Women of the 18th Floor: Cook County Probate Division
At 10:00 a.m. on any given weekday the 18th floor of the Richard J. Daley Center is humming with activity. The 18th floor is solely dedicated to the Probate Division consisting of 11 Judges, with the majority of the Judges being female, including presiding Judge Mary Ellen Coghlan. Probate law consists of two distinct areas: decedent’s estates and guardianship. The decedent’s estates section is comprised of four courtrooms that handle the administration of testate and intestate estates. The guardianship section is comprised of five courtrooms that handle the administration of estates of individuals who have been or are in the process of being adjudicated disabled.
As an outsider to this area of law (I practice solely in Domestic Relations), I thought the ratio of female to male Judges of this division was noteworthy. Even further, I thought a spotlight on females who are amongst the hum of the activity on any given day would bring not only inspiration to females in the legal profession, but also draw more females to probate law.
The three women I interviewed were Judge Susan M. Coleman, an Associate Judge sitting in a decedent’s estates courtroom, Judge Carolyn Quinn, an Associate Judge sitting in a guardianship courtroom, and Ashley C. Coppola of Joseph W. Pieper, Attorney at Law, LLC, a young female attorney practicing in probate.
Prior to taking the bench, Judge Coleman worked at the Cook County Public Defender’s Office then, in 1988, she started her own practice in the Western Suburbs of Chicago. Her practice was a small general practice handling criminal, civil, domestic relations and “it was just kind of run of the gamut.”
Judge Coleman was appointed as an Associate Judge in 1997 with the Fourth Municipal District, Maybrook, being her first assignment. At Maybrook she, similar to most Judges in the Municipal Districts, heard everything from traffic to criminal to civil matters. In 2005, she was assigned to the probate division at the Richard J. Daley Center in one of the decedent’s courtrooms and has been there ever since.
In describing her typical day, Judge Coleman states, “my call typically is openings and closings of deceased estates and then we have status calls and motions. We primarily do openings and closings of deceased estates. We do citations to recover, will contests—well, actually our courtrooms run the gamut. We do presumptions of death. We do all sorts of crazy things. But for the most part in the morning it is just the routine matters; the openings, the closings, statuses, setting hearing dates on motions, setting briefing schedules. And then we usually do contested motions at 11:15 a.m. and then 2:00 p.m. would be contested hearings.” The end of her call, the 2:00 p.m. contested hearing slot, is Judge Coleman’s favorite, “…because the lawyers are very good and very experienced, and that is a pleasure.”
Simply speaking with Judge Coleman one can tell she has not only high expectations of the attorneys who practice before her, but also for herself. “I have always made a practice of being prepared, or I try to make a practice of being prepared… You are so far ahead of the game if you just take the extra time to be prepared and to know what you are doing.”
This has been her motto since before the bench, “it is so important for practitioners to pay more attention to what it is that they are coming to court to accomplish, how it is that they need to get their case ready, how it is that they need to have their witnesses prepared, and that is the key, no matter what area of the law you are practicing in.”
Her strive for excellence is probably why she was assigned in 2005 to a then male-dominated judiciary of decedent’s estates. “I came to the division in 2005 when at that time the courtrooms that handle decedent’s estates, were presided over by male judges…I think it was somewhat surprising back then to the lawyers that a woman in 2005 would take over the court call that previously had belonged to one of the male judges.” Judge Coleman was up for the challenge.
It was not only the judiciary that was male-dominated in 2005, but also the attorneys who practiced in front of her on a daily basis. “The most interesting thing to me was that the lawyers who appeared on those calls before those judges were overwhelmingly male, and that was quite an eye-opener for me because by that time in 2005 women were really, actively practicing in every division in the Circuit Court of Cook County, or so I thought. But really, it was just amazing the numbers of men that were handling those types of cases.”
Interestingly, this ratio of male to female attorneys has not changed, “I will tell you that even now, and I am sure all of the other female judges that preside over the deceased call will tell you, the vast majority of the lawyers that practice in this area, at least on the deceased side, are men.”
