Skip to main content

Full text of "Confirmation hearings on federal appointments : hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Fifth Congress, first session, on confirmation of appointees to the federal judiciary"

See other formats


j^-^  S.  Hrg.  105-205,  Pt.  2 

CONHRMATION  HEARINGS 
ON  FEDERAL  APPOINTMENTS 


Y  4.  J  89/2;  S.  HRG.  105-205/ 
PT.2 

Confirnation  Hearinjs  on  Federal  Ap. . . 


k 


HEAKINGS 

BEFORE  THE 

COMMITTEE  ON  THE  JUDICIARY 
UNITED  STATES  SENATE 

ONE  HUNDRED  FIFTH  CONGRESS 

FIRST  SESSION 

ON 

CONFIRMATION  OF  APPOINTEES  TO  THE  FEDERAL  JUDICIARY 


SEPTEMBER  5,  30;  OCTOBER  28,  29;  NOVEMBER  12,  1997 


Part  2 


Serial  No.  J-105-4 


Printed  for  the  use  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary 


W/IK^ 


S.  Hrg.   105-205,  Pt.  2 

CONHRMATION  HEARINGS 
ON  FEDERAL  APPOINTMENTS 


HEARINGS 

BEFORE  THE 

COMMITTEE  ON  THE  JUDICIARY 
UNITED  STATES  SENATE 

ONE  HUNDRED  FIFTH  CONGRESS 

FIRST  SESSION 

ON 

CONFIRMATION  OF  APPOINTEES  TO  THE  FEDERAL  JUDICIARY 


SEPTEMBER  5,  30;  OCTOBER  28,  29;  NOVEMBER  12,  1997 


Part  2 


Serial  No.  J-105-4 


Printed  for  the  use  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary 


U.S.   GOVERNMENT  PRINTING  OFFICE 
WASHINGTON  :  1998 


For  sale  by  the  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office 

Superintendent  of  Documents,  Congressional  Sales  Office,  Washington,  DC  20402 

ISBN  0-16-056254-6 


COMMITTEE  ON  THE  JUDICIARY 


ORRIN  G. 
STROM  THURMOND,  South  CaroUna 
CHARLES  E.  GRASSLEY,  Iowa 
ARLEN  SPECTER,  Pennsylvania 
FRED  THOMPSON,  Tennessee 
JON  KYL,  Arizona 
MIKE  DeWINE,  Ohio 
JOHN  ASHCROFT,  Missouri 
SPENCER  ABRAHAM,  Michigan 
JEFF  SESSIONS,  Alabama 


HATCH,  Utah,  Chairman 

PATRICK  J.  LEAHY,  Vermont 
EDWARD  M.  KENNEDY,  Massachusetts 
JOSEPH  R.  BIDEN,  Jr.,  Delaware 
HERBERT  KOHL,  Wisconsin 
DIANNE  FEINSTEIN,  CaUfornia 
RUSSELL  D.  FEINGOLD,  Wisconsin 
RICHARD  J.  DURBIN,  Illinois 
ROBERT  G.  TORRICEi^LI,  New  Jersey 


Manus  Cooney,  Chief  Counsel  and  Staff  Director 
Bruce  A.  Cohen,  Minority  Chief  Counsel 


(II) 


CONTENTS 


HEARING  DATES 

Page 

Friday,  Septembers,  1997  1 

Tuesday,  September  30,  1997  339 

Tuesday,  October  28,  1997  665 

Wednesday,  October  29,  1997  919 

Wednesday,  November  12,  1997  1359 

FRIDAY,  SEPTEMBER  5,  1997 
Statements  of  Committee  Members 

Specter,  Hon.  Arlen  1 

Leahy,  Hon.  Patrick  J.  (prepared  statement)  3 

Introduction  of  Nominees 

Graham,  Hon.  Bob  4 

Prepared  statement  5 

Mack,  Hon.  Connie  7 

Prepared  statement  8 

Santorum,  Hon.  Rick  (prepared  statement)  22 

Testimony  of  Nominees 

Marjorie  O.  Rendell,  of  Pennsylvania,  to  be  U.S.  Circuit  Judge  for  the  Third 

Circuit  9 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Specter  10 

Senator  Kohl  12 

Senator  Sessions  13 

Senator  Biden  13 

Bruce  W.  Kauffman,  of  Pennsylvania,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  East- 
ern District  of  Pennsylvania  15 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Specter  15 

Senator  Kohl  17 

Senator  Biden  17 

Richard  A.   Lazzara,  of  Florida,  to  be  U.S.   District  Judge  for  the  Middle 

District  of  Florida  19 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Specter  18 

A.  Richard  Caputo,  of  Pennsylvania,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Middle 

District  of  Pennsylvania  20 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Specter  21 

Senator  Kohl  22 

Alphabetical  List  and  Materl\l  Submitted 

Caputo,  A.  Richard: 

Testimony  20 

Questionnaire 225 


(III) 


IV 

Page 

Graham,  Hon.  Bob: 

"Lazzara  Deserves  Federal  Appointment,"  newspaper  article  from   the 
Tampa  Tribune,  Jan.  7,  1997  6 

Kauffman,  Bruce  W.: 

Testimony  15 

Questionnaire 86 

Lazzara,  Richard  A.: 

Testimony  19 

Questionnaire 159 

Rendell,  Marjorie  O.: 

Testimony  9 

Questionnaire 25 

Specter,  Hon.  Arlen: 

Letter  to  Senator  Orrin  G.  Hatch,  chairman.  Senate  Judiciary  Committee, 

Washington,  DC,  Sept.  4,  1997  2 

Letter  from  Senator  Orrin  G.  Hatch,  chairman,  Senate  Judiciary  Commit- 
tee, Washington,  DC,  Sept.  4,  1997  2 

TUESDAY,  SEPTEMBER  30,  1997 

Statements  of  Committee  Members 

DeWine,  Hon.  Mike  339 

Leahy,  Hon.  Patrick  J.  (prepared  statement)  351 

Radio  address  of  the  President  to  the  Nation  352 

Introduction  of  Nominees 

Hatch,  Hon.  Orrin  G  339 

Bennett,  Hon.  Robert  F  340 

Glenn,  Hon.  John  341 

D'Amato,  Hon.  Alfonse  M  343 

Prepared  statements  346 

Moynihan,  Hon.  Daniel  Patrick  (prepared  statements) 344 

Thompson,  Hon.  Fred  348 

Frist,  Hon.  Bill  350 

Ford,  Hon.  Harold  E  350 

Testimony  of  Nominees 

Ronald  Lee  Oilman,  of  Tennessee,  to  be  U.S.  Circuit  Judge  for  the  Sixth 

Circuit  353 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  DeWine 353 

Senator  Thurmond  355 

Senator  Sessions  356 

Senator  Ashcroft  359 

Sonia  Sotomayor,  of  New  York,  to  be  U.S.   Circuit  Judge  for  the  Second 

Circuit  355 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Thurmond  354 

Senator  Sessions 356 

Senator  Ashcroft  359 

Senator  DeWine 362 

Charles  J.  Siragusa,  of  New  York,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Western 

District  of  New  York  367 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  DeWine 367 

Algenon  L.  Marbley,  of  Ohio,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Southern 

District  of  Ohio  368 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  DeWine 368 

Dale  A.  Kimball,  of  Utah,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  District  of  Utah 368 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  DeWine 368 

James  S.  Gwin,  of  Ohio,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Northern  District 

of  Ohio  369 


James  S.  Gwin,  of  Ohio,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Northern  District 
of  Ohio — Continued 
Questioning  by: 

Senator  DeWine 369 

Richard   Conway  Casey,   of  New  York,   to  be  U.S.   District  Judge  for  the 

Southern  District  cf  New  York  369 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  DeWine 369 

Alphabetical  List  and  Material  Submitted 

Casey,  Richard  Conway: 

Testimony  369 

Questionnaire 627 

Oilman,  Ronald  Lee: 

Testimony  353 

Questionnaire 376 

Gwin,  James  S.: 

Testimony  369 

Questionnaire 599 

Kimball,  Dale  A.: 

Testimony  368 

Questionnaire 574 

Marbley,  Algenon  L.: 

Testimony  368 

Questionnaire 538 

Siragusa^  Charles  J.: 

Testimony  367 

Questionnaire 500 

Sotomayor,  Sonia: 

Testimony  355 

Questionnaire 459 

TUESDAY,  OCTOBER  28,  1997 

Statements  of  Committee  Members 

Hatch,  Hon.  Orrin  G  665 

Leahy,  Hon.  Patrick  J.  (prepared  statement)  683 

Introduction  of  Nominees 

Wyden,  Hon.  Ron  666 

Prepared  statement  667 

Smith,  Hon.  Gordon  668 

Prepared  statement  668 

Mack,  Hon.  Connie  669 

Graham,  Hon.  Bob  670 

Prepared  statement  671 

Robb,  Hon.  Charles  S  673 

Prepared  statement  674 

Warner,  Hon.  John  W 675 

Prepared  statement  676 

Bond,  Hon.  Christopher  S  677 

Prepared  statement  678 

Ashcroft,  Hon.  John  679 

Testimony  of  Nominees 

Stanley   Marcus,   of  Florida,   to   be   U.S.    Circuit   Judge   for  the   Eleventh 

Circuit  680 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Ashcroft  680 

Senator  Durbin  682 

Rodney  W.  Sippel,  of  Missouri,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Eastern 

and  Western  Districts  of  Missouri  684 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Durbin  684 


VI 

Page 
Rodney  W.  Sippel,  of  Missouri,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Eastern 
and  Western  Districts  of  Missouri — Continued 
Questioning  by — Continued 

Senator  Ashcroft  691 

Norman  K.   Moon,  of  Virginia,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Western 

District  of  Virginia  686 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Durbin  686 

Senator  Ashcroft  691 

Ann  L.  Aiken,  of  Oregon,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  District  of  Oregon  ..      687 
Questioning  by: 

Senator  Ashcroft  687 

Senator  Durbin  689 

Jerome  B.  Friedman,  of  Virginia,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Eastern 

District  of  Virginia  687 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Ashcroft  687 

Senator  Durbin  690 

Alphabetical  List  and  Material  Submitted 

Aiken,  Ann  L.: 

Testimony  687 

Questionnaire 856 

Friedman,  Jerome  B.: 

Testimony  687 

Questionnaire 887 

Marcus,  Stanley: 

Testimony  680 

Questionnaire 693 

Moon,  Norman  K.: 

Testimony  686 

Questionnaire 811 

Sippel,  Rodney  W.: 

Testimony  684 

Questionnaire 775 

WEDNESDAY,  OCTOBER  29,  1997 

Statements  of  Committee  Members 

Kyi,  Hon.  Jon  919 

Leahy,  Hon.  Patrick  J.  (prepared  statement)  1017 

Introduction  of  Nominees 

Kohl,  Hon.  Herbert  920 

Feingold,  Hon.  Russell  D 922 

Prepared  statement  923 

Durbin,  Hon.  Richard  J  951 

Evans,  Hon.  Lane  952 

Moseley-Braun,  Hon.  Carol  953 

LaHood,  Hon.  Ray  (prepared  statement)  954 

Feinstein,  Hon.  Dianne  955 

Condit,  Hon.  Gary  A.  (prepared  statement)  999 

Boxer,  Hon.  Barbara  1000 

Santorum,  Hon.  Rick  1001 

Foglietta,  Hon.  Thomas  M  1002 

Specter,  Hon.  Arlen  1003 

Fattah,  Hon.  Chaka  1006 

Testimony  of  Nominees 

James  S.  Ware,  of  California,  to  be  U.S.  Circuit  Judge  for  the  Ninth  Circuit  ...    1007 
Questioning  by: 

Senator  Kyi  1007 

Lynn  S.  Adelman,  of  Wisconsin,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Eastern 
District  of  Wisconsin  1011 


VII 

Page 

Lynn  S.  Adelman,  of  Wisconsin,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Eastern 
District  of  Wisconsin — Continued 
Questioning  by: 

Senator  Kohl  1011 

Senator  Feingold  1013 

Senator  Kyi  1015 

Charles  R.  Breyer,  of  California,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Northern 

District  of  California  1011 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Kyi  1016 

Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr.,  of  California,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Eastern 

District  of  California  1011 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Kyi  1016 

Martin  J.  Jenkins,  of  California,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Northern 

District  of  California  1012 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Kyi  1016 

Michael  P.  McCuskey,  of  Illinois,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Central 

District  of  Illinois  1012 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Durbin  1013 

G.  Patrick  Murphy,  of  Illinois,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Southern 

District  of  Illinois  1013 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Durbin  1014 

Frederica  A.   Massiah-Jackson,  of  Pennsylvania,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge 

for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania  1019 

Questioning  by: 

Senator  Kyi  1019 

Senator  Sessions  1021 

Senator  Durbin  1026 

Senator  Specter  1037 

Alphabetical  List  and  Material  Submitted 

Adelman,  Lynn  S.: 

Testimony  1011 

Questionnaire 1096 

Breyer,  Charles  R.: 

Testimony 1011 

Questionnaire 1124 

Damrell,  Frank  C,  Jr.: 

Testimony  1011 

Questionnaire 1197 

Feingold,  Hon.  Russell  D.: 

Letters  supporting  the  nomination  of  Lynn  S.  Adelman  from: 

John  W.  Reynolds,  judge,  U.S.   District  Court,  Eastern  District  of 

Wisconsin,  Milwaukee,  WI,  Jan.  9,  1997  925 

James  E.  Doyle,  attorney  general,  State  of  Wisconsin,  Department 

of  Justice,  Madison,  WI,  Jan.  13,  1997  926 

Mary  Lauby,  executive  director,  Wisconsin  Coalition  Against  Domes- 
tic Violence,  Madison,  WI,  Jan.  17,  1997  927 

David   E.   Schultz,   associate  dean,   professor  of  law,  University  of 

Wisconsin,  Madison,  WI,  Feb.  25,  1997  928 

Bradley  DeBraska,  president,  Local  #21,  lUPA,  AFL-CIO,  Milwaukee 

Pohce  Association,  Milwaukee,  WI,  Mar.  17,  1997  929 

Karen  M.  Ordinans,  chairman,  Milwaukee  County  Board  of  Super- 
visors, Milwaukee,  WI,  Mar.  25,  1997  930 

Leverett  F.    Baldwin,   sheriff,   Milwaukee  County,   Milwaukee,   WI, 

Mar.  26,  1997  931 

Patrick  T.   Sheedy,  chief  judge.  First  Judicial  District,  Milwaukee 

County  Courthouse,  Milwaukee,  WI,  Mar.  27,  1997  932 

Ben  Brancel,  assembly  speaker.  State  Capitol,  Madison,  WI,  Apr. 

2,  1997  933 

Margaret  A.  Farrow,  State  Senator,  Republican  Caucus  Chair,  Madi- 
son, WI,  Apr.  3,  1997  934 


VIII 

Page 

Feingold,  Hon.  Russell  D. — Continued 

Letters  supporting  the  nomination  of  Lynn  S.  Adelman  from — Continued 

Brian  D.  Rude,  State  Senator,  Wisconsin  Senate  Assistant  Repub- 
lican Leader,  Madison,  WI,  Apr.  4,  1997  935 

Jan  Steinbergs,  executive  director,  Wisconsin  Troopers'  Association, 

Inc.,  East  Troy,  WI,  Apr.  7,  1997  936 

Michael  G.  Ellis,  Senate  Republican  Leader,  Wisconsin  State  Senate, 
Madison,  WI,  Apr.  8,  1997  937 

Alberta  Darling,  Wisconsin  State  Senator,  8th  Senate  District,  Madi- 
son, WI,  Apr.  8,  1997  938 

Steve  Foti,  Wisconsin  State  Representative,  assembly  majority  lead- 
er, State  Capitol,  Madison,  WI,  Apr.  8,  1997  939 

Daniel  M.  Finley,  county  executive,  Waukesha  County,  Office  of 
County  Executive,  Waukesha,  WI,  Apr.  8,  1997  940 

Scott  L.  Klug,  Member  of  Congress,  House  of  Representatives,  Wash- 
ington, DC,  Apr.  9,  1997   941 

Lee  Sherman  Dreyfus,  Governor,  Waukesha,  WI,  Apr.  9,  1997  942 

Thomas  E.  Petri,  Member  of  Congress,  House  of  Representatives, 
Washington,  DC,  Apr.  14,  1997  944 

John  E.  Charewicz,  president,  Wisconsin  Professional  Police  Associa- 
tion, Madison,  WI,  Apr.  16,  1997  945 

Mark  D.  Zeier,  State  president,  Professional  Fire  Fighters  of  Wiscon- 
sin, Inc.,  Madison,  WI,  Apr.  17,  1997  946 

Peggy  Rosenzweig,  State  Senator,  5th  Senate  District,  Madison,  WI, 
Apr.  28,  1997  947 

Fred  Risser,  president,  Wisconsin  State  Senate,  26th  Senate  District, 

Madison,  WI,  May  1,  1997  948 

Jean  M.  Jacobson,  county  executive,  County  of  Racine,  Racine,  WI, 

May  1,  1997  949 

Scott  McCallum,  Lieutenant  Governor,  State  of  Wisconsin,  State  Cap- 
itol, Madison,  WI,  May  5,  1997  950 

Feinstein,  Hon.  Dianne: 

Letters  supporting  the  nomination  of  Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr.,  from: 

Ann  M.  Veneman,  secretary.  Department  of  Food  and  Agriculture, 

State  of  California,  Sacramento,  CA,  Jan.  17,  1997  958 

Attachment:  "A  dream  believer,"  reprint  from  the  Modesto  Bee, 

Dec.  15,  1996  959 

Ernest  Gallo,  office  of  the  chairman,  E.  &  J.  Gallo  Winery,  Modesto, 

CA,  Jan.  17,  1997  962 

Gary  A.  Condit,  Anna  G.  Eshoo,  Sam  Farr,  Nancy  Pelosi,  Howard 
L.  Berman,  and  George  Miller,  Members  of  Congress,  House  of 
Representatives,  Washington,  DC,  Jan.  21,  1997  963 

John  Garamendi,  Deputy  Secretary,  U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior, 

Washington,  DC,  Jan.  21,  1997  965 

Kathleen  Brown,  senior  vice  president  and  managing  director.  Bank 
of  America,  Los  Angeles,  CA,  Jan.  21,  1997  966 

William  T.  Bagley,  law  offices  of  Nossaman,  Guthner,  Knox  &  Elliott, 

LLP,  San  Francisco,  CA,  Jan.  22,  1997  967 

Curriculum  vitae  of  Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr  968 

Carol  G.  Whiteside,  director.  Intergovernmental  Affairs,  Governor's 
Office,  State  of  California,  Sacramento,  CA,  Jan.  23,  1997   970 

John  C.  Danforth,  Bryan  Cave,  LLP,  St.  Louis,  MO,  Jan.  23,  1997  971 

Nancy  Pelosi,  Member  of  Congress,  House  of  Representatives,  Wash- 
ington, DC,  Jan.  28,  1997 972 

Patrick  Johnston,  Fifth  Senate  District,  Senate  California  Legisla- 
ture, San  Francisco,  CA,  Jan.  28,  1997  973 

Anna   G.    Eshoo,   Member  of  Congress,   House   of  Representatives, 

Washington,  DC,  Feb.  4,  1997  975 

Paul  Locatelli,  S.J.,  president,  Santa  Clara  University,  Santa  Clara, 
CA,  Feb.  6,  1997  976 

Carmen  A.  Policy,  president,  San  Francisco  49ers,  Santa  Clara,  CA, 
Feb.  7,  1997  977 

James  C.  Brazelton,  district  attorney.  Court  House,  Modesto,  CA, 

Feb.  14,  1997 978 

Les  Weidman,  sheriff"-coroner.  Sheriffs  Department,  Stanislaus 
County,  Modesto,  CA,  Feb.  14,  1997  979 


IX 

Page 
Feinstein,  Hon.  Dianne — Continued 

Letters  supporting  the  nomination  of  Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr.,  from — Con- 
tinued 

Dianne  Feinstein,  U.S.  Senator,  U.S.  Senate,  Washington,  DC,  Feb. 

26,  1997  980 

Leon  E.  Panetta,  Carmei  Valley,  CA,  Apr.  15,  1997  982 

James  R.  Dignan,  C.P.A.,  Modesto,  CA,  Apr.  17,  1997  983 

Everett  J.  (Skip)  Mohatt,  Amador  Valley  High  School,  Pleasanton, 

CA,  Apr.  21,  1997 984 

Marc  B.  Poche,  associate  justice,  Court  of  Appeal,  San  Francisco, 

CA,  Apr.  23,  1997 985 

Ray  Simon,  supervisor,  fourth  district,  Stanislaus  County,  Board  of 

Supervisors,  Modesto,  CA,  Apr.  24,  1997 986 

Hugh  Rose  III,  presiding  judge.  Superior  Court  of  the  State  of  Cali- 
fornia, County  of  Stanislaus,  Apr.  25,  1997   987 

George  E.  Leonard,  law  offices  of  Shughart  Thomson  &  Kilroy,  Kan- 
sas City,  MO,  Apr.  25,  1997  988 

Richard  A.   Lang,  mayor.  City  of  Medesto,  Modesto,  CA,  Apr.  30. 

1997 989 

Elaine  Watters,  judge,  Superior  Court,  State  of  California,  County 

of  Sonoma,  Santa  Rosa.  CA,  May  1,  1997  990 

Patrick  J.  Frawley,  Jr.,  Agoura,  CA,  June  11,  1997  991 

Richard  Hagerty,  RD,  Modesto,  CA,  Aug.  29,  1997  992 

Gary  A.    Condit,   Member  of  Congress,   House   of  Representatives, 

Washington,  DC,  Sept.  2,  1997  993 

Cosignatories:  Ray  Simon,  Stanislaus  County  Board  of  Super- 
visors; Richard  Monteith,  California  State  Senator;  Dennis 
Cardoza,  George  House,  California  State  Assemblymen;  Rich- 
ard Lang,  mayor,  city  of  Modesto;  Les  Weidman,  Stanislaus 
County  Sheriff;  Jim  Brazelton,  Stanislaus  County  District  At- 
torney; Tom  Mayfield,  chairman,  Nick  Blom,  Paul  Caruso,  Pat 
Paul,  Stanislaus  County  supervisors. 

Richard  Lyng,  Modesto,  CA,  Sept.  15,  1997  995 

David  L.  Moore,  president.  Western  Growers  Association,  Newport 

Beach,  CA,  Oct.  22,  1997  996 

L.  Stephen  Endsley,  M.D.,  Valley  Heart  Associates,  Modesto,  CA  997 

Additional  remarks  and  a  newspaper  article  from  the  Washington  Post, 

Nov.  7,  1997:  "U.S.  Judge  Admits  Lie,  Withdraws  as  Nominee"  998 

Jenkins,  Martin  J.: 

Testimony  1012 

Questionnaire 1224 

Kohl,  Hon.  Herbert: 

Letter  from  Tommy  G.  Thompson,  Governor,  State  of  Wisconsin,  Mar. 

21,  1997  921 

Massiah-Jackson,  Frederica  A.: 

Testimony  1019 

Questionnaire 1327 

McCuskey,  Michael  P.: 

Testimony  1012 

Questionnaire 1264 

Murphy,  G.  Patrick: 

Testimony  1013 

Questionnaire 1302 

Specter,  Hon.  Arlen: 

Letter  to  Hon.   Orrin  G.    Hatch,   chairman,   Senate  Committee  on   the 

Judiciary,  Washington,  DC,  Oct.  8,  1997  1005 

Brief  filed  in  the  Superior  Court  of  Pennsylvania,  Aug.  1,  1988:  Common- 
wealth of  Pennsylvania  v.  Robert  Hicks  1027 

Judgment  1035 

Extract  of  a  memorandum  1045 

Letter  to  Hon.  Orrin  G.  Hatch,  chairman,  Senate  Judiciary  Committee, 

U.S.  Senate,  Washington,  DC,  Oct.  8,  1997  1005 

Ware,  James  S.: 

Testimony  1007 

Questionnaire 1051 


WEDNESDAY,  NOVEMBER  12,  1997 

Statement  of  Committee  Member 

Hatch,  Hon.  Orrin  G 1359 

Introduction  of  Nominees 

Kyi,  Hon.  Jon  (prepared  statement) 1359 

Cleland,  Hon.  Max  1360 

Feinstein,  Hon.  Dianne  1362 

Testimony  of  Nominees 

Barry  G.   Silverman,  of  Arizona,  to  be  U.S.   Circuit  Judge  for  the  Ninth 

Circuit  1364 

Questioning  by: 

Chairman  Hatch  1365 

Senator  Feinstein  1368 

Senator  Grassley  1369 

Carlos  R.  Moreno,  of  California,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Central 

District  of  California  1364 

Questioning  by: 

Chairman  Hatch  1365 

Senator  Feinstein  1368 

Senator  Grassley  1369 

Richard  W.  Story,  of  Georgia,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Northern 

District  of  Georgia  1364 

Questioning  by: 

Chairman  Hatch  1365 

Senator  Feinstein  1368 

Senator  Grassley  1369 

Christine  O.C.   Miller,  of  the  District  of  Columbia,  to  be  a  Judge  of  the 

U.S.  Court  of  Federal  Claims  1365 

Questioning  by: 

Chairman  Hatch  1365 

Senator  Feinstein  1368 

Senator  Grassley  1369 

Alphabetical  List  and  Material  Submitted 

Feinstein,  Hon.  Dianne: 

Letter  to  Hon.  Orrin  G.  Hatch,  chairman.  Senate  Committee  on  the 
Judiciary,  Washington,  DC,  from  Governor  George  Deukmejian,  35th 
Governor  of  California,  Los  Angeles,  CA,  Oct.  6,  1997  1363 

Miller,  Christine  O.C: 

Testimony  1365 

Questionnaire 1476 

Moreno,  Carlos  R.: 

Testimony  1364 

Questionnaire 1417 

Silverman,  Barry  G.: 

Testimony  1364 

Questionnaire 1376 

Story,  Richard  W.: 

Testimony  1364 

Questionnaire 1442 


XI 

Page 

ALPHABETICAL  LIST  OF  NOMINEES 
FOR  FEDERAL  APPOINTMENTS 

Page 

Adelman,  Lynn  S.,  of  Wisconsin,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Eastern 

District  of  Wisconsin  1011 

Aiken,    Ann    L.,    of  Oregon,    to    be    U.S.    District    Judge    for    the    District 

of  Oregon  687 

Breyer,  Charles  R.,  of  Cahfomia,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Northern 

District  of  Cahfomia  1011 

Caputo,  A.  Richard,  of  Pennsylvania,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Middle 

District  of  Pennsylvania  20 

Casey,   Richard  Conway,   of  New  York,   to  be  U.S.   District  Judge  for  the 

Southern  District  of  New  York  369 

Damrell,  Frank  C,  Jr.,  of  California,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Eastern 

District  of  California  1011 

Friedman,  Jerome  B.,  of  Virginia,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Eastern 

District  of  Virginia  687 

Gwin,  James  S.,  of  Ohio,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Northern  District 

of  Ohio  369 

Jenkins,  Martin  J.,  of  California,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Northern 

District  of  California  1012 

Kauffman,  Bruce  C,  of  Pennsylvania,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  East- 
ern District  of  Pennsylvania  15 

Kimball,  Dale  A.,  of  Utah,  to  be  U.S.   District  Judge  for  the  District  of 

Utah  368 

Lazzara,  Richard  A.,  of  Florida,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Middle 

District  of  Florida  19 

Marbley,  Algenon  L.,  of  Ohio,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Southern 

District  of  Ohio  368 

Marcus,   Stanley,    of  Florida,   to  be   U.S.    Circuit  Judge   for   the   Eleventh 

Circuit  680 

Massiah-Jackson,  Frederica  A.,  of  Pennsylvania,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge 

for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania  1019 

McCuskey,  Michael  P.,  of  Illinois,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Central 

District  of  Illinois  1012 

Miller,  Christine  O.C.,  of  the  District  of  Columbia,  to  be  a  Judge  of  the 

U.S.  Court  of  Federal  Claims  1365 

Moon,  Norman  K.,  of  Virginia,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Western 

District  of  Virginia  686 

Moreno,  Carlos  R.,  of  California,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Central 

District  of  California  1364 

Murphy,  G.  Patrick,  of  Illinois,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Southern 

District  of  Illinois  1013 

Rendell,  Marjorie  O.,  of  Pennsylvania,  to  be  U.S.  Circuit  Judge  for  the  Third 

Circuit  9 

Silverman,   Barry  G.,  of  Arizona,  to  be  U.S.   Circuit  Judge  for  the  Ninth 

Circuit  1364 

Sippel,  Rodney  W.,  of  Missouri,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Eastern 

and  Western  Districts  of  Missouri  684 

Siragusa,  Charles  J.,  of  New  York,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Western 

District  of  New  York  367 

Sotomayor,  Sonia,  of  New  York,  to  be  U.S.  Circuit  Judge  for  the  Second 

Circuit  355 

Story,  Richard  W.,  of  Georgia,  to  be  U.S.  District  Judge  for  the  Northern 

District  of  Georgia  1364 

Ware,  James  S.,  of  California,  to  be  U.S.  Circuit  Judge  for  the  Ninth  Circuit  ..    1007 


NOMINATIONS  OF  MARJORIE  O.  RENDELL 
(U.S.  CIRCUIT  JUDGE);  BRUCE  W. 
KAUFFMAN,  RICHARD  A.  LAZZARA,  AND  A. 
RICHARD  CAPUTO  (U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGES) 


FRIDAY,  SEPTEMBER  5,  1997 

U.S.  Senate, 
Committee  on  the  Judiciary, 

Washington,  D.C. 
The  committee  met,  pursuant  to  notice,  at  9:02  a.m.,  in  room 
SD-226,  Dirksen  Senate  Office  Building,  Hon.  Arlen  Specter  pre- 
siding. 
Also  present:  Senators  Sessions,  Biden,  and  Kohl. 

OPENING  STATEMENT  OF  HON.  ARLEN  SPECTER,  A  U.S. 
SENATOR  FROM  THE  STATE  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 

Senator  Specter.  Good  morning,  ladies  and  gentlemen.  We  will 
begin  the  confirmation  hearings  this  morning.  We  are  pleased  to 
have  with  us  four  very  distinguished  nominees — Judge  Marjorie 
Rendell,  now  a  judge  of  the  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  Dis- 
trict of  Pennsylvania,  for  confirmation  for  circuit  court  of  appeals. 
We  have  former  Justice  Bruce  Kauffman,  justice  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  Pennsylvania,  for  the  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Eastern 
District.  We  have  Mr.  A.  Richard  Caputo  for  the  U.S.  District  Court 
for  the  Middle  District,  and  Judge  Richard  A.  Lazzara  for  the  Mid- 
dle District  of  Florida. 

We  had  hoped  to  have  hearings  this  morning  for  Judge  Frederica 
Massiah-Jackson,  and  also  for  Mr.  Bingler.  I  will  put  in  the  record 
an  exchange  of  letters  which  I  had  with  Senator  Hatch  yesterday 
asking  about  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  for  her  hearing  today,  and 
Senator  Hatch's  reply  saying  that  the  committee  could  not  process 
Judge  Massiah-Jackson  in  time  for  this  hearing. 

Senator  Hatch  says: 

At  your  request,  the  Judiciary  Committee  has  undertaken  an  effort  to  promptly 
review  and  process  all  pending  Pennsylvania  judicial  nominees.  I  appreciate  your 
concern  about  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  not  being  included.  As  you  know,  the  commit- 
tee conducts  its  own  review  of  nominees'  writings,  judicial  opinions,  and  background 
materials.  This  review  is,  as  a  matter  of  course,  thorough  and  time-consuming.  Un- 
fortunately, Judge  Massiah-Jackson  did  not  provide  the  committee  with  her  commit- 
tee questionnaire  until  August  15,  more  than  a  week  after  the  other  Pennsylvania 
district  court  nominees. 

While  the  committee  has  endeavored  to  complete  its  review  of  her  nomination,  we 
have  to  date  been  unable  to  do  so.  It  is  my  hope  that,  assuming  all  paperwork  is 
complete  and  fully  reviewed,  her  nomination  will  be  ready  for  consideration  at  the 
next  Judiciary  Committee  judicial  nominations  hearings  presently  slated  for  later 
this  month. 

(1) 


[The  letters  referred  to  follow:] 


U.S.  Senate, 
Committee  on  the  Judiciary, 
Washington,  DC,  September  4,  1997. 


Senator  Orrin  Hatch, 

Chairman,  Senate  Judiciary  Committee, 

Russell  Senate  Office  Building,  Washington,  DC. 

Dear  Orrin:  As  you  know,  I  had  hoped  that  Judge  Frederica  A.  Massiah-Jackson, 
a  nominee  to  be  a  judge  on  the  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, would  be  able  to  testify  at  the  judicial  nominations  hearing  we  are  holding 
tomorrow  morning.  I  think  that  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  would  make  a  fine  addition 
to  the  bench  and  I  would  like  to  see  her  nomination  move  forward. 

To  my  disappointment,  I  have  learned  that  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  is  not  on  the 
witness  list  for  tomorrow's  hearing. 

I  would  appreciate  it  if  you  could  let  me  know  the  reason  why  Judge  Massiah- 
Jackson  was  not  invited  to  testify  at  tomorrow's  hearing. 
Sincerely, 

Arlen  Specter. 


U.S.  Senate, 
Committee  on  the  Judiciary, 
Washington,  DC,  September  4,  1997. 
Hon.  Arlen  Specter, 
Hart  Senate  Office  Building, 
Washington,  DC. 

Dear  Arlen:  Thank  you  for  your  letter  of  September  4,  1997.  At  your  request, 
the  Judiciary  has  undertaken  an  effort  to  promptly  review  and  process  all  pending 
Pennsylvania  judicial  nominees.  I  appreciate  your  expression  of  concern  about  Judge 
Frederica  Massiah-Jackson's  not  being  included  on  this  week's  nominations  hearing 
agenda. 

As  you  know,  the  Committee  conducts  its  own  review  of  nominees'  writings,  judi- 
cial opinions,  and  background  materials.  This  review  is,  as  a  matter  of  course,  thor- 
ough and  time-consuming. 

Unfortunately,  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  did  not  provide  the  Committee  with  her 
Committee  Questionnaire  until  August  15,  1997,  more  than  a  week  after  the  other 
Pennsylvania  District  Court  nominees.  While  the  Committee  has  endeavored  to  com- 
plete its  review  of  her  nomination,  we  have  to  date  been  unable  to  do  so. 

It  is  my  hope  that,  assuming  all  paperwork  is  complete  and  fully  reviewed,  her 
nomination  will  be  ready  for  consideration  at  the  next  Judiciary  Committee  judicial 
nominations  hearing,  presently  slated  for  later  this  month. 
Thank  you  for  your  patience. 
Sincerely, 

Orrin  G.  Hatch,  Chairman. 

Senator  Specter.  I  have  discussed  this  matter  with  Senator 
Hatch  and  it  is  my  hope  we  could  have  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  on 
a  week  after  next,  perhaps  as  early  as  September  16. 

As  to  Mr.  Bingler,  whose  name  has  been  submitted  for  the  west- 
ern district,  we  are  continuing  to  work  on  that,  and  we  shall  con- 
tinue to  do  so.  It  is  my  hope  we  will  be  able  to  ultimately  bring 
him  forward  for  confirmation. 

We  have  with  us  this  morning  two  of  my  distinguished  col- 
leagues, Senator  Connie  Mack  of  Florida  and  Senator  Bob  Graham 
of  Florida.  If  you  gentlemen  would  step  forward,  the  committee, 
after  deferring  to  my  ranking  member.  Senator  Kohl,  would  be  glad 
to  hear  from  you. 

Senator  Kohl.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  do  not  have  a  state- 
ment today,  but  I  would  like  to  thank  you  for  chairing  this  hearing 
and  I  would  like  to  put  a  statement  into  the  record  by  Senator 
Le^hy.  Senator  Leahy  is  concerned  about  the  pace  of  judicial  nomi- 
nations. We  currently  have  more  than  100  judicial  vacancies,  and 


I  am  concerned,  as  he  is,  and  so,  as  I  would  imagine,  are  you,  Mr. 
Chairman. 

I  ask  unanimous  consent  that  Senator  Leahy's  statement  be 
made  a  part  of  the  record. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Without  objection,  it  will  be  made  a  part  of  the 
record. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Leahy  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Hon.  Patrick  J.  Leahy,  a  U.S.  Senator  From  the  State 

OF  Vermont 

This  year  the  Senate  has  confirmed  only  11  federal  judges,  during  a  period  in 
which  we  have  seen  112  vacancies.  We  have  two  nominees  from  the  June  25  hear- 
ings who  still  need  to  be  considered  and  reported  by  the  Judiciary  Committee  and 
nominees  pending  on  the  Senate  Executive  calendar  from  as  long  ago  as  June  12. 

This  is  only  the  fifth  confirmation  hearing  for  judicial  nominees  that  this  Commit- 
tee has  held  all  year.  From  the  first  days  of  this  session  of  Congress,  this  Committee 
has  never  had  pending  before  it  fewer  than  20  judicial  nominees  for  hearings.  This 
Committee's  backlog  has  now  doubled  and  is  more  than  40.  Many  of  these  nomina- 
tions, pending  for  longer  than  a  year,  have  been  re-nominated  by  the  President  after 
having  been  held  up  during  the  stall  last  year.  Some  of  those  pending  before  the 
Comimittee  had  had  hearings  or  were  reported  favorably  by  the  Committee  last  Con- 
gress but  have  been  passed  over  so  far  this  year  as  the  vacancies  for  which  they 
were  nominated  more  than  two  years  ago  persist.  The  President  has  sent  us  61  judi- 
cial nominations  so  far  this  year  and  is  sending  more  each  week. 

While  1  commend  Senator  Specter  for  chairing  this  hearing  and  including  nomi- 
nees to  the  Third  Circuit  and  District  Courts  in  the  Eastern  and  Middle  District 
of  Pennsylvania,  I  remain  concerned  for  those  nominees,  vacancies  and  litigants  who 
are  not  from  a  Circuit  or  District  with  an  active  Republican  member  on  the  Judici- 
ary Committee.  Even  Senator  Specter  was  unable  to  have  included  the  two  other 
nominees  for  judgeships  in  the  Eastern  and  Western  Districts  of  Pennsylvania  at 
this  hearing.  And  while  1  am  delighted  to  see  the  Committee  moving  forward 
promptly  on  nominations  received  at  the  end  of  July,  that  does  not  excuse  us  for 
having  passed  over  and  not  held  hearings  on  dozens  of  other  nominees  throughout 
the  year.  The  Committee  has  12  nominations  that  have  been  pending  for  more  than 
a  year,  including  seven  nominations  that  have  been  pending  since  1995.  I  am  al- 
ways pleased  when  the  Committee  moves  promptly  on  nominees,  but  that  does  not 
excuse  the  Committee's  delay  in  the  consideration  of  nominees  like  Professor  Fletch- 
er, Judge  Beaty,  Judge  Paez,  Ms.  McKeown,  Ms.  Aiken,  Ms.  MoUway  and  the  oth- 
ers. 

We  continue  to  fall  farther  and  farther  behind  the  pace  established  by  Senator 
Hatch  in  the  last  Congress.  By  this  time  two  years  ago.  Senator  Hatch  has  held 
eight  confirmation  hearings  involving  36  judicial  nominees  and  the  Senate  had  pro- 
ceeded to  confirm  35  federal  judges. 

1  have  spoken  often  about  the  crisis  being  created  by  the  101  vacancies  that  are 
being  perpetuated  on  the  federal  courts  around  the  country.  At  the  rate  that  we  are 
currently  going  this  year,  more  and  more  vacancies  are  continuing  to  mount  over 
longer  and  longer  times  to  the  detriment  of  greater  numbers  of  Americans  and  the 
national  cause  of  prompt  justice.  We  are  not  even  keeping  up  with  attrition. 

Chief  Justice  Rehnquist  has  repeatedly  acknowledged  the  crisis  being  inflicted 
upon  the  federal  judiciary  and,  I  believe,  upon  all  Americans.  The  Chief  Justice  has 
called  the  rising  number  of  vacancies  "the  most  immediate  problem  we  face  in  the 
federal  judiciary."  The  Courts  Subcommittee  heard  testimony  just  yesterday  from 
judges  from  the  Second  and  Eighth  Circuits  about  the  adverse  impact  of  vacancies 
on  the  ability  of  the  Federal  courts  to  do  justice.  The  effect  is  seen  in  extended  delay 
in  the  hearing  and  determination  of  cases  and  the  frustration  that  litigants  are 
forced  to  endure.  The  crushing  caseload  will  force  federal  courts  to  rely  more  and 
more  on  senior  judges,  visiting  judges  and  court  staff. 

The  Attorney  General  spoke  recently  about  the  "vacancy  crisis  that  has  left  so 
many  Americans  waiting  for  justice"  and  noted  that  vacancies,  filings,  caseloads, 
and  backlogs  are  all  increasing  and  that  we  are  experiencing  an  "unprecedented 
slowdown  in  the  confirmation  process"  that  has  "very  real  and  very  detrimental  im- 
pacts on  all  parts  of  our  justice  system."  She  spoke  about  the  hundreds  of  appellate 
arguments  being  canceled  and  federal  judges  who  endure  entire  years  without  hear- 
ing a  single  civil  case.  She  said:  "Quite  simply  without  enough  judges,  our  laws  will 
become  empty  promises  and  'swift  justice'  will  become  an  oxymoron,  and  without  the 


independence  they  need  to  uphold  those  laws,  our  judges  will  become  hostages  to 
politics  instead  of  being  the  guardians  of  our  principles." 

Today  we  will  hear  from  a  few  of  the  highly-qualified  nominees  pending  before 
the  Committee,  including  one  who  was  first  nominated  more  than  16  months  ago. 
I  look  forward  to  prompt  and  favorable  action  on  each  of  them. 

As  we  enter  the  last  weeks  of  this  session  of  Congress,  I  urge  the  Republican  ma- 
jority to  reconsider  its  strategy  and  proceed  to  consider  and  confirm  the  nominees 
who  are  before  us. 

Senator  Specter.  I  share  Senator  Leahy's  concern.  Of  course, 
there  could  be  no  complaints  about  this  processing.  These  nomina- 
tions were  submitted  in  late  July  and  for  some  magical  reason  they 
have  appeared  out  of  turn  today;  at  least  the  Pennsylvania  ones 
were.  I  would  have  to  ask  the  Senators  from  Florida  about  their 
timing. 

Welcome,  Senator  Graham  and  Senator  Mack.  As  our  custom  is 
on  seniority,  we  turn  first  to  Senator  Graham. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  BOB  GRAHAM,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  FLORIDA 

Senator  Graham.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman  and  Senator  Kohl. 
I  appreciate  this  hearing  this  morning  for  an  outstanding  Floridian 
who  has  been  nominated  by  the  President  for  the  Middle  Judicial 
District  of  Florida. 

I  have  a  full  statement  which  I  would  like  to  ask  to  be  submitted 
for  the  record. 

Senator  Specter.  Without  objection,  it  will  be  made  a  part  of  the 
record. 

Senator  Graham.  In  deference  to  the  heavy  schedule  that  you 
have,  I  will  summarize. 

Mr.  Chairman,  it  is  a  tremendous  honor  to  introduce  to  this  com- 
mittee Judge  Richard  Lazzara  for  your  consideration  as  the  nomi- 
nee for  the  Middle  Judicial  District  of  Florida.  Before  I  begin,  I 
would  like  to  welcome  Judge  Lazzara  and  his  son,  Damon,  who 
joins  him  today. 

Judge  and  Damon,  if  you  would  please  stand  up? 

[The  persons  stood.] 

Senator  Graham.  I  am  pleased  to  be  joined  today  by  my  good 
friend  and  colleague.  Senator  Mack,  whose  tireless  efforts  on  behalf 
of  Judge  Lazzara  have  made  this  hearing  today  possible,  for  which 
I  extend  my  deep  appreciation. 

Mr.  Chairman,  you  and  Senator  Kohl  are  well  aware  of  the  criti- 
cal responsibility  that  we  share  as  Members  of  the  U.S.  Senate  in 
the  review  of  those  individuals  who  have  been  nominated  to  serve 
in  lifetime  positions  in  our  Federal  court  system.  It  is  vital  that 
these  appointments  command  our  closest  attention  and  scrutiny, 
which  I  know  has  been  the  tradition  of  this  committee.  I  am  cer- 
tain that  in  applying  that  scrutiny,  you  will  be  as  impressed  as  we 
are  with  the  qualifications  of  Judge  Lazzara  for  this  important  po- 
sition. 

Let  me  just  take  a  moment  to  talk  about  the  Middle  District  of 
Florida.  The  Middle  District  of  Florida  is  geographically  an  ex- 
tremely large  judicial  district,  stretching  some  400  miles,  including 
cities  such  as  Jacksonville,  Orlando,  Tampa,  St.  Petersburg,  and 
Senator  Mack's  hometown  of  Ft.  Myers.  This  district  is  projected  to 
grow  by  more  than  1.5  million  citizens  in  the  next  10  years.  That 


growth  is  larger  than  the  current  population  of  13  of  our  Slates 
and  the  District  of  Columbia. 

It  is  also  a  district  which  has  had  a  major  caseload.  The  criminal 
defendants  per  judge  in  the  middle  district,  as  an  example,  are  ap- 
proximately 50  percent  higher  than  the  national  average.  At  the 
end  of  1996,  there  were  over  1,500  criminal  cases  pending  in  the 
Middle  District  of  Florida.  Therefore,  your  holding  this  hearing 
today  and  adding  Judge  Lazzara  to  the  bench,  which  will  bring  this 
bench  to  a  full  complement,  is  extremely  important. 

Mr.  Chairman,  just  briefly  to  review  the  distinguished  career  of 
Judge  Lazzara,  a  graduate  of  the  University  of  Florida  Law  School, 
he  has  served  with  distinction  in  a  number  of  professional  and 
community  positions,  as  well  as  a  long  and  distinguished  career  on 
the  State  judiciary.  He  was  nominated  by  both  Republican  and 
Democratic  Governors  for  increasing  positions  of  responsibility  in 
the  State  judiciary,  now  serving  as  a  member  of  the  Third  District 
Court  of  Appeals,  which  is  the  intermediate  appellate  position  in 
our  State  system. 

His  performance  at  every  level  of  the  judiciary  has  met  with 
overwhelming  praise.  He  received  the  highest  approval  rating  of 
any  of  Hillsborough  County  judges  when  he  serv'^ed  in  that  position 
in  1987,  of  any  13th  Judicial  Circuit  judge  when  he  was  in  that  po- 
sition in  1993,  and  now  of  those  colleagues  with  whom  he  serves 
as  a  Second  District  appellate  judge  in  1995,  was  selected  with  the 
highest  approval  rating.  He  has  received  many  awards  for  his  serv- 
ice. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  recommend  in  the  highest  form  Judge  Lazzara 
for  his  preparation,  his  experience,  his  judicial  demeanor,  his  intel- 
ligence, his  understanding  of  what  it  means  to  be  a  jurist.  He  will 
bring  distinction  to  the  Federal  judiciary.  I  urge  your  earliest  con- 
sideration of  this  nomination. 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you  very  much.  Senator  Graham.  We 
appreciate  your  being  here. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Graham  and  a  newspaper 
article  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Bob  Graham 

Chairman  Hatch,  Senator  Leahy,  members  of  the  Judiciary  Committee,  it  is  a  tre- 
mendous honor  to  introduce  Richard  Lazzara  for  your  consideration  as  the  next 
judge  in  the  Middle  Judicial  District  of  Florida. 

Before  I  begin,  I  want  to  welcome  Judge  Lazzara  and  his  son  Damon  to  Washing- 
ton. I  had  the  privilege  of  meeting  with  both  of  them  in  my  office  before  this  morn- 
ing's hearing.  Mr.  Chairman,  Judge  Lazzara  has  primarily  earned  this  nomination 
through  his  diligent  service  and  distinguished  legal  and  judicial  record.  But  I  think 
that  the  real  measure  of  accomplishment  in  any  individual's  life  is  his  or  her  chil- 
dren. And  in  this  case.  Judge  Lazzara  has  been  very  successful. 

I  also  want  to  thank  my  good  friend  and  fellow  Floridian  Connie  Mack  for  his  tire- 
less efforts  on  behalf  of  this  nomination  and  his  presence  here  today.  For  nearly  a 
decade,  I  have  been  extremely  privileged  to  work  closely  with  Senator  Mack.  I  have 
also  had  the  good  fortune  of  living  across  the  street  from  him. 

Mr.  Chairman,  perhaps  our  most  critical  responsibility  as  a  legislative  body  is  the 
review  of  those  individuals  who  are  selected  to  ser\'e  at  all  levels  of  our  federal  court 
system.  It  is  vital  that  these  appointments  command  our  closest  attention  and  scru- 
tiny, and  I  want  to  commend  you  and  Senator  Leahy  for  your  faithful  dedication 
to  this  task.  In  the  last  year  alone,  your  leadership  has  led  to  the  confirmation  of 
three  new  federal  judges  in  Florida — Robert  Hinkle  in  the  Northern  District,  and 
Alan  Gold  and  Don  Middlebrooks  on  the  Southern  District. 


I  am  hopeful  that  this  hearing  will  be  the  first  step  toward  the  confirmation  of 
Richard  Lazzra  as  the  newest  judge  in  Florida's  large  and  rapidly  growing  Middle 
District,  which  stretches  400  miles  and  includes  the  major  cities  of  Jacksonville,  Or- 
lando, Tampa,  St.  Petersburg,  and  Senator  Mack's  hometown  of  Fort  Myers.  It  is 
projected  to  have  more  than  1.5  million  new  residents  in  the  next  ten  years — a  num- 
ber greater  than  the  population  in  thirteen  states. 

While  not  a  permanent  solution.  Judge  Lazzara's  addition  to  the  federal  bench 
would  be  a  welcome  relief  to  the  overburdened  judges  in  one  of  the  most  under- 
served  judicial  districts  in  the  nation.  Criminal  defendants  per  judge  in  the  Middle 
District  are  approximately  50%  higher  than  the  national  average.  In  fact,  at  the  end 
of  1996,  right  before  Judge  Lazzara  was  nominated,  over  1500  criminal  cases  were 
pending. 

Just  as  the  confirmation  of  judicial  appointees  deserves  our  best  efforts,  the  Amer- 
ican people  served  by  those  jurists  have  a  right  to  expect  judges  who  bring  unques- 
tioned competence,  strong  integrity,  devotion  to  duty,  and  diversity  of  experience 
with  them  to  the  federal  bench. 

Throughout  his  career — as  a  student  at  the  University  of  Florida  Law  School,  a 
Hillsborough  County  attorney  and  prosecutor,  a  distinguished  member  of  the  Tampa 
Bay  area  legal  community,  and  an  outstanding  jurist  at  the  county,  circuit,  and  ap- 
pellate levels — Richard  Lazzara  has  met — and  exceeded — this  standard  of  excellence 
time  and  time  again. 

Floridians  began  relying  on  Richard  Lazzara's  judgment  more  than  twenty-five 
years  ago.  His  record  of  exemplary  yet  humble  service  to  others  at  the  University 
of  Florida  Law  School,  where  he  bravely  complemented  his  studies  with  perhaps  the 
most  challenging  assignment  of  his  career — the  often  thankless  but  always  impor- 
tant job  of  dormitory  resident  adviser. 

Almost  without  hesitation.  Judge  Lazzara's  graduation  from  law  school  was  fol- 
lowed by  three  years  of  public  service.  He  worked  in  the  Office  of  the  Hillsborough 
County  Solicitor  and  then  as  an  Assistant  State  Attorney.  This  prosecutorial  experi- 
ence turned  into  nearly  fifteen  years  of  respected  work  in  private  practice. 

In  1987,  when  he  was  elected  a  Hillsborough  County  Judge,  Richard  Lazzara  en- 
tered the  phase  of  his  career  that  would  earn  him  the  most  distinction. 

In  ten  years  as  a  judge,  his  intelligence,  competence,  and  fairness  has  earned  him 
near-universal  respect  and  bipartisan  attention.  In  1988,  then-Governor  Bob  Mar- 
tinez, a  Republican,  appointed  Judge  Lazzara  to  a  seat  on  Florida's  Thirteenth  Judi- 
cial Circuit.  Five  years  later,  Democratic  Governor  Lawton  Chiles  elevated  him  to 
the  state's  Second  District  Court  of  Appeal. 

His  performance  at  every  level  of  the  state  judiciary  has  been  met  with  over- 
whelming praise.  Judge  Lazzara  received  the  highest  approval  rating  of  any 
Hillsborough  County  Judge  in  1987;  of  any  Thirteenth  Judicial  Circuit  Judge  in 
1993;  and  of  any  Second  District  Appellate  Judge  in  1995.  The  Young  Lawyers  Sec- 
tion of  the  Hillsborough  County  Bar  Association  named  him  their  "Outstanding  Ju- 
rist of  1991-1992."  And  in  1990,  he  received  the  highest  rating  possible  in  sentenc- 
ing habitual  offenders. 

Throughout  his  career,  Richard  Lazzara  has  been  respected  by  his  peers,  hailed 
for  his  outstanding  service  to  the  people  of  Florida,  and  praised  for  his  skill  and 
competence  in  the  legal  arena.  I  have  no  doubt  that  this  pattern  of  distinction  will 
continue  once  he  is  invested  as  federal  judge  in  the  Middle  District  of  Florida. 

Mr.  Chairman,  perhaps  the  best  way  for  me  to  conclude  is  to  express  my  unre- 
served agreement  with  an  editorial  that  was  published  in  the  Tampa  Tribune  on 
January  7,  1997.  I  hope  that  the  members  of  this  Committee  will  share  in  its  astute 
observation:  "Richard  Lazzara  is  just  the  type  of  federal  judge  the  country  needs." 
I  agree,  and  urge  his  speedy  confirmation. 

Thank  you,  I  ask  that  the  full  text  of  the  Tampa  Tribune  editorial  entitled 
"Lazzara  Deserves  Federal  Appointment"  be  printed  in  the  Record  following  my  re- 
marks. 


[From  the  Tampa  Tribune,  Jan.  7,  1997] 

Lazzara  Deserves  Federal  Appointment 

Ask  any  lawyer  in  West  Central  Florida  to  name  the  best  judges  in  the  area  and 
Judge  Richard  Lazzara's  name  is  invariably  on  the  list. 

The  former  circuit  judge,  now  on  the  state's  2nd  District  Court  of  Appeal,  is 
known  for  his  keen  legal  mind,  his  calm  demeanor  and  his  efficiently  handling  of 


Lawyers  are  often  awed  by  Lazzara's  agile  intellect  and  knowledge  of  the  law,  yet 
he  is  a  modest  man  without  a  shred  of  the  arrogance  that  sometimes  afflicts  those 
who  put  on  judges'  robes.  An  example  of  Lazzara's  character  and  his  devotion  to  the 
law  was  found  last  spring  when  he  took  time  from  his  lofty  appeals  court  position 
to  fill  in  for  a  county  judge. 

So  when  Sen.  Bob  Graham  recommended  Lazzara  for  a  federal  judgeship  last 
year,  it  was  hailed  by  judges  and  lawyers  as  an  inspired  choice.  President  Bill  Clin- 
ton, upon  Graham's  advice,  make  the  nomination. 

Unfortunately,  the  Senate  did  not  approve  the  nomination  during  the  presidential 
election  year.  Now  President  Clinton  must  renominate  Lazzara  and  the  Senate  must 
approve  the  appointment. 

We  don't  blame  the  Senate  for  being  cautious  about  judicial  nominations.  The 
country  doesn't  need  any  more  liberal  judges  who  try  to  set  social  policy  from  the 
bench.  But  Lazzara,  who  is  known  for  being  apolitical,  is  not  of  that  stripe.  His  ap- 
proach to  the  law  is  conservative.  He  is  interested  in  interpreting  the  law  as  it  is, 
not  as  he  might  like  it  to  be. 

Scholarly,  hard-working,  not  given  to  theatrics  or  self-aggrandizement,  Lazzara  is 
just  the  type  of  federal  judge  the  country  needs. 

We  urge  President  Clinton  to  renominate  Lazzara  to  the  federal  bench  and  the 
Senate  to  approve  the  appointment  of  this  estimable  jurist. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Senator  Mack. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  CONNIE  MACK,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  FLORIDA 

Senator  Mack.  Senator  Specter,  Senator  Kohl,  again  I  thank  you 
for  holding  this  hearing.  I,  too,  am  delighted  to  be  here  today  to 
recommend  Judge  Richard  Lazzara  for  confirmation  to  the  position 
of  U.S.  district  judge  for  the  Middle  District  of  Florida. 

This  appointment  comes  at  a  crucial  time  for  this  district.  I  am 
going  to  take  a  moment,  too,  to  talk  a  little  bit  about  the  Middle 
District  of  Florida  because  it  is  unique,  with  compelling  demands. 
It  stretches  from  Jacksonville  to  Ft.  Myers  and  contains  7.8  million 
people,  more  than  half  of  the  State's  population.  These  dynamics 
and  the  rate  of  growth  in  the  State  have  contributed  to  a  situation 
of  crisis  proportions  for  the  district. 

The  middle  district  currently  has  the  Nation's  eighth  heaviest 
caseload,  and  the  chief  U.S.  district  judge,  Elizabeth  Kovachevich, 
has  told  me  on  numerous  occasions  that  the  current  backlog  is 
growing  at  an  alarming  proportion,  and  it  is  for  that  reason  that 
Senator  Graham  and  I  are  committed  to  addressing  these  prob- 
lems. 

In  the  meantime,  the  middle  district  is  doing  what  it  can  to  alle- 
viate the  situation.  The  district  recently  announced  an  intention  to 
hold  an  unprecedented  accelerated  civil  trial  calendar  in  June, 
July,  and  August  1998,  in  which  judges  from  the  Jacksonville  and 
Orlando  divisions  will  join  the  U.S.  district  judges  in  Tampa  to  as- 
sist the  Tampa-Ft.  Myers  division  with  their  emergency  case  back- 
log. It  is  clear  that  Judge  Lazzara  will  be  a  welcome  addition  to 
the  Federal  bench  there. 

I  have  heard  from  many  people  in  the  Florida  legal  community 
about  Judge  Lazzara's  fitness  for  the  Federal  bench.  He  is  highly 
respected  in  the  Tampa  area,  where  he  is  currently  on  the  State 
appellate  bench.  The  Tampa  Tribune  had  these  positive  comments 
on  Judge  Lazzara's  nomination,  and  I  quote,  "The  country  doesn't 
need  any  more  liberal  judges  who  try  to  set  social  policy  from  the 
bench.  But  Lazzara,  who  is  known  for  being  apolitical,  is  not  of  the 
stripe.  His  approach  to  the  law  is  conservative."  He  is  also  viewed 
by  those  who  know  him  as  a  warm  and  decent  man. 


8 

I,  too,  believe  that  he  has  shown  himself  to  be  a  conservative  ju- 
rist, interpreting  statutes  and  precedents  in  a  strict  fashion  even 
in  situations  where  the  outcome  is  not  to  his  liking  or  the  public's 
liking.  With  the  current  and  appropriate  emphasis  we  are  placing 
on  opposing  judicial  activism,  Judge  Lazzara  appears  to  be  the 
kind  of  jurist  we  should  enthusiastically  confirm.  I  would  also  like 
to  note  that  back  in  1992,  my  own  judicial  advisory  commission 
recommended  Judge  Lazzara  for  nomination  to  the  Federal  bench. 

I  want  to  thank  the  committee  for  providing  me  with  the  oppor- 
tunity to  introduce  Judge  Lazzara.  I  know  that  Senator  Graham 
and  I  both  appreciate  the  timely  consideration  which  has  been 
given  to  other  Florida  judicial  nominees  in  this  Congress,  and  ask 
that  in  light  of  the  compelling  demands  upon  the  Middle  District 
of  Florida,  Judge  Lazzara  be  confirmed  swiftly  by  the  committee 
and  the  full  Senate. 

I  thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Specter.  Well,  thank  you  very  much.  Senator  Mack. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Mack  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Connie  Mack 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  am  delighted  to  be  here  today  to  recommend  Judge  Richard 
Lazzara  for  confirmation  to  the  position  of  United  States  District  Judge  for  the  Mid- 
dle District  of  Florida.  This  appointment  comes  at  a  critical  time  for  this  district. 

The  Middle  District  of  Florida  is  a  unique  one  with  compelling  demands.  It 
stretches  from  Jacksonville  to  Ft.  Myers  and  contains  7.8  million  people — more  than 
half  of  the  state's  population.  These  dynamics  and  the  rate  of  growth  in  the  state 
have  contributed  to  a  situation  of  crisis  proportions  for  this  district.  The  Middle  Dis- 
trict currently  has  the  nation's  eighth  heaviest  caseload,  and  Chief  U.S.  District 
Judge  Elizabeth  Kovachevich  has  told  me  on  numerous  occasions  that  the  current 
backlog  is  growing  at  an  alarming  proportion.  It  is  a  problem  Senator  Graham  and 
I  are  committed  to  addressing. 

In  the  meantime,  the  Middle  District  is  doing  what  it  can  to  alleviate  the  situa- 
tion. The  District  recently  announced  an  intention  to  hold  an  unprecedented  acceler- 
ated civil  trial  calendar  in  June,  July  and  August  of  1998  in  which  judges  from  the 
Jacksonville  and  Orlando  divisions  will  join  the  U.S.  District  judges  in  Tampa  to 
assist  the  Tampa/Ft.  Myers  division  with  their  emergency  case  backlog.  It  is  clear 
that  Judge  Lazzara  will  be  a  welcome  addition  to  the  federal  bench  there. 

I  have  heard  from  many  people  in  the  Florida  legal  community  about  Judge 
Lazzara's  fitness  for  the  federal  bench.  He  is  highly  respected  in  the  Tampa  area 
where  he  is  currently  on  the  state  appellate  bench.  The  Tampa  Tribune  had  these 
positive  comments  on  Judge  Lazzara's  nomination:  "The  country  doesn't  need  any 
more  liberal  judges  who  try  to  set  social  policy  from  the  bench.  But  Lazzara,  who 
is  known  for  being  apolitical,  is  not  of  that  stripe.  His  approach  to  the  law  is  con- 
servative." He  is  also  viewed  by  those  who  know  him  as  a  warm  and  decent  man. 

I,  too,  believe  that  he  has  shown  himself  to  be  a  conservative  jurist — interpreting 
statutes  and  precedents  in  a  strict  fashion  even  in  situations  where  the  outcome  is 
not  to  his  liking  or  the  public's  liking.  With  the  current,  and  appropriate,  emphasis 
we  are  placing  upon  opposing  judicial  activism.  Judge  Lazzara  appears  to  be  the 
kind  of  jurist  we  should  enthusiastically  confirm. 

I  would  also  like  to  note  that  back  in  1992  my  own  Judicial  Advisory  Commission 
recommended  Judge  Lazzara  for  nomination  to  the  federal  bench.  I  want  to  thank 
the  Committee  for  providing  me  the  opportunity  to  introduce  Judge  Lazzara.  I  know 
that  Senator  Graham  and  I  both  appreciate  the  timely  consideration  which  has  been 
given  to  other  Florida  judicial  nominees  by  this  Congress,  and  ask  that,  in  light  of 
the  compelling  demands  upon  the  Middle  District  of  Florida,  Judge  Lazzara  be  con- 
firmed swiftly  by  this  Committee  and  the  full  Senate.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Specter.  We  will  move  as  expeditiously  as  possible.  I 
have  a  very  high  regard  for  the  work  of  the  Federal  judiciary.  I 
have  been  a  practicing  lawyer  all  my  life;  I  consider  that  up  to  the 
moment.  I  know  how  important  that  processing  is  and  we  will  work 
to  accomplish  that. 


I  want  to  note  the  presence  of  Staff  Director  Manus  Cooney  today 
and  I  want  to  thank  him  personally  for  expediting  the  process. 
When  the  nominations  came  in  as  to  the — thank  you  very  much, 
Senator  Mack  and  Senator  Graham.  I  know  Senator  Mack  is 
straining  at  the  starting  point  for  the  next  race  and  I  know  how 
busy  you  are,  so  we  appreciate  your  being  here. 

Senator  Mack.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Specter.  I  was  saying  I  want  to  thank  Mr.  Cooney  espe- 
cially. After  the  nominations  were  submitted,  he  and  I  talked  on 
a  number  of  occasions  in  the  month  of  August  and  it  has  not  been 
easy  to  have  these  set  up  during  the  first  week  back  from  recess. 
So  we  thank  you,  Mr.  Cooney. 

Senator  Santorum  had  wanted  to  be  here,  but  is  in  Pittsburgh 
today  on  family  business  and  he  sends  his  regrets.  I  know  that  he 
is  very  supportive  of  the  Pennsylvania  nominees  who  are  here. 

At  this  time,  I  would  like  to  ask  Judge  Rendell  to  step  forward, 
please. 

While  you  are  standing,  judge,  will  you  raise  your  right  hand?  Do 
you  solemnly  swear  that  the  testimony  you  are  about  to  give  in  this 
proceeding  will  be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth  and  nothing  but  the 
truth,  so  help  you  God? 

Judge  Rendell.  I  do. 

Senator  Specter.  It  is  a  pleasure  to  welcome  you  here.  Judge 
Rendell.  You  have  an  outstanding  record  as  a  district  court  judge, 
in  the  practice  of  law,  and  an  outstanding  academic  record,  grad- 
uating from  the  Villanova  Law  School  in  1973  and  Phi  Beta  Kappa 
from  the  University  of  Pennsylvania  in  1969. 

On  a  personal  note,  so  that  my  own  bias  will  be  known,  I  have 
known  Judge  Rendell  since  she  was  a  college  student  and  she 
dated  Ed  Rendell,  who  then  had  the  lofty  position  of  assistant  dis- 
trict attorney  in  Philadelphia  and  now  is  the  mayor  of  Philadel- 
phia, America's  mayor  as  well. 

Judge  Rendell,  we  welcome  you  here. 

TESTIMONY  OF  MARJORIE  O.  RENDELL,  OF  FENNSYLVANLV, 
TO  BE  U.S.  CIRCUIT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  THIRD  CIRCUIT 

Judge  Rendell.  Thank  you,  Senator. 

Senator  Specter.  Would  you  care  to  make  any  opening  state- 
ment? 

Judge  Rendell.  I  would  like  to  have  the  record  reflect  those 
members  of  my  family  who  are  present  with  me. 

Senator  Specter.  If  you  would  introduce  them,  we  would  appre- 
ciate it. 

Judge  Rendell.  Yes.  My  immediate  family — my  husband,  Ed 
Rendell,  is  on  his  way.  The  vagaries  of  the  Metroliner  probably 
have  affected  his  being  here,  but  I  know  he  was  on  the  7  a.m.  or 
whatever. 

From  my  immediate  family,  our  son  Jesse,  who  was  here  the  last 
time  I  had  a  hearing,  is  in  his  second  day  of  his  senior  year  in  high 
school,  so  he  is  tending  to  his  educational  duties. 

I  am  pleased  to  have  my  chambers  family  here;  my  secretary, 
Beth  Cummings,  who  has  been  with  me  for  15  years;  my  past, 
former  law  clerk,  Cheryl  Solomon,  who  is  now  with  a  law  firm  here 
in  Washington;  and  my  current  law  clerks,  Adam  Levin,  who  grad- 


10 

uated  from  NYU  Law  School,  as  well  as  Alison  Conn,  a  graduate 
of  Yale  Law  School.  They  have  just  started  their  tenure  with  me, 
so  I  am  very  pleased  to  have  them. 

Senator  Specter.  If  you  would  all  stand,  we  would  appreciate  it. 

[The  persons  stood.] 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you  all  very  much. 

Judge  Rendell.  Thank  you.  Senator,  and  in  addition  to  that,  I 
would  just  like  to  say  I  am  extremely  pleased  and  honored  to  be 
here  and  am  thankful  to  the  committee  for  having  this  hearing. 

Senator  Specter.  I  should  say.  Judge  Rendell,  that  your  nomina- 
tion has  been  pending  for  some  time,  unlike  the  district  court  nomi- 
nees, and  we  will  not  burden  the  record  with  the  reasons  why.  We 
are  just  glad  to  have  you  here  today  and  move  the  process. 

Judge  Rendell.  Thank  you. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  SPECTER 

Senator  Specter.  We  are  on  a  tight  time  schedule,  which  is  cus- 
tomary around  here.  We  have  a  vote  scheduled  at  9:50  this  morn- 
ing, and  the  Governmental  Affairs  Committee  is  going  to  start 
hearings  at  10  and  I  am  on  that  committee  and  early  up  on  a 
round  of  questioning.  But  I  know  we  have  sufficient  time  to  com- 
plete our  work,  but  we  will  move  expeditiously. 

Judge  Rendell,  are  you  committed  to  faithfully  following  the  Su- 
preme Court  precedent  and  the  rulings  of  other  superior  courts  in 
your  legal  decisions? 

Judge  Rendell.  Yes,  I  am,  Senator. 

Senator  Specter.  If  you  are  presented  with  a  case  of  first  im- 
pression, what  principles  will  guide  you  or  what  methods  will  you 
employ  in  deciding  that  case? 

Judge  Rendell.  If  the  case  involves  an  issue  of  statutory  inter- 
pretation, I  would  look  first  to  the  statute  and  to  its  plain  meaning. 
Obviously,  statutes  are  presumed  to  be  constitutional  in  the  first 
instance.  And  if  the  meaning  were  not  plain,  if  there  were  ambigu- 
ity, I  would  look  then  to  the  legislative  history  to  try  to  divine  the 
legislative  intent,  knowing  full  well,  however,  that  sometimes  that 
can  be  misleading.  So,  that  would  involve  some  careful  scrutiny. 

If  the  matter  were  a  matter  of  interpreting  the  Constitution,  I 
would  look  again  to  the  text  of  the  Constitution  and  to  the  histori- 
cal perspective  and  background  of  it.  And  in  all  instances,  I  would 
look  at  other  precedent,  or  if  not  precedent,  other  cases,  analogous 
cases  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  or  fellow  circuit  courts  for 
guidance  in  how  to  make  the  determination. 

Senator  Specter.  Could  you  cite  any  Supreme  Court  opinion 
which  you  think  is  particularly  well  reasoned? 

Judge  Rendell.  I  think  the  Dalbert  case  that  has  to  do  with  ex- 
pert evidence  is  very  well  reasoned  and  has  been  of  great  help  to 
the  trial  courts  in  helping  us  determine  the  reliability  of  expert 
opinion  which  I  think  is  becoming  increasingly  important.  And 
Dalbert  is  well  reasoned  in  that  it  lays  out  tests  clearly  for  us  to 
follow,  so  I  would  cite  that  case. 

Senator  Specter.  Can  you  point  to  any  case  or  specific  areas  of 
constitutional  law  where  you  think  the  Supreme  Court  improperly 
departed  from  the  principles  of  the  Constitution? 


11 

Judge  Rendell.  Well,  I  guess  I  would  make  the  judgment  of  that 
kind  of  case  where  the  Supreme  Court  itself  has  made  a  judgment 
that  it  has  erred  rather  than  myself  presuming  to  say  they  were 
wrong  and,  for  instance,  Plessy  v.  Ferguson  would  be  a  case  that 
I  would  say  fits  that  description. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Judge  Rendell,  if  you  believed  the  Supreme 
Court  had  seriously  erred  in  rendering  a  decision,  how  would  you 
handle  that  in  applying  that  law  to  a  case  pending  before  you? 

Judge  Rendell.  I  would  apply  the  Supreme  Court  precedent. 
That  is  the  law  of  the  land. 

Senator  Specter.  What  is  your  judgment  on  the  constitutionality 
of  the  death  penalty? 

Judge  Rendell.  The  Supreme  Court  has  held  it  constitutional 
and  I  will  follow  that  in  my  decisionmaking. 

Senator  Specter.  Have  you  had  any  death  penalty  cases  come 
before  you  as  a  district  court  judge? 

Judge  Rendell.  I  have  had  the  trial  of  a  case  that  was  being 
prosecuted  as  a  death  penalty  case  under  the  crime  bill,  and  I  con- 
vened a  jury  and  we  were  in  the  midst  of  a  trial  when  the  matter 
was  pled,  a  guilty  plea.  So  I  was  embarking  upon,  in  fact,  the  first 
death  penalty  case  in  our  district.  That  was  last  fall. 

Senator  Specter.  Do  you  have  any  conscientious  scruples  which 
would  inhibit  or  prevent  you  from  imposing  or  upholding  the  death 
penalty? 

Judge  Rendell.  No,  I  do  not.  Senator. 

Senator  Specter.  Do  you  believe  it  is  appropriate  for  the  Amer- 
ican Bar  Association  to  take  stands  on  political  issues  such  as  abor- 
tion, affirmative  action,  gun  control? 

Judge  Rendell.  I  guess  the  appropriateness  of  the  activities  of 
any  group  would  depend  upon  its  mission.  I  am  not  personally  fa- 
miliar with  the  mission  of  the  ABA. 

Senator  Specter.  Have  you  been  a  member  of  the  ABA? 

Judge  Rendell.  I  have  in  the  past.  I  am  not  currently.  When  I 
was  in  practice,  in  commercial  practice,  I  found  it  helpful  to  receive 
their  publications,  but  I  have  never  been  active.  I  think  it  is  dif- 
ficult, if  they  are  purporting  to  speak  on  behalf  of  all  of  the  bar, 
for  them  to  be  taking  positions  on  one  side  or  the  other  of  an  issue. 

Senator  Specter.  I  am  not  sure  about  the  appropriateness  of 
that  question,  but  it  is  part  of  the  boilerplate. 

Judge  Rendell.  Yes. 

Senator  Specter.  Since  you  are  a  friend  and  since  I  am  presid- 
ing, I  am  going  to  ask  you  all  the  boilerplate  questions. 

Judge  Rendell.  I  didn't  address  it  from  the  standpoint  of  ethics 
and  obviously  these  are — I  don't  have  any  such  cases  before  me. 
This  hasn't  come  before  me. 

Senator  SPECTER.  I  have  a  lot  of  views  on  the  ABA,  but  I  don't 
know  that  they  would  qualify  or  disqualify  me  for  anything. 

On  the  subject  of  judicial  activism,  we  always  take  up  this  ques- 
tion, and  with  all  the  preparation,  I  don't  know  that  it  is  possible 
for  a  nominee  to  give  an  inappropriate  answer.  Would  you  care  to 
comment  about  the  doctrine  of  judicial  activism? 

Judge  Rendell.  I  believe  that  a  judge  should  decide  the  case  be- 
fore him  or  her,  the  issues  before  him  or  her,  and  not  stray  from 
that.  And  I  think  my  record  on  the  district  court  shows  that  that 


12 

is  what  I  do  do.  I  believe  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  go  be- 
yond that,  in  Hght  of  the  separation  of  powers.  Our  duty  is  to  en- 
force and  interpret  the  law  and  not  to  legislate.  I  happen  to  believe 
that  and  try  to  act  accordingly. 

Senator  Specter.  In  one  of  my  early  sessions  on  the  Judiciary 
Committee,  Senator  Thurmond,  then  chairman,  asked  a  nominee  a 
question:  if  you  are  confirmed,  do  you  promise  to  be  courteous?  And 
I  was  amazed  at  the  question  because  what  was  a  nominee  to  say 
except  yes.  There  were  two  nominees  from  Pennsylvania,  Judge 
Mansman,  who  is  now  on  the  circuit  court,  and  Judge  Caldwell, 
and  they  both  said  yes. 

Senator  Thurmond  said,  the  more  power  a  person  has,  the  more 
courteous  the  person  should  be.  And  as  I  reflected  on  that,  that  is 
as  wise  a  comment  as  I  have  heard  in  this  room.  The  competition 
hasn't  been  too  heavy  for  wise  comments  in  this  room.  But  that  is 
really  important,  and  I  say  it  only  once  to  the  nominees  who  are 
here  on  the  importance  of  courtesy. 

I  have  seen  in  my  experience  in  the  courtroom,  and  I  have  had 
a  fair  amount  of  it,  a  tremendous  amount  of  conduct  which  is  ex- 
cessive by  judges  once  they  put  on  the  robes — just  really,  really  ex- 
cessive. Once  you  are  a  judge,  you  are  there.  Some  of  us  think  a 
constitutional  amendment  might  be  in  order  to  have  Federal  judges 
run  every  6  years  and,  of  course,  to  have  Senators  serve  for  life. 
[Laughter.! 

But  I  say  with  great  seriousness  the  import  of  Senator  Thur- 
mond's  admonition  that  you  really  ought  to  keep  in  mind  when  liti- 
gants and  parties  are  before  you  that  you  ought  to  consider  your- 
self as  if  they  are  really  before  the  public  and  almost  up  for  elec- 
tion, to  have  your  comments  judged  and  your  demeanor  regarded 
as  if  that  were  on  the  line. 

Senator  Kohl. 

Senator  Kohl.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  SPECTER.  We  have  been  joined,  obviously,  here  by  our 
very  distinguished  colleague,  former  chairman  of  this  committee, 
former  ranking  member  of  this  committee. 

Senator  BiDEN.  Former  everything,  but  go  right  ahead.  Senator. 

Senator  Specter.  And  current  guru  of  this  committee. 

Senator  Kohl. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  KOHL 

Senator  Kohl.  I  will  be  brief.  Judge  Rendell.  In  your  opinion, 
what  are  the  most  important  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the 
20th  century — the  most  important  three  decisions,  and  why? 

Judge  Rendell.  I  believe  that  in  terms  of  changing  the  law  and 
setting  precedent  that  will  guide  us — in  the  criminal  area,  I  would 
have  to  say  Miranda  is  one  which  is  important  in  terms  of  chang- 
ing the  thinking  or  the  balance,  if  you  will,  in  criminal  law  in  a 
way  unlike  it  was  the  first  half  of  this  century. 

Brown  v.  Board  of  Education  obviously  made  a  radical  change  in 
our  thinking  at  a  time  when  the  Supreme  Court  felt  it  was  called 
for.  And  the  third  area — I  am  trying  to  think  of  different  areas  of 
the  law — again,  I  get  back  to  Dalbert  and  the  way  we  conduct  our 
civil  cases.  So  often,  civil  cases  come  before  us  with  experts  or  pre- 
sumed experts,  and  I  think  Dalbert  will  make  a  big  change  in  the 


13 

law  in  terms  of  cases  that  do  and  do  not  proceed  to  trial  based 
upon  the  reliability  of  experts. 

Senator  Kohl.  Thank  you.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you  very  much,  Senator  Kohl. 

Senator  Sessions. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  SESSIONS 

Senator  SESSIONS.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  think  Pennsylvania  and  the 
three  nominees  that  we  are  seeing  here  from  the  State  appear  to 
have  exceptional  qualifications  and  appear  to  be  the  kind  of  nomi- 
nees that  will  do  an  outstanding  job  as  Federal  judges. 

I  congratulate  you  and  Senator  Santorum  and  the  President  for 
nominees  that  appear  to  be  skilled  and  capable  with  good  experi- 
ence. You  are  to  be  congratulated.  I  knov/  you  have  worked  hard 
in  trying  to  have  the  kind  of  judges  that  we  need  in  America. 

Good-quality  judging  is  important.  I  take  it  very  seriously.  My 
staff  and  I  look  at  nominees  and  give  it  some  thought.  It  is  a  life- 
time appointment.  Courtesy,  fidelity  to  the  law,  hard  work,  and 
case  management  are  the  cornerstones  of  a  good  Federal  judge.  I 
have  practiced  full  time  before  Federal  judges  for  15  years,  and  a 
good  judge  makes  it  a  pleasure  to  be  in  court  and  a  bad  judge  can 
make  it  a  nightmare,  or  give  you  nightmares  worrying  about  what 
is  going  to  happen  the  next  day. 

I  think  these  nominees  appear  to  be  the  kind  of  nominees  that 
will  serve  the  Nation  well.  I  do  have  another  committee  hearing  to 
attend.  I  also  think  the  nominee  from  Florida,  Mr.  Lazzara — both 
Senator  Graham  and  Connie  Mack  are  confident  in  his  abilities, 
and  his  background  appears  to  be  excellent,  too. 

So  I  think  it  is  a  good  group  of  nominees  and  I  expect  to  support 
them. 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you  very  much.  Senator  Sessions. 

We  have  been  joined  by  Mayor  Rendell  this  morning.  I  under- 
stand he  is  here.  Welcome,  Mayor  Rendell. 

Senator  BiDEN.  Good  thing  he  is  not  the  nominee.  [Laughter.] 

Senator  Specter.  Do  you  think  the  cross  might  be  a  little  more 
extensive? 

I  am  pleased  to  call  on  now  our  distinguished  colleague.  Senator 
Biden. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  BIDEN 

Senator  Biden.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  am  completely  objective  in  this 
nomination.  The  fact  that  the  judge  is  bright,  well  educated,  hon- 
est, balanced,  and  conscientious,  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  fact 
that  I  have  known  her  since  I  have  been  in  high  school.  She  is  ex- 
tremely qualified  for  this  job.  She  will  be  a  great  addition  to  the 
third  circuit,  which  has  one  of  the  most  distinguished  reputations 
of  all  the  circuits  in  the  history  of  the  United  States  of  America. 
Some  truly  great  jurists  have  served  on  that  court. 

Midge,  as  a  judge,  you  will  be  taking  a  place  where  others  have 
sat  who  have  literally  changed  the  face  of  America  for  the  better, 
and  I  think  you  deserve  to  be  there.  I  should  ask  you  questions  and 
pretend  I  am  interested  in  your  answers.  I  know  you  too  well.  I 
have  too  much  respect  for  you,  and  I  am  completely  confident  in 


14 

your  ability  to  not  only  be  a  sound  jurist,  but  to  be  a  truly  great 
one. 

My  one  regret  and  I  am  sure  it  is  yours,  too,  is  that  your  dad 
is  not  here.  He  would  be,  and  is,  extremely,  extremely  proud  of  you. 

Judge  Rendell.  Thank  you. 

Senator  BiDEN.  I  still  can't  figure  out  why  you  married  a  guy 
fi-om  New  York,  but  I  guess  in  time  we  will  work  that  one  out.  I 
welcome  the  mayor  as  well.  I  think,  quite  frankly,  judge,  you  have 
the  better  job.  Clearly,  the  job  security  is  better,  and  I  think  the 
decisions,  although  difficult,  may  be  even  easier  to  make. 

I  am  excited  about  your  nomination. 

Judge  Rendell.  Thank  you.  Senator. 

Senator  BiDEN.  And  I  compliment  you,  Senator  Specter,  for  push- 
ing the  nomination.  You  know,  everybody  thinks  that  bipartisan- 
ship is  dead  in  this  country.  In  a  lot  of  places,  it  is  not. 

I  must  say,  Mr.  Chairman,  you  have  also  recommended  to  the 
President  three  other  nominees.  I  am  very  regretful  that  one  is  not 
here  today  for  the  western  district.  I  hope  it  is  not  petulance  that 
is  keeping  that  from  occurring  because  he  is  as  qualified  as  the  oth- 
ers that  are  here  today. 

With  the  exception  of  the  circuit  judge,  I  must  tell  you,  Mr. 
Chairman,  and  tell  the  other  judges,  including  Mr.  Kauffman, 
whom  I  know  and  think  is  a  great  appointment  as  well,  that  a  lot 
is  going  to  depend,  from  this  Senator's  standpoint,  on  what  hap- 
pens to  the  judge  from  the  Western  District  as  to  how — at  any  rate, 
that  is  for  another  time  and  another  fight  and  it  is  unrelated  to  you 
directly  and  unrelated  to  Judge  Rendell. 

I  am  excited  about  it.  Midge,  and  I  tell  you  I  think  it  is  wonder- 
ful. Congratulations.  I  look  forward  to  watching  from  afar  your  con- 
tinued distinguished  career. 

Judge  Rendell.  Thank  you,  Senator.  I  am  honored  and  humbled 
by  your  remarks.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you  very  much.  Senator  Biden.  I  had 
commented  about  Mr.  Bingler  earlier,  John  Bingler,  and  had  said 
that  he  had  been  nominated  and  hoped  that  we  would  have  him 
before  this  committee  soon  and  that  that  was  in  process.  I  did  not 
give  any  further  explanation,  but 

Senator  BiDEN.  By  the  way,  I  want  to  make  it  clear  for  the 
record  that  ever3^hing  in  my  experience,  knowing  you  for  a  couple 
of  decades  now — everything  you  have  ever  said,  you  have  done,  and 
I  have  absolute,  complete  confidence  that  you  are  trying  your  best 
to  make  sure  Mr.  Bingler  gets  before  this  committee.  I  appreciate 
that  very  much  and  I  will  pursue  that  with  you. 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you  very  much,  and  the  reason  that 
Judge  Rendell  married  a  New  Yorker  was  because  he  had  a  very 
important  position.  He  was  assistant  district  attorney  in  Philadel- 
phia. 

Judge  Rendell.  For  one  Arlen  Specter,  who  was  then  the  district 
attorney,  I  might  add. 

Senator  Specter.  We  have  had  a  lot  of  fun  over  the  years. 

Thank  you  very  much,  Judge  Rendell.  I  think  that  your  con- 
firmation is  as  close  to  being  assured  as  anything  can  be.  Thank 
you  for  coming. 


15 

Judge  Rendell.  Thank  you,  Senator,  and  thank  you  again  for 
convening  this  hearing. 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you. 

We  will  now  call  the  district  court  nominees  together  to  speed 
the  process  just  a  little.  If  you  would  all  step  forward,  Justice 
Kauffman,  Judge  Lazzara,  and  Mr.  Caputo,  and  raise  your  right 
hands,  do  you  solemnly  swear  that  the  testimony  you  will  give  in 
this  proceeding  will  be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth  and  nothing  but 
the  truth,  so  help  you  God? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  I  do. 

Judge  Lazzara.  I  do. 

Mr.  Caputo.  I  do. 

Senator  BiDEN.  Mr.  Chairman,  before  you  begin,  may  I  clarify 
the  record?  I  referred  to  a  circuit  court  nominee.  I  want  the  record 
to  show  that  I  have  known  her  since  high  school.  We  go  back  all 
the  way  to  high  school;  we  have  been  friends  for  years.  Thank  you 
very  much,  Mr.  Chairman. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  SPECTER 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you  very  much,  Senator  Biden. 

Let  us  begin  with  former  justice  Kauffman,  who  brings  to  this 
position  an  outstanding  record,  having  served  on  the  Supreme 
Court  of  Pennsylvania;  an  outstanding  record  as  a  litigator;  an  out- 
standing academic  record  from  the  University  of  Pennsylvania  and 
Yale  Law  School.  He  couldn't  have  made  two  better  selections  be- 
cause they  are  the  same  as  mine. 

Mr.  Kauffman,  are  you  committed  to  faithfully  following  Su- 
preme Court  precedents  and  the  court  of  appeals  for  your  district? 

TESTIMONY  OF  BRUCE  W.  KAUFFMAN,  OF  PENNSYLVANIA,  TO 
BE  U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  EASTERN  DISTRICT  OF 
PENNSYLVANIA 

Mr.  Kauffman.  Yes,  Senator,  I  am. 

Senator  Specter.  If  you  are  presented  with  a  case  of  first  im- 
pression, what  principles  will  guide  you  in  deciding  the  case? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  The  principles  of  recognizing  that  a  statute  is 
presumed  to  be  constitutional;  that  it  is  the  role  of  the  courts  not 
to  legislate,  but  to  enforce  the  law,  and  therefore  we  search  for 
precedents  that  will  help  us  interpret  an  ambiguous,  if  a  statute 
were  to  be  ambiguous.  And,  finally,  we  look  at  legislative  history, 
if  need  be,  but  I  repeat  what  was  said  earlier  today  that  legislative 
history  sometimes  can  be  very  dangerous  because  it  may  be  only 
the  opinion  of  one  Member  of  the  Congress,  and  therefore  you  have 
to  carefully  scrutinize  legislative  history.  Hopefully,  the  presum^p- 
tion  of  constitutionality  of  the  statute  will 

Senator  Specter.  Can  you  cite  any  specific  Supreme  Court  opin- 
ion which  you  think  is  particularly  well  reasoned? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  Yes;  I  think  that  the  Adarand  decision  is  a  very 
well  reasoned  decision. 

Senator  Specter.  Can  you  cite  any  situation  or  case  where  you 
think  the  Supreme  Court  has  improperly  departed  from  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Constitution? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  Yes;  I  think  I  agree  with  what  Judge  Rendell 
said  that  you  look  at  cases  that  the  Supreme  Court  decided  that 


16 

were  improperly  decided,  such  as  Dred  Scott  and  Plessy  v.  Fer- 
guson. 

Senator  Specter.  What  would  you  do  if  you  believed  the  Su- 
preme Court  or  the  court  of  appeals  had  seriously  erred  in  render- 
ing a  decision?  What  would  you  do  with  respect  to  applying  it  to 
the  case  before  you? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  As  a  Federal  district  judge,  a  trial  judge,  I  would 
be  bound  by  the  precedent  of  the  higher  courts. 

Senator  Specter.  As  to  the  death  penalty,  had  you  sat  on  death 
penalty  cases  when  you  were  on  the  Supreme  Court  of  Pennsyl- 
vania? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  Yes;  I  did.  Senator. 

Senator  Specter.  Do  you  have  any  moral  compunction  against 
the  imposition  of  the  death  penalty? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  I  have  no  moral  compunction  that  would  prevent 
me  from  enforcing  the  law. 

Senator  Specter.  Had  you  been  a  part  of  the  majority  of  the 
court  upholding  the  death  penalty  in  cases  where  you  sat  on  the 
Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  I  don't  think  that  the  opportunity  came  while  I 
was  there  to  actually  enforce  a  death  penalty,  but  there  were  cases 
where  the  principle  came  up  and  I  had  no  moral  compunction 
against  voting  to  enforce  the  law. 

Senator  Specter.  Well,  as  you  say  that,  I  reflect  we  didn't  have 
the  death  penalty  in  Pennsylvania  from  1972  for  a  long  time,  but 
we  had  had  a  lot  of  cases  come  up  where  it  was  imposed  but  wasn't 
carried  out. 

Mr.  Kauffman.  Correct. 

Senator  Specter.  We  are  going  to  skip  the  American  Bar  Asso- 
ciation question  in  this  round. 

What  is  your  view  on  judicial  activism? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  Senator,  I  believe  that  the  tripartite  system  of 
government  that  we  have  is  excellent.  It  has  worked.  Checks  and 
balances  are  important.  The  job  of  a  Federal  court  is  not  to  make 
the  law,  but  to  interpret  the  law.  The  job  of  the  legislature,  the 
Congress,  is  to  make  the  law,  and  I  think  it  is  very  important  that 
Federal  judges  understand  that  and  conduct  themselves  accord- 
ingly. 

Senator  Specter.  Justice  Kauffman,  you  have  had  a  very  distin- 
guished career  and  done  a  lot  of  hard  work.  You  have  had  a  lot  of 
lofty  positions  educationally,  professionally,  supreme  court.  You  are 
a  big  wheel.  Can  you  make  a  commitment  now  to  all  those  lawyers 
and  all  those  litigants  come  before  you  that  you  are  going  to  keep 
your  temper  all  the  time  and  you  are  going  to  be  courteous  to  them 
all  the  time? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  Senator,  yes,  indeed.  This  is  something  I  have 
wanted  to 

Senator  Specter.  OK,  because  I  know  you  pretty  well  and  it  is 
not  an  easy  commitment  to  keep,  and  I  am  going  to  ask  you  to 
think  about  this  when  they  are  before  you  and  some  lawyer  is  ram- 
bling, some  litigant  is  not  too  directed,  and  all  the  temptation  is 
there  and  you  have  had  a  bad  morning.  Think  about  Senator  Thur- 
mond. 


17 

I  had  commented,  Senator  Biden,  earlier  about  Senator  Thur- 
mond's  comment  to  always  be  courteous. 

Mr.  Kauffman.  I  promise  you,  Senator,  I  will  never  forget  that. 

Senator  BiBEN.  He  is  a  man  who  has  never  lost  his  temper,  I  can 
assure  you.  [Laughter.] 

Senator  Specter.  Senator  Kohl. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  KOHL 

Senator  Kohl.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  will  ask  just  one 
question. 

Since  their  inception,  the  Federal  sentencing  guidelines  have 
been  the  subject  of  debate.  In  fact,  at  least  one  district  court  judge 
resigned  because,  according  to  press  accounts,  he  felt  that  the  man- 
datory guidelines  were  too  harsh  and  too  rigid.  Some  appellate 
judges,  like  Judge  Easterbrook  of  the  seventh  circuit,  have  been 
criticized  for  their  unwillingness  to  allow  district  court  judges  to 
depart  from  the  sentencing  guidelines,  even  for  upward  departures. 

Is  that  a  concern  of  yours  generally,  and  is  this  an  issue  in  the 
third  circuit? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  Senator  Kohl,  I  believe  that  a  Federal  district 
judge,  no  matter  what  his  personal  opinion  may  be  of  sentencing 
guidelines,  has  no  choice  but  to  follow  what  the  law  is.  The  Con- 
gress decides  that  issue,  and  I  promise  you  that  I  will  very  vigor- 
ously enforce  the  laws  as  passed  by  Congress  and  I  will  not  let  my 
personal  opinion  of  whether  sentencing  guidelines  are  good  or  bad 
interfere  with  my  administration  of  them. 

Senator  KOHL.  Thank  you.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Specter.  Senator  Biden. 

questioning  by  senator  biden 

Senator  BiDEN.  I  have  one  question  that  is  going  to  sound  like 
I  am  not  being  serious  at  first  blush.  Justice  Kauffman,  but  I  am 
very  serious.  Considering  your  stature  and  success  in  the  law  in 
one  of  the  Nation's  largest  cities,  in  a  town  renowned  for  very  high- 
powered  lawyers,  why  do  you  want  to  be  a  district  court  judge? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  Senator,  this  is  something  that  I  have  wanted  to 
do  all  of  my  life.  I  grew  up  in  a  family  where  my  dad  was  a  lawyer 
and  a  judge.  Our  family  has  always  been  devoted  to  public  service. 
I  view  this  as  the  pinnacle  of  the  profession  and  an  unusual  oppor- 
tunity to  serve  the  public  for  the  rest  of  my  life.  It  is  something 
that  I  want  to  do  very  much,  and  I  have  had  to  answer  the  same 
question  to  my  wife  and  some  others,  too,  and  believe  me.  Senator, 
I  have  thought  about  that. 

But  I  feel  that  I  have  been  very  lucky  in  life  and  that  every  law- 
yer, and  me  in  particular,  has  the  obligation  to  give  back  to  this 
country  that  has  been  so  good  to  all  of  us.  And  I  know  this  sounds 
like  platitudes,  but  I  sincerely  mean  that  I  feel  an  obligation  to  de- 
vote the  rest  of  my  life  to  public  service  and  that  is  what  I  hope, 
if  confirmed,  I  will  be  permitted  to  do. 

Senator  BiDEN.  Well,  I  believe  you  do.  I  can't  think  of  a  better 
reason  why  one  should  want  to  be  a  Federal  judge.  Thank  you. 

Mr.  Kauffman.  Thank  you,  Senator. 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you,  Senator  Biden. 


18 

Justice  Kauffman,  would  you  introduce  your  family  and  friends? 
I  did  not  have  a  chance  earlier  to  greet  all  of  your  friends — I  didn't 
see  him  there — but  I  will  later. 

Mr.  Kauffman.  Thank  you,  Senator.  I  first  want  to  say  I  am 
very  honored,  sincerely  honored  and  grateful  to  be  here  this  morn- 
ing, and  I  do  have  my  family  and  friends,  both  in  person  and  by 
representation. 

My  89-year-old  father  who  is  in  Florida  is  here  in  spirit  and  will 
be  watching  this  on  CNN.  This  is  something  very  important  to  him 
in  his  life,  too,  and  I  am  so  happy  that  he  is  alive  to  see  this. 

My  best  friend  and  my  wife  is  here,  Carol  Jackson  Kauffman. 

Senator  Specter.  Would  you  stand,  Carol,  please? 

[Mrs.  Kauffman  stood.] 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you. 

Mr.  Kauffman.  My  son,  one  of  my  sons,  Robert  Andrew 
Kauffman,  who  is  a  former  assistant  U.S.  attorney  in  Philadelphia, 
and  now  a  lawyer,  a  trial  lawyer,  in  the  distinguished  firm  of 
Reese,  Smith,  Shaw,  McLean  in  Pennsylvania — he  is  here  rep- 
resenting himself,  of  course,  but  also  his  brother.  Brad,  his  sister, 
Margie,  and  his  sister,  Laurie,  and  his  sister,  Christine,  and  my 
brother,  Alan,  who  practices  law  in  Florida,  and  my  grandchildren, 
Stephanie  and  Sara.  So  I  am  very  happy  that  Robert  could  be  here 
today,  for  a  variety  of  reasons.  My  other  children  and  brother  and 
grandchildren  are  not  here. 

Senator  BiDEN.  Bob,  are  you  billing  by  the  hour  for  that  rep- 
resentation? [Laughter.] 

Mr.  R.  Kauffman.  No,  Senator. 

Mr.  Kauffman.  I  have  some  very — I  am  a  lucky  man.  I  have 
some  very  dear  friends. 

Senator  Specter.  Justice  Kauffman,  may  I  ask  you  to  expedite 
this  because  we  are  going  to  have  to  conclude  this  hearing? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  Yes;  here  today  are  some  wonderful  friends  of 
mine — Leonard  Sylk,  of  Philadelphia;  Jerome  Richter,  Esq.,  of 
Philadelphia;  Ken  Tepper,  Esq.,  of  Philadelphia;  and  my  partner 
representing  not  only  himself,  but  the  firm  of  Dilworth,  Paxson, 
Kalish  &  Kauffman,  Thomas  Groshens. 

I  also  have — and  I  saved  him  for  last;  he  should  have  been  first — 
a  marvelous  friend  of  mine  here.  Congressman  Robert  Andrews,  of 
New  Jersey.  Well,  he  was  here  just  a  few  moments  ago. 

In  any  event,  thank  you.  Senator.  I  appreciate  it  very  much. 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you  very  much.  Justice  Kauffman. 

One  final  note  about  Justice  Kauffman's  extraordinary  service 
with  his  law  firm,  the  Dilworth  firm,  in  representing  many  of  us 
in  the  navy  yard  litigation  on  base  closures;  I  think  a  really  re- 
markable contribution. 

questioning  by  senator  specter 

Senator  Specter.  Judge  Lazzara,  welcome.  You  bring  to  this 
hearing  a  very  outstanding  record  academically,  professionally,  and 
as  a  Florida  State  judge.  Let  me  begin  with  a  central  question 
which  has  been  inquired  into  by  the  committee,  and  that  is  with 
respect  to  a  murder  case  which  you  presided  over  where  you  did 
not  impose  the  death  penalty  after  that  was  recommended  by  the 
jury.  That  has  been  inquired  into  in  detail  by  staff,  which  has 


19 

found  your  explanation  satisfactory,  but  I  think  it  is  important  for 
our  record  here  that  you  state  your  reasons  for  departing  from  the 
jury's  recommendation  in  that  case. 

TESTIMONY  OF  RICHARD  A.  LAZZARA,  OF  FLORIDA,  TO  BE  U.S. 
DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  MIDDLE  DISTRICT  OF  FLORIDA 

Judge  Lazzara.  Well,  as  you  know,  Senator,  in  connection  with 
those  inquiries  I  have  furnished  a  complete  copy  of  the  sentencing 
transcript  which  reflects  in  detail  my  legal  reasons  for  not  doing  so. 

In  Florida,  the  jury's  recommendation  as  to  whether  to  impose  or 
not  to  impose  a  death  penalty  is  not  binding  on  the  trial  judge. 
That  awesome  responsibility  falls  on  the  trial  judge.  After  review- 
ing exhaustively  the  law  of  the  State  of  Florida  relating  to  whether 
the  death  penalty  should  or  should  not  be  imposed,  and  after  strict- 
ly applying  that  law  as  it  should  be  applied  to  the  objective  facts 
that  I  found  in  the  record,  it  was  my  determination  that  the  death 
penalty  was  not  an  appropriate  sanction  in  that  case.  And  therefore 
I  exercised  what  I  believed  to  be  and  what  I  still  believe  to  be  good 
judgment  in  sentencing  Mr.  Bailey  to  life  imprisonment. 

That  was  not  the  only  case  that  I  have  had  the  occasion  to  con- 
sider whether  the  death  penalty  should  be  imposed.  There  were 
two  others  which  I  have  noted,  I  believe,  in  my  response.  In  those 
cases,  I  followed  the  exact  same  approach  that  I  followed  in  Mr. 
Bailey's  case.  I  strictly  applied  the  death  penalty  law,  as  I  under- 
stood it,  to  the  objective  facts  appearing  in  the  record.  Using  that 
same  process  in  those  other  two  cases,  it  was  my  determination 
that  the  death  penalty  was  the  appropriate  sanction. 

Senator  Specter.  And  you  imposed  that  sentence? 

Judge  Lazzara.  And  I  imposed  that  sentence  in  both  cases. 

Senator  Specter.  Do  you  have  any  conscientious  scruple  against 
imposition  of  the  death  penalty? 

Judge  Lazzara.  No,  sir. 

Senator  Specter.  Judge  Lazzara,  give  us  your  views  on  judicial 
activism.  What  is  the  appropriate  role  of  a  judge  in  that  respect? 

Judge  Lazzara.  As  I  understand  it,  a  judicial  activist  is  one  who, 
for  their  own  personal  reasons,  consciously  ignores  the  law  and  the 
facts  in  resolving  a  dispute.  I  have  never  been  that  type  of  judge, 
I  think,  as  my  record  reflects.  I  don't  intend  to  be  that  type  of  judge 
as  a  U.S.  district  court  judge,  if  I  am  fortunate  enough  to  be  con- 
firmed. And  in  my  view,  any  judge  who  takes  that  approach  should 
hang  up  the  robe.  If  they  want  to  legislate,  they  should  run  for  the 
legislature  and  should  not  be  in  the  judicial  branch  of  government. 

Senator  Specter.  What  would  you  do  if  you  found  a  case  from 
the  Supreme  Court  or  court  of  appeals  particularly  disturbing  and 
sharply  disagreed  with  it?  How  would  you  handle  that  in  your 
court? 

Judge  Lazzara.  If  it  was  the  law  of  the  land,  binding  precedent 
under  the  basic  principles  of  stare  decisis  which  brings  continuity 
and  finality  to  our  judicial  system,  I  must  follow  them.  I  would  dis- 
agree if  I  felt  appropriate,  but  I  would  have  to  follow  them. 

Senator  Specter.  Can  you  point  to  any  case  where  you  think  the 
Supreme  Court  made  an  erroneous  decision? 


20 

Judge  Lazzara.  I  think  Judge  Rendell  and  former  Justice 
Kauffman  have  pretty  well  covered  the  ballpark  in  that  area. 
Plessy  V.  Ferguson 

Senator  Specter.  They  left  out  a  few  cases. 

Judge  Lazzara.  Yes;  Plessy  v.  Ferguson,  of  course,  comes  to 
mind. 

Senator  Specter.  Do  you  have  members  of  your  family  here, 
Judge  Lazzara?  If  so,  we  would  be  pleased  to  have  you  introduce 
them. 

Judge  Lazzara.  Yes.  I  am  pleased  to  have  here  my  son,  Damon 
Lazzara,  and  his  good  friend  and  my  second  son,  really,  Mr.  Daniel 
Simitovich.  And  my  wife  sends  her  regrets  for  not  being  able  to  be 
here. 

Senator  Specter.  We  have  been  joined  now  by  Representative 
Andrews.  Would  you  stand? 

[Mr.  Andrews  stood.] 

Senator  Specter.  Congressman  Andrews  met  his  wife  in  the 
course  of  the  navy  yard  litigation  and  was  a  party  to  that,  a  very 
distinguished  legislator  and  public  servant. 

Senator  Kohl. 

Senator  KOHL.  I  have  no  questions,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Senator  Biden. 

Senator  BiDEN.  I  have  no  questions. 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you. 

Anything  further  you  would  care  to  say? 

Judge  Lazzara.  I  just  wanted  to  express  my  appreciation  to  Sen- 
ator Graham  and  Senator  Mack  for  taking  time  from  their  busy 
schedules  to  be  here  and  to  present  me  to  the  committee,  and  I  ap- 
preciate the  committee  having  me  here,  sir. 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you  very  much,  judge. 

We  now  turn  to  A.  Richard  Caputo,  who  also  brings  a  very  distin- 
guished record  to  this  hearing,  a  graduate  of  Brown  University  and 
the  University  of  Pennsylvania  Law  School,  1963;  a  JAG  officer  in 
the  Air  Force;  extensive  public  service,  community  activities. 

Judge  Caputo,  welcome.  Is  there  any  opening  statement  you 
would  care  to  make? 

TESTIMONY  OF  A.  RICHARD  CAPUTO,  OF  PENNSYLVANIA,  TO 
BE  U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  MIDDLE  DISTRICT  OF 
PENNSYLVANIA 

Mr.  Caputo.  No,  sir.  I  would  like  to  introduce  members  of  my 
family. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Please  do  that,  yes. 

Mr.  Caputo.  My  wife,  Rosemary. 

Senator  Specter.  Would  you  stand,  Mrs.  Caputo? 

[Mrs.  Caputo  stood.] 

Mr.  Caputo.  My  daughter,  Lisa,  and  my  son,  Richard.  And  my 
daughter,  Christina,  lives  in  Florida  and  was  unable  to  make  it, 
and,  of  course,  her  husband,  Jerry,  and  my  son  Richard's  wife,  Lau- 
rie, and  my  grandson,  Richard  III. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Thank  you  very  much.  It  is  a  very  beautiful 
family  which  you  have,  so  that  I  can  put  that  on  the  record  to  be 
along  with  Senator  Biden.  [Laughter.] 


21 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  SPECTER 

Senator  SPECTER.  Mr.  Caputo,  I  am  presuming  twice  now,  but  I 
don't  think  it  is  an  unreasonable  presumption.  Are  you  committed 
to  faithfully  following  Supreme  Court  precedents  and  the  rulings  of 
the  third  circuit? 

Mr.  Caputo.  Yes;  I  am,  Senator. 

Senator  Specter.  What  are  your  views  on  judicial  activism? 

Mr.  Caputo.  Well,  my  views  on  judicial  activism  are  that  judges 
are  appointed  to  interpret  the  law,  to  decide  controversies  and 
cases,  and  resolve  grievances,  not  make  policy  and  legislate.  I  also 
would  note  that  Federal  courts  are  courts  of  limited  jurisdiction 
and  Federal  judges  certainly  should  be  mindful  of  that  particular 
facet  of  their  function. 

Senator  Specter.  If  you  had  a  case  where  you  thought — well, 
what  Supreme  Court  decision  would  you  point  to,  if  any,  that  you 
thought  was  improperly  decided? 

Mr.  Caputo.  Well,  I  know  everyone  has  so  far  mentioned  Plessy 
and  Dred  Scott.  I  suppose  I  could  add  the  Lochner  v.  New  York  case 
involving 

Senator  Specter.  What  were  the  facts  in  that  case.  Justice 
Kauffman? 

Mr.  Caputo.  Well,  I  don't  really — you  asked  Mr. 

Senator  Specter.  The  facts  in  Lochner? 

Mr.  Kauffman.  The  facts  in  Lochner?  That  was  where  the — 

Senator  Specter.  You  don't  have  to  answer  that.  [Laughter.] 

Senator  BiDEN.  You  are  not  required  to  answer  the  question. 

Senator  Specter.  I  just  wanted  to  know  if  you  were  listening.  Mr. 
Caputo  was  starting  to  answer  it  for  you. 

Do  you  have  any  compunction  against  the  death  penalty,  Mr. 
Caputo? 

Mr.  Caputo.  No,  sir,  I  do  not. 

Senator  Specter.  What  kind  of  cases  have  you  handled  generally 
in  the  practice  of  law? 

Mr.  Caputo.  I  have  handled  most — all  kinds  of  cases.  My  prac- 
tice has  been  fairly  general. 

Senator  Specter.  Have  you  had  some  criminal  cases? 

Mr.  Caputo.  I  have,  not  many. 

Senator  Specter.  Ever  represented  a  defendant  in  a  capital 
case? 

Mr.  Caputo.  No,  I  have  not. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Why  do  you  want  to  be  a  Federal  judge? 

Mr.  Caputo.  I  think  in  many  respects,  as  Judge  Kauffman  said, 
it  is  something  I  have  wanted  to  do  all  my  life.  I  feel  like  I  have 
trained  for  it  my  entire  career,  and  I  think  I  have  reached  the  point 
of  experience  and  temperament  that  qualifies  me  at  this  point  in 
my  life  to  do  it.  I  think  it  is  one  of  the  highest  callings  we  can  have 
in  our  profession,  and  I  feel  as  though  I  am  ready  and  I  would  like 
to  do  some  public  service  at  this  point  in  my  life. 

I  enjoy  a  reputation  for  competence  and  integrity.  I  am  willing 
to  work  hard  and  I  am  a  good  listener,  and  I  think  that  is  what 
a  judge  has  to  do,  listen  and  decide,  and  I  am  prepared  to  do  that. 


22 

Senator  Specter.  You  heard  my  question  to  Justice  Kauffman, 
and  you  also,  Judge  Lazzara,  about  being  courteous  at  all  times. 
Are  you  ready  to  make  that  commitment  to  this  committee? 

Mr.  Caputo.  Absolutely,  I  am,  sir. 

Senator  Specter.  Senator  Kohl. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  KOHL 

Senator  KOHL.  Just  one  question.  I  noticed  that  no  one  this 
morning  mentioned  among  the  most  important  Supreme  Court  de- 
cisions Roe  V.  Wade.  Do  you  have  a  comment  on  that? 

Mr.  Caputo.  I  really  can't  comment  on  that  in  any  way  except 
that  it  is  the  law  and,  if  called  upon,  I  would  follow  it. 

Senator  KOHL.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Specter.  Senator  Biden. 

Senator  Biden.  I  want  a  commitment,  judge,  that  you  will  be 
particularly  mindful  of  litigants  from  Scranton,  PA.  That  is  my 
hometown.  Scranton  doesn't  get  paid  attention  to  enough.  I  just 
want  you  to  know  that. 

Mr.  Caputo.  Yes,  sir.  You  have  my  commitment. 

Senator  Biden.  All  right,  good.  Just  so  long  as  they  are  treated 
fairly,  I  have  no  question. 

I  suspect  the  reason  why  none  of  you  mentioned  Roe,  although 
all  of  you  probably  in  your  hearts  know  it  is  probably  one  of  the 
most  significant  decisions,  whether  you  agreed  with  it  or  not,  is  be- 
cause you  have  all  been  attuned  to  make  sure  not  to  mention  Roe 
because  you  know  that  is  a  flash  point,  the  one  thing  that  will  get 
everyone's  interest.  I  kind  of  wish  one  of  you  had,  but  I  think  that 
is  the  reason.  You  have  all  had  significant  legal  experience,  and  so 
I  am  sure  your  good  judgment  and  wisdom  prevailed  upon  you  not 
to  suggest  Roe  as  one  of  the  decisions.  At  any  rate,  a  wise  decision, 
I  might  add. 

I  thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you.  Senator  Biden. 

Thank  you  all. 

At  this  point  we  will  place  into  the  record  a  statement  submitted 
by  Senator  Santorum. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Santorum  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Hon.  Rick  Santorum,  a  U.S.  Senator  From  the  State 

OF  Pennsylvania 

Mr.  Chairman,  thank  you  for  accepting  this  testimony  in  strong  support  of  the 
nominations  of  Judge  Marjorie  Rendell,  Justice  Bruce  Kauffman,  and  Mr.  Richard 
Caputo,  who  are  appearing  before  you  today. 

I  regret  that  I  will  be  unable  to  appear  before  the  Committee  today.  A  family  com- 
mitment in  Pittsburgh  will  keep  me  in  Pennsylvania  throughout  the  day.  Nonethe- 
less, I  wish  to  provide  for  the  record  this  statement  as  a  means  of  expressing  my 
support  for  these  nominees. 

Judge  Rendell  has  an  impressive  record  of  service  on  the  bench  of  the  U.S.  Dis- 
trict Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania.  Having  had  the  opportunity  to 
review  many  of  her  rulings,  I  am  confident  that  the  Third  Circuit  will  benefit  from 
her  skills  and  experience.  Further,  her  rulings  reflect  a  well  grounded,  common 
sense  understanding  of  the  law  and  the  adjudicatory  role  of  judges.  For  instance, 
in  United  States  v.  Roberson,  1995  WL  314714  (E.D.  Pa.,  May  17,  1995),  Judge 
Rendell  rightly  held  that  evidence  of  drug  dealing  was  admissible  because  the  police 
had  probable  cause  to  stop  the  defendant  after  receiving  a  call  regarding  the  defend- 
ant selling  drugs. 

The  Committee  should  also  take  note  of  Judge  Rendell's  active  involvement  in 
many  charitable  and  nonprofit  organizations  throughout  southeastern  Pennsylvania. 


23 

Whether  it  is  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  the  Visiting  Nurse  Association,  or 
Philadelphia's  Avenue  of  the  Arts,  her  volunteer  efforts  have  contributed  to  the 
quality  of  life  in  our  Commonwealth  for  over  twenty  years.  I  believe  this  work  re- 
flects her  deep  commitment  to  the  people  whom  her  decisions  on  the  bench  will  af- 
fect. 

Justice  Kauffman  has  practiced  law  in  Philadelphia  for  over  thirty-five  years.  He 
has  provided  the  committee  with  extensive  information  on  his  rich  and  varied  expe- 
riences before  numerous  courts  in  the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania.  In  reviewing 
his  background,  I  noted  his  determination  and  effective  representation  of  the  City 
of  Philadelphia  and  others  in  attempting  to  keep  the  Philadelphia  Naval  Shipyard 
open.  Such  pro  bono  work  indicates  Justice  Kauffman's  dedication  to  the  law  and 
interest  in  the  well  being  of  the  people  of  southeastern  Pennsylvania. 

As  you  know,  Justice  Kauffman  has  also  served  as  a  Justice  on  the  Supreme 
Court  of  Pennsylvania.  I  have  had  the  opportunity  to  review  many  of  his  rulings. 
His  work  clearly  reflects  a  deep  understanding  of  the  many  demands  faced  by  one 
serving  on  a  judicial  bench.  I  am  confident  that  the  Committee  will  agree  that  the 
Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania  will  greatly  benefit  from  Justice  Kauffman's  intel- 
lect, character,  and  experience. 

As  with  the  other  nominees,  Mr.  Richaird  Caputo  will  bring  a  wealth  of  experience 
to  the  federal  bench.  For  over  thirty  years,  Mr.  Caputo  has  practiced  law  in  a  wide 
range  of  fields,  including  Special  Courts-martial  in  the  Air  Force,  state  and  federal 
criminal  trials,  and  extensive  civil  litigation.  I  believe  the  Committee  should  take 
special  note  of  Mr.  Caputo's  contributions  as  a  public  servant.  I  include  in  this  de- 
scription both  his  service  in  the  United  States  Air  Force  and  his  work  as  a  public 
defender  for  Luzerne  County,  Pennsylvania.  His  interest  in  returning  to  such  serv- 
ice as  a  judge  for  the  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania 
reflects  his  deep  commitment  to  the  people  of  our  Commonwealth. 

Mr.  Caputo's  experiences  have  shaped  a  career  uniquely  suited  for  future  work 
on  the  federal  bench.  For  instance,  in  Commonwealth  of  PA  v.  Chas.  S.  Grucella, 
Criminal  No.  1343  of  1967,  (Luzerne  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas),  58  Luz. L.Reg. 
137,  59  D&C  2d  610  (1967),  Mr.  Caputo  argued  that  former  Public  Defenders  who 
later  worked  for  the  District  Attorney  should  be  precluded  from  prosecuting  defend- 
ants who  were  former  clients.  I  believe  this  experience  provided  Mr.  Caputo  with 
a  deep  appreciation  for  prosecutorial  powers,  the  balance  of  powers,  the  appearance 
of  conflict  of  interest,  and  the  public  interest  as  a  whole.  Bringing  this  appreciation 
to  the  federal  bench  will  enhance  the  already  high  reputation  of  the  Middle  District 
of  Pennsylvania. 

Mr.  Chairman,  thank  you  again  for  accepting  this  statement.  I  look  forward  to 
aiding  the  Committee  as  it  reviews  these  nominations,  and  I  expect  to  ultimately 
see  these  nominations  pass  overwhelmingly  before  the  full  Senate. 

Senator  Specter.  These  hearings  are  not  as  elongated  as  people 
might  suppose.  I  know  when  nominees  come,  they  are  concerned, 
as  is  obvious.  There  has  been  a  very  thorough  investigation.  Sen- 
ator Santorum  and  I  have  a  judicial  nominating  commission  which 
has  gone  over  the  records  in  detail,  and  then  there  is  an  American 
Bar  Association  review  and  there  is  an  FBI  review.  There  has  been 
a  lot  of  examination. 

Unless  it  is  a  Supreme  Court  nomination  or  a  contested  nomina- 
tion for  some  reason,  these  hearings  do  not  draw  many  of  the  Sen- 
ators. And  we  try  not  to  have  them  pro  forma,  but  you  have  al- 
ready submitted  answers  to  many,  many  questions  which  have 
been  reviewed  in  great  detail.  So  it  ought  to  be  said  briefly  that 
there  has  been  a  very  thorough  examination  of  your  records  and 
qualifications. 

You  undertake  an  enormously  important  job,  and  my  view  is  that 
the  third  branch  of  Government — ^you  are  article  III  in  the  Con- 
stitution, but  the  Federal  judiciary  changed  that  in  Marbury  v. 
Madison  and  you  are  now  No.  1.  You  are  independent,  you  are  in- 
defatigable, and  you  render  decisions  which  have  really  been  the 
pillar  of  America,  in  my  opinion. 

We  are  constrained  here  and  at  the  White  House  by  many,  many 
considerations.  You  take  up  these  cases,  and  you  take  them  up  one 


24 

by  one  and  give  a  kind  of  hearing  and  airing.  The  Federal  judiciary 
is  the  cornerstone  of  our  society,  in  my  opinion.  You  have  a  very, 
very  heavy  responsibiUty,  and  be  courteous. 

Thank  you.  That  concludes  our  hearing. 

[Whereupon,  at  9:57  a.m.,  the  committee  was  adjourned.] 

[Submissions  for  the  record  follow:] 


25 
SUBMISSIONS  FOR  THE  RECORD 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE 

I.   BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

1.  Full  name:  (include  any  former  names  used) . 

Marjorie  0.  Rendell  (nee  Marjorie  May  Osterlund) 

2.  Address :     List   current   place   of   residence   and   office 
address (es) . 


Chambers:  United  States  District  Court 
601  Market  Street,  Room  3114 
Philadelphia,  PA  19106 

3 .  Date  and  place  of  birth. 

December  20,  1947 
Wilmington,  DE 

4.  Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's 
name)  .  List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and  business 
address (es)  . 

Spouse:        Hon.  Edward  G.  Rendell 

Mayor,  City  of  Philadelphia 
215  City  Hall 
Philadelphia,  PA   19107 

5.  Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have 
attended,  including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees  received,  and 
dates  degrees  were  granted. 

University  of  Pennsylvania  (9/65  -  5/69) 
B.A.,  1969 

Dean's  List 

Graduated  cum  laude 

Georgetown  University  Law  Center  (9/70  -  5/71) 
1970-71  (transferred  to  Villanova  upon  marriage) 

Invited  to  join  Law  Journal   and  Criminal   Law 
Review;  declined  due  to  transfer  to  Villanova 

Villanova  School  of  Law  (9/71  -  5/73) 
J.D.,  1973 


26 


Employment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or 
professional  corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other 
enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations, 
nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were 
connected  as  an  officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor,  or 
employee  since  graduation  from  college. 

Employment 

1969-1970    University  of  Pennsylvania 
3451  Walnut  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA  19104 
Annual  Giving  -  Development  Department 
(Fundraising) 

1972-1994     Duane,  Morris  &  Heckscher 

Summer  1972  -    Summer  clerk 
1972-1973    -    Part-time 
1973-1981    -    Full-time  associate 
1981-1994    -    Partner 

1994 -present  United  States  District  Court 
601  Market  Street,  Room  3114 
Philadelphia,  PA  19106 


Other  (Boards) 
1973-1978 


Philadelphia  Bar  Association 

Board  of  Directors,  Young  Lawyers 
Section 


Late  1970s- 
1994 


1978-1994 


University  of  Pennsylvania 
(various  advisory  boards) 

Visiting  Nurse  Association 
of  Greater  Philadelphia 
Visiting  Nurse  Society 


Late  1980s- 
1994 


1992-1994 


East  Falls  Advisory  Board  of 

Chestnut  Hill  National  Bank 
Pennsylvania's  Campaign  for  Choice 

Academy  of  Vocal  Arts 

Market  Street  East  Improvement  Association 
Philadelphia  Bar  Foundation 
Philadelphia  Friends  of  Outward  Bound 


1992-Present    Avenue  of  the  Arts,  Inc.  (Vice-Chair) 


SomU  Judidary 


27 


1995-Present    University  of  Pennsylvania 
{Board  of  Trustees) 
University  of  Pennsylvania  College  of 
Arts  and  Sciences 
(Board  of  Overseers) 


♦NOTE:  I  resigned  from  most  of  the  above  boards  upon  assuming 
the  bench.  I  presently  serve  only  on  the  boards  of 
trustees  of  Avenue  of  the  Arts,  Inc.  and  the  University 
of  Pennsylvania,  and  on  the  Board  of  Overseers  of  the 
College  of  Arts  and  Sciences. 

7.  Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service:  If  so, 
give  particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank 
or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 

No  military  service. 

8.  Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships, 
honorary  degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you 
believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

Phi  Beta  Kappa 

Philadelphia  College  of  Textile  and  Science 

Doctor  of  Laws  -  Honorary  Degree  awarded  in  May  1992 

Fellow,  American  College  of  Bankruptcy,  1996 

9.  Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or 
judicial -related  committees  or  conferences  of  which  you  are  or 
have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of  any 
offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

American  Bar  Association* 
Pennsylvania  Bar  Association* 
Philadelphia  Bar  Association* 

(Board  of  Directors,  Young  Lawyers  Section,  1973-78) 
American  Bankruptcy  Institute* 

Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania  Bankruptcy  Conference* 
Philadelphia  Bar  Foundation  (board  member,  1992-94)* 
Alternative  Dispute  Resolution  Committee 

of  the  Eastern  District  Bankruptcy  Conference 

Mediation  Division* 
The  Historical  Society  of  the  United  States  District 

Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania 
Federal  Judges  Association 
American  Judicature  Society 
National  Association  of  Women  Judges 
American  College  of  Bankruptcy 

*  formerly 


ScnHte  JudklHf7  -   3   - 


28 


10.  other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong 
that  are  active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies.  Please  list 
all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

Organizations  active  in  lobbying:   None. 

Other  organizations: 

Board  Memberships 

Avenue  of  the  Arts,  Inc.  (Vice-Chair) 
University  of ' Pennsylvania 

Board  of  Trustees 

Board  of  Overseers 

of  College  of  Arts  and  Sciences 

Women's  Associations 

International  Women's  Forum 
University  of  Pennsylvania 

Trustees'  Council  of  Penn  Women 

Other 

Vesper  New  Years  Association  -  Vesper  Club  (eating  club) ; 
copy  of  by-laws  provided  herewith. 

11.  Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been 
admitted  to  practice  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any 
such  memberships  lapsed.  Please  explain  the  reason  for  any 
lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same  information  for 
administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission  to 
practice. 

Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania  (11/15/73) 
U.S.  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Third  Circuit  (4/27/78) 
U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District 
of  Pennsylvania  (3/18/75) 

12.  Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of 
books,  articles,  reports,  or  other  published  material  you  have 
written  or  edited.  Please  supply  one  copy  of  all  published 
material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.  Also,  please 
supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving 
constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.  If  there  were  press 
reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to 
you,  please  supply  them. 

Published  Writings: 

Contributing  author  of  seminar  materials  published  in 
connection  with  above-mentioned  annual  seminar 
presentations;  drafted  sections  on  Secured  Creditor 


29 


claims  and  Adequate  Protection  in  all  editions.  The  most 
recent  editions  are: 

Developments  in  Reorganization  and  Commercial 
Finance  Law  --  1990  and  1991  (Ninth  Annual  Seminar) 
(305  pps.) 

Duane,  Morris  &  Heckscher 
Reorganization  and  Finance  Section 
Copyright  1991  Duane,  Morris  &  Heckscher 

Developments   in   Bankruptcy   Reorganization   and 

Finance  Law:  1989;  A  1990  Annual  (Eighth  Annual 

Seminar)  (249  pps.) 

Duane,  Morris  &  Heckscher 

Copyright  1990  Aspen  Publishers,  Inc. 

Developments   in   Reorganization   and   Commercial 
Finance  Law   --   1988   and  1989   (Seventh  Annual 
Seminar)  (181  pps.) 
Duane,  Morris  &  Heckscher 
Reorganization  and  Finance  Section 
Copyright  1989  Duane,  Morris  &  Heckscher 

Speeches  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal 
policy 

11/29/95  -  Villanova  University  School  of  Law 
Nineteenth  Annual  Donald  A.  Giannella  Memorial 
Lecture.  Published  in  Villanova  Law  Review-. 
Honorable  Marjorie  0.  Rendell,  "What  is  the  Role  of 
the  Judge  in  Our  Litigious  Society?,"  40  Vill.  L. 
Rev.  1115  (1995)  . 

Copies  of  each  of  the  foregoing  published  writings  have  been 
provided  herewith. 

13.  Health:  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the 
date  of  your  last  physical  examination. 

Excellent;  12/15/95. 

14.  Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices 
you  have  held,  whether  such  position  was  elected  or  appointed, 
and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each  such  court. 

Judge,  United  States  District  Court 

for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania 
Appointed  by  President  Clinton  on  February  11,  1994 

Jurisdiction:    Complete  original  federal  civil  and 
criminal  jurisdiction. 


30 


15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide 
(1)  citations  for  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you  have 

written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or  where 
your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your 
substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3)  citations  for 
significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional 
issues,  together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings 
on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were  not 
officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

(1)  See  attached  Exhibit  A. 

(2)  My  decision  in  United  States  v.  Roberson.  1995  WL 
314714  (E.D.  Pa.,  May  17,  1995),  rev'd  90  F.3d  75 
(3d  Cir.  1996) ,  was  reversed  by  the  United  States 
Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Third  Circuit.  I  had 
refused  to  suppress  evidence  obtained  by  the  police 
as  a  result  of  a  call  radioed  to  the  police 
regarding  an  individual  selling  drugs  at  a  certain 
location.  The  Third  Circuit  reversed  the 
conviction,  finding  that  the  informant  lacked 
reliability,  detracting  from  the  probable  cause 
necessary  for  a  stop  of  the  defendant. 

(3)  U.S.  V.  Tidwell  (94-CR-353);  12/22/95. 
Copy  of  opinion  provided  herewith. 

16.  Public  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you 
have  held,  other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of 
service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected  or  appointed. 
State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies  for 
elective  public  office. 

Committeewoman  for  the  Republican  Party, 
30th  Ward,  20th  Division,  from  1972-1976. 
Elected  position. 

17.  Legal  career: 

a.    Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience 
after  graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so, 
the  name  of  the  judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of 
the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

No  clerkship. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the 
addresses  and  dates; 

No  solo  practice. 


■^ 


31 


3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or 
offices,  companies  or  governmental  agencies  with 
which  you  have  been  connected,  and  the  nature  of 
your  connection  with  each; 

I  began  at  the  law  firm  of  Duane,  Morris  & 
Heckscher  as  a  summer  clerk  in  1972;  upon 
graduation  I  became  an  associate,  and  in  1981,  a 
partner.  I  left  Duane,  Morris  &  Heckscher  to 
assume  my  current  position  as  judge  of  the  U.S. 
District  Court.   The  firm's  address  is: 

Duane,  Morris  &  Heckscher 
4200  One  Liberty  Place 
Philadelphia,  PA   19103-7396 

b.  1.  What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law 
practice,  dividing  it  into  periods  with  dates  if 
its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 

I  spent  20  years  litigating  and  negotiating 
financial  and  legal  interests  in  the  area  of 
creditors'  rights  and  commercial  litigation  in  and 
out  of  state  courts,  federal  district  courts,  and 
especially  in  the  various  United  States  bankruptcy 
courts . 

2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention 
the  areas,  if  any,  in  which  you  have  specialized. 

My  clients  included  individual  debtors  and 
creditors,  small  to  medium-size  corporations  and 
partnerships,  and  banks  and  insurance  companies  of 
local  and  national  stature,  with  the  subject  matter 
ranging  from  a  chapter  13  restructuring  of  an 
individual  wage  earner  to  complex  restructuring  of 
major  companies.  In  the  course  of  representing 
these  clients,  I  litigated  many  issues,  many  of 
which  were  adversary  proceedings  in  bankruptcy 
court  or  contract  claims  in  state  or  federal  trial 
courts.  While  my  practice  was  varied,  I 
specialized  in  representing  secured  creditors, 
primarily  banks  and  insurance  companies,  whose 
borrowers  found  themselves  in  financial  distress. 
As  a  result,  I  specialized  in,  and  litigated,  all 
areas  of  secured  creditors'  rights,  including  but 
not  limited  to:  perfection  of  security  interests, 
exercise  of  remedies  in  satisfaction  of  judgments, 
rights  of  secured  creditors  under  bankruptcy  and 
chapter  11  provisions,  including  rights  under,  and 
treatment  under,  plans  of  reorganization,  lender 
liability,  as  well  as  preference  and  fraudulent 
conveyance   issues.     Other   significant   legal 


-7 


32 


activities  included  extensive  negotiation  of  rights 
of  various  parties  in  contract  disputes  and  in 
formal  creditor  workouts  and  chapter  H 
proceedings,  including  negotiation  of  complex 
restructurings  on  behalf  of  bank  groups  and 
subordinated  debenture  holders . 

1.  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently, 
occasionally,  or  not  at  all?  If  the  frequency 
of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe 
each  such  variance,  giving  dates. 

In  examining  the  records  of  my  practice  since 
1988,  I  found  that  the  number  of  court 
appearances  changed  radically  in  1992  and 
1993.  My  husband  became  Mayor  of  the  City  of 
Philadelphia  in  January  of  1992,  and  I 
delegated  many  of  the  court  appearances  on  my 
cases  to  others.  Also  during  1992,  my  primary 
focus  was  on  two  major  cases,  both  of  which 
involved  out-of-court  restructurings  of 
amounts  in  excess  of  $100  million  in 
indebtedness;  the  firm  represented,  in  one 
case,  the  bank  group,  and  in  the  other,  the 
subordinated  debenture  group.  Also,  during 
this  time  period,  my  department  of  the  firm 
(the  Reorganization  Section)  delegated  much  of 
the  commercial  litigation  to  a  special  group 
of  attorneys  in  our  Litigation  Department  who 
routinely  did  this  work  with  and  for  our 
section's  attorneys.  During  the  prior  four 
years,  namely,  from  1988  through  1991,  I 
appeared  regularly  in  court  in  amy  given  year 
on  matters  in  which  the  firm  represented  the 
major  secured  creditor  of  a  con^euiy  in 
chapter  11.  There  were  probably  five  to  ten 
such  cases  in  any  given  year.  Also  during 
this  time  period,  I  represented  the  trustee  in 
a  chapter  11  proceeding  and  appeared  regularly 
in  at  least  two  complex  chapter  11  proceedings 
in  which  the  firm  represented  different 
classes  of  indebtedness.  I  believe  that 
during  1988  through  1991,  I  appeared  in  court 
anywhere  from  three  to  eight  days  per  month. 

Court  appearances  were  more  frequent  during 
the  period  from  1980  through  1988 .  More  of 
the  cases  which  I  handled  involved  individual 
secured  creditor  rights,  rather  than  complex 
cases,  and  matters  such  as  the  right  of  the 
secured  creditor  to  take  back  the  collateral 
pursuant  to  a  hearing  for  relief  from  the  stay 
were   tried  to  conclusion   frequently.     I 


33 


appeared  in  court  very  regularly,  perhaps  as 
many  as  two  to  three  days  per  week. 

What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  Federal  courts. 

Most  appearances  were  in  federal  courts. 
(95-100%) 

(b)  State  courts  of  record. 

Seldom  (0-5%) ;  appeared  only  in 
connection  with  execution  on  or 
enforcement  of  judgments,  or  opening  of 
judgment  proceedings. 

(c)  Other  courts. 
0% 

What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  Civil. 
100%. 

(b)  Criminal. 
0%. 


State  the  number  of  cases  you  tried  to  verdict 
or  judgment  (rather  than  settled)  in  courts  of 
record,  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

My  experience  prior  to  assuming  the  bench  was 
primarily  in  the  bankruptcy  courts  in  which  a 
chapter  11  case  was  pending.  Many  contested 
matters  and  adversary  proceedings  are  brought 
before  the  court  by  way  of  complaint  or 
motion,  heard  by  the  court  without  a  jury, 
following  the  Federal  Rules  of  Civil  Procedure 
(made  applicable  by  the  Federal  Rules  of 
Bankruptcy  Procedure) ,  as  well  as  the  Federal 
Rules  of  Evidence,  usually  in  hearings  lasting 
from  one  to  three  days.  It  is  difficult  to 
state  "cases"  that  were  "tried  to  verdict  or 
judgment"  because,  in  each  instance,  the 
matters  involved  hearings  on  fraudulent 
conveyances,   relief   from   stay,   preference 


ScnHte  Judiciary 


34 


actions,  motions  to  dismiss,  and  the  like. 
Many  of  these  were  tried  to  conclusion,  but 
not  all  led  to  the  end  of  the  case  or  total 
resolution  of  a  matter.  I  handled  my  own 
cases  and,  except  in  a  few  instances  in  which 
I  was  assisted  by  an  associate,  I  have  been 
the  sole  and  chief  counsel  in  matters  I  have 
handled.  I  have  appeared  in  and  litigated 
more  than  35  bankruptcy  matters. 

5 .   What  percentage  of  these  trials  was : 

( a )  Jury . 
0%. 

(b)  Non-jury. 
100%. 

18.  Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated 
matters  which  you  personally  handled.  Give  the  citations,  if 
the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and  date  if 
unreported,  give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of  each 
case.  Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you  represented; 
describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  the 
litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.  Also  state 
as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges 
before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of 
co-counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other 
parties . 

See  attached  Exhibit  B. 

19.  Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  sicpiificant  legal 
activities  you  have  pursued,  including  significant  litigation 
which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did  not 
involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation 
in  this  question.  Please  omit  any  information  protected  by 
the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the  privilege  has  been 
waived. ) 

In  1975  I  joined  with  a  then-partner,  David  Sykes, 
to  form  a  bankruptcy  practice  of  two  attorneys  in 
our  firm  (then  approximately  50  attorneys) ,  and 
started  working  for  a  new  bank  client.  At  the  time 
that  I  left  the  firm,  that  client  was  one  of  the 
firm's  major  clients  (perhaps  second  or  third  in 
overall  annual  billings) .  I  was  active  in 
representing  that  bank,  primarily  as  a  secured 


10- 


35 


creditor  in  workout  and  bankruptcy  matters,  for  18 
years  in  matters  involving  anywhere  from  $300,000 
to  $80,000,000  in  debt.  During  that  time  the  firm 
grew  to  205  attorneys,  the  reorganization  section 
to  22  attorneys,  and  the  client  grew  from  a  small 
bank  in  a  community  outside  of  Philadelphia  to  a 
major  banking  force  in  Philadelphia.  I  consulted 
actively  with  this  client  on  complex  strategic 
matters  involving  potential  lender  liability  claims 
and  commercial  litigation,  and  I  was  one  of  their 
primary  attorneys  of  choice  on  difficult  issues 
which  required  special  legal  and  perceptive  skills 
in  situations  involving  borrowers,  participating 
banks,  or  parties  with  whom  they  have  sophisticated 
commercial  relationships. 

At  the  same  time,  I  represented  other  single-entity  clients, 
banks,  insurance  companies,  debtors,  etc.,  in  bankruptcy 
matters  and  commercial  litigation. 

From  about  1985,  my  practice  expanded  to  include 
representation  of  debtors,  large  creditors  or  classes  of 
creditors  in  major  national  restructurings  or  chapter 
proceedings  in,  for  example,  Indianapolis,  Denver,  Pittsburgh, 
Boston,  and  St.  Louis.  Many  of  these  matters  involved  intense 
negotiations  over  claims  and  issues  relating  thereto, 
including  fraudulent  conveyances,  issues  of  absolute  priority, 
rights  to  payments  under  a  plan,  and  plan  confirmation.  Many 
of  these  matters  have  been  in,  or  in  the  context  of,  a  chapter 
11  case  but  resulted  in  amicable  resolution  of  the  claims  or 
the  matter  generally.   Such  matters  include: 

Sudbury,  Inc.  (subordinated  debt  holders) 
Allegheny  International  (subordinated  debt  holder) 
Early  &  Daniel,  Inc.  (railcar  lessors) 
The  Carlson  Group,  Inc.  (debtor) 
Apex  Oil,  Inc.  (single  creditor) 
Frontier  Airlines  (aircraft  lessor) 

I  worked  on  such  matters  either  as  lead  partner  or,  in  the 
larger  matters,  alternating  with  another  partner  on  the  case. 

In  all  of  the  above  instances,  my  representation  involved 
analysis  of  the  client's  legal  position  and  its  relationship 
to  the  positions  of  others,  identification  of  issues  which 
enhanced  or  detracted  from  each  position,  plotting  a  course  -- 
whether  litigation  or  negotiation  or  a  combination  of  both  -- 
to  accomplish  the  client's  goals,  and  pursuing  that  course, 
while  making  any  necessary  adjustments  based  on  changing 
circumstances.  My  approach  has  been  active  rather  than 
reactive.  The  major  "activity"  outside  of  litigation  has  been 
effectively  communicating  --  usually  orally  --to  clients  and 
adversaries  the  relative  positions  of  the  parties,  negotiating 


-  11 


36 


to  achieve  goals,  and  documenting  the  result,  whether  a  loan 
restructure,  a  stipulation,  an  agreement  or  a  consensual  plan. 

From  1973  to  1978  I  served  on  the  board  of  the  Young  Lawyers' 
Section  of  the  Philadelphia  Bar  Association.  For  about  two 
years  prior  to  my  assuming  the  bench,  I  was  an  active  member 
of  the  board  of  the  Philadelphia  Bar  Foundation  (the 
charitable  arm  of  the  Philadelphia  Bar  Association  which  funds 
several  programs  providing  legal  aid  to  the  indigent) .  In 
addition,  I  served  as  a  Mediator  for  the  U.S.  District  Court 
for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania,  and  was  a  member  of 
the  Bar  Alternative  Dispute  Resolution  Committee  developing  a 
mediation  process  for  the  U.S.  Bankruptcy  Court  for  the 
Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania. 

As  a  district  court  judge  I  have  served  on  our  court's 
Bankruptcy  Committee  and  Arbitration  Committee,  and  have  been 
active  in  the  Federal  Judges  Association  Congressional  Liaison 
Committee,  serving  as  coordinator  for  our  Circuit. 

II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

1.  List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts 
from  deferred  income  arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted 
contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which  you  expect  to  derive 
from  previous  business  relationships,  professional  services, 
firm  memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers. 
Please  describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be 
compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or  business 
interests . 

None.  When  I  left  my  former  firm  to  assume  the  bench, 
all  pension  funds  were  rolled  over;  I  have  no  assets  in 
the  firm's  plans  or  funds.  I  have  ongoing  interests  in 
IRAs  and  pension  funds  reflected  as  part  of  assets  listed 
on  the  attached  Net  Worth  Statement . 

2.  Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of 
interest,  including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in 
determining  these  areas  of  concern.  Identify  the  categories 
of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to 
present  potential  conflicts-of- interest  during  your  initial 
service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

I  will  continue  to  recuse  myself  from  any  cases 
involving:  Duane,  Morris  &  Heckscher  (my  former  law 
firm);  Meridian  Bancorp,  Inc.  (former  client);  First 
Fidelity  Bank  (former  client) ;  the  Visiting  Nurse 
Association  of  Greater  Philadelphia  (I  am  a  former  board 
member);  University  of  Pennsylvania  (I  am  an  alumna  and 
board  member);  City  of  Philadelphia  (my  spouse's 
employer);  and  any  entity  in  which  I  have  a  "financial 
interest"  pursuant  to  28  U.S.C.  §  455.   I  have  adopted  a 


12- 


37 


standing  Order  and  waiver  of  disqualification  procedure 
regarding  parties  and  counsel  who  contributed  to  the  1994 
mayoral  campaign  in  which  my  husband  was  the  successful 
candidate.  I  will  follow  the  dictates  of  28  U.S.C.  §  455 
as  to  disqualification  due  to  a  conflict  regarding  any 
other  matters  or  interest. 

3.  Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue 
outside  employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your 
service  with  the  court?   If  so,  explain. 

No. 

4 .  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the 
calendar  year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current 
calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees,  dividends, 
interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and 
other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more.  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so, 
copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report,  required  by  the 
Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  attached  Financial  Disclosure  Report  (Exhibit  C) . 

5.  Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in 
detail  (add  schedules  as  called  for) . 

See  attached  Exhibit  D. 

6.  Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political 
campaign?  If  so,  please  identify  the  particulars  of  the 
campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the  campaign,  your 
title  and  responsibilities. 

Prior  to  my  nomination  in  November  of  1993  for  my  current 
judgeship  on  the  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Eastern 
District  of  Pennsylvania,  I  made  public  appearances  with 
or  for  my  husband  during  various  campaigns  in  which  he 
was  a  candidate  for  public  office:  for  Philadelphia 
District  Attorney  in  1977  and  1981;  a  primary  campaign 
for  Governor  of  Pennsylvania  in  1986;  a  primary  campaign 
for  Mayor  of  Philadelphia;  and  a  primary  and  general 
election  for  Mayor  in  1991.  I  had  no  title  or 
responsibility.  Since  my  nomination  and  induction,  I 
have  scrupulously  avoided  all  political  activities. 

III.   GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

1.  An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar 
Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for 
"every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence  or 
professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in 
serving  the  disadvantaged."   Describe  what  you  have  done  to 


.Senate  Judidary  -    1 3   - 


38 


fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances  and 
the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

My  efforts  on  behalf  of  the  disadvantaged  have  been 
through  my  service  to  several  charitable  organizations, 
on  whose  boards  I  served  until  my  judgeship  appointment 
was  confirmed.  My  primary  efforts  on  behalf  of  the 
disadvantaged  were  through  the  Visiting  Nurse  Association 
of  Greater  Philadelphia;  I  served  on  its  board  and  headed 
many  of  its  committees  for  approximately  15  years.  The 
VNA  is  the  only  non-profit  home  care  entity  which 
provides  services  to  the  indigent  in  the  Philadelphia 
area,  and  in  working  with  VNA,  I  was  personally  involved 
in  fundraising  and  other  efforts  for  the  poor  and 
indigent  of  Philadelphia.  I  dedicated  an  average  of 
10-15  hours  per  month  to  VNA-related  activities.  For  two 
years  prior  to  assuming  the  bench  I  was  also  an  active 
member  of  the  board  of  the  Philadelphia  Bar  Foundation, 
the  charitable  arm  of  the  Philadelphia  Bar  Association. 
I  also  dedicated  considerable  time,  generally  an 
additional  15  hours  per  month,  to  active  service  on  the 
boards  of  civic  and  cultural  organizations  such  as  the 
Market  Street  East  Improvement  Association,  and  Avenue  of 
the  Arts,  Inc.,  and  the  University  of  Pennsylvania. 

2.  The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of 
Judicial  Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge 
to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that  invidiously 
discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you 
currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization 
which  discriminaces  --  through  either  formal  membership 
requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership 
policies?  If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.  What  have 
you  done  to  try  to  change  these  policies? 

No. 

3.  Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to 
recommend  candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If 
so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?  Please  describe  your 
experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from 
beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led  to 
your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you  participated) . 

Not  applicable;  there  is  no  such  commission  for  Court  of 
Appeals  positions.  I  did,  however,  have  several 
discussions  with  representatives  of  the  White  House 
Counsel's  office,  the  Department  of  Justice,  the  ABA,  and 
the  FBI. 

4.  Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a 
judicial  nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal 
issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be 


-  14 


39 


interpreted  as  asking  how  your  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue, 
or  question?   If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

No. 

5.    Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving 
"judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  federal  judiciary  within  the  federal 
government,  and  within  society  generally,  has  become  the 
subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.  It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism 
that  alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of 
the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of 
government . 

I  believe  that  the  role  of  the  judiciary  is  to  be  the 
interpreter  and  enforcer  of  existing  law.  In  the  process 
of  such  interpretation  and  enforcement,  the  judiciary 
should  call  upon  judicial  precedent,  as  well  as  examine 
the  intention  of  those  drafting  relevant  legislation,  in 
determining  the  scope  and  bounds  of  its  decision-making 
authority.  While  it  is  tempting  for  the  judiciary  to 
read  expansions  into  the  law,  rather  than  await  action  of 
the  legislative  branch  to  do  so,  this  temptation  should 
be  resisted  by  the  judiciary  in  fulfilling  its  proper 
role. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have 
been  said  to  include: 

With  respect  to  the  "characteristics"  noted,  I  would 
comment : 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem- solution 
rather  than  grievance -resolution  ,- 

A  judge  should  resolve  the  matter  before  him  or 
her,  addressing  only  issues  at  hand.  While  it  may 
be  the  case  that  the  resolution  of  the  issue  at 
hand  does,  and  will,  have  broader  implications  for 
society  at  large,  the  judge  should  not  attempt  to 
solve  problems  or  seek  solutions  broader  than 
necessary  to  resolve  the  instant  matter. 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual 
plaintiff  as  a  vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching 
orders  extending  to  broad  classes  of  individuals . 


-  15- 


40 


Again,  a  judge  should  provide  only  the  relief 
necessary  to  address  the  claims  of  litigants  before 
him  or  her.  The  judiciary  should  not  seek  out 
controversies,  nor  address  controversies  not 
immediately  presented. 

A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative 
duties  upon  governments  and  society; 

In  certain  limited  instances,  whether  pursuant  to 
mandamus  or  injunctive  powers,  the  judiciary  is 
called  upon  to  impose  affirmative  duties  upon 
governments  and  society  where  the  wrong 
specifically  to  be  remedied  (that  is,  the  issue 
before  the  court)  requires  it.  However,  such  power 
should  be  exercised  with  great  caution,  and  the 
imposition  of  duties  in  such  instances  should  be 
narrowly  drawn  to  address  the  issue  at  hand, 
leaving  the  actual  application  and  implementation 
to  other  branches,  to  the  extent  possible.  Also, 
in  order  to  resolve  conflicts  in  such  situations, 
orders  entered  imposing  such  duties  must  be  clearly 
and  narrowly  stated  so  as  to  avoid  further 
litigation  with  respect  to  the  nature  and  extent  of 
the  power  of  the  judiciary. 

A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening 
jurisdictional  requirements  such  as  standing  and 
ripeness ;  and 

Jurisdictional  requirements  have  been  set  by  law 
and  interpreted  by  courts.  To  the  extent  that  case 
precedent  adjusts  jurisdictional  standards  and  is 
controlling,  it  must  be  adhered  to.  As  a  district 
court  judge,  I  have  no  authority  or  ability  to 
loosen  such  requirements,  and  I  believe  that  the 
appellate  courts'  actions  in  doing  so  must  be  based 
strictly  upon  legislation  and  its  intent,  informed 
by  the  requirements  of  the  Constitution. 

A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other 
institutions  in  the  manner  of  an  administrator  with 
continuing  oversight  responsibilities. 

I  believe  that  the  judiciary  is  limited  in  its  role 
as  indicated  above.  The  judiciary  is  not  a 
panacea,  an  interpreter  of  society,  or  an  overseer 
in  any  sense  of  the  word.  I  believe  it  is 
inappropriate  for  the  judiciary  to  conduct 
continuing  oversight  except  in  those  limited 
circumstances  where  such  relief  is  both  required  to 


.Saiale  Judidnry  -    1 6  - 


41 


address  the  harm  suffered  and  permitted  by  existina 
precedent .  ^ 


-  17 


42 


INDEX  OF  EXHIBITS 


Exhibit  A  -  Ten  Most  Significant  Opinions 

Exhibit  B  -  Ten  Most  Significant  Litigated  Matters 

Exhibit  C  -  1995  Financial  Disclosure  Report 

Exhibit  D  -  Financial  Net  Worth  Statement 


43 


updated  12/18/96 

EXHIBIT  A 

TEN  MOST  SIGNIFICANT  OPINIONS 


U.S.D.C. 
Date  Case  No.      Case 

09/15/94        92-CV-3310     Resolution  Trust  Corp.  v.  Farmer 

Cite:   865  F.  Supp.  1143  (E.D.  Pa. 
1994) 

11/08/94        93-CV-4547     Britamco  Underwriters,  Inc.  v. 

George  Giouzelis,  Inc. 
Cite:   1994  WL  622109  (E.D.  Pa., 
Nov.  8,  1994),  aff 'd.  65  F.3d  161 
(3d  Cir.  1995) 

12/29/94        93-CV-7027     Mallenbaum  v.  Adelphia  Comm.  Corp. 

Cite:   1994  WL  724981  (E.D.  Pa., 
Dec.  29,  1994),  aff 'd,  74  F.3d  465 
(3d  Cir.  1996) 

08/16/95        93-CV-6729     LeJeune  v.  Bliss-Salem,  Inc. 

Cite:   1995  WL  491253  (E.D.  Pa., 
Aug.  16,  1995),  aff 'd,  85  F.3d  1069 
(3d.  Cir.  1996) 

08/18/95        94-CV-1422     Surace  v.  Caterpillar,  Inc. 

Cite:   1995  WL  495123  (E.D.  Pa., 
Aug.  18,  1995) 

10/05/95       93-CV-3701     Taylor  v.  Sterling  Winthrop 

Cite:   1995  WL  590160  (E.D.  Pa., 
Oct.  5,  1995) 

12/22/95       94-CR-0353     United  States  v.  Tidwell 

Cite:   1995  WL  764077  (E.D.  Pa., 
Dec.  22,  1995) 

3/22/96        94-CV-6906     Simmerman  v.  Hardee's  Food  Systems, 

Inc. 

Cite:   1996  WL  131948  (E.D.  Pa., 
Mar.  22,  1996) 


44 


U.S.D.C. 
Date  Case  No .      Case 

4/1/96         94-CV-1818     Stecyk,  et  al .  v.  Bell  Helicopter 

Textron,  Inc.,  et  al . 
Cite:   1996  WL  153555  (E.D.  Pa., 
Apr.  1,  1996) 

9/9/96         94-CV-3991     Doby,  et  al .  v.  Decrescenzo,  et  al . 

Cite:   1996  WL  510095  (E.D.  Pa., 
Sept.  9,  1996) 


In  September  1995,  I  sat  by  designation  on  an  appellate  panel  of 
the  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Third  Circuit .  The 
members  of  the  panel  were  Chief  Judge  Dolores  K.  Sloviter,  Circuit 
Judge  Samuel  A.  Alito,  Jr.,  and  District  Judge  Marjorie  O.  Rendell 
(sitting  by  designation)  .  I  authored  the  Third  Circuit  opinion  in 
United  States  v.  Brannan.  74  F.3d  448  (3d  Cir.  1996). 


45 

Index  to  Exhibit  B 
TEN  MOST  SIGNIFICANT  LITIGATED  MATTERS 

1.  Bartholomew,  et  al .  v.  Northampton  National  Bank 

2.  In  re  Winslow  Center  Associates 

3.  In  re  Reading  Tube  Corporation 

4.  In  re  Dominica  V.  Civitella 

5 .  In  re  Ram  Manufacturing 

6.  In  re  Center  for  the  Blind 

7.  In  re  Philadelphia  Athletic  Club 

8.  In  re  Bates  Energy  Corp. 

9 .  In  re  Marta  Group 

10.   Schweibert  v.  Schweibert 


46 


EXHIBIT  B 
SIGNIFICANT  LITIGATED  MATTERS 


My  trial  experience  was  gained  primarily,  though  not 
exclusively,  in  the  bankruptcy  court  system,  in  which  the  "case"  is 
a  reorganization  proceeding,  and  adversary  matters,  sometimes 
involving  actual  trials,  are  heard  by  the  court.  I  litigated 
matters  in  the  bankruptcy  courts  locally  and  throughout  the  country 
in  at  least  35  cases.  The  following  are  examples  from  ten  cases  in 
which  matters  raised  by  the  motion  or  complaint  were  litigated  by 
me,  as  sole  trial  counsel,  except  as  noted,  several  of  which 
resulted  in  reported  decisions. 


1 .    Bartholomew,  et  al .  v.  Northampton  National  Bank,  et  al . 
Court  and  docket:   U.S.D.C,  E.D.  Pa.,  No.  74-2948 
Cite:   584  F.2d  1288  (3d  Cir.  1978) 

Summarv 

Suit  by  purchaser  of  a  vacation  lot  against  banks  who  financed 
purchase  on  basis  of  Truth- in-Lending,  Interstate  Land  Sales  Full 
Disclosure  Act,  and  usury  law  violations. 

Client 

One  of  the  defendants,  American  Bank  and  Trust  Co.  of  Pa.  (now 
Meridian  Bank) . 

Issues  Litigated 

Whether:  (i)  financing  of  the  purchase  of  a  vacation  lot  was 
the  loan  or  use  of  money  for  purposes  of  usury  law  violations; 
(ii)  banks  that  finance  a  purchase  of  a  lot  are  liable  for 
violations  of  the  Interstate  Land  Sales  Full  Disclosure  Act;  and 
(iii)  Truth  in  Lending  Act  violations  could  be  asserted  after  one 
year  from  the  date  of  the  land  sale  contract.  I,  together  with 
counsel  for  Merchants  National  Bank,  directed  the  litigation  and 
strategy  on  behalf  of  the  banks  and  was  responsible  for  the 
pleadings  and  briefs  in  the  matter,  especially  on  appeal  to  the 
Third  Circuit . 


(continued) 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  1 


47 


Significance  of  Issues 

The  court  decided  against  the  plaintiff  and  in  favor  of  the 
banks.  Issues  involved  the  interpretation  of  two  relatively  new 
statutes  and  were  of  great  significance  to  banks  and  other  entities 
that  financed  lot  sales  in  vacation  home  developments. 

Judge 

Hon.  John  P.  Fullam,  Judge,  United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania.   (1975) 

Hon.  James  Hunter,  III,  Judge,  United  States  Court  of  Appeals 
for  the  Third  Circuit.   (1978) 


Other  Counsel 

Counsel  for  plaintiffs: 
Edward  C.  Toole,  Jr.,  Esquire 
(215)  241-18184 
Michael  J.  Glasheen,  Esquire 
(215)  241-1821 

Clark,  Ladner,  Fortenbaugh  &  Young 
2005  Market  Street,  21st  Floor 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103 

Counsel  for  defendeint  Merchants  Bank  and  Trust  Co.  of  Pa, 

John  E.  Flaherty,  Jr.,  Esquire 

Dechert,  Price  &  Rhoads 

4000  Bell  Atlantic  Tower 

1717  Arch  Street 

Philadelphia,  PA   19103-2793 

(215)  994-2128 

Counsel  for  Northampton  National  Bank  of  Easton: 
Bernard  S.  Bergman,  Esquire 
(current  address  unknown) 

Counsel  for  William  E.  Brock,  III: 

E.  Parry  Warner,  Esquire 

Obermayer,  Rebmann,  Maxwell  &.   Hippel 

Packard  Building,  14th  Floor  -i':.' 

15th  and  Chestnut  Streets 

Philadelphia,  PA   19102-2188  "■    -     '' 

(215)  665-3226  -'    -' 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  2 


48 


2 .    In  re  Winslow  Center  Associates 

Court  and  Docket:   U.S. B.C.,  E.D.  Pa.,  No.  82-00020G 
Cite:   32  B.R.  685  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1983) 
50  B.R.  679  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1985) 
57  B.R.  317  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1986) 

Summary 

Chapter  11  proceeding  of  New  Jersey  partnership  which  owned  a 
shopping  center. 

Client 

Provident  Mutual  Life  Insurance  Company,  the  mortgagee. 

Issues  Litigated 

(1)  Relief  from  stay  requested  based  upon  erosion  of  secured 
creditor's  equity  cushion.  32  B.R.  685  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1983); 
relief  granted. 

(2)  Rights  of  secured  creditor  to  post-petition  rentals 
recognized  under  title  theory.   50  B.R.  679  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1985) . 

(3)  Objected  to  debtor's  recjuest  to  pay  attorneys'  fees  from 
cash  collateral  assets  subject  to  mortgagee's  lien.  57  B.R.  317 
(Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1986);  payment  of  fees  denied. 

Significance  of  Issues 

This  case,  relating  to  the  extent  of  the  interest  of  the 
mortgagee  in  post-petition  rents  as  cash  collateral,  resulted  in 
one  of  the  first  decisions  on  this  issue.  This  issue  thereafter 
became  the  sxibject  of  much  litigation  in  our  district  and 
elsewhere,  commencing  with  the  case  of  In  re  T.M.  Carlton  House 
Partners.  Ltd..  91  B.R.  349  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1988),  and 
subsequently  addressed  by  U.S.  District  Court  Judge  Bartle  in  In  re 
SeSide  Co. .  Ltd. ,  152  B.R.  878  (E.D.  Pa.  1993).  Also,  the  decision 
has  often  been  cited  for  its  holding  that  debtors  may  only  charge 
attorneys'  fees  against  a  secured  creditor's  collateral  if  the  fees 
benefitted  the  secured  creditor. 

Judge 

Hon.  Emil  F.  Goldhaber,  Chief  Judge,  United  States  Bankruptcy 
Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania. 

(continued) 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  3 


49 


other  Counsel 

Counsel  for  Committee  of  Equity  Holders: 
Leonard  Goldberger,  Esquire 
Wolf,  Block,  Schorr  &  Solis-Cohen 
Packard  Building,  12th  Floor 
15th  and  Chestnut  Streets 
Philadelphia,  PA  19102-2678 
(215)  977-2578 

Debtor ' s  Counsel : 

David  Fishbone,  Esquire 

Formerly  with 

Ciardi,  Fishbone  &  DiDonato,  PC  (current  address  unknown) 

1900  Spruce  Street 

Philadelphia,  PA  19103 

(215)  546-4370 

Counsel  for  Trustee : 
Robert  H.  Levin,  Esquire 
Adelman  Lavine  Gold  &  Levin,  PC 
1900  Two  Penn  Center  Plaza 
Philadelphia,  PA   19102-1799 
(215)  568-7515 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  4 


50 


3 .    In  re  Reading  Tube  Corporation 

Court  and  Docket :  U.S. B.C.,  E.D.  Pa.,  Nos .  87-0429T,  87-0430T 
Cite:   72  B.R.  329  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1987) 
73  B.R.   99  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1987) 

Summary 

Chapter  11  proceeding  of  copper  tube  manufacturer. 

Client 

Meridian  Bank,  primary  secured  creditor,  as  well  as  the 
government  agencies  participating  in  its  loan. 

Issues  Litigated 

(1)  Challenged  propriety  of  debtor-in-possession  financing 
where  debtor  failed  to  prove  that  it  had  searched  for  available 
financing  elsewhere;  financing  denied.  72  B.R.  329  (Bankr.  E.D. 
Pa.  1987)  . 

(2)  Initiated  and  litigated  Motion  for  Appointment  of  a 
Trustee  based  upon  allegations  of  fraud,  mismanagement  and  self- 
dealing  of  company's  shareholders.  Discovery  ruling  reported  at  73 
B.R.  99  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1987). 

Significance  of  Issues 

The  Motion  for  Appointment  of  a  Trustee  became  a  trial  of 
issues  of  alleged  fraud  and  mismanagement  conducted  on  an  expedited 
basis,  with  discovery  encompassing  20  to  25  days  over  3  months  and 
the  trial  itself  lasting  for  several  days  during  a  3 -week  period  in 
May  1987.  Extensive  expert  testimony  as  to  financial  dealings  was 
presented.  The  matter  was  settled  before  conclusion  of  the  trial, 
paving  the  way  for  the  plan  of  reorganization  with  favorable 
treatment  of  our  client's  claims  and  release  of  all  claims  against 
our  client,  including  alleged  lender  liability. 

Judge 

Hon.  Thomas  M.  Twardowski,  Bankruptcy  Judge,  United  States 
Bankruptcy  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania. 

Other  Counsel 

Debtor's  Litigation  Counsel: 
Louis  Lustenberger,  Esquire 
Donovan  &  Leisure 
30  Rockefeller  Plaza 
New  York,  NY   10112 
(212)  632-3290 


(continued) 

Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  5 


51 


Debtor's  Bankruptcy  Counsel: 
Bruce  Frankel,  Esquire 
Angel  &  Frankel 
4  60  Park  Avenue,  8th  Floor 
New  York,  NY   10017-3191 
(212)  752-8000 

Counsel  for  Creditors  Committee: 
Charles  Phillips,  Esquire 
Baskin  Leisawitz  Heller  Abramowitch,  P.C. 
2201  Ridgewood  Road,  Suite  400 
Wyomissing,  PA   19610 
(215)  372-8427 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  6 


52 


4 .    In  re  Dominica  V.  Civitella 

Court  and  Docket:   U.S. B.C.,  E.D.  Pa.,  No.  80-01083K 
Cite:   14  B.R.  151  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1981) 
15  B.R.  206  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1981) 

Summary 

Chapter  11  proceeding  of  apartment  complex. 

Client 

The  debtor. 

Issues  Litigated 

Rebuffed  constant  attempts  of  three  secured  creditors  to  cause 
case  to  be  dismissed,  converted,  or  to  file  their  own  plan  of 
reorganization. 

Successfully  reorganized  debtor  and  distributed  one  hundred 
cents  on  the  dollar  to  unsecured  creditors  in  Plan  of 
Reorganization. 

Resulted  in  frequently-cited  reported  decision  holding  that 
Disclosure  Statement  must  be  based  on  statements  of  fact,  not 
opinion.  14  B.R.  151  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1981);  reconsideration 
denied,  15  B.R.  206  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1981) . 

Significance  of  Issues 

The  client  was  a  widow  whose  son  was  managing  the  complex. 
The  personal,  business,  legal  and  strategic  aspects  were  very 
challenging.  The  secured  creditors  were  extremely  aggressive  and 
constantly  commencing  litigation  to  try  to  take  over  the  property. 
We  were  able  to  prevail  over  them  and  confirm  a  100%  plan  --a  rare 
result  in  a  bankruptcy  case.  I  handled  all  of  the  litigation  and 
negotiations  in  order  to  achieve  this  result. 

Judge 

Hon.  William  King,  Judge,  United  States  Bankruptcy  Court  for 
the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania. 

Other  Counsel 

(Each  of  the  following  represented  a  secured  creditor) 

Rush  T.  Haines,  Esquire 
Drinker,  Biddle  &  Reath 
1100  P^fB  Building 
Broad  and  Chestnut  Streets 
Philadelphia,  PA   19107 
(215)  988-2944 
(continued) 

Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  7 


53 


Neal  B.  Colton,  Esquire 
Dechert,  Price  &  Rhoads 
4000  Bell  Atlantic  Tower 
1717  Arch  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA   19103-2793 
(215)  994-2515 

Matthew  Siembieda,  Esquire 
(215)  569-5609 
Samuel  Becker,  Esquire 
(215)  569-5527 

BlanJc,  Rome,  Comisky  &  McCauley 
Four  Penn  Center  Plaza 
Philadelphia,  PA   19103 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  8 


45-964  98  - ^ 


54 


5 .    In  re  Ram  Manufacturing 

Court  and  Docket:   U.S. B.C.,  E.D.  Pa.,  No.  83-OlOlG,  83-0102G 
Cite:   32  B.R.  969  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1983) 
36  B.R.  822  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1984) 


Summary 

Chapter  11  proceeding  of  electronics  manufacturer. 

Client 

Meridian  Bank,  secured  creditor. 

Issues  Litigated 

Whether  Meridian  was  entitled  to  relief  from  the  automatic 
stay  due  to  lack  of  adequate  protection.  Relief  from  stay  granted 
at  32  B.R.  969  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1983) ;  reconsideration  denied  36 
B.R.  822  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1984)  . 

Significance  of  Issues 

The  bankruptcy  court  found  that  accounts  receivable  arising 
from  pending  lawsuits  were  too  uncertain  to  be  considered  for 
purposes  of  adequate  protection,  and  proper  valuation  standard  for 
company  which  had  ceased  operations  was  distress  value. 

Judge 

Hon.  Emil  F.  Goldhaber,  Chief  Judge,  United  States  Bankruptcy 
Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania. 

Other  Counsel 

Counsel  for  Debtor: 
Thomas  B.  Rutter,  Esquire 
Rutter,  Solomon  &  DiPiero 
The  Curtis  Center,  Suite  750 
Philadelphia,  PA  19106 
(215)  925-9200 

Counsel  for  Trustee: 

Donald  M.  Collins,  Esquire  (retired) 

Formerly  with 

Stradley,  Ronon,  Stevens  &  Young 

2600  One  Commerce  Square 

Philadelphia,  PA   19103-7098 

(215)  564-8080 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  9 


55 


6 .    In  re  Center  for  the  Blind 

Court  and  Docket:   U.S. B.C.,  E.D.  Pa.,  No.  79-8 18 -EG 
Cite:   (none) 

Summary 

Chapter  11  proceeding  of  non-profit  corporation  serving  the 
blind. 

Client 

The  debtor. 

Issues  Litigated/Significance  of  Issues 

This  case  was  not  adversarial,  but  it  was  unique  in  that  the 
debtor  confirmed  a  plan  providing  for  the  transfer  and  continuation 
of  the  Center's  endowment  intact  for  the  benefit  of  the  intended 
beneficiaries,  i.e.,  the  blind,  and  payment  to  unsecured  creditors 
of  approximately  fifteen  cents  on  the  dollar.  Given  the  competing 
interests  of  creditors  versus  the  blind  community,  this  case 
required  social  and  political  skills  as  well  as  the  negotiation  and 
litigation  skills  normally  required  in  a  standard  Chapter  11  case. 
[Chapter  11  was  commenced  in  1979  and  concluded  in  1983.] 

Judge 

Hon.  Emil  F.  Goldhaber,  Chief  Judge,  United  States  Bankruptcy 
Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania. 

Other  Counsel 

Counsel  for  Rudolphy  Residence: 

Christopher  H.  Gadsden,  Esquire 

Drinker,  Biddle  &  Heath 

1100  PNB  Building 

Broad  and  Chestnut  Streets 

Philadelphia,  PA  19107 

(215)  988-2780 

For  Attorney  General ,  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania : 
James  Sutton,  Esquire 
(Current  address  unknown) 

Counsel  for  Unsecured  Creditors: 
Lawrence  Lichtenstein,  Esquire 
Buchanan  Ingersoll 

Professional  Corporation 
12  00  Two  Logan  Square 
18th  Sc   Arch  Streets 
Philadelphia,  PA   19103-6933 
(215)  665-3923 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  10 


56 


7 .    In  re  Philadelphia  Athletic  Club 

Court  and  docket:   U.S. B.C.,  E.D.  Pa.,  No.  80-02028G 
Cite:   17  B.R.  345  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1982) 
20  B.R.  325  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1982) 

Summary 

Chapter  11  proceeding  of  athletic  club  facility  in  Center  City 
Philadelphia. 

Client 

Trustees  of  Central  States,  Southeast  and  Southwest  Areas 
Pension  Funds,  Victor  Palmieri  &  Co.  as  Investment  Manager,  primary 
secured  creditor. 

Issues  Litigated 

Initiated  a  motion  for  relief  from  the  stay  and  entered  into 
a  stipulation  providing  for  automatic  relief  from  stay  upon  the 
happening  of  certain  events.  Upon  defaults  by  the  debtor,  relief 
from  stay  was  to  be  automatically  enforceable.  Debtor  defaulted, 
then  contested  such  automatic  relief  in  an  injunction  proceeding. 
The  bankruptcy  court  upheld  the  stipulation  providing  that  relief 
from  the  stay  was  automatically  enforceable.  17  B.R.  345  (Bankr. 
E.D.  Pa.  1982).  Subsequent  stipulation  approved  at  20  B.R.  325 
(Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1982) . 

Sicmif icance  of  Issues 

The  court ' s  opinion  is  often  cited  as  authority  for 
enforcement  of  court -approved  stipulations,  especially  relating  to 
relief  from  stay  for  secured  creditors  who  are  otherwise 
forestalled  from  executing  on  property  which  constitutes  their 
collateral . 

Judge 

Hon.  Emil  F.  Goldhaber,  Chief  Judge,  United  States  Bankruptcy 
Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania. 

Other  Counsel 

Debtor ' s  Counsel : 

Pace  Reich,  Esquire 

Clark,  Ladner,  Fortenbaugh  &.   Young 

2005  Market  Street,  21st  Floor 

Philadelphia,  PA   19103 

(215)  241-1330 


(continued) 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  11 


57 


Counsel  for  Partners  of  Owner  of  Debtor: 

Stuart  H.  Savett,  Esquire 

Savett,  Frutkin,  Pidell  &  Ryan,  PC 

320  Walnut  Street,  Suite  508 

Philadelphia,  PA   19106 

(215)  923-5400 

Counsel  for  Trustee: 
Melvin  Lashner  &  Lashner 
1604  Locust  Street 
Second  floor 
Philadelphia,  PA   19103 
(215)  732-9229 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  12 


58 


8 .    In  re  Bates  Energy  Corp. 

