Gill M. Garman, a prominent Danville attorney and husband of Chief Justice Rita B. Garman of the Supreme Court of Illinois, passed away on Saturday at Barnes-Jewish Hospital in St. Louis. He was 71.

Mr. Garman engaged in the practice of law for more than 45 years and was a senior partner at Kesler Nelson Garman Brougher & Townsley PC. He met his wife when they were both students at the University of Illinois and were married the year before they both graduated from the University of Iowa College of Law in 1968.

A celebration of Mr. Garman's life will be held on Thursday, June 5, 2014, at 11 a.m. at St. James United Methodist Church in Danville with Rev. Randall Robinson officiating. Visitation will be held on Wednesday, June 4, 2014 from 2 to 8 p.m. at Sunset Funeral Home in Danville.

In lieu of flowers, the family suggests donations to St. James United Methodist Church, the Danville Public Library Foundation, the Danville Symphony Orchestra, or any charity of the donor's choosing.

View more at http://www.sunsetfuneralhome.com/obituaries/Gill-Garman/#!/Obituary

Circuit Court of Cook County Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans today entered General Administrative Order No. 2014-06 which permits persons present at court proceedings conducted in courtrooms of the Circuit Court of Cook County to take written notes while court is in session.

“I firmly believe that the integrity of our courts depends on increasing, not limiting, public access in the courtroom, whether that access is allowing the media to film proceedings or allowing people to simply write down what they see and hear,” said Chief Judge Evans. “Every time integrity is embraced, justice is enhanced.”

The use of laptop computers and other electronic devices in the courtrooms of the Circuit Court of Cook County is prohibited and may not be used to take notes unless otherwise expressly permitted by the judge presiding.

General Administrative Order No. 2014-06 is attached.

ISBA Director of Legislative Affairs Jim Covington reviews legislation in Springfield of interest to ISBA members. In this episode he covers Condominium Property Act (House Bill 4783), UM/UIM arbitration (House Bill 5575), Sale of distressed condominium units (Senate Bill 2664), Workers' Compensation Act (Senate Bill 3287), Transfer on Death Instrument (TODI) Cleanup (Senate Bill 2656), Marriage rewrite (House Bill 1452) and Eavesdropping. More information on each bill is available below the video.

ISBA President Paula H. Holderman interviews Marron Mahoney and Brian Monico, co-chairs for the New Lawyer Task Force, about how the ISBA is helping law students and new lawyers and plans to further assist those entering the practice of law.

Annemarie Kill of the Chicago firm Avery Camerlingo Kill, LLC has been named the winner of the 2014 ISBA Diversity Leadership Award. The Diversity Leadership Award recognizes long standing, continuing and exceptional commitment by an individual or an organization to the critical importance of diversity within the Illinois legal community, its judiciary and within the Illinois State Bar Association.

Ms. Kill has made significant contributions to the advancement of diversity within the Illinois legal community and within ISBA. She has served as a member and chair of both the ISBA Diversity Leadership Council and Standing Committee on Women and the Law.

From 2011 to 2012, she served as the Coordinator of the Diversity Fellows, which identifies diverse future leaders and provides them an opportunity to find their leadership niche within ISBA. In this position she led several efforts to improve the program and enhance the positive experience for the Diversity Fellows. She helped institute an initial orientation and reception for the Fellows and drafted a Fellows’ handbook. She also oversaw the revision of the Diversity Fellows’ mentorship program.

Ms. Kill has served on the ISBA Law and Leadership Institute (LLI) Committee. This committee is a statewide initiative to help minority students achieve academic success and aspire to careers in the law.

The owner of a condo unit may not withhold monthly assessments and other expenses in response to an alleged failure by her condominium association to maintain common elements and make repairs, a divided Illinois Supreme Court ruled recently.

In a four to three decision, the majority of the justices rejected a theory that condo unit owners should have the same rights as tenants in a leasehold agreement. The issue arose when a Lake County resident/owner of the Spanish Court Two Condominium Association, who had failed to pay her fees for six months, tried to defend herself against the association's attempt to take possession of her unit. She argued that a leaky roof just above her unit had caused extensive water damage, her faulty toilet was not repaired, and that general upkeep of the common areas of the building was not maintained, and thus she was entitled to withhold payment.

The majority of the justices in the 4-3 ruling said a landlord/tenant scenario is contractual and distinguishable from a community living situation. Condo boards and associations could face serious financial difficulties if they had no recourse to collect unpaid assessments, the court observed. Find out more in the June Illinois Bar Journal.

Q. Can I enter into a fee agreement with a client to lobby the legislature on a proposal where my fee is contingent upon the passage of the proposal?

A. RPC 1.5(d) expressly prohibits contingent fees in only two types of cases (certain domestic relations matters and criminal cases). However, by case law and statute, charging a contingent fee in a lobbying matter is prohibited. See In re Browning 23 Ill.2d 483 (1962) and 25 ILCS 170/8.

ISBA members can browse past ISBA Ethics Opinions, access our Ethics Hotline, and other resources on the ISBA Ethics Page.

Asked and Answered

By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC

Q. I am a solo in Bloomington, Illinois. I have just completed my third year in solo practice. I have one full time secretary, a paralegal, and I office share with a group of attorneys. My overhead is low and my margin is 61%. I have been approached by a two attorney (2 partners) firm regarding merging with their firm. One of the partners is relatively new (joined the firm 3 years ago) and the other is the firm founder and is planning on retiring in the next year. On average the other firm's revenue per attorney and partner earnings is on par or even less than mine. Their overhead is much higher. The two partners have been operating on a handshake with no succession/transition plan for the senior partner and no understanding of retirement financial arrangements (buy-out). While I have some concerns and fears about merging I believe that merger would provide me access to mentoring, additional resources and staff, and ability to improve my competencies and handle larger more complex cases. I would appreciate your thoughts.