 - CHICAGO-(AEAE)-ATTORNEY ASKES THE ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT TO OVERRULE ILLINOIS CASE LAW THAT SAYS THOSE SEEKING S SUBSTITUTION OF A JUDGE FOR CAUSE MUST SHOW “ACTUAL PREJUDICE” and create a standard by which the “appearance of impropriety” would be sufficient. The attorney cited the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Inc., No.08-22 decided June 8th, 2009 http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/08pdf/08-22.pdfthat held the Constitution does not require proof of actual prejudice for the substitution of a judge to be appropriate. The U.S. Supreme Court in that Caperton decision also stated that the Due Process Clause requires “recusal” when a judge has a “direct, personal, substantial, pecuniary interest. The high court sites the “rule” that “a defendant in criminal contempt proceedings should be tried before a judge other than the one reviled by the contemnor. In Stoller's contempt proceeding, which is up on appeal, in which Illinois Divorce Judge Carol K. Bellows “who was reviled” by Stoller's alleged violation of her order banning Stoller from blogging, also tried and convicted Stoller sending him to the Illinois Cook County Jail for 37 days. A decision which clearly is in Opposite Caperton et al id., and Mayberry v. Pennsylvania 400 U.S. 455, 466
|
RSS Feed