the Chief Judge, Ann Callis, and two colleagues, Philip Romani and John Knight are seeking new terms. Knight actually is the resident judge in Bond County but Bond and Madison are in the same circuit and he must win the approval of Madison Count voters also.
Last week, the ICJL met with all four of the judges to discuss the status of the civil justice system in the two counties and to look forward. Their remarks were candid and open, which makes the decision process difficult because we can't look forward without looking back and all of these judges have been serving in areas described as "judicial hellholes" by the American Tort Reform Association. There have been other, perhaps not as colorful, descriptions of the two counties and few, if any, have been complementary.
But we'll try to make a sensible recommendation and it will be announced later this week.
In order for any judicial candidate to be considered for our endorsement, he/she must have completed the ICJL's judicial candidate questionnaire, which includes 12 questions that can be difficult for judges or candidates to answer.
Their answers and other information about all judicial candidates can be found on the ICJL's judicial website at www.IllinoisJudges.net.
The site also provides links to candidates' websites and also to the campaign financial disclosure reports on file with the State Board of Elections. The source of candidates' funding often tells more about the candidate than any response to a question or refusal to answer a question. The site also includes (or will include) the evaluations of judicial candidates by various lawyer groups, including the Illinois State Bar Association, and newspaper or other endorsements.
A Belleville News-Democrat story reports on "negative polling" being conducted in Madison County. Phone calls reportedly are being made to voters and the message is that Madison County judges, especially Chief Judge Ann Callis, are soft on crime and not deserving of retention in November.
The ICJL was mentioned as a potential source of the calls.
We are not. In fact, I spoke with Judge Callis last week and assured her that polling conducted by the ICJL is seeking information about voters' preferences, not trying to influence voters. That's really not "polling," it's more advocacy. I also told Judge Callis that there were two questions relating to her race on a voter survey we sponsored. The first asked if voters planned to vote for or against the three judges seeking retention and the second asked if the recent endorsement of the three by a doctors' group would make voters more or less likely to support the judges.
I didn't share the responses with Judge Callis, other than to inform her that there are still quite a few "undecided" voters in Madison County.
Later this week, the ICJL will be meeting with Judge Callis and her colleagues, Judges John Knight and Charles Romani, to discuss their campaign and their past performance on the court. We also are meeting with St. Clair County Chief Judge Jan Fiss. We'll have more to report later.
On the negative "polling" issue, there are many theories being discussed in Madison County, including the possibility that angry plaintiffs' attorneys are behind the calls.
The other news item (also reported below) concerns the one-year "anniversary" of the enactment of the medical malpractice reform law that Governor Blagojevich signed in August, 2005.
Blagojevich, who opposed the legislation and signed it only because he understood the political ramifications of it, is now claiming credit for it.
Suggesting that he had anything to do with it, other than signing it reluctantly, is as dishonest as the claims by other opponents of the law, especially the plaintiffs' attorneys, that the law is not working because there have not been dramatic reductions in medical malpractice insurance premiums.
The trial lawyers know -- but aren't admitting -- that the new law will not be fully effective until it has been challenged (and upheld) in court. They also know that there has not yet been a suit filed involving an incident that could challenge the law. And they realize that the two year statute of limitations in Illinois means that most of the lawsuits filed in Illinois since August, 2005, involve incidents that took place before the law was even on the books.
The deceit they are engaging in now is no different from the deceit they engaged in while trying to block passage of the law in 2005.
Last Friday, I participated in a 30-minute debate with Keith Hebeisen, former president of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association, on the impact of the new law. The discussion was taped by the Illinois Channel and will be shown sometime soon.
If progress in the civil justice reform fight is measured in miles, Illinois has advanced a few feet in the past few years. Not nearly far enough, but at least the movement is in the right direction.
For years Illinois has been viewed as one of America’s worst legal environments. Since the American Tort Reform Association began describing hostile legal jurisdictions as “Judicial Hellholes,” Illinois has had a disproportionate share of the honors. Currently, three of the six Judicial Hellholes are in Illinois.
Similarly, since the U.S. Chamber of Commerce commissioned Harris International to conduct an annual survey of the worst legal environments, Illinois has been near the bottom, and seeming to get closer to the bottom each year.
But wait ... the 2006 Harris Poll showed slight improvement for Illinois - up to 45th from 46th the year prior.
And even the latest ATRA “judicial hellholes” list had a slightly different Illinois flavor. The jurisdiction that makes us forget the “Bridges of Madison County,” but remember the “Judges of Madison County,” is no longer at the top of the list.
Not that anyone in Madison County, Illinois, is rejoicing just yet. The county is still one of the worst six on the “hellholes” list , but there truly are signs of progress and there truly is uneasiness among the ranks of the forces that have ruled the judiciary in Madison County and its smaller siblings.
It requires a brief look at how and why Illinois, and especially Madison County, evolved (regressed?) to the level that attracted such national attention, and scorn.
The American Enterprise Institute’s William Tucker described Madison County as “once the most industrialized counties in Illinois.” Immediately across the Mississippi River from St. Louis, Madison and St. Clair were junction points for railroads, barges and highways - truly a Gateway to the west. The area was developed with steel mills, freight yards and oil refineries. And that environment led to a litigation environment: suits against railroads, against industry, against corporations.
Boy On Mend After Softball Nearly Kills Him (Naperville Sun, September 14, 2006)
Hit playing catch, Brian, 11, suffered three skull fractures
Eleven-year-old Brian Schmult's doctor teased him about the question mark-shaped scar Brian retained after being hit by a softball May 26.
"He said it was from exploratory surgery to see whether I have a brain or not," Brian said jokingly.
All kidding aside, Brian came close to losing his life when the accident resulted in a bleeding artery and three skull fractures.
Brian was hit while playing catch on the sidelines of a friend's softball game. He went home, told his mother, Terri, and went straight to bed, only to wake up crying a few hours later.
Terri Schmult immediately rushed her son to the emergency room at Edward Hospital, where he spent four days in the intensive care unit.
Although Brian said he felt back to normal a few days after he left the hospital, his parents kept close watch over him this summer. Because brain surgery patients are at considerable risk of seizures, Terri Schmult said Brian was never left alone without an adult.
Brian Schmult is one of tens of thousands of 11-year-olds in Illinois who engage in sports (in this case as a spectator) or other typical activities for young boys and girls. Every one of them is vulnerable to a potentially life-threatening injury from sporting activities, from falling off a bike or out of a tree, or from an auto accident.
Fortunately for Brian and his family, he lives in Naperville, close enough to Edward Hospital for his mother to rush him there into the care of neurologists who could attend to him quickly.
If Brian and his family had lived in Southern Illinois -- virtually anywhere south of Springfield -- they may not have been so fortunate that Brian could joke about the size and shape of the scar on his head.
Neurology -- and neurological surgery -- are among the highest risk medical practices and because of the high cost of medical malpractice insurance, practitioners were among the first to look elsewhere during the recent (and current) medical liability crisis in Illinois.
The medical liability reform legislation that was enacted in Illinois in 2005 has not yet had a chance to be tested and proven, so it is still uncertain as to the full impact of the new law. But one thing that is not uncertain is the fact that Illinois needs additional medical liability reform action to protect hospitals and doctors so that they can protect all of us.