Court  and  Docket:   U.S. B.C.,  N.D.  Ohio,  No.  B-86-476-Y 
Cite:   (none) 

Summary 

Objection  of  creditor,  the  Bethlehem  Corporation,  to  the 
proposed  sale  of  assets  of  Bates  Energy  Corp.  in  Chapter  11 
proceedings . 

Client 

Bethlehem  Corporation,  a  major  unsecured  creditor. 

Issues  Litigated 

Client  believed  that  the  proposed  sale  of  assets  was  for  the 
benefit  of  insiders  of  the  company.  I  traveled  to  Youngstown, 
Ohio,  in  June  of  1986  on  a  few  days'  notice  and  put  on  evidence 
during  four  days  of  hearings  to  demonstrate  insider  dealings  and 
preferences,  sham  transactions,  undercapitalization,  and  detriment 
to  creditors.   The  court  approved  the  sale  over  objection. 

Significance  of  Issues 

Bankruptcy  courts  are  to  scrutinize  transactions  involving 
insiders .  Court  approval  of  a  sale  of  assets  of  a  debtor  company 
presents  a  difficult  predicament  for  a  bankruptcy  judge  where  the 
company  has  little  prospect  for  reorganization  without  such  a  sale. 
While  the  case  itself  may  not  appear  to  be  significant,  what  was 
significant  at  the  time,  and  since  that  time,  was  the  fact  that  I 
put  on  a  substantial  case  of  insider  dealing  on  a  few  days'  notice, 
without  the  opportunity  for  any  discovery.  Notwithstanding  the 
fact  that  I  was  not  successful,  I  believe  I  raised  serious  doubts 
about  the  sale  that  should  have  been  sufficient  to  warrant  its  not 
being  approved. 

Judge 

Hon.  William  T.  Bodoh,  United  States  Bankruptcy  Court  for  the 
Northern  District  of  Ohio;  Case  No.  B-86-476-Y.  (Court's  opinion 
not  reported. ) 

Other  Counsel 

Our  local  counsel : 

Jeffrey  Baddeley,  Esquire  (current  address  unknown) 
Formerly  with 
Squire,  Sanders  &  Dempsey 
4900  Society  Center 
127  Public  Square 
Cleveland,  OH   44114-1304 
(216)  479-8500 
(continued) 

Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  13 


59 


Debtor's  Counsel: 
David  J.  Naftzinger,  Esquire 
Thompson,  Hine  &  Flory 
3900  Society  Center 
127  Public  Square 
Cleveland,  OH   44114-1216 
(216)  566-5500 

Counsel  for  Mellon  Bank  (secured  creditor) 

Eric  A.  Schaffer,  Esquire 

Reed,  Smith,  Shaw  iSc  McClay 

James  H.  Reed  Building 

435  Sixth  Avenue 

Pittsburgh,  PA   15219-1886 

(412)  288-3131 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  14 


60 


9  .    In  re  Marta  Group 

Court  and  Docket:   U.S. B.C.,  E.D.  Pa.,  No.  83-01276G 
33  B.R.  634  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1983) 

Summary 

Chapter  11  debtor  of  appliance  wholesale  cooperative. 

Client 

Emerson  Quiet  Kool  Corporation,  secured  creditor, 
seller/  consignor  of  appliances  to  the  debtor. 

Issues  Litigated 

The  validity  of  consignment  and/or  secured  creditor 
relationship  as  between  Emerson  Quiet  Kool  and  the  debtor. 

Significance  of  Issues 

The  court  was  called  on  to  determine  who  should  suffer  the 
consequences  of  an  improperly  filed  financing  statement:  the 
debtor,  who  contributed  to  the  improper  filing  by  dealing  with 
Emerson  under  a  prior  name,  or  Emerson,  who  should  have  made 
certain  that  its  interest  could  be  determined  from  a  search  of 
relevant  records.  The  court  determined  that  the  onus  should  be 
imposed  on  the  secured  creditor,  who  had  the  burden  of  showing  that 
the  discrepancy  in  debtor's  name  was  not  "seriously  misleading." 
Also,  the  court  concluded  that  consigned  goods  delivered  after 
notice  of  filed  financing  statements  are  not  property  of  the 
estate.   33  B.R.  634  (Bankr.  E.D.  Pa.  1983) . 

Judge 

Hon.  Emil  F.  Goldhaber,  Chief  Judge,  United  States  Bankruptcy 
Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania. 

Other  Counsel 

Counsel  for  Debtor: 

Pace  Reich,  Esquire 

Clark,  Ladner,  Fortenbaugh  &  Young 

2005  Market  Street,  21st  Floor 

Philadelphia,  PA   19103 

(215)  241-1330 


(continued) 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  15 


61 


Counsel  for  Creditors  Committee: 
David  S.  Hope,  Esquire 
Stradley,  Ronon,  Stevens  &  Young 
2600  One  Commerce  Square 
Philadelphia,  PA   19103-7098 
(215)  564-8168 

Counsel  for  other  secured  creditor: 
Howard  T.  Glassman,  Esquire 
Blank,  Rome,  Comisky  &.   McCauley 
Four  Penn  Center  Plaza 
Philadelphia,  PA   19103 
(215)  569-5568 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  16 


62 


10 .   Schweibert  v.  Schweibert 

Court  and  Docket:   Phila.  C.C.P.,  Sept.  Term  1975,  No.  4769 
Cite:   (none) 

Summary 

Suit  in  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Philadelphia  County  by  a 
wife  against  her  psychiatrist  husband  for  enforcement  of  the  terms 
of  a  separation  agreement. 

Client 

Husband. 

Issues  Litigated 

The  matter  was  ultimately  settled,  but  not  without  substantial 
discovery  and  negotiation  involving  the  interplay  of  equity, 
domestic  relations,  and  the  meaning  of  legal  terms  and  conditions 
in  accordance  with  their  intent. 

Significance  of  Issues 

The  legal  issues  were  less  significant  than  the  learning 
experience  for  me,  personally,  to  be  dealing  with  a  dispute  of  this 
nature  in  a  commercial  context.  The  matter  was  ultimately 
satisfactorily  resolved  by  negotiation  of  a  definitive  agreement 
that  had  the  clarity  lacking  in  the  originally  negotiated 
separation  agreement.  The  significance  to  the  client  was  probably 
much  greater  than  the  significance  to  the  client  of  any  other 
matter  I  have  worked  on . 

Hon.  Calvin  Wilson,  Judge  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  for  the 
County  of  Philadelphia. 

Docket  number  not  obtainable. 

Other  Counsel 

Jerome  Charen,  Esquire 
(current  address  unknown) 


Exhibit  B  -  Litigated  Matters  -  page  17 


63 


AFFIDAVIT 


I,  MARJORIE  O.  RENDELL,  do  swear  that  the  information  provided  in 
this  statement  is,  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge,  true  and  accurate. 


Sworn  to  and  subscribed 

this  7th  day  of  January,  1997 


NOTARY  PUBLIC 


V  NOTABAL  SEAL 

SUZANNE  R.  WHTTE  Notary  Public 
Crty  o(  Philadelphia.  Phila.  County 

My  Commissiofi  Expires  Dec.  11.  1998 


FINANCIAL   DISCLOSURE   REPORT 

FOR  CALENDAR  YEAR  1995 


Report  Heqnlrntl  bv  the  Ethics 
Rflform  Act  ot  1*>H9,  Pub 
10  I  -  l')H  .       Ntivnmbar    JO,     19 

(S    use      App      f>.     101-1131 


RENDELL,    MARJORIE   0. 

J      Court   or  Org.mUat  Ion 

U.S.D.C.     (E.D.     Pa.) 

)      Data   of    Report 

05/13/96 
(cev.   8/14/96) 

t.    TltU      l/MtlcU    m    )u.1<i«.    ln,licat«  ..cclv,  oc 

.■*fnioc   scatufl.    Haijlacraco    ludqas    IndLcace 
r»U-   or  parc-clma) 

DISTRICT   COURT   JUDGE     (ACTIVE) 

S      Report   Type    Icheck   jpproprlJtn   typel 
Nomination.    Date        /      / 

6.    Reporting   Purlod 

Ol/Ol/OS    -    l2/n/95 

[nitUl     J(.  Annual      Final 

T.   Oumbers  oc  Office  Address 

UNITED   STATES    DISTRICT   COURT 
SOI    MARKET   STREET,    ROOM    3114 
PHILADELPHIA,     PA      19106 

a.    On   the   basia   of   the    information  contained    in   this   Report   and 
any  modifications   pertaining   thereto,    it    Is,    In  my  opinion, 
in  compliance  with  applicable    laws   and   regulations 

Reviewing  Officer                                                                                 Date 

IMPORTANT  NOTES:    The   inscrucCLona  accompanying  chia    form  muse   be    followed-           Complece  all   parts, 
checking  the  NONE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable   information.          Sign  on  last  page 

I.        POSITIONS.  (Reporting  individual  only;   see  pp.    9-13  of  Instructions.) 

POSITION  NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION/ENTITY 

NONE         {No   reportable   positionsi 


Director  and  Vice-Chair 


Co-Trustee 


Continued  after  Section  VIII 


Avenue  of   the  Arts,    Inc. 


T/U/W  of  Mary  B.    Osterlund    (Mother) 


U.        AGREEMENTS.  (Reporting  individual  only;    see  pp.    14-17  of  Instructions.) 

DATE  PARTIES   AND   TERMS 


n 


NONE         (Wo   reportable   «greemenC3l 


n.        NON-E*fVESTMENT  INCOME.  (Reporting   individual  and  spouse;    see  pp     U-2S  of   In 

DATE  SOURCE   AND   TYPE 


I] 


NONE        (No  reportable 


1995  City   of    Philadelphia    (spouse   salary    -    amount    n/a)  $ 0 .DC 

$ . 


65 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


RENDELL,  MARJORIE  0. 


05/13/96 


IV.  REIMBURSEMENTS  and   GIFTS    -.    transports  ion.     lo.l.,lng.     tood.    ,nt,rc..ln™nc 

Hn.rUi.l.?*   thoan   to  ■poiis«   *nd  dependent  chUdr«n,    ua«  cha  p^renchMC  ICAls    "(Si-    ^nd    "iDCI"    to    In.lLcita    reportabLa 
calmbursemonts  and  glCts    race  Ivod  by  spouao  and  depondanc  children,    roBpectW»*W      Sno   pp      afi-ai  of    InscrMctlona 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 

I  NONE         INo  ,uch    reporcbla    roLmbura.n,e„t3  or  .jUtsl 

Academy  Ball  -  Dinner  &  Concert  1/28/95 

Penna .Society  reception&dinner  12/8/95 

Trip  to  All  Star  Game  7/9-11/95  (Dallas) 

Coooerstown  Baseball  Hall  of  Fame  7/29-30/95 
$282  toward  air  fare  (spouse  speaking  tour) 
$500  toward  lodging (spouse  speaking  tour) 


Phi 

ladelphia 

Orchestra 

PNC 

Bank 

Phi 

ladelphia 

Phillies 

Phi 

ladelphia 

Phillies 

s 
Penn  Club  Fl 

orida  Gold 

Coast 

°Phi 

la.  Club 

of  Palm  Beach 

See 

Section 

VIII 

D 


OTixER  GU"  IS.      (Includea  chose  Co  spouse  and  dependenc  children.-  use  Che  parenchecicals  '(S)'  and  *{DC)"  Co 
indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependenc  children,  respectively.   See  pp.  30-33  of  Inscrucci* 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION  Vf 

NONE        (No  such  reportable  jlCcsl 

Chelsea  House  Publishers Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court 

Please  see  Section  VIII 


s 

150.0 

s 

0.0 

s 

s 

/T.    LIABLLlTrEo.      (includes  chose  of  spouse  «nd  dependenc  ctiildren;  indlcace  where  Applicable,  person  responalble 

for  liabilicy  by  using  che  parencheclcal  ' (S) '  Cor  separate  llablllcy  of  che  spouae,  '(J)'  for  joinc  liability  of 
reporting  individixal  and  spouse,  and  '(DC)'  for  llabilicy  of  a  dependenc  child.   See  pp.  34-36  of  Inatnicclons . ) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE 


D 


NONE        (No  reporcable  li 


United  Savings  Bank 1/2  mortgage  on  vacation  duplex 

(one  rental  prop.;  one  personal  use 


<j  •  iidii.cim  ■'ii.'.om. 


66 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


RENDELL,  MARJORIE  0. 


0AC4  Of   Report 

05/13/96 


'(LIU.    0/14/00) 


Vlt.    PaKC    I  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS 

^lul   .lopaiuLitic    clilldi>»n      Ssa    pp      J7-SJ 


A. 
Oeaci-tpcion  of   Aaaats 

(including  cmsc   jsseca) 

[ndlcate   where  ippUcable,    owner  oC 
thff   asset   by  using   the  p.irenthetlcal 
"(Jl-    Cor    (oint   ownership  ot    report- 
ing   indlvidujL   and   spouse,    "(S)^    Cor 
separotd   ownership  by   spouse.    - (DCl " 
foe  ownership  by  dependent   child. 

Place    -1X1-   after   each   asset 
exempt    (rom  prior   disclosure. 

B 
Income 
during 
reporting 
period 

C. 

Crcaa   value 

.>t   end  of 

reporting 

period 

0 
Tranaactiona   during   reporting  period 

(1) 

Amt-l 
Code 
(A-H) 

(2) 
Type 

^I^ni'or 
Int.) 

(L) 

Value: 
Code 
(J-P) 

(2) 

Value 
Metl>od3 
Code 
.O-n) 

(1) 
Type 

bSy'  iell. 
merger, 
redemo- 

IC   not   exempt    from  diacloauro 

(2) 

Date: 
Month 
Day 

(!) 

Value2 
Code 
(J-P) 

Calm 
Code 
(A-H) 

(SI 

tdenclcy  of 

buyer/seller 

(If   private 

transaction) 

NONE         (No   reportable 

1 

1        Schwab  Money  Market   Fund    (IRA 
rollover)  (includes    lHi2   FDR95I 

S 

Dividend 

K 

T 

3        Vanguard    Intermediate  Treasury 
(IrX   rollover) 

" 

Dividend 

sale 

11/06 

L 

D 

'  T^Voidcur" '""  ""^ 

0 

Dividend 

L 

T 

4       Berger  101    {IRA  rollover) 

A 

Dividend 

■ale 

07/10 

K 

B 

colloverl 

a 

Dividend 

sale 

09/28 

r 

A 

6        Server   100    IIRA  rolloverl 

* 

Dividend 

sale 

07/10 

L 

0 

7       Brandyvtne  Fund    (IRA  rollover) 

D 

Dividend 

L 

T 

8        Oa)cmarlc   Fund    (IRA   rollover) 

B 

Oividend 

X 

t 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

sale/pt 

07/10 

J 

C 

"  VziSi  SKov^if"  '"-""" 

» 

Dividend 

sale 

07/10 

« 

D 

11     Scudder  Global  Fund    (IRA 
rollover) 

* 

Dividend 

K 

T 

12     SOidder  Global   Snail   Co.     (IRA 
rollover) 

A 

Dividend 

sale 

09/26 

J 

B 

13      20ch  Century   Int'l    (IRA 
Rollover) 

A 

Dividend 

« 

T 

14      Schwab  (4oney  Market    IIRA 
concrlb) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Contrib    ) 

* 

Dividend 

sale 

09/26 

J 

A 

U      Kjuttman   F.ind    (IRA  Contrtb) 

A 

None 

^ 

T 

17     Sch»»b  Money  Market    ( (RA 

- 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

l»      Pl.lellt/  OaUnce.l   Fund    IIRA 
UoUover)     (.•!) 

A 

niv(„„„„ 

eale 

09/26 

J 

A 

'   !Sr2^?''3ir5J)     ^:l\^2^L 

'lua                    n.5l 

001    to    32.500                  C-52,501    to    SS.OOO                        D-SS.OOl    to    SIS. 000                1 

'  TlircSr-?!  4  0,)    i:i^^^r^.^^^„.„.o    5:?iS<,";ii(^?o'5?:^33.ooo^:2^?,°?iar,?y§l!o°23o      -"o— o  „oo.ooo 

,  -3.u,^M.n^,o.,„,  ..A^r.,,,,.__            -;---—""- s:;:;Tr;:5               T-c..,.M,.rk,t 

67 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


RENDELL,  MARJORIE  0. 


M-,   of    Rcporr. 

05/13/9S 


(luu.    0/1-4/96- 


VII.   P;«Ko  2  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS   .  uco. 

.«n,l   .l.iioii.Ui.t    chlUlren.    Sea    pp       )7.s<    o(    In. 


Description   oC   Asaeta 
(including   truHt   .issats) 

indlc.ice  where  applicable,    owner  ot 
the  Asset   by  using   the   parenthetical 
"(J)'    Cor    loint   ownership  of    report- 
liw    indLViiiu.xl   .»nd   spouse.    MSl'^for 
aeparace  ownership   by   spouse.    MOC)  • 
Cor  ownership  by  dependenc   child. 

PUca    '4X1"   4fter   each  asaet 
exempt    Croa  prior  disclosure. 

a. 

tncome 
during 

C 
Crosii  value 

reporting 
p«>rlod 

Trana.iCtions   during    reporting  period 

III 

Amt    1 
Code 

121 

^iSTor 
int.! 

111 

V»lue2 
Code 

IJ-Pl 

Vjlue 
Hethodl 
Code 
lO-wl 

buy.    sell, 
merger. 

"ion? 

te  not  exempt   from  disclosure               | 

(21 
Date; 

Day 

(11 

Value2 
Code 
(J-PI 

Oalnl 
Code 
(A-Hl 

(51 

Identity  of 

buyer/seller 

(if  private 

transaction! 

NONE         (No   reportable 
transactions! 

19     Schwab  ^toney  Market    (IRA 
Contribl     {Si 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

20      eerqer    100    (IRA  Contrib)     (S) 

A 

»one 

sale 

07/10 

« 

C 

"  xjsnj?;,^siiisii^j.-i,"""' 

D 

Rent 

" 

" 

A 

None 

J 

T 

»/d 

5/ IS 

J 

23     Public  Service  Enterprise  Crp 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

»  T,ur.^i^.i.f.r"  "  '^' 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Pr . Ret . 

09/15 

J 

2S     Hunl   Inv  Tnuc  Series  13    (Jl 
(19941  lime   1  of  31 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Pr.Rec. 

08/15 

J 

2S     Muni  Inv  Trust  Series   13    (Jl 
lline  J  o£  Jl 

Pr.Rec. 

12/15 

J 

J7     Prince  Geos  Cty  0%  12/17/97 
IJ) 

* 

Interest 

J 

T 

"  iia;5f siss'^f tSTiitSe  i »« 3. 

B 

Dividend 

I 

T 

buy 

05/94 

L 

"  ?5rii!nf 5'5^-;r™  ^«  "= 

sale 

4/10 

I. 

»  ^rixi";!?"??— •— 

buy 

11/07 

K 

31     Schvsb  T»x  E«e«jic  Honey  Marlcet 
(Jl 

e 

Dividend 

J 

T 

buy 

05/94 

« 

"  f5nj?nr?'Sf^!r-"— 

B 

Dividend 

J 

T 

buy 

05/94 

L 

31     Strong   Short   Term  etc      lline   2 
of    31 

sell 

4/10 

< 

14      Strong  Short   Term  etc.     (line    1 
of    11 

sell 

11/06 

K 

"  ?jsT'i5?(T;si  r^fST-  --^ 

c 

Dividend 

1. 

T 

buy 

5/74 

" 

1«      Vannuerd  Muni    ..t;      (line    2   of 

snll 

4/10 

>- 

^ 

'  !!i5r?^?"Si=rsji   s:!ics3i''fo'5?;, ^:i^:^z^?^]^o.,    g:^;o3°Jortrirs„o,o„„  ^:^^i>:^  z['oS3°„„o 

'  ^3ircSr;i .  o>.    i:in^^rL^y^.....    S:?i3.^Sii^?o'5?:SS2.noo  t:2S2;°2i.S%!?3So°33o      -— -  "  ""-"^ 

■  ^3irc37-c^,-'"  ^i&i-i^iL           ;s;;"-' '--  --  3:s:nrt^s 

68 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nama    oC    Pnnon    Rnportinq 

RENDELL,     MARJORIE    0. 


Utrt   oC    Alport 

05/13/96 


VII.   Payc  3  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS   -  i„c<», 

and  JepanJenC  children.  See  pp.  ]7-S4  of  tns 


(cev.   8/14/9 


Dodcrlpcton  at  Adapts 
(Including   tiTHC   .naetill 

tndlote   -h.!.n   ..ppUc.ihU.    o»ner  o( 
Mi^    _.!ia»r.    hy   uj  ui-^d'^i^t)' ''"  =  "« 'CJ I 

ii'iq    i..iUviiu.i'l"^jnj'  'yoJil?,''-  ISl'^'^toc 
dop.-irAC«  o«ntfrship   by   spou*o.     "(DC)" 
eoc  ownorsnip   by  Jependanr   child. 

Pljca    "(Xl-   *£ter   each  aaaec 
axampc    erom  prior  diaclosuce. 

t  ncome 
during 
reporting 
period 

Ci-oea   value 
.ic   end  of 
report Inq 
period 

0 
Tranaactiona  during   reporting  period 

Amt.l 
Code 

(2) 

Type 

d!v^   • 

(I) 

Valuei 
Code 
(J-P) 

Value 
MethodJ 
Code 

lO-W) 

(I) 

buy.    sell, 
merger, 
redemp- 
Clonl 

It   not   exempt    from  dlacloaura 

(21 
Datei 

Day 

(J) 

Value2 
Code 

H) 

Oalnl 
Code 

(S) 

Identity  of 

buyer/seller 

(!(    private 

NONE         INo  rtpoctabla 

n      BeneeiclJl    -    CO    IDCl 

» 

incereac 

J 

T 

19      DuPont     IDCl 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

39      Huffy  Corp       IDCl 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

40     Meridian  Bancorp    (DC) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

41     Toya  R  Oa    (OCl 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

42     Ctt  Accel  Tray  Sn  0%  11/99 
(DCI 

A 

incereac 

J 

T 

43     Schwab  Money  Marlcec  Fd   (DC) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

44      Pederated  2-S  hr.   Oovt.    (IRA 

* 

Dividend 

K 

T 

buy 

11/07 

K 

A 

Dividend 

.c 

T 

buy 

07/11 

K 

"      Olne  I  Sl"2f'"^''    ""  "'°' 

B 

Dividend 

K 

T 

buy 

07/12 

K 

47     Dodge  t  Cox  acoe)c   (IRA  R/0) 
(line  2  of  2) 

buy 

09/29 

J 

49     Oreyfua  S .  I  Oovc .    (IRA  R/0) 

* 

Dividend 

L 

T 

buy 

09/27 

« 

49      Dreyfus    S.I.    Govt.     (IRA   R/0) 

buy 

11/07 

L 

SO      FAM   Value (IRA   R/0) 

* 

Dividend 

K 

T 

buy 

07/11 

K 

SL     Janua    Fund    (IRA  R/0) 

S 

Jividend 

K 

T 

buy 

07/11 

K 

52      PA.    Mutual     IIIIA   R/OI 

0 

Dividend 

J 

T 

buy 

07/11 

J 

5)      MAS    Equlf/IIBA   «/OI 

c 

OlvLrlnnd 

K 

T 

buy 

07/12 

K 

„      S,C,n    incrnatloo^l    ( (,M  R/0) 

A 

Oi-/i<l.»n<J 

K 

T 

buy 

„,/27 

K 

'  !3;r?^?"3i<^rs3,   i^[^zrL^^....     in^i^ik^tJi^o..,    mWo^wi^r......  sisirrinis  jt^srooc 

'  T^ircSr-i  V  o„    i:i&/!^ri.^^...„,.    5:?i3."^ii^?o'5!:S3S,o,.  i:i^^l!^^,l]ii^^.      — ■°"'  "  »— 

,     v.,,.,^M,u,;.o,.,„„     0:a,..j..u;.;., 

'i'S,',' 

.rU-.,( 

'"  i:^:"'^ 

te.i 

-'■ 

~mmti/M.tcktz 

69 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


RENDELL,  MARJORIE  0. 


OS/13/96 


VII.    Pago  4  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS 

^n.t    .iepandanc    chlUlran.    S*,n   pp      JT-s-* 


(rev.  8/14/96) 


( [ncludoH  choaa  of  spouan 


Oe;ii:i'tpc  ton  o(   Aaaets 
liiioluJlnq   tiMOt   a«>ot«l 

tn.llc.it-   »h»r«   dp(>Hcabl«.    o«ner  o( 
cne  j.»«  6y  uslnq  ;ho  p.irenchetlc«I 
•IJ)"    for    lolnc   o«n<sr«hlp  ol    ceporc- 
Inq    inJivu^i.,U   .nJ   jpou.e,    •ISl'^    (or 
Sfparjte    o«ner9hlp    by   spouje.     'IOC)* 
for  ownersnip   by  dependonc   child. 

PUco   -(Xl-  Jtcer  each  «sec 
exetnpc    (rom  prior  dtacloauce. 

0 

durinq 
report inq 
period 

c. 

Cross   value 
.It   end  o( 
report  log 
period 

Tranajcciona   during    raporcmg  parLod 

(11 

Amc.l 
Code 
(A-H) 

(2) 
Type 

(e.q.. 

dl«'  . 

Value: 
Code 
IJ-PI 

C) 

Value 
Mechod] 
Code 
(Q-U) 

buy;   aell, 
merger, 
redemp. 
tlonl 

t(   not   axempt    (rom  diacloaura                ] 

(2) 

Date: 
Month 
Day 

(1) 

Value2 
Code 
(J-P) 

(4) 

Calnl 
Code 

(SI 

Identity  o( 

buyer/siller 

(i(  private 

NONE         INo   reportable 
income,    taseta,   or 

SS     soCen   Intemacion*!    (IS)    (IRA 
Contribi 

'^ 

Dividend 

J 

T 

buy 

OS/27 

J 

5S      SoCen    Incemaclonal    (S) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

buy 

09/27 

J 

S7     mllum  BUir  Crowch    (SI 

* 

Dividend 

K 

T 

buy 

07/11 

« 

51     ATkT    (J) 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Inherit 

06/01 

J 

S9     Abboce  Laboracories    (J) 

A 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

Inherlc 

06/01 

J 

eo     Coca  Cola   (J) 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Inherit 

06/01 

It 

61     Olebold   (Jl 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

inherit 

06/Cl 

J 

62     Wale  Oianey  Co.    (J) 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Inherit 

06/01 

J 

fi3     Federal  Nac'l  Morcqage  Assoc. 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Inherit 

06/01 

X 

64     Cannecc    (J) 

* 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

inherit 

06/01 

- 

6S     General  Eleccrlc    (J) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

inherit 

06/01 

K 

66     Cillecce  Co.    (J) 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Inherit 

06/01 

K 

67     Household  Incemaclonal    (J) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Inherit 

06/01 

J 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

inherit 

06/01 

« 

67     McDonalds   Corp.     tj) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

inherit 

06/01 

« 

A 

Ol/ldend 

. 

T 

inherit 

06/01 

J 

71      p-palco    Inc.     (J) 

A 

Dlvlrttn.l 

J 

T 

inherit 

06/01 

J 

7.      -.U.«r.    S..or„.     inc.     U, 

A 

Oivl.ltin'l 

.- 

inherit 

06/01 

^ 

'  in^rc;;?'s.rs;)   i:l[^2rl^^.....„     ?:i^.^!i^^-?iSs%„o    ^^k,^^^Uo.o  ^:i^^i>^i\^^..o 

'  Tsrcsr-ji .  p„   i:i\^:;!zri:^i..n..„  ^:i^ii;;!i^^t^n:^...o  ^:2J?,°"U^?!3^6°sSo     -^^ "-  "  ""•""■ 

,      V.U,^-,ch^   -:,...        ^..,,r....,^ ..,   .,n.„    J-Aja^n.                                         ..,:,ah...r.,r 

70 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


N.^m«  of  Pnraon  Roporclnq 

RENDELL,  MARJORIE  O. 


D.ICI1    oC    (tupocc 

05/13/96 


(im;.   O/H/90 


VII.   rage  S  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS  -  uco™.  v.iu,.  t 

and   dopondont   cntldron      Sao   pp.    17.54   ot    [natructlon..  I 


D«acrlpclon  at  Aaanti 
1  including  tnmc  a««ta) 

Indlcata   «hera   appUcabla,    o*mer  oC 
the  .»«aot  by  uatmj  the  parenthetical 
•IJI"    Coc    lolnt   o«nerihlp  of    raporc- 
Inq    IndLvlJuAl   ^nd   spouae.    '(S)^    Cor 
aep.iraca  o-norahlp   by  apouaa,    •  (DC)  " 
eor  ownership  by  dependant  child. 

PUca    -(X)"   after  each  aaaat 
exempt    <ro«  prior  diacloaure. 

B 
Income 
durlnq 
reporting 
period 

C 
Croas  value 

reporting 
pirlod 

0 
Tranaactlona  during  reporting  period 

(11 
Code 

(31 
,  Type 

^Irni'or 

(11 

ValueJ 
Code 
(J-P) 

131 

Value 
Method! 
Code 
(O-ai 

1^1. 

buy:   sell, 
merger, 
redemo- 

tC   not   exempt    from  disclosure 

(21 

Date: 
Month 
Day 

(11 

Ualuo2 
Code 
IJ-Pl 

(«1 

Oalnl 
Code 
(A-HI 

(SI 

NOME         (No    reportable 

71      Well*   Fargo   k  Co      (J> 

» 

Dividend 

J 

T 

inherit 

06/01 

K 

74      Xerox  Corp.     (J) 

k. 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Inherit 

06/01 

J 

75      Schwab  US  Treaaury  MonWct .     (J) 

Intereat 

J 

T 

buy 

12/27 

L 

7S      US   T-Noce    S.825%    8/97    (Jl     (J) 

K 

Interest 

J 

T 

buy 

08/n 

K 

77     US  T-Hoce   «.«2S%   S/95    (J) 

» 

Interest 

J 

T 

matured 

OS/IS 

J 

A 

78      OS   T-Moce    1.5*    l2/9«    (J) 

* 

Interest 

J 

T 

buy 

06/30 

K 

79     SaathJCIlne  Seechan  Corp. 

0 

Dividend 

« 

T 

Trust 

•0     Atlantic  Energy 

* 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

Truat 

tl     Oresaer  Indujcriea 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Trust 

82      E.I.    du    Pone   de   Nemouri 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

Trust 

81      Allergan,     Inc 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

Trust 

84     Tremont   Corp. 

* 

Dividend 

a 

T 

Trust 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Trust 

86     Mobil  Corp. 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

Trust 

C 

Dividend 

l. 

T 

Trust 

•a      ML   Induscrlas 

" 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Trust 

A 

Dividend 

. 

T 

Truat 

•JO 

'  !sr?i?-Si'^r's:i   i:][ariJ2^..,..     ^n^^iii^t^ii^o..    ^^i^J^^';Uo.o  ^^^^i^  ]\^iX.u,. 

'  TlircSr?! .  o„    i:i\Ur..''L^r.'.o.n.o    ^]^,^ii^to'Vl:^...o  !c:ia;,^2iaS^I'3:!o"3;!o      '-™  "  ""■"- 

'  v^rcTr.'i,''-'-  3:i;s;ri2^i,           i:^^i-^  —  -'"  s:S""r?Sd              — ./«..r... 

71 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


RENDELL,  MARJORIE  O. 


05/13/96 
(nju.  0/H/9t 


VIII.   ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  or  EXPLANATIONS.    nm.Lc«.  p.rt  o(  R.porc  i 

r.  All  duties  as  Co-Executor  oE  Che  Eacace  oE  Emma  RendeLL  (mv  late 

mother-in-law)  listed  in  the  1994  Report  have  been  discharged.   Due  to  the 

death  oE  mv  Eather  in  January  1996,  duties  as  Co-Trustee  u/w  of  Mary  B. 

Osterlund  have  been  discharged  as  well. . 

IV.  REIMBURSEMENTS  AND  GIFTS:   All  gifts  received  bv  virtue  of  husband's 

position  as  Mayor  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia.   The  trip  to  Dallas  (line  3) 

was  due  to  Philadelphia's  being  site  of  1996  All-Star  Game.   Hall  of  Fame 

(line  4)  was  due  to  two  Philadelphia  Phillies  inductees.   The  trio  in  February 
1995  (lines  5  &  6)  was  a  three-day  trio  to  Florida.   As  wife  of  the  Mayor.  I 
accompany  my  soouse  to  ceremonial  and  other  gala  events  at  which  meals  may  be 
served  and/or  which  include  entertainment.   The  value  of  the  dinners,  event 
tickets,  etc.  attributable  to  my  attendance  at  those  events  listed  in  Section 
IV  hereof  may  exceed  $250.   As  to  spouse,  see  attached  page  from  his  ethics 
report  as  Mayor  (Exhibit  A-2  to  Statement  of  Financial  Interest  filed  with  The 
State  Ethics  Commission  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania) .   I  believe  all 

jifts  are  exempt  due  to  provisions  of  Reas.  of  Judicial  Conference  section 

5(b)  .  set  forth  at  Appendix  (iv)  . 

r.    OTHER  GIFTS:   (1)  As  wife  of  the  Mayor.  I  had  the  use  of  ticltets  for 

;eating  in  the  Mayor's  Box  for  sports  events. 

2)  It  is  my  practice,  and  that  of  mv  spouse,  not  to  accept  honoraria  Eor 

:peaking  or  Eor  performing  wedding  ceremonies. 

3)  In  attending  or  speaking  at  functions  as  wiEe  oE  the  Mayor.  I  have 

ccasionallv  received  token  gifts,  such  as  a  plaaue  or  vase;  I  believ?  ^-hat 


72 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


N.tm«   of    Person    dflporclnq 

RENDELL,  MARJORIE  O. 


OAta  oC  Raport 

05/13/96 
(com  B/lH/Bt 


Vm.  ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  or  EXPLANATIONS.   (tndic.t.  p.«  ».  R.port  , 

the  value  o£  any  such  ai£t3  was  wsll  under  SIOO.   Ag  to  sPouse.  see  attachet^ 
□age  from  his  ethics  report  as  Maypr. 

VII.  INVESTMENTS  AND  TRUSTS:   Please  note  that  last  year's  report  reflected 
entries  for  Schwab  at  lines  Nos .  I   and  2:  these  were  duplicate  entries  and  ar? 
combined  on  this  report  as  No .  1. 

Item  9  reflects  a  partial  sale,  items  28-30  a  partial  return  of  principal. 

Items  Nos.  23.  24.  26.  27.  31.  32  and  34  reflect  certain  1994  transactions 
which  were  inadvertently  omitted  from  mv  1994  report. 

Items  Nos.  85  through  95  are  listed  pursuant  to  the  instruction  on  page  40 

that  if  as  Co-Trustee  I  had  control  over  the  disposition  of  the  asset,  it 

should  be  reported:    I.  together  with  mv  father,  had  such  control  over  these 
assets  that  were  in  the  T/U/W  of  mv  mother,  Mary  B.  Osterlund. 


I.   POSITIONS     (Cont'd.) 

POSITION  NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION/ENTITY 

-o-Exec. (all  duties  discharged  Est,  of  E.Rendell(mother-in-law) (since  3/15/95) 
Member.  Board  of  Overseers     Coll. of  Arts&Sciences-Univ. Penn (since  4/27/95) 
rrustee Bd.  of  Trustees.  Univ.  of  Pa.  (since  1/1/95) 


73 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


H^ata  o(   Ptraon  Rflporcln<j 

RENDELL,  MARJORIE  O. 


OMta  o(   Rttport 

05/13/96 


(i«v.  a/iii/ye 


IX.  CERTIFICATION. 


In  compliance  wich  Che  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinior 
No.  57  of  Che  Advisory  Commiccee  on  Judicial  AcCivicies,  and  Co  Che  besc  of  my 
knowledge  ac  Che  Cime  afcer  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  noc  perform  any 
adjudicacory  funccion  in  any  licigacion  during  Che  period  covered  by  Chis  repc 
in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependenc  children  had  a  financial 
inceresc,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3)(c),  in  Che  ouCcome  of  such  licigacion. 

I  cercify  chac  all  Che  informacion  given  above  (including  informacion 
perCaining  Co  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependenc  children,  if  any)  is  accuraCe, 
Crue,  and  complece  Co  Che  besc  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  Chac  any 
informacion  noc  reporced  was  wichheld  because  ic  meC  applicable  scacucory 
provisions  permiccing  non-disclosure. 

I  furcher  cercify  Chac  earned  income  from  ouCside  employmenc  and  honoraria 
and  Che  accepcance  of  gifcs  which  have  been  reporCed  are  in  compliance  wich  Ch 
provisions  of  5  U.S.pi^  app-  7,  seccion  501  ec.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  7353  and  Judicia 
Conference  regulacic 


SignaCure 


Dace         a■lrJng^    Mi,     IQQfi 


NOTE:  ANY  INDIVIDUAL  M^JQ/ KNOWINGLY  AND  WILFULLY  FALSIFIES  OR  FAILS  TO  FILE 
THIS  REPORT  MAY  BE  SUBJECT  TO  CIVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U.S.C.  APP.  S, 
SECTION  104) . 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS: 

Mail  signed  original  and  3  additional  copies  to: 

Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 

Administrative  Office  of  the  United  States  Courts 

One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E. 

Suite  2-301 

Washington,  D.C.  20544 


74 

FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

NOMINATION 


Report  Required  by  the  tthica 
Refers  Act  ot  1989.  Pub.  L 
101-194.   Hovenber  }0,  lie 

(S  U.S.C.  App.  t,    101-1131 


1.    Pereon  Reporting   (Leat  lune.    flrat.   alddie  Initial) 

RENDELL,    MARJORIE   0. 

3.   Court  or  Organisation 

U.S.D.C.     (E.D.    Pa.) 

3 .   Date  of  Report 

01/07/97 

«.   Title      (Article   III   judqea  Indicate  active  or 

aenlor  atatua;   Naglatrate  judgea  Indicate 
full-  or  part-tlaa)                    ^ 

DISTRICT   COURT   JUDGE    (ACTIVE) 

S.    Report  Type    (check  appropriate  type) 
X     Moalnetion.    Data   01/07/97 
Initial     Annual     Pinal 

C.   Reporting  Period 
01/01/0«    -    13/I6/9C 

7.   Oiaiiibera  or  Office  Addreaa 

UNITED   STATES    DISTRICT   COURT 
601    MARKET   STREET,    ROOM    3H4 
PHILADELPHIA,     PA      19106 

8.  On  Che  baaia  of  the  in£or«ation  contained  in  thla  Report  and 
any  aodificationa  pertaining  thereto,    ic  ia.    in  ay  opinion, 
in  coMpliance  with  applicable  law*  and  regulatlone. 

Raviawing  Officer                                                                                 Date 

IHPORTAirr  HOTBSi   The  InatrucUona  accoeqianylng  chla  fona  auat  be  follomd.          Qxmlete  aU  part*, 
checking  the  MOMB  box  for  each  aectlon  where  you  have  no  reportable  Information.          Sign  on  laat  page. 

I.         POSITIONS.  (Reporting   individual  only;    aee  pp.    9-13  of   Xnatructlona. ) 

PQglTIQN  NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION /ENTITY 

NONE         (Ho  reportable  poaltlonal 


Director  and  Vice-Chair 


Avenue  of  the  Arts.    Inc. 


Member.    Board  of  Overseera College  of  Arts&Sciences-Univ.    of   Pennsylvania 

Trustee Board  of  Trustees.  University  of  Pennsylvania 


U.        AGREENlENTS*  (Reporting  Individual  only;   aea  pp.    14-17  of   Xnatructlona.) 

DATE  PARTIES   AND   TERMS 

I  I  NONE         (No  reportable  agreenenta) 


HI.        NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME.  (Reporting  Individual  and  apouae;   aee  pp.    11-35  of  Inatructlona. 

DATE  SOURCE  AND  TYPE 

NONE    (No  reportable  non-lnveatment  Income) 


□ 


1996  City  of  Philadelphia  (spouse  salary  -  amount  n/a)  $ JLj 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 


75 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSORE  REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 

RENDELL,  MARJORIE  O. 


Date  of  Report 

01/07/97 


IV.         REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS  tran,port.tlon.    lodging,    food,    ,ncert.ln™.nt 

( Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parencheClcals  "(S)"  and  •(DC)"  to  indicace  reporCabl 
reimbursements  and  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  36-29  of  Instruction 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 

f         NONE 


(No  8uch  reportable  reifflbursenenta 


glfta 


EXEMPT 


n 


OTBKR  Gil?  is.      ■.(Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children:  use  the  parentheticals  "  (SI  "  and  '(DC)'  to 

indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.   See  pp.  30-33  of  XnstrucCions 

SOURCE 
NONE 


DESCRIPTION 


VALI 


(Ho  such  reportable  gifts) 


VI. 


n 


LiIaoJULII ]Jco>      (Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible 

for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  " (S) "  for  separate  liability  of  the  spouse,  " (J» •  for  joint  liability  of 
reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  " (DCl '  for  liability  of  a  dependent  child.   See  pp.  34-3$  of  Instructions.) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  COl 


NONE 


(No  reportable  liabilities) 


United  Savinaa   Bank 


1/2   mortgage  on  vacation  duplex 
(one   rental  prop.:    one  personal  use 


VALOE  CODBS 


I   J  •  SIS.OSO  or  Isea       It  •  SIS. 001  -  $SO,000 
If  •  9}S0,001  -  $500,000     0  •  iSOO.OOl  -  $1,000,0 


L  •  $90,001  •  SlCrO.OOO 
P  -  More  than  SI. 000. 000 


H  •  $100,001 


76 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


HAme  of  Paraon  Reporting 

RENDELL,  MARJORIE  O. 


Data  oC  Raporc 
01/07/97 


VU.  Page  1  I^fVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS      mco 

and  (topendttnc  children-    See  pp.    37-S4  oC    In 


alue. 


ions   (Includes  those  of  spouse 


A. 
Description  of  Aasttts 
(InoludlnQ  crust  asaats) 

Indicate  where  applicable,  owner  of 
the  asset  by  using  the  parenthetical 
'(J)*  Cor  lolnc  ownership  of  report- 
ing Indlvldusl  and  apouse.  *{S}*  for 
separate  ownership  by  spouse,  ■  (DCJ  ■ 
for  ownership  by  Sependent  child. 

PUce  •<X)-  after  each  asset 
exeopt  frooi  prior  disclosure. 

Incooe 
during 
reporting 
period 

C. 
arose  value 
at  end  of 

D. 
Transactions  during  reporting  period 

(11 

SSL' 

(A-HI 

(21 
Type 

i!v^- 

(11 

Value2 
Code 
(J-PI 

(2) 

Value 
Method} 
Code 

(Q-m 

111 

buy;  sail, 
■srgec, 
redenp- 
tionl 

tt   not  axe^t  (torn  disclosure 

Month. 
Day 

13) 

Value2 
Code 
(J-PI 

(41 

Oalnl 
Code 
(A-HI 

(5) 
Identity  of 

transaction) 

NONE    (No  reportable 

Incooe,  assets,  or 
transactiona) 

I   Schwab  Money  Market  Fund  (IRA 
rolloverl 

B 

Dividend 

T 

3   Vanguard  P/I  Short  Ten  Corp. 
(IRA  rollover) 

C 

Dividend 

T 

}   Brandywlne  (IRA  rolloverl 

C 

Dividend 

T 

4   Oakmark  Fund  (IKA  rolloverl 

C 

Dividend 

T 

5   Kauffman  Fund  (IRA  rolloverl 

* 

Dividend 

T 

<   Scudder  Global  Fund  (IRA 
rolloverl 

» 

Dividend 

T 

7   20ch  Century  Int'l  (IRA 
Rolloverl 

A 

Dividend 

T 

•   Federated  2-S   yr.  Oovt.  (IRA 
R/OI 

B 

Dividend 

T 

»   Cowen  Opportunity  (IRA  R/OI 

B 

Dividend 

T 

10  Dodge  4  Cox  atock  (IRA  R/OI 

A 

Dividend 

T 

11  Dreyfus  S.I.  Oovt.  (IRA  R/OI 

C 

Dividend 

T 

U  PAH  Value  (IRA  R/OI 

» 

Dividend 

T 

13  Janus  Fund  (IRA  R/OI 

* 

Dividend 

T 

1«   PA.  Mutual  (IRA  R/OI 

c 

Dividend 

T 

IS   HAS  BquitydRA  R/OI 

D 

Dividend 

T 

16   SoGen  International  (IRA  R/OI 

A 

Dividend 

T 

17  Schwab  Honey  Mkt  (IRA  contrtbl 

A 

Dividend 

T 

18   Kaufmann  (IRA  concribi 

A 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

1   Incooe/Oain  Codes:    A-S1,000  or  less          8-Sl,001  to  )3,S00        C-S},S01  to  SS.OOO          O-tS.OOl  to  $15,000 

(See  Col   Bl  k   D<l    E-$15,001  to  SSO,000      F-is6,001  Co  $100,000     O-ll00,001  Co  $1,000,000    H-Hore  Chan  $1,000,000 

2   Value  Codaa.          J-SIS.OOO  or  leea         K.SIS.OOI  Co  S50.000      L.S50,001  Co  SIOO.OOO       M.$100,001  Co  $250,000 
(See  Col.  CI  t   031    1I-S2S6,001  CO  $500,000    0-SSo6,001  to  $1,000,000  P>Hore  than  $1,000,000 

1  Value  Method  Codsei  O-Apprslsal             R>Casc(rssl  estate  onlyl  S-Assesoent              T-Cash/Harksc 
(See  Col.  ai        B-Book  Value            V>0ther                H.Bstiisated 

77 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name   of    Person   Reporting 

RENDELL,  MARJORIE  O. 


3ate  of  Report 

01/07/97 


VII.   Page  2  I>fVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS 

and  dependent  children.  See  pp   37-S< 


(Includes  those  of  apouae 


Oeacrlptlon  of  Aaseta 
(including  truat  aaaeca) 

Indicate  where  applicable,  owner  of 
the  aiaet  by  uaing  Che  parenthetical 
•(J)"  for  lolnc  ownerahlp  of  report- 
ing individual  and  apouae,  '(S)*  for 
aeparace  ownerahip  by  apouae,  • (DC) ■ 
for  ownership  by  dependent  child. 

Place  '(X)*  after  each  asaet 
exeunt  from  prior  diaclosure. 

during 
reporting 
period 

C. 

Groaa  value 

at  end  of 

reporting 

period 

Tranaactiona  during  reporting  period 

(11 

«inc.l 
Code 
lA-Hl 

€-or 

(11 

Value: 
Code 

IJ-Pl 

(21 

Value 
Method] 
Code 
(Q-Wl 

(1) 
Type 
(e.g. , 
buy;  aell, 
merger. 

"ion? 

tf  not  exempt  from  diacloaure 

(2) 

Date: 
Month 
Day 

(3) 

Value2 
Code 
(J-PI 

(41 

Gainl 
Code 
(A- HI 

(51 

Identity  of 

buyer/aeller 

(If  private 

tranaactionl 

NONE    (No  reportable 

income,  asaets,  or 
transact iona) 

19   SoG«n  Int'l  (IRA  contrib) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

20  Schwab  Money  Market  (IRA  R/01 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

21  SoGen  Int'l  (IRA  R/0)  (S) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

22   Schwab  Honey  Market  (IRA 
contrib)  (Si 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

23   Hilliam  Blair  Growth  (IRA 
contrib)  (S) 

» 

Dividend 

K 

T 

24   ATtT  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

25  Abbott  Laboratories  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

26  Allergan  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

- 

T 

27  Atlantic  Energy  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

»  «i».i=  «ic«i,M  ,a, 

B 

Dividend 

L 

T 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

30   Coc«  Col«  (J) 

* 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

31   Disbold  Inc.  (Jl 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

32  Oreaaer  Induacrles  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

33   DuPont  E  I  DeNemouT  IJl 

A 

Dividend 

L 

T 

A 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

36  Federal  N»fl  Mortgage  *»aoc 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

1   Incooie/Oaln  Codee :    ^-Sl.OOO  or  leea          B-Sl.OOl  Co  S2,500        C-SZ.SOl  Co  SS.OOO          D-55.001  to  315,000 

(See  col,  Bl  i  Ml    E.|l4.001  to  SiO.OOO      P-lsO. 001  to  SlOO, 000     G-llio. 001  to  h, 000, 000    H-Hor.  than  ll, 6oO, 000 

2   Value  Codes,          J-SIS.OOO  or  leaa         K.S15,001  to  S50.000      L.S50,001  to  S100,000       M-SlOCOOl  to  S250,000 
(Sa.  col,  CI  4  D3I    N.|2S6,001  to  $500,000    O-lsOO.OOl  to  31.000.000  P-More  than  SI, 000. 000 

3  Value  Kethod  Codoa.   Q.»ppralaal            R-Coac(real  eatate  onlyl  S-Asaeament              T-Caeh/Market 
(See  Col  C3)        a.SSSx  Value           v-other                H-Batlmated 

78 


FIHAMCXAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  o£  Person  Reporting 

RENDELL,  MARJORIE  O. 


Date  of   Report 


VII.  Page  3  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS  --  income. 

and  dependent  children.    See   pp.    37-54  of    Instn 


A. 
Deacrlption  of  Assets 
(including  trust  assets) 

Indicate  where  appllcabla.  owner  of 
the  asset  by  using  the  parenthetical 
•(J)"  for  loint  ownership  of  report- 
ing individual  and  apouae,  "(S)*  for 
separate  ownership  by  apouae,  "(DC)' 
for  ownership  by  dependent  child. 

Place  -(X)'  after  each  asset 
exempt  from  prior  disclosure - 

Income 
during 
reporting 
period 

C. 

Gross  value 

at  end  of 

reporting 

period 

D. 
Transactions  during  reporting  period 

(1) 

Code 
(A-HI 

(2) 
Type 

t'ent  or 
Inc.l 

(11 

Value2 
Code 
(J-Pl 

(21 

Value 
MethodJ 
Code 
(Q-W) 

Typ^'' 

(e.g. . 

buy,  sell, 
merger, 
red amp- 

If  not  exempt  from  disclosure 

(2) 

Month- 
Day 

(3) 

Value2 
Code 
(J-PI 

(41 

Oainl 
Code 
(A-H) 

(SI 

Identity  of 

buyer/seller 

(If  private 

transaction) 

KONE    (Ho  reportable 

37  (Sannett  (J) 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

3B  General  Electric  IJ) 

* 

Dividend 

K 

T 

39  Gillette  Co.  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

« 

T 

40  Household  International  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

41  Loews  International  (J) 

» 

Dividend 

K 

T 

42  Lucent  Technologies  (Jl 

A 

Dividend 

J 

^ 

43  McDonalds  Corp.  (J) 

* 

Dividend 

- 

T 

44  Mobil  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

« 

T 

45  Motorola  Inc.  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

4fi  NL  Industries  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

47  Pepsico  Inc.  {J) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

46  Public  Service  Enterprise  Grp. 

A 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

49   SmithKllne  Beecham  ADR  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

" 

T 

50  Sprint  Corporation  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

51  3£0  Cotnnunicationa  Co.  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

52  Tremonc  Corp.  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

S3  Vulcan  Materials  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

54  Wal-Mart  Stores,  Inc.  (Jl 

A 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

'  iSSrsif^g.^fSJi    S:|h°Sg.°L^I?5.oco      l:y6°§5i^?o'ii!?%oo     l-.\\-.f.lo\\l\VU...o    l:l&:l''\^%\\Ml%oo 

'  ^lircSr'?i .  03,    2:|H6?SSx'Eo^llSo,ooo    S:|l^6»§ii^?„'l?:§§S,ooo^:Si;;°?LS°.!!2S6"22o      "-'-."o-o  «so.ooo 

'  'fsircSt'-g.^-^-^  8:jggE'i:!i.           ;:g?Ki-^ """ """"  S:j;?j:^s5              T.c«./H.r..t 

79 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Parson  Reporting 

RENDELL,  MARJORIE  O. 


Date  of  Report 

01/07/97 


VII.   Page  4  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS  ■-  i„co 

and  dependent  children.  See  pp.  37-54  uC  In 


lona   (Includes  those  of  spouse 


A. 

Description  of  Assets 
(Including  trust  assets) 

Indicate  whore  applicable,  owner  of 
the  asset  by  using  the  parenthetical 
"(J)"  Cor  lolnt  ownership  of  report- 
ing Individual  and  spouse,  *(S]^  for 
separate  ownership  by  spouse,  "(DC)" 
for  ownership  by  dependent  child. 

Place  -(X)-  after  each  asset 

exein)t  from  prior  disclosure. 

B. 
Income 
during 
reporting 
period 

C. 

Gross  value 

at  end  of 

reporting 

period 

D. 
Transactions  during  reporting  period 

Amt.l 
Code 
(A-H) 

Type 

111 

Value2 
Code 
(J-Pl 

(21 

value 
Method] 
Code 

lo-m 

111 
Type 
le  g., 
buy;  sell, 
merger, 
redemp- 
tlonT 

it   not  exeapt  froa  dlacloaure 

(21 

Date: 
Month- 
Day 

131 

Vmlue2 
Code 
IJ-PI 

141 

^^ 

(A-U) 

(5> 
Identity  of 
buyer/seller 

(If  private 
transaction) 

NONE    (No  reportable 
income,  assets,  or 

S5  Wells  Pargo  &  Co.  (J) 

* 

Dividend 

K 

T 

Sfi  Xerox  Corp.  (J) 

* 

Dividend 

« 

T 

S7  OS  T-Note  S.62S%  8/97  (J) 

A 

Interest 

- 

T 

58   OS  T-Note  7.5*  12/98  (J) 

K 

Interest 

.< 

T 

59  Huni  Inv  Tr\ist  Series  14  (J) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

60  Muni  Inv  Trust  Series  13  (J) 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

€1  Dreyfus  Shcrt/Incerm  Tax 
Exempt  Bond  Fund  (J) 

C 

Dividend 

I 

T 

62  Schwab  Tax  Cxempt  r*4  (J) 

C 

Dividend 

H 

T 

' 

6  3  Vangxiard  Muni  Short  Tern  Bond 
Fund  (J) 

B 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

64  Allergan,  Inc.  (DC) 

A 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

65   Atlantic  Energy  (DC) 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

66   Atlantic  Richfield  (DC] 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

67  BeOanan  Instruments  (DC) 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

68  Dresser  Industries  (DC) 

A 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

69   DuPont  <0C) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

10     Huffy  Corp.  (DC) 

» 

Dividend 

J 

T 

71  Mobil  (DC) 

A 

Dividend 

^ 

T 

72  NL  Industries  (DC) 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

1   Income/Gain  Codes:    A-Sl,000  or  less         B-fil,001  to  32,500       C-S2,S0l  to  $5,000         D>$S,001  to  S15,000 

(See  Col.  81  &  D4)    B-$1S,0QI  to  $50,000      P«$50,001  to  $100,000     G-$I0O.00I  to  $1,000,000    H**tor«  than  91,000,000 

2  Value  Codas:         J-SlS.OOO  or  leas        K-SIS,001  to  550,000     L-S50,00l  to  $100,000      M-$100,001  Co  5250.000 
(See  Col.  CI  fc  D3)    N-S2S6,001  to  5500,000   O-S500,00l  to  $1,000,000  P-More  thin  Sl,0o6,000 

3  Value  Method  Codes;   Q-Appralsal             R«Cost(resl  estate  only)  S-Assasment               T«C«sh/Karkat 
(See  Col.  C3]        U-Book  Value            v.othar                W-Bseimaced 

80 


FIHANCIAI.  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


HaiDtt  of   Person  Reporting 

RENDELL,  MARJORIE  O. 


[late  of   Report 

01/07/97 


VII.  Page  5  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS   ■  i„co«..  v.i 

and  dependent  children.  See  pp.  37-54  of  Inatructl 


(Includes  those  of  spouse 


Description  of  Assets 
(including  trust  Assets) 

Indlcace  where  applicable,  owner  of 
the  asset  by  using  the  parenthetic*! 
•(J)"  for  loinc  ownership  of  report- 
ing individual  and  spouse,  "(S)*  for 
separate  ownership  by  spouse,  * (DC) " 
Cor  ownership  by  dependent  child . 

Place  "(Z)"  after  each  asset 

exeeipt  froa  prior  disclosure. 

B. 
Incoeie 
durlna 
reporting 
period 

C. 

Oroaa  value 

at  end  at 

reporting 

period 

D. 
Tranaactiona  during  reporting  period 

<ll 

»mt.l 
Code 
(A-HI 

111 
,  Type 

^Ht'or 
Int.l 

(11 
(J-PI 

(2) 

Value 
Methods 
Code 
(Q-HI 

Type 

(e.g. , 
buy:  aell. 
merger. 

If  not  exempt  from  disclosure 

Month- 
Day 

131 

Value2 
Code 
(J-PI 

(«l 

Gainl 
Code 
(A-HI 

(5> 

Identity  of 

buyer/aeller 

(If  private 

transaction} 

NONE    (No  reportable 

income,  assets,  or 
transactions) 

73   SmithKline  Beecham  ADR  (DC) 

* 

Dividend 

« 

T 

74   Toys  R  Us  (DC) 

Dividend 

J 

T 

75   Ctf  Accrl  Trsy  Srm  Ot  11/98 
(DC) 

» 

Intereat 

J 

T 

7«   Schwab  Honey  siarkt  PD  (DC) 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

" 

7« 

7» 

•0 

•  1 

•  3 

1 
1 

e] 

•4 

as 

•c 

•  7 

•a 

•> 

90 

1  IncoM/Oaln  Oodaa:   A-Sl.OOO  or  Usa        B-Sl.OOl  to  5J.500       CSJ.SOl  to  S5.000        o-»S.0Ol  to  SIS.OOO 

ISM  Col.  Bl  t   Ml    g-JlS.OOl  to  SSO.OOO      P-lsO.OOl  to  $100,000     O-SIOO.OOI  to  SI. 000. 000    H-Mor«  than  }1, 000,000 

]   Value  Codea:          J.StS.OOO  or  leaa         IC.SIS.OOI  to  SSO.OOO      L-SSO.OOl  to  $100,000       M-JlOO.OOl  to  S3S0.000 
(Sae  Col.  CI  4  031    K-SJSO.OOl  to  3500,000    0-3So6.00l  to  SI. 000. 000  P-Moro  thin  SI. 000. 000 

)   Value  Method  Codea  1   O-Appralaal              R-Coat  (real  aetata  onlyl  S-Aaaeeieent                fCaah/Herket 
(See  Col.  C3I        O-Book  Value            v.other                K-Betlmated 

81 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  P«raon  Reporting 

RENDELL,  MARJORIE  O. 


Date  of  Report 

01/07/97 


Vni.     ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  or  EXPLANATIONS.        (moict.  p.r<:  ot  ».port  i 
NOTE:       INFORMATION   PROVIDED    IN   SECTION  VII    IS   AS   OF    12/18/96. 


82 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


ttane  of  Pttraon  Reporting 

RENDELL,  MARJORIE  O. 


D«c«  of   Report 

01/07/97 


K.  CERTIFICATION. 


In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion 
No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Judicial  Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my 
knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any 
adjudicatory  function  in  any  litigation  during  the  period  covered  by  this  repc 
in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  financial 
interest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3) (c) ,  m  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  the  information  given  above  (including  information 
pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent  children,  if  any)  is  accurate, 
true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  amd  that  any 
information  not  reported  was  withheld  because  it  met  applicable  statutory 
provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  emd  honoraria 
and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been  reported  are  in  compliance  with  th 
provisions  of  5  U.S.C^-app.  7,  section  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  7353  and  Judicia 
Conference  regulations. 


Signature 


NOTE:    ANY  INDIVIDUAL 
THIS  REPORT  MAY  BE  SUBJE 
SECTION  104) . 


0(g_>^^ 


'nn-i 


OWINGLY  AND  WILFULLY  FALSIFIES  OR  FAILS  TO  FILE 
O  CIVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U.S.C.  APP.  6, 


PILING  INSTRUCTIONS: 

Mail  signed  original  and  3  additional  copies  to: 

Committee  on  Financial  Disclosiure 

Administrative  Office  of  the  United  States  Courts 

Onoe  Columbus  Circle,  N.E. 

Suite  2-301 

Washington,  D.C.  20544 


MARJORIE  O.  RENDELL 


83 


NHT  WORTH      (as  of  December  18,1996) 


Provide  a  complete,  current  rinwicioJ  net  aonh  suiement  which  itemizes  in  detji] 
ill  iiseii  (Iflcludiflg  binJc  accounis,  real  esuic,  jecuriDcs,  crusu,  invesanenti.  ind  other  fLninciii 
holdings)  iU  liabilides  (including  debts,  mortgiges,  loins,  tnd  other  nninciil  obligadons)  of 
yourseU',  your  spouse,  and  other  imrnediaie  memben  of  your  household. 


1                                                   ASSETS 

LuaaxrtEs                          j 

1   Cuh  00  Nmd  uid  in  b>nb 

3 

300 

NaU4  p4y»blc  u  b4Aki-««air«d 

!    1 

U.S.  Co<tusffl<oi  Mcuriaei->^ 
Khaduli 

No(£i  p«>-kbk  to  b4Al:j-uiVi«cvffcd 

Uiud  .ceanoci-«<U  wioduU  (attached) 

1,681 

705 

** 

Noui  ptytbic  u  reluiva 

Unluu^  luiniics-tiid  icAeduU 

Noiu  piyihlc  to  od«n 

Accocj^u  md  no'xt  nt£<iviblc: 

.\ccounu  uid  bilU  due     (misc) 

2 

000 

Du<  tnm  rUuv«  iM  frScndi 

10, 

XX) 

Unpaid  income  lu 

D««fainm*«Bi  father's  estate 

5, 

300 

Olbcr  unp4id  lu  and  inicrut 

Doub<Ail 

Rul  uuu  nonfifei  pijribU-idd 
'<*>«"«1«       attached 

278 

000 

RuJ  utait  oim«d-.rl4  •<*«^*Attached 

605, 

XX) 

Quad  awnmes  ind  other  lieni  pty- 

XttJ  nuu  moil|itei  rauivibU 

Micr  debu-ituniu: 

AaM  and  e6cr  penoul  prapeny 

50, 

XX) 

Cub  vtluc-Uft  ifuuruice 

Ovhe  uica-iu3iizt; 

Money  market  -  Schwab* 

244, 

)42 

. 

Tool  liibOidet 

280, 

000 

- 

Net  Worth                                            : 

,320, 

047 

TeUl  AjwU 

2.600. 

147 

Totil  Uibilitiw  ind  net  wonb                 ; 

,600, 

047 

CONTP.CE.ST  U.^IUnES 

GENERAL  D.t6rMATI0N 

Aj  cadorscr,  oooulicr  or  |ui.iiiior 

none 

An  any  uku  pledfed?  (Add  Khcd- 
aJe.)                                               no 

Oa  ku4i  or  eonneo 

none 

An  yvu  defcsdant  B  any  loiti  or  le|aj 
aclaoalT                                             no 

Lt(kl  Gauiu 

none 

H«»e  ynu  jvct  taluo  bintov;«ry?     no 

Pro«iiion  Tm  FadcrtJ  lftco(n<  Tu 

none 

1 

Oihc;  ipecitJ  4<b< 

none 

____ 

Inoludaa : 

$187,952 

34,617 

21,835 

118 

$244,542 


-  joint  account 

-  IRA  pension  (M.O.  Randall) 

-  cuatodlan  (for  J.T.  Randall) 

-  IRA  (B.a.  Randall) 


Includes  all 
securities 
In  IRAs  and 
pension  funds 


84 

/ 


^^<^-c.J>-(-(     >f?A:.    ^0 


1973. Ma    villxam  tbfriR  oaotrTH.SHS 

Ua.TlS      COCEN    INTERMATXOfML   EMNO 


14.9000 
37.  MOO 


„,.*03.44 

I16.00#-«0 


(III',  VocU'.J^  y  .k^^  '  C^Jl'.^l 


i 

46a 
8o28 


ALLEROAN    Xl 
■  4TIC   E 

STIC   - 


ERGV  INC 

BECkMAN  XH^ThS    - 


LERa 
J&.    -, 

Rl  INDUSTRIE: 

SMITMkLTNE  BCl 

1  AM  REP  5  CL  A 

INT  11.75X14 


cis.Bti.r 

11.  141. 1 


85 


Marjorie  O.  Rendell 


SCHEDULE  ■?    -  pp^y 


Property 


3425  Warden  Drive 
Philadelphia,  PA 


5032-34  Asbury  Avenue 
Ocean  City,  NJ 


61^35.  QUO 
11370.  OtiO 


Mortgage 
$  130,000 

$  148,000 


Both  mortgages  held  by: 

United  Savings  Bank 
P.  O.  Box  25087 
Philadelphia,  PA  19147 


A'^.Qf^A     oe  A 


86 


I.    BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

1.  Full  name  (include  any  fonner  names  used.) 

Bruce  William  Kauffman 

2.  Address:  List  current  olace  of  residence  and  offlce  address(es). 


Office  Address: 

Dilworth,  Paxson,  Kalish 

&  Kauf&nan  LLP 
3200  Mellon  Bank  Center 
1735  Market  Street 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103 

3.  Date  and  place  of  birth. 

December  1,  1934 
Atlantic  City,  New  Jersey 

4.  Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name).  List 
spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  address(es). 

I  am  married  to  Carol  Jackson  Kauffman. 

Occupation:  Marketing 

Employer:       Lawyers'  Travel  Service 
4000  Beli  Atlantic  Tower 
1717  Arch  Street 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103 

5.  Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including 
dates  of  attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 


Yale  Law  School 

Degree  Awarded:  LL.B  (1959) 

Dates  Attended:  Sept.,  1956  -  May,  1959 


87 


University  of  Pennsylvania 

Degree  Awarded;  Bachelor  of  Arts  (1956) 

Dates  Attended:  Sept..  1953  --  June,  1956 

Duke  University:  Sept.,  1952  --  June,  1953 

EiiiDlo>TneDt  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professioDal 
corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships, 
institutions  and  organizations,  nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms, 
with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor, 
or  employee  since  graduation  from  college. 

1982  -  present:  Chairman  --  Dil worth.  Paxson.  Kalish  &  Kaufftnan  LLP 

1965    -  1980  Partner  -     Dilworth,  Paxson,  Kalish  &  Kauffman 

1960  --  1965  Associate  -  Dilworth,  Paxson,  Kalish  &  Kauffman 

1995  --  present:  Adjunct  Professor  ~  University  of  Pennsylvania 

School  of  Law 

1995  -  present:  USABancShares,  Inc.  -  Chairman,  Board  of  Directors 

1980  -  1982:  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania 

1959  --  1960:  Clerk  to  the  Honorable  Vincent  S.  Haneman  of  the 

Superior  Court  of  New  Jersey,  Appellate  Division 

1956  -  1958:  City  of  Ventnor.  New  Jersey  -  Lifeguard 

Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so  give  particulars, 
including  the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and 
type  of  discharge  received. 

No. 

Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees, 
and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to 
the  Committee. 

University  of  Pennsylvania  -•  Phi  Beta  Kappa  (1955) 
Yale  Law  School  --  Order  of  the  Coif  (1959) 
Jewish  National  Fund  Tree  of  Life  Award  (1996) 
Community  Legal  Services  Champion  Award  (1995) 
Philadelphia  Police  "Assist  Officer  Award"  (1989) 


88 


Judge  Learned  Hand  Human  Relations  Award  (1988) 
Anti-Defamation  League  Torch  of  Libert>'  Award  (1983) 

Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related 
committees  or  conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and 
give  the  titles  and  dates  of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Member.  American  Law  Insiitute 

Fellow,  American  College  of  Trial  Lawyers  (1975-  )  (Chairman 
of  Subcommittee  of  the  Federal  Judiciary  Committee  on  Judicial 
Compensation)  (1994-  ) 

Fellow,  International  Academy  of  Trial  Lawyers 

Fellow,  American  Bar  Foundation 

Fellow,  Pennsylvania  Bar  Foundation 

American  Bar  Association 

Pennsylvania  Bar  Association 

Member  -  House  of  Delegates  (1987) 

Philadelphia  Bar  Association 

Philadelphia  Bar  Foundation.  President  (1982  -  1984) 

Committee  of  Censors  —  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania,  (1976  -  1980) 

Pennsylvania  Judicial  Inquiry 

and  Review  Board  (1984  -  1988),  Chairman  (1988) 

Pennsylvania  Bar  Association  Judicial 

Selection  Reform  Committee  (1983  -  1984) 

The  Juristic  Society 

The  Federalist  Society  (1989  -  1992) 

The  American  Judicature  Society 

Lawyers'  Club 


89 


10.  Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are 
active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies.    Please  list  all  other  organizations 
to  which  you  belong. 

I  belong  to  the  following  organizations,  none  of  which,  to  my  knowledge, 
engage  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies: 

Yale  Law  School  Association.  Vice  President  (1984  --  1986) 

Yale  Law  School  Association  of  the 

Philadelphia  Area,  Past  President  (1965  --  1966) 

The  Yale  Club  (1959-  ) 

Navy  League  of  the  United  States,  Life  Member  (1986) 

The  Pennsylvama  Society  (1970-  ) 

Fellow,  Phi  Beta  Kappa  Associates  (1978-  ) 

Phi  Beta  Kappa  Association  of  the  Delaware  Valley 

Supreme  Court  Historical  Society 

The  Union  League  of  Philadelphia  (1979-  ) 

United  States  Coast  Guard  Auxiliary  (Retired  Status) 

Overbrook  Italian-American  Club  (1975-  ) 

Atlantic  City  Country  Club  (1991-  ) 

Vesper  Club  (1984-  ) 

11.  Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  be«n  admitted  to 
practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships 
lapsed.  Please  explain  the  reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the 
same  information  for  administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission 
to  practice. 

Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  (1965) 

United  States  Courts  of  Appeals: 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  District 
of  Columbia  Circuit  (1988) 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  First  Circuit  (1973) 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Third  Circuit  (1961) 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Fourth  Circuit  (1977) 

4 


90 


United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Fifth  Circuit  (1983) 
United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Eighth  Circuit  (1989) 
United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Ninth  Circuit  (1970) 

United  States  District  Courts: 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern 
District  of  Pennsylvania  (1960) 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  District  of  New  Jersey  (1960) 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  District 
of  the  District  of  Columbia  (1988) 

State  Courts: 

Supreme  Court  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania  (1961) 

Supreme  Court  of  the  State  of  New  Jersey  (1960) 
Court  of  Appeals  for  the  District  of  Columbia  (1982) 

12.       Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books,  articles, 
reports,  or  other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.  Please 
supply  one  copy  of  all  published  material  not  readily  available  to  the 
Committee.  Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues 
involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.  If  there  were  press  reports 
about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you,  please  supply 
them. 

•  Judicial  Selection  in  Pennsylvania:  A  Proposal,  27  Villanova  L.  Rev. 
1163  (1982)  (supporting  merit  selection  of  judges) 

•  Civil  RICO  Litigation  Involving  Banks:  The  Developing  Case  Law,  9 
Delaware  J    of  Corp.  Law  1  (1984) 

•  The  Philadelphia  Special  Investigation  Commission:  Dissenting 
Statement  of  Commissioner  Bruce  W.  Kauffman,  59  Temple  L. 
Quarterly  411  (1986) 

•  The  Philadelphia  Police  Advisory  Commission:  Dissenting  Statement  of 
Commission  Member  Bruce  W.  Kauffman:  In  re  Molses  Dejesus 

•  The  National  Law  Journal,  April  10,  1995,  "A  Conservative  Plea  to 
Save  LSC 


91 


13.  Health:  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  your  last 
physical  examination. 

My  health  is  excellent.  I  received  my  most  recent  general  physical  examination 
in  December,  1996. 

14.  Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have  held, 
whether  such  position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the 
jurisdiction  of  each  such  court. 

On  February  26,  1980,  I  was  appointed  by  Governor  Dick  Thornburg  to  fill  an 
unexpired  term  as  a  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania.  Upon  the 
expiration  of  my  term  in  January,  1982,  1  chose  not  to  run  as  a  partisan 
political  candidate. 

The  Pennsylvania  Supreme  Court  is  the  Commonwealth's  highest  appellate 
court,  with  plenary  jurisdiction  of  all  appeals  from  the  Permsylvania  Superior 
and  Commonwealth  Courts. 

15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  (1)  citations  for  the  ten 
most  significant  opinions  you  have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and 
citations  for  all  appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or 
where  your  judgment  was  afTirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your 
substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3)  citations  for  significant  opinions 
on  federal  or  statf  constitutional  issues,  together  with  the  citation  to 
appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were 
not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

1)  Significant  Opinions  on  Federal  and  State  Constitutional  Issues: 

•  Commonwealth  v.  Hayes.  489  Pa.  419,  .. 

414  A. 2d  318  (1980)  (concurring  opinion)  '^ 

-  Commonwealth  v.  Ward,  493  Pa.  115,  425  A.2d  401  (1981) 

-  Commonwealth  v.  Wadzinski,  492  Pa.  35.  422  A. 2d  124  (1980) 


92 


.Commonwealth  v.  Virtu,  495  Pa   59,  432  A. 2d  198  (1981) 

•  Commonwealth  v.  McElligott,  495  Pa.  75,  432  A. 2d  587  (1981) 

•  Commonwealth  v.  Robinson,  497  Pa.  49, 

438  A, 2d  964  (1981)  (dissenting  opinion) 

-  Commonwealth  v.  Scott.  496  Pa.  78,  436  A. 2d  161  (1981) 

.  CommorM-ealth  v.  Stamps,  493  Pa.  530,  427  A. 2d  141  (1981) 

2)  Reversals: 

None  of  my  Pennsylvania  Supreme  Court  opinions  were  reversed  by  the 
United  States  Supreme  Court. 

3)  Other  Significant  Opinions: 

-  In  re  Albert  Compolongo,  495  Pa.  627.  435  A. 2d  581  (1981) 

-  Pennsyhania  Industries  for  the   Blind  &  Handicapped  v.  Larson, 
Secretary  of  Transportation.  Comm  ,  496  Pa.  1,  436  A. 2d  122  (1981) 

16.       Public  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you  have  held, 

other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such 
positions  were  elected  or  appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any 
unsuccessful  candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

In  1967  I  was  elected  as  a  Delegate  to  the  Pennsylvania  Constitutional 
Convention,  and  scrsxd  until  the  Convention  concluded  in  1968    In  1973  and 
1974  I  served  as  an  elected  member  and  Chairman  of  the  Montgomery  County 
Government  Study  Commission   In  1966  I  ran  unsuccessfully  in  the  primary 
election  for  the  Pennsylvania  State  Legislature.  In  1978  I  ran  unsuccessfully  in 
the  primary  election  for  the  Pennsylvania  Supreme  Court. 

I  have  also  served  on  the  following  public  commissions  and  investigative 

bodies: 

•  Member  of  the  Philadelphia  Police 

Advisory  Commission  (1994-  ) 
(appointed  by  Mayor  Edward  Rendcll) 

'  Co-Chairman  of  the  Philadelphia 

Election  Reform  Task  Force  (1994-  ) 
(appointed  by  Mayor  Edward  Rendcll) 


93 


-  Chairman  (1988),  Pennsylvania  Judicial  Inquir>'  and  Review 

Board  (1984  -  1988) 
(appointed  by  Governor  Dick  Thomburg) 

•  Chairman  of  the  Mayor's  CommissioD  on  Minority 

Employment  in  the  Philadelphia  Police  Department  (1982) 
(appointed  by  Mayor  William  Green) 

•  Member,  Philadelphia  Special  Investigation 

Commission  ("MOVE  Commission")  (1985  --  1986) 
(appointed  by  Mayor  Wilson  Goode) 

.  Chairman  of  Civil  Service  Commission, 

Lower  Merion  Township  (1982  -  1988) 
(appointed  by  Commissioners  of  Lower  Merion  Township) 

17a.      Legal  Career:  Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience 
after  graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1)  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name  of  the 
judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

During  1959  and  1960,  I  clerked  for  the  Honorable  Vincent  S. 
Haneman  of  the  Superior  Court  of  New  Jersey,  Appellate  Division. 

2)  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and  dates; 

Since  concluding  my  clerkship  with  Judge  Haneman,  my  exclusive 
affiliation  has  been  with  the  Dilworth  Firm,  excepting  only  my  service 
between  1980  and  1982  as  a  Jusucc  of  the  Pennsylvania  Supreme  Court. 

3)  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices,  companies 
or  governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected,  and 
the  nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 

•  Dilworth,  Paxson,  Kaljsb 

&  KaufTman  LLP 

3200  The  Mellon  Bank  Center 
1735  Market  Su-eet 
Philadelphia.  Pennsylvania  19103 

Chairman  (1982-  ) 

Chairman  of  Litigation  Department   (1975  --  1980;  1992-  ) 

Partner  (1965--  ) 

8 


94 


Associate  (1960  --  1965) 

•  UNIVERSITV  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 
SCHOOL  OF  LAW 

3400  Chestnut  Street 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19104 

Adjunct  Professor  (1995-  ) 

17b       1)         What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice,  dividing 
it  into  periods  with  dates  if  its  character  has  changed  over  the 
years? 

My  individual  practice  has  foc.used  on  complex  conunercia]  litigation. 
Although  my  practice  has  expanded  into  many  areas  over  my  thirty- 
seven  years  as  a  lawyer,  its  principal  focus  has  always  been  civil 
litigation . 

2)         Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the  areas,  if  any, 
in  which  you  have  specialized. 

I  have  had  the  opportunity  to  represent  hundreds  of  corporate  and 
individual  clients  during  my  practice,  including   Linon  Industries, 
Occidental  Petroleum  Corporation,  Dr.  Armand  Hammer,  Excel 
Communications,  Spectro  Industries,  Inc.,  Frank  Sinatra,  the  Barnes 
Foundation,  Donald  Trump,  Montgomery  County  (Pennsylvania),  the 
School  District  of  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  The  Philadelphia  Electric 
Company  ("PECO"),  as  well  as  a  coalition  of  four  United  States 
Senators,  five  members  of  the  House  of  Representatives  and  three 
Governors  before  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  challenging  the 
closure  of  the  Philadelphia  Naval  Shipyard. 

My  areas  of  specialty  include  antitrust  law,  civil  rights  law,  contract 
law,  statutory  interpretation,  constitutional  law,  commercial  fraud, 
environmental  law,  regulatory  law,  and  the  law  of  defamation  and  libel. 

17c.      1)  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at  all?  If 

the  frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each 
such  variance,  giving  dates. 

Throughout  my  thirty-seven  year  legal  career,  I  appeared  in  both  federal 
and  state  courts  on  a  frequent  basis 


95 


2)  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts:  75% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record ;  25  7c 

(c)  other  courts;  0% 

3)  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil:  95% 

(b)  criminal:  5% 

4)  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to  verdict  or 
judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

I  would  estimate  that,  as  chief  counsel,  I  have  tried  approximately 
twenty  cases  to  a  verdict  or  judgment.  During  my  thirty-seven  years  of 
practice,  I  also  have  served  as  associate  counsel  in  numerous  other 
cases  that  were  tried  to  verdict  or  judgment. 

5)  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury:  5% 

(b)  non-jury:  95^ 


10 


96 


IS.       Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you 

personally  handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the 
docket  number  and  date  if  unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the 
substance  of  each  case.  Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you 
represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  the 
litigation  and  the  fmal  disposition  of  the  case.  Also  state  as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before 
whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  The  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of 
co-counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 

1.  Pia77a  V   Major  League  Baseball. 

Reported  Decisions: 

Piazza  V.  Major  League  Baseball, 

836  F.  Supp.  269  (ED.  Pa.  1993) 

Piazza  V.  Major  League  Baseball, 

831  F   Supp.  420  (ED.  Pa.  1993) 

Summary:  For  the  first  time  since  the  Supreme  Court's  1922  decision 
declaring  the  "business  of  baseball "  to  be  exempt  from  antitrust  regulation,  a  federal  court 
held  that  such  antitrust  immunity  was  narrowly  limited  to  conduct  involving  baseball's  reserve 

clause,  which  wai  not  at  issue  in  the  case. 

As  lead  counsel.  I  represented  the  plaintiffs,  who  had  been  excluded  from  a 
group  attempting  to  purchase  the  San  Francisco  Giants  Baseball  Club  (as  a  result  of 
defamatory  statements  made  by  representatives  of  Major  League  Baseball  concerning  the 
background  of  one  client).  In  a  landmark  antitrust  decision,  the  District  Court  held  that  Major 
League  Ba.seball's  70  year  old  judicially  created  exemption  from  federal  antitrust  laws  did  not 
immunize  Baseball's  conduct  in  excluding  plaintiffs.  After  extensive  discovery  and 
immediately  before  jury  selection,  I  negotiated  a  favorable  financial  settlement  on  behalf  of 
the  plaintiffs,  and  obtained  on  their  behalf  a  formal  apology  from  Major  League  Baseball.  As 
lead  counsel  for  plaintiffs,  I  presented  all  oral  arguments,  deposed  the  central  witnesses,  and 
directed  the  trial  team  in  all  phases  of  the  litigation. 

Parties  Represented:  Vincent  M.  Piazza  and  Vincent  N.  Tirendi 

Dates:  1992  -  1994 


11 


97 


Court:  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania, 

before  The  Honorable  John  R   Padova. 

Co-Counsel: 

Mark  J.  Levin,  Esq.' 
Ballard  Spahr  Andrews  &  Ingersoll 
1733  Market  Street,  51st  Floor 
Philadelphia,  Peiuisylvania  19103 
(215)  864-8200 

Counsel  for  Defendants: 

Arthur  Makadon,  Esq. 
Ballard  Spahr  Andrews  &  Ingersoll 
1735  Market  Street,  51st  Floor 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103 
(215)  864-8200 

Robert  J.  Khccl,  Esq. 

Willkie,  Fan-  &  Gallagher 

One  Citicorp  Center 

153  East  53rd  Street 

New  York,  New  York  10022-4669 

(212)  821-8234 

2.  Specter  v.  John  H.  Dalton.  Secretary  of  the  XaY>'. 

Reported  Decisions: 

Dalton  V.  Specter,  114  S.  Ct.  1719  (1994) 
Specter  V.  Garrett,  971  F.2d  936  (3d  Cir.  1992) 
Specter  v.  Garrett.  Ill  F.  Supp.  1226  (E.D.  Pa    1991) 

Suoimary:  During  the  1993  round  of  military  base  closures,  the  Base  Closure 
Commission  recommended  that  the  Philadelphia  Naval  Shipyard  be  shut  down,  which  would 
result  in  the  loss  of  thousands  of  jobs  and  have  a  devastating  impact  on  regional  businesses 
that  served  the  Shipyard.  I  served  as  lead  counsel  in  a  bipartisan  pro  bono  effort  to  keep  the 
Shipyard  open.  After  extensive  discovery,  it  became  clear  that  the  Commission  had  failed  to 
comply  with  the  express  mandates  of  Congress.  Although  my  argument  was  twice  successful 
in  the  United  Sutes  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Third  Circuit,  the  Supreme  Coun  ultimately 


Mr.  Levin  was  a  parmer  at  the  Dilworth  Firm  through  1996. 

12 


98 


decided  that  the  federal  courts  lacked  jurisdiction  to  review  base  closure  decisions.  As  lead 

counsel  for  plaintifts,  I  supervised  all  phases  of  the  litigation,  deposed  the  critical  witnesses, 
and  presented  the  oral  arguments  before  the  district  court  and  the  court  of  appeals. 

Parties  Represented;  United  States  Senators  Arlcn  Specter,  Harris  Wofford, 
Bill  Bradley  and  Frank  R   Lautenberg;  United  States  Representatives  Robert  E.  Andrews, 
Curt  Weldon,  Marjorie  Margolies-Mczvinsky,  James  C.  Greenwood  and  Robert  A.  Borski; 
the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania  and  its  Governor  Robert  P.  Casey  and  Attorney  General 
Ernest  D.  Preate,  Jr.;  the  State  of  New  Jersey  and  its  Governor  James  J.  Florio  and  Attorney 
General  Fred  DeVesa;  the  State  of  Delaware  and  its  Governor  Thomas  R.  Carper;  the  City  of 
Philadelphia,  the  International  Federation  of  Professional  and  Technical  Engineers,  Local  3; 
the  Metal  Trades  Council,  Local  687  Machinists;  Planners  Estimators  Progressmcn  & 
Schedulers  Union,  Local  No.  2;  and  Union  representatives  William  F.  Reil,  Howard  J. 
Landry  and  Ronald  Warrington. 

Dates:  1991  --  1994 

Courts:  United  States  Supreme  Court;  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the 
Third  Circuit,  before  The  Honorable  Walter  K.  Stapleton,  The  Honorable  Anthony  J.  Scirica, 
and  The  Honorable  Samuel  A.  Alito,  Jr.;  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District 
of  Pennsylvania,  before  The  Honorable  Ronald  L.  Buckwaltcr. 

Co-Counsel: 

Senator  Arlen  Specter 
Green  Federal  Bldg.,  Room  9400 
Sixth  and  .Arch  Streets 
Philadelphia,  Pcnnsylvama  19106 
(215)  597-3580 

Counse]  for  Defendants: 

Drew  S.  Days  (former  U.S.  Solicitor  General) 

Yale  Law  School 

P.O.  Box  208215 

New  Haven,  Connecticut  06520-8215 

(203)  432-4948 

Scott  R.  Mcintosh,  Esq. 
Department  of  Justice 
Civil  Division.  Appellate  Staff 
950  Pennsylvania  Avenue,  N.W. 
Washington,  DC.  20004 
(202)  514-1201 

13 


99 


Stuart  M.  Gerson,  Esq. 
Epstein,  Becker  &  Green,  PC. 
1227  25lh  Street,  N.W..  Suite  700 
Washington,  DC.  20037 
(202)  861-0900 

3.  Philadelphia  Newspapers.  Inc.  v  Borough  of  Swarthmore. 

Reported  decisions: 

Philadelphia  Newspapers,  Inc.  v  Borough  of  Swarthmore, 
381  F.  Supp.  228  (E.D    Pa.  1974) 

Summary:  In  a  case  of  first  impression  in  the  federal  courts,  the  district  court 
held  that  a  borough  ordinance  totally  prohibiting  the  placement  of  newspaper  honor  boxes  on 
public  sidewalks  violated  the  First  and  Fourteenth  Amendments  to  the  Federal  Constitution. 
In  so  holding,  Judge  Fogel  concluded  that  the  First  Amendment  guaranteed  publishers  the 
right  to  distribute  newspapers  by  means  of  honor  boxes  or  other  vending  devices  placed  on 
public  sidewalks,  subject  only  to  reasonable,  narrowly  tailored  regulation  as  to  the  place  and 
maimer  of  distribution.  The  borough's  blanket  prohibition  of  newspaper  honor  boxes, 
concluded  the  district  court,  could  not  be  squared  with  the  Supreme  Court's  long  recognition 
of  "the  imporunce  of  the  right  of  access  to  public  streets  for  the  free  dissemination  of 
mformation."  As  lead  counsel,  I  obtained  a  preliminary  injunction  restraining  the  borough's 
enforcement  of  the  ordinance  and,  following  a  two  day  trial,  .succeeded  in  obtaining 
permanent  injunctive  and  declaratory  relief  against  the  borough. 

Parties  Represented:  Philadelphia  Newspapers,  Inc. 

Date:  1974 

Court:  United  Sutes  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania, 
before  The  Honorable  Herbert  A.  Fogel. 

Co-Counsel: 

Richard  L.  Bazelon,  Esq. 

Bazelon  &  Less 

1515  Market  Street 

7th  Floor 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19102 

(215)  568-1155 


14 


100 


Counsel  for  Defendants: 

G.  Gu>  Smith.  Esq. 
Harris  &  Smith 
211  West  State  Street 
Media,  Pennsylvania  19063 
(610)  565-5300 

4.  In  re  the  Barnes  Foundation. 

Reported  Decisions: 

In  re  ihe  Barnes  Foundation.  453  Pa    Super.  243,  683  A. 2d  894  (1996) 

In  re  the  Barnes  Foundation.  449  Pa.  Super.  81,  672  A. 2d  1364  (1996) 

In  re  the  Barnes  Foundation.  14  Fiduc.Rep.2d  92,  appeal  dis., 
661  A. 2d  889  (Pa.  Super.  1995) 

In  re  the  Barnes  Foundation.  12  Fiduc.Rep  2d  349  (1992), 

aff'd.  430  Pa    Super   655,  630  A. 2d  468,  appeal   denied.  535  Pa   628, 
631  A. 2d  1002  (1993) 

Summary:  The  preservation  of  a  world  class,  priceless  art  collection  was 
threatened  by  provisions  of  the  eccentric,  seventy-  year  old  Trust  Indenture  of  Dr.  Albert  C. 
Barnes,  which  prohibited  even  the  temporary  removal  of  any  part  of  the  collection  from  the 
walls  of  a  rapidly  deteriorating  facility.  Before  the  Montgomery  County  Court  of  Common 
Pleas.  Orphan.s'  Court  Division,  I  successfully  overcame  determmed  opposition  and  won 
approval  of  the  Barnes  Foundation's  requests  to  permit  a  one-time  micmational  exhibition 
tour  of  approximately  eighty  works  of  art  from  the  Foundation's  preeminent  collection  of 
Impressionist  and  Post-Impressionist  paintings.  The  international  tour  raised  more  than  $16 
million  and  generated  good  will  for  the  Foundation.  The  funds  raised  from  the  tour  enabled 
this  public  charity,  whose  endowment  was  being  depleted,  to  undertake  a  critically  needed 
restoration  project  to  modernize  the  Foundation's  deteriorating  systems  and  to  install  a  statc- 
of-the  art  security  system  to  monitor  the  entire  collection,  1  served  as  lead  trial  counsel  and 
presented  all  appellate  arguments  before  the  Superior  Court. 

Parties  Represented:  The  Barnes  Foundation  and  its  Trustees  (Richard  H. 
Glanton,  Esq.,  Shirley  A.  Jackson,  Ph.D.,  Niara  Sudarkasa,  Ph.D.,  Charles  A.  Frank,  HI, 
and  Cuyler  H.  Walker). 

Dates:  1992  to  present;  court  proceedings  in  1992,  1993  and  1995. 


15 


101 


Courts:  Pennsylvania  Supreme  Coun;  Pennsylvania  Superior  Court,  before 
The  Honorable  James  R    Cavanaugh,  The  Honorable  John  T.  J.  Kelly.  Jr.,  and  The 
Honorable  Peter  Paul  Olszewski,  and  before  The  Honorable  Patrick  R.  Tamilia.  The 
Honorable  James  E.  Rowley,  and  The  Honorable  Thomas  G    Say  lor.  Court  of  Common  Pleas 
of  Montgomery  County,  Pennsylvania,  Orphans  Court  Division,  from  1992  to  1994,  before 
The  Honorable  Louis  D.  Stefan;  from  1992  to  the  present,  before  The  Honorable  Stanley  R. 
Ott. 

Co-Counsel: 

Mason  Avrigian,  Esq. 

Wislcr,  Pearlstine,  Talone,  Craig, 

Garrity  &  Potash 
484  Norristown  Road 
Blue  Bell,  Pennsylvania  19422 
(610)  825-8400 

Counsel  for  Other  Parties: 

S.  Gordon  Elkins,  Esq. 

Jeffrey  A.  Lutsky,  Esq. 

Stradley,  Ronon,  Stevens  &  Young 

2600  One  Commerce  Square 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103-7098 

(215)  564-8013 

Marvin  Garfinkel.  Esq. 

Mesirov,  Gelman,  Jaffe,  Cramer  &  Jamieson 

1735  Market  Street 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103 

(215)  994-1450 

Lawrence  BarUh,  Esq.  -  Assistant  Anomey  General 

21  S.  12th  Street 

3rd  Floor 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19107 

(215)  560-2402 

J.  Brooke  Aker.  Esq 

60  East  Perm  Street 

P.O   Box  150 

Norristown,  Pennsylvania  19404 

(610)  275-8200 


16 


102 


Arthur  L,  Jenkins,  Jr.,  Esq. 

325  DeKalb  Street 

P.O.  Box  710 

Norristown,  Pennsylvania  19404 

(610)  275-8222 

S.  American  Bearing  Co.  v.  Litton  Industries.  Inc.. 

Reported  Decision: 

American  Bearing  Co.  v.  Litton  Industries,  Inc. , 

729  F  2d  943  (3d  Cir.  1984) 

Summary:  I  represented  defendant  Litton  Industries  in  an  action  brought  by 
American  Bearing  alleging  Uiar  Litton  had  attempted  to  monopolize  the  market  for  certain 
bearing  components  of  industrial  air  pollution  control  devices.  In  a  successful  effort  to 
remedy  a  miscarriage  of  justice  and  unfortunate  antitrust  precedent,  I  led  the  team  effort  to 
obtain  a  new  trial  and  then  served  as  lead  trial  counsel  following  remand  to  the  district  court. 
Following  an  initial  two  week  jury  trial  resulting  in  a  verdict  for  plaintift,  the  district  court 
granted  defendant's  motion  for  a  new  trial  (I  did  not  participate  in  the  original  trial).  On 
retrial,  the  district  court  granted  my  motion  for  a  directed  verdict.  The  Third  Circuit 
affirmed    I  participated  in  and  supervised  the  briefmg  on  appeal  and  presented  the  successful 
oral  argument 

Parties  Represented:  Litton  Industries,  Inc. 

Dates:  1982  --  1984 

Courts:  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Third  Circuit,  before  The 
Honorable  Arlin  M.  Adams,  The  Honorable  Edward  R.  Becker,  and  The  Honorable  Francis 
L    Van  Dusen,  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania,  before 
The  Honorable  Raymond  J.  Broderick. 

Co-Counsel: 

David  H.  Pinmsky,  Esq. 
Ballard  Spahr  Andrews  &  Ingersoll 
1735  Market  Street,  51st  Floor 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103-7599 
(215)  864-8117 


17 


103 


Counsel  for  Plaintiff: 

Gary  Wynkoop,  Esq.  (deceased) 
Blank  Rome  Comisky  &.  McCauley 
Four  Penn  Center  Plaza 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103 
(215)  569-5500 

6.  Pennwalt  Corp.  v.  Centaur  Partners. 

Reported  Decision: 

Pennwalt  Corp.  v.  Ceniaur  Parinen,, 

710  F.  Supp.  Ill  (E.D.  Pa.  1989) 

Sununary:  In  a  case  of  first  impression  under  Pennsylvania's  newly  enacted 
anti-takeover  statute,  I  served  as  lead  counsel  in  challenging  the  statute's  constitutionality   My 
client.  Cenuur  Partners,  a  major  Pennwalt  shareholder,  attempted  to  call  a  shareholders 
meeting  to  vote  on  removing  obstacles  to  a  possible  acquisition  of  Permwalt  by  Centaur  or  a 
third  party.  Pennwalt's  board  of  directors  brought  an  action  in  federal  court  seeking  to  block 
the  shareholders  meeting.  Centaur  opposed  the  restraining  order,  arguing  that  the  anti- 
takeover statute,  upon  which  Pennwalt's  board  was  relying,  violated  the  Coiruncrce  Clause  of 
the  Federal  Constitution.  While  the  district  coun  initially  rejected  Pennwalt's  various 
abstention  arguments,  it  ultimately  concluded  that  there  was  no  direct  conflict  between  the 
anti-takeover  statute  and  federal  law.  While  the  case  was  on  apf)eal.  a  third-party  offered  to 
purchase  Pennwalt's  shares  at  a  price  approximately  30%  above  that  which  Centaur  was 
offering,  and  the  board  accepted  the  bid. 

Parties  Represented    CenUur  Partners 

Date:  1989 

Courts:  The  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of 
Permsylvania.  before  The  Honorable  Robert  S.  Gawthrop,    III. 

Co-Counsel: 

David  H.  Pittinsky,  Esq. 
Ballard  Spahr  Andrews  &  Ingcrsoll 
1735  Market  Street.  5 1st  Floor 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103-7599 
(215)  864-8117 


18 


104 


Counsel  for  PlaintifT: 

Matthew  J   Brodcrick,  Esq. 
Dechert  Price  &  Rhoads 
4000  Bell  Atlantic  Tower 
1717  Arch  Street 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103 
(215)  994-2652 

7.  Township  of  Phmouth  v.  County  of  Montgomery 

Reported  Decisions: 

Township  of  Ptymouth  v.  County  of  Montgomery , 

121  Pa.  Conunw.  303,  550  A.2d  1033  (1988) 

Township  of  Plymouth  v.  Montgomery  County, 

109  Pa.Commw.  200,  531  A.2d  49  (1987) 

Sununary:  The  Commissioners  of  Montgomery  County,  Pennsylvania 
determined  that  a  trash-to-stcam  facility  was  necessary  to  protect  the  environment  of  the  entire 
County  and  to  resolve  the  County's  growing  refuse  disposal  crisis.  Although  everyone 
recognized  that  such  a  facility  was  needed,  residents  of  Plymouth  Township  (in  which  the 
facility  was  to  be  located)  believed  that  it  should  be  built  in  someone  else's  township. 
Reflecting  the  "not  in  my  back  yard"  theme,  Plymouth  Township  brought  suit  against 
Montgomery  County  seeking  a  declaration  that  the  County's  trash-to-steam  facility  violated 
recently  enacted  Township  zoning  laws.  Despite  exceptionally  bitter  opposition,  I  obuined  a 
judicial  declaration  that  the  Township's  zoning  laws  were  invalid,  and  defeated  the 
Township's  prolonged  legal  challenges  to  block  the  critically  needed  facility.  As  lead  counsel 
for  the  County,  I  presented  all  arguments  and  supervised  all  aspects  of  the  litigation  team's 
efforts. 

Parties  Represented :  County  of  Montgomery 

Dates:  1986  -  1988 

Courts:  The  Commonwealth  Court  of  Pennsylvania,  before  The  Honorable 
David  W.  Craig,  The  Honorable  Bernard  L.  McGinley,  The  Honorable  James  Crumlish,  Jr., 
The  Honorable  John  A.  MacPhail,  The  Honorable  Joseph  T.  Doyle  and  The  Honorable 
Francis  A   Barry;  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Montgomery  County,  before  The  Honorable 
Wilson  Bucher.  on  Special  Assignment  from  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Lancaster 
County. 


19 


105 


Co-Counsel; 

Shcryl  L.  Auerbach,  Esq. 

Dilworth,  Paxson,  Kalish  &  Kauffman,  LLP 

3200  The  Mellon  Bank  Center 

1735  Market  Street 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103 

(215)  575-7124 

Counsel  for  PlaintifT: 

Arthur  W.  Lcfkoe,  Esq    (retired) 
Wisler,  Pearlstein,  Talone,  Craig, 

Garrity  &  Potash 
484  Norristown  Road 
Blue  Bell,  Pennsylvania  19422 
(610)  825-8400 

8.  Robert  Bruce.  Inc.  v.  Sears.  Roebuck  &  Co.. 

Reported  Decision: 

Robert  Bruce,  Inc   v   Sears,  Roebuck  &  Co. , 
343  F.  Supp.  1333  (ED.  Pa.  1972) 

Summary:  In  a  case  pitting  a  "modem  merchandising  monolith"  against  a 
much  smaller  clothing  manufacturer,  I  succeeded  in  defending  the  enormously  valuable 
trademark  rights  of  my  client,  Robert  Bruce,  Inc.,  which  had  spent  years  developing  and 
marketing  its  highly  successful  "Grubb"  line  of  clothing.  At  the  lime  this  trademark 
infringement  action  was  brought,  the  "Grubb"  line  represented  50%  of  Robert  Brucc's  total 
clothing  sales    In  1971  Sears  Roebuck  began  selling  jeans  under  the  "Neets  n  Grubs" 
trademark,  and  refused  the  demand  of  Robert  Bruce  to  cease  and  desist  from  the  infringing 
conduct.  After  a  two  week  trial  in  which  I  served  as  lead  counsel,  the  district  court  held  that 
the  "Grubb"  mark  was  "arbitrary  and  fanciful."  rather  than  descriptive,  and  was  thus  entitled 
to  protection  without  proof  of  secondary  meaning.  The  district  court  further  held  that  the 
'Neets  D  Grubs '  mark  created  a  likelihood  of  consumer  confusion,  and  thus  enjoined  Sears 
from  further  use  of  the  mark. 

Parties  represented:  Robert  Bruce,  Inc. 


20 


106 


Co-Counsel: 

Arthur  H.  Seidel,  Esq. 
Scidel,  Gonda,  Lavorgna  &  Monaco,  PC. 
Two  Pcnn  Center,  Suite  1800 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19102 
(215)  368-8383 

Dates:  1971  --  1972 

Court:  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania, 
before  The  Honorable  Edward  R.  Becker. 

Counsel  for  Defendaot: 

Burton  Y.  Weitzenfeld,  Esq. 
120  South  Riverside  Plaza 
Chicago,  Illinois  60606 
(312)  876-7100 

Charles  M.  Allen.  Esq. 

Howsen  &  Howsen 

P.O.  Box  457 

Spring  House,  Pennsylvania  19477 

(215)  540-9200 

9.  Molinari  v.  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania.  Department  of  Transportation. 

Commonwealth  Court  of  Pennsylvania,  No.  453  M.D.  199  (1993) 

Summary:  In  this  bid  contest  case,  I  represented  Envirotesi  Partners,  one  of 
the  largest  African-.^merican  owned  and  managed  companies  in  the  nation    Following  a 
comprehensive  evaluation  of  proposals  submitted  in  response  to  the  Commonwealth's  Request 
for  Proposals  ("RFP"),  the  Commonwealth  awarded  Envirotest  the  contract  to  implement  and 
operate  an  enhanced  centralized  vehicle  emission  insf>ection  program  required  to  bring 
Pennsylvania  into  compliance  with  the  Federal  Clean  Air  Act  Amendments  of  1990.  A 
disappointed  bidder  sought  to  enjoin  the  contract  award,  alleging,  inter  alia,  that  the  RFP 
points  awarded  to  Envirotest  as  a  Socially/Economically  Restricted  Business  ("SERB")  had 
been  improperly  calculated  by  the  SERB  evaluation  comminec   In  effect   the  disappointed 
bidder  was  challcngmg  the  administration  of  the  entire  SERB  program.  Following  a  six  day 
trial  during  which  I  served  as  lead  counsel  for  Envirotest,  the  Commonwealth  Court  held  that 
Envirotest 's  SERB  points  had  been  properly  calculated  and  upheld  the  Commonwealth's 
selection  of  Envirotest  to  implement  the  emissions  testing  program. 

Parlies  Represented:  Envirotesi  Partners 
21 


107 


Dates:  1993 

Court:  Commonwealth  Coim  of  Pennsylvania,  before  The  Honorable  James  R. 


Kelley. 

Co-Counsei: 

John  L.  Heaion,  Esq. 

(then  Chief  Counsel  of  Pa.  Dept.  of  Transporuiion) 

Weiss,  Weiss  &  Weiss 

802  Walnut  Street 

P.O.  Box  838 

Lebanon,  Pennsylvania  17042 

(717)  273-1661 

Counsel  for  Plaintiffs: 

Michael  D.  Reed,  Esq. 
Mette,  Evans  &  Woodside 
3401  North  Front  Street 
P.O.  Box  5950 

Harrisburg.  Pennsylvania  17110 
(717)  232-5000 

10.  Bethlehem  Steel  Corp.  v.  Litton  Industrie.s.  Inc. 

Reported  Decision: 

Bethlehem  Sreel  Corp.  v.  Litton  Industries,  Inc..  321  Pa.  Super.  357,  468  A  2d 
748  (1983),  aff'd,  507  Pa.  88,  488  A.2d  581  (1984) 

Summary:  As  lead  counsel,  I  defended  Litton  and  its  Lake  Erie  shipbuilding 
division  in  a  $95  million  breach  of  contract  claim  brought  by  Bethlehem  Steel.  In  1968, 
Bethlehem  Steel  purchased  a  1000  foot,  state-of-the-art,  self-unloading  iron  ore  carrier  from 
Litton  for  transporting  ore  between  Michigan  mines  and  Pennsylvania  steel  mills.  At  the  end 
of  1968,  Betlilehem  and  Litton  executed  a  two  page  "option"  letter  under  which  Linon 
offered  to  construct  up  to  five  similar  ships  for  Bethlehem  within  the  next  five  years.  In  the 
ensuing  years,  however,  Bethlehem  repeatedly  told  Litton  that  it  did  not  intend  to  order  any 
additional  ships,  and  Litton  began  dismantling  its  Lake  Erie  shipbuilding  facilities. 

In  1973,  Bethlehem  reversed  course  and  purported  to  order  three  new  1000 
foot  self-unloading  iron  ore  carriers.  After  the  parties  were  unable  to  reach  agreement  on 
critical  contract  terms,  particularly  with  respect  to  inflation  indexing,  Bethlehem  broke  off 
negotiations  and  filed  a  $95  million  breach  of  contract  claim  in  the  Allegheny  County 

22 


108 


Common  Picas  Court.  Following  a  nine  month  trial,  the  court  held  that  the  two  page  option 
letter,  executed  by  two  of  the  nations  largest  corporations,  could  not  have  been  intended  by 
the  parties  to  constitute  an  enforceable  option  coDtract.  Following  en  banc  review  by  three 
judges  of  the  Common  Pleas  Court,  the  decision  was  affirmed  by  both  the  Pennsylvania 
Superior  and  Supreme  Courts.  I  served  as  Litton's  lead  counsel  for  both  the  trial  and  the 
ap(>eals  in  this  case. 

Party  Represented:  Litton  Industries.  Inc. 

Court:  Pennsylvania  Supreme  Court,  before  The  Honorable  John  P   Flaherty, 
The  Honorable  William  D.  Hutchinson,  The  Honorable  Rolf  Larscn,  and  The  Honorable 
Stephen  A.  Zappala;  Superior  Court  of  Pennsylvania,  before  The  Honorable  William  F. 
Cercone,  The  Honorable  John  P.  Hester,  The  Honorable  James  R   Cavanaugh,  The 
Honorable  Richard  B   Wickersham,  The  Honorable  James  E.  Rowley,  The  Honorable  Donald 
E   Wieand.  and  The  Honorable  T    Sidney'  Hoffman;  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  .Allegheny 
County,  before  The  Honorable  Maurice  Louik. 

Co-Counsel: 

Carl  H.  Hanzelik,  Esq. 

Diiworth,  Paxson,  Kalish  &  Kauffinan,  LLP 

3200  The  Mellon  Bank  Center 

1735  Market  Street 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103 

(215)  575-7150 

Counsel  for  Plaintiff: 

William  B.  Mallin,  Esq. 

Eckert  Seamans  Cherin  &  Mcllott 

600  Grant  Street 

Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania  15219 

(412)  566-6027 

Hon.  Robert  L.  Byer 

Kirkpatrick  &  Lockhart,  LLP 
1500  Oliver  Building 
Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania  15222 
(412)  355-6500 


23 


109 


Curtis  H.  Barnette,  Esq. 
President  &.  CEO 
Bethlehem  Steel  Corp. 
8lh  &  Eaton  Avenues 
Bethlehem,  Pennsylvania  19180 
(216)  694-2424 

I  have  had  contact  with  the  following  judges  and  attorneys  within  the  last  five 
years: 

The  Honorable  Edward  R.  Becker 

United  Sutes  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Third  Circuit 

601  Market  Street,  Room  19613 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19106 

(215)  597-9642 

The  Honorable  Raymond  J.  Broderick 
United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania 
601  Market  Street,  Room  10613 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19106 
(215)  597-7500 

The  Honorable  Robert  S   Gawthrop,  III 
United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Eastern  Distnct  of  Pennsylvania 
601  Market  Street,  Room  7613 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvama  19106 
(215)  597-6143 

The  Honorable  John  R.  Padova 
Umted  States  District  Court  for  the 
Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania 
601  Market  Street,  Room  7614 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19106 
(215)  597-1178 

The  Honorable  Louis  H.  Pollack 
United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania 
601  Market  Street,  Room  16613 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19106 
(215)  597-9590 


24 


no 


The  Honorable  Arlin  M.  Adams 

Schnader,  Hainson,  Segal  &  Lewis 

1600  Market  Street 

Suite  3600 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103-7286 

(215)  751-2072 

Richard  H.  Glanton.  Esq. 
Reed,  Smith,  Shaw  &  McClay 
2500  One  Liberty  Place 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103-7301 
(215)  851-8120 

Anhur  G.  Rayncs,  Esq. 

Rayne.';,  McCarty,  Binder,  Ross  &  Mundy 

1845  Walnut  Street 

Suite  2000 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103 

(215)  568-6190 

David  Berger,  Esq. 

Berger  &  Montague,  PC 

1622  Locust  Street 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103-6365 

(215)  875-3030 

Jerome  J    Shestack.  Esq. 

Wolf,  Block.  Schorr  &  Solis-Cohen 

12th  Floor,  Packard  Building 

15th  &  Chestnut  Streets 

Philadelphia,  Penn.<;ylvania  19102-2678 

(215)  977-2290 


25 


Ill 


19.       Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  actiyities  you  have 

pursued,  including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or 
legal  matters  that  did  not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  this  question,  please  omit  any  information  protected  by  the 
attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the  privilege  has  been  waived.) 

•  MeiloD  Bank.  N.A.  v.  Richard  I.  Rubin.  Inc.:  In  a  series  of  lawsuits  in  the 
Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Philadelphia  County,  before  the  Honorable  Sandra 
M.  Moss,  Mellon  Bank  sued  my  clients,  Richard  I.  Rubin  &  Co.,  Inc.,  Ronald 
Rubin  and  related  entities,  on  account  of  Rubin's  refusal  to  close  on  the 
purchase  of  the  Two  Mellon  Building.  Mellon  sought  injunctive  relief  to  force 
Rubin  to  close  the  transaction.  Subsequent  to  the  Court's  denial  of  Mellon's 
motion  for  the  injimction,  a  disastrous  fire  destroyed  the  adjacent  building.  One 
Meridian,  reducing  the  market  value  of  Two  Mellon  by  90%,  and  Mellon 
claimed  damages  exceeding  S42  million    After  extensive  discovery  and 
numerous  court  appearances,  the  parties  entered  into  a  settlement  agreement 
favorable  to  Rubin 

•  Chair  —  Commission  to  Preserve  Legal  Funding  for  All:  I  led  the  fight  to 
restore  over  $2  million  in  state  funding  for  legal  services  to  those  in  need  but 
unable  to  afford  a  lawyer. 

•  Pennsylvania  Judicial  Inquiry  and  Review  Board:  While  serving  on  this 
Board  between  1984  and  1988,  the  final  year  as  Chairman,  I  reviewed 
complaints  brought  against  members  of  the  judiciary  and,  where  appropriate, 
recommended  disciplinary  action  to  the  Pennsylvania  Supreme  Court. 

•  Philadelphia  Special  Investigation  Commission:  During  its  two  year 
investigation,  I  served  on  the  MOVE  Commission,  appointed  by  Mayor  Wilson 
Goodc  to  investigate  the  causes  of  a  police  action  resulting  in  the  deaths  of  a 
number  of  children  and  adults  and  the  destruction  of  an  entire  city  block.  Our 
Commission  focused  not  only  on  the  causes  of  this  tragedy,  but  on  finding 
ways  to  ensure  that  it  would  never  be  repeated, 

•  Pardon  of  Dr.  Armand  Hammer:  Dr.  Armand  Hammer  pled  guilty  to 
making  an  illegal  campaign  contribution  to  President  Nixon's  1972  Reelection 
Campaign.  As  lead  counsel  in  seeking  a  Presidential  pardon  for  Dr   Hammer,  I 
reviewed  the  guilty  plea  and  filed  briefs  with  the  Pardon  Attorney  of  the 
Department  of  Justice.  Dr.  Hammer's  pardon  was  granted  by  President  Bush  in 
1989. 


26 


112 


II.    FLNANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

List  sources,  aiaounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred 
iDcome  arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other 
future  benefits  which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business 
relationships,  professional  services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers, 
clients,  or  customers.  Please  describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to 
be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or  business  interest. 

Under  my  original  agreement  with  the  Dilworth  Firm,  in  accordance  with  its 
standard  ten  year  retirement  program,  I  was  to  receive  $200,000  annually 
during  my  first  five  years  of  judicial  service,  and  $100,000  annually  for  each 
of  the  following  five  years.  To  minimize  any  potential  for  the  appearance  of 
conflict,  however,  the  Firm  has  agreed  to  pay  for  the  five  annual  $100,000 
installments  through  a  fully  paid  up  ahnuity  funded  by  the  Firm  during  the  first 
five  years  of  my  judicial  service.  Payments  under  this  annuity  shall  be 
administered  by  an  independent  third  party.  I  intend  to  recuse  myself  in  any 
case  in  which  the  Dilworth  Firm  is  involved  during  the  entire  ten  year  period 
in  which  I  am  to  receive  payments  under  my  retirement  program.  A  copy  of 
my  agreement  with  the  Firm  is  included  as  Attachment  "A." 

In  1995,  USABancShares  granted  me  options  to  purchase  up  to  30,000  shares 
of  the  Company's  common  stock. 

Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including 
the  procedure  you  will  follow  in  determioins  these  areas  of  concern. 
Identify  the  categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are 
likely  to  present  potential  conflicts-of-interest  during  your  initial  service  in 
the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

I  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest  through  adherence  to  the  Rules 
of  Judicial  Conduct.  More  specifically,  if  my  appointment  to  the  federal 
judiciary  is  confirmed,  I  intend  to  recuse  myself  in  any  case  in  which  the 
Dilworth  Firm  is  counsel  of  record.  I  will  also  recuse  myself  from  any  case  in 
which  a  former  client  or  a  business  entity  in  which  I  have  an  interest  is  a 
party,  in  which  USABancShares  is  party,  or  in  which  the  University  of 
Pennsylvania  is  a  party. 

Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside 
employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the 
court?  If  so,  explain. 

If  my  appointment  to  the  federal  judiciary  is  confirmed,  I  will  resign  as 
Chairman  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  USABancShares,  Inc. 


27 


113 


During  the  past  two  fall  semesters,  I  served  as  an  Adjunct  Professor  of  Law  at 
the  University  of  Pennsylvania's  School  of  Law  and  would  hope  to  continue 
doing  so  if  confirmed.  If  I  do  continue  teaching  at  Pcnn,  I  would,  of  course, 
recuse  myself  in  any  lawsuit  in  which  the  University  is  a  party. 

4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  aU  income  received  during  the  calendar  year 
preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all 
salaries,  fees,  dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria, 
and  other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of 
the  financial  disclosure  report,  required  by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act 
of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  Atuchmcnt  "B"  (Form  AO-10) 

5.  Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail  (Add 
schedules  as  called  for). 

See  Attachment  "C"  (Financial  Net  Worth  Statement) 

6.  Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign?  If 
so,  please  identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate, 
dates  of  the  campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

In  1991,  I  served  in  Ronald  D.  Castille's  campaign  in  the  Philadelphia  mayoral 
race.  The  campaign  ended  in  June,  1991,  when  Mr.  CastiUe,  who  is  now  a 
Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania,  was  defeated  in  the  Republican 
primary  election,  I  also  served  in  Justice  Castille's  successful  campaign  for 
election  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania. 


28 


114 


III.    GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's 
Code  of  Professional  Responsibilit)'  called  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of 
professional  prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to 
participate  in  serving  the  disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to 
fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  speciHc  instances  and  the  amount  of 
time  devoted  to  each. 

-  Chair  -  Commission  to  Preserve  Legal  Funding  for  All:  I  led  the  fight  to 
restore  over  S2  million  in  state  funding  for  legal  services  to  those  in  need  but 
unable  to  afford  a  lawyer.  Between  meetings  in  Philadelphia,  Harrisburg,  and 
Washington,  I  spent  several  hundred  hours  in  this  effort. 

•  Philadelphia  Navy  Yard  Litigation:  I  represented  a  bipartisan  coalition  of 
elected  officials  and  Shipyard  workers  in  a  three  year  legal  effort  to  prevent  the 
Shipyard's  unlawful  closure.  During  the  course  of  litigation  that  ended  in  the 
Supreme  Court,  the  Dilworth  Firm  expwnded  over  $1  million  in  legal  time  on  a 

pro  bono  basis. 

•  Philadelphia  Police  Advisor^'  Commission:  Esublished  by  Mayor  Rendell  in 
1994,  the  Police  Advisory  Commission  has  been  given  the  vital  task  of 
monitoring  and  improving  the  relationship  between  the  Philadelphia  Police 
Department  and  the  communities  and  citizens  the  Department  serves.  From  the 
Commission's  inception,  I  have  participated  in  all  phases  of  its  work, 
reviewmg  not  only  individual  allegations  of  abuse,  but  broader  issues  of  police 
policy  and  procedures.  I  spend  several  hours  per  month  on  Commission  related 
activities. 

•  Mayor's  Task  Force  on  Minority  Employment  in  the  Philadelphia  Police 
Department:  At  the  request  of  Mayor  William  Green,  I  chaired  a  commission 
that  studied  and  issued  a  unanimous  report  on  measures  to  remedy  the  low 
minority  representation  in  the  Philadelphia  Police  Department.  I  devoted 
approximately  one  hundred  hours  to  Task  Force  meetings  and  in  preparing  the 
Final  Report. 

•  Philadelphia  Special  Investigation  Commission:  During  its  two  year 

investigation,  I  served  on  the  MOVE  Commission,  appointed  by  Mayor  Wilson 
Goode  to  investigate  the  causes  of  a  police  action  resulting  in  the  deaths  of  a 
number  of  children  and  adults  and  the  destruction  of  an  entire  city  block.  Our 
Commission  focused  not  only  on  the  causes  of  this  tragedy,  but  on  finding 
ways  to  ensure  that  it  would  never  be  repeated.  Televised  hearings  took  place 
over  several  weeks,  and  I  estimate  that  I  devoted  five  hundred  hours  of  time  to 
MOVE  Commission  work. 


29 


115 


.  Philadelphia  Bar  Foundation  -  President:  The  Foundation  raised  substantial 
funds  for  distribution  to  many  worthy  charities.  During  the  year  in  which  I  was 
President  of  the  Foundation,  I  devoted  several  hours  per  week  to  Foundation 
related  activities. 

2.  The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial 
Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in 
any  organization  that  invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or 
religion.  Do  you  currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any 
organization  which  discriminates  —  through  either  formal  membership 
requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership  policies?  If 
so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.  What  you  have  dune  to  try  to  change 
these  policies? 

To  the  best  of  my  knowledge,  none  of  the  organizations  to  which  I  belong 
(disclosed  in  response  to  Question  I-IO,  supra)  discriminates  on  the  basis  of 
race,  sex.  or  religion.  The  Union  League  of  Philadelphia,  to  which  I  have 
belonged  since  1979,  first  accepted  women  as  fiill  members  in  1983. 

3.  Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  reconmiend 
candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it  recommend 
your  nomination?  Please  describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial 
selection  process,  from  beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances 
which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you  participated). 

I  have  appeared  twice  before  the  Federal  Judicial  Nominating  Commission  of 
Pennsylvania,  most  recently  on  June  12,  1997,  and  previously,  in  early  1996. 
In  conjunction  with  my  June  12,  1997  interview,  I  submitted  a  revised  personal 
data  questionnaire  to  the  Commission.  I  also  interviewed  with  representatives 
of  the  Department  of  Justice,  the  FBI,  and  the  American  Bar  Association. 
Although  I  have  not  received  formal  notice,  I  presume  that  the  Commission 
recommended  my  Nomination  to  the  federal  judiciary. 

4.  Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee 
discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner 
that  could  reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such 
case,  issue,  or  question?  If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

No. 

5.  Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial 
activism." 


30 


116 


The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciar>  within  the  Federal  government,  and 
within  society  generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controrersy 
in  recent  years.  It  has  become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic 
criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of  the 
prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to 
include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than 
grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a 
vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad 
classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  afTirmative  duties 
upon  governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional 
requirements  such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions 
in  the  manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities. 

Under  the  Constitudon's  framework  of  divided  powers,  the  role 
assigned  to  the  judiciary  is  not  to  construct  the  law  from  the  policy 
choices  ot  mdividual  judges,  but  to  interpret  and  apply  that  law  which 
the  elected  members  of  our  legislative  branch  have  enacted   As 
Hamilton  rccogmzed  in  Federalist  No.  78,  the  judiciary  was  the  "least 
dangerous  branch"  precisely  because  it  had  neither  "Force  nor  Will,  but 
merely  judgment  "  The  courts  must  not  be  transformed  into  a  laboratory 
of  social  engineering,  but  should  limit  their  role  to  that  of  applying  the 
law  to  the  cases  and  controversies  brought  before  them.  In  short,  it  is 
the  obligation  of  judges  not  to  make  the  law,  but  to  interpret  the  law 
made  by  those  elected  to  do  so. 


31 


117 

rv.    CONFroENTIAL 

1 .  FuU  name  (include  aay  former  names  used.) 

Bruce  William  Kauffman 

2.  Address:  List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address(es).    List  all 
office  and  home  telephone  numbers  where  you  may  be  reached. 

Current  Residence: 

1820  Rinenhouse  Square 

No.  601 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103 

(215)735-2111 

Office  Address: 

Dilworth,  Paxson,  Kalish 

&  Kauf&nan  LLP 
3200  Mellon  Bank  Center 
1735  Market  Street 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19103 
(215)  575-7001 

3.  Have  you  ever  been  discharged  from  employment  for  any  reason  or  have 
you  ever  resigned  after  being  informed  that  your  employer  intended  to 
discharge  you? 

No. 

4.  Have  you  and  your  spouse  Hied  and  paid  all  taxes  (federal,  state  and  local) 
as  of  the  date  of  yoiu-  nomination?   Please  indicate  if  you  filed  "married 
filing  separately."  Did  you  make  any  back  tax  payments  prior  to  your 
nominations?    If  so,  give  full  details. 

As  of  the  date  of  my  nomination,  my  wife  Carol  and  1  have  paid  all  federal, 
state,  and  local  taxes  owed  as  of  thiit  date.  Since  our  marriage,  Carol  and  I 
have  filed  joint  returns.  For  tax  year  1996,  we  filed  a  timely  request  for 
extension,  under  which  we  received  an  extension  until  August  15,  1997  to  file 
our  1996  federal  income  tax  return.  As  of  July  2,  1997,  all  presently  calculable 
federal  income  tax  liability  for  1996  was  paid  in  full.  On  July  14,  1997,  we 
made  an  estimated  payment  for  tax  year  1997  of  $15,000. 


32 


/i«  ne^A     OQ 


118 


Has  a  tax  lien  or  other  collection  procedure  (to  include  receipt  of  connputer 
balance  due  noticed,  ever  been  instituted  against  you  by  federal,  state,  or 
local  authorities?  If  so,  give  full  details. 

I  have  always  filed  my  tax  returns  and/or  requests  for  extensions  in  a  timcl> 
fashion   With  the  exception  of  tax  year  1995,  I  have  obtained  the  abatement  of 
late  payment  penalties  for  each  tax  year  in  which,  due  to  the  cash  flow 
problems  described  below,  I  was  unable  to  pay  my  full  tax  liability  by  April 
15th.  I  did  not  seek  an  abatement  of  the  late  payment  penalty  for  tax  year  1995 
because  it  was  approximately  $600.00,  and  thus  it  was  less  expensive  to  pay 
the  penalty  than  to  go  through  the  abatement  process.  I  have  received  "balance 
due"  notices  from  the  IRS  for  ux  years  1992  through  1995,  and  anticipate 
receiving  a  balance  due  notice  for  1996.  All  "balance  due"  notices  have  been 
paid  in  full. 

The  following  sets  forth  my  total  federal  iiKome  ux  liability  for  tax  years  1992 
through  1996,  as  well  as  the  date  and  the  amount  of  my  final  payment  for  each 
tax  year: 

Amount  of 
Tax  Year        Tax  Liability  Pate  Paid  in  Full  Final  Payment 

1996  $177,410  (est.)  7/2/97  $11,003 

1995  $118,854  11/26/96  $54 

1994  $206,956  7/15/96  $14,517 

1993  $120,298  6/19/95  510,000 

1992  $138,312  12/28/93  $78,926 

As  explained  in  my  successful  requests  for  abatement  of  late  payment  penalties, 
in  early  1992  the  Dilworth  Firm  lost  almost  50%  of  its  parmers,  and  following 
this  restructuring,  suffered  a  similar  percentage  decline  in  its  annual  revenues. 
During  the  late  1980's  the  Firm  had  also  incurred  a  substantial  debt  which, 
when  combined  with  this  drastic  revenue  reduction,  threatened  the  Firm's 
viability. 

Through  the  sacrifices  of  its  partners  and  a  conservative  fiscal  policy,  the  Firm 
has  survived  and  prospered.  In  that  process,  however,  my  own  annual  salary 
has  been  cut  almost  in  half  from  its  levels  in  the  late  1980  s.  When  combined 
with  my  divorce  settlement,  my  own  cash  flow  has  been  insufficient  to  pay  my 
full  income  tax  liability  when  due   I  have  also  worked  out  a  payment  schedule 


33 


119 


with  the  City  of  Philadelphia  with  respect  to  my  real  estate  ux  liabilities,  to 
which  I  have  adhered. 

I  always  tiled  my  returns  or  requests  for  filing  extensions  in  a  timely  fashion 
As  of  the  date  of  my  nomination,  I  have  paid  all  federal,  state,  and  local 

income  taxes  that  were  due. 

6.  Have  you  or  your  spouse  ever  been  the  subject  of  any  audit,  investigation, 
or  inquir>  for  either  federal,  state,  or  local  taxes?   If  so,  give  full  details. 

No. 

7.  Have  you  or  your  spouse  ever  declared  bankruptcy?  If  so,  give  particulars. 

No 

8.  Have  you  to  your  knowledge  ever  been  under  federal,  state,  or  local 
investigation  for  a  possible  violation  of  either  a  civil  or  criminal  statute  or 
administrative  agency  regulation?   If  so,  give  full  details.    Has  any 
organization  of  which  you  were  an  officer,  director,  or  active  participant 
ever  been  the  subject  of  such  an  investigation  with  respect  to  activities 
within  your  responsibility?  If  so,  give  full  details. 

No 

9.  Have  you  ever  been  the  subject  of  a  complaint  to  any  court,  administrative 
agency,  bar  association,  disciplinary'  committee,  or  other  profes.<;ional 
group  for  a  breach  of  ethics,  unprofessional  conduct  or  a  violation  of  any 
rule  of  practice?    If  so,  give  particulars. 

No 

10.  Have  you  ever  been  a  party  (whether  plaintiff,  defendant  or  in  any  other 
capacity)  to  any  litigation? 

I  have  been  a  party  in  two  divorce  proceedings.  In  addition,  other  than  in  my 
official  or  representative  capacity  as  a  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Pennsylvania,  or  of  the  various  commissions  and/or  governmental  bodies 
disclosed  herein,  I  am  aware  of  three  suits  filed  against  the  Firm  in  which  I, 
together  with  other  partners  in  the  Firm,  were  individually  named.  In  one  suit. 
123  South  Broad  Street  Corp.  v.  Cushman  &  Wakefield.  Inc  .  et  al..  Coun  of 
Common  Pleas.  Philadelphia  County.  Civil  Action  No.  88-12-5304,  brought  by 
a  previous  landlord  of  the  Dilworth  Firm,  I  was  originally  named  a  party  but 


34 


120 


quickJy  dropped,  and  the  dispute  was  subsequently  resolved.  The  name,  current 

address,  and  telephone  number  of  counsel  for  plaintiff  in  that  lawsuit  is: 

Richard  M.  Squire,  Esq. 

Astor.  Weiss,  Kaplan  «S:  Rosenbaum 

The  Bellevue 

Broad  &  Walnut  Streets 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19102 

(215)  790-0100 

I  was  also  named  individually,  along  with  certain  other  members  of  the  Firm's 
Executive  Committee,  in  two  suits  brought  by  former  partners  of  the  Firm 
seeking,  inter  alia,  the  return  of  their  capital  accounts.  Both  of  those  matters 
have  been  settled.  The  following  reflects  docket  numbers,  and  the  current 
addresses  and  telephone  numbers  of  opposing  counsel  in  the  lawsuits  brought 
by  the  former  partners: 

Edwin  Goldsmith  v.  Dilworth.  Paxson.  Kalish  Sc  Kauffman.  ct  al..  Court  of 
Conunon  Pleas,  Philadelphia  County,  Civil  Action  No.  93-04-02165 

Counsel  for  Plaintiff: 

Alan  S.  Fellheimer,  Esq. 

Fellheimer,  Eichen,  Braverman  &  Kasky 

One  Liberty  Place,  21st  Floor 

1650  Market  Street 

Philadelphia.  Pennsylvania  19103-7334 

(215)  575-3900 

Neil  E.  Jokelson,  Esq. 
Neil  E.  Jokelson  &  Associates,  PC 
230  South  Broad  Street 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19102 
(215)  735-7556 

Daniel  Evans  v.  Dilworth.  Piixson.  Kalish  &  Kauffman.  et  al  .  Court  of 
Common  Pleas,  Philadelphia  County,  Civil  Action  No.  94-01-02786 


35 


121 


CouTT-el  for  Plaintiff. 

Richard  P.  Myers,  Esq. 
Paul,  Reich  &  Myers,  PC 
1411  Walnut  St,  Suite  500 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  19102 
(215)  972-7090 


II.        Plestse  advise  the  Coininittee  of  any  unfavorable  information  that  may 
affect  your  nomination. 

I  am  not  aware  of  any  unfavorable  informaiioii  tliat  may  affect  my  nomination. 


36 


122 


AFFIDAVIT 

I,  Bruce  W.  Kauffman,  do  swear  that  the  information  provided  in  this  statement  is, 


to  the  best  of  my  knowledge,  true  and  accurate. 


DATED:  August  7,  1997 


123 


nNANCUL    DISCLOSURE    REPORT 

FOR    CALENDAR    YEAR    1995 


kIK! 


ira  Act  of    I9li.    rub.    L.    He. 


Kauffman,   Bruce  W. 


Dilvrorth  Paxson  Kalish  &  Kauffnan 


8/4/97 


Oiairman 


«ppropri«ct   CVMI 


Cn«rn£«ri  or  offict  Addr«ia 

Dilworth  Paxson  Kalish  &  Kauffman, 
3200  Mellon  Bank  Center 
1735  Market  Street 


c.  Raporting  P«rio4 
1   'l'97-6  '  30  97 


pltcula' 


K«viawin9  Qftn 


ptiiiditeipiua.  PA — t^tm 

IMPORTANT  NOTES:  The  imlnictioiu  accompanying  iliis  form  must  be  followed.     Complete  all  parts, 
checking  the  NONE  box  for  each  seclion  where  you  have  no  reportable  information.     Sign  on  last  page. 


I.     POSITIONS.      (Reporting  individual  only;  see  pp.  9-13  of  Instructions.) 


n 


POSITION 
NONE      (No  reportable  positions) 


Chainnan  of  the  Board 


Trustee     (DC) 


NAME    OF   ORGANIZATION/ENTITY 


Current  Ehploynient 

Dilworth  Paxson  Kalish  &  Kauffman,  LLP  -  Exhibit  1 


USA  BancShares  Inc.  -  Exhibit  2 


Lauri  Ann  Kauffman  Trust  UA/8/7/95 


II.     AGREEMENTS.     (Rcportingindividualonly,  see  pp.  14-17  of  Instructions.) 

Q&I£  PARTIES    AND   TERMS 


n 


NONE       (No  reportable  agreements) 


Dilvrorth  Paxson  Kcilish  &  Kauffman 
Judicial  Bctixonnnt  Program 


1997 


USA  BanrSlvirpg .    Tnr.    (wniild  resign) 


Dilworth  Paxson  Kalish  &  Kauf firan 
Botironpnt  Plan  and  '101    (k) 


See  Part  VII 


III.     NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME.     (Reporting  individual  and  spouse;  see  pp.  18-25  of  Instructions.) 

DAIE  "    -  SgypCS  AW  TYPE 


n 


w^^fAi"^?. 


NONE      (No  reponable  non-inveslnent  income) 


The  Lawyers  Travel  Service 


Sole  Proprietor-Advertising  Services 


Peoples  Thrift  Savings  Bank 


Dilvrorth  Paxson  Kalish  &  Kauffman 


S  6.000 
S433.500 
S 


124 


FINkNCIAI.   DISCLOSURE   RIPORT 


N«*«  Of   Mr«ofl  Itcpomng 

Kauffnan,   Bruce  W. 


8  /  4/97 


n 


REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS  --  irauponatioD.  lodging,  food,  entenainmeiu. 

(Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  diildren;  use  the  parentbeticab  '(S)'  and  '(DC)'  to  indicate  rcponable 
reimbursements  and  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  26-29  of  Inslnictions.) 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 

NONS      (No  such  reponable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 


E^cenpt 


n 


OTHER  GIFTS.      (Includes  (hose  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheticals  '(S)'  and  '(DC)'  lo 
indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  30-33  of  Instructions.) 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 

NOtn      (Nosuch  reportable  gifts) 


VALUE 


Exenpt 


n 


LIABILITIES.      (Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible 
for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  '(S)'  for  separate  liability  of  the  spouse.  '(J)'  for  joint  liability  of 
reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  '(DC)'  Cor  liability  of  a  dependent  child  See  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE 

NONB      (No  reportable  liabilities) 


Great  Lakes  Higher  Education  Corp. 
Jefferson  Bank 


Student  Loan  Financing 


K 


Includes  Residence 

Vanniic    mnrfyirjcg    anH    rmrmoT-r-i  a1 


VALUE  CODES: 


SIS. 001  •  550.00 


125 


PUONCIAL   DISCL0SUR8   RKPORT 


Mmh  or  Mrsen  ftapontiif 

Kauffman,  Bruce  W. 


Data  ot  Rapert 

8     /    4/     97 


VII.  Page  I INTVESTMENTS  and 

and  dependent  children.  See  pp. 


TRUSTS  -  income,  value,  transactions 

37-54  of  Insiructiou.) 


(Includes  those  of  spouse 


D««erlpclon*et  Aa««u 
tinelujling  crujt  «■••»} 

ladlcjcc  wh«r«  appllcajil*.    e«Bar  o( 
cba  aaaac  by  ujlng  tfta  puanuutteal 
•(JJ-   lot  Joint  oSnaranlTol   taport- 
Lnq  Individual  and  apcuja.    •($)*  for 
■  apanca   owoarahlD  by  tpouaa.    •  IDC] ' 

Placa  ■ (X) *  aitar  aacb  aaaot 
axa«pc  froa  prior  dlaeloauro. 

S- 

"K'lod'ir 

TTmnaaetlolia  during  rnportlng  parlod 

ss.; 

(SI 

(J-H 

(Q-til 

111 

I«  not   axvnpt   fro«  dlKlo«ur«                 1 

buy?  Jail. 

valuas 
coda 

Coda 

Idantlty  01 
buyor/aallar 
lit  prlvaca 
cranaactlon) 

NONE        ixo  taponabla 
incoaa.    aaaata,    or 
tranaaetiona) 

'  Black  Horse  Pike  Ltd  1984 

D 

Int. 

M 

T 

'  Prudential  U.S.  Treas.   NW 

A 

Div. 

K 

T 

'  Insured  Income  Prud. 

A 

Int. 

J 

T 

' 

'  Avenham  Assoc.    (Lim.   Ptr) 

B 

Rent 

J 

W 

1 

'  Galeria  Assos.    (Lim.   Ptr) 

B 

Rent 

K 

W 

1 

'  Tof trees  Assoc.    (Lim.   Ptr) 

B 

Rent 

J 

w 

Huntington  Assoc.  (Liju. Ptr) 

A 

Rent 

K 

w 

*  IRA  Rollover  12-30-85 

B 

Div. 

M 

T 

(see  exhibit   3 

Dilworth  Paxson  Retr  Plan 

E 

Div. 

M 

T 

( see  exhibit  4 ) 

Dilworth  Paxson  Retr  Plan 

E 

Div. 

N 

T 

(see  exhibit  5) 

iiLauri  Ann  Kauffiten  Tr  (DC) 

B 

Int. 

K 

T 

(see  exhibit  6) 

"oilworth  Paxson  401   (k) 

D 

Div. 

L 

T 

(see  exhibit  7) 

M 

1      IneoM/OlU  Codaa:         k.Il.OOe  or   lau                      ••{1,001    u   l],500                 C-}}.SC1   co  SS.OOO                     D.SS.001    CO    SIS. 900 

ISM   Col.    Bl    k  Ml         Ctli.OOl   to   ISO.OOO            P.lsi.OOl   CO  SIOO.OOO          a>!l00.001    to  il. 000. 000        H.iUra   than   il.OOO.OOO 

a    vaiua  cod«a:                J*sis,ooo  or  laat              x-fis,ooi  to  sso.ooo         usso.ooi  CO  SIOO.OOO           M-sioo.ool  to  saso.ooo 

(So  Ool.    CI    <   oil         Il.hs6.001   to  SSOO.OOO        O-SSod.OOl    to  Sl.OOO.OOO    P-Mora  than   SI. 000. 000 

,    .    -  XMMtmmMBL 

T    rB>h/Marka« 

IS««  Col     Cil                 0>>oo>  vaiua 

v.« 

h«r 

K-laeiMCtd 

126 


rOIMtCIXL  DISOOSURS  REPORT 


Hm  of  ptraon  Raportuig 


vm.  ADDITIONAL  ESFCXUVUTION  or  EXPLANATIONS.  (ladicatc  pan  of  Rcpon.) 


DC  CERimCATION. 

In  cotnpliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  §  4SS  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  SI  of  the  Advisory  Cbmrunee  on  Judicial  Aaivities. 
and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  a  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  no)  perform  any  adjudicatory  finxion  in  any  l:<igaiion  dunng  the 
period  covered  by  this  report  in  whidi  I.  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  finanaal  inerest,  as  defined  m  Canon  3C(3Xc). 
In  the  oucome  of  such  litigsbon. 

I  certify  that  all  information  givtn  above  (including  informaticn  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent  children,  if  any)  is  accurate, 
true,  and  corrplete  lo  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief  and  that  any  information  not  reported  was  withheld  because  it  met  applicable 
stanxory  provisions  permitting  non-disclostie. 

I  firther  certify  thai  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifb  which  have  been  reported  ae  ir 
compliance  with  die  provisiors  of  5  U.SCA  m^?.  |  SOI  el  seq.,  5  U.SC  §  73S3  and  Judicial  Conference  regulations. 


^^ 


M$/^^ 


SignBtuT 

NOTE;   ANY  INDIVIDUAL  \WK)  KNOVklRxY  AND  WILFUU-Y  FALSIRES  OR  FAILS  TO  RLE  THIS  flEPORT  MAY  BE  SUBJECT 
TOCTVILANDCRIMINALSANCnONS(5U.&CA.  APP.  6,§  104.) 


FIUNG  INSTRUCTIONS: 


Mail  sipad  origiml  aid  3  adftianti  copies  to: 


Commitiee  on  rmanul  DisclosiR 
Adninistmvc  Office  of  the 

United  Staes  Couts 
Ot«  ColiitixB  Orde,  N.E.,  Suite  2-301 
Washii«tan,  DC  20S44 


127 


Exhibit  1 


JXTOICIAL  RETIREMENT  PROGRAM 
BRUCE  W.  KAUFFMAN 


In  the  event  that  Bruce  W.  Kauffman  is  appointed  to  a  federal 
or  state  judicial  office  prior  to  December  31,  1997,  the  Executive 
Committee  seeks  the  authority  of  the  partnership  to  enter  into  a 
retirement  program,  the  essential  economic  terms  of  which  are  as 
follows: 

1.  Payment  from  the  firm  of  $200,000  a  year  for  the  first 
five  (5)  years  and  a  fully  paid  annuity  providing  for  an 
additional  $100,000  a  year  for  an  additional  five  (5) 
years  (paid  $3,846  per  week  by  the  law  firm  for  the  first 
five  years,  and  $1,923.08  per  week  (unless  the  parties 
otherwise  agree)  paid  by  the  annuity  company  during  the 
second  five  years)  ,  commencing  the  first  calendar  month 
following  confirmation  and  appointment  to  Judicial 
office.  The  payments  to  be  made  by  the  firm  in  years  1 
to  5  include  his  capital  account  as  of  December  31, 
1994.^  Assuming  no  further  payment  of  undistributed 
1992,  1993  and  1994  income,  91.7962%  of  each  payment 
shall  represent  a  retirement  payment  and  8.2038%  shall 
represent  return  of  capital.  The  capital  portion  of  such 
payments  shall  decrease  and  the  retirement  portion 
increase  if  additional  1992,  1993  or  1994  payments  are 
made  to  Bruce  W.  Kauffman  before  retirement.  For  income 
tax  purposes  only,  any  negative  tax  capital  shall  be 
reflected  as  income  at  the  end  of  the  last  year  in  which 
the  firm  makes  any  payment  or,  if  earlier,  the  year  of 
dissolution. 

2.  The  retirement  income  portion  of  the  payments  will 
reflect  certain  characteristics  embodied  in  a  retirement 
plan  to  be  adopted  soon  for  certain  other  partners, 
including: 

(i)   no  personal  liability  for  any  partner  in 
respect  of  these  payments; 

(ii)  in  the  event  of  dissolution,  the  retirement 
income  portion  of  the  obligation  of  the  firm 
to  Bruce  W.  Kauffman  is  subordinated  to  all 


^  The  books  and  records  of  the  firm  reflect  the  following 
capital  accounts  as  of  December  31,  1994,  after  consideration  of 
1995  and  September  1996  distributions  of  1994  income  and  the 
provisions  of  paragraph  5  below  regarding  the  $60,000  debt: 

Book  Capital  Account     $82,037.91 
Tax  Capital  Account      ($35,995.58) 


128 


outside  creditors,  financial  institutions, 
accrued  compensation  due  any  partners,  and 
partners'  capital  accounts;  and 

(iii)  for  the  initial  5-year  period,  $110,000  of  the 
retirement  income  portion  of  the  payments 
shall  be  subject  to  an  annual  limitation  on 
the  amount  paid  all  retired  partners 
(including  the  above)  in  the  amount  of  5%  of 
the  Distributable  Net  Income  of  the 
partnership  for  the  prior  fiscal  year  or 
similar  benchmark  amount  in  the  event  the  firm 
is  operating  as  a  professional  corporation. 
To  the  extent  there  is  a  shortfall  in  payments 
on  account  of  this  provision,  the  shortfall 
shall  be  added  to  the  following  year's  target 
number.  Any  shortfall  remaining  at  the  end  of 
5  years  shall  be  paid  at  such  time  to  Bruce  W. 
Kauf fman. 

Contemporaneously,  with  the  effectiveness  of  this 
Judicial  Retirement  Program,  the  law  firm  will  enter  into 
an  annuity  contract  with  a  nationally  recognized 
insurance  company  or  similar  financial  institution,  that 
when  fully  funded  after  5  years,  will  provide  an  annuity 
for  $100,000  a  year  annual  payments  to  Bruce  W.  Kauf fman 
for  years  6  through  10.  An  independent  third  party  will 
be  appointed  to  enforce  the  payment  provisions  of  the 
annuity  which  are  further  described  below.  Bruce  W. 
Kauffman  shall  approve  the  annuity  company  and  the  third 
party  or  trustee  to  be  appointed.  The  firm  shall  pay  all 
costs  and  expenses  associated  with  the  annuity.  All 
payments  due  pursuant  to  the  terms  of  the  annuity  to 
Bruce  W.  Kauffman  shall  be  made  directly  to  him,  his 
estate  and/or  surviving  spouse,  as  the  case  may  be. 

In  a  dissolution  or  liquidation,  any  undistributed 
capital  remaining  owed  to  Bruce  W.  Kauffman  shall  have 
the  same  priority  in  payment  as  the  capital  account  of 
other  partners.  No  partner  shall  have  personal  liability 
for  payments  of  capital  accounts  of  other  partners. 

All  additional  undistributed  1995,  1996  or  1997  profits 
or  capital  due  to  Bruce  W.  Kauffman  shall  be  paid  to  him 
at  the  rate  of  2.778%  of  such  total  per  month  with  the 
balance  due,  if  any,  at  the  end  of  the  third  year.  The 
current  balance  of  1995  and  1996  undistributed  profits  or 
capital  is  $61,883. 

The  annual  payments,  annuity  and  post-1994  capital 
account  payments  will  constitute  the  entire  obligation  to 
Bruce  W.  Kauffman  for  his  capital  account,  severance 


129 


payment  or  otherwise,  and  the  firm  agrees  to  satisfy  his 
indebtedness  owed  to  the  firm  in  an  amount  not  in  excess 
of  $60,000  by  way  of  a  reduction  to  his  capital  account 
as  of  12-31-94. 

7.  The  firm  will  assign  all  life  insurance  policies  to  Bruce 
W.  Kauffman  who  will  assume  all  premium  payments  thereon. 

8.  The  firm  will  move  expeditiously  to  obtain  all  necessary 
Bank  consents  to  the  above  transactions,  which  are  ar- 
precondition  to  its  implementation. 

9.  Should  Bruce  W.  Kauffman  die  during  the  term  of  this 
agreement,  or  during  the  term  of  the  annuity,  and  if  he 
is  survived  by  his  spouse,  the  payments  (except  for  those 
due  under  paragraph  5  above,  which  shall  continue  to  be 
paid  without  diminution)  shall  continue  at  one-half  of 
the  previous  sum,  with  any  reduction  in  payment  applied 
to  the  retirement  income  portion  of  the  payment.  Any 
annuity  payment  not  made  to  Bruce  W.  Kauffman  or  his 
spouse  shall  be  made  to  the  law  firm. 

10.  In  the  event  that  at  any  time  during  the  ten  years 
following  his  retirement,  Bruce  W.  Kauffman  resigns  his 
judicial  appointment  and  resumes  the  practice  of  law  in 
competition  with  the  law  firm  within  a  radius  of  150 
miles  from  the  firm's  principal  office  in  Philadelphia, 
then  this  retirement  program  shall  terminate  and  no 
further  retirement  income  payments  shall  be  due  or 
payable  hereunder  or  under  the  annuity.  Any  remaining 
annuity  payments  shall  be  made  to  the  law  firm. 

11.  It  is  the  intent  of  the  parties  that  Bruce  W.  Kauffman 
not  recognize  any  taxable  income  on  account  of  the 
annuity  unless  and  until  he  receives  payments  in  years  6 
through  10  and  that  the  law  firm  not  currently  deduct  any 
payments  to  fund  the  annuity.  Should  Bruce  W.  Kauffman 
be  taxed  currently  on  said  amounts  or  on  the  value  of 
the  annuity  prior  to  the  time  it  is  paid,  the  firm  shall 
hold  him  harmless  from  such  tax  consequences  by  loaning 
him  the  tax,  and  paying  to  him  the  interest  and  addition 
to  tax,  if  any,  due  from  him  (appropriately  grossed  up 
for  tax  consequences) ,  with  the  loan  to  be  recovered  (up 
to  the  amount  of  the  tax  saved  as  the  annuity  payments 
are  received)  by  the  firm  from  the  remaining  annuity 
payments  on  a  pro  rata  basis  or  from  any  tax  refunds  that 
may  be  due  to  Bruce  W.  Kauffman  from  taxes  paid  on 
receipt  of  annuity  proceeds,  or  such  other  appropriate 
arrangement  as  the  parties  agree.  Bruce  W.  Kauffman 
shall  notify  the  firm  if  any  such  tax  claim  is  made  and 
the  firm  shall  have  the  option  to  participate  in  the 
resolution  of  the  issue  at  its  expense. 


130 


Exhibit  2 


ADVISORY  AGREEMENT 

THIS  AGREEMENT  is  made  on  Sg   jUt^'^'yV- 1 9 9 S  ,  between 
BRUCE  W.  KAUFFMAN  ( "Kauf fman" ) ;  USABARCSHARES ,  INC . ,  a 
corporation  orgamized  under  the  laws  of  the  Commonwealth  of 
Pennsylvania  (the  "Company");  and  PEOPLES  THRIFT  SAVINGS  BANK,  a 
state-chartered  savings  bank  organized  under  the  laws  of 
Pennsylvania  ("the  Bank") .   The  Bank  and  the  Company  are  referred 
to  collectively  as  the  "Companies". 

BACKGROUND 

A.  The  Company  is  a  registered  bank  holding  company, 
and  the  Bank  is  a  wholly-owned  subsidiary  of  the  Company. 

B.  Upon  the  completion  of  first  closing  of  the 
initial  public  offering  of  Common  Shares  of  the  Company  described 
in  the  Prospectus  dated  July  20,  1995  (the  "Closing"),  the  Bank 
became  the  successor  by  merger  to  Peoples  Thrift  Interim  Bank. 

C.  Kauf fman  is  the  Chairman  of  the  Board  of  the 
Company  and  the  Chairman  of  the  Board  of  the  Bank,  and  after 
completion  of  the  Closing  will  continue  to  be  the  Chairmam  of  the 
Board  of  the  successor  by  merger  to  the  Bank. 

0.  Kauf fman  has  substantial  experience  in  the  fields 
in  which  the  Companies  expect  to  operate.   The  Companies  desire 
to  compensate  Kauffman  for  his  advice  and  service  as  Chairman  of 
the  Board  and  for  certain  of  his  expenses  in  connection  with  such 
service,  and  Kauffman  is  willing  to  serve  as  Chairman  of  the 
Board  under  the  terms  and  conditions  set  forth  below. 

NOW  THEREFORE,  the  parties  agree  as  follows,  intending 
to  be  legally  bound: 

1.  Effective  Date.   This  Agreement  shall  become 
effective  upon  completion  of  the  Closing  (the  "Effective  Date"). 

2.  Services.   The  Companies  and  Kauffman  agree  that 
Kauffman  will-  serve  the  Companies  as  Chairman  of  the  Board  during 
the  period  from  the  Effective  Date  until  the  day  immediately 
preceding  the  second  amniversaury  of  the  Effective  Date. 

3.  Compensation.   As  compensation  for  serving  as 
Chairman  of  the  Boaurd  as  required  by  this  Agreement,  Kauffman 
shall  be  entitled  to  the  following: 

(a)   Base  Fee.   The  Companies  shall  pay  to 
Kauffman  a  fee  of  One  Thousamd  Dollars  ($1,000.00)  each  month 


131 


during  his  service  as  Chairman  of  the  Board,  and  a  proraced 
amount  for  each  partial  month. 

(b)   Options.   At  the  Closing  the  Company  shall 
issue  to  Kauffman  options  (the  "Options")  to  purchase  up  to 
Thirty  Thousand  (30,000)  Common  Shares  under  the  CSA  BancShares, 
Inc.  Stock  Option  Plan  (the  "Stoc)t  Option  Plan") .   The  Ontions 
shall  be  exercisable  at  a  price  of  $10.00  per  Common  Share,  and 
shall  be  exercisable  for  a  period  of  ten  (10)  years  from  the  date 
the  Options  are  granted  under  the  Stock  Option  Plan. 

4.  Expenses.   The  Companies  shall  reimburse  Kauffman 
promptly  for  reasonable  out-of-pocket  expenses  incurred  in 
connection  with  his  providing  consulting  services  hereunder,  upon 
receipt  of  appropriate  documentation  therefor,  up  to  a  total  of 
Twelve  Thousand  Dollars  ($12,000.00)  for  the  first  twelve  months 
of  the  term  of  this  Agreement  and  Twelve  Thousand  Dollars 
($12,000.00)  for  the  second  twelve  months  of  the  term  of  this 

Agreement . 

5.  Taxes .   Kauffman  is  responsible  for  paying  any  and 
all  federal,  state  and  local  income  taxes  assessed  with  respect 
to  all  money,  benefits  and  other  consideration  he  receives  from 
the  Companies  under  this  Agreement,  to  the  extent  not  already 
withheld  by  the  Companies;  and  the  Companies  are  entitled  to 
withhold  any  tax  payments  from  amounts  otherwise  due  Kauffman  to 
the  extent  required  by  applicable  statutes,  rulings  or 
regulations. 

6.      Miscellaneous. 

(a)  Definitions .   As  used  throughout  this 
Agreement,  the  term  "Companies"  includes  USA  BancShares,  Inc., 
Peoples  Thrift  Savings  Bank  and  their  respective  Affiliates  and 
all  of  their  respective  successors  and  assigns. 

(b)  Qovemina  Law.   This  Agreement  shall  be 
governed  by  and  construed  in  accordance  with  the  laws  of  the 
Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvamia. 

(c)  Modification.   This  Agreement  may  not  be 
modified  orally  but  only  by  written  agreement  signed  by  Kauffman 
and  the  Chief  Executive  Officer  or  Vice  Chairman  of  both  of  the 
Companies . 

(d)  Notices ■   All  notices  euid  other 
comir.unications  required  or  permitted  under  this  Agreement  shall 
be  in  writing  and  shall  be  deemed  to  have  been  duly  given,  made 
and  received  when  delivered  (personally,  by  courier  service  such 
as  Federal  Express,  or  by  messenger)  or  when  deposited  in  the 


-2- 


132 


United  States  mails,  registered  or  certified  mail,  postage  pre- 
paid, return  receipt  requested,  addressed  as  set  forth  below: 

If  to  the  Bank: 

Peoples  Thrift  Savings  Bank 
8  03  E.  aermantown  Pike 
Norristown,  PA  19401 

If  to  the  Company: 

USABancShares ,  Inc . 

One  Penn  Square 

3  0  South  15th  Street,  Fourth  Floor 

Philadelphia,  PA   19102 

Attention:  Chairman  of  the  Board 

If  to  Kauffman: 

Dilwcrch,  Paxson  Kalish  &  Kauffman 
3200  Mellon  Building 
1735  Market  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA   19103 

Any  party  may  alter  the  address  to  which 
communications  or  copies  are  to  be  sent  by  giving  notice  of  such 
change  of  address  in  conformity  with  the  provision  of  this 
Section  for  the  giving  of  notice. 

(e)  aindir.o  Nature  of  Agreement.   This  Agreement 
shall  be  binding  upon,  and  shall  inure  to  the  benefit  cf  the 
Bank,  the  Company  and  their  respective  successors, 
representatives,  and  assigns  and  shall  be  binding  upon  Kauffman, 
his  heirs,  executors  and  legal  representatives. 

(f)  Savings  and  Seoarabilitv.   If  any  provision 
of  this  Agreement  is  deemed  unlawful  or  unenforceable  by  a  court 
of  competent  jurisdiction,  the  remaining  provisions  shall 
continue  in  full  force  and  effect. 


-3- 


133 


(g)   Section  Haadinae .   The  aection  headings  in 
this  Agreement  are  for  convenience  only;  they  form  no  p*rt  of 
thie  Agreement  and  shall  not  affect  its  interpretation. 

IM  WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the  underaigned  have  executed  this 
Agreement  the  day  and  year  first  above  written. 


Date 


Wi 


SAVINGS  BANK 


'^^'■■^^^y^*.^    4-CtO 

USABANCSKARS^  INC. 


Brace  w.  Kaurimaiv  ^^  J^ 

Date:    ftjrv4»4r>^ 


134 


Exhibit    3 


lis? 


l&l^ai 


UXOI- 
UJU.      (/) 

ZJUII-i-i 
-lOUJX 

»-"       -JQC_J 

l-3-/<lu 
Z  OEO 
LULUK      < 

QeocQcr^x 


4       V  S  c 


si  ss- 


JJJ 


■11 

13 


A' 

»n     r» 

•t 

^i 

t 

?; 

1 

m' 

i 

^S 

>> 

1^ 

E 

-* 

E 

3  < 

3 

o    to 
«i  3 

^ ; 

in 

0 

u,  3 

_l- 

2  § 

c 

5  i 

i  1 

81  s: 


8'  S38SS 


5£  =  S5 

<  ifl  —  UJ  < 

i  ^  w  =  J 


135 


ly 


m 


3;- 


5  5^2 


«     c 


^  Si 


n< 


S  8     S 


13  I 


136 


iti 

ill 


^ 


I  I 


a" 

o  25 


I  ^§ 


3 


5  8  B  " 
-  c  ..  J  3 
§-3         ' 


Hi      I 


rjSgC 

i  s 

..r  J 

1 

,  1  =  1 

°1 

■'lis 

- 

«j  !-2 

w,  =  ;  2 

o;?|? 

t   ~        3 

C4  ^  S-I 

(51  -  *-  " 

«■  i  ;  S 

■n    *  S  V 

N  '  s  ?  . 

4)'  s  a  • 

0-2^53 


137 


I  « 
i  S 


;  8 


2  « 


N 


a! 


i^ 


•  5  < 


-5 

9  '^ 
s!  = 

—  Z 
z  ^ 

is  1 


s  s 

3 


» ^  i 
S  i  ^ 

I  =  8 


<  5  s 


138 


J5 


<  & 

Is 


u.| 


i  l,£ 


139 


Exhibit    4 


^ 

o 

__ 

o 

U1 

3 

1 

z 

m 

T 

IU<       _J 

a 

~ 

1 
9  S 

AUFFMAN    TTE 
SON    RETR    PL 
FMAN    TRANS 
CNTR    33RD    F 
ST 

0- 

0. 

d 

^xu. 

< 

^ 

ox:!- 

9 

3a.<zuj 

z 

; 

*"  o 

g 

^<^Q. 

!! 

~ 

ut-3     «« 

iij 

= 

11 

w 

z:cc     zra 

z 

lii 

ceoujo 

< 

o 

msu-iLO-i 

-z 

!^ 

SS 

5 

_i3_imi-i 

^ 

:5i 

c 

iiQtoiirfa. 

^ 

s;S 

8 

1 

$ 

1 

i 

i 

1 

i 

2 

£ 

? 

I 

« 

■C 

fl 

* 

& 

** 

I 

s 

£ 

I 

1 

5 

§ 

fa 


U           CO   W   S   S 

r 

u        T  <  O) 

1 

mS 

M 

1 

J3 

w 

i 

M 

i   'is5 

is 

r      F^      —  in 

1 

a       o  tj  p2  « 

n 

en 

-  O 

£   "« 

i« 

o 

s 

.^ 

S) 

Z    y 

-     ^ 

c    *>,^ 

I 

cou 

ITIES 
IMENI 
FUND 

Ac 

CUR 
IVES 
IKET 

-   ^15 

Z 

< 

O       ^  X  ^  S 

s 

!!    8S8 

° 

<           -           . 

o     S5S 

C 

g    s^.s 

^. 

tt          ** 

JJ 

2 

8    888 

^ 

eo 

«B           CV 

a.      M 

M 

^ 

^ 

in 

c 

o 

*^ 

3              « 

:€            § 

*;     w     D 

tf)      g      03 

OSS 

rf     5     5 

o 

me 

FUND 
NDS 
BSHII 

o 

z 

O        >«*! 

< 

o     w  r  ^ 

c     125 

5 

^         £0  0. 

"" 

IM 


140 


¥? 


Z  3 


;  =   a. 


S  c  I  c  •  "-p 

■c  I        o  «  «  « 

c  S  -  Z  c  S  s 

K    w  ^    <9  S    V    i 


"     2,|!si: 


i&^T   il^ 


°|2i  ||g 

^    >.£  ~       O    C    > 

?!  S5  -r  S! 


!sll  sil 


;|8    111 

il- 


ls 


Sg 


I! 


t-i-.^v 


g  = 

n 
2* 


141 


Exhibit    5 


u. 

a 

^ 

s 

ul 

1- 

r^ 

^ 

)-Z 

ri 

-: 

o)< 

a 

■^ 

f-* 

~ 

ceo. 

IT 

mr^ 

QC 

m 

Ql- 

< 

Q 

ZUJ 

LUQ. 

_i 

tec 

I 

Z(/) 

-5 

k:z< 

ZOCI- 

9  '^ 

<cnijLi/i 

s 

s 

caxu. 

< 

= 

-JQ.< 

LUX 

S     8 

<       ^^Q. 

i 

^  2 

S 

= 

si§           1 

roc 

ra 

; 

II 

s 

LUOLU 
030 

< 

-5 

§ 

:^5S5 

3_i3rn« 

= 

»5 

z 

c 

0.001^4  0. 

^ 

«  < 

< 

8 

1        S 

1 

1        ^ 

•« 

ID 

cy          c 

c           o 

£ 

i         8- 

•* 

5        c 

•5 

£ 

V 

8- 

° 

\ 

1  ^i? 


£     51 

o 
5 


5S: 


s 

111 

3  ^  a 
Ml 

2    §    o 

5^  z 
a  " 

5     <     Q 

cc    _    fii 
S   23 


^|8 

ill 


:  irt  —  ^u  < 


142 


iCjW:- 


l  =  - 


S  i 


ll 

58 


5   5   :=§S   ":5;S- 

s>  t  i  :2  1  s  "^ 


i-  5  5  I  g  §  5  f 


11 


1  a 

5  < 

03  Q- 

i  ij 

5  5 


143 


■D    01  J 

1;! 


l«i-  §1 J 


s:> 


144 


¥b\ 


S 

g 


3S 


c  S  'i         o  ' 

is     s  i 
- 1 "     i'l 

ill 

1?% 
|1  • 

Sal  • 

'"'%  i 

-  Is 

CT       C  o ! 


di.-i 


-S  5  S? 


;8:S:8i 


:8:i; 


J  -Kg. 
CD  ujo 8 a 


145 


^v 


Irl 


ii 


sa 


zrKB       " 


SS 


III 


is 


146 


o 


s^s; 


3f 


5?|| 
IIS" 

■ml 


9)     ^  g-i  8 
1/)     2        of 

3  Hi! 


og 


■s  s 


l?i 


o  — 

il 

QU 

c  c 
o  o 


.5,9 


147 


148 


Exhibit    6 


? 

im  D 


«9  = 


m 


lA  r^       = 


<u.Ln  ":: 

riLiri-  -: 

u.3\«  : 

u.<r^-    <  ^ 

satoi-"  — 

<     Ntux  z 

zoae-i  = 

3<      <liJ  = 

Qza  : 

u  — I-     <  : 

uacQLn_i  -I 

33     m""  = 

oc<<r-i  ~ 


^ 


m 


2   S  = 


, 

s 

»      « 

a- 

• 

<s 

E 
E 

3 

ii 

5  i 

U) 

K  = 

o 
-1 

8  ; 

c 

S  2 

m 

^  5 

O 

S    8S 

<            ■    « 

o        -  ^ 

g   sa 

o 

3 

M 

> 

1    8S 

to 

flc      ■»  d 

V 

«         CU  ^« 

O) 

M  M 

M  . 

f 

lA 

c 

.2 

3" 

^ 

'C 

u>     1 

5   8 

°9     1 

E 
O 

E    ^9 

u 

z 

8  ^^ 

< 

—  if 

3 

149 


0 


BEi 

a 

■L^.     ^ 

^^Bh^^  ^ 

B^^^^t  £ 

■1     m  E 

I-' '      « 

a         if 

L   1 

U 

9 

^■p 

i^ 

^^ 

c 

^ 

3 

o 

o 

:'     ■ 

u 

< 

b 

z 

< 

S 

S 

o 

' 

^ 

r      t 


s  i 


I  ii 

i  I- 


ill 


'^  fe  i; 


5i 


if!! 


E9 


?  So 
8-a.. 


^s-s: 


5 

5-^  I  I  ' 

S   *    S'    S    5    S 


45-964    98-6 


150 


151 


■a    i 


;S     S 


5    < 


if 


iiii 


IS  I: 


152 


ge 


153 


Exhibit    7 


feS 


81 


51 


"15 

2       o 

!i 

O    Q 


O    W 


2    O  0 

"  =  gi 

>■       »       HH       C 

—  H  g  a 

^  o  u  w  o 
o  u  u  u  u 

V         «   .-   2 

>•  ec  St  >-* 

U  t-  a.  a 


3   (- 


h  g  a 

sees 

■-    M    2 

>-  q:  «  "-■ 
h<  o.  b 


154 


RNANCIAL  STATEMENT 

NET  WORTH  6/30/97 

Provide  a  complete,  current  financial  net  worth  statement  which  itemizes  in  detail  ail 
assets  (including  bank  accounts,  real  estate,  securities,  trusts,  investments,  and  other  financial  holdings) 
all  liabilities  (including  debts,  mortgages,  loans,  and  other  financial  obligations)  of  yourself,  your  spouse, 
and  other  immediate  members  of  your  household. 


ASSETS 

LIABIUTIES 

Cash  OD  band  and  in  banks 

^7 

y-^tf 

Notes  payable  to  banks-secured 

/ 

/O^ 

i>oo 

U.S.  Government  securities  -  add 
schedule 

Notes  payable  to  banks-unsecured 

JLff 

set 

Listed  secuhties-add  schedule 

Notes  payable  to  relatives 

UnUsted  securities-add  schedule 

/<lLf 

c  c  e 

Notes  payable  to  others 

^-t 

^eo 

Accounts  and  notes  receivable: 

Accounts  and  bills  due 

Due  from  relatives  and  frieods 

Unpaid  income  tax 

Due  from  others 

Other  unpaid  tax  and  interest 

Doubtful 

Real  estate  mortgages  payable  - 
add  schedule 

Real  estate  owned— add  schedule 

7  SO 

o  oa 

Chattel  mortgages  and  other  hens 
payable 

Real  estate  mortgages  receivable 

Other  debts-itemize: 

Autos  and  other  personal  property 

/I  i, 

^oo 

Estimated    '97   Income  Tax 

/OC 

aoo 

Cash  value-hfe  insurance 

^7 

o  0  e 

1997  Phila.   Real  Est.  Taj 

¥ 

7eo 

Other  assets-itemize: 

Present  Value  DPK&K  R^^e- 

/ 

o9i 

iee 

Limited  Partnership  Int. 

37 

B  eo 

Retirement  Accounts 

«7  X. 

J+-00 

Total  liabilities 

-i 

3S-i, 

too 

USA  BancShares  Cations 

- 

— 

Net  Worth 

('^S 

*^eo 

Total  Assets 

3 

e^j^ 

a^eo 

Total  habilities  and  net  worth 

^ 

O  *iJL 

XffC 

CONTINGENT  LL-LBtLITIES 

GENERAL  INEORMATION 

As  endorser,  comaker  or  guarantor 

Are  any  assets  pledged?  (Add 
schedule.)      1820   Rittenhous< 

On  Leases  or  contracts 

Are  you  defendant  for  any  suits 
or  legal  actions?          No 

Legal  Qaims        Legal  P.V. 

4¥z 

foo 

Have  you  ever  taken  bankruptcy?  f^ 

Provision  for  Federal  Income  Tax 

3^A 

Sao 

Other  special  debt 

155 


cash  in  Banks 

Jefferson  BanX  $  11,500 

Prudential  Securities  Money  Market  15.900 

$  27,400 


Unlisted  Securities 
Black  Horse  Pike  Ltd.  1984 
formerly  New  Jersey  Economic  Development  Bond   $   120,000 


Real  Estate  Owned 
1820  Rittenhouse  Square  $   750,000 


Auto  and  Other  Personal  Property 

1990  Jaguar                                    $  16,500 

Art,  Furnishings  and  Personal  Effects  100.000 

$  116,500 


Life  Insurance 
American  United  Life  Insurance  Company  $   27,000 


156 


Present  Value-Dilworth  Paxson  Kalish  &  Kauffman  Retirement/Buy  Out 
Agreement 

1995.  1996.  1997  Capital  Account  Due 

The  law  firm  of  Dilworth  Paxson  Kalish  &  Kauffman  has  established 
a  Judicial  Retirement  Program  for  Bruce  W.  Kauffman.  The  firm  has 
agreed  to  pay  $200,000  per  year  for  five  years  and  purchase  a  third 
party  annuity  which  will  pay  $100,000  per  year  for  an  additional 
five  years. 

In  addition  to  the  above  payments,  the  firm  is  also  responsible  for 
paying  1995,  1996  and  1997  undistributed  profits  or  capital 
presently  in  the  amount  of  $61,900.  (See  paragraph  5  of  the 
Judicial  Retirement  Program  for  Bruce  W.  Kauffman.) 

The  present  value  of  this  income  stream,  assuming  an  interest  rate 
of  10%,  amounts  to  approximately  $1,091,900. 


Limited  Partnership  Interests 

Avenham  Associates         36-3066147            $  1,000 

Galeria  Associates         36-3159827  1,000 

Toftrees  Associates-25%     23-2389106  15,000 

Huntington  Associates       36-3102841  20. 000 

$  37,000 


The  above  Partnerships  are  substantially  involved  in  the  business 
of  Real  Estate.  The  equity  and  value  of  these  Partnerships  has  been 
estimated. 


157 


Retirement  Accounts 

IRA  Rollover  Account  dated  12/30/85              $  140,700 

Dilworth  Paxson  Retirement  Plan  13  6,000 

Dilworth  Paxson  Retirement  Plan  543,100 

Dilworth  Paxson  401 (k)  Plan  52.600 

$  872,400 


USA  BancShares.  Inc. 
BWK  owns  30,000  Options  to  purchase 
shares  of  stock  in  the  Company.  The 
Options  may  be  exercised  at  a  price 
of  $10.00  per  share  for  a  period  of 
ten  years  beginning  11/8/95. 


Provision  for  Income  Tax 
Retirement  Accounts  $   342,800 


Legal  Claims 
Divorce  Settlement 

Monthly  Payment  Payment  Total   Present  Value 

Child  Support       $  2,083.33       $      22,917     $   21,800 

Alimony  3,664.00           408,536       271,700 

Property  Settlement  1,833.33           251.165      149.300 

Total  $  442,800 


The  interest  rate  used  was  10%  to  determine  the  present  value  of 
the  payment  stream. 


