East Central Reporter

Today, a status hearing took place in Shelby County regarding the Temporary Restraining Order case filed by Chris Boehm. Concerns were raised about the fairness of the judicial system following events in the courtroom.

Rob Hanlon's motion to intervene was rejected due to non-compliance with Supreme Court Rule 131.d1. The Circuit Clerk reportedly identified this deficiency and informed the judge. Although a recent Supreme Court ruling on the matter was mentioned, specific details were not provided. According to current rules amended through September 23, 2024, attorneys must include their name, business address, e-mail address, and telephone number on documents filed or served.

Typically, such issues are corrected immediately as they are considered ministerial and do not impact the case itself. However, this was not the situation in Shelby County today.

Concerns have been raised about unequal enforcement of rules. Ruth Woolery filed a motion to appoint counsel in the same case without complying with Supreme Court Rule 131 (d)(1), yet her filing was accepted without objection from either the Circuit Clerk or judge.

The perception that rules are enforced selectively in Shelby County has caused alarm among those who believe justice should be applied equally.

Further allegations include violations of law occurring during today's proceedings. The case moved forward without representation for the county board and apparent unawareness of obligations by court officials. Additionally, it is noted that while a State’s Attorney admitted conflict to the board previously, no mention of this conflict was made during critical discussions today.