Crain's Chicago Business this week highlights the progress being made in Madison County. In addition to the federal Class Action Fairness Act and the recent Supreme Court rulings, Crain's gives much of of the credit for the progress to the spotlight we have put on the abuses in the county. Our very own Ed Murnane is quoted:
"Judges and lawyers realize times have changed," says Ed Murnane, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League, a business-backed group. "When bright lights are turned on, those lawyers who would prefer to operate quietly in the shadows will scamper away."
Three new developments last week focused more attention on the question of retention for three circuit judges in Madison County. An endorsement, the announcement of more reforms, and the formation of an opposition committee will all, undoubtedly, play into the minds of voters this November.
Three consecutive days, three new developments for the three judges - Ann Callis, Charles Romani and John Knight - each seeking 60 percent approval and another six years on the Third Circuit bench:
Development #1: On Thursday, the Statewide Medical Alliance for the Survival of Healthcare (SMASH) endorsed the retention of the three judges. SMASH, which supported the election of Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier in 2004 and strenuously advocated the passage of medical malpractice reforms in Illinois, cited Romani and Knight’s "reputations for fairness and ability" and Callis' "much-needed reforms in court rules" in their endorsements, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
According to Dr. Morris Kugler, chairman of SMASH:
"We don’t go by whether they’re Republicans or Democrats. We go by their records and who’s putting money in their campaigns. When someone shows they want to reform a bad system, you ought to give them a chance to keep going."
The Post-Dispatch cited the several high-profile reforms implemented recently in Madison County:
"Since becoming chief judge, Callis has removed Judge Nicholas Byron as chief of the civil division, made it tougher for out-of-state lawyers to get cases tried in Madison County and enacted a rule allowing attorneys in a class action suit to replace a judge only once."
Other reforms not mentioned in the article include the unsealing of numerous documents from a variety of cases (some involving cases involving class action lawyer Tom Lakin), the creation of a new mediation rules, and the rare appointment of a Republican to an associate judgeship (only two have been appointed to the circuit’s twelve associate spots in the past decade).
Development #2: On Friday, Judge Callis announced the enactment of new rules that will govern how court documents are sealed. Under the changes, the public will have access to the court order, which will be required the reasons for putting the documents under seal.
The suppression of court documents in Madison County became a prominent news story earlier this year, when word of a court-sealed lawsuit involving a prominent Madison County lawyer and law firm.
According to the Belleville News-Democrat, the new rules include four provisions:
- A list for the judge of everything in the case file that the lawyer wants sealed.
- A "compelling" reason for withholding from the public each item on the list.
- The placement of the judges order to supress in the case file for public viewing
- A document available to the public giving the reason for a file's suppression, such as confidential medical records or trade secrets.
The guidelines were compiled by Judges Callis, Stack, Weber, Maddox, Byron and Matoesian.
Development #3: On Saturday (at least mine arrived on Saturday), letters arrived in many Madison County mailboxes announcing the formation of an anti-retention committee to oppose the three judges for retention. The committee, Real Court Reform Now, states that its number one goal is the removal of Judges Callis, Romani and Knight.
According to the group’s letter:
"The last six years were undoubtedly the worst in Madison County judicial history. The responsibility of maintaining proper control and policy within our courts are in the hands of our elected judges. These judge have failed Madison County!"
The letter then asks for monetary donations of $20 to $50 to be sent to Douglas Hulme of Edwardsville. Hulme is a Republican Precinct Committeeman and the son of former Madison County Republican Central Committee Chairman Bob Hulme.
A scan of the Illinois State Board of Elections website shows that an official committee was formed on September 5, 2006. The chairman is listed as Bob Hulme and the treasurer is listed as Terrence Peterson, a Godfrey Republican who previously served as Treasurer of the Madison County Republican Central Committee.
So should voters look to the six months of election-year reforms in Madison County or the past six years of judicial antics in the now infamous courthouse in Edwardsville? It could be the fundamental question of whether to retain or not to retain.
One thing is clear, judicial candidates have heard the strong message that Southern Illinois voters sent in voting "no" on the retention of Appellate Justice Gordon Maag. Participation of judicial candidates in the ICJL's judicial candidates questionnaire is high this election. As of this morning, seven of nine Madison County judicial candidates have returned their questionnaires and five of six St. Clair County judicial candidates have returned questionnaires.
Posted on our website - www.IllinoisJudges.net - these questionnaires will give voters more information about local judicial candidates - in their own words - to help voters make better-informed decisions. The high percentage of participation this year is a welcome development for Southern Illinois voters as they make tough decisions about who will represent their court system for the next six years.
To be Frank ... Our friend Ted Frank of AEI and frequent poster at PointofLaw.com, posts today about his op-ed in today's Washington Post "on the eat-one's-cake-and-have-it-too trend in civil litigation to attempt to undo contracts after the fact." Check it out.
ATLA Targeting Endangered Republicans The Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA) is currently up with an ad campaign targeting five endangered Republican House members, including House Republican Conference Chair Deborah Pryce of Ohio. Here is that ad:
Tort reform groups and lawyers representing some of the nation's largest corporations are working with legislators in several states to draft amendments to consumer protection laws that would seek to curb what they see as a tide of costly class actions.
Tort reformers are looking to introduce proposed amendments as early as December in states with a history of large class certifications or high-dollar settlements and verdicts in consumer class actions, such as Massachusetts, Illinois and the District of Columbia.
The new momentum represents continuing fallout from California's Proposition 64, a landmark 2004 ballot initiative that tightened the reins on consumer cases. As part of their efforts, tort reformers are circulating model legislation to state lawmakers that would require consumers to have suffered economic losses or injuries from a company's alleged misstatements in order to file a class action.
If Bruce Stewart Wants To Run Against The Metro East, He Should Return Campaign Support From Metro East Trial Lawyers
by Ed Murnane
Judge Bruce Stewart is trying to have it both ways.
Supposedly a competent judge from Saline County in deep Southern Illinois, Stewart is seeking the Fifth District Appellate judge seat formerly held by Democrat Gordon Maag and currently occupied by Justice Stephen McGlynn, the replacement who was hand-picked by Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier.
It is probably not a coincidence that Southern Illinois Democrats and the strong concentration of trial lawyers in Madison and St. Clair counties chose Stewart. Saline County is about as far away from Madison and St. Clair as you can get and still be in the Fifth District. (I've been to Saline County recently and it's a long haul.)
The power brokers in Southern Illinois, particularly the cabal of plaintiffs' lawyers and Democrats (and some judges), were well aware that another Metro East Democrat judge would have a rough fight. Almost as if he/she would be carrying a sign that said, "I'm not Gordon Maag but I'm following in his footsteps."
So they selected Stewart from the small town of Harrisburg, 142 miles away from the Madison County Courthouse, and supposedly un-tarnished by the Madison-St. Clair system.
Stewart's campaign statements and his website have made it pretty clear: he is not a Madison-St. Clair candidate and -- horrors -- Republican Steve McGlynn is. McGlynn is from St. Clair County.
But there's a serious flaw in Stewart's campaign message. He may not be from Madison or St. Clair -- but his campaign sure seems to be heavily wed to the litigation machine of Madison and St. Clair. In fact, the largest source of campaign financial support for Stewart (as reported to the State Board of Elections) is the Metro East -- 46.4% of his support.
And does this surprise you: 74.5% of Stewart's support comes from attorneys, mostly personal injury lawyers.
This is Gordon Maag all over again.
