D THE OCKE DecTember 2010 Vol.17, No€¦ · D uring the Holiday Season I like to reflect upon the many opportunities I have had to work with our members on community service projects

THE

DOCKETDecember 2010

Vol.17, No.11 The Official Publication of the Lake County Bar Association

HappyHolidays

A publication of the

300 Grand Avenue, Suite AWaukegan, Illinois 60085Phone: (847) 244-3143Fax: (847) [email protected]

2009-2010 Officers & DirectorsElizabeth M. Rochford, PresidentPerry S. Smith, Jr., First Vice-PresidentMarjorie Sher, Second Vice-PresidentKevin M. Kane, TreasurerKeith Grant, SecretaryScott B. Gibson, Immediate Past PresidentHon. Fred L. ForemanSteven P. McCollumJoann M. FratianniMichael J. OriGary SchlesingerMark A. Van Donselaar

Editorial BoardMichael S. Strauss, Co-editorRebecca J. Whitcombe, Co-editorAnn Buche ConroyHon. Mitchell HoffmanDaniel L. JasicaHon. Raymond J. McKoskiStephen J. RiceNeal A. SimonJames K. SimonianHon. Daniel B. Shanes

StaffChristopher T. Boadt, Executive DirectorVirginia Elliott, Program AdministratorCarlos Acevedo, Communications Administrator

Inside this issue...

Advertisers

ADR SystemsAttorney’s Title Guaranty Fund, Inc.Best Process & Attorney Services, Inc.Court on CallDavid L. Gates & AssociatesDeposition ReportersISBA Mutual InsuranceJoseph Modica & Associates, Ltd.L & L Reporting Services, Inc.Lakeside InvestigationsLaw Office of Rebecca J.Whitecombe

6Back

165

12194

19121022

LCBA Holiday PartyLegal Process Service, Inc.McDonald Hopkins LLCNatural Balance Massage TherapyNeil H. GoodPeople’s Law SchoolRobert J. Adams & AssociatesSun-Times MediaThe Gordon Financial Group of Wells FargoVahl Reporting ServiceVerity Partners

620

Front16161493

131613

In the Director’s Chair: Happy Holidaysby Christopher Boadt, Executive Director2

3The Chief Judge’s Pageby Chief Judge Victoria A. Rossetti5

The President’s Page: An Invitation to Make Historyby Elizabeth Rochford

Interview with the Honorable Charles Johnsonby Shyama S. Parikh, Esq.7

11Personal History: Introducing Kim Nguyen, and the Differences Between German and American Legal Educationby Stephen J. Rice

Broker Protocol Revisited: An “Industry Standard” for EmploymentTransitionsby James J. Eccleston

15

2010 Case Law Updatedby Keith Grant18NCSC Selects Robert A. Zastany for Warren E. Burger Society22Meeting Minutes: October 2010by Keith Grant, Secretary23The Grapevine24

Correlation Is Critical When Determining Asset Allocationby James J. Eccleston10

Gala 50/50 & Live Auction Winners14

LCBA Bulletin Board27The Lists, The Ornaments, The Dashby Kathleen M. Ryan28

How to Laugh in the Face of a Data Disasterby Alan Pearlman17

2 The Docket December 2010

Advertising Rates

One Six Twelve Issue Issues Issues

Eighth Page $65 $60 $55

Quarter Page $115 $105 $95

Half Page $170 $155 $140

Full Page $290 $265 $240

Inside Front Cover . . . . . . .$600 per Issue

Inside Back Cover . . . . . . . .$600 per Issue

Back Cover . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$750 per Issue

Bar Bulletin Board

Up to 5 Lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$25

6 to 10 Lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$35

11 to 15 Lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$40

16 to 20 Lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$45

To place an ad or for information on adver-

tising rates, call (847) 244-3143. Submis-

sion deadline: first day of month preceding

the month of publication. All submissions

must be made in electronic format (high res-

olution PDF or JPG format at a resolution of

300 pixels per inch or more.) See www.lake-

bar.org/html/docketRates.asp.

The Docket is the official publication of the

Lake County Bar Association, 300 Grand

Avenue, Suite A, Waukegan, Illinois

60085 (847) 244-3143, and is published

monthly. Subscriptions for non-members

are $45.00 per year.

Reproduction in whole or part without per-

mission is prohibited. The opinions and po-

sitions stated in signed material are those

of the authors and not necessarily those of

the Association or its members.

All submitted manuscripts are considered

by the Editorial Board. All letters to the edi-

tor and articles are subject to editing. Pub-

lications of advertisements is not to be

considered as an endorsement of any prod-

uct or service advertised unless otherwise

stated.

In theDirector’s Chair

byChristopher T. Boadt

During the Holiday Season I like to reflect upon the manyopportunities I have had to work with our members oncommunity service projects during the preceding year. I

am grateful to the many volunteers that help the Lake CountyBar Association and Foundation touch so many lives.

In 2010 we were fortunate enough to see the continuation ofour foreclosure helpdesk and the creation of our guardianshiphelpdesk. Both of these ongoing activities are possible due tomany hours of volunteer work from our attorney and associatemembers. These projects directly impact the citizens of LakeCounty. Thank you!

In March we sponsored “keep-your-home” day and helped hun-dreds of families apply for modifications of their home mortgages.This is an excellent example of how some projects are short induration and have a large impact.

We just finished our initial Foundation Gala Dinner Dance whichwas very well received. We sold-out the event 3 weeks in advance,sold over 400 raffle tickets and had over 70 silent auction items.We look forward to making contributions to our three benefici-aries that will benefit Teen Court, the Family Visitation and Ex-change Center and Prairie State Legal Services.

We are pleased to be supporting Elliot Pinsel’s annual ornamentdrive. December 15th is the deadline to participate. If you havenot done so already, please call and help us make someone’s Hol-iday Season a little brighter.

Thank you for being a member of the Lake County Bar Associa-tion and supporting our community projects. Best wishes in2012.

Happy Holidays

How to write for The Docket

The Editorial Board of The Docket is always looking for fresh and relevant articles to featureevery month. Feature articles should be a minimum of 1,500 words and a maximum of3,500. The deadline for submissions is the first day of the month preceding publication. Arti-cles should be submitted electronically in Word or WordPerfect. The Editorial Board reservesthe right to edit articles as they see fit to meet the needs of the publication. Please send sub-missions to [email protected] or call (847) 244-3143 with questions.

December 2010 The Docket 3

In the year 1912, a group of forward-thinking, community-minded lawyersfrom Waukegan, Illinois, demon-

strated their commitment to collegiality,and high professionalstandards, by estab-lishing The LakeCounty Bar Associa-tion. We are so gratefulto those original mem-bers whose vision wasthe catalyst that has evolved to the vital,thriving organization that we enjoy today.

As the significant 100 year anniversary ofour bar approaches, we thought it wouldbe an appropriate time to examine our his-torical archives. We quickly discovered,we have none. In truth, very little hasbeen preserved to document our first hun-dred years. As we eagerly prepare to cele-brate in 2012, it is equally important thatwe focus on gathering and preserving thedetails of our past.

To this end, we first called on our formerLCBA presidents, who responded immedi-ately and generously. As a result of their

contributions, we can look forward to fu-ture Dockets which will feature articlesand interviews with past leaders. You willbe educated and entertained by their in-

sights and observations, beginning withthe reflections of Murray Conzelman,who served in 1973, when the sole LakeCounty judge sat in the “old courthouse”.He will share his presidential perspectiveon the legal community’s struggles tomeet the demands of a fast growingcounty population, and the resistance tothe building of a new courthouse.

Bernie Winter, who served as president in1991, generously offered to share photosof the bar membership dating back to1938. And we learned that our belovedDocket was first published in its currentform during the 1994 presidential term ofJim DeSanto. I am delighted to report that

the bar was recently the beneficiary of acomplete collection of The Docket, cour-tesy of Judge Ray McKoski. Many othersof our past leaders will share stories, per-

sonal, and profes-sional, of their journeywith this great organi-zation, which I am cer-tain will leave youinspired.

But, that is just the start. We need your helptoo. You are invited to join us in this process,in fact, we simply cannot do it without you!Please search your collective closets, base-ments and memories; share with us yourphotos, documents and recollections, sothat we may properly archive and maintainour history for our current and future en-joyment.

It is only upon proper reflection of ourpast that we will be able to properly cele-brate our current achievements, and en-vision the possibilities of our future. Istrongly encourage you to accept this in-vitation, and join us in this important ini-tiative.

ThePresident’s Page

byElizabeth Rochford

An Invitation To Make History



TheChief Judge’s Page

byChief Judge

Victoria A. Rossetti

It’s December, so I am going to foregomy monthly article of highlighting adivision of the 19th Judicial Circuit, to

wish everyone a happy and healthy holi-day season. Every year I begin this seasonwith a pledge to slow down, enjoy everyminute, every event, not buy so manygifts, to give more and be more charitable– that is – to remember what the holidaysreally mean.

For me, coming from a very large Italianfamily, it is all about family, our Italian tra-ditions and always, always, always –FOOD. We have had the same menu forChristmas Ever dinner, I think, since thebeginning of time, no meat just fish. As alittle girl, I hated it, it smelled, tasted likefish, our house smelled and I just wantedto rush through it all, get to bed, wake upand open my gifts. However, as I got olderand the fry pan and the spatula werepassed on to me, it’s now not only my fa-vorite meal but my favorite day of theyear.

The day begins at 8:00 a.m. at my par-ent’s house, my mom, 2 sisters, 3 sister-in-laws and 7 nieces, cooking, laughing,yelling, tasting, cleaning and orderingeveryone else around to do something. Wecook all day, go home, clean up, and goback to begin the festivities. There are ta-bles and chairs everywhere because we all

have to sit down together, and every yearthere are new additions to our familyadding to the chaos and celebration.

What I didn’t see as a child, but do now, ishow much love was and is in that kitchen.It’s being together, listening to old stories,sharing, learning, helping and makingsure our younger generations keep thesesame traditions – that is what it all meansto me.

Whatever your beliefs or traditions, taketime to relax and drink in the love andwarmth of family and friends. The antici-pation, the shopping and parties some-times seem to overshadow the enjoyment,make an effort to get past it – open yourheart and savor the sounds and smells ofthe season.

And just as our family adds chairs to thetable, so does our 19th Judicial Circuitfamily. On December 6th our thirteenthCircuit Judge, Mark Levitt will be sworn inand we welcome him to our family. Wealso will be selecting an Associate Judge tofill the position held by Judge Dan Shaneswho will also be sworn in as a CircuitJudge on December 6th after being ap-pointed by the Illinois Supreme Court tofill the vacancy left by Judge Ray McK-oski’s retirement.

