the petitioner is a paternal grandparent, great-grandparent, or sibling of the illegitimate child and the paternity has been established by a court of competent jurisdiction.
This Act imposes a rebuttable presumption that a fit parent's actions and decisions regarding visitation are not harmful to the child. It also imposes the burden on the petitioner to prove that the parent's actions and decisions about visitation are harmful to the child. Effective date is Jan. 1, 2005.
Open meetings and verbatim record. Public Act 93-974 amends the Open Meetings Act. It does the following: (1) Requires public bodies to keep written minutes of closed (as well as open) meetings. (2) Deletes the current requirement that a public body periodically meet to review "recordings" of all closed meetings to determine the continuing need for their confidentiality. (3) Exempts the verbatim recording from being subject to discovery in any judicial proceeding other than to enforce the Open Meetings Act. If the court finds an examination of the verbatim record is necessary, it must (now, may) conduct it in-camera. (4) Requires the court's initial inspection in a criminal proceeding to be in-camera as well. (5) Deletes the authority of an administrative hearing officer to determine compliance under FOIA so that only a judge will have that authority. Effective date is Jan. 1, 2005.
"Neither I nor my bailiff orders, advises and instructs anyone to stand and say the Pledge (of Allegiance). I just invite everyone to please join me in saying it. I don't see anything objectionable in that. It's a reminder to people that we have a judicial process, and that there's justice for all."
Tehama County (CA) Superior Court Judge John Garaventa, defending recital of the Pledge in his courtroom, after a lawyer complained to the judicial performance commission
* * *
"That is fundamental First Amendment law, and it is a genuine shame that Judge Garaventa does not appear to even begin to grasp a bright-line U.S. Supreme Court holding."
Chico (CA) criminal defense lawyer William Mayo, who complained about the Pledge recital, referring to a 1943 decision that students cannot be compelled to salute the flag and say the Pledge
* * *
"You have an accumulation of ideas you can express, but if you did it week after week, you'd have to keep generating new ideas, which means you'd not only have to spend a lot of time actually writing the blog, but doing the research and constantly renewing your thoughts."
U.S. 7th Circuit Judge Richard Posner, after guest-writing an Internet blog (web log) for a week; the articles, on such issues as global warming, breaking up the CIA, and fair use in copyright matters involving file sharing are archived at www.lessig.org/blog/
Editor
A few eyebrows were arched and foreheads furrowed at news that the ISBA has formed a committee to review the "tone and content" of political statements made and published during judicial campaigns for Illinois Supreme and Appellate Courts.
What about that 2002 U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White that affirmed the 1st Amendment rights of judicial candidates to speak their minds on legal or political issues? Isn't the bar association overreaching?
President Ole Bly Pace, at that August 25 news conference in Collinsville, responded adroitly that such a suggestion is without merit. He pointed out that the 1st Amendment is a limit on government abuse of the freedoms it codifies.
"The bar association is not government," Pace said, adding that as surrogate for the organized bar of Illinois, the ISBA is merely exercising its own inherent rights to free speech by insisting that judicial candidates conduct clean campaigns.
In other words, Joe Citizen has an equal right of freedom FROM offensive speech. The bar association is uniquely qualified, and obligated, to tell candidates and their agents provocateur when their blather affects the judicial system adversely.
In its comment on the White decision, a five-to-four division of the marbled federal house, the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law took aim at its predictable fallout.
"Under White, it seems that pro-tort reform business organizations and anti-tort reform trial lawyer groups will be able to demand that judicial candidates make general statements coming down on one side or the other on the issue without making a promise to rule on tort cases in a particular way," the institute's analysis surmised.
Continuing, "Even more troubling, judicial candidates will likely find it difficult to resist such demands because these organizations will likely make campaign contributions contingent upon a favorable response."
So although the court decided that Minnesota's ethics clause prohibiting a judicial candidate from announcing views on disputed issues is unconstitutional, the affirming justices ignored a consequence that worries the bar.
As Carl Sandburg wrote, "What about the people?" What can one expect the public to discern in a judicial candidate who seems predisposed on a hot-button issue, such as abortion or the death penalty - that justice isn't really blind?
The Brennan Center report saw, long-range, "a comprehensive loss of public faith in the capacity of elected judges to decide upon the most important legal issues of the day in a manner faithful to the adjudicative ideals of fairness and impartiality."
Justice Scalia thought otherwise. He wrote that while impartiality may be a valid objective, pursuit of it is not a compelling state interest, "since it is virtually impossible, and hardly desirable, to find a judge who does not have preconceptions about the law."
Ole Pace stood between 5th District candidates Lloyd Karmeier and Gordon Maag during the news conference (see photo on page 1). He noted that to their credit, each has signed a pledge drafted by the ISBA to avoid offensive rhetoric and disavow inflammatory statements made by outside interests.
"Ad campaigns that suggest judges are merely tools of interest groups help destroy confidence in our system of justice," Pace said. "Our citizens must have confidence that they can turn to our courts and receive a fair hearing and justice."
At the root of the Minnesota situation is that, like Illinois, the people of the state elect judges. Since it is unlikely that Illinois will soon see the light of appointive judicial selection, the next best goal is to strive for decency in the elective process.