In fact Stewart is walking so closely in Maag's footprints, you might wonder if he's actually wearing Maag's shoes.
Maag, you may recall, made a bogus promise to limit campaign contributions to $2000 from any one source. But he took tens of thousands of dollars -- even hundreds of thousands of dollars -- from plaintiffs' attorneys. Does the name Randy Bono ring a bell? Does the SimmonsCooper law firm ring a bell? Does the Lakin Law Firm ring a bell? (Well, I'll bet Lakin does!)
Last week, in the first joint appearance of Stewart and McGlynn, Stewart expressed dismay over the tone of the Maag-Karmeier campaign in 2004.
I wonder if he ever said anything to Gordon Maag about that tone? Maag began his assault -- personal in many ways -- on Lloyd Karmeier in January when he submitted a statement to the Illinois Civil Justice League which was posted on our judges website.
He said that because the Karmeier campaign did not agree to imposing a limit on campaign contributions,
"... this speaks volumes about Lloyd Karmeier’s integrity and independence."
The nerve of Gordon Maag to question Lloyd Karmeier's integrity because the Karmeier campaign would not agree with Maag to limit contributions .... when Maag himself didn't keep his own pledge.
In the same statement, Maag wrote this:
" ... there is not a single published opinion in the United States, either Federal or State, indicating my opponent, Lloyd Karmeier, played any part as an attorney. Further, Lloyd Karmeier has never written an appellate decision, never participated in an appellate decision, and never heard a case on appeal."
Stewart is following the same path. He's challenging McGlynn's past and record -- conveniently forgetting that while McGlynn may not have trial court experience, he DOES have Appellate Court experience and, of course, that's what this election is all about.
If Bruce Stewart really is cut from a different bolt of cloth than the personal injury lawyers who dominate Madison and St. Clair courts and politics, he should renounce them. He should refuse to take money from them and he should return what he has received -- not just the money he's returned to Tom Lakin and his law firm but to all the Metro East trial lawyers.
And he should denounce Gordon Maag for the negative campaign he launched in January, 2004 and continued through -- and after -- Election Day.
Then we'll see if Stewart means what he is saying.
The Not Me Decade, in which everybody else is responsible for everything, continues:
A college student in Pomona, N.J., who dislocated his shoulder when he wasn't careful climbing out of the top bunk in his dorm sued the maker of the bunk bed for not giving sufficient warning that it is dangerous not to be careful climbing out of a top bunk.
Why doesn't lawyer Stephen Tillery, the would-be class action king of Madison County, just admit that he wants-- rather, he needs-- Judge Nicholas Byron to hear his each and every case before the Third Circuit?
In essence, that's what Tillery conceded with his challenge last week of Chief Judge Ann Callis' new rule that limits plaintiff's lawyers to just one judge substitution.
Callis was trying to stop prolific judge shopping in her Edwardsville court. But Tillery prefers to shop 'til he drops, or at least until he can avoid the most even-handed jurists on the Madison County bench, like Dan Stack or Don Weber.
The problem is that Tillery's dreamy lawsuits, which always frame him dramatically as a consumer crusader from Belleville battling the titans of industry, are plain indigestible by the court without a heavy dose of judicial activism. It takes audacity to file them, and it really takes audacity-- and a giant ego-- to let them proceed.
Trial Lawyer Allies Play Games With the Truth; Distort Positive Effects of Medical Liability Reforms
by Ed Murnane
Earlier last week, three of the closely tied organizations that fought the reforms called for legislation to repeal the 2005 medical liability reforms.
The opponents of the 2005 law -- the same people and groups that oppose any kind of civil justice reform -- play games with the truth. (That's a polite way for saying they lie -- but they also sue, so we'll be polite and say maybe they distort the truth.)
Examples:
-- They say insurance rates for physicians are not coming down. But ISMIE Mutual Insurance Company, the state's largest medical malpractice insurer, cut average premiums by 5.2% on July 1.
-- In their news release last week, they described the 2005 law this way: "this cruel law, which hurts innocent Illinois citizens." The fact is they can not produce one single Illinois citizen who has been hurt by this "cruel law." The fact is the law is not "cruel" but even if it was, is hasn't been on the books long enough to have an impact on a case of alleged medical malpractice that occurred since the law was signed last year.
-- In a St. Louis Post-Dispatch article this morning, a patient who apparently experienced medical malpractice and received an out-of-court settlement told his story. It was reported this way: "If Fansher had been subject to the $500,000 cap, he likely wouldn't be here, he said. He couldn't have afforded the treatments that have kept him alive."
Well the fact is that the cap is on "non-economic" damages, commonly called "pain and suffering" and the actual economic loss the patient may have had -- for the treatments that have kept him alive -- would not be affected, would not be capped.
The Illinois Trial Lawyers Association and their allies know they are distorting the truth and the most cruel aspect of the whole thing is that they are parading -- using -- innocent people, injured people, for their own gain.
An article that appeared in Saturday's Wall Street Journal, provides some optimism that the civil justice reform fight is making serious inroads on several fronts. The article indicates that many of the major U.S. corporations that have been tier one targets of plaintiffs' lawyers aren't getting dragged into court as much, at least to fight high profile fights over asbestos and silica claims.
"The future of mass torts and class actions is very much in question," said Geoffrey Miller, a New York University School of Law professor, in the Journal article.
In some areas of Illinois, we know that the volume of some kinds of litigation has decreased. Through the first six months of 2006, there had not been a single class action lawsuit filed in Madison County, which recently has been viewed as one of the favorite class action playgrounds for plaintiffs' lawyers. (The 2006 shutout was broken recently.)
There are numerous reasons for the apparent climate change nationally, and certainly in Illinois.
Among them are the federal legislation that has been enacted and the high profile attention on lawsuit abuse that has come from The White House and Capitol Hill.
But there is no doubt also that state and local pressure -- in the courts, in the legislature and in the ballot box -- is having an impact.
The medical liability reform legislation that is discussed a few paragraphs down would not have been enacted in Illinois in 2005 had it not been for the intense involvement of reform advocates in the 2004 judicial elections in Illinois.
That same pressure for reform is being seen again in 2006 but it is not confined to Southern Illinois.
And that is the only way that the progress we've been making in Illinois is going to continue: the same level of pressure must be maintained.
Business and health care leaders have to continue to speak out and continue to get involved in both the legislative and political arenas.
They have to tell their stories and work through organizations like the Illinois Civil Justice League that are singularly focused on correcting flawed judicial systems and flawed laws.
We received an e-mail note last week from an out-of-state ICJL member that we'll share (minus the company name):
Just wanted you to know that ***** was granted summary judgment in three product liability suits ******. The three cases were originally filed in Madison County and, after much legal wrangling, we were able to get them removed to their proper Federal Court. In the Federal Court, the judge granted our motions for summary judgment in all three cases.
We give a lot of credit to the ICJL for shining the spotlight on the Madison County venue abuses that allowed us to successfully remove these cases to Federal Court where they should have been in the first place.
Keep up the good work ... battles are being won and you are making a positive difference.
We appreciate the nice words and if our members and allies keep up the good support, we'll keep up the good work.
Trial Lawyer Allies Attempt to Repeal Last Year's Medical Liability Reforms
by Ed Murnane
The trial lawyers are at it again.
This week, trial lawyer allies joined together to call on Governor Blagojevich and the state legislature to repeal one of the most valuable pieces of legislation ever passed in this state: last year’s medical liability reforms.