This ratio of males to females in Judge Coleman’s courtroom can be explained by challenges faced by many female attorneys outside of probate law. “I think [females] still are pigeon-holed, like when I came here in 2005 it was just assumed that I would do a guardianship call and not a deceased call, because the deceased call was for men. It just seems to me that we still have—we are still pigeon-holed into following certain career paths. It must still be happening because I still do not see many women doing the type of cases that I am hearing every day. . . Although maybe the female practitioners are really happy doing what they are doing, and maybe the female practitioners do not feel that they are being pigeon-holed in any way. And that is great, if everybody feels as though they can do whatever it is that they want to do, that is the key. But I know, for me, when I was practicing and as I was getting on the bench it was almost like there was a certain path that you had to follow—you were expected to follow.”
What is certain is that Judge Coleman has taken her own path during her time in the Public Defender’s office, her private practice, and now during her time on the bench. Her strive for nothing short of excellence has made her a role model to female attorneys from all areas of the law.
Judge Carolyn Quinn sits in one of the five guardianship courtrooms. She has been an Associate Judge for the Circuit Court of Cook County since 2003. Judge Quinn started in the First Municipal District, and then moved to mortgage foreclosure and mechanics liens, and then to general chancery before she was assigned to the guardianship call.
She is a graduate of Loyola University School of Law in Chicago, where she earned her Juris Doctor in 1987. She began her career in law working first as a Judicial Clerk in the Illinois Appellate Court and then as an Associate for two law firms. In 1997, she worked as a Judicial Clerk to Justice Mary Ann McMorrow in the Illinois Supreme Court. She then spent two years as the Senior Attorney of the Health Law Division with the American Medical Association. In 2001, she became a Partner with the Hubert Fowler and Quinn Law Firm in Chicago and worked for two years before taking her current position on the bench.
Judge Quinn’s describes her typical day: “I hear emergency matters at 9:30 in the morning, the set call, statuses and motions and things like that for established guardianships is at 10:00 a.m., . . . petitions that have been filed but someone has not been adjudicated disabled are heard on the 11:00 a.m. call. The call ends at no later than 12:30 p.m., then we resume at 2:00 p.m. and the afternoon call is when I have trials, evidentiary hearings, and briefed motions that I think will take a longer amount of time than I would be able to give on a crowded morning call.”
Judge Quinn speaks highly of her daily guardianship call, “very rewarding, very interesting, and I enjoy a great deal dealing with the attorneys who practice in this area.” She describes the attorneys who appear before her as “knowledgeable, very professional, a lot of them have a very compassionate approach to their work when dealing with disabled adults. And they are very good at what they do, which makes a judge’s job easier.” She adds, “I want to be worthy of the effort that they are putting out in front of me.”
She is inspired not only by the individuals who practice before her, but also the judges that are in the probate division, “I am often inspired by the people around me, by the Judges around me who are very, very good, and just by their example, which motivates me to try and do as good a job as I can.” This motivation is for a reason, “it is the type of call where I do not think there is any question that your rulings as a judge will have an immediate impact on someone’s life. If you believe that you are assisting an individual in need, I would say that is the most rewarding.”
When asked if more women are before her on a daily basis, she responded, “I don’t know if more women or more men are going into this field, there is a pretty good mix on the 18th floor between male and female.”
Judge Quinn was a “part of a generation that [had] more females entering the field to begin with” and reflects that “I have been fortunate, [if] I have been subject to a gender-based discrimination, I was not aware of it. I do not feel that I have ever been hindered as a lawyer or a judge because I was a female.” However, “I could see how women, certainly in the past, have faced challenges being a female, and I can certainly see how that could still be occurring.”
Her advice to young female attorneys: “Not knowing where life will take you. I think it is probably when you are in school and early in your career [that it is] probably to your benefit to try and get as much experience in different substantive areas of the law as you possibly can. Take every opportunity that comes your way to try something new, to challenge yourself, to test yourself, and just always be looking to develop your skills and add your skill set, because an opportunity may come your way five or ten years out of law school that you may never have dreamed of when you were just graduating from law school, but the better prepared you are to accept that challenge the more comfortable you will feel and the more doors that will continue to open for you.”
