Opinion ID: 2087167
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Jurisdiction Under Our Supervisory Authority

Text: McDunn finds this court to be without jurisdiction because the appellate court's order was final and entered well before this court's November 18, 1992, intervention and order. Moreover, McDunn contends that the litigation was terminated and the parties relied on the results. McDunn also notes that the case did not arrive at this court by any initiation of the parties or by way of the court's rules governing appeals. While this court's order stated that it was reviewing the case under its supervisory authority, McDunn suggests that such authority is not a proper means by which jurisdiction may be acquired. McDunn concludes that this court's unprecedented grasp of this case is an action beyond its authority, and [a]n awesome and dangerous precedent is being set,    one which is not condoned by due process requirements of the Federal constitution, which require that parties do or perform some act or be in some position where they can reasonably be expected to be haled into court. We initially note that McDunn's argument is not supported by any citation of authority, other than general references to our supreme court rules and Federal due process concerns. While normally this court will not entertain an argument without citation of authority (see 134 Ill.2d R. 341(e)(7)), `it is the province of the court to determine for itself whether the particular case is one within its jurisdiction.' [Citations.] ( In re Contest of the Election for the Offices of Governor & Lieutenant Governor (1983), 93 Ill.2d 463, 474, 67 Ill. Dec. 131, 444 N.E.2d 170.) We find that McDunn's argument misconstrues the nature of our supervisory authority, and conclude that this court does have jurisdiction to hear this matter under its supervisory authority. Article VI, section 4, of the Illinois Constitution provides this court with two types of jurisdiction, original and appellate. (Ill. Const.1970, art. VI, § 4.) These grants of jurisdiction found in section 4, however, are not exhaustive, as section 16 of the judicial article grants this court general administrative and supervisory authority over all courts. Ill. Const.1970, art. VI, § 16. The term supervisory authority was added to the Illinois Constitution of 1970 to: emphasize[] the importance of the general administrative authority of the Supreme Court over the Illinois court system. [It was] intended to strengthen the concept of central supervision of the judicial system. (Ill.Ann.Stat, 1970 Const., art. VI, § 16, Constitutional Commentary, at 527 (Smith-Hurd 1989).) The addition of the term supervisory authority was meant to clarify that the general authority over all courts vested in the Supreme Court covers both administrative and supervisory powers. (Emphasis added.) 6 Record of Proceedings, Sixth Illinois Constitutional Convention 814. A supreme court's supervisory authority is a well-known judicial power and has been thoroughly discussed in decisions outside our jurisdiction. One decision has noted that the supervisory authority: `practically places the Supreme Court in the same relation to the inferior courts of the state as the Court of King's Bench bore to the inferior courts of England, under the common law.'