Those reforms - signed by Governor Blagojevich - will help put an end to the crisis of skyrocketing medical liability rates that have driven doctors and nurses from Illinois ... and left Illinois families without access to quality, affordable health care.
Last year’s reforms placed reasonable, common sense limits on lawsuit awards in medical liability cases ... because these lawsuits should benefit the victims - not the trial lawyers.
In a statement released this week, the Illinois State Medical Society praised these reforms, saying, “Illinois doctors and patients have already begun to see the positive impact" of last year’s reforms.
Illinois is one of only 20 states in a full-blown medical liability crisis, as rated by the American Medical Association.
The reforms passed last year will help us to end that crisis - and protect your access to health care.
You can protect these reforms by emailing your legislator and telling him or her that you support the reforms passed last year.
With your support, we can ensure that greedy trial lawyers aren’t getting rich at the expense of Illinois’ health care system.
Peter Huber writes in the latest issue of Forbes about the scarcity of vaccine manufacturers and the effect that liability has had on the industry:
In the standard telling, the development of the polio vaccine was a triumph of public initiative. Within a generation polio had disappeared from the U.S. But most vaccine manufacturers disappeared with it. Their slow suffocation began on the day the authorities took charge of competition. Dr. Paul A. Offit tells the story in The Cutter Incident, the best account you will ever read about the interplay between big drug companies and bigger government.
President Roosevelt, a polio victim himself, helped launch the foundation behind the March of Dimes, which attracted thousands of volunteers and millions of donors. The dimes funded breakthrough research by Jonas Salk, followed by a trial involving 420,000 children, by far the largest such trial ever conducted.
By early 1953 Salk had pushed the lab science to the point where he would vaccinate his own three children. But, as Salk acknowledged, scaling up the process was a separate challenge. Mass production required a protocol that would inactivate every last particle of the virus in millions of doses but still leave the virus sufficiently intact to trigger an immune response.
... ensuing lawsuits established new standards that made it much easier to sue vaccinemakers. Case by case, liability claims came to dominate the industry's economics. Junk claims overtook legitimate ones and then eclipsed them completely. When liability problems threatened to cut off the supply of some vaccines, Congress imposed a broad-based tax on vaccines to fund an alternative compensation system."
Illinois Judges Are Answering Questions -- Some Judges, Some Questions
by Ed Murnane
Judges throughout Illinois (and candidates for judicial office) have been asked to answer a series of questions by the Illinois Civil Justice League. There are 11 questions for candidates, and 12 for sitting judges. The added question is intended to draw upon a sitting judge's experience.
It reads:
12. (For current sitting judges) What do you consider to be the most serious obstacle or detriment to you as a judge in fulfilling your duties? Has the problem been getting worse or has it been lessening in the past few years? How do you deal with this problem now, and what changes would you like to see to alleviate the problem in the future?
It's straight forward. It asks sitting judges what problems they are experience, and how they would correct them. Nothing political, nothing philosophical, nothing dealing with any case currently before them or every likely to come before them.
Some take advantage of the opportunity to make a statement for help, others ignore that opportunity.
It can be useful to read what sitting judges consider the most serious obstacle or detriment to fulfilling their responsibilities. Hopefully, some higher-ups are paying attention. Judges should have the tools and support they need to ensure justice for all.
These, however, are my favorite questions.
8. Are there civil litigation reforms that you would like to see enacted to remedy particular problems that you have detected, either as a practicing lawyer or as a sitting judge? Are there reforms that would benefit the civil justice system? What needs to be changed? Should the enactment of any such changes be the province of the legislature, the Supreme Court or by Constitutional amendment?
9. Do you feel that our judicial system adequately deters and penalizes frivolous litigation? If not, what reforms would you like to see?
10. Do you believe the Illinois Constitution precludes legislative establishment of limitations on civil damages? Are there or should there be distinctions among economic, non-economic and punitive damages?
They don't get into specific cases, they don't ask a judge (or candidate for judge) to describe his or her philosophy.
They do, however, give the candidate the opportunity to demonstrate that they have thought about the question and the job of being a judge and are willing to state their views.
I admit: Question #10 could be construed as a question asking about an issue that might come before the courts -- but a smart judge (or candidate) could answer that question without compromising his/her independence.
Another admission: these questions have been reviewed (multiple times) by some of the best judicial minds in Illinois, including some current and former judges who were elected under both political party labels.
Some judges and candidates are, quite frankly, cowards. Some won't answer the questions.
One candidate, Nancy Fahey, seeking a judgeship in the Fifth Circuit in Vermilion County, responded this way:
" ... as a judicial candidate, I feel that it would be inappropriate for me to respond. Some of the issues you have raised could come before me as a judge and I would be required to follow the law regardless of my personal beliefs."
For that reason, the Illinois Civil Justice League and JUSTPAC, our political action committee, would not consider an endorsement of Fahey, a Democrat.
However, her opponent, Vermilion Count State's Attorney Frank R. Young, the Republican, has not responded to at least two requests for information and answers, so we won't consider him either.
The Illinois Civil Justice League, through JUSTPAC, has endorsed more Democrats for judge than we have Republicans since we began judicial endorsements more than eight years ago. Although we're a few weeks away from final 2006 endorsements, I would predict right now that the Democrat preponderance probably will continue this year.
Judges seeking retention are in a different position than candidates for a contested judgeship. First, they are not running as Democrat or Republican, but only on their record. Second, they have to win the support of 60% of the voters to stay in office, a much more challenging task than getting one vote more than an opponent in a contested election.
Historically, retention has been almost a "rubber stamp" but that has changed in recent years and many judges seeking retention are working hard to earn voter support.
In Cook County, judges seeking retention are working together to raise funds and they have launched a website and created a speakers bureau.
In one of the most intensely watched retention campaigns -- in Madison County where three circuit court judges are seeking retention -- the judges are reaching out. All three of the Third Circuit judges seeking retention -- Chief Judge Ann Callis and Judges John Knight and Charles Romani -- have responded to the ICJL questionnaire. Their responses can be found (or will be later today) on our IllinoisJudges.net website.
We commend them for doing so and we hope all judges and judicial candidates will follow their lead and help the voters of Illinois learn something about them.
I have a dilemma. Three years ago, along with Tom Donohue, Sherman Joyce and Doug Whitley, I received a check from The Lakin Law Firm.
The four of us -- Donohue, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Joyce, president of the American Tort Reform Association; and Whitley, president of the Illinois Chamber of Commerce -- had just completed a press conference on the steps of the Madison County Courthouse when one of Brad Lakin's people handed each of us subpoenas demanding that we appear before former Judge Philip Kardis and present our membership and contributor records.
With the subpoena was a check -- for $10 -- made out to each of us, apparently to cover our expenses for the return trip to Madison County for our appearance.
The Lakin Law Firm has handed out quite a few checks through the years and, as the story below from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch points out, some of the recipients of those checks are scrambling to get them back.
According to the Post-Dispatch, the Lakin Law Firm has contributed about $700,000 to state and local political candidates and causes during the past 12 years. I bet it was far more than that if a closer look was made.
Among the Lakin Law Firm's friends during the current election cycle are Democrat judicial candidates Bruce Stewart and David Hylla (who can't get rid of the Lakin contributions fast enough) and Governor Rod Blagojevich ($5000), the Democratic Party of Illinois ($10,000) and Illinois Trial Lawyers Association ($20,000).
