{
  "id": 5294544,
  "name": "1616 Building Corporation, an Illinois Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adolph A. Rubinson, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "1616 Building Corp. v. Rubinson",
  "decision_date": "1965-09-24",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 49,830",
  "first_page": "114",
  "last_page": "122",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "64 Ill. App. 2d 114"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 486,
    "char_count": 10457,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.571,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.497341544922815e-08,
      "percentile": 0.39974820925853205
    },
    "sha256": "e53b7af331f8c7ae35ced516afc1c78b375a1283efb2ca8b313ab968f00d29b8",
    "simhash": "1:bf57bff97e58917c",
    "word_count": 1713
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:35:57.055657+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "MCCORMICK, P. J. and DRUCKER, J., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "1616 Building Corporation, an Illinois Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adolph A. Rubinson, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "MR. JUSTICE ENGLISH\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nOn December 26, 1963 plaintiff filed this forcible detainer action before a Justice of the Peace of New Trier Township (Cook County). Summons, which was duly served on defendant, was returnable January 2, 1964. After hearings on various preliminary questions raised by defendant, the case was heard on its merits on May 8, 1964, and a judgment restoring plaintiff to possession was entered that day by a Magistrate of District 2 of the Municipal Department, Circuit Court of Cook County. Defendant has appealed from this judgment.\nBy a careful reading of defendant\u2019s brief, reply brief, and abstract of record, and by cutting through a mass of obfuscatory, dilatory arguments which border on the contumacious, we ascertain defendant\u2019s contentions to be:\nThe Justice of the Peace courts were abolished by amendment of the constitution, effective January 1, 1964.\nThereafter, throughout the pendency and trial of this case, and at the time of entry of the judgment, there was no duly constituted successor court with authority to determine the case.\nNo rules or orders had been published by any purported successor court relating to the docketing of cases, their assignment or trial.\nThe Presiding Judge of District 2 of the Municipal Department, Circuit Court of Cook County had no authority to transfer this case from one magistrate to another for trial.\nThe proceedings were, therefore, a nullity, and the judgment void.\nEssentially the same points were raised by defendant in the trial court. They are baselessly pejorative of the work product of the countless hours devoted by the legislature and its committees, the several bar committees and advisory councils, and the courts themselves, in anticipatory implementation of the constitutional amendment for the purpose of activating and lubricating the transition to the reformed court system on January 1, 1964.\nIt is true, of course, that the Justice of the Peace courts were abolished at the effective date of the constitutional amendment, as set forth in Paragraph 5(a) of the Schedule to Article VI. The very same paragraph of the Schedule, however, provides that \u201call their jurisdiction, judicial functions, powers and duties are transferred to the respective circuit courts, . . . .\u201d And further:\n(c) Each court into which jurisdiction of other courts is transferred shall succeed to and assume jurisdiction of all causes, matters and proceedings then pending, with full power and authority to dispose of them and to carry into execution or otherwise to give effect to all orders, judgments and decrees theretofore entered by the predecessor courts.\n(d) The files, books, papers, records, documents, moneys, securities, and other property in the possession, custody or under the control of the courts hereby abolished, or any officer thereof, are transferred to the Circuit Court; and thereafter all proceedings in all courts shall be matters of record.\nParagraph 2 of the Schedule also directs that:\nExcept to the extent inconsistent with the provisions of this Article, all provisions of law and rules of court in force on the Effective Date of this Article shall continue in effect until superseded in a manner authorized by the Constitution.\nConsistent therewith, the Circuit Court of Cook County adopted certain new Rules and General Orders on January 2, 1964, effective that date, to be used in conjunction with the Uniform Rules for Circuit Courts in Illinois. We believe these Rules and Orders to have been adequately published at that time. While defendant disputes this proposition, he is forced to concede that they were given wide discretion through publication in the Chicago Law Bulletin a few days later, and long prior to any of the significant dates in the hearing of this case.\nIncluded in those Rules and Orders are the following provisions:\nRule 0.1 Rules of Court.\n(a) Uniform rules. The Uniform Rules of Practice of the former Circuit and Superior Courts of Cook County, Illinois, are adopted as rules of the Circuit Court of Cook County.\n(b) Existing rules preserved. The rules of court, general orders of court, and procedures in force on December 81, 1963, in the several courts of and in Cook County and not repealed or superseded by or inconsistent with any provision of the Constitution, statute, rule of court, or general order of the Chief Judge, shall continue in effect on and after January 1, 1964, until repealed, amended, or superseded in accordance with the law.\nGeneral Order No. 1\n1-2. Municipal Department\nThe Municipal Department is divided into six districts :\nDISTRICT 2\u2014\nThe townships of Evanston, ... New Trier\nCIVIL ACTIONS HEARD\n(Among the types and classes of cases designated to be heard by the Municipal Department are \u201cactions of forcible entry and detainer.