And it is with a heavy heart that we say

farewell to Judge Ray McKoski who retires

on December 5th, 2010. Judge McKoski

has been a part of our system of justice in

Lake County for over 25 years. His career

started in 1972 as an Assistant Attorney

General. He was hired as an Assistant

State’s Attorney in Lake County in 1977

and became the Deputy Chief of the Crim-

inal Division. He was appointed an Asso-

ciate Judge in 1985 and in 1991 the

Illinois Supreme Court appointed him as

a Circuit Judge. Judge McKoski served as

Chief Judge from 1996 to 1998 and dur-

ing his tenure eight courtrooms were

added, as well as a court interpreter pro-

gram, juror recognition program and a ju-

dicial speaker’s bureau. He has been our

teacher, our mentor, our ethics expert, but

most importantly our friend and he will

truly be missed by all in the 19th Judicial

Circuit.

I wish all of you and your families peace,

love and happiness during this holiday

season and in the New Year.

Visit the LCBA Website:lakebar.org


All Lake County Bar Association members

are invited to our annual Holiday PartyFriday, December 10, 2010

5:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.Hosted hors d’oeuvres • Beer • Wine

Gorton Community Center400 East Illinois Road • Lake Forest

RSVP [email protected]


The Honorable Charles “Chuck” Johnson was born in a smalltown called Elma, New York, which is about 20 miles outsideof Buffalo. His mother was a factory worker for Fisher Price

Toys and his father, who passed away in 1988, worked in an oil re-finery. The Judge is the youngest of three boys — his eldest brotheris a retired auto worker and his other brother teaches English as a

Second Language in Oman; he has alsotaught in South Korea, Poland and Ger-many and is the smartest person JudgeJohnson knows.

The Honorable Judge married his wife,Joanne, in 1986 and the couple will becelebrating their 25th wedding an-niversary next year.Joanne grew up inElmwood Park and was a Public Rela-tions Director for St. Therese MedicalCenter here in Waukegan until they de-cided to start a family. Currently, JudgeJohnson is the lucky father of two; hisson is a freshman at Purdue Universityand pursuing a career in Engineering,and his daughter is a sophomore at

Stevenson high school and may pursue a career as a Veterinarian.Judge Johnson is delighted that both of his children are musically in-clined and participated in the Stevenson high school band, playingthe tuba. In addition, Judge Johnson is the proud uncle of sevennieces and nephews.

The Judge attended Valparaiso University and obtained his majorin Political Science and his minor in Criminal Justice. He originallyattended Valparaiso to pursue a career as a Lutheran Minister, thenchanged his focus to Pre-Law and went directly through and com-pleted Law school at Valparaiso. Jokingly, he explains that he de-cided to stay there since he already knew where all of the goodtaverns were located. In reality, however, he actually stayed at Val-paraiso because he found it to be a great University that he enjoyedattending and because of their “raw” focus on Liberal Arts. In ad-dition, the Law school focused more on the concept of law insteadof the nuts and bolts of law, which he appreciated.

During his Law School summers, Judge Johnson was an intern forthe LaPorte County, Indiana Prosecutor’s Office as well as a clerkfor three Judges in the LaPorte County Superior Courts. These ex-periences helped the Judge get into a courtroom early on and hefound it enjoyable. The weekend after he graduated Law School,Judge Johnson got married and began working with a small Plain-tiff’s Personal Injury law firm in Chicago, Illinois. That job lasted a

An Interview with

The HonorableCharles Johnson

3number of Gridiron shows in which

Judge Johnson appeared

20# of miles his home town, Elma,

is located outside Buffalo, New York

98%percent Judge Johnson feels

that his lawyers are wonderful

and know what they are doing

2005appointed to the bench as an

Associate Judge of the

Nineteenth Judicial Circuit

Judge Johnsonby the numbers

ByShyama S.Parikh, Esq.


few months and then he began employ-ment with another small Plaintiff’s Per-sonal Injury law firm which last about 3½years.

In 1990, while the Honorable Fred Fore -man was the State’s attorney, Judge John-son was hired by the Lake County State’sattorney office, criminal division. JudgeJohnson spent four years in the State’s At-torney office where he prosecuted every-thing from traffic to murders. Around1992, Judge Johnson became the “Gangcrimes” Prosecutor for the office and wasshocked at how much he liked it! He gotthe opportunity to work with undercoverofficers in various police departments; hewent out on search warrants and had todeal with drug/gun issues regularly. Infact, his wife often teased him about “play-ing cop.” One of his most memorable ex-periences during this time was whileworking with Wayne Hunter, a Lieu-tenant in the Waukegan Police Depart-ment. They were going to a home toexecute a search warrant. Since it was awinter work day, Judge Johnson wasdressed in a suit and a long coat. The Po-lice provided him with a bullet-proof vestthat had a Velcro “Police” patch on thefront. Upon seeing him, Lt. Hunter rippedthe patch off his vest and said he was“enough of a target” wearing the suit.

When they were considering having a sec-ond child, Judge Johnson and his wife de-cided it was time to move back into privatepractice. In 1994, he began working forRudy Magna, who almost exclusivelypracticed local government law, repre-sented local entities and was a local pros-ecutor for several villages. Mr. Magna wasa former President of the Lake County BarAssociation, became Judge Johnson’s bossand later his Business Partner. Whileworking for Rudy Magna, the HonorableCharles Johnson worked in both the “cor-porate” type of local government law andas a prosecutor for approximately 11years, which included the time after he be-came a Partner in approximately1999.He was also lucky enough to workwith Charlie Scott, a former Chief Judge,while he worked at that firm. His experi-ence in private practice was great; it was agood opportunity, he was able to workwith a good group of people and he is eter-nally grateful to Michael Waller for sug-gesting to him the opportunity.

Judge Johnson doesn’t exactly recall whenhe first considered becoming a Judge – itmay have been something that a third

party said or suggested, but he recallscoming across openings due to the retire-ment of several Associate Judges. He alsoremembers that many people had puttheir name in to become a Judge repeat-edly, including himself; he was being con-sidered and waited for his turn. In fact, hehad applied at the same time as the Hon-orable Michael Fusz and based on what heknew about Judge Fusz’s stellar resume,during his interview he asked that thecommittee appoint Judge Fusz instead ofhim!

Finally, in January, 2005, the HonorableCharles Johnson was appointed to thebench as an Associate Judge of the Nine-teenth Judicial Circuit, Lake County, Illi-nois along with the Honorable NancyWaites; however Judge Waites has senior-ity by one day since Judge Johnson had tofinalize a matter before taking thebench.He finds Judge Waites to be a won-derful person and they joke about her “se-niority.”

Judge Johnson remembers the day whenhe received the news that he was selectedto be a Judge. He had just completed hisinterview for the position and had re-turned to his office. He received a tele-phone call from Judge Stark who said tohim, “Are you sure you want to dothis?”Judge Johnson was caught com-pletely off guard since he did not believehe was actually at the top of the list andactually put Judge Stark on hold so hecould tell his partner because he was stillin shock!He immediately called his wife,who was more surprised than he was, butwas understandably, very happy.

Judge Johnson then began windingdown/closing his part of the business andinforming clients about the change thatwas going to occur. It took about onemonth for him to tie up the loose ends andplan a joint party with Judge Waites. InJanuary 2005, Judge Johnson’s swearing-in ceremony took place; his mom camefrom New York, his wife attended as wellas his children, colleagues from the officeand his friends.

In the beginning, Judge Johnson followedother Judges to observe. He was over-whelmed by all of the different court-rooms and reviewed the binders he wasgiven about each area of law. He presidedover traffic cases in branch court for eightto nine months, then was a back-up Judgeon the fourth floor for a few months at themain courthouse. He remembers the large

volume of cases on the 4th floor; at timesup to 600-800 per day. At the time he wason the 4th floor, Court Administrationwas exploring a re-organization so thatthe calls could be spread out more evenly,and Judge Johnson took an active role inhelping with the reorganization. As a re-sult, Judge Johnson presided in his owncourtroom on cases involving DUI’s andmisdemeanors for about three years.

When Judge Rossetti became Chief Judgeshe asked Judge Johnson what assignmenthe would like. He replied with basically thesame response as the other Judges, “any-thing except small claims and familylaw!”As a result, he is now presiding overFamily Law Cases, which include Adop-tions and the Child support call. He finds itto be a “very interesting experience.”

Judge Johnson feels that 98% of lawyersare wonderful and know what they aredoing – that helps make his life a lot easier.He also had a learning curve to overcomeand now finds the laws related to familylaw matters very interesting. One chal-lenge he faces, however, is actually gettingto the legal issue through the “otherstuff.” He constantly observes the differ-ent ways cases proceed, the animosity, theattempt to cloud issues and finds it diffi-cult to watch at times. In fact, he agreeswith a comment made by the HonorableVeronica O’Malley that, “if you can do thisstuff, you can do anything.”

The Honorable Judge Johnson hopes he ishandling himself and his cases well. Heattempts to apply his criminal law back-ground to his cases by narrowing the is-sues and keeping out extraneousissues.He actually believes he has becomea more “well rounded” person as a resultof this experience on the bench.

When asked if there was a memorablecase/experience that he remembers, he re-calls a case in Branch court where awoman was given two tickets, for not hav-ing insurance and for not wearing a seatbelt. When asked why she did not wearher seat belt, she indicated she had re-cently had a “boob job” and that her doc-tor had told not to wear her seat belt! Hewas waiting for the case to be appealed,but it was not. In addition, Judge Johnsonrecalls a post-decree family law case in-volving a very well-to-do family, a Class XPredatory Criminal Sexual Assault of aChild case that had two prior mistrials anda pro se residential burglary case that hepresided over that gave him really good ex-


perience and allowed him a “broad spec-trum” to preside over in his five years onthe bench. At seminars he attends, Judgesin other counties have not been as fortu-nate to have presided over different typesof cases and be as well-rounded as he hasin Lake County.

In order to do well in front of JudgeCharles Johnson, he stresses you mustknow what you are doing; know the keyfacts and the law. With the huge volumeof cases and the lack of Judges, you aredoing a disservice by not knowing whatyou are doing. Also, do not ask him to dothings he does not have the authority todo – this occurs quite often actually.In ad-dition, be professional. If you do not knowwhat you are doing, ask for another dateto try and figure it out; trying to “wing it”doesn’t help you, doesn’t help the clientand wastes time. In fact, he recalls a T-shirt that on the front says “Know whatyou are doing” and on the back says “ActRight.”

What you do not want to do when pre-senting before Judge Johnson is arguewith him, especially after his ruling. In ad-dition, do not attack other people; there isno reason to do it and it is demeaning to

the profession. Remember that what youtell the court matters; we are a court oflaw, not a court of man; what you say tothe opponent does not really matter any-way so treat others respectfully. If the lawand the facts are on your side, you willprevail regardless. In fact, the clients al-ready dislike each other so you shouldstick to presenting the case. The disliketends to blur the facts and the law whichmakes the attorneys’ and judges’ jobsmore difficult by extension.

Judge Johnson is very passionate in stat-ing that the law is set up to facilitate theconflict resolution process and if you fol-low the rules, it makes the process muchbetter. He states chief among his concernsis that he is here to serve and will continuedoing so – that is what he was appointedto do and is trying to do the best job possi-ble.