It's not surprising that the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association has received a hefty $20,000 since the founder of the Lakin Law Firm, L. Thomas Lakin, is a member of the ITLA Board of Managers (at least according to ITLA's website yesterday).
It's going to be fun to watch candidates who have wined and dined with the Lakins and who have considered the Lakins among their friends (or employers, as in the case of State Rep. Jay Hoffman) dance away from the Lakins as the sordid sexual abuse allegations against the ITLA board member play out.
"State Rep. Jay Hoffman, a member of the Lakin Law firm in Wood River, distanced himself from the firm's founder in a statement Saturday."
My dilemma is this: am I tainted by having received (actually, it was forced upon me) a check from the Lakin Law Firm, signed by Brad Lakin? Should I return it?
I think I'll keep it, for two reasons. First, unlike the ingrates who can't get the checks back fast enough, I'm proud of the check and what it stands for and why and when it was presented.
And second, it's in a file somewhere but I'm not sure where.
Topinka's An Easy Choice Over Blagojevich, But Don't Forget Judges
by Ed Murnane
We were happy to see Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Judy Baar Topinka call for "court reform" in two press conferences last week. In fact, we were happy to provide some advice and consultation to her staff in advance of her announcements with two of the ICJL's allies, Senators Kirk Dillard and David Luechtefeld. (For the record, I was asked to participate but was out of town (with grandsons) for three days.)
State Treasurer Topinka focused on "venue reform," which is at the top of the ICJL's legislative agenda. Although it can be a complicated issue, it boils down to a simple principle: lawsuits should be filed where it's logical to file them, NOT where it's beneficial to the plaintiff or defendant.
Without getting into lengthy discussion of the issue (we hope to do that later this summer with one of our Illinois House Committee Chairman friends), the significant point here is that Judy Baar Topinka is a much better choice for voters interested in and calling for civil justice reform. She has not been a vocal advocate for reform ( ... she's been state treasurer, so she hasn't had a reason or occasion ...) but in comparison with the trial lawyers' best friend, Rod Blagojevich, Topinka would have to be a chain-saw-murderer to not have our support. And she's not.
There are two short Blagojevich stories to share.
One was following the debate on the floor of the Illinois House of Representatives in 1995 when the "Civil Justice Reform Amendments of 1995" were under consideration. Blagojevich, then an Illinois House member, was one of the most active and vocal members of the opposition to the bill.
I bumped into him later that evening at a Springfield gathering place with some of his colleagues and he assured me that his comments on the floor were in the "heat of debate" and shouldn't be taken literally -- or seriously.
Another encounter was on a flight from Washington to Chicago shortly after Blagojevich's election in 2002. We sat in adjoining rows and I congratulated him and reminded him that civil justice reform was an important issue to a lot of his newly-expanded base of constituents and that we'd like to get together to talk about what we might be able to put on the table.
He was accompanied by John Wyma, his political guy at the time, and he told me to contact Wyma if I didn't hear from him within a day or two. Wyma was part of the conversation so he knew what his boss was saying.
I didn't expect to hear from Wyma so I called two days later .... and four days later .... and six days later. I dropped it at that point and haven't heard from Wyma (since moved on to greener pastures) or Blagojevich.
If the Illinois Civil Justice League calls Governor Topinka, she'll respond. She'll understand what we're talking about, and she is on our side.
HAVING OFFERED THAT PERSONAL ENDORSEMENT of Judy Baar Topinka for Governor, it's important to stress that the ICJL's primary focus in 2006 is on judicial elections in Illinois.
Other than the Illinois State Bar Association and its clone, the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association (... or is it the other way around? ...), the ICJL is the only Illinois interest focusing on judicial elections.
We've said much about judicial elections and we'll be saying a lot more but a few points that should be stressed ... over and over and over.
1. Judges terms are longer -- in some cases lifetime. A trial court judge (circuit court) is elected to a six-year term. That's one-and-a-half times as long as the President or governor, and three times as long as a Member of Congress or State Representative. An Appellate or Supreme Court justice is elected to a 10-year term. That means the person who is serving as President of the United States when a Supreme or Appellate justice is elected will NOT be in office when the judicial term is over because there is a two-term limit (eight years) for those federal offices.
2. Judges are more powerful than any other elected officials. They can UN-DO what the other branches of government have done. They can put people away for life. They can sentence them to death. They can take children away from their parents. They can take huge sums of money away from private citizens, from corporations or from others -- regardless of whether they live or are based in Illinois.
And the only entities which historically have paid attention to WHO is elected to the judiciary have been lawyer-dominated organizations.
Illinois State Treasurer/Republican Gubernatorial candidate Judy Baar Topinka today called for venue reform in Illinois, according to a press release issued by her campaign.
Specifically, Topinka called for the following venue reforms:
• Restrict access to Illinois courts to only those out-of-state litigants with Illinois residency or with cases where the “most significant” issue in dispute occurred in Illinois.
• Within Illinois, restrict access to a county court to only those litigants with residency in said county or with cases where the “most significant” issue in dispute occurred in said county.
“It just makes common sense,” said Topinka. “An out-of-state litigant should not be allowed into an Illinois courtroom without some significant connection to our state. And within Illinois, litigants should not be allowed to shop their cases among different counties in search of the most favorable result.”
Crain's Op-Ed Makes the Link Between Legal Fairness, Business Climate
by Curt Mercadante
Chicago attorney Gerald D. Skoning writes in Crain's Chicago Business this week about Honda's decision to locate its new $550-million assembly plant in Indiana. Skoning points out -- rightly -- that employers making decisions on where to locate based "on a variety of complex factors ... among the most important: the 'business-friendly' atmosphere of a state."
Then he takes Illinois to task over it's notoriously poor legal climate:
Illinois courts have contributed to the anti-business environment. A 2005 survey by the American Tort Reform Assn. said three out of the six worst "judicial hellholes" in the entire country are in Illinois: Cook (No. 2), Madison (No. 4) and St. Clair counties (No. 5). These plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions have been described as "areas of the country where the scales of justice are radically out of balance."
Down the road, Illinois companies will think about expanding here or moving out of state. Other firms will consider locating manufacturing or distribution facilities here. Illinois' business-friendliness will continue to be a major factor in all these corporate decisions.
Class action lawyers have had a rough summer in Southern Illinois' Fifth District Appellate Court, which is the court that handles appeals arising out of Madison and St. Clair counties. The makeup and attitude of the court has changed considerably since the election of Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier in 2004.
On July 25, the court handed down two rulings in favor of Airborne Express (now DHL) and Intel. The Mt. Vernon Register-News reports the case against Intel will be moved to California court and the Madison County Record reports the court affirmed summary judgment in favor of Airborne Express.
Earlier in the summer, the same court moved a St. Clair County Vioxx class action to Cook County, citing improper venue. See this previous post about Vioxx lawsuits in St. Clair County (IL).
If Merck & Co. is ever going to have to pay tens of billions of dollars in damages over its painkiller Vioxx, plaintiffs' attorneys are first going to have to get past Phil Beck.
Merck tapped the Chicago trial lawyer to steer it through nearly 6,000 federal lawsuits consolidated in U.S. District Court in New Orleans. So far Beck has won one key federal trial and, last week, delivered gracious but pointed opening remarks in another.
