Northern Illinois

State

• State sues Coldwell Banker over earnest money, Crain's

Chicago area

• Cops gets probation for beating bartender, Chicago Tribune
• Wrongful death suit filed against Dunkin' Donuts, Chicago Tribune

Southern Illinois

• New judge assigned in Coleman triple-murder case, Belleville News-Democrat

Nation

• Student loan relief on the way for law grads, ABA Journal

Legal tech

• 5 ways lawyers can utilize the Kindle e-book, Wisconsin Law Journal

This post is updated with breaking news throughout the day.

ISBA leaders have sent a letter to Gov. Quinn and four legislative leaders in a bid to prevent cuts of up to 50% for legal aid in the current State budget. Read the letter from ISBA President Jack Carey and ISBA President-elect John G. O'Brien.

State

Burris won't face perjury charge, MSNBC

By a 4-2 vote in Maddux v. Blagojevich. Justice Freeman delivered the judgment with Chief Justice Fitzgerald and Justices Kilbride and Burke concurring. Justices Karmeier and Garman dissented. Justice Thomas was not part of the decision. From the case summary: William Maddux is the presiding judge of the law division of the Cook County circuit court. He will be 75 years old before his current term expires in 2010. He would like to serve beyond that time, but wants to do so by running for retention, rather than in a contested election. The Illinois Constitution of 1970 states criteria for eligibility for judgeships which do not include age, but also states that the “General Assembly may provide by law for the retirement of Judges *** at a prescribed age.” The Compulsory Retirement of Judges Act states that “a judge is automatically retired at the expiration of the term in which the judge attains the age of 75.” In 1992, the Act was construed by the appellate court as precluding a judge from running for retention after age 75, but as allowing a candidate for judgeship to run in a contested election at any age, thus reaching a compromise between the constitutional absence of age as an eligibility requirement and the legislature’s constitutionally granted power to set a retirement age. This judicial interpretation, now 17 years old, has not been altered by the legislature. This declaratory judgment action seeking summary judgment was brought as an attempt to secure for Judge Maddux the right to run for retention. It was claimed that the statutory scheme now in place is constitutionally invalid. The circuit court dismissed the action.