Convicted Former CEO Suspended

The Illinois Supreme Court has ordered the interim suspension of a recently-convicted attorney.

From the Office of the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois

A federal jury has found four former Commonwealth Edison (“ComEd”) executives and associates guilty on all counts charged, including conspiring to influence and reward the former Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives in order to assist with the passage of legislation favorable to the electric utility company, in addition to multiple bribery and record falsification charges.

The jury found the following defendants guilty of all charges:

MICHAEL McCLAIN, 75, of Quincy, who worked as a lobbyist and consultant for ComEd after serving in the Illinois House of Representatives in the 1970s and early 1980s.

• ANNE PRAMAGGIORE, 64, of Barrington, who served as CEO of ComEd from 2012 to 2018, and later served as a senior executive at an affiliate of Exelon Corp., of which ComEd was a subsidiary.
• JOHN HOOKER, 74, of Chicago, who served as ComEd’s executive vice president of legislative and external affairs from 2009 to 2012, after which he worked as an external lobbyist for ComEd.
• JAY DOHERTY, 69, of Chicago, who owned Jay D. Doherty & Associates, which performed consulting services for ComEd from approximately 2011 to 2019.

Sentencing dates have not been set.  Count 1, charging the conspiracy, has a possible punishment of up to five years in federal prison and a maximum fine of $250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss from the offense.  Counts 2, 5, 6, and 8, charging bribery, have a possible sentence of up to 10 years in prison and a maximum fine of $250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss from the offense.  Counts 3, 4, 7, and 9, charging record falsification, have a possible punishment of up to 20 years in federal prison, a fine of $5,000,000, or twice the gross gain or loss from the offense.

Capitol News Illinois reported on the verdict

 A federal jury on Tuesday convicted three ex-lobbyists and the former CEO of electric utility Commonwealth Edison for their involvement in an alleged bribery scheme aimed at longtime Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan.

Former ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore and Mike McClain – the utility’s longtime contract lobbyist and close confidant of Madigan – were each found guilty of nine counts of conspiracy bribery and falsifying records. Former City Club of Chicago President Jay Doherty, who also served for decades as an external lobbyist for the utility, and John Hooker, a former ComEd executive turned contract lobbyist for the company, were each found guilty of six counts.

Prosecutors alleged the foursome gave Madigan allies jobs and contracts at the utility in exchange for an easier path for ComEd-supported legislation in Springfield.

The four defendants were stoic as Judge Harry Leinenweber read the verdict late Tuesday afternoon. The benches in the courtroom were filled with friends and family of the defendants, and sniffles could be heard in the audience as the judge read the guilty counts.

Defendants declined to comment as they left the Dirksen Federal Courthouse, though Pramaggiore’s attorney, Scott Lassar, briefly spoke to reporters, saying only that his team was “disappointed in the ruling” and planned to appeal.

The six-week trial was borne of a wide-ranging federal corruption probe that has rocked Illinois politics and ultimately unseated Madigan, who had been the longest-serving legislative leader in the nation. The former speaker faces related criminal racketeering charges in his own trial, set for next April.

After the verdict Tuesday, acting U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, Morris Pasqual, acknowledged that the bribery alleged in this case wasn’t about cash flowing to Madigan, but rather a more intangible benefit: increased political capital.

“This was not the $10,000 in a grocery bag in the back room; it was much more complex,” Pasqual told reporters, flanked by the assistant U.S. attorneys who prosecuted the case. “And the dollar amounts involved and the gain involved was much more significant as well. So it was a different type of (bribery) case.”

(Mike Frisch)