Judge Irwin Solganick

Judge Irwin J. Solganick did not earn his position of public trust but obtained it through his personal connections. Robert Sulski vacancy–Irwin Solganick found a place on the ballot when Judge Sulski filed notice of his intent to resign just before the primary filing deadline. It was an objectionable gimmick that gained Mr. Solganick an unopposed position for the Democratic nomination. His opponent is Donald Casey, a partner in a small firm whose Republican nomination was at least untainted by trickery. He gets the endorsement.

In 2016 Irwin Solganick was NOT recommended for retention by CBA yet somehow he found his way to the bench (I guess thanks to $900.00 “donation” to Committee on Retention of Judges) and currently sitting in the Law Division of Cook County Court, Illinois where Irwin J. Solganick serves his parties of interests – well-connected lawyers and wealthy corporations.

11

Judge Solganick’s election  is publicly known as “Sulski-Solganick Stunt”.All following information are citation from published records. The posted picture is a judge who  looks exactly as Irwin Solganick, as I recall when I met him in October 2014 and September 2015.

head

“The Chicago Council of Lawyers is calling for a state investigation of what it calls “the Sulski-Solganick stunt.` This is the smoothly executed hidden-ball play   by which Judge Robert Sulski`s seat on Circuit Court is being handed over to Irwin Solganick, a member of Ald. Edward Vrdolyak`s law firm, with no need to consult the voters.

The gimmick is new and no doubt should be studied for technical pointers, but an investigation of it probably would not turn up anything illegal. It seems just another slick way to gyp the voters, and under our present system of electing judges such methods are fairly standard.

Judge Sulski, a 17-year veteran of the bench, notified the secretary of state on Dec. 2 that he would seek retention. But at 2 p.m. on Dec. 15–three hours before the deadline for filing nominating petitions to become a candidate–he delivered a surprise notification that he didn`t want another term after all. The seat would be vacant.

Less than 80 minutes later, Mr. Solganick filed petitions with the Illinois Election Board, asking to be listed as a candidate to fill Judge Sulski`s vacancy. Even more amazing, his petitions had the 500 signatures required by law. Thanks to timing as precise as a gymnast`s, he slid in just under the deadline to secure a spot on the ballot.”

According to another then-Vrdolyak’s law Associate, Rod Blagojevich, At the firm, Blagojevich admitted to jurors, “I didn’t do a lot of law.”  He recalled that his assignments there included dropping off campaign literature in Hegewisch; getting election petitions signed for another Vrdolyak firm lawyer, Irwin Solganick, to run for judge; and picking up cheesecake from the well-known Lutz bakery for Vrdolyak’s driver.

To hear Irwin J. Solganick tell it, he has a lot of luck.A record number of people are running to fill judicial vacancies in the March 18 primary, but Solganick is running in a slot without opposition.

But Solganick insists his boss had nothing to do with his incredible good fortune. …

Jerome B. Meites, a Council of Lawyers board member who filed the high court action, accused Solganick and Sulski of conspiring to time Sulski’s pullout so others wouldn’t have time to collect 500 names needed to enter the race.

Solganick has not responded to repeated requests for comment.

As a judge Irwin Solganick was repeatedly criticized for corrupt  Court practices and even accused in bribes.

judge_justice_atticus_mobster_cartoon_character_design_cartoon_black_and_white

Citation:”One woman who has directly confronted this political machine is ex-socialite Maria George. She holds, the dubious distinction of having, in her own words, “the largest libel judgment ($9.7 million plus interest) in the history of the state of Illinois, and most probably the entire U.S.”

Ms. George’s foray into this corrupt world began during a high-profile divorce from investment banker Scott George. In a Dec. 12, 2008 letter to U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, she said her husband “boasted that he was ‘protected’ by his ‘friends.’ These individuals included the mayor [Richard Daley], the governor [Rod Blagojevich] (to whom he had made sizable political contributions), Joseph Cari (recently indicted in the Rezko fiasco, as well as Scott George’s former business partner), Ed Vrdolyak (indicted in May 2007 on charges of bribery and mail fraud) and Connie Xinos (‘godfather’ of Scott George and a criminal defense attorney in Chicago who ‘guaranteed’ his acquittal).”

She next explained how her husband “laughed that the litigation was ‘fixed’ and that the judge assigned to the divorce (Michele Lowrance) was none other than a Vrdolyak relative. He also proclaimed that the court-appointed psychiatrist, an additional psychiatrist, the children’s attorney and even her own attorneys all received cash payments.” Ms. George lost everything to her husband, including their 12,000-square-foot $3 million mansion in the prestigious Kenilworth suburb.

One of Ms. George’s primary complaints against her husband, at least in a professional sense, was what she described as a series of “reverse discrimination” shakedown schemes involving a black co-worker that he used as leverage against the management of both Morgan Stanley and Bankers Trust. After alerting his newest employer—Ernst &Young—via a 60-page bill of particulars from their divorce, her troubles escalated. In an October 29 interview by this author, Ms. George described how her husband, “represented by an attorney referred to as ‘the Fixer’ and a known Daley ‘insider,’ sued to get an order of protection against” her.

Prior to this ruling, Ms. George—still undaunted—dropped another bombshell by mailing a scathing three page letter in November 2004 to over 3,000 members of the banking and investment community, business leaders, elected officials, media sources, legal and family advocates and acquaintances. This document served as a catalyst to completely unleash an array of retaliatory forces within the “machine.”