158 


Notes  Payable  to  Banks-Secured 
Jefferson  Bank  ^__iii°lli°° 

yotes  Payable  to  Banks-Unsecured 
Jefferson  Bank  $     262,500 

Great  Lakes  Higher  Education  Corporation  36,800 

$     299,300 


Notes  Pavable-Others 
American  United  Life  Insurance  Company  9      27,000 

Dilworth  Paxson  Kalish  &  Kauffman 

Retirement  Plan  ?5,^0Q 

$      62,600 


159 


SENATE  QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEE 

I.   BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used.) 

Full  Name 

Richard  Alan  Lazzara 

Address:   List  current  place  of  residence  and  office 
address (es) . 


Office  Address 

Second  District  Court  of  Appeal 

800  East  Twiggs  Street 

Suite  600 

Tampa,  Florida  33602 

3.  Date  and  place  of  birth. 

Date  of  Birth 
December  17,  1945 

Place  of  Birth 
Tampa,  Florida 

4.  Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or 
husband's  name).   List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's 
name  and  business  address (es). 

Name  of  Spouse 

Celeste  Lindler  Lazzara. 

Spouse's  Occupation 
Admissions  Counselor 

Spouse's  Employer  and  Business  Address 
Office  of  Admissions 
University  of  South  Florida 
4202  East  Fowler  Avenue 
Tampa,  Florida  33620 

5.  Education:   List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have 
attended,  including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees 
received,  and  dates  degree  were  granted. 


160 


College  Attended 

Loyola  University  of  the  South 

New  Orleans,  Louisiana 

Dates  of  Attendance 

September,  1963  -  May,  1967  (inclusive) 

Degree  Awarded 

Bachelor  of  Arts  in  History 

Date  Degree  Granted 
May  30,  1967 

Law  School  Attended 

University  of  Florida  College  of  Law 

Gainesville,  Florida 

Dates  of  Attendance 

September,  1967  -  June,  1970  (inclusive) 

Degree  Awarded 
Juris  Doctor 

Date  Degree  Granted 
June  13,  197  0 

Employment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or 
professional  corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other 
enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and 
organizations,  nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms, 
with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer,  director, 
partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  from 
college . 

1967: 

Lazzara  Oil  Company  (family  company) 
St.  Petersburg,  Florida 
General  laborer 
June  -  August 

1968: 

University  of  Florida 
Division  of  Housing 
Gainesville,  Florida 
Dormitory  Resident  Assistant 
January  -  June 


-2- 


161 


Gibbons,  Tucker,  McEwen,  Smith,  Cofer,  and 
Taub,  P. A. 
Tampa,  Florida 
Law  Clerk 
June  -  August 

University  of  Florida 
Division  of  Housing 
Gainesville,  Florida 
Dormitory  Resident  Assistant 
September  -  December 

1969: 

University  of  Florida 
Division  of  Housing 
Gainesville,  Florida 
Dormitory  Resident  Assistant 
January  -  June 

1970: 

Office  of  the  Hillsborough  County 

Solicitor 

Tampa,  Florida 

Law  Clerk 

June  -  November 

Office  of  the  Hillsborough  County 

Solicitor 

Tampa,  Florida 

Assistant  County  Solicitor 

November  -  December 

1971  -  1972: 

Office  of  the  Hillsborough  County 

Solicitor 

Tampa,  Florida 

Assistant  County  Solicitor 

1973: 

Office  of  the  Hillsborough  County 
State  Attorney 
Tampa,  Florida 
Assistant  State  Attorney 
January  -  April 


-3- 


162 


Levine,  Freedman,  and  Hirsch,  P. A. 
Tampa,  Florida 
Associate  Attorney 
April  -  December 

1974: 

Levine,  Freedman,  and  Hirsch,  P. A. 
Tampa,  Florida 
Associate  Attorney 

1975: 

Levine,  Freedman,  and  Hirsch,  P. A. 
Tampa,  Florida 
Associate  Attorney 
January  -  April 

Law  Offices  of  Richard  A.  Lazzara 
Tampa,  Florida 
Sole  Practitioner 
April  -  December 

1976  -  1986: 

Law  Offices  of  Richard  A.  Lazzara 
Tampa,  Florida 
Sole  Practitioner 

1987: 

State  of  Florida 

County  Judge  -  Hillsborough  County 

Tampa,  Florida 

1988  -  1992: 


State  of  Florida 

Circuit  Judge  -  Thirteenth  Judicial  Circuit 

Tampa,  Florida 

1993: 

State  of  Florida 

Circuit  Judge  -  Thirteenth  Judicial  Circuit 

Tampa,  Florida 

January  -  November 


-4- 


163 


state  of  Florida 

Appellate  Judge  -  Second  District  Court  of 

Appeal 

Tampa,  Florida 

December 

1994  -  Present: 

State  of  Florida 

Appellate  Judge  -  Second  District  Court  of 

Appeal 

Tampa,  Florida 

Military  Service:   Have  you  had  any  military  service? 
If  so,  give  particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of 
service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of 
discharge  received. 

No. 

Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships, 
honorary  degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that 
you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

Loyola  University: 

1)  Recipient  of  a  full  two-year  academic 
scholarship  for  junior  and  senior  years 

2)  President  of  the  College  of  Arts  and 
Sciences  in  senior  year 

3)  Alpha  Sigma  Nu  Honor  Society 

4)  Delta  Epsilon  Sigma  National  Honor  Society 

5)  Who's  Who  in  American  Colleges  and 
Universities  for  1966-1967 

6)  National  Blue  Key  Honor  Fraternity 

7)  Graduated  magna  cum  laude 

University  of  Florida  College  of  Law: 

1)  Recipient  of  the  book,  American 
Jurisprudence.  2d.  Corporations,  awarded  to 
the  law  student  who  attains  the  highest  grade 
in  the  course  on  corporations 

2)  Attorney  General  and  Chancellor  of  the 
Honor  Court 

3)  Florida  Blue  Key  Honor  Fraternity 

4)  Omicron  Delta  Kappa  National  Honor 
Fraternity 

Judicial  Honors: 

1)  Highest  approval  rating  of  Hillsborough 

-5- 


164 


County  judicial  candidates  in  a  poll 
conducted  by  the  Hillsborough  County  Bar 
Association  in  1986  (Source  -  The  Tampa 
Tribune,  August  22,  1986) 

2)  Highest  approval  rating  of 
Hillsborough  County  county  court  judges  in  a 
poll  conducted  by  the  Hillsborough  County  Bar 
Association  in  1987  (Source  -  The  Tampa 
Tribune,  June  29,  1987) 

3)  Highest  approval  rating  of  Hillsborough 
County  circuit  court  judges  in  a  poll 
conducted  by  the  Hillsborough  County  Bar 
Association  in  1993  (Sources  -  The  Tampa 
Tribune,  October  9,  1993,  and  The  St. 
Petersburg  Times,  October  9,  1993) 

4)  Highest  approval  rating  of  Second  District 
Court  of  Appeal  judges  in  a  poll  conducted  by 
Hillsborough  County  Bar  Association  in  1995 

(Sources  -  Warfield's  Tampa  Bay  Review, 
September  29,  1995,  and  La  Gaceta  trilingual 
newspaper,  October  13,  1995) 

5)  Recipient  of  the  Robert  S.  Patton  Award 
for  most  outstanding  jurist  for  the  year 
1991-1992  awarded  by  the  Young  Lawyers 
Section  of  the  Hillsborough  County  Bar 
Association 

6)  Recipient  of  the  Ybor  City  Optimist  Club's 
1993  "Respect  for  the  Law"  award 

Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or 
judicial-related  committees  or  conferences  of  which  you 
are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates 
of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

1)  American  Bar  Association 

2)  The  Florida  Bar;  Member  of  Thirteenth 
Judicial  Circuit  Grievance  Committee  13-D 
(1985-1986) 

3)  Hillsborough  County  Bar  Association 
^)  American  Judicature  Society 

5)  Ferguson-White  Inn  of  Court;  President 
(1995-1996) 

6)  Conference  of  County  Court  Judges 

7)  Conference  of  Circuit  Court  Judges 

8)  Conference  of  Appellate  Court  Judges; 
Member  of  Education  Committee  (1994) 


165 


10.  other  Memberships:   List  all  organizations  to  which  you 
belong  that  are  active  in  lobbying  before  public 
bodies.  Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which 
you  belong. 

Lobbying  Organizations 
None 

Other  Organizations 
Order,  Sons  of  Italy 
Unita  Lodge  2015 
Tampa,  Florida 
By-laws  attached 

11.  Court  Admissions:   List  all  courts  in  which  you  have 
been  admitted  to  practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and 
lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed.   Please  explain 
the  reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.   Give  the  same 
information  for  administrative  bodies  which  require 
special  admission  to  practice. 

When  admitted  to  The  Florida  Bar  on  November 
13,  1970,  I  was  authorized  to  practice  in  all 
of  the  trial  and  appellate  courts  of  the 
State  of  Florida  -  County  Courts,  Circuit 
Courts,  District  Courts  of  Appeal,  and  the 
Florida  Supreme  Court. 

United  States  District  Court,  Middle  District 
of  Florida  -  admitted  January,  1973 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Fifth 
Circuit  -  admitted  January,  1974. 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the 
Eleventh  Circuit  -  admitted  March,  1983 

12.  Published  Writings:   List  the  titles,  publishers,  and 
dates  of  books,  articles,  reports,  or  other  published 
material  you  have  written  or  edited.   Please  supply  one 
copy  of  all  published  material  not  readily  available  to 
the  Committee.   Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all 
speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law 
or  legal  policy.   If  there  were  press  reports  about  the 
speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you,  please 
supply  them. 


-7- 


166 


Published  Writings: 

1)  Preparation  and  Education:  The  Cardinal 
Rules  of  the  Trial  Lawyer.   This  article  was 
published  in  the  August/September,  1990 
edition  of  The  Bulletin  of  the  Hillsborough 
County  Bar  Association.   A  copy  is  attached. 


2)  DUI  Manslaughter  Trial  -  A  Trial  Judge's 
Perspective.  This  material  was  published  for 
use  in  connection  with  an  advanced  continuing 
legal  education  seminar  presented  by  the 
Academy  of  Florida  Trial  Lawyers  on  October 
22,  1991,  in  Orlando,  Florida.   A  copy  is 
attached. 

3)  Legal  Writing  From  a  Trial  Judge's 
Perspective .   This  material  was  published  for 
use  in  connection  with  a  continuing  legal 
education  seminar  presented  by  the 
Hillsborough  County  Bar  Association  on 
October  22,  1992,  in  Tampa,  Florida.   A  copy 
is  attached. 

4)  Motions  to  Suppress:  The  Riaht  Wav.   This 
material  was  published  for  use  in  connection 
with  a  continuing  legal  education  seminar 
presented  by  the  Pinellas  County  Criminal 
Defense  Lawyers  Association  on  October  22-23, 
1993,  in  St.  Petersburg  Beach,  Florida.   It 
was  later  republished  for  use  in  connection 
with  a  continuing  legal  education  seminar 
presented  by  Stetson  College  of  Law  on 
September  29,  1995,  in  Tampa,  Florida.   A 
copy  is  attached. 

Speeches: 

Although  I  have  given  speeches  regarding  the 
legal  system  before  various  groups,  all  of 
them  were  of  an  informal  nature  and  did  not 
relate  to  issues  of  constitutional  law  or 
legal  policy.   Furthermore,  I  did  not  speak 
from  a  written  text,  and  any  notes  I  may  have 
used  were  discarded.   Finally,  to  my 
knowledge,  none  of  these  speaking  events  were 
reported  by  the  news  media. 


167 


13,   Health:    What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health? 
List  the  date  of  your  last  physical  examination. 

State  of  Health 
Excellent 

Date  of  Last  Physical  Examination 
January  30,  1996 


14.   Judicial  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  judicial 
offices  you  have  held,  whether  such  position  was 
elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the 
jurisdiction  of  each  such  court. 

1)  Current  Judicial  Office 

a)  Court 

Second  District  Court  of  Appeal  of  State  of 
Florida;  Appellate  Judge 

b)  Elected  or  Appointed 

Appointed  by  Florida  Governor  Lawton  Chiles 
in  November  of  1993;  retained  by  the  voters 
residing  within  the  second  district  court  of 
appeal  for  a  six-year  term  commencing  January 
7,  1997  at  the  general  election  held  on 
November  5,  1996. 

c)  Periods  of  Service 
December  1,  1993  to  present 

d)  Jurisdiction 

Primary  jurisdiction  involves  resolving  civil 
and  criminal  cases  appealed  from  the  circuit 
courts  of  the  fourteen  counties  located 
within  the  Second  District.   The  court  also 
possesses  an  "All  Writs"  jurisdiction. 

2)  Prior  Judicial  Offices 

a)  Court 

Circuit  Court  of  Thirteenth  Judicial  Circuit 
of  State  of  Florida;  Circuit  Judge 

b)  Elected  or  Appointed 

Appointed  by  Florida  Governor  Bob  Martinez  in 
November  of  1987;  stood  for  election  without 


-9- 


168 


opposition  for  a  six-year  term  in  September 
of  1988. 

c)  Periods  of  Service 

January  1,  1988  through  November  30,  1993 

d)  Jurisdiction 

As  a  circuit  judge,  I  sat  for  three  and  one- 
half  years  in  a  criminal  division  presiding 
over  felony  cases  and  two  and  one-half  years 
in  a  civil  division  presiding  over  civil 
cases  involving  mortgage  foreclosures, 
medical  and  legal  malpractice  claims, 
personal  injury  and  products  liability  cases, 
and  contractual  and  commercial  disputes.   I 
also  had  jurisdiction  over  general  civil 
cases  in  which  the  amount  in  controversy 
exceeded  $15,000.   My  jurisdiction  also 
included  resolving  civil  and  criminal  appeals 
from  the  county  court,  as  well  as  issuing 
writs  of  certiorari  and  mandamus  to 
governmental  boards  and  agencies. 

a)  Couct 

County  Court  of  Hillsborough  County,  Florida; 
County  Judge 

b)  Elected  or  Appointed 

In  September  of  1986,  I  was  elected  in  a 
county-wide,  non-partisan  election  to  a  four 
year  term. 

c)  Periods  of  Service 

January  1,  1987  through  December  31,  1987 

d)  Jurisdiction 

As  a  county  court  judge,  I  sat  for  six  months 
in  a  criminal  division  where  my  jurisdiction 
was  limited  to  presiding  over  misdemeanor  and 
criminal  traffic  offenses  and  six  months  in  a 
civil  division  where  my  jurisdiction  was 
limited  to  presiding  over  civil  disputes  in 
which  the  amount  in  controversy  did  not 
exceed  $5,000,  landlord-tenant  disputes  and 
civil  traffic  cases. 


-10- 


169 


15.   Citations :   If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide: 

(1)  citations  for  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you 
have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for 
all  appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were 
reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with 
significant  criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural 
rulings;  and  (3)  citations  for  significant  opinions  on 
federal  or  state  constitutional  issues,  together  with 
the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such 
opinions.   If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were  not 
officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the 
opinions . 

(1)  Citations  of  Significant  Opinions: 

1.  Berry  v.  State.  636  So.  2d  555  (Fla.  2d 
DCA) ,  approved  in  part,  disapproved  in  part. 
647  So.  2d  830  (Fla.  1994) . 

2.  Bader  v.  Bader.  639  So.  2d  122  (Fla.  2d 
DCA)  (en  banc),  review  denied.  649  So.  2d  232 
(Fla.  1994) . 

3.  Stephenson  v.  State.  640  So.  2d  117  (Fla. 
2d  DCA  1994),  approved.  655  So.  2d  86  (Fla. 
1995) . 

4.  Kazakoff  v.  State.  642  So.  2d  596  (Fla.  2d 
DCA  1994)  (en  banc) . 

5.  Hamilton  v.  State.  645  So.  2d  555  (Fla.  2d 
DCA  1994),  aff'd  in  part,  rev'd  in  part.  660 
So.  2d  1038  (Fla.  1995)  . 

6.  Snyder  v.  Douglas.  647  So.  2d  275  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1994)  . 

7.  Haines  City  Development  v.  Diggs.  647  So. 
2d  855  (Fla.  2d  DCA  1994),  approved.  658  So. 
2d  523  (Fla,  1995)  . 

8.  State  Farm  Mutual  Automobile  Insurance 
Company  v.  Hassen.  650  So.  2d  128  (Fla.  2d 
DCA  1995),  approved.  674  So.  2d  106  (Fla. 
1996) . 

9.  Humana  of  Florida.  Inc.  v.  McKauahan.  652 
So.  2d  852  (Fla.  2d  DCA  1995),  approved.  668 
So.  2d  974  (Fla.  1996) . 

-11- 


170 


10.  Bentley  v.  Walker.  660  So.  2d  313  (Fla. 
2d  DCA  1995),  approved.  678  So.  2d  1265  (Fla. 
1996) . 

(2)   Citations  of  Reversals  and  Affirmances 
with  Criticism: 

1.  Boffo  V.  State.  543  So. 2d  435  (Fla.  2d 
DCA  1989)  . 

Although  my  judgment  revoking  the  defendant's 
violation  of  probation  was  affirmed,  the 
sentence  I  imposed  was  reversed  and  the  case 
was  remanded  for  imposition  of  a  sentence 
under  the  youthful  offender  statute. 

2.  Parsley  v.  State.  553  So. 2d  730  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1989) . 

My  denial  of  a  motion  to  dismiss  the  charge 
of  racketeering  was  reversed  and  the  judgment 
as  to  this  charge  was  vacated. 

3.  Knight  v.  State.  556  So. 2d  801  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1990) . 

My  departure  order  imposing  a  sentence  in 
excess  of  the  sentencing  guidelines  was 
reversed  and  the  case  was  remanded  for 
resentencing. 

4.  Phelps  V.  State.  561  So. 2d  32  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1990)  . 

My  denial  of  the  defendant's  motion  to 
correct  an  illegal  sentence  based  on  an  award 
of  improper  jail  credit  was  reversed  and  the 
case  was  remanded  for  further  consideration. 

5.  Harris  v.  State.  565  So. 2d  897  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1990) . 

My  denial  of  the  defendant's  motion  for 
additional  jail  credit  was  reversed  and  the 
case  was  remanded  for  further  consideration. 


-12- 


171 


6.  Way  V.  Duaqer.  568  So. 2d  1263  (Fla.  1990), 

My  denial  of  the  defendant's  motion  to  vacate 
his  death  sentence  was  reversed  and  the  case 
was  remanded  for  another  penalty  phase 
hearing.   In  all  other  respects  I  was 
affirmed. 

7.  Helmick  v.  State.  569  So. 2d  869  (Fia.  2d  DCA 
1990)  . 

Although  the  defendant's  convictions  were 
affirmed,  the  court  reversed  the  sentences 
imposed  and  remanded  for  resentencing. 

8.  Parlcer   v.    State.    570   So. 2d    1115    (Fla.    2d   DCA 
1990)  . 

My  imposition  of  a  minimum  mandatory  sentence 
as  to  one  offense  was  vacated.   In  all  other 
respects  I  was  affirmed. 

9.  Edwards  v.  State.  570  So. 2d  1116  (Fla.  2d  DCA 

1990)  . 

My  departure  order  imposing  a  sentence  in 
excess  of  the  sentencing  guidelines  was 
stricken. 

10.  Nichols  V.  State.  571  So. 2d  121  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1990) . 

My  denial  of  the  defendant's  motion  for  post 
conviction  relief  was  reversed  and  the  case 
was  remanded  for  further  proceedings. 

11.  Walker  v.  State.  572  So. 2d  1028  (Fla.  2d  DCA 

1991)  . 

My  denial  of  the  defendant's  motion  for  post 
conviction  relief  was  reversed  and  the  case 
was  remanded  for  further  proceedings. 

12.  Martinez  v.  State.  575  So. 2d  1376  (Fla.  2d 
DCA  1991)  . 

My  denial  of  the  defendant's  motion  for  post 
conviction  relief  was  reversed  and  the  case 
was  remanded  for  further  proceedings. 

-13- 


172 


Following  remand  another  appeal  was  taken  and 
my  ruling  was  affirmed.   Martinez  v.  State> 
583  So.2d  680  (Fla.  2d  DCA  1991). 

13.  City  of  Tampa  v.  Redner.  576  So. 2d  339 
(Fla. 2d  DCA  1991)  . 

The  court  reversed  my  ruling  and  directed 
that  I  reconsider  the  case  using  the  correct 
municipal  ordinance  of  the  City  of  Tampa. 
Following  remand  another  appeal  was  taken  and 
the  court  affirmed  my  second  ruling.   City  of 
Tampa  v.  Redner.  597  So. 2d  305  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991) . 

14.  Johnson  v.  State.  577  So. 2d  725  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991)  . 

My  denial  of  the  defendant's  motion  to 
mitigate  his  sentence  was  reversed  and  the 
case  was  remanded  for  further  proceedings . 

15.  Matthews  v.  State.  578  So. 2d  51  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991) . 

My  written  sentences  were  reversed  and 
remanded  to  conform  to  my  oral  pronouncements 
at  time  of  sentencing.   In  all  other  respects 
the  defendant's  convictions  were  affirmed. 

16.  Busier  v.  State.  578  So. 2d  872  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991)  . 

The  court  reversed  my  order  denying  the 
defendant's  motion  to  suppress  evidence 
deciding  that  there  was  no  founded  suspicion 
to  justify  the  police  officer's  stop  of  the 
defendant . 

17.  Morgan  v.  State.  580  So. 2d  176  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991)  . 

My  imposition  of  a  sentence  under  the 
habitual  felony  offender  statute  was  reversed 
and  the  case  was  remanded  for  resentencing. 


-14- 


173 


18.  Blount  V.  State.  581  So. 2d  604  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991)  . 

My  departure  order  imposing  a  sentence  in 
excess  of  the  sentencing  guidelines  was 
reversed  and  the  case  was  remanded  for 
resentencing. 

19.  Gonzalez  v.  State.  581  So. 2d  648  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991) . 

Although  the  court  affirmed  my  departure 
sentencing  order  which  exceeded  the 
sentencing  guidelines  based  on  one  reason,  it 
found  that  two  of  my  reasons  for  departure 
were  invalid. 

20.  Bur key  v.  State.  582  So. 2d  1252  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991)  . 

My  written  sentences  were  reversed  and 
remanded  to  conform  to  my  oral  pronouncements 
at  time  of  sentencing.   In  all  other  respects 
the  defendant's  convictions  were  affirmed. 

21.  Jancar  v.  State.  585  So. 2d  1200  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991)  . 

Although  the  judgment  and  sentence  were 
affirmed,  the  court  remanded  for  the 
allocation  of  the  proper  amount  of  jail 
credit  to  be  awarded  to  the  defendant. 

22.  State  v.  Milbro.  586  So. 2d  1303  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991) . 

The  court  reversed  my  dismissal  of  the  charge 
of  solicitation  to  deliver  a  controlled 
substance  and  remanded  the  case  for  further 
proceedings . 

23.  Jackson  v.  State.  590  So. 2d  1070  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991)  . 

My  departure  order  imposing  a  sentence  in 
excess  of  the  sentencing  guidelines  was 
reversed  and  the  case  was  remanded  for 
resentencing. 


•15- 


174 


24.  State  v.  Tanskley.  590  So. 2d  1111  (Fla.  2d 
DCA  1991)  . 

Although  the  court  affirmed  the  defendant's 
convictions  for  two  offenses,  it  remanded  for 
the  correction  of  sentence  as  to  one  of  the 
offenses . 

25.  Coleman  v.  State.  592  So. 2d  300  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991) . 

The  defendant  was  convicted  of  burglary  and 
delivery  of  cocaine.   The  court  reversed  the 
burglary  conviction,  affirmed  the  drug 
conviction,  and  remanded  for  resentencing  on 
the  drug  conviction  using  a  corrected 
guideline  sentencing  scoresheet  that  deleted 
the  burglary  conviction. 

26.  Dumas  v.  State.  592  So. 2d  383  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1992) . 

Although  the  defendant's  convictions  were 
affirmed,  my  departure  order  imposing  a 
sentence  in  excess  of  the  sentencing 
guidelines  was  reversed  and  the  case  was 
remanded  for  resentencing. 

27.  State  v.  Bamber,  592  So. 2d  1129  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991) . 

Although  the  court  affirmed  my  granting  of 
the  defendant's  motion  to  suppress  evidence, 
it  stated  that  I  should  have  followed  the 
holding  of  another  District  Court  of  Appeal. 
However,  in  affirming  my  ruling,  the  court 
certified  conflict  to  the  Florida  Supreme 
Court  with  this  other  court's  ruling.   The 
Florida  Supreme  Court  ultimately  affirmed  my 
suppression  of  the  evidence.   State  v. 
Bamber.  630  So.  2d  1048  (Fla.  1994) . 

28.  Mathews  v.  State,  596  So. 2d  79  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1991) . 

The  court  reversed  my  denial  of  the 
defendant's  motion  to  correct  illegal 
sentence  and  remanded  the  case  for  further 
proceedings . 

-16- 


175 


29.  Smith  v.  State.  599  So.Zd  265  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1992)  . 

My  departure  order  imposing  a  sentence  in 
excess  of  the  sentencing  guidelines  was 
reversed  and  the  case  was  remanded  for 
resentencing. 

30.  Lehman  v.  State.  602  So. 2d  610  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1992)  . 

My  departure  order  imposing  a  sentence  in 
excess  of  the  sentencing  guidelines  was 
reversed  and  the  case  was  remanded  with 
directions  to  discharge  the  defendant  from 
any  further  sentence. 

31.  Jasperson  v.  State.  603  So. 2d  144  (Fla.  2d 
DCA  1992) . 

The  court  reversed  the  sentence  imposed  and 
remanded  for  resentencing  using  a  proper 
guideline  sentencing  scoresheet. 

32.  Davis  V.  State.  605  So. 2d  561  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1992) . 

The  court  reversed  my  denial  of  the 
defendant's  motion  to  suppress  evidence  on 
the  basis  that  the  stop  of  the  defendant  by 
the  police  officer  was  pretextual  in  nature. 

33.  Love  V.  State.  606  So. 2d  755  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1992) . 

The  court  reversed  my  ruling  that  the 
defendant's  community  control  should  be 
revoked  and  remanded  the  case  for 
reinstatement  of  the  original  sentence  of 
community  control. 

34.  Rodriguez  v.  State.  610  So. 2d  476  (Fla.  2d 
DCA  1992) . 

The  court  reversed  my  sentence  on  the  basis 
that  it  exceeded  the  sentence  called  for  in  a 
plea  agreement.   It  remanded  the  case  for 
further  proceedings  including  giving  the 


-17- 


176 


defendant  an  opportunity  to  withdraw  his  plea 
of  guilty. 

35.  Reber  v.  State.  611  So.  2d  91  (Fla.  2d 
DCA  1992) . 

The  court  remanded  the  case  for  the 
correction  of  the  written  judgment.   It  also 
struck  a  cost  assessment. 

36.  Dorsey  v.  State.  613  So.  2d  1368  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1993) . 

The  court  reversed  the  defendant's 
racketeering  conviction.   It  also  reversed 
the  defendant's  petit  theft  conviction 
finding  that  I  should  not  have  allowed 
certain  photographs  into  evidence.   However, 
the  court  did  affirm  the  defendant's 
convictions  for  possession  of  cocaine, 
possession  of  marijuana,  and  grand  theft  of  a 
firearm. 

37.  Bryant  v.  State.  614  So.  2d  688  (Fla.  2d 
DCA   1993)  . 

Although  the  court  affirmed  the  convictions, 
it  reversed  one  special  condition  of 
probation  because  it  was  not  orally 
pronounced. 

38.  Holliday  v.  Citv  of  Tamoa.  619  So.  2d 
244  (Fla.  1993) . 

In  Holliday  v.  City  of  Tamoa.  586  So.  2d  64 
(Fla.  2d  DCA  1991),  the  Second  District  Court 
of  Appeal  upheld  my  decision  to  affirm  Mr. 
Holliday' s  conviction  for  loitering  under  a 
Tampa  city  ordinance.   The  Florida  Supreme 
Court,  however,  disagreed  and  held  the 
ordinance  was  facially  unconstitutional. 

39.  Bailev  v.  Hillsborough  County.  619  So. 
2d  346  (Fla.  2d  DCA  1993)  . 

The  court  reversed  my  dismissal  of  a  civil 
complaint  with  prejudice  and  remanded  the 
case  for  the  plaintiff  to  be  able  to  file  an 
amended  complaint. 

-18- 


177 


40.  Guerra  v.  State>  626  So.  2d  706  (Fla.  2cl 
DCA  1993) . 

My  departure  order  imposing  a  sentence  in 
excess  of  the  sentencing  guidelines  was 
reversed  and  the  case  was  remanded  for 
resentencing. 

41.  Charlie  Brown's  of  Tampa.  Inc.  v.  Cook. 
630  So.  2d  1158  (Fla.  2d  DCA  1994)  . 

The  court  reversed  my  order  setting  aside  a 
final  judgment  and  remanded  with  instructions 
to  reinstate  the  judgment. 

42.  Newsome  v.  Sinaletary.  637  So.  2d  9 
(Fla.  2d  DCA  1994) . 

The  court  reversed  my  order  dismissing  a 
complaint  for  lack   of  jurisdiction  and 
remanded  for  further  proceedings. 

43.  State  v.  Berry.  647  So.  2d  830  (Fla. 
1994) . 

Although  the  Florida  Supreme  Court  affirmed 
the  result  reached  in  the  opinion  I  authored 
in  Berry  v.  State.  636  So.  2d  555  (Fla.  2d 
DCA  1994),  it  disagreed  with  the  assessment 
that  a  juvenile  could  never  waive  his  or  her 
right  to  forego  certain  statutory  safeguards 
before  being  sentenced  as  an  adult. 

44.  State  v.  Jackson.  650  So.  2d  24  (Fla. 
1995) . 

Although  the  Florida  Supreme  Court  agreed 
with  the  result  reached  in  the  opinion  I 
authored  in  State  v.  Jackson.  636  So.  2d  1372 
(Fla.  2d  DCA  1994),  it  disagreed  with  my 
substantive  reasoning  that  information 
transmitted  to  a  digital  display  pager  was  an 
electronic  communication.   Instead,  the  court 
held  that  such  information  was  a  wire 
communication. 


•19- 


178 


45.  State  v.  Hamilton.  660  So.  2d  1038  (Fla. 
1995) , 

Although  the  Florida  Supreme  Court  agreed 
with  my  substantive  analysis  of  what 
constitutes  the  "curtilage"  under  Florida's 
burglary  statute  in  the  opinion  I  authored  in 
Hamilton  v.  State.  645  So.  2d  555  (Fla.  2d 
DCA  1994),  it  disagreed  with  remanding  the 
case  for  a  new  trial,  determining  instead 
that  the  evidence  was  insufficient  to  prove 
guilt . 

46.  Florida  Power  &  Light  Company  v.  Polackwich.  677 
So.  2d  880  (2d  DCA  Fla.  1996) . 

Although  the  court  reversed  and  remanded  for 
a  new  trial  because  it  determined  that  two  of 
my  rulings  were  erroneous,  it  pointed  out 
that  at  the  time  I  made  these  rulings  they 
were  consistent  with  the  law  in  effect  at  the 
time  of  trial.   After  the  trial,  however,  the 
law  had  changed  by  virtue  of  two  intervening 
United  States  Supreme  Court  opinions  which 
required  the  appellate  court  to  reverse  and 
grant  a  new  trial. 

47.  State  v.  Montague.  682  So.  2d  1085  (Fla.  1996). 

In  State  v.  Montague.  656  So.  2d  508  (Fla.  2d  DCA 
1995) ,  I  certified  a  question  to  the  Florida  Supreme 
Court  regarding  whether  a  recent  Florida  Supreme  Court 
opinion  had  overruled  prior  precedent  of  the  Second 
District  Court  of  Appeal  in  the  area  of  preserving  a 
sentencing  error  for  review.   Although  the  Florida 
Supreme  Court  acknowledged  that  its  prior  opinion  did 
not  expressly  overrule  the  precedent  of  my  court 
upon  which  I  relied  in  my  opinion,  it  did  hold  that 
this  opinion  tacitly  disapproved  this  precedent. 
The  supreme  court,  therefore,  answered  the  question 
in  the  affirmative  and  reversed  my  decision. 

(3)   Citations  of  Significant  Constitutional 
Opinions: 

1.   State  Farm  Mutual  Automobile  Insurance 
Company  v.  Hassen.  650  So.  2d  128  (Fla.  2d 


■20- 


179 


DCA  1995),  approved.  674  So.  2ci  106  (Fla. 
1996) . 

2.  Walker  v.  Bentley.  660  So.  2cl  313  (Fla. 
2d  DCA  1995),  approved.  678  So.  2d  1265  (Fla. 
1996) . 

3.  State  V.  Barnes.  21  Fla.  L.  Weelcly  D2515  (Fla.  2d 
DCA  Nov.  27,  1996) . 

16.  Public  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  public 
offices  you  have  held,  other  than  judicial  offices, 
including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such 
positions  were  elected  or  appointed.   State 

(chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies  for 
elective  public  office. 

None . 

17.  Legal  Career: 

a.    Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and 
experience  after  graduation  from  law  school 
including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge, 
and  if  so,  the  name  of  the  judge,  the  court, 
and  the  date  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

I  did  not  serve  as  a  clerk  to  a 
judge. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so, 
the  addresses  and  dates; 

From  April  of  1975  until  December 
of  1986,  I  was  a  sole  practitioner 
at  the  following  addresses: 

April  of  1975  -  December  of  1977 
725  East  Kennedy  Boulevard 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 

January  of  1978  -  February  of  1980  ' 

202  South  Governor  Street 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 


■21- 


180 


March  of  1980  -  June  of  1985 
610  West  Deleon  Street 
Tampa,  Florida  33606 

July  of  1985  -  December  of  1986 
606  East  Madison  Street 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 

3.   the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law 
firms  or  offices,  companies,  or  governmental 
agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected, 
and  the  nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 


June  of  1970  -  November  of  1970 

Office  of  the  Hillsborough  County 

Solicitor 

801  East  Kennedy  Boulevard 

Fifth  Floor 

Tampa,  Florida  33602 

Law  Clerk 

November  of  1970  -  December  of  1972 

Office  of  the  Hillsborough  County 

Solicitor 

801  East  Kennedy  Boulevard 

Fifth  Floor 

Tampa,  Florida  33602 

Assistant  County  Solicitor 

January  of  1973  -  April  of  1973 
Office  of  the  State  Attorney 
801  East  Kennedy  Boulevard 
Fifth  Floor 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 
Assistant  State  Attorney 

April  of  1973  -  April  of  1975 
Levine,  Freedman,  and  Hirsch,  P. A. 
725  East  Kennedy  Boulevard 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 
Associate  Attorney 

January  of  1986  -  June  of  1987 

Hillsborough  County  Court  Judge 

Criminal  Division 

801  East  Twiggs  Street 

Tampa,  Florida  33602 


-22- 


181 


July  of  1987  -  December  of  1987 
Hillsborough  County  Court  Judge 
800  East  Kennedy  Boulevard 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 

January  of  1988  -  July  of  1991 

Hillsborough  County  Circuit  Court 

Judge 

Criminal  Division 

800  East  Kennedy  Boulevard 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 

August  of  1991  -  November  of  1993 

Hillsborough  County  Circuit  Court 

Judge 

Civil  Division 

419  Pierce  Street 

Tampa,  Florida  33602 

December  of  1993  -  Present 
Second  District  Court  of  Appeal 
Judge 

801  East  Twiggs  Street 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 


b.    1.    What  has  been  the  general  character  of 
your  law  practice,  dividing  it  into  periods 
with  dates  if  its  character  has  changed  over 
the  years? 

The  general  character  of  my 
practice,  which  remained  constant 
over  the  years,  involved  extensive 
litigation  in  the  areas  of  criminal 
law,  commercial  law,  and  family 
law.   I  also  handled  appellate 
matters  in  these  same  areas  of  the 
law. 

2.    Describe  your  typical  former  clients, 
and  mention  the  areas,  if  any,  in  which  you 
have  specialized. 

My  former  clients  ccime  from  all 
walks  of  life  -  single  parents, 
educators,  business  people,  law 
enforcement  officers,  public 
officials,  and  members  of  the 

-23- 


182 


general  work  force.   Although  I 
considered  myself  a  general 
litigator,  my  area  of  specialty  was 
criminal  defense. 

1.  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently, 
occasionally,  or  not  at  all?   If  the 
frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court 
varied,  describe  each  such  variance,  giving 
dates . 

While  a  practicing  attorney,  I 
appeared  in  court  on  a  regular 
basis  which  did  not  significantly 
vary  over  the  years. 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was 
in: 

(a)  federal  courts  -         30?. 

(b)  state  courts  of  record  -  70  % 

(c)  other  courts  -  0?, 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil  -    30% 

(b)  criminal  -  70  % 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of 
record  you  tried  to  verdict  or  judgment 
(rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether 
your  were  sole  counsel,  chief  counsel,  or 
associate  counsel. 

Sole  Counsel 
145 

Chief  Counsel 
5 

Associate  Counsel 
10 


-24- 


183 

5.    What  percentage  of  these  trials  were: 

(a)  jury  -      60% 

(b)  non-jury  -  40% 

Litigation:   Describe  the  ten  most  significant 
litigated  matters  which  you  personally  handled.   Give 
the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the 
docket  number  and  date  if  unreported.   Give  a  capsule 
summary  of  the  substance  of  each  case.   Identify  the 
party  or  parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in 
detail  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  the 
litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.   Also 
state  as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or 
judges  before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  The  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone 
numbers  of  co-counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for 
each  of  the  other  parties. 

1)  citgticq  Qt   Case 

Autgmatic  Truck  ^    Trgilgr  Wggh 
Centers.  Inc.  v.  Eastamp.  Inc.,  320 
So.  2d  7  (Fla.  2d  DCA  1975) . 

Capsule  Summary  of  Case 

This  case  involved  a  lawsuit  filed 
by  my  client,  a  secured  creditor, 
seeking  to  recover  a  deficiency 
judgment  following  a  foreclosure 
sale  involving  an  automatic  truck 
and  trailer  washer.   The  trial 
court  granted  summary  judgment 
against  the  client  and  ruled  that 
its  rights  were  governed 
exclusively  by  the  provisions  of 
Article  9  of  the  Uniform  Commercial 
Code  relating  to  secured  creditors 
and  that  it  was  not  entitled  to  the 
benefits  of  Article  6  of  the  Code 
which  protected  unsecured 
creditors.   The  appellate  court 
disagreed,  reversed  the  entry  of 
summary  judgment,  and  remanded  for 
further  proceedings.   To  the  best 

-25- 


184 


of  my  recollection,  the  case  was 
settled  on  remand. 

Party  Represented 

Automatic  Truck  &  Trailer  Wash 
Centers,  Inc. 

Nature  of  Participation  in  Case 

I  was  actively  involved  in 
litigating  the  case  at  the  trial 
court  level  in  terms  of  drafting 
pleadings,  researching  the  law, 
participating  in  pre-trial 
depositions,  and  attending  and 
arguing  motions  at  hearings.   I  was 
equally  active  at  the  appellate 
stage  in  terms  of  undertaking  legal 
research  and  preparing  and  drafting 
the  briefs.   I  do  not  recall, 
however,  whether  I  or  my  co-counsel 
argued  the  case  to  the  appellate 
court . 

Final  Disposition  of  Case 

It  is  my  recollection  that  after 
the  appellate  court  reversed  and 
remanded  the  case  the  parties  then 
settled  it. 

Dates  of  Representation 

Fall  of  1974 

Name  of  Court/Judge 

Circuit  Court  of  Thirteenth 

Judicial  Circuit  of  State  of 

Florida 

Circuit  Judge  Laurence  I .  Goodrich 

(retired)  (now  in  private  practice) 

Name/Address/Phone  Numbers  of  Co- 
Counsel  and  Counsel  of  Other 
Parties 


-26- 


185 


Co-Counsel 

Mr.  Michael  J.  Freedman 
300  East  Madison  Street 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 
(813)  229-6925 

Counsel  nf  OthPr  P^rti^'? 

Raymond  C.  Farfante,  Jr. 
(deceased) 


Mr.  John  P.  Griffin 

15819  Dawson  Ridge  Road  N.W. 

Tampa,  Florida  33647 

(813)  979-9831 

Mr.  Harold  H.  Griffin 
(deceased) 

Mr.  Jan  G.  Halisky 
507  South  Prospect  Avenue 
Clearwater,  Florida  34616 
(813)  461-4234 

2)  Citation  of  Case 

United  States  v.  Myerc;.  550  f.  2d 
1036  (5th  Cir.  1977),  42  ALR  Fed. 
855,  appeal  after  remand.  572  F.  2d 
506  (5th  Cir.),  cert,  denied.  439 
U.S.  487,  99  S.  Ct.  147,  58  L.  Ed. 
2d  149  (1978) 

Capsule  Summary  of  Case 

Mr.  Myers  was  indicted  for  robbing 
a  federally-insured  bank,  and  I  was 
court-appointed  to  represent  him. 
He  raised  an  alibi  defense.   His 
first  trial  ended  in  a  mistrial 
after  the  jury  could  not  reach  a 
unanimous  verdict.   His  second 
trial  resulted  in  a  jury  verdict  of 
guilt.   On  appeal,  the  Fifth 
Circuit  reversed  and  remanded  for  a 
new  trial.   The  new  trial  resulted 
in  another  jury  verdict  of  guilt 
which  the  Fifth  Circuit  affirmed. 

-27- 


186 

Party  Represented 

Mr.  Larry  Allen  Myers 

Nature  of  Participation  in  Case 

I  was  court-appointed  to  represent 
Mr.  Myers  at  trial  and  on  appeal. 
In  that  capacity,  I  prepared  and 
filed  various  pre-trial  motions, 
undertook  discovery,  tried  his  case 
to  a  jury  on  three  occasions, 
prepared  and  filed  appellate  briefs 
on  two  occasions,  and  argued  his 
case  on  appeal  on  one  occasion. 

Final  Disposition  of  Case 

Following  the  second  conviction, 
Mr.  Myers  was  sentenced  to  ten 
years  imprisonment.   The  conviction 
and  sentence  were  affirmed  by  the 
Fifth  Circuit,  and  the  United 
States  Supreme  Court  later  denied 
certiorari  review. 

Dates  of  Representation 

1975-1978 

Name  of  Court/Judge 

United  States  District  Court, 

Middle  District  of  Florida,  Tampa 

Division 

United  States  District  Judge  Ben 

Krentzman  (retired) 

Name/Address/Phone  Number  of  Co- 
Counsel  and  Counsel  of  Other  Partv 

Co-Counsel 

None 

Counsel  of  Other  Partv 

Mr.  John  L.  Briggs 
(I  have  been  advised  by  a  former 
law  partner  of  Mr.  Briggs  that  he 

-28- 


187 


is  now  in  a  nursing  home  in  the 
Jacksonville,  Florida  area 
suffering  from  Alzheimer's 
disease. ) 

Mr.  Terry  Smiljanich 

300  First  Avenue  South 

Suite  500 

St.  Petersburg,  Florida  33701 

(813)  823-3837 

3)   Citation  of  Case 

Johnson  v.  Farris.  469  So.  2d  221 
(Fla.  2d  DCA  1985) 

Capsule  Summary  of  Case 

I  filed  a  petition  to  modify  the 
custody  provisions  of  a  final 
judgment  of  dissolution  of  marriage 
on  behalf  of  the  former  husband  in 
which  he  sought  custody  of  his 
minor  child.   The  trial  judge 
dismissed  the  petition  on  the  basis 
that  he  did  not  have  jurisdiction 
under  Florida's  Uniform  Child 
Custody  Jurisdiction  Act.   This 
ruling  was  reversed  on  appeal,  and 
the  case  was  remanded  for  further 
proceedings.   On  remand,  the  case 
was  settled  by  the  parties  with  the 
former  husband  obtaining  more 
extensive  visitation  rights. 

Party  Represented 

Mr.  Cecil  E.  Johnson 

Nature  of  Participation  in  Case 

I  prepared  and  filed  pleadings  in 
the  case,  undertook  research  of  the 
law,  and  argued  the  case  before  the 
trial  judge.   On  appeal,  I  prepared 
and  filed  the  briefs  and  argued 
before  the  appellate  court.   On 
remand,  I  represented  the  client  in 


-29- 


188 


successfully  resolving  the  case 
without  the  need  for  any  further 
litigation. 

Final  Disposition  of  Case 

Following  the  appellate  court's 
reversal  and  remand,  the  parties 
resolved  the  case.   As  I  recall, 
the  former  husband  was  given  more 
liberal  visitation  with  his  minor 
child. 

Dates  of  Representation 

1984-1985 

Name  of  Court/Judge 

Circuit  Court  of  Thirteenth 

Judicial  Circuit  of  the  State  of 

Florida 

Circuit  Judge  Phillip  L.  Knowles 

(retired) 

Name /Address /Phone  Numbers  of  Co- 
Counsel  and  Counsel  of  Other  Party 

Co-Counsel 

None 

Counsel  of  Other  Party 

Mr.  Stephen  Carl  Cheeseman 
700  East  Twiggs  Street 
Suite  105 

Tampa,  Florida  33602 
(813)  223-4007 

4)    Citation  of  Case 

Malone  v.  State.  390  So.  2d  338 
(Fla.  1980),  cert,  denied.  State  v. 
Malone.  450  U.S.  1034,  101  S.  Ct. 
1749,  68  L.  Ed.  2d  231  (1981) 


■30- 


189 


CaPSUlp    Siimin^rv    pf    c^sp 

Mr.  Malone  was  indicted  for  and 
convicted  of  two  counts  of  first- 
degree  murder  and  one  count  of 
robbery.   At  trial,  the  state 
introduced  into  evidence 
incriminating  statements  made  by 
Mr.  Malone  regarding  his 
participation  in  the  murders  and 
robbery.   These  statements  were 
made  to  a  state  informant  who  had 
been  placed  in  a  jail  cell  with  Mr. 
Malone  for  the  specific  purpose  of 
eliciting  incriminating  statements 
from  Mr.  Malone.   A  motion  to 
suppress  these  statements  was 
denied  by  the  trial  judge.   Mr. 
Malone  was  eventually  sentenced  to 
death.   The  Florida  Supreme  Court 
held  that  the  statements  should 
have  been  suppressed.   Concluding 
that  the  introduction  into  evidence 
of  these  statements  was  not 
harmless  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt, 
the  Florida  Supreme  Court  reversed 
Mr.  Malone 's  convictions  and 
sentences  of  death  and  remanded  for 
a  new  trial.   On  remand,  Mr.  Malone 
pleaded  guilty  in  return  for 
concurrent  life  sentences. 

Partv  ReoresPntPH 

Mr,  Charles  Willis  Malone,  Jr. 

Nature  of  Part  i  ri  pr^j-j  r^p 

I  was  court-appointed  to  represent 
Mr.  Malone  at  his  first  trial  and 
after  the  case  was  reversed  and 
remanded  by  the  Florida  Supreme 
Court.   The  Office  of  the  Public 
Defender  represented  him  on  appeal. 
In  connection  with  my  repre- 
sentation of  Mr.  Malone,  I  prepared 
and  filed  extensive  pre-trial 
motions,  including  the  pivotal 
motion  to  suppress,  undertook 
extensive  research  of  the  law  and 

-31- 


190 


pre-trial  discovery,  participated 
in  numerous  arguments  before  the 
trial  judge  in  connection  with  pre- 
trial motions  I  filed,  and  tried 
the  case  to  a  jury.   On  remand,  I 
helped  negotiate  a  favorable  plea 
agreement  on  behalf  of  Mr.  Malone. 

Final  Disposition  of  Case 

Following  the  Florida  Supreme 
Court's  reversal  and  remand  for  a 
new  trial,  Mr.  Malone  pleaded 
guilty  to  all  charges  in  return  for 
concurrent  life  sentences. 

Dates  of  Representation 

1978-1981 

Name  of  Court /Judge 

Circuit  Court  of  Thirteenth 

Judicial  Circuit  of  the  State  of 

Florida 

Circuit  Judge  J.  C.  Cheatwood 

(retired) 

Name/Address/Phone  Numbers  of  Co- 
Counsel  and  Counsel  of  Other  Party 

Co-Counsel 

None 

Counsel  of  Other  Party 

Mr.  C.  Thomas  Davidson 
100  North  Tampa  Street 
Suite  2800 

Tampa,  Florida  33601 
(813)  224-0866 

5)    Citation  of  Case 

United  States  v.  Conover.  772  F.  2d 
765  (11th  Cir.  1985),  affirmed  in 
part  and  remanded.  Tanner  v.  United 
States.  483  U.S.  107,  107  S.  Ct. 
2739,  97  L.  Ed.  2d  90  (1987), 

-32- 


191 


opinion  on  remand.  United  States  v. 
Conover.  845  F.  2d  266  (11th  Cir. 
1988) 

Capsule  Summary  of  Case 

Mr.  Conover  and  Mr.  Tanner  were 
indicted  for  conspiracy  to  defraud 
the  United  States  and  for  multiple 
counts  of  mail  fraud.   The  charges 
arose  from  the  awarding  of  a  road 
building  contract  to  Mr.  Tanner  by 
Mr.  Conover  as  chief  of  procurement 
for  Seminole  Electric  Cooperative. 
This  contract  was  one  of  many 
contracts  let  by  Seminole  Electric 
in  connection  with  its  construction 
of  a  power  generating  plant  with 
funds  loaned  and  guaranteed  by  the 
Rural  Electrification  Admini- 
stration.  The  first  trial  lasted 
approximately  two  months  and  ended 
in  a  mistrial  because  the  jury 
could  not  reach  a  unanimous 
verdict.   The  second  trial  lasted 
approximately  six  weeks  and  ended 
with  jury  verdicts  of  guilt. 

On  appeal,  the  United  States  Court 
of  Appeals  for  the  Eleventh  Circuit 
affirmed  the  convictions.   The 
United  States  Supreme  Court 
accepted  certiorari  jurisdiction  in 
the  case.   It  then  affirmed  one  of 
the  points  raised  relating  to  juror 
misconduct  but  remanded  to  the 
Eleventh  Circuit  to  reconsider  the 
sufficiency  of  the  evidence  to 
sustain  the  convictions.   On 
remand,  the  Eleventh  Circuit 
determined  that  the  evidence  was 
insufficient  and  directed  that  the 
convictions  be  vacated. 

Party  Represented 

Mr.  William  M.  Conover 


-33- 


192 


Nature  of  Participation  in  Case 

I  represented  Mr.  Conover  at  both 
of  his  trials  arid  on  direct  appeal 
to  the  United  States  Court  of 
Appeals  for  the  Eleventh  Circuit. 
Because  I  had  become  a  judge  when 
the  case  went  to  the  United  States 
Supreme  Court,  and  then  on  remand 
to  the  Eleventh  Circuit,  Mr.  John 
DeVault,  III,  assumed  repre- 
sentation of  Mr.  Conover. 

My  participation  in  the  case 
involved  extensive  research  of  the 
law,  extended  discovery,  filing, 
preparing,  and  arguing  numerous 
pre-trial  and  post-trial  motions, 
and  trying  the  case  to  two  juries. 
I  also  assisted  in  the  preparation 
of  the  briefs  on  the  initial  appeal 
to  the  Eleventh  Circuit. 

Final  Disposition  of  Case 

In  United  States  v.  Conover.  845  F. 
2d  266  (11th  Cir.  1988),  the  court 
vacated  Mr.  Conover 's  convictions. 

Dates  of  Representation 

1983-1986 

Name  of  Court/Judge 

United  States  District  Court, 

Middle  District  of  Florida,  Tampa 

Division 

United  States  District  Judge  Ben 

Krentzman  (retired) 

Name/Address/Phone  Numbers  of  Co- 
Counsel  and  Counsel  o  Other  Parties 

Co-Counsel 

None 


-34- 


193 


CounsPl  nf  nther  Parfj^g 

Mr.  David  Best 
20  North  Orange  Avenue 
Orlando,  Florida  32801 
(407)  425-2985 

Mr.  Stephen  Millbrath 
255  South  Orange  Avenue 
Suite  1401 

Orlando,  Florida  32802 
(407)  841-2330 

Mr.  John  DeVault,  III 
101  East  Adams  Street 
Jacksonville,  Florida  32202 
(904)  353-0211 

Mr.  Terry  Zitek 

Office  of  the  United  States 

Attorney 

500  Zack  Street 

Tampa,  Florida  33602 

(813)  274-6000 

Mr.  David  Runyon 

100  2nd  Avenue  South 

St.  Petersburg,  Florida  33701 

(813)  892-6001 

6)    Citation  of  ra^^P 

United  .Statp>.c;  v,  Gui  11  ph-t.j  npr-o.., 
636  F.  2d  1054  (5th  Cir.  1981), 
gppeal  after  rpm^nH   643  F.  2d  1054 
(5th  Cir.  1981) 

Capsule  Summary  of  C.^^e^ 

The  defendants  in  this  case  were 
indicted  for  and  convicted  of 
conspiracy  to  possess  marijuana 
with  intent  to  distribute  and 
possession  of  marijuana  with  intent 
to  distribute.   The  evidence  used 
to  convict  them  was  obtained  from  a 
boarding  of  their  vessel  in  Tampa 
Bay  by  the  United  States  Coast 
Guard  at  the  request  of  United 
States  Customs  officers.   The 

-35- 


194 


central  issue  in  the  case  was 
whether  the  boarding  was  reasonable 
under  the  Fourth  Amendment  to  the 
United  States  Constitution.   The 
United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for 
the  Fifth  Circuit  remanded  the  case 
to  the  trial  judge  for  further 
findings.   After  compliance  with 
this  fact-finding  mandate,  the 
Fifth  Circuit  then  reversed  the 
defendants'  conviction  because  it 
concluded  that  the  boarding  was 
accomplished  without  any  reasonable 
suspicion  of  illicit  activity.   It 
concluded,  therefore,  that  the 
trial  judge  should  have  granted  the 
defendants'  motion  to  suppress 
evidence. 

Party  Represented 

Mr.  Felix  Valle 

Nature  of  Participation  in  Case 

I  represented  Mr.  Valle  both  at 
trial  and  on  appeal.   I  undertook 
research  of  the  law  and  discovery, 
prepared,  filed,  and  argued  the 
motion  to  suppress  before  the  trial 
judge,  tried  the  case  to  a  jury, 
prepared  and  filed  appellate 
briefs,  and  orally  argued  the  case 
to  the  Fifth  Circuit. 

Final  Disposition  of  Case. 

In  United  States  v.  Guillen- 
Linares.  643  F.  2d  1054  (5th  Cir, 
1981),  the  court  reversed  Mr. 
Valle's  convictions. 

Dates  of  Trial  Periods 

1978-1981 


-36- 


195 


Names  of  Court/Judge 

United  States  District  Court, 

Middle  District  of  Florida,  Tampa 

Division 

United  States  District  Judge 

William  Terrell  Hodges 

Name/Address/Phone  Numbers  of  Co- 
Counsel  and  Counsel  of  Other 
Parties 

Co-Counsel 

None 

Counsel  of  Other  Parties 

Mr.  Bennie  Lazzara,  Jr. 
606  East  Madison  Street 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 
(813)  229-2224 

Mr.  Anthony  F.  Gonzalez 
701  North  Franklin  Street 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 
(813)  224-0431 

Mr.  Joseph  Ficarrotta 
600  East  Madison  Street 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 
(813)  223-9788 

Mr.  George  Cardet 
330  S.W.  27th  Avenue 
Miami,  Florida  33125 
(305)  649-4400 

Mr.  Marvin  Rudnick 
35  South  Raymond  Avenue 
Pasadena,  California  91105 
(818)  798-2514 

7)    Citation  of  Case 

United  States  v.  McLarty 
(unreported) 
(case  number  unavailable) 


-37- 


196 


Capsule  Summary  of  Case 

Mr.  McLarty,  who  is  an  attorney, 
was  indicted  for  tampering  with 
evidence  in  violation  of  18  U.S.C. 
§  1512.   The  charges  arose  from  his 
representation  of  various  tax 
protesters  in  an  ongoing  grand  jury 
investigation  in  Tampa,  Florida, 
directed  at  violations  of  the 
federal  income  tax  laws.   He  was 
acquitted  by  a  jury. 

Party  Represented 

Mr.  Scott  McLarty 

Nature  of  Participation  in  Case 

I  was  co-counsel  with  another 
attorney.   My  responsibilities 
included  undertaking  discovery, 
researching  the  law,  preparing, 
filing,  and  arguing  pre-trial 
motions,  and  participating  in  the 
actual  trial  of  the  case. 

Final  Disposition  of  Case 

Mr.  McLarty  was  acquitted  by  a 
jury. 

Dates  of  Representation 

1983 

Names  of  Court/Judae 

United  States  District  Court, 

Middle  District  of  Florida,  Tampa 

Division 

United  States  District  Judge  George 

Carr  (deceased) 

Name/Address/Phone  Numbers  of  Co- 
Counsel  and  Counsel  of  Other  Party 


■38- 


197 


Co-Conn.qpl 

Mr.  Edward  Garland 
3151  Maple  Drive  N.E. 
Atlanta,  Georgia  30305 
(404)  262-2225 

Counsel  nf  nrh^r    Party 

Ms.  Karla  Spaulding 
4830  West  Kennedy  Boulevard 
Tampa,  Florida  33609 
(813)  286-4100 

8)    Citation  of  Ca.gp 

State  of  Florid;^  v.  Rohin'^nn,  Case 
Number  84-13740-A  (unreported) 

Capsule  Snmin;:irv  of  C^^i.qp 

Mr.  Robinson  was  charged  with 
aggravated  battery  in  connection 
with  a  physical  confrontation  with 
another  individual  in  which  this 
individual  sustained  serious  bodily 
injury.   Mr.  Robinson  claimed  he 
acted  in  self-defense  and  so 
testified  to  the  jury.   The  jury 
acquitted  him. 

Party  Repre.qenl-Pd 

Mr.  John  Robinson 

Nature  of  Parti  ripati  nn  in  Ca.qp 

My  representation  of  Mr.  Robinson 
required  me  to  undertake  extensive 
pre-trial  discovery,  including  the 
talcing  of  pre-trial  depositions, 
research  of  the  law,  preparing, 
filing,  and  arguing  relevant 
motions,  interviewing  defense 
witnesses,  and  trying  the  case  to  a 
jury. 


-39- 


198 


Final  Disposition  of  Case 

Mr.  Robinson  was  acquitted  by  a 
jury. 

Dates  of  Representation 

1984-1985 

Names  of  Court/Judae 

Circuit  Court  of  Thirteenth 

Judicial  Circuit  of  the  State  of 

Florida 

Circuit  Judge  Harry  Lee  Coe,  III 

(retired)  (current  State  Attorney 

for  Thirteenth  Judicial  Circuit) 

Name/Address/Phone  Numbers  of  Co- 
Counsel  and  Counsel  of  Other  Party 

Co-Counsel 

None 

Counsel  of  Other  Party 

Mr.  Michael  LeBron 
235  West  56th  Street 
Suite  25D 

New  York,  New  York  10019 
(unpublished  phone  number) 

9)    Citation  of  Case 

State  V.  Moore.  486  So.  2d  79  (Fla. 
2d  DCA  1986) 

Capsule  Summary  of  Case 

Mr.  Moore  and  Mr.  Moorman  were 
indicted  by  a  grand  jury  for 
official  misconduct.   The  trial 
judge  granted  a  motion  to  dismiss 
the  indictment  because  it 
determined  that  the  indictment  was 
tainted  by  the  defendants' 
compelled  appearances  before  the 
grand  jury  that  indicted  them.   The 


-40- 


199 


Second  District  Court  of  Appeal 
upheld  the  dismissal. 

Party  Represented 

Mr.  Joseph  Moore 

Nature  of  Participation  in  Case 

I  represented  Mr.  Moore  in 
connection  with  his  appearances 
before  the  grand  jury.   After  his 
indictment,  I  undertook  pre-trial 
discovery,  including  the  taking  of 
pre-trial  depositions,  engaged  in 
research  of  the  law,  and  prepared, 
filed,  and  argued  pre-trial 
motions,  including  the  critical 
motion  to  dismiss.   I  also 
represented  Mr.  Moore  on  appeal, 
which  included  more  research  of  the 
law,  the  preparation  and  filing  of 
appellate  briefs,  and  oral  argument 
before  the  Second  District  Court  of 
Appeal . 

Final  Disposition  of  Case 

In  State  v.  Moore.  486  So.  2d  79 
(Fla.  2d  DCA  1986),  the  court 
affirmed  the  trial  judge's 
dismissal  of  the  indictment  brought 
against  Mr.  Moore.   He  was  never 
recharged. 

Dates  of  Representation 

1984-1986 

Names  of  Court/Judge 

Circuit  Court  of  Sixth  Judicial 
Circuit  of  the  State  of  Florida 
Circuit  Judge  Lawrence  Keough 
(retired) 

Name/Address /Phone  Numbers  of  Co- 
Counsel  and  Counsel  of  Other 
Parties 


-41- 


200 

Co-Counsel 

None 

Counsel  of  Other  Parties 

Mr.  Bennie  Lazzara,  Jr. 
606  East  Madison  Street 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 
(813)  229-2224 

Mr.  Richard  Mensch 

2001  80th  Street  North 

St.  Petersburg,  Florida  33710 

(813)  847-8158 


Mr.  Michael  Halkitis 
10036  Casey  Drive 
New  Port  Richey,  Florida  34654 
(813)  869-2401 

10)   Citation  of  Case 

United  States  v.  Fred  Arthur 
Anderson  et  al..  Case  Number  85-59- 
Cr.-T-13  (NOTE:  This  case  is 
unreported  as  to  my  client  because 
he  was  acquitted.   It  is  reported 
as  to  convicted,  appealing  co- 
defendants.   See  United  States  v. 
Kotvas.  941  F.  2d  1141  (Uth  Cir. 
1991),  cert,  denied.  506  U.S.  1055, 
113  S.  Ct.  982,  122  L.  Ed.  2d  135 
(1993) .) 

Capsule  Summary  of  Case 

My  client  in  this  case,  Mr.  Richard 
Guagliardo,  was  indicted  for 
conspiracy  to  commit  racketeering, 
racketeering,  and  mail  fraud.   His 
co-defendants  were  indicted  for 
similar  offenses,  including 
extortion.   All  of  the  charges  were 
based  on  acts  of  alleged  public 
corruption  before  the  Hillsborough 
County  Board  of  County 
Commissioners.   The  essence  of  the 
charges  was  that  the  Board  was  a 


■42- 


201 


criminal  enterprise,  and  certain  of 
its  members,  aided  by  non-members, 
were  engaged  in  soliciting  and 
accepting  bribes  in  return  for 
favorable  votes  on  matters, 
particularly  zoning  matters,  which 
came  before  the  Board.   Following  a 
protracted,  highly  publicized  case, 
Mr.  Guagliardo  and  the  majority  of 
his  co-defendants  were  acquitted. 

Party  Represented 

Mr.  Richard  Guagliardo 

Nature  of  Participation  in  Case 

This  case  represented  the  most 
complex  and  time-consuming  matter  I 
ever  undertook  as  a  trial  attorney. 
It  required  extensive  pre-trial 
discovery,  which  included  securing, 
compiling,  cataloging,  and 
reviewing  in  detail  literally 
thousands  of  documents.   The  case 
also  required  extensive  research  of 
the  law,  followed  by  the 
preparation,  filing,  and  arguing  of 
numerous  pre-trial  motions.   It 
also  demanded  intense  preparation 
in  terms  of  attempting  to  secure  a 
fair  and  impartial  jury,  preparing 
and  delivering  an  effective  opening 
statement,  preparing  effective 
cross-examinations  of  numerous 
government  witnesses,  presenting  a 
concise  defense,  and  delivering  a 
convincing  final  argument  to  the 
jury. 

Final  Disposition  of  Case 

The  jury  acquitted  Mr.  Guagliardo 
of  all  charges. 

Dates  of  Representation 

1985-1986 


-43- 


202 


Names  of  Court/Judae 

United  States  District  Court, 

Middle  District  of  Florida,  Tampa 

Division 

United  States  District  Judge  George 

Carr  (deceased) 

Name/Address/Phone  Numbers  of  Co- 
Counsel  and  Counsel  of  Other 
Parties 

Co-Counsel 

None 

Counsel  of  Other  Parties 

Mr.  Michael  Otis 
3841  West  Kennedy  Boulevard 
Tampa,  Florida  33609 
(813)  872-2656 

Mr.  David  Maney 
606  East  Madison  Street 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 
(813)  228-7371 

Mr.  Robert  Polli 
101  East  Kennedy  Boulevard 
Suite  3130 

Tampa,  Florida  33602 
(813)  222-8350 

Mr.  Patrick  Doherty 
619  Turner  Street 
Clearwater,  Florida  34616 
(813)  443-0405 

Mr.  Raymond  Harris 
(no  longer  practices  law;  address 
and  phone  number  unknown) 

Mr.  Claude  Tison 

111  East  Madison  Street 

Suite  2300 

Tampa,  Florida  33601 

(813)  273-4200 


-44- 


203 


Mr.  Lee  Fugate 
13630  58th  Street  North 
Clearwater,  Florida  34620 
(813)  539-6536 

Mr,  Joseph  Beeler 
3050  Biscayne  Boulevard 
Suite  300 

Miami,  Florida  33137 
(305)  576-3050 

Ms.  Julianne  Holt 
801  East  Twiggs  Street 
Fifth  Floor 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 
(813)  272-5980 

Mr.  Thomas  Hanlon 
210  North  Pierce  Street 
Tampa,  Florida  33602 
(813)  228-7095 

Mr.  Manual  Lopez 

801  East  Twiggs  Street 

Fifth  Floor 

Tampa,  Florida  33602 

(813)  272-5980 

Mr.  Joseph  Magri 
7650  Courtney  Campbell  Causeway 
Tampa,  Florida  33607 
(813)  281-9000 

Mr.  David  Runyon 
100  2nd  Avenue  South 
St.  Petersburg,  Florida  33701 
(813)  892-6001 

Ms.  Karla  Spaulding 
4830  West  Kennedy  Boulevard 
Tampa,  Florida  33609 
(813)  286-4100 

In  that  all  of  these  cases  are  older  than 
five  years,  I  provide  the  following  list  of 
members  of  the  legal  community  who  have  had 
recent  contact  with  me  in  my  capacity  as  a 
judge : 


■45- 


204 


Mr.  Frederick  L.  Bateraan,  Jr. 
Bateman  &  Graham,  P. A. 
300  E.  Park  Avenue 
Tallahassee,  Florida  32301 
(904)  224-2677 

Mr.  Thomas  Gonzalez 
Thompson,  Sizemore  &  Gonzalez,  P. A. 
109  N.  Brush  Street-Suite  200 
Tampa,  Florida   33601-0639 
(813)  273-0050 

Ms.  Arthenia  Joyner 

Stewart,  Joyner,  Jordan-Holmes  & 

Holmes,  P. A. 

1112  E.  Kennedy  Blvd. 

Tampa,  Florida   33602-0297 

(813)  229-2300 

Mr.  Christopher  Knopik 

Yerrid,  Knopik  &  Valenzuela,  P. A. 

101  East  Kennedy  Boulevard 

Suite  2160 

Tampa,  Florida   33602-5150 

(813)  222-8222 

Mr.  Thomas  C.  MacDonald,  Jr. 
Shackleford,  Farrior,  Stallings  & 
Evans,  P. A, 

501  East  Kennedy  Blvd. -Suite  1400 
Tampa,  Florida   33601-3324 
(813)  273-5000 

Ms.  Kay  J.  McGucken 

Kay  J.  McGucken,  P. A. 

1320  East  Ninth  Avenue 

Suite  210 

Tampa,  Florida  33605-3616 

(813)  248-3782 

The  Hon.  Stevan  Northcutt 

Second  District  Court  of 

Appeal 

Post  Office  Box  327 

Lakeland,  FL  33802-0327 

(941)  499-2290 


■46- 


205 


Mr.  Hugh  Smith 

Smith  &  Fuller,  P. A. 

101  East  Kennedy  Blvd. -Suite  1800 

Tampa,  Florida  33602-5148 

(813)  221-7171 

Mr.  Thomas  Steele 

Fowler,  White,  Gillen,  Boggs, 

Villareal  &  Banker,  P. A. 

501  E.  Kennedy  Blvd. -Suite  1700 

Tampa,  Florida  33602 

(813)  228-7411 

Mr.  Frank  Strelec 

Williams,  Parker,  Harris,  Dietz  & 

Getzen,  P. A. 

P.O.  Box  3258 

Sarasota,  Florida   34230-3258 

(941)  366-4800. 

19.   Legal  Activities:   Describe  the  most  significant  legal 
activities  you  have  pursued,  including  significant 
litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal 
matters  that  did  not  involve  litigation.   Describe  the 
nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question,  please 
omit  any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client 
privilege  (unless  the  privilege  has  been  waived.) 


1.   I  represented  Mr.  Kenneth  Mullins  in 
State  of  Florida  v.  Mullins,  Case  Number  79- 
5025-D,  Circuit  Court  of  the  Thirteenth 
Judicial  Circuit  of  the  State  of  Florida. 
Mr.  Mullins,  along  with  a  co-defendant  by  the 
name  of  Mr.  Brett  Bachelor,  was  charged  with 
first-degree  murder  and  robbery  of  an  older 
gentleman  in  the  Hyde  Park  area  of  Tampa. 
The  co-defendant  was  arrested  immediately 
after  the  murder,  went  to  trial,  and  was 
convicted  of  second-degree  murder,  after 
which  he  was  sentenced  to  ten  years  in  the 
Florida  State  Prison.   This  co-defendant 
always  maintained  his  innocence. 

Following  the  co-defendant's  trial,  my  client 
was  arrested,  and  I  was  immediately  retained 
to  represent  his  interests.   After  extensive 
pre-trial  discovery,  I  was  able  to  convince 
the  State  Attorney's  office  of  Hillsborough 
County  that  both  my  client  and  the  co- 

-47- 


206 


defendant  did  not  commit  this  crime.   As  a 
result,  the  charges  against  my  client  and  the 
co-defendant  were  dismissed  and  the  co- 
defendant  was  freed  after  spending 
approximately  one  year  in  prison. 

A  very  interesting  event  just  took  place  in 
this  case  several  months  ago.   Another  person 
allegedly  confessed  to  committing  this  murder 
and  has  been  indicted  by  the  Hillsborough 
County  grand  jury  for  first-degree  murder. 
To  my  knowledge,  the  case  has  not  been 
disposed  of. 

The  Assistant  State  Attorneys  who  handled 
these  cases  for  the  State  of  Florida  were  Mr. 
Thomas  Fox,  401  East  Kennedy  Boulevard, 
Tampa,  Florida,  33602,  (813)  228-9819;  now 
Circuit  Judge  Robert  Sims,  Hillsborough 
County  Courthouse  Annex,  Room  122,  Tampa, 
Florida,  33602,  (813)  272-6874;  and  now 
County  Judge  Walter  Heinrich,  Hillsborough 
County  Courthouse  Annex,  Room  123  (813)  272- 
6841.   The  Assistant  State  Attorney  who  is 
handling  the  case  against  the  recently- 
charged  individual  is  Ms.  Karen  Cox, 
Hillsborough  County  Courthouse  Annex,  800 
East  Kennedy  Boulevard,  Fifth  Floor,  Tampa, 
Florida,  33602,  (813)  272-5400. 

2.   I  represented  the  dean  of  students  of  a 
local  high  school  who  was  charged  with 
committing  a  sexual  offense  on  a  young  boy 
who  was  his  "little  brother"  in  the  "Big 
Brother-Little  Brother"  program.   He  was 
immediately  suspended  from  his  position  by 
the  Hillsborough  County  School  Board.   Quite 
naturally,  the  case  was  the  subject  of 
extensive  publicity. 

My  client  was  adamant  that  he  was  innocent  of 
the  charge.   The  child  had  made  a  similar 
accusation  against  another  individual  which 
proved  to  be  unfounded.   Accordingly,  I 
immediately  undertook  an  extensive 
preindictment  investigation  to  establish  his 
innocence  including  the  taking  of  numerous 
sworn  statements  from  relevant  witnesses. 
The  case  was  presented  to  the  Hillsborough 
County  grand  jury  for  its  determination  of 

-48- 


207 


whether  there  was  probable  cause  to  return  an 
indictment  against  my  client.   The  State 
Attorney's  office  of  Hillsborough  County 
presented  certain  evidence  that  I  had 
uncovered  to  the  grand  jury  for  its 
consideration.   Additionally,  my  client, 
without  a  grant  of  immunity,  testified  before 
the  grand  jury.   The  grand  jury  declined  to 
indict  my  client  and  the  charge  against  him 
was  dismissed.   He  was  later  reinstated  to 
his  position  by  the  school  board  and  awarded 
all  of  his  back  pay. 

I  later  had  the  court  file  sealed  pursuant  to 
Florida  law  so  I  cannot  furnish  a  case 
number.   I  do  recall,  however,  that  Mr.  Lee 
Atkinson,  2655  McCormick  Drive,  Clearwater, 
Florida,  34617,  (813)  799-2882,  was  one  of 
the  assistant  state  attorneys  assigned  to  the 
case. 

3.   I  represented  Mr.  Allan  Brown  in  the  case 
of  Independent  Bank  of  Tampa  v.  Brown,  Case 
Number  82-8533-H,  Circuit  Court  of  the 
Thirteenth  Judicial  Circuit  of  the  State  of 
Florida.   Mr.  Brown  had  been  taken  into 
custody  pursuant  to  a  Writ  of  Ne  Exeat.   The 
facts  of  the  case  were  unique  in  that  the 
client  was  alleged  to  be  in  default  as  to  an 
unsecured  bank  loan  in  the  principal  sum  of 
approximately  $100,000.   After  I  obtained  the 
release  of  my  client  from  jail,  I 
counterclaimed  against  the  bank  for  malicious 
prosecution,  false  imprisonment,  and  abuse  of 
process.   The  basis  of  these  claims  was  that 
the  bank  had  misused  the  Writ  of  Ne  Exeat  and 
their  actions  in  that  regard  amounted  to 
nothing  more  than  having  my  client  imprisoned 
for  owing  a  simple  debt  which  is  contrary  to 
Article  1,  Section  11  of  the  Florida 
Constitution.   After  negotiations  with  the 
bank,  it  dismissed  its  claim  against  my 
client  and  forgave  the  $100,000  debt.   In 
return,  my  client  dismissed  his  claims 
against  the  bank  for  the  sum  of  $1. 

The  attorney  for  the  bank  was  Mr.  Samuel 
Mandelbaum,  712  South  Oregon  Avenue,  Tampa, 
Florida  33606,  (813)  222-7500. 


-49- 


208 


4.  I  am  frequently  called  upon  to  lecture  at 
continuing  legal  education  seminars.   Over 
the  past  several  years  I  have  lectured  at 
educational  events  sponsored  by  The  Florida 
Bar,  the  Hillsborough  County  Bar  Association, 
the  Young  Lawyers  Section  of  the  Hillsborough 
County  Bar  Association,  the  Hillsborough 
County  Criminal  Defense  Lawyers  Association, 
the  Pinellas  County  Criminal  Defense  Lawyers 
Association,  the  St.  Petersburg  Bar 
Association,  the  Academy  of  Florida  Trial 
Lawyers,  Stetson  University  College  of  Law, 
The  American  Judicature  Society,  the  Defense 
Research  and  Trial  Lawyers  Association,  the 
Judicial  Assistants  Association  of  Florida, 
and  the  Second  District  Court  of  Appeal.   I 
have  also  judged  "Moot  Court"  competitions 
for  Stetson  University  College  of  Law. 
Finally,  I  have  also  participated  in 
community  relations  forums  sponsored  by  the 
University  of  South  Florida  and  the  City  of 
Tampa  and  have  spoken  to  elementary,  high 
school,  and  college  students  about  the  role 
of  the  judiciary  in  our  society. 

5.  Finally,  I  would  like  to  emphasize 
another  aspect  of  my  background  which  I 
believe  reflects  favorably  on  my  candidacy 
for  United  States  District  Judge.   Since  May 
of  1992,  Senators  Connie  Mack  and  Bob  Graham 
have  impanelled  Federal  Judicial  Nominating 
Commissions  to  consider  the  qualifications  of 
applicants  for  vacancies  on  the  United  States 
District  Court,  Middle  District  of  Florida. 

I  am  honored  to  have  been  the  only  applicant 
recommended  by  each  of  the  Commissions  to 
Senators  Mack  and  Graham  as  being  qualified 
to  be  a  United  States  District  Judge. 


-50- 


20S 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated 
receipts  from  deferred  income  arrangements,  stock, 
options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future 
benefits  which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous 
business  relationships,  professional  services,  firm 
memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers. 
Please  describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be 
compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or  business 
interest . 

Only  two  categories  of  this  question  apply  to 
me — deferred  income  arrangements  and 
retirement  benefits. 

Deferred  Income  Arrangement 

Beginning  in  July  of  1987,  after  becoming  a 
state-court  judge,  I  have  deferred  $100  per 
month  from  my  state  salary  under  the  State  of 
Florida  Deferred  Compensation  Plan 
administered  by  Security  First  Life  Insurance 
Company.   According  to  the  latest  account 
statement  issued  September  30,  1996,  the 
annuity  value  is  $14,983.86,  the  lump  sum 
retirement  value  is  $14,691.29,  the  lump  sum 
termination  value  is  $14,656.33,  and  the  lump 
sum  transfer  value  is  $14,656.33.   Withdrawal 
from  the  Plan  is  limited  to  the  following 
circumstances:  retirement,  termination  of 
employment,  total  and  permanent  disability 
lasting  at  least  six  months,  death,  or 
unforeseeable  emergency.   Assuming  I  am 
confirmed  as  a  United  States  District  Judge, 
I  would  have  the  option  of  obtaining  this 
money  under  the  category  of  "termination  of 
employment."   I  have  not  yet  decided  whether 
I  would  pursue  that  option  or  leave  the  money 
in  the  account  until  I  retire. 

Retirement  Benefits 

Since  becoming  a  state-court  judge  in  January 
of  1987,  I  have  been  a  member  of  the  Elected 
State  and  County  Officers'  Class  of  the 
Florida  Retirement  System.   Retirement 
contributions  to  the  system  are  made  solely 
by  the  state  of  Florida  on  behalf  of  members 
of  the  class  based  on  a  certain  percentage  of 

-51- 


210 


a  class  member's  monthly  salary.   Vesting  for 
retirement  benefits  occurs  after  8  years  of 
continuous  service,  a  requirement  I  have 
fulfilled.   Assuming  I  am  confirmed  as  a 
United  States  District  Judge,  I  would  have 
two  options--take  early  retirement  and 
receive  reduced  benefits  or  wait  until  age  62 
to  start  drawing  retirement  at  a  higher  rate. 
I  have  not  yet  decided  which  option  to 
pursue . 

Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of 
interest,  including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in 
determining  these  areas  of  concern.   Identify  the 
categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements 
that  are  likely  to  present  potential  conf licts-of- 
interest  during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to 
which  you  have  been  nominated. 

As  a  state-court  judge,  I  have  adhered  to  a 
basic  philosophy--always  avoid  even  the 
appearance  of  impropriety.   I  will  continue 
to  adhere  to  this  philosophy  if  I  become  a 
United  States  District  Judge.   That  is,  once 
I  become  personally  aware  of  a  potential 
conflict  of  interest,  either  on  my  own  or 
through  any  source,  I  will  immediately  bring 
it  to  the  attention  of  all  parties  and,  if 
the  conflict  is  of  such  a  nature  that  my 
continued  involvement  in  the  case  manifests 
even  the  appearance  of  impropriety,  I  will 
recuse  myself  from  the  case. 

I  know  of  no  specific  category  of  litigation 
that  may  present  a  conflict  of  interest.   As 
to  financial  arrangements,  I  do  have  a 
partnership  interest  with  other  attorneys  in 
a  law  office  building.   However,  since 
becoming  a  state  judge,  I  have  always  recused 
myself  from  presiding  over  cases  in  which 
these  attorneys  were  involved.   I  will 
continue  to  follow  this  practice  if  I  am 
ultimately  confirmed  as  a  United  States 
District  Judge. 

Additionally,  I  have  several  relatives  who 
practice  law  in  Tampa,  Florida.   Once  again, 
since  becoming  a  state  judge,  I  have  always 
recused  myself  from  presiding  over  cases  in 
which  these  attorneys  are  involved.   I  will 

-52- 


211 


continue  this  practice  if  ultimately 
confirmed  as  a  United  States  District  Judge. 

Finally,  I  will  adhere  strictly  to  the 
standards  imposed  by  the  Codes  of  Conduct  for 
United  States  Judges  and  other  rules  of  the 
Judicial  Conference  of  the  United  States,  as 
well  as  all  statutory  provisions,  governing 
disqualification  or  recusal. 

Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to 
pursue  outside  employment,  with  or  without 
compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court?   If 
so,  explain. 

No. 

List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during 
the  calendar  year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the 
current  calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees, 
dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents, 
honoraria,  and  other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more  (If 
you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure 
report,  requested  by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of 
1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  attached  form  AO-10  which  immediately  follows 
this  part. 

Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth 
statement  in  detail  (Add  schedules  as  called  for) . 

See  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  which 
immediately  follows  this  part. 

Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a 
political  campaign?  If  so,  please  identify  the 
particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate, 
dates  of  the  campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

No. 


■53- 


212 


^?/96 


FINANCIAL    DISCLOSURE    REPORT 

NOMINATION 


i-"!?*.'  Novel 
U.S.(.    App. 


1.   Person  Reporting  (Last  naae,   first,  aiddle  initial) 
LAZZARA,    RICHARD   A. 

2.   Court  or  Organization 

U.S.D.C.    Florida 

3.   Date  of  Report 
01/07/97 

4.  Title    (Article  III  judges  indicate  active  or 

senior  statui;  Ifladistrate  judges  indicate 

U.S.    District   Court  Judge 

5.   Report  Type  (check  appropriate  type) 
X     Noaination,    Date  01/7  /97 
Initial     Annual     Final 

6.   Reporting  Period 
01/01/95  -  01/01/97 

7.   chaabers  or  Office  Address 

801    E.    Twiggs    Street,    #600 
Tampa,    FL      33602 

8.   On  the  basis  of   the   infor^tion  contained   in  this  Report  and 
any  aodifications^pertaining  thereto.^it   is,    in  ay  dpinion, 
in  coap dance  with  applicable  laws  ahd  regulations. 

Reviewing  Officer                                                                     Date 

IMPORTANT  NOTES:  The  instrutSions  accompanying  this  form  must  be  followed.     Complete  all  parts, 
checking  the  NONE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable  information.     Sign  on  last  page. 

I.     POSITIONS.      (Reportingindividualonly,  see  pp.  9-13  of  Instructions.) 


n 


POSITION 
NOME      (No  reportable  positions) 


NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION/ENTITY 


Custodian 


Damon  Lazzara-Florida  Gift  to  Minor's  Act 
Damon  Lazzara  Trust 


II.     AGREEMENTS.     (Reporting  individual  only;  see  pp.  14-17  of  Instructions.) 
DATE  PARTIES   AND   TERMS 


n 


NONE       (No  reportable  agreements) 


III.     NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME.     (Reporting  individual  and  spouse;  see  pp.  18-25  of  Instructions.) 


DATE 


n 


SOURCE   AND   TYPE 
NONE      (No  reportable  non-investment  income) 

State  of  Florida-Judicial  Salary 


State  of  Florida-Judicial  Salary 


University  of  South  Florida  (S) 


S  104382.00 
S  110627.00 
S 0.00 

$ 

$ 


213 


FINAHCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Naae  of  Pcrton  Reporting 
LAZZARA,     RICHARD   A. 


Date  of  Report 
01/07/97 


IV.     REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS  -  transporlation,  lodging,  food,  cntertainmenl. 

(IncJudes  those  (o  spouse  and  dcpendenl  children;  use  the  parentbelicals  '(S)'  and  '(DC)'  lo  indicate  reportable 
reimbursements  and  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  26-29  of  Instructions.) 
SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


n 


Exempt 


NONE       (No  such  reportable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 


Exempt 


OTHER  GIFTS.      (Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheticals  "(S)"  and  "(DC)"  to 
indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  30-33  of  Instructions.) 


n 


SOURCE 
NONE      (No  such  reportable  gifts) 


DESCRIPTION 


Exempt 


Exempt 


VI. 


n 


LIABILITIES.      (Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible 
for  Uabihty  by  using  the  parenthetical  "(S)"  for  separate  liability  of  the  spouse,  "(J)"  for  joint  UabiUty  of 
reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  "(DC)"  for  liability  of  a  dependent  child.  See  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE* 


NONE      (No  reportable  liabilities) 


Barnett  Bank  of  Florida 


Mortgage  on  law  office  in  Taunpa,  FL 


VALUE  COOES: 


iUimr-im,,»o    §  =  U^%--»i?;888,ooo    M  iSI?4<^n  !1?868?8oo 


H  -  1100,001   to  (250,000 


214 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nam  of  Person  Reporting 
LAZZARA,    RICHARD   A. 


Date  of  Report 
OI/O7/97 


VII.  Page  1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS  -income,  value,  transaaions  (Includes  those  of  spouse 
and  dependent  children.  See  pp.  37-54  of  Instructions.) 


A.                         B. 
.Qescriptjon  of  Assets 
(incluaing  trust  assets) 

Indicate  where  applicable,  owner  of 
the  asset  W.usiK§  the^pafenthetical 
°(J)"  for   ibint  ownership  of  report- 
ing indwiiual  and  spousfe,    'tsr'^for 
separate  ouriershfR  b^poise,  .'(DC)'' 
fof  ownership  by  flependent   child. 

Place  "(X)"  after  each  asset 
exe»pt  froo  prior  disclosure. 

IncQue 

during 

'=J?'ln3# 

Transactions  during  reporting  period 

(1) 

(2) 

(1) 

(2) 

Value 
Methods 

j1) 

buyflill, 
■erger. 

If  not  exempt  from  disclosure               ] 

(2) 

Hontfi- 
Day 

(3) 

(4) 

43y%fPt?:r 

NONE       (No  reportable 

'     ^fiiiCy  '?Srp'fS^rif^l%lO/95 

D 

Interest 

Q 

Exempt 

2     L.B.O.P.,    Inc.    stock,  (closest, ,„ 
family  corp.)appraisal  9/30/95 

B 

Interest 

a 

Exempt 

3     Plaza  EquipBen.t  Co.   stock 
(closed  family  corp.) 

None 

u 

Exempt 

4     Lazzara  Family.  PartnershiD 
(closed  family  partnership) 

D 

Rent 

u 

Exempt 

5     Law  office^bujlding  .     .   ,,„, 

(recertified  appraisal  7/23/90) 

None 

pi 

0 

Exempt 

6     Security  First  Life  (Def.comp 
plan) 'Tallahassee,   fL 

A 

Interest 

T 

Exempt 

7    Nationsbank  (IRA),  Tampa,   FL 

A 

interest 

T 

Exempt 

8     PanAmerican  Life  (IRA)  New 

A 

Interest 

T 

Exempt 

9     Nationsbank  (IRA)   (S)  Ta^M, 

A 

interest 

T 

Exempt 

10  PanAmerican  Life  (IRA)   (S), 
New  Orleans,  U 

A 

interest 

T 

Exempt 

"  "a'i?n-uS''t^¥  Ur^iT^Sfv,  N.r. 

A 

interest 

T 

Exempt 

12  Suncpast  Schools  Credit  Union 
(J),   Tampa,   FL 

A 

interest 

T 

Exempt 

13  Univ. of  South  FL  Credit  Union 
(J),   Tampa,   fL 

A 

interest 

T 

Exempt 

"-  "^s^'r^nS^srir^" ""'' 

c 

Dividend 

T 

Exempt 

"  'TfcTVa^Vl^^^"  ""'"" 

C 

Interest 

T 

Exempt 

16 

17 

18 

'  {S^^^'^ei^rsii    t=tls?88i°fol!8,ooo      SI36?8Ji'?o'iiS8°ooo     mU°U°tlhnoo,ooo    BiSlff JhiS  I1!fl88?ooo 

'  n'^'dV'h  &  03)    fi=Ulo?88i°fol!8o,ooo   £li^?8Ji'?o*l?;888,ooo  t=SI?t°?JaS%f:88o?88o     '''*'°°-'^'  "  '""'"^ 

'     rfi^'cS!*^)'"*"^     3=Sggfiltie                          5=S?K^^"^  """  °"^>"  5:H??SfS5                                T=cash/narket 

215 


FINANCIAI.  DISCXOSURE  REPORT 


Naae  of  Person  Reporting 
LAZZARA,     RICHARD    A. 


Date  of  Report 
01/07/97 


VIII.     ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  or  EXPLANATIONS.     (Indicate  part  of  Report) 
None 


216 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Naae  of  Person  Reporting 
LAZZARA,     RICHARD    A. 


Date  of  Report 
01/07/97 


IX.  CERTIFICATION. 


In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion 
No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Conunittee  on  Judicial  Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my 
knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any 
adjudicatory  function  in  any  litigation  during  the  period  covered  by  this  report 
in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  financial 
interest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3)(c),  m  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  the  information  given  above  (including  information 
pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent  children,  if  any)  is  accurate, 
true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any 
information  not  reported  was  withheld  because  it  met  applicable  statutory 
provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria 
and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have/been  reported  are  in  compliance  with  the 
provisions  of  5  U.S.C.  app.  7,  secti^v)*  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  7353  and  Judicial 
Conference  regulations. 


Signature 


Date  January  7,  1997 


NOTE:  ANY  INDIVIDUAL  WHO  KNOWINgifY  AND  WILFULLY  FALSIFIES  OR  FAILS  TO  FILE 
THIS  REPORT  MAY  BE  SUBJECT  TO  CIVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U.S.C.  APP.  6, 
SECTION  104) . 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS: 

Mail  signed  original  and  3  additional  copies  to: 

Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 

Administrative  Office  of  the  United  States  Courts 

One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E. 

Suite  2-301 

Washington,  D.C.  20544 


217 


Lazzara  Family 
Partnership 

289, 

000 

00 

TIAA  (Annuity) 

8, 

750 

00 

Total 
Liabilities 

204, 

400 

00 

Total  assets 

897, 

900 

00 

Net  Worth 

Total 

liabilities  and 
net  worth 

693, 
897, 

500 

900 

00 

Contingent 
Liabilities 

00 

General  In- 
formation 

As  endorser, 
comaker  or 
guarantor 

00 

Are  any  assets 
pledged?  Add 
schedule 

NO 

On  leases  or 
contracts 

00 

Are  you 
defendant  in 
any  suits  or 
legal  actions 

NO 

Legal  claims 

00 

Have  you  ever 

taken 

bankruptcy? 

NO 

Provision  for 
federal  income 
tax 

::o 

Other  special 
debt 

00 

218 


REAL  ESTATE  OWNED/REAL  EASTATE  MORTGAGES  OWED 

1)    RESIDENCE 

Fair  market  value  $198,000 

First  Mortgage  due  Barnett  Bank 
of  Tampa  121,100 

Home  Equity  Loan  due  Barnett  Bank 
of  Jacksonville  10,900 


2)    OFFICE  BUILDING  (1/12  interest) 

fair  market  value  of  interest  $  91,200 

liability  on  mortgage  due 
Barnett  Bank  of  Tampa  based  71,800 

on  interest 

UNLISTED  SECURITIES 

1)  L.  O.  C,  Inc.  $  58,000 
(Closed  family  corporation) 

Lazzara  Bulk  Oil  and  Packaging,  Inc.       58,000 
(Closed  family  corporation) 

2)  Plaza  Equipment  Company 

(Closed  family  corporation)  65,550 


NOTE 

I  am  currently  the  Trustee  for  my  son  Damon's  trust  (he  is 
19  years  of  age).   The  trust  has  $5,580  in  a  money  market  account 
at  the  Suncoast  Schools  Federal  Credit  Union  and  $35,275  in  a 
certificate  of  deposit  at  the  same  institution.   I  also  hold 
shares  of  stock  in  The  Southern  Company  for  my  son  under  the 
Florida  Gift  to  Minors  Act.   The  current  fair  market  value  of  the 
stock  is  $51,085.   I  am  also  the  beneficiary  of  two  life 
insurance  policies  on  my  son's  life  with  Metropolitan  Life  and 
Nationwide  Mutual.   The  cash  value  of  the  Metropolitan  policy  is 
$8,700.   The  cash  value  of  the  Nationwide  policy  is  $1,600.   All 
of  these  assets  were  derived  from  gifts  made  to  my  son  over  the 
years  by  my  parents.   I  am  simply  managing  them  for  his  benefit 
until  such  time  as  he  is  financially  mature  enough  to  manage  them 
himself.   Finally,  my  son  has  no  debts. 


219 


FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORTH 

Provide  a  complete,  current  financial  net  worth  statement  which  itemxzes  in 
detail  all  assets  (including  bank  accounts,  real  estate,  securities,  trusts, 
investments,  and  other  financial  holdings)  all  liabilities  (including  debts, 
mortgages,  loans,  and  other  financial  obligations)  of  yourself,  your  spouse,  and 
other  immediate  members  of  your  household. 


ASSETS 

LIABILITIES 

Cash  on  hand 
and  in  banks 
(average 
monthly 
balance) 

13, 

000 

00 

Notes  payable 
to  banks 
( secured) 

00 

U.S.  Gov't 
securities- -add 
schedule 

00 

Notes  payable 
to  banks 
(unsecured) 

00 

Listed 

securities --add 
schedule 

181, 

550 

00 

Notes  payable 
to  relatives 

00 

Accounts  and 

notes 

receivable 

00 

Accounts  and 
bills  due- 
credit  cards 

600 

00 

Due  from  friend 
or  relative 

00 

Unpaid  income 
tax 

00 

Due  from  others 

00 

Other  unpaid 
tax  and 
interest 

00 

Doubtful 

00 

Real  estate 
mortgage 
payable-add 
schedule 

203, 

800 

00 

Real  estate 

owned-add 

schedule 

289, 

200 

00 

Chattel 
mortgages  and 
other  liens 
payable 

00 

Real  estate 

mortgages 

receivable 

00 

Other  debts- 
itemize 

00 

Autos  and  other 

personal 

property 

45, 

000 

00 

Cash  value 
life  insurance 

11, 

500 

00 

Other  assets- 
itemize —   IRAs 

45, 

000 

00 

Security  Life- 
( Deferred  Comp. 
Plan) 

14, 

900 

00 

220 


III.   GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American 
Bar  Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility 
calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time 
to  participate  in  serving  the  disadvantaged."   Describe 
what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities, 
listing  specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time 
devoted  to  each. 

Both  as  a  lawyer  and  judge,  I  have 
participated  in  various  activities  designed 
to  educate  the  community  about  the  legal 
profession  and  the  judicial  system.   Such 
activities  have  included  service  on  Law  Day 
committees,  speaking  to  members  of  civic 
clubs  and  organizations,  speaking  to  students 
in  a  classroom  setting,  and  serving  on 
community  discussion  panels.   Furthermore, 
although  I  never  belonged  to  any  organization 
which  provided  pro  bono  legal  work  during  my 
years  as  a  practicing  attorney,  I  would  from 
time  to  time  take  cases  for  a  minimal  fee. 
Additionally,  I  was  on  the  court-appointed 
list  of  attorneys  in  both  the  federal  and 
state  systems.   When  selected  from  this  list, 
I  would  provide  legal  representation  to 
indigent  criminal  defendants  for  a  reduced 
fee. 

The  American  Bar  Associates  Commentary  to  its  Code  of 
Judicial  Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a 
judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that 
invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or 
religion.   Do  you  currently  belong,  or  have  you 
belonged,  to  any  organization  which  discriminates-- 
through  either  formal  membership  requirements  or  the 
practical  implementation  of  membership  policies?  If  so, 
list,  with  dates  of  memberships.   What  you  have  done  to 
try  to  change  these  policies. 

I  have  never  belonged  to  any  organization 
that  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex 
or  religion. 

Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to 
recommend  candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal 
courts?   If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination? 

-54- 


221 


Please  describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial 
selection  process,  from  beginning  to  end  (including  all 
circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and 
interviews  in  which  you  participated) . 

Senator  Bob  Graham  has  impanelled  a  Federal 
Judicial  Nominating  Commission  to  recommend 
candidates  to  him  for  nomination  to  the 
United  States  District  Courts  located  in  the 
State  of  Florida.   This  commission 
recommended  me  to  Senator  Graham  for 
nomination  to  the  United  States  District 
Court,  Middle  District  of  Florida. 

In  connection  with  this  process,  I  was 
required  to  fill  out  and  submit  to  each 
commission  member  a  detailed  questionnaire 
designed  to  elicit  much  the  same  information 
that  is  asked  for  in  this  questionnaire. 
After  that,  I  was  invited  to  be  personally 
interviewed  by  the  commission  members  who 
reside  within  the  Middle  District.   During 
the  course  of  the  interview,  which  lasted 
approximately  thirty  minutes  and  was  open  to 
the  public,  the  commission  members  asked  me 
in-depth  and  far-ranging  questions  designed 
to  determine  my  qualifications  to  be  a  United 
States  District  Judge.   My  name,  along  with 
the  names  of  two  other  well-qualified 
individuals,  was  then  submitted  to  Senator 
Graham. 

Senator  Graham  then  conducted  personal 
interviews  of  all  three  of  the  finalists, 
after  which  he  submitted  his  recommendation 
to  President  Clinton  that  I  be  nominated  for 
this  federal  judgeship. 

Following  Senator  Graham's  recommendation  to 
the  President,  I  completed  and  submitted 
comprehensive  background  forms  to  the 
Department  of  Justice,  the  American  Bar 
Association,  and  the  Federal  Bureau  of 
Investigation.   I  was  then  interviewed  by 
representatives  of  the  Department  of  Justice, 
the  ABA,  and  the  FBI  and  was  the  subject  of 
extensive  background  checks  by  all  three  of 
these  entities. 


-55- 


222 


Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as 
a  judicial  nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific 
case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could 
reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule 
on  such  case,  issue,  or  question?   If  so,  please 
explain  fully. 

No. 

Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism 
involving  "judicial  activism." 


The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the 
Federal  government,  and  within  society 
generally,  has  become  the  subject  of 
increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.   It 
has  become  the  target  of  both  popular  and 
academic  criticism  that  alleges  that  the 
judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of  the 
prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of 
government . 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial 
activism"  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A   tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward 
problem-solution  rather  than  grievance- 
resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to 
employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a  vehicle 
for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders 
extending  to  broad  classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to 
impose  broad,  affirmative  duties  upon 
governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  tov;ard 
loosening  jurisdictional  requirements  such  as 
standing  and  ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to 
imposed  itself  upon  other  institutions  in  the 
manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing 
oversight  responsibilities. 


-56- 


223 


As  a  state  court  judge  for  the  past  nine 
years,  I  am  keenly  aware  of  the  criticism 
levied  against  not  just  federal  judges  but 
also  state  judges  regarding  their  tendency  to 
engage  in  "judicial  activism"  and  to  usurp 
functions  which,  under  the  constitutional 
doctrine  of  the  separation  of  powers,  are  the 
exclusive  prerogatives  of  the  executive  and 
legislative  branches  of  government. 

In  my  view,  a  judge's  resolution  of  a  case, 
whether  in  the  federal  or  state  system,  must 
be  accomplished  in  strict  accord  with  the 
relevant  statutory  provision  that  confers 
jurisdiction  to  act  in  the  case. 
Accordingly,  in  resolving  a  case,  a  judge 
must  first  determine  whether  jurisdiction  has 
been  conferred  by  the  legislature  and  whether 
it  has  been  properly  invoked  by  the  parties. 
If  jurisdiction  or  standing  is  lacking,  the 
judge  is  then  obligated  to  terminate  the 
litigation  because  it  is  a  fundamental 
principle  of  our  jurisprudence  that  without 
jurisdiction  conferred  by  law,  a  judge  has 
absolutely  no  authority  to  act. 

Once  a  judge  has  determined  that  jurisdiction 
has  been  legislatively  conferred,  it  is 
equally  important  that  the  judge,  during  the 
dispute-resolution  process,  exercise  that 
jurisdictional  authority  in  strict  accord 
with  the  legislative  will  embodied  in  the 
statutory  provision  at  issue.   I  am  a  firm 
believer  in  the  fundamental  precepts  that 
legislative  intent  is  the  polestar  by  which  a 
judge  must  be  guided  in  interpreting  and 
applying  a  statutory  provision  and  that  such 
intent,  as  gleaned  from  a  statute,  is  the  law 
which  must  be  followed. 

I  also  adhere  to  the  basic  proposition  that 
where  the  legislature  has  clearly  manifested 
its  intent  through  plain  and  unambiguous 
language,  any  further  judicial  construction 
is  not  only  inappropriate  but  unwarranted. 
In  my  view,  a  judge  who  does  not  strictly 
adhere  to  this  fundamental  principle  becomes 
in  effect  a  "legislator"  and  risks  expanding 
the  reach  of  a  statute  far  beyond  what  the 
legislature  intended,  to  the  detriment  of  the 

-57- 


224 


cornerstone  of  our  system  of  constitutional 
government,  the  doctrine  of  the  separation  of 
powers . 


-58- 


225 


I.  BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION 


1.   Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used) . 
A.  Richard  Caputo* 


Address:   List  current  place  of  residence  and  office 
address (es)  . 


Office: 


387  Wyoming  Avenue,  P.O.  Box  2059,  Kingston, 
PA,  18704-2059 


3.   Date  and  place  of  birth. 

May  22,  1938,  Portchester,  New  York 


Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's 
name).   List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and 
business  address (es). 

Married  to  the  former  Rosemary  Shea.   She  is  not  employed 
outside  the  home. 


Education:   List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have 
attended,  including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees  received, 
and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

Brown  University,  1956-1960,  A.B.  Degree  1960 
University  of  Pennsylvania  Law  School,  1960-1963, 
LL.B.  Degree  1963 


Employment  Record;   List  (by  year)  all  business  or  profes- 
sional corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises, 
partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations,  nonprofit  or 
otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were  connected  as 
an  officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since 
graduation  from  college. 


*    My  first  name  is  Albert.   Because  my  father's  name  was  the 
same,  I  have  been  called  Richard  since  childhood,  and  have  never 
used  my  first  name,  with  the  exception  of  military  service  where 
personnel  forms  called  for  the  use  of  one's  first  name. 


226 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


1960-1963   Summers:   Worked  as  a  truck  driver/ laborer  for 

R.  J.  Rich  Construction  Company,  a  residential  developer 
in  the  town  of  Rye,  New  York.   The  firm  is  no  longer  in 
business. 

August  1963-September  1964:   Clerked  in  the  law  office 

of  Charles  A.  Shea,  Jr.,  Esquire,  626  First  Eastern 
Bank  Building,  Wilkes-Barre,  PA,  18701.   I  did  research, 
drafted  pleadings,  briefs  and  memoranda. 

September  1964-September  1967;   Served  in  the  United  States 

Air  Force  (JAG) ,  Plattsburgh  AFB,  New  York.   I  performed 
as  both  trial  and  defense  counsel  in  courts-martial,  as 
counsel  in  administrative  elimination  board  hearings  and 
as  a  claims  officer. 

January-September  1968:   Served  as  a  public  defender  for 

Luzerne  County,  Pennsylvania.   I  represented  indigent 
defendants  in  criminal  cases. 

September  1968-Present;   Principal  in  Shea,  Shea  &  Caputo, 

626  First  Eastern  Bank  Building,  Wilkes-Barre,  PA,  18701 
(1968-1982);  310  Bicentennial  Building,  Wilkes-Barre, 
PA,  18701  (1982-October,  1994);  387  Wyoming  Avenue, 
Kingston,  PA,  18704  (November,  1994-Present) .   I  have 
been  engaged  in  the  general  practice  of  law  with  empha- 
sis on  construction  and  commercial  litigation  and 
multiemployer  pension  plan  law. 

1973-1992 ;   Secretary  and  Director  of  Stegmaier  Brewing  Company, 
Wilkes-Barre,  Pennsylvania 

1980-Present;   Assistant  Secretary,  McCarthy  Enterprises,  Inc., 
Kingston,  Pennsylvania 

1985-Present:   Partner  in  Druid  Associates,  an  investment 
partnership,  which  owns  an  interest  in  an  apartment 
building  in  Mamaroneck,  New  York  (Carolyn  Court) ,  and 
an  interest  in  an  apartment  building  in  Fleetwood, 
New  York  (William  Street) .   I  am  a  twenty-five  (25%) 
percent  partner  in  Druid  Associates. 

1985-Present:   Assistant  Secretary  of  Bronsberg  &  Hughes 

Pontiac,  Inc.,  d/b/a  Wyoming  Valley  Motors,  Larksville, 
Pennsylvania 

1986-Present :   Partner  in  Alafaya  Associates,  an  investment 
partnership,  which  owns  an  interest  in  an  apartment 
building  in  Fleetwood,  New  York  (William  Street) .   I  am 
a  sixteen  and  two-thirds  (16  2/3%)  percent  partner  in 
Alafaya  Associates. 


-2- 


227 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


1988-1992;   Director  of  Unifax,  Inc.  (now  US  Foodservice,  Inc.) 
Wilkes-Barre,  Pennsylvania 

1990-Present:   Assistant  Secretary  of  Middle  Road  Development 
Corp. ,  Kingston,  Pennsylvania 

1990-Present;   Assistant  Secretary  of  Magicorp,  Inc., 
Kingston,  Pennsylvania 

1990-Present;   Assistant  Secretary  of  Plainco,  Inc., 
Kingston,  Pennsylvania 

1990-Present:   Assistant  Secretary  of  Forsuns,  Ltd., 
Kingston,  Pennsylvania 

1990-Present;   Assistant  Secretary  of  Robbins  Door  &  Sash 
Company,  Kingston,  Pennsylvania 

1991-Present:   Director  and  Vice-President  of  Maplemoor, 
Inc. ,  Lehman,  Pennsylvania 

1994-Present:   Director  and  Secretary/Treasurer  of  The 
Luzerne  Foundation,  a  community  foundation, 
Wilkes-Barre,  Pennsylvania 

7.  Military  Service:   Have  you  had  any  military  service?   If  so, 
give  particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of  service, 
rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 

Yes, 

September  2,  1964,  through  September  1,  1967,  U.S.  Air  Force 

(JAG)  -  First  Lieutenant,  promoted  to  Captain  March  2,  1966 

Inactive  Reserve  from  September  2,  1967  through  September  27, 

1973 

Serial  Number:  FV  3106149 

Honorably  Discharged  September  27,  1973 

8.  Honors  and  Awards:   List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  hon- 
orary degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you 
believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

None. 


9.   Bar  Associations:   List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or 

judicial-related  committees  or  conferences  of  which  you  are  or 

have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of  any 
offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

American  Bar  Association 
Pennsylvania  Bar  Association 

-3- 


228 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


Federal  Bar  Association 

Luzerne  County  Law  &  Library  Association  (Luzerne  County 
Bar  Association) 

Member,  Committee  on  Unauthorized  Practice 
Member,  Committee  on  Continuing  Legal  Education 

Member,  Third  Circuit  Judicial  Conference 


Other  Memberships;   List  all  organizations  to  which  you 
belong  that  are  active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies. 
Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

Lobbying: 

Except  for  the  American  Bar  Association,  I  am  not  aware 
that  I  belong  to  any  organization  which  is  active  in 
lobbying  before  public  bodies. 

Other  organizations  to  which  I  belong: 

Huntsville  Golf  Club  -  Bylaws  attached  as  Exhibit  "1" 
The  Luzerne  Foundation 

Westmoreland  Club  -  Bylaws  attached  as  Exhibit  "2" 
Wyoming  Valley  Country  Club  -  Bylaws  attached  as 
Exhibit  "3" 


11.  Court  Admissions;   List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been 
admitted  to  practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if 
any  such  memberships  lapsed.   Please  explain  the  reason  for 
any  lapse  o'f  membership.   Give  the  same  information  for 
administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission  to 
practice. 

Supreme  Court  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania, 

April  27,  1964 
Luzerne  County  Court,  February  27,  1964 
United  States  District  Court  for  the  Middle  District  of 

Pennsylvania,  October  26,  1967 
United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of 

Pennsylvania,  April  4,  1996 
United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Third  Circuit, 

March  19,  1970 

12.  Published  Writings:   List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates 
of  books,  articles,  reports,  or  other  published  material  you 
have  written  or  edited.   Please  supply  one  copy  of  all  pub- 
lished material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee. 
Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on 
issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.   If 
there  were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are 
readily  available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

None. 


-4- 


229 


A.  Richard  Caputo 

13.  Health:   What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?   List 
the  date  of  your  last  physical  examination. 

On  October  16,  1993,  I  suffered  a  heart  attack. 
On  October  25,  1993,  I  had  coronary  artery  bypass  surgery 
which  involved  three  (3)  grafts.   I  was  hospitalized  at 
Wilkes-Barre  General  Hospital,  Wilkes-Barre,  Pennsylvania 
from  October  16,  1993,  to  November  1,  1993.   I  began  to  work 
in  January,  1994,  on  a  part-time  basis  and  resumed  full-time 
practice  in  April,  1994.   I  have  recovered  and  function  as 
well  as  before  the  episode  and  surgery. 

Since  October,  1993,  examinations  are  ongoing  every 
three  (3)  to  five  (5)  months. 

14.  Judicial  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  judicial 
offices  you  have  held,  whether  such  position  was  elected  or 
appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each 
such  court. 

None. 


15.  Citations:   If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide: 

(1)  citations  for  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you  have 
written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or 
where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant  criticism 
of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3)  citations 
for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitu- 
tional issues,  together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court 
rulings  on  such  opinions.   If  any  of  the  opinions  listed 
were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the 
opinions. 

Not  applicable. 

16.  Public  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices 
you  have  held,  other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the 
terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected  or 
appointed.   State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful 
candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

1968-1974  -  Member  of  Fairview  Township  Zoning  Commission 
Appointed  by  the  Board  of  Supervisors  of  Fairview  Township. 
This  was  a  non-paying  position.   I  have  never  run  for  public 
office. 


17 .   Legal  Career: 

a.   Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and 
experience  after  graduation  from  law  school 
including: 

-5- 


230 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and 
if  so,  the  name  of  the  judge,  the  court,  and 
the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk;   No. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so, 
the  addresses  and  dates;   No. 

3.  the  dates,  name  and  addresses  of  law  firms 

or  offices,  companies  or  governmental  agencies 
with  which  you  have  been  connected,  and  the 
nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 

August  1963-Septerober  1964:   Charles  A.  Shea,  Jr.,  Esquire 
626  First  Eastern  Bank  Bldg. ,  Wilkes-Barre, 
Pennsylvania,  18701;  research,  drafting  pleadings, 
briefs  and  memoranda. 

September  1964-September  1967:  U.S.  Air  Force  (JAG), 
Plattsburgh  AFB,  New  York;  trial  and  defense  counsel. 

January-September  1968:   Public  Defender  for  Luzerne 
County;  represented  indigent  defendants  in  criminal 
cases. 

September  1967-present :   Shea,  Shea  &  Caputo,  626 
First  Eastern  Bank  Building,  Wilkes-Barre,  PA,  18701 
until  1982;  310  Bicentennial  Building,  Wilkes-Barre, 
PA,  18701  until  October,  1994;  and,  387  Wyoming  Avenue, 
Kingston,  PA,  18704  from  October,  1994  to  present, 
office  principal;  general  practice  with  emphasis  on 
construction  and  commercial  litigation  and  multiemployer 
pension  plan  law. 


b.   1.   What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law 
practice,  dividing  it  into  periods  with  dates, 
if  its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 


1963-4 :   Research,  drafting  of  briefs,  memoranda  and 
pleadings  in  civil  matters 

1964-7 :   Trial  and  defense  counsel  in  six  (6)  General 
Courts-martial  (criminal) ,  ten  (10)  Special  Courts- 
martial  (criminal) ,  and  in  excess  of  20  Administrative 
Elimination  Review  Hearings  (civil) 

1967-9 :   Criminal  trials,  extensive  work  on  numerous 
federal  actions  for  collection  of  pension  contributions, 
research,  memoranda,  briefs,  pleadings  and  motions 

1970-present;   General  practice,  litigation  and  arbi- 
tration, multiemployer  pension  plan  law,  construction  law 


-6- 


231 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


Describe  your  typical  former  clients  and  mention 
the  areas,  if  any,  in  which  you  have 
specialized. 


Clients: 


A  multiemployer  pension  plan;  several  contractors; 
numerous  small  businesses;  and  numerous  individuals 
and  families  from  all  walks  of  life. 

Specialization; 

General  practice  with  emphasis  on  commercial  litigation; 
construction  contract  disputes;  federal  law  relating  to 
multiemployer  pension  plans. 


c.   1.   Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently, 

occasionally,  or  not  at  all?   If  the  frequency 
of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe 
each  such  variance,  giving  dates. 

For  the  past  fifteen  (15)  years,  I  have  appeared  in 
court  six  (6)  to  ten  (10)  times  annually.   From  1967 
to  1980,  I  appeared  in  court  more  frequently,  viz  twelve 
(12)  to  eighteen  (18)  times  annually. 

2.   What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts;  70% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record;         30% 

(c)  other  courts.  N/A 


3.   What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil;  99% 

(b)  criminal.  1% 


4 .   State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record 
you  tried  to  verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than 
settled) ,  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

Approximately  thirty-six  (36)  .   I  approximate 
because  as  a  public  defender  I  cannot  recall  the  exact 
number.   I  know  I  had  at  least  ten  (10)  jury  trials  and 
ten  (10)  non-jury  trials.   Therefore,  I  am  certain  of  at 
least  sixteen  (16)  trials  to  verdict  or  judgment.   In 
all  but  two  (2) ,  I  was  sole  or  chief  counsel. 


-7- 


232 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


5.   What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury;  52.8% 

(b)  non-jury.  47.2% 

18.   Litigation:   Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated 

matters  which  you  personally  handled.   Give  the  citations, 
if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and  date 
if  unreported.   Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of 
each  case.   Indentify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you 
represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your  partici- 
pation in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the 
case.   Also  state  as  to  each  case: 


(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or 
judges  before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone 
numbers  of  co-counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for 
each  of  the  other  parties. 

1.   Lakeland  School  District  Authority  and  Lakeland  School 
District  v.  The  Sutter  Corporation;  Albert  A.  Miller,  t/a  Phoenix 
Roofing  and  Supply  Company  and  Albert  Miller,  individually; 
Celotex  Corporation;  Bellante  Clauss  &  Partners  and  Joseph 
Bianca.  Jr. .  Civil  Action  No.  190  September  Term  1979  (Lackawanna 
County  Court  of  Common  Pleas) . 

In  this  case,  I  represented  defendant.  The  Sutter 
Corporation,  a  general  contractor  who  contracted  with  plaintiffs 
to  build  a  new  high  school  according  to  the  plans  and  specifica- 
tions of  the  defendant  architects,  Bellante  Clauss  &  Partners  and 
Joseph  Bianca,  Jr.   Sutter  entered  into  a  contract  with 
defendant,  Albert  A.  Miller  t/a  Phoenix  Roofing,  to  install  the 
roof  and  defendant,  Albert  A.  Miller  t/a  Phoenix  Roofing,  pur- 
chased the  roofing  products  from  defendant,  Celotex  Corporation. 

The  school  was  constructed  by  Sutter,  the  Celotex  built-up 
roof  installed  by  Miller,  t/a  Phoenix  Roofing,  and  shortly 
thereafter,  and  while  students  were  in  attendance,  the  roof  began 
to  leak  profusely.   Ultimately,  the  roof  failed,  and  it  was 
replaced  by  the  plaintiffs  with  a  rubber  roof  at  a  cost  some 
seven  (7)  times  the  amount  of  Sutter's  agreement  with  Miller,  t/a 
Phoenix  Roofing. 


233 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


Action  was  instituted  against  the  defendants  on  the  theories 
of  breach  of  warranty  and  negligence.   Defendant,  Bianca,  settled 
immediately  and  secured  a  joint  tortfeasor  release.   All  other 
defendants  answered  and  cross  claimed  against  each  other. 

The  case  was  tried  before  a  jury.   The  trial  lasted  three 
(3)  weeks,  at  the  end  of  which  the  jury  returned  a  verdict  in 
excess  of  $900,000.00  against  Sutter  (34%)  Miller,  t/a  Phoenix 
Roofing  (33%),  Celotex  (32%)  and  Bianca  (1%). 

After  an  appeal  was  filed,  the  case  was  settled. 

My  involvement  was  as  sole  counsel  for  defendant,  Sutter. 
The  trial  preparation  was  extensive  and  involved  four  (4)  experts 
on  built-up  roofing.   My  preparation  for  their  cross  examinations 
involved  educating  myself  about  a  myriad  of  technical  data  con- 
cerning built-up  roofing  and  the  careful  review  of  the  reports  of 
the  experts.   The  other  preparation  related  to  the  engineering 
involved  in  the  parapet  wall  design  and  the  connections  of  the 
structural  steel  at  the  top  of  the  building. 


(a)  1982. 

(b)  The  Honorable  John  J.  Cottone 

Judge  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Lackawanna  County 

(c)  Counsel  for  defendant.  Miller,  t/a  Phoenix  Roofing 

Company 

James  E.  O'Brien,  Sr. ,  Esquire  (deceased) 
Kennedy,  O'Brien,  McCormack  &  Mulcahey 
Suite  700  Scranton  Life  Building 
538  Spruce  Street 
Scranton,  PA  18503-1808 
(717)  342-0151 

Counsel  for  defendant,  Celotex  Corporation 

Christopher  K.  Walters,  Esquire 
Reed  Smith  Shaw  &  McClay 
2500  One  Liberty  Place 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103-7301 
(215)  851-8100 


-9- 


234 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


Counsel  for  defendant,  Joseph  Bianca,  Jr. 

James  M.  Howley,  Esquire 

Scanlon,  Howley,  Scanlon  &  Doherty 

321  Spruce  Street 

Scranton,  PA  18503 

(717)  946-7651 

Opposing  Counsel:   James  A.  Kelly,  Esquire 

1500  South  Webster  Avenue 
Scranton,  PA  18501 
(717)  346-1735 

John  Krisa,  Esquire 

Krisa,  McDonough  &  Cosgrove 

Route  6 

Blakely,  PA  18447 

(717)  383-3205 

2 .   Emmett  Thomas.  Nicholas  J.  Haydock  and  John  D.  Jillson. 
Trustees  of  the  Anthracite  Health  and  Welfare  Fund  v.  Blue  Coal 
Corporation.  Civil  Action  No.  71-46  (M.D.Pa.),  355  F.Supp.  510 
(M.D.Pa.),  aff'd  by  judgment  order  sub  nom.,    Savitskv  v.  Blue 
Coal  Corp. .  485  F.2d  681  (3d  Cir.  1973). 

This  was  a  case  in  which  my  client,  the  plaintiffs. 
Trustees  of  the  Anthracite  Health  and  Welfare  Fund,  a 
multiemployer  pension  fund,  brought  suit  against  the  defendant, 
Blue  Coal  Corporation,  to  recover  contributions  alleged  to  be  due 
the  plaintiffs.   Defendant  was  obligated  to  make  pension  contri-' 
butions  to  the  plaintiffs  on  the  basis  of  anthracite  (coal)  it 
"produced  for  use  or  for  sale." 

Defendant  had  purchased  discolored  anthracite  from  a  third 
party  which  was  not  a  party  to  the  collective  bargaining  agree- 
ment which  required  parties  such  as  the  defendant  to  contribute  a 
per  ton  royalty  contribution  to  plaintiffs  on  anthracite  the 
party  "produced  for  use  or  for  sale."   The  discolored  coal  had 
been  processed  through  the  third  party's  preparation  plant  and 
was  saleable  as  coal,  but  because  of  its  color,  it  would  not 
bring  the  price  of  non-discolored  coal.   After  defendant  pur- 
chased the  coal,  it  ran  it  through  its  processing  plant  with  its  raw 
coal,  and  as  a  result,  blended  it  with  a  non-discolored  product 
thereby  reducing  its  notoriety.   The  defendant  did  not  pay  plain- 
tiffs a  royalty  on  the  quantity  of  purchased  discolored  coal 
although  it  did  pay  on  the  finished  coal  with  which  it  was 
blended  in  the  process  mentioned  above.   Plaintiffs  brought  an 
action  seeking  the  royalty  contributions  on  the  discolored  coal 
on  the  theory  it  had  been  produced  for  use  or  sale  by  the 
defendant. 


-10- 


235 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


The  case  was  tried  before  a  judge  without  a  jury,  and  the 
court  determined  that  plaintiffs  were  not  entitled  to  recover 
because  the  subject  coal  had  already  been  "produced  for  use  or 
for  sale"  before  it  arrived  at  defendant's  plant.   The  court  said 
subsequent  processing  was  irrelevant.   I  was  sole  counsel 
for  plaintiffs. 

The  case  was  appealed,  and  the  decision  was  affirmed  without 
opinion. 

This  case  is  significant  in  that  it  set  a  precedent  in  the 
anthracite  industry  with  respect  to  the  point  at  which 
"production  for  use  or  sale"  occurs  and  hence  when  more  impor- 
tantly in  cases  such  as  this,  whether  a  contribution  is  due. 

(a)  1972. 

(b)  The  Honorable  Malcolm  Muir 

Judge  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Middle  District  of  Pennsylvania 

(c)  Opposing  Counsel:   James  E.  O'Brien,  Sr. ,  Esquire 

(deceased) 
Kennedy,  O'Brien,  McCormack  & 

Mulcahey 
Suite  700  Scranton  Life  Building 
538  Spruce  Street 
Scranton,  PA  18503-1808 
(717)  342-0151 

3.   H.  Eugene  Wagner  v.  Corey  E.  Wagner,  et  al..  Civil  No.  27 
of  1972  (Luzerne  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas) ;  No.  611  of  1974 
(Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania,  Eastern  District);  466  Pa.  532, 
353  A. 2d  819  (1976) . 

This  was  a  suit  by  a  father  against  his  children  to  establish 
his  claim  to  ownership  of  the  stock  of  a  corporation.   He  had, 
through  his  attorney,  formed  a  corporation  which  bought  a  piece 
of  real  estate,  its  sole  asset,  and  subsequently  informed  his 
children  that  he  was  making  a  gift  of  the  corporation  to  them. 
He  instructed  his  attorney  to  issue  the  stock  certificates  to  the 
children.   This  was  never  done  in  completed  fashion,  and  a  year 
later,  the  father  brought  the  suit  and  the  children  defended  on 
the  basis  that  the  complete  gift  had  been  made.   I  represented 
the  children  and  the  case  was  tried  in  the  Luzerne  County  Court 
of  Common  Pleas  in  equity  before  The  Honorable  Bernard  J. 
Brominski,  P.J.  Judge  Brominski  found  for  my  clients,  the 
Defendants.   The  Court  en  Banc  overruled  the  Plaintiff's 
exceptions.   On  appeal,  the  Pennsylvania  Supreme  Court  affirmed. 
The  decision  is  reported  in  466  Pa.  532,  353  A. 2d  819  (1976). 


236 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


This  case  is  significant  because  it  presented  the  difficult 
problems  of  having  to  represent  children  who  were  being  sued  by  a 
parent.   These  children  were  people  who  had,  throughout  their 
childhood,  and  most  of  their  adult  lives,  been  extremely  close  to 
their  father.   The  series  of  cases  involved  in  the  complete  sce- 
nario were  the  domestic  breakup  of  the  mother  and  father;  the 
dissolution  of  the  family  construction  business;  the  upsetting 
of  liens  of  the  Small  Business  Administration  wrongfully  extended 
by  the  father  to  the  assets  of  the  family  business  as  well  as  the 
corporation,  the  subject  of  the  foregoing  suit;  the  accounting  by 
the  father  of  the  business  of  the  family  partnership 
(construction  business) ;  and  proceedings  before  the  United  States 
Tax  Court.   The  emotional  problems  occasioned  by  such  litigation 
were,  of  course,  delicate.   The  handling  of  legal  problems  with 
the  undercurrent  of  family  disharmony  was  significant  in  my 
development  as  a  lawyer. 

(a)  1972-4. 

(b)  The  Honorable  Bernard  J.  Brominski  (Trial  Judge) 
The  Honorable  Richard  L.  Bigelow  (deceased) 

The  Honorable  Robert  J.  Hourigan  (deceased) 

The  Honorable  Peter  P.  Olszewski  (now  a  Judge  of  the 

Superior  Court  of  Pennsylvania) 
The  Honorable  Bernard  J.  Podcasy 
The  Honorable  Arthur  D.  Dalessandro 
Luzerne  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas  en  Banc 
and  Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania,  Eastern  District 

(c)  Opposing  Counsel:   William  J.  Taylor,  Esquire 

Taylor  &  Taylor 
Suite  811 

Ten  Penn  Center  Plaza 
1801  Market  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103 
(215)  568-2644 

Lawrence  I.  Washor,  Esquire 
address  unknown 


4.   Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania  v,  Gregory  Reap.  No.  675  of 
1984,  No.  676  of  1984  (Luzerne  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas). 

In  this  case,  I  represented  a  twenty-two  (22)  year  old 
defendant  accused  of  aggravated  assault  and  battery  and  simple 
assault.   The  facts  of  the  case  are  typical.   Four  (4)  young  men 
were  out  drinking  at  a  local  singles  bar.   When  they  spoke  to  two 
(2)  young  women,  who  they  thought  were  unescorted,  their  spouses 
suddenly  appeared.   Words  ensued  and  all  parties  were  asked  to 
leave.   The  controversy  continued  in  the  parking  lot  and  onto  the 
highway,  where  threats  and  challenges  resulted  in  the  vehicles 


-12- 


237 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


stopping  and  a  physical  confrontation  taking  place.   The  defendant 
and  his  three  (3)  male  friends  were  pitted  against  the  two  (2) 
husbands,  each  of  whom  was  bigger  and  stronger  than  the  defendant 
and  his  friends.   The  defendant  said  that  in  order  to  protect  one 
(1)  of  his  friends,  he  hit  one  (1)  husband  on  the  head  with  a 
rock.   This  resulted  in  a  serious  head  wound  and  other  injuries. 
The  other  husband  was  beaten  about  the  head  and  face  with  fists. 
The  defendant  and  his  friends  suffered  minor  injuries. 

The  defendant  and  two  (2)  of  his  friends  were  tried 
before  a  jury  and  convicted  after  four  (4)  days  of  trial.   An 
unsuccessful  appeal  followed,  and  the  defendant,  who  had  no  prior 
record,  was  sentenced  to  ten  (10)  years  probation  and  ordered  to 
pay  restitution. 

I  acted  as  chief  trial  counsel  and  prepared  all  defense 
witnesses.   I  also  prepared  the  cross  examinations  of  the 
prosecution  witnesses,  which  involved  the  review  of  extensive 
prior  testimony. 

(a)  1985. 

(b)  The  Honorable  Arthur  D.  Dalessandro 

Judge  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Luzerne  County 

(c)  Co-Counsel:   Cynthia  A.  Smith,  Esquire  (now  by 

marriage  Cynthia  A.  Muroski,  Esquire) 
Shea,  Shea  &  Caputo 
3  87  Wyoming  Avenue 
P.O.  Box  2059 
Kingston,  PA  18704 
(717)  288-5020 

Opposing  Counsel:   Joseph  G.  Albert,  Esquire 
Albert,  Dingle,  Russin, 

Sklarosky,  Sieminski  &  Kamage 
1575  Wyoming  Avenue 
Forty  Fort,  PA  18704 
(717)  283-1200 

5 .   Leo  R.  Corgan  v .  Kingston  Metal  Specialties  Co. .  William 
Dickson.  Jr..  Robert  Oeller  and  Jeff  Dickson.  Civil  Action  No. 
352-C  of  1987  (Luzerne  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas) . 

I  represented  the  plaintiff  who  brought  suit  against  the 
defendants  to  recover  damages  for  cutting  down  some  ninety  (90) 
mature  trees  on  the  plaintiff's  property. 


-13- 


238 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


Defendant,  Kingston  Metal  Specialties,  owned  by  the  Dicksons, 
was  a  land  owner  which  adjoined  the  plaintiff's  property. 
Defendants'  property  was  higher  than  plaintiff's  and  was  visible 
in  the  winter  from  an  expressway  artery  serving  the  largest  con- 
centration of  population  in  the  county.   In  the  spring  and  summer, 
the  mature  trees  on  plaintiff's  land  obscured  the  view  of 
defendants'  business  establishment  from  that  road.   The 
defendants,  claiming  they  did  not  know  it  was  plaintiff's  land, 
entered  the  land  and  cut  down  some  ninety  (90)  mature  trees. 

Because  of  the  intentional  acts  of  the  defendants,  the 
plaintiff  also  sought  punitive  damages. 

The  case  was  tried  before  a  jury.   I  acted  as  chief  counsel. 
The  jury  returned  a  verdict  for  the  plaintiff  for  both  damages 
and  punitive  damages  in  the  amount  of  $15,000.00  and  $780.00, 
respectively . 

There  were  several  damage  theories  viz  diminishment  of  value 
of  the  real  estate,  loss  of  the  value  of  the  trees,  replacement 
cost  as  a  measure  of  damages,  damages  for  the  trespass  and 
whether  exemplary  damages  were  appropriate.   There  were  expert 
witnesses  on  land  value  and  tree  replacement  cost. 

I  mention  this  case  because  it  involved  a  dispute  about 
fundamental  real  property  rights. 

(a)  1990. 

(b)  The  Honorable  Bernard  C.  Brominski 

Judge  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Luzerne 
County 

(c)  Co-counsel:   J.  Thomas  Shea,  Esquire  (deceased) 

Shea,  Shea  &  Caputo 

Opposing  Counsel:   Charles  A.  Shaffer,  Esquire 
Mahler,  Shaffer  &  Pugliese 
541  Pierce  Street 
Kingston,  PA   18704 
(717)  283-1800 
Counsel  for  Kingston  Metal 
Specialties  Company  and  Dicksons 

Charles  R.  Coslett,  Esquire 
COSLETT  &  COSLETT 
312  Wyoming  Avenue 
Kingston,  PA  18704 
(717)  288-4517 
Counsel  for  Oeller 


-14- 


239 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


6.  Division  Two.  Inc.  v.  Linde  Enterprises.  Inc. .  Civil 
Action  No.  86-0942  (M.D.Pa.). 

In  this  case,  I  represented  the  plaintiff.  Division  Two, 
Inc.,  a  dewatering  contractor  from  Denton,  Maryland.   Plaintiff 
brought  an  action  against  the  defendant,  a  Pennsylvania  utilities 
contractor,  for  the  balance  due  on  a  contract  to  dewater  a  site 
for  the  defendant.   The  defendant  counterclaimed  for  defective 
performance  and  failure  to  cure.   The  counterclaim  exceeded  the 
claim  ($75,000.00  to  $126,481.00). 

The  case  was  tried  before  a  jury  in  May,  1987.   I  acted  as 
sole  counsel.   My  involvement  was  trial  preparation  as  well 
as  the  conduct  of  trial.   Preparation  included  preparing 
witnesses,  reviewing  and  learning  technical  data  regarding  the 
dewatering  process,  the  design  of  the  dewatering  holes  and  the 
preparation  of  cross  examinations  of  defendant's  witnesses 
including  an  expert  on  dewatering.   The  case  also  involved  a 
parol  evidence  issue,  since  the  defendant  sought  to  introduce  evi- 
dence at  variance  with  the  written  agreement  between  the  parties. 
The  parol  evidence  issue  was  resolved  favorably  by  the  court. 

After  a  four  (4)  day  trial,  the  jury  returned  a  verdict  in 
favor  of  plaintiff  of  $56,250.00  and  in  favor  of  the  defendant  on 
the  counterclaim  of  $18,618.00.   No  appeal  was  taken. 

(a)  1987. 

(b)  The  Honorable  William  J.  Nealon 

Judge  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Middle 
District  of  Pennsylvania 

(c)  Opposing  counsel:   Raymond  P.  Wendolowski,  Esquire 

Koff,  Wendolowski,  Ferguson  &  Mangan 
22  East  Union  Street 
Wilkes-Barre,  PA   18701 
(717)  822-5600 

7.  Uniqraphic-Color  Corporation  v.  Mobil  Oil  Corporation  and 
Petroleum  Service  Company.  Civil  Action  No.  1675-C  of  1985 
(Luzerne  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas) 

This  was  a  jury  trial  in  which  I  acted  as  chief  trial         . 
counsel.   The  case  involved  a  claim  against  Mobil  Oil  and  its 
distributor  for  breach  of  warranty,  product  liability  and 
negligence.   The  plaintiff  was  a  printing  company,  and  it  intro- 
duced the  Defendant  Mobil's  oil  product  into  two  (2)  of  its  large 
printing  presses.   The  presses  had  thousands  of  moving  parts 
which  required  constant  lubrication.   The  presses,  which  were  of 
superior  quality  in  the  industry,  began  to  experience  mechanical 


-15- 


240 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


failures  and  breakdowns.   In  fact,  the  failures  and  breakdowns  far 
exceeded  what  could  be  considered  normal  experience.   Further 
complicating  the  process  was  the  fact  that  the  printed  product 
produced  in  the  presses  became  inferior  and  unclear.   When  a  tar- 
like substance  was  discovered  in  the  oil  in  the  presses,  the 
plaintiff  sought  to  establish  that  Mobil  oil  was  contaminated 
with  asphalt,  and  that  the  oil  had  been  delivered  in  that 
condition. 

After  a  trial  of  approximately  two  (2)  weeks  and  the 
testimony  of  several  witnesses,  including  two  (2)  expert  wit- 
nesses in  the  field  of  spectography,  an  engineer  who  expressed 
the  opinion  that  the  contiminated  oil  caused  the  catastrophic 
failure  of  the  presses,  and  an  engineer  who  was  an  expert  on  the 
maintenance  of  operation  of  these  particular  presses,  the  jury 
returned  a  defense  verdict. 

My  preparation  in  this  case  involved  becoming  familiar 
with  a  voluminous  maintenance  manual  for  the  presses,  as  well  as 
the  cross  examinations  of  the  experts  in  spectography  and  the 
maintenance  and  operation  of  the  presses. 

(a)  1988. 

(b)  The  Honorable  Gifford  R.  Cappellini 

Judge  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Luzerne  County 

(c)  Co-Counsel:   Charles  A.  Shea,  III,  Esquire 

Shea,  Shea  &  Caputo 
387  Wyoming  Avenue 
P.O.  Box  2059 
Kingston,  PA  18704 
(717)  288-5020 

Opposing  Counsel:   Edward  F.  Mannino,  Esquire 
Mannino  Griffith,  P.C. 
2400  One  Commerce  Square 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103 
(215)  851-6300 

Thomas  J.  Elliott,  Esquire 
Elliott,  Reihner,  Siedzikowski, 

North  &  Egan,  P.C. 
Union  Meeting  Corporate  Center  V 
925  Harvest  Drive 
Blue  Bell,  PA  19422 
(215)  977-1000 


-16- 


241 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


8.   Interfacts  America.  Inc.  v.  Dr.  Jalal  B.  Fatemi.  Civil 
Action  No.  85-0609  (M.D.Pa.). 

I  was  chief  counsel  for  a  plaintiff,  private  investigator, 
which  brought  suit  against  a  client  for  the  payment  of  fees  for 
services  performed.   The  defendant,  while  not  denying  the  engage- 
ment, disputed  the  extent  of  services  provided  and  contended 
nothing  was  due. 

The  facts  revealed  the  defendant  engaged  plaintiff  to  find 
his  children,  whom  he  advised  had  been  kidnapped  by  his  wife  with 
whom  he  was  having  domestic  difficulties.   The  plaintiff's  people 
performed  investigative  services  such  as  surveillance,  record 
checking,  personal  inquiries  and  other  related  activities.   The 
performance  of  these  services  took  them  from  Wilkes-Barre, 
Pennsylvania,  to  Baltimore,  Maryland,  to  Savannah,  Georgia. 
Unfortunately,  the  plaintiff  never  found  the  defendant's 
children.   The  contract  between  the  parties  was  oral  and  provided 
for  the  payment  of  services  at  hourly  rates  regardless  of  whether 
or  not  the  children  were  found. 

The  case  was  tried  before  a  jury  which,  after  three  (3)  days 
of  trial,  returned  a  verdict  in  favor  of  the  plaintiff  for 
approximately  fifty  percent  (50%)  of  the  amount  claimed. 

My  involvement  in  the  case  consisted  of  discovery,  the  review 
of  my  client's  billing  records  and  time  records,  the  preparation 
of  plaintiff's  witnesses  and  the  preparation  of  cross  examina- 
tions of  defendant  and  his  witnesses. 


(a)  1986. 

(b)  The  Honorable  William  J.  Nealon 

Judge  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Middle  District  of  Pennsylvania 

(c)  Opposing  Counsel:   Arthur  L.  Piccone,  Esquire 

Ronald  V.  Santora,  Esquire 
Hourigan,  Kluger,  Spohrer  & 

Quinn,  P.C. 
700  Mellon  Bank  Center 
8  West  Market  Street 
Wilkes-Barre,  PA  18701 
(717)  825-9401 

9.   The  Sutter  Corporation  v.  Girard  Bank.  Civil  Action 
No.  82-C  of  1980,  (Luzerne  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas). 

In  this  case,  I  represented  the  plaintiff,  a  general 
contractor,  who  brought  suit  against  Girard  Bank  to  recover  for 
the  balance  due  plaintiff  for  the  construction  of  an  office 


■17- 


242 


A.  Richard  Caputo 

building  in  Wilkes-Barre,  Pennsylvania.   The  plaintiff  had  a 
construction  agreement  with  the  owner,  who  never  paid  the  balance 
due  on  the  contract,  and  ultimately  sought  bankruptcy  protection. 
Defendant,  Girard  Bank,  had  entered  into  a  loan  agreement  with 
owner  to  provide  owner  the  funds  to  construct  the  building.   The 
construction  agreement  was  in  the  amount  of  $1,730,000.00  and  the 
loan  agreement  was  for  $1,600,000.00.   The  plaintiff  was  not  a 
party  to  the  loan  agreement.   The  defendant,  Girard  Bank,  drafted 
and  caused  the  owner  and  the  contractor  to  execute  a  document 
providing  for  the  assignment,  at  Girard' s  option,  of  the  con- 
struction contract  to  Girard.   All  payments  to  plaintiff  were 
made  by  Girard;  Girard  failed  to  require  owner  to  deposit 
sufficient  funds  in  excess  of  the  loan  commitment  of 
$1,600,000.00  to  build  the  building,  despite  a  requirement  in  the 
loan  agreement  to  do  so;  Girard  contracted  with  plaintiff's  sub- 
contractors to  do  work  on  the  building,  bypassing  the  plaintiff's 
contractual  relationship  with  those  subcontractors;  and,  Girard 
failed  to  pay  plaintiff,  despite  Girard's  inspecting  architect's 
commitment  to  pay  for  all  work  and  change  orders  if  the  plaintiff 
would  complete  the  project. 

Girard  contended  it  had  not  triggered  the  assignment 
because  it  had  not  given  written  notice  it  was  doing  so.   Plain- 
tiff argued  that  by  its  actions,  Girard  had  indeed  triggered  the 
assignment  and  stood  in  the  shoes  of  the  owner.   Girard  also  con- 
tended its  inspecting  architect  was  not  its  agent  and  that  it  was 
therefore  not  bound  by  what  he  said. 

The  case  was  tried  before  a  jury  in  November,  1994.   At  the 
conclusion  of  five  (5)  days  of  trial,  the  jury  returned  a  verdict 
for  the  plaintiff  on  all  theories  of  liability,  namely: 
(a)  Girard  exercised  its  rights  of  assignment,  took  over  the  con- 
struction contract,  and  breached  it  by  its  failure  to  pay;  (b) 
the  architect  was  the  agent  of  Girard,  promised  payment,  and 
Girard  was  bound  to  pay;  (c)  Girard  made  material  misrepresenta- 
tions to  plaintiff  and  was  liable  therefor;  and,  (d)  Girard 
intentionally  interfered  with  the  contractual  relations  between 
the  plaintiff  and  its  subcontractors. 

I  acted  as  chief  trial  counsel.   I  prepared  all  witnesses  for 
the  plaintiff  and  the  cross  examination  for  each  defense  witness. 
Preparation  involved  becoming  completely  familiar  with  the  operative 
contracts,  the  job  conference  minutes,  the  payment  requisitions 
and  correspondence. 

The  Superior  Court  of  Pennsylvania  reversed  on  the  basis  of 
the  lower  court's  denial  of  defendant's  pretrial  motion  for  non 
pros.   A  petition  for  allowance  of  appeal  to  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Pennsylvania  was  denied. 

(a)  1994. 

(b)  The  Honorable  Hugh  F.  Mundy 

Judge  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Luzerne  County 

-18- 


243 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


(c)   Co-counsel; 


Joseph  A.  Dente,  Esquire 
Shea,  Shea  &  Caputo 
3  87  Wyoming  Avenue 
P.O.  Box  2059 
Kingston,  PA  18704 
(717)  288-5020 


Opposing  Counsel: 


James  C.  Ingram,  Esquire 

Michael  K.  Sullivan,  Esquire 

Drinker,  Biddle  &  Reath 

134  5  Chestnut  Street 

Suite  1100 

Philadelphia  National  Bank  Bldg. 

Philadelphia,  PA  19107 

(215)  988-2700 


10.   Frank  J.  Valvano  and  Pamela  B.  Valvano.  his  wife  v. 
Joseph  E.  Galardi  and  Kaye  L.  Galardi.  his  wife.  Civil  No.  48  of 
1984  (Lackawanna  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas),  aff'd,    Frank  J. 
Valvano  and  Pamela  B.  Valvano.  his  wife  v.  Joseph  E.  Galardi  and 
Kaye  L.  Galardi.  his  wife.  363  Pa. Super.  584,  526  A. 2d  1216 
(1987)  . 

In  this  case  I  was  sole  counsel  representing  a  husband  and 
wife  who  were  defendants  in  an  action  for  specific  performance  of 
an  agreement  to  provide  a  right-of-way. 

The  defendants  entered  into  an  agreement  to  buy  ten  (10) 
acres  of  thirty  (30)  which  v;ere  owned  by  the  plaintiffs.   An 
agreement  of  sale  was  prepared  by  a  broker,  signed  by  the  defen- 
dants and  submitted  to  plaintiffs  who  rejected  the  agreement  and 
offered  an  amendment  to  the  agreement  which  was  signed  by  the 
plaintiffs  and  the  male  defendant  only.   The  amendment  provided 
an  option  to  the  defendants  to  buy  the  remaining  twenty  (20) 
acres  within  two  (2)  years,  and  it  provided  for  a  right-of-way  to 
plaintiffs  in  the  event  the  option  was  not  exercised.   The  trans- 
action of  purchase  closed,  the  two  (2)  years  expired,  and  the 
defendants  did  not  exercise  the  option.   Thereafter,  the  defen- 
dants refused  access  to  the  plaintiffs,  and  the  plaintiffs 
brought  an  action  for  specific  performance  of  the  agreement  and 
the  amendment  to  agreement.   The  female  defendant  testified  she 
was  not  aware  of  the  amendment  until  two  (2)  years  after  closing. 

The  plaintiffs  contended  that  the  defendants  performed  the 
amendment  by  closing  the  transaction  and  thereby  acknowledging  de 
facto  the  terms  of  the  agreement.   They  contended  that  part  per- 
formance took  the  matter  outside  of  the  Statute  of  Frauds. 
Defendant  contended  that  the  Statute  of  Frauds  prevented  the 
action  for  specific  performance  of  the  right-of-way  because  the 
female  defendant  never  executed  the  agreement  or  the  amendment  to 
the  agreement. 


■19- 


244 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


The  trial  judge,  sitting  without  a  jury,  in  equity,  agreed 
with  the  plaintiffs  and  entered  a  decree  of  specific  performance. 
The  defendants  appealed,  and  the  lower  court  was  affirmed. 

The  trial  of  this  case  presented  issues  of  credibility  as 
well  as  issues  of  law.   The  court  simply  did  not  believe  the 
female  defendant  on  the  issue  of  her  awareness  of  the  amendment. 
It  was  my  contention  that  the  failure  of  execution  by  a  wife  in 
these  circumstances  violated  the  Statute  of  Frauds  and  did  not 
permit  the  forced  performance  of  the  amendment  against  her. 
Neither  court  agreed  with  me. 


(a)  1987. 

(b)  The  Honorable  James  Munley 

Judge  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Lackawanna 
County 

(c)  Opposing  Counsel:   William  J.  Oliver,  Esquire 

(deceased) 
Oliver,  Price  and  Rhodes 
Suite  300  -  200  Penn  Avenue 
P.O.  Box  1409 
Scranton,  PA  18501 
(717)  343-6581 


For  further  reference,  I  include  the  following  list  of  judges 
and  counsel  with  whom  I  have  been  involved  in  various  matters  in 
the  past  two  (2)  years: 

1.  Michael  Beltrami,  Esquire 
1110  South  Church  Street 
Hazleton,  PA  18201 

(717)  459-1491 

2.  Martin  J.  Cerullo,  Esquire 
CERULLO,  DATTE  &  WALLBILLICH,  P.C. 
Second  Street  &  Laurel  Boulevard 
P.O.  Box  450 

Pottsville,  PA  17901 
(717)  622-0767 

3.  Ruth  S.  Borland,  Esquire 
BORLAND  &  BORLAND 

Suite  1100,  PNC  Bank  Building 
69  Public  Square 
Wilkes-Barre,  PA  18701 
(717)  822-3311 


-20- 


245 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


4.  Morton  F.  Daller,  Esquire 
DALLER,  GREENBERG  &  DIETRICH 
Valley  Green  Corporate  Center 
7111  Valley  Green  Road 

Fort  Washington,  PA  19034 
(215)  836-1882 

5.  Michael  B.  Sacks,  Esquire 
10  Fairfield  Drive 
Short  Hills,  NJ  07078 
(215)  912-9679 

6.  George  A.  Spohrer,  Esquire 
4  00  Third  Avenue 

Suite  101 
Kingston,  PA  18704 
(717)  287-1156 

7.  The  Honorable  William  J.  Nealon 
United  States  District  Court  for 

the  Middle  District  of  Pennsylvania 
23  5  North  Washington  Street 
P.O.  Box  1148 
Scranton,  PA  18501 
(717)  344-9619 

8.  The  Honorable  Edwin  M.  Kosik 
United  States  District  Court  for 

the  Middle  District  of  Pennsylvania 
235  North  Washington  Street 
P.O.  Box  1148 
Scranton,  PA  18501 
(717)  344-2124 

9 .  The  Honorable  Thomas  I .  Vanaskie 
United  States  District  Court  for 

the  Middle  District  of  Pennsylvania 
235  North  Washington  Street 
P.O.  Box  1148 
Scranton,  PA  18501 
(717)  344-0125 

.0.   The  Honorable  Correale  F.  Stevens 

Luzerne  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas 
2  00  North  River  Street 
Wilkes-Barre,  PA  18711 
(717)  825-1723 


-21- 


45-964  98  -  9 


246 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


19,   Legal  Activities;   Describe  the  most  significant  legal 

activities  you  have  pursued,  including  significant  litigation 
which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did  not 
involve  litigation.   Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in 
this  question,  please  omit  any  information  protected  by  the 
attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the  privilege  has  been  waived.) 

1.   International  Union  of  United  Brewery.  Flour.  Cereal. 
Soft  Drink  and  Distillery  Workers  of  America.  AFL-CIO.  et  al.  v. 
Stegmaier  Brewing  Company,  et  al. .  Civil  No.  70-556  (M.D.Pa.). 

This  case  involved  a  suit  by  a  decertified  bargaining  agent 
of  a  bargaining  unit  comprised  of  two  (2)  local  breweries  to  com- 
pel arbitration  toward  the  termination  of  the  employee  benefit 
plan  theretofore  established  and  maintained  by  the  employers  and 
the  decertified  bargaining  agent.   I  represented  one  (1)  of  the 
breweries,  the  Stegmaier  Brewing  Company,  which  was  also  one  (1) 
of  the  defendants. 

In  addition  to  the  facts  revealed  by  the  foregoing  paragraph, 
a  new  bargaining  agent  had  been  certified  by  the  N.L.R.B.  and  on 
the  defendants'  Motion  for  Summary  Judgment  the  question  was 
whether  the  new  bargaining  agent  should  be  substituted,  as  a 
matter  of  law,  on  the  panel  of  fund  trustees  in  the  place  of  the 
decertified  bargaining  agent  as  the  representative  of  the  employ- 
ees thereon  within  the  meaning  of  §302  of  the  National  Labor 
Relations  Act,  as  amended,  29  U.S.C.  §186. 

I  argued  on  'behalf  of  the  defendant  company  and  contended 
that  the  newly  certified  union  should  be  substituted  in  place  of 
the  old  union  for  purposes  of  representing  the  employee  interests 
on  the  governing  body  of  the  jointly  administered  pension  trust 
and  that,  consequently,  the  plaintiffs  had  no  standing  to  compel 
arbitration.   This  position  was  sustained  and  a  summary  judgment 
was  granted  by  Judge  Muir.   An  appeal  to  the  Third  Circuit 
followed,  but  subsequent  to  the  submission  of  briefs  and 
appendices,  the  appeal  was  abandoned. 

I  view  this  case  as  significant  because  it  concerned  a  point 
of  federal  labor  law  not  theretofore  directly  decided,  viz:   by 
what  authority  could  it  be  said  that  a  newly  certified  bargaining 
agent  represented  retired  personnel  as  a  trustee  of  a  jointly 
administered  trust  when  the  authority  conferred  on  it  as  a  bar- 
gaining agent  under  the  Act  did  not  extend  to  retired  personnel. 
The  resolution  of  the  issue  involved  the  determination  of  the 
extent  of  that  authority  in  the  newly  certified  bargaining  agent 
under  the  federal  common  law  of  collective  bargaining  agreements, 
not  under  federal  statutory  law. 

(a)   1970-1. 

-22- 


247 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


(b)  The  Honorable  Malcolm  Muir 

Judge  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Middle 
District  of  Pennsylvania 

(c)  Co-counsel:   S.  Keene  Mitchell,  Esquire  (deceased) 

Edward  Darling,  Esquire  (deceased) 
Darling,  Mitchell  &  Schooley 
Mellon  Bank  Center 
Wilkes-Barre,  PA  18701 
(717)  822-8195 

Allan  M.  Kluger,  Esquire 

Hourigan,  Kluger,  Spohrer  &  Quinn,  P.C. 

700  Mellon  Bank  Center 

8  West  Market  Street 

Wilkes-Barre,  PA  18701 

(717)  825-9401 

Alan  R.  Howe,  Esquire 

53  0  Park  Avenue 

Unit  205 

P.O.  Box  34 

Scotch  Plains,  NJ  07076 

(908)  322-8184 

Opposing  Counsel:   Bernard  N.  Katz,  Esquire 
Meranze  and  Katz 
12th  Floor 

Lewis  Tower  Building 
N.E.  Corner  15th  and  Locust  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA  19102-3977 
(215)  546-4183 

2.   Commonwealth  of  PA  v.  Chas.  S.  Grucella.  Criminal  No. 
1343  of  1967,  (Luzerne  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas). 

Upon  the  election  of  a  new  District  Attorney  in  Luzerne 
County,  the  successful  candidate  hired  seven  (7)  assistants, 
three  (3)  of  whom  were  immediate  past  members  of  the  staff  of  the 
Public  Defender  of  Luzerne  County.   Since  in  excess  of  twenty- 
five  (25)  cases  wherein  the  defendants  were  represented  by  the 
Public  Defender's  Office  were  to  be  tried  in  the  first  term  of 
Criminal  Court  handled  by  the  new  District  Attorney,  the  question 
was  presented  as  to  whether  or  not  the  foregoing  facts  did  not 
present  such  an  appearance  of  a  conflict  of  interest,  if  not  an 
actual  conflict  in  some  cases,  sufficient  to  cause  the  disquali- 
fication of  the  entire  District  Attorney's  staff  from  prosecuting 
the  cases  where  the  defendants  were  represented  by  the  Public 
Defender. 


-23- 


248 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


In  advance  of  the  commencement  of  the  new  term  of  Criminal 
Court,  we  of  the  Public  Defender's  Office  filed  a  motion  to 
disqualify  the  District  Attorney  and  his  staff  from  prosecuting  any 
cases  against  defendants  represented  by  the  Public  Defender's 
Office. 

I  argued  the  case  for  the  Public  Defender's  Office  before  the 
Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Luzerne  County  en  Banc.   The  Court  en 
Banc  ultimately  decided  the  matter  adversely  to  the  position  I 
advanced  on  behalf  of  the  Public  Defender,  two  (2)  members  dis- 
senting (3  to  2) .   An  unsuccessful  appeal  later  followed. 

I  view  this  case  as  significant  because  it  presented  a  ques- 
tion of  the  public  confidence  in  a  public  official  on  the  one 
hand  and  the  integrity  of  the  prosecutorial  system  as  it  related 
to  Public  Defender  clients,  present  and  future,  on  the  other. 

(a)  1968. 

(b)  The  Honorable  Bernard  C.  Brominski 

The  Honorable  Richard  L.  Bigelow  (deceased) 

The  Honorable  Jacob  Schiffman  (deceased) 

The  Honorable  Robert  J.  Hourigan  (deceased) 

The  Honorable  Peter  P.  Olszewski  (now  a  Judge  of  the 

Superior  Court  of  Pennsylvania) 
Luzerne  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas  en  Banc 

(c)  Co-counsel:   William  R.  Keller,  Esquire 

1111  Mellon  Bank  Center 
8  West  Market  Street 
Wilkes-Barre,  PA  18701 
(717)  822-6138 

Peter  J.  Webby,  Esquire  (deceased) 
Northeastern  Bank  Building 
Wilkes-Barre,  PA  18701 
(717)  824-3161 

John  E.  O'Connor,  Esquire 
14  60  Wyoming  Avenue 
Forty  Fort,  PA  18704 
(717)  288-6441 

Joseph  C.  Giebus,  Esquire 
2  Oakwood  Drive 
Laflin,  PA  18702 

Opposing  Counsel:   The  Honorable  Patrick  J.  Toole 
President  Judge 

Luzerne  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas 
Luzerne  County  Courthouse 
200  North  River  Street 
Wilkes-Barre,  PA   18711 
(717)  825-1667 

-24- 


249 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


Blythe  H.  Evans,  Jr.,  Esquire 
1013  PNC  Bank  Building 
69  Public  Square 
Wilkes-Barre,  PA   18701 
(717)  825-6601 

S.  Keene  Mitchell,  Esquire  (deceased) 
Darling,  Mitchell  &  Schooley 
Mellon  Bank  Center 
Wilkes-Barre,  PA   18701 
(717)  822-8195 

3 .   Frank  J.  Galqay  and  Francis  P.  Bonner.  Trustees  of  the 
Anthracite  Health  and  Welfare  Fund  and  the  Anthracite  Health 
and  Welfare  Fund  v.  Gil-Pre  Corporation.  Civil  No.  86-1363 
(M.D.Pa.  198  6);  Frank  J.  Galqay  and  Francis  P.  Bonner.  Trustees 
of  the  Anthracite  Health  and  Welfare  Fund  and  the  Anthracite 
Health  and  Welfare  Fund  v.  Gilberton  Energy  Corporation.  Civil 
No.  86-1364  (M.D.Pa.  1986) ;  aff'd  on   other  grounds,    Frank  J. 
Galqay.  et  al.  v.  Gil-Pre  Corporation.  No.  88-5200  (3d  Cir. 
1988) ;  aff'd  on  other  grounds,    Frank  J.  Galqay.  et  al.  v. 
Gilberton  Enerqy  Corporation.  No.  88-5201  (3d  Cir.  1988) ;  aff'd 
on   other  grounds,    Galqay  v.  Gil-Pre  Corp. ,  864  F.2d  1018  (3d  Cir. 
1988) . 

This  began  as  a  suit  by  the  Anthracite  Health  and  Wel- 
fare Fund  (the  "Fund"),  the  multiemployer  pension  plan  which 
involves  retired  anthracite  miners  and  the  anthracite  industry 
employers,  against  one  (1)  of  the  employers,  Gil-Pre  Corporation, 
to  recover  pension  fund  contributions  in  the  form  of  tonnage 
royalties.   The  operative  collective  bargaining  agreement  pro- 
vided that  a  royalty  was  due  the  Fund  on  all  anthracite  "produced 
for  use  or  for  sale"  by  an  anthracite  operator  or  employer.   The 
quoted  language  had  been  in  all  industry  collective  bargaining 
agreements  dating  back  to  1946  and  as  of  the  time  of  the  suit, 
the  number  was  fourteen  (14) .   The  entire  industry  was  organized 
until  the  late  1960's,  and  this  language  was  taken  to  mean  that 
the  royalty  was  due  when  the  anthracite  was  prepared  in  a  coal 
breaker.   It  could  have  been  when  the  coal  was  mined,  but  since 
there  was  verified  measurement  (weighmasters)  and  sale  to  con- 
sumers after  it  was  finished  in  the  coal  breaker,  the  parties 
interpreted  the  key  phrase  to  mean  the  royalty  was  due  after  the 
raw  mined  coal  was  prepared  in  the  coal  breaker. 

Two  (2)  things  changed  in  the  industry.   First,  the 
industry  was  no  longer  completely  organized  after  the  late 
1960's.   Indeed,  more  and  more  operators  were  nonunion  to  the 
point  where  today  over  one-half  of  the  total  production  of 
anthracite  is  produced  by  nonunion  operators.   Second,  techno- 
logical advances  in  the  utilization  of  anthracite  permitted  what 
had  been  waste  to  be  used  as  a  fuel  without  the  necessity  of  coal 
breaker  preparation.   The  employers  sought  to  exclude  production 
from  royalty  on  the  basis  that  it  did  not  go  through  the  breaker 
process.   Gil-Pre  was  such  a  case. 

-25- 


250 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


Factually,  Gil-Pre  involved  a  substandard  product  that 
had  been  screened  and  then  sent  on  for  further  processing.   The 
United  States  District  Court  for  the  Middle  District  of  Pennsyl- 
vania determined  that  the  material  was  not  subject  to  royalty 
because  it  did  not  go  through  a  coal  breaker.   Indeed,  the  Dis- 
trict Court  held  that  the  words  "produced  for  use  or  for  sale" 
exclusively  meant  run  through  a  coal  breaker.   This  would  have 
excluded  material  being  sold  and  used  as  anthracite  coal.   We 
appealed. 

On  appeal  to  the  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the 
Third  Circuit,  the  Court  rejected  the  District  Court's  view  of 
the  operative  contract  language  and  recognized  that  technology, 
as  well  as  the  realities  of  a  non-organized  industry,  compelled  a 
construction  of  the  key  language  which  required  a  royalty  on 
material  made  marketable  for  use  as  fuel,  whether  it  went  through 
a  breaker  or  not. 

The  significance  of  the  case  is  manifest.   The  anthracite 
pension  plan  now  receives  contributions  on  material  which  does 
not  pass  through  a  coal  breaker  or  other  involved  process.   The 
use  of  key  language  of  the  contract  as  language  of  exclusion  has 
lessened  since  this  decision. 


(a)  1986-8. 

(b)  The  Honorable  Richard  P.  Conaboy 

Judge  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Middle  District  of  Pennsylvania 

The  Honorable  Walter  K.  Stapleton 

The  Honorable  Carol  Los  Mansmann 

Judges  of  the  United  States  Court  of  Appeals 

for  the  Third  Circuit 

The  Honorable  Clarkson  S.  Fisher 

Judge  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for 

the  District  of  New  Jersey,  sitting  by  designation 

(c)  Co-counsel:   Cynthia  A.  Smith,  Esquire,  now  by  marriage 

Cynthia  A.  Muroski,  Esquire 
387  Wyoming  Avenue 
P.O.  Box  2059 
Kingston,  PA   18704 
(717)  288-5020 


Opposing  Counsel:   Howard  A.  Rosenthal,  Esquire 
Pelino  &  Lentz 
32nd  Floor 
One  Liberty  Place 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103-7393 
(215)  665-1540 


-26- 


251 

A.  Richard  Caputo 


4 .   Frank  J.  Galgay  and  Francis  P.  Bonner.  Trustees  of  the 
Anthracite  Health  and  Welfare  Fund  (Pension  Trust)  and  the 
Anthracite  Health  and  Welfare  Fund  (Pension  Trust)  v.  Pagnotti 
Enterprises.  Inc..  No.  3:CV-91-0999  (M.D.Pa.). 

In  this  case,  my  client,  the  Trustees  of  the  Anthracite 
Health  and  Welfare  Fund,  instituted  suit  against  Pagnotti 
Enterprises,  Inc.  ("PEI")  to  recover  the  withdrawal  liability  of 
Beltrami  Enterprises,  Inc.  ("BEI")  on  the  theory  that  PEI  and  BEI 
were  part  of  a  controlled  group  of  companies  within  the  meaning  of 
29  U.S.C.  §1301(b) (1) . 

The  issue  in  the  case  was  whether  PEI  ever  became  a  member  of 
a  controlled  group  with  BEI. 

While  there  never  was  a  transfer  of  the  stock  of  BEI  to 
PEI,  the  parties  began  negotiations  in  1980  and  arrived  at  an 
"agreement  in  principle"  in  March,  1982.   Thereafter,  we  alleged 
and  believe  we  established  through  discovery,  that  PEI  exercised 
such  a  degree  of  control  of  BEI  for  the  next  eight  (8)  years 
that,  for  purposes  of  the  statute,  it  controlled  BEI.   The 
indicia  of  control  upon  which  we  relied  included  the  control  of 
funds,  accounts  payable,  field  operations,  labor  relations, 
sales,  pricing,  and  environmental  matters.   Admitted  funds  in 
excess  of  $34  Million  passed  from  PEI  to  BEI  between  1982 
and  1988  in  the  form  of  "advances  for  coal"  for  which  no  coal  was 
delivered.   Moreover,  there  were  no  notes  or  other  evidence  of 
indebtedness  regarding  the  funds  advanced. 

Cross  motions  for  summary  judgment  were  denied.   The  case  was 
called  for  trial  in  1997,  and  after  four  (4)  days  of  trial,  the 
case  was  settled. 

The  case  is  significant  because  we  sought  to  establish  that 
substance  should  govern  over  form  with  regard  to  the  enforcement 
of  the  controlled  group  provisions  of  29  U.S.C.  §1301(b)(l).   BEI 
declared  bankruptcy  while  owing  the  Fund  $2,4  00,000  in  withdrawal 
liability.   Although  there  was  no  executed  agreement  of  purchase 
between  BEI  and  PEI,  we  attempted  to  show  that  the  requisite 
degree  of  control  was  extent  by  virtue  of  the  conduct  of  the 
parties. 

(a)  1991-February,  1997. 

(b)  The  Honorable  Thomas  I.  Vanaskie 

Judge  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Middle  District  of  Pennsylvania 

(c)  Opposing  Counsel:   Robert  D.  Schaub,  Esquire 

Robert  N.  Gawlas,  Jr. ,  Esquire 
Rosenn,  Jenkins  &  Greenwald 
15  South  Franklin  Street 
Wilkes-Barre,  PA  18711 
(717)  826-5600 

-27- 


252 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


5.   Eininett  Thomas,  et  al.  and  Charles  Nedd.  et  al.  v. 
Honevbrook  Mines.  Inc. .  Civil  Action  No.  8499  (M.D.Pa.). 

This  was  a  suit  by  the  trustees  of  an  employee  benefit  fund 
which  had  been  established  as  a  result  of  collective  bargaining 
between  the  United  Mine  Workers  of  America  and  the  anthracite 
coal  operators  against  an  operator  which  was  delinquent  in  its 
contributions  to  the  fund.   Jurisdiction  was  founded  in  §301  of  the 
Labor  Management  Relations  Act,  as  amended,  29  U.S.C.  §185.   The 
issue  in  the  case  was  whether  the  trustees  of  a  jointly  admini- 
stered multiemployer  pension  fund  could  maintain  an  action  to 
recover  delinquent  contributions  in  a  federal  district  court  pur- 
suant to  §301  supra  absent  diversity  of  citizenship  between  the 
parties. 

The  matter  was  heard  on  the  delinquent  operator's  motion  to 
dismiss  before  The  Honorable  William  J.  Nealon,  United  States 
District  Judge,  and  Judge  Nealon  sustained  jurisdiction.   This 
was  later  affirmed  by  the  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the 
Third  Circuit. 

This  case  is  significant  because  it  was,  at  the  time,  a  case 
of  first  impression  in  the  United  States.*   Moreover,  the  trus- 
tees of  this  fund  were,  at  the  time  of  the  institution  of  this 
suit,  confronted  with  an  industry  which  was  virtually,  to  an 
operator,  delinquent  in  its  contributions  to  the  fund.   In 
addition,  the  fund  was  in  terrible  financial  condition  and  was 
attempting  to  pay  benefits  to  some  14,000  pensioned  miners.   The 
prospect  of  suits  in  local  courts  was  undesirable  because  of  the 
rumored  and  known  coal  interests  of  various  county  common  pleas 
judges.   It  was  imperative  that  a  more  objective  forum  be 
selected  to  resolve  the  issues  of  delinquencies.   The  federal 
courts  proved,  with  the  passage  of  time  and  some  thirty-seven 
(37)  additional  cases,  to  have  been  that  forum. 

(a)  1964-71. 

(b)  The  Honorable  William  J.  Nealon 

Judge  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Middle 
District  of  Pennsylvania 


The  passage  of  the  Employee  Income  Retirement  and  Security  Act 
(ERISA)  provided  a  statutory  enforcement  mechanism  for  such 
actions  after  1974;  29  U.S.C.  §1132,  1145. 


-28- 


253 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


(c)   Co-counsel:   Charles  A.  Shea,  Jr.,  Esquire  (deceased) 
Shea,  Shea  &  Caputo 
626  First  Eastern  Bank  Building 
Wilkes-Barre,  PA  18701 
(717)  823-2151 

The  Honorable  Thomas  N.  O'Neill,  Jr. 
Judge  of  the  United  States  District  Court 
for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania 
14613  U.S.  Courthouse 
Independence  Mall  West 
601  Market  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA  19106 
(215)  597-2750 

Opposing  Counsel:   Theodore  R.  Laputka,  Esquire  (Deceased) 
Laputka,  Bayless,  Ecker  &  Cohn 
Citizens  Bank  Building 
Hazleton,  PA  18201 
(717)  455-4731 


6.   I  serve  on  the  Unauthorized  Practice  Committee  of  the 
Luzerne  County  Bar  Association.   The  Committee  is  currently 
considering  three  (3)  matters  of  alleged  unauthorized  practice. 
I  have  attended  one  (1)  meeting  with  regard  to  these  matters,  and 
I  will  be  involved  in  the  final  decision  as  to  how  to  proceed 
with  respect  to  each  case. 


-29- 


254 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts 
from  deferred  income  arrangements,  stock,  options, 
uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which  you 
expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  pro- 
fessional services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers, 
clients,  or  customers.   Please  describe  the  arrangements  you 
have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial 
business  interest. 

I  expect  to  collect  the  outstanding  fees  on  matters  on 
which  I  have  performed  services  up  to  the  date  I  discontinue 
practice.   I  do  not  expect  to  negotiate  a  buyout  or  deferred 
income  arrangement.   I  do  anticipate  that  my  interest  in  the 
building  in  which  I  practice  and  which  Charles  A.  Shea,  III 
and  I  own  will  be  purchased  on  a  market  basis. 

With  respect  to  Druid  Associates  and  Alafaya  Associates, 
I  expect  to  continue  to  hold  my  interests,  which  I  understand 
do  not  have  an  optimistic  future. 

I  currently  hold  options  to  purchase  664  shares  of 
Rykoff -Sexton  stock  at  a  price  of  $10.54  per  share. 

Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of 
interest,  including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in  deter- 
mining these  areas  of  concern.   Indentify  the  categories  of 
litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  pre- 
sent potential  conf licts-of-interest  during  your  initial 
service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

Obviously,  I  would  recuse  myself  from  cases  involving 
former  clients,  entities  in  which  I  served  as  an  officer 
and/or  director,  and  for  the  prescribed  period,  from  any  matters 
handled  by  members  of  my  firm.   I  do  have  one  (1)  client,  the 
Anthracite  Health  and  Welfare  Fund  (Pension  Plan) ,  which  has 
been  active  in  federal  litigation,  and  as  I  stated,  I  would 
recuse  myself  from  any  matter  in  which  it,  or  any  other 
client,  was  involved.   I  would,  of  course,  follow  the  Code 
of  Judicial  Conduct. 

In  the  event  any  matter  involved  an  entity  in  which  the 
Grace  K.  Shea  Trust  (my  wife,  children  and  I  are  beneficiaries) 
my  wife's  IRA  or  my  IRA  had  an  interest,  I  would  recuse  myself. 

I  would  use  the  same  due  diligence  I  use  in  my  practice 
to  identify  problem  areas,  and  I  would  avoid  any  appearance  of 
impropriety  by  recusing  myself. 


255 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue 
outside  employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your 
service  with  the  court?   If  so,  explain. 

No. 


