Supreme Court Quick Takes

Our panel of leading appellate attorneys review Thursday's Illinois Supreme Court opinions in the Civil case Downtown Disposal Services, Inc., v. The City of Chicago and the Criminal case People v. Murdock.

CIVIL

Downtown Disposal Services, Inc., v. The City of Chicago

By Karen Kies DeGrand, Donohue Brown Mathewson & Smyth LLC

A corporation must be represented by counsel in legal proceedings. In a four to three split opinion, with Justice Burke writing for the majority,  the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that a corporation's complaint, filed by its lay president rather than by an attorney, was not automatically a nullity. Rather, circuit courts should consider the circumstances of the case to determine whether the filing defect requires dismissal or may be cured.  

Our panel of leading appellate attorneys review Thursday's Illinois Supreme Court opinions in the Civil case Karbin v. Karbin and the Criminal case In re S.B.

CIVIL

Karbin v. Karbin

By Michael T. Reagan, Law Offices of Michael T. Reagan, Ottawa

In holding that a plenary guardian of a disabled adult has standing to institute dissolution of marriage proceedings on behalf of the ward, Karbin v. Karbin directly overruled In re Marriage of Drews, 115 Ill.2d 201 (1986). The circuit and appellate courts were constrained by Drews. Justice Garcia, for the appellate majority, noted both vulnerabilities of Drews in light of subsequent developments and the alternative need for legislative action. The late Justice Cahill dissented, seeking to distinguish Drews on the ground that the ward’s initial filing here was as a counter-petitioner for dissolution. (How graceful it is that the appellate majority referred to "our colleague in dissent," in light of Justice Cahill’s passing.)

CIVIL

Jackson v. The Board of Election Commissioners of the City of Chicago

By Michael T. Reagan, Law Offices of Michael T. Reagan, Ottawa

Carmelita Earls and her husband obtained homestead exemptions on three properties in Cook County. Preparatory to filing to run for Alderman, Earls checked with the Indebtedness Check Unit of the City of Chicago Department of Revenue and was told that she owed no outstanding debt to the City. Shortly after, the Assessor's office challenged two of the homestead exemptions. Earls then promptly executed waivers of those exemptions. An objection was raised to Earls' candidacy, in which it was contended that Earls was in arrears in payment of taxes or other indebtedness to the City. 

Our panel of leading appellate attorneys review Thursday's Illinois Supreme Court opinions in the Civil cases Jane Doe-3 v. McLean County Unit District No. 5 Board of Directors and Santiago v. E.W. Bliss Company.

Jane Doe-3 v. McLean County Unit District No. 5 Board of Directors

By Karen Kies DeGrand, Donohue Brown Mathewson & Smyth LLC