Opinion
No. 01 C 4696
December 14, 2001
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this action to condemn land in Kendall, McHenry, DeKalb and Will counties in Illinois, to build a natural gas pipeline from Joliet, Illinois, to the Wisconsin border (and then beyond), the land in Kendall and Will counties is in the Eastern Division and the land in MeHenry and DeKalb counties is in the Western Division. The suit was filed in the Eastern Division. Some of the landowners in McHenry and DeKalb counties prefer to litigate in the Western Division (and some prefer to stay here), and they have moved to bifurcate the case and to transfer the litigation, as it pertains to their parcels, to Rockford. Those motions are denied.
If this lawsuit involved only these parcels, these defendants' arguments might be more compelling. But it does not. Even if we granted the motions, most of the case would remain in the Eastern Division. That would require different judges to rule upon pending objections, which have largely common themes, thus requiring duplication of effort and possibly inconsistent rulings. Plaintiff would have to litigate in both Rockford and Chicago.
This should not be a document-intensive case. The primary witnesses probably will be expert appraisers, and the selection pool is far greater in Chicago than in Rockford. The distances involved are not great in any event and, indeed, McHenry County defendants may be as close to Chicago as to Rockford. If trial should be by commission, as provided by Rule 71A(h), the commission can convene whenever it is most convenient to all concerned. If trial should be before a jury and, for example, a viewing would be desirable, the matter can be transferred shortly before trial. But we see no gain in convenience by bifurcating these proceedings at the present time.