A Question of Residency

James L. Kaplan: In search of judicial robes, willing to travel

See Mark Suppelsa’s related report on Cook County Judge James L. Kaplan for WGN.

James L. Kaplan lived for decades with his family in Lincolnshire, Lake County. So when the state Supreme Court prepared to appoint him in 2010 to a vacant judicial seat in Cook County’s 8th subcircuit, Kaplan rented a condominium in Chicago’s River North neighborhood.

After he lost the March 2012 primary to fill that seat, the state Supreme Court gave him another appointment: A vacancy in the 12th subcircuit, covering Cook County North Shore suburbs.

Kaplan found another condominium — this time, in Glenview — and now is a candidate to hold onto his seat in the upcoming March Democratic primary. While he moves from rental home to rental home in hopes of holding a seat on the Cook County Court, Kaplan’s family still lives in the Lake County home.

If Kaplan’s longtime Lake County residence raises eyebrows about the Supreme Court appointments, consider this: One of the candidates who filed to run against him is another sitting judge. Allan W. Masters has long lived in Glencoe, which is in the 12th subcircuit; but he actually is currently serving in the 9th subcircuit, thanks to another appointment from the state’s highest court.

Confused?

Though a state law requires the state Supreme Court to fill temporary vacancies with candidates who live within the subcircuit, the appointments of Kaplan and Masters are further evidence uncovered by Medill Watchdog at Northwestern University and WGN Investigates of how that law is often stretched or even ignored.

The state Supreme Court, through its spokesman, declined to comment.

University of Illinois Law Professor Jamelle Sharpe told Medill Watchdog that however much the state court may be trying to appoint the most qualified lawyers to judicial vacancies, those choices could undercut public confidence in the judiciary if the appointments violate residency requirements.

“The judiciary, more than any other branch of government, gets its power from the respect the public has for it,” Sharpe said. “Even if the appointee is exceptionally well qualified, the manner in which they got their position could undermine the confidence the public has in them.”

And the questionable appointments are only one of many flaws in the system of choosing Cook County judges uncovered in a continuing joint probe by Medill Watchdog and WGN-TV.

A state law that took effect in 1992 ordained that most elected judges be elected from specific geographic subcircuits, as a way to promote diversity on the bench. In 2003 the legislature enacted a second law calling for the state Supreme Court to fill vacancies in a given subcircuit with residents of those same subcircuits.

But things haven’t worked exactly as planned. Some judges live outside their subcircuits, at times complying with the law even as they appear to violate the spirit of it. In a few cases, Medill Watchdog/WGN Investigates found judges stating on mortgages or property tax forms that their primary residence is a home outside the subcircuit in which they claim, on other forms, to live.

Investigation Into the Judicial Selection Process

In Cook County, judges are chosen in a variety of ways. Some judges are elected in countywide races. For the past two decades, most elected judges join the bench by winning partisan contests in one of 15 subcircuits into which Cook County is divided. The Circuit Judges themselves pick “associate judges” who do not have to run in partisan contests. And when an elected spot on the bench becomes vacant, the state Supreme Court fills the seat by appointments that last through the following general election.

This article about the upcoming March 12th subcircuit race is the latest in a joint investigation by Medill Watchdog and WGN Investigates of problems in the judicial selection process. The joint investigation has shown:

• Judges elected from subcircuits are far more likely than judges elected countywide to win office despite failing to win favorable recommendations from several lawyer organizations that review and evaluate candidates.
• Subcircuit judges have moved to houses outside their districts, some miles away. In many cases the moves are legal, but violate the spirit of the law meant to promote geographic diversity on the bench.
• A few judges have given conflicting information on documents about their primary residence, and whether they actually live in their subcircuits or in houses they own elsewhere.
• The state Supreme Court has on several occasions filled vacancies with little regard to where the candidate lives – despite a state law to the contrary.
• Judicial races in general, and especially subcircuit races, attract few potential voters who even bother to cast ballots,. Many who do so seem to know little about the candidates. As a result races often are decided by local political bosses or the apparent ethnicity of a candidate’s name.
• Party endorsements have long been considered a critical bonus, and candidates say that if they are slated they are expected to donate thousands of dollars to the party.
• To help win election, several candidates have hired campaign advisors with questionable backgrounds.

Judicial residences are not the only issue that raises questions about how Cook County judges are chosen.

It is a system in which old-fashioned politics plays an outsized role in selecting judges who, in office, are expected to be apolitical. With judicial elections attracting little attention, many voters fail to cast ballots in the subcircuit races, and legal experts express concern that not only the ethnic sound of a name but also the influence of local party leaders can make all the difference.

Because the races are so low profile, a Medill Watchdog/WGN analysis found, subcircuit judges win office even if they fail to win the recommendation of legal groups at a higher rate than judges elected countywide.

Candidates go before meetings of party officials to seek endorsement and boast of their longtime party loyalty. If slated they are then commonly expected to contribute thousands of dollars to the party. Many judicial hopefuls, unfamiliar with how to navigate the process, hire campaign consultants with unlikely backgrounds to help them.

After both Kaplan and Masters filed for the same 12th subcircuit seat, the two then engaged in one of the regular pre-election activities of subcircuit judicial elections: They challenged each others’ petitions for lacking the minimum 1,000 legitimate signatures from voters in the subcircuit.

The result: Masters isn’t even going to be on the ballot after all. County officials ruled after two days of hearings that so many of the 1,538 signatures on petitions circulated on behalf of Masters were invalid that he was left five valid signatures short of the minimum.

