Chief Circuit Judge Kathryn E. Creswell is pleased to announce that following an October 6, 2016 meeting of the Circuit Judges of the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit Court, two finalists for the Office of Associate Judge have been selected and certified to the Illinois Supreme Court. The finalists are seeking to fill the vacancy created by the appointment of Associate Judge Karen M. Wilson to Circuit Judge. From these names, the Circuit Judges will select one appointee by secret ballot.

The Illinois Supreme Court has adopted a new rule and amended another to address the use of restraints on a minor in delinquency proceedings arising under the Juvenile Court Act of 1987. The new rule and rule changes take effect November 1, 2016. New Supreme Court Rule 943 (Use of Restraints on a Minor in Delinquency Proceedings Arising Under the Juvenile Court Act) provides that instruments of restraint shall not be used on a minor during a court proceeding unless the court finds, after a hearing, that such restraints are necessary to prevent physical harm to the minor or another, the minor has a history of disruptive behavior that presents a risk of harm, or there is a well-founded belief that the minor presents a substantial flight risk. Amendments were also adopted to Rule 941 to state that the rules in Article IX apply to all juvenile delinquency proceedings filed under Article V of the Juvenile Court Act of 1987.

Though the term "joint parenting" has replaced "joint custody," the joint-custody concept survives under the revised IMDMA -- which means judges must continue to put kids first when making parenting decisions. That's the view of retired Champaign County Circuit Court Judge Arnold F. Blockman, who says "joint custody" is just as available now as before the enactment of the divorce-law rewrite that took effect last January 1. This is true despite the creation under the new law of an entirely new vocabulary to describe parenting, says Blockman, who serves on the ISBA's Family Law Section Council. In the August Family Law newsletter, Blockman opines that "[w]hatever the other merits…of the new Act, it certainly changed nothing (except terminology) in regard to the parties agreeing as to joint parenting or the ability of the court to impose joint parenting on the parties even without agreement of one or both parents." As a result, judges still must make sure that divorcing parents have the kind of willingness to cooperate and mutual respect that make joint parenting possible. Find out more in the October Illinois Bar Journal.

Asked and Answered By John W. Olmstead, MBA, Ph.D, CMC Q. I am the managing partner of an eighteen attorney firm in New Orleans. We have six equity founding partners, four non-equity partners, and eight associates. We represent institutional clients. Four of the six equity partners are in their sixties and two are in their late fifties. The six equity partners are concerned about the future of the firm as they approach retirement. If they retired today the firm would cease to exist - the non-equity partners would not be able to retain our existing clients and acquire new clients. We have not been successful at motivating our non-equity partners to develop and bring in new clients. We have harped on this for years and encouraged all attorneys to develop business. We implemented a component of our non-equity partner and associate compensation system to compensate them for new client origination. Unfortunately, we have not been able to motivate our non-equity partners and associates to develop new sources of business. Our non-equity partners and associates have a nine to five work ethic and an entitlement mentality. Would you share your thoughts?