As Merck's lead outside counsel, the co-founder of Chicago's Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott is trying to score a second win here in a series of federal trials brought by plaintiffs who say Vioxx caused heart attacks in themselves or a loved one.
Some good press in the Mt. Vernon Register-News on ICJL's endorsement of Justice Steve McGlynn for the Fifth Appellate Court:
The same group that helped Lloyd Karmeier break the Metro East Democrat’s 34-year reign on the Fifth District seat of the Illinois Supreme Court last week threw its weight behind Steve McGlynn for the appellate court.
The Illinois Civil Justice League announced Wednesday while visiting the Register-News that it chose to endorse the Republican over Democrat opponent Bruce Stewart.
ICJL President Edward Murnane said this is a “continuation of the reform movement that began in 2004.” Karmeier appointed McGlynn as Maag’s successor.
“Justice McGlynn, as one of (Karmeier’s) first appointees is truly the flag-bearer,” Murnane said. “His election is our highest priority.”
Meanwhile, up north, the JUSTPAC-supported candidate in the Third Appellate Court received an important business endorsement, as reported by the Morris Daily Herald:
Saying that the state needs judges " who will be conscious of our reputation in the state and hold that in high regard," Illinois Chamber of Commerce President Douglas Whitley announced that the chamber is endorsing Judge Michael Powers, of Will County, for the Third Appellate Court.
Powers, a Republican who is currently an associate judge on the 12th Judicial Circuit, is running against Judge Vickie Wright, a Democrat who sits on the 14th Judicial Circuit, for the 10-year term.
Indictment Taking a Toll on the Class Action King...
by Curt Mercadante
Reuters reports that the indictment against class action king Milberg Weiss is having a big impact on the sheer number of cases the plaintiffs' firm is filing recently:
The indictment of Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP, long the dominant U.S. class-action securities litigator, is having a big impact on its ability to bring fraud cases and on class-action litigation in general.
Milberg Weiss has lost many lawyers and some clients since a federal grand jury on May 18 indicted the firm and two partners, David Bershad and Steven Schulman, over an alleged scheme to pay kickbacks to plaintiffs who file lawsuits.
The firm and the lawyers have pleaded innocent and the indictment does not stop Milberg Weiss from practicing law.
Yet in 2006, the firm filed just 17 class-action lawsuits, according to a tally of its press releases on Business Wire and PRNewswire. That is down from 36 in the second half of 2005 and 55 in the first half. Milberg Weiss has announced no new lawsuits since the indictment.
The news media in Southern Illinois -- indeed throughout Illinois -- still doesn't understand why the Supreme Court election in 2004 went the way it did.
During a three-day, 18-county tour of Southern Illinois with Appellate Justice Stephen P. McGlynn last week, we heard one question or comment over and over again (or a variation of it): Is this going to be as expensive a campaign as 2004? How much are you going to spend? Where is it coming from?
The media, and others who don't like what happened in Southern Illinois in 2004, are assuming the only reason Judge Lloyd Karmeier was elected to the Illinois Supreme Court was because so much money was spent on his behalf.
That's baloney.
Money had nothing to do with the outcome of the election.
According to every published report available, the money raised and spent by the two campaigns was virtually equal: $4.7 million on the Karmeier side; $4.6 million on the Gordon Maag side. True, it was a lot of money, but it was virtually equal.
The only impact the money had was that more voters were aware of the campaign, and they made their decision to vote for Lloyd Karmeier.
What has exercised the media and some of the "reform" groups who were disturbed by the amount of money spent was the fact that the business community, health care interests, not-for-profit groups and local "voters" were engaged -- and they contributed money and shoe leather to elect Lloyd Karmeier.
What determined the outcome of the 2004 election was the frustration, anger and outright rejection of a judicial system that abused the local citizens for the benefit of a cabal of wealthy lawyers who had good and close friends wearing black robes.
Particularly ironic is the fact that the media and liberal outcry against the 2004 spending was never heard in two previous Illinois Supreme Court elections when trial lawyer dollars overwhelmed the support base of Republican candidates.
In 2000, for example, Justice Thomas Kilbride reported receipts of $844,801 during the second half of the year, compared to $426,458 collected by his Republican opponent, former Sen. Carl Hawkinson. Much of Kilbride' war chest came from the Democratic Party of Illinois and virtually all of that money came from trial lawyers and organized labor, as it did in 2004.
Similarly in 2002, Democrat Appellate Judge Susan Myerscough (a former trial lawyer) was heavily funded by the trial lawyers and outspent her Republican opponent, Rita Garman, by hundreds of thousands of dollars. Garman, however, was able to overcome the spending blitz and she now sits on the Supreme Court.
The latest campaign disclosure reports, filed last Monday, show that Democratic appellate candidate Bruce Stewart has the same funding base that Gordon Maag had in 2004: trial lawyers and organized labor. In fact, Stewart's two largest contributions came from trial lawyer goliaths, SimmonsCooper ($20,000) and the Lakin Law Firm ($15,000). Perhaps somewhat squeamish about the close ties to the Lakin Law Firm, Stewart has refunded that contribution.
It is true that McGlynn has received substantial support from JUSTPAC, the political action committee of the Illinois Civil Justice League. But it is also true that his campaign has received individual contributions from more than 600 residents -- voters -- in the Fifth Appellate District.
As with Lloyd Karmeier in 2004, McGlynn appears likely to win the support of Southern Illinois residents who want to continue the reform movement in the court system.
Trial Lawyers On Attack
The new president of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association has declared a new war on the Illinois Civil Justice League and our allies. In a letter to ITLA members, Judy Cates, a St. Clair County trial lawyer, said ITLA is installing new billboards throughout Illinois (we've seen at least one in Madison County) and vowed "through alliances with labor, consumer groups, and our senior citizen allies, ITLA will begin a project to aggressively educate the public and our policymakers about the Illinois Civil Justice League."
Cates also gets personal in her attack on the ICJL.
It is not the first time the ICJL has been under assault by trial lawyers. In 2003, we were issued a subpoena by the Lakin Law Firm following a press conference on the steps of the Madison County Courthouse. I'd say we've fared better than the Lakin Law Firm has since that time and I have no reason to think Judy Cates will be any more successful.
Mud Wrestling? More Like Muddy Reporting
In an editorial in today's St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the newspaper repeats unfounded claims that Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier was improperly influenced by campaign support in rulings he participated in after joining the Supreme Court. The accusations are simply untrue and have been repeatedly proven so -- even in challenges that have gone to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Post-Dispatch, generally one of the better newspapers covering Illinois, needs to read the full record before relying on its own faulty clipping file.
Vioxx trial scorecard: 5-3, with Merck & Co. ahead by two following a win in Los Angeles yesterday. A jury of eight men and four women cleared Merck of responsibility in Stewart Grossberg’s heart attack. Here’s the WSJ story.
The Whitehouse Station, N.J., drug maker faces roughly 14,200 lawsuits over Vioxx. It pulled the painkiller from the market in Sept. 2004 after a study linked the drug to an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes.
Illinois Chamber Endorses Powers for Third Appellate Court Judge Powers landed yet another endorsement for the Third Appellate Court...this story from the Peoria Journal-Star:
To help improve the image of the state's judicial system, the Illinois Chamber of Commerce will begin to endorse candidates for appellate positions.
On Wednesday, Chamber President Douglas Whitley was in town to announce his organization's decision to back Will County Associate Judge Michael Powers for the opening on the 3rd District Appellate Court created by the retirement of Justice Kent Slater.
