Palos Community Hospital v. Humana Insurance Co., Inc., 183 N.E.3d 677

Palos Community Hospital sued Humana for fraud and breach of contract alleging underpayment for services; only the breach claim against Humana proceeded to trial.
Judge Tailor appointed retired Judge James Sullivan as a discovery master to mediate and issue recommendations on discovery disputes; Sullivan submitted a recommendation to produce rate documents.
At hearings before Judge Shelley, she indicated precedent supported appointing a discovery master; Palos objected and moved to strike the appointment and Sullivan’s report.
On April 20, 2017, Palos filed a substitution-of-judge motion under 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(2) before trial and before any substantial ruling by Judge Shelley.
The trial court denied the motion as untimely, applying the “test the waters” doctrine (finding Palos had formed an opinion from prior remarks), and later denied reconsideration; Palos appealed and the appellate court affirmed.
The Illinois Supreme Court granted review to decide whether the test the waters doctrine can be used to deny a statutory substitution-of-judge motion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the "test the waters" doctrine is a valid basis to deny a substitution-of-judge motion under § 2-1001(a)(2)	§ 2-1001(a)(2) requires grant if motion is filed before trial/hearing and before judge has ruled on any substantial issue; Palos met those criteria	Older cases permit denying substitution if party "tested the waters" and formed an opinion of the judge’s position; doctrine prevents judge-shopping	Test the waters conflicts with the statute’s plain text and is not a valid basis to deny a motion that meets the statutory timing and form requirements.
Remedy when a substitution-of-judge motion is improperly denied	All subsequent orders entered after the timely motion are null and must be vacated	Court should retain discretion to avoid gamesmanship; trial court may use inherent powers to police abuse	Every order entered after Palos’s timely motion (April 20, 2017) must be vacated; case remanded for further proceedings.

Bowman v. Ottney, 2015 IL 119000 (Illinois Supreme Court discussing § 2-1001 and substitution-as-of-right)
In re Dominique F., 145 Ill. 2d 311 (1991) (timely substitution motions must be granted and subsequent orders are void)
Sander v. Dow Chemical Co., 166 Ill. 2d 48 (1995) (recognizing courts’ inherent authority to manage dockets and prevent abuse)
People v. Lawrence, 29 Ill. 2d 426 (1963) (pre-amendment authority referencing timeliness and judge-shopping concerns)
Commissioners of Drainage Dist. No. 1 v. Goembel, 383 Ill. 323 (1943) (older case cautioning against testing the judge’s attitude)
Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626 (1962) (courts’ inherent power to manage affairs)
Dietz v. Bouldin, 136 S. Ct. 1885 (2016) (Supreme Court on inherent powers to control proceedings)