A libel trial ensued in September 2006, and again Ms. George detailed to Patrick Fitzgerald what took place. Her lawyer, “Mr. Ducote presented to Judge Irwin Solganick (a longtime friend of the ‘godfather’) Scott George’s own notes detailing his discussions with Bankers Trust, admitting to receiving a ‘payoff’ that was structured to evade paying taxes, and specifically noting that he was paid to ‘not file a reverse discrimination lawsuit.’”

The judge refused to admit these notes, or any other testimony pertaining to them, into the court proceedings. He also redacted large portions of her “letter.” No tax returns or other financial information substantiating Mr. George’s work history were allowed either. In his opening statement for this case, Ducote paraphrased to the jurors what Mr.

George is said to have told his wife. “I can bribe the judge. That’s what he used to tell her.” Again, despite being armed with thousands of pages of court transcripts, internal company memos and incriminating personal notes Ms. George lost her case. The verdict landed her on the Chicago Sun-Times front page (October 7, 2006). She now faces a $14 million debt and impending bankruptcy.

Another victim of Judge Irvin Solganick corrupt Court practices is African American lawyer Lance Amu who criticized Solganick  and was unjustly disbarred   by Jerome Larkin, ARDC Administrator. According to Lanre Amu,

“Lawyers Like Myself Who “Naively” File Complaints Against  Corrupt Judges Thinking they are Working to Improve Our Legal System Receive the Shock of their Lives! They are Defamed, Ostracized, Harassed, Suspended and/or Disbarred! By Making a Public Example of Us “Naive” Lawyers, these Justices Impose a Conspiracy of Silence on the Entire Bar! Many People and Entities, Including Practicing Lawyers, are Afraid to Publicly Talk About Judicial Corruption Out Fear for Their Livelihood and/or Other Consequences Should They End Up Before The Judges or Justices

Lawyer Amu described his experience in Judge Irwin Solganick’s Court as following:

Judge Irwin J. Solganick engaged in corrupt ruling that undermined this case in favor of the defense . . .” (p. 4 of Response)

Judge Solganick struck all of plaintiff’s requests to admit without reading them. . . . I now allege that it was a corrupt ruling.” (p. 5)

Judge Solganick . . . was ignorant of the medical issue in the medical malpractice case; he did not read the requests to admit before he struck them in the entirety.” (p. 5)

“I did find out that Judge Solganick used to be a law partner with Ed Vrdolyak. . . Ed Vrdolyak was recently sentenced to prison for sophisticated fraud, kickbacks and/or related activity. Generally, birds of the same feather flock together.” (p. 5-6)

“All Judge Solganick saw before him was a black lawyer (one of only two black lawyers in courtroom 2005 at the time) going against several insurance defense lawyers, in a sea of white lawyers in courtroom 2005.” (p. 6)

“This is a corrupt use of judicial power under the guise of judicial discretion. It was like nothing I said really mattered to Judge Solganick. I was simply being disarmed and railroaded to a trial.” (p. 7)

“Plaintiff is however entitled to a fair and an impartial trial. Corruption within the system prevented that from happening.” (p. 7)

All Lanre Amu statements about Judge Irwin Soganick were true and supported by similar precedents from Maria George case where Solganick “refused to admit these notes” and “redacted large portions of her “letter

I have my personal and very negative experience in Judge  Solganick’s Court.

On or about October 20, 2014 I appeared before Judge Solganick to present my Motion to Sever my legit Law Division case 14-L-3632 from frivolous “defamation” case filed by my Defendants, Chicagoland Community Management, Inc. (“CCM”) in Chancery.

CCM were not able to present ANY legitimate argument to support their bogus complaint. So, in the stunning spin in less than 30 days CCM lawyer Michael Franz defrauded 6 (SIX) judges in TWO Divisions of Cook County Court, Illinois, and corruptly consolidated their Chancery Division claim with my Law Case, which was approved by Judge Thomas L. Hogan, who received at least $4,550.00 from another set of CCM lawyers,  Hinshaw &Culertson LLP, who joined  lawyer Franz’s “defamation” case.

Judge Solganick, to whom Judge James P. Flannery passed my Motion at the last moment, did not even review it  and denied it, as asked by well-connected lawyers.

Judge  Irwin Solganick had a huge conflict of interests to handle my case  – since he is connected to my Defendants, Carl Sandburg Village Master HOA where his election office was located (or where Solganick probably resides – 1560 N. Sandburg Terrace. The HOA whom I sued is located at 1360 N. Sandburg Terrace.

sand

But all  Judge Solganick saw before him was a solo ProSe litigant  going against several insurance-funded  defense lawyers who have at least 5 (FIVE) personal judges sitting in Cook County Court who have family relations to my Defendants’ lawyers: Judges Snyder, Sullivan, Mulroy, Horan and Griffin.

Judge Irwin J. Solganick engaged in corrupt ruling that undermined this case in favor of the defense. (Id.)

This is a corrupt use of judicial power under the guise of judicial discretion. It was like nothing I said really mattered to Judge Solganick. (Id.)

My second appearance before Judge Solganick was on or about September 15, 2015 when I tried to present a Petition to recuse  Judge John C. Griffin from my case which Judge James P. Flannery once again kicked to be heard by another judge. (which was judge Flannery’s modus operandi in my case – pass it to other  judges for fixing)

Solganick refused to hear my Petition due to his “conflict of interests” since he  threatened to sue me for defamation after I disclosed his corrupt way to the bench.

As of today, December 2017,  Irwin Soganick still did not file his “defamation” case against me which was merely a traditional bullying and scary tactic utilized by most corrupt Judge in Cook County Court to shun opposition.