Rulings are considered "substantial" when they are directly related to the merits of the case. In re Marriage of Talty, 252 Ill. App.3d 80, 82 (1993), rev'd on other grounds, 166 Ill.2d 232, 652 N.E.2d 330 (1995). A motion to substitute judges is untimely if brought after the judge has ruled on a substantial issue in the case.
In a post-decree order, Helen was awarded $15,000 in prospective attorney fees for the defense of the present appeal. The appellate court affirmed the judgment. ( 252 Ill. App.3d 80.) We allowed William's petition for leave to appeal (145 Ill.2d R. 315(a)), and we now reverse the judgments of the courts below and remand the matter to the circuit court for further proceedings.
(76702, 76868) Styck v. Iroquois County Sheriff's Merit Comm'n No. 3-93-0014, filed 11/30/93 ........................... Denied. (76770) Talty v. Talty 252 Ill. App.3d 80 .................................... Allowed. (76768) Taradash v. Adelet/Scott Fetzer Co. No. 1-92-1906, filed 12/27/93 ........................... Denied.
The policy behind this rule is to preclude a litigant's attempt to "judge shop" after forming an opinion that the judge may be unfavorably disposed toward that litigant's cause. In re Marriage of Talty, 252 Ill. App.3d 80 (1993), rev'd rem. on other grounds, 166 Ill.2d 232 (1995). Again, no one disputes that a party cannot seek substitution after the judge has issued a ruling on a substantial issue.