In his free time Judge Johnson enjoys read-ing and was in the middle of two books onHistory and Native Americans at the endof September. He enjoys watching televi-sion, especially the Simpsons, Family Guyand Glee; he also sings in his Church choirand has participated in the Gridiron forthe past three shows. In addition, the

Judge likes to do some travelling as well aslikes watching most sports – hockey, foot-ball and even baseball, when it is good.Heenjoys listening to classic rock and youmay be surprised to know he is often de-scribed as conservative and old-fashioned.

Judge Charles Johnson is currently theVice President of his Church council atHope Lutheran Church of Long Grove aswell as a member of the Lake County BarAssociation, the Illinois State Bar Associ-ation and the Illinois Judges Associa-tion.He believes he is infinitely blessed tobe where he is today and cannot think ofanything else he would rather be doing.Heknows that by and large, people knowwhat the right thing is and that renewshis faith in our species and allows him tocontinue presiding over cases and doing“the right thing.”

Thank you Judge Johnson for your timeand best of luck!

Shyama is a Partner at Fraser, Youra &Parikh, LLC and has been practicing FamilyLaw in Lake County since 2003. She is alsothe Vice President of AWALC, a Teen CourtJudge for NICASA as well as on the Board ofDirectors for the YWCA.


Prudent investors and their financialadvisers have known for years thatasset allocation is fundamental and

that determining correlation among as-sets is critical to that allocation determi-nation. Let’s overview the basic concept

and then dis-cuss a newwebsite thattakes the cor-relation analy-sis to the nextlevel.

Correlation isa statisticalm e a s u r ewhich indi-cates the de-gree to whichthe prices oftwo assetsmove together.

When two assets move completely in tan-dem, the correlation is 1; when they movecompletely in opposite directions, the cor-relation is -1. Correlation does not shedlight on the volatility of any asset class(another important examination). Butmodern portfolio theory (and practice) es-

tablishes that adding an investment to aportfolio which is negatively correlatedwith the portfolio as a whole will not onlyreduce the volatility of the portfolio but italso will provide higher returns for lessrisk. The goal, then, is to invest across arange of sectors, countries and assetclasses that have, relatively speaking, lowor negative correlations.

Examples of pairing low or negatively cor-related assets abound. Stocks andbonds.Stocks and TIPS (Treasury InflatedProtected Securities). Stocks and gold.Stocks and real estate. Stocks and com-modities. Until recently, though, therewere few if any free sources of substantivedata with which to seriously approach thetask. That now has changed with the ad-vent of www.assetcorrelation.com.

The website analyzes several differentkinds of asset class correlation matrices.Users also have the ability to modify thetime periods anywhere from one month toten years. That’s an important feature, be-cause the correlations among asset classesconstantly are changing. Investors andtheir advisers need to pay attention towhether those correlations are narrow-ing, widening or staying the same, and, inturn, consider making adjustments to theasset allocation.

The predominant matrix is, and alwayshas been, the so-called “major asset classcorrelation matrix.” That analysis com-pares the correlations of the following:TIPS, gold, U.S. bonds, emerging marketbonds, oil, commodities, U.S. real estate,international real estate, emerging mar-kets, Europe/Australia/Far East, U.S. smallcap stocks, U.S. large cap stocks and U.S.mid cap stocks. The matrix reveals severalimportant facts, including that it is pru-dent to pair U.S. large cap stocks withTIPS, gold, and especially U.S. bonds.Moreover, by comparing the matrix for tenyears versus the matrix for two years, onelearns that the correlation among smalland mid cap stocks with large cap stockshas narrowed to the point (.95 and .98,respectively) where pairing them no

longer is helpful for purposes of asset allo-cation.

Another correlation matrix on the websiteprovides data relating to correlationamong the sectors that compose the S&P500. It examines how each sector is cor-related to the S&P 500 as a whole as wellas to each of the other sectors. The results,for example, demonstrate that utilitiesstocks tend to have the lowest correlationwith the other sectors and with the S&P500 as a whole. However, the data alsoshows that those correlations have nar-rowed more recently.

Still another correlation matrix revealshow various countries have been corre-lated over one month to two year periods.Brazil and Chile tend to have the lowestcorrelation with their counterpartsaround the globe.

Finally, a most illuminating correlationmatrix analyzes the correlation amongthe various bond classes. Investors andtheir advisers can find a great deal of use-ful information regarding Treasuries (sev-eral terms), corporate investment gradebonds, corporate high yield bonds, mu-nicipal bonds, emerging market bondsand mortgage-backed securities. For ex-ample, emerging market bonds and mu-nicipal bonds have the lowest correlationwith their counterparts. By comparison,mortgage-backed securities are moder-ately correlated with Treasuries (exceptshort-term Treasuries with which theyhave low correlation).

In conclusion, this website should be a“favorite” for investors and their advis-ers.Some time spent surfing this websitewill guide them in selecting prudent assetallocations with an eye towards low andnegative correlation among the assets.

James J. Eccleston is a securities attorney rep-resenting investors as well as brokers and bro-kerage firms nationwide in arbitration,litigation and regulatory affairs. He is an eq-uity partner with Shaheen, Novoselsky,Staat, Filipowski & Eccleston.

Correlation Is Critical WhenDetermining Asset Allocation

ByJames J.Eccleston


Personal History

Introducing Kim Nguyen, and the Differences Between German and

American Legal EducationIlived in Germany for six years, so

when the Bar office asked if I’d inter-view a German legal intern working

in Waukegan for The Docket, I jumped atthe opportunity. I anticipated writing a

story aboutthe personwith a focuson the differ-ences betweenlegal educa-tion in Ger-many and theUnited States.I was sur-prised at theoutset, how-ever, to learnthe person’sname: KimNguyen. Any-

one who has lived in the Midwest—muchless Germany—will recognize that as avery non-German name.

In our first meeting, we never even got tothe differences between the German andAmerican systems of legal education. Iwill get there in this article, but let me firstintroduce you to Kim’s fascinating per-sonal history.

While the United States is a land of immi-grants in the truest sense of the word—the vast majority of American citizenscome from someone who immigrated tothis country—Germany is quite different.Here, you can walk down the street and

pass people of African, Irish, Korean, Chi-nese, Hungarian, Polish, and many otherethnicities and think nothing other than“there go a bunch of Americans.” A simi-lar assumption does not apply in Ger-many.1

Kim Nguyen is not your “typical” Ger-man, as her name makes clear. Her her-itage is Vietnamese, although she wasborn and raised in Germany. Kim’s pathfrom Vietnam to Germany to Waukeganis certainly, in the words of Robert Frost,“the one less traveled by.”

First, a bit of background. Although Viet-nam and Germany are similar in popula-tion (both about 85 million) and size (likeMontana or New Mexico), that may bewhere the similarities end. Six thousandmiles separate the countries, and onemight not expect much exchange betweenthem based on that fact alone. Still, beforeGermany’s reunification, both the Eastand the West German governments ac-cepted Vietnamese into Germany. In WestGermany, the vast majority were asylumseekers. East Germany, on the other hand,developed an exchange program withVietnam to supply “guest workers,” even-tually making East Germany’s Vietnamesepopulation the largest immigrant group inthat country.

Kim’s parents came to Germany as asy-lum seekers, not guest workers, and there-fore landed in West Germany. The reasonfor their migration is borne out by history.

According to the United Nations RefugeeAgency, “By early 1978, formal measureswere being taken to expropriate busi-nesses of private entrepreneurs, most ofwhom were ethnic Chinese.”2 Kim’s momwas ethnic Chinese, and Kim’s grandfa-ther owned a jewelry business. Kim’s fa-ther worked as an engineer. As Kimrelates, in 1980 her parents, like manyother Vietnamese, fled Vietnam due to po-litical and social unrest. In fact, this wastheir second attempt at flight, with thefirst ending in a six-month period of in-carceration for her father.

Flight from Vietnam was a worldwide af-fair in which Germany participated, as al-most 17,000 Vietnamese were resettled toWest Germany between 1975-95.3 ThatKim’s parents wound up in Germany wasby dint of fate: the small fishing boat onwhich they left Vietnam was—after beingattacked by Thai pirates who tried to sinkthem in shark-infested waters—picked upby the German humanitarian freighterCap Anamur.4 Kim has no recollection ofthese travels because her participation oc-curred in utero.

The German ship first took its refugees tothe Philippines, where Kim’s parents livedin tents and temporary housing for sixmonths. While in the Philippines, her par-ents took German language courses, andKim says that her parents speak fondly ofthe time they spent in that country.

After six months, Kim’s family was relo-cated to Hanau, Germany, which is just

ByStephen J.

Rice

1 In reality, Germany has had considerable immigration since World War II, and is today the home to millions of immigrant citizens, such that perception and re-ality are somewhat incongruent. See http://bit.ly/dtHu5S (Migrationsbericht 2008 published by the Bundesamtes für Migration und Flüchtlinge). In addition, thepopulation of foreign-born residents in both the U.S. and Germany is almost the same, totaling about 9% in Germany and 10% in the U.S. For statistics on the for-eign-born populations in the two countries as of 2007, see: U.S. – http://bit.ly/9PVV7U (U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Security website); Germany – http://bit.ly/dBypkC(German Federal Statistical Office).2 State of the World’s Refugees 2000, Ch. 4—Flight from Indochina, U.N. Refugee Agency, located at http://www.unhcr.org/3ebf9bad0.html, at page 82 of the PDFcontained on that website (hereafter simply “UNHCR”).3 “Between July 1979 and July 1982, more than 20 countries—led by the United States, Australia, France, and Canada—together resettled 623,800 Indochineserefugees.” UNHCR at 86. During that same time period, 424,590 Vietnamese refugees were resettled to the U.S. UNHCR at 99.4You can learn about the history of Cap Anamur at www.cap-anamur.org/eng/.


east of Frankfurt. There, they first lived ina refugee house. A short time later, theGerman government, pursuing a policythat sought to disperse Vietnameserefugees throughout the country so as toavoid the creation of ghettos, sent Kim’sfamily along with three or four others to asmall town outside of Kassel.5 There,Kim’s mother worked as a nurse in a nurs-ing home, and her father again found em-ployment as an engineer fixing industrialmachines.

The German educational system is quitedifferent from the American, and Kim’shistory in it is illustrative. Kim started ele-mentary school at age seven, and the pri-mary years of German schooling are quitesimilar to those in the United States(which is little wonder, since Americanchildren start in . . . kindergarten). Germanschooling departs from our systemaround sixth grade, when children aresorted into three different types of schoolsbased on their achievement in primaryschool and perceived abilities: the Gymna-sium is the school that prepares studentsto qualify for college education;6 theHauptschule offers more vocationally ori-ented education; and the Realschule sits inbetween Gymnasien and Hauptschulen.7

Upon turning 11, Kim attended severaldifferent schools that set her on the pathto qualify for college admission.

