East Central Reporter

The judicial system in Shelby County is under scrutiny following a recent court filing by local resident Chris Boehm concerning the potential sale of a farm. The case has brought to light several issues within the courthouse, including questions about legal representation and the hiring of attorneys.

Boehm's counsel argued that only the State’s Attorney can represent the county chairman unless appointed by the court. This assertion was challenged when it was revealed that attorney Ed Flynn, who was involved in a previous case in Shelby County, had not been court-appointed. Boehm’s counsel claimed Flynn was hired with board and court approval in that prior matter, but conflicting records suggest otherwise.

Ed Flynn drafted an affidavit for former State’s Attorney Gina Vonderheide indicating he was hired by her, not the board. However, County Board minutes show former board member Barbara Bennett motioned to hire Flynn, which was approved according to those minutes. There is no evidence of any court approval for Flynn's hiring, as confirmed by his own prior court filings and county board records.

Concerns have been raised about a law firm that previously sued the county to be paid from taxpayer funds for private legal services arguing against private hiring of attorneys without court appointment. According to case law, county officials who hire counsel on their own are responsible for those expenses, and public funds cannot be used for such purposes.

Current State’s Attorney Ruth Woolery's actions are also under examination. She confessed to claims filed against the county but did not disclose advising Chairman Orman he could hire private counsel: “You are free to do that, however, I have already filed a motion requesting the Court to appoint you and the board separate counsel. Up to you how you’d like to proceed.”

The inconsistency between rulings on private legal representation raises questions about fairness in the judicial process. Previous instances where officials hired private counsel without issue further complicate this matter.

Observers await further developments as potential violations of law exposed last week might prompt action from the State’s Attorney or result in further disclosures during upcoming hearings.