Supreme Court: Ex-Gov. Ryan can't keep pension
Lawyer Blogs
The Illinois Supreme Court today rejected a bid by imprisoned former Gov. George Ryan to keep a portion of his lucrative government pension that was built up before his corrupt reign as governor and secretary of state.
The high court’s 6-1 decision cost the disgraced former Republican governor $70,824 a year, sending an unmistakable message from the court to Illinois’ governing elite that cronyism and corruption do not pay.
“As the victims of Ryan’s crimes, the taxpayers of the state of Illinois are under no obligation to now fund his retirement,” Justice Robert R. Thomas wrote in the court’s majority opinion.
The state General Assembly Retirement System had moved to strip Ryan, who turns 76 next Wednesday, of the entire $197,037 pension he was drawing annually up until his 2006 conviction on racketeering, conspiracy, mail fraud and other corruption charges linked to his tenure as governor and secretary of state.
But last year, a state appeals court reversed that decision, saying he should get to keep pension earnings from his 24 years as a Kankakee County official, state legislator and lieutenant governor – posts in which he was not accused of criminal wrongdoing.
“Although Ryan held multiple public offices over the course of his time in the system, all of those offices were in service to a single public employer — the state of Illinois. And it was the state of Illinois whose trust Ryan betrayed when he committed 16 job-related felonies,” Thomas wrote.
The lone dissenting justice was Anne Burke, who contended a 2005 ruling by the court in another case should dictate that Ryan keep his pension earnings from before his time as secretary of state and governor.
“I do not intend to diminish in any way the seriousness of the criminal acts committed by the former governor. Also I understand the very human impulse to want to punish Ryan for his wrongdoings by depriving him of all of his pension benefits,” Burke wrote. “However, while I sympathize with such impulses, our constitutional obligation is to follow the law, not our personal preferences.”
Related listings
-
Philip Morris Takes Case to Supreme Court
Lawyer Blogs 02/19/2010Cigarette maker Philip Morris, a unit of Altria Group Inc., asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a landmark ruling that found the tobacco industry violated federal racketeering laws for deceiving the public about the dangers of smoking. The U.S. ...
-
Hawaii county sues Merrill Lynch in federal court
Lawyer Blogs 02/18/2010Maui County is suing Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. in federal court over access to $32 million invested in student-loan auction-rate securities, county officials announced Wednesday.The county purchased securities from Merrill Lynch ...
-
Freedom asks court to OK sale of Ariz. newspapers
Lawyer Blogs 02/17/2010Freedom Communications asked a bankruptcy judge on Tuesday to approve the sale of the East Valley Tribune and several other Phoenix-area publications for about $2 million.Irvine, Calif.-based Freedom Communications Holdings Inc. put the Tribune up fo...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.