The difference in Germany’s secondaryeducation is equally reflected and illus-trated by Kim’s legal education. Unlike theAmerican system of professional educa-

tion, in which students must first receivean undergraduate degree, no similar col-lege degree is required in Germany. Thismay sound like an accelerated path to theprofessions, but it is not.

Unlike the three-year duration of Ameri-can law school, the average length of Ger-man legal studies is eight years.8Thus, thepath to becoming a lawyer is almost equalin length in both countries, since Ameri-can students first require a four-year de-gree. The distinction is interesting toponder: while an American student profitsfrom a system that encourages a multidis-ciplinary educational path, the Germanstudent receives a more thorough intro-duction to the many facets of law. (Had Igrown up under the German system, Iwould unlikely be writing this articletoday, since my undergraduate degree—German Literature—would have been un-necessary and my connection to Germanyprobably nonexistent.)

An American reader might now questionhow a student can afford such a long edu-cation? The simple answer is: it’s basicallyfree (at least, the tuition is free). Studyingin Germany was universally free ten yearsago, before German universities began in-stituting modest tuition. (Currently, mostGerman states are rolling back tuition be-cause of political pressure.)9 Kim’s uni-versity maintained a no-tuition policythroughout its existence, so long as a stu-dent graduates in a prescribed time frame.

Kim graduated high school with her

Abitur, which qualified her to study at aGerman university, but she first took abreak from school, in part to explore Sin-gapore, Malaysia, and Vietnam. She thenbegan studying at the University of Mainz,which lies outside of Frankfurt.

A German student’s eight-year odyssey tobecome a lawyer first encompasses an ini-tial curriculum lasting 4-5 years (Regel-studienzeit), depending on the State thelaw school is in. In Mainz, the Regelstu-dienzeit entails nine semesters. After thiscoursework is completed, students takethe first of two bar exams (Staatsexamen)before two years of internships (Referen-dariat). But for the cost of law school in theUnited States, which already drives manylaw students into a financial abyss, theAmerican system of legal educationwould be greatly enhanced by addingsuch an internship requirement.

The internships in Germany take studentsthrough the primary substantive areas oflegal practice: interns begin working at alocal court, where they first spend severalmonths assisting in civil courts, then sev-eral more assisting in criminal courts.Next, students go to a governmental officewhere they get practical training in ad-ministrative law. Then it’s off to clerkingin private practice. Finally, there is an elec-tive internship, and during this internshipmany students choose to work in foreigncountries. During these internships, stu-dents earn approximately $1,100 permonth, which is paid by the state in whichthey study.

5 Kassel is almost in the geographic center of now-unified Germany.6 There are other ways to qualify for college admittance in Germany, but graduating from a Gymnasium is the traditional and most common credential required.7 As in the U.S., education in Germany is operated by the state and not the federal government, and some German states operate other types of schools outside themore traditional Gymnasium-Realschule-Hauptschule system.8 http://www.brak.de/seiten/pdf/Statistiken/Jurastudententext.pdf.9 Tuition at German universities that require it averages about $700 per semester.

During her elective internship, Kim cameto the United States to work with Lakelaw.After taking the first German bar exam,she performed her various internships inGerman courts and law firms and then, bysending resumes to law firms she found onthe Internet, she landed the position atLakelaw in Waukegan. Lakelaw focuses itspractice on bankruptcy law and foreclo-sure defense, and Kim assisted both in thefirm’s bankruptcy practice, as well as withthe bankruptcy trustee work performed bythe firm’s founder, David Leibowitz.10 Kimhas relatives who live in Illinois, and shewas initially able to stay with them inRockford before finding closer quartersnear Waukegan.

For those who feared the American Barexam—a two-day affair in Illinois butthree days in some states—the Germanequivalent will sound positively horrific.There are two exams separated by severalyears, and the first is two weeks long. Thefirst exam is taken upon completion of a

student’s normal coursework and con-tains two parts: 6-7 written essays cover-ing the three major areas of German law,which include civil, criminal, and publicor administrative law.

If students pass the first part of the firstexam, they must then sit for an oral examabout five months later. The oral examtypically constitutes one-quarter to one-third of the total points needed to pass thefirst bar exam, depending on the state inwhich you study. Given the rigors of thisexam, it might not surprise to learn thataround 30 percent of exam takers fail it.(An additional 10 percent fail the secondbar exam, which is approximately the fail-ure rate for the Illinois Bar Exam for first-time takers).11 The second German barexam, which is also a written test and iscompleted after the internships, focusesless on legal theory and more on actualprecedent and laws. Like their Americancounterparts, German law students typi-cally attend a BARBRI-like course, though

instead of an eight-week preparation,most students prepare for the exam for anentire year.

Kim continues to prepare for the secondGerman bar exam, and last month she leftthe United States to return to Cologne Ger-many, where she will resume studyingwhile working for the accounting firmKPMG. Once she completes the exam, Kimplans on returning to Chicago and, if allgoes according to plan, she will clerk witha firm in the city that specializes in serv-ing a Vietnamese clientele.

When she returns, I would be happy to in-troduce you to this very unique Germanwoman.

Stephen J. Rice is an associate with Lesser,Lutrey & McGlynn, LLP, in Lake Forest,where he concentrates his practice in trusts,estates, and probate planning, administrationand litigation. He can be reached at [email protected]


10 See lakelaw.com for a complete overview of the firm.11 Illinois statistics (2007): http://www.iit.edu/publications/iittoday/pdf/103007_ChicagoLawBulletin.pdf; German statistics (2008):http://www.bmj.bund.de/files/-/4500/Ausbildungsstatistik%202008.pdf.


50/50 Raffle Winner Donates Back

The raffle generated $4,270 in ticket sales. Thewinner of half of the proceeds, $2,136,Richard Biondi donated $500 of his win-nings back to benefit our beneficiaries.

Live Auction WinnersTrump This!Bill Lindsay

Sparkle! Diamond EarringsMichael and Judge Waller

Blackhawks TicketsScott Gibson

Mother’s Day Week in Cabo San Lucas

Todd Warren

PEOPLE’S LAW SCHOOLthe laws that impact your life, in plain language!

FREE

PRESENTED BY

Co-sponsored by:Illinois State Bar Assn. College of Lake County

A series of four 90-minute programs featuring a variety of law related topicsthat are facilitated by local licensed andpracticing attorneys.

Registration is encouraged for thisFREE 4-session course of instruction.

To register: call 847.244.3143or E-mail your name and classes of interest to [email protected].

2011 SAVE THE DATEFOUR WEEKLY EVENING SESSIONS

College of Lake County • Grayslake CampusFrom 7 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. • Auditorium C005

SCHEDULE DATES:Wednesday, February 16, 2011Wednesday, February 23, 2011Wednesday, March 2, 2011Tuesday, March 8, 2011

TOPICS OF INTEREST:Traffic & DUI • Divorce & CustodyProbate & Social Security Disability

Bankruptcy & Foreclosure


In early 2009, I examined the Protocolfor Broker Recruiting (the “Protocol”)and court opinions applying it to situ-

ations in which financial advisers hadtransitioned their employment from onefinancial services firm to another. The

Protocol ini-tially was con-ceived as a“safe passage”set of proce-dures whichallowed signa-tories to theProtocol toavoid litigation(TROs, otherinjunctive re-lief and dam-a g e s )a s s o c i a t e d

with the solicitation of clients and the tak-ing of client information from one signa-tory firm to another signatory firm.

Moreover, at the time I also spoke of an“unintended consequence.” That is, non-Protocol signatories, faced with litigation,began arguing that the Protocol effec-tively had become an industry standardfor transitioning financial advisers. Thosenon-signatories to the Protocol thereforecontended that they should not be subjectto TROs, other injunctive relief and dam-ages even though they themselves mighthave signed employment agreements orother contractual agreements that ex-pressly had contemplated such relief. Iconcluded at that time that such a cre-ative argument had experienced consider-able (though certainly not universal)success in the courts.

For example, in Merrill Lynch v. Brennan,2007 WL 632904 (N.D.Ohio), financialadvisers transitioned from Merrill Lynch(a signatory firm) to Bear Stearns (a non-signatory firm). The court denied the re-quest for injunctive relief, stating that, “Bysetting up such a procedure for departing

brokers to take client lists, Merrill tacitlyaccepts that such an occurrence does notcause irreparable harm.” Likewise, inSmith Barney v. Griffin, 2008 WL 325269(Mass.Super.), a financial advisor hadtransitioned from a Protocol signatoryfirm, Smith Barney, to a non-signatoryfirm (N.Y. Life). The existence of the Pro-tocol led the court to conclude that: (1)Smith Barney did not regard certain clientinformation, as defined in the Protocol,truly to be confidential; (2) the financialadviser’s non-solicitation agreement trulywas unnecessary to protect the goodwillof Smith Barney; and (3) a preliminary in-junction truly was unnecessary to preventa substantial risk of irreparable harm.

In examining more recent court opinionsone and one-half years later, it appearsthat the trend continues towards deemingthe Protocol to be an industry standard fortransitioning financial advisers. Let’soverview the Protocol and discuss somerecent court opinions.

Although the Protocol began in 2004with just three financial services firmssigning on – Citigroup Global Markets(Smith Barney), Merrill Lynch, and UBSFinancial Services – there now are 530signatory firms to the Protocol! The prin-cipal goal of the Protocol, as noted in theopinions of numerous courts, is clientchoice. The Protocol provides:

The principal goal of the followingprotocol is to further the clients’ in-terests of privacy and freedom ofchoice in connection with the move-ment of their [financial advisers] be-tween firms. If transitioning[financial advisers] and their firm fol-low this Protocol, neither the transi-tioning [financial adviser] nor thefirm that he or she joins would haveany monetary or other liability to thefirm that the [financial adviser] left byreason of the [financial adviser’s] tak-ing the information identified belowor the solicitation of the client serv-

ices by the [financial adviser] at his orher prior firm.

To take advantage of the Protocol protec-tion, though, transitioning financial ad-visers may take only the following clientaccount information: client name, ad-dress, phone number, email address, andaccount title of the clients that they serv-iced while at the firm (the “Client Infor-mation”). They are prohibited from takingany other client documents or informa-tion (such as client account numbers, ac-count statements or tax identificationnumbers). Similarly, financial advisersmay not share with their new firm anyclient information prior to resignation (ex-cept personal sales production informa-tion). Further, the Protocol requires thatresignations be in writing, be delivered tolocal branch management, and include acopy of the Client Information that the fi-nancial adviser is taking with him or her.The Client Information list delivered to thebranch additionally must include the ac-count numbers for the clients serviced bythe financial adviser. It is worth notingthat nothing in the Protocol alters thecommon law duty of loyalty as it relatesto prohibiting a financial adviser from so-liciting clients (to move their accounts)and staff (to join the new firm) before theadviser resigns.

Finally, the Protocol expressly does notprotect against injunctive relief and dam-ages for what the securities industry calls“raiding” cases. Those cases are not easilydefined, but normally “you know ‘emwhen you see ‘em.” They occur when a fi-nancial services firm loses so many of itsadvisers to a competitor that a “severeeconomic impact” results. That impacthas been quantified as approximately 40%of a business unit’s production, but thepercentage varies and the determinationdepends upon what kind of “impropermeans” was employed and/or the degreeof “malice/predation” that existed.

