Ezel / Ethics Opinions / JUDICIAL-IL

Did an Illinois judge have to recuse when a case lawyer sued the judge or filed a Judicial Inquiry Board complaint?

Short answer The Committee found no automatic recusal from either filing alone. The judge still had to assess personal bias and whether impartiality could reasonably be questioned.
Bar
JUDICIAL-IL
Issued
March 7, 1995

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1995. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.

Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

After a judge ruled in a case, a participating lawyer sued the judge for misconduct and moved for reconsideration. The opinion also considered a complaint to the Judicial Inquiry Board instead of a suit.

The Committee found neither filing alone sufficient for mandatory recusal. It called for the judge to examine personal bias and objectively assess whether impartiality could reasonably be questioned under former Rule 63C(1).

The Committee considered the risk of a litigant using a suit or complaint to choose another judge and noted the judge’s duty to dispose promptly of court business. Allegations without more did not establish the needed bias.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1997 under the 1993 Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct. The Committee’s page says that Code was superseded on January 1, 2023, and does not assess the effect of the 2023 Code. Treat this page as historical context and verify the current Code before relying on its analysis.

Common questions

Q: Did the lawyer’s lawsuit automatically disqualify the judge?

A: No. The Committee required a separate impartiality assessment.

Q: Did a Judicial Inquiry Board complaint alone require recusal?

A: No. Mere allegations did not mandate disqualification.

Q: What still mattered?

A: The judge’s personal bias and whether an informed observer could reasonably question impartiality.

Background and rules framework

The Committee applied former Illinois Supreme Court Rules 63C(1) and 63C(1)(a) on impartiality and bias, and Rule 63A(5) on prompt disposition. It cited In re Marriage of Hartian on complaints as an insufficient basis alone.

Citations and references

  • Illinois Supreme Court Rules 63A(5), 63C(1), and 63C(1)(a).
  • In re Marriage of Hartian, 222 Ill. App. 3d 566, 584 N.E.2d 245 (1st Dist. 1991).

See also

Source

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1995. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace