With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 3d 575, 578.) In the instant case, the trial court ruled that notice given approximately 24 hours prior to the time the petition for substitution of judge was presented to the court was unreasonable under the circumstances. This ruling is consistent with prior cases addressing this issue. In Buckingham Corp. v. Modern Liquors, Inc. (1973), 16 Ill. App. 3d 534, the defendant delivered to the plaintiff notice of motion and a petition for substitution of judge (then termed change of venue) at 3:50 p.m., on April 26, 1972. The following morning, at 10 a.m., the defendant presented the petition to the court. The judge found that the notice was unreasonable and denied the motion. The appellate court affirmed. Buckingham, 16 Ill. App. 3d at 537, quoting Hutson v. Wood (1914), 263 Ill. 376 (<HOLDING>). Although the approximately 24 hours’ notice

A: holding that presentation of an untimely petition to the states highest court satisfied the exhaustion requirement
B: holding that an affidavit in opposition to a motion for summary judgment that is not served at least one day before the hearing is barred by the civil practice act from consideration as evidence unless the record discloses the trial court in the exercise of its discretion has allowed the affidavit to be served and considered
C: holding notice unreasonable where it was served the afternoon of the day before the presentation of the petition to the court
D: holding that a telephone request to the court for a continuance the day before the trial was to start was a nullity
C.