Message from the President

May 5, 2006

Preface: The following message is a collaborative effort inspired by Bob Schultz, President of J.M. Schultz Investment Co., LLC of Effingham. Bob is a member of the Illinois Chamber Board of Directors and a resident of the Fifth District of the Illinois Supreme Court. It describes many after effects of 2004’s judicial election results in Southern Illinois as a reminder of what is at stake for voters and employers in 2006.

Before the flood of communication begins from and about this year’s candidates for office, I think it is a good time to review the significant changes that have occurred in less than two years to remind readers that judicial offices on the ballot have as much effect as any other. We hardly need reminding that judicial decisions have far reaching consequences on the state’s reputation and future. I urge you to stay tuned into and informed on Illinois’ judicial races as the campaign season approaches. Your vote truly does make a difference.

Judicial Landscape Change Continues Since Karmeier Election
By Bob Schultz and Doug Whitley

Rarely does a single election, out of hundreds conducted over dozens of years, have a seismic impact.

But one election did in 2004 and the aftershocks continue now, almost two years later.

And the effect has been almost entirely positive.

Flash back two years to the heat of the Supreme Court election in Southern Illinois and see how the situation has changed. Defenders of the status quo (the long-standing plaintiff-dominated judicial system) argued these points:

Those were among the most common arguments of the legal establishment in Southern Illinois.

What is amazing and common to all of these assumptions is that each has been proven wrong in less than two years.

The final item on the list was proven false just weeks ago when the largest medical malpractice insurer in Illinois announced it was cutting premiums an average of 5.2 percent as a result of malpractice reform measures enacted last year.

One by one, the three earlier “certainties” had been disproved.

First, Governor Rod Blagojevich signed into law a medical malpractice reform bill in August, 2005 setting reasonable limits or “caps” on non-economic damages in malpractice claims. Passage of the legislation and the governor’s signature were a direct result of Judge Lloyd Karmeier’s election to the Illinois Supreme Court.

It wasn’t because of any particular action by the Supreme Court, but because politicians in Illinois, particularly in Southern Illinois, saw the outrage of doctors and voters caused by a runaway legal system in select Illinois courthouses.

That outrage led to Justice Karmeier’s election as an alternative to entrenched trial lawyer control of courtrooms. Voters sent a clear message and it frightened political leaders who worried they might be the next politician cast out of office.

So while common sense should have convinced them that medical liability reform was necessary, it was the fear of political losses that ultimately caused the politicians to move in the right direction, reminding us of the old adage that politics often come before policy.

The second claim, that Appellate Judge Gordon Maag was a reasonable jurist and opposed to frivolous and outrageous lawsuits, was disproved by Maag himself: he filed a $110 million lawsuit against several organizations that had opposed him during the campaign, including the Illinois Chamber and the Illinois Civil Justice League. Maag’s suit has been dismissed twice in state courts but he persists with appeals, and has filed a similar suit in federal court. Maag, who lost both the Supreme Court election and retention of his own appellate seat, has since moved to Alabama.

It was the third claim above, that the legal system in Madison and St. Clair Counties could not be changed, that has seen the most stunning invalidation.

Not only did the election change the balance and temperament of the Illinois Supreme Court, it set in motion a widespread restructuring of the court system throughout the southern third of Illinois.

For example: Supreme Court justices are responsible for making recommendations to the full Court to fill vacancies in Appellate and Circuit courts in the Justice’s district. The full Court customarily approves those recommendations.

Thus far, Justice Karmeier has filled two vacancies on the seven-member Appellate Court in the Fifth District. Those appointments have created a rare opportunity for appellants to expect a fair hearing since the Appellate Court is no longer perceived as a rubber stamp for Madison-St. Clair County plaintiffs’ interests.

Justice Karmeier also has been charged with filling two vacancies in the Madison County Circuit Court and one each in Randolph and Jasper Counties. Each of these appointments has had a positive impact, particularly in the Madison-St. Clair judicial systems.

As evidence of the rapid improvement in the Southern Illinois judicial system (therefore in Illinois’ entire judicial system), consider these facts:

Class action suits have declined in Madison County, with clear evidence lawyers are going elsewhere.
The Illinois Supreme Court overturned three outrageous class action lawsuits that sprang from Southern Illinois courtrooms, including the astronomical $10 billion judgment against Philip Morris and two involving State Farm.
In two cases, including one of the State Farm cases, the Supreme Court made it clear that lawsuits should be filed in jurisdictions with some bearing on the case, not simply in a venue favorable to plaintiffs.
Illinois has begun to shift away from its terrible judicial image. Ratings by both the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Tort Reform Association show a slight improvement in 2005 in fairness and quality of our judicial system compared to prior years.

We still have a long way to go, but there are clear signs of improvement. The real challenge ahead of all Illinois residents is to ensure movement toward fairness and integrity in our court system continues. Powerful trial lawyer interests are trying to nullify these improvements. They would like to rewrite laws or have them thrown out, starting with the medical malpractice insurance reform law of 2005. They want to defeat new judges appointed by Justice Karmeier and the Supreme Court. They want their own hand-picked judges to win the 2006 elections.

Trial lawyers have lost their absolute control of the judicial system and they want it back. Judicial reform in Illinois is underway largely because coziness between plaintiffs’ lawyers and the judiciary in certain critical counties and jurisdictions is being exposed and challenged. Those who desire continued progress toward fairness and balance in our courts must be engaged in the 2006 elections. Voters and employers must not diminish their zeal for continued change in order to prove Justice Karmeier’s election was not a fluke, but indeed only the first wave of electing fair-minded judges who will restore balance to Illinois’ courts.

Late breaking developments: As we were completing this column, two new advances came to our attention reflecting positive changes in Illinois’ judicial climate. We encourage members to keep us informed of developments they see in the coming months.

In Cook County’s Democratic Primary, the First District Appellate Court race was so close that it took three weeks to certify the results and just 500 votes to decide. We’re pleased the victor was Joy Cunningham, general counsel for Northwestern Memorial Hospital. The Chamber PAC supported her candidacy, and we anticipate her professional experience may provide knowledge on health care and management issues that will benefit Illinois courts.

In Madison County, New Chief Judge Ann Callis assumed office this Monday and addressed forum shopping in class action cases on her second day in office. According to the Belleville News Democrat, Callis said the goal of a new rule limiting judge substitutions is to create a fair and expeditious process for hearing class actions.

"We want to provide parties with the right to one substitution, but not an unrestricted right to change judges that amounts to forum shopping," she said. "It's a question of fairness and equal justice. This reform is a first step in the reform process I announced when I was elected chief judge," Callis said, adding, "There'll be more to come."

ARCHIVE OF PRIOR MESSAGES