\u201d)\n1-3. Transfer or Assignment\nASSIGNMENT OF ACTIONS\nAny action may be assigned to any Judge, Associate Judge, or Magistrate of the Circuit Court of Cook County for hearing or trial, regardless of the department, division or district in which the case was filed or to which the judge is regularly assigned. Any action or proceeding may be heard or tried in any courtroom in the Circuit Court of Cook County, regardless of the department, district or division in which the case was filed or for which the courtroom is regularly used.\nGeneral Order No. 1-4\n(New civil actions in District 2 of the Municipal Department are directed to be filed in the office of the Clerk of the Court at 1454 Elmwood Street, Evanston.)\nGeneral Order No. 6\n(Provides a system for the captioning and numbering of cases thereafter filed.) It also states: 6-1 (b) Pending Actions\u2014 In actions pending on Dec. 31, 1963, pleadings, motions, orders, court forms and other papers filed on and after Jan. 1, 1964, should be captioned as provided in section (a) of this order, but shall be valid if entitled in the name of the court in which the action was filed prior to Jan. 1, 1964.\n6-2 (b) Pending Actions \u2014 Each action pending on Dec. 31, 1963, in any court in or for Cook County shall retain the number given in the court in which the action was filed prior to Jan. 1, 1964, and pleadings, orders, judgments and other papers subsequently filed shall bear the number so given.\nGeneral Order No. 10\n(Directs that the Presiding Judge of each District of the Circuit Court may assign to Magistrates within his District certain listed types of proceedings including proceedings in forcible entry and detainer.)\nFurther implementing the new constitutional provisions, the Circuit Court of Cook County also adopted certain Special Orders on January 2, 1964. These included :\nSpecial Order No. 4-1-1\nActions and proceedings filed in the former courts of original jurisdiction in Cook County and pending therein at the close of court on Dec. 31, 1963, are transferred to the Circuit Court of Cook County and assigned as follows, and that subsequent filings in these actions be made at the following offices of the Clerk:\n1. Transfer of Pending Actions.\n(i) Other Courts \u2014 Actions and proceedings, civil or criminal, pending in any court outside the territorial limits of the City of Chicago and not transferred by sections (b) or (c) [Chancery and Divorce] of this order are transferred to the respective District of the Municipal Department which includes the territorial limits of the city, village, incorporated town, township, or other municipal corporation in which the court was established.\n2. Subsequent Filing in Pending Actions.\n(a) Actions not in Former Circuit and Superior Courts \u2014 In actions and proceedings filed on or before Dec. 31, 1963, in any court of original jurisdiction in and for Cook County, except the former Circuit Court of Cook County and the Superior Court of Cook County, pleadings, motions and other papers filed on and after Jan. 1, 1964, shall be filed in the office of the Clerk of Court for the department, division, or district to which the action is transferred, as specified in General Order No. 1-4.\nSpecial Order No. 4-1-4\n(Assigns Associate Judges and Magistrates to the various Districts of the Municipal Department commencing January 2, 1964. Among the assignments to District 2 were the Associate Judge and all three Magistrates who entered orders in the instant case.)\nWe should think that the Circuit Court and its Chief Judge would have the inherent power to adopt the above Rules and Orders. However, if additional authority is needed, it is to be found in the Civil Practice Act, Section 2 (Power of courts to make rules). Ill Rev Stats (1963), ch 110, \u00a7\u00a7 1 and 2. See also article VI, \u00a7 8 of the Constitution and Supreme Court Rule 1. ch 110, \u00a7 101.1.\nDesignation of the places of holding court in District 2 of the Municipal Department was also given wide publicity on December 19, 1963 in the Chicago Tribune, the metropolitan daily newspaper of largest circulation. Other publications followed in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, and in community newspapers published in the areas concerned with this case (Evanston, Skokie and Winnetka). Some of these were at later dates, but long before the trial of the instant case. It may be noted that defendant was personally present in court at all proceedings in the case, including the trial.\nWe believe that the foregoing furnishes a complete refutation of defendant\u2019s contentions and requires no further comment.\nThe notice of appeal and defendant\u2019s briefs also purport to appeal from alleged error in the entry of an order on May 8, 1964 denying a motion of defendant to consolidate this case with a combination equity and law action previously filed by defendant in the Circuit Court. The record contains no such order. Consequently, that part of this appeal will be considered a nullity.\nThe judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nMCCORMICK, P. J. and DRUCKER, J., concur.\nThis motion was made before a Magistrate of District 2 of the Municipal Department. It may be noted in passing that Circuit Court General Order No. 12 requires that such a motion be made before the Assignment Judge of the Law Division, County Department.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "MR. JUSTICE ENGLISH"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Adolph Allen Rubinson & Associates, of Chicago (Norman Hanfling, of counsel), for appellant.",
      "Emmet J. Cleary, of Chicago, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "1616 Building Corporation, an Illinois Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adolph A. Rubinson, Defendant-Appellant.\nGen. No. 49,830.\nFirst District, Fourth Division.\nSeptember 24, 1965.\nAdolph Allen Rubinson & Associates, of Chicago (Norman Hanfling, of counsel), for appellant.\nEmmet J. Cleary, of Chicago, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0114-01",
  "first_page_order": 126,
  "last_page_order": 134
}