More recent court opinions include Mer-rill Lynch v. Baxter, 2009 WL 960773

Broker Protocol RevisitedAn “Industry Standard” for Employment Transitions

ByJames J.Eccleston


(D.Utah). In that case, Merrill Lynchsought injunctive relief against a financialadviser who had transitioned to a non-Protocol firm, Ameriprise Financial Serv-ices. Relying upon the Protocol and SmithBarney v. Griffin, the court denied the re-quest for injunctive relief, stating, “If cus-tomer confidence is not underminedwhen a departing broker leaves for an-other Protocol firm, it is difficult to com-prehend why customer confidenceconstitutes irreparable harm when a de-parting broker goes to a non-Protocol

firm.” Likewise, in Smith Barney v. Darling,2009 WL 1544756 (E.D.Wis.), SmithBarney sued financial advisers who hadtransitioned to a non-Protocol firm,Robert W. Baird & Co. The court reliedupon the Protocol, Smith Barney v. Griffinand Wisconsin law to deny a TRO requestas to client names, addresses, telephonenumbers and email addresses.

There can be no doubt that the Protocolhas been nothing less than a “sea change”for the financial advisers who seek to tran-sition their books of business from one

firm to another. It now appears that theunintended consequence of allowingnon-signatories to the Protocol to take ad-vantage of the existence of the Protocol toargue an industry standard and therebydefeat litigation seeking injunctive reliefhas taken a firm hold.

James J. Eccleston is a securities attorney rep-resenting investors as well as brokers and bro-kerage firms nationwide in arbitration,litigation and regulatory affairs. He is an eq-uity partner with Shaheen, Novoselsky,Staat, Filipowski & Eccleston.


How to Laugh in theFace of a Data Disaster

Imagine that, for three years, a busi-ness client of yours ignored its IT con-sultant’s advice to create daily data

backups and engage in a maintenanceprogram to provide comprehensive over-sight of the entire network.Now add to

that the obvi-ous fact thatthis businessgenerates ani n o r d i n a t eamount ofdust. Every-day dustclouds waftinto the officearea from themachine shopnearby. Dustliterally pene-trates every-thing andeverywhere;

there are absolutely no safeguards to pro-tect sensitive electronic equipment. Nowfurther imagine that this company is run-ning all its critical applications on a singleserver. But, hey, life is good. New ordersare coming in daily and shipments aregoing out just as fast. 2010 is going to beway better than that disastrous 2009.Maybe…

Where’s that music from Jaws - thoseplaintive tones that signal a great whiteshark is close and senses distress?Remark-ably, there is hope. An idea flickers in themind of the company president that per-haps his consultant might have a pointabout the computer. He grudgingly agreesto buy services to start backing up andprotecting the company’s mission criticaldata. Hooray, the boat is steering awayfrom shark-infested waters. But don’trelax yet! As fate would have it just beforethese long-needed security measures canbe implemented, two of our hero’s threedisk drives storing data fail. All the datastored on them vanishes, never to be seenagain, producing a catastrophic data andbusiness failure.

Could this happen to one of your clients?

Could it happen to you?

This is a true story from the case chroni-cles of ETS Investigative Services of Wil-mette, Illinois, a firm specializing in datasecurity, recovery, forensics and investiga-tions, and one that I use and recom-mend.In June 2010, ETS was called in tohelp a client that lost nearly three years ofbusiness data and is now working fever-ishly to reconstruct, at great cost, all thelost data from paper records.

ETS hopes that everyone learns a con-structive lesson from this example.Today,many small businesses still do not performbackups.However, even performing back-ups are no longer sufficient.If a serverdrive crashes and no backup of the serveroperating “environment” exists, it couldtake days to rebuild the server so that itcan accept data.This is exactly the situa-tion ETS faced for their client.It took daysbefore data could be reintroduced. Howmany businesses today can overcomeserver downtime even for a few hours, letalone a number of days?

Tape has been the traditional method ofbackup.However, tapes wear over time, re-quire manual procedures to store andcycle, and become unreliable overtime.With high-speed internet connectiv-ity being universally available, many busi-nesses now use online backup likeCarbonite and MozyPro.ETS highly rec-ommends using these as a secondary formof backup.The only drawback is time - ifit took you many days to backup yourdata, then it typically takes about thesame amount of time to return it back tothe server – and this can only be doneonce the server is finally back up and run-ning!

ETS’s business continuity model savestime and it’s simple. Step One is to “virtu-alize” the server(s).Simply put, this in-volves installing a special free operatingsystem (ESXi from VMware) on the mainserver after the current server “image”has been temporarily copied.The currentserver “image” is then returned to the

main server, but it is now running as aguest under ESXi.What is revolutionaryhere is that now the entire server “image”is one really big file rather than tens ofthousands of smaller ones.

Each night, the entire server image iscopied over to a lower performance (andmuch lower cost) backup server, while themain server is actually live!If the mainserver crashes, the backup quickly startsup, and within minutes you have yourserver image up and running.Incremen-tal backups can also be captured duringthe day to further minimize the possibilityof data loss.Some clients even send theirserver images to external hard drives to bestored offsite because they are nowquickly accessible.This solution can be im-plemented for just a few thousand dollarsand is well worth the investment.

A server crash need no longer be a sourceof major concern.With regard to its afore-mentioned client, ETS reports that afterimplementing the recommended safe-guards the company’s management nowactually sleeps at night. They know thatthey have in place a reliable, rapid re-sponse, and a low cost way to safeguardtheir data so that their business is insu-lated from another major interruption.

Coaching your clients to adopt these sim-ple yet effective solutions should help youbuild customer appreciation and a long-term mutually beneficial relationship.Someday your clients will thank you fortaking the time to be very concernedabout backup procedures in your office.You will be glad you did - I sure am!

Alan Pearlman is a practicing attorney inChicago and surrounding suburbs. Mr. Pearl-man is the author of the nationally syndi-cated and trademarked column entitled "TheElectronic Lawyer"™. Mr. Pearlman is alsoactive as a computer consultant to several lawfirms in Chicago, as well as other firmsthroughout the U.S. © Copyright 2010 ”TheElectronic Lawyer” ™ All Rights Reserved.

ByAlan

PearlmanThe Electronic Lawyer™


The year 2010 saw mostly smallsteps forward in the Illinois criminalcourts. The Appellate and Supreme

Courts spent much of the year clarifyingrules and principles which they had previ-ously articulated. Their main “leap for-

ward” was theresolution ofthe issue ofadmissibilityof HGN testsin DUI cases.During theCriminal LawCommittee’srecent verysuccessful an-nual seminarin Milwaukee,Wisconsin, Iwas able toprovide an

over-view of our courts’ most importantcriminal law decisions this past year.

For Interrogation Purposes, “Mostly Dead” Isn’t “All the Way Dead” In People v. Armstrong, 919 N.E.2d 57 (1stDist. 2009), the defendant, age 17, ad-mitted in non-recorded in-custody inter-rogations that he shook a baby and threwhim to the ground. At the time of the in-terrogation, the interrogators did notknow that the baby was medically diag-nosed as brain dead, thus an exception toSection 103-2.1 applied, so that state-ments were presumed voluntary, eventhough not recorded, and suppressionwas not required. For the court’s pur-poses, the definition of “dead” was thatused by the medical professionals – in thiscase, “brain-dead.”

Interrogations, Bad Cops &SuggestibilityThe Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Nel-son, 922 N.E.2d 1056 (2009), found nobasis to reverse the defendant’s convic-tions on multiple charges of murder, homeinvasion and aggravated arson. The de-fendant failed to show relevance of a testwhich a clinical psychologist performed onthe defendant to show his susceptibility togiving a false confession. While the trial

court erred in using a “Frye-plus” analy-sis, the test was not shown to be relevant.It was within trial court’s discretion to ex-clude evidence that detectives who ob-tained inculpatory statements had beensued, in an unrelated federal court case,for civil rights violation alleging coercionof false confession. Existence of such a suit(essentially an unproven allegation) is notthe same as evidence of departmental dis-ciplinary action.

Transport = Arrest & the Tape Better be AudibleWhen the Chicago police repeatedlytransported defendant from Cook CountyJail to CPD holding so that his conversa-tions with an informant could be elec-tronically recorded, People v. Hunt, WL3291930 (1st Dist. 2010), held that eachsuch transport was a subsequent arrestwithout probable cause and questioningby the informant is custodial interroga-tion. Further, since the audio tapes weremostly inaudible, the trial court was cor-rect in suppressing the statements madeduring those recording sessions.

Confusion is not an Assertion ofRightsWhere a defendant being interrogatedasks a series of questions like “can I havea lady lawyer” and “could I have a lawyerright now” or “what if I can’t afford alawyer,” and finally says “ok, lets do thisyour way,” People v. Quevedo, 932 N.E.2d642 (2nd Dist., 2010), held that the de-fendant did not make an unequivocal andunambiguous demand for counsel andsubsequent questioning was proper.

Confrontation & Availability for Cross-ExaminationA number of cases this year addressed justwhen a witness who actually takes thewitness stand should be considered “un-available for cross-examination” and thusfails to satisfy the confrontation prong ofthe Crawford decision. Where a child wit-ness took the stand, couldn’t discern truthfrom lie, testified vaguely on direct (with-out addressing the charges of abuse) andwho on cross-examination answeredmostly “I don’t know,” People v. Learn, 919

N.E.2d 1042 (2nd Dist. 2009), held thatthis was essentially “mere presence” andinsufficient to satisfy section 115-10.When a witness answers that she was“too drunk to remember” whether shemade a statement or not, People v.Tracewski, 927 N.E.2d 1271 (4th Dist.2010), held that this was sufficientlyavailable. Finally, whatever the witnessdoes or doesn’t say on direct examination,defense counsel risks an adverse rulingwhen he or she elects not to cross-exam-ine the witness on the substance of thecharges. People v. Major-Flisk, 923 N.E.2d324 (1st Dist. 2010).

Controlled Substances: Keep Separate RuleThis year Illinois courts again held that itis generally improper to aggregate cocaineto support a conviction for a greater chargebased upon the total weight of the cocaine.In People v. Sherrod, 916 N.E.2d 1256 (1stDist. 2009), the court ruled that, takenalone, possession of a lot of individuallywrapped rocks of cocaine are not sufficientto convict for intent to deliver (there shouldbe some other evidence like cell phones,cash, scales, etc.). In People v. Clinton, 922N.E.2d 1118 (1st Dist. 2009), the court re-versed where the chemist combined pack-ets of controlled substance to reachrequired weight before testing.