Simply speaking with Judge Quinn, she is not only professional but also the level of compassion and thoughtfulness she provides to her cases is apparent. It is clear that she considers her role on the bench deciding the guardianship cases before her as a privilege and an honor. “I enjoy this assignment a great deal. I hope to be here for a good long time.”
Finally, to round this article I thought the young female attorney perspective was important and so I interviewed Ashley C. Coppola. Ms. Coppola graduated from the John Marshall Law School, where she was a Dean’s Scholar and served as an executive editor and board member of The John Marshall Journal of Information Technology and Privacy Law, and clinical student in the Veteran’s Legal Support Center and Clinic. During law school, Ms. Coppola worked as a law clerk for the Child Protection Division of the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office, Adult Guardianship Division of the Cook County Office of the Public Guardian, Juvenile Division of the Cook County Office of the Public Guardian, and was also a volunteer at the Domestic Violence Legal Clinic in Chicago. Ms. Coppola’s practice consists primarily in probate law.
Discussing the differences between guardianship and decedent’s estates, Ms. Coppola also noted the majority male decedent’s estate section. Being a young female attorney, “when I first started practicing, I would feel out of place under these circumstances, but I quickly realized that I had just as much reason and right to be there as any other attorney sitting in that room. I had cases to be called, issues to argue, and advocating on behalf of my clients, just like any other person in that courtroom.”
“Decedent’s estate is a very interesting area of the law and I would like to see more women, especially younger women like myself, being involved and having easier accessibility to practice in this area, in all aspects, such as litigation, administration, serving as special administrators and so forth.”
Agreeing with Judge Quinn, “I do think that guardianship, in Cook County at least, is evenly represented between male and female attorneys.” Ms. Coppola reflects that, “it is not uncommon to be before a female judge, with all female attorneys at the bench, and a female sheriff.”
It is also the opportunity of being appointed as a Guardian ad Litem in guardianship cases that remind Ms. Coppola why she chose to practice in probate. “I always knew that I wanted to advocate for the elderly and disabled, and so I spent most of my law school time working towards that goal…serving as Guardian ad Litem in disabled estates has been my most rewarding experience as a probate attorney. I think probate is one of few forums, where the “best interest” standard is truly met, and the Guardian ad Litem is the driving force behind ensuring that this standard is met. As a Guardian ad Litem, you have a direct, positive effect on the lives of adults with disabilities, in a way that is completely unique and rewarding.”
When asked to comment on the discrepancy between females practicing in guardianship and decedent’s estates, “I think we see more women in guardianship, than in decedent’s estates, due to the fact that we see more women in smaller firms than big firms. Smaller firms typically handle more guardianship estates than decedents, since it is less lucrative for big firms to take on this complicated, time-consuming area of the law.” Further, she adds, “the historical big law firm paradigm. In the past, many larger firms handled decedent estate work and men primarily dominated these firms, which is why we still see the typical male profile in the decedent division of probate.”
This historical big firm paradigm relates to the challenges faced by females in the legal profession. “Female practitioners face challenges that men do not face and I think the statistics illustrating the discrepancies between the number of female partners, women in leadership roles at big firms, women in the judiciary, and the amount of women who choose to leave the field, support this fact. I think many people assume that gender bias does not exist, however merely because it is not as overt as it used to be, does not mean it has been eradicated.”
Despite the challenges, probate law is where Ms. Coppola will stay. “One of the many reasons why I love practicing in probate, is due to the camaraderie and respect I receive from the many dedicated group of attorneys that I regularly practice with.” Further Ms. Coppola adds, “I have also been lucky to have a group of amazing female mentors in probate, who immediately took me under their wing upon my first day on the 18th floor of the Daley Center. Because of these women, I have found confidence, inspiration, and friendship in the work that I do on a daily basis…. I also value appearing before a female judge, as I know that women in the judiciary are still underrepresented and that many years ago, I would rarely have the opportunity to practice before such intelligent and confident women.”
These are just a few of the remarkable women of the 18th floor. When taking probate law as a whole, it appears based upon these interviews that there is still a need for female attorneys. With the baby boomers aging, probate will be the next emerging area of law. If nothing else, this article should motivate female attorneys across the state to take their own path, challenge themselves, to test themselves, climb the ranks, and maybe even consider practicing probate. ■
__________