to the Missouri Tort Victims’ Compensation Fund. Mo. Ann. Stat. §537.675(3) (West 2004). These provisions further accentuate the strong interest the State of Missouri has in this controversy. While Missouri has a strong interest in deciding this matter locally, “Illinois courts have an interest in not being burdened with applying foreign law in the absence of strong policy reasons and a strong connection to the case.” Gridley, 217 Ill. 2d at 175. “In addition, the residents of Illinois should not be burdened with jury duty given the fact that the action did not arise in, and has no relation to, Illinois.” Gridley, 217 Ill. 2d at 175. This is especially true in the case of Madison County, which is judicially recognized as having a congested docket. See Dawdy, 207 Ill. 2d at 181 (<HOLDING>). For the reasons set forth above, it is clear
holding that the supreme court has final appellate review of agency decisions holding that the illinois supreme court has taken notice of madison countys congested docket and that while this factor in itself is relatively insignificant the supreme court has repeatedly recognized that it is appropriate to consider the congested condition of the docket in the plaintiffs chosen forum holding that notice of appeal filed under the wrong docket number is a bona fide attempt to invoke appellate jurisdiction and that the court of appeals dismissal was improper holding that the court of appeals lacks the authority to overrule decisions of the supreme court of north carolina and has a responsibility to follow those decisions until otherwise ordered by the supreme court holding that district court opinion which cites controlling authority that is pending review in florida supreme court allows supreme court to exercise jurisdiction