List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the 
calendar  year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current 
calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees,  dividends, 
interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and 
other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so, 
copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report,  required  by  the 
Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 


See  attached  Exhibit  "4' 


Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in 
detail  (Add  schedules  as  called  for) . 


See  attached  Exhibit  "5", 


6.   Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political 
campaign?   If  so,  please  identify  the  particulars  of  the 
campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the  campaign, 
your  title  and  responsibilities. 

In  1991,  I  was  active  in  raising  campaign  funds  for 
The  Honorable  Hugh  F.  Mundy,  Judge  of  the  Court  of  Common 
Pleas  of  Luzerne  County,  in  his  bid  for  election  to  a  ten 
(10)  year  term.   I  had  no  official  title,  but  I  was  active 
in  seeking  contributions  from  people  who  supported  him. 


-2- 


256 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


III.   GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar 
Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for 
"every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence  or  pro- 
fessional workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  serv- 
ing the  disadvantaged."   Describe  what  you  have  done  to 
fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances 
and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

As  essentially  a  practitioner  in  a  moderately  sized 
community,  I  have  and  continue  to  perform  legal  services  for 
a  number  of  people  who  cannot  afford  to  pay,  on  a  no  fee  for 
service  basis.   I  estimate  that  in  the  performance  of  this 
type  of  service,  I  devote  approximately  twenty  (20)  hours  per 
year.   In  addition,  I  have  volunteered  and  am  an  active  Pro 
Bono  Project  Volunteer  Attorney  which  project  is  sponsored 
by  the  local  bar  association  and  Legal  Services  of 
Northeastern  Pennsylvania,  Inc. 

I  also  serve  as  Secretary,  Treasurer  and  Director  of  The 
Luzerne  Foundation,  a  community  foundation  organized  in  1994 
to  serve  the  communities  of  Luzerne  County.   This  is  the 
first  community  foundation  established  in  this  geographical 
area,  and  it  involves  approximately  thirty  (30)  hours  per 
year. 

The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of 
of  Judicial  Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a 
judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that  invidiously 
discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex  or  religion.   Do  you 
currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization 
which  discriminates  --  through  either  formal  membership 
requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership 
policies?   If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.   What  have 
you  done  to  try  to  change  these  policies? 

I  have  been  a  member  of  the  Wyoming  Valley  Country  Club 
since  1967.   It  is  a  golf  club.   Until  April,  1995,  it  did  not 
offer  voting  membership  to  women.   It  did  offer  a  "Ladies" 
membership  which  involved  dues  which  were  less  than  those  of  a 
full  member,  and  which  also  involved  limited  access  to  the 
course.   In  1995,  as  a  new  member  of  the  by-laws  committee, 
I,  along  with  others,  proposed  the  elimination  of  this  inequity. 
The  new  by-laws  provided  for  full  membership  to  women  by  way  of 
a  conversion  from  "Ladies"  membership  to  "Senior"  member.   No 
initiation  fee  was  required;  only  the  payment  of  Senior  member 
dues.   I  drafted  the  set  of  changes  to  the  by-laws  which 
accomplished  this  task  and  offered  full  membership  to  women. 
These  changes  were  adopted  by  the  membership  on  April  22,  1995. 


257 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  rec- 
ommend candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts?   If 
so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?   Please  describe  your 
experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from 
beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led  to 
your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you  participated) . 

Yes,  the  Federal  Judicial  Nominating  Commission  of 
Pennsylvania.   I  do  not  know  if  it  recommended  my 
nomination. 

In  the  late  spring  of  1995,  I  was  contacted  by  Congress- 
man Paul  Kanjorski,  who  said  he  was  seeking  qualified  people 
for  the  position  of  Judge  of  the  United  States  District  Court 
for  the  Middle  District  of  Pennsylvania.   I  indicated  my 
interest  to  him.   I  asked  the  Luzerne  County  Democratic  Party 
leader  to  write  a  letter  to  the  President  recommending  me  for 
the  position,  and  I  also  made  the  same  request  of  the  State 
Democratic  Party  leader.   In  addition,  I  sought  the  support 
of  those  who  were  aware  of  my  abilities  and  whom  I  thought 
could  appropriately  recommend  me  to  the  President  for  consid- 
eration as  a  nominee.   In  April  of  1995,  I  was  contacted  by 
White  House  counsel  and  asked  to  complete  and  return  various 
forms.   I  did  so,  and  shortly  thereafter,  vetting  began.   I 
was  interviewed  extensively  by  a  deputy  assistant  attorney 
general.   Others  such  as  clients,  lawyers,  judges  and  busi- 
ness associates  reported  to  me  that  they  had  been  interviewed 
as  well.   In  August  of  1995,  I  was  interviewed  at  the  Justice 
Department  in  Washington  by  representatives  of  the  Office 
of  Policy  Development.   In  October  of  1995,  I  was  interviewed 
by  the  FBI,  and  in  December,  1995,  by  the  American  Bar 
Association. 

On  February  25,  1997,  I  was  asked  by  the  Office  of 
Policy  Development  at  the  Justice  Department,  to  complete  and 
update  various  forms  necessary  to  be  further  considered  for 
nomination.   I  did  so.   I  was  again  interviewed  by  an  FBI 
agent  in  March,  1997.   I  was  interviewed  by  the  Federal 
Judicial  Nominating  Commission  of  Pennsylvania  on  June  17,  1997. 

Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a 
judicial  nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal 
issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be  inter- 
preted as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue,  or 
question?   If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

No. 


-2- 


258 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


5.   Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism 
involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal 
government,  and  within  society  generally,  has  become  the 
subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.   It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that 
alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  pre- 
rogatives of  other  branches  and  levels  of  government.   Some 
of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been 
said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution 
rather  than  grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual 
plaintiff  as  a  vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far- 
reaching  orders  extending  to  broad  classes  of 
individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirm- 
ative duties  upon  governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  juris- 
dictional requirements  such  as  standing  and 
ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon 
other  institutions  in  the  manner  of  an  administrator 
with  continuing  oversight  responsibilities. 

Federal  courts  are  courts  of  limited  jurisdiction. 
The  judiciary  determines  matters  in  the  context  of  a  case  or 
controversy,  considering  standing  and  ripeness.   It  should 
not,  as  the  legislature  is  charged  to  do,  make  broad 
pronouncements  of  policy.   The  federal  judiciary  is  not  a 
popularly  elected  body,  and  it  does  not  have  the  constitu- 
tional or  statutory  mandate  to  generally  engage  in  solving 
society's  problems.   That  is  left  to  the  Congress,  and  to  a 
lesser  extent,  the  President.   The  judiciary's  function  is  to 
decide  cases  or  controversies,  viz  resolve  grievances  between 
and  among  parties,  and  in  the  process,  follow  precedent, 
interpret  statutes  and,  when  called  upon,  review  legislation 
to  determine  constitutionality.   With  respect  to  the  latter, 
we  should  be  mindful  that  state  and  federal  legislators  and 
state  court  judges  also  take  the  oath  to  uphold  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States. 


-3- 


259 

A.  Richard  Caputo 


Moreover,  with  respect  to  following  precedent,  stare 
decisis  is  a  fundamental  principle  of  the  judicial  process. 
It  provides  predictability,  and  therefore  stability  to  the 
judicial  system.   A  lower  court  judge  has  the  responsibility 
and  obligation  to  follow  the  precedent  of  the  relevant  higher 
courts,  even  if  he  or  she  disagrees  with  that  higher  court 
decision. 

The  ability  of  any  one  branch  of  our  government  to  check 
or  contain  the  usurpation  of  the  function  of  any  other  is 
manifest  in  our  system.   Indeed,  this  separation  of  powers  and 
checks  and  balances  has  been  acknowledged  as  part  of  the 
genius  of  our  system.   I  believe  the  ability  of  the  other 
branches  of  our  government  to  keep  the  judiciary  in  check 
provides  the  ultimate  remedy  for  the  type  of  concerns 
proposed  in  the  criticisms  I  have  attempted  to  address  here. 


-4- 


260 

A.  Richard  Caputo 


hgcrddsk 

hgc.cll 

as    of    2/23/95 


EXHIBIT    "1" 


Bylaws  of  the  Huntsville  Golf  Club. 


CONSTITUTION 

OF  THE 

HUNTS VI LLE  GOLF  CLUB 


ARTICLE  I 
NAME  AND  PURPOSE 


1.1   The  organization  shall  be  known  as  the  HUNTSVILLE 
GOLF  CLUB  (hereinafter  "HGC"  or  the  "Club") .   The  Club  is  a  pri- 
vate golf  club  wholly  owned  by  Maplemoor,  Inc.  which  exists  for 
the  purpose  of  fostering  an  interest  in  the  game  of  golf  and  its 
traditions. 


ARTICLE  II 
MEMBERSHIP 


2.1   Classes.   The  Membership  shall  consist  of  the 
classes  and  number  of  Members  permissible  per  class  as  follows: 


(a) 

Regular 

300 

(b) 

Junior 

100 

(c) 

Associate 

See  Paragraph  2 . 4 

(d) 

Non-Resident 

50 

(e) 

Honorary 

10 

2.2  Regular  Members.   Only  persons  at  least  thirty-five 
(35)  years  of  age  shall  be  eligible  for  Regular  Membership. 
Regular  Members  may  enjoy  all  the  privileges  of  the  Club. 
Regular  Memberships  are  voting  (as  permitted  by  this 
Constitution) ,  nonproprietary,  assessable,  nontransferable  and 
terminate  upon  death. 

2.3  Junior  Members.   Only  persons  at  least  twenty-one 
(21)  years  of  age  who  have  not  reached  their  thirty-fifth  (35th) 
birthday  shall  be  eligible  for  Junior  Membership.   Junior  Members 
may  enjoy  all  the  privileges  of  the  Club.   All  Junior  Memberships 


261 


are  nonproprietary,  nonvoting,  nonassessable,  nontransferable  and 
terminate  upon  death.   Sons  and  daughters  of  Regular  Members  in 
good  standing  may  have  priority  over  other  applicants  for  Junior 
Memberships. 

A  Junior  Member  accepted  to  Membership  on  or  before 
December  31,  1994  shall  purchase  a  Membership  Bond  according  to 
the  schedule  in  Paragraph  5.2.   However,  a  Junior  Member  shall  be 
permitted  to  make  equal  annual  payments  toward  the  cost  of  that 
Membership  Bond.   The  amount  of  the  payments  shall  be  determined 
by  dividing  the  total  cost  of  the  Membership  Bond  by  the  number 
of  years  difference  between  the  Junior  Member's  age  at  acceptance 
to  Membership  and  when  that  Junior  Member  will  reach  his  thirty- 
fifth  (35)  birthday.   A  Junior  Member  purchasing  on  installments 
shall  be  paid  interest  on  the  amount  of  the  installment  paid  in 
at  the  rate  of  interest  provided  in  the  Membership  Bond.   In  the 
event  there  is  a  default  in  a  payment  ot  an  installment  which 
persists  for  thirty  (30)  days  beyond  the  due  date,  the  Junior 
Member  shall  be  deemed  to  have  withdrawn  from  the  Club,  lose  his 
privileges  of  Membership,  and  be  repaid  the  amount  of  the 
installments  already  paid.   The  applicable  initiation  fee  will  be 
payable  as  hereinafter  set  forth  in  Article  V. 

A  Junior  Member  accepted  to  Membership  after 
December  31,  1994  shall  pay  a  Membership  Fee  according  to  the 
schedule  in  Paragraph  5.2.   However,  a  Junior  Member  shall  be 
permitted  to  make  equal  annual  payments  toward  the  cost  of  that 
Membership  Fee.   The  amount  of  the  payments  shall  be  determined 
by  dividing  the  total  cost  of  the  Membership  Fee  by  the  number  of 
years  difference  between  the  Junior  Member's  age  at  acceptance  to 
Membership  and  when  that  Junior  Member  will  reach  his  thirty- 
fifth  (35th)  birthday.   In  the  event  there  is  a  default  in  a  pay- 
ment of  an  installment  which  persists  for  thirty  (30)  days  beyond 
the  due  date,  the  Junior  Member  shall  be  deemed  to  have  withdrawn 
from  the  Club,  lose  his  privileges  of  Membership,  and  be  repaid 
the  amount  of  the  installments  already  paid.   The  applicable  ini- 
tiation fee  will  be  payable  as  hereinafter  set  forth  in  Article 
V. 

A  Junior  Member's  annual  dues  shall  vary  according  to 
his  age  as  determined  by  the  Board  of  Governors.   Upon  reaching 
his  thirty-fifth  (35)  birthday,  a  fully  paid  Junior  Member  shall 
become  a  Regular  Member  and  shall  pay  the  same  dues  required  to 
be  paid  by  Regular  Members. 


-2- 


262 


2.4   Associate  Members.   Only  persons  who  are  surviving 
spouses  of  Regular,  Junior  or  Non-Resident  Members  are  eligible 
for  Associate  Membership.   Associate  Members  may  enjoy  all  the 
privileges  of  the  Club,  except  as  modified  herein.   Associate 
Memberships  are  nonproprietary,  nonvoting,  nonassessable,  non- 
transferable and  terminate  upon  death,  marriage  or  remarriage. 
Those  Associate  Members  who  are  the  surviving  spouses  of 
Non-Resident  Members  shall  continue  limited  golfing  privileges  as 
stated  in  Section  2.5. 


2.5   Non-Resident  Members.   Only  persons  at  least 
twenty-one  (21)  years  of  age  who,  for  at  least  nine  (9)  months  a 
year  do  not  reside  within  forty  (40)  miles  from  Public  Square  in 
Wilkes-Barre  (hereinafter  the  "Club  Area"),  are  eligible  for 
Non-Resident  Membership.   Non-Resident  Members  may  enjoy  all  the 
privileges  of  the  Club,  provided,  however  that  they  shall  be 
restricted  to  twenty  (20)  rounds  of  golf  per  year,  including 
those  played  by  the  Member  and  those  played  by  other  eligible 
family  members.   Non-Resident  Memberships  are  non-proprietary, 
nonvoting,  nonassessable,  nontransferable,  and  terminate  upon 
death.   Upon  establishing  legal  residence  in  the  Club  Area,  a 
Non-Resident  may,  within  ninety  (90)  days,  make  application  to 
the  Club  for  Regular  Membership. 

If  the  Non-Resident  Member  becomes  an  Accepted  Applicant 
for  Regular  Membership  on  or  before  December  31,  1994,  and  there 
are  no  Regular  Memberships  available  to  him,  the  name  shall  be 
placed  upon  the  waiting  list  for  Accepted  Applicants  to  Regular 
Membership.   Such  Non-Resident  Member  may  retain  his  status  as  a 
Non-Resident  Member  until  such  time  as  he  is  accepted  as  a  Regu- 
lar Member,  provided,  however  that  such  a  Non-Resident  Member  may 
continue  his  status  only  after  depositing  with  the  Club  an  amount 
equal  to  one-fourth  (h)    of  the  Membership  Bond  and  initiation  fee 
required  for  the  last  Regular  Membership  accepted.   Such  deposit 
shall  be  applied  toward  the  Membership  Bond  and  initiation  fee 
required  to  be  purchased  at  the  time  of  the  acceptance.   A  Non- 
Resident  Member  in  making  payment  in  order  to  be  accepted  as  a 
Regular  Member,  shall  receive  credit  toward  the  Regular  Member- 
ship for  the  amount  of  such  payments  made  for  such  Non-Resident 
Membership,  provided,  however,  said  amount  does  not  exceed  the 
amount  of  the  Regular  Membership  transfer  fee  then  established. 
During  the  period  of  time  said  Non-Resident  Member  is  on  the 
waiting  list  of  Accepted  Applicants  for  Regular  Membership,  he 
shall  pay  Regular  Member  dues  and  receive  all  privileges  accorded 
a  Regular  Member  (except  the  right  to  vote)  but  he  shall  be 
counted  as  a  Non-Resident  Member  for  the  purpose  of  determining 
the  number  of  Non-Resident  Members  then  outstanding.   In  the 
event  such  Non-Resident  Member  fails  to  make  such  deposit  or  fails 


-3- 


263 


to  perform  such  acts  as  are  required  by  this  Constitution  for 
acceptance  to  Regular  Membership  after  Regular  Membership  is  made 
available  to  him,  his  Non-Resident  Membership  together  with  all 
Club  privileges,  shall  thereupon  terminate. 

If  the  Non-Resident  Member  becomes  an  Accepted  Applicant 
for  Regular  Membership  after  December  31,  1994,  and  there  are  no 
Regular  Memberships  available  to  him,  the  name  shall  be  placed 
upon  the  waiting  list  for  Accepted  Applicants  to  Regular 
Membership.   Such  Non-Resident  Member  may  retain  his  status  as  a 
Non-Resident  Member  until  such  time  as  he  is  accepted  as  a  Regu- 
lar Member,  provided,  however  that  such  a  Non-Resident  Member  may 
continue  his  status  only  after  depositing  with  the  Club  an  amount 
equal  to  one-fourth  (h)    of  the  Membership  Fee  and  initiation  fee 
required  for  the  last  Regular  Membership  accepted.   Such  deposit 
shall  be  applied  toward  the  Membership  Fee  and  initiation  fee 
required  to  be  paid  at  the  time  of  the  acceptance.   A  Non- 
Resident  Member  in  making  payment  in  order  to  be  accepted  as  a 
Regular  Member,  shall  receive  credit  toward  the  Regular  Member- 
ship for  the  amount  of  such  payments  made  for  such  Non-Resident 
Membership,  provided,  however,  said  amount  does  not  exceed  the 
amount  of  the  Regular  Membership  transfer  fee  then  established. 
During  the  period  of  time  said  Non-Resident  Member  is  on  the 
waiting  list  of  Accepted  Applicants  for  Regular  Membership,  he 
shall  pay  Regular  Member  dues  and  receive  all  privileges  accorded 
a  Regular  Member  (except  the  right  to  vote)  but  he  shall  be 
counted  as  a  Non-Resident  Member  for  the  purpose  of  determining 
the  number  of  Non-Resident  Members  then  outstanding.   In  the 
event  such  Non-Resident  Member  fails  to  make  such  deposit  or 
fails  to  perform  such  acts  as  are  required  by  this  Constitution 
for  acceptance  to  Regular  Membership  after  Regular  Membership  is 
made  available  to  him,  his  Non-Resident  Membership  together  with 
all  Club  privileges,  shall  thereupon  terminate. 

2.6   Honorary  Members.   Honorary  Memberships  may  be 
issued  to  worthy  individuals  upon  the  majority  vote  of  the  Board 
of  Governors.   Honorary  Members  may  enjoy  all  the  privileges  of 
the  Club.   Honorary  Memberships  shall  be  nonproprietary,  non- 
voting, nonassessable,  nontransferable  and  terminate  upon  death. 
The  term  of  an  Honorary  Membership  shall  be  for  one  (1)  year. 
Upon  the  expiration  of  such  term,  the  Board  of  Governors  shall 
review  such  Membership  and  in  its  sole  discretion  either  renew 
the  Membership  for  an  additional  one  (1)  year  term  or  determine 
not  to  renew  the  Membership,  whereupon  the  Membership  shall 
terminate. 


-4- 


264 


2.7  Residence  Requirement.  All  Members,  regardless  of 
Membership  classification,  shall  reside  within  the  Commonwealth 
of  Pennsylvania. 

2.8  Extension  of  Privileges.  The  Board  may  extend  the 
privileges  of  the  Club  to  such  other  persons  and  upon  such  terms 
as  the  Board  may  from  time  to  time  prescribe. 

2.9  Privileges  of  the  Club.   As  used  in  this 
Constitution,  "privileges  of  the  Club"  means  the  right  to  use  the 
facilities  of  the  Club  and  to  sponsor  guests  to  use  those  facili- 
ties subject  to  any  rules  and  regulations  which  may  from  time  to 
time  be  established  by  the  Board. 

2.10  Family  Privileges  -  Persons  Entitled.   A  Member's 
spouse  is  entitled  to  the  same  privileges  as  the  Member  enjoys. 
Members'  unmarried  children  up  to  the  age  of  twenty-one  (21) 
years  or  up  to  the  age  of  twenty-four  (24)  years  who  are  attend- 
ing college  on  a  full  time  basis  and  living  either  in  the  family 
home  or  at  or  about  the  college  campus  during  the  college  term 
are  entitled  to  the  same  privileges  as  their  member  parent. 
Where  a  Member  has  living  with  him  and  dependent  upon  him  for 
financial  support,  an  immediate  member  of  his  family  other  than 
his  spouse  or  children,  the  Board  may  grant  such  person  such 
privileges  of  the  Club  for  such  period  and  under  such  restric- 
tions as  the  Board  may,  in  its  discretion,  choose  and  provide 
that  any  such  privileges  granted  may  be  changed  or  withdrawn  by 
the  Board  at  any  time.   The  enjoyment  of  family  privileges  by  any 
person  entitled  thereto  pursuant  to  this  Section  is  subject  to 
such  rules  as  may  be  adopted  by  the  Board. 

2.11  Admission  Application.   Subject  to  the  general 
provisions  hereinafter  set  forth,  the  Board  shall  prescribe  when 
and  the  manner  in  which  all  applicants  for  Membership  shall  be 
made.   Each  Applicant  must  initially  be  invited  to  join  by  a 
Regular  Member,  and  his  formal  application  for  Membership  must  be 
endorsed  and  sponsored  by  at  least  two  (2)  Regular  Members  of  the 
Club.   Only  Regular  Members,  with  at  least  two  (2)  years  tenure 
as  Regular  Members,  may  sponsor  new  Applicants  for  Membership  and 
such  sponsorship  is  limited  to  two  (2)  Applicants  in  any  one  (1) 
calendar  year. 

Until  such  time  as  there  are  Regular  Members  of  the  Club 
with  at  least  two  (2)  years  tenure  as  Regular  Members,  Applicants 
may  only  be  invited  to  join  by  the  Board. 


-5- 


265 


2.12  No  Discrimination.   Applicants  shall  be  accepted 
and  consideration  given  for  Membership  in  the  Club  without  regard 
to  sex,  race,  creed  or  color. 

2.13  Membership  Committee.   The  Membership  Committee 
shall  consist  of  the  Board  of  Governors.   The  Membership 
Committee  shall  investigate  each  Applicant  for  Membership.   The 
records  and  proceedings  of  the  Membership  Committee  shall  be  con- 
fidential and  shall  be  subject  to  the  inspection  only  by  the 
Board.   The  Membership  Committee  shall  fix  the  time  for  the  hold- 
ing of  its  regular  and  special  meetings  and  shall  be  subject  to 
rules  and  regulations  as  the  Board  may  from  time  to  time  adopt 
with  respect  to  the  Committee. 

2.14  Election  to  Membership.   Applicants  shall  be 
elected  to  Membership  only  after  they  shall  have  received  a 
majority  vote  of  acceptance  from  Members  of  the  Membership 
Committee  in  attendance  at  a  regular  meeting  with  a  quorum.   An 
Applicant  receiving  such  vote  shall  be  known  as  an  "Accepted 
Applicant."   The  name  of  each  Accepted  Applicant  shall  be  placed 
upon  a  list  of  Accepted  Applicants  and  the  Membership  Committee 
shall  thereafter  promptly  notify  such  Accepted  Applicant. 

2.15  (A)   Acceptance  to  Membership  on  or  before  Decem- 
ber 31.  1994.   At  the  time  of  his  election,  an  Accepted  Applicant 
shall: 

(i)   If  a  Membership  vacancy  exists,  be  accepted 
to  Membership  upon  payment  in  full  to  the  Club  for  the  applicable 
Membership  Bond  and  initiation  fee. 

(ii)   If  no  Membership  vacancy  exists,  be  accepted 
to  Membership,  subject  to  any  waiting  list  established  pursuant 
to  Section  2.18,  when  (a)  a  Membership  vacancy  occurs  by  reason 
of  the  death,  resignation  or  surrender  of  a  Membership,  and 
(b)  full  payment  for  the  applicable  Membership  Bond  and  initia- 
tion fee  has  been  received  by  the  Club. 

An  Accepted  Applicant  who  within  seven  (7)  days  after 
receipt  of  notification  of  the  availability  of  a  Membership  has 
not  made  the  above  payment,  shall  have  his  name  removed  from  the 
waiting  list  which  is  established  for  Accepted  Applicants,  unless 
the  Board,  for  cause  extends  the  time  for  payment. 


-6- 


266 


(B)   Acceptance  to  Membership  after  December  31, 
1994 .   At  the  time  of  his  election,  an  Accepted  Applicant  shall: 

(i)   If  a  Membership  vacancy  exists,  be  accepted 
to  Membership  upon  payment  in  full  to  the  Club  for  the  applicable 
Membership  Fee  and  initiation  fee. 

(ii)   If  no  Membership  vacancy  exists,  be  accepted 
to  Membership,  subject  to  any  waiting  list  established  pursuant 
to  Section  2.18,  when  (a)  a  Membership  vacancy  occurs  by  reason 
of  the  death,  resignation  or  surrender  of  a  Membership,  and 
(b)  full  payment  for  the  applicable  Membership  Fee  and  initia- 
tion fee  has  been  received  by  the  Club. 

An  Accepted  Applicant  who  within  seven  (7)  days  after 
receipt  of  notification  of  the  availability  of  a  Membership  has 
not  made  the  above  payment,  shall  have  his  name  removed  from  the 
waiting  list  which  is  established  for  Accepted  Applicants,  unless 
the  Board,  for  cause  extends  the  time  for  payment. 

2.16   (A)   Membership  Bond.   The  Board  shall  require  the 
purchase  of  a  Membership  Bond  upon  acceptance  as  a  Regular,  Jun- 
ior or  Non-Resident  Member  on  or  before  December  31,  1994  as 
hereinafter  set  forth  in  Article  V. 


(B)   Membership  Fee.   The  Board  shall  require  the 
payment  of  a  Membership  Fee  upon  acceptance  as  a  Regular,  Junior 
or  Non-Resident  Member  after  December  31,  1994  as  hereinafter  set 
forth  in  Article  V, 


2.17  Initiation  Fee.   The  Board  shall  require  a 
nonrefundable  initiation  fee  to  be  paid  by  Regular,  Junior 

and  Non-Resident  Members  as  hereinafter  set  forth  in  Article  V. 

2.18  Waiting  List.   The  Board  may  establish  a  waiting 
list  for  Accepted  Applicants  to  whom  no  Membership  is  then  avail- 
able for  issuance.   The  Board  shall  regulate  all  aspects  of  any 
waiting  list  established,  including,  without  limitation,  priority 
on  the  list  and  the  obligations  and  privileges  of  and  payments, 
if  any,  to  be  made  by  persons  on  the  list. 


-7- 


267 


2.19  Resignations.   Any  Member  may  resign  his 
Membership;  provided,  however,  such  resignation  may  be  refused  by 
the  Board  unless  and  until  any  indebtedness  owing  to  the  Club  by 
such  Member  has  first  been  paid  in  full.   Such  resignation  shall 
be  submitted  in  writing  to  the  Board. 

2.20  Leave  of  Absence.   A  leave  of  absence  may  be 
granted  in  the  discretion  of  the  Board  upon  the  showing  of  spe- 
cial circumstances. 


2.21   Changes  in  Classes.   The  Board  of  Governors  may 
make  such  changes  in  the  number  of  classes  of  Membership  or  the 
number  of  Members  permissible  per  class  as  it  may  deem 
appropriate. 


ARTICLE  III 
GOVERNMENT 

3.1  Governing  Body.   The  management  of  the  Club  shall 
be  under  the  control  of  a  governing  body  of  nine  (9)  persons  to 
be  known  as  the  Board  of  Governors.   Five  (5)  persons  shall  be 
appointed  to  the  Board  by  Maplemoor,  Inc.  (hereinafter  "Appointed 
Governors") .   The  remaining  four  (4)  persons  shall  be  elected  by 
the  Members  of  the  HGC  as  hereinafter  set  forth  (hereinafter 
"Elected  Governors") .   The  Chairman  of  the  Board  of  Governors 
shall  be  appointed  by  Maplemoor,  Inc. 

3.2  Eligibility.   Only  Regular  Members  shall  be  eligi- 
ble for  election  to  the  Board  of  Governors.   Candidates  shall  be 
nominated  by  the  Nominating  Committee  appointed  by  the  Board  of 
Governors.   The  Nominating  Committee  shall  submit  the  names  to 
the  Board  Of  Governors  at  least  thirty  (30)  days  prior  to  an 
annual  meeting  in  which  an  election  is  to  be  held.   The  Board 
shall  post  the  list  of  names  at  the  premises  of  the  Club  on  a 
bulletin  board  and  mail  a  copy  of  same  to  each  Regular  Member  at 
least  three  (3)  weeks  prior  to  the  annual  meeting. 

Any  Regular  Member  in  good  standing  may  make  additional 
nominations  of  a  Member  or  Members  who  are  eligible  for  election 
to  the  Board  of  Governors  by  submitting  the  name  or  names  of  the 
candidates  in  writing  at  least  fifteen  (15)  days  prior  to  the 
annual  meeting  to  the  Board  of  Governors  which  shall  promptly 


-8- 


268 


post  such  names  on  the  bulletin  board  at  the  Club  upon  which 
names  of  others  for  such  office  have  been  posted  and  shall  mail  a 
list  of  such  names  to  each  Member  at  least  ten  (10)  days  prior  to 
the  annual  meeting. 

3.3  Term.   Elected  Governors,  shall  be  elected  for  a 
term  of  three  (3)  years.   An  Elected  Governor  may  be  elected  to 
succeed  himself  once  but  may  not  serve  more  than  two  (2)  consecu- 
tive terms  unless  his  first  service  on  the  Board  is  to  fill  the 
unexpired  term  of  another  Member  who  has  for  any  reason  left  the 
Board.   All  Members  of  the  Board  shall  assume  their  duties  imme- 
diately upon  election. 

3.4  Elections .   Elected  Governors  shall  be  elected  by 
the  Regular  Members  at  the  annual  meeting  at  which  time  the 
Chairman  of  the  Board  shall  appoint  two  (2)  tellers  who  shall  act 
as  inspectors  and  shall  tabulate  the  vote. 

Voting  shall  be  by  ballot  and  the  four  (4)  candidates 
receiving  the  highest  number  of  votes  shall  be  declared  elected. 
In  the  event  of  a  tie  vote  between  two  (2)  candidates,  the  Board 
of  Governors  shall,  at  its  next  regular  meeting,  or  at  a  special 
meeting  called  for  such  purpose,  decide  which  such  candidates 
shall  be  elected. 


Elections  shall  be  held  every  three  (3)  years  at  which 
time  all  four  (4)  Elected  Governors  shall  be  chosen. 

3.5  Vacancies.   Vacancies  in  the  Board  of  Governors 
among  the  Elected  Governors  shall  be  filled  by  the  Chairman  of 
the  Board  by  appointment,  subject  to  the  confirmation  of  the 
Board,  and  Members  so  appointed  shall  hold  office  until  the  next 
regular  election. 


3.6  Quorum.   Seven  (7)  Members,  no  less  than  four  (4) 
of  whom  shall  be  Appointed  Governors  shall  constitute  a  quo- 
rum of  the  Board  of  Governors. 

3.7  Rules  and  Regulations.   The  Board  of  Governors 
shall,  from  time  to  time,  make  such  rules  and  regulations  as  it 
may  deem  necessary. 


269 


3.8  Appointment  to  Committees.   The  Chairman  with  the 
approval  of  the  Board  of  Governors  shall  appoint  the  Members  of 
all  Committees  provided  for  in  this  Constitution  and  shall  like- 
wise have  power  to  establish  and  fill  such  other  standing  or  spe- 
cial committees  as  may  be  deemed  necessary  to  assist  in  the 
management  of  tha  Club. 

3.9  Power  to  Censure.  Suspend  or  Expel.   The  Board  of 
Governors  shall  have  power  to  censure,  suspend  or  expel  any 
Member  or  Members,  for  nonpayment  of  money  owing  to  the  Club  or 
for  conduct  prejudicial  in  their  judgment  to  the  good  name  or 
welfare  of  the  Club.   Ten  (10)  days'  notice  in  writing  shall  be 
given  to  the  Member  against  whom  charges  have  been  made,  at  which 
time  the  Member  may  appear  and  be  heard. 

3.10  Interpretation  of  Constitution.   The  Board  of 
Governors  shall  be  the  final  authority  for  the  interpretation  of 
this  Constitution  and  such  rules  and  regulations  as  may  be 
enacted. 


3.11  Meetings.   The  Board  of  Governors  shall  meet 

at  the  Clubhouse  or  a  designated  location  with  such  frequency  as 
they  may  determine.   Special  meetings  of  the  Board  may  be  called 
by  the  Chairman  upon  his  own  motion  and  must  be  called  by  him 
upon  the  written  request  of  four  (4)  Members  thereof. 

3.12  Resignations.  An  Elected  Governor  who  shall 
absent  himself  without  leave  from  three  (3)  consecutive  regular 
meetings  of  the  Board  may  be  deemed  by  the  Board  of  Governors  to 
have  resigned  therefrom. 

3.13  Removal  from  Office.   An  Elected  Governor  may  be 
removed  from  office  by  the  affirmative  secret  ballot  of  a  major- 
ity of  the  Members  of  the  Board  of  Governors  present  at  a  special 
meeting  of  the  Club  called  for  such  purpose,  at  which  time  such 
Governor  may  appear  and  be  heard. 

3.14  Control  and  Management.   The  Board  of  Governors 
shall  have  control  and  management  of  the  affairs,  funds  and  prop- 
erty of  the  Club,  and  shall  authorize  and  control  all 
expenditures;  they  shall  have  full  power,  and  it  shall  be  their 
duty  to  carry  out  the  purposes  of  the  Club  according  to  law,  and 
as  provided  in  the  Constitution,  and  to  make  and  enforce  all 


270 


rules  and  regulations  which  they  may  deem  desirable  for  the  wel- 
fare of  the  Club.   The  Board  of  Governors  shall  have  full  power 
to  make  and  levy  assessments. 

3.15  Proxy.   No  Member  of  the  Board  may  cast  any  ballot 
by  proxy  on  any  issue. 

3.16  Legal  Action.   No  legal  action  based  upon  any 
claim  shall  be  brought  against  the  Club  by  any  Member  unless  the 
claim  is  first  presented  in  writing  to  the  Board  of  Governors 
thirty  (30)  days  prior  thereto.   The  Member  shall  receive  ten 
(10)  days'  written  notice  of  a  hearing  on  such  claim. 

3.17  Membership  Meetings.   There  shall  be  an  annual 
meeting  of  the  Regular  Membership  on  the  first  Saturday  in  April. 
Special  Meetings  of  the  Regular  Membership  may  be  called  by  the 
Board  of  Governors  upon  reasonable  notice.   Action  by  the  Regular 
Membership  shall  be  upon  majority  vote  of  those  Regular  Members 
in  attendance  at  the  Annual  and/or  Special  Meeting.   There  shall 
be  no  quorum  required. 


ARTICLE  IV 
COMMITTEES 

4.1  The  Standing  Committees  of  the  Club  shall  be: 

Executive  Committee  Membership  Committee 

Green  and  Grounds  Committee  Nominating  Committee 

Entertainment  Committee  Golf  Committee 
Planning  Committee 

4.2  Executive  Committee.   The  Executive  Committee  shall 
consist  of  the  five  (5)  Appointed  Governors,  and  the  Chairman  of 
the  Board  of  Governors  shall  be  Chairman  thereof.   It  shall  con- 
vene at  the  call  of  the  Chairman  and  may  act  on  behalf  of  the 
Board  of  Governors  during  the  interim  between  Board  meetings.   In 
so  acting,  it  shall  have  the  same  authority  and  effect  as  the 


-11- 


271 


Board  itself;  provided  such  actions  shall  be  fully  reported  to 
the  Board  of  Governors  and  ratified  by  the  body  at  its  next  suc- 
ceeding meeting. 

4.3  Green  and  Grounds  Committee.   The  Committee  shall 
define  and  be  solely  responsible  for  all  policy  relative  to  care 
and  maintenance  of  the  golf  course  and  the  purchase  of  supplies 
and  equipment  relating  thereto.   The  Committee  shall  review  and 
monitor  the  professional  manner  in  which  the  Golf  Course 
Superintendent  implements  Committee  and  Club  policy. 

4.4  Entertainment  Committee.   The  Committee  shall 
initiate,  arrange,  promote  and  supervise  the  execution  of  a  pro- 
gram of  social  activities  and  entertainment,  in  cooperation  with 
the  management  and  the  scheduled  affairs  of  other  Committees. 
Expenditures  for  music,  performance,  decorations  and  publicity 
shall  emanate  from  funds  allocated  to  the  account  of  this 
Committee.   The  Entertainment  Committee  shall  work  with  such 
other  Committees  as  necessary  to  implement  its  programs. 

4.5  Planning  Committee.   The  Committee  shall  study  all 
trends  and  Club  usage  and  shall  develop  and  continually  update  a 
long-range  program  of  facilities  and  activities  for  the  Club. 
They  shall  advise  the  Board  of  Governors  concerning  all  proposals 
for  alterations  and  improvements  of  the  Club  buildings,  its 
facilities  and  grounds  and  other  properties.   In  general,  the 
Committee  shall  concern  itself  primarily  with  matters  to  be 
accomplished  two  (2)  or  more  years  in  the  future. 

4.6  Membership  Committee.   The  Committee  shall  have 
charge  of  all  matters  pertaining  to  Membership  applications, 
resignations,  cancellations,  suspensions  and  transfers  in  status; 
and  shall  make  recommendations  in  connection  therewith  to  the 
Board  of  Governors,  who  shall  have  full  and  final  authority  to 
act  with  respect  to  such  matters. 

4.7  Nominating  Committee.   The  Committee  shall  be 
appointed  by  the  Chairman  of  the  Board  of  Governors  and  consist 
of  at  least  five  (5)  Members  of  the  Club.   It  shall  nominate  can- 
didates for  the  Board  of  Governors  to  succeed  those  whose  term  is 
about  to  expire. 


-12- 


272 


4.8  Golf  Committee.   The  Committee  shall  have  adminis- 
trative charge  of  all  play,  including  intra-Club  and  inter-Club 
matches.   It  shall  have  the  power  to  establish  local  rules  con- 
cerning play  which  are  not  inconsistent  with  those  of  the  United 
States  Golf  Association.   It  shall  recommend  the  selection  and 
use  of  an  improved  system  of  handicaps  and  shall  exercise  control 
over  the  condition  and  awards  of  all  golf  trophies  and  other 
prizes.   It  shall  review  and  monitor  the  professional  manner  in 
which  the  Golf  Professional  implements  Committee  and  Club  policy. 
It  shall  regulate  Greens,  Caddy  Fees  and  Cart  Fees  subject  to  the 
approval  of  the  Board  of  Governors. 

4.9  Special  Committees.   In  addition  to  the  Standing 
Committees,  the  Chairman  of  the  Board  of  Governors  may  from  time 
to  time  also  create  such  other  Committees  as  he  may  deem 
necessary. 

4 . 10  Advisory  Committees.   All  Committees  are  advisory 
in  nature,  and  have  no  authority  to  act  without  express  approval 
of  the  Board  of  Governors.   All  Committees  shall  make  written 
reports  to  the  Board  of  Governors  as  often  as  required. 


ARTICLE  V 
FEES.  DUES  AND  ASSESSMENTS 

5.1  Business  Year.   The  business  year  of  the  Club  shall 
be  the  calendar  year. 

5. 2  Membership  Bonds.  Membership  Fees  and  Initiation 
Fees.   Upon  acceptance  to  Membership  on  or  before  December  31, 
1994,  each  Member  shall  be  required  to  purchase  a  Membership 
bond.   Upon  acceptance  to  Membership  after  December  31,  1994, 
each  member  shall  be  required  to  pay  a  Membership  Fee.   One-half 
(H)    of  the  Membership  Fee  shall  be  due  upon  acceptance  to  Member- 
ship and  one-half  (%)  of  the  Membership  shall  be  due  six  (6) 
months  after  acceptance  to  Membership.   The  schedule  of  the  cost 
of  the  Membership  Bonds  and  Membership  Fees,  as  the  case  may  be, 
for  each  classification  of  Membership  is  as  follows: 

(a)  Regular  $15,000.00 

(b)  Junior  $15,000.00 

(See  Paragraph  2.3) 

-13- 


273 

(c)  Associate  $    -0- 

(d)  Non-Resident         $  5,000.00 

(e)  Honorary  $    -0- 

In  addition  to  the  purchase  of  the  Membership  Bond,  all 
Regular,  Junior  and  Non-Resident  Members  shall  pay  a 
nonrefundable  initiation  fee  in  such  amounts  as  determined  by  the 
Board  of  Governors. 


No  play  on  the  course  will  be  permitted  until  the  initi- 
ation fee  is  paid,  and  in  the  event  the  initiation  fee  is  not 
paid  within  twenty  (20)  days  of  acceptance  to  Membership,  the 
Member  shall  be  deemed  to  have  withdrawn  as  a  Member  of  the  Club. 


Except  as  otherwise  noted  herein,  a  new  Applicant 
accepted  to  Membership  or  a  Member  transferring  to  another  clas- 
sification for  which  the  purchase  of  a  Membership  Bond  or  payment 
of  a  Membership  Fee  and/or  payment  of  an  initiation  fee  is 
required  shall  thereupon  become  obligated  for  payment  of  the  Mem- 
bership Bond  or  Membership  Fee  and/or  initiation  fee  amount  in 
full.   Except  however,  one-half  (%)  of  any  Membership  Fee  shall 
be  due  upon  acceptance  to  Membership  or  transfer  to  another  clas- 
sification of  Membership  and  one-half  (H)    shall  be  due  six  (6) 
months  after  acceptance  to  Membership  or  transfer  to  another 
classification  of  Membership.   In  the  event  that  such  payment  is 
not  made  within  twenty  (20)  days  of  the  date  it  becomes  due,  the 
Member  shall  be  deemed  to  have  withdrawn  as  a  Member  of  the  Club. 


Interest  shall  be  paid  on  the  Membership  Bonds  semi- 
annually at  the  rate  of  interest  provided  in  the  Membership  Bond. 
Redemption  shall  occur  within  ninety  (90)  days  of  the  date  of  the 
Member's  death  or  disability,  regardless  of  the  availability  of  a 
new  Member  to  take  his  place.   A  Member  shall  also  be  entitled  to 
receive  full  repayment  of  the  face  amount  of  the  Membership  Bond 
within  ninety  (90)  days  of  the  termination  of  his  Membership, 
provided  there  is  an  available  new  Member  to  take  the  place  of 
the  withdrawing  Member.   If  such  replacement  is  not  immediately 
available,  then  redemptions  shall  be  made  on  a  first 
withdrawn/first  redeemed  basis.   Interest  will  be  paid  on  the 
Membership  Bonds  so  long  as  they  remain  outstanding.   The 
Membership  Bonds  also  have  a  call  provision  granting  Maplemoor 
the  right,  at  any  time,  to  redeem  all  or  a  portion  of  the 
Membership  Bonds  on  a  ratable  basis.   In  any  and  all  events,  the 
Membership  Bonds  shall  have  a  fixed  maturity  date  of  twenty  (20) 


■14- 


274 


years  from  the  date  of  issue.   The  Membership  Bonds  will  not  be 
amortized  and  there  will  be  no  return  of  principal  to  a 
Membership  Bondholder  except  under  the  terms  for  redemption  which 
are  described  above.   The  interest  income  on  the  Membership  Bond 
will  be  paid  semi-annually.   A  form  1099  will  be  provided  to  the 
Member  in  the  amount  of  the  Member's  Membership  Bond  interest. 

Repayment  of  the  Membership  Fee  shall  occur  within 
ninety  (90)  days  of  the  date  of  the  Member's  death  or  disability, 
regardless  of  the  availability  of  a  new  Member  to  take  his  place. 
A  Member  shall  also  be  entitled  to  receive  full  repayment  of  the 
Membership  Fee  within  ninety  (90)  days  of  the  termination  of  his 
Membership,  provided  there  is  an  available  new  Member  to  take  the 
place  of  the  withdrawing  Member.   If  such  replacement  is  not 
immediately  available,  then  repayments  shall  be  made  on  a  first 
withdrawn/ first  repaid  basis. 

5.3  Annual  Dues.   All  Members  of  the  Club  shall  pay 
regular  dues  in  such  amounts  and  in  such  manner  as  determined  by 
the  Board  of  Governors.   Dues  are  payable  in  advance  as  follows: 
one-half  (%)  is  due  the  first  day  of  January  of  each  year  and 
one-half  (^)  is  due  the  first  day  of  May  of  each  year.   Dues 
shall  be  prorated  for  the  portion  of  the  half  year  within  which 
acceptance  to  Membership  occurs. 

5.4  Assessments.   The  Board  of  Governors  may  levy 
assessments  against  Regular  Members  as  it  deems  proper  for  funds 
required  for  Club  purposes,  provided  that  any  assessment  or 
assessments  which  in  the  aggregate  in  any  given  year  exceed  fifty 
percent  (50%)  of  the  annual  dues  for  Regular  Members  shall  not  be 
effective  unless  approved  by  a  majority  of  the  Regular  Members  in 
attendance  at  a  Membership  meeting  preceded  by  written  notice  to 
all  Regular  Members  mailed  thirty  (30)  days  prior  to  the 
Membership  meeting  stating  the  intent  to  make  such  assessment, 
the  amount  and  purpose  thereof,  and  the  effective  date  and  manner 
of  payment. 

5.5  Nonpayment .   Except  as  otherwise  noted  herein,  the 
Board  of  Governors  shall  cause  to  be  posted  by  the  I5th  of  each 
month,  the  names  of  and  the  amounts  due  by  Members  who  have 
failed  to  pay  within  one  (1)  month  after  due  any  dues,  fees, 
assessments,  penalties,  fines  or  debts  owed  the  Club.   If  such 
sum  and  all  debts  accruing  thereafter  are  not  paid  with  fifteen 
(15)  days  after  such  posting,  the  Board  of  Governors  shall  cause 
to  be  sent  to  such  delinquent  Member  a  notice  that  if  the  debts 
are  not  paid  within  ten  (10)  days  after  the  mailing  of  the 


-15- 


275 


notice,  the  Member  will  be  suspended.   If  the  debts  are  not  paid 
within  such  ten  (10)  day  period,  the  Member  is  automatically  sus- 
pended from  all  privileges  of  Membership  unless  the  Board  of 
Governors  accepts  the  Member's  explanation  as  justifying  the 
delinquency  in  which  case  the  Board  may  extend  for  not  more  than 
thirty  (30)  days  the  time  for  payment  of  the  debts  and  the  effec- 
tive date  of  suspension.   Prior  to  expulsion,  the  Board  of 
Governors  shall  reinstate  any  Member  so  suspended  upon  payment  of 
all  debts  owed  the  Club,  including  any  sums  for  dues  or  the  debts 
which  would  have  accrued  during  the  period  of  suspension.   Any 
Member  who  fails  to  pay  for  any  Membership  Bond,  Membership  Fees, 
fees,  dues,  penalties,  fines  or  other  debts  owed  the  Club  for  a 
period  of  three  (3)  months,  whether  or  not  the  Member  has  been 
suspended  shall  be  expelled  at  the  next  regular  or  special  meet- 
ing of  the  Board  of  Governors.   A  Member  whose  Membership  is  sus- 
pended due  to  non-payment  for  the  second  time  in  one  (1)  fiscal 
year,  shall  be  expelled  by  the  Board  of  Governors  at  its  next 
regular  or  special  meeting. 


ARTICLE  VI 
GUESTS 


6.1   Guests  Permitted.   The  use  of  the  privileges  of  the 
Club  by  guests  of  Members  shall  be  as  determined  by  the  Board  of 
Governors. 


6.2   Violation  of  Rules.   Any  guest  or  visitor  violating 
the  Constitution,  rules  or  regulations  of  the  Club  may,  in  the 
discretion  of  the  Board  of  Governors,  be  notified  that  he  is  no 
longer  able  to  enjoy  the  privileges  of  the  Club. 


ARTICLE  VII 
DISCIPLINE  AND  COMPLAINTS 


7.1   Suspension  and  Expulsion.   Any  Member  may  be  sus- 
pended or  expelled  for  cause  by  the  Board  of  Governors  on  the 
complaint  of  a  Member,  or  on  its  own  initiative.   Except  as  oth- 
erwise expressly  provided  in  this  Constitution,  no  such  action 
shall  be  taken  before  the  Member  shall  have  been  furnished  with  a 
written  statement  of  the  charges  preferred  against  him,  and  shall 


-16- 


276 


have  been  given  at  least  ten  (10)  days'  notice  of  the  time  when, 
and  the  place  where,  the  same  will  be  considered  by  the  Board. 
Every  such  Member  shall  have  the  right  to  appear  before  the  Board 
and  be  heard  in  answer  to  the  charges  before  final  actions  shall 
be  taken. 


7.2   Complaints.   All  complaints  by  Members  against 
other  Members  for  conduct  in  violation  of  Club  rules  or  other 
misconduct  bearing  on  a  Member's  suitability  for  continued  Mem- 
bership in  the  Club,  and  complaints  against  employees  of  the  Club 
for  whatever  reason,  shall  be  in  writing,  signed  and  dated  by  the 
complainant,  and  delivered  to  the  Board  of  Governors.   The  Board 
may  refer  such  complaints  to  appropriate  Committees  of  the  Club 
for  recommendations,  and  upon  receipt  of  such  recommendations 
take  appropriate  action. 


ARTICLE  VIII 
MISCELLANEOUS 


8.1   Amendments.   This  Constitution  and  any  rules  and 
regulations  promulgated  thereunder  may  be  amended  by  a  majority 
vote  of  the  Board  of  Governors. 


8.2  Notice.  Any  notice  required  to  be  given  to  the 
Board  of  Governors  of  the  Club  shall  be  sent  by  United  States 
mail,  postage  prepaid  addressed  as  follows: 

Board  of  Governors 
Huntsville  Golf  Club 
147  Hayfield  Road 
Shavertown,  PA  18708 

8.3  Prohibition  Against  Solicitation  Mailings.   Members 
shall  not  use  or  disclose  to  others  for  use  the  Membership  roster 
for  the  purpose  of  making  mass  or  general  mailings  for  business 
or  commercial  purposes. 

8.4  Gender.   Any  references  in  this  Constitution  to  the 
masculine  gender  shall  be  deemed  to  include  the  feminine  and  any 
references  to  the  feminine  gender  shall  be  deemed  to  include  the 
masculine. 


8.5   Club  Colors.   The  colors  of  the  Huntsville  Golf 
Club  shall  be  Hunter  Green  and  Gold. 


-17- 


277 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


EXHIBIT  "2" 


Bylaws    of    the    Westmoreland    Club. 


45-964    98-10 


278 


z  ° 

Be  ° 

3  S 

<  S 

>-  o 
«/> 

ul  "a 


■B    £ 


-  2  f      5  3 
E   ?  2      _  ^ 


S  I     III      §   5 


CO.*  ■£q:<  O  £»-^ 


03 

^ 

Q) 

^ 

D 

O 

i 

E   1 

>. 

E 

§  1 

"O 

ro 

1 

5  E 

3 

O 

o 

"O 

1- 

00 

o 

m  ~ 

u 

.a  2 

W     C 

>• 

■a 

;o    rS 

c 

3 

0  ~ 

1  d 

279 


2  E         Ex.  »  ' 

uj    5  • 

■^  Q. 


1 8  t; 


'5      3 


2     -D  2      o 
o       a 


.1    i     ° 


E   E. 


!  5 

"  I 

E  2 - 


O  ■£   "        ^     "D 

5  -a      as 


If    S    o  _ 

E  s  ^  S- 
i-c -°-§ 


280 


ui  ro      0  £ 


Jo 

i  i 
d)  -I 


:8!2 

i< 

i  a 

*  _i 

S  9 

r 


0,  O 

«  < 


li 

2  S 


o  o 


<  5 


9  .?      °  & 


S  O 


281 


0£   O 

o «-» 


„  o  5 


^  b 


moo 

16  6 

J  z  S 
o.  o  s 

?  Z    a: 


<o   I   s 

«  O  < 
=  g  z 


OFFICERS  &  BOARD  OF  GOVERNORS  -  I997 


S.ot.d  1.1.  ,0  rish.:  A  John  D.^ond.  >ec,^,ory 
prei.deni    M.choe'  H    Cook    l,„t  .,ce  , 

S..»di„9  r.h  ,„  ,.gt„:  RaulJ  s-eje/.  Jo.eph  , 
Mart,  G    Contreros,  Boord  of  Governor 


r:  Dovidt.  Dov,. 
Bru<e  I   Co., 
fronk  f  P    Conyngh. 
'  '^orn  photo    Jomei 


9ov« 


Or    goberl  O    Cler, 


282 


-  i 


siSsfi^^^ 


Si    t     s  i  s  -f  =  i  I  i  -  2  ^  : 

■""MiMiiiliiiin 


A  £  S  i 


i  .  si        '     t     ^ 

J    '-    ^  :i  III  „  1         *"    S    ^    3 

dllll^Ulj!    l|li|1||o|:ii|3||||| 

?      i^sss         ^83=      i:  ^  t  ^  a      s  s  ft  .  i^ 


si5 

tt.   5   3 


II 


§ 
2  I 


o  ■  li 

o>  SS  i» 

o  ^ 

e  O  S" 

<D  o  J 

«  5  S 

■D  0  a 

S  .?  ^^ 


9  S 

O     K 


g  § 
S  <  ^ 

•c  m  ^ 
2  5^ 
«  O  5 


O 


O  s 


o  i;; 


1  <  s 

2  _.    i« 

O 


z  »- 

<  - 

5    E 


283 


3 
8- 


,_      c 


Z    3 

O    2" 


i 

=5     2    -i 

d  ^  3 

5"s 

s 

O  s  s 

ip 

►-    u. 

z  i. 

5   1 

J 

K      o  ^  I 


£.  I  I  o 


S  «  ' 


I  *- 
o  f 


O    •  p 
3  ;^  S 


B  13 

<  c    1 

s  §  j 

o  I  ! 


284 


s  •  s    <  .  a 


S-?     >-f;?5     »•>- 


5  J  ' 


2^-    g|- 


§1 

ill 

ii 

Z  to 

°i.8 

sil 

B      - 

2  ^ 

>■  "?  S 

i|i 

X    .^ 

"1 

a. 

ill 
111 

z  '^  i 
=  t 

If 

VALLEY  COUNTRY  CLUB 

r  Av«nu«.  Conyngham,  PA 

(717)  78811 12 

1  exchange  Club  House  PrivU 
respective  clubs.  Please  con 
tion. 

^    £ 

^  - 

>  2 

i       »5l 

£l 

?  ? 

= 

b 

il 

1    Isl 

11^ 


?.  =  s 


.  -     s  "■  ^     < 


285 


3  5 " 


1     8  s  g  a 


3  2J 


Mi 


!X°    octJSS. 


&I  *. "  i  °' 

t  =  1 1 1-    >.- 


■  E  —  0* 


§<2 
-5  3 


111 
?  o.s 

ill  ill 


"    S  i  Q  Q      j," 


g  5 
S  E 

s  5 


■S  5 


§■  c-3     . 

■i!l| 

.  1 1  "S  = 


8  t 

1=  I 

.2  E 


O     EB    C 


.  s  e  i  2 

^§1  =  1  .  & 

Sz  ^  s 


Z     S  U  ■=  8  "3  £  =  „     J  ._ 

u    2  "^  -  o  '^"  *  -c  —   s  w      -S 

vy    ■35S-"  =  =-B„    - 

g|||o|5seGt?^ll  |l 

So    -SEScsi-oS    •Sc'"    t.i§»^3 

5  "I  if  file  i-g  t  lie!"! 


™   =  °  3  E  "-a  2 


I  §  'a  E 

'at! 


'  2.  "  * 


» JS  c  2  g^ 


i|3 

'  S  si 


"  E 
73  S 
2  S 


S I  •=  5  s 
"  "  "  S  5 


1.  * 


S  g  *  °  ^=  6  S  _-! 
II  -1  C  !-K  -  =" 

=  ^.  .1  £  ■§  £  s,  t  = 


286 


-^f-2^5      a,s:i*      1=14      l'^°'£'      .11 
>:    ."  ■g  -      "S=-      ^-g^"     =a'g?      °  ^ 


E':;-2    3  6 


•BIo    c    E    °  "2 


s      ouIesI-s 


»-|-f  53!  i'^p^  i.*slo  tlsll  o|     2>||s      I 


>5.^?   S--i-  S?-?' 

i-0^"£    fill's  6B  =  s 

i-s  5 -°  a';  s  g  «  s  5_^a 

iTSC*-?!       oSSoE  >.*0-=.= 


,||  ^Ei-si  £  s  s  s|  s' 


;  °  i  5  g  -   S  s  2  ^  - 


-  -  I  _ 
■£.5z  t 


^6=-5b        5  2^ 


.  U  I  I   =   E   S  ^ 


rS  n  6. 


|gL|i||     JSi^'^lil     1|s|||  •^'gill-gig      if, 
til'^lli    l-«ES?t    *l<ll^f^l  =  "Ik|     "I 


.Islilf  iij; 


cai'i^-SS      * 


287 


121 

=  o  K 


i^lil 


^■a  E  -a 


m^  ^-^^^^ 


55:3 

E  S_.'>: 


Jo 


gd  8<<5s  5l  a 
§  -■= 

V     a     2   "^     S  n 


11^ 


s . 

«  «  _- 


E  6  -a 


Pm  WO!  «  g,o        °  5  IS 


-J^: 


sJ  a| 


"   S  E 


,  ■=    i-  E'o        °-l  -■§    I  I  3 
■    »  -  •        0.0     "•  -  -■ 

I 


i  |S 


°- 1  s- . 


Is 


■a  g 


=  f= 


J  >.  E   „ 


■§ll 


oil  <2i^a^2'?^  >^~i 

=  >Eu         CS5  5         .S££         8.S8 


288 


a  <•  s  S 
a.  a.  a.  £ 


J5  «  «  w  tfi. 


^oi^ 


gar 

3- 

Sd" 


P»3 
Ou, 


|ll:f 


Q  a  3  s  S   . 


-  z 

1  i 


8.  S  S  » -5  ». 


£  s 

is   5£ 


8  ||d 

^  u  I  E  a 
■3^=6  = 
3   3   "•  o  S 


O-o       o  o 
«s5  6s 


S  1 


a.  cu  a.  0.  a. 


S-S        ^08836    I-  =-o 

C       C  '^   ^  M  M  Jt  M       Sons 


3  ££.a 


II  ^!- 


3==  .=  cc«o=5c„: 


289 


«i&  =  l 


•H I  ^ 

•2  3  8  S 


0^  s  s 
I  =  11 


;    iS' 


iS|-S 


05 


u  S 


'J     i 


I  =  g 

=  00 


•  2  ;2,  T=  I 


:j!  :t 


ill' 


P  y  ft  i  i  -  ■ 

*  c  *  -is 

u.  <  ii  6  -J 

00  ^  «•■- 

z"  <■=  = 

C  s  t  s 


)   6^ 


i-S  B' 


u   U     u  o  o  S 

u  5  53?  »^ 


5  *■  3  ■g 
5      c  —  , 

5  V  c  « 

:    g  ■£    "    S 

i  =  o  ■£  ^ 


I IS 


g  ^s 


III 


a  ^  =  5  g- 
1  £  I  ^  !- 


=    "    -    S    o    ^  ■?  " 


"    >— ^Jg^-S^E- 


»     L- 


-      is 

S     £-£0-     E-S 


151    y  i3  |£  o 


•3   J   I  c-SI   - 

E  °£  eg  °-  5. 

^    C   c  V    o    t    V 

^   ^o  "^   E   g-S. 

_;  £  U  M  S  O  ^  : 

S  3  g  3  i  -a   E 


290 


•s  s  i  =  1  ^  I  ? 

5? -to  "■■sis 

■fi  — -  i  »-  -   5  .S  ^ 

S  si  'a  f  tl  o  s  =" 
s5i|f  51 i 


s«     sills 

fi  s  §  ■§  *. 

2  .-0  <J  § 

II     -ess  |-.||sl 

lir'illlllli 


II 

S  3 


si 


E  .3- 


9  II 


t8ll?i£=|  -is  -If  — 


its 


o  8  e 
=  £  E 

-"8  1 

I  ?  li 
s  •§  J  ■ 


E  g 

9  I 


Ss 


51   lii 
I   111 


&0  - 
5  S-S 


SB 


lis 


e  0  s 

*"  "  ? 

£.3  = 

s  s 


E  -si  i  ■ 

•&-2  *  ? 
■8851 


sag 

I  3  3 

S  S  i  I 
1  S  8  " 


8"? 


§S 
11 


^1 


o  >;  a  '^ 

s  a  8  o 


>  s 


5  g-2  S51'8| 


5J|I 


■-SEO"'2o2c 
"2  i  I  S  g  §  II  € 


fJio 

5-s 


i  J  s    •    0  6-5     6 


I  S  a  b 
r  S,  85 


I  las 


3S 


*  i  ■ 


i!&j 


1^ 


<K-o    £^ 


Is 

gs. 

s-g 
if 

p 

Is 

So 


58 


as  s 


-   =•  S   S   E 


291 


g  i  i  "  ?  3  - 

i-  C  2  *f  5;   ^  -O 


;o  §   0.  a: 


io?   '5-is.Se-ag   £§=«>■  1 


>  •£  8  i  S  6- 


«  D  z 


^G  °"  >uoOs"2   o 


•2-S^   liislfi?^  i- 


S 

:;u|  = 

She 

3^ 

° 

g 

^■ 

S 

Is!  g 

"  ■s  E 

5  '^ 

1 
E 

z 

0 

—  w 

^ 

z 

0  s  0  - 

la 

E 

£■ 

c  >^  3 

-■^     3 

H 

;;  ^  3 

>^    Q. 

< 

0 
0 

il? 

T3  "^ 

1 

s 

<«c  I-""  SocD!: 


OwE-esf^E  0^5 


292 


■^la^ll^.^iiisl!^    !o|'i|^|| 


a? 


K  e  J   = 

(«  •^  O     ■S 


„'S>  s  t-°-S|::  >-!f|t:  H-H?  §  g°  s'a-s 

„        -  -  o  *:S-^        ESSjj6|sf^3gj:E°£B         _       _ 


3€  1 
2■3  8     s 


I-    -  j: 


numna 


^  3- 


i  S  O  E  ^ 


i  tS  i  S 


8  5  S!  g  1  i  § 

the  Second  Vi 
ililies  of  the  Fi 
ereof.  Otherwi 
list  Vice-Presid 
cnt  and  the  Bo: 
ing  standing  Co 
shall  be  tx-of  fi 

8 

-B  •=  u-  -6    i   ? 

-President 
c  responsi 
Section  2 
1  assist  the 
3  the  Presi 
>f  the  folio 
ce-Presidei 

ommitK 
jmmitte 
gc  Com 
brary  C 
mittee 

E   O   u    2   J    E 

First  Vice 
ime  all  th. 
rovided  in 
sident  shal 
ly  report  ti 
he  status  c 
Second  Vi 

issions  Co 
ate  Clubs 
tainmeni 
and  Beve 
rical  and 
nating  Co 

Ihe 
assi 
IS  pi 
Pre 
ical 
lot 
the 

^  t;   c    o    -   o 

_  =  -  g  ^  S  •§ 

<  <  u  u.  I  z 

<  g  C  a  g  C 

ty  or  deatI 
President 
Vice-Presii 
the  Second 
and  shall  p 
of  Governi 
mulees  of ' 
member: 

2  J5W.     i 


"5  i  "  = 


=   S   E     _  _ 


293 


iS: 


1 1  e. 

0  :=   -  • 


55  E  2- 

E  E  i-a- 


ill 


E  §  ■ 


;  w  8  : 


E   E 


65     ^ 


E     I  o 


^11 
I   E 


li 

§|g-22  §  ? 

°:?  2 

°sg    , 

1? 

E  °  § 

ip  of  the  Club  shall  c 
:iBss  B  and  Resident  C 
there  ahall  be  only  i 
membership;    provid 
bers  existing  on  May 
hip  classincation  as  N 
t  Class  B.  as  hereiofc 

III' 

a  E  8   S 
\c   >  -^ 

Is!! 

E   H  S   S 

Tibership  shall  consist 
s  of  age  and  who  res 
in  Wilkes-Barrcorwh* 
lin  the  aforesaid  area 

^1- 
S  "^ 

»l  5 
2-8  ! 
^2  2 

Z    c    = 

e  V  f 
III 

Section  S.  Resident  Membershi 
sist  of  Resident  Class  A,  Resident  C 
C.  Commencing  May  18.  1984, 
classification    of    Non-Resident 
however,  that  Non-Resident  mem 
:  1984.  may  maintain  their  members 
"Resident  Class  A  or  Non-Residen 

Section  6.  Resident  Class  A  Me 
all  members  who  are  40  years  of  as 
within  50  miles  of  the  Public  Square 
principal  place  of  business  is  with 

Section  7.  Resident  Class  B  Mei 
all  members  who  are  30  to  39  yeai 
within  50  miles  of  the  Public  Square 
principal  place  of  business  is  with 

S  E 
E  E 
E   = 


111  ■=  :     I 

z  £  k  -  ' 

"  2o  J  5 

£  ^2  II- 


6  ?  = 


<   E   §^ 


I     (Si 


3-5  t  °  t    P' 
e  E  R  I   ~ 


294 


S  3  53 

liiil 
11  in 

i  ^  li  t 

si  |l 


s  1 


s  B  =.  § 
a  S^s 

mi 


g      =5  2 


I  ^  .3  § 


II 


^1^1 -I  1 


1 5 
6  s 

if 


11 


1 


:^  ^ 


8111 
•5  -S  J 


E  S  » 

■lot 


if 

S  E  B  :^    5  V    .:;  5 

m    2  t;   -a  S  5    s* 

■8-S^  I?  It-!  i 


I  ^  1 2  L 


3^ 
III 


2* 


:U6 


lliiill-  iri^lll 


i  I  e  a  1  ■«  ■§  I :  ■; 


i-Ss 


So  8' 


^x.= 


s  e ' 


-eg 


S  s  E 


E   S- 


E  's  -  S  ;: 


_.   ;   E    ^  ~ 


^■s -1: 


:,SE 

Ez  £ 


£   n  -o 

-S 

^..-^■g  £■§  E 

1   2U 

DO 

3  »  "  S  "3  (J  U 

l^.-s 

"i 

S 

s 

^ 

12 

1 

=  ■;;  s  g  i  0  "5 

III 

3    _£ 

u 

0 

E 
0 

e 

jiillll 

>^  c  ~ 

si 

< 

u 

1 

a.       ^  ^  «  ^  0 

^  0  C 

^t 

■0 
■< 

■S  1  °  S  5  5  > 

0  "2  " 

^1 

~  0  S  ^  "  2  " 

i  1  ^ 

"  1 

=  C^y-S5E 

g  E 

C    0    « 
0  X)   -^ 

II 

iiiliil 

2-5-5 

^ 

E  Q  U   2   S  •£ 

295 


11 


§2 


^  I 

.1   S  si 


H 

is 


8  5 


-:3  is? 
-I    " 


li 


K5 


u  it 


E     c 

1  s 


:^==f  i 


■a  °  "i  13  !■ 
Ill  <3l  %'■ 
all  I!  ^ 

£  of    5  a  3. 


E  °  2  S-1  S-o 
•S  '3  K  u  3  >  5 
■8 

i 


as-   s 


'§  5  1^  i-- 


s  g  = 

-5  8 


S  S   !• 


E   g 


iS  2 
^  E 


■2-'2  r  S  I  - 


=  6.f 

oil 

>-  aE 


a  9  w 

"is 
-  5  s 

2  U  Q. 

IP 

1^  o 

U  3  2 

ill 


2 1 


5  «£<3 

=  t  t  < 


g<3  s 


E  §     E 


o»;2  :se5    Sa-    "-D 

l^ss  -oiu  S'-'o  ":: 

5s£  ^o„a£»2|^ 

'3C'S°  S^^     «>.o     ^T- 


5  2-cc         5^S     o~E-osg 
Hr^lr       &°*    S.s^    3  =  0 


ill lllld 1^1 


Jl=  •?■ 


;is-i: 


-•3        1    s^e8ES> 

%    =  ^  §5  :<3|1 

,  ,i.  g  S     ^   u   -  -  .£   a   I 


"  §  g  •=      J 

■SoS-S       5 


s  E  5  = 


?2  S.E6^ 

11 -lis 
i  .  §  «  g  E 


296 


A.i 

s.  a 

=  8 

SI 
^  X 

5i 


'^i  ^ 


6    a 

11 
is 


8 ;:  !i 


I  : 


Mall  1^11,  . 


-I  -1^    ^   5- 


5  8  S 

)3  So: 
I  i  I  • 


5  E  I-  5 , 


„  5  9  m  >. 
'  ?  V  *  ?  2 


I  1  S  6    5  - 


11. 


|o?«°l^ 


zi's  ;i-  35  i 


K  S  i  S  2 
,=  ;  8  e  s 


S  P  =   0   &  ■ 


297 


5  ;  s" 
Oca*' 

S  o  A  2 


Is 


3S 


r3s 


51 


I   IS 


2  -   0  . 


3  S£ 

S  5  0 

I  s  g 


E  »  as 


a  6  5. 
11? 

"11 


31 


='.1||E.&-S 
'  9  5  -i  S  g  I 


5  X£sl«  = 


11  J 


S"i 


5    _ 

ills 

nil 


3  .= 

S  E 

si 


^  frE 


-  -  i.  »  •=  2 

0*  o  m  <«  b  u 

-I  ■=-?■§  2 

i    u    0   _  -a  \o  2 

'sis  ^|| 0 


on 


§1=  5     go 


■o  £ 


•^  S I  *:!  =  5  -8     f  =t  "  ?.  '  " 
5|?iSVJ^s      .1:5  Sell 

^1 5  sill  I  :flliis 


ill! 

E   = 

5  £  ,  . 


■3    3 


1^ 

si 

E  - 


g  |S 

111 

*  i  s 

as 

s  X  S 


II: 


as  3 

5=1- 


ii: 


s-3  r 


Qi   uS  2     6 


£  S  2 

3  »  I 
II  u 


I' 


S    5  =     -  *   C 


11  =  S 

a   «  §   S 


S  =o 


f  s 


■o   E  I 
S(3u 


J  ^D  s  eo 
z  „  s  >.  ".  ■§ 

e  S  5  £  _■  <5 


;  o  s  - 


in 


11  a 


Ss|"  £=  S;  s3j 


Ills? 


298 


«  as 


i-5         -ajn???"!  "  I   S^  2=  ?S   -f -2.S  §■§   o   - 


!  5     e 


:  -  3  £■  I  • 
-   X  ^  E   » 


P2 


6   t  3  c  I 


L°2p5-£        m  O -S  So  6  5 -5  ™  E  6  5  o  S  O  " 


■5  2  E 


lis 

5  S  o 

E    '.   o 


;  u  =:  -I  i  = 

CI  g:i  S  E 


■■^-&e1  = 


C  =  *  K  " 

J  E  S  =  m 

-  1  g  S  o 

=  :3  =  1 E 


5  sQ  -  IS: 


=   E 


299 


■  5  2  C  2  - 

s  ^  I  ?  II I 

■8  is  I -•■S?"  «  =  '*  -• 


'  O  JS  "B  ^  o    ^ 


■£  S-E  ■ 


c    -o  =  5  E    -  5  "  J  «,S  i  S  S  .-  V  .2 


as  Eg  o|oE  115=16^=1 -g- 


5s^ 

E   E 


^  2  I 


So^ 


"»-a.|J£^£o  =  ^cg       ii  o  „- a  S    Ji  j;  lis      ii  "  ■»  * 

5o,&s.s5'oog.iSi:saS.-£-£l       s  cl-  5  -s  ^i  g^ 


.1 1 

0  8 


5  E 


•s-S. 


!  («  -   3 

IK  -2 

'  U  3   X 

iff  !■" 


S3 


P  2 
s   z 


<2  P 


o  -  5  :2  °  E   > 


a.  J  u  c  S 

O   5   o  P    tJ    =  J 
=   2  5   »   V    ;;    : 


;  E  "  6 


-  o 


300 


i  Jc  V  s  3  6 


2  ^   S     6   E 

3  -     C        C     C 


'■SlEoirssii 
■8  g-^'J      ^   - 


E     S  ■ 


i  S  --  "^  ■£  Ml  ■£ 

"  -   „    .  E  •=  ::  u. 

S  "S  *>  «  S  -o  ^ 

i    S  1'^  I   i  Si  g 


B|§5Et,E:is=  :^E 

.2j&3.-iE   =   ^^      >Jii 


2-  oou 


,g^-i:;^i=si: 


10||| 


"     "  S     E   5 


™  c - ?1 S  "  = 

.5EiH2i5i 


"     Ei. 


t  E   "■ 


c.  o   if  -^  5<  =  ■£ 


I   C   o. 


H   E  S 
<   o  < 


o    < 

p  ° 


- !  i  =-§  e' 


301 


I  1  I  .  *  i 


•  o 

i  o  - 


-    E 
"■  <    5  J   " 
ci  "2  "P   ~ 


^     ~      E     I      i       ;       I     t     I       C       C       C-     t.    J      S     I      II     I     1     ^     1    ^     1     1 


."  S       o  J  ff  Sot  |€. 


!  S  i  S 

,   C   E  ■= 

:*,=!  =  ■ 


„■"'-     gS^     to- 


a     c  -=  E  -3  ^ 


E  32 


302 


T       '•  "^  I  o"  <  A  g    -  *  ^  ?  i  f  .  i  i  ^  1  *.  =  s  ^  c  i  ^-  <  1 1  .  ^-  j 
girls?!     s^ElsjIlcefffEEysj-jsI-jl 

CD 

s 

I  ^ 

S         9■r°i■i■?^5°z5l|°^=";^^f^|l6|-l       S|5 

^  1 1  ° ^  - 1 !"  1 ! "  - °  I II  ? -H    ■  A.   1  ^    ^  i *.  1 

I "^  1 1 1 1 1  i  1 1 1 1  i  I  i  i  1 1  i  1 1  ii  I  i  I     i  1 1  I 


■£   13 
a  o    S.  o. 

<  «  I  1 5  I  ^  I  ^  g 

S  O   -  i  =  s  ^  I 

_   o    E    E    E    E    e  I  - 

J    5    J-II.I.I.-I5  . 


o   S 


i.^    .      E>    i    " 

t    I   I    I  ^   "2"   S  :=    S  I  ^   1   ^    • 
*    I  '^^  Q   o  Q   i;   5   ^    c   I    5    5   t 

a  a  a  a  o,q   oqooqooo 


5    ic    lsl;^    ssl* 
?  r  I  ?  --  = '  -I  I  -  s  ^. :  ? « ^ 


303 


I  *  ° .  °  •  t 


S  6 

J  ,  S  _ 

o  E  r  -o  O 

(.  C  «  O     «     . 


S  i   5 


I  J  ■£  = 

O  O   S    5 


S   o   o 
•  s  -, 


I  S  s  s  -s  S  S  §  5  •     3 
oooooooodo 


O   IS 

="    E   ^    ;    ; 
XXIII 


^  *  1 1 1 :  !  i  J 1. 

i  I  ^'  =  1 1  '^  °-  i  I  ^ 


-  *  I 


t    i    t    *    J 
I   I   I   I   I 


304 


^s  E  1: 


i  =  »  ;  >=  S 


g       IIIISSSSSSS    ZZZZ2ZZZZZZ2Z  00000006 

a 
S 

UJ 

I     '  ^  1  i  i  L  -  ^    - ,  -« .  1  :i : «     < .  1 .  e .  -   — .   I 

sllllllllllssssssssslllll  11  i  i  s  i  i  i  i 


'     o    i 

^  ■Si 


II  e|| 
^  I  i  I  ^ 

I I I  i  ! 


305 


I o -       11     ^  *  i  *  c . f  , 5  <  r  <  <   s  ^ I 

"li.<irIiilitll3liUliit|l;i^i!^^l 


■9   2    w  .•>  5 


I 

°  J  »  ; 


llJJlilllJ* 


:  i 


i^i 


>--dZ||   -,       «" 


ii  i  ii  Sii?  t  t  i  'tis 


1 1  i  s  * 

"  =  I  I  c 


»„  -"  =   < 

.  C  ;  O  -D 


S  I  II  I  I  I  S  S  1 


I  -8  5  i  i  I  J  '^.  i  ?  1   i  ' 


s  -  ^ 


5^-5  ;■  O  S  ■?  ■?  " 
-"^"5  —  =  '5  2.1  '  Z  m  £  S  1 


"ill 


2  < 


306 


1  i  !  :s  ^  I  1 1  I  *  1  i  I  X 
I  I  I  I  <  A  s  4  5  I  I  I-  f,  I 

^    "!  -s  -J   E    E    6    i    E    c    c    »   ~   '" 


iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 


i   ^   -*    © 
J  ■£  I  S 

I  5  -J  ^ 


5SSSS555S 


-  S     .  >  "   ?       «    •   •   i  2  5  u   °  £  5     -   E  5  ■=        £    S   .     .    .,        s  _■  •" 


2    ? 

.  o      s 


^""fxi-s||z_5c8§,S5f 

lifilliJJllll  ll  I  I  Ir^gll  I  mil 


5  < 

SEE 


X      ?    S 


307 


V    E 


1 1 1  i  1  I   E   1 1   I 

s  s  ^  ^  ^    ^     I     Is     > 


z       1|     ;e    -o^_     e-sjo 

O  Si         °  S        S   -^    *    t         2  5-nc 


Z    Z  O   O  5    oe 


i    E 


2^5         '^  S   -5 


SSSSSSSSSSS  I 


S        5S  -?Ti^  §       .-SS 

^  ■^  -  I  IllllliJ  IIId 


E  S  ^  . 
°  =  E  J  -5 
o  J  I  *  ° 


s  I 


308 


i * :  JiS <  s5 
*  in  I ? 1 s : 


j5  I  2  s  "  I  '^ 

s  ?  s  I  •  .■  . 

■5  i  -5  ■?  ,•  ?  1 

5  5  5  5  5  S  S 


E    5    2  -« 
=  6  s  i 


c   O    „   - 

I  S  s  I 


E    S   r 


ss  S  I 


I  o  --  6  ' 
'  I  -  I  ^. 


X    X    Z     X 


^.  !■ » 


o  s 

5    o 


S    J  s 


•  si 


Q   5   O   S    o 

s  1  s  s  " 


309 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


EXHIBIT    "3" 

uvcc   dsk 

HVCC. 1 

Bylaws  of  the  Wyoming  Valley  Country  Club. 


CONSTITUTION  AND  BY-LAWS 

ARTICLE  I 

NAME 

The  name  of  the  organization  shall  be  THE  WYOMING  VALLEY 
COUNTRY  CLUB. 


ARTICLE  II 

OBJECT 

This  Club  is  organized  to  promote  social  recreation 
among  its  Members  through  encouraging  and  stimulating  an  interest 
in  golf.   It  is  a  corporation  which  does  not  contemplate  monetary 
gain,  incidental  or  otherwise,  to  its  Members. 


ARTICLE  III 

MEMBERSHIP  CLASSIFICATIONS 

SECTION  I. 

The  membership  of  the  Club  shall  consist  of  the 
following  classifications: 

A.  SENIOR  -   All  Members  over  the  age  of  twenty- 
five  (25)  .   Seniors  shall  be  the  only  voting 
Members,  and  the  only  ones  entitled  to  hold  office 
in  the  Corporation.   Senior  Members  in  good  standing 
shall  be  the  only  Members  considered  to  have  equity 
in  the  Club. 

B.  SPOUSE  -  The  spouse  of  any  Senior  Member  in  good 
standing,  and  the  spouse  of  an  Associate  who  married 
prior  to  his  or  her  twenty-sixth  (26th)  birthday. 

If  the  Senior  Member  or  Associate,  and  his  or  her 
spouse  shall  be  divorced,  then  the  spouse  shall  no 
longer  be  a  Member  of  the  Club. 

C.  ASSOCIATE  -  Sons  or  daughters  of  a  Senior  Member 
between  the  ages  of  twenty-one  (21)  and  twenty-five 
(25)  years  of  age.   Upon  marriage,  prior  to  their 
twenty-fifth  (25th)  birthday,  he/she  may  apply  for 
Senior  Membership. 


310 


Associate  Members  who  have  paid  one  (1)  year's 
associate  dues  must  apply  for  Senior  Membership 
before  reaching  their  twenty-sixth  (26th)  birthday. 
If  accepted,  they  automatically  become  Members 
regardless  of  a  waiting  list  and  no  initiation  fee 
will  be  charged. 

D.  JUNIOR  -  Children  of  Senior  Members  or  children  of 
their  spouse.   They  may  have  automatic  golfing 
privileges  until  their  twenty-first  (21st)  birthday. 

E.  CLERGY  -  Open  to  ordained  clergy  of  all  faiths. 

F.  SOCIAL  -  Those  Members  entitled  to  the  full 
facilities  of  the  Club  but  do  not  have  golfing 
privileges,  except  for  one  (1)  round  of  eighteen 
(18)  holes  per  month,  upon  payment  of  the  required 

Green  Fee. 

G.  NON-RESIDENT  -  Any  Senior  Member,  in  good  standing, 
moving  his  or  her  permanent  residence  beyond  a 
seventy-five  (75)  air-mile  radius  from  the  Clubhouse 
may  apply  to  the  Board  for  transfer  to  this 
category.   Permanent  residence  to  mean  in  this 
instance  year  round  living  at  the  new  address. 

H.   HONORARY  -  May  be  granted  under  extraordinary 
circumstances  for  service  to  the  Club,  but  is 
limited  to  one  (1)  in  any  given  year.   Subject  to 
majority  Board  approval. 

I.   WIDOW/WIDOWER  -  The  surviving  spouse  of  a  Senior 
Member. 

J.   SPECIAL  -  All  those  previously  Members  under  the 
category  heretofore  known  as  LADIES  who  shall  not 
elect  to  become  Senior  Members,  and  who  maintain 
membership  without  interruption  shall  remain 
Members  in  this  classification. 


SECTION  II. 

The  Board  of  Governors,  under  the  powers  granted  by 
these  By-laws,  may  limit  the  number  of  memberships  available  in 
any  of  the  classifications  when  they  feel  that  it  is  in  the  best 
interest  of  the  Club  to  do  so. 


311 


SECTION  I 


ARTICLE  IV 
APPLICATION  AND  ELECTION 


A  Candidate  for  membership  must  first  be  proposed 
by  a  Senior  Member,  in  good  standing,  acting  as  the 
Candidates'  Sponsor.   The  Sponsor,  by  letter  to 
the  Secretary  of  the  Board,  shall  not  only  recommend 
the  Candidate,  but  also  state  his  or  her  willingness 
to  orient  his  or  her  Candidate  regarding  course  and 
Club  rules.   Upon  the  acceptance  of  the  Candidate, 
in  his  or  her  letter,  the  Sponsor  shall  list  three 
(3)  other  references  on  behalf  of  his  or  her 
Candidate;  one  (1)  of  whom  shall  be  another  Senior 
Member  in  good  standing. 

The  Secretary,  upon  receipt  of  the  proposal,  shall 
immediately  notify  the  Membership  Chairman.   The 
Membership  Committee  shall  then  contact  the  four  (4) 
references  as  to  the  Candidates'  financial 
responsibility,  character,  integrity  and  any  other 
information  the  Committee  may  deem  necessary.   If 
the  Membership  Committee  finds  that  a  Candidate  is 
not  worthy  of  membership,  the  Chairman  shall  so 
inform  the  Board. 

Once  a  Candidate  is  screened,  and  recommended  for 
acceptance  by  the  Membership  Committee,  he/she  must 
appear  before  the  Board  of  Governors  prior  to 
approval.   Seven  (7)  Members  shall  constitute  a 
quorum  for  purpose  of  acceptance  or  rejection.   Two 
(2)  negative  votes  by  any  Member  of  the  Board  will 
reject  the  acceptance  of  any  Candidate.   If  a 
Candidate  is  rejected  by  the  Board,  he/she  may  not 
reapply  for  membership  for  a  period  of  two  (2) 
years.   Upon  approval  by  the  Board,  an  accepted 
Candidate's  name  shall  be  posted  on  the  bulletin 
board  for  a  period  of  two  (2)  weeks  for  scrutiny  by 
the  general  membership. 

Any  Senior  Member,  in  good  standing,  may  write  a 
letter  to  the  Secretary  objecting  to  the  admission 
of  any  Candidate  for  membership.   If  two  (2)  or  more 
such  letters  are  received,  it  will  be  necessary  to 
so  inform  the  Sponsor  of  the  Candidate;  who,  in 
turn,  shall  have  the  right  to  appear  before  the 


-3- 


312 


Board  to  support  his  or  her  Candidate.   The  Board, 
sitting  as  a  Committee  on  Admissions,  shall  then 
re-evaluate  the  Candidate  and  either  accept  or 
reject  the  plea  of  the  Sponsor.   Two  (2)  negative 
votes  will  reject  the  Candidate. 

E.  Once  a  Candidate  has  been  screened,  approved  and 
accepted  for  membership,  his/her  admission  is 
automatic,  providing  there  is  not  a  waiting  list 
for  admission.   In  the  event  there  is  such  a  list, 
the  Candidate's  name  shall  be  placed  on  said  list 
in  order  of  his/her  date  of  application,  until  such 
time  as  an  opening  in  the  classification  is 
available.   However,  this  does  not  obligate  the 
Committee  on  Admissions  to  necessarily  accept  those 
heading  the  waiting  list  in  preference  to  applicants 
who  may  have  been  placed  on  the  waiting  list  at  a 
later  date. 

F.  Upon  admission,  all  fees  such  as  initiation  and  the 
pro-rated  amount  of  the  yearly  dues  must  be  paid 
prior  to  the  use  of  Club  facilities. 

G.  All  Candidates  must  be  informed  of  their  status  as 
to  rejection,  acceptance  on  a  waiting  list,  or 
admission  within  ninety  (90)  days  of  their  date  of 
application. 


SECTION  II, 


A.  The  Board  of  Governors  may  transfer  a  Member  from 
one  (1)  membership  classification  to  another 
classification  in  the  event  of  an  age  or  residence 
change  by  a  said  Member.   Existing  dues  and  initia- 
tion fees  shall  be  changed  as  of  the  date  the  Board 
makes  this  determination  either  on  its  own 
authority,  or  at  the  request  of  the  individual 
Member . 

B.  The  Board  of  Governors  may  declare  any  category  of 
membership  of  the  Club  to  be  closed  at  any  time, 
when,  in  its  discretion,  it  is  in  the  best  interest 
of  the  Club  to  do  so. 

C.  At  any  time  the  membership  is  declared  to  be 
closed.  Candidates  may  be  encouraged  to  apply  for 
membership  and  be  placed  on  the  waiting  list  until 
such  time  as  the  membership  shall  be  declared  open. 


-4- 


313 


SECTION  I. 


SECTION  II. 


ARTICLE  V 
RESIGNATION  AND  LEAVE  OF  ABSENCE 


Any  Member,  in  good  standing,  and,  with  no  indebted- 
ness to  the  Club,  may  resign.   The  resignation  shall 
be  in  writing,  addressed  to  the  Board  of  Governors, 
and  must  be  filed  with  the  Treasurer  to  release  the 
Member  from  liability  for  dues.   Any  indebtedness 
incurred  for  any  phase  of  the  Club  operation  prior 
to  the  date  of  receiving  said  resignation  at  the 
Club  office  will  be  considered  a  liability.   All 
Senior  Members  resigning  or  otherwise  losing  their 
membership  shall  forfeit  their  equity  in  the  Club. 

Members  who  resign  and  who,  at  the  time  of  resigna- 
tion, were  in  good  standing  may  be  re-elected  to 
membership  by  the  Board  with  payment  of  one-half  (%) 
of  the  then  current  initiation  fee  by  the  following 
procedures  outlined  in  Article  IV. 


A.  Any  Member,  in  good  standing,  with  no  indebtedness 
to  the  Club,  may  request  a  leave  of  absence  due  to 
illness  of  prolonged  duration.   The  conditions  for 
granting  a  leave  of  absence  will  be  the  same  as 
those  outlined  above  in  Article  V,  Section  I  A  on 
resignation  except  the  Member  requesting  leave  shall 
be  carried  on  the  roll  as  "on  leave"  and  his/her 
dues  shall  be  suspended  until  the  termination  of 
his/her  illness  or  the  Member  requests,  in  writing, 
reinstatement  to  active  status. 

B.  The  Board  of  Governors,  at  its  discretion,  may  con- 
sider a  leave  of  absence  for  a  reason  other  than 
illness  if  there  are  extenuating  and  unusual 
circumstances  surrounding  such  a  request  by  a 
Member . 

C.  In  no  case  will  leave  be  granted  for  more  than  one 
(1)  year.   If  more  time  is  needed,  a  new  request 
must  be  submitted  by  the  Member  or  someone  desig- 
nated to  act  on  his/her  behalf. 


-5- 


314 


ARTICLE  VI 

SUSPENSION  AND  EXPULSION 

SECTION  I. 

Any  Member  violating  any  rules  of  the  Club  or  guilty  of 
any  misconduct,  and  especially  any  Member  whose  conduct  shall  be 
injurious  to  the  character  or  interest  of  the  Club,  may  receive  a 
Letter  of  Reprimand  with  a  warning  or  be  suspended  or  expelled  by 
the  Board  of  Governors.   No  Member  shall  be  suspended  or 
expelled  without  an  opportunity  to  be  heard.   In  the  event  the 
Board  agrees  that  suspension  and/or  expulsion  is  being 
considered,  the  Member  must  be  notified  by  certified  mail  that  a 
hearing  will  take  place  within  ten  (10)  days  of  notice  to 
him/her.   The  notice  will  list  the  time,  place,  date  and  charges. 

SECTION  II. 

If,  after  the  hearing,  the  Board  agrees  to  a  suspension, 
said  suspension  shall  automatically  be  for  a  minimum  of  two  (2) 
weeks.   Suspension  will  be  valid  when  a  majority  of  the  Board 
present  so  votes. 

If  the  Board  agrees  to  expulsion,  it  shall  be  valid  when 
a  two-thirds  (2/3)  majority  of  the  total  Board  so  votes. 

SECTION  III. 

All  suspended  or  expelled  Members  shall  be  denied  all 
Club  privileges  and  denied  access  to  Club  property. 

Expelled  Members  shall  be  dropped  from  the  rolls,  and  may 
never  again  apply  for  membership  to  The  Wyoming  Valley  Country  Club 
and  it  shall  be  so  recorded  in  the  minutes  of  the  Club. 


ARTICLE  VII 

FEES  AND  DUES 

SECTION  I. 

The  Board  of  Governors  shall  have  the  power  to  determine 
the  annual  dues  and  golf  fees;  to  establish  initiation  fees;  to 
set  assessment  rates;  and,  to  levy  any  charges  it  may  deem  neces- 
sary to  maintain  the  financial  stability  of  the  Club. 


-6- 


315 


SECTION  II. 

The  fiscal  year  will  be  considered  as  the  first  of 
October  of  the  calendar  year  until  the  30th  of  September  of  the 
following  calendar  year. 

A.  The  annual  dues  are  payable  on  the  first  of 
October,  however,  the  amount  due  may  be 
pro-rated  on  a  schedule  approved  by  the  Board 
of  Governors,  except  for  new  Members  who  shall 
pay  all  fees  as  directed  under  Article  IV, 
Section  I  F  of  these  By-laws. 

B.  Senior  Member  applicants  accepted  after  July 
1  pay  half-year  dues,  plus  full  initiation 
fees  for  that  fiscal  year. 

SECTION  III. 

When  the  dues,  or  any  other  indebtedness  to  the  Club, 
remains  unpaid,  by  a  Member,  for  a  period  of  twenty  (20)  days 
following  the  month  in  which  said  indebtedness  occurred,  the  Mem- 
ber shall  be  considered  in  arrears.   The  Treasurer  shall  then 
send  a  second  statement  to  the  Member  advising  him  or  her  that 
the  Member's  name  shall  be  posted  unless  the  account  is  paid 
within  ten  (10)  days  from  the  date  of  such  notice.   At  the  end  of 
this  ten  (10)  day  period,  the  Member  will  then  be  in  arrears  for 
thirty  (30)  days,  and,  if  his/her  debt  is  still  unpaid,  he  or  she 
shall  be  posted  by  the  Treasurer.   ONCE  THE  MEMBER'S  NAME  IS 
POSTED,  HE  OR  SHE  WILL  BE  CONSIDERED  DELINQUENT  AND  SHALL  BE 
DENIED  ALL  PRIVILEGES  OF  CLUB  MEMBERSHIP,  INCLUDING  ADMISSION  TO 
THE  CLUB  PROPERTY. 

The  Treasurer  shall  notify  the  Board  of  Governors  when 
Members  are  posted.   When  the  indebtedness  of  a  Member  remains 
unpaid  for  ten  (10)  more  days  after  being  posted,  or  a  total  of 
forty  (40)  days  following  the  month  in  which  said  indebtedness  is 
incurred,  the  Board  of  Governors  shall  then  declare  such  member- 
ship to  be  forfeited,  and  the  delinquent  shall  thereupon  cease  to 
be  a  Member  of  the  Club.   Any  member  thus  forfeiting  a  membership 
may  be  considered  for  reinstatement  upon  payment  of  all  arrears, 
and  requesting,  in  writing,  that  the  Board  of  Governors  reinstate 
him  or  her.   The  individual  concerned  shall  not  become  an  active 
Member  until  he  or  she  is  so  advised  that  the  request  is  granted. 
A  favorable  vote  by  the  Board  of  Governors  present  at  any  meeting 
of  the  Board  will  be  necessary  for  reinstatement. 


-7- 


316 


When  circumstances  seem  to  justify  such  action,  the 
Board  of  Governors  may  authorize  for  non-payment  of  indebtedness 
when  said  Member  is  known  to  be  ill  or  absent  from  home. 


ARTICLE  VIII 
OFFICERS 


SECTION  I, 


The  officers  shall  be  a  President,  First  and  Second 
Vice-Presidents,  Secretary,  Treasurer  (who  will  also 
be  the  Finance  Chairman),  four  (4)  Governors,  and 
the  respective  chairmen  of  the  Golf,  Green,  House 
and  Membership  Committees  provided  for  in  Article  X 
of  these  By-laws,  and  these  officers  shall  consti- 
tute the  Board  of  Governors. 

Quorum  -  At  all  meetings  of  the  Board,  the 
majority  of  the  Officers  in  office  shall  be  neces- 
sary to  constitute  a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of 
business,  and,  the  acts  of  a  majority  of  the 
officers  present  at  a  meeting  at  which  there  is  a 
quorum  shall  be  the  acts  of  the  total  Board  of 
Governors. 


SECTION  II. 

In  case  of  any  office  becoming  vacant  for  any  cause,  the 
Board  of  Governors  shall  fill  the  office  by  appointment  for  the 
remainder  of  the  term. 

SECTION  III. 

Effective  in  fiscal  year  1987/88  and  thereafter,  officers' 
terms  of  office  shall  be  as  follows: 

The  President,  First  Vice-President  and  two  (2)  of 
four  (4)  Governors  shall  be  chosen  at  an  annual 
meeting  and  shall  hold  office  for  two  (2)  years. 
The  Second  Vice-President,  Secretary  and  Treasurer 
shall  be  chosen  at  the  annual  meeting  and  shall  hold 
office  for  one  (1)  year. 


-8- 


317 


SECTION  IV. 

Above  officers  shall  be  chosen  at  the  annual  meeting 
by  a  majority  of  votes  cast  by  the  Senior  Membership  present  and 
by  way  of  absentee  ballots  cast.   Election  need  not  be  by  ballot 
except  in  cases  where  an  opposing  slate  has  been  posted. 

SECTION  V. 

The  President,  or  in  his/her  absence,  the  First  or  Sec- 
ond Vice-President  shall,  at  least  thirty  (30)  days  prior  to  the 
annual  meeting,  appoint  a  committee  of  five  (5)  Members,  not  more 
than  two  (2)  of  whom  shall  be  officers  of  the  Club,  and  the  com- 
mittee shall  nominate  a  slate  of  candidates  for  all  vacancies 
about  to  occur.   The  proposed  candidates  will  be  posted  on  the 
bulletin  board  at  least  twenty  (20)  days  before  the  date  of  the 
annual  meeting.   Any  five  (5)  Senior  Members  may  nominate  other 
candidates  for  the  same  offices,  but  the  names  of  such  candidates 
must  be  posted  on  the  bulletin  board  at  least  ten  (10)  days  prior 
to  the  annual  meeting. 

The  names  of  the  Senior  Members  placing  the  candidate's 
name  or  names  in  nomination  must  be  signed  on  the  posting.   No 
Member  shall  be  eligible  to  any  office  unless  nominated  and 
posted  as  aforesaid. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Club  shall  have  ballots  prepared 
containing  all  the  names  so  posted,  and  furnish  the  same  to  the 
Members  at  the  opening  of  the  meeting  when  the  election  is  to 
take  place.   If  there  is  no  slate  or  candidates  for  office  in 
opposition  to  those  candidates  recommended  by  the  nominating 
committee,  voting  need  not  be  by  ballot. 

The  Secretary  shall  also  have  available  a  current  list 
of  Senior  Members,  in  good  standing,  all  of  whom  shall  be 
entitled  to  one  (1)  vote. 

If  there  is  more  than  one  (1)  candidate  for  any  office, 
voting  shall  be  by  ballot.   If  voting  by  ballot,  the  President 
shall  appoint  three  (3)  Judges  of  Election  from  the  Senior 
Membership.   They,  in  turn,  will  name  one  (1)  of  their  Members  as 
Chairman.   None  of  the  judges  shall  be  candidates  for  office. 
The  judges  shall  take  all  action  necessary  to  ensure  fairness  to 
all  concerned,  to  tally  the  votes  and  announce  the  results  of  the 
election  to  the  membership. 


-9- 


318 


A.  When  voting  is  by  ballot,  an  Absentee  Ballot 
will  be  available  in  the  office  for  any  Senior 
Member  who  cannot  be  present  to  vote  on  election 
day . 

B.  Senior  Members  must  sign  for  an  official  Absen- 
tee Ballot,  seal  and  return  the  ballot  prior  to 
election  day  in  order  for  it  to  be  placed  in  the 
ballot  box  by  the  Chairman  of  the  Election 
Committee . 

C.  The  number  of  Absentee  Ballots  placed  in  the 
election  box  will  be  duly  recorded  in  the  Min- 
utes of  the  Club. 

D.  Only  Senior  Members,  in  good  standing,  with  no 
indebtedness  to  the  Club,  who  have  been  Members 
for  two  (2)  years,  are  eligible  to  vote. 


ARTICLE  IX 
DUTIES  OF  OFFICERS 


SECTION  I. 


PRESIDENT  -  The  President  shall  be  the  chief  executive 
officer  of  the  Club.   The  President  shall  preside  at  all  meetings 
of  the  Board  of  Governors  and  at  all  meetings  of  the  general 
membership.   The  President  shall,  with  the  Secretary,  sign  all 
written  contracts  and  obligations  of  the  Club  and  perform  such 
other  duties  as  may  be  required  by  these  By-laws  or  the  Board  of 
Governors.   The  President  shall  appoint  all  committees  and  shall 
be  an  ex-officio  member  of  all  such  committees.   The  President 
shall  arrange  for  an  annual  audit  of  the  accounts  of  the 
Treasurer,  and  present  an  annual  report  on  the  business  of  the 
Club  to  the  membership.   Such  report  to  be  given  either  in  writ- 
ing and  mailed  to  each  Member,  presented  orally  at  a  business 
meeting,  or  a  copy  of  the  report  placed  in  the  files  at  the 
office,  after  notifying  each  Member  of  his/her  right  to  study 
said  report. 

SECTION  II. 

VICE-PRESIDENTS  -  The  first  Vice-President  shall,  in 
the  absence  or  disability  of  the  President,  perform  the  duties 


-10- 


319 


and  exercise  the  powers  of  the  President  and  shall  perform  such 
other  duties  as  may  be  assigned  to  him/her  by  the  Board  of 
Governors.   The  Second  Vice-President  assumes  responsibility  if 
both  the  President  and  First  Vice-President  are  disabled  or 
absent  from  any  meetings. 

SECTION  III. 

SECRETARY  -  The  Secretary  shall  attend  all  meetings  of 
the  Board  and  of  the  membership  and  act  as  clerk  thereof,  and 
record  all  the  votes  and  minutes  thereof  in  books  to  be  kept  for 
that  purpose.   The  Secretary  shall  notify  all  Members  of  their 
election  to  office,  arrange  to  have  the  proper  people  informed  of 
all  meetings  as  to  the  time,  place  and  purpose.   The  Secretary 
shall  be  co-signer,  with  the  President,  of  all  written  contracts 
and  obligations  of  the  Club.   The  Secretary  shall  conduct  or 
cause  to  be  conducted,  all  official  correspondence  of  the  Club 
and  shall  see  that  such  correspondence  is  properly  preserved  and 
filed  until  otherwise  disposed  of  by  the  Board.   In  the  event 
that  he/she  shall  be  absent  at  any  meeting  duly  called,  he/she 
shall  arrange  to  have  the  minutes  of  all  previous  meetings  made 
available  to  the  Board  for  their  edification  when  necessary.   In 
such  absence,  the  President  shall  appoint  any  Board  Member  in 
attendance  as  Temporary  Secretary  for  the  recording  of  the 
minutes. 

SECTION  IV. 

TREASURER  -  The  Treasurer  shall  be  the  chief  financial 
and  accounting  officer  and  shall  cause  full  and  accurate  accounts 
of  receipts  and  disbursements  to  be  kept  in  books  belonging  to 
the  Club.   The  Treasurer  shall  render  to  the  President,  and  to  the 
Directors,  at  regular  meetings  of  the  Board,  or  whenever  the 
President  or  the  Board  may  require,  an  account  of  all  his/her 
transactions  as  Treasurer  and  the  financial  state  of  the  Club. 
The  Treasurer  shall  cause  to  be  deposited  all  funds  of  the  Club 
in  one  (1)  or  more  of  the  banks  in  the  Wyoming  Valley  area,  in  the 
name  and  to  the  credit  of  the  Wyoming  Valley  Country  Club.   The 
Treasurer  shall  send  out  bills  for  dues  and  all  other  indebted- 
ness to  the  Club,  as  specifically  set  forth  in  Article  VIII 
Sections  II  and  III  of  these  By-laws  or  as  may  be  ordered  by  the 
Board.   The  Treasurer  shall  sign  and  countersign  all  such 
instruments  as  may  be  required  by  his/her  signature  as  an  officer 
of  the  Club.   The  Treasurer  shall  perform  all  such  other  duties 
as  may  be  properly  assigned  to  him/her  by  the  Board,  one  (1)  of 
which  will  be  Chairman  of  the  Finance  Committee. 


-11- 


320 


SECTION  V. 

THE  BOARD  OF  GOVERNORS  -  This  body  shall  exercise  gen- 
eral supervision  of  the  affairs,  funds  and  property  of  the  club 
and  to  this  end  is  invested  with  all  the  powers  of  the  Club.   It 
shall  make  such  house  and  ground  rules  as  may  be  deemed 
necessary.   It  shall  make  and  enforce  all  regulations  as  it  may, 
from  time  to  time,  feel  are  essential  for  the  proper  maintenance, 
care  and  use  of  the  golf  course;  including,  but  not  restricted  to, 
regulations  providing  for  the  registration  of  golfers,  and  the 
use  of  the  course  by  registered  golfers  only.   It  shall  set 
regulations  providing  for  the  establishment,  imposition  and  col- 
lection of  golf  dues  or  charges  and  green  fees.   It  shall  set  any 
regulations  necessary  to  prevent  damage  or  congestion  of  the  golf 
course.   The  Board  shall  meet  on  call  of  the  President  or  on 
written  request  of  any  three  (3)  Board  Members.   Due  notice  shall 
be  given  by  the  Secretary  of  such  meeting.   A  majority  of  the 
Members  of  the  Board  in  office  shall  be  necessary  to  constitute  a 
quorum  as  specified  in  ARTICLE  VIII,  SECTION  I  B. 

ARTICLE  X 

COMMITTEES 

SECTION  I. 

Immediately  after  the  annual  election,  the  President 
shall  appoint,  with  the  approval  of  the  Board,  any  committees 
that  are  deemed  necessary  or  desirable  for  the  successful  opera- 
tion of  the  Club  for  the  ensuing  year.   It  shall  be  mandatory 
that  the  standing  committees  be  Finance,  House,  Greens  and 
Grounds,  Membership  and  Golf  Committees.   Committees  shall  not 
consist  of  more  than  five  (5)  Senior  Members.   The  President 
shall  designate  the  chairman  of  each  committee.   The  committees 
shall  be  delegated  authority  to  fulfill  their  mission,  subject  to 
the  approval  of  the  Board,  and,  for  purposes  not  inconsistent 
with  these  By-laws.   Each  committee  chairman  must  submit  his 
annual  anticipated  budget  for  the  coming  year  for  scrutiny  by  the 
Finance  Committee.   Final  budgets  must  be  presented  for  Board 
approval  at  the  regular  meeting  of  the  Board  in  the  month  of 
March  following  the  January  election  of  officers.   Once  approved 
by  the  Board,  the  committee  is  free  to  expend  funds  as  needed. 
Any  unexpected  expenditures  beyond  the  funds  already  budgeted 
roust  be  submitted  for  Board  approval.   All  monies  received  or 
expended  by  all  committees  roust  be  handled  by  the  office  under 
the  supervision  of  the  Club  Treasurer.   All  members  of  any 
special  committee  shall  serve  until  their  successors  have  been 


-12- 


321 


appointed  or  until  the  Board  decides  that  a  particular  committee 
is  no  longer  necessary. 

A.  FINANCE  COMMITTEE  -  This  Committee,  subject  to  the 
Board,  shall  have  general  supervision  of  the  finances 
of  the  Club;  help  other  committees  determine  their 
financial  needs  for  the  year;  help  determine  the 
Club's  total  yearly  budget;  and,  act  in  an  advisory 
capacity  in  reference  to  all  financial  matters 
affecting  the  Club.   The  elected  Treasurer  will  be 
the  Chairman  of  this  Committee. 

B.  HOUSE  COMMITTEE  -  The  House  Committee,  subject  to 
Board  approval,  shall  have  full  charge  of  the 
clubhouse,  and  any  buildings  where  refreshments, 
articles  or  supplies  are  sold.   Keeping  within  its 
established  budgetary  allowance,  it  shall  have 
authority  to  make  all  purchases  necessary  for  the 
proper  maintenance  and  operation  of  each  building 
and  facility  under  its  supervision.   It  shall  deter- 
mine the  prices  to  be  charged  for  all  articles  and 
supplies  served  in  any  facility  under  its  jurisdic- 
tion and  shall  prescribe  any  special  terms  and  con- 
ditions under  which  Members  or  outside  agencies  may 
use  the  facilities  under  its  charge  for  private 
occasions.   This  Committee  shall  supervise  the 
employment  and  discharge  of  all  personnel  needed  to 
properly  fulfill  its  obligations  to  the  membertship. 
It  shall  be  the  duty  of  this  Committee  to  make  the 
necessary  house  rules  and  regulations  that  all 
Members  are  to  abide  by  and  to  have  said  rules 
printed  and  posted  in  a  conspicuous  place  in  the 
golf  clubhouse. 

C.  GOLF  COMMITTEE  -  The  Golf  Committee,  subject  to 
Board  approval,  shall  arrange  and  conduct  all 
tournaments,  exhibition  matches  and  other  special 
golf  events.   This  Committee  shall  consult  with 
other  Committees  that  may  be  involved,  such  as  the 
House  Committee,  as  to  the  dates  of  such  events  and 
will  notify  Members  of  said  dates  and  conditions 
pertaining  to  such  events.   It  shall  have  the 
authority  to  employ,  supervise  or  discharge  extra 
tournament  personnel,  and  to  purchase  such  articles 
or  supplies  as  may  be  necessary  for  the  efficient 
conduct  of  such  special  events.   It  shall  have 
charge  of  all  publicity  for  special  events  and  shall 
select,  purchase,  and  award  any  prizes  which  are  won 


-13- 


322 


by  the  contestants.   During  special  golf  events 
only,  it  shall  have  charge  of  carts,  the  caddie 
area,  caddie  master  and  caddies  fixing  the  latter's 
tournament  fees. 

The  Golf  Committee  will  conduct  and  supervise  any 
inter-club  matches  held  during  the  season.   This 
Committee  shall  organize  and  select  Members  to  rep- 
resent the  Club  at  any  such  matches.   Along  with  the 
House  Committee,  they  shall  provide  for  the 
reception  and  entertainment  of  the  visiting  teams. 
The  Golf  Committee  shall  be  responsible  for 
determining  the  handicaps  of  all  Club  golfers  and 
for  posting  such  handicaps. 

D.   GREENS  AND  GROUNDS  COMMITTEE  -  This  Committee, 

known  simply  as  the  Greens  Conmiittee,  subject  to 
Board  approval,  shall  have  full  charge  of  the  golf 
course  and  grounds  of  the  Club  property.   This 
includes  all  trees,  shrubs,  vines,  road,  walk,  cart 
paths  and  automobile  parking  spaces  on  said  property 
and  such  buildings  as  not  specifically  covered  by 
the  House  Committee  in  Article  X  B.   This  Committee 
shall  employ  such  personnel  and  procure  such 
articles,  tools,  equipment  and  supplies  as  may  be 
necessary  for  the  proper  upkeep  and  maintenance  of 
such  facilities  that  come  under  its  jurisdiction. 
Any  major  changes  or  alterations  on  the  course  or 
grounds  beyond  what  would  be  considered  as  routine, 
every  day  procedure  must  first  be  presented  to  the 
Board  for  discussion  and  approval.   Since  this  Com- 
mittee is  directly  concerned  with  the  golf  course, 
and  since  said  course  is  the  basis  of  the  entire 
Club  operation,  it  shall  be  empowered,  after  consul- 
tation with  the  greenskeeper ,  to  decide  when  and  if 
the  course  is  being  damaged  for  any  reason,  such  as 
weather  conditions,  use  of  golf  carts,  or 
negligence,  and  to  take  whatever  steps  to  remedy 
such  situations  as  may  be  deemed  necessary.   In  the 
best  interest  of  the  Club,  this  could  mean  limiting 
the  use  of  carts,  closing  certain  area  to  play,  or 
complete  closing  of  play  at  the  course  until  the 
problem  is  resolved.   This  Committee  shall  be 
responsible  for  proper  training  and  supervision  of 
all  caddies. 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  this  Committee  to  make  the 
necessary  rules  and  regulations  concerning  the 


-14- 


323 


course  and  carts  that  all  Members  are  to  abide  by 
and  to  have  said  rules  printed  and  posted  in  a 
conspicuous  place  in  the  Clubhouse. 


MEMBERSHIP  -  This  Committee  shall  be  responsible 
for  screening  candidates  in  all  membership 
classifications  before  presentation  to  the  Board  of 
Governors  for  approval. 


F.  Standing  Committee  Chairmen  are  voting  members  of 
the  Board. 

a.   Immediate  Past  President  is  Honorary  Member 
of  Board  for  one  (1)  year,  but  has  no  voting 
privileges. 

G.  Long  Range  Planning  Committee  is  a  special  committee 
of  the  Club. 

It  shall  consist  of  nine  (9)  Members  whose  individ- 
ual term  will  be  five  (5)  years.   These  Members  will 
be  elected  at  the  annual  meeting 

The  Committee  will  elect  their  chairman  annually 
after  the  general  election  and  he/she  shall  be  a 
voting  Member  of  the  Board. 

The  Long  Range  Planning  Committee  is  a  Special 
Committee  of  the  Club,  and  as  such,  will  be  charged 
with  the  responsibility  of  planning  the  future 
growth  and  development;  refurbishing  the  present 
facility;  and,  replacing  the  equipment,  buildings, 
grounds,  etc. ,  in  a  sound  and  orderly  manner 
consistent  with  logical  development  of  The  Wyoming 
Valley  Country  Club.   Said  Committee  will  formulate 
its  plans  and  report  to  the  Board,  which  will  then 
be  responsible  for  the  appropriate  action  within  the 
confines  which  that  Board  sees  proper. 

The  recommendations  of  the  Long  Range  Planning 
Committee  are  not  to  be  considered  binding  on  the 
Board,  but  since  they  are  the  recommendations  of  a 
Committee  of  the  Club,  their  plans  must  be  given 
very  serious  consideration  by  the  Board. 


324 


SECTION  II. 

CAPITAL  IMPROVEMENTS 

A.  Capital  Improvement  Budgets  shall  not  exceed  ten 
percent  (10%)  of  the  audited,  preceding  year's  dues 
income,  without  a  special  membership  meeting  on  the 
proposed  budget. 

B.  In  the  event  capital  expenditure  actual  figures  may 
exceed  budgeted  figures  by  ten  percent  (10%),  a  Spe- 
cial Membership  Meeting  must  be  called  by  the  Board 
to  inform  the  membership. 

C.  When  and  if  it  becomes  necessary  to  borrow  from  any 
lending  institution  to  finance  capital  improvements, 
a  Special  Meeting  of  the  Membership  must  be  held  to 
inform  the  Members  of  the  project (s)  involved  prior 
to  any  commitment  by  the  Club, 

ARTICLE  XI 

MEETINGS 

SECTION  I. 

There  shall  be  an  Annual  Meeting  of  the  Club  for  the 
election  of  officers  which  shall  be  the  second  Saturday  of  Janu- 
ary in  the  clubhouse  at  a  time  to  be  determined  by  the  Board. 

A.  Notice  of  such  meeting  shall  be  posted  in  the 
clubhouse  not  less  than  two  (2)  weeks  before  the 
meeting  date. 

B.  Fifteen  (15)  Members  shall  constitute  a  quorum  for 
the  Annual  Meeting. 

C.  The  audited  Financial  Report  for  the  preceding  year 
must  be  mailed  to  all  Senior  Members  by  December  1. 

D.  In  the  event  of  a  tie  vote  for  any  office,  a  Special 
Election  for  the  office/officer  in  question  will  be 
held  not  later  than  the  first  Saturday  in  February. 


-16- 


325 


SECTION  II. 

The  order  of  business  shall  be  as  follows: 

1.-   Reading  the  minutes  of  the  last  stated  meeting,  and 
of  any  special  meetings  held  thereafter. 

2.  Report  by  the  President  for  the  Board. 

3.  Report  of  the  Treasurer. 

4.  Appointment  of  Auditor. 

5.  Report  of  standing  Committees. 

6.  Election  of  officers. 

7.  New  Business 

8.  Adjournment. 

SECTION  III. 

Special  Membership  Meetings  may  be  called  at  the  discre- 
tion of  the  President  and  must  be  called  upon  written  request  of 
ten  (10)  Senior  Members  who  shall  state  the  specific  purpose  of 
the  meeting. 

A.  Special  meetings  must  be  held  within  twenty  (20) 
days  of  such  a  request  by  either  the  President  or 
Members . 

B.  Each  Member  of  the  Club  shall  receive  ten  (10)  day's 
notice,  stating  the  place,  time  and  purpose  of  the 
meeting. 

C.  No  business  shall  be  transacted  other  than  the 
stated  purpose  of  the  meeting. 

SECTION  IV. 

QUORUM  -  Twenty-five  percent  (25%)  of  the  Senior 
Membership  shall  constitute  a  quorum  of  the  Club  for  special 
meetings.   The  acts  of  the  majority  of  the  quorum  present  shall 
be  the  acts  of  the  total  Senior  Membership.   Any  decisions  voted 
upon  by  the  membership  shall  be  considered  to  be  binding  upon  the 
Board  of  Directors  in  any  future  meeting  of  the  Board  relating  to 
the  decision  made  at  the  special  meeting. 


-17- 


326 


ARTICLE  XII 

VISITORS 

SECTION  I. 

Upon  written  request,  by  a  Senior  Member  in  good 
standing,  the  Secretary  may  issue  an  invitation  to  any  person  not 
a  resident  of  Wyoming  Valley  to  use  the  facilities  of  The  Wyoming 
Valley  Country  Club  for  a  two  (2)  week  period.   The  same  guest 
shall  not  be  introduced  more  than  twice  in  one  (1)  season  and 
then  only  after  an  interval  of  at  least  one  (1)  month.   The  guest 
shall  pay  the  required  greens  fee  for  each  round  of  golf.   No 
Member  shall  have  three  (3)  introductions  in  force  at  any  one  (1) 
time. 

SECTION  II. 

Should  a  non-resident  guest  of  a  Senior  Member  desire  to 
use  the  Club  beyond  two  (2)  weeks,  he/she  may,  if  the  Board 
approves,  be  granted  a  two  (2)  month  guest  card  upon  payment  of 
one-fourth  (*;)  of  the  then  current  annual  dues. 

SECTION  III. 

The  names  and  places  of  residence  of  such  visitors,  as 
outlined  in  the  last  two  (2)  sections,  shall  be  recorded  in  the 
Pro  Shop  in  a  book  kept  for  that  purpose.   Any  Member  who  uses  the 
privileges  of  these  rules  shall  be  held  responsible  for  any  debts 
or  liabilities  to  the  Club  that  may  be  incurred  by  any  person 
he/she  introduces  or  sponsors. 

ARTICLE  XIII 

COLORS  AND  EMBLEM 

The  colors  of  the  Club  shall  be  Blue  and  Red  and  the 
Club  emblem  shall  be  a  Tomahawk. 


ARTICLE  XIV 

EQUITY  AND  DISSOLUTION 

SECTION  I. 

In  the  event  that  it  is  considered  necessary  or  proper 
to  dissolve  the  corporation,  the  Board  of  Directors  shall  notify 


-18- 


327 


all  Members  in  good  standing  of  a  meeting  to  be  held  for  the 
purpose  upon  not  less  than  ten  (10)  day's  written  notice  to  each 
paid  Member  at  his  last  known  address. 

At  the  meeting  so  called,  an  election  to  dissolve  the 
Corporation  shall  be  made  by  a  majority  vote  of  all  of  the 
Members . 

Following  the  vote  concerning  dissolution,  the  Board  of 
Directors  may  take  whatever  action  they  deem  proper  and  necessary 
to  wind  up  the  Corporation  by  the  sale  of  all  of  its  assets  pro- 
viding for  the  payment  of  all  secured  or  unsecured  obligations. 
After  all  debts  and  obligations  of  the  Corporation  are  approved 
and  paid,  any  assets  remaining  shall  be  distributed  to  Senior 
Members  of  the  Club  who  are  fully  paid  and  in  good  standing  on 
the  date  of  dissolution,  provided  however,  that  only  Senior  Mem- 
bers who  have  been  Members  of  the  CLub  in  good  standing  for  five 
(5)  consecutive  years  immediately  prior  to  the  date  of  dissolu- 
tion shall  be  entitled  to  any  equity  distribution. 


ARTICLE  XV 

AMENDMENTS 

These  By-laws  may  be  amended  by  a  two-thirds  (2./3)  vote 
of  the  Members  present  at  any  regular  or  special  meeting,  pro- 
vided the  proposed  amendments  shall  be  in  writing,  and  shall  be 
proposed  by  the  Board  of  Governors,  or  by  ten  (10)  Senior 
Resident  Members  two  (2)  weeks  prior  to  the  annual  meeting,  or  a 
special  meeting  called  for  that  purpose,  and  that  the  notice  of 
said  meeting  shall  contain  a  copy  of  the  proposed  additions  or 
amendments.  ,   ,  .. 


ARTICLE  XVI 

EFFECTIVE  DATE  OF  BY-LAWS 

These  By-laws  shall  become  effective  on  the  date  of  a 
regular  or  special  meeting  of  the  Senior  Members  of  the  Club  duly 
called  for  the  purpose  of  their  adoption. 


-19- 


328 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


EXHIBIT  "4" 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

Nomination  Report 


Report  Required  by  the  Ethics 
Krform  Aa  of  1989.  Pub  L  No. 
1 01 -1 94.  November  SO.  J 989 
(S  use  App   4  .  Sec  101-112) 


1.  Person  Rtporting         (Last  name,  first,  rruddle  initial) 
CAPUTO,     A.       RICHARD     . 


2.  Court  or  Organization 

US    DIST    CT   MID    DIST    OF    PA 


3.  Date  of  Report 

08/01/1997 


4.  Title  (Article  III  judges  indicate  active  or 

senior  status:  magistrate  judges  indicate 
fiill-  or  pan-time) 

U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGE  NOMINEE 


S.  Report  Type  (check  type) 

X     Nominalion.     Date     07/31/1997 


6.  Reporting  Period 

01/01/1996 
07/30/1997 


7.  Chambers  or  Office  Address 

387  WYOMING  AVENUE 

P.O.  BOX  20S9 

KINGSTON,     PA      18704-2059 


8.  On  the  basis  of  the  information  contained  in  this  Report  and  any 
modincations  pertaining  thereto,  it  is  in  my  opinion,  in  complianci 
with  applicable  laws  and  regulations. 


IMPORTANT  NOTES:   The  instruaions  accompanying  this  form  must  be  followed.    Complete  all  parts, 
checking  the  NONE  box  for  each  seaion  where  you  have  no  reportable  information    Sign  on  the  last  page 


I.    POSITIONS      (Reporting  individual  only,  see  pp  9- 1 3  of  Instructions) 

POSITION 

NONE  {No  reportable  positions.) 

'  VICE  PRESIDENT  AND  DIRECTOR  MAPLEMOOR,  INC 


NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION  /  ENTITY 


2  SECTY,  TREASURER  &  DIRECTOR 
3V.P.,  ASST.  SECY  t  DIRECTOR 


THE  LUZERNE  FOUNDATION 


BACK  MOUNTAIN  HOLDINGS,  INC. 


II.      AGREEMENTS    (Reponmgindivulual  only:  see  pp. 14-17  of  instructions.) 

DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


n 


NONE    (No  reportable  agreements  ) 

Fees   which  have   been   billed,    and    those   representing  my   work   in   progress   not   yet   billed 
will    be    ascertained    upon   my   departure    from  my   office,    and    those    sums   will    be    remitted 
to   me   when   received   over   the   next    twenty-four    (24)   months. 


III.     NON-INVESTMENTINCOME        (Reporting  individual  and  spouse:  see  pp  1S-2S  of  Insii 
DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


□ 


NONE    (No  reportable  i 
1    1995  INCOME    FROM    LEGAL    SERVICES 


2   1996 


INCOME  FROM  LEGAL  SERVICES 


3  TO  7/97     INCOME  FROM  LEGAL  SERVICES 


GROSS  INCOME 

(yours,  not  spouse's) 


326,091.00 


294,877.00 


140,270.67 


329 


RNANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Penon  Reponing 
CAPUTO,    A.        RICHARD 


Dale  of  Rcpon 
08/01/1997 


SECTION  HEADING.      (Indicale  pan  of  repon  ) 
SECTION    1.     POSITIONS     (cont'd.) 
Li.    Position 


Name   of   Organization/Entity 


4  CO -TRUSTEE 

5  ASSISTANT  SECRETARY 

6  ASSISTANT  SECRETARY 

7  ASSISTANT  SECRETARY 

8  ASSISTANT  SECRETARY 

9  ASSIST7UJT  SECRETARY 

10  ASSISTANT  SECRETARY 

11  ASSISTANT  SECRETARY 

12  PARTNER 

13  PARTNER 

14  PARTNER 


GRACE  K.  SHEA  TRUST 

MCCARTHY  ENTERPRISES,  INC. 

PLAINCO,  INC. 

BRONSBERG  &  HUGHES  PONTIAC,  INC. 

MIDDLE  ROAD  DEVELOPMENT  CORP. 

MAGICORP,  INC. 

FORSUNS ,  LTD . 

ROBBINS  DOOR  t  SASH  CO. 

DRUID  ASSOCIATES 

ALAFAYA  ASSOCIATES 

3  87  WYOMING  AVENUE  ASSOCIATES 


330 


Name  ol  Person  Kcponing 

FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT      CAPUTO,    A.      RICHARD 


Dale  of  Report 
08/01/1997 


IV.    REIMBURSEME^fTS    and    GIFTS    -   iransportanon.  lodging,  food,  cnlenainmeni 

(Includes  those  lo  spouse  and  dependent  children:  use  the  parentheticals  '{Si '  and  '(DC)'  to  indicate  reportable  reimbu\ 
and  dependent  children,  respectively    See  pp.  26-29  of  Instructions.) 


SOURCE 

NONE  (No  such  reportable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 


DESCRIPTION 


V.    OTHER  GIFTS 


(Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children, 
respectively    See  pp.  30-33  of  Instruaions  } 


D 


SOURCE 

NONE  (No  such  reportable  gifts) 


r  the  parentheticals  '(Sj '  and  '(DQ '  lo  indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children. 

DESCRIPTION  VALUE 


VI.    LIABILITIES 

(Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible  for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  '(S)' for  separate 
liability  of  the  spouse.  '(J)'  for  joint  liability  of  reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  '(DQ  "for  liabiliry  of  a  dependent  child.    See  pp   34-36  of  Instructions.) 


D 


CREDITOR 

NONE    (No  reportable  liabilities) 


1   FIRST  UNION  NATIONAL  BANK 


DESCRIPTION 


LINE  OF  CREDIT 


2 

MELLON  BANK 

3 

MBNA 

4 

FIRST  NATIONAL  COMM.  BANK 

5 

FIRST  NATIONAL  MORTGAGE  CORP. 

e 

7 

VALUE  CODE* 


CREDIT  CARD 

J 

CREDIT  CARD 

J 

MTG.  ON  PROP. (3  87  WYO .  AVE  ASSOC.) 

N 

MORTGAGE  ON  PROPERTY  (RESIDENCE) 

J 

>  VALCODES:J=$15.000orlesj  K=J15.001-$50.0(X)  L=S50.001  lo  J100.(X)0  M=J100.001-$250,000  N  =  $250.001-$500.000 

0=$5(X).001-$I.000.0(X)    P1=$1,0(X).001-$5.000.000    P2  =  $5.000.001-J25.000.000    P3  =  J25.O0O.O01-J50.O0O.0OO    P4  =  $50.000.(X)1  or  more 


331 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Penon  Reporting 

CAPUTO,     A.        RICHARD 


Dale  of  Report 
08/01/1997 


VII.   Page      1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS 


-■  income,  value.  iransacUons  (includes  those  of  spouse  and 
dependent  children .   See  pp.  37-54  of  Instructions.) 


A. 
Description  of  AsseU 

Indicate  where  applicable,  owner  of 
the  asset  by  using  the  parenthetical 

B. 

Income 
during 
reponing 

C. 

Gross  value 
at  end  of 
reporting 

D. 

Transactions  during  reporting  period 

individual  and  spouse.  '(S)  'for  sep- 
erate  ownership  by  spouse.  '(DQ ' 
for  ownership  by  dependent  child. 

Place  '00  '  after  each  asset 
exempt  from  prior  disclosure. 

(1) 

Amt. 

Code 

(A- 

H) 

(2) 

Type 

(e.g.. 

dividend. 

rent  or 

interest) 

(1) 

Value 
Code 
(JP) 

(2) 

Value 

Method 

Code 

(QW) 

(1) 

Type 

(e.g.. 

buy,  sell, 

merger. 

redcmp- 

If  not  exempt  from  disclosure 

(2) 
Date: 
Month- 
Day 

(3) 
Value 
Code 
OP) 

(4) 
Gain 
Code 
(AH) 

(5) 

Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
(if  private 

NONE  (no  rcponabtc  income. assets,  or 
transactions) 

1      RENTAL    PROPERTY       11    -    RYE,    NY 

D 

Rent: 

" 

W 

2  RENTAL    PROPERTY       12    -    RYE,    NY 

D 

Rent 

M 

w 

3   FIRST   UNION   NAT ' L    BANK    -    INTEREST 
CHECKING 

" 

Interest 

*" 

T 

4   DEAN   WITTER    REYNOLDS    -     IRA   -    GTE 
COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

5  DEAN    WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA   -    GE    - 
COMMON   STOCK 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

6  DEAN  WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA   - 
CHRYSLER  CORP.    -    COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

1   DEAN    WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA    - 
TCW/DW    EMERGING   MARKETS 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

B  DEAN    WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA    -    LIQ. 
ASSETS    FUND 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

9    DEAN   WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA   - 
COMPAO   COMPUTER    -    COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

10  DEAN   WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA    - 
TRAVELERS-.^ETNA    -    COMMON    STOCK 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

11  DEAN  WITTER   REYNOLDS    -    IRA    - 
MOBIL   CORP    -    COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

12  DEAN  WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA    - 

AMER.     SAFETY    RAZOR    -    COM.     STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

13  DEAN   WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA    - 
CARNIVAL   CORP.     -    COM.     STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

H    DEAN   WITTER   REYNOLDS    -    IRA   - 

GENERAL   MOT.    CORP.     -    COM.     STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

15  DEAN    WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA    - 
INGERSOLL    RAND    -    COM.     STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

16  DEAN   WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA   - 

COMPUTER   ASSOC.     INT'L    -    CM.     STK 

* 

Dividend 

J 

T 

n   DEAN    WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA    - 
HARLEY    DAVIDSON    -    COMM.     STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

1  Inc/Olin  Codes:  A-$  1.000  Of  less                     B=S1.001-J2,S00                  C-K.501.$5.000                       D>$3,O01-$15.00O                     E=$15.001-$50.000 
(Col.  B1.D4)      F-$50.001.$100,000              G=$100.001-$I,000.000        H1«J1.000.001-J5.000.000       H2=J5.000.001  ormore 

JVilCodes:         J-J  15.000  or  less                   K-$15.001-$50,000               L-J50.001-S100,000              M-$I0O.OOl-J250.0O0            N-$250,001-$500.000 
(Col.Cl.D3)     O-JSOO.OOl-S  1.000,000        P|.$1.000.001-$5.000.000  P2-I5.O0O.001-J25.0OO.0O0  P3-$25.000.001-$50.000.000  P4.$S0.000.001  ocmore 

3  Vil  Mlh  Codes:  Q= Appraisal                            R=Cost  (real  csuie  only)                            S=Assessment                                   T=Cash/Msrket 
(Col.C2)            U-BookVdue                         V-Other                                                    W=Esumaled 

332 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 
CAPUTO,    A.       RICHARD 


Date  of  Repon 

08/01/1997 


VII.   Page      2  I>fVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS 


-  income,  value,  iransaaions  (includes  those  of  spouse  and 
dependent  dOdren.   See  pp.  37-54  of  Im 


A. 
Description  of  Assels 

Indicate  where  applicable,  owner  of 
the  asset  by  using  the  parenthetical 
'(J)'  for  Joint  ownership  of  reporting 
individual  and  spouse.  '(S}' for  sep- 
erate  ownership  by  spouse.  '(DC)' 
for  ownership  by  dependent  child. 

Place  "(X)  ■  after  each  asset 
exempt  from  prior  disclosure. 

B. 
Income 

during 
reporting 

C. 

GiDss  vabe 
at  end  of 
reporting 

D. 

Transactions  during  reporting  period 

(1) 

Ami. 

Code 

(A- 

H) 

(2) 
Type 
C^g. 
dividend. 

inlerest) 

(1) 
Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

(2) 

Vabe 

Mednd 

Code 

(QW) 

(1) 

Type 

(e.g. 

buy.  sell. 

merger. 

redemp- 

!f  not  exempt  from  disclosure 

(2) 
Date: 
Month- 
Day 

(3) 

Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

(4) 
Gam 
Code 
<A-H) 

(5) 

Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
(if  private 

NONE  (no  reportable  income.assels.  or 
transactions) 

18  GRACE    K.     SHEA    TRUST    -    AIR 
PRODUCTS-    COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

19  GRACE    K.     SHEA   TRUST    -    AMERICAN 
HOME    PRODUCTS    -    COM.     STOCK 

B 

Dividend 

« 

T 

20  GRACE    K.     SHEA    TRUST    -    ATST    - 
COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

21  GRACE    K.     SHEA    TRUST    -    CHEVRON    - 
COMMON    STOCK 

B 

Dividend 

>" 

T 

22  GRACE    K.     SHEA   TRUST    -    CHRYSLER    - 
COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

23  GRACE    K.     SHEA   TRUST    -    COCA    COLA    - 
COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

L 

T 

24  GRACE    K.     SHEA    TRUST    -    COMPAQ 
COMPUTER    -    COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

25  GRACE    K.     SHEA   TRUST    -    DUPOMT    - 
COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

'' 

T 

26    GRACE    K.     SHEA   TRUST    -    GE    - 
COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

27  GRACE    K.    SHEA   TRUST    -    GTE    - 
COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

28  GRACE    K.     SHEA   TRUST    -    JOHNSON    ( 
JOHNSON    -    COMMON    STOCK 

B 

Dividend 

L 

T 

29  GRACE    K.     SHEA   TRUST    -    LUCENT 
TECH.     -    COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

30  GRACE    K.     SHEA    TRUST    -    MICROSOFT    - 
COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

31    GRACE    K.     SHEA    TRUST    -    SARA    LEE    - 
COMMON    STOCK 

B 

Dividend 

L 

T 

32  GRACE    K.     SHEA   TRUST    -    SMITH-KLINE 
-    COMMON    STOCK 

B 

Dividend 

L 

T 

33  GRACE    K.     SHEA   TRUST    -    HARLEY 
DAVIDSON    -    COMM.     STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

34  GRACE    K.     SHEA   TRUST    -    CARNIVAL 
CORP.     -    COMM.     STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

llnc/Oain  Codes:  A-$1.000  or  less                      B-SI.OO1-J2.500                  C«K.5ai-J5,0O0                       D"$5.001 -SI  5.000                      E«$15.001-$5O.O0O 
(Col.  BI.D4)       F-$50,001-$100,000               G-S  100,001 -$1,000,000         Hl=$l,000.OOl-$5.OOO.O00        H2=$5.000.001  or  more 

2V«lCo<les:          J-$l  5.000  or  less                      K-$15.001-J50.000                L-S50.00I-I100.000               M-$100.00l-$250.000             N-J250.O01-$500,OOO 
(Col.Cl,D3)     O-J500.001 -J  1.000.000         Pl=$l,000.001.$5.000.000  P2.$5.OOO,0Ol-I25,0O0.OOO  P3»$25.OOO.OOl-J5O.0OO.000  P4«J50.000,001  ormore 

3  V.1  Mlh  Codes:  Q-Apprais«l                            R-Cost(re»l  estate  only)                            S-Assessment                                     T-CaslVMarkel 
(Col  C2)             U-Book  Value                          VOlher                                                    W-Eslimaled 

333 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 
CAPUTO,     A.       RICHARD 


Dale  of  Rcpon 

08/01/1997 


VII.   Page      3  INVESTMENTS  and 


-  incomf.  valme.  iransaaions  (includes  those  of  spouse  and 
IKUdld        dependent  children    See  pp.  37-54  of  Instructions.) 


A. 

Descripuon  of  Assets 

Indicate  where  applicable,  owner  of 
the  asset  by  using  the  parenthetical 

B. 

Income 

during 

reporting 

C 

Gross  value 
at  end  of 
reporting 

D 

Transactions  during  rcponing  penod 

individual  and  spouse,  '(S)'forsep- 
erate  ownership  by  spouse.  '(DO ' 
for  ownership  by  dependerxt  child. 

Place  '(X) '  after  each  asset 
exempt  from  prior  disclosure. 

(1) 
Ami- 
Code 
(A- 
H) 

m 

Type 
(=8. 
dividend. 
rent  or 
interest) 

(1) 
Value 
Code 
(JP) 

0) 

Value 

Method 

Code 

(Q-W) 

(1) 

Type 

(c-g. 

buy.  sell. 

merger. 

redemp- 

If  not  exempt  from  disclosure 

(2) 
Date: 
Month- 
Day 

(3) 

Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

(<) 
Gain 
Code 
(A-H) 

(5) 

Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
(if  private 

NONE  (no  reporuble  income.assets.  or 
transactions) 

35  GPWCE    K.    SHEJi  TRUST    -   ACTIVE 
ASSETS    -   MONEY   MARKET 

B 

Dividend 

J 

T 

36    FARMER    BROTHERS    -    COMMON    STOCK 
IS] 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

37    FIRST    UNION    NATIONAL    BANK    - 
COMMON    STOCK     (SI 

C 

Dividend 

M 

T 

38  RYKOFF-SEXTON    -    OPTIONS    -    COMMON 
STOCK 

None 

J 

T 

39  DEAN   WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA    ISI 
-TWC/    OW   CR,    EQ.    TR.     ,    MUT    FD 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

40  DEAN    WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA    ISI     - 
DW  AM    VALUE/MNY    MARKET 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

41  DEAN    WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA 

-CARLISLE    CO.,     INC.     -    COM.    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

42  DEAN   WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA- 
FEDERAL    EXPRESS    CORP.     -    COMMON 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

4  3    DEAN   WITTER    REYNOLDS    -    IRA- 
DUPONT    EI     DENEMOURS    -    COMMON 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

4  4  GRACE       K.     SHEA   TRUST    -    FEDERAL 
EXPRESS    CORP.     -    COMMON 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

45  AMERICAN    SAFETY    RAZOR     IS]     - 
COMMON    STOCK 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

46  80    ACS    VACAWT    LAND    -    ORANGE    CTY . 
INEAR    ORLANDO!        FLORIDA    IS] 

0 

W 

1  Inc/Giin  Coda:  A-$1.000  or  less                     B-SI.001-n.500                  C-K.501.JS.000                       D-$S.001-$15.000                      E-$IS,O01-$50.000 
(ColBl.D4)       F-J50.001-S100.000              O-S100.00l-Sl,000.000        Hl-J1.0O0.0Ol-$5.000.000       H2  =$5,000,001  or  more 

2V»ICoda;          J-Jl 5,000  or  less                    K»$15,0Ol-$50.O00               L=$50.001-$10O.000              M-$100.001.S250,000            N-$250.001-J500,000 
(ColCl,D3)     O-S500.001-S  1.000,000        Pl-$1.000.001-S5.000,000  P2=I5,DOO.OOI-$25.000.000  P3-S25,OOO.OOl-J50.0OO.000  P4-$50.000,001  or  more 

3  V«l  Mlh  Codes:  Q-Appr»is»l                            R-Cosl  <re«l  estate  only)                            S=Assessnient                                     T=Cash/M»ricel 
(Col.C2)             U-Book  Value                         VOther                                                    W=Estimated 

334 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 
CAPUTO,     A.        RICHARD 


Date  of  Report 
08/01/1997 


VIII.     ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS. 

X       NONE    (No  adduional  information  or  explanations  ) 


335 


HNANCIAL  DISCLOSURE   REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 
CAPUTO,    A.         RICHARD 


Date  of  Report 
08/01/1997 


IX.    CERTIFICATION 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
Judicial  Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory 
function  in  any  litigation  during  the  period  covered  by  this  report  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children 
had  a  financial  interest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  the  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent 
children,  if  any)  is  accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  reported 
was  withheld  because  it  met  applicable  statutory  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been 
reported  are  in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C.  app.  4,  section  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  7353  and  Judicial  Conference 
regulations. 


Signature 


^l±_h7 


Any  individual  who  knowingly  and  wilfully  falsifies  or  fails  to  file  this  report  may  be  subject  to  civil 
and  criminal  sanctions  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  Section  104). 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS 

Mail  original  and  three  adilitional  copies  to: 

Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 
Administrative  Office  of  the  United  States  Courts 
One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E. 
Suite  2-301 
Washington,  D.C.  20544 


336 


A.  Richard  Caputo 


EXHIBIT  "S* 


FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORTH 


Notes  payable  to  banks-secured 

-0- 

Cash  on  hand  and  In  banks 

27 

916 

39 

Notes  payable  to  banks-unsecured 

4 

960 

18 

U.S.  Government  securities 

-0- 

Notes  payable  to  relatives 

-0- 

Listed  securities 

-0- 

Notes  payable  to  others 

-0- 

Unlisted  securities 

15 

000 

00 

Accounts  and  bills  due 

12 

800 

00 

See  Schedule  "A" 

Unpaid  Income  tax 

20 

OOC 

00 

Accounts  and  notes  receivable: 

(Estimated  for  1997) 

Due  from  relatives  and  friends 

-0- 

Other  unpaid  tax  and  interest 

-0- 

Due  from  others 

76 

153 

00 

Real  estate  mortgages  payable 

516 

964 

43 

Doubtful 

6 

700 

00 

See  Schedule  "0" 

Real  estate  owned 

1,110 

000 

00 

Chattel  mortgages  and  other 

-0- 

See  Schedule  "B" 

liens  payable 

Real  estate  mortgages  receivable 

-0- 

Other  debts 

-0- 

Autos  and  other  personal  property 

15 

000 

00 

Cash  value  -  life  Insurance 

10 

259 

00 

Other  assets 

Retirement  Plan 

88 

716 

18 

Interest  in  Partnerships 

8 

000 

00 

See  Schedule  "C" 

Total  Liabilities 

554 

724 

61 

Net  Worth 

803 

049 

96 

Total  assets 

1,357 

774 

57 

Total  Liabilities  and  Net  Worth  1 

,35^ 

774 

57 

CONTINGENT  LIABILITIES 

GENERAL  INFORMATION 

As  endorser,  comaker  or  guarantor 

-0- 

Are  any  assets  pledged?  No 

Are  you  defendant  in  any  suits  or 

On  leases  or  contracts 

-0- 

legal  actions?  No. 

Legal  Claims 

-0- 

Have  you  ever  taken  bankruptcy?  No 

Provision  for  Federal  Income  Tax 

-0- 

(See  Liabilities  above) 

Other  special  debt 

-0- 

337 

A.  Richard  Caputo 


SCHEDULE  "A"  -  UNLISTED  SECURITIES 


$15,000.00  (Bond)  Huntsville  Golf  Club  -  20  years  -  8? 
Bond  -  Cost  $15,000.00 


SCHEDULE  "B"  -  REAL  ESTATE  OWNED 


Personal  Use 

Residence 

Shavertown,  Pennsylvania,  18708  -  owned  by  A.  Richard  Caputo 

and  Rosemary  S .  Caputo 
Purchased  1974 
Market  Value  -  $210,000.00 


Investments  in  Real  Estate 

11  New  Street 

Rye,  New  York  10580  -  owned  by  A.  Richard  Caputo 
purchased  1975 
Market  Value  -  $200,000.00 

17  New  Street 

Rye,  New  York  10580  -  owned  by  A.  Richard  Caputo 
purchased  1975 
Market  Value  -  $200,000.00 

3  87  Wyoming  Avenue 

Kingston,  Pennsylvania  18704  -  owned  by  A.  Richard  Caputo  and 

Charles  A.  Shea,  III  as 

co-partners 

Purchased  1994 

Market  Value  -  $500,000.00 


338 

A.  Richard  Caputo 


SCHEDULE  "C"  -  PARTNERSHIP  INTERESTS 


Druid  Associates  -  25%  interest  -  owns  an  interest  in  an  apart- 
ment building  in  Mamaroneck,  New  York,  and  an 
interest  in  an  apartment  building  in 
Fleetwood,  New  York,  with  other  investors. 
Current  value  of  my  interest  is  estimated  at 
$5,000.00. 


Alafaya  Associates  -  16  2/3%  interest  -  owns  an  interest  in  the 
same  apartment  building  in  Fleetwood,  New 
York,  in  which  Druid  Associates  owns  an 
interest.   Current  value  of  my  interest  is 
estimated  at  $3,000.00.   My  wife  also  owns 
16  2/3%  interest. 


SCHEDULE  "D"  -  REAL  ESTATE  MORTGAGES 


First  Union  Mortgage  Corp. 

Balance:    $8,173.40 

Security:   Residence  -  Shavertown,  Pennsylvania 


First  Union  Mortgage  Corp. 

Balance:    $132,897.69 

Security:   Residence  -  Shavertown,  Pennsylvania 

First  National  Community  Bank 

Balance:    $375,893.34 

Security:   387  Wyoming  Avenue,  Kingston,  Pennsylvania 

Mortgagors:   A.  Richard  Caputo  and  Charles  A.  Shea,  III 


NOMINATIONS  OF  RONALD  LEE  GILMAN  AND 
SONIA  SOTOMAYOR  (U.S.  CIRCUIT  JUDGES); 
CHARLES  J.  SIRAGUSA,  ALGENON  L. 
MARBLEY,  DALE  A.  KIMBALL,  JAMES  S. 
GWIN,  AND  RICHARD  CONWAY  CASEY  (U.S. 
DISTRICT  JUDGES) 


TUESDAY,  SEPTEMBER  30,  1997 

U.S.  Senate, 
Committee  on  the  Judiciary, 

Washington,  DC. 
The  committee  met,  pursuant  to  notice,  at  3:02  p.m.,  in  room 
SD-226,  Dirksen  Senate  Office  Building,  Hon.  Mike  DeWine  pre- 
siding. 

Also  present:  Senators  Hatch,  Thurmond,  Thompson,  Torricelli, 
Sessions,  and  Ashcroft. 

OPENING  STATEMENT  OF  HON.  MIKE  DeWINE,  A  U.S.  SENATOR 
FROM  THE  STATE  OF  OHIO 

Senator  DeWine.  I  would  invite  my  colleagues,  I  see  Senator 
Glenn  and  Senator  Bennett,  to  come  immediately  to  the  table.  We 
are  now  proceeding  to  hearings  for  two  circuit  court  judges  and  five 
district  court  judges.  We  need  to  be  out  of  here  by  4:30  p.m.,  which 
I  assume  we  can  be. 

I  would  say  to  all  of  the  prospective  judges  who  are  here  that  it 
is  certainly  possible  that  we  may  submit  some  written  questions  for 
the  record,  either  because  we  run  out  of  time  or  because  some 
members  are  not  here.  Some  members  may  have  to  leave,  so  you 
should  be  prepared  to  receive  written  followup  questions  from 
them,  as  well. 

Let  me  start,  if  I  could,  with  the  chairman  of  the  committee.  Sen- 
ator Hatch.  Mr.  Chairman. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  ORRIN  G.  HATCH,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  UTAH 

Senator  Hatch.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  appreciate  this  op- 
portunity to  appear  before  the  committee  for  and  on  behalf  of  Dale 
A.  Kimball,  who  has  been  nominated  for  district  court  judge  for  the 
District  of  Utah.  I  am  also  happy  to  be  here  with  my  friend  and 
colleague,  Senator  Bennett,  as  well. 

Mr.  Kimball  obtained  his  B.S.  from  Brigham  Young  University  in 
August  1964,  his  juris  doctorate  from  the  University  of  Utah  in 
1967,  became  an  associate  with  the  largest  law  firm  in  Utah  and 

(339) 


340 

one  of  the  most  prestigious,  was  a  partner  and  then  helped  form 
one  of  the  major  firms  in  Salt  Lake  City,  Kimball,  Parr,  Waddoups, 
Brown  &  Gee.  He  has  been  the  senior  partner  in  that  law  firm 
from  1975  to  the  present.  He  was  an  associate  professor  of  law  at 
the  Brigham  Young  University  School  of  Law  from  1974  to  1976, 
and  adjunct  professor  from  1976  to  1979. 

Mr.  Kimball  has  extensive  experience  in  the  practice  of  law  and 
has  been  engaged  in  general  practice,  title  work,  oil  and  gas  and 
mineral  matters,  contract  negotiations,  and  litigation,  including  se- 
curities law,  shipping  disputes,  administrative  agency  matters,  and 
criminal  defense.  Since  1975,  he  has  been  engaged  primarily  in 
business  litigation,  including  securities  fraud,  insurance,  antitrust, 
contract,  and  energy  cases,  along  with  some  arbitrations  and  mu- 
nicipal litigation. 

He  has  had  extensive  experience  in  the  practice  of  law,  in  the 
practice  of  teaching  law,  and  as  a  fine  lawyer  in  the  Utah  area.  He 
has  authored  several  articles.  He  is  a  member,  of  course,  of  the  ap- 
propriate bar  associations  and  is  one  of  the  finest  people  I  know. 

Dale  Kimball  is  not  only  an  excellent  lawyer,  he  is  a  person  of 
the  highest  integrity,  the  highest  ability,  a  person  we  can  rely 
upon,  a  person  who  understands  the  role  of  judging,  and  a  person 
who,  literally,  I  think,  will  elevate  the  Federal  bench  in  this  coun- 
try. 

There  is  so  much  more  we  could  say.  He  is  here  with  his  wonder- 
ful wife.  I  have  known  him  for  a  long  time.  I  have  total  respect  for 
him,  as  I  think  do  all  people  in  Utah  and  especially  all  members 
of  the  bar  association. 

As  you  know,  in  any  of  these  situations,  it  is  very  difficult  to 
make  a  decision  as  to  who  should  replace  another  Federal  district 
judge.  There  are  so  many  people  who  can  be  qualified  for  that  posi- 
tion, and  there  are  a  number  in  Utah  who  certainly  do  qualify,  but 
I  know  of  none  better,  none  greater,  or  none  with  more  ability  than 
Dale  Kimball.  I  think  he  will  become  one  of  the  great  judges  in 
America  and  I  would  expect  no  less  from  him. 

I  recommend  to  the  committee  that  they  approve  this  nomination 
as  quickly  as  possible  and  help  us  to  resolve  the  problem  of  an 
open  seat  on  that  bench,  which  has  been  open  since  June  of  this 
year. 

Senator  DeWine.  Senator,  thank  you  very  much. 

Let  me  turn  now  to  the  junior  Senator  from  Utah,  Senator  Ben- 
nett. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  ROBERT  F.  BENNETT,  A  U.S.  SENATOR 
FROM  THE  STATE  OF  UTAH 

Senator  Bennett.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  Being  the  junior 
Senator  and  not  being  a  member  of  the  Judiciary  Committee  where 
the  senior  Senator  is  the  chairman  of  the  Judiciary  Committee  usu- 
ally means  that  my  activity  with  respect  to  the  appointing  of  Fed- 
eral judges  is  a  fairly  minimal  one. 

I  will  say  that  Senator  Hatch  has  been  more  than  solicitous, 
however,  of  my  opinion  and  he  came  down  to  see  me  early  in  this 
process  to  tell  me  of  the  various  people  that  were  being  considered 
for  this  particular  vacancy  and  to  tell  me  that  his  recommendation 


341 

would  be  Dale  Kimball.  This  made  it  very  easy  for  me  to  say  yes 
without  any  kind  of  demur  or  objection. 

I  will  not  go  over  the  specifics  in  Dale  Kimball's  background. 
Senator  Hatch  has  already  done  that  and  they  are  available  to  the 
committee  generally.  I  will  share  with  you  this  personal  experience. 

I  was  the  CEO  of  a  company  that  grew  very  rapidly  and  finally 
got  to  the  point  where,  if  its  investors  were  to  get  any  of  their 
money  out,  it  had  to  go  public.  The  decision  was  made  that  it 
would  go  public  and  go  directly  to  the  New  York  Stock  Exchange. 
That  meant  underwriting  by  two  of  the  Nation's  largest  investment 
bankers,  Merrill  Lynch  and  Smith  Barney,  and  I  said  to  the  people 
who  were  then  handling  it,  I  assume  this  means  we  are  going  to 
hire  a  very  expensive  law  firm  in  either  New  York  or  San  Francisco 
or  possibly  both. 

The  folks  at  Merrill  Lynch  said,  actually,  you  have  one  of  the  fin- 
est law  firms  in  the  country  dealing  with  this  particular  issue  in 
Kimball,  Parr  and  we  would  recommend,  as  a  New  York  invest- 
ment banker,  that  the  law  firm  that  handles  the  public  offering  for 
Franklin  be  Kimball,  Parr.  That  was  the  first  time  I  had  heard  Mr. 
Kimball's  name,  and  as  I  associated  with  the  people  at  Kimball, 
Parr,  both  in  that  official  manner  and  in  the  unofficial  question  of 
how  I  handle  my  own  shareholdings,  I  have  come  to  realize  how 
wise  they  were  in  making  that  recommendation. 

Mr.  Kimball  is  the  founder  of  that  firm  and  his  name  is  the  first 
in  the  list  of  named  partners.  He  would  be  qualified  to  serve  on 
any  bench  in  any  jurisdiction  and  I  am  happy  to  add  my  endorse- 
ment to  that  of  Senator  Hatch's,  based  on  that  personal  experience 
with  him  and  his  legal  background. 

Senator  DeWine.  Senator  Bennett,  thank  you  very  much. 

Let  me  now  turn  to  the  senior  Senator  from  the  State  of  Ohio, 
my  colleague,  John  Glenn. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  JOHN  GLENN,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  OHIO 

Senator  Glenn.  Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman  and  mem- 
bers of  the  committee.  It  is  a  pleasure  to  be  here  today  to  introduce 
to  the  committee  two  Ohioans  who  have  been  nominated  by  the 
President  to  serve  as  Federal  district  court  judges.  They  are  prod- 
ucts of  our  judicial  review  commission  that  advises  me  on  these  se- 
lections, as  the  chairman  knows. 

These  individuals,  Judge  James  Gwin  and  Mr.  Algenon  Marbley, 
are  certainly  worthy  of  appointment  and  I  would  ask  them  to  come 
up  and  sit  with  me  up  here  while  I  introduce  them,  if  I  could.  Mr. 
Marbley  and  Judge  Gwin,  would  you  come  up,  please?  Thank  you. 

They  both  have  had  very  distinguished  careers,  and  before  I  go 
on  to  scribe  some  of  the  qualities  in  these  gentlemen  that  I  believe 
make  them  well  suited  to  serve  on  the  Federal  bench,  I  want  to 
take  just  a  moment  to  recognize  their  families  who  have  traveled 
with  them  here  today  to  share  in  this  proud  moment.  As  I  read 
your  names,  if  you  would  just  stand  back  there,  I  would  appreciate 
it  so  you  could  be  recognized. 

We  have  Mr.  Marbley's  wife,  Janet  Green  Marbley,  as  well  as 
their  two  sons,  Algenon,  Jr.  and  Aaron  Marbley.  They  are  both 


45-964    98-12 


342 

here.  They  are  joined  by  Mr.  Marbley's  mother,  Ann  Johnson.  We 
thank  you  for  coming  in  today. 

We  also  have  Judge  Gwin's  wife,  Bonnie  Gwin,  their  two  sons, 
John  and  Michael  Gwin,  and  Judge  Gwin's  mother,  Carol  Gwin. 
Thank  you  all  for  coming  here  today.  I  am  not  sure  who  is  minding 
the  store  back  home,  Mr.  Chairman,  but  they  have  quite  a  contin- 
gent in  here. 

This  committee  has  a  large  amount  of  information  on  these  nomi- 
nees. I  will  not  try  and  go  through  it  all.  I  will  just  sort  of  summa- 
rize or  highlight  some  of  the  things  I  believe  make  them  outstand- 
ing nominees. 

Jim  Gwin  currently  sits  as  a  Stark  County  Court  of  Common 
Pleas  judge,  where  he  has  presided  for  the  last  7  years.  Judge 
Gwin  has  earned  a  reputation  for  hard  work.  Since  1989,  he  has 
presided  over  more  jury  trials  than  any  other  general  division 
judge  in  the  State  of  Ohio.  Judge  Gwin  has  presided  over  440  jury 
trials,  including  225  felony  trials,  19  of  which  were  murder  trials. 
Where  the  average  is  15  jury  trials  per  year,  Jim  Gwin  has  aver- 
aged more  than  50  jury  trials  per  year,  so  we  would  definitely  be 
getting  a  hard  worker,  Mr.  Chairman,  when  we  get  Jim  Gwin. 

When  not  hearing  cases,  Judge  Gwin  has  been  active  with  the 
Ohio  Judicial  Conference,  chairing  the  court  technology  subcommit- 
tee and  serving  as  a  member  of  the  court  reform  committee.  He  has 
also  worked  in  the  community  on  behalf  of  the  Central  Stark  Coun- 
ty United  Way,  the  Central  Stark  County  Mental  Health  Center, 
the  East  Central  Ohio  Juvenile  Diabetes  Foundation,  and  the  Can- 
ton Group  Home.  Judge  Gwin  has  also  been  a  lecturer  at  the  Ohio 
Judicial  College. 

In  my  opinion.  Judge  Gwin  has  demonstrated  the  talent,  the  in- 
tellectual capacity  and  commitment  to  public  service  to  make  an 
exceptional  addition  to  the  Federal  bench  in  the  Northern  District 
of  Ohio. 

I  would  also  like  to  introduce  to  the  committee  Mr.  Algenon 
Marbley,  or  Monte  Marbley,  as  he  is  better  known.  Mr.  Marbley  is 
a  partner  in  the  law  firm  of  Vorys,  Sater,  Seymour  &  Pease.  He, 
too,  is  exceptionally  well  qualified  to  serve  on  the  Federal  bench. 
He  has  had  18  years  of  excellent  experience  as  a  trial  lawyer,  both 
in  the  public  sector,  for  the  U.S.  Department  of  Health  and  Human 
Services,  and  in  the  private  sector,  with  Vorys,  Sater.  Mr.  Marbley 
has  had  substantial  trial  experience  at  the  Federal  and  State  levels 
in  civil  and  criminal  matters,  both  in  jury  and  nonjury  trials. 

Monte  Marbley  has  significant  academic  experience  as  an  ad- 
junct professor  at  both  the  law  school  and  undergraduate  levels 
and  he  has  taught  trial  advocacy  to  lawyers  at  the  National  Insti- 
tute for  Trial  Advocacy  for  the  past  10  years. 

Like  Judge  Gwin,  Mr.  Marbley  has  also  taken  the  time  to  play 
an  active  role  in  his  community.  He  has  worked  as  a  leader  in  or- 
ganizations assisting  disadvantaged  youth  in  the  Columbus  area. 
He  has  served  as  secretary  and  counsel  to  the  board  of  directors 
of  the  Big  Brothers  and  Big  Sisters  Association  of  Franklin  County. 
He  has  served  for  7  years  on  the  board  of  directors  and  2  years  as 
president  of  the  Salesian  Boys  and  Girls  Club,  which  serves  eco- 
nomically disadvantaged  inner-city  youth.  He  also  has  served  in 
leadership  positions  for  the  Franklin  County  United  Way  Cam- 


343 

paign  and  the  United  Negro  College  Fund.  In  1995,  he  was  honored 
as  1  of  the  top  10  outstanding  young  citizens  of  Columbus,  OH. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  recommend  Jim  Gwin  and  Monte  Marbley  with- 
out any  reservation  whatsoever  and  I  believe  both  of  them  will 
make  very,  very  fine  Federal  judges.  They  have  the  demonstrated 
ability  and  they  have  the  temperament  to  be  able  to  dispense  jus- 
tice fairly  and  impartially  and  I  am  confident  the  committee  will 
agree  with  this  assessment  and  I  hope  to  see  their  very  swift  con- 
firmation. 

Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  DeWine.  Senator  Glenn,  thank  you  for  that  fine  state- 
ment. 

Let  me  turn  now  to  our  colleague  from  the  State  of  New  York, 
Senator  D'Amato. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  ALFONSE  M.  D'AMATO,  A  U.S.  SENATOR 
FROM  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Senator  D'Amato.  Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman.  Might 
I  ask  that  as  I  introduce  the  nominees,  they  have  an  opportunity 
to  come  forward. 

First,  it  is  my  pleasure  on  behalf  of  both  myself  and  Senator 
Moynihan,  who  has  submitted  an  extensive  statement,  and  let  me 
just  read  a  little  part  of  it.  He  said  today  is  a  great  day  for  New 
York,  and  he  talks  to  the  honor  and  privilege  it  is  for  him  to  put 
forth  and  join  with  me  in  support  of  three  of  the  wonderful  nomi- 
nees that  will  be  before  this  committee. 

I  am  going  to  ask  Mr.  Richard  Casey,  who  is  the  President's 
nominee  for  the  southern  district.  This  nomination  follows  the  nom- 
ination of  Mr.  Casey  by  President  Bush.  Not  very  often  do  we  get 
one  nominee  nominated  by  two  Presidents  for  the  same  job,  two 
Presidents  of  different  parties.  I  think  that  is  a  testimony  to  our 
Presidents,  their  administrations,  the  Justice  Department,  and  to 
the  caliber  of  the  nominee. 

Second,  Judge  Sotomayor,  who  comes  before  the  committee  for 
the  second  time.  It  was  less  than  5  years  ago  when  the  judge  was 
nominated  for  the  southern  district,  a  position  that  she  has  held 
now  for  almost  5  years  and  she  is  now  nominated  to  one  of  the 
most  important  courts  in  the  land,  the  Courts  of  Appeals,  Second 
Circuit. 

Then  Judge  Charles  Siragusa  from  Rochester,  whose  wife  went 
to  law  school,  coincidentally,  with  my  son,  Christopher.  I  think  she 
helped  him  get  through.  [Laughter.] 

By  the  way,  I  want  you  to  know  that  this  ^s  not  a  payback,  that, 
indeed,  I  have  been  privileged  to  support  this  nomination. 

Judge  Siragusa  was  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  President  by 
Senator  Moynihan.  Were  it  not  for  Senator  Moynihan  feeling  some- 
what under  the  weather,  as  he  has  a  heavy,  heavy  cold,  he  would 
be  here.  I  ask  that  his  statement  be  inserted  in  the  record  as  if 
read. 

Senator  DeWine.  His  statement  will  be  made  a  part  of  the  per- 
manent record. 

Senator  Torricelli. 


344 

Senator  TORRICELLI.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  had  three  statements  from 
him.  Senator  D'Amato,  do  you  have  all  three  statements  from  Sen- 
ator Moynihan? 

Senator  D'Amato.  Yes;  all  three  of  them,  and  that  is  why  I  want- 
ed to  characterize  his  statement  as  this  being  a  great  day  for  the 
judicial  system  of  this  country,  but  particularly  as  it  relates  to 
these  three  magnificent  individuals. 

[The  prepared  statements  of  Senator  Moynihan  follow:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Daniel  Patrick  Moynihan  on  the  Confirma- 
tion OF  SONIA  SOTOMAYOR  FOR  THE  UNITED  STATES  COURT  OF  APPEALS  FOR  THE 

Second  Circuit 

It  is  my  great  honor  today  to  support  Sonia  Sotomayor,  a  most  exemplary  can- 
didate for  the  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Second  Circuit. 

In  March  of  1991,  I  had  the  pleasure  of  recommending  Sonia  Sotomayor  to  be  a 
U.S.  District  Court  Judge  for  the  Southern  District  of  New  York,  a  position  which 
she  currently  holds.  Her  career  as  a  District  Court  Judge  has  been  a  distinguished 
one.  She  has  presided  over  a  number  of  high  profile  cases,  including  one  which,  to 
the  delight  of  baseball  fans  everywhere,  put  an  end  to  a  bitter  strike  in  1995.  Dur- 
ing the  five  year  tenure,  her  decisions  have  been  reversed  only  six  times — an  out- 
standing record. 

Judge  Sotomayor  is  a  former  Assistant  District  Attorney  with  the  New  York 
County  District  Attorney's  office  and  was  a  partner  at  the  law  firm  of  Pavia  &  Har- 
court.  She  has  considerable  experience  in  criminal  law  from  her  work  as  a  prosecu- 
tor, as  well  as  commercial  litigation  from  her  days  in  private  practice. 

Her  academic  achievements  are  truly  outstanding.  She  was  graduated  summa 
cum  laude  from  Princeton  University  in  1976,  where  she  was  elected  Phi  Beta 
Kappa  and  was  a  co-winner  of  the  M.  Taylor  Pyne  Honor  Prize,  awarded  to  the 
graduating  senior  who  has  most  clearly  m.anifested  excellent  scholarship  and  effec- 
tive support  of  the  best  interests  of  the  University.  She  received  her  law  degree  from 
Yale  University,  where  she  was  an  Editor  for  the  Yale  Law  Journal. 

I  believe  that  Judge  Sotomayor's  considerable  accomplishments  merit  appoint- 
ment to  the  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Second  Circuit  and  I  am  con- 
fident that,  upon  confirmation,  she  will  serve  with  high  distinction. 


Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Daniel  Patrick  Moynihan  on  the  Confirma- 
tion OF  Charles  J.  Siragusa  To  Be  United  States  District  Judge  for  the 
Western  District  of  New  York 

I  am  pleased  to  present  to  the  committee  New  York  State  Supreme  Court  Justice 
Charles  Joseph  Siragusa,  nominated  to  be  United  States  District  Judge  for  the 
Western  District  of  New  York. 

Might  I  note  that  my  judicial  screening  panel  interviewed  more  than  twenty  ap- 
plicants to  fill  the  vacancy  that  resulted  when  Judge  Michael  A.  Telesca  took  senior 
status.  There  were,  as  one  might  have  expected,  many  splendid  candidates.  How- 
ever, Judge  Charles  J.  Siragusa  stood  out. 

Judge  Siragusa  has  served  with  great  distinction  in  the  Seventh  Judicial  District. 
He  was  elected  to  the  State  Supreme  Court  in  1992,  following  fifteen  years  as  a 
prosecutor  with  the  Monroe  County  District  Attorney's  office.  In  that  capacity  he 
tried  over  100  felonies  and  was  involved  in  a  number  of  significant  criminal  cases 
including  the  prosecution  of  Arthur  J.  Shawcross,  a  serial  killer  responsible  for  the 
deaths  of  eleven  women.  He  received  widespread  recognition  and  praise  for  his  work 
on  that  case. 

A  native  of  Rochester,  Judge  Siragusa  was  graduated  from  LeMoyne  College  in 
DeWitt,  New  York  in  1969.  He  received  his  law  degree  from  Albany  Law  School 
1969  and  has  been  a  member  of  the  New  York  State  Bar  since  1977. 

Judge  Charles  J.  Siragusa  is  a  man  of  great  intelligence  and  unwavering  prin- 
ciple. I  am  confident  that,  upon  confirmation,  he  will  serve  with  honor  and  distinc- 
tion. 


345 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Daniel  Patrick  Moynihan  on  the  Confirma- 
tion OF  Richard  C.  Casey  as  a  U.S.  District  Court  Judge  for  the  Southern 
District  of  New  York 

It  is  my  great  privilege  to  support  the  confirmation  of  Richard  Conway  Casey,  a 
nominee  for  United  States  District  Judge  for  the  Southern  District  of  New  York. 

Mr.  Casey  has  been  associated  with  the  New  York  firm  of  Brown  &  Wood  for  over 
thirty  years,  serving  as  a  partner  for  fourteen  years  before  becoming  Of  Counsel  to 
the  firm  in  1984.  During  his  time  in  private  practice,  he  has  specialized  in  securi- 
ties, corporate  and  criminal  litigation. 

Earlier  in  his  career,  he  served  as  Assistant  United  States  Attorney  for  the  South- 
em  District  of  New  York  and  investigated  public  corruption  as  counsel  to  a  Special 
Commission  of  the  State  of  New  York,  commonly  known  as  the  Moreland  Act  Com- 
mission. 

Might  I  add  that  Mr.  Casey  has  benefited  from  the  rigors  of  a  Jesuit  education. 
He  was  graduated  from  the  College  of  the  Holy  Cross  in  1955  and  went  on  to  receive 
his  law  degree  at  Georgetown  University  Law  center  in  1958.  At  Georgetown  he  was 
the  recipient  of  the  Beaudry  Cup  for  best  Moot  Court  argument  in  his  class.  He 
later  went  on  to  be  a  finalist  in  the  National  Moot  Court  Competition. 

It  is  an  honor  to  introduce  Mr.  Casey  to  the  Committee  today.  I  am  quite  con- 
fident that  upon  his  confirmation  he  will  serve  New  York  with  distinction. 

Senator  D'Amato.  Let  me  say,  I  am  going  to  ask  that  my  full 
statement  be  included  in  the  record  as  if  read  in  its  entirety,  be- 
cause I  have  these  loquacious  speech  writers  who  have  gone  into 
every  detail  of  all  of  the  candidates  and  their  lives.  Some,  they 
might  want  to  hear.  Others  would  be — well,  no. 

Senator  DeWine.  It  will  be  made  a  part  of  the  record. 

Senator  D'Amato.  Let  me  say  that  it  is  a  great  privilege  and 
honor  to  nominate  Dick  Casey.  Dick  Casey's  impressive  legal  career 
is  quite  extraordinary.  But  I  think  more  extraordinary  is  the  fact 
that  over  the  past  several  years,  Mr.  Casey's  legal  work  has  shifted 
slightly  as  a  result  of  his  blindness.  He  is  blind.  He  would  be  the 
first  district  court  judge  who  would  be  nominated  for  this  position 
and  take  the  bench  as  a  person  who  has  no  sight — who  is  legally 
blind. 

There  is  no  doubt  as  to  his  legal  acumen.  There  is  no  doubt  as 
to  the  brilliance  of  his  academic  record  and  his  distinguished  career 
before  the  bar.  Even  after  he  lost  his  sight,  he  remained  vigorous 
in  actively  practicing  law,  probably  more  than  most.  His  tenacious- 
ness  toward  justice  and  fairness  will  never  be  impeded  by  his  loss 
of  sight. 

We  had  a  distinguished  panel  of  jurists  before  our  committee 
who  came  forward  with  this  nominee  and  who  explored  the  ques- 
tion as  to  whether  or  not  he  would  be  able  to  discharge  the  duties 
as  a  trial  justice.  This  was  headed  by  the  former  chief  justice  of  the 
southern  district.  Their  recommendation  was  unanimous  in  terms 
of  indicating  that  Dick  Casey  could  do  the  job. 

I  believe  that  not  only  is  he  eminently  qualified  by  way  of  his 
background  and  his  experience,  but  his  success  in  the  face  of  the 
disability  that  he  has  had  to  deal  with  will  give  further  testimony, 
living  proof,  to  his  great  personal  strength  and  it  will  be  an  inspi- 
ration to  Americans  and  many  others  that  we  are  winning  the  bat- 
tle against  the  prejudice  toward  the  disabled.  As  always,  he  will  be 
a  trail  blazer,  opening  new  doors  for  others. 

Let  me  just  add,  for  the  record,  just  some  of  his  credentials.  I 
might  mention  that  those  who  know  him  best  have  come  forward 
and  are  here  today,  not  only  his  family  but  one  of  the  great  U.S. 
attorneys  from  the  Southern  District  of  New  York,  a  great  prosecu- 


346 

tor  in  his  own  right  is  here  today  to  lend  his  support  to  his  friend 
and  colleague,  former  U.S.  attorney  Otto  Obermeyer. 

Mr.  Casey's  impressive  legal  career  began  as  an  assistant  U.S. 
attorney  in  the  Southern  District  in  the  Criminal  Division.  He 
joined  the  special  commission  for  the  State  of  New  York  investigat- 
ing public  corruption,  and  for  over  three  decades,  he  has  been  prac- 
ticing with  Brown  and  Wood  in  New  York  City.  So  it  is  my  distinct 
pleasure  to  put  forward  this  nominee. 

As  it  relates  to  Justice  Sotomayor,  what  can  one  say?  But  only 
in  this  country,  the  daughter  of  a  humble  working  family  has  risen 
by  way  of  her  legal  scholastic  stewardship  to  the  highest  trial  court 
in  the  Federal  district,  the  premiere  district,  I  might  add  with  some 
prejudice,  the  Southern  District  of  New  York,  where  she  has  distin- 
guished herself. 

I  predicted  to  this  committee  almost  5  years  ago  that  Judge 
Sotomayor  would  be  an  exemplary,  outstanding  justice.  She  has 
demonstrated  that  repeatedly.  She  has  shown  compassion,  wisdom, 
one  of  the  great  intellects  on  the  court.  Her  experience  both  as  a 
prosecutor,  civil  litigator,  and  Federal  trial  judge  makes  her  an  ex- 
ceptionally qualified  candidate  for  the  second  circuit.  She  is  here 
with  her  beautiful  mama,  and  I  am  wondering  if  we  could  have 
your  mother  stand.  Mrs.  Sotomayor,  congratulations  to  you. 

Last  but  not  least  is  Judge  Siragusa,  and  I  want  you  to  know 
that  the  judge  comes  with  one  of  the  most  highly  rated  records  as 
a  great  trial  judge,  sitting  in  the  Supreme  Court  in  Monroe  County, 
having  served  as  first  assistant  district  attorney  and  thereafter 
being  recognized  by  more  groups  than  one  could  possibly  mention 
in  terms  of  his  service  to  community  and  in  terms  of  his  legal  stew- 
ardship. 

Of  all  of  his  great  accomplishments,  I  might  add,  is  the  fact  that 
the  judge  graduated  from  a  wonderful  school,  and  you  know  that 
my  chief  and  top  administrative  assistant  put  this  in.  He  said, 
after  graduating  from  a  wonderful  college,  LeMoyne  College  in  Syr- 
acuse. So  I  want  you  to  know,  judge,  that  Mike  Kinsella  has  never 
forgotten  that  kinship  and  we  share  that  with  this  committee 
today. 

I  recommend  him  to  this  committee,  along  with  Senator  Moy- 
nihan,  recognizing  that  the  President  has  chosen  well  and  also  that 
this  district  is  one  of  the  busiest  districts,  most  overworked  dis- 
tricts, in  the  country  and  they  certainly  could  use  the  judge  as 
quickly  as  possible. 

Mr.  Chairman,  it  is  a  great  honor  to  recommend  these  three 
nominees  and  join  with  our  senior  Senator  in  presenting  them  to 
the  committee  today. 

Senator  DeWine.  Senator  D'Amato,  thank  you  very  much  for 
joining  us. 

[The  prepared  statements  of  Senator  D'Amato  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Alfonse  D'Amato  Introducing  Sonia 

Sotomayor 

I  am  pleased  to  join  my  colleague,  Senator  Moynihan  in  the  introduction  of  Judge 
Sonia  Sotomayor  to  the  Senate  Judiciary  Committee. 

Several  years  ago  I  introduced  Judge  Sotomayor  to  the  Judiciary  Committee  when 
she  was  nominated  to  the  federal  bench  in  the  Southern  District  of  New  York.  I  was 


347 

confident  then  that  she  would  be  a  fine  addition  to  the  federal  bench  and,  nearly 
5  years  later,  I  remain  confident  of  her  abilities  and  fairness  as  a  federal  judge. 

After  graduating  from  Princeton  University,  Summa  Cum  Laude,  and  then  earn- 
ing a  law  degree  from  Yale,  where  she  served  as  editor  of  the  Yale  Law  School  Jour- 
nal, Judge  Sotomayor  worked  in  the  New  York  County  District  Attorney's  Office. 
She  joined  the  law  firm  of  Pavia  &  Harcourt  and  made  Partner  in  1988.  In  private 
practice.  Judge  Sotomayor  has  had  significant  experience  in  general  civil  litigation 
including  real  estate,  employment,  contract,  intellectual  property  law  and  export 
commodity  trading. 

Judge  Sotomayor  has  exercised  her  civic  duties  as  a  Board  Member  of  a  number 
of  organizations,  including  the  Puerto  Rican  Legal  Defense  &  Education  Fund,  the 
New  York  State  Mortgage  Agency  and  the  New  York  City  Campaign  Finance  Board. 

During  her  term  in  the  Southern  District  of  New  York,  she  received  numerous 
honors  including  the  "Distinguished  Woman  in  the  Field  of  Jurisprudence"  by  the 
Secretary  of  State  of  Puerto  Rico,  "Recognition  of  Outstanding  Achievement  and 
Dedication  to  the  Latino  Community"  by  the  Latino  American  Law  Student  Associa- 
tion of  Hofstra  University  School  of  Law  and  an  Award  for  "Outstanding  and  Dedi- 
cated Service  to  the  People  of  New  York  County"  by  the  District  Attorney's  Office. 
Her  "Lifetime  Achievement  Award"  was  presented  to  her  by  both  the  National  Puer- 
to Rican  Coalition  and  the  Hispanic  National  Bar  Association. 

Judge  Sotomayor's  experience  as  prosecutor,  civil  litigator,  and  federal  district 
court  judge  makes  her  an  exceptionally  qualified  candidate  for  the  Second  Circuit. 
Her  extensive  knowledge  of  the  law  and  her  experience  deciding  federal  cases  pre- 
pares her  for  the  complex  legal  decisions  that  must  be  made  by  Circuit  Court 
judges. 

I  thank  the  Committee  for  this  opportunity  to  present  Judge  Sotomayor  and  urge 
the  Committee's  swift  consideration  of  her  nomination  to  the  Second  Circuit. 


Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Alfonse  D'Amato  Introducing  Charles 

Joseph  Siragusa 

I  am  pleased  to  introduce  Mr.  Charles  Siragusa  to  the  Senate  Judiciary  Commit- 
tee. As  the  Committee  is  aware,  the  President  has  nominated  Judge  Siragusa  to  the 
position  of  District  Court  Judge  for  the  Western  District  of  New  York. 

I  would  like  to  take  a  moment  to  recognize  his  family  members  who  are  present — 
his  bride  (as  of  August  30,  1997)  Lisa  Serio  Siragusa  and  his  new  parents-in-law, 
Mr.  and  Mrs.  James  Serio.  (In  fact.  Judge  Siragusa  would  have  been  before  the 
Committee  weeks  ago  had  he  been  able  to  get  a  plane  back  from  his  honeymoon.) 

Judge  Siragusa  is  from  Rochester,  New  York  and  has  been  a  life-long  New  Yorker. 
After  graduating  from  a  wonderful  school,  LeMoyne  College  in  Syracuse,  and  work- 
ing for  several  years  as  a  teacher  in  a  Rochester  school.  Judge  Siragusa  entered  law 
school,  and  graduated  from  Albany  Law  School. 

Judge  Siragusa's  impressive  legal  career  began  as  an  Assistant  District  Attorney 
with  the  Monroe  County  District  Attorney's  Office.  He  was  promoted  to  First  Assist- 
ant District  Attorney  and  was  employed  in  that  position  for  eight  of  his  fifteen  years 
of  service.  Judge  Siragusa's  work  at  the  prosecutor's  office  has  been  recognized  by 
many  groups,  awarding  him  distinguishing  honors  including,  among  others,  the 
Gannet  Rochester  Times  Union's  Person  of  the  Year  (1991),  Honorary  Deputy  Chief 
of  the  Rochester  Police  Department  (1991),  Exemplary  Service  Award  from  the  Mon- 
roe County  Sheriffs  Department  (1991)  and  a  Distinguished  Service  Award  for  his 
contribution  to  the  Italian  American  Community-Counsel  General  of  Italy  (1996). 

Since  1993,  Judge  Siragusa  has  served  New  York  State  as  a  State  Supreme  Court 
Judge  in  Rochester,  deciding  cases  in  a  fair  and  equitable  manner. 

This  nominee  has  also  served  in  several  community  positions,  volunteering  his 
leadership  and  knowledge  for  people  in  need.  He  has  sat  on  the  Advisory  Board  for 
Rape  Crisis  and  the  Families  and  Friends  of  Murdered  Children  and  Victims  of  Vio- 
lence. 

I  thank  the  Committee  for  allowing  me  this  opportunity  to  introduce  Judge 
Siragusa  and  I  look  forward  to  swift  action  on  his  nomination. 


Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Alfonse  D'Amato  Introducing  Richard 

Conway  Casey 

It  is  an  honor  for  me  to  introduce  Richard  Casey  to  the  members  of  the  Senate 
Judiciary  Committee — a  highly  regarded  and  respected  lawyer,  and  a  close  personal 
friend,  who  President  Bill  Clinton  has  nominated  to  the  Southern  District  of  New 
York,  echoing  a  prior  endorsement  by  former  President  George  Bush. 


348 

After  graduating  from  the  College  of  Holy  Cross,  Mr.  Casey  attended  Georgetown 
University  Law  Center.  A  sign  of  his  future  abilities,  he  became  a  finalist  in  a  na- 
tional competition  for  his  moot  court  team.  He  served  his  country  in  the  United 
States  Army  and  served  overseas  before  he  was  honorably  discharged. 

Mr.  Casey's  impressive  legal  career  began  as  an  Assistant  U.S.  Attorney  with  the 
U.S.  Attorney's  Office,  Criminal  Division,  in  the  Southern  District  of  New  York.  He 
joined  the  Special  Commission  for  the  State  of  New  York  investigating  public  cor- 
ruption. 

For  over  three  decades,  Mr.  Casey  has  been  practicing  with  Brown  &  Wood  in 
New  York  City,  elected  to  partner  in  1970  and  Counsel  in  1984,  practicing  complex 
securities,  corporate  and  criminal  litigation. 

Over  the  past  five  years,  Mr.  Casey's  legal  work  has  shifted  slightly  as  a  result 
of  his  blindness  but  there  is  no  doubt  he  remains  vigorously  active  in  the  practice 
of  law,  probably  more  than  most.  His  tenaciousness  toward  justice  and  fairness  will 
never  be  impeded  by  his  loss  of  sight. 

What  some  may  view  as  a  disability  has  only  strengthened  his  resolve  for  equity 
and  justice.  He  served  as  Director  of  Guiding  Eyes  for  the  Blind,  a  non-profit  school 
for  training  of  guide  dogs  and  the  blind  and  Director  of  Catholic  Guild  for  the  Blind, 
a  nonprofit  organization  dealing  in  rehabilitation  of  the  blind. 

In  addition  to  his  work  with  these  groups,  Mr.  Casey  has  shared  his  incredible 
knowledge  of  the  law,  civil  and  criminal,  as  the  Chairman  of  the  American  Bar  As- 
sociation Committee  on  Securities  Litigation  from  1975  to  1977  and  as  a  member 
of  the  Southern  District  of  New  York  Trial  and  Appellate  Panel  representing  indi- 
gent defendants  in  criminal  trials  and  appeals  for  twenty  years. 

Mr.  Casey  was  appointed  by  the  Honorable  Jack  Weinstein  to  serve  on  the  Special 
Commission  on  Discovery  Abuse,  amending  local  rules,  and  previously  served,  at  the 
request  of  Chief  Justice  Warren  Burger,  on  the  Special  Committee  for  Discovery 
Abuse,  which  issued  a  report  recommending  amendments  to  the  Federal  Rules  of 
Civil  Procedure. 

Whether  a  criminal  case  or  a  civil,  with  a  disability  or  without,  Mr.  Casey  has 
earned  the  tremendous  reputation  that  has  followed  him  throughout  his  career.  His 
extensive  knowledge  of  the  law,  thoughtful  consideration  and  his  demonstrated  lead- 
ership make  him  an  exceptionally  well  qualified  candidate  for  this  position. 

Besides  being  eminently  qualified  to  serve  in  this  position,  his  success  in  the  face 
of  his  disability  is  further  testament  of  his  great  personal  strength.  His  appointment 
shows  that  in  America  we  are  winning  the  battle  against  prejudice  towards  the  dis- 
abled. As  always,  he  will  be  a  trailblazer,  opening  new  doors  for  others. 

I  strongly  support  his  nomination  and  urge  the  Committee's  swift  consideration. 

Senator  DeWine.  Let  me  turn  now  to  my  colleague  from  the 
State  of  Tennessee,  Senator  Thompson. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  FRED  THOMPSON,  A  U.S.  SENATOR 
FROM  THE  STATE  OF  TENNESSEE 

Senator  Thompson.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Mr.  Oilman,  would  you  come  forward,  please. 

Senator  DeWine.  I  see  our  colleague  from  Tennessee,  also.  Sen- 
ator Frist,  is  here. 

Senator  THOMPSON.  Mr.  Chairman  and  fellow  members  of  the 
committee,  I  am  pleased  to  come  here  today  before  you  to  introduce 
Ronald  L.  Oilman,  the  President's  nominee  to  fill  a  vacancy  in  the 
U.S.  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Sixth  Circuit.  I  want  to  start  by  ac- 
knowledging my  gratitude  and  the  gratitude  of  all  lawyers  who 
practice  before  the  sixth  circuit  to  our  chairman  for  scheduling  a 
hearing  on  Mr.  Oilman's  nomination  so  promptly. 

Before  I  summarize  Mr.  Oilman's  accomplishments  to  the  com- 
mittee and  explain  why  I  believe  he  merits  the  committee's  ap- 
proval, I  want  to  say  a  brief  word  to  recognize  Judge  Ted  Milburn, 
whose  seat  Mr.  Oilman  will  be  filling  if  he  is  confirmed. 

Judge  Milburn  has  served  the  people  of  Tennessee  and  the 
United  States  as  a  judge  for  almost  a  quarter  of  a  century,  first  as 
a  State  trial  judge  and,  since  1983,  a  Federal  judge.  Judge  Milburn 


349 

is  widely  regarded  throughout  the  sixth  circuit  as  a  leader  on  the 
court.  On  behalf  of  all  Tennesseeans,  I  want  to  thank  him  for  his 
service  and  wish  him  well  in  his  retirement.  Mr.  Oilman  has  big 
shoes  to  fill. 

Let  me  turn  now  to  the  nominee  before  you  today.  Mr.  Oilman 
is  a  native  of  Memphis  and  attended  high  school  at  Christian 
Brothers  Academy  in  Memphis,  from  which  he  graduated  as  val- 
edictorian. He  left  Tennessee  for  college  and  law  school  in  Massa- 
chusetts, attending  the  Massachusetts  Institute  of  Technology  and 
Harvard  Law  School.  After  graduating  cum  laude  from  Harvard  in 
1967,  Mr.  Oilman  returned  to  Memphis,  where  he  has  practiced 
ever  since  in  one  of  Tennessee's  leading  law  firms,  Ferris,  Mat- 
hews, Oilman,  Branan  &  Hellen.  I  might  point  out  that  the  Mat- 
hews in  that  firm  name  is  former  Senator  Harlan  Mathews.  I 
might  also  point  out  that  my  son  is  a  member  of  that  firm. 

Mr.  Oilman  rapidly  became  established  as  a  leader  of  the  Mem- 
phis bar,  serving  as  the  president  of  the  young  lawyers  division  of 
the  Memphis  Bar  Association  and  president  of  the  young  lawyers 
conference  of  the  Tennessee  Bar  Association.  He  subsequently 
served  a  term  as  president  of  both  the  Memphis  Bar  Association 
and  the  Tennessee  Bar  Association.  In  recognition  of  Mr.  Oilman's 
leadership  at  the  bar,  he  was  appointed  to  serve  on  the  Tennessee 
Court  of  the  Judiciary,  which  hears  disciplinary  cases  against  State 
judges.  He  has  also  served  occasionally  as  a  special  judge  in  the 
State  courts  in  Memphis. 

Mr.  Oilman  has  been  a  leader  not  just  in  the  Memphis  bar  but 
in  the  Memphis  community,  as  well.  He  has  served  on  the  board 
of  directors  of  the  Chickasaw  Council  for  the  Boy  Scouts  of  Amer- 
ica, the  Memphis  Jewish  Home,  and  the  Memphis  Senior  Citizens 
Services,  among  other  groups.  In  1981,  Mr.  Oilman  was  awarded 
the  Sam  A.  Myar,  Jr.  Memorial  Award  for  outstanding  service  to 
the  legal  profession  and  the  Memphis  community. 

Perhaps  most  interesting  of  all  is  Mr.  Oilman's  membership  in 
the  Society  of  Memphis  Magicians,  which  he  served  as  president  in 
1986.  While  this  gives  me  a  little  concern,  I  assume  he  will  restrict 
himself  to  pulling  rabbits  out  of  his  hat  and  not  judicial  decisions. 

Mr.  Oilman  is  an  extremely  well-qualified  and  unusually  well- 
rounded  nominee.  While  his  practice  is  concentrated  on  litigation, 
particularly  commercial  litigation,  he  also  has  engaged  in  estate 
planning  and  general  business  law.  Not  only  is  he  experienced  in 
civil  law,  but  in  criminal  law,  as  well,  as  he  has  represented  a 
number  of  indigent  criminal  defendants  in  Federal  court. 

More  recently,  Mr.  Oilman's  practice  has  focused  on  the  practice 
of  alternative  means  of  dispute  resolution,  such  as  arbitration  and 
mediation.  Mr.  Oilman  has  often  served  as  an  arbitrator  and  medi- 
ator for  groups  like  the  American  Arbitration  Association  and  the 
National  Association  of  Securities  Dealers.  With  the  backlog  in  civil 
litigation  throughout  the  Nation,  I  think  it  is  important  to  recog- 
nize the  importance  of  the  nominee's  experience  in  this  area.  Not 
only  is  this  experience  similar  to  the  experience  of  being  a  judge, 
but  it  will  no  doubt  help  him  bring  a  special  insight  to  a  variety 
of  procedural  issues  to  help  the  civil  litigation  system  work  better. 

I  know  his  wife,  Betsy,  is  here  today.  I  know  he  will  want  to  in- 
troduce her.  I  want  to  thank  again  Chairman  Hatch  for  scheduling 


350 

this  hearing  and  you,  Mr.  Chairman,  for  presiding  today.  I  am  con- 
fident that  after  hearing  from  Mr.  Oilman,  the  committee  will  fa- 
vorably report  his  nomination  and  that  the  full  Senate  will  confirm 
him  promptly.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Senator  DeWine.  Let  me  turn  to  the  other  Senator  from  the 
State  of  Tennessee,  Senator  Frist.  I  also  saw  Congressman  Ford 
back  there.  Congressman,  can  you  come  on  up  and  join  us? 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  BILL  FRIST,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM  THE 
STATE  OF  TENNESSEE 

Senator  Frist.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  will  join  my  col- 
league from  Tennessee  in  welcoming  the  opportunity  to  introduce 
Mr.  Ron  Oilman,  who  has  been  nominated  to  fill  the  vacancy  in  the 
Sixth  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals.  The  President  has  chosen  wisely  in 
his  selection  of  Ron  Oilman  of  Memphis,  TN,  to  fill  this  vacancy 
and  it  is  an  honor  for  me  to  be  here  to  speak  on  his  behalf 

I  have  heard  from  many  Tennesseeans  since  the  nomination  from 
across  the  State,  and  uniformly  and  unanimously,  they  have  called 
to  express  their  support,  their  full  support,  for  this  nomination.  Mr. 
Oilman  will  make  an  outstanding  judge  and  do  a  tremendous  job 
in  serving  Tennessee,  as  well  as  the  entire  sixth  circuit. 

His  experience,  which  has  been  outlined  to  you,  is  diverse  and 
impressive.  His  reputation  throughout  Tennessee  is  fair  and  delib- 
erative, all  of  which  speaks  volumes  toward  his  integrity.  I  am 
proud  to  support  this  outstanding  nominee,  was  glad  to  have  the 
opportunity  to  meet  his  family  earlier  today,  and  look  forward  to 
completion  of  this  nomination  process. 

Senator  DeWine.  Senator  Frist,  thank  you  very  much. 

Congressman  Ford,  welcome. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  HAROLD  E.  FORD,  A  REPRESENTATIVE 
IN  CONGRESS  FROM  THE  STATE  OF  TENNESSEE 

Mr.  Ford.  Thank  you,  and  I  certainly  thank  my  Senators,  Mr. 
Thompson  and  Mr.  Frist,  for  their  leadership  on  this.  I  welcome  my 
friend  and  certainly  the  future  sixth  circuit  jurist,  Mr.  Oilman,  and 
his  family.  I  know  his  wife  Betsy,  if  she  would  not  mind  standing, 
and  certainly  his  daughter.  Sherry,  who  is  there  in  the  back.  I 
know  Laura  was  not  able  to  be  with  the  soon-to-be  jurist  today,  but 
I  am  sure  she  would  be  proud  of  her  father. 

I  thank  Chairman  Hatch,  and  certainly,  again,  my  Senators  for 
moving  this  process  forward  in  the  way  that  they  were  able  to  and 
did.  I  would  certainly  say  that  Mr.  Oilman's  nomination,  the  way 
that  this  Senate  has  conducted  itself,  I  believe,  is  a  clear  illustra- 
tion of  how  this  process  can  and  should  work  when  partisan  politics 
takes  a  back  seat  to  the  pressing  needs  of  our  judiciary. 

I  thank  you  again,  Mr.  Chairman,  for  scheduling  this  hearing 
and  I  congratulate  my  friend,  Mr.  Oilman,  again. 

Senator  DeWine.  Congressman,  thank  you  very  much. 

I  have  a  statement  that  Senator  Leahy  has  asked  me  to  place  in 
the  record.  It  will  be  made,  without  objection,  a  part  of  the  record 
today. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Leahy  and  President  Clin- 
ton's radio  address  on  judicial  nominations  follow:] 


351 

Prepared  Statement  of  Hon.  Patrick  J.  Leahy,  a  U.S.  Senator  From  the  State 

OF  Vermont 

I  commend  the  Chairman  for  holding  this  confirmation  hearing  for  judicial  nomi- 
nees this  afternoon  and,  in  particular,  for  including  Judge  Sonia  Sotomayor  among 
those  being  considered.  Judge  Sotomayor  has  been  an  outstanding  Federal  District 
Court  Judge.  She  was  nominated  to  fill  a  vacancy  on  the  Second  Circuit  Court  of 
Appeals  last  June.  There  are  currently  four  vacancies  among  tlie  13  judgeships  that 
constitute  that  distinguished  court.  The  Chief  Judge  of  Second  Circuit  recently  testi- 
fied that  in  light  of  these  vacancies  80  percent  of  Second  Circuit  3-judge  panels  over 
the  next  12  months  will  have  to  be  filed  by  visiting  judges,  since  there  are  simply 
not  enough  Second  Circuit  judges  to  complete  them  and  to  hear  all  the  cases  that 
need  attention.  I  hope  that  we  will  proceed  without  delay  to  consider  the  nomination 
of  Judge  Sonia  Sotomayor  to  the  Second  Circuit  and  move  promptly  to  fill  the  va- 
cancies plaguing  the  Second  Circuit. 

I  note  that  we  are  also  considering  the  nomination  of  Ronald  Oilman  to  the  Sixth 
Circuit,  which  nomination  was  received  in  July  16;  the  District  Court  nominations 
of  Charles  Siragusa  and  Richard  Casey  to  the  Western  and  Southern  Districts  in 
New  York,  which  nominations  were  both  received  in  mid-July;  the  District  Court 
nominations  of  James  Gwin  and  Algenon  Marbley  to  the  Northern  and  Southern 
Districts  in  Ohio,  which  nominations  were  received  in  late  July  and  the  District 
Court  nomination  of  Dale  Kimball  to  the  District  of  Utah,  which  nomination  was 
received  on  September  5,  less  than  one  month  ago.  I  expect  that  Senator  Thompson 
and  Senator  DeWine  are  likewise  appreciative  of  the  Chairman's  willingness  to  in- 
clude these  nominees  in  this  hearing.  The  confirmation  process  for  the  vacancy  in 
Utah  is  likely  to  set  the  standard  for  how  promptly  this  Committee  can  proceed  to 
review  and  report  federal  judgeship  nominations.  We  all  look  forward  to  Mr. 
Kimball's  speedy  confirmation. 

Unfortunately,  this  is  only  the  sixth  confirmation  hearing  for  judicial  nominees 
that  the  Committee  has  convened  all  year.  By  this  time  two  years  ago,  the  commit- 
tee had  held  nine  confirmation  hearings  involving  36  judicial  nominees. 

While  I  am  encouraged  that  the  Committee  is  today  proceeding  with  a  hearing 
on  these  six  nominees,  there  remains  no  excuse  for  the  Committee's  delay  in  consid- 
ering the  nominations  of  such  outstanding  individuals  as  Professor  William  A. 
Fletcher,  Judge  James  A.  Beaty,  Jr.,  Judge  Richard  A.  Paez,  Ms.  M.  Margaret 
McKeown,  Ms.  Ann  L.  Aiken,  and  Ms.  Susan  Oki  MoUway,  to  name  just  a  few  of 
the  outstanding  nominees  who  have  all  been  pending  all  year  without  so  much  as 
a  hearing.  Professor  Fletcher  and  Ms.  Mollway  had  both  been  favorably  reported 
last  year.  Judge  Paez  and  Ms.  Aiken  had  hearings  last  year  but  have  been  passed 
over  so  far  this  year. 

After  this  hearing,  which  is  the  first  time  this  year  the  Committee  has  been  will- 
ing to  hold  two  hearings  in  any  one  calendar  month,  the  Committee  will  still  have 
pending  before  it  more  than  40  nominees  in  need  of  a  hearing  from  among  the  69 
nominations  sent  to  the  Senate  by  the  President  during  this  Congress.  From  the 
first  day  of  this  session  of  Congress,  this  Committee  has  never  had  pending  before 
it  fewer  than  20  judicial  nominees  for  hearings.  The  Committee's  backlog  has  now 
doubled  and  is  more  than  40.  Many  of  these  nominations  were  before  us  last  Con- 
gress, during  the  election  year  slowdown,  and  have  had  to  be  re-nominated  by  the 
President.  The  vacancies  for  which  they  are  nominated  have  not  been  filled  but  per- 
sist for  periods  now  reaching  years.  For  example,  the  Committee  has  10  nominees 
who  have  been  pending  for  more  than  a  year,  including  five  who  have  been  pending 
since  1995.  Thus,  while  I  am  delighted  that  we  are  moving  more  promptly  with  re- 
spect to  the  nominees  being  considered  today,  I  remain  concerned  about  the  other 
vacancies  and  other  nominees. 

Some  of  those  pending  before  the  Committee  had  hearings  or  were  reported  favor- 
ably by  the  Committee  last  Congress  but  have  been  passed  over  so  far  this  year  as 
the  vacancies  for  which  they  were  nominated  more  than  two  years  ago  persist.  The 
President  has  sent  us  69  judicial  nominations  so  far  this  year  and  is  sending  more 
each  week.  Over  the  last  three  weeks,  apparently  in  anticipation  of  the  President's 
radio  address  on  the  judicial  vacancy  crisis,  the  Senate  doubled  its  confirmations 
from  9  to  18  in  the  course  of  23  days.  I  expect  even  those  who  have  spent  so  much 
time  this  year  holding  up  the  confirmations  of  federal  judges  were  uncomfortable 
defending  this  Senate's  record  of  having  proceeded  on  only  9  of  the  61  nominees  re- 
ceived through  August  of  this  year.  With  the  two  confirmations  last  Friday,  the  Sen- 
ate achieved  the  snail-like  pace  of  confirming  two  judges  a  month  over  the  course 
of  this  year,  while  still  faced  with  almost  100  vacancies. 

The  Senate  continues  to  lag  well  behind  the  pace  established  by  Majority  Leader 
Dole  and  Chairman  Hatch  in  the  104th  Congress.  By  this  time  two  years  ago,  the 


352 

Senate  had  confinned  36  federal  judges,  double  the  number  achieved  this  year.  For 
purposes  of  perspective,  let  us  also  recall  that  by  the  end  of  September  1992,  during 
the  last  year  of  the  President  Bush's  term,  a  Democratic  majority  in  the  Senate  had 
confirmed  59  of  the  72  nominees  sent  to  us  by  a  Republican  President.  This  Senate 
is  on  pace  to  confirm  less  than  one-third  of  a  comparable  number  of  nominations. 

Those  who  delay  or  prevent  the  filling  of  these  vacancies  must  understand  that 
they  are  delaying  or  preventing  the  administration  of  justice.  We  can  pass  all  the 
crime  bills  we  want,  but  you  cannot  try  the  cases  and  incarcerate  the  guilty  if  you 
do  not  have  judges.  The  mounting  backlogs  of  civil  and  criminal  cases  in  the  dozens 
of  emergency  districts,  in  particular,  are  growing  taller  by  the  day.  National  Public 
Radio  broadcast  a  series  of  reports  all  lasts  week  on  the  judicial  crises  and  quoted 
the  Chief  Judge  and  U.S.  Attorney  from  San  Diego  earlier  this  week  to  the  effect 
that  criminal  matters  are  being  affected. 

I  have  spoken  about  the  crisis  being  created  by  the  vacancies  that  are  being  per- 
petuated on  the  Federal  courts  around  the  country.  At  the  rate  that  we  are  going, 
we  are  not  keeping  up  with  attrition.  When  we  adjourned  last  Congress  there  were 
64  vacancies  on  the  federal  bench.  After  the  confirmation  of  18  judges  in  nine 
months,  there  has  been  a  net  increase  of  30  vacancies,  an  increase  of  almost  50  per- 
cent in  the  number  of  federal  judicial  vacancies. 

The  Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  has  called  the  rising  number  of  vacancies 
"the  most  immediate  problem  we  face  in  the  federal  judiciary."  Chairman  Hatch  has 
said  that  we  can  do  better.  I  agree  with  them  and  add  that  we  must  do  better.  I 
have  urged  those  who  have  been  stalUng  the  consideration  of  these  fine  women  and 
men  to  reconsider  their  action  and  work  with  us  to  have  the  Committee  and  the 
Senate  fulfill  its  constitutional  responsibility. 

This  weekend  the  President  of  the  United  States  devoted  his  national  radio  ad- 
dress to  the  threat  being  posed  to  our  judicial  system  by  those  who  are  intent  on 
partisan  and  ideological  intimidation  of  federal  judges.  I  ask  that  a  copy  of  the 
President's  Radio  Address  on  Judicial  Nominations  from  September  26,  1997,  be  in- 
cluded in  the  record. 


Radio  Address  of  the  President  to  the  Nation 

The  President:  Good  morning.  I  want  to  talk  this  morning  about  a  very  real 
threat  to  our  judicial  system.  For  more  than  220  years  our  nation  has  remained 
young  and  strong  by  meeting  new  challenges  in  ways  that  renew  our  oldest  values. 
Throughout  our  history  our  judiciary  has  given  life  and  meaning  to  those  values  by 
upholding  the  laws  and  defending  the  rights  they  reflect,  without  regard  for  politics 
or  political  party. 

That  is  the  legacy  of  the  judicial  system  our  founders  established,  a  legacy  we  re- 
called this  Thursday  on  the  40th  anniversary  of  the  court-ordered  desegregation  of 
Little  Rock  Central  High  School. 

But  in  the  past  18  months  this  vital  partnership  has  broken  down  as  the  Senate 
has  refused  to  act  on  nomination  after  nomination.  And  in  federal  courthouses 
across  America,  almost  100  judges'  benches  are  empty.  In  1996,  the  Senate  con- 
firmed just  17  judges — that's  the  lowest  election-year  total  in  over  40  years. 

This  year  I've  already  sent  70  nominations  to  Congress,  but  so  far  they've  acted 
on  less  than  20.  The  result  is  a  vacancy  crisis  in  our  courts  that  Supreme  Court 
Chief  Justice  William  Rehnquist  warned  could  undermine  our  court's  abiUty  to  fair- 
ly administer  justice. 

Meanwhile,  our  courts  are  clogged  with  a  rising  number  of  cases.  An  unprece- 
dented number  of  civil  cases  are  stalled,  affecting  the  lives  of  tens  of  thousands  of 
Americans — from  the  family  seeking  life  insurance  proceeds,  to  the  senior  citizen 
trying  to  collect  Social  Security  benefits,  to  the  small  business  protecting  its  right 
to  compete.  In  our  criminal  courts  nearly  16,000  cases  are  caught  in  limbo,  while 
criminals  on  bail  await  punishment  and  victims  await  justice.  Our  sitting  judges  are 
overloaded  and  overworked,  and  our  justice  system  is  strained  to  the  breaking  point. 

The  Senate's  failure  to  act  on  my  nominations,  or  even  to  give  many  of  my  nomi- 
nees a  hearing,  represents  the  worst  of  partisan  politics.  Under  the  pretense  of  pre- 
venting so-called  judicial  activism,  they've  taken  aim  at  the  very  independence  our 
founders  sought  to  protect.  The  congressional  leadership  has  actually  threatened  sit- 
ting judges  with  impeachment,  merely  because  it  disagrees  with  their  judicial  opin- 
ions. Under  this  politically  motivated  scrutiny,  under  ever-mounting  caseloads,  our 
judges  must  struggle  to  enforce  the  laws  Congress  passes  and  to  do  justice  for  us 
all. 

We  can't  let  partisan  politics  shut  down  our  courts  and  gut  our  judicial  system. 
I've  worked  hard  to  avoid  that.  And  the  people  I've  nominated  for  judgeships  and 


353 

had  confirmed  have  had  the  highest  rating  of  well  qualified  from  the  American  Bar 
Association  of  any  President  since  these  ratings  have  been  kept. 

So  today  I  call  upon  the  Senate  to  fulfill  its  constitutional  duty  to  fill  these  vacan- 
cies. The  intimidation,  the  delay,  the  shrill  voices  must  stop  so  the  unbroken  legacy 
of  our  strong,  independent  judiciary  can  continue  for  generations  to  come.  This  age 
demands  that  we  work  together  in  bipartisan  fashion — and  the  American  people  de- 
serve no  less,  especially  when  it  comes  to  enforcing  their  rights,  enforcing  the  law, 
and  protecting  the  Constitution. 

Thanks  for  hstening. 

Senator  DeWine.  We  will  now  proceed  with  our  circuit  court 
nominees.  I  would  ask  our  two  nominees  to  come  forward.  We 
apologize  for  moving  everyone  around,  but  I  think  that  we  will  pro- 
ceed with  two  panels,  starting  with  the  circuit  court  nominees. 

As  you  come  up,  I  will  just  ask  you  to  remain  standing  and  take 
the  oath.  Do  you  swear  the  testimony  you  shall  give  in  this  hearing 
shall  be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so 
help  you,  God? 

Mr.  Oilman.  I  do. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  I  do. 

Senator  DeWine.  Thank  you  both  for  joining  us  today.  We  will 
start  with  Mr.  Oilman.  Mr.  Oilman,  is  there  anyone  in  the  audi- 
ence who  is  with  you  that  has  not  been  introduced  that  you  would 
like  to  introduce?  This  is  sort  of  a  family  day  here  today,  which  is 
just  fine  with  me. 

TESTIMONY  OF  RONALD  LEE  OILMAN,  OF  TENNESSEE,  TO  BE 
U.S.  CIRCUIT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  SIXTH  CIRCUIT 

Mr.  Oilman.  Well,  I  appreciate  it,  Mr.  Chairman.  My  wife,  I  be- 
lieve, has  been  introduced,  and  my  daughter.  Sherry.  Also,  I  have 
my  cousins  from  Chevy  Chase,  Marian  and  Leon  Blum. 

Senator  DeWine.  Let  us  have  them  all  stand  up,  or  maybe  they 
are  standing  up  already. 

Mr.  Oilman.  And  I  have  three  friends  of  my  daughter  Sherry, 
Rhonda  Rivens,  Allison  Issacman,  and  Stuart  Frisch  are  all  here, 
living  in  the  Washington,  DC  area.  Thank  you  very  much. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  DE  WINE 

Senator  DeWine.  Mr.  Oilman,  all  of  us  have  interest  in  all  of  the 
nominees.  I  obviously  have  a  special  interest  in  your  nomination, 
because  you  will  be  serving  in  the  sixth  circuit.  The  State  of  Ohio, 
of  course,  also  happens  to  be  part  of  the  sixth  circuit. 

I  notice  in  your  resume  that  you  have  worked  as  an  arbitrator- 
mediator  for  the  American  Arbitration  Association.  I  think  you  also 
worked  as  a  referee  in  the  Dalkon  shield  litigation. 

Mr.  Oilman.  Yes,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  DeWine.  You  have  written  on  this  topic.  I  wonder  if  you 
could  just  comment  for  us  as  to  whether  you  think  our  system  uses 
mediation  enough,  both  at  the  Federal  level  and  at  the  State  level. 

Mr.  Oilman.  My  own  experience,  of  course,  is  in  the  Tennessee 
courts  and  it  is  just  coming  of  age.  It  was  just  this  year,  as  a  mat- 
ter of  fact,  that  the  Tennessee  Supreme  Court  adopted  an  official 
rule  for  mediation.  The  Western  District  of  Tennessee  just  set  up 
its  program  this  year.  I  believe  it  is  something  that  has  been  quite 
helpful.  I  know  the  sixth  circuit  several  years  ago  set  up  a  special 


354 

counsel's  office  to  try  to  resolve  disputes,  even  when  they  reached 
the  court  of  appeals. 

It  seems  to  me  a  way  of  shortening  the  process  of  resolving  civil 
cases  and  the  statistics  show  that  about  80  percent  of  cases  that 
are  mediated  end  up  being  resolved.  So  I  think  the  parties  are  bet- 
ter off  and  the  courts  are  better  off  because  it  unclogs  the  system 
a  good  bit. 

Senator  DeWine.  What  is  your  opinion?  Are  we  using  this  to  its 
fullest  potential  in  the  Federal  system? 

Mr.  Oilman.  It  is  not  yet,  in  my  own  experience  in  the  Western 
District  of  Tennessee,  not  being  fully — but  it  is  just  in  the  process 
of  being  utilized.  I  expect,  though,  as  I  have  talked  to  colleagues 
in  the  States  of,  for  example,  Texas  and  Florida,  where  it  has  been 
in  existence  for  approximately  10  years,  I  understand  it  has  gotten 
to  the  point  in  those  States  where  you  cannot  go  to  trial  until  you 
first  try  mediation,  and  that  is  probably  the  direction  that  we  are 
going  in,  which,  in  fact,  I  think  is  healthy,  as  particularly  medi- 
ation is  not  binding  and  the  parties  are  not  obligated  to  settle,  so 
if  they  have  to  go  to  court,  they  certainly  have  the  opportunity  and 
the  legal  right  to  do  so.  But  on  the  other  hand,  many  of  these  civil 
cases  get  resolved  far  earlier  and  at  far  less  expense  to  the  parties 
than  if  they  had  to  go  through  traditional  litigation. 

Senator  DeWine.  Mr.  Oilman,  during  your  tenure  as  president  of 
the  Tennessee  Bar  Association,  the  Association  drafted  a  profes- 
sional creed  for  Tennessee  lawyers.  Is  there  anything  particularly 
unique  about  that  professional  creed  that  we  should  take  note  of? 

Mr.  Oilman.  Only  that  probably  the  thing  that  seems  most  im- 
portant is  the  need  for  attorneys  to  disagree  without  being  dis- 
agreeable. Unfortunately,  it  seems  to  be  more  and  more  as  the  pro- 
fession grows  where  the  lawyers  do  not  have  regular  contact  with 
each  other  on  a  repeated  basis  that  you  find  less  civility  in  the 
process  and  that  then  reflects  on  the  cost  to  the  litigants  and  the 
prolonging  of  the  litigation  and  the  need  for  lawyers  to  be  able  to 
cooperate,  particularly  on  procedural  matters  that  do  not  affect  the 
substance  of  the  case,  but  rather  than  just  schedule  a  deposition 
date  and  then  have  problems,  oh,  I  am  going  to  be  out  of  town,  to 
talk  to  each  other  first  and  do  things  informally,  where  it  does  not 
affect  the  merits  but  yet  it  greatly  aids  in  the  case  being  processed 
through  the  system,  and  that  is  sort  of  the  heart  of  the  profes- 
sionalism and  the  creed  standards. 

Senator  DeWine.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Thurmond. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  THURMOND 

Senator  Thurmond.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  Judge 
Sotomayor,  a  former  Supreme  Court  Justice  has  expressed  his  view 
of  consitutional  interpretation  as  follows,  and  I  quote,  "We  look  to 
the  history  of  the  time  of  framing  of  the  Constitution  and  the  inter- 
vening history  of  interpretation,  but  the  ultimate  question  must  be, 
what  do  the  words  and  the  text  mean  in  our  time?"  Do  you  agree 
with  that  statement? 


355 

TESTIMONY  OF  SONIA  SOTOMAYOR,  OF  NEW  YORK,  TO  BE  U.S. 
CIRCUIT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  SECOND  CIRCUIT 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  No,  sir,  not  fully.  I  agree  with  the  first  two 
parts  of  it,  that  you  look  at  the  Constitution  and  what  it  meant  at 
the  time.  The  last  suggests  that  I  would  be  trying  to  change  its 
meaning  today,  and  no.  I  think  the  first  two  would  inform  what  the 
last  result  should  be,  which  is  what  did  it  mean  then  and  how  to 
apply  new  facts  to  that  if  the  issue  is  new  facts. 

Senator  THURMOND.  Mr.  Oilman. 

Mr.  Oilman.  Senator,  I  think  that 

Senator  Thurmond.  Do  you  want  me  to  repeat  that,  or  do  you 
remember  it? 

Mr.  Oilman.  If  you  would,  that  would  be  fine. 

Senator  THURMOND.  "We  look  to  the  history  of  the  time  of  fram- 
ing of  the  Constitution  and  the  intervening  history  of  interpreta- 
tion, but  the  ultimate  question  must  be,  what  do  the  words  and  the 
text  mean  in  our  time?" 

Mr.  Oilman.  I  think  that  we  need  to  look  more  at  the  text  of  the 
Constitution  as  it  was  written.  The  words  are  important  and  I 
think  that  if  the  Constitution  is  to  have  enduring  meaning,  those 
concepts  obviously  have  to  be  applied  to  current  circumstances. 
New  events  arise  all  the  time,  but  I  think  the  Constitution  has  got 
to  be  interpreted  within  the  meaning  of  its  text. 

Senator  Thurmond.  Now,  this  question  is  for  both  of  you.  You 
have  both  had  some  involvement  with  the  American  Bar  Associa- 
tion. Do  you  believe  that  the  ABA  should  take  positions  on  social 
and  public  policy  issues  such  as  abortion  and  aid  to  the  homeless? 

Mr.  Oilman.  I  would  be  glad  to  answer  first.  I  was  actually  in 
the  House  of  Delegates  for  the  last  8  years.  I  am  no  longer  in  the 
House.  My  term  ended  in  August  of  this  year.  I  believe  the  ABA 
does  a  tremendous  amount  of  good  in  areas  like  continuing  legal 
education  and  professionalism  and  providing  legal  services.  My  own 
opinion  is  it  should  not,  though.  Senator,  be  involved  in  these 
issues  that  are  primarily  social  and  moral  on  which  lawyers  have 
no  particular  expertise,  and  I,  in  fact,  have  voted  against  those 
kind  of  resolutions  when  they  have  come  up  before  the  House. 

Judge  Sotomayor.  I  have  only  been  an  inactive  member  of  the 
bar.  I  joined  it  largely  because  of  its  educational  importance.  The 
American  Bar  Association  regularly  issues  studies  on  the  current 
state  of  the  law  and  analysis  of  where  the  law  is  and  what  is  hap- 
pening in  that  area  and  I  receive  their  publications  and  receive 
them  for  that  purpose. 

I  am  aware,  obviously,  as  any  reader  of  newspapers,  that  they 
have  taken  larger  positions  on  social  issues.  I  believe,  like  Mr.  Oil- 
man, that  that  perhaps  would  not  be  terribly  helpful  to  them  gen- 
erally because  it  undermines  their  effectiveness  on  the  central 
issues  of  their  mission,  which  is  the  education  of  lawyers. 

Senator  Thurmond.  This  question  is  for  you.  It  is  a  sad  fact  that 
many  young  people  get  involved  in  selling  drugs.  Based  on  your  ex- 
perience as  a  judge,  why  do  you  believe  many  young,  poor  youths 
become  drug  dealers? 

Judge  Sotomayor.  Senator,  I  wish  I  had  the  answer.  If  we  had 
the  answer,  we  would  have  a  solution  to  one  of  the  worst  ravages 
on  our  society,  drugs,  and  I  do  not.  The  reason  why  kids  become 


356 

in  drugs,  as  I  have  learned  as  a  judge,  vary  enormously.  Some,  be- 
cause of  the  lure  of  easy  money,  something  that  perhaps  they 
should  not  be  tempted  by,  but  they  are.  Others,  through  their  own 
self-ignorance  about  the  damage  they  are  doing  to  society  and  to 
themselves.  I  simply  do  not  have  one  reason  I  can  give  you.  The 
reasons  are  myriad  and  complex. 

Senator  Thurmond.  Nov^  another  question.  Do  you  oppose  man- 
datory minimum  sentences  for  drug  offenses? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  No,  sir. 

Senator  Thurmond.  Another  question.  Some  argue  that  the  Fed- 
eral sentencing  guidelines  do  not  provide  enough  flexibility  for  the 
sentencing  judge  and  some  even  say  they  should  be  abolished. 
What  is  your  view  of  the  Federal  sentencing  guidelines,  based  on 
your  experience  with  them? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Thus  far,  sir,  in  the  vast  majority  of  cases,  I 
have  found  the  guidelines  to  be  very  helpful  in  giving  some  comfort 
to  me  as  a  judge  that  I  am  not  arbitrarily  imposing  sentences 
based  on  my  personal  feelings.  I  believe  that  congressional  senti- 
ment, as  reflected  in  the  guidelines,  is  important  because  it  permits 
me  not  to  impose  my  personal  views  but  to  let  the  democracy  im- 
pose the  society's  views. 

With  respect  to  your  second  point.  Senator,  the  guidelines  al- 
ready provide  mechanisms  for  departures  in  appropriate  cir- 
cumstances. In  my  experience,  when  there  are  principled  and  rea- 
soned grounds  to  depart,  the  guidelines  already  permit  it. 

Now,  there  is  obviously  discussion  going  on,  I  am  very  well 
aware  of  it,  of  issues  that  the  Senate  is  taking  up  on  changes  with- 
in the  guidelines  with  respect  to  some  kinds  or  others  or  with  re- 
spect to  some  issues  or  other.  I  expect,  as  has  happened  during  the 
last  10  years,  that  the  Sentencing  Guideline  Commission  will  con- 
tinue to  take  up  those  issues  and  revisit  them  when  they  are  ap- 
propriate. 

Senator  THURMOND.  Thank  you  both  for  your  presence  and  your 
testimony. 

Senator  DeWine.  Senator  Sessions. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  SESSIONS 

Senator  SESSIONS.  Mr.  Oilman,  I  think  you  are  correct.  We  do 
need  to  look  for  ways  to  develop  alternatives  to  litigation  and  I 
think  we  can  do  a  better  job  of  settling  controversies  many  times 
without  the  expense  and  the  trauma  of  a  full-fledged  litigation.  I 
am  impressed  that  you  have  tried  37  cases  going  directly  to  judg- 
ment. I  think  that  helps  you  bring  something  to  the  circuit  that 
would  be  a  kind  of  experience  and  understanding  of  what  it  is  like 
to  be  in  the  pit,  if  I  might,  so  I  congratulate  you  for  that. 

I  notice  that  you  are  an  Eagle  Scout.  I  will  ask  you  a  legal  opin- 
ion. Do  you  feel  that  the  Washington  Zoo  appropriately  denied  the 
Boy  Scouts  the  right  to  have  a  court  of  honor  there  because  the 
Scouts  affirmed  a  belief  in  a  superior  being?  Do  you  think  that 
would  be  an  appropriate  decision  for  them  to  make  under  the  Con- 
stitution? 

Mr.  Oilman.  I  do  not  have  any  immediate  opinion  on  that.  I  was 
not  familiar  with  the  issue.  Senator. 


357 

Senator  Sessions.  Apparently,  that  has  been  somewhat  of  a  con- 
troversy and  I  think  they  have  backed  down  now,  but  originally, 
that  was  the  explanation  that  I  understand  they  gave.  I  think 
sometimes  we  do  need  to  respect  differences.  We  need  to  respect 
people's  religious  views  and,  under  the  Constitution,  the  right  to 
exercise  those  views.  I  do  not  think  they  should  be  discriminated 
against  because  of  that. 

With  regard  to  the  Constitution,  I  think  you  were  pretty  clear 
about  that.  Do  you  take  the  view,  and  would  you  not  agree  that  the 
Constitution  was  fundamentally  a  contract  between  the  people  and 
its  government.  The  first  three  words,  "We  the  People,"  shows  that 
it  was  a  contract  with  the  people  and  we  should  be  very  careful  be- 
fore we  alter  the  meaning  of  a  contract  which  the  people  ratified. 

Mr.  Oilman.  I  fully  agree  with  that,  Senator. 

Senator  Sessions.  Judge  Sotomayor,  would  you  agree  that  if  we 
respect  that  Constitution,  we  have  to  enforce  it,  the  good  and  bad 
parts? 

Judge  Sotomayor.  Absolutely,  sir. 

Senator  Sessions.  Even  if  we  do  not  agree  with  a  part  of  it? 

Judge  Sotomayor.  Absolutely. 

Senator  Sessions.  And  we  really  undermine  and  weaken  that 
Constitution  when  we  try  to  bend  it  to  make  it  fit  our  contem- 
porary feelings  of  the  moment? 

Judge  Sotomayor.  Sir,  I  do  not  believe  we  should  bend  the  Con- 
stitution under  any  circumstance.  It  says  what  it  says.  We  should 
do  honor  to  it. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  And  when  we  honor  it  as  it  is  written,  I  think 
we  strengthen  it  and  make  it  available  to  protect  us  when  any 
great  threat  to  our  liberty  arises.  I  agree  with  you  on  that. 

You  mentioned  the  sentencing  guidelines  that  Senator  Thurmond 
asked  you  about.  I  did  notice  that  you  had,  on  occasion,  stated  that 
you  disagree  with  the  mandatory  minimums.  Is  that  correct?  I  have 
heard  that. 

Judge  Sotomayor.  Sir,  I  do  not  ever  remember  saying  that. 
There  may  have  been  situations  in  which  in  a  particular  set  of 
facts  I  was  unhappy  with  the  results,  but  I  do  not  believe  that  I 
have  ever  stated  that  I  was  unhappy  with  mandatory  minimums 
as  a  policy  question,  no,  sir. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  I  think  you  made  a  good  point  about  the  fact 
that,  as  a  judge,  it  would  be  easier  to  sleep  at  night  when  you  basi- 
cally have  a  guideline  to  help  you  decide  what  that  sentence  should 
be  rather  than  having  it  totally  your  burden  from  0  to  20  years. 
I  think,  in  some  ways,  it  provides  more  uniformity  and  would  be 
easier  on  a  judge. 

Judge  Sotomayor.  Unquestionably,  sir. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  Do  you  find  it  that  way? 

Judge  Sotomayor.  I  have  no  idea  how  the  judges  before  me  ever 
set  a  consistent  standard  by  which  to  sentence  individuals.  The 
guidelines  do  provide  that  framework  in  a  very  helpful  way. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  I  have  been  in  court  when  I  thought  a  person 
might  get  probation  and  they  got  15  years  and  vice  versa.  I  think 
something  is  not  healthy  when  you  have  that  much  flexibility. 

So  I  do  believe  in  the  guidelines  and  I  think  in  the  long  run  they 
are  helpful,  but  I  do  notice  in  one  case  that  you  issued  a  sentence 


358 

and  you  were  very  critical  of  the  guidelines  and  said,  "I  hope  that 
yours,"  referring  to,  I  believe,  Louis  Gomez's  case,  "will  be  among 
the  many  that  will  convince  our  new  President  and  Congress  to 
change  these  minimums.  The  only  statement  I  can  make  is  this  is 
one  more  example  of  an  abomination  being  committed  before  our 
sight.  You  do  not  deserve  this,  sir.  I  am  deeply  sorry  for  you  and 
your  family,  but  the  laws  require  me  to  sentence  you  to  the  5-year 
minimum.  I  have  no  choice."  Would  you  like  to  comment  on  that? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Sir,  that  is  a  case  where  the  facts  and  my 
personal  feelings  would  have  imposed  a  different  result,  but  I  did 
not.  I  imposed  what  the  law  required.  If  that  is — I  am  sorry,  the 
name  of  the  case  is? 

Senator  Sessions.  I  think  it  was  Louis  Gomez. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Can  you  tell  me  how  far  back  that  case  was, 
sir? 

Senator  DeWine.  Ninety-three. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  If  I  am  not  mistaken,  sir,  that  was  before  the 
safety  valve  provisions  that  were  passed  by  Congress  and  I  believe, 
and  I  could  be  completely  mistaken,  because  it  has  been  a  very 
long  time  and  I  have  had  many  sentences  since,  that  I  may  have 
been  talking  about  the  mandatory  minimums  more  than  the  guide- 
lines in  a  first  offense — exactly  what  Congress  later  did,  which  was 
to  say,  in  a  first  offense  situation  with  someone  who  is  willing  to 
cooperate,  as  that  gentleman  was  but  had  nothing  to  give  and  he 
has  no  history  of  violence  and  none  was  used,  that  you  could  depart 
from  the  guideline  minimums  in  that  regard,  or  lower  them. 

So  I  may  be  mistaken,  sir,  but  I  do  believe  that  that  was  the  sit- 
uation and  that  Congress  did  do  what  I  had  earlier  stated,  which 
was  to  look  at  the  factual  situations  and  the  impact  and  make 
changes  when  they  are  appropriate. 

Senator  Sessions.  I  think  the  Congress  should  do  that  and  I  do 
not  disagree  with  the  judge  calling  on  Congress  and  suggesting 
that  they  should  consider  making  any  changes  in  the  law.  How- 
ever, I  do  think  that  a  judge,  would  you  not  agree,  has  to  be  careful 
in  conducting  themselves  in  a  way  that  reflects  respect  for  the  law 
and  the  system? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Absolutely,  but 

Senator  Sessions.  A  second  guess  about- 


Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Maybe  I  would  not  have  called  it  an  abomina- 
tion, but  I  was  thinking  more  of  the  factual  outcome  in  that  case. 
But  no  question  that  all  I  meant  in  the  context  of  that  case  was 
the  facts  of  that  particular  case,  which  Congress  did  come  very 
shortly  thereafter  to  change.  So,  obviously,  my  strong  feelings  were 
reflected  sufficiently  that  Congress — not  because  of  me,  obviously, 
I  doubt  they  knew  who  I  was  at  the  time  and  may  not  all  know 
who  I  am  now — but  it  was  because  of  the  hardships  that  were  cre- 
ated in  many  situations  that  caused  the  safety  valve  provision  to 
be  passed. 

I  do  agree,  however,  that  great  respect  both  for  the  law  and  for 
the  process  is  terribly  important,  and  as  I  underscored  there,  I  do 
what  the  law  requires  and  I  think  that  is  the  greatest  respect  I 
could  show  for  it. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  It  is  important  to  follow  the  law,  though,  in 
cases  like  this,  had  you  not,  it  would  have  been  reversed.  But  I 


359 

think  that  perhaps  had  you  expressed  your  criticism  with  the  skill 
you  have  done  today,  it  might  be  a  little  better  conduct  for  a  judge. 
I  just  think  that,  as  you  know,  when  you  set  a  standard  of  guide- 
lines, everybody  is  not  going  to  fit  perfectly  within  it  and  maybe 
you  have  a  responsibility  to  help  that  defendant  to  understand 
that,  though  it  may  be  unfortunate  and  you  personally  would  not 
have  given  as  much,  that  there  is  a  rationale  to  this  law. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  I  have  done  that  on  numerous  occasions.  Sen- 
ator, and  there,  it  was  very  shortly  at  the  time  that  I  took  the 
bench  and  I  believe  that  since  then,  I  have  always  been  very  care- 
ful, and  I  say  it  repeatedly  at  sentencing.  When  I  am  faced  with 
emotionally  difficult  situations  for  defendants  and  their  families, 
often,  I  get  a  lot  of  letters  from  heartbroken  family  members  and 
at  sentencing,  I  explain  to  them  that  as  much  as  I  understand  their 
pain,  that  I  have  a  greater  obligation  to  society  to  follow  the  law 
in  the  way  that  it  is  set  forth. 

Senator  Sessions.  One  more  thing.  I  noticed  a  New  York  Times 
article  that  indicated  that  you  had  not  applauded  or  not  stood  and 
applauded  when  Justice  Thomas  appeared  at  the  second  circuit 
conference.  Are  you  aware  of  that? 

Judge  SoTOMAYOR.  Well,  I  never  did  say  that,  sir.  I  took  the  fifth 
amendment  when  the  New  York  Times  asked  me  that  because  of 
the  raging  controversy  at  the  time.  I  thought  it  made  no  sense  for 
a  prospective  nominee  to  enter  that  kind  of  political  fray  by  any 
statement,  but  I  do  not  think  I  ever  did,  sir. 

Senator  Sessions.  Well,  that  might  explain  it.  The  question  in 
the  article  was,  when  Justice  Clarence  Thomas  was  introduced  at 
the  second  circuit  conference,  the  question  of  the  reporter  was, 
were  you  among  those  who  sat  on  her  hands  rather  than  giving 
him  a  standing  ovation,  and  you  said,  "I  will  take  the  Fifth." 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  I  explained  to  her  clearly,  as  I  do  to  you  now, 
I  did  that  because  I  thought  as  a — at  that  point,  I  was  a  confirmed 
nominee,  and  as  a  judge,  that  I  should  never  be  making  political 
statements  to  the  press  or  anyone  else  and  I  thought  that  was  a 
politically  charged  question. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  Let  me  just  ask  you,  did  you  see  fit  to  stand 
and  applaud  when  he 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  He  was  my  Supreme  Court  Justice  of  my  cir- 
cuit. I  stood  up. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  DeWine.  Senator  Ashcroft. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  ASHCROFT 

Senator  AsHCROFT.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  appreciate  the 
opportunity. 

Mr.  Oilman,  I  was  interested  in  Senator  Sessions'  question  about 
the  Boy  Scouts,  who  for  a  time  were  deprived  of  an  opportunity  to 
conduct  a  ceremony  at  the  zoo  because  their  organization  espoused 
a  belief  in  a  supreme  being.  I  was  more  interested  in  your  re- 
sponse. You  seemed  to  express  some  uncertainty  about  whether  or 
not  that  should  be  a  disabling  characteristic  of  an  organization.  Do 
you  think  that  organizations  or  groups  of  people  that  express  a  be- 
lief in  a  supreme  being  should  be  subject  to  differential  access  to 
public  facilities  or  should  have  fewer  rights  than  others? 


360 

Mr.  Oilman.  Oh,  absolutely  not.  No.  I  think  I  just  expressed  that 
I  was  not  familiar  with  that  situation,  Senator.  No.  I  certainly 
would  be — frankly,  sounded  shock  that  that  would  be  a  basis  for 
denying  the  Boy  Scouts  of  America  access  to  a  public  facility. 

Senator  Ashcroft.  I  would  hope  that  that  would  be  the  way  you 
would  approach  the  first  amendment.  Thank  you  for  clarifying 
that.  It  was  not  something  I  knew  anything  about,  but  I  have  come 
to  trust  my  colleague  from  Alabama. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  I  am  relying  on  Eagle  Scout  Mike  Enzi,  who 
examined  that  recently. 

Senator  AsHCROFT.  Judge  Sotomayor,  at  one  time,  you  were 
asked  to  rule  on  a  case  of  a  prisoner  who  was  removed  from  his 
food  service  job  in  prison  because  he  was  an  open  homosexual.  The 
plaintiff  sued  under  the  1983  provisions,  arguing  that  prison  offi- 
cials violated  his  constitutional  rights  by  transferring  him  from  the 
food  service  job.  Prison  officials  argue  that  he  was  reassigned  from 
his  food  service  job  to  prevent  disciplinary  problems  that  could 
arise  from  having  open  homosexuals  prepare  food. 

You  denied  the  motion  for  summary  judgment  on  procedural 
grounds,  but  you  wrote  that  a  person's  sexual  orientation,  standing 
alone,  does  not  reasonably,  rationally,  or  self-evidently  implicate 
mess  hall  security  concerns.  You  ruled  that  prison  officials  did  not 
present  evidence  that  having  homosexuals  prepare  food  was  a  real 
threat. 

I  wonder,  as  a  Federal  judge,  how  much  difference 

Judge  Sotomayor.  Sir,  may  I  just  interrupt  one  moment,  and  I 
apologize  greatly.  It  was  not  a  motion  for  summary  judgment,  it 
was  a  motion  to  dismiss,  which  has  a  different  standard.  So  I  am 
somewhat  surprised  when  you  say  that  I  criticized  them  for  not 
producing  evidence,  because  on  a  motion  to  dismiss,  they  do  not 
produce  evidence.  I  have  to  take  the  prisoner's  allegations  on  their 
face.  And  I  am  sorry.  I  did  not  know  if  that  affected  the  premise 
of  your  question. 

Senator  AsHCROFT.  I  am  going  to  find  out  here  in  a  minute.  I 
guess  what  I  really  want  to  know  is,  what  level  of  deference  does 
a  Federal  judge  owe  to  prison  officials  when  trying  to  figure  out 
what  security  risks  there  are  in  a  prison? 

Judge  Sotomayor.  Enormous.  It  is  a  rational  basis,  which  means 
any  government  interest,  as  long  as  there  is  a  reasoned,  rational 
basis  for  it  and  it  is  not  arbitrary  and  capricious,  the  prison  offi- 
cials can  do  what  they  like. 

In  that  particular  case,  sir,  as  I  said,  it  was  a  motion  under 
12(b)(6)— I  believe  it  is  12(b)(6).  It  could  have  been  12(b)  (6)  or  (5). 
But  under  either,  you  take  the  plaintiff,  in  this  case,  the  prisoner's 
facts  as  stated.  You  do  not  in  any  way  pay  attention  to  what  the 
defendants  are  saying.  You  take  just  the  pleadings,  and  the  plead- 
ings in  that  case  alleged  that  there  was — the  plaintiff  claimed  that 
there  were  no  security  threats  against  overt  homosexuals  whatso- 
ever, that  he  was  not  aware  of  any  threats,  none  had  been  directed 
in  prison. 

The  reason  I  know  this  case  so  well.  Senator,  is  I  just  tried  it 
last  week  and  it  turned  out  the  jury  found  in  favor  of  the  prison 
guards  because  there  was  one  fact  there  that  was  slightly  different. 
The  prison  claimed  that  it  never  removed  him  from  the  food  line. 


361 

That  was  a  factual  dispute  between  them.  They  say  that  they 
asked  him  to  leave  and  that  he  consented  to  leave  because  of  the 
threats  that  had  been  made.  And,  in  fact,  the  jury  credited  the 
prison  guards  on  that  claim  and  held  for  the  defendants. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  You  say  you  just  tried  this  case  last  week? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Yes. 

Senator  AsHCROFT.  Is  this  on  a  second  appearance  before  you, 
then?  Is  this  the  Holmes  v.  Artuse? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Holmes  v.  Artuse. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  I  had  that  as  a  1995  case.  Am  I  mistaken? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  It  was.  What  happened,  sir,  in  that  case,  is 
if  you  notice  my — because  it  was  a  motion  to  dismiss,  I  had  invited 
pro  bono  counsel  to  take  on  the  case.  They  came  on  it  later,  I  do 
not  remember  exactly  when,  and  we  just  got  it  to  trial  last  week. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  What  was  the  outcome  of  the  case? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  As  I  said,  the  jury  found  for  the  defendants 
on  the  initial  question,  which  is  that  the  prison  had  not  removed 
him  without  his  consent,  that  he  had,  in  fact,  consented  to  the  re- 
moval. But  those  are  issues  of  fact  that  a  judge  cannot  decide  on 
paper,  sir.  Those  are  factual  questions  always  for  a  jury.  Did  X  or 
Y happen? 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  I  think  those  are  evidentiary  questions. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Exactly.  Exactly. 

Senator  Ashcroft.  I  guess  it  is  possible  that  a  judge  can  decide 
evidentiary  questions  in  the  absence  of  a  jury,  though. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Well,  in  some  circumstances. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Do  you  believe  that  there  is  a  constitutional 
right  to  homosexual  conduct  by  prisoners? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  No,  sir;  there  is  not.  The  case  law  is  very 
clear  about  that.  The  only  constitutional  right  that  homosexuals 
have  is  the  same  constitutional  right  every  citizen  of  the  United 
States  has,  which  is  not  to  have  government  action  taken  against 
them  arbitrarily  and  capriciously.  The  Supreme  Court  said  that 
last  term  in  Evans  v.  Romer.  But  outside  of  that,  that  is  a  basic 
constitutional  right,  not  to  them  in  particular,  but  to  the  world  that 
constitutes  the  United  States. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Do  you  think  there  should  be  one,  a  special 
constitutional  right? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  I  do  not  think  that  we  should  be  making  con- 
stitutional rights  any  greater  than  they  exist  right  now.  The  Con- 
stitution should  be  amended  sparingly,  sir,  as  it  has  been  through- 
out our  history.  It  is  something  that  should  be  done  only  after 
much  history  and  much  thought. 

Senator  AsHCROFT.  Do  you  agree  with  the  amendments  that  have 
been  made  to  date? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Yes,  sir.  It  is  a  document  that  I  live  by. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  I  agree  with  them  and  I  think  it  was  good 
that  they  were  amended,  so  I  accept  the  process.  So  in  your  judg- 
ment, you  would  not  read  additional  rights  into  the  Constitution, 
like  a  right  for  homosexual  conduct  on  the  part  of  a  prisoner? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  I  cannot  do  it,  sir.  I  cannot  do  it  because  it 
is  so  contrary  to  what  I  am  as  a  lawyer  and  as  a  judge.  The  Con- 
stitution is  what  it  is.  We  cannot  read  rights  into  them.  They  have 
been  created  for  us. 


362 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Are  there  any  rights  that  are  not  protected 
by  the  Constitution  that,  as  a  matter  of  poHcy,  you  would  hke  to 
see  protected? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  I  have  not  thought  about  that  in  a  while,  sir. 
No. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  My  time  is  not  up. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  I  think  I  answered. 

Senator  Ashcroft.  In  your  opinion,  do  you  think  Congress  has 
the  right  constitutionally  to  restrict  the  jurisdiction  of  lower  Fed- 
eral courts? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  You  know,  I  have  not  examined  that  question 
in  the  longest  time,  but  I  cannot — I  am  not  thinking — we  were  cre- 
ated by  legislation  of  Congress,  so  I  would  think  that  if  Congress 
created  it.  Congress  can  take  it  away.  What  you  cannot  do  is  take 
away  that  which  the  Constitution  would  give  the  courts.  I  think 
that  was  established  in  Marbury  v.  Madison.  But  absent  that,  not 
looking  at  the  question  or  studying  it  in  depth,  I  cannot  give  a  bet- 
ter answer  than  that. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  I  thank  you,  Chairman  DeWine.  Thank  you. 

Senator  DeWine.  Judge,  one  of  the  great  burdens  of  being  a  Fed- 
eral district  court  judge  must  be  to  deal  with  prisons.  I  have  a  little 
familiarity  with  that.  When  I  was  Lieutenant  Governor  in  Ohio, 
one  of  my  jobs  was  to  oversee  our  prison  system — so  I  have  a  great 
deal  of  sympathy  with  judges  who  have  to  deal  with  the  litigation, 
and  there  is  a  tremendous  amount  of  litigation. 

I  say  that  and  preface  it  by  way  of  an  apology  because  I  am  going 
to  turn  to  one  more  prison  question,  if  I  could.  I  do  not  have  a 
name  for  this  case,  but  I  suspect  you  will  recall  it.  The  date  I  have 
is  1994  and  the  issue  was  multicolored  necklaces  under  the  cloth- 
ing of  prisoners.  Do  you  remember  the 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Yes,  I  do. 

Senator  DeWine.  So  you  remember  the  name  of  the  case? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  It  is  my  Campos  case.  It  is  better  known  as 
the  Santorea  beads  case,  or  at  least  colloquially  known  that  way, 
I  should  say. 

Senator  DeWine.  My  understanding  is  that  there  was  a  dispute 
involving  the  wearing  of  these  beads.  Again,  I  am  going  to  summa- 
rize and  you  can  correct  me  and  then  tell  me  a  little  bit  about  the 
case.  What  I  am  trying  to  get  at  is  how  you  reason  as  a  judge. 

My  understanding  is  that  prison  officials  argued  that  the  beads 
were  gang  symbols  that  provoked  fights.  Contrary  to  that,  I  assume 
the  argument  is  the  religious  freedom  question.  Do  you  want  to 
walk  through  for  me  how  you  balance  that,  and  ultimately,  do  we 
get  back  to  what  we  were  just  talking  about  a  minute  ago,  a  factual 
question? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  In  that  case,  sir,  yes,  prison  officials  had 
taken  the  position  that  the  wearing  of  beads  of  colors  were  a  sym- 
bol of  gang  membership.  The  prisoners,  in  turn,  had  asked  the  pris- 
on officials  to  permit  them  to  wear  the  beads  under  their  shirts  as 
opposed  to  visibly.  So  the  question  for  me  was,  was  it  rational  for 
the  Government  not  to  permit  that  alternative  when  I  was  bal- 
ancing a  religious  right  against  a  security  concern. 

The  Supreme  Court  in  these  cases  has  held  that  you  must  give 
heightened  deference  to  prison  security  concerns  and  other  con- 


363 

cerns  but  that  prisoners  do  not  lose  fundamental  rights,  like  reli- 
gion, in  prison,  and  so  that  unlike  the  standard  rational  basis  re- 
view that  is  given — this  is  before  the  Religious  Restoration  Act, 
Senator,  it  is  not  a  part  of  the  jurisprudence  tied  to  that 

Senator  DeWine.  I  understand. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  The  Court  has  said  that  it  is  a  slightly  dif- 
ferent review  in  that  context,  that  the  context  there  is  that  you 
must  balance  as  a  judge  the  security  concerns  with  readily  acces- 
sible alternatives.  There  is  no  bright  line  rule,  but  there,  unlike  the 
traditional  rational  basis  test  where  you  take  as  a  presumption 
that  the  Government  is  doing  what  it  thinks  is  right,  that  is  a  jury 
or  a  factfinder,  you  must  weigh  whether  there  are  reasonable  alter- 
natives that  could  be  just  as  effective. 

My  reasoning  in  that  particular  case,  as  the  opinion  stated,  was 
that,  in  essence,  hiding  the  beads  was  a  reasonable  alternative  be- 
cause it  could  not  show.  I  do  not  know  if  in  the  opinion,  but  I  know 
when  I  spoke  to  the  prison  officers  later,  I  said  to  them,  if  it  turns 
out  that  they  are  finding  ways  to  evade  that,  then,  obviously,  you 
can  take  steps  that  are  different.  But  until  that  was  tried  first,  be- 
cause it  was  a  reasonable,  inexpensive  alternative  and  not  terribly 
costly,  that  I  felt  that  that  was  consistent  with  Supreme  Court 
precedent  on  this  area. 

Senator  DeWine.  I  appreciate  your  explanation.  Let  me  move  to 
one  final  case,  the  1993  Gonzalez  case.  Let  me  quote  you  in  that 
case.  "We  understand  that  you,"  referring  to  the  defendant,  "were 
in  part  a  victim  of  the  economic  necessities  of  our  society,  but  un- 
fortunately, there  are  laws  that  I  must  impose."  Do  you  recall  that 
case  at  all? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Not  much,  sir. 

Senator  DeWine.  I  understand  that,  because  we  sit  up  here  and 
we  can  look  at  all  your  cases  and  you  have  to  try  on  the  spot  to 
remember  a  case  that  may  have  occurred,  in  this  case,  4  or  5  years 
ago,  so 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  I  have  had  two  or  three  Gonzalez  cases,  and 
I  cannot,  meaning  not  the  same  defendant,  but  different  ones 

Senator  DeWine.  Let  me  give  you  the  additional  facts,  and  if  it 
refreshes  your  memory,  fine,  and  you  can  tell  me  about  it.  If  it  does 
not,  we  will  just  move  on. 

My  understanding  is  that  Gonzalez  had  been  convicted  of  con- 
structively possessing  at  least  600  grams  of  cocaine.  He  exercised 
dominion  and  control  of  an  apartment  in  which  the  cocaine  was 
found.  He  also  stated  he  knew  someone  else  was  supposed  to  pick 
up  the  cocaine  to  sell  it  and  distribute  it  to  others.  Do  you  recall 
anything  about  that? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  No. 

Senator  DeWine.  OK.  That  is  fine. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  I  am  terribly  embarrassed  to  say  that  that 
fact  situation  is  also  extraordinarily  common 

Senator  DeWine.  And  I  can  understand  that.  I  appreciate  it. 
Thank  you. 

Any  other  questions  from  any  members  of  the  committee?  Sen- 
ator Sessions? 

Senator  SESSIONS.  I  would  like  to  ask 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  If  you  would  like  to — I  am  sorry.  Senator. 


364 

Senator  DeWine.  No,  go  right  ahead,  Judge. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  If  you  have  a  question  generally  about  some- 
thing I  might  have  said,  perhaps  I 

Senator  DeWine.  I  think  it  is  difficult,  frankly,  if  you  do  not  re- 
call. I  think  it  would  be  unfair  to  you  to  ask  you  an3rthing  further 
about  that,  if  you  do  not  recall  it. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Thank  you,  sir. 

Senator  DeWine.  Senator  Sessions. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  You  mentioned  that  you  appointed  pro  bono 
counsel  in  this  prison  case? 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  We  do  not  appoint  them,  sir.  There  are  no 
funds  to  appoint  counsel  in  civil  cases,  as  you  may  know.  What  we 
do  is  put  the  case  on  a  pro  bono  list,  which  is  made  up  of  volunteer 
lawyers,  and  the  volunteer  lawyers  decide  whether  they  want  to 
take  the  case  or  not.  So  if  I  used  the  word  "appoint"  the  lawyer 
there,  what  it  means,  in  essence,  is  putting  them  on  the  list  so  that 
they  are  eligible  to  get  a  lawyer  from  that  volunteer  list  if  a  lawyer 
chooses  to  take  the  case. 

Senator  Sessions.  Those  turn  out  to  be  often  very  expensive 
processes.  Sometimes  it  is  easy  for  a  judge  to  call  in  a  lawyer  and 
then  charge  him  to  take  a  case — I  am  not  saying  you  did,  but  I 
have  seen  that  befo'*e — but  the  State  has  the  expense  of  going 
through  this  whole  process,  which  went  on  from  1995  until,  I  guess, 
just  last  week.  A  lot  of  expense  goes  into  that.  I  think  we  have  got 
to  learn  to  do  a  better  job. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Senator,  if  I  may  add,  I  put  people  on  a  pro 
bono  list  very,  very  rarely.  I  am  on  the  pro  se  committee  of  our 
court.  I  do  it  only  when,  generally,  after  some  discovery  has  hap- 
pened so  I  can  take  a  look  at  what  is  there  and  determine  whether 
there  is  some  substance  to  the  claim,  and  not  initially  in  all  cases, 
and  where  there  may  be  a  complex  legal  question. 

For  example,  in  that  case  and  a  few  others,  in  that  Holmes  v. 
Artuse,  where  I  did  that,  the  Supreme  Court  was  just  considering 
an  equal  protection  claim  that  I  mentioned  might  elucidate  this 
area.  In  a  case  like  that,  where  there  is  an  unsettled  legal  question, 
and  you  can  define  that  by  something  where  the  circuits  are  split 
or  the  Supreme  Court  is  hearing  an  issue,  then  I  will  usually  ask 
for  a  lawyer  because  then  the  questions  are  so  complex  that  one 
needs  some  help  in  terms  of  making  sure  that  you  have  thought 
of  all  the  arguments.  You  want  the  lawyers  and  not  a  pro  se  pris- 
oner to  brief  them. 

Senator  Sessions.  Thank  you. 

Senator  DeWine.  I  want  to  thank  both  of  you  very  much  and 
thank  you  for  your  patience.  I  would  just  again  state  that  there 
may  be  questions  from  members  of  the  committee  who  were  not 
here  today.  They  will  be  submitted  to  you  in  writing.  On  the  other 
hand,  there  may  not  be  any  written  followup  questions. 

Also,  I  would  invite  you,  if  you  want  to  elaborate  on  any  answer 
and  want  to  submit  an5rthing  in  writing  to  us,  the  committee  would 
be  more  than  happy  to  receive  that. 

Judge  SOTOMAYOR.  Senator,  may  I  take  just  half  a  second  just 
to  introduce  my  mother  again  and  my  fiance? 

Senator  DeWine.  I  think  that  is  very  appropriate. 


365 

Judge  SoTOMAYOR.  My  mother,  Celina  Sotomayor,  is  here,  and 
my  fiance,  Peter  White,  and  respecting  your  time,  I  will  not  intro- 
duce individually  all  of  the  wonderful  supportive  friends  I  have 
here,  other  than  my  godson,  who  is  a  Boy  Scout. 

Senator  DeWine.  Let  us  have  the  godson  stand  up,  then. 

Judge  Sotomayor.  Tommy  John  Butler.  He  is  the  back  standing 
up. 

Senator  DeWine.  He  is  standing  up  anyway.  Thank  you  very 
much. 

Mr.  Oilman.  Thank  you.  Senator. 

Judge  Sotomayor.  Thank  you. 

Senator  DeWine.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Let  me  just  make  kind  of  a  personal  comment.  As  the  father  of 
eight  kids,  I  have  rarely  seen  children  so  quiet.  We  have  a  room 
full  of  children  here  and  I  congratulate  all  of  you  for  staying  with 
us. 

I  would  ask  our  next  panel  to  come  up.  We  are  going  to  take 
about  a  4-  or  5-minute  break,  then  ask  you  to  come  forward.  We 
are  going  to  start  this  at  15  after,  so  we  will  give  you  a  couple-min- 
utes break.  After  the  break,  we  are  going  to  plow  right  on  through. 
Thank  you  very  much. 

[Recess.] 

Senator  DeWine.  Let  me  thank  all  of  you  for  coming  today  and 
thank  you  also  for  your  patience. 

Let  me  just  start  from  my  left  with  you,  Judge  Siragusa.  Judge, 
is  there  anyone  in  the  room  you  want  to  introduce?  We  are  going 
to  go  right  down  and  do  that  to  begin  with  because  I  do  not  want 
you  leaving  here  and  getting  home  and  realizing  there  is  someone 
who  has  not  been  introduced. 

Judge  Siragusa.  Mr.  Chairman,  at  the  risk  of  correcting  a  U.S. 
Senator,  it  was  my  wife,  Lisa,  who  attended  law  school  with  Sen- 
ator D'Amato's  son,  although  I  am  sure  of  two  things,  that  she  is 
very  flattered  by  his  comment  and  she  will  never  let  me  forget  it. 
[Laughter.] 

Judge  Siragusa.  My  wife,  Lisa,  is  here,  and  my  in-laws,  James 
and  Lucille  Serio,  and  I  thank  them  for  coming.  Thank  you. 

Senator  DeWine.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Mr.  Marbley. 

Mr.  Marbley.  Yes,  Senator.  I  have  been  fortunate.  I  have  had 
some  very  good  support  throughout  this  process  and  I  have  some 
law  school  classmates  who  were  with  me  back  in  the  old  days  at 
Northwestern  who  came  and  I  would  like  to  have  them  acknowl- 
edged for  the  record,  if  I  may.  One  is  Thomas  Preston,  who  is  with 
the  IRS,  and  then  another  friend  of  mine,  Antoinette  Cook  Bush 
was  here.  I  do  not  know  whether  she  left.  She  was  a  former  staffer 
and  now  partner  at  Skadin  Arps.  Then  I  have  Ronald  Sullivan, 
who  was  like  an  understudy  but  he  is  a  Harvard  lawyer  now,  so 
I  cannot  call  him  that  anymore,  and  he  is  a  Washington  attorney 
now,  so  thank  you  very  much. 

Senator  DeWine.  Very  good. 

Mr.  Kimball. 

Mr.  Kimball.  Thank  you.  Senator.  I  am  grateful  to  have  my  wife, 
Rachel,  here.  She  is  a  nurse  and  I  hope  I  do  not  need  her  medical 
services  during  the  hearing.  Our  six  children  and  16  grandchildren 


366 

are  scattered  across  the  country  taking  care  of  each  other  and 
working. 

Senator  DeWine.  Judge  Gwin. 

Judge  GwiN.  I  am  pleased  to  have  my  wife,  Bonnie,  and  my  sons, 
Michael  and  John  here.  I  would  also  introduce  my  sister,  Mary  Jo 
Weis,  and  her  husband,  Ted  Weis,  and  their  sons,  Robert  and  Ed- 
ward, and  also  my  mother,  Carol.  I  have  also  some  special  friends 
who  have  been  helpful  to  me  and  these  include  John  Lewis  of  the 
Squires,  Sanders  firm  and  John  Heider,  who  is  the  executive  vice 
president  of  B.F.  Goodrich,  and  John  Manos  had  been  here,  Judge 
John  Manos,  but  he  may  have  stepped  out.  I  thank  them  for  their 
help  during  this  process. 

Senator  DeWine.  Thank  you. 

Mr.  Casey. 

Mr.  Casey.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  would  like  to  introduce,  I  have  my 
sister  here,  Mrs.  Carol  Brunell.  Unfortunately,  my  son,  Richard  Jr., 
was  unable  to  be  here  today,  but  I  do  have  v;ith  me  my  nephew, 
Christopher  Brunell,  and  his  daughter,  Kelly,  and  my  nephews, 
Frank  Casey,  and  Tom  Casey. 

Senator  DeWine.  Great. 

Mr.  Casey.  I  also  have  with  me.  Senator,  some  of  my  very  dear- 
est friends  who  have  been  so  supportive  to  me  from  years  back  and 
since  I  lost  my  eyesight.  With  me  here  today  is  Mr.  Richard  McCar- 
thy, Mr.  Otto  Obermeyer,  who  the  Senator  identified  as  a  former 
U.S.  attorney.  Another  friend  was  supposed  to  be  here,  Suzanne 
Brown,  and  she,  unfortunately,  could  not  make  it.  But  I  also  have 
with  us  today  several  members  of  the  National  Federation  of  the 
Blind  and  some  other  blind  organizations.  I  am  not  sure  all  have 
arrived,  but  I  am  very  grateful  for  their  support.  Thank  you,  Sen- 
ator. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  DE  WINE 

Senator  DeWine.  Very  good.  Thank  you  all  very  much. 

One  of  the  privileges  of  having  this  gavel  is  you  get  to  ask  what- 
ever questions  you  want 

Mr.  Casey.  Excuse  me.  Senator.  I  am  sorry.  It  would  be  remiss 
and  I  could  not  go  home.  I  have  two  of  my  partners  here,  Mr. 
Thomas  Suther  and  Mr.  Robert  Petersak  and  life  would  not  be  too 
good  when  I  got  home  if  I  did  not  mention  them. 

Senator  DeWine.  I  appreciate  that.  I  have  had  law  partners  my- 
self. 

Mr.  Casey.  Thanks  so  very  much. 

Senator  DeWine.  I  appreciate  that  very  much. 

Let  me  just  say  to  the  nominees  that  the  questions  that  we  ask 
are,  frankly,  difficult  to  frame  because  most  of  us  who  sit  here  and 
who  have  the  obligation  to  confirm  or  not  confirm  Presidential  ap- 
pointments have  some  very  definite  ideas  about  what  we  think  a 
judge  should  be.  Those  of  us  who  have  appeared  before  judges,  es- 
pecially have  our  ideas.  But  it  is  difficult  sometimes  to  phrase 
questions  that  can  get  at  what  we  are  really  looking  for. 

Let  me  just  be  very  candid  with  you  and  then  I  am  going  to 
start,  Judge,  with  you,  if  I  could,  and  we  will  just  go  from  my  left 
all  the  way  down.  We  often  talk  about  judicial  temperament.  I  do 


367 

not  particularly  like  the  term  because  I  do  not  even  know  what  it 
means,  but  I  think  we  generally  know  what  we  are  talking  about. 

One  of  the  things  that  I  am  always  concerned  about  and,  frankly, 
it  is  difficult  asking  somebody  this  question  and  getting  an  answer 
that  is  going  to  tell  you  a  whole  lot — maybe  I  am  just  stating  it  so 
that  2  years  from  now  or  10  years  from  now,  at  some  point,  maybe 
you  will  remember  what  some  U.S.  Senator  said  during  the  con- 
firmation hearing. 

One  of  the  things  that  troubles  me  is  that  occasionally  when 
someone  is  either  elected  to  the  bench — but,  frankly,  maybe  more 
often  when  they  are  appointed  to  the  bench  and  they  have  life  ten- 
ure— they  become  what  I  would  call  arrogant.  They  become  out  of 
touch  with  the  community.  They  fall  out  of  touch  with  the  people 
whom  they  have  dealt  with  before.  I  would  just  like  for  you  to  talk 
a  little  bit  in  turn  about  any  kind  of  judicial  temperament. 

Before  I  get  into  the  substantive  questions,  let  me  ask  you  now 
to  stand  and  we  will  actually  swear  you  in,  which  is  the  normal 
procedure  of  the  committee.  Do  you  swear  the  testimony  you  shall 
give  in  this  hearing  shall  be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  noth- 
ing but  the  truth,  so  help  you  God? 

Judge  SiRAGUSA.  I  do. 

Mr.  Marbley.  I  do. 

Mr.  Kimball.  I  do. 

Judge  GwiN.  I  do. 

Mr.  Casey.  I  do. 

Senator  DeWine.  Thank  you.  Judge. 

TESTIMONY  OF  CHARLES  J.  SIRAGUSA,  OF  NEW  YORK,  TO  BE 
U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  WESTERN  DISTRICT  OF  NEW 
YORK 

Judge  SiRAGUSA.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  think  there  are  three  basic 
qualities  that  go  into  a  good  judicial  temperament.  The  first  is  com- 
mitment. I  think  that  you  have  to  be  committed  to  be  the  very  best 
judge  you  can  be.  That  involves  a  commitment  to  work  hard,  a 
commitment  to  dem.and  no  more  of  the  attorneys  who  appear  in 
front  of  you  than  you  demand  of  yourself.  It  involves  a  commitment 
to — a  judgeship  is  not  just  a  profession  but  really  a  way  of  life  to 
excel  as  best  you  can. 

I  think  the  next  broad  trait  would  be  dedication.  You  have  to  be 
dedicated  to  the  oath  that  you  take.  I  have  been  a  trial  judge  and 
you  have  to  understand  that  the  responsibility  of  a  trial  judge  is 
to  resolve  the  cases  and  controversies  that  come  in  front  of  you  and 
not  to  think  of  yourself  as  a  talisman  to  solve  the  social  ills  that 
plague  society. 

The  third,  I  think,  is  humility.  I  think  you  have  to  have  an  ap- 
preciation that  it  is  the  position  that  is  important  and  not  the  indi- 
vidual. I  have  tried  a  lot  of  cases  as  a  litigant.  I  have  had  inter- 
action with  a  lot  of  judges  following  my  election  and  I  think  there 
is  a  danger  that  sometimes  people  get  what  I  refer  to  as  robe-itis, 
that  because  you  put  on  the  robes,  it  does  not  make  you  a  better 
person  and  it  is  well  to  remember,  and  perhaps  it  is  most  impor- 
tant that  it  is  the  position  that  is  important  and  not  the  individual. 
Thank  you. 


368 

Senator  DeWine.  Certainly  none  of  us  have  ever  known  anybody 
in  that  position. 
Mr.  Marbley. 

TESTIMONY  OF  ALGENON  L.  MARBLEY,  OF  OHIO,  TO  BE  U.S. 
DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  SOUTHERN  DISTRICT  OF  OHIO 

Mr.  Marbley.  Certainly,  one  of  the  advantages  of  going  second, 
Mr.  Chairman,  is  that  you  can  adopt 

Senator  DeWine.  Mr.  Casey  is  given  the  last  shot  at  this  thing. 
Now,  he  does  not  know  we  are  going  to  start  with  him  first  next 
time.  [Laughter.] 

Mr.  Marbley  [continuing].  The  testimony  of  Judge  Siragusa,  but 
I  think  that  one  of  the  key  traits  that  a  judge  has  to  have  is  a  com- 
mitment to  fairness.  I  think  that  a  judge  has  to  be  fair  to  the  liti- 
gants who  appear  before  him  or  her.  I  think  that  another  key  con- 
sideration is  the  quality  of  being  courteous.  You  have  to  be  cour- 
teous to  the  litigants,  and  I  think  that  that  will  permeate  your 
courtroom.  Once  you  establish  that  you  are  going  to  be  courteous 
and  that  civility  will  carry  the  day,  the  litigants  who  appear  before 
you  will  understand  that  they  are  to  conform  their  behavior  accord- 
ingly, so  we  will  not  have  the  problem  of  noncivility  in  an  other- 
wise charged  adversarial  relationship. 

I  think  that  humility  is  perhaps  one  of  the  most  single  important 
qualities  because  you  have  to  realize  that  you  have  within  your 
hands  often  the  ability  to  affect  the  course  of  events  or  alter  peo- 
ple's lives,  and  so  you  have  to  be  humble  with  that  type  of  respon- 
sibility. 

Finally,  I  think  you  have  to  be  thoughtful.  When  someone  has 
posed  the  faith  in  you  to  allow  you  to  sit  in  that  position  and  to 
be  a  neutral  arbiter  of  cases  and  controversies,  the  least  that  you 
could  do  is  to  be  thoughtful  in  your  deliberations. 

I  think  all  of  those  qualities,  in  addition  to  the  qualities  that 
Judge  Siragusa  pointed  out,  make  for  a  sound  judicial  tempera- 
ment. 

Senator  DeWine.  Mr.  Kimball. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DALE  A.  KIMBALL,  OF  UTAH,  TO  BE  U.S. 
DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  DISTRICT  OF  UTAH 

Mr.  Kimball.  Thank  you.  Senator.  I  certainly  agree  with  what 
these  two  gentlemen  have  said.  A  judge  must  be  fair,  a  judge  must 
be  impartial,  a  judge  must  be  patient,  a  judge  must  be  well-pre- 
pared and  informed  and  render  timely  and  thoughtful  and  well-ex- 
plained decisions. 

I  believe  the  best  example  of  judicial  temperament  I  know  is  the 
judge  I  hope  to  replace,  Judge  David  Winter.  One  of  the  reasons 
he  is  such  a  great  judge  is  because  he  has  always  remembered,  as 
he  says,  what  it  is  like  on  the  other  side  of  the  bench,  on  the  law- 
yers' and  the  participants',  the  parties'  side  of  the  bench,  and  I 
would  hope  to  be  as  he  is.  Thank  you. 

Senator  DeWine.  Judge. 


369 

TESTIMONY  OF  JAMES  S.  GWIN,  OF  OHIO,  TO  BE  U.S.  DISTRICT 
JUDGE  FOR  THE  NORTHERN  DISTRICT  OF  OHIO 

Judge  GwiN.  Thank  you.  I  think  I  would  adopt  just  by  reference 
the  comments  made  eariier,  but  I  have  also  been  impressed — it  is 
so  important  for  judges  and  people  in  the  judicial  system  to  under- 
stand that  for  most  litigants,  they  come  before  a  court  one  time  in 
their  life,  perhaps  two  or  three  times,  and  if  those  people  have  gone 
away  from  the  court  believing  that  their  concerns,  their  claims, 
their  defenses  have  been  given  just  short  shrift,  I  think  that  they 
walk  away  with  a  diminished  respect  for  our  legal  system. 

So  I  think  it  is  extremely  important  in  every  case  that  all  the 
participants,  but  especially  the  judge,  give  a  concern  for  that  and 
treat  people  with  respect  and  treat  people  with  an  open  mind.  So 
those  would  be  the  qualities  I  would  hope  to  bring  to  the  bench  for 
the  Northern  District  of  Ohio. 

Senator  DeWine.  Mr.  Casey. 

TESTIMONY  OF  RICHARD  CONWAY  CASEY,  OF  NEW  YORK,  TO 
BE  U.S.  DISTRICT  JXn)GE  FOR  THE  SOUTHERN  DISTRICT  OF 
NEW  YORK 

Mr.  Casey.  Senator,  I  love  the  profession  of  the  law  and  I  have 
the  greatest  admiration  for  and  affection  for  the  Southern  District 
of  New  York.  It  is  where  I  started  and  I  am  going  to  be  fortunate 
enough,  if  I  am  confirmed,  to  be  with  several  colleagues  that  I 
started  out  with. 

But  I  think  what  has  made  me  love  being  a  trial  lawyer  is  the 
wonderful  experiences  before  some  great  judges  in  that  district. 
There  is  nothing  quite  as  pleasurable  for  a  trial  lawyer  to  try  a 
case  before  an  intelligent  judge  who  has  compassion  and  under- 
standing, at  the  same  time  understands  his  function  and  moves  the 
administration  of  justice  along,  but  just  as  important,  one  who  has 
a  sense  of  humor  that  we  all  need  in  life  and  I  would  hope  to  emu- 
late some  of  those  that  I  have  had  the  pleasure  of  appearing  before 
over  the  years. 

Senator  DeWine.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Let  me  turn  to  my  second  question.  Mr.  Casey,  I  will  start  with 
you,  if  that  is  all  right.  If  each  one  of  you  is  confirmed,  you  will 
be  taking  over  a  specific  court  with  a  docket  and  I  would  ask  you 
to  maybe  reflect — ^you  have  to  have  given  it  some  thought — about 
some  of  the  things  you  want  to  do.  What  I  am  looking  for  is  not 
substance  in  the  sense  of  how  you  decide  cases,  but  I  am  looking 
at  more  procedure — how  you  would  run  the  court,  what  you  have 
observed  in  Federal  courts  or  in  other  courts  that  work,  what  does 
not  work,  what  you  like,  what  you  do  not  like,  how  you  would  real- 
ly run  your  court,  because  one  of  the  things  that  litigants  want  is 
a  disposition  of  their  case.  They  want  the  case  resolved.  So  the 
speed  at  which  cases  can  be  brought  to  trial,  or  can  be  resolved  in 
some  way,  is  important. 

So  if  you  could  just  maybe  comment  on  that,  maybe  reflect  on  the 
use  of  support  staff,  reflect  on  the  use  of  law  clerks,  reflect  on  the 
use  of  arbitration  or  whatever  the  local  rule  might  allow.  That  is 
the  type  of  response  that  I  am  looking  for.  What  have  you  thought 
about  that?  What  is  important  to  you,  or  what  is  not  important? 


370 

Mr.  Casey.  Well,  Senator,  I  think  one  thing,  at  least  in  the 
course  of  my  experience,  I  have  spent  a  substantial  amount  of  time 
in  private  practice,  at  least,  involved  in  major  securities  litigation 
and  I  would  think  that  a  major  step  to  handle  the  administration 
of  the  court,  if  I  were  to  be  confirmed,  is  to  get  involved  early,  espe- 
cially in  large  cases,  to  get  a  handle  on  what  the  issues  of  the  case 
are  before  things  can  get  out  of  hand  in  order  that  you  can  move 
them  along. 

I  have  served  on  committees  involving  discovery  abuse  and  I 
think  much  of  that  can  be  prevented  if  a  judge  is  to  get  in  early, 
get  his  or  her  hands  on  the  case,  assist  the  lawyers  in  setting  the 
discovery  schedule,  and  move  the  case  along  and  always,  of  course, 
with  a  mind  that  an  early  trial  date  frequently  helps  things  to 
move  along,  as  well. 

As  far  as  the  staff,  certainly,  it  is  a  team  effort  with  the  law 
clerks  and  everyone  involved.  I  would  certainly  keep  a  keen  eye  to 
things  that  various  judges  I  know  in  the  Southern  District  have  ex- 
perimented with  as  to  how  they  move  their  dockets  along  and  I 
would  certainly  try  to  inquire  of  them  and  utilize  all  their  experi- 
ence, as  well. 

Senator  DeWine.  Judge  Gwin. 

Judge  GwiN.  I  think  it  is  so  terribly  important  that  cases  move 
along  to  an  expeditious  conclusion.  After  conversations  with  innu- 
merable people  who  have  been  involved  in  litigation,  I  find  that  one 
of  their  biggest  concerns  is  how  destructive  and  debilitating  it  is  to 
have  litigation  pending.  That  is  true  for  individuals.  It  is  perhaps 
equally  or  more  true  for  businesses.  It  is  just  to  have  the  uncer- 
tainty of  a  litigation  pending  is  very  damaging. 

So  I  think  it  is  extremely  important  for  litigation  to  move  along 
quickly.  I  think  the  ways  we  do  that  are  well  known.  It  requires 
an  early  intervention  by  the  judge  in  terms  of  setting  reasonable 
but  firm  dates  for  preparation  of  motions  and  trials.  It  requires  a 
judge  to  stick  to  those  dates,  it  requires  a  judge  to  quickly  super- 
vise discovery  disputes,  and  it  requires  a  judge  to  quickly  rule  and 
supervise  dispositive  motions. 

The  things  that  it  takes  to  move  a  case  along,  I  think,  are  well 
known,  but  it  does  require  the  hands-on  effort  of  a  judge,  and  those 
are  things  I  would  like  to  have  an  opportunity  to  give  to  the  North- 
ern District. 

Finally,  I  would  comment,  I  am  a  big  believer  in  alternative  dis- 
pute resolution  and  I  find  that  in  many  cases,  it  can  help  narrow 
the  differences  between  the  parties,  even  if  it  is  not  able  to  bring 
about  a  conclusion  to  the  matter.  So  that  would  be  another  area 
where  I  would  give  emphasis. 

Mr.  Kimball.  I  agree  with  Judge  Gwin,  that  the  litigation  proc- 
ess can  be  very  disruptive  in  people's  lives  and  it  is  very  important 
that  it  move  along.  I  would  also  say  it  can  be  very,  very  expensive 
and  if  some  of  that  expense  can  be  saved  by  good  management  by 
judges,  then  that  ought  to  be  done. 

I  have  been  an  arbitrator.  I  have  been  a  mediator.  I  have  rep- 
resented clients  in  front  of  arbitrators  and  in  front  of  mediators 
and  I  would  encourage  the  voluntary,  but  not  mandatory,  use  of 
those  ADR  processes. 


371 

I  believe  in  the  early  intervention  and  management  that  has 
been  discussed.  Perhaps  there  is  no  more  important  case  manage- 
ment technique  than  timely  and  well-explained  decisions,  and  I 
would  hope  to  be  able  to  render  those.  I  believe  it  is  important  to 
utilize  the  magistrate  judges  and  I  consider  myself  a  good  manager 
and  would  utilize  the  various  management  techniques  for  moving 
things  along  and  keeping  them  orderly  that  I  have  utilized  in  my 
la^v  practice. 

Senator  DeWine.  Mr.  Marbley. 

Mr.  Marbley.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Perhaps  the  single  most  important  feature  is  the  early  entry  of 
the  judge  into  the  fray.  That  is  important  because  the  judge  can 
counsel  the  litigants  on  the  expense  of  litigation,  perhaps  reach  an 
early  resolution  of  the  matter  through  settlement  or  otherwise. 
Judges  tend  to  be  able  to  help  the  parties  close  the  gap  and  resolve 
their  differences. 

Also,  the  judge,  I  think,  should  counsel  the  litigants  about  the 
advantages  of  alternative  dispute  resolution,  and  I  know  that  in 
our  district,  there  are  options  in  that  respect,  and  so  that  would  be 
another  method  to  move  the  cases  along. 

Third,  I  think  that  it  will  be  important  to  resolve  motions  that 
are  pending,  particularly  discovery  motions  or  dispositive  motions. 
Certainly,  magistrate  judges  can  be  used  for  that  and  those  mag- 
istrate judges  who  perhaps  have  their  own  backlog  and  cannot  do 
it,  you  certainly  can  rely  on  your  law  clerks  to  get  much  of  that 
research  done  to  resolve  pending  motions. 

Finally,  and  perhaps  most  important,  is  to  establish  a  reputation 
for  setting  realistic  discovery  deadlines  and  trial  dates  and  sticking 
to  them.  A  judge  who  has  a  reputation  for  having  firm  trial  dates 
is  a  judge  who  moves  his  docket  along  with  a  great  deal  of  dis- 
patch, and  I  think  that  once  the  litigants  in  your  district  realize 
that  you  are  going  to  adhere  to  those  trial  dates  and  that  they  are 
firm,  then  you  will  see  a  lot  more  motion  in  terms  of  getting  mat- 
ters resolved. 

Senator  DeWine.  Judge. 

Judge  Siragusa.  As  I  listen  to  my  colleagues,  the  old  maxim  of 
justice  delayed  is  justice  denied  comes  to  mind,  and  I  think  it  is 
true,  and  I  think  the  ultimate  responsibility  is  with  the  presiding 
judge  to  manage  his  caseload.  Certainly,  the  techniques  that  have 
been  suggested  are  good  ones.  I  think  it  starts  with  a  judge  who 
actively  is  involved  in  his  case,  who  utilizes  scheduling  orders,  and 
I  agree  to  set  realistic  demands  and  not  grant  adjournments  unless 
there  is  a  legitimate  reason.  Certainly  in  Federal  court,  the  use  of 
magistrate  judges  to  deal  with  both  nondispositive  and  dispositive 
motions. 

I  agree  that  it  is  important  for  a  judge  to  establish  a  reputation 
that  the  judge  is  prepared  and  willing  to  do  the  work,  and  I  think 
you  do  that  by  rendering  prompt  decisions.  I  found  that  attorneys 
can  live  with  a  decision  that  goes  against  them  because  then  they 
can  proceed  to  the  next  step.  What  they  cannot  live  with  is  deci- 
sions that  pend  for  months  upon  end. 

Certainly,  the  use  of  mediation  or  alternative  methods  of  dispute 
resolution  is  something  that  I  think  can  be  utilized  to  deal  with  our 
backlog.  Thank  you. 


372 

Senator  DeWine.  Judge,  let  me  continue  with  you,  if  I  could. 

Judge  SiRAGUSA.  Yes. 

Senator  DeWine.  You,  in  April  of  this  year,  had  a  writing  that 
had  to  do  with  cameras  in  the  courtroom..  Do  you  want  to  tell  us 
about  that? 

Judge  SiRAGUSA.  Sure. 

Senator  DeWine.  Any  conclusions  you  reached,  or 

Judge  SiRAGUSA.  I  was  careful  not  to  give  any  conclusion  to  the 
presentation,  but  basically,  I  was  asked  as  part  of  the  continuing 
education  program  to  present  both  the  pros  and  the  cons  on  cam- 
eras in  the  courtroom  and  I  made  that  presentation.  I  would  be 
glad  to  comment  on  it. 

I  should  preface  it  by  saying,  in  June  of  this  year,  the  New  York 
experiment  on  cameras  in  the  courtroom  ceased.  There  is  no  legis- 
lation now.  So  since  I  am  a  sitting  judge,  I  will  speak  to  what  my 
experience  has  been  on  cameras  in  the  courtroom. 

In  New  York,  the  purpose  of  promulgating  rules  on  cameras  in 
the  courtroom  was  a  recognition  by  the  legislature  that  it  was  im- 
portant to  enhance  the  citizens'  understanding  of  our  criminal  jus- 
tice system  and  thereby  promote  both  confidence  in  the  judiciary 
and  also  to  promote  the  fair  administration  of  justice,  and  that  is 
why  these  rules  for  cameras  in  the  courtroom  were  initially  enacted 
back  in  1987. 

In  my  experience  in  New  York,  both  in  trying  cases  that  were 
some  televised  live  and  in  presiding  on  cases,  the  goals  of  the  ex- 
periment have  been  approached,  but  I  think  it  primarily  de- 
pends  

Senator  DeWine.  The  goals  have  been- 


Judge  SiRAGUSA.  Approached.  I  am  not  going  to — quote,  ap- 
proached. I  am  not  going  to  say 

Senator  DeWine.  What  does  that  mean? 

Judge  SiRAGUSA.  I  think  it  would  be  naive  to  say  that  we  have 
achieved  exactly  what  the  legislature  intended,  but  I  think  in  New 
York  they  have  been  approached,  but  it  largely  falls  because  of 
three  reasons,  the  responsibility  of  the  media,  the  responsibility  of 
the  attorneys,  and  the  responsibility,  of  course,  of  the  judge. 

In  my  experience  in  Monroe  County,  the  media  has  been  respon- 
sible about  not  being  intrusive  in  the  positioning  of  cameras  and 
following  the  dictates  of  the  judge.  The  litigants  have  not  engaged 
in  histrionics.  There  has  not  been  theatrics.  They  have  not  been 
playing  to  the  cameras.  And  I  hope  myself,  as  a  judge,  and  cer- 
tainly the  judges  who  have  presided  on  cases  that  I  have  tried  that 
have  been  publicized,  have  kept  control  of  their  courtroom  and 
were  consistent  in  the  demeanor  that  was  established  in  the  court- 
room, whether  the  presentation  was  televised  or  not. 

Senator  DeWine.  Any  unintended  consequences,  based  on  either 
your  personal  experience  or  what  you  found  out? 

Judge  SiRAGUSA.  No.  I  think,  to  share  an  aside,  I  mean,  and  why 
I  said  the  goal  was  approached,  when  I  was  in  the  D.A.'s  office,  I 
tried  a  case  that  was  televised  live  for  12  weeks  and  after  the  case 
was  over,  more  than  one  citizen  came  up  and  said  they  were  im- 
pressed by  the  professionalism  both  of  the  prosecutor,  the  defense 
attorneys,  and  the  judges,  and  I  think  that  speaks  toward  the  pur- 
pose of  approaching  the  goal. 


373 

Senator  DeWine.  Mr.  Kimball,  let  me  refer  to  something  that 
you  wrote  a  few  years  ago,  I  believe  it  is  entitled  "The  Constitu- 
tional Convention,  Its  Nature  and  Powers,  and  the  Amending  Pro- 
cedure," Utah  Law  Review.  It  has  been  a  few  years  ago,  I  guess. 

Mr.  Kimball.  A  lot  of  years  ago. 

Senator  DeWine.  I  guess  maybe  the  lesson  that  people  take 
away  from  these  hearings  is  do  not  ever  write  an3rthing  so  you  will 
not  be  asked  questions — but  I  hope  that  is  not  the  lesson. 

Considering  the  job  that  you  have  been  nominated  for,  I  wonder 
what  you  learned  from  pertbrming  research  for  that  law  review  ar- 
ticle that  might  be  of  any  relevance  to  your  service  on  the  Federal 
bench. 

Mr.  Kimball.  As  I  recall  that  law  review  article,  it  was  basically 
about  State  constitutions  and  the  amending  process  and  problems 
that  arose  and  how  conventions  were  called  and  what  powers  they 
had  and  so  on. 

I  think  I  gained  a  greater  respect  for  both  what  constitutions  say 
and  what  the  people  say  through  their  whatever  it  be,  whether  it 
is  the  writing  of  the  Constitution  or  the  writing  of  legislation.  That 
has  to  be  given  great  deference  by  a  judge.  That  is  one  thing  I 
would  have  learned  through  writing  that  article. 

Senator  DeWine.  Let  me  ask  each  one  of  you,  and  we  will  start 
with  Mr.  Casey — ^you  had  the  opportunity — I  think  you  were  all  in 
the  room  when  the  circuit  court  nominees  were  here — to  hear  a  se- 
ries of  questions  in  regard  to  a  problem  that  Federal  court  judges 
have  to  deal  with — and  that  is  State  prison  systems.  I  wonder  if, 
based  on  what  you  heard  today,  you  have  any  additional  comments 
about  that,  about  your  philosophy,  and  how  you  approach  that  type 
of  a  case. 

Please  understand,  I  am  not  asking  you  to  comment  about  any 
particular  case.  I  am  not  asking  you,  obviously,  to  comment  about 
anything  we  already  have  discussed.  But  I  would  just  like  to  know 
your  approach  in  general.  You  all  had  the  opportunity  to  hear  the 
two  judges  talk  earlier  and  I  wonder  if  you  have  anything  to  add 
to  that.  Mr.  Casey. 

Mr.  Casey.  Well,  Senator,  I  was  very  interested  by  the  comments 
of  the  two  candidates.  It  is  a  problem  which,  I  think,  many  mem- 
bers of  the  court  in  the  Southern  District  are  concerned  about. 
However,  it  is  a  responsibility  of  the  judge,  regardless  of  who  the 
litigants  are,  to  give  them  a  fair  and  reasonable  hearing,  just  as 
they  would  to  anyone  else. 

Senator  DeWine.  Judge  Gwin. 

Judge  Gwin.  I  would  generally  think  that  in  all  cases,  there 
ought  to  be  differentiated  management,  and  so  I  think  it  is  impor- 
tant for  the  judge  on  a  case  to  take  an  early  perspective  on  the 
case,  the  claims  made,  and  put  it  on  a  track  that  leads  to  a  final 
disposition  commensurate  with  the  claims  made  and  the  defense  as 
a  surrogate. 

I  use  that  as  background  to  say  that  I  think  it  is  important  for 
judges  to  separate  the  wheat  from  the  chaff  in  terms  of  this  type 
of  litigation  and  others  and  to  set  these  type  of  cases  on  a  path 
where  they  come  to  final  disposition  fairly,  but  not  running  a  case 
that  should  be  resolved  quickly  through  a  long  history  of  litigation 
before  a  final  resolution  is  reached. 


45-964    98  -  n 


374 

So  I  would  comment  just  generally,  I  think  that  is  important  in 
all  civil  litigation  and  I  think  it  applies  equally  to  the  prison  litiga- 
tion. It  applies  similarly  to  habeas  corpus  litigation. 

Senator  DeWine.  The  prison  cases  are,  to  some  extent,  unique  in 
the  sense  that  we  have  had  experience  with  special  masters  with 
whom  these  cases  go  on  and  on  for  years.  I  know  that  is  not  totally 
unique  to  prisons.  It  happens  in  other  areas,  as  well.  It  might  hap- 
pen in  a  school  district.  But  some  of  these  cases  go  on  and  on  and 
on.  That  is  something  that  I  think  I  have  some  sensitivity  to  be- 
cause of  the  previous  position  I  held  and  some  of  the  problems  that 
I  saw.  I  know  it  is  very  difficult  to  comment  in  general  about  that. 

Mr.  Kimball. 

Mr.  Kimball.  I  agree  with  what  these  two  gentlemen  on  my  left 
have  said,  but  I  would  also  say  that  it  seems  to  me  that  it  would 
be  a  very  unusual  and  unique  set  of  circumstances  that  would  re- 
quire or  even  allow  a  judge  to  really  get  into  the  management  busi- 
ness, which  I  think  is  partly  what  you  are  talking  about.  I  do  not 
really  see  that  as  part  of  the  job  description. 

Senator  DeWine.  Mr.  Marbley. 

Mr.  Marbley.  I  think  that  I  can  answer  your  question  in  two  re- 
spects. First,  these  matters  have  to  be  dealt  with  expeditiously  be- 
cause they  are  administrative  matters  and  an  early  resolution  is 
important  to  everyone  involved,  the  inmates  as  well  as  the  prison 
officials. 

Second,  and  perhaps  more  importantly,  you  have  to  subject  them 
to  the  same  type  of  analysis  that  you  would  most  other  cases.  You 
start  with  whatever  existing  precedent  is  and  then  as  far  as  the 
issues  that  were  discussed  here  today,  it  appears  that  as  long  as 
there  are  no  suspect  classifications  involved,  you  use  a  rational  re- 
lationship test,  and  in  doing  so,  you  give  substantial  deference  to 
officials  who  are  enacting  a  particular  program  or  whatever  the 
issue  may  be  before  the  court. 

So  as  long  as  you  take  that  sort  of  analytical  approach  that  we, 
as  lawyers,  are  trained  to  do  and  abide  by  the  doctrine  of  stare  de- 
cisis, as  we  as  article  III  judges  are  obligated  to  do,  I  think  that 
you  can  pretty  much  dispose  of  that  litigation  expeditiously  and 
fairly. 

Senator  DeWine.  Judge. 

Judge  SiRAGUSA.  Again,  I  do  not  know  that  I  will  add  anything 
new,  but  I  do  believe  that  deference  should  be  given  to  administra- 
tive decisions.  Obviously,  if  there  is  a  rational  basis  for  an  adminis- 
trative decision  affecting  an  inmate,  it  should  be  upheld.  If  cases 
get  to  the  court  system,  then  I  think  it  is  the  responsibility  of  the 
judge,  where  possible,  to  separate  the  frivolous  lawsuits  out  and  to 
deal  with  them  expeditiously. 

Senator  DeWine.  Let  me  thank  each  one  of  you  for  your  presence 
and  for  your  patience  today.  I  will  again  state  that  the  record  will 
remain  open  and  you  may  get  additional  questions.  If  any  of  you 
want  to  supplement  any  of  your  answers,  you  are  more  than  wel- 
come to  do  that  by  contacting  the  committee  staff  and  you  can  do 
that  in  writing. 

Again,  I  appreciate  your  participation  and  appreciate  the  pa- 
tience of  the  members  of  your  families,  particularly  the  young 
members  of  your  families. 


375 

Mr.  Casey.  Senator. 

Judge  SiRAGUSA.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Mr.  Marbley.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Mr.  Kimball.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Judge  GwiN.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Mr.  Casey.  Senator. 

Senator  DeWine.  Yes. 

Mr.  Casey.  Could  I  just,  because  I  have  to  ride  home  with  them 
on  the  plane,  ask  the  chair  to  recognize  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Doyle,  who 
came  with  me,  too,  because  that  would  be  a  long  ride  home. 

Senator  DeWine.  It  would  be.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Casey,  very  much. 

Mr.  Casey.  Thank  you,  Senator. 

Senator  DeWine.  The  committee  is  adjourned. 

[Whereupon,  at  4:48  p.m.,  the  committee  was  adjourned.] 

[Submissions  for  the  record  follow:] 


376 
SUBMISSIONS  FOR  THE  RECORD 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE 
I.   BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 


Full  neune  (include  any  former  names  used)  . 
Ronald  Lee  Gilman 


2.    Address:    List  current  place  of  residence  and  office 
address (es) . 

Office; 

Farris,  Mathews,  Gilman,  Branan  &  Hellen,  P.L.C. 
One  Commerce  Square,  Suite  2  000 
Memphis,  Tennessee    38103 

Home; 

Memphis,  Tennessee 


Date  and  place  of  birth. 

October  16,  1942,  in  Memphis,  Tennessee 


4.  Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's 
name) .  List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and 
business  address(es). 

Married  to  Betsy  Dunn  Gilman.  Former  preschool  director. 
Currently  a  community  volunteer. 


Education;  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have 
attended,  including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees 
received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

Massachusetts  Institute  of  Technology 

1960-1964 

S.B.  degree  awarded  in  June  of  1964 

Harvard  Law  School 

1964-1967 

J.D.  degree  awarded  in  June  of  1967 


377 


Employment  Record;  List  (by  year)  all  business  or 
professional  corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other 
enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and 
organizations,  nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms, 
with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer,  director, 
partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  from 
college. 


Paid  Employment 


1967  -  present! 


Farris,  Mathews,  Gilman,  Branan  & 
Hellen,  P.L.C. 

One  Commerce  Square,  Suite  2000 
Memphis,  Tennessee    38103 


Associate  1967  -  1969; 
Partner  since  1969 


1980  -  Present; 


University  of  Memphis  School  of  Law 
Memphis,  Tennessee    38152 


Adjunct  professor  of  Trial  Advocacy 


1988  -  Present: 


American  Arbitration  Association 
211  Seventh  Avenue  North,  Suite  300 
Nashville,  Tennessee    37219 


Arbitrator  and  Mediator 


1993  -  Present: 


National  Association  of  Securities 

Dealers 
10  S.  LaSalle  Street,  20th  Floor 
Chicago,  Illinois    60603 


Arbitrator  and  Mediator 


1994  -  Present: 


Private  Adjudication  Center 
8000  Weston  Parkway.  Suite  330 
Cary,  North  Carolina   27513 


Dalkon  Shield  Referee 


-2- 


378 


Unpaid  Activities 

1967  -  Present:  Memphis  Bar  Association  (see  9  below) 
1967  -  Present:     Tennessee  Bar  Assn.  (see  9  below) 

1967  -  Present:     American  Bar  Assn.  (see  9  below) 

1995  -  Present:      Association  of  Attorney-Mediators 

(see  9  below) 

1991  -  Present:      Commercial  Law  Affiliates 

(see  9  below) 

1993  -  Present:      Boy  Scouts  of  America,  Chickasaw 

Council  (Executive  Board) 

1979  -  Present:      Society  of  Memphis  Magicians 

(President  1986) 

1988  -  1995:         Capital  Case  Resource  Center 

of  Tennessee  (Board  member) 

1984  -  1987:         Memphis  Jewish  Home  (Board  member) 

1979  -  1987:        Tennessee  Court  of  the  Judiciary 

(Member  of  the  Court,  serving 
without  compensation.   See 
14  below  for  an  explanation 
of  the  Court's  function.) 

1968  -  1973:        Senior  Citizens  Services 

(Board  member  &  Treasurer) 

1968  -  1973:        Memphis  Junior  Chamber  of  Commerce 

(Parliamentarian  -  Legal 
Counsel  1971) 

I  have  also  sat  at  various  times  throughout-  the  years  as 
a  special  judge  in  the  Shelby  County  Circuit  Court  and 
the  Shelby  County  Probate  Court  at  the  request  of  several 
regular  judges  during  their  absences  from  the  bench. 
Such  service  was  without  compensation. 


Military  Service;  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If 

so,  give  particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of 

service,   rank  or  rate,   serial  number  and  type  of 
discharge  received. 

No 


-3- 


379 


Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships, 
honorary  degrees,  and  honorary  society  meniberships  that 
you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

Eagle  Scout  Award  (1958) 

William  L.  Stewart,  Jr.  Award  for  "Outstanding 

Contributions  to  Extracurricular  Life  at  M.I.T." 
(1964) 

Cum  Laude  graduate  of  Harvard  Law  School  (1967) 

Sam  A.  Myar,  Jr.  Memorial  Award  for  "Outstanding  Service 
to  the  Legal  Profession  and  the  Community"   (1981) 

Best  Lawyers  in  America  (Woodward/White) 

(Listed  in  categories  of  business  litigation, 
corporate  law,  and  estate  planning) 

Who's  Who  in  American  Law  (Marquis) 

Who's  Who  in  America  (Marquis) 


9.  Bar  Associations;  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or 
judicial-related  committees  or  conferences  of  which  you 
are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates 
of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Memphis  Bar  Association 
President  (1987) 
President,  Young  Lawyers  Division  (1974)       ^ 

Tennessee  Bar  Association 
President  (1990-1991) 

Speaker,  House  of  Delegates  (1985-1987) 
President,  Young  Lawyers  Conference  (1978-1979) 

American  Bar  Association 

Member,  House  of  Delegates  (1990-Present) 

American  Law  Institute 

American  Bar  Foundation 

American  Judicature  Society 

American  Arbitration  Association 

Tennessee  Bar  Foundation 

Memphis  Bar  Foundation 

-4- 


380 


Association  of  Attorney  Mediators  (West  Tennessee  Chapter 
Vice  President,  1996-Present) 

American  College  of  Trust  and  Estate  Counsel 

Life  member,  Sixth  Circuit  Judicial  Conference 

Chair,  Bankruptcy  Merit  Selection  Panel  for  the 
Western  District  of  Tennessee  (1992-1993) 

Member,  University  of  Memphis  Law  Dean  Search  Committee 
(1991-1993) 

Member,  Federal  Court  Local  Rules  Revision  Committee 
(1989-1992) 

Commercial  Law  Affiliates 

Board  of  Directors  (1991  -  1993) 

Lawyers  Journal  Club  of  Memphis   (This  unincorporated 
educational  organization  has  no  bylaws.) 

10.  other  Memberships;  List  all  organizations  to  which  you 
belong  that  are  active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies. 
Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

American  Mensa,  Ltd. 

B'nai  B'rith 

Boys  Scouts  of  America,  Chickasaw  Council 

Economic  Club  of  Memphis   (A  copy  of  the  Bylaws  of  this 
organization  is  attached  to  this  Questionnaire  as 
Exhibit  1.) 

Estate  Planning  Council  of  Memphis   (A  copy  of  the 

Bylaws  of  this  organization  is  attached  to  this 
Questionnaire  as  Exhibit  2.) 

Kiwanis  Club  of  Memphis   (A  copy  of  the  Constitution  and 
Bylaws  of  this  organization  is  attached  to  this 
Questionnaire  as  Exhibit  3.) 

International  Brotherhood  of  Magicians 

Society  of  Memphis  Magicians 

I  am  not  aware  that  any  of  the  above  organizations  are 
active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies,  although  the  Boy 
Scouts  and  B'nai  B'rith  may  occasionally  do  so. 

-5- 


381 


11.  Court  Admission:  List  all  cour^  s  in  which  you  have  been 
admitted  to  practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses 
if  any  such  memberships  lapsed.  Please  explain  the 
reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same 
information  for  administrative  bodies  which  require 
spe<.ial  admission  to  practice. 

Shelby  County  Chancery  Court  1967 

Shelby  County  Circuit  Court  1967 

Shelby  County  General  Sessions  Court  1967 

Shelby  County  Probate  Court  1967 

Shelby  County  Criminal  Court  1967 

Tennessee  Court  of  Appeals  1967 

Tennessee  Supreme  Court  1967 

Unites  States  District  Court 

for  the  Western  District  of  Tennessee      1967 

United  States  Tax  Court  1980 

United  States  Cou. t  of  Appeals 

for  the  Sixth  Circuit  1973 

United  States  Supreme  Court  1971 


12.  Published  Writings;  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and 
dates  of  books,  articles,  reports,  or  other  published 
material  you  have  written  or  edited.  Please  supply  one 
copy  of  all  published  material  not  readily  available  to 
the  Committee.  Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all 
speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law  or 
legal  policy.  If  there  were  press  reports  about  the 
speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you,  please 
supply  them. 


BOOK 

Tennessee  Corporations.  Lawyers  Cooperative  Pub.  Co. 
(1980;  supplemented  annually  through  1994) 


382 


ARTICLES  IN  LEGAL  PERIODICALS 

"The  Extension  of  the  Privilege  to  Libel  Without 

Actual  Malice,"  3  Harvard  Legal  Commentary  169  (1966) 

"Medical  Expert  Testimony  in  Tennessee,"  34  Tennessee 
Law  Review  572  (1967) 

"Non-Tax  Aspacts  of  Estate  Planning,"  2  Memphis  State 
University  Law  Review  41  (1971) 

"Annotated  By-Laws  for  a  Tennessee  Corporation," 
Tennessee  Bar  Journal  (May,  1975) 

"Agreements  for  Buying  and  Selling  a  Business," 
The  Practical  Lawyer  (Jan.,  1977) 

"Saving  for  College  with  a  Clifford  Trust," 
The  Practical  Lawyer  (June,  1979) 

"The  Holographic  Codicil,"  Tennessee  Bar  Journal 
(August,  1982) 

"Dishonesty  Alone  Dov^.s  Not  Deck  a  Fidelity  Insurer," 
Insurance  Counsel  Journal  (October,  1984) 

"Tangible  Evidence  in  Tennessee,"  Tennessee  Bar  Journal 
(May/June,  1986) 

"Planning  for  Disability,"  The  Practical  Lawyer 
(March,  1989) 

"The  Shifting  Focus  of  Estate  Planning  from  Death 

to  Disability,"  Tennessee  Bar  Journal  (May/June,  1989) 

"Pro  Bono  &  You,"  Tennessee  Bar  Journal 
(March/April,  1993) 

"Mediation:   Prime  ADR  Tool  of  the  '90s,"  Tennessee  Bar 
Journal  (March/April,  1994) 

"Resolving  Commercial  Cases  through  Alternative  Dispute 
Resolution,"  26  University  of  Memphis  Law  Review  1121 
(Spring,  1996) 


OTHER  ARTICLES 

President's  Column  in  Memphis  and  Shelby  County 

Bar  Forum  during  my  year  as  Memphis  Bar  Association 
President  in  1987  (Issued  quarterly) 


-7- 


383 


President's  Column  in  The  Bar  Flyer  (name  changed  in  1987 
to  The  Bar  Essentials)  during  my  year  as  President  of 
the  Memphis  Bar  Association 

Letter  to  the  Editor  written  as  President  of  the 

Memphis  Bar  Association,  replying  to  an  editorial 
titled  "Only  Lawyers  Lose."   (Published  in  the 
Memphis  Commercial  Appeal  on  December  27,  1987) 

President's  Column  in  the  Tennessee  Bar  Journal  and 
Across  the  Bar  during  my  year  as  President  of  the 
Tennessee  Bar  Association  in  1990-1991. 

Travel  report  to  Singapore,  published  in  the  Memphis 
Business  Journal  on  October  9,  1989. 


SPEECHES 

I   have   made   no   speeches   on   issues   involving 
constitutional  law  or  legal  policy. 


CONTINUING  LEGAL  EDUCATION  PROGRAMS 

I  have  made  numerous  talks  over  the  last  28  years  at 
various  Bar  Association  continuing  legal  education 
programs  in  the  areas  of  estate  planning,  business 
organizations,  trial  practice,  and  mediation.  Many  of 
these  programs  required  the  preparation  of  handout 
materials.  I  have  not  made  a  practice  of  saving  these 
materials.  Copies  of  such  handouts,  to  the  extent 
available  in  the  files  of  the  Memphis  Bar  Association  and 
the  Tennessee  Bar  Association  (the  two  organizations  that 
have  sponsored  almost  all  of  the  talks  I  have  given)  , 
have  been  supplied. 


Health:   What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?   List 
the  date  of  your  last  physical  examination. 

Excellent.    Last  general  physical  exam  was  on  May  5, 
1997. 


384 


14.  Judicial  Office;  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial 
offices  you  have  held,  whether  such  position  was  elected 
or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of 
each  such  court. 

Tennessee  Court  of  the  Judiciary,  1979-1987.  I  was 
appointed  as  a  member  of  the  Court  by  the  Tennessee  Bar 
Association.  The  Court  has  jurisdiction  over 
disciplinary  complaints  against  state  court  judges. 
During  my  time  on  the  Court,  it  met  semi-annually  to 
handle  vari<5us  disciplinary  complaints,  as  well  as 
adjudicated  several  cases  against  judges  where  no 
voluntary  settlement  could  be  reached. 

I  have  also  sat  on  various  occasions  as  a  special  judge 
in  the  Shelby  County  Circuit  Court  and  the  Shelby  County 
Probate  Court  at  the  request  of  several  regular  judges 
during  their  absences  from  the  bench. 


15.  Citations;  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide: 
(1)  citations  for  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you 
have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for 
all  appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed 
or  where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant 
criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and 
(3)  citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or 
state  constitutional  issues,  together  with  the  citation 
to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of 
the  opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please 
provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

I  wrote  no  opinions  as  a  member  of  the  Court  of  the 
Judiciary.  My  only  written  opinion  during  my  service  as 
a  special  judge  was  in  the  Circuit  Court  case  of  Rita 
Hahn,  et  al.  v.  John  Freeman,  et  al..  Case  No.  82401 
(Opinion  dated  November  30,  1981).  The  Tennessee  Court 
of  Appeals  unanimously  affirmed  my  Opinion  on 
November  22,  1982.  Copies  of  both  my  Opinion  and  the 
Opinion  of  the  Tennessee  Court  of  Appeals  are  attached  as 
Exhibit  4  to  the  full  sets  of  this  Questionnaire. 


16.  Public  Officer  State  (chronologically)  any  public 
offices  you  have  held,  other  than  judicial  offices, 
including  tho  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions 
were  elected  or  appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any 
unsuccessful  candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

None 

-9- 


385 


17.   Legal  Career; 


a.  Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and 
experience  after  graduation  from  law  school, 
including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if 
so,  the  name  of  the  judge,  the  court,  and  the 
dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

Not  applicable 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the 
addresses  and  dates; 

Not  applicable 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or 
offices,  companies  or  governmental  agencies 
with  which  you  have  been  connected  and  the 
nature  of  your  connection  with  each. 

1967  -  present:      Farris,  Mathews,  Gilman,  Branan  & 
Hellen,  P.L.C. 

One  Commerce  Square,  Suite  2000 
Memphis,  Tennessee    38103 

Associate  1967-1969; 
Partner  since  1969 


1979  -  1987:         Tennessee  Court  of  the  Judiciary 
100  Supreme  Court  Building 
Nashville,  Tennessee   37219 

Judge  appointed  by  the  Tennessee  Bar 
Association 


1980  -  Present:      University  of  Memphis  School  of  Law 
Memphis,  Tennessee    38152 

Adjunct  professor  of  Trial  Advocacy 


1988  -  Present:      American  Arbitration  Association 

211  Seventh  Avenue  North,  Suite  300 
Nashville,  Tennessee    37219 

Arbitrator  and  Mediator 


-10- 


386 


1993  -  Present:      National  Association  of  Securities 

Dealers 
10  S.  LaSalle  Street,  20th  Floor 
Chicago,  Illinois    60603 

Arbitrator  and  Mediator 


1994  -  Present:      Private  Adjudication  Center 

8000  Weston  Parkway.  Suite  330 
Cary,  North  Carolina    27513 

Dalkon  Shield  Referee 


b.  1.  What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your 
law  practice,  dividing  it  into  periods  with 
do:tes  if  its  character  has  changed  over  the 
years? 

Early  in  my  legal  career  (1967-1973),  I  represented 
indigent  defendants  in  the  United  States  District 
Court  for  the  Western  District  of  Tennessee  and 
engaged  in  a  very  general  practice.  Later  (1974- 
1984)  I  began  to  concentrate  in  the  areas  of  estate 
planning,  business  formation,  and  commercial 
litigation.  Since  1985,  my  primary  emphasis  has 
been  in  the  areas  of  commercial  litigation, 
arbitration,  and  mediation. 


2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and 
mention  the  areas,  if  any,  in  which  you  have 
specialized. 

My  typical  clients  are  business  corporations,  an 
insurance  company,  a  bank,  other  lawyers,  and 
individuals  with  moderate  to  large  estates. 

My  areas  of  concentration  are  the  following: 

Business  Litigation.  Much  of  my  practice  has  been 
in  the  U.S.  District  Court  and  the  Shelby  County 
Chancery  Court  representing  litigants  as  both 
plaintiffs  and  defendants  in  cases  dealing  with 
contractual,  statutory,  or  constitutional  disputes. 
Such  cases  have  included  issues  dealing  with 
fidelity  bonds,  commodity  contracts,  securities 
laws,  bank  regulations,  statutory  ambiguities,  and 
alleged  constitutional  violations.  Many  of  these 
cases  have  required  extensive  document  production 
and  numerous  depositions.   My  longest  jury  trial, 

-11- 


387 


for  example,  lasted  six  and  one-half  weeks  in  the 
U.S.  District  Court  and  involved  over  40  pretrial 
depositions,  many  witnesses,  massive  exhibit  books, 
and  thousands  of  pages  of  documents.  The  case 
arose  from  the  failure  of  the  Butcher  banking 
system,  and  was  settled  near  the  end  of  the  trial 
with  a  recovery  to  my  client  of  over  one  million 
dollars. 

Representation  of  Other  Lawyers.  I  am  currently 
defending  various  local  attorneys  in  four  separate 
cases,  with  the  issues  ranging  from  legal 
malpractice  to  statutory  violations  to  contract 
disputes. 

Estate  Planning.  I  have  drafted  hundreds  of  wills, 
trusts,  durable  powers  of  attorney,  and  living 
wills  over  the  past  29  years  for  clients  with 
moderate  to  large  estates.  These  instruments  often 
incorporate  the  use  of  the  unlimited  marital 
deduction  and  credit  shelter  trusts  to  minimize  the 
impact  of  the  federal  estate  tax  on  the  individuals 
and  their  families. 

Mediation  and  Arbitration.  I  am  currently 
certified  as  a  trained  mediator  by  both  the  United 
States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of 
Tennessee  and  the  Tennessee  Supreme  Court.  I  am 
also  a  member  of  the  arbitration  panels  for  the 
American  Arbitration  Association,  the  National 
Association  of  Securities  Dealers,  and  the  Private 
Adjudication  Center  associated  with  Duke 
University.  I  have  served  as  a  mediator  in  38 
cases  and  as  an  arbitrator  in  15  cases  within  the 
last  few  years.  The  cases  have  included  claims  of 
personal  injury,  wrongful  death,  statutory 
violations,  property  damage  and  distributions, 
medical  and  legal  malpractice,  contract  disputes, 
and  business  dissolutions. 


1.  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently, 
occasionally,  or  not  at  all?  If  the  frequency 
of  your  appearance  in  court  varied,  describe 
each  such  variance,  giving  the  dates. 

I  appear  in  court  occasionally  as  needed  for  the 
various  cases  I  am  handling.  My  appearances  in 
court  were  more  frequent  during  my  first  20  years 
of  practice.  In  the  last  10  years,  I  have  made 
fewer  appearances  in  court,  but  the  cases  I  have 
handled  have  tended  to  be  larger  and  more  complex. 

-12- 


388 


I   have   also   become   increasingly   involved  in 

arbitration  and  mediation,  having  served  as  an 

arbitrator  in  15  cases  and  as  a  mediator  in  38 
cases  within  the  last  few  years. 


2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts; 
50% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record; 
35% 

(c)  other  courts. 
15% 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil; 
90% 

(b)  criminal. 
10% 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record 
you  tried  to  verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than 
settled) ,  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

I  have  tried  to  judgment  or  verdict  in  courts  of 
record  37  cases.  I  have  also  handled  24  appeals  in 
the  federal  and  state  courts.  I  served  as  either 
sole  or  chief  counsel  in  all  of  these  cases. 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury; 
25% 

(b)  non-jury. 
75% 


-13- 


389 


18.  Litigation;  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated 
matters  which  you  personally  handled.  Give  the 
citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket 
number  and  date  if  unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary  of 
the  substance  of  each  case.  Identify  the  party  or 
parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail  the 
nature  of  your  participation  in  the  litigation  and  the 
final  disposition  of  the  case.  Also  state  as  to  each 
case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  The  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or 
judges  before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  The  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone 
numbers  of  co-counsel  and  of  the  principal  counsel 
for  each  of  the  other  parties. 


FEDERAL  CASES 

1.  Gau  Shan  Company,  Ltd.  v.  Bankers  Trust  Company  & 
The  Julien  Company,  United  States  District  Court 
for  the  Western  District  of  Tennessee,  Civil  Action 
No.  90-2122;  956  F.2d  1349  (6th  Cir.  1992) 

This  case  involved  a  $20  million  dispute  between 
Gau  Shan  (a  Hong  Kong  cotton  merchant) ,  The  Julien 
Company  (a  bankrupt  Memphis  cotton  merchant) ,  and 
Bankers  Trust  Company  (a  major  New  York  bank) .  I 
represented  Gau  Shan  as  lead  counsel,  both 
presenting  all  the  proof  in  the  trial  court  and 
arguing  the  case  on  appeal. 

Gau  Shan  filed  suit  in  the  United  States  District 
Court  for  the  Western  District  of  Tennessee  in 
February  of  1990  to  enjoin  Bankers  Trust  Company 
(BTC)  from  suing  in  Hong  Kong  for  the  collection  of 
a  $20  million  promissory  note  signed  by  Gau  Shan 
for  cotton  that  was  never  delivered  due  to  the 
bankruptcy  of  The  Julien  Company  (TJC) .  After  a 
three  day  injunction  hearing  before  U.S.  District 
Judge  Robert  M.  McRae  Jr.  in  May  of  1990,  the 
District  Court  enjoined  BTC  from  filing  suit  in 
Hong  Kong  on  a  finding  of  fraudulent 
misrepresentation  by  the  bank  relating  to  the 
signing  of  the  note.  The  whole  issue  of  "foreign 
anti-suit  injunctions"  and  "international  comity" 
was  decided  by  the  Sixth  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals 
on  February  24,  1992. 

-14- 


390 


The  Sixth  Circuit  reversed  Judge  McRae  and  remanded 
the  case  back  to  the  District  Court  for  trial.  The 
case  was  then  mediated  by  U.S.  District  Judge  Julia 
S.  Gibbons,  resulting  in  a  partial  settlement  with 
BTC.  The  remainder  of  the  claims  between  Gau  Shan 
and  TJC  was  then  arbitrated  for  three  days  in 
February  of  1993  before  a  panel  of  distinguished 
neutrals  drawn  from  a  list  prepared  by  the  Center 
for  Public  Resources. 

BTC  was  represented  by: 

Lee  L.  Piovarcy 
22  North  Front  Street 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  522-9000 

TJC  was  represented  by: 

David  J.  Harris 
130  Court  Avenue 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  524-5120 

Assisting  me  within  my  own  firm  was: 

Rebecca  P.  Tattle 
One  Commerce  Square,  Suite  2000 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  575-0100 


2.  Charles  D.  Winston  v.  Federal  Express  Corp.,  United 
States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of 
Tennessee;  853  F.2d  455  (6th  Cir.  1988) 

I  was  the  sole  attorney  for  the  plaintiff  Winston 
in  both  the  trial  court  and  on  appeal,  handling  all 
aspects  of  the  case.  The  Complaint  for  a 
Declaratory  Judgment  was  filed  on  May  28,  1986, 
seeking  to  recover  $176,570  in  profits  from  the 
plaintiff's  sale  of  his  Federal  Express  stock  that 
Federal  Express  impounded  following  his  sale  of  the 
same  on  March  26,  1986.  The  issue  in  the  case  was 
whether  the  District  Court  erred  in  holding  that 
the  plcintiff  was  an  officer  of  Federal  Express 
within  the  meaning  of  Section  16(b)  of  the 
Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934  when  he  purchased 
8,298  shares  of  its  stock  on  September  30,  1985. 
U.S.  District  Judge  Julia  S.  Gibbons  granted 
summary  judgment  in  favor  of  Federal  Express  on 
April  28,  1987,  although  she  acknowledged  that  "the 

-15- 


391 


question  is  an  extremely  close  one  ..."  The  Sixth 
Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  affirmed  the  ruling  of  the 
District  Court. 

The  case  was  significant  in  that  it  involved  the 
proper  interpretation  of  the  "short  swing  profit" 
prohibition  of  Section  16(b)  of  the  Securities 
Exchange  Act  in  light  of  the  facts  presented. 

Federal  Express  was  represented  by: 

Veronica  F.  Coleman 

(currently  the  United  States  Attorney  for  the 

Western  District  of  Tennessee) 
800  Federal  Building 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  544-4231 


3.  Interstate  Brands  Corp.  v.  Hartford  Accident  & 
Indemnity  Co.,  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Western  District  of  Tennessee;  Sixth  Circuit  Court 
of  Appeals,  No.  82-5660  (1984)  (noted  at  729  F.2d 
1461  as  an  unpublished  opinion) 

I  was  the  sole  attorney  for  the  defendant  Hartford 
in  both  the  trial  court  and  on  appeal,  handling  all 
aspects  of  the  case.  The  Complaint  sought  recovery 
on  a  fidelity  bond  claim  for  $223,716  plus  a  bad 
faith  penalty  against  Hartford.  The  case  was  filed 
on  March  27,  1981.  A  jury  verdict  for  Hartford  was 
rendered  on  September  13,  1982,  and  the  verdict  was 
affirmed  by  the  Sixth  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  on 
February  3,  1984.  U.S.  District  Judge  Odell  Horton 
presided  over  the  trial.  The  case  was  significant 
in  recognizing  the  subtle  difference  between 
fidelity  insurance  and  surety  bonds  where  the 
plaintiff  had  previously  obtained  state  court 
judgments  against  the  dishonest  employees. 

The  plaintiff  was  represented  by: 

Patrick  M.  Ardis 
6055  Primacy  Parkway,  Suite  360 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38119 
(901)  763-3336 

and 


-16- 


392 


Glen  G.  Reid,  Jr. 
6075  Poplar  Avenue,  Suite  650 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38119 
(901)  537-1000 


4.  Gilman  v.  FDIC,  United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Wes-tern  District  of  Tennessee;  660  F.2d  688 
(6th  Cir.  1981) 

This  lawsuit,  filed  in  1976,  alleged  the  violation 
of  Regulation  U  margin  requirements  under  the 
Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934.  Seymour  Gilman 
and  Rosalind  Gilman  brought  suit  in  the  United 
States  District  Court  to  void  a  $139,500  promissory 
note  signed  by  them  and  held  by  the  FDIC  as 
liquidator  of  the  Hamilton  National  Bank  of 
Chattanooga.  I  represented  the  plaintiffs  (my 
parents)  as  their  sole  counsel,  handling  all 
aspects  of  the  case  both  in  the  trial  court  and  on 
appeal. 

On  October  15,  1979,  U.S.  District  Judge  Robert  M. 
McRae,  Jr.  rendered  judgment  for  the  plaintiffs. 
He  voided  the  promissory  note  in  question  based  on 
a  violation  of  Regulation  U  by  the  bank.  On 
December  1,  1981,  the  Sixth  Circuit  Court  of 
Appeals  reversed  Judge  McRae 's  ruling  and  found  for 
the  FDIC.  The  case  was  settled  prior  to  perfecting 
a  petition  for  certiorari  to  the  United  States 
Supreme  Court. 

This  case  involved  complex  and  novel  issues  as  to 
the  interpretation  of  Regulation  U,  the  measure  of 
damages,  whether  a  private  right  of  action  exists, 
and  the  status  of  the  FDIC  as  liquidator. 

The  FDIC  was  represented  by: 

James  W.  McDonnell,  Jr. 

6075  Poplar  Avenue,  Suite  650 

Memphis,  Tennessee  38119 
(901)  537-1000 

and 

Mimi  Phillips 

22  North  Front  Street,  Suite  800 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  529-0606 


-17- 


393 


5.  H.  Molsen  &  Co.,  Inc.  v.  Flowers,  et  al..  United 
States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of 
Tennessee  No.  C-72-139  (Judgment  on  Jury  Verdict 
rendered  on  September  11,  1973;  62  F.R.D.  14  (1973) 

I  was  the  plaintiff  Molsen's  sole  attorney  in  this 
case,  handling  all  aspects  of  the  litigation.  H. 
Molsen  &  Co.,  Inc.  was  a  Texas  cotton  merchant  who 
brought  suit  against  a  number  of  West  Tennessee 
farmers  and  their  agent  for  failure  to  deliver  on 
their  cotton  contracts.  Because  the  market  value 
at  the  time  of  harvest  was  substantially  higher 
than  the  contract  price,  the  farmers  failed  to 
deliver  all  the  contracted  cotton. 

After  a  four-day  trial  and  two  more  days  of  jury 
deliberation  between  August  27  and  September  4, 
1973,  the  jury  returned  a  verdict  for  Molsen  in  the 
sum  of  $21,750,  and  U.S.  District  Judge  Harry  W. 
Wellford  added  a  $2,000  attorney's  fee  in  the 
nature  of  punitive  damages.  The  case  was  reported 
in  the  September  15,  1973  issue  of  Cotton  Digest 
International  with  the  headline  "Molsen  Wins 
Landmark  Decision  Against  Farmers  When  Farmers 
Renege  On  Acreage  Contract,"  and  stated  that  it  was 
the  nation's  first  cotton  contract  case  tried  to  a 
jury  verdict  in  federal  court.  A  copy  of  the 
article  is  attached  to  this  Questionnaire  as 
Exhibit  5. 

The  defendants'  attorneys  were: 

John  S.  Wilder 

(currently  Lieutenant  Governor  of  Tennessee) 

108  E.  Court  Square 

Somerville,  Tennessee   38068 

(901)  465-3616 

and 

Thomas  F.  Johnston 
80  Monroe  Avenue,  Suite  700 
Memphis,  Tennessee 
(901)  523-8211 


STATE  CASES 

6.  United  Physicians  Ins.  Risk  Retention  Group,  et  al. 
V.  United  American  Bank  of  Memphis,  Chancery  Court 
for  Davidson  County,  No.  94-1889;  Tennessee  Court 
of  Appeals  No.  01-A-01-9503-CH-00096  (1996) 

-18- 


394 


I  was  the  lead  counsel  for  the  defendant  United 
American  Bank  of  Memphis  (UAB) ,  both  presenting  all 
the  proof  in  the  trial  court  and  arguing  the  case 
on  appeal.  The  Complaint  was  filed  in  June  of  1994 
by  the  Tennessee  Commissioner  of  Commerce  and 
Insurance,  as  the  plaintiff's  liquidator,  to 
recover  the  sum  of  $800,000  that  the  Commissioner 
alleged  had  been  received  by  UAB  as  a  preferential 
payment.  The  case  involved  the  proper 
interpretation  of  the  Tennessee  statutes  dealing 
with  preferences  that  may  be  avoided  by  a 
liquidator. 

This  was  a  case  of  first  impression  in  Tennessee  as 
well  as  in  the  29  other  jurisdictions  which  have 
enacted  the  Insurers  Rehabilitation  and  Liquidation 
Model  Act.  Nashville  Chancellor  Robert  S.  Brandt 
granted  UAB's  Motion  to  Dismiss  the  Commissioner's 
Complaint  on  January  20,  1995,  and  the  Tennessee 
Court  of  Appeals  affirmed  the  dismissal  on 
February  7,  1996,  The  case  was  reported  in  the 
February  22,  1996  issue  of  Mealey's  Litigation 
Report;  Insurance  Insolvency,  a  copy  of  which  is 
attached  to  this  Questionnaire  as  Exhibit  6, 

The  Commissioner  was  represented  by: 

William  B.  Hubbard 
424  Church  Street,  Suite  2900 
Nashville,  Tennessee   37219 
(615)  251-5444 

My  local  co-counsel  was: 

John  Knox  Walkup 
(currently  Attorney  General 

for  the  State  of  Tennessee) 
500  Charlotte  Avenue 
Nashville,  Tennessee   37243 
(615)  741-3491 

Assisting  me  within  my  own  firm  was: 

Rebecca  P.  Tuttle 
One  Commerce  Square,  Suite  2000 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  575-0100 


7.  Mall  of  Memphis  Associates  v.  Tennessee  State  Board 
of  Equalization,  et  al..  Chancery  Court  of  Shelby 
County,  No.  106118-3;  Tennessee  Court  of  Appeals, 

-19- 


395 


No.  02A01-9609-CH-00214  (appeal  pending,  1997) 

This  case  was  filed  in  the  Chancery  Court  of  Shelby 
County  by  the  Mall  of  Memphis  in  July  of  1995, 
challenging  the  right  of  the  Shelby  County  Assessor 
of  Property  to  revalue  the  Mall's  real  estate  for 
the  tax  year  1990  without  simultaneously  examining 
the  values  of  all  the  hundreds  of  strip  centers  in 
Shelby  County.  I  was  retained  to  represent  the 
Assessor  and  have  been  lead  counsel  for  the  defense 
in  both  presenting  all  the  proof  in  the  trial  court 
and  arguing  the  case  on  appeal. 

In  March  of  1996,  Chancellor  D.  J.  Alissandratos 
entered  a  Final  Decree  voiding  the  Mall  of 
Memphis 's  increased  property  tax  assessment  for  the 
year  1990  on  the  basis  that  the  Assessor's  action 
violated  the  Mall's  14th  Amendment  rights  under  the 
United  States  Constitution.  The  Assessor  and  the 
State  Board  of  Equalization  appealed  this  decision 
to  the  Tennessee  Court  of  Appeals,  arguing  that  the 
Chancellor  applied  the  wrong  legal  test  in  his 
determination  of  a  constitutional  violation.  I 
argued  the  case  before  the  Tennessee  Court  of 
Appeals  on  April  15,  1997.  The  case  is  currently 
under  advisement. 

The  Mall  of  Memphis  was  represented  by: 

Clare  Shields  and  Harry  J.  Skefos 
22  North  Front  Street,  Suite  1100 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  522-9000 

The  State  Board  of  Equalization  was  represented  by: 

Christine  Lapps 

Assistant  Attorney  General 

404  Janes  Robertson  Parkway,  Suite  2121 

Nashville,  Tennessee   37243 

(615)  741-6424 

Assisting  me  v/ithin  my  own  firm  was: 

Steven  C.  Brammer 
One  Commerce  Square,  Suite  2000 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  575-0100 


8.    Gaile  K.  Owens  v.  State  of  Tennessee,  Shelby  County 
Criminal   Court  No.   P-8806;   Tennessee  Court  of 

-20- 


396 


Criminal  Appeals  No.  02C01-9111~CR-00259 ;  Tennessee 
Supreme  Court,  908  S.W.2d  923  (Tenn.  1995) 

I  was  originally  appointed  by  United  States 
District  Court  Judge  Jerome  Turner  in  October  of 
1989  to  represent  Gaile  K.  Owens  on  her  petition 
for  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus.  Ms.  Owens  i^i  and  was 
an  indigent  defendant  incarcerated  at  the  Tennessee 
Prison  for  Women  in  Nashville.  Prior  to  my 
appointment,  she  was  convicted  (on  January  15, 
1986)  of  being  an  accessory  before  the  fact  to  the 
first-degree  murder  of  her  husband,  and  was 
sentenced  to  death  by  the  jury.  The  petition  for 
writ  of  habeas  corpus  was  dismissed  without 
prejudice  in  September  of  1991  in  order  to  allow 
Ms.  Owens  to  pursue  her  state  petition  for  post- 
conviction relief  which  had  been  filed  in  February 
of  1991.  I  was  thereafter  appointed  to  continue 
representing  Ms.  Owens  by  state  Criminal  Court 
Judge  Arthur  T.  Bennett,  along  with  co-counsel 
Stephen  B.  Shankman. 

I  petitioned  Judge  Bennett  for  an  ex  parte  hearing 
to  request  authorization  for  investigative  and 
support  services  necessary  to  protect  Ms.  Owens 's 
constitutional  rights  in  a  capital  case  post- 
conviction proceeding.  Judge  Bennett  denied  Ms. 
Owens 's  petition,  but  allowed  her  an  interlocutory 
appeal  to  the  Tennessee  Court  of  Criminal  Apptals. 

The  Tennessee  Court  of  Criminal  Appeals  held  that 
support  services  should  be  provided  to  an  indigent 
prisoner  in  an  appropriate  case,  but  denied  her 
right  to  an  ex  parte  hearing  to  show  her  need  for 
such  Sijrvices.  On  the  State's  appeal  to  the 
Tennessee  Supreme  Court,  the  Supreme  Court  held 
that  a  proper  interpretation  of  the  Tennessee 
statutes  and  its  own  Rules  entitled  Ms.  Owens  to  an 
ex  parte  hearing  to  request  support  services  at  the 
state's  expense.  The  Opinion  of  the  Tennessee 
Supreme  Court  was  rendered  on  October  23,  1995. 

I  was  lead  counsel  for  Ms.  Owens  in  both  the  trial 
court  and  on  appeal,  both  presenting  the  proof  in 
the  trial  court  and  arguing  the  case  on  appeal.  At 
the  joint  request  of  Stephen  B.  Shankman  and 
myself.  Judge  Bennett  discharged  us  from  further 
responsibilities  as  Ms.  Owens'  counsel  on  November 
28,  1995,  shortly  after  the  successful 
interlocutory  appeal. 


-21- 


397 


The  State  was  represented  by: 

Amy  L.  Tarkington 
Assistant  Attorney  General 
450  James  Robertson  Parkway 
Nashville,  Tennessee   37243 
(615)  741-2216 

Co-counsel  in  a  related  case  consolidated  for  the 
appeal  was: 

J.  Brooke  Lathram 
130  Court  Avenue 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  524-5130 

Assisting  me  within  my  own  firm  was: 

Steven  C.  Brammer  and  Rebecca  P.  Tuttle 
One  Commerce  Square,  Suite  2000 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  575-0100 

My  outside  co-counsel  was: 

Stephen  B.  Shankman 

(currently  the  Federal  Public  Defender) 
100  N.  Mid-America  Mall 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  544-3895 


9.  State  of  Tennessee,  et  al.  v.  County  of  Shelby,  et 
al..  Circuit  Court  of  Shelby  County,  No.  55237-4; 
Tennessee  Supreme  Court,  No.  02S01-9312-CV-00083 
(1994) 

This  case  began  in  1992  when  the  four 
African-American  members  of  the  Shelby  County  Board 
of  Commissions  brought  suit  in  the  United  States 
District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of 
Tennessee  to  challenge  the  then-existing 
reapportionment  plan  for  the  Shelby  County 
Commission.  I  was  retained  to  represent  the 
County,  the  Mayor,  the  Board  of  Commissioners,  and 
the  individual  white  Commissioners.  As  lead 
counsel,  I  both  presented  all  the  proof  in  the 
trial  court  and  was  principally  responsible  for  the 
briefs  on  appeal.  United  States  District  Judge 
Jerome  Turner  stayed  the  action  on  July  9,  1993  in 
order  to  allow  the  state  courts  an  opportunity  to 
settle  the  underlying  state  law  question  of  whether 

-22- 


398 


the  required  number  of  votes  needed  to  adopt  a 
reapportionment  plan  was  a  majority  (pursuant  to 
the  applicable  state  statute)  or  two-thirds 
(pursuant  to  the  Shelby  County  Charter) • 

State  Circuit  Court  Judge  James  E.  Swearengen 
entered  an  order  on  November  16,  1993  voiding  the 
reapportionment  plan  approved  by  a  majority  vote. 
The  defendants  then  appealed  the  trial  court's 
order  to  the  Tennessee  Supreme  Court,  arguing  that 
the  trial  judge  erred  in  ruling  that  the  Shelby 
County  Charter  controlled  over  a  conflicting  state 
statute.  While  the  appeal  was  pending,  the  Shelby 
County  Board  of  Commissioners  reached  a  political 
compromise  on  December  7,  1993  by  adopting  a  new 
redistricting  plan  by  more  than  a  two-thirds  vote. 
The  Tennessee  Supreme  Court  subsequently  dismissed 
the  appeal  as  moot. 

The  plaintiffs  were  represented  by: 

P.  A.  Hollingsworth 

415  Main  Street 

Little  Rock,  Arkansas   72202 

(501)  374-3420 

and 

Keith  C,  Kyles 

200  Jefferson  Avenue,  Suite  850 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  522-1200 

Assisting  me  within  my  own  firm  was: 

Rebecca  P.  Tuttle 
One  Commerce  Square,  Suite  2000 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  575-0100 


10.   Phil  M.  Canale,  et  al.  v.  Ruby  Stevenson/   458 

S.W.2d  797  (Tenn.  1970) 

I  was  lead  counsel  for  the  plaintiff  Stevenson  in 
both  the  trial  court  and  on  appeal,  handling  all 
aspects  of  the  case.  Ms.  Stevenson  brought  suit  to 
declare  unconstitutional  a  Tennessee  statute 
prohibiting  the  practice  of  fortune-telling  in 
counties  whose  population  exceeded  400,000  persons. 


-23- 


399 


Chancellor  Charles  Nearn  ruled  in  favor  of  Ms. 
Stevenson  after  a  trial  in  December  of  1969,  and 
his  decision  was  affirmed  by  the  Tennessee  Supreme 
Court  on  October  5,  1970.  The  case  was  significant 
in  that  both  the  trial  and  appellate  courts  held 
that  the  statute  was  unconstitutional  as  arbitrary 
and  capricious  class  legislation,  because  there  was 
no  discernable  reason  for  the  classification  based 
on  county  population. 

The  State  was  represented  by: 

Eugene  C.  Gaerig 

(then  an  Assistant  District  Attorney  General) 
100  North  Main  Building,  Suite  3118 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  526-6000 

Supervising  me  within  my  own  firm  was: 

Henry  H.  Hancock 
One  Commerce  Sguare,  Suite  2000 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  575-0100 


ARBITRATION  AND  MEDIATION  CASES 

Other  representative  members  of  the  Memphis  legal 
community  who  have  had  recent  contact  with  me  in  my 
capacity  as  an  arbitrator  or  mediator  are  as 
follows: 

1.  David  M.  Cook 

80  Monroe  Avenue,  Suite  650 
Memphis,  Tennessee    38103 
(901)  525-8776 

2.  Richard  Glassman 

2  6  North  Second  Street 
Memphis,  Tennessee    38103 
(901)  527-4673 

3.  J.  Kimbrough  Johnson 

One  Commerce  Square,  Suite  2900 
Memphis,  Tennessee    38103 
(901)  525-8721 


-24- 


400 


4.  Hayden  Lait 

99  North  Third  Street 
Menphis,  Tennessee    38103 
(901)  523-0301 

5.  Earle  J.  Schwarz 

50  North  Front  Street,  Suite  1300 
Memphis,  Tennessee   38103 
(901)  543-8000 

6.  Kenneth  R.  Shuttleworth 

200  Jefferson  Avenue,  Suite  1500 
Memphis,  Tennessee    38103 
(901)  526-7399 


19.  Legal  Activities;  Describe  the  most  significant  legal 
activities  you  have  pursued,  including  significant 
litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal 
matters  that  did  not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the 
nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question,  please 
omit  any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client 
privilege  (unless  the  privilege  has  been  waived.) 

I  consider  my  service  as  President  of  the  Memphis  Bar 
Association  (1987) ,  President  of  the  Tennessee  Bar 
Association  (1990-1991) ,  and  my  membership  in  the  House 
of  Delegates  of  the  American  Bar  Association  (1990- 
Present)  among  my  most  significant  legal  activities. 

The  programs  and  innovations  that  occurred  during  my  term 
as  President  of  the  Memphis  Bar  Association  included  the 
establishment  of  a  Lawyers  Helping  Lawyers  Committee,  a 
Corporate  Counsel  Section,  a  staff  policy  manual,  the 
addition  of  a  CLE  Director/Section  Administrator,  a 
committee  to  plan  for  a  new  bar  headquarters,  new  bylaws, 
a  judicial  evaluation  program,  and  changing  the  election 
for  bar  leadership  positions  from  in-person  voting  to  a 
mail  ballot  system. 

The  programs  and  innovations  that  occurred  during  my  term 
as  President  of  the  Tennessee  Bar  Association  included 
the  formation  of  two  new  sections,  one  on  criminal  law 
and  the  other  on  environmental  law,  the  drafting  of  a 
professional  creed  for  Tennessee  lawyers,  the  formation 
of  special  committees  to  study  alternative  dispute 
resolution,  lawyer  advertising,  merit  selection  of 
judges,  outreach  to  the  public,  and  the  pros  and  cons  of 
a  unified  bar,  and  the  formation  of  a  Long  Range  Planning 
Committee  to  formulate  a  list  of  both  goals  and 
strategies  to  guide  the  Tennessee  Bar  Association's 
future  activities. 

-25- 


401 


I  also  consider  my  service  as  a  member  of  the  Federal 
Local  Rifles  Revision  Committee  (1989-1992),  as  Chair  of 
the  Bankruptcy  Merit  Selection  Panel  for  the  Western 
District  of  Tennessee  (1992-1993),  as  a  board  member  of 
the  Capital  Case  Resource  Center  of  Tennessee  (1988- 
1995) ,  and  as  a  member  of  the  University  of  Memphis  Law 
Dean  Search  Committee  (1991-1993)  to  be  significant 
activities  that  have  advanced  the  interests  of  our  legal 
system. 


-26- 


402 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 


1.  List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated 
receipts  from  deferred  income  arrangements,  stock, 
options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits 
which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business 
relationships,  professional  services,  firm  memberships, 
former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please  describe 
the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the 
future  for  any  financial  or  business  interest. 

Pursuant  to  the  Farris,  Mathews,  Gilman,  Branan  &  Hellen, 
P.L.C.  Operating  Agreement,  I  would  be  paid  a  lump  sum 
within  90  days  of  my  withdrawal  from  the  firm  for  my 
interest  in  its  tangible  assets.  I  would  receive  no 
payment  for  accounts  receivable  or  for  work  in  process, 
and  would  thus  have  no  continuing  financial  interest  in 
the  firm.  I  would  also  promptly  transfer  my  account  with 
the  firm's  401 (k)  Plan  to  an  Individual  Retirement 
Account. 


Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of 
interest,  including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in 
determining  these  areas  of  concern.  Identify  the 
categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that 
are  likely  to  present  potential  conf licts-of-interest 
during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which  you 
have  been  nominated. 

I  do  not  anticipate  any  potential  conf licts-of-interest. 
If  any  potential  conflict  were  to  arise,  I  would  recuse 
myself  from  hearing  any  case  in  which  even  the  appearance 
of  a  conflict  might  exist.  Any  potential  conflicts  would 
be  resolved  by  fully  complying  with  the  applicable 
provisions  of  the  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct. 


3.  Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to 
p^'rsue  outside  employment,  with  or  without  compensation, 
during  your  service  with  the  court?   If  so,  explain. 

No 


4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during 
the  calendar  year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the 
current  calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees, 
dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents, 

-27- 


403 


honoraria/  and  other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you 
prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure 
report/  required  by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978, 
may  be  svibstituted  here.) 

A  copy  of  the  Financial  Disclosure  Report  is  attached  to 
this  Questionnaire  as  Exhibit  7. 


5.    Please   complete   the   attached   financial   net   worth 
statement  in  detail  (Add  schedules  as  called  for) . 

My  financial  net  worth  statement  is  attached  to  this 
Questionnaire  as  Exhibit  8. 


Have  you  ev«r  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a 
political  campaign?  If  so,  please  identify  the 
particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate, 
dates  of  the  campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

No 


-28- 


404 


III.   GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 


An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American 
Bar  Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility 
calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  workload/  to  find  some  time  to 
participate  in  serving  the  disadvantaged."  Describe  what 
you  have  done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing 
specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to 
each. 

Early  in  my  legal  career  (1968-1973),  I  served  as  a  board 
member  and  then  as  treasurer  of  Senior  Citizens  Services, 
a  United  Way  Agency.  Later  I  served  for  3  years  (1984- 
1987)  on  the  board  of  the  Memphis  Jewish  Home.  For  the 
past  5  years,  I  have  served  on  the  Executive  Board  of  the 
Chickasaw  Council  of  the  Boy  Scouts  of  America.  For  the 
past  2  of  those  years  (1995  and  1996)  ,  I  was  chair  of  the 
Special  Scouting  District.  This  is  the  District  for 
physically  and  mentally  handicapped  youth  with  special 
needs.  Our  activities  included  a  Learning  for  Life 
program  in  the  schools  and  a  Special  Scouting  Jamboree 
each  fall. 

In  the  legal  arena,  I  volunteered  to  represent  indigent 
defendants  in  the  federal  court  system  prior  to  the 
establishment  of  the  public  defender's  office.  MOi e 
recently,  I  volunteered  to  represent  an  indigent  death 
row  inmate  at  the  request  of  the  Honorable  Odell  Horton, 
then  Chief  Judge  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Western  District  of  Tennessee.  He  explained  that  as 
President  of  the  Tennessee  Bar  Association,  my 
participation  in  a  post-conviction  proceeding  would 
encourage  other  civil  law  practitioners  to  do  the  same. 
Because  of  the  very  modest  rates  of  compensation  for  time 
spent  in  representing  such  indigents,  I  consider  this  as 
largely  pro  bono  work. 


The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of 
Judicial  Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a 
judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that 
invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or 
religion.  Do  you  currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged, 
to  any  organization  which  discriminates  --  through  either 
formal  membership  requirements  or  the  practical 
implementation  of  membership  policies?  If  so,  list  with 
dates  of  membership.  What  you  have  done  to  try  to  change 
these  policies? 

I  do  not  belong  to  any  organization  that  invidiously 

-29- 


405 


discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion. 
The  Kiwanis  Club  of  Memphis,  prior  to  1987,  did  not  admit 
women  to  membership.  I  have  been  a  member  of  the  Kiwanis 
Club  since  1981,  though  I  have  never  been  an  officer  or 
director  of  the  organization.  I  voted  to  admit  women  as 
members  every  time  it  came  to  a  vote. 


Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to 
recommend  candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal 
courts?  If  SO/  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?  Please 
describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection 
process,  from  beginning  to  end  (including  the 
circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews 
in  which  you  participated) . 

There  is  no  selection  commission  in  my  jurisdiction  to 
recommend  candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal 
courts.  I  was  recommended  for  this  judicial  position  by 
my  law  partner  Harlan  Mathews,  a  former  United  States 
Senator  from  Tennessee.  His  recommendation  was  supported 
by  numerous  written  endorsements  from  legal,  political, 
and  community  leaders  in  Tennessee.  I  was  not 
interviewed  prior  to  Vice  President  Gore's  decision  to 
recommend  me  to  the  President  for  this  judicial  vacancy. 
I  met  briefly  with  Michael  O'Connor  in  the  White  House 
Counsel's  Office  after  my  selection  to  discuss  the 
process  of  background  checks  and  to  review  the  various 
forms  to  be  completed.  I  have  subsequently  been 
interviewed  by  representatives  of  both  the  American  Bar 
Association  and  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation  as 
part  of  their  respective  background  investigations. 


Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a 
judicial  nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific  case, 
legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably 
be  interpretrid  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case, 
issue,  or  question? 

No 


Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism 
involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal 
government,  and  within  society  generally,  has  become  the 
subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.  It 
has  become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic 
criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has 
usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and 

-30- 


45-964  98 


406 


levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism" 
have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution 
rather  than  grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the 
individual  plaintiff  as  a  vehicle  for  the 
imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to 
broad  classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad, 
affirmative  duties  upon  governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening 
jurisdictional  requirements  such  as  stanc'ing  and 
ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon 
other  institutions  in  the  manner  of  an 
administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities. 

A  federal  judge  needs  to  be  mindful  of  the  proper  role  of 
the  judiciary  in  the  basic  constitutional  scheme 
concerning  the  separation  of  powers.  The  federal  courts 
must  carefully  balance  their  responsibilities  as 
interprc l;ers  of  the  constitution  with  the  limited  nature 
of  their  jurisdiction,  their  duty  to  resolve  actual 
controversies  on  the  narrowest  possible  grounds,  and  with 
due  respect  for  the  doctrine  of  judicial  restraint.  In 
particular,  the  judiciary  should  refrain  from  unwarranted 
intrusion  into  the  legislative  and  executive  processes 
that  the  constitution  delegates  to  Congress  and  the 
Executive  Branch.  By  the  same  token,  the  federal  courts 
must  maintain  their  judicial  independence,  remedy 
constitutional  violations,  and  interpret  statutory 
language  in  their  basic  role  as  the  resolver  of  disputes 
properly  brought  before  them. 


-31- 


407 


BY-LAWS 

OF 

ECONOMIC  CLUB  OF  MEMPHIS 

ARTICLE  I 

The  name  of  this  corporation  shall  be  Economic  Club  of 
Memphis . 

ARTICLE  II 

The  purpose  and  objectives  of  the  Economic  Club  of  Memphis 
shall  be  those  set  forth  in  its  charter  of  Incorporation,  as 
such  Charter  now  exists  and  as  it  may  hereafter  be  amended  from 
time  to  time,  and  no  others.   The  aims  and  purposes  of  the  cor- 
poration are  to  be  carried  out  through  any  and  all  lawful  acti- 
vities, both  direct  and  through  contributions  to  any  other  cor- 
poration, trusL  fund  or  foundation  whose  purposes  are  chari- 
table, scientific,  literary  or  educational,  provided: 

1.  That  any  such  activity  or  contributions  shall  conform 
to   any  applicable  restrictions  or  limitations  set  forth  in  the 
corporate  charter. 

2.  That  any  such  activity  or  contribution  shall  conform  to 
any  restrictions  which  are  imposed  by  the  Internal  Revenue  Code 
on  corporations  described  in  Section  501(c)(3)  of  the  Internol 

0* 


Revenue  Code  and  Its  regulations 


EXHIBIT 

1       1 


408 

The  Economic  Club  of  Memphis  shall  exercise  only  such 
powers  as  are  in  furtherance  of  its  exempt  purpose  under  the 
Internal  Revenue  Code. 

ARTICLE  III 

Section  1.   The  principal  office  of  the  corporation  shall 

be  located  at  City  of  Memphis, 

County  of  Shelby,  State  of  Tennessee.  The  corporation  may  have 
such  other  offices  as  the  Board  of  Directors  may  determine  from 
time  to  time. 

Section  2.   The  fiscal  year  of  the  corporation  shall  be 
June  1  -  May  31. 

ARTICLE  IV 

Section  1.   The  elected  officers  of  the  corporation  shall 
be  a  President,  a  Vice-President,  a  Secretary-Treasurer,  and 
such  other  officers  as   may  be  elected  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  this  Article. 

Section  2.   The  Vice-President  and  Secretary-Treasurer  shall 
be  elected  by  the  membership  annually  by  written  ballot  to 
take  office  on  June  1  for  a  term  of  one  year  or  until  their 
successor  is  elected  and  qualified,  except  as  hereafter  pro- 
vided . 

-  2  - 


409 


Section  3.   The  President  shall  be  the  Chief  Executive 
Officer.   He,  or  in  his  absence,  the  Vice  President,  or  other 
executive  officer,  shall  preside  at  all  meetings  of  the  Board 
and  of  the  membership.   The  President  shall  preside  at,  or  may 
choose  a  presiding  officer  for,  each  public  discussion. 

Section  4.   The  Vice-President  shall  perform  all  of  the 
functions  of  the  President  in  his  absence.   Upon  completion  of 
his  term  as  Vice-President  he  shall  succeed  to  the  office  of 
President,  which  office  he  shall  hold  for  an  additional  term. 
He  shall  also  be  President  of  the  program  Committee,  which 
shall  consist  of  himself  and  two  other  members  selected  by  him 
with  the  approval  of  the  Board  of  Directors.   This  Committee 
shall  be  responsible  for  recommending  programs  to  the  Board  of 
Directors. 

Section  5.   The  Secretary-Treasurer  shall  perform  such 
duties  as  ordinarily  attached  to  that  office,  including 
keeping  minutes  of  all  meetings  of  the  Board  and  Executive 
Committee.   He  shall  have  custody  of  the  funds  of  the  cor- 
poration.  He  shall  be  Chairman  of  the  Finance  Committee,  which 
shall  in  addition  to  himself  consist  of  not  more  than  four  or 
less  than  two  other  members  selected  by  him  with  the  approval 
of  the  Board. 

Section  6.   There  shall  also  be  an  Executive  DJ rector,  who 
shall  be  appointed  by  the  President,  subject  to  the  approval  of 
the  Board. 

-  3  - 


410 

Section  7.   Any  officer  elected  or  appointed  may  be  removed 
at  any  time  by  a  vote  of  a  majority  of  the  members  of  the  Board 
of  Directors  whenever  In  its  judgment  the  best  interest  of  the 
corporation  would  be  served  thereby. 

Section  8.  A  vacancy  in  any  office  because  of  death, 
resignation,  removal,  discfualification,  or  otherwise,  may  be 
filled  by  the  Board  of  Directors  for  the  unexpired  portion  of 
the  term. 

Section  9 .   The  several  officers  shall  have  such  powers 
and  shall  perform  such  duties  as  may  from  time  to  time  be  spe- 
cified in  resolutions  or  other  directives  of  the  Board  of 
Directors.   In  the  absence  of  such  specifications,  each  officer 
shall  have  the  powers  and  authority  and  shall  perform  and 
discharge  the  duties  of  officers  of  the  same  title  serving  in 
non-profit  corporations  having  the  same  or  similar  general  pur- 
poses and  objectives  as  this  corporation.   The  powers  of  the 
Executive  Director  however  shall  be  limited  to  those  delegated  to 
him  by  the  Board  of  Directors. 

ARTICLE  V/ 

Section  1.   The  corporate  powers  of  the  Corporation  shall 
be  exercised  and  directed  by  a  Board  of  Directors  consisting  of 


411 


12  members  elected  as  provided  in  Article  VII  hereof  and  in 
addition  such  officers  as  qualify  under  Section  2  of  Article  v 
hereof.   The  Executive  Director  may  unless  the  Board  determines 
otherwise  meet  with  the  Board  but  shall  have  no  vote.   The 
President  may  with  the  consent  of  the  Board  designate  others  to 
attend  its  meeting  but  without  vote.   ^ 

The  Board  of  Directors  shall  determine  the  policies 
programs  of  the  corporation  and  the  projects  for  which  funds 
will  be  expended,  provided,  however,  such  policy  determinations 
are  within  the  exempt  purposes  as  provided  by  Section  501  of 
the  I.R.C.  of  the  United  states  and  the  applicable  Sections  of 
the  Tennessee  Code  Annotated  under  which  this  corporation  is 
organized . 

The  Board  of  Directors  may,  from  time  to  time,  appoint,  as 
advisers,  persons  whose  advice,  assistance  and  support  may  be 
deemed  helpful  in  determining  policies  and  formulating  programs 
for  carrying  out  the  corporate  purposes.  ^^-v-  •"" 

The  Board  of  Directors  is  authorized  to  employ  such  persons, 
including  an  Executive  Director,  officer,  attorneys,  agents,  and 
assistants,  as  in  its  opinion  are  needed  for  the  administration 
of  the  corporation  and  to  pay  reasonable  compensation  for  ser- 
vices and  expenses  thereof. 


5  - 


412 


Each  member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  shall  serve  in  a 
fiduciary  capacity  and  shall  refrain  from  exercising  any  powers 
in  such  manner  as  to  disqualify  the  corporation  from  federal 
income  tax  exemption  as  to  qualified  charitable  organization  or 
any  gift  from  deduction  as  a  charitable  contribution,  gift  or 
bequest  in  computing  federal  income,  gift  or  estate  tax  of  the 
donor  or  his  estate. 

Neither  the  Board  of  Directors,  nor  any  of  its  members 
individually,  shall  be  liable  for  acts,  neglects  or  defaults  or 
any  employee,  agent  or  representative  selected  with  reasonable 
care  nor  for  anything  it  may  do  or  refrain  from  doing  in  good 
faith,  including  the  following  if  done  in  good  faith:   errors 
In  judgment,  acts  done  or  committed  on  advice  of  counsel,  or 
any  mistakes  of  fact  or  law. 

The  Board  of  Directors  may  provide  for  such  standing  or 
special  committees  as  it  deems  desireable,  in  addition  to  the 
committees  herein  provided  for,  and  discontinue  the  same  at  its 
pleasure.   Each  such  committee  shall  have  such  powers  and 
peform  such  duties,  not  inconsistent  with  law,  the  Charter  of 
the  corporation,  or  these  By-Laws,  as  may  be  delegated  to  it  by 
the  Board  of  Directors,   vacancies  in  such  committees  shall  be 
filled  by  the  President  or  as  the  Board  of  Directors  may  provide. 


413 


Section  2.   The  President,  the  immediate  past  President,  the 
Vice-President ,  and  the  Secretary-Treasurer  shall  (if  not  other- 
wise members  of  the  Board  of  Directors)  be  Directors  ex 
officio  while  holding  those  offices. 

Section  3-   Officers  (except  the  President)  and  Directors 
shall  be  ejected  from  and  by  the  membership,  by  written  ballot  as 
herein  provided.   The  directors  shall  be  divided  into  three 
classes,  each  class  consisting  of  four  (4)   directors.   Each  year 
the  successors  to  the  class  of  directors  whose  terms  expire  that 
year  shall  be  elected  to  hold  office   for  the  term  of  three  years, 
except  as  herein  provided. 

Section  5.   A  majority  of  the  Board  of  Directors  shall 
constitute  a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business  at  any 
meeting  of  the  Board.   The  acts  of  a  majority  of  the  directors 
present  at  the  meeting  at  which  a  quorum  is  present  shall  be 
the  act  of  the  Board  of  Directors. 

Section  6.      Any  vacancy  occuring  in  the  Board  of  Directors, 
including  those  resulting  from  an  increase  in  the  number  of 
directors,  shall  be  filled  by  the  Board  of  Directors.   A 
Director  appointed  to  fil.l  a  vacancy  shell  serve  for  the  unex- 
pired term  of  his  predecessor  in  office. 


414 


Section  7.   Directors  as  such  shall  not  receive  any  compen- 
ation  for  their  services,  but  shall  be  reimbursed  for  expenses 
incurred  on  behalf  of  the  corporation.   Nothing  herein  con- 
tained shall  be  construed  to  preclude  any  director  from  serving  . 
the  corporation  in  any  other  capacity  and  receiving  compen- 
sation therefor. 

Section  8 .   A  regular  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Directors 
shall  be  held  annually  in  June.   Special  meetings  of  the  Board 
of  Directors  may  be  called  by  or  at  the  request  of  the  President 
or  any  three  members  of  the  Board  of  Directors,  and  shall  be 
held  at  the  principal  office  of  the  corporation  or  at  such 
other  place  as  the  President  may  determine. 

Section  9 .   Notice  of  Annual  and  Special  Meetings  of  the 
Board  of  Directors  shall  be  given  at  least  ten  (10)  days  pre- 
vious thereto  by  written  notice  delivered  personally  or  sent  by 
mail  to  each  director  at  his  address  as  shown  by  the  records  of 
the  corporation.   If  mailed,  such  notice  shall  be  deemed  to  be 
delivered  when  deposited  in  the  United  States  mail  in  a  sealed 
envelope  so  addressed,  with  postage  thereon  paid.   Any  director 
may  waive  notice  of  any  meeting.   The  attendance  of  a  director 
at  any  meeting  shall  constitute  a  waiver  of  notice  of  such 
meeting,  except  where  a  director  attends  a  meeting  for  the 
express  purpose  of  objecting  to  the  transaction  of  any  business 
because  the  meeting  is  not  lawfully  called  or  convened.   The 
business  to  be  transacted  at  the  meeting  need  not  be  specified 

-  a  - 


415 


in  the  notice  or  waiver  of  notice  of  such  meeting,  unless  spe- 
cifically required  by  law  or  by  these  Dy-Laws- 

ARTICLE  VI 

Section  1-   There  shall  be  an  Executive  Committee  composed  of 
the  elected  officers  and  the  immediate  past  President.   The 
Executive  Director  shall  be  a  member  ex  officio  without  vote.   The 
Chairman  shall  preside  at  all  of  meetings  of  the  Executive 
Committee,  except  that  in  the  event  of  his  absence  fr. m  any 
meeting,  the  members  of  the  committee  may  designate  one  of 
their  members  to  preside  over  such  meeting. 

Section  2.   Between  meetings  of  the  Board  of  Directors,  the 
Executive  Committee  shall  have  all  of  the  powers  and  duties  of 
the  Board,  including  the  management  of  the  corporation's 
business;  the  making  of  necessary  arrangements  for  meetings; 
and  the  procuring  of  speakers  nad  the  providing  of  payment  for 
services,  rents  or  other  expenses  incurred  in  carrying  on  the 
work  of  the  corporation;  but  the  Executive  Committee  shall  have 
no  po-er  to  increase  the  size  of  the  membership  of  the  Board  of 
Directors  or  to  fill  vacancies,  nor  to  amend  these  By-Laws. 

ARTICLE  VII 

Section  l.   Any  member  may  nominate  any  other  member  for 
any  office  or  for  the  Board  of  Directors  by  so  advising  the 

-  9  - 


416 


Executive  Director  in  writing  before  April  1.   On  or  before  that 
date   each  year,  the  President  shall  appoint  a  nominating  commit- 
tee consisting  of  five  (5)  former  Presidents  (Chairmen)  who  are 
active  members,  subject  to  approval  by  the  Board  of  Directors.  . 
No  more  than  twenty  (20)  days  after  its  appointment  the  nominating 
committee  shall  make  its  report  in  writing  to  the  President,  con- 
sisting of  the  nomination  of  one  member  for  each  of  the  offices  of 
Vice-President  and  Secretary-Treasurer  and  four  (4)  for  the  Board 
of  Directors.   These  may  but  need  not  have  been  already  nominated 
by  another  member.   This  report,  together  with  the  names  of  all 
members  otherwise  nominated,  shall  no  later  than  May  1  be  mailed 
to  the  membership  together  with  a  ballot  prepared  in  such  a  way  as 
to  allow  each  member  to  vote  for  any  such  nominee  individually  or 
for  a  write- jn  candidate  of  his  choice.   A] 1  such  ballots  shall 
state  that  in  order  to  be  counted  they  must  be  received  by  the 
Executive  Director  by  June  1 . 

Section  2.   On  June  1  the  candidate  for  each  office 
receiving  a  plurality  of  the  votes  then  received,  and  the  four 
candidates  for  Director  receiving  the  most  votes  shall  be 
declared  elected  and  take  office. 

ARTICLE  VIII 

Section  1.   The  Board  of  Directors  on  the  recommendation  of 
the  President  shall  appoint  a  membership  committee  of  three  (3) 
members  which  shall  act  on  all  applications  for  membership  by 
making  recommendations  to  the  Board  of  Directors.   At  such  date 

-  10  - 


417 


as  the  membership  reaches  the  total  as  set  by  the  Board,  new 
applications  for  membership  shall  be  acted  upon  only  at  the 
regular  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Directors  in  June. 

Section  2.   New  members  shall  be  elected  upon  nomination  by   a 
member.   Each  such  nominee  shall  then  be  considered  by  the  mem- 
bership committee,  and  recommendation  of  approval  or  disapproval 
shall  be  made  to  the  Board,  of  Directors  pursuant  to  Section  1  of 
Article  VIII.   Applicants  approved  by  the  Board  of  Directors  shall 
become  members  of  the  corporation  upon  payment  of  initiation  fee 
and  dues  fixed  as  provided  herein,  provided  all  other  requirements 
for  membership  are  met. 

Section  3.   Any  member  wishing  to  resign  may  do  so  by 
filing  with  the  Secretary,  written  notice  of  resignation,  but 
such  resignation  shall  not  relieve  the  member  so  resigning  of 
the  obligation  to  pay  any  dues,  assessments,  or  other  charges 
theretofore  accrued  and  unpaid  and  no  return  of  dues  previously 
paid  will  be  made. 

ARTICLE  IX 

Section  1.   Regular  meetings  of  the  members  shall  be  held 
at  places  and  times  designated  by  the  Board  of  Directors. 

Section  2.   Special  meetings  of  the  members  may  be  called 
by  the  President  or  the  Board  of  Directors,  or  not  less  than  ten 

-  11  - 


418 


(10)  members  having  voting  rights,  at  a  place  in  Memphis, 
Tennessee,  to  be  designated  by  the  President.   The  Executive 
Director  upon  receipt  of  notice  of  a  request  for  a  special  meeting 
shall  be  charged  with  the  duty  of  notifying  the  President  who  shall 
then  be  required  to  call  such  meeting  not  more  than  thirty  (30) 
days  thereafter. 

Section  3.   Each  member  In  good  standing  shall  be  entitled 
to  one  vote  on  each  matter  submitted  to  a  vote  of  the  members. 

Section  4.   Written  or  printed  notice  stating  the  place, 
day,  and  hour  of  any  meeting  of  members  shall  be  delivered 
either  personally  or  by  mail,  to  each  member  entitled  to  vote 
at  such  meeting,  not  less  than  ten  (10)  nor  more  than  twenty 
(20)  days  before  the  date  of  such  meeting,  by  or  at  the  direc- 
tion of  the  President  or  the  secretary.   In  case  of  a  special 
meeting  or  when  required  by  statute  or  by  these  By-Laws,  the 
purpose  or  purposes  for  which  the  meeting  is  called  shall  be 
stated  in  the  notice. 

Section  5.   Any  notice  or  other  communication  required  by 
these  by-laws  shall  be  deemed  to  be  delivered  when  deposited 
in  the  United  States  mail  addressed  to  the  member  at  his 
address  as  it  appears  on  the  records  of  the  corporation,  with 
postage  thereon  prepaid. 


12  - 


419 


Section  6.   Any  action  required  by  laws  to  be  taken  or  per- 
mitted to  be  taken  at  a  meeting  of  the  members  may  be  taken 
without  a  meeting  if  a  consent  in  writing  setting  forth  the 
action  so  taken  is  signed  by  a  majority  of  all  the  members 
entitled  to  vote  with  respect  to  the  subject  matter  thereof. 

Section  7.   Twenty  (20)  members  present  at  any  meeting 
shall  constitute  a  quorum  at  such  meeting.   If  a  quorum  is  not 
present  at  any  meeting  of  members,  a  majority  of  the  members 
present  may  adjourn  the  meeting  from  time  to  time  without 
further  notice. 

Section  8.   At  any  meeting  of  members,  a  member  entitled  to 
vote  may  vote  by  proxy  executed  in  writing  by  a  member  or  by 
his  duly  authorized  attorney  in  fact.   No  proxy  shall  be  valid 
if  dated  three  (3)  months  or  more  prior  to  the  date  of  the 
meeting  at  which  it  is  presented,  except  if  such  is  an 
adjourned  meeting  and  the  original  meeting  was  one  at  which  the 
proxy  would  have  been  valid. 

ARTICLE  X 

Section  1.   The  Board  of  Directors  may  authorise  any  officer 
or  officers,  agent  or  agents  of  the  corporation,  in  addition 
to  the  officers  so  authorized  by  these  By-Laws,  to  enter  into 
any  contract  or  execute  and  deliver  any  instrument  In  the  name 

-  13  - 


420 


of  and  on  behalf  of  the  corporation,  and  such  authority  may  be 
general  or  may  be  confined  to  specific  instances. 

Section  2.  All  checks,  drafts,  or  orders  for  the  payment 
of  money,  notes,  or  other  evidences  of  indebtedness  issued  in 
the  name  of  the  corporation,  shall  be  signed  by  the  Executive 
Director  or  by  such  officer  or  officers,  agent  or  agents  of  the 
corporation,  and  in  such  manner  as  shall  from  time  to  time  be 
determined  by  resolution  of  the  Board  of  Directors.  All  per- 
sons so  authorized  shall  be  bonded. 

Section  3.   All  funds  of  the  corporation  shall  be  deposited 
from  time  to  time  to  the  credit  of  the  corporation  in  such 
banks,  trust  companies,  or  other  depositaries  as  the  Board  of 
Directors  may  select. 

Section  4.  The  Board  of  Directors  may  accept  on  behalf  of 
the  corporation  any  contribution,  gift,  bequest,  or  devise  for 
any  purpose  of  the  corporation. 

ARTICLE  XI 

The  corporation  shall  keep  correct  and  complete  books  and 
records  of  account  and  shall  also  keep  minutes  of  the  pro- 
ceedings of  its  members.  Board  of  Directors,  committees  having 
and  e,\ercising  any  of  the  authority  of  the  Board  of  Directors, 
and  the  membership  committee,  and  shall  keep  at  the  principal 

-  14  - 


421 


office  a  record  giving  the  names  and  addresses  of  the  members 
entitled  to  vote.   All  books  and  records  of  the  corporation  may 
be  inspected  by  any  member,  or  his  agent  or  attorney  for  any 
proper  purpose  at  any  reasonable  time,  and  shall  be  audited 
annually. 

ARTICLE  XII 

Section  1.   The  Board  of  Directors  shall  determine  from 
time  to  time  the  amount  of  initiation  fee,  if  any,  and  annual 
dues  payable  to  the  corporation  by  its  members,  and  shall  give 
appropropriate  notice  thereof. 

Section  2.   Annual  dues  shall  be  payable  in  advance  by  June 
1  of  each  year.   The  Board  of  Directors  shall  determine  ini- 
tiation fees,  if  any,  and  the  pro  rata  share  of  annual  dues 
to  be  paid  by  new  members  upon  election. 

Section  3.   When  any  member  is  in  default  in  the  payment  of 
dues  for  a  period  of  four  (4)  months  from  the  beginning  of  the 
period  from  which  such  dues  became  payable,  his  membership  may 
thereupon  be  terminated  by  the  Board  of  Directors  as  provided 
hereinabove.   However,  such  default  may  be  waived  in  advance 
thereof  by  the  Executive  Committee. 


422 


ARTICLE  XIII 

Whenever  any  notice  is  required  to  be  given  under  the  pro- 
visions of  T.C.A.  48-703,  or  the  By-Laws  of  the  corporation,  a 
waiver  thereof  in  writing  signed  by  the  person  or  persons 
entitled  to  such  notice,  whether  before  or  after  the  time 
stated  therein,  shall  be  deemed  equivalent  to  the  giving  of 
such  notice. 

ARTICLE  XIV 

These  By-Laws  may  be  altered,  amended,  or  repealed,  and  new 
By-Laws  may  be  adopted  by  a  majority  of  the  directors  present 
at  any  regular  meeting  or  at  any  special  meeting  of  the  Board 
of  Directors,  if  at  least  ten  (10)  days  written  notice  as  given 
of  intention  to  alter,  amend,  or  repeal  or  to  adopt  new  By-Laws 
at  such  meeting. 


-  16 
IITD/91/es-ecsb/61-76/cpm 


423 


4/92 


The  purpose  of  the  Charter  Amendments  which  you  are  asked  to  approve 
today  efiFective  May  31.  1992,  when  Kurt  Flexner  retires,  is  to  change  the  name 
of  the  registered  agent  of  the  Club  to  its  new  Executive  Director.  Robert  L. 
Berl,:  the  address  of  the  registered  and  principal  office  of  the  Club  to  Fogelman 
College  of  Business  and  Economics;  to  preserve  the  Club's  tax  exempt  status 
by  bringing  the  Charter  into  accord  with  present  requirements  of  the  Internal 
Revenue  Code;  and  to  take  advantage  of  certain  provisions  of  the  Tennessee 
Corporation  law  dealing  with  the  limitation  of  liability  and  indemnification  of 
Directors.  Copies  of  the  proposed  amendments  are  available  to  anyone  desiring 
further  details. 


Purpose  for  Board  of  Directors 

One  of  the  purposes  of  the  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Directors  is  to  adopt 
certain  amendments  to  the  By-Laws.  The  first  amendment  proposed  for 
adoption  merely  implements  the  Board's  earlier  decision  to  modify  the 
procedures  relative  to  the  appointment  of  members  to  sit  upon  the  Nominating 
Committee.  The  text  of  the  proposed  amendment,  which  will  be  effective 
immediately  upon  approval  by  the  Board,  is  inserted  anc'  underlined  on  page  7 
of  the  By-Laws  which  Is  enclosed  herewith.   If  adopted  by  the  Board,  said 
amendment  is  effective  immediately. 

The  remaining  amendments  proposed  for  adoption  implement  the  Board's 
earlier  decision  to  change  the  By-Laws  with  respect  to  the  administration  of 


424 


the  Club.  The  proposed  amendments  are  in  accordance  with  the  Report  of  the 
Transition  Committee  which  was  presented  to  the  Board  at  Its  meeting  on  May 
21.  1991.  The  text  of  these  proposed  amendments  has  been  inserted  in  the 
enclosed  set  of  By-Laws,  and  is  underlined.  If  adopted  by  the  Board,  said 
amendments  shall  be  effective  as  of  July  1.  1992. 

In  addition  to  the  foregoing,  proposed  Articles  of  Amendment  to  the 
Charter  of  the  Club  shall  be  presented  to  the  Board  for  Its  review.  Said  Articles 
of  Amendment  reflect  that  as  of  July  1.  1992,  the  address  of  the  principal 
office  and  registered  office  of  the  Club  as  well  as  the  name  of  the  registered 
agent  of  the  Club  will  change.  The  Articles  of  Amendment  also  contain 
amendments  which  implement  changes  made  to  the  Tennessee  Nonprofit 
Corporation  Act  in  1987  by  the  Tennessee  General  Assembly. 

Some  of  the  amendments  contained  In  the  Articles  of  Amendment  can  be 
adopted  only  by  the  members  of  the  Club.  Therefore,  the  Articles  are  being 
presented  to  the  BoEird  in  order  that  the  Board  may  consider  recommending  the 
Articles  to  the  members  for  adoption  at  a  meeting  of  the  members. 


Presented  to  Members  on  ^mS- 


425 


RESTATED  BYLAWS  OF 
THE  ESTATE  PLANNING  COUNCIL 
OF  MEMPHIS,  TENNESSEE,  INC. 


ARTICLE  I 
The  Estate  Planning  Council  of  Memphis,  Inc.  shall  be  a 
Tennessee  not  for  profit  corporation  pursuant  to  T.C.A. 
S  48-1-601  \et  seq. 

ARTICLE  II 


Membership 
The  membership  of  this  Council  shall  be  comprised  of:       ■-" 

1.  Trust  Officers  of  trust  companies  and  banks  main- 
taining trust  departments. 

2.  Chartered  Life  Underwriters, 

3.  Practicing  Attorneys  at  Law.  - 

4.  ■  Certified  Public  Accountants  in  public  service. 
Membership  shall  be  limited  to  one  hundred  (100)^^«p  >^/^tf5A/4ai»y 

members;  the  total  membership  for  the  years  ended  May  31, 
1981,  1982,  1983,  1984  and  thereafter  shall  not  exceed 
eighty-five  (85),  ninety  (90),  ninety-five  (95),  and  one 
hundred  (100)  members  respectively.   Of  the  aforementioned 
professional  classifications,  no  single  participant  group 
shall  consist  of  more  than  forty  (40%)  per  cent  of  such 
total.   Espba-tei  4udfle&  of  Shelby  County,  J^de^.a!,  F-stat.e-  Tax 
E^xamixifers ,  and  Xennesfi/^fe  Ijahecfeiance.  T-ax..  Ejcamxners  ,  who  meet 


426 


any  of  the  above  gualif ications^slxaXl-.noi:  Restrict  the 
,cX.ciMifications  of  which  they  .ar.e.  a:  roejnber,  or  the  total 
number  of  members.   To  be  qualified  for  membership,  an 
applicant,  after  the  adoption  of  these  Bylaws,  must  have 


four  (4) .years  experience 
must  be  interested  in. and 


in  his  category  and  such  applicant- 
actively  engaged  in  cooperative 
estate  planning  or  compliance  activities  in  the  Memphis, 
Tennessee  area. 

A  member  who  is  in  a  category  which  does  not  restrict  . 
the  total  number  of  such  member's  category  and  the  total 
number  of  members  of  the  Council,  and  who  ceases  for,  any 
reason  not  involving  a  question  of  moral  turpitude,  to  be  a 
member  of  such  category,  shall,  upon  written  notice  of  such 
member's  desire  so  to  do,  continue  as  a  member  of  the 
Council  in  the  proper  category.   By  attrition  the  total 
number  of  members  of  the  Council,  and  the  affected  category, 
shall  be  brought  within  the  limitations  otherwise . 
established  by  these  Bylaws  prior  to  the  admittance  of  new 
members  to  the  Council. 

Members  shall  be  elected  by-:;a::<majority  vote,  of .  the 
Executive  Committee  upon  recommendation  of  the  Membership 
Committee.   Applications  for  membership  shall  be  submitted 
to  the  Secretary  and  shall  be  endorsed  by  five  (5)  members 


2  - 


427 


of  the  Council,  three  of  whom  shall  be  in  different  mem- 
bership classifications  and  only  one  of  whom  may  be  asso- 
ciated in  business  with  the  applicant. 

ARTICLE  III 
Executive  Committee 

All  powers  necessary  for  the  governing  of  the  Council 
shall  be  vested  in  an  Executive  Committee  composed  of  the 
officers,  the  immediate  past  President  of  the  Council,  and 
four  (4)  members-at-large  with  no  more  than  one  (1)  trom  any 
participating  group. 

At  each  annual  meeting  and  at  all  other  meetings  for  the 
election  of  members  of  the  Executive  Committee,  two  (2). 
members-at-large  shall  be  elected  for  a  term  of  two  (2) 
years  as  members  of  the  Executive  Committee,  with  the 
remaLning  members  to  continue  in  office  until  the  expiration 
of  their  term  or  until  their  successors  are  elected. 

ARTICLE  IV 

Officers 

The  officers  of  the  Council  shall  consist  of  a 

President,  a  Vice  President,  a  Secretary  and  a  Treasurer. 

The  Vice  President  shall  serve  as  Chairman  of  the  Program 

Committee  and  the  Secretary  shall  be  Chairman  of  the 


-  3 


428 


Membership  Conunittee/  The  officers  shall  hold  office  for 
one  (1)  year  or  until  their  successor  shall  have  been  cho- 
sen. . 

ARTICLE  V 
Quorum  js 
Any  five  (5)  members  of  the  Executive  Committee,  shall 
constitute  a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business.-  The 
Executive  Committee  shall  have  the  power  to  fill,  for  the 
unexpired  term,  any  vacancy  which  may  occur  in  any  office  or 
in  their  own  body,,  by  a  concurrence  of  at  least  five  (5) 
members. 

The  presence  of  twenty-five  (25)  members  shall  consti- 
tute a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business  at  any  regular 
meeting  of  the  Council,  provided  there  shall  be  at  least  ten 
(10)  days  written  notice  of  the  time  and  place  of  the 
.meeting. 

ARTICLE  VI 
Nominations  and  Elections 
The  President  shall,  sixty  (60)  days  prior  to  the  date 
of  each  annual  meeting,  appoint  a  nominating  committee  to 
submit  a  list  of  nominees  for  officers  of  the  Council,  and 
for  menbers-at-large  of  the  Executive  Committee,  to  be  voted 


-  4  - 


429 


upon  at  the  annual  meeting.   Such  Committee  shall  file  the 
names  of  their  nominees  with  the  Secretary  at  least  fifteen 
(15)  days  before  the  date  of  the  meeting.   In  addition,  any 
nine  (9)  members/  by  notice  in  writing  filed  with  the 
Secretary  at  least  five  (5)  days  before  the  date  of  the 
meeting,  may  nominate  candidates  for  officers  of  the  Council 
and  for  members-at-large  of  the  Executive  Committee.   The 
members  shall  be  entitled  to  vote  for  any  candidate  named  by 
either  on^  of  the  above  methods  at  such  meeting.   The  can- 
didate receiving  a  simple  majority  of  votes  cast  for  his 
office  shall  be  declared  elected. 

ARTICLE  VII 
Annual  Meeting 
The  annual  meeting  of  the  Council  shall  be  held  on  the 
fourth  Tuesday  in  May  of  each  year  or  at  such  other  time  as 
may  be  selected  by  the  Executive  Committee,   The  Secretary, 
shall  mail  each  member  a  notice  of  the  meeting  at  least  ten 
(10)  days  prior  to  the  date  hereof. 

ARTICLE  VIII 
Executive  Committee  Meetings 
Meetings  of  the  Executive  Committee  may  be  called  by  the 
President  at  his  discretion,  or  when  requested  so  to  do  by 
three  (3)  members  of  the  Committee.   The  Executive  Committee 


-  5  - 


430 


shall  establish  rules  of  procedure  and  practice  for  its 
meetings,  subject  to  approval  of,  or  amendment  by,  the 
Council. 

•    .  ARTICLE  IX 
Committees 
The  President  of  the  Council,  with  the  advice  and  con- 
sent of  the  Executive  Committee,  shall  have  the  power  to 
appoint  committees  on.  programs,  membership,  ethics,  coopera- 
tion, education,  legislation  and  such  other  committees  as  he 
shall  deem  advisable  to  further  the  interests  of  the  Council 
and  its  members;  and  to  delegate  to  such  committees  such 
power  and  authority  as  the  Executive  Committee  shall  deem 
advisable. 

■  .   . ..      ARTICLE  X 

Program  Meetings 
Meetings  for  the  furtherance  of  the  purposes  o.^  this 
association  may  be  called  by  the  Executive  Committee  at 
stated  times,  or  from  time  to  time  in  its  discretion.   The 
program  of  such  meetings  shall  be  arranged  by  the  Executive 
Committee  and  the  Program  Committee- 


6  - 


431 


ARTICLE  XI 
Duties  of  Officers 

The  President  shall  preside  at  all  meetings  of  the 
Council  and  the  Executive  Conunittee,  and  perform  the  duties 
herein  set  out. 

The  Vice  President  shall  perform  the  duties  of  the 
President  in  the  absence  of  the  President. 

The  Secretary  shall  keep  a  record  of  the  proceedings  of 
all  meetings  of  the  Council  and  the  Executive  Committee,  and 
he  shall  be  responsible  for  maintaining  a  current  membership 
roll  and  for  the  mailing  of  notice  of  meetings  and  other 
communications  to  such  members. 

The  Treasurer  shall  have  custody  of  all  funds  and  pro- 
perty of  the  Council  and  shall  deposit  all  funds  of  the 
Council  in  the  name  of  the  Council  in  a  bank  or  trust  com- 
pany located  in  Memphis,  Tennessee.   All  withdrawals  of  such 
funds  shall  be  on  checks  or  orders  signed  by  him  or  by  the 
President.   He  shall  prepare  and  submit  a  statement  of  the 
financial  condition  of  the  Council  at  the  annual  meeting  and 
at  such  times  and  in  such  manner  as  the  Executive  Committee 
may  require. 


-  7  - 


432 


ARTICLE  XII 
Expenses  and  Dues 
The  expenses  of  the  Council  shall  be  provided  for, by 
annual  dues  of  Ninety  ($90.00)  Dollars  for  each  member, 
payable  in  advance  on  or  before  the  September  meeting  in 
each  year.   Annual  dues  may  be  increased  by  the  majority  of 
the  members  at  a  meeting  duly  called  with  at  least  ten  (10) 
days  prior  written  notice  of  the  proposed  increase. 

ARTICLE  XIII 
Advertisement 
No  members  of  this  association  shall  use  his  membership 
herein  in  any  form  of  advertisement  of  solicitation  of  busi- 
ness. 

ARTICLE  XIV 
Revocation  of  Membership 
Any  member  who  shall  have  been  absent  from  two  (2)  con- 
secutive called  meetings  of  the  Council,  or  shall  have 
failed  to  pay  his  dues  at  the  time  and  in  the  amount 
prescribed  by  these  Bylaws /  as  from  time  to  time  amended, 
shall  have  his  name  referred  to  the  Executive  Committee  by 
the  Secretary.   The  Executive  Committee,  in  its  sole  discre- 
tion, may  direct  that  such  member  be  dropped  from  the  roll 


-  8  ~ 


433 


of  this  Council,  in  which  event  he  shall  be  so  notified  in 
writing  by  the  Secretary.   Any  such  member  who  has  been 
dropped  from  the  roll  of  the  Council  by  action  of  the 
Executive  Committee  shall  not  be  eligible  for  membership  in 
thi^  Council  for  a  period  of  at  least  three  (3)  years 
thereafter. 

ARTICLE  XV 

Amendments 
Upon  at  least  ten  (10)  days  written  notice  setting  out 
the  proposed  "amendment ,  these  Bylaws  may  be  amended  at  any 
annual  or  called  meeting  of  the  Council  by  a  vote  of  two- 
thirds  (2/3)  of  the  membership  present. 

ARTICLE  XVI 
Guests 
Provided  the  inviting  member  pays  the  meal  cost -as 
established  by  the  Executive  Committee  for  each  guest,  smy 
member  of  the  Council  will  be  permitted  to  invite  guests  of 
his  or  her  choosing,  provided  he  or  she  does  not  bring  the 
same  guest  to  more  than  two  (2)  meetings  in  any  one  (1) 
fiscal  year. 

ARTICLE  XVII 
The  corporate  fiscal  year  shall  be  June  1  through  May  31. 

Revised:   June,  1986 

-  9  - 


434 


^1 


iL-s 

^   o 


;; « = 


2  = 


E   o 


S   £   c   o 
"    O    C    re 


^  o 

"    XI 


1  f  i2 


-  s  =  *- 

•=     u     O     = 


•S  XI  'c    re 

i  E  2  Si 

2  i  i " 


o  E 


o  -5 
c 
"2  '^ 


u  3  w  w 
I  2  I  ■? 
H  *  .-  " 


2. -6  2 

c  -=  j: 

■=  12  ^ 

_  Z  ~ 

c  .  S 

f  U  -g 

I  I 


c  — 
=5    o 


I    = 

Eu 


^     -    -3 


S   E        = 


^■§  s 

III 

IS  i2  s 
C  u  E 
o  5  g 

0  E    2 

1  52 

"  °  I 
•~    o  ^ 

lis 


E   S, 


i   E        "2 

=  e  t  Ef 


w    X     C 

ESS 


X>    re 


•I.      g> 
■°       E 


E   g  i 


ii  -5  ^ 


X     >< 


X    ^ 


X     i-  "O  •TJ 


=     *     ^ 

12  s 


w    t)    em 


Co- 


:^    S'of  ^ 


=  a 


«,  o-  X  a 
i  _  -  O 
■;  re  S  O 
S    o    >>  2 

=   5 


°  =.  -i  s  s  V  s 


5    c 
o    o 

I.    '3 


■3  3  1 

^   ■^   7j 
o   E  -S 


<    O 
Z    s 

O    3 


82 


it 

-il 

u  O 
=  5  = 

<  H   " 

Q   o 

z  ■= 

<  i3 

11 

z  = 


(«S 


•=       a:       = 


U  H  ^  5. 

J  U  -  "> 

U  Id  n  ■= 

^  -rr  c 


•§    1 


"2  ■=  .2  -^ 

_     =     D.    lA 

E  E  S  = 
^  8-.=  = 


^  §  I  '3 


=  -  E  i 


^    £.  X 


-•    =    re    S    E 

=  2  b  "  X 

•£  -3    =  .il 


f^    S-^ 


a|l|i|2 
;  X  o  S  5;  o  £  g; 

•2  £   £  ,o   b  j2  ^ 

E      5 


•2(2  ^^ 


z 
o 

-  .S- 

H 

re    j^ 

< 

u 

fs 

b 

o   c 

K 

>.  ^ 

»   1/2 

^   o 

=   < 

sd 

E   S 

U  Q 

~ 

i^ 

-°   S 

c. 

<£: 

X 

1  1 

!^  ■«■ 

i 

X 

E 

X  ^ 

i 

a 

2 

o 

*• 

1  ^ 

i  X     D. 


435 


i  1 


U   E 


it 

1-5 


■s  s 


5  Q   •=         O    u 

i     |i   li 


e  ■=  = 


E   2 


i^i 


u  -S 


1  gl 
ill 


^  :^  -o 

C     D.    ^ 

.2?  c  ifl 

u    u  o 

'-  JO  3 

«   S  K 

E    -C    Q 

•§1  ° 
i  "1 

E  5   o 


o  CQ 
-    -   o   o 

r„co 


W3  .E   S  XI 


<  3 


■s  a  -3 

§  "  s- 

^  -e.  B 

o  s  i 

2  .9  1: 


■=  I  -S   E  >2 


•.^=  s  s--?. 


0  -3  c  .5 


o   S  I 


>   E|- 

5  5-1 


?i5-o   c 


I  "    >.  S    c  T3    d. 

15  -2.  E   &■  K   " 
I  !•£  sl^ 

gxi  -o   iJ   o   E 

= « i'C  l-i 

«.  ^'  !i  E  9  P 
S  S  «  S^'i: 

o  Q  .i:  ■=  ^    2 

g    °    §■  =  I  "S 
E  -P   ,_  

T-    "^    "^ 

=  -s  """  .-    . 

i^     S     u     ?^ 

S  2  s  s;  "  a 

j3  t;  o  "5  s 

i  £  a'^  -  5 

E  E  5  o  c  trt 


o   * 

0--0 


n 

>» 

E 

^ 

i 

3 

0.  ^ 

= 

_3 

E 

1 

s 

r* 

"5 

.:£ 

0 

1 

c 

u 

- 

s 

0 

E 

_> 

1 

"0 

0 

2i 

1 

1 

E 

1 

3 

j: 

J 

.0 

"> 
c 

D. 

1 

■a 
E 

>> 

c 

•0 

c 

0 

< 

2 
■0 

3 
C 

c 

0 

c: 

^  I  ^  g  *-.  V 
I   >,  §  3  E   E 

■5  5  s'  s;  o  ^ 
s  2.  =  Q  -5  ^ 
E  c  .e-  O  „  I 

infill 

ai  XI  =  ^  ^  ^.> 

•J    n         X3    S    a 


s-i 


^   i   "  -S   § 

O     u 

■S    E 


Si2 


E-H  S 

sir 

£   E   i 

J  1 1 

gi  § 


^  E-g 
I  E  S 
E-^5 
^  §  S. 

"  i2  c 
i2   S 

U  3  ^ 
JD    73     C 


■=  E 
E 


0^0   = 


Sl5 


■^  5  -S 
•S  °  ■'° 

U     «     D. 
jD     M    "T 

O   J3 


I  S-5 

III 

"  ="  I 


^^1 


S.S 


E-go 

&■       .T3      U 

O     s     "     N 

,    C    -O     M    d 

O  c     DU 

jn   a.  "3   « 

=  1  ?  s 
^^  °1 

"ESS 
u    O  .2 

£-5:2 


W      5  Z  -g 

y  lie 

<    Op  1 


!i| 


E  S 


IN 

C     D.    M 

S  S  8 

£|.= 
Is  6 
|§l 

u  2 


436 


U3  & 

=  Si; 
<  o 


(£  -o  3  .2  - 

,,  5  o  c    u  . 

^  a  u  o  2 

E 


o  1» 


'   </5 


5  2 


"  c^  S  M  o  c 

I  «£ s  ^  s 

T)  '-C  -  S  £  ij 

«  E  -.g  I  ^  -a 

I  S  ||  °  1 

St  "o   E   L-  £  5 

°  S  u  ^  :h  « 

(f  "^  "S  I  K  f 

"  s'  E  "^  "S 

—  _•  g  ^  «  _ 

c  5  >•  o  "^  = 

o  "o    >^  E  "o  "o 

1/3  cu  .H   o  S^  a. 


il  i 

S  6  12 

f  I  Ji. 

•a  °  o 


i3  c 


o  \B 

•C   a 


■a  ° 

0  o 

B  E  ■ 

S  "  •= 

a  s;  T5 

S  u  § 

S  ^  5 

1  -  « 


-1^ 
>»   "  3 

£  s-o 

u    u    u 
S     O     o 

en  O   3 


=3-= 


5.S 
"5:  Q 


B     M     „ 

he 


5  5  ■= 

!1  Q.-- 


H    <5   S 


MUM 

.f  5  ^ 
go  a 

C     "!     3 

8.s"2 

^^■s•S 


=    Si 


°m'SS 


I    73   ^   •*• 

fO   -'> 
-     3 
I     ">   J3   75 

'  g  -2  u 

!  "  "  -S 

1  =  -S  2 

i  S  '--  c 

.   X)    o    o 

!■§"■! 

:  £  u  '^ 
,  o  c  a 

nil 


;d 


2S  el's 

U     3    S     S 

=    h   c   o 

liil 

I  §5  SL 

S  I   o   >. 

■2  |2i 
^  §  =  3 


•S  -5  -o 

111 

.tJ    o    u 


o  -5 


Se 


_2    C    c    S 


S  S  8  -g 

to..- 


5  -S  2 


Hi 

.E  <  £ 

ill 

I  si 


c     O   — 

.5  aa  "o 


J-    € 


■S.I -5 


£  ■=  .5   E 
"P    °    c  3 


i'll 


5  -S  2 

£  s  S 

"o     3    Q 


-  -a   _^  ^ 


S   C   E   ^ 

§  2  a 


Mug 

elm 

.  -a  u 
<  S-5 


£  5  -S~ 


=  m  Q  M 
Il  °-c 

§;°  I  .E 

3  ■§  CO  -o 

„  -  *  a 

a   S!  —   2 
o   ">    o   c 

■S   §   S   8 

4  —    O    « 

!-^^^ 

5  °  ^ 
j2  T3  '^  a 

i  ^  ""s 

E  g  °-S 
.2  II  ^ 

C     C     U     3 

"  S  I  -a 

^  Sis 

■  -a   -  13 
I  "?   i- 


=  ii  5  'a 

P  -  E  i 

1  Q  -a  2 

2  >g  3    3 


=   25- 
X    »,  2    E 

0  D  -3  a  E 

o   c  *  i 


§£ 


llll 
P   P   S   c 


i"5|| 


P   c 


.5  8-5 
E  ^  S  S  c2 
§1  E  ^' 
•g   ^   Il   ^ 

s  s  ><  e  .5 


p-S 
2  >. 
S  -a 


J,   S   >,Q 
•g   £   I 


S'lZlO 


I  J   S   S    „   S   P 
E   u  2  o  2  a  o 

u   j=    ^  ffi         'c    P 

p e2£  S 11 


•=  p  tn  —  —  S  " 

u    3    u  d  "a    a.  >, 
(/I   (3  ■£  ;^  IS   n    S 


p  "S  o 
III 

is-l 

u  a  V 
■°  a.  „- 
a   S   E 


5  ■a    S 

I|i2 


§  §  " 

■2   E| 

«     C     n 


437 


C  "  -S  g  *  5 

"  %  ^  -  ^  7, 

-  =  S  3  ■S  ^ 

I  -2  '^  £  I  = 

T3  J!      O  O  -  ^ 


.H  -3  5 


o 

_  H 

u)S5 


o  s;  2 

re  :=    o 


g-^ 


o    o 
h    o 


•a    >   a  •5 


0  — 

1  ^ 


00  =5    ■*- 


u  :5  e 


p      CL    U 


15 


u 

S 

£1 

U 

>^ 

"o 

T3 

6 

o 

1 

1 

a 

s 

1 

o 
CD 

-O 
§ 

S 

'o 

O 

o 

o 
3 

■d 

u 

3 

E 

o 

3 

■5 
o 

3 

c 

3 

1 

o 

o 

S 

•- 

u 

O 

-a 

en 

'o 

^ 

^ 

£ 

c 

t/i 

"o 

iB 

j?  -5    _ 


->  o    > 


■3  ■■2 


■^         ^ 


O    -o     c 


2  o. 
o  .2 


E  ~ 


_i2  S 


iH  s  .-  u  'o  '° 

>^  5  £  "3  ^  c 

•S  -  H   S   S 

■c  o  ^  '3    n 


■g  -s 

^    2 


•3   u  "a 
§    E  -5 


ll°:|i| 


7;    c  "a  *—  CD  '^    S? 


—    K    o    >' 
1  -S  ^  -3 


is  ! 


J,    o    i_  -5 


t  s 


;3  a. 
a  -S 


'S  3:  I  o 

■O     ^  ^  u 

S    J!  E  "S 

11  I  ^ 

.2    c  "  o 


o    o  ,2 
5^ 


-^   E  1 

;2  E  -s 


s  i 


§  -g  c 


.  °  §  ,!^ 


•I  s 


■;2  o  2 


s  It  a 


I  S.2  i^ 


o    c 


i  I  e  1 1 

f  -  i  I 

i  °  ^  i 

S  u  "  £  ' 

- !  1 1  ■ 

2  I  o  1 

5-  i;  £  o 


5  ■a 


■o    £" 


I  i  -  a  o 
g  i  S  i  !=■  E  Q  E 

g|-S|5§|S. 

;55    S'yJSo-S    u'S 
S--P,    OT3   3'Sg' 

E:y5^Si°S 
o£<   =co   S.2S 

I  .i  ^  8  E  -3  ^  >2 


^  § 


1^11  = 


S  c  a:  ■£ 

(J  o  •  o 

^  -  i^  r- 

o  S  2  y 


45-964    98-15 


438 


o  !•  .1  §  ^ 

£  5!  I  -^  3 

j;  s   o  -o  o 

•S  S  ^  "1 

"■=20"' 

E  !3  £  B  § 

8  a  o  ■^  c 

2  C     »C    T3    n* 

•g  o  c   I  '^ 

S  °  I  -■  ■£ 

i  u  o  "i  u 

E  «   «>  S3 

8  £  I  f  i 

■S  -s  g  c  -a  § 


t»  e  ^-s  S  a 


H.2 


o  -o 


to   la  ■'^  '^ 
u   u    s    c 

2f       -f  E 
3   °  ^   G 

T3 ;;;  §  8 
s  >  a  a 

rill 


II 


« s  i 

5   -   "   o 

1  °^'  o 

.u  00  "1  u: 
^  ■«  ^  I 
5   ^2   S 


§  .^  -a   e 
S    S    u    u 

|-  8- 

^'^^'^ 

-  ^  E  0 

c  -a  5  T3 

2  °  P  -a 

"  ■§  >  o 

M  E  5  E 


I  2 


III 
>.  g-  E 


•sis 


§■2 


,^  §: 


^■^.^ 


u 


S  2 

■  -  3 

£  ° 

■o  c 


0  ^ 


(S  S-"^ 


1    2 


O  3 

-3     O 


E   o. 


St 

<  u 


■s  § 


5  1 


<  -^ 


S  -a  <o  t^ 


z  a  5- 


e/2   >     U   <   O 


£  £ 


J  S  cu  a!  iS  £ 


=3      3 


i    3 

12  12 


439 


"Eg 


S  *  S  O  -5 
«£  §  "  S 


rf^lli 


■a  -S 


n  6 

e  X) 


Sic 

£  S..5 
I  §  = 
=  =;  E 


gS 


!5| 


f5| 


11^ 
.§^^ 

S!    I  -g 
o   o   S 

■g-.S  s 
5a  i3  ! 


y     O     C 


g  s 


u  t 

■  >  •c 


5    3 


=as 


E     DO 


!5|  § 


II 


ra    „    O 

ai| 

«>  .=  E 

C  '5.  e 

—  o  E 

0  S  I 

.§  o  i 

1  q  -S 
t   S   = 

u  E ;:; 

[5l  I 
c  *| 

o    u  ^ 

•a  .2  ° 

u     >   73 


e  5 


2  e 


■S  -JB 

1 1 

5  ''^ 

S  s  = 

g    -O      M 
3     ^    ^ 


°  pi 

j^  pa 
It 

Q.73 


C     O    ^ 

111 
111 

ve   E   = 


2  S 


"  -o  -q  c 

•o    o   1/1  E 

>/,-  E  "i  3 

fe-S-s  I 

■  E   ?  " 

Ji  c  _g  o 

if  s  *  ^ 


•^  5  E  t; 


o   o 

-   -  -  fr  5 

en   o  ^   i:    c 


=35 


I  Q 


2-s 


a.—         o 


:h  o 
a  oa  ■ 

°l 


If, 


a.  =; 


2.^ 

S   E 

Q.  — . 


^■: 


Q.73 
=     C 


5|' 

£  c 
«    o 

§1 


E   I 


c   c  -o 
o  ■-    c 

a  a.  ^ 


So  C  ■" 

c:    a.  M 
•^5  2 


S.5 
a  J 


-2     c     OO  J 


-J  =  » 

3  ■=  _g 

C  T3     " 


(31 


J3  5 


1^1 


fl 


o  u  o  -o 

.2  E  ■»  i; 

15  •?  o  I 

in  §  o  E 


440 


E  ■£ 


14     [S 


>    o      r. 


■s  §  ^ 

52    s 


li  'o  -o 

is  § 


<.  i  e 


:^e 


;:  u:  .E 


^  Ui 

ai  CO 


g  §   !>   S 


S  ^ 


il 


1=  f3 


S  t3  _£  -  ■■ 

I  ill. Si 

3  ■=  >,  ■^  5 

I  5  ^  I  3 

^  rt  ■   J=  o 

.2  s  5  -g  C. 

c/5  -S  5    E    o 


■S  [S  -s  & 
I   ^'°   > 

r  S  .y  g. 


■5  -3  5  I 


o  -    S 
op  - 


O   " 


o  —   P  ^ 

w     C    "rt    „  " 

5  ^  6  •*.  JO 

I,  =  -  °  e 

y    "        O     1)  flj 

fS   M  O.J  E 


SIS 


c   o  C 


"3  ■-  .b 


fS: 


He -I 


O     M 

£D  .E 


.2   S    ;: 

n  —    2 


•3  2'S 

O     ^     X 


2^ 


o  *  -  § 

g  ■"  -S  c 

^  :;  '^  5 

a  o  .2  g 

i  ■£  3)  i 

-^  ^  O  c 

3  Si  .- 


Q.    £ 


fSil 


5  1  e 

■IP,  I 


*  3 


5   E 


i^ 


2   I 


E  -g  -o 
o    o    q 


"  CO 

if 

ob  *  -. 

£    Ml 


2  E 


■a        —   rt 


I   u-  2  § 

0^   § 


■3,S 


g   S 


i 

-§5^.2 

E 

=^4:  -o  -E 

1 

ee  on 
whic 

Is,  an 
and 

_C 

dia  b 
dide 
istric 

■p 

o 

0   E   §?, 

o 

T3 

rhe 

the 
ects 
.th( 

S 

.    "S    ^     M 

S  SO  g 

E 

=  ■3^3 

2 

•2  -g  i  i 

a. 

Sec 

mat 
Ki« 
Inte 

441 


o  ^ 


^  2  ^ 

-"3 


3   K  5  "o   2 


.2  =3   u 


III 


S   E  § 

■S  "  -~ 

(^  "^  H 

Q       C  JX 

CO    c  ^ 

=   o  o 

o    c  -3  ' 

Ml 

■5   =  5; 


e  > 
ll 


si 


=    c    u 
■a   o  •- 


Sit 

•S  -g   3 

"S  ^  -S 
■I    E  T3 

I  i  S 

S    is    c 

•^l-s 
1 E  i 


'^  ^  "S  =5'  u  u 

c  -  >  J  3  c 

u  £  -a  jr  S  g 

t/)  i  n  ■£  c  -Si 


b1 


o    - 


2  £ 


3  S 


•s  -g 

o    ti 
^-1 


li?^ 


2  -s 


2  * 

!3  ^  £ 
In 


O     fc,     V 

*  1  £ 


E.i' 


S-s 

if   !« 
■I   5.. ■a 


r=  I  =■ 

*  s  = 

c  c  o 

a.  a.  a 


5     § 


-    ^    -^    ■= 


E  .5  S 


op  OO 

"I    . 

Hi 

O    00  _*; 


c  a  I 


E  -g 


|S  -o  S  .2 


E^ 


'5  .2 
E   J! 


S,  o 

Ml -a 
'3  i 


in  3. 


o    J, 

I' 

7,  P 


6  i  2   E 


§  S  !3 
o  5;  o 
>  H  CO 


o  u  S  ^ 

■g  S  -  I 

S  •"  =  c 

.2  -E  -o  S 

S  2  s  ^  e 


■s  t; 


-■s  I  S 


g.  0  "  g  s 

■-     i,  J^     g   Sg 

■p    5  'o    j«    o 

s  "  a  °  — 

•o  2  "  5 

1    §    u   .§   _ 
^  u-   -S  "O   ^ 

"  °  >.  o  -5 

§  I  ^  ^  ^- 

IS 

T3     Si 

§  5  S  --c 

n  -o   bi  ^ 

Si  "   -   E 
.--or.   = 


T3    o 


r   E 


°  ■^.  S  2  "S 


o   o 


-  O 
u  u 
u  J 
S  Q 

-<  z 

< 


i2  '^  m!5  -a  - 


•s     s 
S     I- 

n  -^  .0 

.  u    c    = 

o    mU 

;  =  c  ^ 


o  ■§ 
^-  E 

o  a 


§  g 


-22 


11 


s  =5  1  ^ 


ii  .2  ^  f^ 


1:   E 


E   o 


5  5 
o  -^ 


Z        £ 


s  ■= 


■6  S 
"o   E 

I  I 

c   (^ 

u    o 


o  -o  .'.  ?; 


"2  i 

y  E 

—  o 

a.  3  ■ 


■S   E 


eS  1^ 


a   o 


•i   3 


=    E 


ii  '^  ^  -^  e 


Z-  s 


|---S_  =1^1   ^^l^. 


V3   u    E  v)  x>    u 


X)  ^  -o 


D.    CL    CL    rt      C      3      W 

u    u  .Sea. 


c   j;  .g  .y  ^ 


3    2: 
c    o 


E   o   -    ^    g 


>-    E   E  c  ^    I    5 
033        .^    ^ 


E   S  ^  .£  _2 
c   M.2P  -    o- 


^   -   o  „ 


a.     F  T3 


.£  .i  .S  ^   _ 


n    =■    E 


442 


.o   o 


•c-Q. 


u  5 

e  ° 


O  =  ■=  S  E.n  - 
■o  E  w  i2  '^  ^  c 
c  o  n       ,.  =  6 


■g  5  s  *  =  -s  E 


•"  u  s  a 

1  -s  §  S 

2  o  S  t: 

g  s  i  li 

8--S  a-S 


p  t  u  j:  -r  •=  ^ 


3  S 


?       2 


"2   H 


S  =  "  2  S^  -S  E 

O  o  C  „    -     _  ^ 

^  (/,  «  00  .y  ™  " 

=  ■-  i:  .5  E  o  « 


u    E    u 


S     . 


"  '^  '^  -g  ^  -2  i 

Q  I  -S  ^  75  -g  § 

.  *    2    o    c  S  " 

I  H I  i  E 1 1 

tj  rt          >    w  w  «j 

c/3  -a  J3    n  —  <3  rj 


El 
■^  S-'i 

c  6  ■£    S 

I     D.    c"  ^    ^ 
,     £    S     U     O 

;  u  2  -o  ./I 

;  ^  c  1  .s 

'  •S  i"  "^^  si 
=  o  °  E 
.2  5   rt  5 

I  5  1  I 

■s^l  I' 

c  "a  °  ^ 

g  6  o  S 

u  o  £  6 

X3  X)  h-  o 


a.  — 


I  e 


5  .9 


E   "   u 

;  I  s  I  2 
:  o  i  £  I 

r  o  "   S  ? 


S  =55 


:§  >,.2 

*  -S  £ 

I  -  ^ 

"  -a   a. 


•2  e^ 


-  „-ii 


a 
°  s.  ^ 


:  °  § 


^  5  1  c 

-  £  -O  «1 

—  3  la  c 

o  ">  I  § 

5  a  £  i2 


£      a 


-=    ^  r-    ^    s;   75 


S  ■£   E 

■O     I.     u 

in 

!=  i-  t 


E  =■  ° 

c  .2  -o 

^  «j  o 

P  -S  m 


I  -o  I  -5  I  I  5 

1^  1  "  £  g"  ^  if 

I   S  S  1   S  I  S 

u  g  «  y  o  E  o 

5  I  S  >  -s  §  5 

g  i;  Lu  ^  >,  6  £ 

1 1 1  =  !S  .2 1 

£    o  £   S  S  I  c   5 


rt    O 


o  2  C^  —  -o 


5   "   S  C   I   § 
■«  J3  c/i   E  oa  2 


O  tn  —  O  i2  M 

u  4>  rt  C  f^  C 

O  ^  -S  <*-  T3  -j: 

0  c  d  —  c  u 

1  °  I  S  I     1  c 

i  1  i  S  s    u  -s 

s  s  a  §  i:    s  o 


1 1  iii 

•   °    S   E    o 

■5  I  g  ^  I" 
^  o  S  -  c 
o  ^  5  •§  ■= 

=  -2  £  ""  ■= 
o  5  ■*-  i>   c 

V]   o   "  x>   o 


S  E 
•3  § 


^   E 
-"    o 


W5  -5 


^■=■2 


§  3 


:-  § 


E^ 

Er 


§!■§  s 


!:;;   "s 


„  -£ 


<tr  -o  s  5  t;  5  ^ 


2  13 


o   S' 


-.     D.    „    — 


■y 


S   2 


E  -o 
e  -a 
a.  a 

!  I 

>2   '" 


(5  •§  i 

"     ■  o 

_    11  E 


443 


3  e 


2    = 

si 

g   E 
o  -5 


E  T3  rt 


5-  4  «  S 
E  2  c  i 


5   g 


II  1  I 
I  -H   "   E 


"f   g-' 


c 

T3 

'B 

1 

E 

s 

'> 

3 

■o 

1 

o^ 

3 

o 

"_ 

E 
s 

■g 

o 

a. 

n 

"5 

s 

c 

1 

5 

2 

T3 

1 
a. 

■§ 

1 

'c 

l' 

o 

•s 

1 

o. 

C 
3 

■S 

E 

•a 

3 
T3 

o 

O 

o 

3 

CO 

C 

a. 

3 

o 

E 

° 

E 

2 

O 

E 

> 

5 

1 

> 

E 

1 

« 

■T3 

^ 

1 

C 

s 

^ 

1 
E 

1 

3 

3 
C 

e: 

'o 

s 

£2 

'c 

o 

W 

>2 

> 

1 

G 

3 

E 
1 

o 

1 

o 

■5 

C 

1 

'^ 

^ 

■S 

e 
o 

§. 

■s 

•= 

■^ 

■a 

>. 

4> 

M 

c 

J3 

■D 

.£ 

J  S 


MS" 

3  V. 


2l 


-  5 
■5  £ 


O    V 


s  s  I :  •§ 


5  s 


E  .5  ; 

^     to    ^ 


.,     «J     u     =    ■^     u 

•S  i=  i=  -2  -S  H 


.=  E  -^ 
'  E  E  -o 
X.    o    u 


a.  ^ 


>  H 

:S    E    °    M 

S  > 

^  £  -  S 

M  H 

5  *c  "^  "" 

DS^ 

•^  —    M  .2 

1-    2    i!    J3 

P  u 

-°      U              3 

^i 

3 

1  seek 
memh 
posed 

0. 

—    „    o  ^ 

J=   ~    D.  .ii 

'^      Q.             -C 

■o    u    >>   S 

3     U     S 

u   -^          -S 

1/1     O    -o    '". 

.2   -    c    c 

j=    w    n    o 

*"«„■= 

-    S    S    c 

C      u      "      O 

.2  ^   g     - 

•-    t;    3    u 

u    o    o.  •^ 

«    c    E   2 

U    T3     ^     >     S     ^ 
^     ^     "     -     "     Z 

E  ^  £  ^   2    C 


s  *  °  £  s  :r 

C  .      »*-  —  *^  _ 

o  ><  5  j:  £  ^ 

S  =   H  ^  ^  o 


.  5  "2   > 


Q-    E     . 

=    S    S 
'  o   o  2 


V)    a-  ^    o  — 


444 


-I 

■<  z 

o 


i§ 


•sin. 

En    ^'°' 

.2  ill' 

=   1    '^^^ 

K|  s  = 

ol-e 


I  e 

E  3 
5-S 


3    -S 


O       -S  si-5 

^     lis 

I  ii ° « 

_:  i 

§  i  §1 

■■o  S  y  2 

</3    Q-Q    c 


i-S^g 


u   S   e  5; 


Ill 

5  S  5 


>3 
5 

Q 


01) 

V 

1> 

« 

1 

T3 

C 

8.Q 


o 

2 

1 

j3 

CQ 

Q 

■~ 

5 

"o 

■5 

c    ,y; 

T3 

u 

0  u 

1  2 

m 

irt 

c   •— 

u 

o 

■5  ^ 

(S 

^ 

c 

^;       3 

^ 

•c 

in 

■s  S 

c 

e 

P    u 

.2 

_o 

o 
a. 

u 

^i 

V 

u 

4/ 

S.-S 

VI 

■a 

(/] 

do 


c  -o 


c    n    ' 
P.   E 


°  2 


5  ^ 

a   o 


•=   E 

73  "3 


5S 


•?    ~  —    Q.  > 


o  £  5 


e  CD  o 


£    E 


^5 
12 


en  u  5   Q.  Q.  S 


5       E  I 


3s 
552 


E  ~ 

=  1 

c/j  -O 

*  "5 


445 


IN  TllK  CIRCUIT  COURT  Of  TENNESSEE 
FOR  THE  FIFTEENTH  JUDICIAI,  CIRCUIT  AT  MEMPHIS 


RITA  HAUN  and  KENNETH  IIAUN, 
Individually  and  as  wife 
2nd  Husband, 


VS. 

JOHN  FREEMAN,  Superintendent 
of  the  City  of  Memphis  Board 
of  Education,  and  THE  CITY  OF 
MEMPHIS  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION, 

Defendants. 


NO.  82<01  T.D. 


SUPPLEMENT  TO 
ANSWER  15  ON 
PAGE  9  OF 
QUESTIONNAIRE) 


EXHIBIT 


This  case  involves  the  tragic  situation  of  a  kindergarten 
teacher  at  the  A.  B.  Hill  Elementary  School  being  raped  in  her 
classroom  by  an  unknown  adult  assailant  shortly  after  she  had  dis- 
missed her  class  on  March  31,  1977.   The  teacher  and  her  husband 
(hereinafter  collectively  referred  to  as  "plaintiff")  have  sued  the 
Board  of  Education,*  essentially  claiming  that  the  Board  was  negli- 
gent in  failing  to  provide  her  with  a  safe  place  to  work.   More 
specifically,  she  claims  that  she  was  assigned  by  the  school's 
principal  to  a  relatively  isolated  classroom  on  the  first  floor  of 
the  original  school  building,  rather  than  to  another  available 
classroom  that  was  also  in  the  original  building  but  closer  to  the 
other  three  kindergarten  classrooms  in  the  adjacent  newer  building 
on  the  school  campus.   Plaintiff  believes  that  the  assault  in  ques- 
tion would  not  have  occurred  if  she  had  been  assigned  to  the  other 
classroom,  and  contends  that  this  alleged  misassignment  was  the 
proximate  legal  cause  of  her  injuries. 

Plaintiff's  action  is  subject  to  and  controlled  by  the 
Tennessee  Governmental  Tort  Liability  Act,  T.C.A.  29-20-101  et  seq. 
This  Act  allows  actions  against  governmental  entities  for  injuries 
proximately  caused  by  a  negligent  act  or  omission  of  any  employee 
within  the  scope  of  his  employment,  with  certain  enumerated 


'The  Complaint  as  Co  co-ilef endant 
dismissed  by  Order  dated  May  13,  1980 


Remainder  of  this  Exhibit  is 
included  in  the  full  sets  of  this 
Questionnaire 


446 


Volum    XLVI,    Number   3 

September  IS,  1973 
(Reg.   U.   S.  Pot.  Office) 

INTERNATIONAL 

V  wholly   disapprove   of   what   you    say    but   will   deFend   to   the  deoth   your  right   to   soy   it. -Voltaire. 


It  Is  Very  Important  That  Farmers 
Deliver  Every  Bale  On  Contract 


RECENT  PRESS  RELEASES  from  the  depart- 
ment of  agriculture  indicate  that  122,000  bales 
of  cotton  had  been  sold  for  export  during  the 
19T2-T3  marketing  year  but  were  undelivered  as  of 
Aug-ust  10,  1973.  It  was  also  reported  that  another 
6,100,000  bales  have  been  sold  for  e.xport  during 
the  1973-74  marketing  year  (August  1  to  July 
31)  and  that  1.600,000  bales  have  been  booked  for 
v;:--;--  durir.-:  tls^  1074-7-")  — --.■'retir.g  yea;-. 

i;.~ort3  :r.j:  y?ar  were  a;c,-.;  .'i.-iCO.CO'.^  bales 
cjid  ii  the  preceding  season.  1071-72,  were  3,229,- 
000  bales. 

Tnus,  we  face  final  export  sales  this  season  of 
around  7,000,000  bales,  the  trade  believes.  Can  this 
much  cotton  be  handled  through  American  ports? 
This  is  the  big  question. 

■ff  we  do  ship  7.000,000  and  our  own  mills  con- 
sume 7,500,000,  this  offtake  of  14..=)00,000  bales 
will  be  about  1,.500.000  bales  above  the  latest  crop 
estimate  of  12,938. -500,  which  report  was  issued 
this  week  by  the  USUA  in  Washington. 

It  is  nowestimated  that  we  will  have  a  carry- 
over of  3,.500.000  bales  next  Augi'st  1..  but  if  ex- 
ports do  run  as  high  as  we  have  mted,  it  would 
apoear  to  us  that  these  carryover  predictions,  will 
behalf  a  million  bales  too  much.  ,It  is  a  good  thing 
that  we  do  have  the  caryover  or  U.  S.  mills  would 
be  in  worse  despair  than  they  are  now.  And  they 
are  crvnng  daily  for  export  controls  to  be  placed 
on  further  sales. 

Many  in  the  trade  now  consider  controls  in- 
evitable due  to  the  continuing  heavy,  unprecedent- 
ed sales.  They  may  come  so  late  that  controls  will 
be  academic,  for  foreign  buyers  will  h.ive  filled 
tl-.eir  needs,  except  for  fill-in  orders  here  and 
there  as   the  season   progresses.  . 

As  for  U.  S.  mill  consumption,  it  haj  been 
steadilv  downward,  and  the  trend  seems  to  con- 
tinue do^vnward  whether  the  crop  is  larfrc  or 
small.  Last  year,  we  had  a  big  crop,  yet  total  cot- 
ton consumption  was  only  7,471,000  running  bale.s. 


This  compares  with  8,03 
ing  the  1971-72  season 
1970-71  season. 

While  U.  S.  mills  u; 
uorl'l  use  is  expandmg- 
dicate  that  the  day  may 


EXHIBIT 


S 


I 


farmer  may  be  producing  for  foreign  consumption 
mainly,  instead  of  for  U.  S.  consumption. 

IT  IS  VERY  IMPORTANT  to  the  future  of  the 
cotton  industry  that  American  farmers  deliver 
every  bale  of  cotton  they  have  contracted  to  de- 
liver from  every  acre  this  year.  The  trade  has  sold 
cotton  ahead  to  world  and  U.  S.  mills. 

True,  the  farmers  might  have  received  better 
prices  if  :hey  had  waited  to  sell  their  cotton,  but 
there  is  nothing  to  be  done  now.  The  trade  too' 
would  have  received  better  prices  if  the  farmers 
had  waited  to  sell.  This  is  water  over  the  dam. 

The  farmers  can  recover  some  of  the  profits 
they  might  have  made  by  selling  ahead  at  higher 
prices  in  the  1974-75  season.  But,  we  would  recom- 
mend that  farmers  move  slowly,  sell  only  part  of 
their  intended  plantings  and  hold  the  remainder  of 
the  acreage  for  later  deals.  This  way,  they  can 
have  their  cake  and  eat  it  too. 

But  for  cottjn  already  contracted  for  this  sea- 
son, the  farmer  must  deliver  if  he  wants  to  do 
business  with  buyers  in  the  future.  The  farmer 
must  help  insure  that  merchants  will  ge  the  cot- 
ton they  have  contracted  for — for  if  the  trade 
doesn't  receive  every  bale  for  every  acre  they  have 
bought,  thre  won't  be  many  firms  remaining  to  do 
business  with  in  the  future.  It  is  that  simple. 

The  entire  cotton  industry  needs  every  member 
it  now  has,  and,  in  fact,  could  use  some  new  buyers 
as  well  as  new  producers  in  1974 — for  it  appears 
that  we  will  need  at  least  another  million  acres. 

Thus,  H.  Molsen  &  Company's  landmark  de- 
cision against  15  Tennessee  farmers  who  failed  to 
deliver  two  seasons  ago  takes  on  added  importance 
now.  It  was  the  first  federal  case,  and  it  shows 
that  the  farmer  must  deliver  under  the  law, 
whether  he  wants  to  or  not.  Most  farmers  are 
delivering — and  most  of  them  want  to  deliver. 
They  know  the  merchant  must  deliver  to  the  mill 
or  the  merchant  will  be  used. 

There  have  been  only  142,800  bales  ginned  in 
the  Lower  RiO  Grande  Valley  to  September  10  but 
reports  from  the  Valley  say  that  the  farmers  are 
delivering.  They  are  living  up  to  their  word 
whether  they  like  to  or  not.  They  also  seem  to  be 
delivering  sati.sfactonly  in  the  Corpus  Christi  and 


^  (SUPPLE>!ENr  TO  ANSWER   18    (CASE  5)   Oti  PAGE   18  OF  QUESTIONNAIRE)  THE  COTTON   DIGEST 


447 


In  Memphis,  Tennessee: 


Molsen  Wins  Landmark  Decision  Against  Farmers 
When  Farmers  Renege  On  Acreage  Contract 


IN  A  LANDMARK  DECISION.  H. 
Molsen  &  Company,  Dallas  cotton 
merchants,  won  a  S2l,T50  jury 
verdict  this  week  (September  4)  in  a 
Memphis,  Tennessee,  federal  district 
court  against  15  farmers  and  a  cotton 
jrinner-producer. 

The  jury  ruled  that  the  West 
Tennessee  farmers  and  dinners  were 
in  breach  of  contract. 

The  farmers  were  charged  with 
breaking  contracts  for  the  sale  of 
their  cotton  in  order  to  sell  on  the 
open,  market  when  the  prices  were 
higher  later  in  the  harvesting  period. 

The  case  was  file<i  in  April  1972 
and  covered  transactions  on  the  1971 
crop.  The  farmers  were  found  guilty 
of  diverting  bales  that  were  on 
contract- 

The  jury  awarded  the  full  amount 
per  bale  asked  by  the  Dallas  cotton 
shipping  firm,  which  was  the  dif- 
ference in  contract  price  and  market 
price  at  the  time  the  firm  learned  of 
the  diversion  which  forced  them  to 
cover  the  loss  in -the  open  market. 

The  amount  awarded  the  Molsen 
firm  was  $50  per  bale,  which  was  the 
difference  between  the  23  cents  per 
pound  average  contract  price  and  33 
cents  per  pound  average  cover  price. 

The  Hefendants  were  George  Flow- 
ers  &  bon,  Covington  Tennessee,  and 
Wm.  B.  Cowan,  Cowan  Brothers, 
producers  and  ginners  from  La 
Grange,    Tennessee. 

Individual  farmers  whom  the  federal 
judgement  were  delivered  against 
were  Bynum  Leajhenvood,  Leona 
Powell,  R.  D.  Daniel.  Franklin  Farms. 
William  B.  Cowan,  Jr..  Clyce  Weath- 
erly,  J.  J.  Smith,  B.  C.  Yoger.  Sr.. 
Paul  Gatlin,  O.  D.  Maclin.  Robert 
Sparkman,  William  Gaugh,  Joe 
Harvey,  Franklin  and  C.  W.  Mid- 
dlecoff. 

Molsen's  attorney.  Ronald  Gilman 
of  Memphis,  said  the  case  was  the 
first  cotton  contract  default  claim 
presented  to  a  jury  in  Tennessee.  It 
is  believed  to  be  the  first  cotton 
contract  case  in  federal  court,  al- 
though several  other  cases  have  been 
heard  in  state  courts  in  Texas  and 
California.  The  case  was  tried  before 
U.  S.  District  Judge  Harrv  W.  Will- 
ford. 

Mr.  Gilman  said  the  15  farmers 
contracted  to  sell  their  cotton  at  an 
average  price  of  23  cents,  but 
testimony  showed  they  actually 
delivered  only  659  hales  from  the 
1.985  acres  under  contract,  selling 
much  of  the  remainer  of  the  produc- 
tion at  prices  ranging  up  to  33  cents 
a  pound. 

In  the  Molsen  case,  Mr.  Gilman  said 
the  West  Tenneaseee  farmers  contract- 
ed in  1971  to  sell  all  of  their  1971 
cotton  crops  through  George  Flowers, 
III,  a  Covington.  Tennessee,  cotton 
merchant. 

Mr.  Flowers,  in  turn  contracted  to 
sell  the  cotton  to  Molsen  through  the 


Texas  firm's  Memphis  agent.  Jini 
Spurlock  of  the  Delta  Cotton  Com- 
pany,  Mr.  Gilman  said. 

Heinz  Molsen.  Jr..  of  Dallas  said 
this  week  in  ftlemphis  that  he  felt 
his  firm  had  received  a  landmark 
decision  in  the  entire  industry  as  it 
was  carried  to  a  federal  jury  vealict 
— which  may  be  the  first  such  case 
in  the  nation.  It  was  tried  in  federal 
court  due  to  the  fact  the  principles 
resided    in   different  states. 

Mr.  Molsen  said  that  *'I  feel  the 
verdict  should  have  a  substantial 
bearing  on  all  cotton  contract  to  that 
time,  and  it  has  a  very  special  bear- 
ing on  this  year's  contracts,  with 
regard  to  market  prices  moving 
upwards  after  the  contracts  were  ex- 
ecuted. 


"I  feel  especiallv  happy  about  this 
decision  since  last  year  we  paid  for 
large  volumes  of  contracted  cotton 
where  the  price  was  much  lower  at 
hai'vest  time  than  when  the  contracts 
were  initially  executed.  This  means- 
that  the  farmers  receivetl  $2,000,000 
to  $3,000,000  additional  by  contract- 
ing prior  to  the  season  than  they 
would  have  received  if  they  had  sold 
in  the   market  during  har\'est  oeriod. . 

The  jury  found  that  ilr.  Flowers 
was  merely  acting  as  agent  for  the" 
IG  farmers,  and  he  was  therefore 
not  personally  liable  for  the  damages. 
The  jury  also  found  that  it  was  proven 
that  435  bales  had  been  diverted,  and 
they  awarded  S50  per  bale  damage,, 
or  a  total  of  $21,750.  in  the  historic 
decision. 


WASJilNGTON  Nlp^S 


etine  in  Dallas.  Texas  on 
August  24,  1973.  the  ex- 
ulive  Committee  of  the  National 
'Cotton  Council  and  the  Proilucer 
Steering  Committee  met  at  the 
Producer  Steerine  Committee  m... 
request  of  the  American  Tex 
Manufacturers  Institute 
the  current  cotton  supply  situatji 
light  of  the  strong  export 
spiraling  prices,  and  the/general 
problems  concerning  the  p^sent  cot- 
ton textile  situation. 

No    determinations^ 
this    meeting;    ho\\*©^r,    a   force    was 
appointed  to  iliscu^  alternatives  that 
the    Council    dilators    could    consi<ler 
at    the    Boar^Meeting    in    Memphis 
next    week^/The    task    force    \\iU    be 
headed  bj/C.  R.  Sayre  of  Greenwood. 
I    cooperative    represent- 
other    members     are:     \V.     D. 
1,     III.     of     Gastonia.     North 
irolina.  President  of  Cotton  Council 
International,     former     president     of 
.\CSA  and  a  n\erchant  ilirertor  of  the 
National  Cotton  Council;  Gordon  M 
Cahe    of    Greenville.    South    Carolin 
Vice    President  of  J.    P.   Stevens   ar 
a    spinner    director    of    the    N' 
Cotton  Council;  an 

of    Crosbyton,    Texas,    past    preiiident 
of  the  Plains  Cotton  Grover 

.    '  of    tl 
^tional  Cotton  Council. 
It  is  understood  that^e  task  fo 
ilabi 
ig  the  operi^fon  of  Sect 


of  the  ARric>inural  Adjustment  Act 
of  1933  (S^urday  authority  avail- 
able for  reporting  raw  upland  cotton), 
licensinir  of  cotton  exports,  export 
controiv  and  some  questions  concem- 
ingy!Tie  trading  of  cotton  futures  on 
thi^New  York  Cotton  Exchange. 
/The  merchant  directors  to  the 
'National  Cotton  Council  are  W.  D. 
Lawson,  111;  William  Tharp  of  Las 
Cnices,  New  Mexico;  A.  Starke 
Taylor.  Jr.  of  Dallas.  Texas;  Rudi  E. 
Scheldt  and  W.  B.  Dunavant,  Jr.  of 
Memphis.  Tennessee. 

Sec.  r.utz  Critizes  .\TJ1I 

Reacting  to  intense  pressur 
nerated  bv  U.  S.  textile  inte 
Secretary  Butz  was  strongly/ritical 
of  efforts  to  seek  restriction^n  U.  S. 
cotton  exports.  Secretarv/Butz  told 
the  Washington  Post>^the  textile 
people  asking  for  cj>fttrols  are  e.x- 
actly  like  the  wheat/fiUers:  they  don't 
know  how  to  ope/Ste  in  a  free  price 
cononiy.  They  >5y:  'We  want  you  to 
protect  our  sjirpply,'  when  they  really 
&nt  lower  prices  for  raw- 
product.'/' 

Tlie  yrt-iry  further  related   that: 

"isp  language.  Butz  said  that 

nerican    textile    manufacturers 

opeal    for   export   controls    on    the 

;  of  assuring  cheaper  prices  for 

consumers,    he    will    suggest    the_y 

propose      removal      of      'volant 

import   quotas    on   competing 

from  the   Far  East. 

The  Department,  in  a  for, 

ment    issued    yesterday    b/' Assists 

Secretary  Carroll  G.  Bryrhthaver,  said 

there  would  be  no  ex/ftrt  controls 

cotton     "short     of  y^me     unforeseen 

disaster  to  this  yorfr's  growing  crops." 


SEPTEMBER  8,  1973 


448 


MEALEY'S  LITIGATION  REPORTS 

INSURANCE  INSOLVENCY 

TWICE  MONTHLY  BY  MEALEY  PUBUCATIONS.  INC.  •  P.O.  BOX  446 «  WAYNE.  PA  19087-0446  •  (610)  688-6566 
Volume  7.  Issue  #18  February  22.  1996 

FIDUCIARY  DUTY 

No  Breach  Of  Duty  In  Purchase,  Termination  Of  Mutual  Benefit  GIC 

Michigan  federal  judge  rules  in  action  brought  by  former  employees  of  Abitibi-Price 3 

(PREFERENTIAL  TRANSFER 
Avoidance  Period  For  Preferential  Transfers  Only  For  Liquidations 
Tennessee  court:  transfer  made  within  four  months  of  rehabilitation  petition  not  voidable 5 

ASSOCIATION  LIABILITY 

Missouri  Association  Liable  For  Damages,  Attorney  Fees 

Court  finds  statutory  coverage  limit  does  not  apply  to  costs  of  defending  insured 6 

Workers'  compensation  carrier  may  not  enforce  lien  against  Delaware  association 8 

JURISDICTION 

Deference  To  Centaur  Illinois  Rehabilitation  Proceedings  Appropriate 

However.  California  appeals  court  provides  for  stay  instead  of  dismissal 9 

Appealability  Of  Remand  At  Issue  Before  High  Court 

Oral  arguments  in  Mission,  Allstate  dispute  center  on  type  of  review,  finality 11 

PREEMPTION 

Second  Circuit  Amends  Ruling  On  Preemption 

Refers  to  ruling  applying  FAA  in  new  footnote;  motions  call  rulings  inconsistent 13 

SETTLEMENT 

Canadian,  U.S.  Estates  Agree  To  Separate  Confederation  Life  Actions 

Uruier  agreement  in  principle,  U.S.  policyholders  will  look  to  U.S.  proceeding  for  relief 14 

RULINGS  OF  NOTE 

Policyholder  Did  Not  Breach  Duty  To  Settle 

Second  Circuit  also  affirms  New  York  district  court's  denial  of  attorneys'  fees 15 

Massachusetts  high  court  to  consider  realm  of  owned-property  clause 16 

INDUSTRY  NEWS 

CIGNA  Restructuring  Approved  By  Pennsylvania  Corrunissioner 

Request  for  stay  peruling  review  of  petition  for  appeal  denied  Feb.  13 17 

LITIGATION  NOTES 

Third  Circuit  Denies  Rehearing  In  Unisys  Case 

Ruling  vacated  order  which  granted  summary  judgment  to  Unisys  .... 

California  court  of  appeal  publishes  Mission  ruling 

Kentucky  court  releases  decision  on  standing  to  appeal  for  publicati 

©  COPYRIGHT  1996  MEALEY  PUBLICATIONS.  INC.   ALL  RIGHTS  RESERVED  ^-J  Publiconon  ovoiloble  on  disk 

REPRODUCTION  STRICTLY  PROHIBrTED  WITHOUT  WRITTEN  PERMISSION  ■■  '~°' '"°'  ***-*5** 

(SUPPLEMENT  TO  ANSWEK  18  (CASE  6)  ON  PAGE  19  OF  QUESTIONNAIRE) 


449 


MEALEY'S  LITIGATION  REPORTS 

INSURANCE  INSOLVENCY 

Febnjaiy  22.  I9i3 


are  represented  by  Stp«(n  Bompey  and  Ira  R05; 
stein  of  Orricjj/Herrington  &  SutcJ, 
New  York  aiiQ  Charles  S.  Mishkin^/^  Miller, 
Canfiek^Taddock  cS:  Stone  in^^Brand  Rapids, 
Mi^Jt:  Counsel  representing^^AP  are  Frances 
Menton  Jr.  and  Marv,i3erdes  of  Willkie.  Eafr 
&  Gallagher  in  Uey/^oik  and  Thomas  f'^'^Ko- 
ernke  of  Boyde;><waddell.  Timmonx^  Dilley 
in  Grand  Rapfds.  Mich. 


Avoidance  Period  For 
Preferential  Transfers 
Only  For  Liquidations, 
Tennessee  Court  Holds 


NASHVILLE,  Tenn.  —  The  phrase  "the  peti- 
tion" in  the  portion  of  the  Tennessee  statute  pro- 
viding a  four-month  avoidance  period  for  pref- 
erential transfers  refers  only  to  petitions  for  liq- 
uidation, a  state  appeals  court  held  Feb.  7. 

Therefore,  an  $800,000  transfer  made  within  four 
months  of  a  petition  for  rehabilitation,  but  more 
than  seven  months  before  a  petition  for  liquida- 
tion, is  not  a  voidable  preference,  according  to 
the  court  CUnited  Physicians  Insurance  Risk  Re- 
tention Group,  el  al.  v.  United  American  Bank 
of  Memphis.  No.  01-A-01-9503-CH-00096,  Tenn. 
Ct.  of  App.,  Middle  Sec). 

(Text  of  Opinion  in  Section  C.  Mealey's  Doc- 
ument #10-960222-103.) 

The  appeals  court  thus  affirmed  the  dismissal  of 
a  petition  of  the  Tennessee  Commissioner  of 
Commerce  and  Insurance  as  liquidator  of  Unit- 
ed Physicians  Insurance  Risk  Retention  Group 
(UPI)  to  avoid  an  $800,000  transfer  made  to 
United  American  Bank  of  Memphis  to  pay  off 
an  outstanding  bank  loan. 

UPI  was  a  captive  insurance  company  established 
in  1989  by  United  Physicians  Association  Inc. 
to  provide  medical  malpractice  insurance  to  its 
members.  Statuary  capitalization  requirements 
were  satisfied  first  by  $1   million  in  letters  of 


credit.  Two  years  later.  United  Physicians  bor- 
rowed $1  million  from  United  American  Bank 
of  Memphis  and  deposited  the  funds  with  the 
insurance  department  to  replace  the  letters  of 
credit.  Subsequently,  the  balance  of  the  loan  was 
reduced  to  $800,000. 

The  transfer  occurred  in  December  1991  as  part 
of  a  reinsurance  transaction,  according  to  the  court. 
United  Physicians  caused  $2.9  million  to  be  paid 
from  the  "L.I. O.N.  Trust  Account  for  U.P.I."  to 
Anchorage  Fire  and  Casualty  Insurance  Co. 
Anchorage  used  part  of  the  funds  to  retire  cer- 
tain UPI  debts,  including  the  $800,000  bank  loan. 
The  court  noted  that  the  parties  do  not  agree 
that  the  funds  used  to  pay  off  the  loan  were  UPI's 
funds  and  the  court  assumed  the  truth  of  the 
allegation  for  purposes  of  the  motion  to  dismiss. 

According  to  the  court,  UPI's  1991  annua!  state- 
ment showed  it  to  be  insolvent  by  $764,102.  UPI 
was  placed  under  administrative  supervision  in 
March  1992,  ordered  into  rehabilitation  in  April 
1992  and  ordered  into  liquidation  in  July  1992. 

In  June  1994  the  commissioner  filed  a  complaint 
seeking  to  avoid  Anchorage's  payment  to  the  bank 
as  a  voidable  preference.  The  bank  successfully 
moved  to  dismiss  the  complaint  because  the  pay- 
ment did  not  occur  within  four  months  of  the 
filing  of  the  petition  for  liquidation  as  set  out  in 
Tenn.  Code  Ann.  Section  56-9-3 17(a)(2)(B)  which 
provides  that  a  "preference  may  be  avoided  by 
the  liquidator  if  .  .  .  (tjhe  transfer  was  made 
within  four  (4)  months  before  the  filing  of  the 
petition,"  the  court  noted. 

Therefore,  the  court  held,  the  question  of  whether 
a  preferential  transfer  entered  into  more  than  four 
months  before  the  filing  of  the  petition  for  liq- 
uidation is  voidable  when  made  within  four 
months  before  the  filing  of  a  rehabilitation  peti- 
tion centers  on  what  is  meant  by  "petition." 

In  ruling,  the  court  considered  the  phrase  "the 
petition"  in  three  contexts. 

In  the  context  of  the  language  of  the  section  it- 
self, the  coun  held  that  the  term  "preference"  is 
"framed  chiefly  in  the  context  of  a  liquidation 
proceeding"  and  as  stated  in  Section  56-9- 
317(a)(2)  "can  only  refer  to  a  petition  for  liqui- 
dation." 


O  COPYRICKT  19%  MEALEY  PUBLICATIONS.  INC  .  WAYNE.  PA 


450 


February  22.  1996 


MEALEY'S  LITIGATION  REPORTS 

INSURANCE  INSOLVENCY 


Vol.  7.  #18 


Next,  considering  the  phrase  in  the  context  of 
the  Insurers  Rehabilitation  and  Liquidation  Act, 
the  court  found  that  the  act's  provisions  allow- 
ing both  liquidators  and  rehabilitators  to  set  aside 
fraudulent  conveyances  "demonstrate  that 
the  legislature  understood  the  difference  be- 
tween rehabilitation  and  liquidation  proceedings 
and  that  it  intentionally  drafted  Tenn.  Code 
Ann.  §  56-9-3 17(a)(2)(B)  to  exclude  petitions  for 
rehabilitation." 

Finally,  considering  the  term  in  the  context  of 
the  purposes  of  the  act,  the  coun  noted  that  the 
purpose  of  rehabilitation  is  to  preserve  a  compa- 
ny as  an  ongoing  business.  "Since  officer  and 
employees  of  on-going  insurance  companies  do 
not  have  the  authority  to  avoid  preferences,  re- 
habilitators likewise  do  not  have  this  authority," 
the  court  held. 

Further,  the  coun  noted,  "A  preferential  trans- 
action is  one  that  circumvents  the  statutory  pri- 
ority provisions  thereby  permitting  a  creditor  to 
obtain  more  than  its  fair  share  of  an  insurance 
company's  estate  upon  dissolution.  Since  cred- 
itors of  an  on-going  insurance  company  have  no 
claims  against  the  insurance  company's  "estate,' 
rehabilitators  need  not  concern  themselves  with 
preferences  or  with  the  priority  of  creditors' 
claims."  Therefore,  the  court  found,  "preferen- 
tial transfers,  by  their  very  nature,  have  no  rel- 
evance in  a  rehabilitation  proceeding." 

Concluding,  the  coun  noted  that  the  first  men- 
tion of  the  power  to  avoid  preferences  appears 
in  the  delineation  of  a  liquidator's  duties.  "It  is 
only  in  the  context  of  a  liquidation  proceeding 
that  the  avoidance  of  preferences  makes  sense," 
the  court  held. 

Judge  William  C.  Koch  wrote  the  court's  opin- 
ion, joined  by  Judges  Samuel  L.  Lewis  and  Ben 
H.  Camrell. 

The  liquidator  is  represented  by  William  B. 
Hubbard  of  Weed.  Hubbard,  Berry  &  Doughty 
in  Nashville.  Tenn.  Counsel  for  the  bank  are 
Ronald  Lee  Oilman  of  Farris.  Mathews,  Oilman, 
Branan  &  Hellen  of  Memphis,  Tenn.,  and  John 
Knox  Walkup  of  Gullett.  Sanford,  Robinson  & 
Manin  in  Nashville.    ■ 


Missouri  Association 
Liable  For  Damages, 
Attornefv  Fees 


LOUIS,  Mo.  —  The  Missouri  Insura 
Guaranty  Association  (MIGA)  is  liable  fgrf'^actu- 
al  damages  up  to  the  statutory  cov^t'age  limit 
plus  attorney  fees  incurred  by  an  >fisured  of  an 
insolvent  carrier  in  defending>«  discrimination 
claim,  a  state  appeals  courj/nere  has  held,  af- 
firming a  summary  judgment  (Missouri  Property 
&  Casualty  Insuranca/Ciuarantv  Association  v. 
Petrolite  Corp.  N</^68061.  Mo  Ct  nf  App 
Eastern  Dist). 

(Text  of  Of>inion  in  Section  D.  Mealey's  Doc- 
ument>n0-960222-104.) 

fie  court  held  that  the  policy  of  the  insolvent^ 
insurer  provided  coverage  for  an  age  discrin 
nation  claim,  that  MIGA  was  obligated  tQ/-pro- 
vide  a  defense  and  that  MIGA's  statutory^over- 
age  limit  did  not  apply  to  attorney  fj«  incurred 
in  defending  the  insured  after  MKjA  withdrev 
its  defense  in  the  employment  d>«crimination  case. 

Defendant  Petrolite  Corp^was  insured  under  a 
commercial  catastroctie  policy  issued  by  now- 
insolvent  Integrity^surance  Co.  providing  cov- 
erage of  $5  nuKion  per  occurrence,  $5  million 
annual  aggreg^e,  with  a  retained  limit  of  $10,000. 

■lying  Litigation 

1  October  1985,  former  Petrolite  employee  Wil- 
liam M.  Zachary  filed  a  discrimination  cha^ 
with  the  Equal  Employment  Opportunity  >€^m- 
mission  (EEOC)  claiming  he  was  dischjtfged  by 
Petrolite  because  of  his  race.  The  EEDC  filed  a 
complaint  against  Petrolite  in  September  1< 
in  the  U.S.  District  Court  fpt  the  District  of 
California. 

MIGA  provided  Petperfite  with  a  defense  in  the 
place  of  the  insolv^  insurer  and  settled  by  paying 
Zachary  $ll,Op«r  MIGA  then  asked  Petrolite  to 
pay  it  the  S^t),000  retained  limit  under  the  In- 
tegrity KiJficy,  but  Petrolite  refused. 


«a COPYRIGHT  1996  MEAL£y  PUBLICATIONS.  INC  .  WAYNE.  PA 


451 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

Nomination  Report 


Fepon  Requirtd  by  the  Elttici 
Reform  Act  o/  1989.  Pub  L  No. 
101194.  November  30.  1989 
(}  US.C.  App.  4 .  Sec.  I0III2) 


1.  Penon  Reporllni        (Lasi  mme.  flrsl.  miiUk  imiial) 

Gllman,  Ronald  L. 


2.  Court  or  Orfuilxalloii 

U.  S.  Court  of  Appeals,  6  CIr. 


3.  Date  of  Report 

07/17/1997 


lAnicle  III  Judges  indicale  acnve  or 
senior  aalus:  magistrate  judges  indicale 
fiilt-  or  pan-time) 


U.  S.  Circuit  Judge  Nominee 


5.  Report  Type  (check  type) 
X.  Nomination.    Dace    07/16/1997 
Initial  Annual  Final 


i.  Reporting  Period 
01/01/1996 

06/30/1997 


7.  Chajnben  or  OfTice  Address 

One  Commerce  Square    #2000 
Memphis,  TN.  38103 


8.  On  the  basis  of  the  in/ormatlon  contained  in  this  Report  and  any 
modirications  pertaining  thereto,  it  is  in  my  opinion,  in  compUanci 
with  applicable  laws  and  regulations. 


Reviewing  Ofllcer 


DiiPORTAyr  NOTES:  The  instruaions  accompanying  this  form  must  be  followed.    Complete  alt  parrs, 
checking  the  NONE  bos  for  each  seaion  where  you  have  no  reportable  informalion.   Sign  on  the  tost  page. 


I.    POSITIONS      Ottporting  individual  only: 

□  POSITION 

NONE  (No  reportable  posjiions.) 

Member  

^  Vice  President 

'  Board  Member 


e  pp.  9- 1  i  of  Instructions) 


NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION  /  ENTITY 


Fanis,  Mathews,  Oilman,  Branan,  &  Hellen,  P.L.C 
Association  of  Attorney-Mediators,  West  Tn.  Chap 
Boy  Scouts  of  America,  Chickasaw  Council   


n.     AGREEMENTS   (Reporting  individual  only:  see  pp. 14-n  of  Inaruaions.) 

DATE  PARTIES  A.ND  TERMS 


,  NONE    (No  rcporuble  agreements.) 

^  1997  


Farrls.  Mathews,  et  al  -  buy  out  of  partnership  interest  within 
90  days  of  withdrawal;  401  (k)  plan  Interest  will  be  transferred 
to  an  IRA 


III.      NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME       (Reporting  individual  and  spouse:  see  pp.  18-25  of  Instructions.) 


DATE 


PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


NONE   (No  reportable  non-investment  i 


1995 


2  1996 


Farris.  Mathews,  et  al  -  member 


Farris.  Mathews,  et  al  -  member 


University  of  Memphis  School  of  Law  -  adjunct  prof 
Farris,  Mathews,  et  al  -  member 


5  June  97         University  of  Memphis  School  of  Law  -  adjunct  prof 


GROSS  INCOME 

(yours,  not  spouse's) 


$    251,597.00 


EXHIBIT 


1      1 


$    231,635.00 


S      1,950.00 


$     86,640.00 
$      1,950  00 


452 


FINANCUL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Penon  Repomng 

Gilman,  Ronald  L. 


Date  of  Report 

07/17/1997 


IV.    REIMBURSEMENTS    and    GIFTS   -  crmspotunon.  lodging,  food,  enwiuinmenl. 

ilnctiulei  thuse  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  Ihe  poremheticats  '(S) '  and  '(DQ '  to  indicate  repanable  reimbunetnents  and  gifts  received  by  spouse 
and  dependent  children,  respectively.   See  pp.  26-19  of  Instructions  ) 


SOURCE 

NONE  (No  such  rcporuble  reimbuRcmcnu  or  gifts) 


DESCRimON 


Exempt 


V.    OTHER  GIFTS 


(Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children; 
respectively.  See  pp.  30-33  of  Instructions.) 


SOURCE 
NONE  (No  such  reportable  gifts) 


-  the  parentheticals  75) '  and  '(DO  *  to  indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children, 

DESCRIFnON  VALUE 


Exempt 


VI.    LI.\BILITIES 

(Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children:  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible  for  UabiUry  by  using  the  parenthetical  '(Si'  for  separate 
liability  of  the  spouse.  '  (J)' for  joint  liability  of  reporting  ituUvidual  and  spouse,  and  '(DQ'for  Uabiliry  of  a  dependent  child.  See  pp.  34-36  of  Instruaions.) 


CREDITOR 

NONE    (No  reportable  liabilities) 


DESCRIPTION 


VALUE  CODE* 


'  VALCODES:I-J15.(»Uorless  K-JI5.0OI-J5O.0UO  L-tJO.OOl  10  JKM.OOO  M-$IUO.001I250.(X)0  N -KSO.UOl  $500,000 

0-J500.00I-$I.OOO.OOO    PI-JI.OOO.OOIJS.OOO.OOO    P2-t5.OUO.OOI-J25.0OO.0OO    P3-J23,0OO.0OII5O.OOO,U0O    P4-J5U.000.OOI  or  more 


453 


Name  of  Person  Reponiag 

FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT  I   Q^^"^"-    Ronald  L. 


Date  of  Report 
07/17/1997 


vn. 

-  income,  value,  transaaions  (Includes  those  of  spouse  and 
Page       1  INVESTMENTS  and   TRUSTS      ilependem  children.  See  pp.  37-54  of  instructions.) 

A. 
Docriplioa  of  Asseu 

Iruliaae  wlure  appUcablt.  owner  af 
Ifu  asset  by  using  the  parenthetical 
'Ui'  /or  joint  owmnhtp  of  reporting 
indivtdtult  onti  spcuse.  '(S)' for  lep- 
erase  ownership  try  spouse.  'IDQ ' 
for  ownership  by  dependent  chtUt. 

Place  '(X)  ■  after  each  asset 
aeniplfrom  prior  itisclosure. 

B 

Income 

during 

reporring 

period 

C. 

Grou  value 

•lend  of 

reponing 

period 

D. 

TraiuacUoiu  dunng  reponing  period 

(1) 

Ajm. 

Code 

(A- 

H) 

(2) 
Type 
(e.g.. 
dividend. 

interest) 

(1)   \m 

Viluei  Vilue 
Code  i  Medwd 
(J-P)    Code 
(Q-W) 

(1) 

Type 
(e.g., 
buy,  sell, 
merger, 
redemp- 
tion) 

ir  not  eiempi  from  disclosure 

(2) 
Dale: 
Month- 
Day 

(3) 

Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

(4) 
Gain 
Code 
(A-H) 

(5) 

Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
(if  pnvate 
transaction) 

NONE  (no  repomble  incomcasseo.  oc 
transactions) 

1 

1 

i 

Exempc 

1  ta.    cent.    Infl   Disc.     (J) 

A 

Dividend 

K      1     T 
1 

3  Am.   Cone.    Infl  Disc.    «01(k) 

C 

Dividend 

M            T 

4  An.   Cent.    Pr.    Capital  Rss.    (J) 

C 

Dividend 

S  Evergreen  Tax  Kx    (J) 

B 

Dividend 

K 

T 

«  Fidelity  Divsfd.    Infl    (J> 

A 

Dividend 

H 

T 

7  Fidelity  Divsfd.    Infl   IRA 

A 

Dividend 

L 

T 

8  Fidelity  Divsfd.    Infl   IRA    (SI 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

9   Fidelity  Real  Estate    (Jl 

D 

Dividend 

H 

T 

10  Fidelity  Sel.    Am.    Gold    (J) 

* 

Dividend 

11  Fidelity  Sel.   Natural  Gas   IRA 

B 

Dividend 

12  Fidelity  Sel.   Natural  Gas   IRA   (S) 

B 

Dividend 

U  Fidelity  Sel.    Prec.   Metals    (J) 

A 

Dividend 

14  Fidelity  Sel.    Prec.   Metals   IRA 

A 

Dividend 

15  Fidelity  Sel.    Prec.   Metals   IRA 
(SI 

A 

Dividend 

1 

IS  Fidelity  SE  Asia      (Jl 

A 

Dividend 

n  Fidelity  Spar.    Muni   M.       (Jl 

A 

Dividend 

lire/Gain  CodesA-Jl.OOO  or  less                      B-1 1,00  (-$2,500                   C-J2.501-$5.0<X)                        D-J5.00( -J  15.000                      E.$I5.001-$50.000 
(Col.  BI.D4)       F-JSO.Ofll-JlOO.OOO              G-J100.00I-JI,000.000         Ml-J1.00O.0OI-J5.0OO,0Ofl        H2-J5.000.001  ormore 

2ValCo<la:          J-$1S,OOC  or  less                    K-J  15.001 -$30,000               L-$50.001-$100.000              M-$100,OOI-$250.000            N-J250.001 -$500,000 
(Col.Cl.D31      C>-$500.001-$  1,000.000         Pl-$l,000,00l-$5.000.000  P2-$S,0OO.0Ol -$25,000,000  P]-$25.0OO,0OI-$5O.OOO.0OO  P4-$50.000,001  or  more 

]  Val  Mill  Ca<tes:  Q-Appraisal                             R-Cosi  (real  ellale  only)                             S-Assessmenl                                       T-Cuh/Markel 
(Col.  C2)              U-Uook  Vilue                          V-Olher                                                       W-EslimaleJ 

454 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 
FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT  |    oilman,    Ronald   L. 


>.  value,  iransaaions  (includes  those  of  spouse  and 


I  Dale  of  Repon 
I  07/17/1997 


^^  ^^     -  income,  value,  transaatons  (includes  those  of  spouse 

VII,    Page        2  INVESTMENTS  and    TRUSTS       dependent  children.   See  pp.  37-54  of  Instntaions.) 


A. 
Descrtpdon  of  Asseu 

Indicose  where  applicable,  owner  of 
the  asset  by  using  the  parenlheticat 
'(J)' for  joint  ownership  of  reporting 
individual  and  spouse.  '  IS} '  for  lep- 
erase  owntrshtp  by  spouse.  'IDQ' 
for  ownership  by  dependent  child. 

Place  ■«)•  after  each  asset 
ejiemptfrom  prior  disclosure. 

B. 

Income 
during 
reponing 
penod 

C. 

Gross  value 

at  end  of 

reporting 

penod 

D 

Transactions  during  reporting  period 

(I) 

Amt, 

Code 

(A- 

H) 

(2) 

Type 

(e.g,. 

dividend. 

rem  or 

interest) 

(1) 

Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

(2) 

Value 

Method 

Code 

((3-W) 

(1) 

Type 

(e.g.. 

buy.  sell. 

merger, 

redemp- 

uon) 

If  not  exempt  from  disclosure 

(2) 
Date: 
Month- 
Day 

(3) 

Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

(4) 
Gain 
Code 
(A-H) 

(5) 

Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
(if  private 
transaction) 

NONE  (no  reporable  income.isseB.  or 
transactions) 

la  MPS  Cash  Res.        401 (kl 

A 

Dividend 

1 

19  MFS  Gold  &  Nat;.    Rea.      401(kl 

A 

Dividend 

20  Janus  Overseas    (J) 

A       Dividend 

L      1      T 

21  Lindner  Bulwark    (J) 

C        Dividend 

M      1      T 

22  R-S  ContLrarian    (J) 

D 

Dividend 

N 

T 

23  T.    Rowe   Price  Muni.      M.     (J) 

A 

Dividend 

24  Vanguard  Energy    (J) 

B 

Dividend 

25  Vanguard  Gold   &   P.    M.     (J) 

B      iDividend 

1 

26   Vanguard   Inc'l   Gro.     (J) 

A 

Dividend      |   M      1     T 

1      1 

27  Farris,    Mathews,      ec   al 

B 

Interest 

K      1      0 

1 

28  Gulf   Housing  L.P. 

A 

Dividend 

L      j      W 

29  Locke  Rd.    Farms   in  Sh.    Co. 

A 

Incereat 

j 

30  Pasture  land  in  sh.   Co. 

A 

Rent 

H       1       W 

1 

31  NBC    (J  accc.) 

A 

Intereat      1    J     j     T 

32Mort.    note;    C.    Mednikow 

D 

Interest      |    l 

T 

1 

Ilnc/OalnCodes  :A-$l.000orkS5                       B-$l.001J2.50O                   C-J2.5OI-J5.0OO                        D-I5.0O1-II5.0OO                      E-JIS.OOl-JSO.OOO 
(Col  BI.D4)       F-J50.00l-I100,000              G-1 100.001 -J  1.000.000         H 1 -J  1. 000,00 1-J5. 000.000        H2-J5.00O,0Ol  oi  more 

IValCodes:          J-J  15.000  or  less                     K-J  15,00 1 -$50,000                L-JSO,OOI -J  100,000               M-JIOO,001-I250.000             N-J250,0Ol-J50O,000 
(Col  C1,D3)      O-J500,001 -J  1.000,000         Pl-J1.000,001-J5,000,000  P2-J5,0OO,OOI-I25,0OO.OO0  P3-J25.000,001-J50.000,000  P4-J50,000,001  or  more 

3  Val  Mlh  Codes    Q-Appraisal                              R<oil  (real  eslale  only)                              S-AsjessmenI                                       Kash/Markcl 
(Col.  C2)              U-Dook  Value                           V-Olher                                                       W-Eslimaled 

455 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 
FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT]   Gilman,    Ronald   L. 

VIII.     ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS. 

I  NONE    (No  addittoul  infomulion  or  explaniuoiu.) 


(Ifidicaie  ptn  of  repon.) 


Due  of  Report 
07/17/1997 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Repotting 

Gilman,  Ronald  L. 


Date  of  Repon 
07/17/1997 


SECTION  HEADING,      (indicate  part  of  report.) 

SECTION  1.  POSITIONS  (confd.) 

Li.  Position  Name  of  Organization/Entity 


4  Board  Member 


Capital  Case  Resource  Center  of  Tennessee  ( 1 995) 


456 


FINANCUL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Reponing 

Gilman,  Ronald  L. 


Date  of  Repon 
07/17/1997 


IX.    CERTIFICATION 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
Judicial  Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory 
function  in  any  litigation  during  the  period  covered  by  this  report  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children 
had  a  financial  interest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  the  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent 
children,  if  any)  is  accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  reported 
was  withheld  because  it  met  applicable  statutory  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been 
reported  are  in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C.  app.  4,  section  501  et.  seq.,  5  'J.S.C.  7353  and  Judicial 
Conference  regulations. 


Signature 


.'^...di^^^.il. 


D.«  ^/n/<^^ 


Note: 


Any  individual  who  knowingly  and  wilfully  falsifies  or  fails  to  file  this  report  may  be  subject  to  civil 
and  criminal  sanctions  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  Section  104). 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS 

Mail  original  and  three  additional  copies  to: 

Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 
Administrative  OfFice  of  the  United  States  Courts 
One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E. 
Suite  2-JOI 
Washington,  D.C.  20544 


457 


Ronald  Lee  Gllman 
BeCsy  D.  Gllman 


FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORTH 


June    30,    1997 


Provide  a  complete,  cuirent  financial  net  worth  statement  which  itemizes  in  detail 
all  assets  (including  bank  accounts,  real  esute,  securities,  trusts,  investments,  and  other  financial 
holdings)  all  liabilities  Cmcluding  debts,  mortgages,  loans,  and  other  financial  obligations)  of 
yourself,  your  spouse,  and  other  immediate  members  of  your  household. 


j                                                ASSETS 

LIABIUTIES 

Cuh  oa  bMoi  ind  ia  buJu 

18, 

000 

Noiei  paytbk  to  biola-ucurod 

- 

tJ4.  Govemmtnt  Mcuricia-idd 

- 

Nolo  ptyibk  to  btcla-unseoBul 

- 

Uatd  ttaaiaa-yU  (chedulc 

1, 

788, 

000 

Note!  pmyiblt  to  nltaya 

- 

Ualiiied  $tasiaei-tdd  (chcdule 

62, 

000 

Hotct  payifale  to  otbm 

- 

1 

Accaonu  uid  notes  reccivible: 

- 

Accounts  lAd  bills  due 

- 

1 

Due  from  reltQvu  and  frieiids 

- 

Unpaid  income  tiz 

1 

Duc&om  odiat 

Other  unpaid  tix  and  interest 

- 

: 

Doubtful 

- 

Real  cstau  martfa^es  payable-tdd 
•diedule 

- 

Keil  awe  owTud-4dd  idiedule 

387, 

000 

able 

- 

Rul  awe  mangigci  teccivibU 

61, 

000 

- 

Aiitoi  Uid  other  pmoail  ptopeny 

I'l, 

noo 

Cuh  vtJue-Iile  insunncs 

39, 

300 

1  Other  useu-ilemize: 

Law   firm  buy-out   value 

42, 

300 

Xotll  T^flWi'l'f^'** 

0 

Net  Worth 

2 

,472, 

300 

Total  AueU 

2 

,472 

,000 

Total  UabiliQea  and  net  wotth 

2 

,472, 

300 

CONTINCENT  UABIUnES 

GENERAL  INFORMAnON 

Xi  eadorser,  coouJur  or  punator 

25 

000 

Are  any  assets  pledged   (Add  iched- 
ale.) 

no 

Oa  leuei  or  conncu 

_ 

An  you  dcfodant  in  any  toiu  or  lefal 
actioiu? 

no 

Lcgtl  CUiflU 

Have  you  erer  takes  bjr.ltrtiptcy? 

no 

Proviiioo  for  paUnl  Income  Ttx 

- 

Other  cpccuJ  ilebl 

1    - 

EXHIBIT 


P       ? 


458 


Ronald  Lee  Gilman  and  Betsy  D.  Gilman  June  30,  1997    NET  WORTH  SCHEDULE 
Listed  Securities 


American  Century  Mutual  Fund 
Evergreen  Mutual  Fund 
Fidelity  Mutual  Funds 
Janus  Mutual  Fund 
Lindner  Mutual  Fund 
Robertson-Stephens  Mutual  Fund 
Vanguard  Mutual  Fund 


Total 


133,000 
43,000 
688,000 
60,000 
181,000 
487,000 
196,000 

1,788,000 


Unlisted  Securities 
Gulf  Housing  Limited  Partnership 


62,000 


Real  Estate  Owned 

Residence  in  Memphis,  TN 

30  Acres  in  Shelby  County,  TN  (undivided  %  interest) 


222,000 
165,000 


387,000 


459 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


UNITED  STATES  SENATE 

COMMITTEE  ON  THE  JUDICIARY 

OUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 

I.  BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

Full  name  (include  any  foimer  names  used.) 

Sonia  Sotomayor  —  October  1983  to  the  Present. 

Sonia  Sotomayor  de  Noonan,  Sonia  Maria  Sotomayor  de  Noonan, 
or  Sonia  Noonan,  Married  Names  —  August  1976  to  October  1983. 
As  pari  of  my  divorce  decree,  I  resumed  my  maiden  name  without  my 
middle  name. 

Sonia  Maria  Sotomayor  —  Birih  to  Marriage,  August  1976. 

Address:    List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address(es). 

RESIDENCE:  OFFICE: 

New  York,  New  York  U.S.  Courthouse 

500  Pearl  Street,  Room  1340 
New  York,  New  York  10007 

Date  and  place  of  birth. 

June  25, 1954 

New  York,  New  York 

Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name).  List  spouse's 
occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  address(es). 

Divorced  since  October  1983.  Engaged  to  be  married  to  Peter  White, 
President  of  Commercial  Residential  and  Industrial  Construction 
Corporation,  656  Central  Park  Avenue,  Yonkers,  New  York  10704, 


460 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates  of 
attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 


SCHOOL 


DEGREE 


DATES 
ATTENDED 


GRADUATION 


Yale  Law  School 


Princeton 
University 


J.D. 


A.B.,  Summa 
Cum  Laude 


1976-1979 
1972  -  1976 


June  1979 
June  1976 


Employment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional  corporations,  companies, 
firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations,  nonprofit  or 
otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer,  director, 
partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  fi-om  college. 


DATES  OF 

ORGANIZATION 

ADDRESS 

ASSOCIATION 

POSITION 

United  States  District 

U.S.  Courthouse 

10/92  to  present 

Judge 

Court  -  Southern 

500  Pearl  Street 

District  of  New  York 

New  York,  NY 
10007 

Pavia  &  Harcourt 

600  Madison  Ave. 

1/88  to  10/92 

Partner 

New  York,  NY 

4/84  to  12/87 

Associate 

10022 

New  York  County 

1  Hogan  Place 

8/79  to  3/84 

Assistant 

District  Attorney's 

New  York,  NY 

District  Attorney  in 

omce 

10013 

Trial  Bureau  50 

Sotomayor  &  Associates  10  3rd  Street 

1983-1986 

Counseling  and 

Brooklyn,  NY 

consulting  work  for 

11231 

family  and  friends 

Yale  Law  School 

127  Wail  Street 

9/78  to  5/79 

Sales  person 

Mimeo  Room 

New  Haven,  CT 
06520 

Paul,  Weiss,  Rifkind 

1285  Avenue  of  the 

6/78  to  8/78 

Summer  Associate 

Wharton  &  Garrison       Americas 

New  York,  NY  10019 


461 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


The  Graduate, 
Professional  Studen' 
Center 


306  York  Street 
New  Haven.  CT 
06520 


9/77  to  5/78 


Sales  person 


Office  of  the 
General  Counsel, 
Yale  University 

The  Equitable  Life 
Assurance  Society 
of  the  United  SUtes 


Woodbridge  Hall 
New  Haven,  CT 
06520 

1285  Avenue  of  the 
Americas 
New  York,  NY 
10019 


6/77  to  9/77 


6/76  to  8/76 


Summer  Intern 


Summer  Clerk 


New  York  City 
Campaign  Finance 


40  Rector  Street 
New  York,  NY 
10006 


1988  to  10/92 


Member, 

Board  of  Directors 


State  of  New  York 
Mortgage  Agency 


260  Madison  Avenue 
New  York,  NY 
10016 


1987  to  10/92 


Member, 

Board  of  Directors 


Puerto  Rican  Legal 
Defense  &  Education 
Fund 


99  Hudson  Street 
New  York,  NY 
10013 


1980  to  10/92 


Member, 

Board  of  Directors 


Maternity  Center 
Association 


48  East  92nd  Street 
New  York,  NY 
10128 


1985  - 1986 


Member, 

Board  of  Directors 


Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give  particulars,  including 
the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 

No. 

Honors  and  Avyards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees,  and  honorary 
society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 


I  received  financial  assistance  in  the  form  of  scholarships  during  my  four 
years  at  Princeton  University  and  my  three  years  at  Yale  Law  School.  I 
graduated  summa  cum  laude,  Phi  Beta  Kappa,  from  Princeton.  Princeton 
awarded  me,  as  a  graduating  student  co-winner,  the  M.  Taylor  Senior  Pyne 
Prize,  for  scholastic  excellence  and  service  to  the  University.  My  senior  thesis 
work  received  an  honorable  mention  from  the  University's  History 
Department. 


462 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

While  at  law  school,  I  served  as  an  Editor  of  the  Yale  Law  Journal  and 
Managing  Editor  of  the  Yale  Studies  in  World  Public  Order.  I  was  also  a 
semi-flnalist  in  the  Barrister's  Union  competition,  a  mock  trial  presentation. 

In  reverse  chronological  order,  I  have  received  the  following  awards: 

Secretary  of  State  of  Puerto  Rico 

July  4, 1996 

Award  as  Distinguished  Woman  in  the  Field  of  Jurisprudence 

Latino  American  Law  Student  Association 

of  Hofstra  University  School  of  Law 

March  15, 1996 

Award  in  Recognition  of  Outstanding  Achievement 

and  Dedication  to  the  Latino  Community 

District  Attorney  -  New  York  County 

January  17, 1995 

Award  for  Outstanding  and  Dedicated  Service 

to  the  People  of  New  York  County  from  8-13-79  to  3-16-84 

National  Puerto  Rican  Coalition,  Inc. 

October  20, 1994 

Lifetime  Achievement  Award 

National  Conference  of  Puerto  Rican  Woman 

New  York  City  Chapter 

March  24, 1994 

Certificate  of  Excellence  in  Grateful  Recognition  of 

Outstanding  Achievements  and  Contributions  to  the  Community 

Cardinal  Spellman  High  School 
Honors  Night  1993 
Excellence  with  a  Heart  Medal 

Hispanic  National  Bar  Association 
Law  Student  Division 
September  25, 1993 
Lifetime  Achievement  Award 


463 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

Hispanic  National  Bar  Association 

September  24, 1993 

Award  for  Commitment  to  the  Preservation  of  Civil 

and  Constitutional  Rights  for  all  Americans 

Bronx  Community  College 

of  the  City  University  of  New  York 

Paralegal  Studies 

June  17, 1993 

Human  Rights  Award  for  Service  to  Humanity 

John  Jay  College  of  Criminal  Justice 

May  27, 1993 

Claude  E.  Hawley  Medal  for  Scholarship  and  Service 

The  Puerto  Rican  Bar  Association,  Inc. 

1993 

Emilio  Nunez  Award  for  Judicial  Service 

Bar  Association:    List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related  committees  or 
conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of  any 
offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Member,  Budget  Committee  of  the  Southern  District  of  New  York 
("S.D.N. Y."),  1996  to  present. 

Member,  Pro  Se  Committee  of  the  S.D.N.  Y.,  1996  to  present. 

Member,  Puerto  Rican  Bar  Association,  1994  to  present. 

Honorary  Member,  Public  Service  Committee  of  the  Federal  Bar  Council, 
1994  to  the  present. 

Member,  Second  Circuit  Task  Force  on  Gender,  Racial,  &  Ethnic  Fairness, 
1993  to  present  (Preliminary  Draft  Report  Attached). 

Member,  Committee  on  Rules  of  Practice  and  Procedure  of  the  S.D.N.Y., 
1993  to  present. 

Member,  Grievance  Committee  of  the  S.D.N.Y,  1992  to  present. 

5 


464 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 
Member,  Hispanic  National  Bar  Association,  1992  to  present. 
Member,  American  Bar  Association,  1980  to  present. 


1 0.  Other  Memberships:    List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are  active  in 
lobbying  before  public  bodies. 

None. 

Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 
None. 

1 1 .  Court  Admission:    List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice,  with  dates 
of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed.  Please  explain  the  reason  for 
any  lapsed  membership.  Give  the  same  information  for  administrative  bodies  which 
require  special  admission  to  practice. 

United  States  District  Court,  Eastern  District  of  New  York  -  March  30, 1984. 

United  States  District  Court,  Southern  District  of  New  York  ~  March  27, 
1984. 

New  York  -  First  Department  -  April  7, 1980. 

12.  Published  Writings:    Listthe  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books,  articles,  reports,  or 
other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.  Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.  Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of 
all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.  If  there  were 
press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

Note,  Statehood  and  the  Equal  Footing  Doctrine;  The  Case  for  Puerto  Rican 
Seabed  Rights.  88  Yale  L.J.  825  (1979)  (copy  attached). 

Sonia  Sotomayor  &  Nicole  A.  Gordon,  Returning  Majesty  To  The  Law  and 
Politics;  A  Modern  Approach.  30  Suffolk  U.L.  Rev.  35  (1996)  (copy 
attached). 

The  speeches  I  have  given,  in  reverse  chronological  order,  are  as  follows; 


46f 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

Sonia  Sotomayor,  The  Genesis  and  Need  of  an  Ethnic  Identity,  Keynote 
Speech  at  Princeton  University's  Latino  Heritage  Month  Celebration  (Nov.  7, 
1996). 

Sonia  Sotomayor,  El  Orgullo  y  La  Responsabilidad  de  Ser  Latino  y  Latina, 
Keynote  Speech  for  the  National  Board  of  Governor's  Reception  of  the 
Hispanic  National  Bar  Association  held  at  the  Association  of  the  Bar  of  the 
City  of  New  York  (May  17, 1996). 

Sonia  Sotomayor,  El  Orgullo  y  La  Responsabilidad  de  Ser  Latino  y  Latina, 
Speech  at  the  Third  Annual  Awards  Banquet  and  Dinner  Dance  for  the 
Latino  and  Latina  American  Law  Students  Association  of  Hofstra  University 
School  of  Law  (Mar.  15, 1996). 

Sonia  Sotomayor,  Hogan-Morgenthau  Award  Address  (Jan.  17, 1995). 

Sonia  Sotomayor,/!  Judge's  Guide  to  More  Effective  Advocacy,  Keynote 
Speech  at  the  40th  National  Law  Review  Conference  (Mar.  19, 1994). 

Sonia  Sotomayor,  Women  in  the  Judiciary,  Panel  Presentation  at  the  40th 
National  Conference  of  Law  Reviews  (Mar.  17, 1994). 

Sonia  Sotomayor,  Doing  What's  Right:  Ethical  Questions  for  Private 
Practitioners  Who  Have  Done  or  Will  Do  Public  Service,  Presiskel/Silverman 
Speech  at  the  Yale  Law  School  (Nov.  12, 1993). 

The  drafts  of  these  speeches  are  attached.  I  am  unaware  of  any  press  reports 
about  any  of  my  speeches.  I  am  aware  of  one  press  report  of  a  panel 
presentation  of  which  I  was  member,  Edward  A.  Adams,  Women  Litigators 
Discuss  Battling  Bias  in  Courtroom,  N.Y.  Law  Journal,  April  2, 1993,  at  1. 
This  press  report  is  also  attached. 

13.        Health;  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  your  last  physical 
examination. 

Good.  Please  note,  I  am  a  juvenile  diabetic  (insulin  dependent  since  age  7). 
My  condition  is  permanent  and  subject  to  continuing  treatment.  It  does  not 
impair  my  work  or  personal  life.  My  last  physical  examination  was  January 
1997. 


466 


Sotomayor  Senate  Questionnaire 

14.  Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  office  you  have  held,  whether  such 
position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each  such  court. 

Appointed  by  President  George  W.  Bush  as  a  United  States  District  Court 
Judge  for  the  Southern  District  of  New  York.  I  commenced  service  on 
October  2, 1992.  The  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District 
of  New  York  includes  the  counties  of  the  Bronx,  Dutchess,  New  York, 
Orange,  Putam,  Rockland,  Sullivan,  and  Westchester,  and,  concurrently 
with  the  Eastern  District  of  New  York,  the  waters  within  the  Eastern  District. 
The  jurisdiction  of  United  States  District  Courts  is  limited  to  those  matters 
permitted  by  Article  III,  Section  2  of  the  United  States  Constitution. 

1 5 .  Citations:    If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  ( 1 )  citations  for  the  ten  most 
significant  opinions  you  have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was 
affirmed  with  significant  criticisms  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3) 
citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues,  together  with  the 
citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were  not 
officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

(1)  The  following,  in  reverse  chronological  order,  are  ten  of  my  most  significant 
opinions,  with  citations. 

1.  United  States  v.  The  Spy  Factorv.  Inc..  951  F.  Supp.  450  (S.D.N. Y.  1997). 

2.  Krueger  Int'l  v.  Nightingale.  Inc..  915  F.  Supp.  595  (S.D.N. Y.  1996). 

3.  United  States  v.  Lech.  895  F.  Supp.  586  (S.D.N.Y.  1995). 

4.  Refac  Int'l.  Ltd.  v.  Lotus  Development  Corp..  887  F.  Supp.  539  (S.D.N.Y. 
1995),  afTd.  81  F.3d  1576  (Fed.  Cir.  1996). 

5.  Silverman  v.  Major  League  Baseball  Player  Relations  Committee. 
880  F.  Supp.  246  (S.D.N.Y.  ),  afTd.  67  F.3d  1054  (2d  Cir.  1995). 

6.  Modeste  v.  Local  1199.  Drug.  Hospital  &  Health  Care  Employees  Union. 
850  F.  Supp.  1156  (S.D.N.Y.),  afTd.  38  F.3d  626  (1994). 

7.  United  States  v.  Hendrickson.  26  F.3d  321  (2d  Cir.  1994)  (sitting  by 
designation). 


467 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

8.  Campos  v.  Coughlin.  854  F.  Supp.  194  (S.D.N. Y.  1994). 

9.  Azurite  Corp..  Ltd.  v.  Amster  &  Co..  844  F.  Supp.  929  (S.D.N.Y.  1994), 
afTd.  52  F.3d  15  (2d.  Cir.  1995). 

10.  Flamer  v.  Citv  of  White  Plains.  841  F.  Supp.  1365  (S.D.N.Y.  1993). 


(2)  The  following,  in  reverse  chronological  order,  is  a  short  summary  of  and 
citations  for  all  appellate  opinions  where  my  decisions  were  reversed  or  where  my 
judgments  were  affirmed  with  significant  criticisms  of  my  substantive  or  procedural 
rulings. 

1.  Hellenic  American  Neighborhood  Action  Committee  v.  City  of  New  York. 
933  F.  Supp.  286  (S.D.N.Y.),  rev'd.  101  F.3d  877  (2d  Cir.  1996). 

I  granted  a  preliminary  injunction  on  behalf  of  a  contractor  which  alleged 
that  it  was  barred  from  city  procurements  in  violation  of  its  due  process 
rights  under  the  Fourteenth  Amendment.  The  Second  Circuit  reversed 
without  addressing  whether  the  City's  alleged  misconduct  deprived  plaintiff 
of  protected  property  and  liberty  interests.  The  Court  reasoned  that  even  if 
there  was  such  a  deprivation,  there  was  no  failure  of  due  process  because 
there  was  an  adequate  remedy  available  to  the  contractor  under  state  law. 


2.  Aurora  Maritime  Co..  Ltd.  v.  Abdullah  Mohamed  Fahem  &  Co..  890  F. 
Supp.  322  (S.D.N.Y.  1995),  afTd  on  other  grounds.  85  F.3d  44  (2d  Cir. 
1996). 

The  Second  Circuit  affirmed  my  decision  denying  a  bank's  motion  to  vacate 
various  Supplemental  Admiralty  Rule  B  attachments  of  plaintiffs  bank 
account.  I  held  that  "because  plaintiffs  obtained  Rule  B  attachments  before 
[the  bank]  exercised  its  set-off  rights  . . .  plaintiffs  gained  a  limited  property 
interest  under  federal  law  that  cannot  be  defeated  by  a  subsequently 
executed  state  law  set-off  right."  Although  upholding  my  ruling,  the 
Second  Circuit  disagreed  with  my  conclusion  "that  [the  bank's]  set-off  right 
and  appellees'  Rule  B  attachments  d[id]  not  conflict."  Instead,  the  Second 
Circuit  reached  the  constitutional  issue  and  found  that  the  dismissal  was 
proper  because  federal  law  preempted  the  bank's  right,  under  Section  15 1  of 
state  law,  to  the  funds  in  the  disputed  account. 


468 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


3.  European  American  Bank  v.  Benedict.  1995  WL  422089  (S.D.N.Y.  1995), 
vacated.  90  F.3d  50  (2d  Cir.  1996). 

I  affirmed  a  Bankruptcy  Court  decision  rescinding  its  prior  order  which  had 
extended  the  time  period  for  a  creditor  to  file  a  dischargeability  complaint. 
I  reasoned  that  the  Bankruptcy  Court  did  not  have  the  discretion,  under  the 
applicable  statute  of  limitations,  to  extend  the  time  for  filing  a  complaint, 
and  that  the  Bankruptcy  Court  was  therefore  correct  when  it  reversed  its 
initial  decision  to  do  so.  Recognizing  a  split  of  authority  on  the  issue,  the 
Second  Circuit  determined  that  the  applicable  limitations  period  under  the 
Federal  Bankruptcy  Rules  is  not  jurisdictional,  and  that  it  is  therefore 
subject  to  waiver,  estoppel,  and  equitable  tolling.  The  Court  proceeded  to 
enforce  the  Bankruptcy  Court's  initial  decision  to  extend  the  period  for 
filing,  because  the  debtor  had  waived  its  right  to  object  to  the  extension  by 
failing  to  raise  that  objection  prior  to  the  expiration  of  the  statutory 
deadline. 


4.  Bernard  v.  Las  Americas  Communications.  Inc..  (no  written  opinion), 
afTd  in  part,  vacated  in  part.  84  F.3d  103  (2d  Cir.  1996). 

Pursuant  to  a  jury  verdict,  I  entered  judgment  in  favor  of  plaintiff,  an 
attorney,  seeking  legal  fees  in  connection  with  his  representation  of 
defendant  in  proceedings  before  the  Federal  Communications  Commission. 
Applying  Washington,  D.C.  law,  the  Second  Circuit  approved  of  my  jury 
instructions  on  the  issues  of  proximate  causation  and  damages,  but  found 
error  with  respect  to  my  instruction  on  materiality.  Specifically,  I  had 
instructed  that  a  material  breach  "defeats  the  purpose  of  [an]  entire 
transaction";  the  Second  Circuit  held  that  D.C.  law  requires  only  that 
defendant  prove  that  he  received  "something  substantially  less  or  different 
fi'om  that  for  which  he  bargained."  On  remand,  a  jury  again  foimd  for 
plaintiff,  and  judgment  was  entered  accordingly. 


10 


469 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

5.  Bolt  Electric.  Inc.  v.  Citv  of  New  York.  1994  WL  97048  (S.D.N. Y.  1994), 
rev'd.  53  FJd  465  (2d  Cir.  1995). 

I  granted  a  motion  to  dismiss  on  behalf  of  the  City  of  New  York  (the 
"City")  in  a  breach  of  contract  action  brought  by  plaintiff  Bolt  Electric,  Inc. 
("Boh').  I  found  that  because  the  City  had  undertaken  to  pay  Bolt  for 
general  contracting  services  pursuant  to  a  letter  which  was  not  filed  and 
endorsed  by  the  City's  Comptroller,  as  required  under  New  York's 
Administrative  Code,  the  contract  was  unenforceable.  The  Second  Circuit 
reversed,  reasoning  that  compliance  with  the  endorsement  provision  of  the 
Administrative  Code  was  not  a  mandatory  precondition  to  the  formation  of 
a  valid  contract.  In  the  alternative,  the  Court  reasoned  that,  even  if  the 
contract  was  executed  without  proper  authority,  it  was  enforceable  because 
the  City  had  funds  available  for  performance. 


6.  Runquist  v.  Delta  Capital  Management.  L.P.  1994  WL  62965  (S.D.N.Y.), 
rev'd.  48  F.3d  1212  (2d  Cir.  1994). 

The  Second  Circuit  reversed  a  decision  in  which  I  adopted  a  Magistrate 
Judge's  recommendation  that  plaintiffs  claims  of  securities  fi-aud  be 
dismissed.  Before  the  Magistrate  Judge,  plaintiff  failed  to  file  a  timely 
opposition  to  defendant's  motion  for  summary  judgment,  and  subsequently 
filed  an  affidavit  which  the  Magistrate  Judge  foimd  insufficient  to  raise  a 
triable  issue  of  fact  as  to  the  element  of  reliance  in  plaintiflPs  fraud  claim. 
The  Second  Circuit  found,  however,  that  the  affidavit  was  sufficient  to  raise 
an  issue  of  material  fact,  and  that  it  was  error  for  me  to  have  dismissed 
plaintiffs  remaining  claims  on  the  basis  of  his  attorney's  repeated 
noncompliance  with  applicable  filing  procedures  and  deadlines. 


(3)  The  following,  in  reverse  chronological  order,  are  citations  for  my 
significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues,  together  with 
citations  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions. 

1.  Estate  of  Joseph  Re  v.  Kornstein.  Veisz  &  Wexler.  958  F.  Supp.  907 
(S.D.N.Y.  1997). 


11 


4'S-9M    08  .  lA 


470 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

2.  United  States  v.  The  Spy  Factory  et  al..  951  F.  Supp.  450  (S.D.N. Y. 
1997). 

3.  National  Helicopter  Corp.  of  America  v.  City  of  New  York.  952  F. 
Supp.  1011  (S.D.N.  Y.  1997). 

4.  United  States  v.  Ni  Fa  Yi.  951  F.  Supp.  42  (S.D.N. Y.  1997). 

5.  Gelb  V.  Board  of  Elections.  950  F.  Supp.  82  (S.D.N. Y.  1996). 

6.  United  States  of  America^  Louis  Menchaca.  96  Civ.  5305,  decision 
unpublished,  read  into  the  record  on  August  26, 1996. 

7.  Hellenic  American  Neighborhood  Action  Committee  v.  City  of  New 
York.  933  F.  Supp.  286  (S.D.N. Y.  1996),  rev'd.  101  F.3d  877  (2d  Cir. 
1996). 

8.  In  re  St.  Johnsbury  Trucking  Co..  Inc..  191  B.R.  22  (S.D.N. Y.  1996); 
199  B.R.  84  (S.D.N.Y.  1996). 

9.  United  States  v.  Jimenez.  921  F.  Supp.  1054  (S.D.N. Y.  1995). 

10.  Lee  V.  Coughlin.  902  F.  Supp.  424  (S.D.N. Y.  1995),  reconsideration 
granted.  914  F.  Supp.  1004  (S.D.N.Y  1996). 

11.  Ortiz  V.  United  States.  1995  WL  130516  (S.D.N.Y.  1995),  afPd.  104 
F.3d  349  (2d  Cir.  1996). 

12.  Senape  v.  Constantino.  1995  WL  29502  (S.D.N.Y.  1995),  afTd.  99 
F.3d  401  (2d  Cir.  1995). 

13.  Clapp  V.  LeBoeuf.  Lamb.  Leiby  &  MacRae.  862  F.  Supp.  1050 
(S.D.N.Y.  1994),  afTd.  54  F.3d  765  (2d  Cir.),  s£rL  denied.  116  S.  Ct. 
380  (1995). 

14.  Campos  v.  Coughlin.  854  F.  Supp.  194  (S.D.N.Y.  1994)  (cited  with 
approval  in  Jolly  v.  Coughlin.  76  F.3d  468  (2d  Cir.  1996). 


12 


471 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

15.  Flamer  v.  Citv  of  White  Plains.  841  F.  Supp.  1365  (S.D.N.  Y.  1993). 

16.  United  States  v.  Castellanos.  820  F.  Supp.  80  (S.D.N. Y.  1993). 
Copies  of  opinions  not  officially  published  are  attached. 

16.  Public  Office:    State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you  have  held,  other 
than  judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions 
were  elected  or  appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies 
for  elective  public  office. 

1988  to  1992  -  Board  of  Directors,  New  York  City  Campaign  Finance 
Board,  appointed  by  the  Mayor. 

1987  to  1992  -  Board  of  Directors,  State  of  New  York  Mortgage 
Agency,  appointed  by  the  Governor. 

1979  to  1984  -  Assistant  District  Attorney,  New  York  County, 
appointed  by  the  District  Attorney. 

17.  Legal  Career: 

a.  Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after  graduation 
from  law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name  of  the  judge, 
the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

No. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and  dates; 

Yes,  with  Sotomayor  &  Associates,  10  3rd  Street,  Brooklyn,  New 
York,  11231,  from  1983  to  1986,  but  this  work  was  more  in  the 
nature  of  a  consultant  to  family  and  friends  in  their  real  estate, 
business,  and  estate  planning  decisions.  If  their  circumstances 
required  formal  legal  representation,  I  referred  the  matter  to  my 
firm,  Pavia  &  Harcourt,  or  to  others  with  appropriate  expertise. 

13 


472 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices,  companies  or 
governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected,  and  the  nature 
of  your  connection  with  each; 


Dates  of 

Association 

Organization 

Address 

Position 

4/84  to  10/92 

Pavia  &  Harcourt 

600  Madison  Ave. 

Partner  (1/88  to 

New  York,  NY 

10/92) 

10022 

Associate 

8/79  to  3/84 

New  York  County 

1  Hogan  Place 

Assistant 

District  Attorney's 

New  York,  NY 

District 

Office 

10013 

Attorney 

1 .  What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice,  dividing  it  into 
periods  with  dates  if  its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 

See  1(b)(2)  below. 

2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the  areas,  if  any,  in  which 
you  have  specialized. 

From  April  1984  as  an  associate,  and  from  January  1988  until 
October  1992  as  a  partner,  I  was  a  general  civil  litigator  involved  in 
all  facets  of  commercial  work  including,  but  not  limited  to,  real  estate, 
employment,  banking,  contract,  distribution  and  agency  law. 
Moreover,  my  practice  had  significant  concentration  in  intellectual 
property  law  involving  trademark,  copyright  and  unfair  competition 
issues.  I  also  worked  in  automobile  franchise  law,  and  export 
commodity  trading  law  under  the  North  American  Grain  Association 
Contract.  I  conducted  over  fifteen  arbitration  hearings  involving  the 
banking,  fashion,  grain,  and  tire  distribution  industries.  My  typical 
clients  were  significant  European  companies  doing  business  in  the 
United  States. 

From  August  1979  to  March  1984,  as  a  prosecutor  in  New  York 
County,  my  cases  typically  involved  "street  crimes,"  jiC.,  murders, 
robberies,  etc.  I  also  investigated  child  pornography,  child  abuse, 
police  misconduct,  and  fraud  matters.  I  further  prepared  the 
responsive  papers  for  five  criminal  appeals,  two  of  which  I  argued 
and  ail  of  which  resulted  in  affirmances  of  the  convictions. 


14 


473 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


c.  1 .  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at  all?  If  the  frequency 

of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such  variance,  giving  dates. 

I  appeared  daily  in  court  as  a  prosecutor  and  I  appeared  regularly  in 
court  as  a  civil  commercial  litigator  in  New  York  with  a  largely 
federal  practice. 


2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

In  private  practice  As  a  prosecutor 

1 .  federal  courts                     approx.  70%  0% 

2.  state  courts  of  record          approx.  20%  100% 

3.  other  courts                        approx.  10%  0% 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

In  private  practice  As  a  prosecutor 

(a)  civil                                             99%  0% 

(b)  criminal                                        1%  100% 


4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to  verdict  or  judgment 
(rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether  you  were  sole  counsel,  chief  counsel, 
or  associate  counsel. 

I  have  tried  over  23  cases  to  verdict.  In  two  of  the  cases,  I  was  chief 
counsel  and  in  another,  co-counsel.  In  all  other  cases,  I  was  sole 
counsel. 


15 


474 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 
5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

1.  Jury --90% 

2.  Non-jury -10% 


Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you  personally 
handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and  date  if 
unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of  each  case.  Identify  the  party  or 
parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  the 
litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.  Also  state  as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before  whom  the  case  was 
litigated;  and 

(c)  the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co-counsel  and  of 
principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 


I  list  the  ten  litigated  matters  in  reverse  chronological  order. 

1. 

Case  Name:  Fratelli  Lozza  (USA)  Inc.  v.  Lozza  fVSA\  &  Lozza  SpA 

Court:  United  States  District  Court,  Southern  District  of  New  York 

Index  No.:  90  Civ.  4170 

Judge:  Then  District  Court  Judge  Fred  I.  Parker  (sitting  by  designation) 

Federal  Building 
1 1  Elmwood  Avenue 
P.O.  Box  392 

Burlington,  Vermont  05402 
(802)951-6401 

Date  of  Trial:  March  16,  1992 


16 


475 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

Co-Counsel:  Allison  C.  Collard,  Esq. 

Attorney  for  co-defendant  Lozza  (USA) 
1077  Northern  Blvd. 
Roslyn,  New  York  11576 
(516)365-9802 

Adversaries:  Charles  E.  Temko 

Teinko  &  Temko 
19  West  44th  Street 
New  York,  New  York  10036 
(212)840-2178 

Case  Description:      I  represented  the  defendant  Lozza  SpA  in  this  trademark  infringement, 
trademark  abandonment,  unfair  competition,  breach  of  contract,  and 
rescission  action.  The  plaintiff,  a  corporation  owned  and  operated  by  a 
former  shareholder  of  the  defendant  corporation,  claimed  the  defendant 
had  breached  an  agreement  with  the  plaintiff  for  the  trademark  use  of 
"Lozza"  in  the  United  States,  had  abandoned  use  of  its  marks  in  the  United 
States,  and  had  infringed  certain  of  the  plaintiffs  trademarks.  I  conducted 
the  trial  for  the  lead  defendant,  and  secured  a  dismissal  of  all  of  the 
plaintiffs  claims.  The  Court  also  issued  an  injunction  against  the 
plaintiffs  use  of  the  defendants'  marks,  and  of  false  and  misleading  terms 
in  its  advertising.    Findings  of  Fact.  Conclusions  of  Law  and  Order 
reported  at  789  F.  Supp.  625  (S.D.N. Y.  1992). 


Administrative 
Case  Name; 


Ferrari  of  Sacramento.  Inc.  v.  Ferrari  North  America 


Agency: 


State  of  California  New  Motor  Vehicle  Board 
(Appeared  jjtq  hac  vice) 


Protest  No. 


PR-973-88 


Administrative 
Law  Judges: 


Marilyn  Wong 

c/o  New  Motor  Vehicle  Board 

1507  21st  Street,  Room  330 

Sacramento,  California  95814 

(916)445-1888 


17 


476 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


Robert  S.  Kendell  (retired) 
Contact:  Michael  Sabian 
c/o  New  Motor  Vehicle  Boeird 
1507  21st  Street,  Room  330 
Sacramento,  California  95814 
(916)445-1888 

Dates  of  Hearing:       10/16/90,  10/17/90,  10/31/90,  1 1/1/90,  and  1 1/2/90 

Co-Counsel:  Nicholas  Browning,  III,  Esq. 

Herzfeld  &  Rubin 
1925  Century  Park  East,  Suite  600 
Los  Angeles,  California  90067-2783 
(310)553-0451 

Adversaries:  Jay-Allen  Eisen 

Jay-Allen  Eisen  Law  Corporation 
9A0  9th  Street,  Suite  1400 
Sacramento,  California  95814 
(916)444-6171 

Donald  M.  Licker,  Esq. 

2443  Fair  Oaks  Boulevard 

Room  340 

Sacramento,  California  95825 

(916)924-6600 

Case  Description:       In  or  about  1 988,  Ferrari  North  America  ("Ferrari")  terminated  the 
plaintiff  dealer.  Thereafter,  the  dealer  filed  a  timely  protest  of  the 
termination  with  the  California  New  Motor  Vehicle  Board  (the  "Board"). 
At  a  prehearing  settlement  conference,  Ferrari  and  the  dealer  entered  into  a 
Stipulated  Settlement  that  permitted  Ferrari  to  terminate  the  dealer, 
without  a  hearing,  if  the  dealer  failed  timely  to  cure  specified  obligations 
under  its  franchise  agreement  with  Ferrari.  When  the  dealer  breached  the 
terms  of  the  Stipulated  Settlement,  Ferrari  terminated  the  dealer,  with  the 
Board's  approval  and  without  a  hearing.  The  dealer  then  secured  a  writ  of 
mandate  from  a  California  court  directing  the  Board  to  hold  an 
administrative  hearing. 

I  had  primary  responsibility  for  representing  Ferrari  at  the  administrative 
hearing.  The  Board  determined  that  1 )  the  dealer  had  violated  the  terms  of 


18 


477 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

the  Stipulated  Settlement,  2)  the  violations  constituted  good  cause  for 
Ferrari's  termination  of  the  dealer  under  California's  Automobile 
Franchise  Law,  and  3)  the  plaintiffs  loss  of  its  franchise  was  not  an  illegal 
forfeiture  under  California  law. 

While  the  hearing  before  the  Board  proceeded  after  issuance  of  the 
mandate,  Ferrari  also  appealed  the  judgment  on  the  writ,  which  judgment 
was  reversed  on  appeal  in  an  unpublished  opinion.  The  California  Court 
of  Appeals,  Third  Appellate  District,  determined  that  enforcing  the 
Stipulated  Settlement  and  terminating  the  dealer,  without  a  hearing,  did 
not  violate  due  process. 

Although  not  listed  as  counsel  for  appellant's  briefs,  I  contributed 
significantly  to  the  drafting  of  the  briefs.  The  appellate  case  was 
captioned  Ferrari  of  Sacramento.  Inc..  Respondent  v.  New  Motor  Vehicle 
Board  and  Sam  Jennings  as  Secretary.  Appellants,  and  Ferrari  North 
America.  Real  Party  in  Interest  and  Appellant:  No.  C008840  in  the  Court 
of  Appeals  of  the  State  of  California  in  and  for  the  3rd  Appellate  District; 
Sacramento  Superior  Court,  Case  No.  360734. 


Case  Name:  In  re:  Van  Ness  Auto  Plaza.  Inc..  a  California  Corporation,  d/b/a  Auto 

Plaza  Lincoln  Mercury.  Auto  Plaza  Porsche  and  Auto  Plaza  Ferrari. 
Debtors. 


Court: 


United  States  Bankruptcy  Court,  Northern  District  of  California 
(Appeared  j2m  hac  vifig) 


Case  No.: 


3-89-03450-TC 


Judgs: 


Hon.  Thomas  E.  Carlson 

U.S.  Bankruptcy  Court  Judge 

235  Pine  Street 

San  Francisco,  California  94104 

(415)705-3200 


Dates  of  Hearing:       1/22/90  and  3/1 9/90 


19 


478 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

Co-Counsel:  Nicholas  Browning,  III,  Esq. 

Herzfeld  &  Rubin 
1925  Century  Park  East,  Suite  600 
Los  Angeles,  California  90067-2783 
(213)553-0451 

Adversaries:  Henry  Cohen,  Esq. 

Cohen  and  Jacobson 
Attorneys  for  Debtor 
577  Airport  Blvd.,  Suite  230 
Burlington,  California  90067-2783 
(415)342-6601 

William  Kelly,  Esq.  (retired) 

Address  Unknown 

Home  Tel.  No.  (415)  641-1544 

Case  Description:      I  represented  Ferrari  North  America  ("Ferrari"),  a  franchisor  of  a  bankrupt 
dealer,  in  hearings  related  to  Ferrari's  opposition  to  the  rejection  of 
customer  contracts,  assimiption  of  the  dealer's  franchise  agreement,  and 
confirmation  of  the  proposed  sale  of  the  dealer's  franchise.    At  the  time, 
Ferrari  was  introducing  a  limited  production  and  valuable  new  car  model 
to  the  marketplace.  A  rejection  by  the  dealer  of  contracts  for  that  model 
would  have  frustrated  the  expectations  of  customers  and  subjected  Ferrari 
to  potential  multiple  claims.  After  a  number  of  hearings,  the  Bankruptcy 
Court  ruled  that  the  dealer  could  not  reject  the  customer  contracts, 
although  financially  burdensome,  and  then  assume  the  franchise 
agreement  with  Ferrari.  The  case  also  involved  alleged  claims  by  the 
dealer  and  customers  that  Ferrari  had  violated  the  California  automobile 
franchise,  antitrust,  and  securities  laws.  The  case  settled  with  the  sale  of 
the  dealership  and  resolution  of  claims  among  the  bankrupt  dealer,  the  new 
franchise  buyer,  Ferrari,  and  customers. 


Case  Name:  Fendi  S.a.s.  di  Paola  Fendi  e  Sorelle  v.  Burlington  Coat  Factory 

Warehouse  Corp..  et  al. 

Case  No.:  86  Civ.  0671 

Court;  United  States  District  Court,  Southern  District  of  New  York 


20 


479 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


Judge: 


Co-Counsel: 


Adversaries: 


Dates  of  Trial: 
Case  Description: 


Hon.  Leonard  B.  Sand 

U.S.  District  Judge 

U.S.  Courthouse 

500  Pearl  Street 

New  York,  New  York  10007 

(212)805-0244 

Frances  B.  Bernstein,  Esq. 
(Deceased) 

Stacy  J.  Haigney,  Esq. 

Herbert  S.  Kasner,  Esq. 

Attorneys  for  Burlington  Coat  Factory  Warehouse  and 

Monroe  G.  Milstein 

Burlington  Coat  Factory  Warehouse,  Corp. 

263  West  38th  Street 

New  York,  New  York  10018 

(212)221-0010 

Dennis  C.  Kreiger,  Esq. 

Esanu,  Katsky,  Korins  &  Sieger 

Attorneys  for  Firestone  Mills,  Inc.  and  Leo  Freund 

605  Third  Avenue,  1 6th  Floor 

New  York,  New  York  101 58 

(212)953-6000 

5/18/87  to  5/19/87 

Combined  Case  Description  in  5  below. 


Case  Name:  Fendi  S.a.s.  di  Paola  Fendi  e  Sorelle  v.  Cosmetic  World.  Ltd..  Loradan 

Imports.  Inc..  Linea  Prima.  Inc.  a/k/a  Lina  Garbo  Shoes.  Daniel 
Bensoul.  Michael  Bensoul  a/k/a  Nathan  BendeL  Paolo  Vincelli  and 
Mario  Vincelli 

Case  No.:  85  Civ.  9666 

Court:  United  States  District  Court,  Southern  District  of  New  York 


21 


480 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


Judges: 


Hon.  Leonard  B.  Sand 

U.S.  District  Judge 

U.S.  Courthouse 

500  Pearl  Street 

New  York,  New  York  10007 

(212)  805-0244 

Hon.  Joel  J.  Tyler 

Magistrate  Judge,  U.S.  District  Court 

Home  address: 

2  Primrose  Avenue 

Yonkers,  New  York  10710 

Telephone  unpublished 


Co-Counsel: 


Frances  B.  Bernstein 
(Deceased) 


Adversary:  Stanley  Yaker,  Esq. 

Attorney  for  Paolo  Vincelli  and  Mario  Vincelli 

Former  Address: 

114  East  32nd  Street 

Suite  1104 

New  York,  New  York  10016 

(212)983-7241 

Telephone  not  in  service.    1  have  been  unable  to  locate  Mr.  Yaker. 

No  attorneys  appeared  for  the  remaining  defendants,  who  settled  pro  se. 

Date  of  Inquest 

Hearing:  1/6/88 

Case  Descriptions:     From  1985,  my  former  firm  represented  Fendi  S.a.s.  di  Paola  Fendi  e 

Sorelle  ("Fendi")  in  Fendi's  national  anticounterfeiting  work.  Frances  B. 
Bernstein,  a  partner  at  Pavia  &  Harcourt  (now  deceased),  and  1  created 
Fendi's  anticounterfeiting  program.  From  1988  until  the  time  1  left  the 
firm  for  the  bench  in  1992, 1  was  the  partner  in  charge  of  that  program.  I 
handled  almost  all  discovery  work  and  substantive  court  appearances  in 
cases  involving  Fendi.  This  work  implicated  a  broad  range  of  trademark 
issues  including,  but  not  limited  to,  trademark  and  trade  dress 
infringement,  false  designation  of  origin,  and  unfair  competition  claims. 


22 


481 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

Approximately  once  every  two  months  from  1989  to  1992, 1,  for  Fendi, 
applied  for  provisional  injunctive  relief  in  district  court  to  seize  counterfeit 
goods  from  street  vendors  or  retail  stores.  These  applications  required 
extensive  submission  of  evidence  documenting  Fendi 's  trademark  rights, 
its  protection  of  its  marks,  the  nature  of  the  investigation  against  the 
vendors,  and  Fendi's  right  to  ex  parte  injunctive  relief  Generally,  the 
street  vendors  defaulted  but  others  appeared  and  settled  pro  se.  Two  of 
these  cases  filed  in  the  Southern  District  of  New  York  were  captioned  Jane 
Doe  V.  John  Doe  and  Various  ABC  Companies.  89  Civ.  3122,  the  Hon. 
Thomas  P.  Griesa  presiding  (Tel.  No.  (212)  805-0210),  and  Fendi  S.a.s.  Pi 
Paola  Fendi  e  Sorelle  v.  Dapper  Dan's  Boutique.  89  Civ.  0477,  the  Hon. 
Miriam  G.  Cedarbaum  presiding  (Tel.  No.  (212)  805-0198). 

The  preceding  two  cases  (A4  and  A5)  involved  a  trial  and  a  damages 
hearing  on  Fendi's  trademark  claims  against  the  defendants.    In  the  first, 
the  Burlington  case,  Fendi  alleged  that  defendants  knowingly  trafficked  in 
counterfeit  goods  and  Fendi  sought  triple  profits  from  the  defendants  and 
punitive  damages.  After  extensive  discovery,  submission  of  a  pre-trial 
order  and  memorandum,  and  Fendi's  presentation  of  its  expert  at  trial,  the 
case  settled.  I  was  sole  counsel  present  at  trial.  In  the  Cosmetic  World 
case,  the  Court  granted  Fendi's  summary  judgment  motion  on  liability  and 
referred  the  matter  to  a  magistrate  judge  for  an  inquest  on  damages.  See 
642  F.  Supp.  1 143  (S.D.N.  Y.  1986).  I  conducted  the  contested  hearing  on 
damages  before  the  magistrate  judge  who  recommended  an  award  in 
Fendi's  favor. 

6. 

Case  Name:  Republic  of  the  Philippines  v.  New  York  Land  Co..  et  al.  (the 

"Philippines  Case")  and  Security  Pacific  Mortgage  and  Real  Estate 
Service  Inc.  v.  Canadian  Land  Company,  et  al.  (the  "Security  Pacific 
Case"). 

Case  Nos.:  90-7322  and  90-7398 

Court:  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Second  Circuit 

Panel:  Hon.  Thomas  J.  Meskill 

U.S.  Circuit  Judge 
1 14  W.  Main  Street,  Suite  204 
New  Britain,  Connecticut  06051 
(203)224-2617 

23 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


482 


Hon.  Lawrence  J.  Pierce 

U.S.  Circuit  Judge 

c/o  U.S.  Courthouse 

40  Foley  Square 

New  York,  New  York  10007 

(212)791-0951 

Hon.  George  C.  Pratt 
U.S.  Circuit  Judge 
U.S.  Courthouse 
Uniondale  Avenue 
Hempstead  Turnpike 
Uniondale,  New  York  1 1553 
(516)485-6510 

Co-Counsel:  David  A.  Botwinik,  Esq. 

Pavia  &  Harcourt 
600  Madison  Avenue 
New  York,  New  York  10022 
(212)980-3500 

David  Glasser,  Esq. 
Levin  &  Glasser,  P.C. 
675  Third  Avenue 
New  York,  New  York  10471 
(212)  867-3636 

Roy  L.  Reardon,  Esq.  (455-2840) 
David  E.  Massengill,  Esq.  (455-3555) 
Simpson  Thacher  &  Bartlett 
425  Lexington  Avenue 
New  York,  New  York  10017 

Adversaries:  Jeffrey  J.  Greenbaum,  Esq. 

James  M.  Hirschhom,  Esq. 

Sills,  Cummis,  Zuckerman,  Radin,  Tischman,  Epstein  &  Gross 
Attorneys  for  the  Republic  of  the  Philippines 
Legal  Center 
1  Riverfront  Plaza 
Newark,  New  Jersey  07102 
(201)  643-7000 


24 


483 


Sotomavor  Senate  Ouestmnniiirg 


Pattof  ArgMinynt:     6/1 5/90  (Argued  by  Roy  L.  Reardon,  Esq.  of  Simpson,  Thacher  &  Bartlett) 


District  Court 
Case  Name: 


Case  Nos.: 


Court: 
Judge: 


Co-Counsel: 


AND 

Republic  of  the  Philionines  v.  New  York  Land  Co..  ct  al  dhp 
"Philippines  Case")  and  Security  Pacific  Mortgage  and  Real  E.state 
Service  Inc.  v.  Canadian  Land  Company,  et  al.  (the  "Security  Pacific 
Case"). 

The  Philippines  Case:  86  Civ.  2294 
The  Security  Pacific  Case:  87  Civ.  3629 

United  States  District  Court,  Southern  District  of  New  York 

Hon.  Pierre  N.  Leva! 

U.S.  Circuit  Judge  (Then  District  Court  Judge) 

U.S.  Circuit  Judge 

U.S.  Courthouse 

40  Foley  Square 

New  York,  New  York  10007 

(212)857-2319 

David  A.  Botwinik,  Esq. 

Pavia  &  Harcourt 

600  Madison  Avenue 

New  York,  New  York  10022 

(212)980-3500 

David  Glasser,  Esq. 
Levin  &  Glasser,  P.C. 
675  Third  Avenue 
New  York,  New  York  10471 
(212)  867-3636 


25 


484 


Sotomayor  Senate  Questionnaire 


Participating 
Adversaries 
Opposing  Motion: 


Jeffrey  J.  Greenbaum,  Esq. 

James  M.  Hirschhom,  Esq. 

Sills,  Cummis,  Zuckerman,  Radin,  Tischman,  Epstein  &  Gross 

Attorneys  for  the  Republic  of  the  Philippines 

Legal  Center 

1  Riverfront  Plaza 

Newark,  New  Jersey  07102 

(201)643-7000 

Michael  Stanton,  Esq. 

Weil,  Gotshal  &  Manges 

Attorneys  for  Security  Pacific 

767  Fifth  Avenue 

New  York,  New  York  10153 

(212)310-8000 


Date  of  Argument:     2/12/90 

Case  Description:      My  former  firm,  Pavia  and  Harcourt,  represented  Bulgari  Corporation  of 
America  ("Bulgari"),  an  international  retailer  of  fme  jewelry,  who  was  a 
tenant  in  the  Crown  Building  at  730  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York,  New  York. 
The  Crown  Building  was  the  subject  of  a  foreclosure  sale  in  the  Security 
Pacific  Action,  and  its  beneficial  ownership  was  in  dispute  in  the 
Philippines  Action.  Bulgari  was  not  a  party  to  these  actions.  The  district 
court  denied  Bulgari's  request,  by  way  of  Order  to  Show  Cause,  to 
approve  a  rental  amount  it  had  reached  with  the  manager  of  the  Crown 
Building.  I  primarily  drafted  the  papers  presented  to  the  district  court  and 
argued  the  motion.  Bulgari's  motion  attempted  to  demonstrate  that  no 
competent  evidence  existed  to  dispute  Bulgari's  proof  that  the  rental 
amount  agreed  upon  was  at  or  above  fair  market  value  and  benefited  the 
Crown  Building  and  its  claimants.  Bulgari  appealed  the  district  court's 
denial  of  its  approval  of  the  rent  agreement  on  the  grounds  that  the  denial 
was  effectively  an  injunction  against  Bulgari's  exercise  of  its  contractual 
lease  rights  to  have  its  rent  fixed  by  agreement  during  the  term  of  the 
lease,  and  that  the  district  court  improperly  granted  the  injunction  without 
a  hearing.  I  did  not  argue  the  appeal  but  participated  extensively  in  the 
drafting  of  appellant's  brief  and  reply.  The  district  court's  Order  was 
affirmed  on  appeal,  without  a  published  opinion.  909  F.2d  1473  (2d  Cir. 
1990). 


26 


485 

Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

7. 

Case  Name:  Miserocchi  &  C  SdA  v.  Alfred  C.  Toepfer  International.  G.m.b.H. 

Case  No .:  85-7734 

Court:  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Second  Circuit 

Panel:  Hon.  J.  Edward  Lumbard 

Senior  Judge 
U.S.  Circuit  Judge 
U.S.  Courthouse 
Foley  Square 

New  York,  New  York  10007 
(212)  857-2300 

Hon.  James  L.  Oakes 

Then-Chief  Judge 

U.S.  Circuit  Judge 

U.S.  Courthouse 

40  Foley  Square 

New  York,  New  York  10007 

(212)857-2400 

Hon.  George  C.  Pratt 
U.S.  Circuit  Judge 
U.S.  Courthouse 
Uniondale  Avenue 
Hempstead  Turnpike 
Uniondale,  New  York  11553 
(516)485-6510 

Adversary:  Stephen  P.  Sheehan 

Wistow  &  Barylick 
61  Weybosset  Street 
Providence,  Rhode  Island  02903 
(401)831-2700 

Date  of  Argument:     9/17/84 


AND 

27 


486 


District  Court 
Case  Name; 

Case  No .; 

Court: 

Judge; 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

Miserocchi  &  C.  SpA  v.  Alfred  C.  Toepfer  International.  G.m.b.H. 

84  Civ.  6112 

United  States  District  Court,  Southern  District  of  New  York 

Hon.  Kevin  Thomas  Duffy 

U.S.  District  Judge 

U.S.  Courthouse 

40  Foley  Square 

New  York,  New  York  10007 

(212)805-6125 

David  A.  Botwinik,  Esq. 

Pavia  &  Harcourt 

600  Madison  Avenue 

New  York,  New  York  10022 

(212)980-3500 

Stephen  P.  Sheehan 
Wistow  &  Barylick 
61  Weybosset  Street 
Providence,  Rhode  Island  02903 
(401)831-2700 

Date  of  Argument;     9/5/84  (argued  by  David  Botwinik  of  Pavia  &  Harcourt) 


Co-Counsel: 


Adversary: 


Case  Description:      This  action  involved  the  bankruptcy  of  an  Italian  corporation,  Miserocchi 
&  C,  SpA  ("Miserocchi"),  with  affiliates  in  London  and  elsewhere.  The 
London  affiliate  of  Miserocchi  breached  a  grain  commodity  trading 
contract  with  my  then  client,  Alfred  C.  Toepfer  International,  G.m.b.H. 
("Toepfer").  Toepfer  demanded  arbitration  of  the  dispute  against  both 
Miserocchi  and  its  London  affiliate  under  the  terms  of  the  grain 
commodity  trading  agreement  between  the  parties  and  a  guarantee  signed 
by  Miserocchi.  Shortly  before  the  arbitration  hearing  was  to  commence, 
Miserocchi  moved  to  stay  the  arbitration  against  it,  arguing  that  it  was  not 
a  party  to  the  arbitration  agreement.  Although  my  partner,  David  A. 
Botwinik,  argued  the  motion  before  the  district  court,  I  primarily  drafted 
Toepfer' s  responsive  papers  to  the  motion  to  stay  arbitration  and  the 
cross-motion  to  compel  arbitration.  Toepfer  argued  that  Miserocchi  was 


28 


487 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

bound  to  arbitrate  both  as  an  alter  ego  of  its  London  affiliate  and  under  the 
terms  of  its  guarantee.  After  the  district  court  ruled  in  Toepfer's  favor, 
Miserocchi  filed  a  notice  of  appeal  and  sought  an  expedited  stay  of  the 
district  court's  Order  denying  the  stay  of  arbitration  and  compelling 
arbitration.  1  argued  the  motion  to  stay.  At  the  conclusion  of  the 
argument  on  the  motion,  the  Second  Circuit  not  only  denied  the  motion  for 
a  stay  but  also  dismissed  the  appeal.  I  participated  extensively  as  co- 
counsel  in  the  arbitration  that  followed  and  subsequently  appeared  in  the 
post-confirmation  proceedings  resulting  from  the  arbitration  award 
rendered  in  favor  of  Toepfer.  The  matter  settled  before  the  hearing  on 
appeal  of  the  confirmation  order. 


8. 

Case  Name: 


The  People  of  the  State  of  New  York  v.  Clemente  D'Alessio  and  Scott 

Hymao 


Indictment  No.: 


4581/82 


Judgg: 


Hon.  Thomas  B.  Galligan  (retired) 

Then- Acting  Justice,  Supreme  Court, 

c/o  Administrative  Judge's  Office 

Juanita  Newton 

1 1 1  Centre  Street 

New  York,  New  York  10013 

(212)374-4972 


Associate  Counsel:     Karen  Greve  Milton 

Director  of  Education  Training  Program 

Association  of  the  Bar  of  the  City  of  New  York 

42  West  44th  Street 

New  York,  New  York  10036-6690 

(212)382-6619 

Adversaries:  Steven  Kimehnan,  P.C. 

Attorney  for  Scott  Hyman 

757  Third  Avenue 

New  York,  New  York  1 001 7 

(212)421-5300 


29 


488 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


Dates  of  Trial: 


Case  Description: 


James  Bernard,  Esq. 

Attorney  for  Clemente  D'Alessio 

1 50  Broadway 

New  York,  New  York  10038 

(212)233-0260 

2/2/83  to  3/2/83 

I  was  lead  counsel  in  this  action  in  which  defendants  were  charged  with 
selling  videotapes  depicting  children  engaged  in  pornographic  activities. 
Defendant  Scott  Hyman  dealt  directly  with  the  undercover  agent  and 
attempted  to  raise  numerous  defenses  at  trial  based  upon  his  alleged  drug 
addiction.  The  proof  against  defendant  Clemente  D'Alessio  was 
circumstantial  and  he  raised  a  misidentification  defense  at  trial.  This  action 
was  the  first  child  pornography  case  prosecuted  in  New  York  State  after 
the  U.S.  Supreme  Court  upheld  the  constitutionality  of  New  York's  laws 
in  New  York  v.  Ferber.  458  U.S.  747  (1982).  The  defendants  filed  a 
plethora  of  motions  before  and  during  trial.  The  defendants'  request  for 
severance  was  denied,  as  were,  after  a  hearing,  the  defendants'  motions  for 
the  suppression  of  statements,  evidence,  and  identification.  Other  issues 
addressed  at  trial  included  whether  the  trial  court  should  or  could,  upon 
defendants'  request,  require  the  government  to  stipulate  to  the 
pornographic  nature  of  the  evidence,  whether  defendant  Hyman  could 
present  expert  testimony  on  the  effects  of  drug  addiction  on  mens  rea,  and 
whether  defendant  Hyman  was  entitled  to  jury  charges  on  diminished 
capacity  or  intoxication.  The  jury  convicted  defendants  after  trial.  The 
defendants  received  sentences,  respectively,  of  3'/2  to  7  years  and  2  to  6 
years.  The  convictions  were  affirmed  on  appeal.  See  People  v.  D'Alessio. 
62N.Y.2d619,476N.Y.S.2d  1031  (Ct.  App.  1 984V  People  v.  Hvman.  62 
N.Y.2d  620, 476  N.Y.S.2d  1033  (Ct.  App.  1984). 


Case  Name:  The  People  of  the  State  of  New  York  v.  Richard  Maddicks 

Indictment  No.:         886/82 

Court;  Supreme  Court  of  the  State  of  New  York,  County  of  New  York 


30 


489 


Judge; 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


Hon.  James  B.  Leff  (retired) 

Justice,  Supreme  Court 

c/o  Administrative  Judge's  Office 

Juanita  Newton 

100  Centre  Street 

New  York,  New  York  10013 

(212)374-4972 


Lead  Counsel; 


Hugh  H.  Mo,  Esq. 

Law  Offices  of  Hugh  H.  Mo 

750  Lexington  Avenue 

15th  Floor 

New  York,  New  York  10022 

(212)750-8000 


Adversary; 


Dates  of  Trial; 


Case  Description; 


Peter  A.  Furst,  Esq. 

100  Pine  Street 

Suite  2750 

San  Francisco,  California  941 1 1 

(415)433-2626 

Almost  all  of  January  1983 

The  defendant  was  dubbed  the  "Tarzan  Murderer"  by  the  local  Harlem 
press  because  he  committed  burglaries  by  acrobatically  jumping  or 
climbing  from  rooftops  or  between  buildings  and  entering  otherwise 
inaccessible  apartments.  If  the  defendant  found  a  person  in  the  apartment, 
he  shot  them.  I  was  co-counsel  on  the  case,  and  prepared  and  argued  the 
motion,  before  Justice  Harold  Rothwax,  that  resulted  in  the  court 
consolidating  the  trial  of  four  murders  and  seven  attempted  murders 
relating  to  eleven  of  the  defendant's  burglaries.  The  consolidation  was 
unusual  in  that  up  to  that  point,  most  New  York  courts  had  limited 
consolidation  to  crimes  in  which  an  identical  modus  operandi  had  been 
used.  We  argued  successfully  that  the  commonality  of  elements  in  the 
crimes,  although  with  some  variations  in  modus  operandi,  warranted 
consolidation.    I  participated  extensively  in  preparing  and  presenting 
expert  and  civilian  witnesses  at  trial.  The  defendant  was  convicted  after 
trial,  and  sentenced  to  67'/2  years  to  life.  The  conviction  was  affirmed  on 
appeal.  Sss  People  v.  Maddicks.  70  N.Y.2d  752,  520  N.Y.S.2d  1028  (Ct. 
App.  1987). 


31 


490 


10. 

Case  Name: 


Indictment  No: 
Judge: 


Adversaries: 


Dates  of  Trial: 
Case  Description: 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


The  People  of  the  State  of  New  York  v.  Manny  Morales  a.k.a.  Joey 
Hernandez.  Joseph  Pacheco,  and  Eduardo  Pacheco 

4399/82 

Hon.  Alfred  H.  Kleiman  (retired) 

Then-Acting  Justice,  Supreme  Court 

c/o  Administrative  Judge's  Office 

Juanita  Newton 

100  Centre  Street 

New  York,  New  York  10013 

(212)  374-4972 

Ira  I.  Van  Leer  (deceased) 

(Associates  present  at  portions  of  the  trial:  Valerie  Van  Leer-Greenberg 

and  Howard  Greenberg) 

Van  Leer  and  Greenberg 

Attorneys  for  defendant  Manny  Morales  a.k.a.  Joey  Hernandez 

132  Nassau  Street,  Suite  523 

New  York,  New  York  10038 

(212)962-1596 

Lawrence  Rampulla,  Esq. 