Powers, Whitley said, represents a blend of experience as a judge, a prosecutor and as a private practice attorney. As such, he said, Powers is the person who can best represent the interests of the state.
He will take on Democrat Vicki Wright, who is also a judge and a former prosecutor in the November election.
Southern Illinois Judicial Race Making the News Following the campaign disclosure report filings last week, the Fifth District Appellate Court race is starting to garner major headlines...here is the latest:
Will Southern Illinois see another battle of the judicial titans this election season?
It may be too early to tell, but the cash coming into the Fifth District Appellate Court race is comparable to contributions last seen during the 2004 race for the Illinois Supreme Court.
Republican Stephen McGlynn, a Belleville attorney, and Democratic challenger Bruce Stewart, a circuit judge from Harrisburg, have a combined total of $287,438 during the first half of this year.
Should We Retain Judges? 123 Are Asking For 'Yes' Vote
by Ed Murnane
If you have dealt with a judge in an Illinois courtroom -- perhaps a traffic issue, or a divorce or child custody case, or maybe a more serious issue involving a death or personal injury -- you probably have an opinion of the judge involved and you probably would have a quick answer for the question, "Should that judge be kept in office?"
But apart from personal experiences, few Illinois voters know much -- if anything -- about the more than 900 men and women who serve as judges in Illinois. That's far more people than are elected to serve in the Illinois General Assembly, the U.S. Congress and the various constitutional offices in Illinois, including governor.
This year, in addition to candidates seeking judicial office in contested (or in many uncontested) elections, more than 100 Illinois judges are seeking voter approval to serve another six or ten year term. There are four appellate judges on the ballot (although one, Justice Ann Burke of Chicago, is now on the Supreme Court). There also are 119 circuit court judges seeking voter approval for another term, 73 in Cook County and 46 in the other 101 counties in Illinois.
For years, retention of judges has been a rubber stamp process. You can count on the fingers of one hand the number of judges who have been voted off the court within the past 20 years. Some years, judges who have been opposed by every bar organization, every newspaper, and every political organization, have been retained.
That's surprising because it takes an affirmative vote of 60% to win retention.
The attitude toward retention changed in 2004, particularly against judges seeking retention, when Madison County judge Gordon Maag was voted off the Illinois Appellate Court. As a result of that stunning outcome, judges seeking retention are likely to be much more active in seeking voter approval between now and November 7. Judges in Southern Illinois, particularly those seeking retention in Madison County, already are conducting active campaigns with websites, advertising and fund-raising events.
This week, the ICJL begins its process of evaluating judges who are seeking retention.
Their responses, plus biographic and other information they provide, will be posted on the ICJL's Illinois Judges website, which you can find at his link: IllinoisJudges.net.
The Illinois Judges website will provide links to candidates' websites, to campaign financial disclosure reports, to bar association and legal group evaluations, and to newspaper and other endorsements.
As it has been in the past, the ICJL's judicial website will provide the most comprehensive information on judicial candidates available anywhere in Illinois. If a candidate for judge -- retention or a new candidate -- does not provide information and respond to the ICJL's request, it probably means he or she does not want Illinois voters to know him or her. Voters should keep that in mind.
These lawyers apparently have no fear of sharks - unless they're the kind that file lawsuits.
About 40 lawyers from across the country have signed up for the National Lawyers on Longboards Surfing Contest scheduled during the Aug. 3-8 American Bar Association convention in Honolulu.
But the ABA has pulled out of sponsoring the surfing competition. The event organizer says the lawyers are afraid of being sued.
"It's really funny - the ABA won't officially sponsor it for liability reasons," said Lea Hong, a Honolulu environmental lawyer and surfer.And the trial lawyers wonder why they are the butt of everyone's jokes.
(Madison County Chief Judge) Callis needs to also deal with the problem lawyers; she needs to deal with guys like Jeffrey Millar.
Millar, a Lakin Law Firm class action specialist, is making headlines this week as it's been revealed that the plaintiff in one of his pending lawsuits has actually been dead for more than two years. The lawyer himself didn't tell the court that one Manual Hernandez of Granite City, helping Millar sue American Family Insurance over auto accident payouts, died of a heart attack in 2004. Rather, it was the defendants who did their own investigation, breaking the news to the court in March.
Picking Illinois Judges: Elect Or Appoint? by Ed Murnane
The impact of Judge Lloyd Karmeier's election to the Illinois Supreme Court in 2004 continues to be felt, not only in Illinois but nationally.
At a conference on "The State of the American Judiciary" in Washington, D.C. last week, the Illinois Supreme Court election was referenced at least three times, generally in connection with (a) the various methods of selecting judges or (b) the cost of the election.
There are many misconceptions about what happened in Illinois in 2004. One accusation opponents of Judge Karmeier have made, and which has not yet gone away, is that the State Farm Insurance Company was the major financial contributor to the Karmeier campaign. That was simply not true and every document and record from the campaign, including records of the State Board of Elections, confirms that it was not true.
Another distortion, not heard at the Washington conference but included in a recent column by the president of the Georgia Bar Association (a medical malpractice lawyer named J. Vincent Cook) was that the Karmeier campaign spent nearly $10 million. That, of course, was not true either. The combined campaigns spent close to $10 million but it was almost equally divided with the virtually all of Democrat Gordon Maag's funding coming from plaintiffs' lawyers, funneled through the Illinois Democratic Party or through various political action committees.
To be sure, much of the Karmeier campaign's funding came from Republican Party sources and doctors and the business community but there were also more than 1,200 individual contributions from residents of the Fifth Judicial District who expressed their preference with a check, in addition to a vote.
The most significant impact of the 2004 election, however, is what is going on today in Southern Illinois (particularly in Madison County) and throughout Illinois.
An editorial in today's St. Louis Post-Dispatch, heralds the changes that have been taking place in the Madison County court system since the appointment of Judge Ann Callis as Chief Judge. "Hellhole Freezes Over," reads the headline. Similar headlines and stories have appeared in other local newspapers and it has been interesting to see what the judges in Madison County have been doing.
It is not a coincidence that Judge Callis, a former plaintiffs' attorney and member of a prominent plaintiffs' attorney family, is a candidate for retention to her judicial seat in November. She and two colleagues who are up for retention are campaigning aggressively. They have formed a committee, have held fund-raisers, and are advertising already, including on the electronic version of the Madison County Record, hardly a news outlet that has been friendly to them.
But this is an election year and some candidates will do and/or say whatever is necessary to win. The short-term beneficiaries are the residents of Madison County -- and the system of justice in Madison County. Of course, election year conduct and actions can change in a flash after the election and voters will be wise to consider judicial conduct during the past six years, not just during the past six weeks or six months leading up to the election.
All of this prompts a further discussion of exactly how we do select judges in Illinois. It is not a pretty process and maybe it should be changed.
An article in the Springfield State Journal-Register last week reminded readers that Illinois voters will be asked in 2008 if a Constitutional Convention should be convened. Perhaps the answer is yes. Perhaps Illinois voters should take a look at the 1970 Constitution and take a strong look at how we select judges. There are more than 30 different ways that judges are selected in the various states and perhaps its time for us to look at a better way. Maybe the other 30-plus are not better, but we should look.
Another news item last week included a recommendation for a new non-partisan judicial election process with public funding in Illinois.