DUI: Do Things in the Right Order & at the Right TimeIn People v. Faint, 920 N.E.2d 1247 (3rdDist. 2009), the court erred when it foundthe defendant guiltybefore the trial wasover. During a bench trial, the defensemoved for a directed finding at the end ofthe State’s case. The court heard argu-ment and then both denied the motionand found the defendant guilty. Timingwas also critical in People v. Ziobro, 921N.E.2d 1264 (3rd Dist. 2010), where de-fendants were given appearance dates be-yond the time allowed in Rule 504. Thedefendants who timely filed jury demands(10 days before first appearance) and an-nounced “ready for trial” at first appear-ance were entitled to dismissal withprejudice.

2010 Case

ByKeith Grant


Law UpdateThe court in People v. Keithley, 927 N.E.2d299 (5th Dist. 2010), held that waitingthe required 20 minutes for observation isnot required when the defendant is refus-ing to blow.

Frye & DUIBoth LIDAR (People v. Mann, 922 N.E.2d533 (2nd Dist. 2010)) and the HGN test(People v. McKown, 236 Ill.2d 278 (2010))were found to meet the Frye test for ad-missibility. The McKown court went on tonote that this ruling did not excuse theState from the requirement that they laya proper foundation showing the test wasproperly administered by a qualified per-son.

Cannabis Cases: Where There’s Smoke…You StillNeed Evidence (and Training)In several DUI-drug cases courts com-mented upon the weight to be given to anofficer’s observations. In People v. McPeak,927 N.E.2d 312 (2nd Dist. 2010), thecourt found a strong odor of cannabis andan admission that driver had smoked pre-viously did not satisfy requirement ofsome evidence of drug “in his breath,blood or urine.” In People v. Foltz, 2010WL 3330949 (5th Dist, 2010), the courtfound the officer lacked sufficient experi-ence (less than two years on the force) ortraining (none) to testify that the defen-dant was under the influence of drugs.

Videotape & Police Officer Testimony Should be Viewed CarefullyIn People v. Taylor, 922 N.E.2d 1235 (2nd

Dist, 2010), a video with several cuts andjumps should not have been admittedwithout a foundation establishing that itwas unaltered and explaining how it wastransferred from DVD to VHS tape. Wherea police officer was allowed to testify thathe never believed the defendant, People v.Munoz, 923 N.E.2d 898 (1st Dist, 2010),held that because a jury is likely to creditmore weight to a police officer as a figureof authority, the case must be reversed.

Experts: Basis for Their OpinionsTwo cases this year held that while expertsmay not testify exclusively about a thirdparty report (this violates confrontation),they may testify that the report of anotherexpert formed a part of the basis for theiropinion. In People v. Johnson, 915 N.E.2d845 (1st Dist. 2009), the court affirmedthe reliance of a DNA expert upon the re-port and procedures employed by otheranalysts. However, that holding is re-versed and remanded for further findingsby the Illinois Supreme Court in its laterholding in People v. Williams, 2009 WL2780344 (2009), where an expert’s re-port, relied upon by another expert informing his opinion was not offered for thetruth of the matter and thus was nothearsay. The testifying expert was allowedto testify about the report to the extent itexplains the basis for his opinion.

Frye and Shaken Baby SyndromeIn People v. Armstrong, 919 N.E.2d 57 (1stDist, 2009). the trial court admittedshaken baby syndrome testimony without

first conducting a Frye hearing (taking ju-dicial notice of the evidence). The review-ing court found this to be harmless error,distinguished from McKown by a lack ofdivergent court opinions on the topic, andnoted that this case is not a determinationof whether or not the syndrome satisfiesFrye.

Sticking with a “babies” theme, the courtin People v. Alvarez-Garcia, 395 Ill.App.3d719 (1st Dist. 2009), found that the doc-trine of transferred intent applies in afelony murder trial where the defendant ischarged with the murder of an unbornbaby whose death was a reasonable andforeseeable outcome of shooting a preg-nant woman several times.

Krankel:Courts Should Inquire if the Allegationis Substantive – But Not by ItselfIn People v. Vargas, 919 N.E.2d 414 (1stDist. 2009), a defendant’s written andverbal complaints about counsel’s per-formance, made immediately before sen-tencing, were completely ignored by thetrial court. The case holds that, where apro se and substantive complaint of inef-fective assistance is made, it is the trialcourt’s duty to inquire. In People v. Trussel,913 N.E.2d 266 (4th Dist. 2010), theclerk merely filed a letter to the court com-plaining of ineffective assistance. That let-ter should have been given to the Judge todetermine if appointment of Krankelcounsel was necessary. Where the claimof ineffective assistance fails to state a sin-gle substantive example of ineffective be-

havior, the court in In re Westley AF, 928N.E.2d 150 (2nd Dist. 2010), correctly re-fused further inquiry. Finally the court inPeople v. Givens, 237 Ill.2d 311 (2010),erred when it sua sponte initiated a Krankelhearing. In acting without promptingfrom any of the parties, the court aban-doned its impartial role.

Krankel Analysis: No hindsight Allowed But Futility is a KillerIn People v. Jacobazzi, 2-05-0902 (2nd Dist.2009), the court erred when it second-guessed the strategic decisions of trialcounsel using hindsight, which has noplace in a Strickland analysis underKrankel. In cases where the defendant’sclaim of ineffective assistance would com-pel counsel to undertake a futile act (inthis case, a motion to dismiss underspeedy trial), People v. Sharifpour, 930N.E.2d 529 (2nd Dist. 2010), holds thatfailing to fight the unwinnable fight is notineffective.

Zehr: All Four & Individual InquiryA large number of cases this year founderror when trial courts scrimped or

skipped all or some of the Zehr principlesset forth at Supreme Court Rule 431(b).The short version: inquire of the entirevenire all of the principles (which are):

• Defendant is presumed innocent

• State must prove guilt beyond a reason-able doubt

• Defendant need not offer any evidence indefense

• Failure to testify cannot be held againstdefendant

While the inquiry is not dependent upon arequest from the defense, People v. Madrid,916 N.E.2d 1273 (1st Dist. 2009), is onecase that did find the issue waived wheredefense failed to object to their omission;People v. Russell, 921 N.E.2d 1 (3rd Dist.2009), applied plain error analysis ratherthan strict compliance.

In the Jury Room: No Google or Bible (and Leave the“Sole Vote for Life” Alone)Where there is evidence presented thatone juror brought google results into de-liberations and another brought bible pas-

sages, the court erred when it refused toinquire further. People v Wilmer, 919N.E.2d 1035 (3rd Dist. 2009). In anothercase, the trial court erred when it removedthe sole holdout for life after the other ju-rors complained he had made up his mindand refused to deliberate (there was con-tradictory evidence that he had engagedin deliberations). Since that jury could notbe reconstituted, the case was remandedfor non-capital sentencing. People v. Nel-son, 235 Ill,2d 386 (2009).

One-Act-One-Crime (Not Two-Acts-One-Crime) Must Be Charged AccuratelyFirst, two separate acts, charged differ-ently, in two separate counties, were(amazingly enough) found not to be a sin-gle act; or, more important in sex offenses,not part of a single course of conduct. Peo-ple v. Gray, 924 N.E.2d 1109 (4th Dist.2009). And where the State’s charging in-strument fails to distinguish between mul-tiple counts of battery where defendant(a) smashed a pitcher into a victim’s face,and (b) rubbed the broken pitcher intothat same face, must be considered underone-act. People v. Garcia, 922 N.E.2d 495(1st Dist. 2009).


THANKYOU!

To volunteer, please contact Susan Perlman at [email protected]

or 847-662-6925.

Scott Williams

David Semmelman

Kathy Curtin

Wilfred Chan

Sarah Chomiak

The following attorneys have accepted Pro Bono cases through Prairie State Legal

Services in November 2010.


Post-Conviction Petitions & Mandatory Supervised ReleaseIn 2005, the Supreme Court announcedthat failing to advise a defendant that hissentence will subject him to MSR is a fatalflaw. People v. Whitfield, 217 Ill.2d 177(2005). Sick and tired of the flood of Post-Conviction Petitions alleging no MSR ad-visals, the Court refined the rule to applyONLY after the date of the Whitfield rul-ing (December 20, 2005). People v. Mor-ris, 236 Ill,2d 345 (2010).

Since then, the lower courts have beenrushing to interpret what this all means.People v. Davis, 2010 WL 3172191 (1stDist. 2010), finds a Whitfield violationonly where there has been no mention ofMSR prior to plea – while Davis’ singlemention is enough, it’s better practice toinclude MSR in a written sentencingorder. Next, People v. Snyder, 2010 WL3516115 (3rd Dist. 2010), interpretingWhitfield where defendant not admon-ished regarding restitution, finds a defen-dant may either (a) have the benefit of theplea they were admonished on or (b) with-draw from the plea all-together. People v.Merritt, 916 N.E.2d 631 (4th Dist. 2009),found that a Whitfield violation is ignored

where a defendant is sentenced to lessthan the cap.

Searching Cars: Not Getting Any EasierRelying upon Arizona v. Gant, the courtfound a warrantless search of a car un-reasonable where the defendant was al-ready secured in the police car and hisarrest was for obstructing (no evidence ofobstructing likely to be found in the car).People v. Bridgewater, 235 Ill.2d 85(2009). The “seizure” portion of search &seizure takes place when officer activateshis lights and siren, however briefly. Peo-ple v. Cash, 922 N.E.2d 1103 (2nd Dist.2009). And while there has to be at leastsome reasonably articulable suspicion (asopposed to a DEA agent who sees defen-dant put a bowling bag in the trunk), Peo-ple v. Christmas, 920 N.E.2d 1240 (2ndDist. 2009), when the defendant consentsto a search, he also implicitly consents tothe time it takes to conduct that search.People v. Oliver, 232 Ill.2d 446 (2010).

Battering Rams, Dead Dogs & Lock-StepWhen the police battered in a door with-out exigent circumstances, immediately

shooting the family dog, they clearly vio-lated the Richards “knock and announce”rule. The trial court properly refused tosuppress the evidence since knock-and-announce violations do not trigger the ex-clusionary rule under federal law andIllinois is a “lock-step” jurisdiction. Thisdecision is essentially a textbook on no-knock, the exclusionary rule and lock-step analysis. People v. Glorioso, 924N.E.2d 1153 (2nd Dist. 2010).

ConclusionThis has been just a “dip of the toe” intothe 58 pages of caselaw announced sinceour 2009 Criminal Law Seminar. I’vetried to hit most of the highlights andwhat (at least so far) seem to be the cor-nerstone cases. The full text of my caselawsummary can be found at the LCBA web-site.

Keith Grant is the Lake County Public De-fender’s Chief of Special Defense & Profes-sional Development. A criminal trial attorneywith 20 years experience and a certified leadcounsel in the Illinois Capital Litigation TrailBar, he is also c-chair of the LCBA CriminalLaw Committee.

LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICEWhy should YOU join the LCBA Lawyer Referral Service?

The LCBA Lawyer Referral Service (LRS) is a valuable member benefit as well as a public service. LRS providesmember attorneys with an opportunity to build business through client referrals. The service benefits thepublic by helping callers quickly find an attorney in the area of law in which they need help. The LRS iswidely publicized and all LCBA members in good standing who carry the required malpractice insuranceare eligible to join.

