The Bar News

A Fresh Look at Supervisory Orders

The Illinois Supreme Court interprets its supervisory authority broadly and holds that it is “unlimited in extent and hampered by no specific rules or means for its exercise.” Yet, historically, the court has used its supervisory powers only regarding issues brought to the court’s attention in petitions for leave to appeal (“PLAs”) where the court can order relief without full briefing, oral argument, or issuance of an opinion. 

But recently, the court has been willing to exercise its supervisory power outside of the traditional context of PLAs. Examples include removing a judge for alleged judicial bias and misconduct, reinstating a summary judgment order vacated by the trial court on an improper basis, and ordering the appellate court to vacate an injunction. 

So, what are the limits of this extraordinary relief? And what is the procedure by which it can be sought? In their article in July’s Illinois Bar Journal, “A Fresh Look at Supervisory Orders,” Tim Eaton and Jonathan Amarilio attempt to answer these questions. 

Read more in the July issue of the Illinois Bar Journal.

Posted on July 23, 2018 by Rhys Saunders
Filed under: 

Member Comments (1)

It would be helpful if the Supreme Court would attempt to have a uniform approach to efiling in the various counties.  As an example, some counties appear to take a different approach to whether you can attach an exhibit to the main document or do it as a separate attachment filing.

It would also be helpful if the Supreme Court could require all Judges to allow an attorney to appear on routine matters before trial by hiring a service to provide the Judge a technician with a monitor, printer and audio,so an attorney can be seen on screen while addressing the court and providing any physical exhibits on screen for the court to see. Hence 15 mintues of billing instead of an hour with a relatively low cost to the client for the technician's services. 

We are not keeping up with technology in our courtrooms and as a result are costing litigants excessive fees for routine matters that can be handled using today's technology.  

The court's are still in the era of cut and paste on a manual typewriter approach, instead of computer based internet era technology.


Login to post comments