Joseph H. Goldenhersh

The case concerned Edward A. Loss III's petition for admission to the Illinois bar after the Committee on Character and Fitness recommended certification based on evidence of his rehabilitation from a history of juvenile delinquency, criminal convictions, drug use, and military discharge issues in the 1960s and 1970s. The Supreme Court of Illinois denied the petition, holding that it retains inherent authority to independently assess an applicant's good moral character and fitness despite committee approval under Supreme Court Rule 708. The majority concluded that Loss had not satisfactorily established his fitness due to the extraordinary circumstances of his past record and some discrepancies in his disclosures. A dissent argued that the court should defer to the committee's uncontradicted findings of rehabilitation and that the denial lacked a fair basis.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned an indigent defendant charged with DUI who sought appointed counsel for hearings on rescinding his summary driver's license suspension and obtaining a judicial driving permit under Illinois implied consent laws. The court denied the petition for a supervisory order, ruling that the defendant had no right to public defender representation at those proceedings. It reasoned that the hearings are civil in nature, limited in scope, and not critical stages of the criminal process, with no potential loss of liberty at stake. The court further held that the hearings are distinct from motions to suppress evidence and do not implicate due process, equal protection, or other constitutional requirements for counsel.

criminal lawcivil rightsprocedure

The case involved Robert Byron and codefendant Harold Bean, who were jointly tried and convicted in Cook County circuit court of the 1981 murder of Dorothy Polulach as well as related charges of armed robbery, home invasion, and conspiracy. Byron appealed the denial of his pretrial motion for severance, arguing that a joint trial with Bean prejudiced his defense. The Illinois Supreme Court reversed Byron's conviction and remanded the case, holding that the failure to sever deprived him of a fair trial because the weight of the evidence and witness credibility differed significantly between the two defendants, and Bean took a position adverse to Byron. The court distinguished this from mere disparity in evidence and found that the joint trial created undue prejudice not cured by other safeguards.

criminal law

The case involved defendant Donald R. Lego, who was charged in Will County with the murder of 82-year-old Mary Mae Johnson by stabbing and beating her, along with related felony murder counts arising from burglary and armed robbery. After a jury trial, Lego was convicted on all counts and sentenced to death following a hearing where the jury found an aggravating factor and no sufficient mitigating factors. On appeal, the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and death sentence in part, rejecting claims that pretrial media coverage required a venue change because most selected jurors had no prior exposure to the case and all affirmed their ability to decide impartially based on the evidence. The court also addressed other procedural and constitutional challenges to the trial and sentencing process. A partial dissent argued that errors in voir dire and the death penalty statute warranted reversal.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a wrongful death action brought by the administrator of a driver killed when his vehicle was struck by a train at a railroad crossing protected only by a crossbuck. The plaintiff introduced testimony that the railroad's trains had a habit of failing to sound their whistles properly before reaching the crossing, and the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff. The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, concluding that the defendant had not preserved for appellate review its specific objections to the admission of the habit evidence. The court noted that the objection at trial was limited to relevance and did not raise the arguments about eyewitness availability or insufficient foundation that were advanced on appeal.

proceduretorts & liability

This case involved plaintiff Carlo Ferretti's claim for unemployment benefits after his discharge as a lathe operator, which the Illinois Department of Labor initially approved but later denied on grounds that he failed to actively seek work as required by section 500(C) of the Unemployment Insurance Act. The Board of Review upheld the denial following hearings, the circuit court affirmed, and the appellate court reversed. The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the appellate court, holding that whether Ferretti was actively seeking work presented a question of fact but that the Board's adverse finding was contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence. The court reasoned that Ferretti's undisputed testimony established 48 job contacts over the relevant period, along with explanations of limited opportunities in his field during winter months, which could not be disregarded.

labor & employment