The LRS program is designed to assist persons who are able to pay normal attorney fees but whose ability tolocate legal representation is frustrated by a lack of experience with the legal system, a lack of informationabout the type of services needed, or a fear of the potential costs of seeing a lawyer.

Available Referral Panels• Administrative

• Appellate

• Commercial

• Consumer

• Criminal

• Employment

• Environmental

• Family

• Real Estate

• Estate Planning, Wills,Trusts and Probate

• Personal Injury /Property Damage

Start taking advantage of all the LRS has to offer!

Call the LCBA Office (847-244-3143) with questions or download the procedures and application from our website at www.lakebar.org.

22 The Docket November 2010

Williamsburg, Va. (Nov. 15,2010) — Robert A. Zastany,executive director of the Ad-

ministrative Office of the Nineteenth Ju-dicial Circuit of Lake County, Ill., will beinducted into the Warren E. Burger So-ciety during the National Center forState Courts’ (NCSC) Annual Recogni-tion Luncheon on Friday, Nov. 19. Theluncheon, which will be held at theMandarin Oriental hotel in Washing-ton, D.C., will be hosted by Texas ChiefJustice Wallace B. Jefferson, chair ofNCSC’s Board of Directors.

The Warren E. Burger Society honorsindividuals who have volunteered theirtime, talent, and support to the NationalCenter in exceptional ways. It is named

for the former chief justice of the U.S.Supreme Court who helped found theNCSC in 1971.

Zastany has been executive director ofthe Administrative Office of the Nine-teenth Judicial Circuit since 1984. Healso has worked for the Oklahoma Ad-ministrative Office of the Judiciary, theWarren/Trumbull County, Ohio, courts,and NCSC. He has served on the faculty

of the NationalCenter’s Institutefor Court Manage-ment (ICM), anddeveloped a part-nership programthat enabled Illi-nois court staff toattend ICM’sclasses at a localcommunity col-lege. Zastany alsovolunteered as aconsultant withNCSC’s Interna-tional Division inKosovo by sharinghis skills and expe-rience with the ju-diciary of thatcountry.

He is an activemember of the Na-tional Associationfor Court Manage-ment, has servedon its Board of Di-

rectors, and is a three-time recipient ofthe association’s Lady of Justice Award.He is a certified government perform-ance manager and an ICM fellow, andreceived ICM’s Star Award in 2009 andthe National Center’s DistinguishedService Award in 1996. Zastany re-ceived his master’s and bachelor’s de-gree from Youngstown State University.

Burger Society inductees are selected bya committee chaired by Texas attorneyCharles M. Noteboom, who commis-sioned a portrait of Chief Justice Burgerthat hangs in the National Center’sheadquarters in Williamsburg, Va. Eachinductee receives a limited edition ofthat portrait, which is signed and num-bered by the artist, Fran Di Giacomo.There are 1,986 prints of the portrait,the first two of which are owned byChief Justice Burger’s children and thelast of which was owned by the late U.S.Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, whotook his oath from the retiring Chief Jus-tice Burger in 1986.

The National Center for State Courts,headquartered in Williamsburg, Va., isa nonprofit court reform organizationdedicated to improving the administra-tion of justice by providing leadershipand service to the state courts. Foundedin 1971 by the Conference of Chief Jus-tices and Chief Justice of the UnitedStates Warren E. Burger, NCSC provideseducation, training, technology, man-agement, and research services to thenation’s state courts.

Note: This news release is located on theNCSC website. National Center for StateCourts, 300 Newport Avenue, Williams-burg, VA 23185-4147

NCSC Selects Robert A. Zastanyfor Warren E. Burger Society

Induction Recognizes Role in Professional Development of Court Staff


Prior MinutesA motion was duly made, sec-onded, carried and it was re-solved that the minutes from theSeptember, 2010 Board Meetingwere approved

New MembersSeveral officers have begun con-tacting new members and wel-coming them to the Association.This is meeting with a favorableresponse. A motion was dulymade, seconded, carried and itwas resolved that the Board ap-proved new members to the LakeCounty Bar Association. TheBoard, on behalf of the bar, wel-comes the following members:

Attorney MembershipMaurice Burnell Holman

Harold M. SaalfeldGraham Jeep

Agnes T. PrindivilleJohn M. D’ArcoJohn J. Reid

Roger A. WhiteSharanya Gururajan

Colin M. Jones

Associate MembershipDr. Julie Atkins WaitsDr. Daniel SorkinNatasha JacksonJessica McClainApryl ZieglerAndrew Ringel

Elain PanBernadette KucikEugene EvangelistaLaura SullivanJanet Gager

Leah St. MartinColin CorrJohn Dooley

Kaitlyn PyleLinda TuckerNeal SchroederBridget MazzioCheryl Cook

Agata CzyzewskaVictoria NobuJolie Lasaine

Barbara ZimmersAmy Gibbons

Suzanne CostelloAnn NormanAshley VelaDenita RicciMarina Rivits

Denise C. RolandoMichael a GoldbergBrent R. Erwin

Maureen A RimerMargaret L. LargayEvelyn J. TribbsSusan L. Soullaci

Treasurer’s ReportAs of October 1, the bar is hold-ing $52,638 in its accounts.This is a traditional low point inthe year for dues income. Execu-tive Director Chris Boadt hasdone a very good job containingcosts at Association functions.The Association is on-budgetand there is nothing else to re-port.

A motion was duly made, sec-onded and carried and it was re-solved to approve the Treasurer’sReport.

Delinquent MembersTreasurer Kevin Kane recentlysent a letter to the last knownaddresses of every member whohas not yet paid his or her dues,he has also sent the same letter

to any other addresses for thosemembers known to him. Whilethis has met with some positiveresponses, a number of mem-bers did not respond and remaindelinquent. The Executive Direc-tor will send written notice toeach delinquent member in-forming them that they arebeing removed from the rolls ofmembership.

Committee Chair ThomasGurewitzMr. Gurewitz, who was presentat the meeting, was invited tojoin the Board at the table. Anumber of additional Associa-tion members who were presentwere advised that they would beafforded an opportunity to beheard at a later time during themeeting.

October 2010

Executive Board MeetingMEMBERS PRESENT

Elizabeth RochfordPresident

Perry SmithFirst Vice-President

Kevin KaneTreasurer

Keith GrantSecretary

Scott GibsonImmediate Past President

Hon. Fred ForemanHon. Joann FratianniSteve McCollumMark Van DonselaarGary SchlesingerMichael Ori

Chris BoadtExecutive Director

Rebecca WitcombeLiaison from The Docket

ByKeithGrant,Secretary

Minutes

Editorial Board seeks new member.Interested parties please E-mail [email protected]

A motion was duly made andseconded but did not carrythat the Board go into Execu-tive Session.

President Elizabeth Rochfordfirst explained to Mr. Gurewitzthat, although she had beentasked with informing him ofthe Association’s decision totake no action regarding hisletter of August 16, 2010, shehad failed to do so. She apolo-gized for this oversight and ex-plained briefly on the recordthat the Judicial Selection &Retention Committee had rec-ommended to the Board thatno action be taken and theBoard had adopted this posi-tion during its Septembermeeting.

President Rochford also notedthat Association memberMichael Noonan had con-tacted Immediate Past Presi-dent Scott Gibson (copyingFirst Vice President PerrySmith) via e-mail on October18, 2010. Mr. Noonan raisedthe issue of the appropriate-ness of Mr. Gurewitz’ OctoberLCBA Family Law CommitteeNewsletter. Particularly, hequestioned whether thenewsletter improperly putforth Mr. Guerwitz’ politicalopinions via his position asCommittee Chairman.

Executive Director Boadt ad-vised the Board that any Com-mittee Chair can submitcommunications to the Asso-ciation office for distribution tocommittee members throughConstant Contact, a group e-mail service. Submissions arereceived as Word documentsand pasted into the ConstantContact format. These submis-sions are not edited, they areonly checked for accuracy ofdates and locations. Commit-tee announcements are onlysent to members who haveidentified themselves as mem-bers of a particular committee.Mr. Guerwitz noted that this isexclusively how he communi-

cates with his membership.

Director Boadt noted that via,Constant Contact, there is alink to Facebook which allowsrecipients of the e-mail to con-nect it to their own Facebookpage. Director Boadt notedthat upon receipt of Mr. Guer-witz’ submission, he reviewedit, and then reviewed Article 2,Section 6 of the LCBA Bylaws.In short, that section, prohibitsAssociation members frommaking “any public statementon behalf of the Association”without the prior approval ofthe membership or board ofdirectors. Director Boadt alsoreviewed Article 8, Section 7of the Bylaws which bars rep-resentation of the Associationbefore any other body oragency without the express ap-proval of the board of direc-tors. After reviewing thesesections of the Bylaws, Direc-tor Boadt sent Mr. Guerwitz’newsletter as written.

Mr. Guerwitz was then givenan opportunity to address theBoard. He cited his long in-volvement with the LCBA as amember, a committee chair-man and even as President ofthe Association. He noted thathis Family Law CommitteeNewsletter has a seventeenyear history and that in thistime he has effectively utilizedhis irreverent humor and deepcommitment to the family lawbar to involve as many mem-bers of the community as pos-sible. Regarding “publicstatements”, Mr. Guerwitznoted that past issues involv-ing such statements con-cerned statements explicitlymade by Association officersacting in their official capacityand expressing opinions assuch. Mr. Guerwitz contendedthat his statements in theNewsletter were personalopinions and not made on be-half of the Association.

Mr. Guerwitz noted also that atthe last meeting of the Family

Law Committee, a vote wastaken as to whether his state-ment was deemed by the com-mittee to be in violation of theabove-cited rules. 27 commit-tee members voted that he wasnot, the only other reportedvotes were a number of sittingcircuit judges and members ofthe Association’s ExecutiveBoard who abstained. In lightof the foregoing, Mr. Guerwitzexpressed his dissatisfaction atbeing asked to appear beforethe Executive Board and hisfeeling that he was somehowbeing disciplined.

Though offered an opportu-nity to be heard, other Associ-ation members present electednot to speak.

The Executive Board then dis-cussed the issue. While somefelt that the Facebook link may

have made the Newsletter apublic statement, others com-pared the link to a more effec-tive means of reproductionand re-distribution beyond thecontrol of the original sender,it was ultimately the sense ofthe Board that the Newsletterwas an internal Associationcommunication, directly sentonly to Association memberswho were also members of theFamily Law Committee.

The Board determined that Mr.Guerwitz’ communication wasnot “public” and it was thesense of the Board that Mr.Guerwitz’ expressions of hispersonal opinions in theNewsletter were not in viola-tion of either Article 2, Section6 or Article 8, Section 7 of theBylaws and thus, did not re-quire any action by the Board


TheGrapevine

Amy C. Hoogasian was sworn-in as an Immigration Judgeon November 5, 2010 at the Homeland Security Head-quarters in Falls Church, Virginia. Judge Hoogasian is thedaughter of the late Lake County Judge Jack Hoogasianand LCBA member Claudia and the niece of LCBA memberDavid Aho. She will preside in San Francisco California.


or the Association.