Meanwhile, across the Mississippi
Early this month, 22 Missouri lawyers traveled to the state law school at Columbia to vie for appointment to a vacancy on the Supreme Court. A screening commission will narrow the field down to three finalists for the seat that Duane Benton relinquished when he ascended to the Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit.
The commission will evaluate the credentials of the candidates and consider the variables of diversity in geography, gender and ethnicity. That's how the appointive system works in the Show-Me State, where the Latin motto translates to "the welfare of the people shall be the supreme law."
After he receives the names of the three finalists, Gov. Bob Holden will vet them for 60 days before announcing his decision. The new justice will serve through the November 2006 election before facing retention for a 12-year term.
You can't conserve your time, so spend it shrewdly
By Paul J. Sullivan
An efficient running office will allow you to spend most of your time practicing law, or to focus on the growth of your practice.
Time spent on billable activities is the primary source of your income. Time spent on marketing is an investment in the future of your practice. All time spent doing something else is costing you money.
Large firms have figured this out. Most of them have hired professional administrators to run their offices. Proven office systems, effective policies, and good operating procedures are all components of an efficient running office, but there's more.
Keeping informed on the changes in technology, governmental reporting requirements, and industry trends are an integral part of an effective law office operation.
The practice of law is a business. Effective business management at some point becomes as important as being a good lawyer, if your want your practice to grow and succeed.
Unfortunately, many lawyers enter the profession totally unprepared or educated in the finer points of running a business. Because of this, solos and small firms are really at a disadvantage.
There are a variety of useful resources for information on the management of your practice, and your Illinois State Bar Association is one. With this column, we're hoping to give you another way to find new ideas or solutions to the frustrations you may be experiencing in your practice.
If you have a specific question about law office management, please send an e-mail to psullivan@qjhp.com. We will respond to all inquiries. If the question you raise could have widespread appeal to our readers, we will also publish the answer in a future column.
With this format, we will be able to cover more than one topic each month and to provide more timely response for you, too.
Through my participation in ISBA programs over the years, the issues that always come up are staff situations, questions on how to allocate costs to determine compensation, and ways to grow the practice. Since staff issues seem to affect everyone, this month I will address a fairly common problem.
You can't live with them, and you can't live without them. If you are fortunate enough to have hard-working, loyal and dedicated employees, count your blessings and feel comfortable knowing that you indeed are doing something right.
Too often, I'm told of staff people who spend much of their time on the phone, who surf the Internet, or who constantly send personal e-mails. They come late to work and really don't perform to expectations.
I'm asked how to deal with it. My quick answer is: Have you told them what you expect of them and identified the consequences of them not meeting your expectations?
Most employees want to do the right thing, but as long as there is no feedback telling them their performance is unsatisfactory, they will continue to do whatever they do. Effective communication eliminates misunderstanding.
It's easy to ignore the problem for awhile, hoping it will go away, but it almost always gets worse. Not only will it increase your frustration, but other employees will be resentful that no action is being taken. A small problem becomes a big one.
If you have any doubt about the problems poor communication cause, consider how many files you are handling in your practice that are the result of a lack of or a breakdown of communication. You're getting feedback, so why not your staff?
Your clients are either pleased or disappointed with the results you get for them. You get results from a judge who rules on your motions, and you get results from the jury when you try a case.
Imagine practicing law where you file motions and try cases, but you never get the result. Consider a no-feedback world in non-work-related activities. You hit a great golf shot and watch it fly to the green, but you never really know how close to the hole you are. Imagine watching a sporting event where you never know if your favorite team wins or loses.
Clearly defining what you expect, and then outlining the consequences for not performing, will usually get the results you want. When it doesn't work, it then becomes necessary to use progressive discipline with adequate documentation on the steps you've taken.
Eventually, you either get the results you want or you reach the point where it's time to replace the employee.
So if you have this problem in your office, do something about it now, and you can get on with the important things of your practice: performing billable tasks and marketing your practice.
Send questions on law practice management to Paul Sullivan
Applications will be accepted through Nov. 5 for the position of judge of U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District. Application forms may be obtained from clerks of the district and the Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, or by accessing www.ca7.uscourts.gov.
Eligibility requirements include admission to practice in a state court and membership in good standing of the bar; a reputation for integrity and good character; sound physical and mental health; outstanding legal ability and competence, and aptitude for legal scholarship and writing.
Applicants must be familiar with courts and judicial processes, and be willing to travel to other courts in the 7th Circuit. The term of office is 14 years, and the current salary is $145,452.
* * *
Comments will be accepted through Nov. 1 regarding the reappointment of Byron G. Cudmore as a magistrate judge of U.S. District Court for the Central District for eight more years. His current term will expire Aug. 31, 2005.
The court will appoint a panel of citizens to make a recommendation. Pertinent information may be submitted in writing to Chief Judge Joe B. McDade, 122 Federal Building, 100 NE Monroe, Peoria, Ill. 61602.
Circuit judges seated
After five months of recount litigation, Associate Judge Paula M. Daleo was declared the winner of a contested primary election for the Cook County Circuit Court by four votes.
Chicago attorney Lawrence F. Andolino had been the apparent winner by 36 votes, but Daleo's requested recount resulted in a finding that she had 19,187 votes to Andolino's 19,183. Daleo, a Democrat, faces no opposition in the November election.