Attorney  for  defendant  Edwardo  Pacheco 

2040  Victory  Blvd. 

Staten  Island,  New  York  10314 

(718)761-3333 

Stephen  Goldenberg,  Esq. 

Attorney  for  defendant  Joseph  Pacheco 

277  Broadway,  Suite  1400 

New  York,  New  York  10007 

(212)346-0600 

March  25, 1983  to  May  12, 1983 

This  multiple-defendant  case  involved  a  Manhattan  housing  project 
shooting  between  rival  family  groups.    I  was  sole  counsel  in  this  action  on 
behalf  of  the  government.  Prior  to  trial,  I  conducted  various  hearings 
opposing  defense  motions  to  suppress  statements  and  identifications.  This 


32 


491 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

lengthy  trial  involved  witnesses  with  significant  credibility  issues.  The 
jury  convicted  one  of  the  three  defendants  who  was  sentenced  to  3  to  6 
years  for  Criminal  Possession  of  a  Weapon  in  the  Third  Degree.  The 
conviction  was  affirmed  on  appeal.  See  People  v.  Pacheco.  70  N. Y.2d 
802,  522  N.Y.S.2d  120  (Ct.  App.  1987). 


Additional  Question  under  Item  18:  In  addition,  if  the  majority  of  cases  you  list  in 
response  to  this  question  are  older  than  five  years,  provide  the  name,  address  and  phone 
number  for  10-12  members  of  the  legal  community  who  have  had  recent  contact  with  you, 
even  if  the  contact  was  only  an  appearance  before  you  as  a  judge. 

I  have  interpreted  this  question  to  be  seeking  a  list  of  individuals  who  are  familiar  with 
my  judicial  work  because  they  are  knowledgeable  about  some  of  my  cases  or  opinions,  or 
because  they  have  appeared  before  me.  If  you  seek  only  individuals  who  have  tried  cases 
or  made  other  substantive  appearances  before  me,  please  advise  me.  I  list  these 
individuals  in  alphabeticid  order. 


Martin  J.  Auerbach,  Esq. 

Dormand,  Mensch,  Mandelstan,  Schaeffer 

747  Third  Avenue 

New  York,  New  York  10017 

(212)759-3300 

The  Hon.  Miriam  G.  Cedarbaum 
United  States  District  Court  Judge 
Southern  District  of  New  York 
500  Pearl  Street,  Room  1330 
New  York,  New  York  10007 
(212)  805-0198 

Justin  N.  Feldman,  Esq. 
Kromish,  Lieb,  Weiner  &  Hellman 
1114  Avenue  of  the  Americas,  47th  Floor 
New  York,  New  York  10036-7798 
(212)479-6210 


33 


492 


4.  Leonard  F.  Joy,  Esq. 
Attomey-in-Charge 

Legal  Aid  Society,  Federal  Defender  Division 

52  Duane  Street 

New  York,  New  York  10007 

(212)285-2830 

5.  John  Kidd,  Esq. 
Rogers  &  Wells 
200  Park  Avenue 

New  York,  New  York  10166-0153 
(212)878-8000 

6.  The  Hon.  John  G.  Koeltl 
United  States  District  Court  Judge 
Southern  District  of  New  York 
500  Pearl  Street,  Room  1030 
New  York,  New  York  10007 
(212)805-0222 

7.  Sara  Moss,  Esq. 
Vice-President  and  General  Counsel 
Pitney  Bowes 

1  Elmcroft  Road 

Stamford,  Connecticut  06926 

(203)351-7924 

8.  John  S.  Siffert,  Esq. 
Lankier,  Siffert  &  Wohl 

500  Fifth  Avenue,  33rd  Floor 
New  York,  New  York  10110 
(212)921-8399 

9.  Gerard  Walperin,  Esq. 
Rosenman  &  Colin 
575  Madison  Avenue 

New  York,  New  York  10022 
(212)940-7100 


34 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


493 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 


10.        Mary  Jo  White,  Esq. 

United  States  Attorney  for  the  Southern  District  of  New  York 

U.S.  Courthouse  Annex 

One  St.  Andrew's  Plaza 

New  York,  New  York  10007 

(212)791-0056 


1 9.        Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have  pursued, 

including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did  not 
involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question,  please  omit 
any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the  privilege  has  been 
waived). 

In  the  last  five  years  as  a  judge,  my  legal  activities  have  spanned  the  gamut  of 
federal  jurisdiction.  As  part  of  my  daily  work,  I  have  addressed  many  of  the 
complex  legal  questions  of  our  time  in  fields  as  diverse  as  the  First  and  Fourteenth 
Amendments  to  the  United  States  Constitution,  antitrust,  securities,  habeas  corpus, 
immigration,  tax,  intellectual  property,  ERISA,  employment  discrimination,  and 
many  other  areas  of  law.  The  numerous  opinions  I  have  cited  in  Question  Number 
15  describe  in  detail  many  of  these  significant  cases. 

A  great  part  of  my  litigation  work  while  in  private  practice  involved  pre-trial  and 
discovery  proceedings  for  cases  which  were  typically  settled  before  trial.  I 
conducted  a  number  of  preliminary  injunction  hearings  in  trademark  and  copyright 
cases,  and  post-motion  hearings  before  magistrate  judges  on  a  variety  of  issues.  My 
work  also  involved  rendering  advise  to  clients  on  a  wide  variety  of  legal  issues, 
including,  but  not  limited  to,  product  liability,  warranty,  antitrust,  securities, 
environmental,  banking,  real  estate,  patents,  employment,  partnership,  joint 
venture  and  shareholder  laws;  customs,  automobile  and  joint  tire  regulations;  and 
franchising  and  licensing  matters.  I,  moreover,  conducted  over  fifteen  arbitration 
hearings  involving,  predominantly,  export  grain  commodity  trading  on  behalf  of 
foreign  buyers  but  also  hearings  involving  banking,  partnership,  tire,  and  fashion 
industry  disputes. 

Finally,  in  addition  to  my  work  in  establishing  a  national  anti-counterfeiting 
program  for  Fendi  S.a.s.  Paola  Fendi  e  Sorelle,  I  participated,  on  behalf  of  Fendi,  in 
establishing  a  Task  Force  of  prominent  trademark  owners  to  change  New  York 
State's  anti-counterfeiting  criminal  statutes.  I  also  supervised  and  participated  in 
the  national  dealers  and  customer  warranty  relations  programs  for  Ferrari  North 
America,  a  division  of  Fiat  Auto  USA,  Inc. 

35 


494 


Sotomayor  Senate  Questionnaire 
II.  FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred  income 
arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which  you 
expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  professional  services,  firm 
memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please  describe  the  arrangements 
you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  fiiture  for  any  financial  or  business  interest. 

None. 

Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including  the  procedure 
you  will  follow  in  determining  these  areas  of  concern.  Identify  the  categories  of  litigation 
and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present  potential  conflicts-of-interest  during 
your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

Because  my  former  firm,  Pavia  &  Harcourt,  advises  me  on  personal  matters, 
I  will  continue  to  recuse  myself  from  any  matter  in  which  my  form  firm  or  its 
clients,  or  a  former  client  with  whom  I  worked  are  involved.  Similarly,  I  will 
continue  to  recuse  myself  from  hearing  any  matter  involving  an  issue  in 
which  I  participated  while  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  non- 
profit organizations  described  in  Part  III,  Question  1.  I  will  further  recuse 
myself  from  any  matter  involving  a  client  or  associate  of  my  husband-to-be. 
In  all  matters,  I  will  follow  the  dictates  of  28  U.S.C.  §  455  and  the  Code  of 
Judicial  Conduct. 

Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside  employment,  with 
or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court?  If  so,  explain. 

No. 

List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar  year  preceding  your 
nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees,  dividends, 
interest,  gifls,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and  other  items  exceeding  $500  or 
more.  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report,  required  by  the 
Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 


36 


495 


Sotomavor  Senate  Ouestionnaire 

1996 

1997 

Salary  -  U.S.D.J. 

S133,600 

$66,800  to  5/31/97 

Interest  -  Citibank  Savings  Acct. 

$       912 

$     373  to  6/1/97 

Rent  from  Kings  Co.  Coop 
[SllOOamonth] 

S  13^00 

$  6600  to  6/1/97 

My  Financial  Disclosure  Report,  AlO,  is  attached. 

Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail.  (Add  schedules  as 
called  for.) 

My  Net  Worth  Statement  and  Schedule  is  attached. 

Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign?  If  so,  please 
identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the  campaign, 
yoiu'  title  and  responsibilities. 

No. 


37 


496 

Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 
III.  GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 


An  ethicjil  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's  Code  of 
Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participaie  in  serving  the 
disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fiilfill  these  responsibilities,  listing 
specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

Before  my  appointment  as  a  judge,  all  of  the  non-profit  organizations  with 
which  I  had  been  affiliated  served  the  disadvantaged  either  directly  or 
through  projects  I  had  participated  in  developing.  The  Puerto  Rican  Legal 
Defense  and  Education  Fund,  for  example,  promotes,  through  legal  and 
educational  activities,  the  civil  and  human  rights  of  disadvantaged  Hispanics. 
I  had  served,  at  various  times,  as  the  First  Vice  President  of  the  Board  of 
Directors  of  the  Fund  and  as  Chairperson  of  its  Litigation  and  Education 
Committees. 

The  State  of  New  York  Mortgage  Agency  ("SONYMA")  structures 
affordable  housing  programs  for  residents  of  the  State  of  New  York.  During 
my  service  on  its  Board  of  Directors,  SONYMA,  among  many  other  projects, 
implemented  special  mortgage  programs  for  low-income  families  to  purchase 
homes. 

I  was  also  a  member,  in  1988,  of  the  Selection  Committee  for  the  Stanley  D. 
Heckman  Educational  Trust  which  granted  college  scholarships  to  minorities 
and  first  generation  immigrants.  I  had,  moreover,  served,  in  1990-1991,  as  a 
member  of  New  York  State's  Panel  on  Inter-Group  Relations.  The  Report  of 
that  Panel  is  attached. 

Finally,  I  had  been  a  member  of  the  New  York  City  Campaign  Finance 
Board  from  its  inception  in  1988  until  1992.  This  Board  distributes  public 
funds  to  candidates  for  certain  elective  positions  in  New  York  City  when  such 
candidates  agree  to  limit  the  amount  of  the  contributions  they  will  accept, 
and  expenditures  they  will  make,  during  campaigns. 

The  time  I  devoted  to  my  service  to  these  assorted  organizations  varied 
through  the  years  but  it  was  never  less  than  two  hours  a  week  and  had  been 
over  eight  hours  a  week  during  certain  periods.  I  devoted  an  average  of 
approximately  six  hours  a  week  cumulatively  to  the  various  non-profit 
organizations  of  which  I  was  a  member. 

38 


497 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

The  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  limits  my  ability  to  provide  legal  service  to  the 
disadvantaged.  While  a  judge,  I  nevertheless  contribute  my  time  as 
permitted  by  law  to  bar  and  law  school  activities.  I  have  served  as  an 
honorary  member  of  the  Public  Service  Committee  of  the  Federal  Bar 
Council.  I  also  serve  on  the  selection  committees  for  the  Root-Tilden-Snow 
Scholarship  granted  to  selected  New  York  University  Law  School  students 
interested  in  public  service  and  the  Kirkland  and  Ellis  New  York  Public 
Service  Fellowship  granted  to  a  Columbia  Law  School  graduate  to  support  a 
year's  employment  in  public  service.  I  serve  on  moot  court  panels  and  in 
trial  advocacy  courses  at  local  law  schools  and  for  the  office  of  the  District 
Attorney  of  New  York  County;  I  also  speak  regularly  at  bar  association 
functions  on  issues  such  as  judicial  clerkships  for  minority  students  and 
women  in  the  law.  Finally,  I  have  lectured  about  trial  advocacy  skills  at  the 
Office  of  the  Attorney  General  for  the  State  of  New  York.  It  is  difficult  to 
quantify  the  time  I  spend  on  these  activities  because  I  participate  in  functions 
as  my  schedule  permits.  I  estimate  that  I  attend  at  least  one  community 
service  function  a  month,  and  often  twice  a  month. 

The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  states  that 
it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that  invidiously 
discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you  currently  belong,  or  have  you 
belonged,  to  any  organization  which  discriminates  ~  through  either  formal  membership 
requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership  policies?  If  so,  list,  with 
dates  of  membership.  What  you  have  done  to  try  to  change  these  policies? 

No. 

Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates  for 
nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?  Please 
describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from  beginning  to  end 
(including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interview  in  which  you 
participated). 

I  am  not  aware  of  any  selection  commission  which  recommended  me  for  this 
Circuit  Court  nomination.  I  was  interviewed  by  the  Office  of  the  Counsel  to 
the  President  in  or  about  March  of  1996  and  again  in  March  of  1997. 
Thereafter,  the  American  Bar  Association  and  the  Federal  Bureau  of 
Investigations  interviewed  me.  The  President's  nomination  followed. 


39 


498 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee  discussed  with 
you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be 
interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue  or  question?  If  so,  please 
explain  fully. 

No. 

Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal  government,  and  within  society 
generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.  It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial 
branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than  grievance- 
resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a  vehicle  for  the 
imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad  classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duties  upon 
govenunents  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional  requirements  such  as 
standing  and  ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions  in  the  manner 
of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight  responsibilities. 

At  the  time  I  was  nominated  as  a  district  court  judge,  I  answered  this 
question  as  follows: 

"Our  Constitution  vests  the  right  to  make  and  administer  laws  in  the 
legislative  and  executive  branches  of  our  government.  Judges 
impermissibly  encroach  upon  that  right  by  rendering  decisions  that 
loosen  jurisdictional  requirements  outside  of  the  scope  of  established 
precedents  and  by  fashioning  remedies  aimed  at  including  parties  not 
before  the  court  to  resolve  broad  societal  problems. 


40 


499 


Sotomavor  Senate  Questionnaire 

Judges  must  provide  fair  and  meaningful  remedies  for  violations  of 
constitutional  and  statutory  rights  to  the  parties  before  a  court.  Doing 
so  can,  at  times,  affect  broad  classes  of  individuals,  may  place 
affirmative  burdens  on  governments  and  society  and  may  require 
some  administrative  oversight  functions  by  a  court. 

A  judge's  decision  should  not,  however,  start  from  or  look  to  these 
effects  as  an  end  result.  Instead,  because  judicial  power  is  limited  by 
Article  III  of  the  Constitution,  judges  should  seek  only  to  resolve  the 
specific  grievance,  ripe  for  resolution,  of  the  parties  before  the  court 
and  within  the  law  as  written  and  interpreted  in  precedents. 
Intrusion  by  a  judge  upon  the  functions  of  the  other  branches  of 
government  should  only  be  done  as  a  last  resort  and  limitedly." 

My  service  as  a  judge  has  only  reinforced  the  importance  of  these  principles. 
Finding  and  maintaining  a  proper  balance  in  protecting  the  constitutional 
and  statutory  rights  of  individuals  versus  protecting  the  interest  of 
government,  financial  and  otherwise,  is  very  difficult.  Judges  must  be 
extraordinarily  sensitive  to  the  impact  of  their  decisions  and  function  within, 
and  respectful  of,  the  constraints  of  the  Constitution. 


41 


500 


I.   BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 
Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used.) 
Charles  Joseph  Siragusa 

Address:  List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address(es). 

Home  address:  Webster,  New  York  14580 

Business  Address:  Rochester,  New  York  14614 

Date  and  place  of  birth. 

August  10, 1947 
Rochester,  New  York 

Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name).  List  spouse's 
occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  address(es). 

Divorced.  However,  I  am  engaged  to  be  married  on  August  30,  1997.  My 
fiancee's  name  is  Lisa  Serio.  She  is  a  lawyer  currently  employed  as  an 
assistant  district  attorney  in  the  Monroe  County  District  Attorney's  Offlce, 
Rochester,  New  York  14614. 

Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates  of 
attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 


Colleges: 


State  University  of  New  York  at  Buffalo 
August  1965 -May  1966 
Transferred  to  LeMoyne  College 

LeMoyne  College 
September  1966  •  May  1969 
B.A.  Sociology  -  Cum  Laude 
Date  Granted:  June  7, 1969 


Law  Schools: 


Franklin  Pierce  Law  School 
August  1973 -May  1974 
Transferred  to  Albany  Law  School 


501 


Albany  Law  School 

September  1974  •  May  1976 

J.D. 

Date  Granted:  June  5, 1976 

Employment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional  corporations, 
companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations, 
nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  finms,  with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer, 
director,  partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  from  college. 


1969  •  1973 


1974  (summer) 


1977-  1992 


1984-1992 


1993 -present 


1995  -  Present 


St.  James  School 

Rochester,  New  York  14609 

I  was  employed  as  a  sixth  grade  and  then  junior 

high  teacher. 

Diocese  of  Rochester 
Catholic  Youth  Organization 
Day  Camp  Counselor 

Monroe  County  District  Attorney's  Office 
Rochester,  New  York  14614 
I  was  employed  as  an  Assistant  District  Attorney 
From  1984  through  1992, 1  served  as  First  Assistant 
District  Attorney 

Rape  Crisis  Advisory  Board  Member 
(non  paid,  volunteer  position) 

New  York  State,  Seventh  Judicial  District 
Rochester,  New  York  14614 
I  am  currently  employed  as  a  New  York  State 
Supreme  Court  Justice 

Families  and  Friends  of  Murdered  Children  and 
Victims  of  Violence  Advisory  Board  Member  (non 
paid,  volunteer  position) 


Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  sen/ice?  If  so,  give  particulars, 
including  the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of 
discharge  received. 

No. 


A^    OA/I       Q8 


502 


Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees,  and 
honorary  society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the 
Committee. 

1969    Pi  Gamma  Mu  National  Honor  Society 

1983   Certificate  of  Appreciation  -  Brighton  Police  Department 

1985   Certificate  of  Merit  for  Representing   Monroe  County  with 
Integrity  and  Conviction  -  Town  of  Irondequoit 

1985  Certificate  of  Recognition  for  Successful  Prosecution  of  Robert 
P.  Reilly  -  Gates  Police  Department 

1985  Distinguished  Service  Award  -  Kiwanis  Club;  Lakeshore- 
Rochester  Chapter 

1987    Distinguished  Service  Award  -  Rosewood  Club 

1987  Recognition  for  Successful  Prosecution  of  Northeast  Rapist  - 
Rochester  Police  Department 

1988  Distinguished  Service  Award  -  Crime  Stoppers 

1988  Special  Recognition  for  Successful  Prosecution  of  $500,000 
Armored  Car  Theft  -  New  York  State  Police 

1990  Citizen  of  the  Year  -  Rochester  Police  Locust  Club 

1990  Person  of  the  Year  -  Gannett  Rochester  Times  Union 

1991  Honorary  Deputy  Chief  of  the  Rochester  Police  Department 

1991  Exemplary  Service  Award  -  Monroe  County  Sheriffs  Department 

1991  Recognition  and  Service  Award  for  Outstanding  Service  - 
American  Association  of  Retired  Persons 

1991  Commendation  on  Behalf  of  Citizens  of  Monroe  County  for 
Successful  Prosecution  of  Arthur  J.  Shawcross  -  Monroe  County 
Legislature 


503 


1991  Certificate  of  Honor  for  Outstanding  Service  and  Contribution  to 
Law  Enforcement  -  Association  of  Rochester  Police  and  Area 
Law  Enforcement  Retirees 

1991  Letter  of  Recognition  for  Successful  Prosecution  of  Arthur  J. 
Shawcross  -  Frank  Horton,  House  of  Representatives 

1991  Certificate  of  Honor  for  Extraordinary  Diligence  in  Preparation 
and  Successful  Prosecution  of  Arthur  J.  Shawcross  -  American 
Society  for  Industrial  Security,  Rochester  Chapter 

1991  Letter  of  Recognition  for  Dedication  and  Commitment  to  Public 
Service  -  Louise  M.  Slaughter,  Member  of  Congress 

1991  Letter  of  Recognition  for  Successful  Prosecution  of  Arthur  J. 
Shawcross  -  Alphonse  M.  D'Amato,  United  States  Senate 

1991  Certificate  of  Appreciation  -  National  Association  of  Women  in 
Construction 

1992  Government  Award  -  Greater  Rochester  Metro  Chamber  of 
Commerce 

1996   Recognition  Award  -  Monroe  County  Magistrates  Association 

1996  Distinguished  Service  Award  -  For  Contribution  to  the  Italian 
American  Community  -  Counsel  General  of  Italy 

1997  Certificate  of  Excellence  -  For  support  of  the  Rochester  City 
School  District's  Weapons  Diversion  Program 

Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related  committees  or 
conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates 
of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

New  York  State  District  Attorney's  Association 

Monroe  County  Bar  Association 
Ethics  Committee  - 1986 
Courts  Committee  - 1990 
Academy  of  Law  Board  of  Governors  - 1995 
Chairperson,  Evidence  Institute  - 1996 


504 


Association  of  Supreme  Court  Justices,  Seventh  Judicial  District . 
1993  to  present. 

Association  of  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State  of  New  York. 
1993  to  present. 

Rochester  Inns  of  Court.  1995  to  present. 

Jury  Advisory  Committee.  1996  to  present. 

10.  Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are  active  in 
lobbying  before  public  bodies.  Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you 
belong. 

I  am  not  a  member  of  any  organization  which  is  active  in  lobbying  before 
public  bodies.  As  to  other  organizations,  I  am  a  member  of  the  Health  Club 
of  the  Jewish  Community  Center. 

1 1 .  Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice,  with 
dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed.  Please  explain  the 
reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same  information  for  administrative 
bodies  which  require  special  admission  to  practice. 

Admitted  to  practice  in  State  of  New  York,  Appellate  Division,  Fourth 
Department  -  February  22, 1977 

Admitted  to  practice  in  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of 
NewYori<-May9, 1977 

12.  Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books,  articles,  reports, 
or  other  published  material  you  bave  written  or  edited.  Please  supply  one  copy  of 
all  published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.  Also,  please  supply 
a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy. 
If  there  were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you, 
please  supply  them. 

"Prosecution  of  a  Serial  Killer",  St.  Vincent's  Hospital,  Melbourne,  Australia, 
February,  1992,  at  Tab  A 

Rochesterian  Magazine  "View  from  the  Bench"  series,  January,  1994,  at 
TabB 

As  to  speeches,  I  have  included  the  following: 


505 


Speech  given  at  the  66th  Dante  Ball  of  the  Italian  Women's  Civic  Club, 
September  28, 1971,  at  Tab  C. 

Speech  given  at  the  Monroe  County  Columbus  Day  Celebration,  October  4, 
1991,  at  Tab  D. 

Speech  given  at  the  Safety  Council  Luncheon,  May  14, 1993,  at  Tab  E. 

Speech  given  at  the  Families  and  Friends  of  Murdered  Children  and  Victims 
of  Violence  Dinner,  May  27, 1994,  at  Tab  F. 

Speech  given  at  the  30th  Firefighter  of  the  Year  Luncheon,  October  13, 1995, 
at  Tab  G. 

Presentation  on  Cameras  in  the  Courtroom  as  part  of  the  American  Justice 
Seminar  at  Fairport  High  School,  April  26, 1997,  at  Tab  H. 

1 3.  Health:  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  your  last  physical 
examination. 

Excellent 
April  9, 1997 

14.  Judicial  OfTice:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have  held,  whether 
such  position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each 
such  court. 

1993  to  present      New  York  State  Supreme  Court  Justice  Seventh  Judicial 
District 

I  currently  serve  as  a  New  York  State  Supreme  Court  Justice  in  the  Seventh 
Judicial  District.  This  is  the  only  judicial  position  which  I  have  held.  I  was 
elected  to  a  14-year  term  in  November  1992  and  took  office  in  January  1993. 
The  Supreme  Court  is  the  highest  trial  court  in  New  York  with  general 
jurisdiction  relating  to  both  criminal  and  civil  matters.  Since  taking  office,  I 
have  been  assigned  to  an  IAS  civil  part,  although  I  have  presided  over  some 
criminal  cases  as  well.  As  of  May  26, 1997, 1  began  a  full  time  assignment  to 
a  criminal  part. 


506 


15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  (1)  citations  for  the  ten  most 
significant  opinions  you  have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was 
affirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3) 
citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues,  together 
with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions 
listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

15(1) 

(1).  Citizens  for  a  Safer  Community;  The  Genesee  Conservation  League, 
Inc.,  The  IVIonroe  County  Conservation  Council;  The  New  York  State 
Rifle  &  Pistol  Association,  Inc.;  The  Shooters  Committee  on  Political 
Education,  Inc.  (Monroe  County  Chapter);  Leadloader  Arms,  Inc.  d/b/a 
American  Sportsman;  Frederick  Calcagno;  Steven  C.  DeMallie;  and 
Kurt  Thomann  -  versus  -  The  City  of  Rochester,  New  York;  The  Council 
of  the  City  of  Rochester,  New  York;  Thomas  Ryan,  as  Mayor  of  the  City 
of  Rochester,  New  York;  Louis  Kash,  as  Corporation  Counsel  for  the 
City  of  Rochester,  New  York;  Roy  Irving,  as  Chief  of  Police  of 
Rochester,  New  York;  John  Curran;  Maxine  Childress  Brown;  Wade 
Norwood;  Tim  Mains;  Benjamin  Douglas;  Lois  Giess;  Nancy  Padilla  and 
Robert  Stevenson,  as  Members  of  the  Council  of  the  City  of  Rochester, 
New  York. 
Reported:  164  Misc  2d  822 


(2)       In  the  Matter  of  the  Investigation  into  the  Rape  of  Jane  Doe,  John 
Horace,  Respondent. 
Reported:  168  Misc  2d  981 


(3)  Gregory  J.  Mott,  as  Guardian  Ad  Litem  for  Sayer  M.  Rivazfar,  a  Minor 
Over  the  Age  of  Fourteen  Years,  and  Arash  P.  Rivazfar,  a  Minor  Under 
the  Age  of  Fourteen  Years  -  versus  •  Patricia  An  Rivsizfar  n/k/a  Patricia 
Ann  Pafford  and  Ahmad  Rivazfar 

Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  I. 

Modified  _  AD2d  _,  653  NYS2d  760,  leave  application  to  the  New  York 

Court  of  Appeals  Granted NY2d 06/27/97 

(4)  Keigh  Beth  Kenyon  -  versus  -  Security  Insurance  Company  of  Hartford 
(DPIC  Companies)  and  William  C.  Larsen  and  William  C.  Larsen,  P.E., 
P.C.  d/b/a  Larsen  Engineers/Architects 

Reported:      163  Misc  2d  991,  afTd  206  AD2d  980,  Iv  den  84  NY2d  813 


507 


(5)  Maiden  Lane  Neighborhood  Association;  Frank  Andolino;  Emily 
Andoiino;  Paul  Andree;  Gay  Andree;  Burnett  Barrett;  Beverly  Barrett; 
Richard  Bauer;  Julie  Bauer;  James  Borden;  Patricia  Borden;  Albert 
Buettner;  Joyce  Buettner;  Gloria  Carpenter;  Robert  Cross;  Helene 
Cross;  Edward  Croteau;  Joanne  Croteau;  Elaine  Cummings; 
Christopher  Curatalo;  Catherine  Curatalo;  Charles  Dennett;  Mark 
Erbelding;  Madeline  Erbelding;  Gerard  Federation;  Carole  Federation; 
Harry  Flaherty;  Gail  Flaherty;  Stephen  French;  Louise  S.  French; 
Sidney  Gear;  Laura  Gear;  John  Hamer;  Sharon  Hamer;  Richard  Hare; 
Marilyn  Hare;  Thomas  Kenny;  Betty  Kenny;  Richard  Kurz;  Catherine 
Kurz;  Roy  LaForce;  Mary  Ann  LaForce;  Lawrence  Little;  Beveriy  Little; 
John  Meagher;  Jean  Meagher;  Marjorie  Monte;  Albert  Rehn;  Mary  Beth 
Rehn;  Miles  VanBuren;  Cindy  VanBuren;  Elizabeth  VonBacho;  Alice 
Webber  Till;  Howard  Weltzer;  Beveriy  Weltzer;  Edward  White;  Ellen 
White;  Frank  Yanno;  Carol  Yanno;  individually  and  Wegman's  Food 
Markets,  Inc.  -  versus  -  The  Town  of  Greece;  Roger  Boily;  Vincent  B. 
Campbell;  Raymond  S.  DiRaddo;  Joan  T.  Korsch;  and  Charies  J. 
Zicari,  as  and  constituting  the  Greece  Town  Board;  Maiden  Associates; 
and  Mark  IV  Construction  Co.,  Inc. 
Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  J. 


(6)  In  the  Matter  of  the  Application  of  Anthony  L.  Jordan  Health  Center, 
Inc.  -  versus  -  Barbara  Ann  DeBuono,  M.D.,  as  Commissioner  of  Health 
of  the  State  of  New  York,  Brian  Wing,  as  Acting  Commissioner  of  Social 
Services  of  the  State  of  New  York,  and  Patricia  Woodworth,  as  Director 
of  the  Budget  for  the  State  of  New  York. 
Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  K. 


(7)  In  the  Matter  of  the  Penfield  Tax  Protest  Group;"Phyllis  Dann,  Jim  and 
Carolyn  Welton  and  Peter  Sciortino,  for  Themselves  and  on  Behalf  of 
All  Others  Similariy  Situated  -  versus  -  Linda  Yancey,  the  Assessor  of 
the  Town  of ,  The  Town  Board  of  the  Town  of  Penfield  and  the  Town  of 
Penfield. 

Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  L,  afPd  210  AD2d  901,  app.  dism.  85  NY2d 
903,  Iv.  den'd  86  NY2d  760 


(8)  Lawrence  J.  Demarse;  John  Sussek,  Jr.  and  Marie  Sussek  d/b/a  Sussek 
Enterprises;  Donald  A.  Robins;  K.G.  VanDine,  M.D.,  P.C;  Troser  Group, 
Ltd,;  Slocum  Dickson  Medical  Group,  P.C,  Pension  Fund;  and  Joseph 
Komler,  III,  Individually  and  as  Limited  Parents  of  Simulnet  East 
Associates,  a  New  York  Limited  Partnership,  on  behalf  of  themselves 


508 


and  all  other  Limited  Partners  of  Simulnet  East  Associates,  similarly 
situated,  and  for  the  benefit  and  in  the  right  of  Simulnet  East 
Associates  -  versus  -  Simulnet  East  Associates,  a  New  York  Limited 
Partnership;  Simulnet,  L.P.;  Cable/Mac  Services,  Inc.,  A.  Ross 
MacGregor;  Vincent  Laurendi;  Donald  E.  Dillon;  John  B.  Fisher; 
Waldon  S.  Hayes,  Jr.,;  Parijat  Capital,  Ltd.;  David  P.  Ott;  J.  Anthony 
DiGuilio;  Ashvin  J.  Zaveri;  Bytex  Corporation;  Simulnet  Corporation; 
Jerry  Nelson;  and  Jonathan  S.  Edwards. 
Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  M. 


(9)       Iqbal  Singh  -  versus  -  John  Karle;  Richard  Passero;  Ram  Shrivastava; 
William  Larsen,  P.E.,  d/b/a  Larsen  Engineers. 

Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  Mc,  afTd AD2d 07/03/97, 1997  WL 

378479 


(10)  Richard  D.  Castle;  William  Gowgill;  James  C.  Duffus;  J.  Allen  Gray; 
John  W.  Handy;  James  T.  Henderson;  William  F.  Holly;  Jean  Fox  Lee; 
Frank  E.  Luellen,  Jr.;  Douglas  Martin;  Newtin  Y.  Robinson;  Robert  F. 
Sykes;  Herbert  W.  Vandenbrul;  Nora  Ward  as  Executor  of  the  Estate  of 
Hawley  Ward;  Jessica  W.  Warren;  Eugene  S.  Wetmore  -  versus- 
Alexander  and  Alexander  Services,  Inc. 
Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  N. 


15(2) 

(1)       Funkv.  Barry 

The  oral  decision  in  Funk  v.  Barry,  which  granted  plaintiffs  motion 
requesting  that  the  Court  sign  a  judgment  in  this  case  and  denied 
defendant's  cross-motion  to  dismiss  the  action  as  abandoned,  was 
reversed  by  the  Appellate  Division,  Fourth  Department  in  an  Opinion 
reported  at  222  AD2d  1017. 

The  Appellate  Division  then  denied  plaintiff's  motion  for  leave  to  appeal 
by  order  reported  at  1996  WL  192891.  However,  the  Court  of  Appeals 
granted  plaintiff's  subsequent  motion  for  leave  by  order  reported  at  88 
NY2d  809. 

That  Court  reversed  the  decision  of  the  Appellate  Division  and 
reinstated  the  judgment  in  favor  of  the  plaintiff  in  an  opinion  reported 
at  89  NY2d  364.  A  transcript  of  my  oral  opinion  is  included  at  Tab  O. 


509 


(2)       Marker  v.  Rochester  City  School  District,  et  al 

The  decision  in  Marker  v.  Rochester  City  School  District,  et  al,  denying 
defendants'  summary  judgment  motion,  was  reversed  by  the  Appellate 
Division,  Fourth  Department,  in  an  opinion  dated  July  3, 1997,  reported 

at AD2d ,  1997  WL  373747.  A  copy  of  my  decision  is  included 

at  Tab  P. 


(3)       Rennoldson  v.  Voipe  Realty  Corp.,  et  al. 

The  decision  in  Rennoldson  v.  VoIpe,  et  al.  granting  plaintiffs  motion 
for  summary  judgment  on  a  Labor  Law  section  240(1 )  cause  of  action 
and  denying  defendants'  motion  for  summary  dismissing  that  cause 
was  reversed  by  the  Appellate  Division,  Fourth  Department  in  an 
opinion  reported  as  Rennoldson  v.  James  J.  VoIpe  Realty,  et  al.,  216 
AD2d  912. 

The  parties  settled  the  case  while  plaintiffs  motion  for  leave  to  appeal 
was  pending.  The  application  for  leave  was  dismissed.  That  dismissal 
was  reported  at  86  NY2d  837.  A  copy  of  my  written  decision  is  included 
at  Tab  Q. 


(4)       Schiffman  v  Spring,  et  al. 

The  order  denying  defendants'  summary  judgment  motion  was 
reversed  by  the  Appellate  Division,  Fourth  Department  in  an  opinion 
reported  at  202  AD2d  1007.  A  copy  of  my  order  is  included  at  Tab  R. 


15(3) 

(1)  Citizens  for  a  Safer  Community;  The  Genesee  Conservation  League, 
Inc.,  The  Monroe  County  Conservation  Council;  The  New  York  State 
Rifle  &  Pistol  Association,  Inc.;  The  Shooters  Committee  on  Political 
Education,  Inc.  (Monroe  County  Chapter);  Loadloadcr  Arms,  Inc.  d/b/a 
American  Sportsman;  Frederick  Calcagno;  Steven  C.  DeMallie;  and 
Kurt  Thomann  -  versus  -  The  City  of  Rochester,  New  York;  The  Council 
of  the  City  of  Rochester,  New  York;  Thomas  Ryan,  as  Mayor  of  the  City 
of  Rochester,  New  York;  Louis  Kash,  as  Corporation  Counsel  for  the 
City  of  Rochester,  New  York;  Roy  Irving,  as  Chief  of  Police  of 
Rochester,  New  York;  John  Curran;  Maxine  Childress  Brown;  Wade 
Norwood;  Tim  Mains;  Benjamin  Douglas;  Lois  Giess;  Nancy  Padilla  and 
Robert  Stevenson,  as  Members  of  the  Council  of  the  City  of  Rochester, 


510 


New  York. 

Reported:  164  Misc  2d  822 


(2)       In  the  Matter  of  the  Investigation  into  the  Rape  of  Jane  Doe,  John 
Horace,  Respondent. 
Reported:  168  Misc  2d  981 


(3)  Gregory  J.  Mott,  as  Guardian  Ad  Litem  for  Sayer  M.  Rivazfar,  a  Minor 
Over  the  Age  of  Fourteen  Years,  and  Arash  P.  Rivazfar,  a  Minor  Under 
the  Age  of  Fourteen  Years  -  versus  -  Patricia  An  Rivazfar  n/k/a  Patricia 
Ann  Pafford  and  Ahmad  Rivazfar 

Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  I. 

Modified  _  AD2d  _,  653  NYS2d  760,  leave  application  to  the  New  York 

Court  of  Appeals  Granted NY2d 06/27/97 

(4)  Maiden  Lane  Neighborhood  Association;  Frank  Andolino;  Emily 
Andolino;  Paul  Andree;  Gay  Andree;  Burnett  Barrett;  Beverly  Barrett; 
Richard  Bauer;  Julie  Bauer;  James  Borden;  Patricia  Borden;  Albert 
Buettner;  Joyce  Buettner;  Gloria  Carpenter;  Robert  Cross;  Helene 
Cross;  Edward  Croteau;  Joanne  Croteau;  Elaine  Cummings; 
Christopher  Curatalo;  Catherine  Curatalo;  Charies  Dennett;  Mark 
Erbelding;  Madeline  Erbelding:  Gerard  Federation;  Carole  Federation; 
Harry  Flaherty;  Gail  Flaherty;  Stephen  French;  Louise  S.  French; 
Sidney  Gear;  Laura  Gear;  John  Hamer;  Sharon  Hamer;  Richard  Hare; 
Marilyn  Hare;  Thomas  Kenny;  Betty  Kenny;  Richard  Kurz;  Catherine 
Kurz;  Roy  LaForce;  Mary  Ann  LaForce;  Lawrence  Little;  Beveriy  Little; 
John  Meagher;  Jean  Meagher;  Marjorie  Monte;  Albert  Rehn;  Mary  Beth 
Rehn;  Miles  VanBuren;  Cindy  VanBuren;  Elizabeth  VonBacho;  Alice 
Webber  Till;  Howard  Weltzer;  Beveriy  Weltier;  Edward  White;  Ellen 
White;  Frank  Yanno;  Carol  Yanno;  individually  and  Wegman's  Food 
Markets,  Inc.  -  versus  -  The  Town  of  Greece;  Roger  Boily;  Vincent  B. 
Campbell;  Raymond  S.  DiRaddo;  Joan  T.  Korsch;  and  Charies  J. 
Zicari,  as  and  constituting  the  Greece  Town  Board;  Maiden  Associates; 
and  Mark  IV  Construction  Co.,  Inc. 

Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  J. 

(5)  In  the  Matter  of  the  Application  of  Anthony  L.  Jordan  Health  Center, 
Inc.  -  versus  -  Barbara  Ann  DeBuono,  M.D.,  as  Commissioner  of  Health 
of  the  State  of  New  York,  Brian  Wing,  as  Acting  Commissioner  of  Social 
Services  of  the  State  of  New  York,  and  Patricia  Woodworth,  as  Director 
of  the  Budget  for  the  State  of  New  York. 

Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  K. 


511 


(6)  In  the  Matter  of  the  Penfleld  Tax  Protest  Group,  Phyllis  Dann,  Jim  and 
Carolyn  Welton  and  Peter  Sciortino,  for  Themselves  and  on  Behalf  of 
All  Others  Similarly  Situated  -  versus  -  Linda  Yancey,  the  Assessor  of 
the  Town  of  Penfield,  The  Town  Board  of  the  Town  of  Penfield  and  the 
Town  of  Penfield. 
Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  L,  afTd  210  AD2d  901 


(7)  In  the  Matter  of  the  Application  of  Karen  Noble  Hanson,  Petitioner,  v. 
Marguerite  L.  Relin  and  Ronald  Starkweather,  Commissioners  of  the 
Monroe  County  Board  of  Elections  and  Kevin  Murray,  Respondents. 
For  a  Judgment  invalidating  the  designating  petitions  filed  with  the 
Board  of  Elections,  nomination  Kevin  B.  Murray,  Respondent,  as  a 
Democratic  candidate  for  Mayor  of  the  City  of  Rochester,  State  of  New 
York,  in  a  primary  election  to  be  held  on  September  14, 1993. 
Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  S. 


(8)       Sabrina  Johnson,  Plaintiff,  v.  City  of  Rochester,  Defendant. 
Unreported:  Opinion  at  Tab  T. 


16.  Public  Office:  State  (chronologicaily)  any  public  offices  you  have  held,  other  than 
judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were 
elected  or  appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies  for 
elective  public  office. 

1977  - 1992  I  held  the  appointed  position  of  Assistant  District  Attorney 

in    the    Monroe   County    District   Attorney's   Office   in 
Rochester,  New  York. 

November  1991       I  ran  unsuccessfully  for  the  position  of  New  York  State 
Supreme  Court  Justice,  7th  Judicial  District. 


512 


17.       Legal  Career: 


a.  Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after 
graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1 .  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name 
of  the  judge,  the  court,  and  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a 
clerk; 

I  did  not  serve  as  a  Clerk  to  a  Judge. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and 
dates; 

I  did  not  practice  alone. 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices, 
companies  or  governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have 
been  connected,  and  the  nature  of  your  connection  with 
each; 

1977-1992 

Monroe  County  District  Attorney's  Office 

201  Hall  of  Justice 

Rochester,  New  York  14614 

I  served  as  an  Assistant  District  Attorney. 

From  1984  through  1992,    I  served  as  First  Assistant 

District  Attorney 

1993  -  Present 

New  York  State  Supreme  Court  Justice 

400  Hall  of  Justice 

Rochester,  New  York    14614 

In  November,  1992, 1  was  elected  to  serve  as  a  New  York 

State  Supreme  Court  Justice  in  the  Seventh  Judicial 

District  for  a  14  year  term  and  took  office  in  January  1993. 

b.  1 .        What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice, 

dividing  it  into  periods  with  dates  if  its  character  has  changed 
over  the  years? 

My  entire  career  as  a  practicing  attorney  from  1977 
through  1992  was  spent  in  the  Monroe  County  District 
Attorney's  Office. 


513 


2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the  areas,  if 
any,  in  which  you  have  specialized. 

As  a  Monroe  County  Assistant  District  Attorney,  I 
prosecuted  cases  on  behalf  of  the  People  of  the  State  of 
New  York.  My  area  of  specialization  was  criminal  law,  and 
I  routinely  interacted  with  both  victims  of  crimes  and 
witnesses  to  crime. 

c.  1 .  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at  all? 
If  the  frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe 
each  such  variance,  giving  dates. 

As  an  Assistant  District  Attomey,  I  frequently  appeared  in 
court. 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts;  0% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record;  100% 

(c)  other  courts.  0% 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil;  0% 

(b)  criminal.  100% 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to 
verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether 
you  were  sole  counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

I  tried  to  verdict  approximately  100  felony  cases  where  I 
was  sole  trial  counsel.  I  was  also  sole  trial  counsej  on 
numerous  misdemeanor  and  violation  cases. 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury;  95% 

(b)  non-jury.  5% 

1 8.  Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you  personally 
handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and 
date  if  unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of  each  case. 
Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of 
your  participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.  Also  state 
to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before 


514 


whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 
(c)       the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co- 
counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 


In  each  case,  I  was  sole  trial  counsel  for  the  People. 

1.        People  V  Arthur  Shawcross 

September  17, 1990  -  December  13, 1990 

Indictment  #058 

Filed  01/23/90 

Murder  in  the  Second  Degree  (10  counts) 

Court:  Monroe  County  Court 

Presiding  Judge:  Honorable  Donald  J.  Wisner 


Defense  Attorneys:  David  A.  Murante,  Esq. 

700  Wilder  Building 
Rochester,  NY  14614 
(716)232-6830 

Thomas  J.  Cocuzzi,  Esq. 
700  Wilder  Building 
Rochester,  NY  14614 
(716)  232-6830 

Reported:  192  AD2d  1128;  Iv  den  82  NY2d  726 

SUMMARY: 

Shawcross,  a  serial  killer,  was  responsible  for  the  deaths 
of  1 1  women.  He  was  on  parole  to  the  Rochester  area 
having  been  convicted  18  years  earlier  for  the  sexual 
assault  and  slaying  of  an  8-year-old  girl.  At  that  time, 
Shawcross  also  admitted  to  the  death  of  a  10-year-old 
boy. 

The  victims  in  Rochester  included  prostitutes  and  street 
people,  ranging  in  age  from  22  to  59  years  old.  At  trial, 
Shawcross  claimed  an  insanity  defense  and  offered  an 
expert  witness.  Dr.  Dorothy  Otnow  Lewis.  Dr.  Lewis 
claimed  that  Shawcross,  due  to  physical  and  sexual  abuse 
that  he  suffered  as  a  child,  as  well  as  a  brain  injury  that 
resulted  in  complex  partial  seizures,  was  not  responsible 


515 


for  his  conduct  in  killing  the  women.  Dr.  Lewis  submitted 
tapes  of  interviews  with  Shawcross  which  she  maintained 
were  conducted  under  hypnosis.  It  was  also  maintained 
that  Shawcross  cannibalized  two  of  his  victims  in 
Rochester,  and  previously  cannibalized  Viet  Cong  women 
while  serving  in  the  U.S.  military  in  Viet  Nam.  The 
cornerstone  of  Dr.  Lewis'  defense  of  Shawcross  was  her 
premise  that  he  suffered  from  dissociative  states  akin  to 
multiple  personalities.  The  prosecution  countered  with  Dr. 
Park  Dietz,  an  expert  in  forensic  psychiatry,  who 
challenged  Dr.  Lewis'  findings  and  offered  the  opinion  that 
Shawcross  was,  at  best,  an  anti-social  personality.  In 
December  1991,  Shawcross  was  found  guilty  charged. 

2.        People  V  Robert  Ahalt  and  Carl  "Butch"  Campbell 
January  19,  1988  -  March  9, 1988 
Indictment  #834 
Filed  11/13/86 

Murder  in  the  Second  Degree  (11  counts);  Arson  in  the 
Second  Degree;  Arson  in  the  Third  Degree  (2  counts) 

Court:  New  York  State  Supreme  Court 

Presiding  Judge:  Honorable  Donald  J.  Mark 

Defense  Attorneys:  Culver  K.  Barr,  Esq. 

1025  Reynolds  Arcade  Building 
Rochester,  NY  14614 
716-454-7672 

Felix  V.  Lapine,  Esq. 
One  East  Main  Street 
Suite  711 

Rochester,  NY  14614 
716-454-6690 

Reported: 

People  v  Ahalt,   139  Misc  2d  863;  170  AD2d  982,  Iv 
den  78  NY2d  953 

People  V  Campbell,  139  Misc  2d  863;  170  AD2d  982, 
Iv  den  78  NY2d  963 

SUMMARY: 

Ahalt  and  Campbell  were  convicted  of  murdering  five 
people  during  a  48-hour  period.  Among  their  victims  were 


516 


three  people,  one  male  aged  56  and  two  females,  aged  74 
and  75,  all  who  were  bludgeoned  to  death.  The  following 
day  they  killed  a  28  year  old  female.  Prior  to  killing  her, 
the  defendants  forced  her  to  ingest  glass,  broke  bottles  in 
her  face,  and  stabbed  her  seventh-month-old  fetus  with  a 
coat  hanger.  Her  body  was  mutilated  after  her  murder. 
That  same  day  at  a  different  location,  another  female, 
acquainted  with  the  defendants,  was  beaten  to  death  by 
Ahalt.  Following  all  the  homicides,  Ahalt  and  Campbell 
attempted  to  cover  their  crimes  by  setting  the  murder  sites 
on  fire.  In  the  second  double-jury  trial  ever  to  be  held  in 
New  York  State,  both  men  were  convicted  of  multiple 
counts  of  murder.  Ahalt  was  found  guilty  on  March  9, 
1988  and  Campbell  was  found  guilty  on  March  10, 1988. 

3.        People  V  Richard  Mainprize,  Jr. 
March  15, 1984  -  March  27, 1984 
Indictment  #907 
Filed  12/30/82 
Murder  in  the  Second  Degree  (3  counts) 

Court:  Monroe  County  Court 

Presiding  Judge:  Honorable  Charles  T.  Maloy 

Defense  Attorney:  Vincent  Rizzo,  Esq. 

200  Hall  of  Justice 
Rochester,  NY 
716-418-5616 

Reported:  134  AD2d  943,  Iv  den  71  NY2d  899 

SUMMARY: 

Mainprize  was  convicted  of  murder  in  the  death  of  Diane 
Marlowe,  a  22-year-old  female.  Mainprize  beat  and 
strangled  Ms.  Marlowe.  After  killing  her,  Mainprize  placed 
Ms.  Mariowe's  naked  body  in  an  abandoned  refrigerator. 
At  trial,  Mainprize  claimed  insanity,  saying  he  watched  a 
"black  form"  perform  the  homicide  acts.  The  insanity 
defense  was  rejected.  Mainprize  was  found  guilty  of 
murder  in  the  second  degree  on  March  27, 1984. 


517 


4.         People  V.  Nathaniel  Lee  Jones 

September  2, 1987  -  September  21, 1987 
Indictment  #918 
Filed  12/23/86 

Burglary  in  the  First  Degree  (10  counts);  Rape  in  the  First 
Degree  (12  counts);  Sexual  Abuse  in  the  First  Degree  (5 
counts);  Attempted  Rape  in  the  First  Degree  (4  counts); 
Robbery  in  the  First  Degree;  Sodomy  in  the  First  Degree 
(4  counts);  Petit  Larceny 

Court:  Monroe  County  Court 

Presiding  Judge:  Honorable  Donald  J.  Wisner 

Defense  Attorney:  Norman  A.  Palmiere,  Esq. 

205  St.  Paul  St. 
Suite  300 

Rochester.  NY  14604 
716-232-6144 

Reported:  152  AD2d  984,  Iv  den  74  NY2d  812 

SUMMARY: 

Jones,  who  became  known  the  "Northeast  Rapist",  was 
involved  in  10  separate  incidents  of  burglary,  rape, 
sodomy  and  sexual  abuse  that  occurred  over  a  9-month 
period  from  April  1986  through  December  1986.  His 
victims  ranged  in  age  from  9  to  26.  On  September  21, 
1987,  he  was  convicted  of  37  counts  of  sexual  assault  and 
burglary. 

5.        People  V  Anthony  J.  Salem,  Jr. 
July  11, 1988 -July  18, 1988 
Indictment  #734 
Filed  10/08/87 

Burglary  in  the  First  Degree  (5  counts);  Burglary  in  the 
Second  Degree;  Rape  in  the  First  Degree  (4  counts); 
Sodomy  in  the  First  Degree  (11  counts);  Sexual  Abuse  in 
the  First  Degree  (12  counts);  Petit  Larceny  (4  counts) 

Court:  New  York  State  Supreme  Court 

Presiding  Judge:  Honorable  Eugene  W.  Begin 


518 


Defense  Attorney:  Thomas  J.  Kidera,  Esq. 

lONorthFitzhughSt. 
Rochester,  NY  14614 
716-428-5642 

Reported:  167  AD2d  840,  Iv  den  77  NY2d  911 

SUMMARY: 

Salem  was  a  serial  rapist  who  was  convicted  of  burglary, 
rape,  sodomy  and  sexual  abuse.  Over  a  six-month  period, 
he  sexually  assaulted  six  different  victims  who  ranged  in 
age  from  24  to  46.  On  July  18,  1988,  Salem  was  found 
guilty  of  a  37-count  indictment. 

6.        People  V  Bruce  W.  Walden 

August  25,  1986  -  September  4, 1986 

Indictment  #877 

Filed  11/27/85 

Murder  in  the  Second  Degree  (3  counts) 

Court:  New  York  State  Supreme  Court 

Presiding  Judge:  Honorable  Donald  J.  Mark 

Defense  Attorney:  Edward  F.  Scanlan,  Esq. 

10  North  Fitzhugh  St. 
Rochester,  NY  14614 
716-428-5210 

Reported:  148  AD2d  971,  Iv  den  75  NY2d  819 

SUMMARY: 

Walden  was  convicted  of  murder  in  the  death  of  11 -year- 
old  Sunshine  McKendree.  The  child's  body  was  found  on 
an  abandoned  railroad  track,  nude  from  the  waist  down, 
with  a  red  scarf  wrapped  tightly  around  her  neck,  dead 
from  strangulation.  On  September  4,  1986,  Walden  was 
convicted  of  murder  in  the  second  degree  for  intentionally 
killing  the  child  during  a  rape  attempt. 


519 


7.  People  V  David  R.  Larson 
September  26,  1985  -  October  10, 1985 
Indictment  #191 

Filed  03/29/84 

Murder  in  the  Second  Degree 

Court:  New  York  State  Supreme  Court 

Presiding  Judge:  Honorable  David  O.  Boehm 

Defense  Attorney:  Michael  Couture,  Esq. 

Unknown  -  Moved  out  of  State 

Reported:  145  AD2d  976,  Iv  den  73  NY2d  1017 

SUMMARY: 

Larson  was  convicted  of  murder  in  the  death  of  Tracy 
Kotlik,  a  14-year-old  female.  Larson  killed  the  girt  by 
slashing  and  stabbing  her  18  times  with  a  knife.  Larson 
submitted  an  intoxication  defense  at  trial,  but  it  was 
rejected  by  the  jury.  On  October  10,  1985,  Larson  was 
found  guilty  of  murder  in  the  second  degree. 

8.  People  V  Thomas  Taylor  and  Thomas  Torpey 
Indictment  #433 

Filed  06/10/82 

Murder  in  the  Second  Degree 

Court:  New  York  State  Supreme  Court 

Presiding  Judge:  Honorable  Robert  P.  Kennedy 

Defense  Attorneys:  Robert  H.  Murphy,  Esq. 

6461  Main  St. 
Williamsville,  NY  14221 
716-634-6750 

David  A.  Murante,  Esq. 
700  Wilder  Building 
Rochester,  NY  14614 
716-232-6830 

Reported: 

Taylor:  1 55  AD2d  980,  Iv  den  75  NY2d  81 8,  cert 

den'd  Taylor  v.  New  York,  496  US  926 
Torpey:         1 68  AD2d  91 6.  Iv  den  77  N Y2d  967 


520 


SUMMARY: 

Taylor  and  Torpey,  members  of  an  organized  crime 
faction,  were  convicted  of  murder  in  the  second  degree  in 
connection  with  the  shotgun  slaying  of  John  Fiorino. 
Taylor  and  Torpey  contracted  a  hitman  to  kill  Fiorino,  who 
was  a  member  of  a  rival  mob.  Both  defendants  were 
found  guilty  on  March  12, 1986 


9.         People  V  Robert  Reilly 

October  21, 1985  -  November  11, 1985 

Indictment  #004 

Filed  01/11/85 

Murder  in  the  Second  Degree  (4  counts) 

Court:  Monroe  County  Court 

Presiding  Judge:  Honorable  Andrew  G.  Celli 

Defense  Attorney:  Thomas  J.  Kidera,  Esq. 

10  North  Fitzhugh  St. 
Rochester,  NY  14614 
716-428-5642 

Reported:  155  AD2d  961,  Iv  den  75  NY2d  923 

SUMMARY: 

Reilly,  43,  was  convicted  of  four  counts  of  murder  in 
connection  with  the  death  of  his  wife,  31,  and  his  three 
children,  ages  3,  6  and  8.  Reilly  killed  his  wife  by  cutting 
her  neck  and  striking  her  with  a  hammer.  Then  he 
drowned  his  three  children  in  the  upstairs  bathtub.  At 
trial,  Reilly  claimed  insanity,  saying  he  was  not 
responsible  for  his  conduct  due  to  major  depression.  The 
insanity  defense  was  rejected  and  on  November  8, 1985, 
Reilly  was  found  guilty  of  four  counts  of  murder  in  the 
second  degree. 


521 


10.      People  V  Kurtis  Brown,  Thaxton  Hamlin  and  Billy  Joe 
Green 

Indictment  #088 

August  20, 1984  -  September  4, 1984 
January  3, 1989  -  January  10, 1989  (retrial  of  Kurtis  Brown 
only) 

Indictment  #088 
Filed  02/08/83 
Murder  in  the  Second  Degree  (2  counts) 

Court:  New  York  State  Supreme  Court 

Presiding  Judge:  Honorable  Eugene  W.  Begin 

Defense  Attorneys:  Lawrence  J.  Andolina,  Esq. 

130  East  Main  St. 
Rochester,  NY  14614 
716-232-4440 

Sidney  T.  Farber,  Esq. 
2140  Penfield  Rd. 
Penfield,  NY  14526 
716-377-6990 

Michael  T.  DiPrima,  Esq. 
2024  West  Henrietta  Rd. 
Unit  3-G 

Rochester,  NY  14623 
716-292-0170 

Reported: 

Brown:  124  AD2d  973,  rev  71  NY2d  750,  170  AD2d 
955,  Iv  den  78  NY2d  962 

Hamlin:  131  AD2d  200,  afTd  71  NY2d  750 

Green:  147  AD2d  955 

SUMMARY: 

Brown,  Hamlin  and  Green  were  convicted  of  murdering 
Brown's  21 -year-old  wife,  Susan.  Brown  plotted  to  have 
Hamlin  and  Green  kill  Mrs.  Brown  to  obtain  the  proceeds 
from  her  $100,000  insurance  policy.  Brown  arranged  an 
alibi  for  himself  while  Hamlin  and  Green  carried  out  the 
killing  by  stabbing  the  victim  more  than  30  times  and 


522 


hitting  her  with  a  cane.  On  September  4,  1984,  at!  three 
were  convicted  of  murder  in  the  second  degree.  Brown's 
conviction  was  reversed  because  of  a  Bruton  issue. 
Specifically,  subsequent  to  the  trial,  retroactive  effect  was 
given  to  an  appellate  decision  limiting  interlocking 
confessions.  However,  Brown  was  retried  and  again 
convicted  of  murder  in  the  second  degree  on  January  10, 
1989. 

19.  Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have  pursued, 
including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did 
not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question, 
please  omit  any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the 
privilege  has  been  waived.) 

During  my  tenure  as  First  Assistant  District  Attorney,  I  was  on-call  24  hours 
a  day,  7  days  a  week  for  all  homicides  that  occurred  within  Monroe  County. 
It  was  my  responsibility,  if  called,  to  report  to  the  scene  and  act  as  a  legal 
advisor  to  the  investigating  police  agency.  I  would  estimate  that  I  responded 
to  250  to  300  homicide  scenes,  and  at  various  times  I  assisted  the  police  in 
drafting  search  warrants,  conducting  lineups,  and  in  making  decisions 
relating  to  arrest  and  probable  cause. 

Further,  as  First  Assistant,  I  had  supervisory  and  administrative 
responsibilities  in  the  office  and  acted  as  the  District  Attorney  in  his  absence 
from  the  County.  I  also  handled  a  number  of  cases  that  resulted  in  pleas  prior 
to  trial  and  was  assigned  several  Grand  Jury  investigations. 

Finally,  I  have  provided  legal  instruction  on  various  occasions.  I  was  a 
volunteer  instructor  at  a  trial  advocacy  seminar,  presented  by  the  Monroe 
County  Bar  Association  and  sponsored  by  the  National  Institute  for  Trial 
Advocacy.  Also,  in  conjunction  with  my  responsibilities  as  First  Assistant 
District  Attorney,  I  provided  recruit  instruction  and  in-service  training  for 
police  officers  at  the  Monroe  Community  College  Criminal  Justice  and  Public 
Safety  Training  Center.  Additionally,  I  have  provided  training  for  volunteer 
counselors  at  Rape  Crisis.  Most  recently,  I  chaired  the  Evidence  Institute, 
sponsored  by  the  Monroe  County  Bar  Association. 


523 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  ail  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred  income 
arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits 
which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  professional 
services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please 
describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any 
financial  or  business  interest. 

Based  on  my  20  years  of  public  service,  I  will  be  eligible  at  age  62  to  receive 
retirement  benefits  from  the  New  York  State  Retirement  System.  The  yearly 
amount  would  be  approximately  40%  of  my  current  salary.  As  an  Assistant 
District  Attorney,  I  participated  in  a  deferred  compensation  plan  through  the 
County  of  Monroe,  and  as  a  Supreme  Court  Justice,  I  participated  in  a 
deferred  compensation  plan  through  the  State  of  New  York.  As  of  June  30, 
1997,  the  fund  value  of  my  County  deferred  compensation  plan  was 
$124,365.83.  As  of  that  same  date,  the  value  of  my  State  deferred 
compensation  plan  was  $44,832.42.  I  was  eligible  to  receive  the  monies  on 
deposit  in  the  County  plan  when  I  left  County  employment.  However,  I 
decided  to  maintain  the  account.  With  respect  to  the  monies  on  deposit  in  the 
State  deferred  compensation  plan,  I  would  be  eligible  to  receive  those  when 
I  leave  State  employment.  Prior  to  the  institution  of  a  deferred  compensation 
plan  in  Monroe  County,  I  contributed  to  an  IRA.  As  of  June  30, 1997,  the  value 
of  that  IRA  was  $16,214.00. 

Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including  the 
procedure  you  will  follow  in  determining  these  areas  of  concern.  Identify  the 
categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present  potential 
conflicts-of-interest  during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been 
nominated. 

Since  I  have  served  as  a  New  York  State  Supreme  Court  Justice  for  the  last 
four  and  a  half  years,  I  don't  believe  that  there  are  any  such  potential  conflicts 
of  interest.  However,  I  will,  of  course,  follow  the  guidelines  of  the  Code  of 
Judicial  Conduct. 

Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside 
employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court?  If 
so,  explain. 

I  do  not. 


524 


4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar  year  preceding 
your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees, 
dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and  other  items 
exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure 
report,  required  by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

Please  see  attached  copy  of  my  Financial  Disclosure  Report. 

5.  Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail  (Add  schedules 
called  for). 

Please  see  attached  Net  Worth  Statement. 


Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign?  If  so,  please 
identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the 
campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

Other  than  my  own  campaigns  for  New  York  State  Supreme  Court  in  1991  and 
1992, 1  have  not. 


525 


AO-10M 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

Nomination  Report 


Report  Rttnind  by  (ft*  EtNa 
Ratom  Ac(oH9B9.PubLNo. 
101-194,  NonmbtrX,  1»t» 
(S  U.S.C.  Afip.4.Stc.  101-112) 


1.  Pcnon  Reporting      (LtsI  naim,  list.  wUdh  UlaO 
Siraguea,    Charles  J. 


2.  Court  or  Organlzitlon 

US  District  Court/Western  NY 


J.  Data  of  Report 
07/16/1997 


4.'nii«  (A/SdtlBJudgeskKlcalfellnor 

sf*>r  sMia;  mti^stma  Judgas  kxtcaf 
l\ji-orptrt-«ma) 

U.S.  District  Court  Judge 


t.  Report  Typo  (check  type) 

X    Ncnilnation.   Date    07/15/1997 


e.  Reporting  Pertod 

01/01/1997 

to 
06/30/1997 


7.  Ctumlien  or  Olllce  Address 
400   Hall   of   Justice 
Rochester,    New  York      14614 


I.  On  the  iMSis  of  the  Inrormatlon  contained  In  this  Report  and  any 
modifications  pertaining  tfiereto.  It  Is  In  my  opinion.  In  compliance 
with  appilcatile  laws  and  regulations. 


Reviewing  Officer 


IMPORTANT  NOTES:  Tha  Instructions  accompanying  this  toim  must  b«  tokwed.  Completa  al  parts, 
checking  ttta  NONE  box  for  aactj  section  whan  you  have  no  raportabta  htonnation.  Sign  on  tha  last  page. 


NAME   OF   ORGANIZATION  /  ENTITY 


I.   POSITIONS      (Raportinglndvlduatonly:seapp.9-13oflnstnjctions} 

POSITION 

NONE  (No  reportable  positions.) 

'■  Advisory  Board  Member Families  &  Friends  of  Murdered  Children 


and  Victims  of  Violence 


II.    AGREEMENTS    (Reporting in<fvidualoi^.saapp.14-17  of InstnicHons.) 

DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


n 


NONE   (No  reportable  agreements ) 
^  Pension 


NYS  Retirement  System 


(eligible  to  receive  benefits  at  age  62) 


NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME 
DATE 


D 


(Reporting  tndividuat  and  spouse;  see  pp.  1S-25  of  Instnjctions.} 
PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


NONE    (No  reportable  nofrirrvestmenl  income.) 

1  1996  State  of  New  York-Salary/NYS   Supreme  Court  Justice 


GROSS  INCOME 

(yous,  not  spouse's) 

$    112,430.00 


1995 


State  of  New  York-Salary/NYS  Supreme  Court  Justice 


112,287.00 


526 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Penon  Repoctiqg 

Siragusa,    Chcurles  J. 


DaUoTBcpca 

07/16/199 


IV.    REIMBURSEMENTS   and    GIFTS  -  ttanvoitatiaa,  lodiiiK.  boi,  atatmanat. 

(btebida  tkoM  to  Mpous*  ait^  dtptndau  ABdrtn;  MM  At parmihttteaU  '(S}'  and  '(PC)'  to  btdtoau  rtpontbU  nitnbttntmtno  and g^  rtetived  bytpoiat 
ai^ d^tamUm chddrtn,  r€sp*tStvttf.  Sttpp.  i6-J9cfbatnictionj.) 


D 


SOURCE 

NONE  (No  iDcb  reportable  reuDbunemcda  or  gift*) 


DESCRIPTION 


V.    OTHER  GIFTS 

0iclud€S  thore  to  xpo%at  and  dependent  children;  use  the parerUheticats  '(S)'  and  '(DC)'  to  indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children, 
rapecttvefy.   See  pp.  30-33  of  Instructions.) 


D 


SOURCE 

NONE  (No  Bich  reportable  gifts) 


DESCRIPTION 


VI.    LIABILinES 

(Includes  those  of  ^>ou5e  and  dependent  children;  indicate  v^iere  applicable,  person  rtsponsible  for  tiabiUty  by  using  Ae  parenthetical  '  (S)'  for  separtOe 
liability  offfte  spouse.  '(J)' for  Joint  liability  of  reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  'ff)Q*for  liability  of  a  dependent  chUd.   See  pp.  34-36  of  btstructimu.) 


□ 


CREDITOR 

^     I    NONE    (No  reportable  lUbilitiea) 


DESCRIPTION 


VALUE  CODE* 


>  VALCX)DESJ-$13,(XX)oclesa  K-$1S,001-S30.0(»  L-UO,0OI  lo  {100,000  M-S100.00I-$23O,0OO  N-$MO.OOl-MOO,000 

0-$500,00l-$t,000,000    PI-J1,000,OOI-$},000,000    P2-U,OaO,OOI-S2S,000,000    P3-S25,000.00l-U0,000,000    P4"«0.000.001ocnio»B 


527 


FINANC3AL.  DISCLOSURE  HEPORT  |   Slraguaa,    Charles   J. 


Dau  of  Report 
07/16/1997 


-  Bfamt,  taltit.  tmaaetlcni  QncakUi  man  efjpaat  md 

Vn,  Page     1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS    J^pmdaidaun^  s-pp.sr-UefiatnKticm.) 

A. 
DcKii{i6aaorAncti 

ttaeaUidttntppUcatU.  mmtrof 

'(Ji'jbrJcHmmtnh^  efrtpcrtbif 
InHiUmlmdtpoia:  •(5)'/ortip- 

a 

C 

OfOSSTahie 
at  cad  or 
Rpocdat 
pcdod 

D. 

"Raam  Ih  ml  ouilJ<4  w|KMUm  pcood 

0) 

AlK. 

Co<lo 

(A- 

CO 

•I>p. 

(0^.. 
<Urkki>d. 
mMor 
boeroO 

0) 
VakM 
Coda 
O-T) 

TO 

Value 

Mclhod 

Coda 

(Q-W) 

0) 

■Tn* 

•loj.aell, 
lioiO 

VMcrcn^b^Omiam 

Bale: 

(3) 

Vitoa 

Code 

W 
OalD 
Coda 
(AH) 

CJ) 
Idcoliqtor 

D«J 

Ofpdvala 
tmuadioo) 

NONE  <■>»  ttpojublo  iiiooiiio,atMa,  or 
tnnnrrtnm) 

1  H4T  Bank 

B 

interest 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

2  MtT  Bank 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

EXmPT 

3  Herrill   Lynch    (IRA) 

EXEMPT 

4  — Alliance   Income   Builder 

B 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

5— ML  Global  Allocation  -  B 

B 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

6  Merrill  Lynch 

EXEMPT 

7  Ready  A^aet  Trust 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

E3CEHET 

8  —Putnan  Utilities  Growth  < 
Income   Fund  Class  A 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

9  — Putnam  Global   Growth   Fund 
Class  A 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

10  — HFS  Municipal    Income   FD  Class   B 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

11  Work  Recovery  New  Common  Stock 

None 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

12  Deferred  Compensation  PEBSOO 

EXEMPT 

13  —Putnam  Investors    Fund  Class  A 

B 

Dividend 

K 

T 

EXEMPT 

H   —American  Century  20th  Century 
Ultra 

None 

K 

T 

EXEMPT 

15— Fidelity  Equity  Income 

C 

Dividend 

K 

T 

EXEMPT 

16  — Tenpleton    Foreign   Fund  Class   I 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

EXEMPT 

17  Deferred  Compensation  Copeland 
Companies 

EXEMPT 

llncXlainCoilecA-tl.OOOorkss                    B-S1.00I-$2,500                   0-Sl^l-ii,OV>                       D-J5,0Ol-$15.0O0                     E-J15.0OI-S3O.OOO 
(ColBl,D4)      F-»0.001-$IO0.aO0             0-$  100.001 -$1,000,000        H1-S1,000,001-S3,000,000       H2-{5,000.00l  croons 

IValCoies:         J-$tS,000  or  Ics                   K-J13.001-S50.000               U-U0,001-{100,000              M-S100,C0I-a}0,000            N-«30,OOI-S500,000 
(ColCl.D3)     O-JJ00,001.Jl,000,000        P1-JI,000,001-M,000,000  P2-M.000,001-«3.000,000  PJ-S«.000,001-MO,000,000  P4-«0,000,001  ormert 

3V.lMlhCo.fa:  Q-Aj>praml                         R-Co« (ital olila ooly)                           S-A«nma<                                  T-Osli*tafa« 
(Cold)             U-BookVito.                        V-Ollier                                                     W-Ej«im««d 

528 1 


FINANCIAI.  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Slragusa,    Charles   J. 


DtfoofKepoct 
07/16/1997 


Vn.  Page     2  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTTS    Jtpaidaiddu^  sttpp-n^eftumaiaa.) 


A. 

Ol  >  ll|WOil  of  A««*i» 

ti^cauwlitn  appBeatU,  OMitr  ef 
tuctutlysAitllupannaietlcal 

iHUMmlmdipaa:  •0)'M'V- 

Plaa  'CO' iffter  tach  aael 
txaiflfnom  prior  JlicUmtn. 

B. 
lacooM 

C. 

Onaanhw 
•t  cad  of 

pedod 

D. 

0) 
AnS. 
Code 
<A- 

(2) 
Type 

dMdend. 

rcKor 

lalereit) 

0) 

Vahw 
Coda 
(^P) 

CD 

Valua 

»fol>ad 

Coda 

(Q-W) 

0) 

firp. 

(e.«.. 

boy.  lell, 

nkerser, 

redcsip- 

lioa) 

If  Boc  oeniiit  6om  dlacloiun                                                    1 

C2) 
Dale: 

(3) 

Vaba 
Code 
d-P) 

(O 
Oaln 
Code 
(AH) 

(3) 

Uesti^of 
buyec/ieDer 
(ifprivale 
tramtaftintl) 

D«7 

NONE  (no  reportable  iacome^usett,  or 
tnouctioiu} 

18  — Stable  Income   Fund 

A 

Dividend 

K 

I 

EXEMPT 

19  — Janus  Fund 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

20  — TRP  Equity  Incoiae   Fund 

B 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

21  —TRP  International   Stock 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

22  —Vanguard  GNMM 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

|lDo*aiis  Codec  A-tl,000  or  ks                     &-Sl,001-S2.JOO                   OQ^l-tJ.OOO                      D-S],001-$13,000                      E<l),OOI-t}0.000 
(ColBI,D4)      F-S30^1-J100.000              O-J100,001-JI/K»,000        Hl-»1.000.001-«.000.000       HX3.000.OOl  ormoro 

2V<ICo<ks:        J-IlJ.OOO«irfcj.                  K-$15.001-I30.000              1^-J50.0014100.000             M-S100.0OI-S23O.00O           N-S230.001-«300,000 
(OeLCUIS)     O-JJOO.OOl-Jl.000.000        P1<JA)0,OOI-«.000.000  W-«.000.00I-SU.000AI0  P><23.000.001-«0.000.000  P4-S30.000.001  oriDore 

3ValUbOi><lerQ-A|i|nB>l                          R-Cctf  (real  aUK  oely)                           S-AneamcX                                  t-C»AnSiAA 
(PeLC3)           O-BoolcValDO                       V-OOcr                                                  W-Eiiimtfal 

529 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nuaa  of  Penoa  Rqxiniag 
Siragusa,    Charles    J. 


DUeof  Repoct 

07/16/1997 


Vra.     ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS. 

I      y     I  NONE    (No  ■fWiitiniMl  bifacir«tioa  or  exptuutiooi.) 
N(»IE 


(Indicalo  put  of  Rpoit.) 


530 


FINANCIAL  DISC1X)SURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Penoo  Reporting 

Siragusa,    Charles   J. 


DuaofRepoit 
07/16/1997 


K.    CERTIFICATION 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
Judicial  Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory 
fimction  in  any  litigation  during  the  period  covered  by  this  rqwrt  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children 
had  a  financial  interest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3Xc),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  the  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent 
children,  if  any)  is  accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  rqwrted 
was  withheld  because  it  met  applicable  statutory  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  fiirther  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been 
reported  are  in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C.  app.  4,  section  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  7353  and  Judicial 
Conference  regulations. 


Signature 


CAa/igi,&j^  ^kMif^kj^Qj         Date  ///cj/y? 


Note: 


Any  individual  who  knowingly  and  wilfully  falsifies  or  fails  to  file  this  rqx)rt  may  be  subject  to  civil 
and  criminal  sanctions  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  Section  104). 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS 

Mail  original  and  three  additional  copies  to: 

Committee  on  Knandal  Disdosnre 
Administrative  OfTicc  of  the  United  States  Coarts 
One  Coltuabns  Circle,  N.E. 
Suite  2-301 
Washington,  D.C  20S44 


531 


FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORTH 


Provide  a  complete,  current  financial  net  worth  statement  which  itemizes  in  detail 
all  assets  Oncluding  bank  accounts,  real  estate,  securities,  trusts,  investments,  and  other  financial 
holdings)  all  llabilides  including  debts,  moitgages,  loans,  and  other  financial  obligatioDs)  of 
yourself,  your  spouse,  and  other  immediate  members  of  your  household. 


1                                                ASSETS 

UABILmES 

===] 

Cuh  on  bic^  uid  in  bulu 

21 

?23 

61 

Note*  ptyible  la  btcia-uaaei 

0 

VJS.  CoyoBmcci  Mcuritia-<di 
(dxilule 

217 

571 

25 

Nolei  ptytUe  to  htvla-vnitcund 

0 

Holes  piyible  to  teluivei 

0 

Unliiied  icasitie*-*ii  ichulult 

0 

Notei  piyible  to  othen 

0 

1 

AcoianU  md  nates  ncciyible: 

0 

Accountt  lad  billf  due 

0 

Due  £nm  itUdvu  (j)d  friends 

Unpiid  income  us 

0 

Due  from  othen 

Other  tinpid  tix  t&d  intentt 

0 

Doubtful 

Retl  cttiie  moRgif  es  piyible-idd 
Khedule           SEE    °B" 

155 

000 

00 

Ketl  esuie  o-wneii-uld  tcbolale 

210 

DOC 

00 

Chirtfl  ooitiite*  sad  other  lieos  fty- 
•ble 

Re4l  tttH£  ffiart{i(U  reccivtble 

0 

Other  debu-itcmizc: 

- 

Adioi  ind  oiiKt  pcnooil  prapeny 

40 

000 

00 

^if^  vtlue-4iic  iosunnce 

2 

200 

00 

OtSs  UMU-ilemize: 

0 

1 

, 

■ 

- 

Total  Enbilicief 

155 

000 

00 

■-. 

Net  Worth 

336 

094 

86 

j  Total  AJScU 

491 

094 

86 

Totjl  liihilitics  tad  net  vot\h 

491 

094 

86 

- 

1              CONTINGEKr  LIABIUTIES 

GENERAL  INFORMATION 

0 

Are  uy  luett  jdedgel?  (Add  <chad- 
ole.) 

NO 

I  Ob  leua  or  contncti 

0 

Are  yoa  defend iiu  in  any  loiu  or  lejil 
•ctioniT 

NO 

I  Lc(>lCliimi 

0 

Have  you  ever  fiVrn  baalit]]xcy? 

NO 

1  PiOTuioo  tar  Fedenl  Income  Tiz 

r 

.__ 

1  Other  ipesitl  d^x 

nl 

_' 

J== 

532 


SCHEDULE  A 

I.  Merrill  Lynch 

A.  Ready  Asset  Trust  7.215.00 

B.  Mutual  Funds 

1 .  Putnam  Utilities  Growth  and  Income 

Fund  Class  A  71 .00 

2.  Putnam  Global  Growth  Fund  Class  A      10,363.00 

3.  MFS  Municipal  Income  FD  Class  B         13.426.00 

Total  31.075.00 

II.  Merrill  Lynch 

A        Alliance  Income  Builder  Class  C  7,389.00 

B.        ML  Global  Allocation  B  8.825.00 

Total  16,214.00 

III.  Common  Stock 

Work  Recovery  New  1 ,084.00 

IV.  Deferred  Compensation  -  County  of  Monroe  -  PEBSCO 

A  Putnam  Investors  Fund  Class  A  34,917.71 

B.  Fidelity  Equity  -  Income  33,485.78 

C.  American  Century.  20th  Century  WLTRA  28,912.59 

D.  Templeton  Foreign  Fund,  Class  I  27.049.75 


V. 


Total 

124,365.83 

Defen-ed  Compensation  -  State  of  New  York  -  The 

Copeland  Companies 

A        Stable  Income  Fund 

16,310.29 

B.        Janus  Fund 

727.11 

C.        TRP  Equity  Income  Fund 

9.935.49 

D.       TRP  International  Stock 

8,520.16 

E.        Vanguard  GNMA 

9.339.37 

Total  44,832.42 


533 


SCHEDULE  B  -  REAL  ESTATE 

Residence:  Webster,  New  York  1 4580 

Fair  Market  Value:  $21 0,000 

Mortgage  Loan:  $155,000 

Mortgage:  Standard  Federal  Bank 

Savings/Finalcial  Services 


45-964    98-18 


534 


III.  GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's  Code  of 
Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  serving  the 
disadvantaged."  Desaibe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing 
specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

From  1984  through  1992,  while  a  member  of  the  Monroe  County  District 
Attorney's  Office,  i  served  on  the  Rape  Crisis  Advisory  Board,  and  also 
provided  legal  instruction  for  volunteer  counselors  with  that  organization. 
From  1988  through  the  present,  I  have  participated  in  the  Mentor  Program 
sponsored  by  the  Board  of  Cooperative  Educational  Services  by  providing 
guidance  for  students  interested  in  careers  in  law  and  criminal  justice. 
Beginning  in  1991,  I  became  involved  in  the  Community  Reading  Program 
sponsored  by  the  Rochester  City  School  District.  In  conjunction  with  this 
program,  I  had  the  opportunity  to  read  to  inner-City  school  children  at  the 
primary  level  to  encourage  their  interest  in  learning  through  reading.  Since 
1992, !  have  participated  in  police  civilian  academies,  sponsored  by  various 
law  enforcement  agencies  within  Monroe  County.  The  purpose  of  these 
academies  is  to  foster  better  relationships  between  the  police  and  the 
communities  they  serve.  In  1992, 1  began  assisting  Families  and  Friends  of 
Murdered  Children  and  Victims  of  Violence,  an  organization  started  by  a 
mother  whose  son  had  been  murdered  in  the  City  of  Rochester.  On  behalf  of 
this  group,  I  have  spoken  to  teenagers  on  the  impact  of  violence,  based  on  my 
experience  as  an  assistant  district  attorney  and  as  a  judge.  Presently,  I  serve 
on  the  Advisory  Board  for  this  organization.  Since  1993, 1  have  been  active 
in  the  Weapons  Diversion  Program  of  the  Rochester  City  School  District.  In 
connection  with  this  program,  I  have  spoken  to  inner-City  students, 
suspended  from  school  because  of  weapons  possession,  and  their  parents, 
about  the  potential  consequences  of  such  conduct,  as  well  as  the  mutual 
responsibility  to  foster  a  safe  environment  for  learning  in  our  schools.  Since 
1994, 1  have  been  involved  in  the  Park  Ridge  Chemical  Dependency  Outreach 
Program.  I  have  met  with  high  school  students  in  the  program,  as  well  as 
their  parents,  and  discussed  the  legal  ramifications  and  reasons  behind  drug 
and  alcohol  abuse.  Finally,  I  am  currently  a  member  of  the  Monroe  County 
Criminal  Justice  Council,  a  group  comprised  of  professionals  from  various 
discipline,  which  monitors  criminal  justice  issues. 


535 


The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  states 
that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that 
invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you  currently 
belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization  which  discriminates  -  through 
either  formal  membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of 
memtjership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership  policies? 
If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.  What  you  have  done  to  try  to  change  these 
policies? 

I  do  not,  nor  have  I  ever  belonged  to  any  such  organization. 


Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates  for 
nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?  Please 
describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from  beginning  to 
and  (including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in 
which  you  participated). 

Yes,  there  is.  The  process  started  with  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  for 
Senator  Daniel  Patrick  Moynihan.  The  Committee  required  the  submission  of 
a  detailed  "Candidate's  Questionnaire"  followed  by  an  interview.  At  my 
interview,  which  occurred  in  New  York  City,  the  Committee  members 
thoroughly  questioned  me  about  my  qualifications,  experience  and 
background.  After  completing  interviews  with  all  candidates,  the  Committee 
recommended  certain  individuals  to  Senator  Moynihan.  I  was  one  of  the 
individuals  recommended,  and  was  subsequently  interviewed  by  Senator 
Moynihan  himself  in  Washington.  Approximately  two  weeks  later.  Senator 
Moynihan  informed  me  that  he  would  be  recommending  me  to  President 
Clinton  for  appointment  as  a  Federal  District  Court  Judge.  Shortly  thereafter, 
I  received  various  forms  from  the  Office  of  Counsel  to  the  President,  including 
the  American  Bar  Association  Questionnaire  and  the  F.B.I.  Standard  Form  86. 
After  completion  of  these  forms,  I  was  interviewed  extensively  in  Washington, 
D.C.  by  members  of  the  Department  of  Justice,  and  next,  in  Rochester,  New 
Yorit,  first  by  a  representative  of  the  F.B.I.,  and  then  by  a  representative  of  the 
American  Bar  Association.  With  respect  to  the  A.B.A.  investigation,  I  was 
informed  that  I  was  rated  well  qualified  for  the  appointment.  Finally,  on  July 
15, 1997,  I  was  notified  by  the  White  House  Counsel's  Office  that  President 
Clinton  was  nominating  me  for  the  position  of  United  States  District  Judge  for 
the  Western  District  of  New  York. 


536 


Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  a  judicial  nominee  discussed 
with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could 
reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue,  or 
question?  If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

No. 

Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal  government,  and  within 
society  generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent 
years.  It  has  become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that 
alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other 
branches  and  levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than 
grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff 
a  vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending 
to  broad  classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duties 
upon  governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional 
requirements  such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other 
institutions  in  the  manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing 
oversight  responsibilities. 

I  believe  in  our  tripartite  system  of  government.  The  strong 
presumption  of  constitutionality  of  legislative  acts  compels  trial  courts, 
in  the  absence  of  a  clear  showing  of  conflict  with  the  Constitution,  to 
determine  and  give  full  force  and  effect  to  legislative  intent.  Adherence 
to  this  rule  is  necessary  to  ensure  that  our  representative  government 
works  and  works  well.  Trial  courts  need  to  appreciate  their 
jurisdictional  limitations.  While  the  constitutionality  of  legislative 
enactments  may  properiy  be  the  subject  of  litigation,  a  review  of  the 
"wisdom"  of  such  legislation,  state  or  federal,  is  not. 


537 


Cases  in  trial  courts,  in  my  experience,  involve  the  assertion  of  the 
individual  interests  of  the  parties  themselves.  These  litigants  are  not 
the  representatives  of  society  at  large.  While  sometimes  their  interests 
are  broad  and  affect  a  number  of  people,  as  in  class  actions,  more 
typically  these  interests  are  very  narrow  and  specific,  as  in  negligence 
and  contract  actions.  Therefore,  an  individual  case,  at  the  trial  court 
level,  should  not  occasion  the  creation  of  new  rights  or  the 
implementation  of  far-reaching  social  policy. 

My  sixteen  years  as  a  trial  attorney  and  my  four-and-  a-half  years  as  a 
trial  judge  have  left  me  with  a  strong  sense  that  what  litigants  expect, 
and  what  they  are  entitled  to  from  the  courts,  is  an  impartial  application 
of  existing  law  and  precedent,  as  well  as  the  established  rules  for 
determining  legislative  intent.  I  do  not  see  the  role  of  federal  district 
courts  differently. 


538 


I    BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

Full  Name  (include  any  former  names  used). 

Algenon  Lamont  Marbley 
Nickname;  Monte  Marbley 

Address:  List  current  place  of  residence,  office  address(es),  and  telephone  numbers. 

Residence:       Blacklick,  Ohio  43004 

OflBce:  Vorys,  Sater,  Seymour  and  Pease 

52  East  Gay  Street 
P.  O.  Box  1008 
Columbus,  Ohio  43216-1008 

Date  and  Place  of  Birth. 

Date  of  Birth:  September  19,  1954 

Place  of  Birth:  Morehead  City,  North  Carolina 

Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name):  List  spouse's 
occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  address(es). 

Married:  Yes 

Spouse:  Janet  Lynn  Green  Marbley 

Occupation:     Administrator  and  Counsel,  Supreme  Court  of  Ohio  Client's  Security  Fund 
175  South  Third  Street,  Columbus,  Ohio 

Education:       List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates  of 
attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

University  of  North  Carolina  Northwestern  University  School  of  Law 

at  Chapel  Hill  Matriculated  August,  1976 

Matriculated  August,  1972  Graduated  May,  1979 

Graduated  May,  1976  Juris  Doctor  Degree,  1979 
Bachelor  of  Arts  Degree,  1976 


539 


Employment  Record:  List  (by  year  starting  with  the  most  recent)  all  business  or 
professional  corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions 
and  organizations,  nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were  connected 
as  an  officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  fi'om  college 


Associate  (1986-1991) 
Partner  (1991  -Present) 


Vorys,  Sater,  Seymour  and  Pease 
52  East  Gay  Street 
Columbus,  Ohio  43215 


Board  Member  (1991  -  Present) 
Board  President  (1995  -  1997) 


Salesian  Boys  and  Girls  Club 
80  South  Sixth  Street 
Columbus,  Ohio  43215-4784 


Board  Member  (1991  -  Present) 
Secretary  and  Counsel  to  the  Board 
(1992-  1996) 


Big  Brothers/Big  Sisters  Association 
of  Columbus 


Adjunct  Professor  of 
Trial  Advocacy 
Fall  1995 


Capital  University  Law  School 
665  South  High  Street 
Columbus,  Ohio 


Instructor,  1987 -Present 


National  Institute  of  Trial 
Advocacy 


Assistant  Regional  Attorney 
(1981-1986) 


United  States  Department  of  Health  and 

Human  Services 
Office  of  the  Regional  Attorney 
105  W.  Adams  Street 
Chicago,  Illinois 


Adjunct  Professor  of  Criminal 
Law  and  Procedure  (1985  -  1986) 


Northeastern  Dlinois  University 
5500  N.  St.  Louis  Avenue 
Chicago,  Illinois 


Associate  (1979  - 1981) 
Law  Clerk  (1977 -1979) 


James  D.  Montgomery  and  Associates 
(formerly  Montgomery  and  Holland) 
39  South  LaSalle  Street 
Chicago,  Illinois 


Legal  Assistance  Clinic 
Law  Clerk  (Summer  1977) 


Northwestern  University 
357  E.  Chicago  Avenue 
Chicago,  Illinois  6061 1 


Laborer  (Summer  1976) 


Bethlehem  Steel  Corporation 

U.  S.  Highway  12,  Portage,  Indiana 


540 


7.  Military  Service;  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give  particulars,  including  the 
dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number,  medals  awarded,  and  type  of 
discharge  received. 

None. 

8.  Honors  and  Awards:  List  (by  month  and  year  starting  with  the  most  recent)  any 
scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you 
believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Conference. 

Ten  Outstanding  Young  Citizens  of  Columbus  (1995), 

Outstanding  Service  Award,  Minority  Legal  Education  Resources,  Inc  (1986)  (Nonprofit 

organization  which  assisted  minorities  and  others  in  taking  the  Illinois  Bar 

Examination); 
Order  of  the  Golden  Fleece  (1975),  Highest  Co-educational  Honorary  Society  at  the 

University  of  North  Carolina,  Chapel  Hill, 
Order  of  the  Grail  (1974),  Highest  Male  Honorary  Society  at  the  University  of  North 

Carolina,  Chapel  Hill; 
North  Carolina  Fellow  (1973),  Based  on  Academic  Performance  and  Leadership  Ability, 

awarded  to  approximately  20  students  each  year. 

9.  Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related  committees  or 
conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of  any 
offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Bar  Associations: 

American  Bar  Association 
National  Bar  Association 
Columbus  Bar  Association 
Ohio  State  Bar  Association 

Committees: 

Columbus  Bar  Association: 

Chairman,  Trial  Advocacy  Committee  -  (1996  -  1997) 

10.  Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are  active  in  lobbying 
before  public  bodies.  Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

a.  Lobbying  Organizations: 

National  Institute  for  Trial  Advocacy  (I  have  not  been  involved  in  lobbying 
activities) 


541 


b  Other  Organizations: 

President  of  the  Board  of  Directors,  The  Salesian  Boys  and  Girls  Club;  (Term 

Expires  7/97) 
Secretaiy  and  Counsel  to  the  Board,  Big  Brothers/Big  Sisters  Association  of 

Franklin  County,  (Term  Expires  7/97) 
Omega  Psi  Phi  Fraternity,  Inc. 
Jefferson  Golf  and  Country  Club 
The  Capital  Club 

1 1 .  Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice,  with  dates 
of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed    Please  explain  the  reason  for  any 
lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same  information  for  administrative  bodies  which  require 
special  admission  to  practice. 

Court  Date  of  Admission 

Supreme  Court  of  Illinois  1980 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Northern  District  of  Illinois  1980 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Seventh  Circuit  1982 

Supreme  Court  of  Ohio  1987 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of  Ohio  1987 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Sixth  Circuit  1996 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of  Illinois  1 996 

12.  Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books,  articles,  reports,  or 
other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.  Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.  Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of 
all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.  If  there  were 
press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

None 

13  Health:   What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  your  last  physical 
examination. 

Present  state  of  health:  Excellent 

Date  of  last  physical  examination :       1 997 

14  Judicial  Office:    State  (chronologically,  most  recent  first)  any  judicial  offices  you  have 
held,  whether  such  position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction 
of  each  such  court. 

None 


542 


15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  (1)  citations  for  the  ten  most 
significant  opinions  you  have  written,  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all  appellate 
opinions  where  your  decision  were  reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with 
significant  criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings:  and  (3)  citations  for 
significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues,  together  with  the  citation  to 
appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were  not  officially 
reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

None 

1 6.  Public  Office:   State  (chronologically,  most  recent  first)  any  public  offices  you  have  held, 
other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were 
elected  or  appointed.  State  (chronologically,  most  recent  first)  any  unsuccessful 
candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

None. 

17.  Legal  Career: 

a.  Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after  graduation  fi^om 

law  school  including: 

(1)  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name  of  the  judge, 
the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

No. 

(2)  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and  dates; 
No. 

(3)  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices,  companies  or 
governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected,  and  the 
nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 

Title  Employer  Date 

Law  Clerk,  Certified  71 1  Northwestern  University  Legal  September  1976- 

Student  (As  a  third  year  law  Assistance  Clinic  May  1979 

student,  I  was  allowed  to  375  E.  Chicago  Avenue 

represent  clients  in  court  Chicago,  Illinois 
under  supervision  of  an 
attorney,  1975-1976) 


543 


Associate  Attorney 


Montgomery  and  Holland 

39  South  LaSalle  Street 

Chicago,  Illinois 

(n/k/a  James  D  Montgomery  and 

Associates) 


May  1979  - 
October  1981 


Assistant  Regional  Attorney 


Adjunct  Professor  of 
Criminal  Law  and  Procedure 

Associate  (1986-  1991) 
Partner  (1991  -Present) 


Instructor 


Adjunct  Professor  Trial 
Advocacy 


United  States  Department  of 
Health  and  Human  Services 
105  W.  Adams  Street 
Chicago,  Illinois  60603 

Northeastern  Illinois  University 
Chicago,  Illinois 

Vorys,  Sater,  Seymour  and  Pease 
52  East  Gay  Street 
Columbus,  Ohio  43215 

National  Institute  of  Trial 
Advocacy 

Capital  University  Law  School 
665  South  High  Street 
Columbus,  Ohio 


October  1981  - 
November  1986 


1985  -  1986 


1986 -Present 


1987  -  Present 


Winter  1995 
Present 


(1)       What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice,  dividing  it  into 
periods  with  dates  if  its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 

May  1979  -  October  1981  (Montgomery  and  Holland) 

I  was  employed  by  Montgomery  and  Holland  at  the  beginning  of  my 
second  year  in  law  school  (fall  1977).  I  worked  there  continuously  through 
law  school,  until  October  1981. 

Montgomery  and  Holland  was  a  litigation  boutique  with  approximately 
seven  attorneys.  I  worked  primarily  with  the  senior  partner,  James  D. 
Montgomery,  doing  federal  and  state  criminal  defense.  My  primary 
responsibility  was  assisting  Mr.  Montgomery  in  the  preparation  and  trial  of 
cases.  Typically,  I  prepared  witnesses  for  testimony,  took  witness 
statements  and  engaged  in  general  investigation.  I  was  responsible  for 
drafting  pleadings,  writing  briefs  and  arguing  motions. 


544 


While  at  Montgomery  and  Holland,  I  tried  six  cases  to  a  jury.  I  served  as 
lead  counsel  on  four  of  those  trials,  and  as  second  chair  on  the  remaining 
two.  I  was  involved  in  one  civil  jury  trial,  a  paternity  case,  which  I  also 
second  chaired  with  Mr.  Montgomery.  The  remaining  four  jury  trials 
involved  three  felony  criminal  matters  and  one  misdemeanor  matter,  ail  of 
which  I  first  chaired 

October  1980  -  November  1986 

In  October  1980, 1  left  the  Montgomery  and  Holland  firm  and  began 
employment  with  the  Office  of  the  Regional  Attorney,  U.  S.  Department  of 
Health  and  Human  Services  ("HHS")  in  Chicago.  I  was  recruited  to  the 
Department  of  Heahh  and  Human  Services  primarily  to  practice  in  the 
administrative  litigation  area.  My  primary  responsibilities  were  prosecuting 
physician  exclusion  and  physician  suspension  cases  pursuant  to  Section 
11 60  of  the  Social  Security  Act. 

At  issue  in  physician  suspension  cases  was  the  length  of  time  that  a 
physician  should  be  suspended  fi"om  the  Medicare  Program  due  to  a 
conviction  relating  to  Medicaid  fi"aud.  The  physician  exclusion  cases  were 
akin  to  medical  malpractice  cases.  At  issue  in  those  cases  was  whether  the 
physician's  practice  fell  below  the  standard  of  care  for  physicians  in  that 
particular  geographical  area.  If  it  was  determined  by  the  administrative  law 
judge  that  the  practitioner  fell  below  the  standard  of  care,  then  that 
practitioner  would  be  excluded  fi-om  the  Medicare  program  for  a  period  of 
time.  While  at  Health  and  Human  Services,  I  tried  two  physician  exclusion 
cases  and  won  both.  I  tried  In  The  Matter  of_Dr.  H.  R.,  ,  which  was  one 
of  the  first  such  proceeding  to  go  to  hearing  in  the  country.  I  also  tried  as 
first  chair  In  The  Matter  ofM.  F.    Again,  the  Agency  prevailed  throughout 
the  administrative  process.  My  remaining  duties  included  representing  the 
various  HHS  umbrella  agencies~e.g.  the  Social  Security  Administration 
and  the  Health  Care  Financing  Administration  in  various  administrative 
matters.  During  that  time,  I  represented  the  Agency  before  the  Seventh 
Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  in  the  case  ofSt.  EUzabeth  Hospital  v.  Bowen, 
797  F.2d  449  (7th  Cir.  1986),  a  case  relating  to  hospital  reimbursement 
regulations,  in  which  the  Agency  prevailed. 


'J  Pursuant  to  the  pertinent  regulations,  the  name  of  the  respondent  cannot  be  disclosed. 

7 


545 


November  1 986  -  December  1 995 

I  joined  Vorys,  Sater,  Seymour  and  Pease  as  an  Associate  in  November 
1986.  1  was  recruited  directly  into  the  litigation  group  to  handle  medically- 
related  matters,  such  as  medical  malpractice  defense,  product  liability 
litigation  and  workers  compensation  litigation    My  first  major  case, 
however,  was  in  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District 
of  Ohio  in  the  case  ofRopak  v.  Buckhom,  656  F  Supp  209  (S.D  Ohio 
1987),  a  securities  litigation  matter  in  which  the  primary  issue  was  the 
validity  of  a  "poison  pill"  plan.  This  was  a  case  of  first  impression  in  this 
district  and  I  was  a  part  of  the  litigation  team.  Ropak  was  the  first 
litigation  in  which  a  poison  pill  plan  under  Delaware  law  was  found  invalid. 
I  also  participated  in  the  preparation  of  the  brief  filed  with  the  Sixth  Circuit 
Court  of  Appeals    The  Sixth  Circuit  affirmed  the  favorable  ruling  below. 
Having  participated  in  that  case,  I  also  was  involved  in  the  trial  of  General 
Acquisitions,  Inc.  etal.  v.  Gencorp,  Inc.,  et  al..  Case  No  C2-87-348  U.S. 
District  Court  Southern  District  of  Ohio  before  the  Honorable  Joseph 
Kinneary.  There,  as  in  the  Ropak  litigation,  I  was  primarily  involved  in 
drafting  pleadings,  and  interviewing  and  preparing  witnesses  for  trial.  The 
GenCorp  matter  eventually  settled. 

Subsequent  to  my  involvement  in  securities  litigation,  my  litigation  practice 
involved  primarily  product  liability  defense,  general  business  litigation  and 
workers  compensation  litigation.  I  have  represented  a  variety  of  clients  in 
my  product  liability  defense  practice,  including  General  Motors,  Coca- 
Cola,  Illinois  Tool  Works  and  Ford  Motor  Company.  One  significant  case, 
an  automobile  fire  case.  Bales  v.  General  Motors,  Case  No.  86  CI  397, 
I  tried  to  a  jury  before  the  Honorable  Nicholas  Holmes,  in  the  Ross 
County,  Ohio  Court  of  Common  Pleas    I  also  tried  two  additional  product 
liability  matters,  as  well  as  three  workers'  compensation  matters  during  this 
period. 

My  commercial  litigation  experience,  in  addition  to  securities  litigation, 
involved  matters  ranging  fi^om  breach  of  contract  to  commercial  paper.  I 
was  involved  in  a  protracted  breach  of  contract  case  with  product  liability 
overtones,  Buckeye  Custom  Products,  Inc.  v.  77?^^  Technar,  Case  No.  C2- 
90-207,  before  the  Honorable  James  Graham.  That  case  settled  on  the  day 
of  trial  following  arguments  on  motions,  but  before  jury  selection.  I  also 
was  involved  in  a  complex  set  of  commercial  paper  cases  on  behalf  of 
Signet  Bank  Maryland  which  were  pending  in  the  District  Court  with 
parallel  cases  pending  in  the  Franklin  County,  Ohio  Court  of  Common 
Pleas    Those  cases  settled. 


546 


1995  to  Present 

In  1 995  my  practice  changed  to  some  degree.  I  now  practice  primarily  in 
the  area  of  employment  litigation  and  commercial  litigation.  In  1995, 1 
undertook  all  of  the  Ohio  litigation  for  Illinois  Tool  Works,  a  Fortune  100 
company    Illinois  Tool  Works  selected  me  as  the  attorney  for  its  sixteen 
factories  in  the  State  of  Ohio.  I  am  responsible  for  all  of  the  company's 
labor  work  and  all  of  the  litigation  involving  those  factories,  including  all  of 
its  divisions.  I  also  am  doing  a  significant  amount  of  employment  litigation 
for  The  Limited  and  its  various  divisions.  I  serve  as  lead  counsel  in  several 
employment  litigation  matters  pending  in  the  United  States  District  Court 
for  the  Southern  District  of  Ohio,  and  I  have  appeared  as  trial  counsel  for 
such  other  companies  as  Symix  Systems,  Inc.,  Pitney  Bowes  and  M/I 
Schottenstein  Homes 

(2)        Describe  your  typical  (former)  clients,  and  mention  the  areas,  if  any,  in 
which  you  have  specialized 

Most  of  my  clients  are  large  corporations,  although  I  have  represented 
several  smaller  enterprises  and  individuals    My  civil  litigation  experience 
has  been  in  the  areas  of  general  business  litigation,  product  liability  and 
employment  litigation.  My  representative  clients  in  litigation  include: 

Business  Litigation 

Wendy's  International,  Inc. 
Worthington  Industries 
Illinois  Tool  Works 
National  City  Bank 
Signet  Bank  Maryland 

Product  Liability 

General  Motors 
Ford  Motor  Company 
The  Coca-Cola  Company 
Illinois  Tool  Works 

Employment  Litigation 

The  Limited 
Symix  Systems,  Inc. 
Illinois  Tool  Works 
M/I  Schottenstein  Homes 


547 


Workers'  Compensation  Litigation 

General  Motors 

Teledyne 

Illinois  Tool  Works 

George  Lynch  Controls 

Special  Counsel  Litigation 

The  Ohio  State  University 
Franklin  County  Children's  Services 
Big  Brothers/Big  Sisters  Association 
Project  Linden,  Inc. 

I  have  also  represented  The  Ohio  State  University  as  special  counsel  in  a 
wrongful  death  action  from  which  the  University  was  dismissed  pursuant  to 
a  Motion  to  Dismiss  in  State  Court  and  later  dismissed  in  the  Court  of 
Claims    I  also  have  appeared  as  special  counsel  for  Franklin  County 
Children  Services  in  a  contested  child  custody  matter  in  which  the  Agency 
had  been  implicated  on  negligence  counts. 

(1)  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at  all?  If  the 
frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such  variance, 
giving  dates 

I  appear  in  court  frequently.  Virtually  100%  of  my  professional  work  is 
litigation.  The  only  exception  would  be  some  of  the  pro  bono  counseling 
that  I  provide  and  have  provided  to  Big  Brothers/Big  Sisters  Association  as 
well  as  The  Salesian  Boys  and  Girls  Club  for  the  past  six  years. 

(2)  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts: 

Approximately  33%  of  my  cases  have  been  in  the  Federal  courts. 

(b)  state  courts  of  record: 

Approximately  66%  of  my  cases  have  been  in  the  State  courts. 

(c)  other  courts: 

Less  than  1%  of  my  cases  have  been  in  other  courts. 


10 


548 

(3)  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil: 
85% 

(b)  criminal: 
15% 

(4)  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to  verdict  or 
judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether  you  were  sole  counsel, 
chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel 

Twenty  (20) 

•  Sole  Counsel:  9 

•  Chief  Counsel:  15 

•  Associate  Counsel:      5 

(5)  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury  -  85% 

(b)  non-jury-  15% 


18.       Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you  personally 

handled    Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and  date  if 
unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of  each  case.  Identify  the  party  or 
parties  whom  you  represented,  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  the 
litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case    Also  state  as  to  each  case: 

a.  the  date  of  representation; 

b.  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before  whom  the  case 
was  litigated;  and 

c  the  individual  name,  address,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co-counsel  and  of  principal 

counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 


11 


549 

The  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  are  as  follows 

1)  United  Stales  v.  Powell,  654  F  2d  724  (7th  Cir  1981) 

a  Date  of  Representation    1980 

b  Court    United  States  District  Court  for  Northern  District  of  Illinois 

Honorable  Nicholas  J  Bua 

c  Co-Defense  Counsel:  James  D  Montgomery 

39  S  LaSalle  Street 
Chicago,  Illinois 
(312)977-0200 

d.         Opposing  Counsel;  Assistant  United  States  Attorney  Daniel  Reidy 

(Mr.  Reidy  is  now  a  partner  at  Jones,  Day,  Reavis  and  Pogue,  Chicago, 
(312)269-4140) 

Defendant  James  H  Powell  was  charged  with  violation  of  the  Hobbs  Act,  18 
use.  §  1951    The  government  argued  that  Mr  Powell,  a  plumbing  inspector  for 
the  City  of  Chicago,  had  extorted  money  from  an  electrical  contractor. 

The  matter  was  tried  to  a  jury  in  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Northern 
District  of  Illinois  before  Judge  Nicholas  Bua.  The  government  was  represented 
by  Assistant  United  States  Attorney,  Dan  Reidy,  now  a  partner  with  the  law  firm 
of  Jones,  Day,  Reavis  &  Pogue  in  Chicago    The  jury  trial  lasted  approximately  one 
week  and  was  tried  pursuant  to  a  multi-count  indictment    The  principal  issue 
before  the  jury  was  whether  defendant,  Mr.  Powell,  extorted  money  fi-om  the 
electrical  contractor  who  had  received  goods  moved  in  interstate  commerce.  In 
prosecuting  its  case,  the  government  relied  on  wire  tap  evidence  derived  fi-om  a 
wire  worn  by  their  primary  witness,  the  electrical  contractor.  At  trial,  we  proved 
that  the  tape  testimony  was  unreliable  and  the  defendant  was  convicted  of  only  two 
counts  of  the  multi-count  indictment    The  defendant  was  sentenced  to  one  year  in 
the  federal  penitentiary 

The  Powell  case  was  significant  to  me  because  it  was  my  first  jury  trial  in  Federal 
court    I  was  responsible  for  putting  on  the  entire  defense  case,  which  included  the 
direct  examination  of  the  defendant  and  various  defense  factual  witnesses  and 
character  witnesses    In  addition,  I  cross  examined  some  of  the  prosecution 
witnesses  and  argued  all  motions  before  the  Court.  The  fact  that  I  was  able  to 
convince  the  jury  through  my  examination  of  the  defendant  that  the  wire  tap 
evidence  was  unreliable  and  was  to  be  disbelieved  certainly  resulted  in  the 
defendant  not  being  convicted  of  the  more  serious  charges. 


12 


550 


2)         Buckeye  Custom  Products.  Inc.  v.  TRW  Technar,  Case  No  C2-90-207 

a  Date  of  Representation;   1990-1991 

b  Court:  United  States  District  Court  for  Southern  District  of  Ohio 

Honorable  James  Graham 

c  Co-Counsei:     Michael  G.  Long 

Vorys,  Sater,  Seymour  and  Pease 
52  East  Gay  Street 
Columbus,  Ohio  43215 
(614)464-6297 

d.         Opposing  Counsel:      Richard  I.  Werder,  Jr. 
Michael  Carpenter^ 
Jones,  Day,  Reavis  &  Pogue 
North  Point 
901  Lakeside  Avenue 
Cleveland,  Ohio  44114 
(216)586-7260 

This  breach  of  contract  action  was  brought  by  my  client.  Buckeye  Custom 
Products,  Inc  ,  against  TRW  Technar  in  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Southern  District  of  Ohio  before  the  Honorable  James  Graham    Buckeye  Custom 
Products,  a  division  of  Worthington  Industries,  sued  TRW  for  its  failure  to  honor  a 
requirements  contract  between  the  companies  for  the  production  of  cylinders  that 
were  incorporated  in  TRW's  airbags.  TRW  counterclaimed  against  Worthington 
Industries,  Inc.,  arguing  that  the  part  Buckeye  produced  was  defective. 

The  case  involved  complex  commercial  issues,  as  well  as  technical  issues.  TRW's 
claim  was  in  the  nature  of  a  product  liability  claim  because  it  involved  questions  of 
whether  the  cylinder  produced  by  Buckeye  was  in  full  compliance  with  the 
specifications  of  the  contract.  The  primary  technical  area  of  contention  was 
whether  the  cylinders  were  "burr  fi^ee,"  or  produced  without  any  extruded  metal 
fi-agments.  This  required  extensive  expert  testimony  on  "burr  technology."  The 
case  lasted  approximately  two  years,  with  discovery  lasting  approximately  one 
year. 


^J  Mr.  Carpenter  is  now  a  member  of  the  firm  of  Zeiger  and  Carpenter,  Suite  1600,  4 1  South  High  Street, 
Columbus,  Ohio  43215,  (614)  365-4100. 


13 


551 


I  was  primarily  responsible  for  conducting  much  of  the  discovery,  including  talcing 
the  depositions  of  TRW  s  factual  and  expert  witnesses  and  defending  the 
depositions  of  Buckeye's  factual  and  expert  witnesses.  I  also  was  responsible  for 
the  trial  brief  and  arguing  motions  The  case  settled  after  argument  on  the  motions, 
but  prior  to  voir  dire 


3)  Thomas  Bales  v.  General  Motors  Corporation,  Case  No.  86  CI  397 

a.  Date  of  Representation    1987 

b.  Court:  Ross  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas 
Honorable  Nicholas  Holmes 

c  Co-Counsel:     Gerald  P  Ferguson 

Vorys,  Sater,  Seymour  and  Pease 
52  East  Gay  Street 
Columbus,  Ohio  43215 
(614)  464-6484 

d  Opposing  Counsel:      Charley  Hess 

1520  Old  Henderson  Road 
Suite  102  A 
Columbus,  OH  43220 
(614)442-5800 

This  case  was  a  product  liability  action.  I  defended  on  behalf  of  General  Motors 
Corporation.  The  plaintiff  alleged  that  a  defect  in  the  ignition  system  of  the 
Camero  caused  the  Camero  to  ignite  after  the  ignition  had  been  turned  off  and  the 
car  parked  in  the  garage.  The  fire  which  ensued  consumed  the  garage  and  its 
contents  and  much  of  the  plaintiffs  house.  The  defense  argued  that  the  fire  was 
not  caused  by  any  defect  in  the  Camero,  but  offered  as  a  possibility  defective 
wiring  in  the  garage. 

The  defense  strategy  which  I  developed  was  significant  in  two  respects.  First,  the 
defense  not  only  had  to  rebut  Plaintiffs  theory,  but  had  to  present  a  plausible 
theory  of  the  fire's  origins.  In  effect,  the  defense  had  to  sustain  a  burden  of 
persuasion  to  establish  that  wiring  in  the  garage  was  the  likely  cause  of  the  fire. 
Secondly,  because  the  fire  destroyed  much  of  the  family's  belongings,  I  had  to 
convince  the  jury  to  be  guided  by  scientific  fact  instead  of  emotions.  It  was, 
therefore,  incumbent  upon  the  defense  to  focus  the  jury's  attention  on  the  issue  of 
liability  instead  of  damages  and  on  the  expert  testimony  instead  of  that  of  the 
Plaintiffs. 


14 


552 


The  case  was  tried  to  a  jury.  I  was  responsible  for  every  aspect  of  this  trial, 
including  jury  selection,  opening  argument,  presentation  of  the  defense  case,  cross 
examination  of  witnesses  in  the  plaintiffs  case,  closing  arguments  and  arguments 
on  motions    My  co-counsel  only  participated  in  the  charging  conference    The  jury 
returned  a  verdict  in  favor  of  the  defense  on  all  claims 


4)         In  re  M.  F.,  Case  No.  000-57-7005 

a.  Date  of  Representation:  February  27  -  March  1,  1985;  August  12  -  14, 
1985 

b.  Department  of  Health  and  Human  Services,  Social  Security  Administration 
Office  of  Hearings  and  Appeals 

Chief  Administrative  Law  Judge,  Kenneth  Stewart 

c.  Co-Counsel:     Donna  Morris  Weinstein 

Regional  Attorney 

U.  S.  Dept  of  Health  and  Human  Services 

105  W.  Adams  Street 

Chicago,  Illinois  60603 

(312)886-1710 

d.  Opposing  Counsel:      Steven  O.  Murray 

Otjen,  Van  Ert,  Stangle,  Lieb  &  Wier 
450  Science  Drive,  Suite  110 
Madison,  Wisconsin  53711 
(608)  238-9500 

This  case  was  a  physician  exclusion  case  brought  by  my  client,  the  United  States 
Department  of  Health  and  Human  Services  ("Department"  or  "DHHS")  pursuant 
to  Section  11 60  of  the  Social  Security  Act.  The  Department  alleged  that  the 
respondent.  Dr.  F.  rendered  care  that  fell  below  the  professionally  recognized 
standards  of  care  for  the  geographical  area  in  which  he  practiced  and  that  he 
should,  therefore,  be  excluded  from  participation  in  the  Medicare  Program  for  a 
period  of  five  (5)  years.  The  Department  had  the  burden  of  establishing  its  case 
through  medical  expert  testimony. 

The  case  of  Dr  F.  involved  seven  medical  charts  and  several  days  of  expert 
medical  testimony.  At  the  conclusion  of  the  testimony,  the  administrative  law 
judge  found  for  the  Department  and  excluded  Dr.  F  for  five  years.  The 
significance  of  this  case  was  that  it  was  one  of  the  first  cases  tried  nationally  under 
the  then  newly-enacted  Section  11 60  of  the  Act  and  was  the  second  one  tried  and 
won  in  our  region.  I  had,  in  fact,  tried  the  first  case  of  this  kind  in  the  six-state 
region  served  by  the  Chicago  office  of  HHS    The  Dr  F  matter  also  was 


15 


553 


significant  because  I  trained  our  Regional  Attorney,  Donna  Weinstein,  in  trying 
physician  exclusion  cases. 


Parks  V.  Tdedyne  Ohio  Cast,  Case  No  91-CV-0221 

a  Date  of  Representation  April,  1993 

b  Court:  Clark  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas 

Honorable  Gerald  F  Lorig 

c.  Co-Counsel:     None. 

d  Opposing  Counsel:      John  Workman 

1375  Dublin  Road 
Columbus,  Ohio  43215-1069 
(614)486-8935 

This  was  a  workers'  compensation  death  case  brought  against  my  client,  Teledyne. 
The  claimant's  decedent  had  prevailed  throughout  the  administrative  process  and 
Teledyne  appealed  the  matter  to  Common  Pleas  Court  for  a  trial  de  novo.  At  issue 
in  this  case  was  whether  the  Plaintiffs  decedent's  lung  disease  was  contracted  as  a 
result  of  his  work  in  the  Teledyne  foundry.  This  two-day  jury  trial  centered 
primarily  on  the  medical  testimony  of  several  experts.  I  was  responsible  for  the 
entire  case:  argument  on  motions,  opening  statement,  examination  of  all  witnesses 
and  closing  argument. 

Af^er  several  hours  of  deliberation,  the  jury  returned  a  verdict  in  favor  of  Teledyne. 
This  case  was  significant  because  it  was  one  of  those  rare  trials  in  which  the 
claimant  had  prevailed  throughout  the  administrative  process  on  essentially  the 
same  medical  evidence  as  was  presented  to  the  jury.  It  was  a  very  difficult  case, 
both  technically  and  emotionally,  inasmuch  as  the  Plaintiff  was  a  very  sympathetic 
figure,  and  it  was  tried  in  a  city  which  had  some  antipathy  toward  Teledyne 
because  it  had  closed  its  foundry,  relocated  and  taken  a  significant  number  of  jobs 
from  the  Springfield  community. 


16 


554 


6)         Pruitt  V.  General  Motors,  74  O  App  3d  520  (1991),  Juris  Mtn  overruled,  62  O. 
St.  3d  1447(1991) 

a.  Date  of  Representation:   1991 

b.  Court;  Franklin  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas 
Honorable  David  Johnson 

c.  Co-Counsel:     Gerald  P.  Ferguson 

Vorys,  Sater,  Seymour  and  Pease 

52  East  Gay  Street 

P  O  Box  1008 

Columbus,  Ohio  43216-1008 

(614)464-6484 

d.  Opposing  Counsel:      Lyman  Brownfield 

Lyman  Brownfield  Law  Offices 

341  S.  Third  Street 

Suite  10 

Columbus,  OH  43215 

(614)  221-5834 

This  is  a  product  liability  case  in  which  I  represented  General  Motors  ("GM").  At 
issue  in  this  case  was  whether  a  cable  located  on  a  semitractor,  which  broke, 
causing  the  Plaintiff"  significant  bodily  harm,  was  defective.  The  defense  contended 
that  the  accident  resulted  fi^om  product  misuse  or  abuse,  and  was  not  related  to  any 
design  defect  or  production  defect.  The  case  was  tried  to  a  jury  over  a  three-day 
period.  At  the  end  of  the  Plaintiff's  case,  the  Court  granted  GM's  Motion  for  a 
directed  verdict  based  on  GM's  ability  to  refiite  Plaintiffs'  expert  testimony.  The 
responsibilities  for  this  case  were  divided  evenly  with  co-counsel.  I  was 
responsible  for  voir  dire  and  cross  examination  of  several  of  Plaintiff's  witnesses, 
including  Plaintiff's  expert.  We  also  prevailed  in  the  Tenth  District  Court  of 
Appeals  of  Ohio.  I  shared  responsibility  for  preparation  of  the  appellate  brief 


17 


555 


7)         Null  V.  Franklin  County  Children  Services,  Case  No.  92  JU-0 1  -84 

a  Date  of  Representation    March,  1992 

b  Court:  Franklin  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas 

The  Honorable  Ronald  Solove 

c.  Co-Counsel:     None. 

d.  Opposing  Counsel       Charles  K.  Milless 

175  South  Third  Street 
Columbus,  Ohio  43215 
(614)228-6885 

Nancy  K.  Wonnell 
Wonnel!  &  Wonnell 
330  S.  High  Street 
Columbus,  Ohio  43215-4510 
(614)224-7291 

Natalie  Fletcher 
122  E.  Main  Street 
3rd  Floor 

Columbus,  Ohio  43215 
(614)267-3700 

This  was  a  child  custody  case  in  which  there  were  two  primary  issues: 
(1)  whether  the  two  minor  children  involved  should  be  in  the  custody  of  Franklin 
County  Children  Services  ("FCCS");  and  (2)  whether  FCCS  had  been  negligent  in 
allowing  the  children  to  return  to  their  home  after  they  had  been  in  the  temporary 
custody  of  FCCS.  The  case  was  tried  over  the  course  of  several  days  before  Judge 
Ronald  Solove  and  was  highly  publicized  by  The  Columbus  Dispatch.  I  was 
retained  as  special  counsel  to  represent  FCCS  in  the  proceeding  before  Judge 
Solove. 

This  was  an  important  case  for  several  reasons.  First,  the  safety  and  well-being  of  the 
children  was  of  paramount  importance.  It  was  in  the  best  interest  of  the  children  to  be 
permanently  removed  from  a  neglectful  home  environment.  I  also  had  to  defend  the 
Agency  on  charges  made  by  the  guardian  ad  litem,  Charles  K.  Milless,  Esq.,  that  the 
Agency  had  been  negligent  in  returning  the  children  to  the  home  after  the  Agency  had 
taken  them  into  temporary  custody.  I  had  to  persuade  the  Court  that  the  Agency 
exercised  due  caution  and  sound  discretion  in  returning  the  children  to  the  home.  I 
had  to  demonstrate  to  the  Court  that,  where  possible,  it  was  the  policy  of  the  Agency 
to  reunite  and  to  maintain  the  family  unit.  I  was  successfiil  in  persuading  the  Court 
that  FCCS  acted  reasonably  under  the  circumstances 


18 


556 


The  Court  agreed  with  our  position  and  removed  the  children  from  the  home    The 
Court  declined  to  find  that  FCCS  had  been  guilty  of  actionable  negligence  in 
returning  the  children  to  the  home. 


8)         Chase  Enterprises  v.  Wendy 's  International,  Case  No.  395  CV  00486 

a.  Date  of  Representation:   1996 

b.  Court:  United  States  District  Court  For  The  District  of  Connecticut 
Honorable  Peter  C  Dorsey 

c.  Co-Counsel:     Michael  G.  Long 

Vorys,  Sater,  Seymour  and  Pease 

52  East  Gay  Street 

P.  O.  Box  1008 

Columbus,  Ohio  43216-1008 

(614)464-6297 

d.  Opposing  Counsel:      Kathleen  McManus  TraflFord 

Porter,  Wright,  Morris  &  Arthur 
41  South  High  Street 
Columbus,  Ohio  43215-3406 
(614)227-1915 

This  was  a  breach  of  contract  case  brought  by  Chase  Enterprises  against  Wendy's 
International,  Inc.  ("Wendy's)  for  alleged  violations  of  Wendy's  franchise 
agreement.  Plaintiff,  a  franchisee  whose  store  was  located  in  Krakow,  Poland, 
argued  that  Wendy's  failed  to  provide  adequate  support  services  to  assist  the 
fledgling  franchise.  On  behalf  of  Wendy's,  I  took  the  position  that  Wendy's 
International  Group  offered  all  of  the  technical  support  that  it  was  obligated  to 
provide  pursuant  to  the  franchise  agreement 

This  case  was  of  precedential  value  to  Wendy's    If  it  were  found  that  Wendy's 
failed  to  support  its  international  franchisee,  then  other  franchisees  stood  poised  to 
register  similar  complaints.  The  Wendy's  support  system  and  network,  in  effect, 
were  on  trial.  It  was  essential  that  the  system  be  exonerated,  and  that,  irrespective 
of  the  resolution  of  the  case,  the  structure  of  Wendy's  franchise  agreement  remain 
intact. 

In  order  to  defend  Wendy's  interests  effectively,  I  had  to  immerse  myself  in 
Wendy's  operational  procedures,  as  well  as  develop  an  understanding  of  franchise 
law.  I  was  responsible  for  conducting  virtually  all  of  the  discovery  in  the  matter, 
developing  our  litigation  strategy  and  coordinating  the  efforts  of  the  various 


19 


557 


Wendy's  divisions  I  also  was  responsible  for  negotiating  with  opposing  counsel 
to  settle  the  dispute  This  matter  eventually  was  referred  to  arbitration  but,  prior 
to  arbitration,  was  settled  by  the  parties 

9)         Howard  v.  The  Limiled Inc.,  Case  No  BC086556 

a  Date  of  Representation;   1994-1995 

b  Court:  Superior  Court  of  the  Los  Angeles  Judicial  District  for  the  County 

of  Los  Angeles 
Honorable  Edward  M.  Ross 

c.  Co-Counsel:     Jay  S.  Hill  (Local  Counsel) 

Wiedner  and  Swanson 
10  Universal  City  Plaza 
Universal  City,  California 
(818)754-3300 

d  Opposing  Counsel:      Timothy  E  Meyer 

2029  Century  Park  East 

Suite  1020 

Los  Angeles,  California  90067-2901 

(310)203-0754 

In  this  case,  the  Plaintiff,  Garry  Howard,  brought  an  action  against  The  Limited 
alleging  that  The  Limited  violated  the  California  Pubhc  Accommodations  Act  and 
other  state  civil  rights  statutes.  Howard  alleged  that  he  was  wrongfully  detained  at 
the  behest  of  The  Limited  and  that  The  Limited  thus  violated  the  civil  rights  of 
Howard  and  his  female  companion    In  addition  to  filing  suit,  the  Plaintiff  engaged 
in  a  campaign  against  The  Limited  consisting  of  picketing  and  leafleting    On  behalf 
of  The  Limited,  I  argued  that  PlaintifTs  civil  rights  had  not  been  violated,  that  The 
Limited  was  acting  well  in  its  power  in  surveilling  Plaintiff  while  he  was  in  the 
store,  and  demonstrated  conclusively  that  The  Limited  did  not  order  that  the 
Plaintiff  be  searched  or  detained.  The  trial  court  agreed  with  our  position  and 
granted  summary  judgment  in  favor  of  The  Limited. 

Although  on  the  surface  this  case  was  not  technically  complex,  it  was  a  very 
sensitive  matter  for  all  involved  and  required  me  to  use  not  only  my  legal  skills  but 
also  my  judgment  in  handling  a  tense  racially  charged  situation.  I  had  to  maintain 
the  focus  on  the  legal  issues  in  the  case  and  persuade  the  Court  that  this  was  a 
legal  issue  susceptible  of  resolution,  and  not  a  political  issue. 

I  had  total  responsibility  for  every  aspect  of  this  case,  which  was  closely  monitored 
by  The  Limited 's  corporate  office 


20 


558 


10)       Symix  v.  LaRoque,  Case  No  95  CVH  06-4279;  295-CV-632  (US  District  Court) 

a  Date  of  Representation:  1995-  1996 

b  Court;  The  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  Franklin  County 

Honorable  Nodine  Miller 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of  Ohio 
Honorable  John  Holschuh 

c.  Co-Counsel:     None 

d.  Opposing  Counsel:      Rex  H.  Elliott,  Esq. 

Cooper,  Elliott  &  Connors 
17  South  High  Street 
Columbus,  Ohio  43215 
(614)221-1177 

This  was  a  breach  of  contract  action  brought  by  my  client,  Symix  Systems,  Inc. 
("Symix")  against  two  ex-employees  who  were  former  members  of  the  Symix 
management  team    Defendants  counterclaimed,  alleging  wrongful  discharge.  It 
was  a  very  contentious  matter.  Discovery  covered  a  significant  period  of  time, 
lasting  approximately  one  year  and  involved  issues  ranging  fi-om  psychological 
damages  to  the  First  Amendment 

I  had  primary  responsibility  for  the  case  and  conducted  all  discovery,  drafted 
pleadings  and  presented  arguments  before  the  court.  The  case  was  on  parallel 
tracks  in  both  the  Federal  Court  and  state  court,  and  the  federal  case  was  held  in 
abeyance  pending  resolution  in  the  state  court.  Within  approximately  one  year  of 
commencing  discovery,  settlement  discussions  ensued.  As  we  neared  trial,  I  had  to 
withdraw  from  litigation  as  one  of  my  law  partners,  a  board  member  at  Symix,  was 
slated  to  be  a  witness  at  the  trial.  Shortly  after  my  withdrawal— and  based  on  the 
negotiations  that  already  had  begun~this  matter  settled. 


21 


559 


19.        Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have  pursued,  including 
significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did  involve 
litigation    Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question.  Please  omit  any 
information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the  privilege  has  been 
waived). 

1 )  Winfrey,  et  al.  v.  Franklin  County  Community  Based  Correctional  Facility,  et  al 
97CVH01  2225 

Our  clients  in  this  litigation  are  the  Franklin  County  Community  Based 
Correctional  Facility  ("CBCF")  and  the  Franklin  County  Judicial  Corrections 
Board  ("JCB").  The  CBCF  is  comprised  of  all  of  the  judges  on  the  Franklin 
County  Court  of  Common  Pleas    The  plaintiffs  are  former  employees  of  CBCF 
who  claim  that  their  positions  were  wrongfully  abolished  and  that  their 
constructive  discharge  was  based  on  race  and  sex  discrimination.  This  case  is  still 
pending. 

The  significance  of  this  case  is  personal    I  have  been  selected  as  lead  counsel  to 
represent  the  judges  of  the  Franklin  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas  in  a 
significant  employment  discrimination  matter.  Having  had  jury  trials  before  both 
Judge  McGrath,  the  current  JCB  President,  and  Judge  David  Johnson,  the  past 
JCB  President,  I  consider  my  selection  to  be  a  high  compliment  fi^om  the  judges, 
and  a  recognition  from  the  judges  of  my  skills  as  a  litigator.  Moreover,  the 
implications  of  this  case  are  far  reaching  inasmuch  as  precedent  may  be  set  for 
other  community-based  correctional  facilities  located  throughout  the  state.  I  am 
therefore  looking  forward  to  the  challenge  of  litigating  what  I  am  certain  will  be  a 
very  compelling  case. 

2)  United  States  v.  Erickson,  CR-2-93  -66 

United  States  District  Court  for  Southern  District  of  Ohio 
Honorable  John  Holschuh 

Our  client,  Vem  Erickson,  was  a  buyer  for  BMY  Corporation  ("BMY")    BMY 
Corporation  was,  among  other  things,  a  supplier  to  the  army.  B\fY  was  under 
investigation  by  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Justice  for  fraud  in  connection  with 
certain  contracts  that  BMY  had  with  the  Army.  Mr.  Erickson  himself  was  accused 
of  participating  in  BMY's  fraudulent  activity,  but  was  persuaded  to  cooperate  with 
the  government  in  its  investigation.  Mr.  Erickson  did  in  fact  cooperate  and  was 
sentenced  to  a  term  of  probation.  Under  government  contracting  regulations, 
however,  the  Department  of  the  Army  decided  to  debar  Mr.  Erickson  fi-om 
participation  in  any  government  contracting  activity.  Because  Mr.  Erickson  spent 
much  of  his  career  in  government  contracting  and  had  completed  plans  to  open  his 
own  consulting  firm,  debarrment  would  have  effectively  ended  his  career. 


22 


560 


I  appealed  the  Department  of  the  Army's  decision  to  the  Department  of  the  Army 
Office  of  The  Judge  Advocate  General    We  received  a  favorable  decision  from  the 
hearing  officer    Because  of  the  nature  of  the  decision,  the  Army  did  not  appeal. 
Under  the  terms  of  the  order,  Mr.  Erickson  was  not  excluded  from  participating  in 
government  contracts,  working  on  behalf  of  government  contractors,  or  otherwise 
being  involved  in  government  contracting  activities. 

3)        Kay  Snyder  v.  The  Bank  of  Marion. 

In  this  case,  the  Plaintiff,  Kay  Snyder,  was  a  secretary/administrative  assistant  for 
one  of  the  officers  of  the  Marion  Bank.  She  contacted  me  to  handle  her  case, 
although  she  had  some  trepidation  about  our  accepting  her  representation  because 
she  was  under  the  impression  that  our  law  firm  represented  companies  and  not 
individuals.  I  took  her  representation  because  Ms.  Snyder  had  what  I  believed  to 
be  a  legitimate  sexual  harassment  claim  and,  although  she  did  not  have  the 
resources  to  prosecute  the  claim,  we  undertook  the  representation  because  of  the 
personal  appeal  that  she  made 

At  the  time  that  I  took  the  case,  I  was  an  associate  at  Vorys  and  enlisted  the 
support  of  another  colleague  of  mine  who  also  was  an  associate.  We  negotiated 
with  the  Bank's  counsel  and,  after  several  weeks  of  negotiations,  were  able  to 
reach  an  amicable  resolution  without  having  to  file  suit.  Mrs.  Snyder  was 
compensated,  the  Bank  took  the  appropriate  action  with  respect  to  its  officer,  and 
opposing  counsel  left  that  encounter  with  renewed  respect  for  me. 

4)         Minority  Legal  Education  Resources  Inc  ("MLER") 

MLER  is  a  not-for-profit  corporation  located  in  Chicago,  Illinois,  which  began  as 
an  organization  which  assisted  minority  applicants  in  preparing  for  the  Illinois  Bar 
exam.  I  was  first  a  participant  in  MLER  then  an  instructor  for  several  years.  I 
later  became  a  Board  Member,  and  then  President  of  the  Board.  The  program  was 
a  supplement  to  the  Bar  Review  course  that  was  offered  by  various  companies 
such  as  BAR/BRI.  We  met  once  a  week  and  taught  bar  taking  techniques  with  an 
emphasis  on  taking  multiple  choice  examinations  and  writing.  I  taught  in  both 
sections. 

This  was  one  of  the  most  rewarding  undertakings  that  I  have  been  involved  in  as  a 
lawyer.  Many  of  the  students  we  helped  were  individuals  who  had  never  taken  the 
bar  exam.  We  were  able  to  impart  not  only  our  technical  knowledge,  but  also 
insights  to  give  first-time  takers  the  confidence  that  they  needed  to  pass  the  bar 
exam.  However,  a  small  percentage  of  people,  from  10  to  20  percent  in  the 
summer  program,  and  the  majority  of  individuals  who  took  our  program  in  the 
winter,  were  persons  who  had  failed  the  bar.  It  was  a  particular  challenge  to 
restore  their  sense  of  confidence  and  self  esteem,  while  at  the  same  time  prepare 
them  to  prevail  on  the  upcoming  bar  examination.  It  was  most  rewarding  to  share 


23 


561 


with  them  the  success  of  passing  the  bar  after  they  had  initially  failed.  As  an 
organization,  we  had  a  second  time  pass  rate  that  was  higher  than  the  national 
average. 

5)  Teaching  at  the  Capital  University  Law  School. 

In  the  fall  semester  of  1995, 1  was  an  adjunct  professor  of  Trial  Advocacy  at 
Capital  University.  (I  have  enjoyed  teaching,  as  I  taught  criminal  law  and 
procedure  on  the  undergraduate  level  at  Northeastern  Illinois  University  from  1985 
through  1986).  Very  few  activities  in  which  I  have  engaged  have  been  more 
rewarding  than  teaching  young  lawyers  to  become  skilled  advocates 

6)  The  National  Institute  for  Trial  Advocacy. 

My  pedagogical  bent  has  led  me  to  accept  invitations  to  teach  at  the  National 
Institute  for  Trial  Advocacy  ("NITA")  from  1987  to  the  present.  I  have  taught 
both  the  flill  trial  courses  as  well  as  the  deposition  courses.  My  teaching  has  been 
at  the  Midwest  Course  held  at  Northwestern  University,  and  Nova  University  Law 
School  in  Fort  Lauderdale,  Florida.  1  have  been  invited  to  teach  at  Temple 
University,  at  the  NITA  program  in  Dallas  and  at  Case  Western  Reserve 
University.  In  the  NITA  sessions,  I  have  performed  cross  examination 
demonstrations  for  the  entire  student  population,  as  well  as  direct  examination 
demonstrations.  I  have  been  a  team  leader,  the  highest  teaching  rank,  as  well  as 
section  leader.  As  a  team  leader,  I  taught  the  course  for  approximately  ten  days, 
from  beginning  to  end.  As  section  leader,  I  was  a  part  of  a  team  and  taught  for  a 
five  day  period. 

7)  In  connection  with  my  teaching  responsibilities,  I  also  have  given  demonstrations 
for  the  Ohio  State  Bar  Association,  as  well  as  the  Committee  on  Regional 
Training,  which  was  responsible  for  teaching  trial  advocacy  to  lawyers  in  the  Legal 
Aid  Societies  for  the  states  of  Ohio  and  Michigan. 


24 


562 


FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST 

1 .  List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred  income 
arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits 
which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  professional 
services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please 
describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any 
financial  or  business  interest 

I  have  no  deferred  income  arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts,  or 
fijture  benefits  which  I  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships, 
professional  services,  firm  membership,  former  employers,  clients  or  customers. 
When  1  resign  as  a  partner  in  my  law  firm,  I  will  receive  my  capital  contribution  to 
the  partnership,  which  includes  a  buyout  of  my  percentage  ownership  of  the  law 
firm.  As  of  June,  1997,  that  amount  (determined  at  the  end  of  the  quarter  ending 
December  1996)  is  approximately  $52,000.00  and  would  be  paid  to  me  upon  my 
resignation  from  the  partnership.  The  disbursement  would  include  no  future 
income  of  the  law  firm,  and,  I  am  advised,  would  be  made  within  a  month 
following  my  last  month  with  the  firm. 

I  also  have  an  account  established  pursuant  to  Section  401(k)  of  the  Internal 
Revenue  Code.  There  is  approximately  $36,000.00  in  that  account,  of  which  I 
have  full  ownership.  Upon  resignation  from  the  partnership,  I  would  in  all 
likelihood  put  that  account  into  an  individual  retirement  account  in  an  institution 
unaffiliated  with  the  law  firm. 

2.  Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including  the 
procedure  you  will  follow  in  determining  areas  of  concern    Identify  the  categories 
of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present  potential  conflicts- 
of-interest  during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been 
nominated. 

Through  my  law  firm,  I  will  identify  all  matters  which  are  pending  in  the  Southern 
District  of  Ohio  in  which  any  lawyer  in  the  firm  is  the  counsel  of  record.  I  will 
then  identify  to  the  Chief  Judge  for  the  Southern  District  of  Ohio  any  and  all 
matters  which  may  present  actual  potential  conflicts  of  interests    I  will  be  guided 
by  the  rules  embodied  in  the  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  and  any  other  governing 
ethical  and/or  disciplinary  rules. 


25 


563 


I  do  not  anticipate  any  categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are 
likely  to  present  potential  conflicts  of  interest  during  my  initial  service  on  the 
Federal  District  Court  Bench    I  do,  however,  have  several  matters  pending  before 
the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of  Ohio  and  I  will 
identify  those  specific  matters  to  the  Chief  Judge.  Any  other  categories  of 
litigation  which  would  present  potential  conflicts,  of  course,  would  involve  cases 
that  are  pending  with  the  court  in  which  my  firm  is  counsel  of  record 

3.  Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside 
employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court?  If 
so,  explain. 

As  a  United  States  District  Court  Judge  for  the  Southern  District  of  Ohio,  I  intend 
to  continue  teaching  in  the  National  Institute  for  Trial  Advocacy  for  which  I  would 
receive  my  per  diem  expenses  if  I  am  a  group  leader  and  a  small  stipend  if  I  am  a 
team  leader.  I  also  intend  to  continue  to  teach  in  both  the  trial  practice  and 
deposition  courses,  schedule  permitting    That  commitment  does  not  exceed  two 
weeks  annually. 

It  is  possible  that  I  will  teach  again  at  Capital  University  Law  School.  That  will 
depend,  however,  upon  my  caseload  at  the  Court.  I  have  no  other  specific  plans, 
commitments  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside  employment  while  a  Judge  on  the 
United  States  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of  Ohio. 

4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar  year  preceding 
your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees, 
dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and  other  items 
exceeding  $500.  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report, 
required  by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  attached  AO-10  Form  (pages  31a  -  3 Id). 

5.  Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail.  (Add 
schedules  as  called  for.) 

See  attached  financial  statement  (page  3 1  e). 


26 


564 


Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign*^  If  so, 
please  identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the 
campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities 

Yes.  I  had  a  role  in  the  1993  re-election  campaign  of  The  Honorable  Janet 
Jackson,  then  a  Judge  on  the  Municipal  Court  of  Franklin  County,  Ohio    I  worked 
with  my  then  law  partner.  The  Honorable  R  Guy  Cole,  Jr.  and  Pat  Logsdon,  Judge 
Jackson's  campaign  manager,  in  raising  money  in  the  African  American 
community.  My  involvement  spanned  the  period  from  January  1993  through 
Judge  Jackson's  election  in  November  1993. 


m.       GENERAL 


An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's  Code 
of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  serving 
the  disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities, 
listing  specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

Big  Brothers/Big  Sisters  Association. 

Serving  as  Secretary  and  Counsel  to  the  Board  of  Big  Brothers/Big  Sisters 
Association  of  Franklin  County. 

In  my  capacity  as  counsel  to  the  Board  of  Big  Brothers/Big  Sisters  Association  of 
Franklin  County  ("BB/BS"),  a  mentoring  organization  which  matches  adults  with 
children  of  the  same  sex  from  single-parent  homes,  I  had  the  responsibility  of 
serving  as  BB/BS's  counsel  on  a  variety  of  legal  matters    There  was  one  matter 
which  comes  to  mind  which  was  of  vital  importance  to  the  organization  and  whose 
resolution  was  essential  to  the  continued  well  being  of  the  organization  both 
financially  and  from  a  public  relations  vantage  point.  That  situation  involved  a 
threatened  suit  by  the  Stonewall  Union,  a  gay  and  lesbian  group,  who  contended 
that  BB/BS  did  not  allow  matches  between  homosexual  mentors  and  children.  As 
BB/BS'  lawyer,  I  was  charged  with  the  responsibility  of  avoiding  this  lawsuit  and 
the  attendant  negative  publicity  which  could  have  resulted.  Through  negotiations 
with  counsel  for  the  Stonewall  Union,  we  were  able  to  reach  an  agreement  which 
avoided  litigation  and  was  satisfactory  to  both  sides. 


27 


565 


Salesian  Boys  and  Girls  Club. 

I  have  served  on  the  Board  of  Directors  of  The  Salesian  Boys  and  Girls  Club  for 
the  past  seven  years  During  that  time,  I  have  provided  pro  bono  legal  services  to 
the  Board  on  various  legal  matters  that  have  arisen  Those  matters  have  included, 
but  have  not  been  limited  to,  counseling  on  employment  matters,  revising  the  By- 
Laws,  counseling  relating  to  the  property  issues  as  well  as  to  insurance  issues.  The 
population  served  by  the  Boys  and  Giris  Club  is  almost  exclusively  minority  inner- 
city  youth,  who  are  economically  disadvantaged. 

Slate  V.  Carlton  Gary 

For  the  past  three  years  I  have  assisted  one  of  my  law  partners,  James  A.  Wilson, 
in  the  habeas  corpus  proceedings  involving  Carlton  Gary.  Mr.  Wilson  was 
assigned  the  Cariton  Gary  matter  by  the  American  Bar  Association  Death  Penalty 
Project  Though  I  am  not  a  member  of  the  Death  Penalty  Project,  nor  a  direct 
volunteer  in  it,  I  have  assisted  Mr  Wilson  in  providing  services  for  Mr  Gary. 
Those  services  have  included  conducting  a  habeas  corpus  proceeding  in  the  State 
of  Georgia  and  helping  to  prepare  various  pleadings,  motions  and  memoranda 
related  to  Mr  Gary's  habeas  corpus  proceeding. 

United  Negro  College  Fund.  Fund  Raiser. 

For  the  past  four  years,  I  have  been  a  fund-raiser  for  the  United  Negro  College 
Fund  ("UNCF")    The  UNCF  helps  economically  disadvantaged  students  by 
providing  financial  assistance  to  historically  Airican  American  colleges  and 
universities.  The  fiands  that !  assisted  in  raising  are  used  primarily  to  provide 
scholarship  funds  for  disadvantaged  youth  to  attend  college 

Innerbelt  Chair  for  the  United  Way  Campaign 

In  1995, 1  served  as  the  Innerbelt  Chairman  for  the  Franklin  County  United  Way 

Campaign    My  responsibility  was  primarily  raising  fiands  from  the  downtown 

Columbus  business  community  for  a  projected  36.1  million  dollar  campaign  for  the 

United  Way.  The  United  Way  assists  local  agencies  in  providing  services  to  the 

disadvantaged. 


The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct 
states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization 
that  invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you 
currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization  which  discriminates  ~ 
through  either  formal  membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of 
membership  policies?  If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.  What  you  have  done 
to  try  to  change  these  policies'' 


28 


566 


No,  except  that  I  am  a  member  of  the  Omega  Psi  Phi  Fraternity,  Inc.  which  admits 
only  men    This  is  a  college  fraternity,  which  I  joined  as  a  graduate.  The  fraternity 
was  founded  in  1911  and  is  comprised  primarily  of  African  American  males, 
although  there  are  no  racial  restrictions  and  there  are  some  white  male  members 
Most  persons  join  during  their  college  years  and  remain  lifetime  members.  The 
members  of  Omega  Psi  Phi  include  a  variety  of  men  of  diverse  backgrounds. 

The  Jefferson  Golf  and  Country  Club  has  no  restriction  on  membership  based  on 
either  gender  or  race    Nor  does  it  have  restrictions  on  tee  times.  There  is  a  men's 
only  grill  which  most  of  the  time  is  limited  to  the  male  members  and  their  guests. 
That  Grill  Room,  however,  is  occasionally  open  for  mixed  dining  when  the  dining 
room  itself  is  closed 

Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates  for 
nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination? 
Please  describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from 
beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and 
interviews  in  which  you  participated). 

Yes,  the  selection  commission  is  the  Ohio  Judicial  Review  Commission.  It 
recommended  me  for  this  nomination.  The  Commission  is  a  five  person  bipartisan 
commission  composed  exclusively  of  lawyers  from  the  Southern  District  of  Ohio. 
It  was  chaired  by  Anthony  J.  Celebreeze  (Columbus),  a  partner  at  Dinsmore  & 
Shohl  LLP,  and  included  Ralph  K.  Frasier  (Columbus),  General  Counsel  for  The 
Huntington  National  Bank,  Michael  Barrett  (Cincinnati),  a  partner  at  Barrett  & 
Weber;  Beth  Schaeffer  (Dayton),  a  partner  at  Pickrel  Schaeffer  &  Ebeling;  and 
Gary  Smith  (Woodsfield),  a  partner  at  Sherry,  Smith  &  Coury. 

The  candidates  were  required  to  complete  an  application  which  is  similar  in  many 
respects  to  the  Senate  Judiciary  Committee's  application  for  District  Court  Judges. 
The  application  had  to  be  submitted  along  with  any  letters  of  reference  that  the 
candidates  chose  to  include.  After  all  applications  were  submitted,  the 
Commission  chose  approximately  ten  candidates  to  be  interviewed.  The 
Commission  conducted  thirty-minute  interviews  of  the  candidates.  Based  on  the 
interviews  and  the  applications  submitted,  the  Commission  chose  me  as  the 
candidate  to  be  recommended  to  Senator  Glenn. 

Senator  Glenn  then  recommended  me  to  President  Clinton.  I  have  since  been 
investigated  by  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation,  the  American  Bar  Association, 
and  the  Justice  Department. 


29 


567 


Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee 
discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could 
reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue,  or 
question''  If  so,  please  explain  fully 

No 

Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judiciai  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal  government,  and  within  society 
generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years    It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that  alleges  that  the 
judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels 
of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than 

grievance-resolution, 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a 

vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending 
to  broad  classes  of  individuals, 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duties 

upon  governments  and  society, 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional 

requirements  such  as  standing  and  ripeness,  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions 

in  the  manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities. 

Resolution  of  specific  disputes  is  the  function  constitutionally  delegated  to 
our  adversarial  system  of  justice.  The  premise  of  the  adversary  system  is  that 
parties  have  a  strong  incentive  to  develop  and  present  persuasively  the  facts  that 
bear  upon  their  individual  dispute.  Traditional  doctrines  such  as  standing  and 
ripeness,  among  other  things,  help  assure  that  the  parties  presenting  a  case  have 
the  necessary  incentive  to  develop  and  present  these  facts.  The  responsibility  of  a 
judge,  particularly  a  trial  court  judge,  is  to  focus  the  trial  or  other  resolution  of  a 
case  upon  the  specific  facts  presented  by  the  parties  in  that  particular  dispute. 
Most  of  the  time,  the  challenge  facing  a  trial  judge  is  not  creating  or  finding  new 
law  ~  it  is  assuring  that  the  law  is  effectively  applied  to  the  case  that  the  parties 
present 

Generally,  the  courts  are  not  well-equipped  to  resolve  issues  beyond  the 
scope  of  the  particular  controversy  before  them.  Parties  normally  do  not  have 
adequate  incentive  to  develop  and  present  facts  that  do  not  bear  upon  their 


30 


568 


individual  disputes.  Moreover,  remedies  broader  than  necessary  to  resolve  the 
particular  dispute  before  a  court  will  inevitably  affect  the  rights  of  individuals  and 
institutions  that  had  no  opportunity  to  be  heard  in  the  litigation.  This  type  of 
judicial  activism  is  inconsistent  with  our  adversarial  system  of  justice  and  the 
limited  constitutional  delegation  of  power  to  the  judiciary. 

On  the  other  hand,  our  society  and  the  executive  and  legislative  branches 
have  much  broader  expectations  of  the  judiciary  than  has  historically  been  the  case. 
The  Courts  are  now  required  to  review  more  administrative  agency  decisions,  to 
interpret  statutes  containing  remedies  unknown  at  common  law,  and  fashion  class 
action  relief  Because  of  all  of  these  circumstances,  particularly  in  light  of  the 
favor  with  which  the  courts  have  treated  class  action  relief  under  the  Federal  Rules 
of  Civil  Procedure,  it  is  inevitable  that  judicial  decisions  in  this  context  may  often 
appear  to  be  the  result  of  judicial  activism. 

A  judge  must  carry  out  the  responsibilities  and  jurisdiction  the  Constitution 
and  Congress  has  legitimately  given  to  him  or  her.  However,  these  responsibilities 
must  be  carried  out  in  recognition  of  the  fact  that  we  still  work  within  an 
adversarial  system  of  justice.  The  role  of  the  courts,  particularly  the  trial  courts, 
remains  to  ensure  that  parties  to  a  particular  dispute  before  the  court  have  a  fair 
and  efficient  opportunity  to  present  their  controversy,  and  to  order  relief  that  is 
broad  enough  to  resolve  that  dispute  between  the  parties,  and  no  broader. 


31 


569 


FINANCIAL     DISCLOSURE     REPORT 

FOR  CALENDAR  YEAR  1996 


1      Person   keporlin;     ,Lasl    na-.-       ;i:st,    midd'.r    .n.-.ia:' 

Marbley,    Algenor.   L. 

United   States    District   Court 
For    Southern   District   of   Ohio 

3       Dale    o-    Report 
8/2/97 

5en;o:    status,    haaistrate    luU^.^    inaicj:- 
fai;      or  par: .ti«* 

U.    S.    District   Judge   -   Nominee 

'      k-l-^rt    T>T'-    ■i.-i'.-CK.  approprrate   ;yi>'r 
X    Nomw,at.on.    Dat.     7,31.97 

4      Reporting    Veri:,d 

:  /  1/96     7  a  /  97 

VOID'S ,    Sater,    Seymour   and   Pease 
52   East  Gay  Street 
Columbus,    Ohio   43215 

any"mo<I:!ica-;or.«    pertair.inq    t'h,— -."c.     i:    is.     m  my   opm'ior;. 
in  compliance  with  applicaoie    ia»s  ar.u  regulations 

IMPORTANT  NOTES;  The  instruclions  accompanv-ing  ihis  form  must  be  followed      Complele  all  pans, 
checking  ihe  NONE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable  information     Sign  on  last  page. 

I.      POSITIONS.      (Reporting  individual  only;  sec  pp  9-13  of  Instructions.) 


n 


POSITION 
NOKE       (No  reportable  positions) 


NAME    OF   ORGANIZATION/ENTITY 


Salesians   Boys   and  Girls  Club 


Big   Brothers/Big   Sisters  Association   of   Franklin  Countj 


II.     AGREEMENTS.      (Reporting  individual  only;  see  pp.  14-17  of  Instructions.) 

DATE  PARTIES    AND    TERMS 


n 


NONE      (No  reportable  agreements) 

There   is   no  written  partnership  agreement  between  myself   and  my   law   fit 

Vorys,    Sater,    Seymour   and  Pease.      Upon   resigning   from  the  partnership. 


I  will   receive  the  balance  of  my   capital   account   in   the   approximate 

of    $52,000.00. 

in.     NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME.  (Reporting  individual  and  spouse;  see  pp.  18-25  of  Instructions.) 

DATE  SOURCE   AND   TYPE 


n 


NONE      (No  reportable  non-investment  income) 


Vorvs 

Sater, 

Seymour 

and 

Pease 

State 

of   Ohio 

(S) 

Vorys 

Sater, 

Seymour 

and 

Pease 

State 

of  Ohio 

(S) 

$ 

134,412 

S 

s 

119,358 

s 

s 

570 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name    of    Person   Reporting 

Algenon  L.   Marbley 


I    2  I     <il 


IV.      REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS  -  transponation,  lodging,  food,  cntcrtainmcm 

{Includes  those  lo  spouse  and  dcpcndcni  children,  use  Ihe  parcnlhelicals  '(S)'  and  '(DC)'  to  indicate  reportable 
reimbursements  and  gifts  received  bv  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  Sec  pp.  26-29  of  Instructions.) 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


□ 


NONE       (No  such  reportable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 


n 


V.     OTHER  GIFTS.      (Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parenlheticals  '(S)"  and  "(DC)"  lo 
indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  30-33  of  Instructions.) 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 

NONE      (No  such  reportable  gifts) 

Exempt 5 

$_ 

$_ 


VI.     LIABILITIES.       (Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  appUcable,  person  responsible 
for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  '(S)"  for  separate  liability  of  the  spouse,  "(J)"  for  joint  liability  of 
reponing  individual  and  spouse,  and  "(DC)"  for  liability  of  a  dependent  child.  See  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODl 


n 


NOKE      (No  reportable  liabilities) 
Fifth  Third  Bank 


J-S1S,000  or  less  K-SIS. 001 -SSO, 000   L-S50. 001 -SlOO, 000   M-SlOO, 001 -S250, 000 

0-SSOO,  001-$1  .  000,  000        Pl-Sl.OOO.  001-$ " "'  ""'   * 

P3-S2S.000.001-SSO.0  00.  000   M-550.  000.  001 


01 -$S. 000. 000  P2-SS.000.001-S2S.000.000 


571 


FINANCIAL    DISCLOSURE    REPORT 


Algenon  L.    Marbley 


1/2    /  97 


MI.  Page   1  IWESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS  -  Income,  value,  transaciion.'.  (Includes  those  of  spouse 
and  dcpendcnl  children  Sec  pp  .^7-54  of  Inslruclions.) 


Des-ription  of   Ass*cs 

Ind.rate  where  applirabU.    own-,    -f 
the  isset   by  using  the  pj! enthe; ; -a: 
-IJ    ■    tor    joint    ownership  ol    lepor; 
ing    indiviQual    and  spouse.    "(Si'-    In 
separate  ownership  by  spouse,    "(PC- 
for  ownership   by  dependent    child 

exempt    fron-  piior  disclo.':.;re 

d::; 

Gross  value 

reporting 
period 

T-.ansaction.    o.r'.n,    reporting   period 

s.^ 

IV- 

Code"' 

"Er' 

Type 

le.g    , 

buy.    sen. 

merger. 

If    no:    e«eirp-_    frorr  disclosure                 | 

121 
Day 

Value; 
Code 

Cainl 

Code 

(51 
Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
(If    private 

1                  NONE          ,No    reportabie 

Vorys,    Sater,    Seymour   and 
Pease   401 (K) 

D 

Div. 

K 

T 

Redemp- 
tion 

4/97 

K 

A 

2  Public   Employees    Retire- 
ment.   System    (SI 

B 

Div. 

K 

T 

]  Fifth   Third   Bank 
Monev   Market   Fund 

A 

Int. 

J 

T 

>o 

" 

- 

" 

» 

- 

:. 

1' 

u 

;cJr'e?:s.^-  r.iioTo.'^hiri.o         i:i!6S°So?^ir?oS:??6"'-"-"°  E:!h°?Sonii°??.ooo,ooo  S5!H;§sj:?i;r_ 

ic^!'?$r-        8:S?gf'il!ie                                     ;.Cost, real    estate  only.                                   S-Xs^ent                        T.ca.h.«ar.et 

572 


FINANCIAL   DISCLOSURE    REPORT     (conc'd)        Algenon   L.    Marbley 


VIII.   ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS  (Indicate  part  of  Report.) 


IX.  CERTIFICATION. 

Id  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U  S.C  §  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Judicial 
Activiiies,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  tune  after  reasonable  inquuy.  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory  function  in  any  litigation 
during  the  period  covered  by  this  report  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  fmancial  inleresi,  as  defined  in 
Canon  3C(3)<c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  information  given  above  (including  information  peruining  to  my  spouse  and  mmor  or  dependent  children,  if  any)  is 
accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  reponed  was  withheld  because  it  met 
applicable  sunitoty  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been  reported  are 
in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C.A.  app.  4,  §  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  §  7353  and  Judicial  Conference  regulations. 


Signature 


^5-^!^ 


f?97 


NOTE      ANY  INDIVIDUAL  WHO  KNOWINGLTT^ND  WILFULLY  FALSIFIES  OR  FAILS  TO  FILE  THIS  REPORT  MAY  BE 
SUBJECT  TO  CIVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U.S.C.  App  4,  §  104.) 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS: 


Mail  signed  original  and  3  additional  copies  to: 


Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 
Administrative  Office  of  the 

United  Sutes  Courts 
Suite  2-301 

One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E., 
Wasbmgton.  DC.  20544 


573 

FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORTH 


Provide  &  complete,  cunwit  financial  net  worth  statement  which  itemizes  in  detail 
all  assets  (including  bank  accounts,  real  estate,  securities,  trusts,  investments,  and  other  financial 
holdings)  all  liabilities  (including  debts,  mortgages,  loans,  and  other  financial  obligations)  of 
yourself,  your  spouse,  and  other  immediate  members  of  your  household. 


ASSETS 

LIABIUnES 

Cub  oc  bind  tni  tc  bu±i 

16 

500 

00 

UtMt  payible  to  binVi-«fnn-ed 

49 

675 

DO 

VS.  CoTcmmeac  Kcunacs-«<U 
Kbedule 

Note*  peyiUc  to  binki-unKCured 

18 

000 

DO 

Nota  ptyibk  to  ttlltivci 

None 

UoGiud  $ceunsiet-*M  tchuSulc 

Motet  ptytble  lo  olhen 

None 

AecoaoU  tad  nolo  nccivtbic: 

Accounts  ind  bSli  due 

None 

Out  bom  reUdvu  ind  bicaii 

Unpiid  I'fV^TTK  tix 

None 

Due  fncn  oihai 

Other  tinp<p5  cut  and  intenst 

Doubtful 

Reel  cttue  manfita  ptytbU-nii 
(dxdule 

307 

000 

00 

tjul  aW£  ovxici-tid  >ciK4ulc 
See   Below   * 

(Home) 
360 

000 

00 

CbttTfl  taattttta  tad  other  licm  pty- 
ibk 

Kul  ouie  motV^SCi  rcceivible 

None 

Aatot  tnd  otbct  penoul  piupuiy 

75 

000 

00 

VTSfi 

3 

000 

00 

Cufa  vtlue-CIe  iniunnce 

2 

000 

bo 

Lazarus 

850 

00 

Other  tTT^T'^f'^^JT^: 

Shell   Oil   Co. 

350 

00      • 

Retirement  Accounts 

88 

JOO 

00 

The   Bombay  Co. 

. 

470 

00 

Retirement  Accounts    (S) 

18 

500 

00 

ToUl  EibiC^ei 

379 

345 

00 

^ 

Net  Worth 

181 

155 

00 

■T«(ll  AUCU 

560 

500 

DO 

Total  CibOilief  ud  net  wotth 

560 

500 

00 

CONTlNGEJfr  UAEIUnES 

GENERAL  INPORMA-TION 

Ai  taiana,  comtler  or  ruruor 

None 

Art  uy  (ueti  (ied|c<17  tAdd  icfaad- 
ok,) 

No 

_ 

None 

Arc  yoo  defcadint  in  loy  niiu  or  le{il 
letioofT 

No 

LcfilOiiflu 

Hive  yoo  erer  Utea  biabupceyT 

NO 

'FtOTiiioe  tat  Fedenl  laeome  Tix 

Other  tpedii  debt 

None 

L_ 

i= 

*  Mortgage  Holder:   Fifth  Third  Bank 

21  E.  State  Street 
Columbus,  OH 


574 


I.    BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used) 

Dale  Albert  Kimball 

Address:    List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address(es). 

Home:  Draper,  Utah  84020 

Office:  185  S.  State  Street,  Suite  1300 

Salt  Lake  City,  Utah  84111 

Date  and  place  of  birth. 

November  28,  1939;  Provo,  Utah 

Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name).  List  spouse's 
occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  address(es). 

Rachel  Henriod  Ballard  Kimball 
nurse  -  Alta  View  Hospital 

9660  South  1300  East 

Sandy,  Utah  84094 

Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates  of 
attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

Brigham  Young  University;  September  1958  -  December  1959; 
Brigham  Young  University;  March  1962  -  August  1964; 
Bachelor's  of  Science  Degree  August  21,  1964; 

University  of  Utah  Law  School;  September  1964  -  June  1967; 
Juris  Doctor  Degree  June  9,  1967. 

Emplovment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional  corporations,  companies, 
firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations,  nonprofit  or 
otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer,  director, 
partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  from  college. 

Summers  of  1964  and  1965:  Employer:  Utah  State  Highway  Department  (West  Jordan, 
Utah);  position  held:  laborer; 

1966-67:  Employer:  University  of  Utah  Law  School  or  the  American  Law  Institute,  Salt 
Lake  City,  Utah;  position  held:  research  assistant 


575 


1967-74:  Van  Cott,  Bagley,  Cornwall  &  McCarthy;  position  held:  associate  (from  June 
1967-Spring  1972),  then  partner  (from  Spring  1972-June  30,  1974). 

1974-76:  Brigham  Young  University  Law  School,  Provo,  Utah;  position  held:  Associate 
Professor. 

1976-79:  Brigham  Young  University  Law  School;  position  held:  Adjunct  Professor. 

1975-present:  Kimball,  Parr,  Waddoups,  Brown  &  Gee,  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah;  Senior 
Partner. 

Former  member  Alta  View  Hospital,  Board  of  Governors  1979-1991; 

Member  of  Board  of  Directors  and  Executive  Committee,  Deseret  News  Publishing,  May 

1996-present; 

Member,  Board  of  Directors  Pioneer  Theatre  Company,  1980-1990;  1993-present; 
Former  Member,  Jordan  Education  Foundation  Board,  1989-1994;  Former  Member, 
Board  of  J.  Reuben  Clark  Law  Society,  1990-1993. 

Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give  particulars,  including 
the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 

Utah  Air  National  Guard,  Fall  of  1957-Spring  of  1964; 

From  February  1960  -  February  1962;  inactive  status  due  to  serving  an  LDS  Mission  in 
Northern  California; 

Serial  Number  AF  28939504;  honorably  discharged  in  1964. 

Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees,  and  honorary 
society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

Brigham  Young  University,  1964,  Magna  Cum  Laude;  Phi  Kappa  Phi 

University  of  Utah  Law  School,  finished  second  in  the  class  of  1967;  Order  of  the  Coif, 

case  note  editor.  University  of  Utah  Law  Review; 

Utah  State  Bar  1996  -  Distinguished  Lawyer  of  the  year; 
Master  of  Bench,  American  Inns  of  Court; 

Former  member,  Utah  Federal  District  Court,  Mediation/Arbitration  Panels. 

Bar  Association:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related  committees  or 
conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of  any 
offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 


576 


Utah  State  Bar  Association;  Member  Screening  Panel  Utah  State  Bar  Ethics  and 
Disciplinary  Committee  1986-87;  Chairman,  Utah  State  Bar  Ethics  and  Discipline 
Committee  1988-94;  Chairman,  Utah  State  Bar  Committee  on  the  Unauthorized  Practice 
of  Law,  1984-86; 

American  Bar  Association,  1973-present. 

Since  1995,  I  have  been  the  Chairman  of  the  Utah  State  Judicial  Performance  Evaluation 
Committee. 

10.  Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are  active  in 
lobbying  before  public  bodies.    Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

I  am  not  a  member  of  any  organization  which  lobbies  of  which  I  am  aware. 

I  have  been  a  registered  lobbyist  before  the  Utah  State  Legislature  for  three  clients: 
VISA,  WECCO,  and  Geneva  Steel.  These  three  corporations  are  clients  for  which  I 
have  done  minor  lobbying. 

Other:  LDS  Church 

1 1 .  Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice,  with  dates 
of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed.  Please  explain  the  reason  for 
any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same  information  for  administrative  bodies  which 
require  special  admission  to  practice. 

All  Utah  trial  and  appellate  courts,  October  17,  1967; 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Tenth  Circuit,  March  20,  1973; 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of  Missouri,  1984; 

District  Court  of  Clark  County,  Nevada,  1988; 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  District  of  Nevada,  1991; 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of  Missouri,  March  1996. 


12.  Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books,  articles,  reports,  or 
other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.  Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.  Also,  please  supply  a  copy 
of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.  If  there 
were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you,  please  supply 
them. 

Case  Note:  Appropriation  of  Name,  Likeness  and  Personality  -  Relatives  and 
Administratrix  Held  to  Have  No  Claim  Under  Privacv  or  Property  Theories.  9  Utah  Law 
Review  999  (1964-65)  (my  own  work) 


577 


Note,  The  constitutional  Convention.  Its  Nature  and  Powers  -  And  the  Amending 
Procedure.  1966  Utah  Law  Review  390  (my  own  work) 

Note,  "Like  Grade  and  Quality"  Under  Section  2(a)  of  the  Robinson-Patman  Act.  1967 
Utah  Law  Review  251  (my  own  work) 

Kimball,  Compulsion  Without  Protection  or  Recourse:  The  Case  for  No-Fault  Accident 
Insurance  for  School  Children.  1975  Utah  Law  Review  925  (a  student  helped  me  with 
it) 

Parr  and  Kimball,  Acquisition  of  Non-Mineral  Land  for  Mine  Related  Purposes.  23rd 
Armual  Rocky  Mtn.  Min.  L.  Inst.  595  (this  is  half  my  work  and  half  my  partner's  work) 

American  Law  of  Mining.  Second  Edition.  Chapter  204,  "Liens"  (my  own  work) 

13.  Health:  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  your  last  physical 
examination. 

Excellent;  late  summer  of  1996 

14.  Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have  held,  whether  such 
position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each  such 
court. 

None 

15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  (1)  citations  for  the  ten  most 
significant  opinions  you  have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was 
affirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3) 
citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues,  together  with 
the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were 
not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

Not  applicable 

16.  Public  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you  have  held,  other  than 
judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected 
or  appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies  for  elective  public 
office. 

None 


-4 


578 


17.       Lepal  Career: 


Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after  graduation  from 
law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name  of  the  judge, 
the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk. 

No 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and  dates; 

No 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices,  companies  or 
govenunental  agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected,  and  the 
nature  of  your  coimection  with  each; 

June  1967  -  end  of  June  1974 

Van  Cott,  Bagley,  Cornwall  &  McCarthy 

50  S.  Main  Street,  #1600 

Salt  Lake  City,  Utah  94144 

Associate  until  Spring  1972,  at  which  time  I  was  made  a  partner  in  the 
firm. 

In  early  July  of  1974,  I  became  an  Associate  Professor  of  Law  at  Brigham 
Young  Law  School,  Provo  Campus,  456  JRCB,  Provo,  Utah  84602;  I  was 
a  full-time  Associate  Professor  of  Law  from  July  1974  through  April 
1976.  I  was  an  Adjunct  Professor  of  Law  at  Brigham  Young  University 
Law  School  from  1976  until  approximately  April  1979. 

In  April  of  1975  (while  I  was  still  teaching),  I  was  one  of  the  founding 
partners  and  I  am  now  the  Senior  Partner  of  the  law  firm  of  Kimball, 
Parr,  Waddoups,  Brown  &  Gee,  185  S.  State  Street,  Suite  1300,  Salt  Lake 
City,  Utah  84111. 

1.  What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice,  dividing  it  into 
periods  with  dates  if  its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 

During  the  first  seven  years  of  my  practice  at  Van  Cott,  Bagley,  Cornwall 
&  McCarthy,  I  engaged  in  a  very  general  practice.  I  did  title  work, 
contract  negotiation,  oil,  gas  and  mineral  work,  administrative  work  and 
a  variety  of  litigation  including  securities  fraud,   shipping  problems, 

-5- 


579 


telephone  company  matters,  criminal  defense  and  appearances  before  a 
variety  of  administrative  agencies.  From  1975  to  the  present  I  have 
generally  engaged  in  a  business  litigation  practice  including  securities 
fraud,  insurance  matters,  antitrust  problems,  general  contract  disputes  and 
energy  work.  I  appear  in  court  very  frequently.  In  the  last  five  years  of 
my  practice  I  have  also  had  some  major  arbitrations  and  some  municipal 
litigation. 

2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the  areas,  if  any,  in 

which  you  have  specialized. 

Corporations  with  some  emphasis  on  energy  litigation.  In  recent  years, 
the  emphasis  has  been  on  general  litigation. 

1.  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at  all?  If  the 
frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such 
variance,  giving  dates. 

I  have  appeared  in  court  frequently  over  my  career.  During  the  last  five 
years  I  have  probably  appeared  in  court  somewhat  less  frequently  than  in 
the  ten  years  immediate  preceding  because  of  my  desire  to  get  younger 
partners  more  court  appearances. 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts;  35% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record;  45% 

(c)  other  courts;  20% 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil  -  95%; 

(b)  criminal  -  5%. 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to  verdict  or 
judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether  you  were  sole  counsel, 
chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

40  total,  15  as  sole  counsel,  10  as  co-counsel  and  15  as  chief  counsel 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury  -  25%; 

(b)  non-jury  -  75%. 

-6- 


580 


Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you  personally 
handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and  date 
if  unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of  each  case.  Identify  the  party 
or  parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your  participation  in 
the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.    Also  state  as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before  whom 
the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  The  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co-counsel  and 
of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 

1.  Buzas  Baseball.  Inc..  et  al..  v.  Salt  Lake  Trappers.  Inc.  et  al.  Civil  No. 
940907477CV,  In  the  Third  Judicial  District  Court  of  Salt  Lake  County,  State  of 
Utah,  Judge  Homer  F.  Wilkinson;  925  P. 2d  941  Oct.  4,  1996;  Salt  Lake 
Trappers.  Inc.  et  al..  v.  Buzas  Baseball.  Inc.  et  al..  Supreme  Court  Case  No. 
950351,  Appeal  from  the  Third  Judicial  District  Court  for  Salt  Lake  County,  The 
Honorable  Homer  F.  Wilkinson. 