That result still doesn’t make the race a cakewalk for Kaplan.

There are three other candidates still on the ballot whom he must beat to get to the November general election.

One of them, Ralph Eugene Meczyk, is a high-profile defense attorney who has a significant blemish in his past: A criminal conviction, for which he later was pardoned.

Meczyk pleaded guilty to filing false income tax returns in 1987, after he and his partner were caught up in an offshoot of the federal investigation.

Meczyk and his partner blamed poor bookkeeping. During his final weeks in office in 2000, President Bill Clinton pardoned Meczyk, who said he had sought to clear the family name on behalf of his late father, a Holocaust survivor, according to news accounts at the time.

Meczyk has since served as a high-profile attorney for such defendants as former police officer Drew Peterson, in his murder case, and several police officers accused of corruption.

While bar association ratings have not yet been released for the March primary, Meczyk was well-rated by most of the legal groups when he sought a post as associate judge last year.

The exception would be the Chicago Council of Lawyers, which called him a “highly respected practitioner with substantial litigation experience…praised for his temperament and his legal ability.” But, the report states, “the Council as a matter of policy is unable to find him qualified due to this past felony conviction.”

Meczyk said in an interview that he believed his extensive experience since that conviction – more than 100 jury trials – established why he is the best qualified candidate for the bench.

Another candidate, James E. Hanlon Jr. is a commercial litigation attorney whose wife already serves as a judge in the subcircuit, having won an election in 2004. Hanlon has sought a judgeship before, and his website lists favorable ratings from a variety of bar groups. The Chicago Bar Association cited his “knowledge of the law, integrity, and outstanding demeanor.”

Hanlon’s past campaign donations often went to Republican candidates and organizations, and county records show he has voted in Republican primaries in some recent contests. But Hanlon said that he is a Democrat, and said his past contributions – and voting – were evidence of his support for his wife, a Republican.

The final candidate in the race is civil litigator Samuel Bae, a Mount Prospect attorney who works as a solo practitioner in Des Plaines. Bae said he decided to run because he believes in public service, and he characterized his candidacy as a grassroots campaign without endorsements from politicians.

Bae, who is Korean-American, said Cook County lacks Korean American judges, even though the point of judicial subcircuits is to promote diversity.

As Jewish candidates, Kaplan and Meczyk face their own ethnic hurdle; Cook County voters have historically favored candidates with Irish-sounding names. In the past some judicial hopefuls changed their names – a practice that ended when the state enacted a 2007 law that the old names had to appear on the ballot of any candidates who adopted new names within three years of election.

Kaplan, who currently holds the seat by appointment, is by all accounts well regarded on the bench. Since his initial appointment, Kaplan has presided over heart-wrenching cases of child protection in the domestic relations court. The Council of Lawyers said of him in 2012, “As a judge, he is reported to demonstrate a good temperament and ability to manage a courtroom.”

But until his 2010 appointment, Kaplan long lived with his family in their home in Lincolnshire. That house puts them close to a facility that provides services for the couple’s disabled son, who still lives in the family house.

Acknowledgements

The digital article, and video courtesy of WGN-TV, is the latest in the joint project of Medill Watchdog at Northwestern University and WGN Investigates examining issues surround the Cook County judicial selection process.

The package represents the joint work of WGN anchor/reporter Mark Suppelsa and investigative producer Marsha Bartel; and, for Medill Watchdog, director Rick Tulsky, research associate Kari Lydersen, and Medill Watchdog’stireless interns.

Medill Watchdog was founded in 2011 with the support and encouragement of Medill School of Journalism, Media and Integrated Marketing Communications and Northwestern University. We are especially appreciative of the additional financial support we have received from the Robert R. McCormick Foundation, Medill alum Mark Ferguson, and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation.

Kaplan said in a recent interview that he moved to comply with the law; he returns to the family home many weekends and remains married to his wife. But his wife, Allin, likely will not be able to vote for him; as of this week, she remains a Lake County registered voter.

Kaplan was the partner for decades of Sheldon Sorosky, a lawyer for Rod Blagojevich; the former governor appointed Kaplan to a position in 2005 as a judge on the state Court of Claims, a part-time position.

In October 2010, records show, Kaplan first moved to a rental condominium in the River North neighborhood of Chicago, days before the state Supreme Court appointed him to a vacancy in the 8th subcircuit, which runs along the lakeshore. The appointment was effective from December 2010 through December 2012.

As he prepared to run in the March 2012 Democratic primary for that 8th subcircuit seat, Kaplan talked of his roots in the subcircuit –how he was born on the South Shore, and went to high school at Lake View.

Kaplan lost that primary election. But on Aug. 20, 2012, after the death of a judge created a vacancy, the Supreme Court entered a new order that is striking in explicitly showing an appointment of a judge from one subcircuit into a vacancy in another subcircuit. Kaplan, “Circuit Judge of Cook County, Eighth Subcircuit, is appointed Circuit Judge of Cook County, Twelfth Subcircuit,” the court directed.

The court made the effective date of the appointment August 23, 2012.That is the same date, records show, that Kaplan changed his voter registration to his current Glenview address, where reporters found him one recent evening, while his wife and son were in Lincolnshire. Kaplan said in a brief interview that he spends most nights in Glenview, and that his actions complied with the residency law which requires subcircuit judges to have their “domicile” in the subcircuit – a term that legal experts say depends heavily on the specific facts of each case.

Professor Sharpe mulled the state Supreme Court’s tendency to fill vacancies without regard to the law on residences: “The public may not care, but the public should care.”