That ought to be considered -- but there is one strong condition that must be included: any change in the Illinois process of selecting judges cannot be determined by lawyers and/or politicians. There will need to be a very broadly-based coalition of Illinois citizens, including doctors, manufacturers, teachers, retirees and others who agree to any new process.
The calls for reform and change of the system in Illinois that we hear today are primarily from lawyer groups or others who are not happy with changes that have taken place in the past few years.
They are not happy that the business community, that doctors and hospitals, and that local everyday citizens have become engaged in judicial elections and have taken control, at least as far as 2004 was concerned.
If there are going to be more headlines like "Hellhole Freezes Over," it's going to be the result of Illinois citizens making -- and forcing -- changes, not because judges or lawyers read the political tea leaves and enact "reforms."
Here is the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform's new ad regarding ATLA's decision to change it's name to the "American Association for Justice...click on the photo to see the full size...
Rockford Woman Sues Mom Over Icy Driveway Fall An Illinois woman is suing her mom in Wisconsin over an injury blamed on an icy driveway. The Chicago Chicago Tribune reports:
Happy birthday, Mom. I'll see you in court.
An Illinois woman is suing her Wisconsin parents for negligence, claiming a surprise birthday visit to her mother in January 2005 left the woman with a broken ankle after a fall on her parents' icy driveway.
Even worse, the daughter is using an apology letter from her mom as part of the evidence.
The daughter, Carriel Louah, 25, is brandishing an apology letter from her mom as the smoking gun in her lawsuit seeking damages for medical bills and lost wages.
In the letter, dated months after the fall, Wendi Reichling wrote that she and her husband "should have fixed that damn (gutter) years ago. We have learned we have to take better care of our sidewalks."
I guess sorry doesn't always work.
(Via Drudge) A WKMG Channel 6 (Orlando) poll of 42,000+ viewers shows that 86% wouldn't sue their parents regardless of the extent of injuries. Only 1% of those polled would sue no matter what the circumstances.
More Change in Madison County "Citing dropping public confidence in the way lawsuits are handled in Madison County Circuit Court," Madison County, IL Chief Judge Ann Callis on Tuesday "removed Judge Nicholas Byron from his post as chief judge of the civil division," replacing Byron with Circuit Judge Dan Stack, "who now presidents over the county's asbestos docket." The St. Louis Post Dispatch reports:
"Public confidence in the civil division has flagged during Judge Byron's tenure, and I think it is important to restore that confidence," Callis said Tuesday. "I believed we needed fresh leadership there (the civil division), and Dan has made it clear that he is committed to reform."
New York's Academy of Trial Lawyers says the proposed tough new rules on attorney advertising are welcome and overdue. In fact, the 500-member group contends, if anything they do not go far enough.
"We need to take back the profession and restore some dignity so people respect and understand the causes that we stand for and realize that they are legitimate, appropriate and meritorious," said the group's president, Robert E. Lahm of Syracuse.
So...the Association of Trial Lawyers of America is changing it's name to the "American Association for Justice" due to the fact that public opinion of "trial lawyers" is so low...the New York trial lawyers are welcoming the crack-down on lawyer advertising...
It's hard to resist poking fun at the members of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, including, we assume, many members of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association, who are meeting this week in Seattle.
In addition to the usual cast of sue-sue-sue advocates on the agenda (such as former Sen. John Edwards, Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, James Carville, Eliot Spitzer), ATLA members are considering a heavy issue -- so heavy, in fact, that they have three separate discussions of it on the agenda of their meeting.
The issue is changing the name of the organization -- getting rid of the term "trial lawyer" and replacing it with "American Association for Justice."
ATLA President Kenneth M. Suggs, in a June 28 letter to members, said the ATLA board voted 91 to 5 for the change.
Excuse me for giggling -- or gagging.
Trial lawyers -- and we should be clear: we're referring to plaintiffs' lawyers, and usually plaintiff's personal injury lawyers -- understand that they are not particularly well-respected. They are the brunt of jokes, they are the target of criticism from corners such as this, they are held in pretty low regard.
They are the original "ambulance chasers." And it's good that they understand that.
But what they don't understand is that their image problem is not because of their name, it's because of their conduct.
And changing their name is not going to fix that, nor their image.
Earlier today (Sunday) as I was skimming the local newspaper (Daily Herald in Arlington Heights, IL), I was attracted to an advertisement I had seen numerous times in the past few weeks.
In large type it stated,
"Attention Merrill Lynch Retirees. If you are a retired or current employee and participate in Merrill Lynch's 401k plan, we would like to speak to you about your pension benefits."
That was on Page 6 of the Daily Herald.
On Page 11 of the same edition of the Daily Herald was another ad, which I also had seen in the past. It stated:
"Attention Accenture Retirees. If you are a retiree or a current participant in Accenture's' 401k plan, we would like to speak with you about your pension benefits."
Both advertisements were from the same law firm in Swansea, Illinois, a pleasant community in -- surprise -- St. Clair County, adjacent to Madison County in the St. Louis suburbs in Illinois.
Both ads are obviously fishing for potential members of a "class" so that the law firm (I won't mention it -- but it could be one of dozens like it) can build a huge base of "class members" to file a class action suit against Merrill Lynch or Accenture.
This happens every day, through newspaper and magazine advertisements or through direct mail to prospective class members.
What it amounts to is plaintiffs' trial lawyers "creating" a "wrong" and trying to find "victims." Generally the "victims" don't have any idea they have been "wronged," and in most cases probably have not. But the attraction of a cash award can be tempting and many sign on. The only winners -- ever -- are the attorneys. There have been numerous cases in which the lawyers make millions while the "victims" get virtually nothing. In at least one reported instance, the plaintiff-victims actually lost money. Unfortunately, many of these suits have been filed in Illinois, especially in Madison, St. Clair and Cook Counties.
That's only ONE of the reasons why trial lawyers have the image problem they have -- an image that is prompting them to stop calling themselves "trial lawyers."
Incidentally, Judy Cates, new president of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association, springs from a similar mold. Her most noted cases (besides suing the school board on which she serves), were the ultimately rejected Philip Morris case in Madison County and a failed case against Allstate in which she found her lead plaintiff by placing a newspaper ad.
It has to be stated that many -- maybe most -- of the top plaintiffs' attorneys (trial lawyers) are good at what they do and represent their clients well. Several Chicago firms are outstanding examples. Corboy and Demetrio and Clifford Law Offices are two such firms. Their clients -- generally, as we've observed -- have legitimate issues to raise. We may disagree with the presentation and arguments of the case but there are actual cases that can be reviewed.
That is not usually the situation with the cases that appear to be manufactured for the benefit of the lawyers -- the kind of cases Judy Cates and so many others have embraced.
Cates declared in one of her recent commentaries in the ITLA newsletter, "I am proud to be your president and proud to be a trial lawyer."
Lisa Rickard, president of the Institute for Legal Reform and a close ally of the Illinois Civil Just League, was quoted last week in the Washington Post:
"Trial lawyers are at the bottom of the list" in public favorability tests, Lisa A. Rickard, president of the chamber's Institute for Legal Reform, said yesterday. "No one did this to them. They did it to themselves. They can change their name, but it's not going to change how people feel about trial lawyers. We've been around since 1911," she added, and "we're not changing our name."
We'll watch what ITLA does with its name this year. Are they really proud to be trial lawyers -- or only if no one knows that the are?
Illinois Justice Blog
