Chief Justice Miller on state of the courts

By F. MARK SIEBERT

The largest court system in the world — the idea may seem mind-boggling, but that's what Illinois has. Combine that with an 86 percent turnover in two years in the system's supervisory body, the Illinois Supreme Court, and it's understandable that the head of the whole shebang should be thinking about its general health.

Each year the Supreme Court makes a formal written report to the General Assembly on the whole system. Much of the report is a compilation of statistical and factual data, possibly informative upon analysis but not a neat summary of the health of the system. Illinois' Chief Justice Benjamin K. Miller used the occasion of his address to the Illinois Judicial Conference on September 2 to outline problems of the state's judicial system and recent progress toward solutions. In his first such address last year he considered the role of the courts in American society; this year he was specific about Illinois' courts.

In this era of fiscal constraint, funding, of course, looms large. Illinois' courts fared better in the state budget than some other divisions of government. Although the courts didn't receive all of their requests, Miller said, "We were able to fund a much-needed cost of living allowance for judges and other personnel." He said that chief judges in jurisdictions across the state made budget reductions. "The resulting budget will enable us to meet the needs of the public, and to fulfill our role in society, despite these fiscal constraints."

Problems with the delay and expense of litigation plague the Illinois court system, and Miller described five areas of attack on these problems.

• Better case flow management can prevent delays, and Miller noted that both the Supreme Court and the Judicial Conference have sponsored seminars on the subject. He said the goal is "a system that assures timely access to our courts with a scheduled and determinate progress to case disposition." Judges must be better managers, he said, to avoid time standards being imposed by the legislature. "To succeed, case-flow management requires the active involvement of and cooperation of both judges and lawyers. . . . Judges should control the case flow, schedule discovery cut-off periods and set trial dates within a relatively short time after filing."

• Arbitration has already shown its usefulness in reducing delay and expense, Miller said. Experience with pilot programs underway in several northern circuits suggests further improvements: raising the money limit on matters subject to arbitration; finding ways of compelling the participation of reluctant parties who now simply go through the process to delay the inevitable payments of meritorious claims; and raising the salaries and qualifications of arbitrators.

• Mediation is being studied as an alternative to adversarial proceedings for child custody cases. Miller said.

• New rules adopted last year authorize courts to set up expedited child-support systems "to permit the prompt and inexpensive resolution of child support disputes" instead of the often protracted actions under the Public Aid Code, the Parentage Act and the Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act.

• Technology can expedite case flow, and Miller noted a new rule that permits motion hearings and some conferences by telephone. Under study is the use of fax and computer for filing court documents.

Miller also addressed "the conduct and competence of judges and lawyers." While he did not mention it, several of the areas of progress he cited were reactions to federal, not state probes of misconduct in Illinois courtrooms. Sweeping changes in the attorney discipline system have been made and new rules written on professional conduct. Miller also noted that the Supreme Court has instituted a new program of judicial performance evaluation, but he omitted mention of the current activity of the so-called "Solovy Commission" appointed by the Supreme Court to study the judicial system across the state.

8/ November 1992/ Illinois Issues

Miller explained new controls at the threshold of a legal career that should assure that those taking the state bar examination are ethically qualified. The former State Board of Law Examiners will now be known as the Board of Admissions to the Bar. It will administer a new pre-screening program for law school students. Those planning to take the state bar exam will have to apply and undergo screening during their first year in law school. The board will also supervise the character and fitness committees of the various appellate districts.

Miller seemed most proud of the April conference sponsored by the court on "The Future and the Courts of Illinois" where journalists, civic and business leaders, teachers as well as judges and attorneys concentrated on developments expected in the next 30 years. Miller said, "The work of the judicial branch is probably the least understood of the three branches of government, and I expect that the wide public participation at the conference will spur greater public knowledge and awareness of the legal system."

Just one month after this address Miller announced the resolution of a matter in which the long-standing attitude of the Supreme Court has raised some hackles. After 15 years of resistance the court has agreed to audits of the Attorney Disciplinary and Registration Commission and the Board of Admissions to the Bar. Previously the court stonewalled against the repeated attempts of former Auditor General Robert G. Cronson to conduct the audits on the grounds that the two agencies do not use appropriated funds. Miller now opened the books to Cronson's successor, William G. Holland, "as a matter of comity between judicial branch and the legislative branch." In this atmosphere of sweetness and light the court could continue to deny the legal obligation asserted by Cronson while taking one more step in the direction of improvement — which was really what Miller's talk was all about.

November 1992/ Illinois Issues/9