{
  "id": 3514317,
  "name": "KENNETH A. KOZEL, Plaintiff-Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. THE STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, Acting as an Electoral Board, et al., Defendants-Appellees (Douglas B. Olivero, Defendant-Appellee and Cross-Appellant)",
  "name_abbreviation": "Kozel v. State Board of Elections",
  "decision_date": "1988-04-28",
  "docket_number": "No. 4\u201488\u20140145",
  "first_page": "501",
  "last_page": "503",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "168 Ill. App. 3d 501"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 256,
    "char_count": 3469,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.77,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.5522964274278852e-07,
      "percentile": 0.675134341809117
    },
    "sha256": "cdf3ca11f82b966e5a952bbfff6d442384eb0830b33fad9b6fd7725dc3a68d38",
    "simhash": "1:409221a536bb92f1",
    "word_count": 551
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:02:50.417384+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "KENNETH A. KOZEL, Plaintiff-Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. THE STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, Acting as an Electoral Board, et al., Defendants-Appellees (Douglas B. Olivero, Defendant-Appellee and Cross-Appellant)."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE SPITZ\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThis appeal is taken from the judicial review proceeding by the circuit court of Sangamon county affirming the administrative order of the State Electoral Board (Board) directing the name of Douglas B. Olivero, defendant, be placed on the ballot as a candidate for the office of La Salle County Resident Circuit Judge in the March 1988 Republican primary. These actions were taken after plaintiff Kenneth A. Kozel filed objection to defendant\u2019s nominating petitions.\nAfter reviewing the record and the parties\u2019 briefs and having considered the oral argument of counsel, we find that plaintiff timely filed his complaint within 10 days of the Board issuing its January 19, 1988, order correcting an earlier order dated January 15, 1988. For this reason, the defendant\u2019s motion to dismiss this appeal is denied. We further find that the Board was properly convened on December 28, 1987, when the Board adopted procedural rules and assigned this matter to a hearing officer, even though some Board members were not physically present but were connected to the meeting by telephonic conference (see 1982 Ill. Att\u2019y Gen. Op. 124), and that the State Election Board was the proper body to convene as the State Electoral Board to consider plaintiff\u2019s objections since the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit is situated in more than one county. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 46, par. 10 \u2014 9.\nLastly, we consider plaintiff\u2019s objections to 528 of the 963 signatures on defendant\u2019s nominating petitions. The hearing officer, electoral board and circuit court focused on the objection to some 450 signatures of registered voters residing in Bureau and Grundy Counties. Plaintiff complains that, since only residents of La Salle County are eligible to vote in the primary and general elections, only residents of La Salle County should be allowed to sign and circulate nominating petitions even though Bureau and Grundy Counties are within the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit.\nThe statute governing the nomination of circuit judges by political parties is unambiguous and allows for signatures from registered voters residing anywhere within the judicial circuit to be on the nominating petitions. \u201cIf for a candidate for judicial office, by at least 500 qualified primary electors of his or her judicial district or circuit, as the case maybe.\u201d Ill. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 46, par. 7 \u2014 10(h).\nContrary to plaintiff\u2019s argument, such an interpretation has a basis in reason. This allows less populated counties to have multiple candidates in primaries where the 500-signature requirement would otherwise preclude it, or to have a candidate at all in counties where one or the other of the parties is predominant.\nAccordingly, the motion to dismiss is denied and the order of the circuit court of Sangamon county is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nGREEN, P. J., and LUND, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE SPITZ"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Kenneth A. Kozel, of Petz & Kozel, of La Salle, appellant pro se.",
      "Neil P. Hartigan, Attorney General, of Springfield, and James Tenuto, of State Board of Elections, of Chicago, for appellee State Board of Elections.",
      "Louis E. Olivero, of Peru, for appellee Douglas B. Olivero."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "KENNETH A. KOZEL, Plaintiff-Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. THE STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, Acting as an Electoral Board, et al., Defendants-Appellees (Douglas B. Olivero, Defendant-Appellee and Cross-Appellant).\nFourth District\nNo. 4\u201488\u20140145\nOpinion filed April 28, 1988.\nRehearing denied May 24, 1988.\nKenneth A. Kozel, of Petz & Kozel, of La Salle, appellant pro se.\nNeil P. Hartigan, Attorney General, of Springfield, and James Tenuto, of State Board of Elections, of Chicago, for appellee State Board of Elections.\nLouis E. Olivero, of Peru, for appellee Douglas B. Olivero."
  },
  "file_name": "0501-01",
  "first_page_order": 523,
  "last_page_order": 525
}