The Board noted that, regard-ing Mr. Guerwitz’ original let-ter of complaint to theAssociation dated August 16,2010, the Board conducted atimely review of the contentsof that letter, properly referredthe question to the Judicial Se-lection & Retention Commit-tee, and ultimately acceptedthe conclusion of that Com-mittee, that the Associationtake no further action.

The Board then resolved thatno additional action was re-quired either in response to Mr.Guerwitz’ original letter, hisOctober Newsletter, or the e-mails of Mr. Noonan. Mr.Guerwitz was thanked, bothfor his attendance at this meet-ing and for his long history ofcontribution to the Associa-tion and he then excused him-self from the meeting.

Judicial Selection & Reten-tion CommitteeIn response to the Board’s re-quest for clarification of thedecision regarding Rule18.1(a) the JSRC reported toExecutive Director Boadt thatthe Committee felt that requir-ing applicants for Circuit Judgepositions to submit applica-tions for consideration prior toevery selection process is ap-propriate. The Committee feltthat this will allow for more ac-curate and impartial polling ofthe Association membershipbefore the Committee issues itscircuit court judicial recom-mendations regarding the en-tire field of interestedapplicants. The Committee feltthis process was more impor-tant than attempting to bring

candidates in for interviews orre-interviews in cases whereprior evaluations expiredshortly before selection.

It was resolved by the Boardthat this reasoning was soundand that the rules amendmentis approved. Pursuant to JSRCRule 9, the JSRC shall be per-mitted to amend Rule 18 as ap-proved.

Upcoming Social EventsThe LCBA Holiday Open Housewill be held on Friday, Decem-ber 10, 2010 at the GortonCommunity Center in LakeForest, IL. The Open House willbegin at 5:00pm and continueuntil 8:00pm and all Associa-tion members are encouragedto partake in this festive event.It should be noted that thisyear’s event will be marked byan absence of bagpipes of anykind.

The LCBA President’s AwardDinner is scheduled for Febru-ary 25, 2011. Members areencouraged to save the dateand to look out for future an-nouncements regarding loca-tion and honorees.

The Board recognized Presi-dent Rochford’s personal ef-forts in involving the LCBA inthe recent 2010 Unity AwardDinner sponsored by the Diver-sity Scholarship Foundation.This ensured that our Associa-tion was a prominent partici-pant with nearly fifty otherlocal and regional Bar Associ-ations in celebrating the Illi-nois legal community’scommitment to diversity.

Bar Foundation GalaIt was proposed that the indi-

vidual members of the Boardattend the Gala and personallypurchase a table for that pur-pose. A question was raised re-garding the policies of the hostsite, Exmoor Country Club re-garding minority membership.Executive Director Boadt notedthat he had become aware of apersistent rumor circulatingamong LCBA members thatExmoor refused to accept mi-nority members, particularlyAfrican Americans and Jews.In response to this rumor, Di-rector Boadt contacted a num-ber of civil rights organizationsoperating in Northern Illinois,none had ever received such acomplaint. Director Boadt di-rectly contacted Exmoor Cluband learned that their policiesdo not exclude any race, reli-gion or ethnic group and thatthe membership of the Clubdoes in fact contain a numberof minority members.

The Board wishes to assure itsmembership that both theLake County Bar Foundationand the LCBA take seriouslytheir commitment to diversityand would not consider busi-ness partners whose practiceswere in conflict with that com-mitment.

The Foundation Gala is sched-uled for Friday, November 19and the members of the Exec-utive Board encourage all As-sociation members to join intheir support of the importantphilanthropic mission of theFoundation by supporting thisevent.

An Important AnnouncementAssociation members are en-couraged to mark Thursday,

July 21, 2011 on their calen-dars. It is a day that couldchange their lives. On that day,at ThunderHawk Golf Coursein Beach Park, Illinois, theLake County Bar Associationwill host the LCBA Golf Cham-pionship Tournament. In addi-tion to trophies, food and ahost of valuable prizes, partic-ipants will have the opportu-nity to win $1,000,000 (that’sOne-Million Dollars) or a newcar.

Upcoming Events• December 10, 2010 – Holi-day Open House

• January 28, 2011 – Back toSchool Technology forLawyers

• February 25, 2011 – Presi-dent’s Dinner

• February 17-20, 2011 –Family Law Travel Program(CLE)

• March 2011 –Doctor/Lawyer Dinner

Board MeetingThe next board meeting isscheduled for November 18,2010 at 12:00 p.m. at the Of-fice of the Lake County Bar As-sociation.

There being no additionalbusiness, it was duly moved,seconded and carried and itwas resolved that the meetingwas adjourned.

Do you have a speaker idea or suggestion for our business meetings?

We would love to hear from you! Just send a note to:Chris Boadt ([email protected])



LCBA

BulletinBoard

THREE OFFICE SUITE FOR RENTIN DOWNTOWN WAUKEGANComplete interior renovation. Walk-ing distance to courthouse, 1200+square feet with 2 bathrooms,kitchen, conference room, receptionarea, and three offices. Also includescentral air/heat. Parking front andback. MAC Real Estate at 847-548-5723. www.homesbymacreales-tate.com/208west

OFFICE SPACELocation: Chicago Loop / 1 E. WackerDrive, Ste 2300. Law firm has re-cently made available 1 office for renton the 23rd floor of luxurious highrise. Close to Courthouse, fully fur-nished with spectacular view. Ameni-ties include conference room,reception area, phone, kitchen & po-tential referrals. Approximately 11 ft.x 15 ft. AVAILABLEIMMEDIATELY. Contact: Reyna @312-372-1655, ext. 16.

OFFICE BUILDING FOR SALE218 N County St, Waukegan. 2,457sq ft masonry building. 13 Parkingspaces. City Garage across the street.Asking $299,000. Virtual Tour:www.tjproperties.com. (847)680-4740.

DOWNTOWN WAUKEGANAcross from Courthouse, 275-1800square feet. Janitorial provided. Wellmaintained. Space available. 33 N.County & 325 Washington. Pleasecall Ron Pollack at (847) 482-0952.

DOWNTOWN WAUKEGAN222 N County St., New Construction.2,700 sq ft. Divisible. Up to 7 offices.Fully furnished if required. 200 N MLKing Ave, Single Office. Shared con-ference and lunch room. Space avail-able for Secretary. Basement Storage.For more information please seewww.tjproperties.com. (847)680-4740.

LCBA member?

(847) 244-22721534 Washington Street • Waukegan

(1 mile W of the LC courthouse)

www.JobsPM.com

• Quick Copies Same Day • Duplication Services• Stationary/Business Cards• Announcements• Newsletters

• Mailing Services• Internet Marketing• Promotional Items: Custom Pens, Mugs , Etc.

• E-mailed Files Accepted

FREE pick-up & delivery!

17th Annual Family Law Conference

SAVE THE DATEPuerto Rico • Caribe HiltonFebruary 17 - 21, 2011

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACTLake County Bar Association • 300 Grand Avenue, Ste A • Waukegan, IL 60085

TEL (847) 244-3143 • FAX (847) 244-8259 • www.lakebar.org

Thursday, February 17, 2011Group Arrival

Friday, February 18, 20112 Hours of CLE (morning)Welcome Reception

Saturday, February 19, 20114 Hours of CLE (morning)Walking Tour of Old San JuanDine Around

Sunday, February 20, 20114 Hours of CLE (morning)Group Closing Dinner

Monday, February 21, 2011Group Departure

QUICK FACTSTime Zone: AtlanticLocation: Caribbean OceanDistance: 5 Hour Direct Flight

from ChicagoActivities: Rain Forest

GolfBeach & WaterHistoric San Juan

LOW COST AIRFAREAVAILABLE NOW!

The Lists, The Ornaments, The Dash


One Friday afternoon, the 7th grade students in her class were being particularly disrespectfultowards each other. So she asked them to take out a piece of paper and list the name of eachclass member, leaving a space in between each name. She then asked them to write under each

student’s name one quality about that student that they admired. At the end of the class she collectedthe lists.

Over the weekend, she compiled an individual list for each student. Underneath each student’s nameshe listed the words each classmate had used to describe the other. On Monday morning she handedeach student their list. They smiled. She never said another word about it. But she noticed. She noticedthe change in the student’s attitude towards each other.

Years later she received a phone call from the father of one of her former students advising that hisson had been killed in the war. After the funeral he approached her and handed her a worn out pieceof paper that looked as if it had been folded and refolded many times. He found it in his son’s wallet.She knew without reading it that it was The List. Her other students that were there told her thatthey too had kept their lists.

This story reminds me that one person can really make a difference in the lives of others. For the pastfifteen years, Elliot Pinsel has been that person. Each year Elliot has amassed his own list containingthe holiday wishes of many people and groups in Lake County. The list comes in the form of a paperornament containing the wish of the recipient. Elliot, with the assistance of a few others has qui-etly gone about fulfilling these wishes.

During this holiday season, the Lake County Bar Foundation in conjunction with the Lake CountyBar Association is hoping to assist Elliot in fulfilling the wishes of many Lake County organizationssuch as The Ann Kiley Center for developmentally disabled adults. We are hoping that the sheerstrength of numbers of our membership will allow us to fulfill all 500 requests. Ornaments con-taining gift requests may be obtained directly from Elliot or at the Lake County Bar Association Of-fice. Gifts can be dropped off at either location.

There is a poem that many of you may have read called The Dash. The poem refers to the dash be-tween the date of your birth and the date of your death. It points out that the dash is really what youdo with your life in between those dates. Call it your list, call it your dash or whatever else you wantbut please do consider making the wish of someone in need a part of your “to do” list this holidayseason.

As I write this column, I am delighted to report that the Foundation’s inaugural fund raising galahas been sold out. The Foundation is most grateful to all of you for your overwhelming generosityand support. I am anticipating that by the time you are reading this column that we will have hada spectacular night of dining and dancing while raising funds to benefit The Family Visitation Cen-ter, Prairie State Legal Services and Teen Court. More on this next month with pictures from thephoto booth.

Happy Holidays.

If you are interested in becoming a member of the Board of Directors of the Foundation please con-tact Kathleen Ryan @ryanryanlanda.com.

byKathleen M. RyanVice-President, Lake County Bar Foundation

LAKE COUNTY BAR FOUNDATION

D i n n e r D a n c e G a l aEXMOOR COUNTRY CLUB r NOVEMBER 19 , 2010

300 Grand Avenue, Suite AWaukegan, IL 60085

PRESORT STDUS POSTAGE

PAIDGURNEE, IL

PERMIT NO. 356

Documents

D THE OCKE DecTember 2010 Vol.17, No€¦ · D uring the Holiday Season I like to reflect upon the many opportunities I have had to work with our members on community service projects