CHICAGO SUN TIMES
Cook County judge seeking retention had 34 decisions struck down in 6 years
By Jacob Toner Gosselin and Kobi Guillory | Injustice Watch on August 17, 2018 5:30 am
MARGARET ANN BRENNAN
Injustice Watch reviewed the reversals of every judge running for retention in Cook County to find that these judges improperly applied the law far more often than their colleagues, in the views of higher courts.
A reversal means an appeals court decided a judge was wrong and overturned all or part of a ruling.
“When a judge has a higher reversal rate than normal, it raises a red flag,” says attorney David Melton, former head of the Chicago Council of Lawyers’ judicial evaluation committee.
Brennan, a circuit judge since 2002, serves in the law division, where judges hear civil suits with damages of at least $30,000 being sought. She has been reversed 40 times since 2014, records show — far more often than any of her colleagues running for retention.
Nine of her reversals involved errors in issuing summary judgments — a ruling a judge makes for one party in a civil lawsuit, finding the evidence is so clear that the case doesn’t even warrant a full trial. They’re supposed to help judges ensure that only cases with valid claims go to trial.
In one case Brennan heard, the son of a man who died while held at the Cook County Jail sued the lawyers who filed a wrongful-
Brennan awarded summary judgment to the law firm, ruling that the plaintiff failed to prove he was the dead man’s biological son.
He appealed, and appellate Judge Maureen Connors reversed the decision, citing “the drastic nature of a summary judgment order” and saying Brennan should have allowed the case to go to trial, where paternity evidence could have been presented.
In another, higher-
Notable:
Brennan’s decisions have been reversed by appeals courts 40 times since 2014, the most of any judge running for retention this year. The number of reversals are significantly higher even than her counterparts in the law division. Many of these reversals revolve around Brennan’s decision to dismiss a lawsuit before it goes to trial, in a ruling known as “summary judgment.”
Last year, Brennan imposed more than $1 million in sanctions against a man and his lawyer for filing what she called a “frivolous” lawsuit against his condominium association. The man, Marshall Spiegel, claimed that Brennan had held unethical conversations with the other party outside of the courtroom, and that the sanctions were retaliation for his effort to remove her from the case.
In 2012, Brennan reversed an administrative law judge’s decision that the Chicago Bears owed Cook County $4.1 million more in amusement taxes than they had paid. Brennan’s decision in that case was, itself, reversed in 2014.
In an emailed statement, Brennan disputed Injustice Watch's accounting of her reversals and said they represent "approximately 1%" of her decisions. She also denied retaliating against litigants or attorneys.
Click for Chicago Sun Times Article
Click for Injustice Watch Article
Divorce court weds power and privacy
By BY CYNTHIA DIZIKES AND TODD LIGHTY and CHICAGO TRIBUNE REPORTERS
APR 28, 2013 AT 11:50 AM
The Tribune has found the use of initials is one way that judges in Cook County's Domestic Relations Division have helped the wealthy, well-
Two other Cook County judges, Eileen Brewer and Margaret Brennan, had their entire domestic files sealed. Brennan and Brewer, who used initials in her filing, have said they had safety concerns.
Legal experts said cases should remain open and identities should be shielded only in exceptional instances. Entire case files should not be hidden because individuals want privacy or because they might be embarrassed.
Nor should cases be concealed from the public just because they might cause the parties economic or professional harm, said lawyer Nancy Chausow Shafer, president of the Illinois chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.
"If you avail yourself of the court system, you have to pay the price of it being public," Chausow Shafer said. "If we start making exceptions for the rich and famous, it creates a dual court system, which goes against our populist belief of what a court should be, which is really justice for all without distinguishing between the rich and poor."
Click for Chicago Tribune Article
Corruptionpedia Article
Information about corruption in judicial and political elections
Judge Margaret Ann Brennan (rated unqualified, backed by 5 sitting judges)
*In 2002 Brennan was rated “unqualified” by Chicago Council of Lawyers, but with powerful support from 5 sitting Judges and well-
Prior to becoming a judge, Margaret Ann Brennan was Assistant General Counsel for Exelon Business Services from 1994 to 2002.
Before she was elected seven years ago, the Chicago Council of Lawyers rated her unqualified, saying she lacked the “depth and breadth of experience” for the position.(published on December 17, 2009 )Block 37 judge meets burden of proof,
Also backing her campaign were colleagues at Exelon, with 17 employees donating a total of $1,375. Pam A. Strobel, an Exelon executive vice-
Judge Brennan lives in west suburban Indian Head Park.
Brennan decided to hide her personal records (read: conceal names of her election supporters) from the public. “Two other Cook County judges, Eileen Brewer and Margaret Brennan, had their entire domestic files sealed. Brennan and Brewer, who used initials in her filing, have said they had safety concerns.” “If you avail yourself of the court system, you have to pay the price of it being public,” said Nancy Chausow Shafer, president of the Illinois chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. “If we start making exceptions for the rich and famous, it creates a dual court system, which goes against our populist belief of what a court should be, which is really justice for all without distinguishing between the rich and poor.”
While Margaret Ann Brennan’s PERSONAL information, including her home address and phone number, is widely available through all open public records, her ELECTION records, including donors’ names (particularly 5 sitting judges who supported her in 2002) are hidden from voters’ view.
Click for Corruptionpedia Article
