Linda Moore Decides Not to Appeal Second Separation of Powers Decision

Linda Moore

The litigation concerning who has what power in Grafton Township has been long and expensive, but also interesting.  I’ve discussed how it involves the pitting of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of local government with Linda Moore’s attorney John Nelson and an attorney at Ancel, Glink, suggesting the case would be wonderful for law school students.  The one at Ancel, Glink said he would talk to a professor at Northwestern University.

The first case was won by Moore.

Judge Michael Caldwell ruled that she had executive powers much as do village board presidents.  (Both, you will note have a vote on their legislative bodies.)

Ancel, Glink, dismissal by Moore was ratified and Township Administrator Pam Fender, installed by the Trustees to take over pretty much ever duty the Supervisor had had under the man she beat in the GOP primary, John Rossi, performed, except the administration of General Assistance (a very limited welfare program) and keeping the books.

The second time around, Caldwell also ruled for Moore, saying that her choice for Township Attorney, Nelson, would be installed even though he had been rejected by the four Township Trustees.

The Trustees attorney, Thomas DiCianni, seemed visible stuck (read the bottom of the transcript) by Caldwell decision.  After regaining his composure, he asked to appeal and, upon consideration, Caldwell granted him that request.

Trustees Rob LaPorta, Barb Murphy, Berry Zirk and Gerry McMahon won that effort in the 2nd Appellate Court.

Now, Moore has announced that she will not appeal the ruling that Trustees must approve her nomination for Township Attorney.

Last night two Trustees, LaPorta and Murphy, joined more in appointing Michael Torchalski as “Special Counsel” to handle legal affairs in the sale of the Haligus Road property.  That parcel was purchased from the Village of Lake in the Hills for a new township hall.  That decision by the Township Board headed by John Rossi.  Moore used the issue to defeat Rossi in the first GOP primary election in Grafton Township.  (Previous township officials were elected on ad hoc party names.)

Here is the press release from Grafton Township Supervisor Linda Moore:

Grafton Township Supervisor Declines Appeal to the State Supreme Court

Linda Moore, Supervisor of Grafton Township announced today she did not authorize an appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court as to whether it was legal for the trial court to order confirmation of her Attorney, John M. Nelson, as Grafton Township Attorney.

The Second District Court of Appeals reversed the order of the trial court in its decision on August 2011.

“The case involves complicated issues of enforcement of a court’s injunction versus arguments of separation of powers. While my attorney was anxious to have the Illinois Supreme Court decide these important issues, unfortunately, the cost to township taxpayers of such an appeal would vastly outweigh the benefits to Grafton Township and it’s taxpayers, “

Ms. Moore stated.

“The trustees’ attorneys, Ancel Glink have charged a total of $57,379 for just their appeal to the Second District. This is in addition to Attorney Nelson’s charges of $ $11,707.

“I can only imagine how many more tens of thousands of dollars it would cost to make law on this issue,”

stated Moore.

In addition, there is no guarantee the parties could obtain an expedited hearing for a quick decision.

“The Illinois Supreme Court is very deliberate because they set the rule of law in the state, “Ms. Moore said.

“We need a township attorney now, not months from now.”

Ms. Moore pledged she would continue to nominate qualified attorneys to assist Grafton Township in their legal matters. She continued by saying,

“Hopefully the trustees will come to their senses and confirm this appointment so we can move beyond the self-defeating actions that have driven this board.”


Linda Moore Decides Not to Appeal Second Separation of Powers Decision — 14 Comments

  1. $70,000 JUST FOR THE APPEAL, down the tubes because Moore tried to circumvent Illinois Township law which clearly states “The supervisor, with the ADVICE AND CONSENT of the township board, may appoint a township attorney.”

    Good thing she was elected to save the taxpayers money… How’s that working for ya?

  2. Blow, blow, blow all the money away Linda. Fine supervisor you are.

  3. Excuse me, but the trustees initiated the appeal so the cost is on them!

  4. “The trustees’ attorneys, Ancel Glink have charged a total of $57,379 for just their appeal to the Second District”

    Dear Trustees – get a different attorney. No matter what side people are on, this size of this charge is flipping ridiculous.

  5. The trustees wouldn’t need an attorney if Linda would stop suing them. I suggest you watch the video from the last meeting… Linda’s ready to kick off another lawsuit against the Road District. More money down the drain.

  6. Free, that’s like saying that you punched me in the nose, and I bled all over the carpet, so its my responsibility to replace the carpet, since its my blood.

    As I stated in my first post, the township code clearly states that the supervisor appoints the attorney with the advice and consent of the board. Linda violated this code.

  7. From the Daily Herald article on 8-12-2011:

    But in its opinion filed Monday, the Second District Appellate Court of Illinois ruled that the Circuit Court of McHenry County did not have the authority to direct township trustees to hire Nelson.

    “The trial court’s order in this case removed the board from the process, in essence allowing an attorney to be appointed solely by the action of the supervisor,” the opinion read. “This is plainly at odds with the statute … The statute provides for the board to give its ‘advice and consent’ rather than directing it to perform an action.”
    So in this case, the Appellate Court knows more than Judge Caldwell. Maybe you should familiarize yourself with the issues at hand.

  8. I guess that in your opinion Judge Caldwell violated the code too?
    I wonder would the supreme court reverse the appellate court?
    Are you in favor of going to the next highest court now?

  9. In my opinion, Judge Caldwell overstepped his authority. This opinion was also shared by the Appellate Court.

    As for being in favor of goint to the next highest court, I wasn’t in favor of this going to ANY court in the first place. I think the entire lawsuit is a waste of time and money, and has caused Grafton Township to become a laughing stock.

    Although Linda has created a new college drinking game. You watch a video of township meetings, and every time Linda mentions Judge Caldwell’s decision, everyone has to drink a shot!

  10. The Supreme Court would probably have to determine if the Trustees were being unreasonable in saying No to pretty much anything the Supervisor wanted to do re and atty. Yes, it could be an interesting case to watch.

    As to the money charged by the Trustees’ personal atty. – I find it hard to believe that 1. the fee should be the amount stated and 2. that the Trustees signed on to pay for it. Maybe the Atty. was already happy with the other thousands and thousands of dollars and did this for free?

  11. Nothing about this is interesting to watch, unless you’re an attorney in Linda’s stable. I’d sure as hell like to know how a plaintiff in multiple cases encoumpassing a three year stretch can tell the public with a straight face, she racked up only $12,000 in legal expenses, yet signed off on $600,000 of legal expenses. Judge Caldwell got played by Linda and filleted by a superior court. Linda was probably advised not to continue this because she looked at the low % of appeliate decisions that get overturned. She’d rather that get spent on her salary and bonus.

  12. Imagine that, she has the ability to do all of that. Do you really think she has that much influence? Impressive.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.