State’s Attorney brought two count complaint alleging violations of the state’s Consumer Fraud Act. After the complaint was filed, the Attorney General (along with 47 other states) reached a settlement and entered into an Assurance of Voluntary Compliance with the defendant. In exchange for conduct relief and monetary payments, the state released all claims based on the subject matter of the Assurance that were or could have been brought before the date of the Assurance. The trial court dismissed the State’s Attorney’s claims and he appealed. The State’s Attorney argued that the Attorney General did not have the authority to settle claims brought by the County Attorney under the Consumer Fraud Act on behalf of the people of Illinois because the AG and State’s Attorney had concurrent authority. The court held that the Illinois Attorney General had the authority to issue the release contained in the Assurance pursuant to his common law powers. The Illinois Supreme Court has held thtat the Attorney General’s authority includes all of the powers and duties associated with the office of attorney general at common law. those powers include “the competence to control all litigation on behalf of the State including intervention in and management of all such proceedings.”