This  case  was  litigated  from  1995-97.  Our  firm  was  counsel  for  the  Salt  Lake 
Trappers  and  I  was  chief  counsel  on  the  case.  The  underlying  arbitration 
involved  whether  our  clients  baseball  territory  and  franchise  had  been  improperly 
taken  from  it  and,  if  so,  the  appropriate  amount  of  damages  therefor.  Plaintiffs 
alleged  that  the  arbitrator  had  awarded  our  client  an  inappropriate  award  in  a 
previous  arbitration.  The  trial  court  in  1996  agreed  with  the  plaintiffs.  We 
appealed  to  the  Utah  Supreme  Court  which  reversed  and  found  that  the  arbitrator 
had  acted  appropriately.  This  was  a  significant  case  in  Utah  setting  forth  the 
appropriate  and  limited  scope  of  review  of  an  arbitrator's  decision.  Gregory 
Phillips,  then  of  our  Firm,  also  worked  on  the  case. 

Opposing  counsel:      Robert  S.  Campbell,  Jr. 

Campbell,  Maack  &  Sessions 
201  S.  Main  Street,  /I' 1300 
Salt  Lake  City,  Utah  84111 
801-537-5555 

2.  SALT  LAKE  CITY  CORP. .  et  al. .  UTAH  TRANSIT  AUTHORITY  BD. . 
et  al..  vs.  SALT  LAKE  COUNTY,  et  al.. Co-counsel  Jeffrey  J.  Hunt;  Civil  No. 
960907363CV,  Judge  Homer  F.  Wilkinson;  Stephen  J.  Rees.  v.  Utah  Transit 
Authority,  et  al..  Bonnie  Fernandez.  Dan  Berman.  et  al..  v.  Utah  Transit 
Authority,  etal..  Nos.  960519,  96020,  Utah  Supreme  Court,  939  P. 2d  680  June 
9,  1997. 


581 


We  represented  seven  members  of  the  Utah  Transit  Authority  Board.  I  was  chief 
counsel  for  these  seven  clients.  Jeffrey  J.  Hunt  of  our  firm  helped  me  on  the 
case.  The  litigation  involved  a  question  over  the  proper  appointment  powers  to 
the  UTA  Board. 

The  controlling  statute  and  legislative  history  created  significant  ambiguities 
respecting  the  powers  of  appointment  to  the  Utah  Transit  Authority  Board  by  the 
various  counties,  cities  and  other  population  members  of  the  Utah  Transit 
Authority  District. 

Salt  Lake  City  was  aligned  with  the  clients  and  was  represented  by  Roger  Cutler, 
451  S.  State,  #505,  Sak  Lake  City,  Utah  84111,  801-535-7788.  Salt  Lake 
County  represented  by  William  Hyde,  2001  S.  State  Street,  #S-360O,  Salt  Lake 
City,  Utah  84190,  801-468-3420,  was  opposing  us  on  the  case.  The  other  seven 
members  of  the  Board  opposing  our  clients  were  represented  by  Alan  Sullivan, 
Van  Con,  Bagley,  Cornwall  &  McCarthy,  50  S.  Main,  #1600,  Salt  Lake  City, 
Utah  84144,  801-532-3333.  Steven  Reese,  who  wanted  to  be  appointed  to  the 
Board,  was  represented  by  Dale  F.  Gardiner,  O'Rorke  &  Gardiner,  6995  Union 
Park  Center,  #470,  Midvale,  Utah  84047,  801-569-31311. 

In  the  fall  of  1996  the  court  granted  our  motion  for  a  preliminary  injunction 
freezing  the  then  current  Board  members  in  place.  Salt  Lake  County  and  the 
other  seven  Board  members  appealed  to  the  Utah  Supreme  Court.  We  argued  the 
case  in  January  of  1997  and  the  Supreme  Court  upheld  the  granting  of  the 
preliminary  injunction  and  remanded  the  case  to  the  trial  court  for  further 
proceedings.  After  that  the  Utah  legislature  clarified  the  appointment  procedure 
and  mooted  the  entire  case. 

Young  Electric  Sign  Co.-  Vaughan  Cannon  v.  YESCO.  Civil  No.  C892213, 
Third  Judicial  District  Court  for  Salt  Lake  County,  State  of  Utah;  Judge  J.  Dennis 
Frederick,  Third  Judicial  District  Court.  We  represented  Young  Electric  Sign 
Company  and  certain  of  its  officers  and  directors.  They  were  sued  by  two 
minority  shareholders  seeking  the  appointment  of  a  receiver,  the  dismantling  of 
the  company  and  high  values  for  their  shares.  The  case  was  tried  in  1992.  After 
a  two-week  bench  trial.  Judge  Frederick  ruled  entirely  in  our  favor.  I  was  chief 
counsel  for  our  client.  My  partner  Michael  M.  Later  helped  me  on  the  case. 
This  case  saved  a  major  company. 


582 


Opposing  counsel:       Leland  Eugene  Backus 
Nancy  M.  Somers 

Thomdal,  Backus,  Maupin  &  Armstrong 
P.O.  Drawer  2070 
Las  Vegas,  Nevada  89125-2070 
702-366-0622 

Steven  W.  Dougherty 

Hansen  &  Anderson 

50  West  Broadway,  Sixth  Floor 

Salt  Lake  City,  Utah  84101 

801-534-1700 


4.  State  of  Utah,  v.  Cecil  D.  Andrus.  486  F.  Supp.  995;  (D.C.  Utah  1979),  10  ELR 
20570  (1979),  No.  C79-0037;  No.  C79-0307.  We  represented  Cotter 
Corporation.  As  I  recall,  our  client  had  obtained  unpatented  mining  claims 
pursuant  to  the  Mining  Law  of  1872  and  was  attempting  to  develop  said  claims. 
In  order  to  develop  mining  claims  access  is  required.  Since  the  claims  had  been 
staked  the  area  in  question  had  been  set  aside  as  a  wilderness  study  area  under  the 
Wilderness  Act  and  the  Federal  Land  Policy  Management  Act  had  been  enacted. 
At  the  time,  I  recall  no  law  on  the  question  of  what  was  necessary  to  obtain  a 
right-of-way  under  FLPMA,  particularly  with  respect  to  wilderness  study  areas. 
The  United  States  was  attempting  to  deny  access  altogether.  The  case,  as  I 
recall,  was  tried  by  me  in  1978  and  our  clients  were  granted  an  appropriate  right- 
of-way  limited  to  the  least  intrusive  methods  of  construction. 

Opposing  counsel:      James  Holbrook  (formerly  AUSA) 
Callister,  Nebeker  &  McCuUough 
10  E.  South  Temple,  #900 
Salt  Lake  City,  Utah  84133 
801-530-7300 

Dallin  W.  Jensen 
Parsons,  Behle  &  Latimer 
201  S.  Main  Street,  #1800 
Sak  Lake  City,  Utah  84111 
801-532-1234 

5.  Great  Salt  Lake  Minerals  and  Chemicals  Corp.  v.  Marsh.  596  F.  Supp.  548 
(D.C.Utah  1984),  No.  C84-0230A.  We  represented  Great  Salt  Lake  Minerals 
and  Chemicals  Corp.  (I  was  lead  counsel  and  my  partner  Patricia  W.  Christensen 
was  co-counsel)  in  an  effort  to  keep  the  Army  Corps  of  Engineers  from  breaching 


583 


the  causeway  in  the  Great  Salt  Lake.  The  case  was  tried  on  a  preliminary  and 
final  injunction  for  about  a  week  (as  I  recall)  in  1984  before  Judge  Aldon  J. 
Anderson.  We  lost  the  case.  The  government  was  allowed  to  breach  the 
causeway. 

The  Utah  water  year  in  1983  was  very  high.  The  Great  Salt  Lake,  a  navigable 
and  therefore  federally  owned  body  of  water,  was  lower  in  the  northwest  arm  of 
the  lake  because  of  a  railroad  causeway.  Our  client  had  valid  leases  to  extract 
mineral  brine  from  the  northwest  arm  of  the  lake.  The  Army  Corps  of  Engineers 
set  about  to  breach  the  causeway  and  equalize  the  level  of  the  lake  for  flood 
control  purposes.  We  sought  to  prevent  the  breach  and  keep  our  leases  valuable 
by  our  ability  to  extract  brine  in  its  more  concentrated  form. 

Opposing  counsel:       Dallin  W.  Jensen  (for  the  State  of  Utah) 
Parsons,  Behle  &  Latimer 
201  S.  Main  Street,  #1800 
Salt  Lake  City,  Utah  84111 
801-532-1234 

Joseph  W.  Anderson 

US  Attorney's  Office 

185  S.  State  Street 

Sak  Lake  City,  Utah  84111 

801-524-5682 

SCFC  ILC,  INC.  d/b/a  MOUNTAINWEST  FINANCIAL,  vs.  VISA  U.S.A. 
Inc.,  VISA  U.S.A.,  INC.  and  VISA  INTERNATIONAL  SERVICE 
ASSOCIATION,  Delaware  corporations,  v.  SEARS  CONSUMER  FINANCIAL 
CORPORATION;  and  SCFC  ILC,  INC.  d/b/a  MOUNTAINWEST  FINANCIAL, 
United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Tenth  Circuit,  36  F.3d  958  (U.S.  App. 
1994);  Certiorari  Denied  June  19,  1995;  819  F.Supp.  956  April  1,  1993,  Civil 
No.  2:91-CV-047B,  Judge  Dee  V.  Benson  (D.C.  Utah  1993);  SCFC  ILC,  Inc. 
V.  VISA  USA,  Inc.,  No.  93-4105  (1994),  936  F.2d  1096  (U.S.  App.  1991);  I 
served  as  associate  counsel  along  with  my  partner  Clark  Waddoups.  We 
represented  VISA,  USA,  INC. 


10 


584 


Lead  counsel  was: 


M.  Laurence  Popofsky 

Stephen  V.  Bomse 

Marie  L.  Fiala 

Renata  M.  Sos 

Robert  G.  Merritt 

Heller,  Ehrman,  White  &  McAuliffe 

333  Bush  Street,  Suite  3100 

San  Francisco,  CA  94104 

415-772-6000 


Opposing  counsel: 


William   H.  Pratt 

James  H.  Gale 

Ellen  M.  Moskowitz 

153  East  53rd  Street 

New  York,  New  York  10022 

212-446-4800 


Gary  F.  Bendinger 

Giauque,  Crockett,  Bendinger  &  Peterson 

170  South  Main  Street,  Suite  400 

Salt  Lake  City,  Utah  84101 

801-533-8383 

The  plaintiff  in  this  case  alleged  that  VISA'S  refusal  to  allow  the  Discover  card 
into  the  VISA  system  was  a  violation  of  Section  1  of  the  Sherman  Act.  The 
Discover  Card  was  a  relatively  new  credit  card  competing  with  VISA, 
Mastercard,  American  Express,  etc.  Discover  Card  attempted  to  enter  the  VISA 
system  and  create  a  Discover  VISA  Card.  VISA  refused  on  the  grounds  that  it 
had  no  obligation  to  aid  a  healthy  competitor.  Discover  Card  alleged  that  the 
refusal  constituted  an  antitrust  violation.  After  a  five-week  jury  trial,  the  jury 
found  for  the  plaintiff.  The  Tenth  Circuit  reversed  and  the  Supreme  Court  denied 
certiorari. 


White  River  Shale  Oil  Corp.  v.  Public  Service  Com'n  of  Utah.  700  P. 2d  1088 


(Utah  1985),  No. 
Transmission. 


19848,  No.   19849.     We  represented  Deseret  Generation  & 


This  case  involved  the  question  of  whether  our  client,  Deseret  Generation  & 
Transmission,  or  White  River  Shale  Oil  Corp.  Co.  had  the  right  to  serve  a 
territorial  area  with  electric  power.  After  an  administrative  trial  before  the  Public 
Service  Commission  we  prevailed.  On  appeal  to  the  Utah  Supreme  Court  we  also 
prevailed.    I  handled  the  trial  and  the  appeal. 


11 


585 


Opposing  counsel: 

Robert  F.  Reeder 
Parsons,  Behle  &  Latimer 
201  S.  Main  Street,  #1800 
Salt  Lake  City,  Utah  84111 
801-532-1234 

Salt  Lake  City  v.  Western  Area  Power  Admin..  926  F.2d  974  (C.A.  10  Utah 
1991),  Federal  Court,  bench  trial,  U.S.  District  Court,  Judge  Thomas  Greene. 
I  was  lead  counsel  and  we  represented  the  Colorado  River  Energy  Distributors 
Association  (CREDA). 

In  this  case.  Salt  Lake  City  and  others  attempted  to  obtain  public  power  produced 
on  the  Colorado  River  System  by  the  Western  Area  Power  Administration. 
WAPA  was  represented  by  lawyers  from  the  Department  of  Justice  in  Washington 
and  in  Denver.  Other  municipalities  and  Utah  Power  and  Light,  a  stockholder 
owned  power  company,  attempted  to  obtain  public  power  produced  on  the 
Colorado  River  System  by  the  Western  Area  Power  Administration  (WAPA). 
This  case  involved  what,  in  our  experience,  was  a  unique  attempt  by  parties  not 
associated  with  public  power  production  attempting  to  muscle  in  on  its  cheaper 
rates.  The  case  was  tried  in  1989  or  1990.  The  result  was  that  the  municipalities 
and  privately  owned  power  company  not  associated  with  the  public  power  systems 
were  not  allowed  to  obtain  Colorado  River  Power.  Gary  Dodge  of  our  firm 
helped  me  on  this  case. 

WAPA  was  represented  by: 

(Justice  Department) 

Max  C.  Vassanelli 

Civil  Division,  Room  3730 

United  States  Department  of  Justice 

10th  &  Constitution  Avenue,  NW 

Washington,  D.C.  20530 

(In-house  counsel) 

Mike  Hacskaylo 

Susan  Earley 

Western  Area  Power  Administration 

1627  Cole  Blvd. 

Golden,  Colorado  80402 

WAPA  was  aligned  with  us.    I  believe  the  trial  was  in  1989  or  1990. 


12 


586 


Opposing  counsel:       Donald  B.  Holbrook 

Jones,  Waldo,  Holbrook  &  McDonough 

170  S.  Main,  #1500 

Salt  Lake  City,  Utah  84101 

801-521-3200 

9.  Atlas  Corp.  v.  Clovis  Nat'l.  Bank.  737  P. 2d  225  (Utah  1987),  No.  19239.  In  the 
mid  1980's  I  tried  this  case  before  Judge  Boyd  Brunnell  in  Monticello,  Utah.  I 
represented  two  banks  from  Clovis,  New  Mexico,  who  were  claiming  a  net 
profits  interest  in  land  owned  by  Atlas  Corp.  I  was  chief  and  lead  counsel  for 
our  clients.    We  lost  the  trial  and  won  on  appeal  in  the  Utah  Supreme  Court. 

Opposing  counsel:      Stephen  D.  Alfers 

Alfers  &  Carver,  LLC 
730  17th  Street,  Suite  340 
Denver,  Colorado  80202 
303-592-7674 

Robert  Anderson 
P.O.  Box  275 
Monticello,  Utah  84535 
801-587-2222 

10.  Biben  v.  Card  (Midwestern  Cases,  1983-1994);  Fed.  Sec.  L.  Rep.  (CCH) 
P92,462  January  6,  1986;  United  States  District  Court  For  The  Western  District 
of  Missouri,  Western  Division;  Honorable  Harold  Sachs.  I  was  chief  counsel  for 
an  engineer,  John  P.  Redd,  who  was  a  defendant  in  several  consolidated  federal 
securities  fraud  claims  in  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District 
of  Missouri.  Plaintiffs  in  these  consolidated  cases  included  a  class  of 
shareholders  at  Midwestern,  limited  partners  who  had  purchased  an  interest  in 
ethanol  plants  and  certain  individuals.  The  ethanol  industry  collapsed  in  the  early 
1980's  as  did  the  Midwestern  companies.  Other  defendants  included  other 
directors  and  officers,  accountants,  lawyers  for  Midwestern  and  other  related 
parties.  Hundreds  of  depositions  were  taken,  scores  of  motions  were  argued  and 
decided  and  the  case  was  finally  settled  on  the  eve  of  a  three-month  jury  trial. 
We  also  represented  our  client  in  peripheral  and  related  insurance  litigation  over 
coverage  and  payment  to  us,  said  claims  being  against  National  Union  Insurance 
Company.  We  also  did  a  Wells  Submission  to  the  Securities  and  Exchange 
Commission.  Robert  S.  Clark  of  our  office  worked  with  me  on  the  cases.  Two 
of  these  numerous  cases  are  currently  on  appeal  in  the  Eighth  Circuit.  The 
parties  and  their  counsel  are: 


13 


587 


Attorneys  for  National  Union  Insurance  Company: 
Benjamin  F.  Mann,  Esq. 
Blackweil,  Sanders,  Matheny, 

Weary  &  Lombardi 
Two  Pershing  Square 
2300  Main  Street 
Suite  1100 

Kansas  City,  Missouri  64141-6777 
816-274-6817 

Attorneys  for  KPMG  Peat  Marwick: 

George  E.  Feldmiller 

Berkowitz  &  Feldmiller 

Suite  550 

Two  Brush  Creek  Boulevard 

Kansas  City,  Missouri  64112 

816-561-7007 

Attorneys  for  Defendant  Harold  E.  Card: 

Neil  L.  Johnson 

Swanson  &  Midgley 

1500  Commerce  Trust  Building 

922  Walnut 

Kansas  City,  Missouri  64106-1848 

816-842-6100 

Attorneys  for  Defendant  Ira  W.  Palmer: 

Donald  E.  Howell,  Jr. 

P.O.  Box  6705 

Lee's  Summit,  Missouri  64064-6705 

816-525-5200 

Attorneys  for  Raymond  Jallow: 

C.  Edward  Simpson 

Jones,  Bell,  Simpson,  Abbott  &  Fleming 

601  South  Figuroa  Street 

27th  Floor 

Los  Angeles,  California  90017-5759 

213-485-1555 


19.  Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have  pursued, 
including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did  not 
involve  litigation.   Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question,  please  omit 


-  14 


588 


any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the  privilege  has  been 
waived). 

I  taught  law  school  on  a  full-time  and  adjunct  basis.  I  have  chaired  several  important  bar 
committees  including  the  Unauthorized  Practice  of  Law  Committee,  the  Ethics  and 
Discipline  Committee  and  the  Judicial  Performance  Evaluation  Committee. 

I  have  represented  for  many  years  a  finance  company  with  respect  to  UCC  Article  9 
financing  and,  in  addition,  I  have  litigated  many  of  those  matters. 

I  litigated  a  significant  tort  case  in  Nevada  from  1988-1992  which  was  settled  on  the  eve 
of  a  six-month  jury  trial. 

The  following  is  a  description  of  some  of  my  legal  activities  in  the  last  while: 

1.  I  am  chief  counsel  for  First  Health  Strategies,  Inc.  and  First  Health 
Services  Inc.  in  the  following  matter.  FIRST  HEALTH  STRATEGIES, 
INC.,  and  FIRST  HEALTH  SERVICES  CORPORATION,  Claimants,  vs. 
FOUNDATION  HEALTH  PHARMACEUTICAL  SERVICES,  INC., 
AND  INTEGRATED  PHARMACEUTICAL  SERVICES,  INC., 
Respondents;  Charles  T.C.  Compton,  arbitrator,  of  Wilson,  Sonsini, 
Goodrich  &  Rosati,  650  Page  Mill  Road,  Palo  Alto,  California  94304- 
1050.  This  is  a  complicated  matter  involving  the  construction  of 
formulary  agreements  and  administrative  services  agreements  in  the  health 
management  area. 

2.  I  am  chief  counsel  for  Halotron,  Inc.  in  the  matter  of  Halotron,  Inc.,  et 
al.  V.  AB  Bejaro- Product,  et  al..  Arbitration  No.  81.153.00026.96.  This 
matter  involves  intellectual  property  problems  and  contract  disputes. 
Professor  Hans  Smit  is  the  Arbitrator. 

3.  Also,  I  am  lead  counsel  for  two  banks  in  a  major  case  in  the  Third 
Judicial  District  Court,  State  of  Utah  involving  the  appropriate  scope  of 
credit  union  activities. 

4.  I  have  been  hired  by  the  LDS  Church  to  conduct  a  major  legal  audit  of 
one  of  its  large  departments. 

5.  I  am  also  currently  involved  in  giving  general  legal  advice  to  the  Chief 
Executive  Officer  of  Geneva  Steel  Company. 

6.  I  am  chief  counsel  in  a  case  in  the  Utah  State  District  Court  regarding 
appropriate  state  taxes  on  airline  assets. 


-  15 


589 


7.  I  am  chief  counsel  in  a  case  in  the  Federal  Court  currently  regarding  Fair 
Labor  Standard  Acts  problems. 

8.  I  am  also  Chief  counsel  for  certain  developers  who  have  numerous 
problems  with  municipalities  and  several  on-going  lawsuits  concerning  the 
same. 

9.  Along  with  my  partner  Richard  G.  Brown,  I  have  recently  represented  a 
group  of  investors  who  have  purchased  a  controlling  interest  in  a  bank. 
We  have  worked  through  the  regulatory,  contract  and  other  problems 
relating  to  this  purchase.    We  now  represent  the  bank. 


-  16- 


590 


HNANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred  income 
arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which  you 
expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  professional  services,  firm 
memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please  describe  the  arrangements 
you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or  business  interest. 

I  own  an  interest  in  the  pension  and  profit  sharing  plans  at  Kimball,  Parr,  Waddoups, 
Brown  &  Gee.  The  Firm  is  agreeable  to  continue  managing  my  interest  in  the  plan  or 
turning  it  over  to  an  independent  manager. 

I  own  minor  interest  in  a  couple  of  limited  partnerships  which  pay  modest  dividends  from 
time  to  time. 

Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including  the  procedure 
you  will  follow  in  determining  these  areas  of  concern.  Identify  the  categories  of 
litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present  potential  conflicts-of- 
interest  during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

As  long  as  my  current  law  firm  is  involved  in  the  management  of  my  retirement  plan, 
I  assume  I  could  not  hear  any  cases  from  said  law  firm.  The  Firm  is  agreeable  to 
continue  managing  my  interest  in  the  plan  or  turning  it  over  to  an  independent  manager. 
If  the  management  of  the  fund  is  transferred  to  an  independent  manager  then  I  could  not 
hear  cases  involving  that  manager.  I  would  resign  from  all  profit  and  non-profit 
organizations  from  which  I  am  affiliated  except  for  my  church. 

I  obviously  could  not  hear  cases  involving  the  limited  partnerships  in  which  I  retain  an 
interest. 

For  an  appropriate  period  of  time,  I  would  not  hear  cases  from  my  former  firm.  Further 
I  would  not  hear  cases  involving  former  clients.  I  would,  in  all  instances,  follow 
appropriate  guidelines  including  the  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct. 

Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside  employment,  with 
or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court?   If  so,  explain. 

No 

List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar  year  preceding  your 
nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees,  dividends, 
interest,  gifts,  rents  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and  other  items  exceeding  $500  or 


17 


591 


more  (if  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report,  required  by  the 
Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  attached  Financial  Disclosure  Report. 

Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail  (add  schedules  as 
called  for). 

See  attached  Net  Worth  Financial  Statement. 

Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign?  If  so,  please 
identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the  campaign, 
your  title  and  responsibilities. 

No 


18 


592 

FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORTH 


Provide  a  complete,  cuirent  financial  net  worth  stattmcnt  which  itemizes  in  detail 
aU  assets  Cmduding  bank  accounts,  real  estate,  securities,  trusts,  investments,  and  other  financial 
holdings)  all  Uabiliries  Cmcluding  debts,  mortgages,  loans,  and  other  financial  obligations)  of 
yourself,  your  spouse,  and  other  immediate  members  of  your  household. 


ASSETS 

LIABrLniES 

Cuh  on  htnd  uid  in  bccki 

42,0QQ 

Notes  payable  to  bants-seoired 

none 

]  U.S.  Goveznmcax  »ccuritics— uld 
J  idiedule 

none 

Notes  payable  to  ban]a-«a»ecured 

none 

1  Lilted  ucaiiaes—vid  tcbfidule 

— 

Notes  payable  to  relatives 

none 

1  UtiUitcd  t£ciffitics — Mjid  schedule 

— 

Notes  payable  ta  othen 

none 

1 

Accoonti  and  nous  receivable: 

Accounts  and  btUj  due 

1 

Due  from  reUdvei  and  friends 

— 

Unpaid  income  tax 

none 

1 

1        Due  from  others 

none 

Other  unpaid  tax  and  interest 

none 

! 

Doubtful 

none 

Real  estate  mortjatei  payable-add 
schedule 

^61,0( 

0 

louse  and    land  located    in 

Real  ataxc  owned— add  schedule 
praper,    Utah 

450, OOC 

Chattel  mort{a{e3  and  other  lieits  pay- 
able 

none 

Real  estate  mortgages  receivable 

none 

Other  debo-itemize; 

!5,00( 

Autos  and  other  personal  properly 

100, OOC 

sharing    trust) 

Cash  value-lile  iniurance 

— 

1  Other  assets-tlemiie: 

1  Pension  and   profit    sharing   plan 

7  5a,  OOC 

, 

1 

Limited    partnership    interest    in 
"Village  Anartments 

100. OOC 

122    shares  of   Mt .    Jordan   Ltd. 

5,. OOC 

Total  T^«t^'i'^'^« 

186,0 

)0 

4    shares   of    Draper   Irrigation 
Company       '' 

6,  OOC 

Net  Worth                                          ^  ■ 

277,0 

)C 

Kageiian   common    stocK    ^,lS,y->J^ 

10, OOC 

Total  lisbililies  and  net  wcnh                   ' 

4  63,0 

)0 

ifi'^.OOC 

CONTINGENT  UABIUTIES 

GENERAL  INFORMATION 

Ai  endoner.  comaker  or  juarantoc 

''see  be 

low 

Are  any  aaiets  piedied?  £Add  sched- 
,   ,hc!use   ahd  T-antT,    see 
ule.)                          abo-*e 

On  leases  or  contracts 

none 

Are  yoQ  defendant  in  any  luki  or  le|al 
tenons? 

no 

Legal  Claims 

none 

Have  you  ever  taten  bankruptcy? 

no 

Piovisioo  for  Federal  Income  Tai 

none 

Other  special  debt 

lone 

Liabilities  secured-First  Mortgage  payable  to  Bank  One  approximately  $145,(XX);  Second  Mortgage  payable  to  Bank  One  $16,000. 

Unpaid  income  lax:  I  have  withheld  more  than  ovfed. 

1  am  an  accommodation  maker  for  one  of  my  daughters  on  a  residence  note  lo  Chase  Manhattan  Bank.  The  amount  of  the  note  Is  approximately 

$205,000.  The  value  of  the  secunty  for  the  note  is  approximately  $320,000.  My  daughter  is  currently  refinancing  and  I  will  then  no  longer  be  on 

this  note.  1  am  also  an  accommodation  maker  for  one  of  my  sons  on  a  residence  note  to  PMC  Mongage  Corporation  In  Lubbock,  Texas.  The  amount 

of  the  note  is  $57,000.  The  value  of  the  security  for  the  note  is  approximately  $65.0(X). 


593 


FI.NAMCI.\L     DISCLOSURE     REPORT 

FOR    CALENDAR    YEAR    199S 


oC    19«},     Pus.    ■;,,    Mo 


I.    Person   Reporting    (Las:    name.     Jirsc.    i*iddl-    ifiiZLalt 

Kimball,    Dale   A. 

2.    Couri  or  Orjaniiacior. 

U.S.    District   Court 
District   of   Utah 

3.   Oace  Qt  Aepoc: 
9  /    9/97 

U.S.    District   Judge 

5,    Sepor-   Type    [c.-.£c!c  i=?r=QriJ:«  cvpe! 

X     Mm-.r^-.-.or..    Oizt  9   A    /  97 

r.Titiil      A.-..-.ual      .-i.-.al 

5      Xtporli.-.^    Period 

within   30  days   of 
nomination 

1/1/96   -'9/4/97 

7     CSdcvbers  or  Oii::i   .Wdress 

185  S..  State  Street,    #1300 
Salt   Lake   City,    Utah  84111 

)     On  :.-.s  basis  a:   cSe   -.licrraiiar.  cortzt'.r.ti  i.i  cms  lecor:  and 
any  .^diricaciors   aertdi.-.i.-.g  tnerslo.     i;    is.    m  mv  oo---or 
m  compliance    wich  appLicacii    ta-s  a.-.d   rs^ulacioni      ' 

Ieviawi.-.5  0£;icsr                                                                               Dace 

IMPORT AiVT  NOTES:  The  instructions  accompanying  this  form  must  be  followed.     Complete  all  parts, 
checking  the  NONE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable  information.    Sign  on  last  page. 

I.     POSITIONS.      (Reporting  individual  onJy;  see  pp.  9-13  of  Instructions.) 


n 


POSITION 
NONE       (No  reportable  positions) 


Partner/Shareholder 
Board   of   Directors 


Executive   Committee 
Limited   Partner 


Limited   Partner 


NAME    OF    ORG-gLNIZATION/ENTITY 


Kiahall,    Parr,   Waddoups,    Brown   &   Gee 

Deseret   News  Publishing 

Mt.     .Tnrdan    T  ^r^ 

Village  Apartments 


II.     AGREEiVIEiNTS.      (Reporting  individual  only;  see  pp.  14-17  of  Instructions.) 

DATE  PARTIES    AND    TERiMS 


y 


NONS       (No  reportable  agreements) 


Some  agreement  will  have  to  be  reached  regarding  payments  to  me  from  my  share 
or  ttie  K.imbaii,  Parr,  Waddoups,  Brown  &  Gee  pension  and  profit  sharing  trust. 
The  firm  is  prepared  to  either  continue  to  manage  my  share  or  to  turn  it  over 
to   an    independer.t   manager.  ~ 


III.     NON-IIWESTMENT  INCOME.     (Reporting  individual  and  spouse;  see  pp.  18-25  of  Instructions.) 

DATE  SOURCE    AND    TYPE 


n 


NONE       (No  reportable  non-investment  income) 

Dale  Kimball 

1995  Kimball,  Parr,  Waddoups,  Brown  S  Gee 


Kimball,  Parr,  Waddoups,  Brown  &  Gee 


Kimball,  Parr,  Waddoups,  Brown  &  Gee 


Rachel  Kimball 

1995  Jordan  Vallev  Hospital 


Columbia/HCA  ffealthcare  Corp 
Jordan  Valley  Hospital 


Hospi 
LC4  View  HospiC4l 
City  of  Drapet 
Alta  View  Hospital 


g  182,210.84 

207,386.18 
5 


222,383.08 


594 


FINANCIAL    DISCLOSURE    REPORT  Dale  A.    Kimball  „  "    '" 

9/9/97 

rV.     REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS  --  transportation,  lodging,  food,  entertainment 

(Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children,  use  the  parentheticals  '(S) '  and  (DC)"  to  indicate  reportable 
reimbursetnents  and  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  26-29  of  Instructions  ) 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


n 


NONE       (No  such  reportable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 


n 


V.     OTHER  GIFTS.       (Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheticals  "(S)"  and  "(DC)"  to 
indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  30-33  of  Instructions.) 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 

NONE       (No  such  reportable  gifts) 
Exempt  J 

$_ 

?. 


VI.     LIABILITIES.       (Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible 
for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  "(S)"  for  separate  liability  of  the  spouse,  "(J)"  for  joint  hability  of 
reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  "(DC)"  for  Liability  of  a  dependent  child.  See  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  V?d.UE    CODE" 


D 


NONE       (No  reportable  liabilicics) 


•Value  Codes:   J-SIS.OOO  or  less  K-SIS. OOL-SSO, 000   L-SSO. OOL-SIOO, 000 

0-SSOO, OOL-Sl,OOO.OaO        Pl-Sl. OQO.OOl-SS.OOO.OOO 
P3-S2S.OO0.0OL-SSO,00O,00O   P4-S50. OOP. 001  or  more 


595 


FINANCIAL    DISCLOSURE    REPORT 


/9    /q 


VII.   Page   1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS  •- income,  value,  transactions  (Includes  those  of  spouse 
and  dependent  children.  See  pp.  37-34  of  Instructions.) 


OescrvpCLon'of  Assecs 

I.-ifiiracs    -here   aopUraale.    o«r.er  a- 

i.-.i   ir.ii^Juil'ard   siocse. '- ^sf'^fSr 
sesarace  owners.Tio  3y   soouse.    "(DC)" 
;or  3«p.er3ti:.p  by  Seper.der.c  cnild. 

exempt    from  prior  disclosure 

3 

c 

Gross  value 

r;=ir:i.-.g 
?er:.od 

^--—   .urL,    repor:..,  Per.rd 

(11 

Code" 
(A-KI 

(21 

Tv3e 

(e".j,  . 

(11 

Value 

Code 
(J--?l 

value 

.1eci-.od3 

Code 

(O-wl 

Su/'leil 

:.'   r.oc    e.<er.pc    :roa  disclosure                1 

.^cr."" 

Value; 

Code 
(J-?) 

Sair. 

Code 

IA-« 

(SI 
Idenciiv  o: 
buy-r/seller 
(i;   ?ri«a:e 

NONE         (Mo   repor:aole 

Exempt 

1    y4aiage.  Apt:s» 

$100 

,000 

2     122   units  Mt,   Jordan 

5 

,000 

3     4    shares   Draper   Irrigation 

6 

,000 

«     Magellan  coiranon   stock 

10 

,000 

s 

' 

» 

' 

10 

u 

w 

13 

M 

IS 

13 

1' 

IS 

\ci'i''it%^'--  r.u^To.'-idr.ioo        s:it63»So??s5°2oS:i^6"^-"-°°"  °.:nroii'ikr..o...ooo  5jfH:SSJi^?-r™r= 

■-^  -'  WM^mM^^...  imaa^iiP-—'  --^-^^^°^-—'°' 

JValMchCds:      Q-Aopraisal                                        R-Cosl:(real    escace  onlyl                                    S-Assesment                       T-Caah/Markec 
(Col.    C2I                  U-SbSk  Value                                     v-other                                                                          a-isciroaced 

596 


FINANCIAL    DISCL0SUH2    REPORT    (conC'd) 


Dale   A.    Kijib'all 


9  /9  /97 


VIII.  ADDITIONAL  INTORALATION  OR  EXPLAiVATIONS   andtcate  pan  of  Report.) 


IX.  CERTiriC.4.TI0N. 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  §  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  .Advisory  Cotnminee  on  Judicial 
Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  tcnowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inqmry,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory  function  in  any  litiganon 
during  the  period  covered  by  this  report  m  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  fmanciai  interest,  as  defined  in 
Canon  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  information  given  above  (including  information  penaming  to  my  spouse  and  mmor  or  dependent  children,  if  any)  is 
accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  reponed  was  withheld  because  it  met 
applicable  statutory  provisions  pennicting  non-disclosure. 

I  fiirther  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been  teponed  are 
in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C. A.  app.  4,  §  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  §  7353  and  Judicial  Conference  regulations. 


J^r^O  ^f    /C 


2sd^2. 


Signanire 

NOTE:     AiVY  INDIVIDUAL  WHO  KNOWINGLY  AND  WILFULLY  FALSIFIES  OR  FAJLS  TO  FILE  THIS  REPORT  MAY  BE 
SUBJECT  TO  CIVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  §  104.) 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS: 


Mail  signed  original  and  3  additional  copies  to; 


Comnuttee  on  Financial  Disclosure 
Admimstrative  Office  of  the 

Um'ted  States  Courts 
Suite  2-301 

One  Columbus  Circle.  N.E., 
Washington,  D.C.  20544 


597 


III.    GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's  Code  of 
Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence 
or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  serving  the  disadvantaged." 
Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances  and 
the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

From  1980-1989  I  managed  the  law  firm's  pro  bono  legal  activities  and  did  some  of  the 
work  myself.  I  do  not  know  how  much  time  I  spent.  I  have  also  done  considerable 
work  for  penniless  friends  and  relatives  over  the  years.  I  would  guess  it  involved  500 
hours  worth  of  work.  I  also  recently  supervised  pro  bono  litigation  in  our  office  for  a 
convicted  murderer  in  an  effort  to  require  the  State  of  Utah  to  reimburse  lawyers  in 
capital  cases. 
I  have  engaged  in  the  following  civic  service: 

Master  of  Bench,  American  Inns  of  Court  1994-present;  Former  member,  Utah  Federal 
District  Court  Mediation/Arbitration  Panels  1993-96;  Former  Member  Alta  View 
Hospital  Board  of  Governors  1978-90;  Former  Member,  Jordan  Education  Foundafion 
Board  1989-95;  Former  Member  Board  of  J.  Reuben  Clark  Law  Society  1991-93; 
Pioneer  Theater  Company  Board  1980-90;  1992-present;  University  of  Utah  Law  Alumni 
Board  1988-90. 

The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  states  that 
it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that  invidiously 
discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you  currently  belong,  or  have 
you  belonged,  to  any  organization  which  discriminates  —  through  either  formal 
membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership  policies?  If  so, 
list,  with  dates  of  membership.    What  you  have  done  to  try  to  change  these  policies? 


I  do  not  belong  to  any  such  organizations. 


Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates  for 
nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?  Please 
describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from  beginning  to  end 
(including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you 
participated). 

No.  I  spoke  with  Senator  Orrin  Hatch,  Senior  Senator  from  the  State  of  Utah  about  my 
interest  in  becoming  a  United  States  District  Judge.   I  believe  we  had  two  conversations. 

I  have  had  several  conversations  with  personnel  at  the  Department  of  Justice.  In 
addition,  I  was  interviewed  by  an  FBI  agent.  Further,  I  was  interviewed  by  a 
representative  of  the  American  Bar  Association. 

-  19- 


45-964    98-20 


598 


Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee  discussed  with 
you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be 
interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue,  or  question?  If  so,  please 
explain  fully. 

No. 

Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal  government,  and  within  society 
generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.  It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial 
branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than 
grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a  vehicle 
for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad  classes  of 
individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duties  upon 
governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional  requirements 
such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions  in  the 
maimer  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight  responsibilities. 

Judges  are  required  to  honor  the  philosophy  embraced  in  our  system  of  govenmient: 
namely,  there  are  three  branches  of  government  with  a  separation  of  powers.  The 
judiciary  should  not  improperly  intrude  into  the  functions  of  the  executive  or  legislative 
branches  of  government.  Further,  courts  are  bound  to  follow  the  principle  of  stare 
decisis.  The  developed  doctrines  of  standing  and  ripeness  also  control  and  shape  which 
appropriate  issues  and  parties  come  before  the  judicial  branch  of  government. 


-20 


599 

I.  Biographical  Information  (Public) 
Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used.) 
Judge  James  S.  Cwin 

Address:  (List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  addresses). 

Office: 

Stark  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas 

Stark  County  Courthouse 

115  Central  Plaza  South 

Canton,  Ohio  44702 

Residence: 

Canton,  Ohio  44718 

Date  and  place  birth. 

August  10,  1954 
Canton,  Ohio 


Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife  or  husband)  and  spouse's  occupation, 
employer's  name  and  business  address. 

I  am  married  to  Bonnie  Wetterer  Cwin,  married  November  16,  1985. 

She  is  Senior  Location  Manager  and  Business  Unit  Executive,  Travel  and  Transport 

Industry,  I.B.M.  Ccporation. 

Suite  400,  Main  Place, 

121  South  Main  Street 

Akron,  OH  44308 


Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates  of 
attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

Kenyon  College 

Gambler,  Ohio 

1972-76 

A.B.,  cum  laude,  granted  May  22,  1976 

The  University  of  Akron  School  of  Law 

Akron,  Ohio 

1976-1979  (Completed  in  IVi  years) 


600 


J.D.,  earned  December  1978,  conferred  May  1979 


Employment  Record  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional  corporations, 
companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations, 
nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer, 
director,  partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  -since  graduation  from  college. 

Judge,  Court  of  Common  Pleas 
Stark  County,  Ohio 
1 989-  present 

Gutierrez,  Mackey  &  Cwin,  L.P.A. 

1985-1989 

Partner,  shareholder 

Wise  &  Gutierrez 

1979-1985 

Associate 

Urbanistics,  Inc. 
Canton,  Ohio 
January  1979- May  1979 
Research  Associate 

Blakemore,  Rosen  &  Norris,  L.P.A. 
Akron,  Ohio 
1976-1979 
Law  Clerk 

Doctors  Hospital  of  Stark  County 

Massillon,  Ohio 

1993-94 

Former  Board  of  Trustees  Member,  unpaid 

North  Central  Ohio  Juvenile  Diabetes  Foundation 

Canton,  Ohio 

1991-94 

Former  Board  of  Trustees  Member,  unpaid 

Central  Stark  County  Mental  Health  Center 

Canton,  Ohio 

1990-1994 

Former  Board  of  Trustees  Member,  unpaid 

Canton  Croup  Home,  Inc. 

Canton,  Ohio 

Approximately  1980-1985 

Former  Board  of  Trustees  Member,  unpaid 


601 


Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give  particulars,  including 
the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge 
received. 

None 


Honors  and  Awards  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees,  and 
honorary  society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the 
Committee. 

Kenyon  College 
cum  laude 

The  University  of  Akron,  School  of  Law 
Akron  Law  Review 


Bar  Associations  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial  related  committees  or 
conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of 
any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Ohio  Bar  Association 

Stark  County  Bar  Association 

Ohio  Judicial  Conference 

Chair,  Court  Technology  Subcommittee 

Approximately  1995  to  present 

Ohio  Judicial  Conference 
Member,  Court  Reform  Committee 

Ohio  Judicial  Conference 
Member,  Legislation  Committee 

Office  of  Criminal  Justice  Services 
Member,  Regional  Working  Group 

Ohio  Judicial  Conference 

Former  member,  Jury  Instructions  Committee 

Ohio  Judicial  College 
Lecturer 

State  Justice  Institute 

Member,  "State  Courts  and  Toxic  Torts"  Advisory  Board 


602 


Stark  County  Bar  Committee 

Grievance  Committee,  Technology  Committee,  Citizenship  Committee 


10  Other  Memberships  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are  active  in 
lobbying  before  public  bodies.  Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

I  do  not  belong  to  any  organization  that  lobbies  before  public  bodies 

United  Way  of  Central  Stark  County,  committee  member 

Brookside  Country  Club 

1 1  Court  Admission  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice,  with 
dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed.  Please  explain  the 
reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same  information  for  administrative 
bodies  which  require  special  admission  to  practice. 

Ohio  Supreme  Court,  May  7,  1979 

U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Northern  District  of  Ohio,  September  4,  1 980 

U.S.  Court  of  Appeals,  Sixth  Circuit,  August  27,  1986 

U.S.  Supreme  Court,  August  12,  1988 

My  membership  has  not  lapsed  in  any  of  these. 


12        Published  Writings  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  publication  of  papers, 
articles,  reports,  or  other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.   Please 
supply  one  copy  of  all  published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  committee. 
Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law 
or  legal  policy.  If  there  were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily 
available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

I  have  spoken  on  legal  issues  and  legal  procedures  often.  These  were  given  to  various 
judicial  education  groups  and  attorney  groups.   1  have  spoken  on  Ohio's  criminal 
sentencing  provisions,  on  evidence,  on  the  use  of  technology,  on  effective  writing,  and 
on  opening  statements,  among  others.   I  did  not  keep  the  notes  used  for  these  speeches 
or  talks. 


13         Health:   What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?    List  the  date  of  your  last  physical 
examination. 

Good,  last  physical  examination  June  9,  1997 


603 


14        Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  office  held,  whether  such  position 
was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each  such 
court. 

Stark  County  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  appointed  April  1,  1989,  elected  November  4, 
1990.  in  1996,  I  was  reelected  without  opposition.  General  jurisdiction  (Felony  and 
civil) 

My  peers  elected  me  Administrative  Judge  in  1 990,  1 993  and  1 997.   In  1 995,  my  peers 
elected  me  Presiding  Judge. 


1 5        Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide: 

(1)        citations  for  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you  have  written;  (If  any  of  the 
opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

Roseman  v.  Firemen's  and  Policemen's  Death  Benefit  Fund,  579  N.E.2d  560  (1991.) 
This  decision  was  affirmed  by  the  Ohio  Supreme  Court  in  Roseman  v.  Firemen  & 
Policemen's  Death  Benefit  Fund,  66  Ohio  St. 3d  443  (1993) 

Carrols  Corporation  v.  Jacobs  Visconsi,  1990  Ohio  Misc.  LEXIS  four  (Enclosed) 

Moore  v.  Consolidated  Rail  Corp.,  Stark  County  Case  No.  1995  CV  01 185,  (Enclosed) 

State  V.  Jewell,  Stark  County  Case  No.  1996CV01944,  (Enclosed) 

Bradley  v.  Time  Warner,  Stark  County  Case  No.  1996CVn03,  (Enclosed) 

State  V.   Fry,  Stark  County  Case  No.  1994CR0176,  (Enclosed) 

Mohr  V.  fianc  One,  Akron  Stark  County  Case  No.  1992CV304,  (Enclosed) 

Barr  v.  Ohio  Edison,  Summit  County  Case  No.  91-12-4661,  (Enclosed) 

In  Re  Annexation  of  369.781  Acres,  1990  Ohio  Misc.  LEXIS  8,  (Enclosed) 

State  V.  Williams,  Stark  County  Case  No.  CV93-021 13  (Enclosed) 

None  of  these  decisions  have  been  reversed. 


2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all  appellate  opinions  where  your 

decisions  were  reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant 
criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed 
were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

I  have  been  reversed  twenty  eight  times.   I  enclose  copies  of  these  reversals.  To  give 
perspective,  I  have  presided  over  more  than  426  jury  trials  in  the  last  eight  years, 


604 


including  more  than  230  felony  cases.  I  have  presided  over  more  than  6,730  total  case 
terminations. 

State  V.  Allen  Wendling  (August  7,  1995),  Stark  App.  No.  95  CA  0044,  unreported.   In 
this  case  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  Ohio,  Fifth  District,  Stark  County  ruled  that  I  erred  in 
sentencing  the  defendant.  The  state  charged  the  defendant  with  felonious  assault,  he 
was  found  not  guilty  of  the  charged  offense  of  felonious  assault,  but  guilty  of  the  lessor 
included  offense  of  aggravated  assault  with  a  physical  harm  specification.  The  Court  of 
Appeals  ruled  that  the  defendant  could  not  be  sentenced  to  an  indeterminate  period  of 
incarceration  of  two  to  five  years  because  the  indictment  had  not  included  a  physical 
harm  specification.  The  defendant  was  returned  and  resentenced. 

State  V.  Bowersock  (October  21,  1996),  Stark  App.  No.  1995CA00418,  1996  WL 
608464,  unreported.  The  State  charged  the  Defendant  with  gross  sexual  imposition. 
The  State  alleged  that  Bowersock  fondled  a  seven  year  old  girl  in  the  vaginal  area  and 
performed  cunnilingus  on  the  child.   During  trial,  the  child  witness  had  testified  that  she 
had  drawn  a  picture  of  the  area  involved  in  pretrial  interviews.   I  ruled  that  the  drawings 
would  be  hearsay  and  not  admissible.  The  Court  of  Appeals  ruled  that  the  drawings 
were  discoverable  under  Criminal  Rule  16  as  a  statement  of  a  witness. 

State  V.  Stanley,  (Jan.  17,  1995),  Stark  App.  No.  1994CA00025,  unreported.   In  a 
criminal  case  the  defendant  had  pled  not  guilty  by  reason  of  insanity.  At  trial  the  State 
had  sought  to  introduce  evidence  that  the  Defendant  remained  silent  after  being  given 
Miranda  warnings.  The  State  argued  that  this  silence  suggested  that  the  defendant  was 
not  delusional.   I  allowed  the  evidence.  The  Court  of  Appeals  ruled  that  the  use  of  post- 
Miranda  silence  to  prove  sanity  was  not  permitted.  The  Defendant  was  returned  and 
pled  guilty. 

in  Estate  of  Baxter  v.  Grange  Mut.  Cas.  Co.,  73  Ohio  App. 3d  512  (5th  Dist.  1992)  the 
plaintiff  brought  a  declaratory  judgment  action  against  insurer  for  bad  faith  in 
investigation  and  denial  of  insurance  coverage.  The  Court  of  Appeals  affirmed  all  the 
major  decisions  I  made  in  the  case.  The  Court,  however,  ruled  that  I  erred  in  awarding 
prejudgment  interest  before  the  amount  of  damage  had  been  arbitrated  and  confirmed. 

Cole  V.  Motorist  Mutual  Insurance  Company  (October  16,  1995),  Stark  App. 
1995CA00066,  1995  WL  617610,  unreported.   In  Cole,  the  Plaintiff  sued  their 
uninsured  motorist  provider  for  bad  faith  when  the  insurer  refused  to  pay  a  wrongful 
death  claim.  After  trial,  I  granted  a  motion  for  a  new  trial  on  the  issue  of  damages.  The 
Court  of  Appeals  ruled  that  I  had  erred  in  refusing  to  grant  a  new  trial  on  the  issue  of 
punitive  damages  as  well. 

In  Sherlin  v.  Palace  Theater,  (April  20,  1992),  Stark  App.  No.  CA-8476,  the  plaintiff  was 
a  welfare  worker  assigned  to  do  clean  up  at  a  not-for-profit  theater.  The  plaintiff  was 
injured  in  a  fall.  The  Court  of  Appeals  found  that  I  erred  in  not  giving  judgment  to  the 
Defendant.  The  Court  of  Appeals  found  that  the  theater  employed  the  injured  party 
under  a  borrowed  employee  theory.   The  Court  of  Appeals  found  the  theater  enjoyed 
immunity  under  Ohio's  Workers  Compensation  Law,  R.C.  4123.74. 

Lewis  V.  Pizza  Rack,  Inc.,  (5th  Dist.  1992)  1992  WL  71512  In  this  case,  the  Court  of 


605 


Appeals  reversed  my  grant  of  a  new  trial.  After  a  ten-day  trial  on  a  contract  case  and 
verdict  for  a  franchisor,  the  franchisees  moved  for  a  new  trial.  They  alleged  that  the 
foreman  of  the  jury  was  heard  saying:  "It  doesn't  matter.  They  signed  the  contract  and 
they  should  have  to  honor  it."  I  found  this  was  the  central  issue  in  the  case  and  the 
foreman  had  disregarded  my  instruction.  The  Court  of  Appeals  found  that  the 
franchisees  failed  to  show  the  jury's  verdict  was  adversely  affected  or  prejudiced  by  the 
foreman's  remarks. 

In  Klapchar  v.  Dunbarton  Properties,  itd.,(5th  Dist.  1991)  1991  WL  249432,  I  gave 
summary  judgment  on  a  fraud  claim  involving  real  estate.   I  granted  summary  judgment 
after  the  plaintiff  testified  that  noone  purposely  deceived  him  and  that  the  transaction 
was  done  'in  good  faith  by  everyone.'  The  Court  of  Appeals  reversed  and  found 
sufficient  evidence  remained  to  require  a  jury  trial  on  the  fraud  claim. 

Wayne  Mutual  Insurance  Company  v.  Burdge,  (July  10,  1995),  Stark  App.  No. 
95CA001 1,  1995  WL  617655,  unreported.   In  this  declaratory  judgment  involving 
uninsured  benefits,  I  ruled  that  the  insurance  company  that  had  paid  uninsured  benefits 
was  required  to  pay  medical  benefits  for  the  same  accident  to  the  father  of  the  injured 
parties.  The  Court  of  Appeals,  with  a  dissent,  ruled  that  the  insurance  company  could 
set  off  amounts  received  under  the  medical  pay  provisions  of  the  policy. 

In  Spatz  Wholesale  Floral,  Inc.  v.  Midwestern  Indem.  Co.,  (5th  Dist.  1992)  1992  WL 
1 2804,  the  Court  of  Appeals  found  error  in  the  introduction  into  evidence  of  an  offer  to 
compromise. 

In  Davis  v.  Licbtenwalter,  (5th  Dist.  1994)  1994  WL  75615,  I  gave  summary  judgment 
on  Plaintiff's  false  arrest  and  malicious  prosecution  claims.   I  found  that  the  Plaintiff 
failed  to  file  his  claim  within  one  year  of  his  arrest  and  within  Ohio's  statute  of 
limitations.  The  Court  of  Appeals  found  I  had  erred,  saying  that  a  false  arrest  claim  does 
not  accrue  at  the  time  of  the  arrest. 

Ross  V.  Burns  (March  10,  1997),  Stark  App.  No.  1996CA00284,  1997  WL  1 16941, 
unreported.   In  Ross,  the  plaintiff  attorney  sued  his  former  client  for  legal  fees.  The  jury 
awarded  the  plaintiff  attorney  damages.   I  ruled  the  plaintiff  was  not  entitled  to 
pre-judgment  interest  under  Ohio  R.C.  1 343.03  because  the  amount  due  under  the 
contract  was  not  reasonably  ascertainable.  The  Court  of  Appeals  ruled  that  the  plaintiff 
should  have  received  prejudgment  interest. 

Capadona  v.  Scott  (January  10,  1994),  Stark  App.  No.  CA  9271,  1994  WL  22849, 
unreported.  At  trial  of  a  personal  injury  lawsuit,  the  defense  attorney  said:  "   So  I  just 
ask  you  to  use  your  collective  perspective  and  return  a  fair  verdict  for  both  Mr.  Scott 
who  has  to  pay  this  out  of  his  pocket  *  ■*  *"   In  fact,  the  defendant  had  insurance.   I 
sustained  an  objection  and  directed  the  jury  to  disregard  the  statement  and  reminded 
the  jury  that  the  counsel's  statements  were  not  evidence.  The  Court  of  Appeals  held 
that  I  should  have  granted  a  new  trial  because  of  the  defense  attorney's  misconduct. 

State  V.  Patterson  (March  1 4,  1 994),  Stark  App.  No.  CA  9435,  1 994  WL  1 1  5952, 
unreported.  The  State  charged  the  defendant  with  aggravated  robbery.  The  State 
alleged  that  the  defendant  took  cash  from  a  convenience  store  while  armed  with  a  knife. 


606 


The  defendant  said  the  knife  involved  was  not  a  deadly  weapon  but  instead  a  produce 
knife.  I  denied  a  motion  to  dismiss  the  aggravated  robbery  charge.  The  Court  of 
Appeals  reversed  and  said  insufficient  evidence  showed  that  the  knife  was  a  deadly 
weapon. 

MDS  Development  v.  Professional  Services  Industries  Oune  1997),  Stark  App.  No. 
1996CA00353,  unreported.  The  Plaintiff  developer  sued  the  defendant  soil  testing 
company  for  negligence  in  performing  soil  tests  in  an  area  intended  for  housing 
development.   I  ruled  that  a  $50,000.00  limit  on  damages  contained  in  the  parties 
contract  was  valid.  As  a  result,  I  reduced  the  jury's  verdict  of  $137,375.61  to 
$50,000.00.  The  Court  of  Appeals  found  that  the  contractual  limitation  on  damages  was 
not  enforceable  as  to  the  tests  conducted. 

State  V.  Luttrell  (August  30,  1993),  Stark  App.  No.  CA-9207,  1993  WL  370651, 
unreported.  The  State  charged  the  defendant  with  felonious  sexual  penetration  and 
gross  sexual  imposition,  alleging  the  defendant  sexually  abused  an  eleven  year  old 
child.  At  trial,  the  victim  objected  to  a  single  time  of  abuse.  The  defendant  objected 
that  the  victim's  testimony  was  not  consistent  in  time  with  the  bill  of  particulars, 
because  the  bill  of  particulars  alleged  a  continuous  course  of  conduct.   I  denied  a 
motion  for  a  mistrial,  finding  that  there  was  insufficient  showing  of  prejudice.  The  Court 
of  Appeals  reversed  and  ruled  that  I  should  have  granted  a  mistrial. 

State  V.  Vincent  Hill  (October  27,  1994),  Stark  App.  No.  94  CA  0142,  unreported.   Hill 
was  convicted  of  carrying  a  concealed  weapon.  At  trial,  the  verdict  form  did  not  state 
the  enhancing  factor  that  the  weapon  involved  was  loaded  or  that  ammunition  was 
ready  at  hand.  The  Court  of  Appeals  held  that  Hill  should  have  been  sentenced  to  a  first 
degree  misdemeanor  rather  than  a  felony  of  the  third  degree  because  the  verdict  form 
did  not  have  the  enhancing  factors. 

In  State  v.  Zerbe,  (5th  Dist.  1991),  1991  WL  302418,  the  State  indicted  the  defendant 
for  sexual  battery.  After  getting  more  specific  information  from  the  victim,  the  State 
moved  to  dismiss  the  charges.  The  State  then  indicted  the  defendant  for  sexual 
imposition.   I  denied  the  defendant's  motion  to  dismiss  the  charges  on  speedy  trial 
grounds.  The  Court  of  Appeals  reversed  and  found  that  the  sexual  imposition  charge 
was  sufficiently  related  to  the  sexual  battery  charge  as  to  cause  the  speedy  trial 
requirements  to  run  from  the  time  of  the  first  indictment. 

In  American  Seaway  Foods,  Inc.  v.  Belden  South  Associates  Ltd.  Partnership,  (5th  Dist. 
1994)  the  parties  disputed  a  complicated  commercial  lease  and  security  arrangment.  In 
a  replevin  action,  I  ruled  that  the  Defendant  real  estate  developer  had  right  to  replevin 
equipment  taken  by  the  Plaintiff.  The  Court  of  Appeals  found  the  real  estate  developer 
was  entitled  to  elect  between  a  return  of  the  equipment  or  a  judgment  in  the  amount  of 
the  value  of  the  equipment. 

In  Shearson  Lehman  Hutton,  Inc.  v.  Cook,  (1991)  1991  WL  57131,  1  allowed  a  debtor  to 
present  evidence  tending  to  show  that  the  amount  of  judgment  did  not  reflect  payments. 
The  Court  of  Appeals  found  that  the  judgment  could  not  be  challenged  absent  a  motion 
to  vacate. 


607 


In  Morris  v.  Wilson,  (5  Dist.  1991),  1991  WL  241990,  I  granted  summary  judgment  in  a 
personal  Injury  claim.  The  Court  of  Appeals  reversed  and  found  material  issues  existed 
that  should  be  submitted  to  a  jury.   In  this  case,  parents  made  claim  against  a  neighbor 
for  injuries  to  their  son.  The  son  had  gone  to  a  neighbor's  house  and  been  injured 
when  he  had  tried  to  to  pound  down  a  nail  with  his  tennis  shoes.  The  nail  entered  the 
boy's  foot.   I  ruled  insufficient  evidence  showed  that  the  neighbor  was  aware  of  the 
dangerous  condition  or  of  the  son's  conduct.  The  Court  of  Appeals  found  sufficient 
material  facts  so  as  to  require  a  trial. 

In  Ungar  v.  jett,  (1991),  1991  WL  123840,  the  Court  of  Appeals  found  I  erred  in 
allowing  the  jury  to  give  damages  to  a  building  owner  where  the  claim  had  been 
brought  only  by  his  insurer. 

\nShawv.  Matheny,  (OhioApp.  1991)  1991  WL87136,  I  presided  over  a  case 
involving  real  estate.  The  Court  of  Appeals  found  that  I  erred  in  failing  to  find  that  the 
Plaintiffs  breached  a  deed  covenant  of  quiet  enjoyment. 

In  Wilhelm  v.  Peoples  Federal  Oanuary  22,  1991),  Stark  App.  No.  CA-8181,  I  allowed 
the  plaintiff  to  present  evidence  that  a  savings  association  wrongly  allowed  the  plaintiff's 
mentally  impaired  son  to  pledge  a  joint  savings  account,  resulting  in  loss  to  his  mother. 
The  Court  of  Appeals  found  I  had  erred  and  the  savings  association  was  statutorily 
immune. 

In  Ream  v.  Civil  Service  Com'n  of  City  of  Canton,  (1 990),  1 990  WL  1 87076,  the 
Plaintiff  contested  a  civil  service  establishment  of  an  eligibility  list  for  the  position  of 
police  captain.  He  said  the  civil  service  commission  violated  Ohio's  Sunshine  Law, 
R.C.  121.22,  by  failing  to  give  proper  notice  of  a  meeting.   I  ruled  that  the  Civil  Service 
Commission  violated  this  provision.  The  Court  of  Appeals  reversed.  The  Court  of 
Appeals  ruled  that  the  Commission  was  not  required  to  give  the  Plaintiff  notice  because 
he  had  failed  to  place  his  name  on  the  pertinent  "subscribers  mailing  list." 

In  Metheny  v.  Spitzer  Chevrolet  Co.,  (1990)  1990  WL  93932,  I  ruled  the  Ohio  Civil 
Rights  Act  gave  the  Ohio  Civil  Rights  Commission  exclusive  authority  to  process  the 
plaintiff's  pregnancy  discrimination  claim.  The  Civil  Rights  Act  gave  that  Civil  Rights 
Commission  power  to  investigate  discrimination  and  gave  plaintiffs  the  right  to  appeal 
the  Civil  Rights  Commission's  determination.  The  Court  of  Appeals  ruled  that  a  private 
cause  of  action  remained.   In  a  later  case,  EIek  v.  Huntington  Natl.  Bank,  (1991)  60 
Ohio  St. 3d  135,  the  Ohio  Supreme  Court  ruled  an  employee  could  institute 
independent  civil  action  to  seek  redress  for  discrimination  on  basis  of  physical 
disability. 

In  State  v.  Allen  (March  24,  1997),  Stark  App.  No.  96CA044,  the  Court  of  Appeals  ruled 
that  I  had  given  the  defense  insufficient  time  to  prepare  for  the  trial  of  an  aggravated 
robbery. 

In  State  v.  Nieb  (May  27,  1997),  Stark  App.  No.  96CA256,  unreported,  the  Court  of 
appeals  reversed  because  I  had  not  instructed  the  jury  on  what  "deadly  force"  is.   In  the 
case,  the  defendant  male  punched  his  girlfriend  in  the  face,  breaking  her  sinuses, 
shattering  her  teeth  and  breaking  her  nose.   During  instructions,  the  defense  attorney 


608 


never  requested  an  instruction  defining  'deadly  force.'  Ohio  has  pattern  jury 
instructions.  Ohio's  pattern  instructions  do  not  suggest  that  trial  courts  give  an 
instruction  on  'deadly  force.' 


(3)       citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues, 
together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the 
opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

Roseman  v.  Firemen's  and  Policemen's  Death  Benefit  Fund,  579  N.E.2d  560  (1991) 
This  decision  was  affirmed  by  the  Ohio  Supreme  Court  in  Roseman  v.  Firemen  & 
Policemen's  Death  Benefit  Fund,  66  Ohio  St.3d  443  (1993) 

State  V.  Fry,  Stark  County  Case  No.  1994CR01 76,  (Enclosed) 

State  V.  Mallett,  Stark  County  Case  No.  1993CR3154  (Enclosed) 


16        Public  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you  held  other  than  judicial 
offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected  or 
appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies  for  elective  public 
office. 

I  was  an  unsuccessful  candidate  for  the  U.S.  Congress  in  1984.   I  served  as  an  appointed 
board  member  of  the  Canton  Fair  Housing  Commission  from  approximately  1 982  to 
1986.  I  was  an  unsuccessful  candidate  for  the  Ohio  State  Senate  in  1986. 


1 7        Legal  Career:  Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after 
graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1 .         Whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name  of  the  judge,  the 
Court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk: 

I  have  never  served  as  a  judicial  law  clerk. 


2.         Whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and  dates; 

I  have  never  practiced  law  alone. 


3.  The  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices,  companies  or 

governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected,  and  the  nature  of 
your  connection  with  each. 

In  December  1978,  I  completed  law  school  after  two  and  one  half  years.   I  took  the 
Ohio  Bar  Examination  in  February  1979  and  was  admitted  in  May  1979. 

In  June  1979,  I  accepted  a  position  as  an  associate  with  Wise  &  Gutierrez,  Suite  610, 


10 


609 


Bliss  Tower,  Canton,  Ohio  44702.  Wise  &  Gutierrez  was  a  Martindale  Hubbell  'av' 
rated  firm.   In  this  position  I  worked  with  Earle  E.  Wise  until  he  took  a  position  as  Judge 
of  the  Ohio  Court  of  Appeals,  Fifth  Appellate  District.   He  is  now  retired  and  lives  at 
11242  Marlboro  Avenue,  N.E.,  Alliance,  OH  44601,  330/935-2156.   I  also  worked  with 
Roy  Gutierrez.   He  keeps  his  office  at  610  Bliss  Tower,  Canton,  OH  44702,  330/452- 
6567. 

In  1 985,  Judge  Wise  went  to  the  position  as  Judge.   I  became  a  partner  with  Roy 
Gutierrez  and  John  Mackey  in  the  firm  of  Gutierrez,  Mackey  &  Gwin.  John  Mackey 
keeps  his  office  at  610  Bliss  Tower,  Canton,  OH  44702,  330/452-6567.   I  continued  in 
this  partnership  until  I  was  appointed  Stark  County  Common  Pleas  Judge  on  April  1, 
1989. 


1 .  What  was  the  general  character  of  your  practice,  before  you  became  a  judge, 
dividing  it  into  periods  with  dates  if  its  character  changed  over  the  years. 

2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the  areas,  if  any,  in  which 
you  specialized. 

I  engaged  in  a  general  practice  of  law.  My  practice  was  generally  civil  although  I 
represented  some  defendants  in  appeals  of  criminal  convictions.  My  practice  was 
approximately  90  percent  related  to  litigation.  The  litigation  included  personal  injury, 
labor  law  and  commercial  law. 

Over  time,  I  increased  my  emphasis  upon  litigation  in  federal  court  with  special 
emphasis  upon  labor  law  and  on  equal  employment  litigation.   I  became  District 
Counsel  to  the  United  Steelworkers  of  America  and  took  responsibility  for  litigation  in 
many  counties.   I  also  served  as  counsel  to  United  Food  &  Commercial  Workers, 
International  Brotherhood  of  Boilermakers,  Graphic  Arts  International  Union,  Fraternal 
Order  of  Police,  Oil,  Chemical  and  Atomic  Workers.   I  successfully  represented  these 
bodies  in  complex  litigation  involving  complicated  labor,  pension,  and  commercial 
matters. 

I  represented  the  Steelworkers  in  complex,  large  dollar  cases.  These  included  a 
bankruptcy  litigation  case  involving  more  than  500  workers  and  more  than  $15  million 
in  claims.  Alone,  I  successfully  represented  the  Steelworkers  before  the  NLRB  including 
many  trials  with  more  than  five  days  of  testimony.  Alone,  I  also  successfully 
represented  the  Boilermakers  in  major  federal  litigation  involving  more  than  $500,000 
in  benefits  owing  in  a  plant  shutdown. 

I  represented  Stark  Technical  College  as  an  Assistant  Ohio  Attorney  General  acting  as 
General  Counsel.  In  that  position  I  represented  the  College  in  a  significant  amount  of 
EEO  litigation  in  federal  courts. 

I  have  personally  appeared  before  the  Ohio  Supreme  Court  and  before  the  U.S.  Court  of 
Appeals  for  the  Sixth  Circuit. 


610 


As  an  attorney,  I  appeared  in  court  on  civil  litigation.  While  the  wide  majority  of  my 
work  was  litigation,  the  amount  of  time  I  appeared  in  Court  varied      In  the  final  year  oi 
my  practice  I  acted  as  sole  counsel  in  a  trial  that  lasted  eleven  trial  days  and  created  a 
record  of  more  than  291 5  pages.    In  the  same  year,  I  acted  as  sole  counsel  in  a  trial  that 
took  eight  trial  days  and  created  a  record  of  more  than  241 5  pages. 

Since  becoming  a  common  pleas  judge,  I  have  presided  over  more  than  420  jury  trials 
including  more  than  220  felony  jury  trials. 


2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

a.  Federal  courts. 

b.  State  courts  of  record. 

c.  Other  courts. 

In  the  early  years  of  my  practice,  I  appeared  in  State  Courts  approximately  80%  of  my 
litigation.   In  these  years,  I  appeared  before  Federal  Courts,  including  bankruptcy  courts, 
approximately  20%  of  my  litigation.     In  later  years,  I  appeared  in  Federal  Courts 
approximately  40%  of  my  litigation  and  before  Federal  agencies  and  bankruptcy  courts 
approximately  40% 


3  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

a.  civil 

b.  Criminal. 

My  litigation  was  approximately  95%  civil  and  5%  criminal  appeals. 

4  State  the  number  of  cases  you  tried  to  verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than  settled) 
in  courts  of  record,  indicating  whether  you  were  sole  counsel,  chief  counsel,  or 
associate  counsel. 

I  believe  I  tried  approximately  three  cases  to  verdict  in  jury  trials  as  chief  counsel. 


5.         What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

a.  Jury 

b.  Non-jury. 

I  believe  I  participated  as  associate  counsel  in  approximately  three  additional  cases  tried 
to  verdict  in  jury  trials.    I  tried  at  least  three  cases  to  verdict  in  nonjury  trials  as  sole 
counsel. 


Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you  personally 
handled.   Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and 
date  if  unreported.   Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the-substance  of  each  case.   Identify 
the  party  or  parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  In  detail  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.   Also  state  as  to 

17 


611 


each  case: 

a.  the  date  of  representation; 

b.  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before  whom 
the  case  was  litigated;  and 

c.  The  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co-counsel 
and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 

I  have  handled  a  large  amount  of  litigation  as  an  attorney  and  more  as  a  judge.  These 
cases  have  included: 

International  Brotherhood  of  Boilermakers  v.  Transue  &  Williams,  879  F.  2d  1388  (6th 
Or.  1989).  As  sole  counsel,  I  represented  the  Boilermakers.  After  negotiations,  the 
employer  and  union  believed  they  had  reached  accord  on  a  new  collective  bargaining 
agreement.  The  parties  then  became  unable  to  agree  on  language  for  their  agreement. 
During  the  pendency  of  the  effort  to  journalize  their  agreement,  the  Company  shut 
down  the  plant  employing  more  than  two  hundred  bargaining  unit  members.  The 
Company  refused  to  pay  severance,  insurance  and  other  benefits  and  refused  to  arbitrate 
the  dispute.   I  sued  for  the  Union  in  the  United  States  District  Couit  for  the  Northern 
District  of  Ohio.  The  case  was  assigned  to  Judge  David  Dowd.   Upon  motion  for 
summary  judgment,  the  District  Court  ordered  the  Company  to  arbitrate.  The  Company 
appealed.  The  Sixth  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  completely  adopted  my  argument.   I 
represented  the  Union  in  the  arbitration.   I  tried  and  prepared  the  case  without  co- 
counsel.  Mr.  Timothy  Wood  of  Schwartz,  Einhart,  Wood  &  Szuter  represented  the 
opposing  side.  Mr.  Wood  is  currently  at  1400  Bank  One  Center,  Cleveland,  Ohio 
44114,  216/363-1400 

M.  K.  Morse  Co.  and  United  Steelworkers,  302  NLRB  No.  147;  138  L.R.R.M.  1245 
(1991).  As  sole  counsel,  I  represented  the  United  Steelworkers  in  support  of  charges 
made  to  the  NLRB.  The  case  involved  claimed  violations  of  the  National  Labor 
Relations  Act.  The  trial  of  the  case  took  eleven  trial  days  between  January  11,1 988,  to 
February  11,  1988,  and  created  a  record  of  more  than  2915  pages.   I  was  successful  in 
having  Administrative  Law  Judge  Harold  Bernard  find  that  the  Company  had  violated  all 
except  one  of  more  than  fifty  claimed  violations.   I  was  successful  in  having  the 
Administrative  Law  Judge  issue  a  bargaining  order  though  the  Steelworkers  had  lost  the 
representation  election.  These  decisions  were  subsequently  upheld  by  the  Board  after  I 
had  taken  the  bench.   I  tried  the  case  and  prepared  the  brief  to  the  Board  without  co- 
counsel.  Opposing  counsel  was  Terence  Ryan.  Mr.  Ryan  is  currently  at  The  Arcade, 
Suite  332,  401  Euclid  Avenue,  Cleveland,  Ohio  441 14,  216/241-7220. 

Summitville  Tiles,  Inc.  and  United  Steelworkers  of  America,  300  NLRB  No.  9,  136 
L.R.R.M.  1 180  (1990).  As  sole  counsel,  I  represented  the  United  Steelworkers  in 
support  of  charges  made  to  the  NLRB.  The  case  involved  claimed  violations  of  the 
National  Labor  Relations  Act.  The  trial  of  the  case  took  eight  trial  days  November  3, 
1 987,  and  December  3,  1 987,  before  Administrative  Law  Judge  Honorable  Karl  H. 
Buschmann,  and  created  a  record  of  more  than  241 5  pages.   1  was  successful  in  having 
the  Administrative  Law  Judge  Karl  Buschmann  find  that  the  Company  had  violated  all 
except  one  of  seven  claimed  violations.   I  tried  the  case  without  assistance.   Opposing 
counsel  was  Theodore  Mann,  Jr.   Mr.  Mann  is  currently  at  644  Huntington  Building, 
925  Euclid  Avenue,  Cleveland,  Ohio  441 15-1493,  216/621-6147 


13 


612 


In  Re.  Enduro  Stainless,  Inc.   United  State  Bankruptcy  Court  for  the  Northern  District  of 
Ohio  at  Canton.   I  represented  the  United  Steelworkers  when  a  Company  employing 
more  than  500  employees  petitioned  for  bankruptcy  and  shut  down  the  plant.  After 
major  negotiations  and  litigation  I  was  successful  in  having  a  trustee  appointed.  At  trial 
before  U.S.  Bankruptcy  Judge  James  Williams,  I  established  that  the  former  owners  had 
siphoned  assets  of  the  company  at  a  time  when  they  owed  obligations  to  Steelworkers 
and  others.  The  information  I  developed  later  led  to  criminal  charges  and  convictions 
against  the  Company  owners.  The  Trustee  sold  the  Company  to  a  Company  that 
reopened  the  plant  and  again  employed  more  than  500.  Mr.  Richard  Seltzer  of  Cohen, 
Weiss  &  Simon,  330  West  42nd  Street  New  York,  New  York  10036-6976,  212/563- 
4100  was  co-counsel.  Other  attorneys  involved  included  Alan  Kopit,  3300  BP  America 
Building,  200  Public  Square,  Cleveland,  Ohio  441 14-2301,  216/621-0150  representing 
the  creditors  committee  and  Howard  Levy,  2300  BP  America  Building,  200  Public 
Square,  Cleveland,  Ohio  441 14-2378,  216/363-4500,  representing  the  debtor. 

In  Re  Union  Metal,  842  F.2d  879  (6th  Cir.  1988).   I  represented  the  United 
Steelworkers  when  a  Company  employing  more  than  200  went  bankrupt.  The  Debtor- 
Company  sought  to  stop  payments  of  retiree  health  and  life  insurance  benefits.   First,  the 
Debtor  sought  to  reject  the  collective  bargaining  agreement,  1 1  U.S.C.  §  1113.  After 
trial  before  U.S.  Bankruptcy  Judge  James  Williams,  the  Judge  denied  the  Company's 
request  to  reject  the  collective  bargaining  agreement.  The  Company  then  sought  to  stop 
the  payments,  claiming  they  were  not  administrative  expenses.  The  Bankruptcy  Judge 
ruled  that  payments  should  not  be  made.   I  appealed  for  the  Steelworkers.  The  District 
Court  affirmed  the  Bankruptcy  Court's  order  denying  payment.  The  Union  appealed  to 
the  Sixth  Circuit.  The  Sixth  Circuit  reversed.  The  Sixth  Circuit  held  that  the  Debtor  was 
required  to  pay  retiree  benefits  until  the  Debtor  succeeded  in  rejecting  the  collective 
bargaining  agreement.  As  a  result,  the  Company  remained  obligated  to  honor 
commitments  to  provide  retiree  health  and  welfare  benefits.  The  Union  members 
subsequently  received  distributions  when  the  Company  submitted  a  plan  of 
reorganization.   I  served  as  co-counsel  with  Paul  Whitehead,  United  Steelworkers  of 
America,  5  Gateway  Center,  Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania  15222,  412/562-254.  Mr.  Alan 
Kopit,  3300  BP  America  Building,  200  Public  Square,  Cleveland,  Ohio  441 14-2301, 
216/621-0150  and  Eric  Fingerhut,  200  Public  Square,  Cleveland,  Ohio  represented  the 
Debtor. 

Louise  Weber  v.  Stark  Technical  College,  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Northern  District  of 
Ohio,  Case  No.  84-3535A.   In  this  case,  1  represented  Defendant  Stark  Technical 
College  in  an  age  and  sex  discrimination  case.   U.S.  District  Court  Judge  David  Dowd 
presided  over  the  case.  The  Plaintiff  alleged  that  a  decision  not  to  renew  her  faculty 
contract  was  motivated  by  sex  and/or  age.  At  the  time  of  her  separation,  the  Plaintiff 
had  been  earning  in  excess  of  $40,000.00  per  year.  As  sole  counsel,  I  represented  Stark 
Technical  College  through  a  large  amount  of  discovery  and  trial  preparation.  The  case 
was  settled  in  December  1 984,  after  the  first  day  of  trial.  The  case  was  settled  for 
$6,000,00.  This  was  far  less  than  the  Plaintiff's  original  settlement  demand  of  more  than 
$200,000.00.   The  plaintiff  was  represented  by  Ralph  Cosiano,  1 1  707  Terminal  Tower, 
Cleveland,  OH  44113,  216/687-1400.   (This  is  his  former  address.  The  Ohio  Supreme 
Court  does  not  have  any  current  registration.   I  believe  he  may  now  be  deceased.) 

Diana  Smith,  Guardian  of  Geoffrey  Dean  v.  Shane  Steel,  U.S.  District  Court  for  the 

14 


613 


Northern  District  of  Ohio,  Case  No.  C88-1 598.  In  this  case,  I  represented  the  Plaintiff 
who  brought  claim  for  violation  of  constitutional  rights  by  the  Carroll  County  Sheriff's 
Department  and  its  employees.  The  Plaintiff  received  massive  brain  injuries  after  being 
stopped  for  a  traffic  violation.  We  alleged  that  this  resulted  from  an  assault  by  the 
deputy  sheriff.  We  alleged  a  pattern  of  similar  activities  by  this  Sheriff's  Department 
that  manifested  a  policy.  The  case  was  assigned  to  U.S.  District  Court  Judge  Alice 
Batchelder.  I  represented  the  Plaintiff  through  most  of  the  discovery.   I  assisted  in 
preparing  a  response  to  the  Defendants'  motions  for  summary  judgment.  This  case  went 
to  trial  after  I  had  taken  a  seat  on  the  common  pleas  bench.  After  I  took  the  bench,  the 
case  was  prosecuted  by  John  Mackey,  Robert  Swan  (now  deceased)  and  Kathleen 
Tatarsky,  all  at  Suite  610  Bliss  Tower,  Canton,  Ohio,  44702,  330/452-6567.  The  case 
was  settled  during  trial  for  approximately  $250,000.00.  The  Carroll  County  Sheriff  was 
represented  by  Chris  Nolan,   300  Courtyard  Square,  80  South  Summit  Street  Akron, 
Ohio  44308-1  71 9,   330/253-5454. 

Helen  L.  lacquez  v.  Stark  Technical  College,  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Northern  District 
of  Ohio,  Case  No.  C84-1673.   In  this  case,  I  represented  Defendant  Stark  Technical 
College  in  an  age  and  sex  discrimination  case.   U.S.  District  Court  Judge  Sam  Bell 
presided  over  the  case.  The  Plaintiff  alleged  that  a  decision  not  to  renew  her  faculty 
contract  was  motivated  by  sex  and/or  age.    The  Plaintiff  also  alleged  intentional 
infliction  of  emotional  distress.  The  Plaintiff  was  represented  by  Roy  Battista,  4808 
Munson  Street,  N.W.,  Canton,  OH,  499-0900.  At  the  time  of  her  separation,  the 
Plaintiff  had  been  earning  in  excess  of  $35,000.00  per  year.   I  represented  Stark 
Technical  College  with  John  Childs,   50  South  Main  Street,  Akron  Centre  Plaza,  P.O. 
Box  1500,  Akron,  Ohio  44309-1500,  330/376-5300;  I  represented  Stark  Technical 
College  through  a  large  amount  of  discovery  and  trial  preparation.  The  case  was  settled 
in  April  1985.   The  case  was  settled  for  $15,000.00. 

Diane  Davis  v.  Allen  Tulgan,  Et  al.,  Stark  County  Common  Pleas  Case  No.  80-1 123.   I 
represented  the  Plaintiff  as  an  associate  of  the  principal  counsel,  Earle  Wise,  1 1 242 
Marlboro  Avenue,  N.E.,  Alliance,  OH  44601,  330/935-2156.  The  Plaintiff  claimed  the 
defendant  neurological  surgeon  had  failed  to  properly  stage  a  brain  tumor.  The  Plaintiff 
claimed  that  the  Defendant  did  not  surgically  remove  a  benign  brain  tumor  and  wrongly 
used  radiation,  chemotherapy  and  high  cortisone  therapy.  As  an  associate,  I  prepared 
discovery  and  all  the  pleadings.  After  the  Court  denied  the  Defendants'  motion  for 
summary  judgment,  the  case  was  settled.   I  believe  the  case  was  settled  for  near 
$200,000.00.  The  principle  defendant  was  Allen  Tulgan,  M.D.   Dr.  Tulgan  was 
represented  by  David  Hilkert,  50  South  Main  Street,  Akron  Centre  Plaza,  P.O.  Box 
1 500,  Akron,  Ohio  44309-1 500,  330/376-5300. 

Thomas  Butchko  v.  Stark  Technical  College,  Stark  Common  Pleas  Case  No.  84-1992.   I 
represented  Stark  Technical  College.  The  Plaintiff  alleged  that  Stark  Technical  College 
had  wrongfully  failed  to  renew  the  Plaintiff's  faculty  contract.  After  conducting 
significant  discovery,  the  case  was  settled  for  $6,000.00.  Mr.  Butchko  was  represented 
by  Ronald  Macala,  4150  Belden  Village  St.,  Canton,  Ohio  44718,  330/493-1570. 


Legal  Activities  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have  pursued, 

including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did 


15 


614 


not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question, 
please  omit  any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the 
privilege  has  been  waived.) 

I  have  been  active  In  a  number  of  judicial  and  legal  organizations.  Since  about  1995,  I 
have  served  as  Chair  of  the  Ohio  Judicial  Conference  Subcommittee  on  Court 
Technology.  This  committee  facilitates  the  use  of  technology  by  Ohio  Judges.   I  serve 
as  a  member  of  the  Ohio  Judicial  Conference  Committee  on  Court  Reform  and 
Legislative  Committee.   This  committee  does  long  range  revievv  of  issues  affecting  Ohio 
Courts.   I  have  served  on  the  Stark  County  Bar  Association  Grievance  Committee.  I 
have  lectured  a  number  of  judicial  education  programs  Including  programs  on  Ohio's 
new  criminal  sentencing  law,  on  technology,  on  evidence,  and  on  effective  writing. 


615 


II.  Financial  Data  and  Conflict  of  Interest  (Public) 

List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred  income 
arrangements,  stock  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which 
you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  professional  services,  firm 
memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please  describe  the 
arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or 
business  Interest. 

I  have  certain  rights  under  the  Ohio  Public  Employee  Retiree  System.   I  believe  these 
entitle  me  to  receive  approximately  2%  times  my  years  of  service  of  my  average  best 
three  years  salary.   I  have  no  other  deferred  benefit  arrangements  excepting  tax  deferred 
savings  that  were  wholly  contributed  by  me. 


Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including  the  procedure 
you  will  follow  In  determining  these  areas  of  concern.  Identify  the  categories  of 
litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present  potential  conflicts-of- 
interest  during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

I.B.M.  Corporation  employs  my  wife  as  Senior  Location  Manager  and  Business  Unit 
Executive,  Travel  and  Transport  Industry.  We  own  I.B.M.  common  stock.  My  wife  has 
certain  pension  rights  with  I.B.M.  I  would  have  a  potential  conflict  of  interest  in 
litigation  involving  I.B.M.  Corporation.   I  anticipate  I  would  recuse  myself  from  any 
litigation  involving  I.B.M.   I  would  follow  the  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  in  making  that 
determination  and  other  determinations. 

Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside  employment, 
with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court?   If  so,  explain. 

I  have  no  plans  to  pursue  any  outside  employment  with  or  without  compensation.   I 
have  no  agreements  to  receive  any  income  from  anyone. 


List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar  year  preceding 
your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees, 
dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and  other  items 
exceeding  $500  or  more  (if  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure 
report,  required  by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  financial  disclosure  report. 


Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail  (Add  schedules  as 
called  for.) 

See  attached.  The  attached  schedule  reflects  both  my  and  my  wife's  assets. 


17 


616 


Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  In  a  political  campaign?   If  so,  please 
identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the 
campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

In  1990,  I  was  a  candidate  for  my  current  seat  on  the  Stark  County  Common  Pleas 
Court.  John  Boggins  (now  Judge  John  Boggins)  opposed  me.   I  won  with  63%  of  the 
vote.   In  1996,  I  was  unopposed  for  reelection. 

I  was  a  candidate  for  the  29th  Ohio  Senate  District  in  1986.    I  lost  a  close  election  to  the 
incumbent. 

I  was  a  candidate  for  the  U.S.  House  of  Representatives,  26th  District  in  1 984.  I  lost  the 
election  by  a  wide  margin  against  the  incumbent.   I  have  helped  on  other  campaigns 
without  holding  a  formal  position 


617 


AO-IO  M 
ltn.t/96 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

Nominatioo  Report 


Report  Required  by  the  Ethics 
Reform  Act  of  I9S9.  Pub  L  No. 
101194,  Noveinber  30.  1919 
0  use.  App  4  .  Sec.  101-112) 


1 1.  Pcnoo  Reporting         (Last  r. 

GWIN,  JAMES  S. 


I   2.  Court  or  Organizalion 

!  U.S.  DISTRICT  COURT,  N.D.  OHIO 


3.  Bite  of  Report         I 

08/01/1997         j 


6.  Reporting  Period  1 

01/01/1996  ; 

to 

07/31/1997  j 


j  4.  Title  {Article  III  judges  indtcae  active  or 

i  ieiuor  siatus.  magistrate  judges  indicate 

I  fitll-  or  pan-rime) 

U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGE  -  ACTIVE 


5.  Report  Type  (check  type) 
yt    NomiiUQOn.    Datt        /   / 
Initial  Annual 


7.  Chambers  or  Office  Address 

STARK  COUNTY  COURTHOUSE 
CANTON.  OH  44702 


8.  Od  the  hasis  of  the  infornutioo  contained  in  this  Report  and  any 
modiflcations  pertaiiung  thereto,  it  Is  in  my  opinion,  in  compllanci 
with  applicable  laws  and  regulations. 


, 

Reviewing  OfTicer 

Dale 

j                                             IMPORTAm  NOTES:  The  insrrvcn 
!                                                 checking  the  NOSE  box  for  each  sec 

ons  accorrtpanying  this  form  must  be  followed-    Comple 
tion  where  you  have  no  reportable  mformahon    Sign  o 

e  all  parts. 
1  the  last  page. 

I.    POSITIONS      (Repomng  uuLvulmil  only:  see  pp.  9-13  of  Instructions) 

POSITION 

X  NO>X  (Noreponableposinons.) 


NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION  /  ENTITY 


II.      AGREEMENTS    (Reporting  individual  only:  see  ppl4-17  of  Im 

DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


NONE    (No  reponablc  agreements.) 


STATE  OF  OHIO  PUBLIC  EMPLOYEES  RETIREMENT  SYSTEM 


m.    NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME 
DATE 


(Reporting  individual  and  spouse:  see  pp   18-25  oflnsiruaions-) 
PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


NO?VE    (No  reporuble  non-investment  income  ) 

1/1/96  STATE  OF  OHIO,  JUDCIARY 


2  1/1/96 


INTERNATIONAL  BUSINESS  MACHINES.  INC.  (S) 


GROSS  INCOME 

(yours,  noi  spouse's) 


S    175,565.50 


618 


!    name  01  nnon  Keporant  I    DaieofRepon 

RNANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT  |  qvVIN.  JAMES  S.  !  08/01/1997 


rV.  REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS  -  nansporaUon,  lodging,  food. 

(Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children:  use  the  parenlheticats  '(S) '  and  '(DQ '  to  indicate  reportable  reimbursements  and  gifts  received  by  spouse 
and  ttependent  children,  respecnvety.   See  pp.  26-29  of  Instructions.) 

i ;  SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 

j  NONE  (No  such  reportable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 

'  EXEMPT 


V.    OTHER  GIFTS 

(Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children,   use  the  parenthestcats  'fSi '  and  '(DC) '  to  indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependenl  children, 
respectively.   See  pp  30-33  of  Instructions.) 

■ SOmCE  DESCRIPTION  VA 

NONE  (No  such  reporoble  gifts) 

1     EXEMPT 


VI.    LL\BILITIES 

Oncludes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children:  indicate  M-here  applicable,  person  responsible  for  liabiliry  by  using  the  parenthetical  '  IS)'  for  separate 
tiabiUty  cf  the  spouse.  'IJj'  for  jotnl  liability  of  reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  '(DO'  for  liability  of  a  dependent  child.   See  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE* 

X  NONE    (No  repomble  liibiiiues) 


'  VALCODES:J-S15.000orless  K  =  S15.001S5O.0OO  L=  550.00 1  lo  SI  00.000  M  =  S100.00IS:50.000  N  =  S23O.0Ol-S50O.00O 

0-S500.001-S1.000.000    PI  =$1,000  OOl-SS.OOO.OOO    P:  =  S5  000.001 -S:5  000.000    P3=S25.O0O.OOI-$50.0OO.OOO    PJ  =  550.000.001  or  more 


619 


I    Hunt  of  Person  Reporting 
FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT  ]    GWIN,    JAMES   S. 


Due  of  Repon 
08/01/1997 


-  income,  value,  iransaaions  {includes  those  of  spouse  arui 
dependeru  children.  See  pp  S7-S4  of  Instructions.) 


Vn.  Page      1  ENTVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS 


Descnpdon  of  Assets 

Indicate  where  applicable,  owner  of 
the  asset  by  using  the  parenthetical 
'P)  'for  joins  ownership  ofrepomng 
indx\idual  and  spouse.  ' (S) '  for  sep- 
erate  orwnenfiip  by  spouse,  "(DC 
for  o**nership  by  deperuieni  child. 

Place  '00'  <^tf  foch  asset 
exempt  from  prior  disclosure. 


'  Income 
J  during 
I  reponing 
I  period 


I  Gross  value 
I  ai  end  of 
I  reporting 
period 


'  Transacbons  during  reporting  period 


1(1}  I  a) 

Iajw.  Type 

]Co<*e  (e.g.. 

j(A-    I  dividend, 

|h)    I  itmor 

j  interest) 


(1)     |(2)       ;  (1) 
VaJue  Value    '.  Type 
Code|Method|  (e-8-. 
(J-P)  :Code    1  buy.  sell. 
(Q-W)  liwrger. 


I  If  not  exempt  from  disclosure 


(2)         j(3)      I  (4) 
I  Date:      Value  Gain 
Month- 1  Code  i  Code 


Identity  of 
buyer/seller 


(J-P)  |(A-H)    (ifpnvate 
i  transaction) 


NONE  (00  ttponable  tnconte.asseu 

'               nnsactions) 

or 

1 
1 

! 

i       i 

1    !     ; 

1     1  AIM   INTEKNATIOHAL   GKOHTH   FUND 

|A 

'Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

;     2  AIM   CONSTELLATION   FUND 

'D 

Dividend 

L 

T 

EXEMPT 

.    3   IBM  COMMON   SHARES 

1 

.A 

Dividend 

M 

T 

EXEMPT 

; 

*  GALAXY   SMALL  COMPANY   FUND 

C 

Dividend 

L 

T 

EXEMPT 

5  GALAXY   LARGE   COMPANY   FiniD 

A 

Dividend 

J 

EXEMPT       1 

e  MERRILL  LYNCH  GROWTH  FOTD 

i 

D 

Dividend 

K 

T 

EXEMPT 

1 

■     7  TRCWE   PRICE   MID    CAP   FUND 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

;     8  MERRILL   LYNCH    CASH   MANAGEMENT 
ACCOUNT 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

9    PIHCO   OPPORTUNITY   TJNO 

C 

Dividend 

1  Inc. Gain  Codes  A=S  1 .000  or  less 
(C01BI.D4)       F'S.'iO.OOl-SlOO.OOO 

B 
G= 

=si.ooi-s:.5oo 

SI  00.001 -SI. 000.000 

c= 

HI 

S:.501-S5.000 
Sl.000.001-S5.000.000 

D=S5.001-S15.000 
H2=S3.000.001  or  more 

E=SI;.001-S50.000 

;ValC0(Jc5  J=S  15.000  or  less  K=S15.001-S50.000  L=S5a00l-SI00,0D0  M=$I00.00I-S:50.000  N=S:50  001-S500-000 

(Col  C1.D3)     OS500.00 1 -SI. 000.000         PI=SI.000.001-S5,000,000  P:=S5.O0O.OOI-S:5.OOO.OOO  P3=S:5.000.00 1 -550.000.000  P4=S50.000.00I 


3  Val  Mih  Codes   (J^.Appraisal 
(Col  C2)  L=Book  Valui 


R=Cosi  (real  e 
V=Ollier 


S=Asscssmcnl 
W=Estimaied 


T=C  ash.  Market 


620 


I    „*uic  u.  rcrson  ncponmg  I  Dale  of  Rtpon 

FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT     GWIN,    JAMES   S.  08/01/1997 


Vm.     ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS.  Ondicatt  pan  of  rcpon ) 

j  NONE  (No  iddirionil  infomuiion  or  ciplaMdons.) 

I  have  rights  under  the  Ohio  Public  Employees  Retirement  System  to  receive  pension  benefits. 
have  right  to  receive  2.1%  times  the  number  of  years  of  Ohio  public  employment  times  the 
average  of  my  highest  three  years  salary. 


621 


I    Name  of  ?cnoD  Reportmg 

FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT  j  q^^^  JAMES  S 


D>ic  of  Repon 
08/01/1997 


DC.    CERTmCATION 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C  455  and  of  Advisory'  Opinion  No^  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
Judicial  Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory 
function  in  any  litigation  during  the  period  covered  by  this  repon  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children 
had  a  financial  interest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation 

I  certify  that  all  the  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent 
children,  if  any)  is  accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  reponed 
was  withheld  because  it  met  applicable  stamtory  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure 

I  further  cenify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been 
reponed  are  in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C.  app.  4,  section  501  el.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  7353  and  Judicial  Conference 
regulations. 


Signamre         "^   Y      *-^  £0*^  '***'V^ Date      *>   '  ]^\ 


Any  individual  who  knowingly  and  wilfully  falsifies  or  fails  to  file  this  repon  may  be  subject  to  civil 
and  criminal  sanctions  (5  U.S.C.  App  4,  Section  104). 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS 

Mail  original  and  three  additional  copies  to: 

Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 
Administrative  Office  of  the  United  Stales  Courts 
One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E. 
Suite  2-301 
Washington,  D.C.  20544 


622 


Financial  Statement 
Net  Worth 


Assets 

Liabilities 

Notes  payable  to  bank,  secured 

.i-5 — 

32.161.29 

Cash  on  hand  and  m  banks 

$ 

24.007.89 

Notes  payable  to  bank,  unsecured 

U.S.  Government  securities,  add 
schedule 

$ 

Notes  payable  to  relatives 

Listed  securities 

$403,779.07 

Accounts  and  bills  due 

i  $ 

377.72 

Unlisted  lecurities 

i 

_ 

Unpaid  income  tax 

. 

Accounts  and  notes  receivable 

$ 

Other  unpaid  tax  and  interest 

1  * 

. 

Due  fronn  relatives  and  Iriends 

« 

Real  estate  mortgages  payable,  add 
schedule  (to  Keycorp  Mortgage  Corp.) 
Chattel  mongages  and  other  liens 
payable 

■  s 

155.349.08 

Due  from  others 

s 

• 

:  $ 

Doubtful 

s 

Other  debts,  itemize 

s 

Real  estate  owned,  add  schedule 

5290,000.00 

Total  liabilities 

1  s 

187.888.09 

Real  estate  mortgages  receivable 

S 

Net  worth 

$ 

601.164.52 

Autos  and  other  personal  property 

i 

60,000.00 

Total  liabilities  and  net  worth 

'  s 

789,042.61 

Cash  value,  life  insurance 

$ 

11,255.65 

Other  assets,  itemize 

$ 

General  information 

Total  assets 

$789,042.61 

Are  any  assets  pledged?  (Add 

schedule) 

No 

Are  you  a  defendant  in  any  suits  or 
legal  actions? 

Yes 

Contingent  Liabilities 

Have  you  ever  taken  bankruptcy? 

— 

No 

As  endorser,  comaker  or  gurantor 

$ 

On  leases  or  contracts 

$ 

. 

Legal  Claims 

$ 

. 

Provisions  for  Federal  Income  Tax 

$ 

Other  special  debt 

$ 

- 

1 

623 


GWIN-All  Investment  Accts 


Security 


Portfolio  Value  Report 

(Includes  unrealized  gains) 
•  Estimated  Pnces 

Shares         Curr 


Cost  Basis      Gain/Loss 


AGAAX 

CSTGX 

IBM 

IBM  Tax  Defer 

ILCIX 

iSCIX 

MOQRX 

Merrill  Lynch  Growth 

T.  Rowe  Price 

-Cash- 

TOTAL  Investments 


Page  1 
Balance 


588.582 

18.740 

10.000.00 

1.030  03 

11.030.03 

2.881  577 

30.210 

70.056,49 

16.995.95 

87.052  44 

1.337.601 

105  3/4 

60,285.38 

81.16597 

141,451  35 

2.356.314 

16.800  • 

34.295.46 

5.290.62 

39,586  08 

723.887 

29.230 

15.446  66 

5.712.55 

21,159.21 

1.775.298 

27.360 

42.156.86 

6.415.31 

48,572  17 

291738 

30.510 

748.92 

8.13675 

8.885.67 

1.191.000 

28.180 

29.660.01 

3.902.37 

33.562.38 

452.694 

27.320 

10.000.00 

2.367.60 

12.367  60 

112.140 

1.000 

112.14 

0.00 

112.14 

272,761.92 

131.017.15 

403.779.07 

624 


III      General  (Public) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's  Code  of 
Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  serving  the 
disadvantaged.  Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing 
specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

I  have  given  much  time  to  programs  benefitting  less  advantaged  persons.  I  served  for 
more  than  six  years  on  the  Board  of  Trustees  of  Canton  Croup  Home,  Inc.  (Pathway), 
which  operates  group  homes  and  referral  services  for  children  involved  in  abuse  or 
criminal  situations.  This  responsibility  involved  monthly  meetings  to  track  the 
governance  of  the  program  together  with  time  spent  on  activities  needed  for  fund 
raising. 

I  served  more  than  five  years  on  the  Canton  Fair  Housing  Commission.  This 
commission  sought  fair  housing  for  all  citizens.  This  responsibility  required  monthly 
meetings  and  special  meetings  to  review  Fair  Housing  Enforcement. 

I  served  for  more  than  five  years  as  a  member  of  Central  Mental  Health  Agency,  Stark 
County's  largest  provider  of  mental  health  services.  Central  Mental  Health  provides 
most  of  these  services  to  the  poor.     This  responsibility  involved  monthly  meetings  and 
committee  meetings  to  monitor  the  program. 

I  was  a  founding  trustee  of  the  Urban  Family  Life  Institute.   It  gives  advice,  food,  and 
other  services  to  disadvantaged  families.  The  Urban  Family  Life  Institute  tries  to  change 
destructive  patterns  of  behavior. 

For  more  than  six  years,  I  have  served  as  a  member  of  the  United  Way  Community 
Planning  Committee,  which  reviews  and  makes  grant  of  seed  monies  to  community 
programs  for  the  disadvantaged.  This  responsibility  requires  monthly  meetings  and 
other  reviews  of  applicants  for  funding. 


The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  states 
that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that 
invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you  currently 
belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization  which  discriminates  -  through 
either  formal  membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of 
membership  policies?  If  no,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.  What  you  have  done  to 
try  to  change  these  policies? 

I  do  not  currently  belong  nor  have  I  ever  belonged  to  any  organization  that 
discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion. 


Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates  for 
nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?   Please 
describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from  beginning  to 


625 


and  (including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in 
which  you  participated). 

U.S.  Senator  John  Glenn  has  used  a  selection  commission  to  screen  applicants  for 
appointment  to  the  federal  courts  and  to  make  recommendations  concerning  the  same. 
The  Committee  has  two  Democrats,  two  Republicans  and  is  headed  by  former  Ohio 
Attorney  General  Anthony  Celebrezze,  Jr. 

This  Commission  solicited  applications  from  all  persons  who  had  expressed  an  interest 
in  appointment  to  the  district  court  in  recent  years.  The  press  reported  about  this 
selection  process.  The  Commission  then  received  a  large  number  of  its  long  application 
form.  The  Commission  also  solicited  comments  concerning  applicants.  After  this,  the 
Commission  narrowed  the  field  to  between  12  to  15  applicants.  The  Commission  then 
interviewed  these  persons.  After  interviewing  these  applicants,  the  Commission  me  first 
for  this  position  on  the  U.S.  District  Court.   I  am  told  that  this  Commission  unanimously 
selected  me  for  this  position. 

Near  May  1 5,  1 997,  Ohio  Senator  John  Glenn  adopted  this  Commissions 
recommendation  and  sent  a  letter  supporting  me  for  appointment.  Subsequently,  I  have 
been  interviewed  by  representatives  of  the  Department  of  Justice,  the  F.B.I,  and  the 
American  Bar  Association. 


Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee  discussed 
with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably 
be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue,  or  question?  If  so, 
please  explain  fully. 

I  have  not  discussed  any  pending  case,  legal  issue,  or  question  with  anyone  involved 
with  the  selection  process  in  a  way  that  could  reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  how  I 
would  rule  on  such  case. 


Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  Judiciary  within  the  Federal  government,  and  within  society 
generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years,  it  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial 
branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of 
government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  a  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem  solution  rather  than 
grievance  resolution; 

b.  a  tendency  by  the  Judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a 
vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad 
classes  of  individuals; 

c.  a  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad  affirmative  duties  upon 
governments  and  society; 


20 


626 


d.  a  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional  requirements 
such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 

e.  a  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions  in  the 
manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  overnight  responsibilities. 

Article  III,  Section  2  of  the  U.S.  Constitution  gives  judges  power  over  'Cases,  in  Law 
and  Equity  ♦  ♦  ♦'    With  this  grant,  the  Constitution  says  Courts  should  decide  real 
disputes  between  parties  with  real  interest.  Judges  should  decide  the  issues  at  hand  and 
the  case  at  hand. 

Courts  function  best  when  judges  make  narrow  decisions  on  the  faas  and  law  of 
individual  cases.  Litigants  have  real  interests  that  should  not  be  subsumed  to  some 
agenda  of  the  judge.  They  need  to  feel  that  their  case  was  decided  upon  the  law  and 
facts  of  their  case.  Parties  should  not  feel  that  outside  influence  or  issues  decided  their 
case. 

Judges  should  maintain  the  quality  of  impartiality.  They  lose  the  perception  of  fairness 
if  litigants  or  the  public  believe  that  they  decided  the  case  on  matters  other  than  the 
merits  of  the  parties'  case  and  on  the  law.  Also,  Judges  lose  the  perception  of  fairness  if 
the  parties  or  the  public  sees  judges  as  deciding  cases  on  a  whim. 

Stare  decisis  is  the  preferred  course  because  it  promotes  the  evenhanded,  predictable, 
and  consistent  development  of  legal  principles.  It  fosters  reliance  on  judicial  decisions, 
and  contributes  to  the  actual  and  perceived  integrity  of  the  judicial  process.  Stare 
decisis  is  specially  important  in  cases  involving  property  and  contract  rights,  where 
reliance  interests  are  involved. 

Judges  should  use  care  in  the  exercise  of  their  authority. 


21 


627 


I.   BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used.) 

Richard  Conway  Casey 

Address:   List  current  place  of  residence  and  office 
address (es) . 

Office:   Brown  &  Wood 

One  World  Trade  Center 
New  York,  New  York   10048 

Residence:  New  York,  New  York   10022 

Date  and  place  of  birth: 

January  19,  1933;  Ithaca,  New  York 

Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's 
name).   List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and 
business  address (es). 

Divorced. 

Education:   List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have 
attended,  including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees  received, 
and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

College  of  The  Holy  Cross,  September  1951  to  June  1955. 

Received  a  B.S.  Degree  on  June  8,  1955. 
Georgetown  University  Law  Center,  September  1955  to 

January  19  58.   Received  LL.B.  Degree  on  February  1, 

1958. 

Employment  Record:   List  (by  year)  all  business  or 
professional  corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other 
enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations, 
nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were 
connected  as  an  officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor,  or 
employee  since  graduation  from  college. 

Answer:  During  my  law  school  career,  I  accelerated  my 
academic  program  and  attended  school  year-round.   The  only 
employment  that  I  had  during  law  school  was  when  I  worked 
during  two  Christmas  seasons  as  a  clerk  at  The  Georgetown 
Men's  Shop. 

From  April  1958  through  approximately  June  1958,  I 
served  as  a  legal  investigator  for  the  District  Attorney's 
Office,  New  York  County. 


628 


From  June  1958  through  December  1958,  I  served  in  the 
United  States  Army. 

From  June  1959  to  September  1963,  I  served  as  Assistant 
United  States  Attorney,  Southern  District  of  New  York. 

From  September  1963  until  June  1964,  I  served  as 
Counsel  to  Special  Commission  of  the  State  of  New  York. 

From  July  1964  to  the  present,  I  have  been  associated 
with,  and  a  partner  of,  the  law  firm  of  Brown  &  Wood,  New 
York  City,  New  York  (the  firm  had  different  names  during 
this  period).   I  was  hired  as  an  associate  in  1964,  and  was 
made  a  partner  on  January  1,  197  0.   I  became  Of  Counsel  to 
the  firm  in  1984. 

I  am  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  Guiding  Eyes 
for  the  Blind,  Catholic  Guild  for  the  Blind  and  Ski  for 
Light. 

7.  Military  Service:   Have  you  had  any  military  service?   If 
so,  give  particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of 
service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge 
received. 

Answer:  I  served  in  the  United  States  Army  from  June 
1958  to  December  1958.   I  was  released  from  active  duty  as  a 
PFC,  and  remained  in  the  reserve  affiliated  with  the 
National  Guard  of  New  York.   From  October  1,  1961,  to  August 
1962,  I  returned  to  active  duty  during  the  Berlin  Crisis, 
and  held  the  rank  of  Specialist  4th  Class  (E-4)  while 
serving  at  Fort  Knox,  Kentucky.   I  was  honorably  discharged 
in  the  summer  of  1963.  My  serial  number  was  NG  21-992-946. 

8.  Honors  and  Awards:   List  any  scholarships,  fellowships, 
honorary  degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you 
believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

Georgetown  University  Law  Center 

1956:   Beaudry  Cup  Winner  (best  Moot  Court  argument. 

Freshman  Class) . 
1957-1958:  Finalist,  National  Moot  Court  Competition. 
College  of  the  Holy  Cross: 

Freshman  Class  President,  Varsity  Football  Letter 
and  Purple  Key  Honor  Society. 

9.  Bar  Associations:   List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or 
judicial-related  committees  or  conferences  of  which  you  are 
or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of  any 
offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Member,  American  Bar  Association 


629 


Member,  Association  of  the  Bar  of  the  City  of  New  York 

Member,  The  Special  Commission  for  Discovery  Abuse  in 
the  Eastern  District  of  New  York,  1979-1980,  appointed  by 
Chief  Judge  Jack  B.  Weinstein. 

Member,  The  Special  Committee  on  Discovery  Abuse, 
1975-1979,  appointed  at  the  request  of  Chief  Justice  Warren 
Burger. 

Chairman,  Forum  on  Securities  Litigation  of  the  Bar 
Association  for  the  State  of  Colorado,  1976. 

Chairman,  American  Bar  Association  Committee  on 
Securities  Litigation,  1975-1977. 

Panelist,  American  Bar  Association  Litigation 
Section  Panel  on  Discovery  Abuse,  1975. 

Member,  Southern  District  of  New  York  Trial  and 
Appellate  Panel  established  under  Federal  Criminal  Justice 
Act,  1964-1984. 

10.  Other  Memberships;   List  all  organizations  to  which  you 
belong  that  are  active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies. 
Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

I  do  not  belong  to  any  organizations  that  are  active  in 
lobbying  before  public  bodies. 

The  other  organizations  to  which  I  belong  are: 

Member,  Board  of  Directors,  Guiding  Eyes  for  the  Blind. 

Member,  Board  of  Directors,  Catholic  Guild  for  the  Blind. 

Member,  Holy  Cross  Alumni  of  New  York. 

Member,  American  Association  of  the  Sovereign  Military  Order 

of  Malta  (Knights  of  Malta) . 

Member,  Board  of  Directors,  Ski  for  Light. 

Member,  Friendly  Sons  of  St.  Patrick. 

11.  Court  Admission:   List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been 
admitted  to  practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  laps^  if 
any  such  memberships  lapsed.   Please  explain  the  reat.'^^for 
any  lapse  of  membership.   Give  the  same  information  for 
administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission  to 
practice. 

Admitted  to  the  Bar  of  the  State  of  New  York,  Second 

Department,  on  July  1,  1959 
Admitted  to  the  Bar  of  the  United  States  Court  of 

Appeals  for  the  Second  Circuit  in  May,  1960 
Admitted  to  the  Bar  of  the  United  States  District  Court 

for  the  Southern  District  of  New  York  on  June  11, 

1963 
Admitted  to  the  Bar  of  the  United  States  Court  of 

Appeals  for  the  Fifth  Circuit  in  March,  1973 
Admitted  to  the  Bar  of  the  United  States  District  Court 

for  the  Eastern  District  of  New  York  on  No.vember  9, 

1989 


630 


Admitted  before  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States 
of  America  on  May  26,  1992. 

12.  Published  Writings:   List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates 
of  books,  articles,  reports,  or  other  published  material  you 
have  written  or  edited.   Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee. 
Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues 
involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.   If  there  were 
press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily 
available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

None. 

13.  Health:   What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?   List  the 
date  of  your  last  physical  examination. 

Excellent  (but  I  am  blind);  December,  1996. 

14.  Judicial  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  judicial 
offices  you  have  held,  whether  such  position  was  elected  or 
appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each 
such  court. 

None. 

15.  Citations:    If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide: 

(1)  citations  for  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you  have 
written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or 
where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant  criticism 
of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3)  citations 
for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional 
issues,  together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court 
rulings  on  such  opinions.   If  any  of  the  opinions  listed 
were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the 
opinions. 

Not  applicable. 

16.  Public  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices 
you  have  held,  other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the 
terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected  or 
appointed.   State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful 
candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

Assistant  United  States  Attorney,  appointed  by  William  P. 
Rogers  and  subsequently  by  Robert  F.  Kennedy  (deceased) ; 
Counsel  to  a  Special  Commission  of  the  State  of  New  York 
appointed  by  Chairman  Herman  Stitchman  (deceased) . 


631 


17.   T.egal  Career: 

a.  Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and 
experience  after  graduation  from  law  school 
including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and 
if  so,  the  name  of  the  judge,  the  court,  and* 
the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

No 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the 
addressees  and  dates; 

No 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms 
or  offices,  companies  or  governmental 
agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected, 
and  the  nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 

Answer:  From  June  1959  to  September  1963,  I  served  as 
Assistant  United  States  Attorney,  Southern  District  of  New 
York  (currently  located  at  1  St.  Andrew's  Plaza,  New  York, 
New  York  10007) . 

From  September  1963  until  June  1964,  I  served  as 
Counsel  to  a  Special  Commission  of  the  State  of  New  York 
(Moreland  Act  Commission)  to  investigate  public  corruption. 

From  July  1964  to  the  present,  I  have  been  associated 
with  and  a  partner  of  the  law  firm  of  Brown  &  Wood,  New  York 
City,  New  York  (the  firm  had  different  names  during  this 
period) .   I  was  hired  as  an  associate  in  1964  and  was  made  a 
partner  on  January  1,  1970.   I  became  Of  Counsel  to  the  firm 
in  1984. 

b.  1.    What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your 

law  practice,  dividing  it  into  periods  with 
dates  if  its  character  has  changed  over  the 
years? 

Answer:  From  1959  to  1963,  as  Assistant  United  States 
Attorney  in  the  Criminal  Division,  my  practice  involved 
prosecuting  Federal  crimes. 

From  September  1963  to  June  1964,  as  Counsel  to  Special 
Commission  of  the  State  of  New  York,  I  investigated  public 
corruption. 


632 


From  July  1964  to  the  present,  my  practice  has 
consisted  of  securities,  corporate  and  criminal  litigation. 

2.    Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and 

mention  the  areas,  if  any,  in  which  you  have 
specialized. 

Answer:  In  private  practice,  my  typical  clients  have 
included  numerous  investment  banking  firms,  corporations  and 
individuals  employed  in  the  financial  services  and  other 
industries.   I  have  specialized  in  securities,  corporate  and 
criminal  litigation. 

c.    1.    Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently, 
occasionally,  or  not  at  all?   If  the 
frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court 
varied,  describe  each  such  variance,  giving 
dates. 


Answer:  My  practice  from  1959  through  1963  was 
exclusively  criminal,  and  the  nature  of  the  practice  as 
Assistant  United  States  Attorney  required  that  I  be  in  court 
on  almost  a  daily  basis.   After  I  entered  private  practice, 
my  practice  was  predominantly  civil  in  nature  and  as  a 
result,  the  appearances  in  court  were  less  frequent. 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts; 

(b)  state  courts  of  record; 

(c)  other  courts. 

Answer;  Over  my  entire  professional  career,  my 
appearance  in  courts  has  been  predominantly  (approximately 
90%)  in  Federal  courts. 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil; 

(b)  criminal. 

Answer:  Since  leaving  the  United  States  Attorney's 
Office,  my  practice  has  been  approximately  90%  civil  and  10% 
criminal  litigation. 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record 
you  tried  to  verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than 
settled) ,  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

Answer:  Approximately  40  as  chief  counsel  and/or  sole 
counsel  and  I  was  co-counsel  or  associate  counsel  on  an 
additional  5  cases. 


633 


5.    What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury; 

(b)  non-jury. 

Answer:  95%  of  the  trials  were  by  jury,  and  5%  were 
non-jury. 

18.   Litigation:   Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated 

matters  which  you  personally  handled.   Give  the  citations, 
if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and  date 
if  unreported.   Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of 
each  case.   Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you 
represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of 
the  case.   Also  state  as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or 
judges  before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  The  individual  name,  addressees,  and  telephone 
numbers  of  co-counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for 
each  of  the  other  parties. 

Criminal  Litigation 

My  tenure  at  the  United  States  Attorney's  Office 
in  New  York  City  included,  among  various  other 
prosecutions,  my  prosecution  of  three  Russian  spy 
cases  listed  below. 

1.  United  States  v.  Sob! en.  60  CR  996  (1961) 
(U.S.D. C. -S.D.N. Y. )  (sentencing  opinion  written  by 
Judge  Her lands  appears  in  United  States  v.  Soblen, 
199  F.  Supp.  11  (1961) ) . 

a)  Dates  of  Action/Decisions:  The  trial 
lasted  approximately  one  month  in  or  about 
June,  1961.   After  trial  by  jury  before  the 
Honorable  Judge  Herlands,  the  defendant  was 
found  guilty  of  espionage.   The  conviction 
was  affirmed  on  appeal  and  certiorari  was 
denied  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States. 

b)  Court  and  Judge:  The  case  was  tried  before 
the  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Southern  District  of  New  York,  the  Honorable 
William  Herlands,  District  Judge,  presiding. 

c)  Parties  to  the  Litigation;  Dr.  Soblen, 
along  with  18  unindicted  co-conspirators,  was 
charged  with  espionage. 

8 


634 


d)  Summary  of  Case/Significance;  As  Assistant 
United  States  Attorney  and  lead  counsel,  I 
prosecuted  Dr.  Soblen  for  espionage.   The 
case  disclosed  a  network  of  Soviet  spy 
activity  in  the  United  States  that  was,  as 
Judge  Herlands  noted  in  his  sentencing 
opinion,  "conceived  by  the  Secret  Police  of 
Soviet  Russia"  and  "executed  through  the 
active  connivance  and  financial  support  of  at 
least  two  high-ranking  Soviet  diplomats."  199 
F.  Supp.  at  13. 

e)  Co-Counsel/Opposina  Counsel;  My  co-counsel 
was  David  R,  Hyde  (currently  a  retired 
partner  with  the  law  firm  of  Cahill  Gordon  & 
Reindel,  8  0  Pine  Street,  New  York  City,  New 
York  10005  (tsl.  (212)  701-3000)).  The 
defendant  was  represented  by  Mr.  Joseph 
Brill,  a  sole  practitioner  formerly  residing 
at  66  Pinebrook  Boulevard,  New  Rochelle,  New 
York,  and  by  Mr.  Jacob  W.  Friedman,  a  sole 
practitioner  formerly  residing  at  295  St. 
John's  Place,  Brooklyn,  New  York.   Neither 
Mr.  Brill  nor  Mr.  Friedman  is  currently 
listed  in  the  Martindale-Hubbell  Law 
Directory.   I  do  not  know  the  current 
whereabouts  of  these  gentlemen,  or  whether 
they  are  still  alive. 

2.  United  States  v.  Zborowski.  CR  156-113  (1962) 
(U.S.D.C.-S.D.N.Y. ) 

a)  Dates  of  Action/Decisions:  The  trial  was 
conducted  during  the  autumn  of  1962.   After 
trial  by  jury  before  the  Honorable  Judge 
Richard  Levet,  the  defendant  was  found  guilty 
of  perjury. 

b)  Court  and  Judge;  The  case  was  tried  before 
the  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Southern  District  of  New  York,  the  Honorable 
Richard  Levet  presiding. 

c)  Parties  to  the  Litigation;  The  defendant 
was  Mark  Zborowski,  a  Soviet  espionage  agent 
who  was  charged  with  perjury. 

d)  Summary  of  Case/Significance;  As  Assistant 
United  States  Attorney  and  lead  counsel,  I 
prosecuted  retrial  of  the  defendant  for 
perjury.   The  defendant  was  a  Soviet  spy  who 
had  perjured  himself  before  a  grand  jury  by 


635 


denying  that  he  knew  another  Soviet  spy.   The 
second  spy  ultimately  testified  against  Mr. 
Zborowski  at  trial.   The  case  was  retried 
after  his  original  conviction  had  been  set 
aside  by  the  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Second 
Circuit. 

e)  Co-Counsel /Opposing  Counsel:  Counsel  for 
the  defendant  was  Frederick  S.  Nathan 
(currently  with  the  law  firm  of  Kelley,  Drye 
&  Warren,  101  Park  Avenue,  New  York  City,  New 
York  10178  (tel.  (212)  808-7800)). 

3.  United  States  v.  Drummond,  62  CR  910  (1963) 
(U.S.D.C.-S.D.N. Y. )  (no  reported  opinion). 

a)  Dates  of  Action/Decisions:  The  trial 
lasted  approximately  one  month  in  or  about 
July,  1963. 

b)  Court  and  Judge:  The  case  was  tried  before 
the  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Southern  District  of  New  York,  the  Honorable 
Thomas  Murphy,  District  Judge,  presiding. 

c)  Parties  to  the  Litigation:  The  defendant 
was  Mr.  Nelson  Drummond,  a  Chief  Petty 
Officer  in  the  United  States  Navy, 

d)  Summary  of  Case/Significance:  As  Assistant 
United  States  Attorney,  I,  along  with  my  co- 
counsel,  prosecuted  the  defendant  for 
espionage  for  attempting  to  deliver  military 
secrets  to  agents  of  the  former  Soviet  Union. 
The  first  trial  of  the  defendant  occurred  in 
or  about  May,  1963,  and  resulted  in  a 
mistrial  due  to  the  inability  of  the  jury  to 
reach  a  verdict.   The  case  was  re-tried  in 
July  1963  and  the  defendant  was  found  guilty 
of  conspiracy  to  commit  espionage. 

e)  Co-Counsel /Opposing  Counsel:  My  co-counsel 
were  Vincent  L.  Broderick  (now  deceased) ,  and 
John  S.  Martin  (currently,  a  United  States 
District  Court  Judge  in  the  Southern  District 
of  New  York,  U.S.  Courthouse,  500  Pearl 
Street,  New  York  City,  New  York  10007  (tel. 
(212)  805-0228)).   Defending  Mr.  Drummond  was 
Mr.  William  Chance  (deceased) . 


10 


636 


civil  Litigation 

My  civil  litigation  experience  has  been  primarily 
in  the  areas  of  securities  and  commodities  fraud 
cases  brought  by  customers  of  brokerage  and 
investment  banking  firms,  including,  among  others, 
Merrill  Lynch,  Pierce,  Fenner  &  Smith  Incorporated 
("Merrill  Lynch") .   The  seven  cases  set  forth 
below  are  a  fair  representation  of  my  private 
practice. 

4.  Sinva.  Inc.  v.  Merrill  Lynch,  65  Civ.  1566 
(U.S.D.C.-S.D.N. Y. )  (a  reported  decision,  with 
respect  to  defendant's  motion  to  dismiss  the 
complaint  or  stay  the  action  pending  arbitration, 
appears  at  253  F.  Supp.  359  (1966)), 

a)  Dates  gf  Action/Decisigng:  The  case, 
through  the  initial  complaint  and  subsequent 
trial,  extended  from  1965  through  1969. 

b)  Court  and  Judge;  The  case  was  tried  before 
the  United  States  District  Court,  Southern 
District  of  New  York,  the  Honorable  Dudley 
Bonsai,  District  Judge,  presiding,  and  was 
retried  before  the  Honorable  Lloyd  McMahon, 
presiding. 

c)  Parties  to  the  Litigation;  The  plaintiff 
to  the  civil  suit  was  Sinva,  Inc.,  a 
Panamanian  corporation  with  its  headquarters 
in  Berne,  Switzerland,  and  Merrill  Lynch. 

d)  Summary  of  Case/Significance;  I  was  the 
lead  counsel  for  the  defendant,  Merrill  Lynch 
in  a  commodities  fraud  action  brought  by  a 
Merrill  Lynch  customer  in  connection  with 
losses  suffered  by  the  customer  in  sugar 
futures  contracts.   The  first  trial  ended  in 
a  mistrial,  due  to  the  inability  of  the  jury 
to  reach  a  verdict.   The  second  trial 
resulted  in  a  verdict  for  the  defendant 
Merrill  Lynch.   The  significance  of  the  case 
lies  in  the  fact  that  it  was  a  successful 
defense  of  a  complex  commodities  futures 
contracts  case  before  a  jury. 

e)  Co-Counsel /Opposing  Counsel;  My  co-counsel 
was  Robert  A,  Foy,  currently  located  at  90 
South  Bedford  Road,  Mt.  Kisco,  New  York  10549 
(tfil.  (914)  666-7393).   Counsel  for  the 
plaintiff  Sinva,  Inc.  were  Lawrence  P. 

11 


637 


McGauley,  (current  address  unknown)  and  John 
G.  Lipsett  (currently  with  the  law  firm  of 
Forsythe,  Holbrook,  Seward  &  Bovone,  420 
Lexington  Avenue,  New  York,  New  York  10170 
(teJL.  (212)  867-8280)). 

5.  Dunn  V.  Merrill  Lynch,  64  Civ.  1285  (The  only 
reported  decision  in  the  case,  relating  to  the 
recovery  by  Merrill  Lynch  of  the  actual  expenses 
for  flying  in  witnesses  subpoenaed  by  the 
plaintiff,  appears  at  279  F.  Supp.  937  (1968)). 

a)  Dates  of  Action/Decisions:  The  complaint 
against  Merrill  Lynch  was  filed  in  1964,  and 
the  case  ultimately  decided  in  February, 
1968. 

b)  Court  and  Judge;  The  case  was  tried  before 
the  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Southern  District  of  New  York,  the  Honorable 
Milton  Pollack,  District  Judge,  presiding. 

c)  Parties  to  the  Litigation:  The  plaintiff 
was  Burton  D.  Dunn,  an  investor  residing  in 
France,  who  employed  Merrill  Lynch  as  his 
broker  during  the  early  1960s. 

d)  Summary  of  Case/Significance:  As  counsel, 
I  represented  Merrill  Lynch  in  an  action 
brought  by  a  customer  who  sustained  losses 
through  his  investment  in  the  common  stock  of 
Syntex  Corporation.   Mr.  Dunn  sued  Merrill 
Lynch  under  a  theory  of  common  law  securities 
fraud  and  negligence  under  the  Securities 
Exchange  Act  of  1934,  which  was  tried  before 
a  jury  and  ultimately  resolved  in  favor  of 
the  defendant  Merrill  Lynch.   The  case 
presented  an  original  attack  on  the 
reasonableness  of  investment  recommendations 
provided  by  a  broker  and  involved  the 
explanation  of  both  "technical"  and 
"fundamental"  factors  supporting  such 
research  to  a  jury. 

e)  Co-Counsel/Opposing  Counsel;  Assisting  me 
from  Brown  &  Wood,  One  World  Trade  Center, 
New  York  City,  New  York  1004  8  was  Henry  F. 
Minnerop  (tal.  (212)  839-5555).   Counsel  for 
the  plaintiff  was  John  F.  McNeill,  of  the  law 
firm  of  Stone,  Malone,  Driver  &  McNeill, 
formerly  at  12  0  Broadway,  New  York  City,  New 
York.   The  firm  has  disbanded,  and  there  is 

12 


638 


currently  no  listing  for  Mr.  McNeill  in  the 
Martindale-Hubbell  Law  Directory. 

6.  Simon  v.  Merrill  Lynch,  Civ.  No.  34094 
(Michigan)/  Misc.  675,  Civ.  Action  No.  CA  3-4273 
(Texas) . 

a)  Dates  of  Action/Decisions:  The  suit  was 
initiated  on  December  16,  1969,  and  was 
conducted  through  August,  1972.   The  sole 
reported  decision  in  this  case  denying  class 
action  status  and  upholding  the  judgment  in 
favor  of  defendant,  Merrill  Lynch,  was 
affirmed  by  the  United  States  Court  of 
Appeals  for  the  Fifth  Circuit  reported  at  482 
F.2d  880  (1973) . 

b)  Court  and  Judge:  The  case  was  first  tried 
before  the  United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Eastern  District  of  Michigan,  Southern 
Division,  and  was  subsequently  transferred  to 
the  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Northern  District  of  Texas,  Dallas  Division. 
The  case  was  tried  without  a  jury  to  the 
Honorable  Ernest  J.  Guinn,  District  Judge, 
who  rendered  a  judgment  in  favor  of  the 
defendant,  Merrill  Lynch. 

c)  Parties  to  the  Litigation:  Plaintiffs 
James  Simon  and  The  Bank  of  the  Commonwealth 
were  two  representatives  of  a  purported  class 
(of  approximately  6,000  individuals) 
allegedly  injured  by  the  advice  of  defendant 
Merrill  Lynch  with  respect  to  the  stock  of 
Scientific  Control  Corporation 
("Scientific") . 

d)  Summary  of  Case/Significance:  This  case 
was  one  of  three  cases  in  which  I  was  lead 
counsel  to  Merrill  Lynch  and  one  of  its 
employees  that  arose  out  of  allegedly 
improper  and  misleading  investment  advice 
provided  by  employees  of  Merrill  Lynch  with 
respect  to  the  stock  of  Scientific,  a  Dallas 
corporation  which  filed  for  bankruptcy  after 
having  been  favorably  described  in  research 
reports  of  Merrill  Lynch.   In  the  Simon  case, 
the  plaintiffs  attempted  to  certify  their 
claims  as  those  of  a  class  of  plaintiffs. 

The  Simon  case  (as  well  as  the  other  related 
Scientific  cases)  was  notable  both  for  the 
allegations  of  pervasive  and  substantial 

13 


639 


fraud  by  Merrill  Lynch 's  sales 
representatives,  as  well  as  the  novel  attacks 
by  both  private  plaintiffs  and  the  United 
States  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission 
alleging  that  Merrill  Lynch 's  "inadequate" 
securities  research  was  a  violation  of  the 
Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934.  , 

e)  Co-Counsel /Opposing  Counsel:  Merrill 
Lynch 's  local  counsel  of  record  in  Michigan 
were  Erwin  S.  Simon  and  Douglas  G.  Graham,  of 
the  law  firm  of  Butzel,  Levin,  Winston  & 
Quint  (now  Butzel  &  Long),  Suite  900,  150 
West  Jefferson,  Detroit,  Michigan  48226  (tsl. 
(313)  225-7000).   Merrill  Lynch • s  local 
counsel  of  record  in  Texas  was  Frank  Finn,  of 
the  law  firm  of  Thompson,  Knight,  Simmons  & 
Bullion  (now  Thompson  &  Knight) ,  330  First 
City  Center,  1700  Pacific  Avenue,  Dallas, 
Texas  75201  (tfil-  (214)  969-1700) .   William 
H.  Merrill  (current  address  unknown)  and 
Robert  R.  Bradshaw,  currently  of  the  law  firm 
of  Babb  &  Bradshaw,  P.C.,  905  Congress 
Avenue,  Austin,  Texas   78767  (t£l.  (512)  457- 
0188)  were  counsel  for  the  plaintiffs. 

7.  Santilli  v.  Merrill  Lynch ^  Civ.  No.  4469 
(U.S.D.C. -D.R.I.)  (No  reported  decisions.) 

a)  Dates  of  Action/Decisions:  The  action  was 
instituted  on  December  4,  1970.  A  verdict  in 
favor  of  the  defendant  Merrill  Lynch  was 
issued  on  February  29,  1972. 

b)  Court  and  Judge:  The  case  was  tried  before 
a  jury  in  the  United  States  District  Court 
for  the  District  of  Rhode  Island,  the 
Honorable  Edward  W.  Day,  District  Judge, 
presiding. 

c)  Parties  to  the  Litigation;  Plaintiff 
Anthony  Santilli  was  an  individual  investor 
who  employed  Merrill  Lynch  as  his  broker- 
dealer. 

d)  Summarv  of  Case /significance:  As  lead 
counsel  in  the  Santilli  case,  I  defended 
Merrill  Lynch  against  charges  that  the  sale 
of  Scientific  stock  to  the  plaintiff  was  by 
fraudulent  and  negligent  representations  as 
to  the  value  and  safety  of  such  stock  by  one 
of  Merrill  Lynch 's  employees. 

14 


640 


e)  Co-Counsel/Opposing  Counsel:  Assisting  me 
from  Brown  &  Wood,  One  World  Trade  Center, 
New  York,  New  York  10048  was  Henry  F. 
Minnerop  (t£l.  (212)  839-5555) .   Local 
counsel  of  record  for  Merrill  Lynch  in  Rhode 
Island  was  Richard  M.  Borod,  of  the  law  firm 
of  Edwards  &  Angell,  2700  Hospital  Trust 
Tower,  Providence,  Rhode  Island  02903  (t£l. 
(401)    274-9200) .   Counsel  for  the  plaintiff 
was  John  P,  Bourcier  (a  sole  practitioner) , 
with  his  offices  formerly  located  at  1000 
Smith  Street,  Providence,  Rhode  Island.  There 
is  currently  no  listing  for  Mr.  Bourcier  in 
the  Martindale-Hubbell  Law  Directory. 

8.  In  the  Matter  of  Merrill  Lynch ,  Pierce,  Fanner 
&  Smith.  Inc. ,  Administrative  Proceeding  File  No. 
3-4329  before  the  United  States  Securities  and 
Exchange  Commission  (the  "SEC")  (reported  in  SEC 
Release  No.  34-14149  (1977)). 

a)  Dates  of  Action/Decisions:  The  SEC  issued 
an  order  on  June  10,  1970,  directing  a 
private  investigation  of  Merrill  Lynch  to 
examine  allegations  of  alleged  fraud  in 
trading  the  stock  of  Scientific.   On  June  22, 
1973,  the  SEC  issued  an  order  for  a  public 
proceeding  against  Merrill  Lynch  and  49 
individuals  (either  current  or  former 
employees  of  Merrill  Lynch) .   The  proceeding 
commenced  in  March  1974  and,  after  hearings 
lasting  over  a  two-year  period,  resulted  in  a 
settlement  with  the  SEC  effective  November  9, 
1977. 

b)  Court  and  Judge:  The  proceeding  was  tried 
before  Sidney  Ullman,  an  Administrative  Law 
Judge  of  the  SEC.   The  trial  was  completed  on 
November  2,  1977. 

c)  Parties  to  the  Litigation:  SEC,  Merrill 
Lynch  and  49  individuals  (either  current  or 
former  employees  of  Merrill  Lynch) . 

d)  Summary  of  Case/Significance:  The  SEC 
Order  charged  Merrill  Lynch  and  its  employees 
with  fraud  in  the  solicitation  and  trading  of 
the  stock  of  Scientific,  and  inadequate 
research  on  behalf  of  its  research  department 
in  recommending  the  purchase  of  Scientific 
stock.   I  was  lead  counsel  for  Merrill  Lynch 
and  several  of  its  employees  during  the 

15 


641 


proceedings.   At  the  time  the  proceeding  was 
brought,  I  believe  that  it  was  the  largest 
(with  several  hundred  witnesses)  and  most 
extensive  administrative  proceeding  ever 
brought  against  any  broker-dealer  by  the  SEC. 
It  was  also  the  first  time  that  the  SEC  had 
charged  that  inadequate  research  in 
recommending  the  purchase  of  a  security  was  a 
violation  of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of 
1934. 

e)  Co-CounseT /Opposing  Counsel:  I  was  the 
lead  counsel  on  behalf  of  Merrill  Lynch  and 
most  of  the  individual  respondents,  with  the 
exception  of  David  Phelps  (who  was 
represented  by  Otto  G.  Obermaier  (currently 
with  Weil,  Gotshal  &  Manges,  LLP.,  767  Fifth 
Avenue,  New  York  City,  New  York  10153  (tglt 
(212)  310-8843))  and  Robert  Morvillo, 
(currently  with  the  law  firm  of  Morvillo, 
Abramowitz,  Grand,  lason  &  Silberberg,  565 
Fifth  Avenue,  10th  Floor,  New  York  City,  New 
York  10017  (t£l.  (212)  856-9600)));  Richard 
J.  Murphy  (who  was  represented  by  Arthur  F. 
Mathews  of  the  law  firm  of  Wilmer,  Cutler  & 
Pickering,  2445  M  Street,  N.W. ,  Washington, 
D.C.  20037  (tsl.  (202)  663-6000),  and  Mary  A. 
McReynolds  (current  address  unknown)  and  John 
J.  Ruzicka  (who  was  represented  by  Mahlon  M. 
Frankhauser,  currently  with  the  law  firm  of 
Kirkpatrick  &  Lockhart,  1800  Massachusetts 
Avenue,  N.W. ,  Suite  200,  Washington,  D.C. 
20036-1800  (t£l.  (202)  778-9000).   The  SEC 
was  represented  by,  among  other  individuals, 
John  F.X.  Peloso  (currently  with  Morgan, 
Lewis  &  Bockius,  101  Park  Avenue,  New  York 
City,  New  York  10178  (tel.  (212)  309-6000)), 
Michael  T.  Gregg  (currently  Senior  Vice 
President,  Law  Department,  Dean  Witter 
Reynolds,  Inc.,  2  World  Trade  Center,  4th 
Floor,  New  York  City,  New  York  10048  (tgl- 
(212)  392-2222)),  Steven  J.  Glusband 
(currently  with  Carter,  Ledyard  &  Milburn,  2 
Wall  Street,  New  York  City,  New  York  10005 
(tel.  (212)  732-3200))  and  Thomas  F.  Egan 
(currently  with  the  brokerage  firm  of  Langdon 
P.  Cook,  100  Park  Avenue,  New  York  City,  New 
York  10017  (t£l.  (212)  682-7074)). 

9.   T.oeb  v.  Mprrin  Lvnch  ■  79  Civ.  0788  (U.S.D. C.- 
D.N. J.)  (no  reported  decision). 


16 


642 


a)  Dates  of  Action/Decisions;  The  action  was 
commenced  on  March  20,  1979  and  was  concluded 
on  December  31,  1980,  with  a  judgment 
rendered  in  favor  of  my  client,  the  defendant 
Merr  ill  Lynch . 

b)  Court  and  Judge;  The  case  was  tried  before 
the  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
District  of  New  Jersey,  the  Honorable 
Frederick  B.  Lacey,  District  Judge, 
presiding. 

c)  Parties  to  the  Litigation:  The  plaintiff 
in  the  action  was  Mrs.  Else  Julie  Loeb,  an 
investor,  against  Merrill  Lynch. 

d)  Summary  of  Case/Significance:  I  was  lead 
counsel  for  defendant  Merrill  Lynch  in  a  suit 
brought  by  a  private  investor  alleging 
misrepresentation,  securities  fraud  and 
allegations  of  unauthorized  securities 
trading  by  defendant.   The  plaintiff  sought 
compensatory  damages  in  excess  of  $5  million. 
The  case  was  decided  in  favor  of  the 
defendant  with  costs  assessed  against  the 
plaintiff.   The  significance  of  the  case  was 
in  the  difficulty  of  trying,  before  a  jury,  a 
complex  case  involving  a  knowledgeable,  but 
sympathetic  plaintiff. 

e)  Co-Counsel /Opposing  Counsel:  Assisting  me 
from  Brown  &  Wood,  One  World  Trade  Center, 
New  York  City,  New  York  10048  were  A.  Robert 
Pietrzak  (tel.  (212)  839-5537) ,  Judith  Welcom 
ftel.  (212)  839-5362)  and  Kent  E.  Daiber 
(current  address  unknown) .   The  local  counsel 
of  record  for  defendant  Merrill  Lynch  was 
John  L.  Moore  (deceased) .   Counsel  to  the 
plaintiff  was  John  J.  LaFianza  of  the  law 
firm  of  LaFianza  &  Auriginma  (deceased) ,  and 
Harry  L.  Carman  (current  address  unknown) . 

10.   Schwarz  v.  Dean  Witter  Reynolds,  Inc., 
82  Civ.  0452  (U. S . D. C. -S . D. N. Y . ) (no  reported 
decision) . 

a^  Dates  of  Action/Decisions:  The  action 
commenced  on  April  13,  1982.   No  decision  was 
rendered,  since  the  case  was  settled  on  the 
eve  of  trial  during  the  summer  of  1983. 


17 


643 


b)  Court  and  Judge:  The  case  was  before  the 
United  States  District  Court  for  the  Southern 
District  of  New  York,  the  Honorable  Robert 
Carter,  District  Judge,  presiding. 

c)  Parties  to  the  Litigation:  The  plaintiff, 
Mr.  Fred  Schwarz,  was  a  client  of  Dean 
Witter;  the  defendants  were  Dean  Witter 
Reynolds,  Inc.,  a  brokerage  firm  ("Dean 
Witter")  and  Palomba  Weingarten,  the 
individual  broker  who  serviced  Mr.  Schwarz 's 
account, 

d)  Summary  of  Case/Significance:  I  was  lead 
counsel  for  the  defendant  Dean  Witter  in  a 
case  brought  by  a  customer  of  the  defendant 
under  Section  10(b)  of  the  Securities  and 
Exchange  Act  of  1934,  alleging  securities 
fraud  and  misrepresentation. 

The  significance  of  the  action  is  that  the 
case  involved  extremely  complex  option 
trading  as  well  as  alleged  unauthorized 
trading  and  misrepresentations. 

e)  Co-Counsel/Opposing  Counsel:  Counsel  for 
the  co-defendant  Palomba  Weingarten  was  Debra 
Brown  Steinberg,  currently  with  the  law  firm 
of  Cadwalader,  Wickersham  &  Taft,  100  Maiden 
Lane,  New  York  City,  New  York  1003  8  (tfil. 
(212)  504-6000) .   Counsel  for  plaintiff  was 
Richard  Kraver  (deceased) . 

See  Attachment  A  for  list  of  Professional  References. 

Legal  Activities:   Describe  the  most  significant  legal 
activities  you  have  pursued,  including  significant 
litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters 
that  did  not  involve  litigation.   Describe  the  nature  of 
your  participation  in  this  question,  please  omit  any 
information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege 
(unless  the  privilege  has  been  waived.) 

Answer:  Some  of  the  most  significant  litigation  that  I 
handled,  apart  from  the  cases  discussed  in  question  17 
above,  include  representation  of  Merrill  Lynch  in  private 
civil  suits  (which  were  settled)  and  in  administrative 
proceedings  before  the  U.S.  Securities  and  Exchange 
Commission  entitled  In  re  Douglas  Aircraft.   They  were  one 
of  the  first  significant  insider  trading  cases.   In 
addition,  I  was  counsel  in  the  New  York  City  Municipal 
Securities  litigation,   representing  Merrill  Lynch  &  Co.  as 
defendant.   The  case  involving  my  client  was  ultimately 

18 


644 


settled.   I  tried  numerous  arbitration  and  administrative 
proceedings,  which  include  administrative  proceedings  before 
the  U.S.  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission,  and 
arbitrations  before  securities  self-regulatory  bodies  such 
as  the  National  Association  of  Securities  Dealers,  Inc.,  the 
American  Stock  Exchange,  and  the  New  York  Stock  Exchange. 


19 


645 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts 
from  deferred  income  arrangements,  stock,  options, 
uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which  you 
expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships, 
professional  services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers, 
clients,  or  customers.  Please  describe  the  arrangements  you 
have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial 
or  business  interest. 

As  disclosed  on  the  financial  forms  below,  I  have  vested 
interests  in  two  Brown  &  Wood  retirement  plans  (the  Brown  & 
Wood  Profit  Sharing  Retirement  Plan  and  the  Brown  &  Wood 
Defined  Benefit  Plan) ,  as  well  as  an  IRA.  I  receive  a  salary 
from  Brown  &  Wood  that  will  terminate  upon  my  accepting  any 
other  position.   I  currently  receive  tax-free  income  from  a 
disability  insurance  arrangement  in  an  amount  equal  to 
$50,829.24  per  annum,  which  will  continue  until  age  65. 
Other  than  these  arrangements,  I  do  not  anticipate  any  other 
benefits  from  my  current  professional  relationship. 

Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of 
interest,  including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in 
determining  these  areas  of  concern.   Identify  the  categories 
of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to 
present  potential  conf licts-of-interest  during  your  initial 
service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

I  do  not  believe  that  there  will  be  any  potential  conflicts 
of  interest  arising  out  of  my  professional  and  charitable 
obligations.   However,  if  there  are,  in  an  exercise  of 
caution,  I  would  follow  the  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  and 
recuse  myself  from  any  matter  that  could  pose  a  potential 
conflict. 

Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue 
outside  employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during 
your  service  with  the  court?   If  so,  explain. 

No. 

List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the 
calendar  year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current 
calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees,  dividends, 
interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and 
other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so, 
copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report,  required  by  the 
Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  Attachment  B. 


20 


646 


5.  Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement 
in  detail  (Add  schedules  as  called  for) . 

See  Attachment  C. 

6.  Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a 
political  campaign?   If  so,  please  identify  the  particulars 
of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the 
campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

No. 


21 


647 


III.   GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar 
Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for 
"every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence  or 
professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in 
serving  the  disadvantaged."   Describe  what  you  have  done  to 
fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances 
and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

Answer:  I  served  on  the  Federal  Criminal  Justice  Act 
Indigent  Panel  for  the  Southern  District  of  New  York  and  for 
the  Second  Circuit  for  Trial  and  Appeals  from  the  mid-1960 's 
to  late  1970's. 

I  served  again  during  the  early  1980 's  on  the  Federal 
Criminal  Justice  Act  Indigent  Panel  for  the  Southern 
District  Court  of  New  York. 

During  the  late  1960 's  and  early  1970' s,  I  served  on 
the  Assigned  Counsel  Panel  for  Indigent  Defendants  in 
criminal  cases  in  Nassau  County,  New  York. 

I  have  handled  numerous  trials  and  appeals,  on  a  pro 
bono  basis,  (including  U.S.  v.  McBryde,  U.S.  v.  Tucker,  U.S. 
V.  Coppin  and  U.S.  v.  Stransky^ ,  before  the  federal  courts. 
From  1983  to  1991,  I  served  as  Assigned  Counsel  on  a  civil 
case  under  the  Civil  Rights  Act  in  the  United  States 
District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  New  York. 

I  am  responsible  for  Brown  Wood  representing  the  U.S. 
Blind  Golfers  Association  in  connection  with  their 
application  for  501-C3  status  as  a  not-for-profit 
organization. 

I  am  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  Guiding  Eyes 
for  the  Blind. 

I  am  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  Ski  for 
Light. 

The  American  Bar  Association  Commentary  to  its  Code  of 
Judicial  Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge 
to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that  invidiously 
discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.   Do 
you  currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any 
organization  which  discriminates  —  through  either  formal 
membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of 
membership  policies?   If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership. 
What  you  have  done  to  try  to  change  these  policies? 


22 


648 


Answer ;  To  the  best  of  my  knowledge,  the  only 
organizations  that  I  have  been  a  member  of  that  could 
possibly  be  viewed  as  discriminatory  (if  the  organizations 
listed  below  are,  in  fact  considered  to  be  discriminatory) 
are  the  following: 

Boy  Scouts  of  America  (terminated  my  association  in  the 

1940s) 
Knights  of  Columbus  (terminated  my  association  in  the 

1950s) 
The  Friendly  Sons  of  St.  Patrick  (current  member) 

In  addition,  I  was  a  member  of  a  private  country  club 
(the  Creek  Club,  Locust  Valley,  New  York)  from  1974  to 
1985.   I  do  not  believe  that  the  membership  policies  of 
the  Creek  Club  during  that  time,  nor  currently,  are 
discriminatory . 

Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to 
recommend  candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts? 
If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?   Please  describe 
your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process, 
from  beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led 
to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you 
participated) . 

Answer:   Senator  D'Amato  has  a  Committee  to  recommend 
judicial  nominees.   I  submitted  an  application  to  that 
Committee  and  was  interviewed  by  them  on  March  26,  1997. 
This  committee  recommended  my  candidacy  to  Senator  D'Amato. 
Senator  D'Amato  subsequently  designated  me  for  a  vacancy  on 
the  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of  New 
York.   I  also  appeared  before  Senator  Moynihan's  Committee 
on  March  6,  1997.   I  do  not  know  the  recommendation  of  the 
Committee,  but  I  do  know  that  Senator  Moynihan  has  endorsed 
my  candidacy. 

Between  May  and  July,  1997,  I  was  interviewed  by  the 
Department  of  Justice,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation 
and  the  American  Bar  Association.   Based  on  information  and 
belief,  I  received  a  favorable  recommendation  by  all  three 
entities. 

Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a 
judicial  nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal 
issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be 
interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case, 
issue,  or  question?   If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

No. 


23 


649 


Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism 
involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal 
government,  and  within  society  generally,  has  become  the 
subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.   It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism 
that  alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of 
the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have 
been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward 
problem-solution  rather  than  grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the 
individual  plaintiff  is  a  vehicle  for  the 
imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to 
broad  classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad, 
affirmative  duties  upon  governments  and  society; 


d. 


A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening 
jurisdictional  requirements  such  as  standing  and 
ripeness;  and 

e.    A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon 
other  institutions  in  the  manner  of  an 
administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities . 

Answer:  Judging  is  inherently  a  reactive,  not  a 
proactive,  process.   Federal  judges  are  bound,  in  the  words 
of  Article  III  of  the  United  States  Constitution,  to  resolve 
"cases"  and  "controversies"  properly  appearing  before  them, 
not  to  foment  disputes  or  mandate  policies  that  individual 
judges  find  personally  compelling.   Federal  judges  have  the 
duty,  while  deciding  the  merits  of  a  case  properly  before 
them,  to  resolve  the  competing  claims  of  litigants  in  a 
manner  consistent  with  precedent  and  with  the  terms  of  the 
applicable  statutes  and  the  Constitution.   Judges  must 
render  decisions,  and  provide  remedies,  that  are  both  lawful 
and  equitable  for  the  individual  parties,  and  do  not  usurp 
the  allocation  of  power  among  the  executive,  legislative  and 
judicial  branches  of  the  federal  government.   However,  a 
judge  may  not  shirk  a  controversy  that  is  properly  before 
his  or  her  court,  regardless  of  the  identity  of  the  parties. 
The  rights  of  the  citizenry  are  ill-served  if  the  courts 
sacrifice  their  obligation  to  judge  fairly  between  the 
claims  of  competing  parties,  because  one  party  is  unpopular 

24 


650 


or  because  a  party  may  be  an  agency  of  federal  or  state 
authority.   Within  the  limited  breadth  of  the  judiciary's 
authority,  the  courts  have  the  obligation  to  interpret  the 
law,  and  to  resolve  the  grievances  of  the  parties  to  the 
full  extent  that  the  law  provides  a  remedy. 


25 


651 


Attachment  "A" 

Thomas  McC.  SoTither,  Esq.  (212)  839-5846 

Brovm  &  Wood  LLP 

One  World  Trade  Center 

New  York,  New  York  10048 

A.  Robert  Pietrzak,  Esq.  (212)  839-5537 

Brown  &  Wood  LLP 

One  World  Trade  Center 

New  York,  New  York   10048 

Laurel  J.  Southworth,  Esq.  (212)  839-5559 

Brown  &  Wood  LLP 

One  World  Trade  Center 

New  York,  New  York  10048 

Joseph  W.  Armbrust,  Jr.,  Esq.  (212  839-5390 

Brown  t  Wood  LLP 

One  V7orld  Trade  Center 

New  York,  New  York   10048 

James  D.  Zirin,  Esq.  (212)  839-6576 

Brown  &  Wood  LLP 

One  World  Trade  Center 

New  York,  New  York  10048 

Andrew  J.  Maloney,  Esq.  (212)  839-5825 

Brown  &  Wood  LLP 

One  World  Trade  Center 

New  York,  New  York   10048 

Roger  J.  Hawke,  Esq.  (212)  839-5544 

Brown  &  Wood  LLP 

One  World  Trade  Center 

New  York,  New  York   1004  8 

Kenneth  J.  Kornblau,  Esq.  (212)  839-5529 

Brown  &  Wood  LLP 

One  World  Trade  Center 

New  York,  New  York  10048 


652 


John  J.  Kilkenny,  Esq.  (212)  449-9513 

Vice  President  and  Senior  Counsel 

Merrill  Lynch 

World  Financial  Center,  North  Tower 

250  Vesey  Street  -  12th  Floor 

New  York,  New  York  10281-1312 

Daniel  Dolan,  Esq.  (212)  449-1260 

Vice  President  and  Assistant  General  Counsel 

Merrill  Lynch 

World  Financial  Center,  North  Tower 

250  Vesey  Street  -  12th  Floor 

New  York,  New  York  10281-1312 


AOlO  M 


653 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

Nomination  Report 


Attachment  B 

Report  Required  by  the  EAics 
Reform  Aa  of  I9S9.  Pub  L  No. 
101194.  November  30.  19S9 
(5  V.S.C.  App.  4  .  Sec.  I0I-II2) 


1.  Pmn  IcpMtlng        (Lan  name.  fint.  nmLOe  initial) 

Casey,    Richard  C. 

2.  Couil  or  OrjmJxatioo 

O.S.    District   Ct. (S.D.N. Y.) 

3.  Date  of  Report 

07/16/1997 

4.  nh           (Artlde  Uljudtes  Indicaie  active  or 

tenior  nana,  mafistraie  judfa  imBcatt 
fia-  orpatt-diK) 

Judicial  Nominee 

S.  Rtport  Tjrpt  (dKck  type) 

X    Nomiaiion.    Dw   07 //t  /  17 

01/01/1996 
to 

lojiiil               Amual               Final 

12/31/1996 

7.  ChaAcn  or  OOn  Addrcs 
%Brown  &  Wood 

1  World  Trade  Center 
Mew  York,   New  York  10048 

t.  On  (he  Iwslf  of  the  tarfoniuuikia  mntilnril  In  this  Report  and  an; 
modlDcatloos  pertxtnJnf  thereto,  li  b  In  m;  opinion.  In  compliance 
with  appUcihle  Uwi  and  ntubUoaa. 

Ktrfewliii  Ofdeer                                                                 Dale 

aiPOKTANT  NOTES:  Tlu  iiatructlats  accompanyiitt  Ms  form  must  be  Jdttmitd.  Complete  all  para. 
diecHiit  the  NONE  bm  fi)r  each  lection  where  you  bare  no  reportable  infDrmallon.  Spt  an  the  last  pa/e. 

L    POSITIONS     (Keportii>t  indimtuil  only: 

posmoN 

NONE  (No  repoitlHe  poiiliiKis.) 

1  Of  Counsel 

2  Member,  Board  of  Directors 

3  Member,  Board  of  Directors 


epp.  9-13  of  Initnictions) 


□ 


NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION  /  ENTITY 

Brown  &  Wood,  1  World  Trade  Center,  NY  NY  10048 

Guiding  Eyes  for  the  Blind 
Catholic  Guild  for  the  Blind 


n.     AGREEMENTS  lfteponlKtlndMdKalaiity:utpi).l4-l7cfliutTuaiau.) 

DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


n 


NONE  (NoiepoinMe 


Brown  &  Wood  Profit  Sharing  Retirement  Plan 
Brown  &  Wood  Defined  Benefit  Plan 


in.  NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME 
DATE 


(Kepofting  individual  and  spouse:  see  pp.  18-25  of  Instruaians.l 
PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


GROSS  INCOME 

_(y(Mn.  not  spoose's) 


1996  Brown  &  Wood    (compensation) 

$ 

20",  622.0 

1996  ONUM  Long  Term  Disability  Policy  No. 

0041501 

$ 

50,829.2 

654 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nunc  of  Person  Repbraog 

Casey,    Richard  C. 


[>ice  of  Report        i 
07/16/199 


IV.   REIMBURSEMENTS  and   GIFTS   -  tramponuioii,  lodjinj,  food,  enenunaaa. 
^ulMda  thou  to  spouie  and  depeiklaa  diUdrtn;  lat  Uk /xmnthetkals  '(5)'  and  '(DO'  lo  indicau  rtporubU  rtOnbummau  and  t^  rectivtd bf  tpouse 
a^  dependent  diiUrm.  raptaivet).  See  pp.  26-29  cflnaruaicm.) 


'199     I 


□SOURCE 
NONE  (No  nich  rcpomMe  leimbunemeim  or  gifts) 


DESCRIPTION 


V.    OTHER  GIFTS 

(htdudes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheticals  '(S)'  and  '(DQ'  to  indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children, 
respeaivety.  See  pp.  30-33  cf  Instructions.) 


□ 


SOURCE 

NONE  CNo  such  repomUc  gifts) 


DESCRIPTION 


VI.    LIABILITIES 

ffnctudes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible  for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  '(S)  'for  separate 
liabUisy  of  the  spouse,  'tJ}' for  Joint  liability  of  repotting  individual  and  spouse,  and 'ff>Q'  for  liability  cf  a  dependent  child.  See  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 


CREDITOR 

NONE    (No  reponable  liabilities) 


Dime  Savings  Bank 


DESCRIPTION 


VALUE  CODE* 


Cooperative  Loan 


;*VALCODES:J-$IS.000orless  K=$IS,OOI-$50.000  L^SSO.OOI  lo  $100,000  M-S100,mi-CX),000  N=Q50.001-SSOO,000 

!  O'^SSOO.OOI-Sl.000,000    Pl°$1.000.a01-$3.000,000    P2=U,000.001-$U,000,000    P3-S2S.aaO,OOI-SSO.OOO,000    P4=SS0,000.001oriliore 


655 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 

Casey,  Richard  C. 


Vn.  Page      1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS 


Date  of  Rcpon 
07/16/1997 


-  income,  value,  transaaions  (includes  those  of  spouse  and 
dependent  children.  See  pp.  37-54  cf  Instructions.) 


A. 
Description  of  Asseis 

Indicate  where  applicable,  owner  of 
the  aster  fry  using  the  parenthetical 
'Ui'forjoijtt  ownership  of  reporting 
individutil  and  spottse.  '(S)'forsep- 
erase  ownership  by  spouse,  '(DQ' 
for  ownership  by  depertdent  child. 

Place  '00'  t^er  each  asset 
exempt  from  prior  disclosure. 

B. 
Income 

reporting 
period 

C. 

Gross  vtlue 

It  end  of 

reporting 

period 

D. 

Trmnsactions  during  repotting  period 

(1) 

Amt. 

Code 

(A- 

H) 

m 

TVpe 
(e.g.. 
dividend, 
rent  or 
interest) 

(1) 
ViJue 
Code 
(J-P) 

m 

Vilue 
Method 
Code 
(Q-W) 

(1) 
Type 
(e.g.. 
buy. seU. 
merger, 
redemp- 
tion) 

If  not  exempt  from  disclosure 

(2) 
Date: 
Month- 
Day 

(3) 

Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

(4) 
Gain 
Code 
(A-H) 

(5) 

Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
(if  private 
tituisactioo) 

■    NONE  (00  repomble  income.issets.  or 
mnsacdoos) 

1  75  shs  Equity  Income  Fund   1st 
Exchange  Series 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

2  260  shs   Exxon  Corp.    Com. 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

3  200  shs   Fleet   Financial  Group 
Inc.   Com 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

j 

4  264     shs  General  Electric  Corp. 
Com 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

1 

5  350  shs  Morgan  Stanley  Group 
6.75%   pfd.    Depository 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

redeem 

53097 

J 

j 

6  $50,000   f.a.    Bell   South  Telecom 
Notes   6.5*  due  2/1/00 

C 

Interest 

L 

T 

7  S25,000  AT  t  T  Corp.    Notes  7.125* 
due   1/15/02 

B 

Interest 

K 

T 

e  Merrill  Lynch,    New  York,   NY  12771 
shs     CMA  Money  Hark  Accoun 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

9  Merrill   Lynch      IRA        Retirement 
Reserves      382.57   shs 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

1 

10  Merrill  Lynch  IRA  20,348   shs 
Sel.   Ten96B     Dow  Eq.    Inc.    Fnd 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

1 
i 

11  Merrill   Lynch   IRA      9251.7973      shs 
Eq.    Inc.      Fnd.    Tele-Global 

B 

Dividend 

J 

T 

1 
i 
1 

12  Brown   i   Wood      Retire.    Plan 
1134.518   shs   Fidelity  Magellan 

A 

Dividend 

M 

T 

1 

13  Brown   I  Mood  Retire.    Plan   2099.18 
shs   Fidelity  Eq.    Income 

A 

Dividend 

H 

T 

' 

14  Brown  (  Mood  Retire.    Plan  4108. 
594   shs   Fidelity   Inv.      Bond 

B 

Interest      1    K 

T 

15  Brown  (  Wood  Retire.    Plan  1064. 
915     shs  Fidelity  Overseas 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

16  Brown  (     Wood  Retire.    Plan  9301. 
59     shs     Fidelity  Hon.   Mark 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 
T 

-                - 

L,.   ._. 

- 

1 

17  Brown  (  Wood  Retire.    Plan 

1649.494   shs   Fidelity  Contrafund 

A 

Dividend     1    L 

1  Inc/Oain  Codes:  A-=S  1 ,000  or  less                     B- 

Jl.OO 

-$2,500 

C= 

J2.50I.] 

5,000 

>-j5,00 

T-J"15T(S 

OO                    E=$  15,001 -$50,000 

I  2  Val  Codes:         J-$lS,000or  less 
:    (Col.Cl.D3)      O=$500,00l-$1,000,000 
i  3  Val  Mth  Codes:  Q-Appraisal 
(Col.CZ)  U'Book  Value 


G"$l00.00l-$l.000.000        Hl=$l,000,00l-$5.000,000       H2-$5,000,00l  or  more 

K-$I5.001-$50,000  L-$50,00 1 -$100,000  Mi$100,OOr$25'oSOO  N=$250,OOl-$50O,000 

PI-$1,000,OOI-$S.OOO.OOO  P2=$5,000,00l-$25.000,000  P3-$25,000,001-$SO,000,000  P4=$50,000,001  or  more 

f'Cash/Matlcet 


R-CosI  (real  estate  only) 
V-Othet 


S>Asscssment 
W-Eaimated 


656 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

Nunc  of  Penon  Repoiting 

Casey,    Richard  C. 

Date  of  Repon            | 
07/16/1997     i 

-  income,  vabu,  transactions  (m^tdcs  those  of  spouse  and 
Vn.    Page       2  INVESTMENTS  and   TRUSTS      dependent  children.  See  pp.  37-54 1^ Instructions.) 

A. 
Descfqiboa  of  Assets 

Indicate  yAure  applicable,  owner  of 
the  asset  by  using  the  parentheticai 
'W  'far  joint  ownership  cf  reporting 
individual  and  spouse.  '(S)'/drsep- 
eraie  ownership  by  spouse,  '(DQ  ' 
far  ownership  by  dependent  child. 

Place  '00  '  f^ef  'och  asset 
exempt  from  prior  disclosure. 

B. 
Income 

reporting 
period 

C. 

Gross  vilue 

■lender 

rcponing 

period 

D. 

Transactions  during  reponing  period 

(I) 

Ami. 

Code 

(A- 

H) 

(2) 

Type 

(e.g.. 

interest) 

(1) 

Vilue 
Code 
(J-P) 

(2) 

Value 

Method 

Code 

(Q-W) 

(1) 
Type 
(eg.. 
buy.  seU. 
merger. 

lion) 

If  not  exempt  from  disclosure 

m 

Date: 

MoMh- 

Day 

(3) 

Value 
Code 
(IP) 

(4) 
Gain 
Code 
(AH) 

(5) 

Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
(if  piivaie 
transaction) 

■    NONE  (00  reponable  income, assets,  or 
tnnsactions) 

18  Brown  k  Wood   Defined  Benefit   Plan 

A 

Interest 

J 

H 

1 

I 
i 

1 

1 

;  llnc/Gsin  Codes:  A-1 1,000  or  less                   B=$l.001-$2.500                C=$2,501- 
'    (Col.Bl,D4)      F-SSa.001-$l(XI,000             G^  100,001 -SI, 000,000        HI4I,000. 

S.OOO 
S0I-I5.000.0( 

D=-S5,00\-$I5.000                    E=jr5,00l-$SO,000 
DO       H2=$5.000,001ormore 

M=$IOO.OOI-$250,000           N-J250.00I-JSOO.OOO 
0  P3-$25.000.001-$S0,000,000  P4=$50,000.001  or  more 

ZVJCodes:         J-SI  5,000  or  less                   K-$l5,00l-$50.000              L-J50,001-$iOO,000 
(Col.CI.D3)     O>J500,00l-Si.000.000        PI-$I,000,OOI-J5.000.000  P2-$5,000.001-S2J,000.00 

1  3VilMthCo<les:  Q-Appraisal                           R-Cost  (ml  csuie  only)                           S-Assessmetlt                                   T-Cash/Mailet 
(Col.C2)             U-Book  Value                        V-Olher                                                   WEstlnuled 

657 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 

Casey,  Richard  C. 


vm.     ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS. 

NONE   (No  additional  infomution  or  expUnalions.) 


Date  of  Repon  { 

07/16/1997 


(Indicate  pan  of  report.) 


RE:  Schedule  VII-  Investments  and  Trusts: 
RE:  Item  18-  Brown  S  Wood  Defined  Benefit  Plan 

The  Plan  is  being  terminated  effective  as  of  March  31,  1997  and  once  a  determination  letter  has 
been  received  from  the  Internal  Revenue  Service  a  distribution  will  be  made  to  all  participants 
of  their  accrued,  benefit . 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

SECTION  HEADING,   (indicate  pan  of  repon.) 
SECTION  1.  POSITIONS  (cont'd.) 
Li .  Position 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 
Casey,    Richard  C. 


Dale  of  Repon 
07/16/1997 


Name  of  Organization/Entity 


4   Member,    Board  of  Directors 


Slci    for  Light 


658 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nunc  of  Penon  Reponiiig 

Casey,  Richard  C. 


Dsucof  Rcpon 
07/16/1997 


K.    CERTIFICATION 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
Judicial  Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory 
fimction  in  any  litigation  during  the  period  covered  by  this  report  in  which  I.  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children 
had  a  financial  interest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  the  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent 
children,  if  any)  is  accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  reported 
was  withheld  because  it  met  applicable  statutory  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been 
reported  are  in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C.  app.  4,  section  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  7353  and  Judicial  Conference 
regulations. 


Signature 


\'{...<X^  ^'''^U'yt^ 


Date  0-i/\e>lqi 


Note: 


Any  individual  who  knowingly  and  wilfully  falsifies  or  fails  to  file  this  report  may  be  subject  to  civil 
and  criminal  sanctions  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  Section  104). 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS 

Mail  original  and  three  additional  copies  to: 

Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 
Administrative  OfTice  of  the  United  SUtes  Courts 
One  Columbus  Ci^cl^  N.E. 
Suite  2-301 
Washington,  D.C.  20S44 


659 


FTNANOAL  STATIMENT 

NET  WORTH 

Riphard  Conway  Casey 

ftovide  t  complete,  tuunit  fininriil  na  worth  nunoent  which  Iiemaes  ja  fti»n,i 
all  assers  Qncludlng  bank  accounts,  real  estate,  teamries.  tnuts,  inresirnaui,  and  other  fiw.».-fB] 
holdings)  all  liahilides  Qneluding  debts,  moitgifBa,  loans,  and  ertfaer  ^"-niT  ohiigadens)  of 
yoonelf,  your  spouse,  and  other  irr<T-i'^f*t^in'-'r,h^^  gf  yogr  honcehald. 


•  See  attached  Statement 

••  SSI  shares  of  41S/52  Owners  Coop  are  pledged  as  collateral  for  coop  lean 
nade  by  Tne   Dine  Savings  BanX. 


660 


RICHARD  CONWAY 
CASEY 

I .  Cash  on  hand  and 
in  banks : 

1.  Chase  Bank 
New  York,  New  York 

Checking  account 
No.  001-287923 
(balance  as  of 
7/16/97) 

$   2,515.21 

2.  Merrill  Lynch 
New  York,  New  York 

CMA  Account  No . 
840-99K26  (balance 
as  of  7/16/97) 

$     891.56 

TOTAL: 

$   3,406.77 

II.  Securities: 

1.  Equity  Income 
Fund  1st  Exchange 
Series  (unit 
investment  trust 
formed  from 
interests  in  AT&T 
and  Bell  affiliates 
by  Merrill  Lynch 
upon  AT&T 
divestiture) 

75  shares  (value  as 
of  7/16/97) 

$   7,040.00 

2 .  Exxon  Corp . 
Common 

260  shares  (value 
as  of  7/16/97) 

$  16,315.00 

3 .  Fleet  Financial 
Group  Inc.  Common 

200  shares  (value 
as  of  7/16/97) 

$  13,012.00 

4 .  General 
Electric  Corp. 
Common 

264  shares  (value 
as  of  7/16/97) 

$  19,536.00 

5.  Bell  South 
Telecom  Notes  6.5% 
due  2/1/00 

$50,000  face  amount 
(value  as  of 
7/16/97) 

$  50,312.00 

6.  AT&T 
Corporation  Notes 
7.125%  due  1/15/02 

$25,000  face  amount 
(value  as  of 
7/16/97) 

$  25,718.00 

7.  Merrill  Lynch 
CMA  Money  Market 
Account  840-99K26 

(value  as  of 
7/16/97) 

$  12,771.00 

TOTAL  LISTED 
SECtJRITIES 

$144,704 .00 

661 


8.  415/52  Owners 
Corp. 

851  shares 

(cooperative 

apartment) 

$260, 000.00^ 

TOTAL  XJNLISTED 
SECURITIES 

$260,000.00 

III.  Other  tangible 
personal  property 

Furniture, 
furnishings  and 
personal  effects 

$  20,000.00^ 

IV.  Cash  value  of 
life  insurance 
policies 

$500,000  life 
insurance  policy 
provided  by  Brown  & 
Wood  to  former 
partners 

No  cash  surrender 
value 

$                 0.00 

V.  Other 

miscellaneous 

assets 

1.  Merrill  Lynch 
IRA,  consisting  of: 

Account  No. 
84093784  (value  as 
of  7/17/97) 

$  33,991.57 

a.  Retirement 
Re serves /Cash 

(value  as  of 
7/17/97) 

$     382.57 

b.  Select  Ten  96B 
Dow  Equity  Income 
Fund 

20,348  shares 
(value  as  of 
7/17/97) 

$  20,750.00 

c.  Equity  Income 
Fund  Tele -Global 
Trust  Defined  Asset 
Funds 

(value  as  of 
7/17/97) 

$  12,859.00 

^     Value  of  the  apartment  shares  as  of  July  17,  1997  is  an 
informal  estimate  provided  by  the  managing  agent,  without  the 
benefit  of  a  formal  appraisal.   Further  documentation  will  be 
provided  as  available.   Acquisition  cost  (1982)  $130,000. 

^  Estimated  value  of  apartment  furnishings  and  clothes;  Mr.  Casey 
does  not  have  an  itemized  insurance  list  of  his  possessions. 

BWNY2/.  1/99990/00004/1785  July  18,  1997  4:13pm  2 


A'^.Qf.A     Qfi  _  T) 


662 


2 .  Interest  in 
Brown  &  Wood  Profit 
Sharing  Retirement 
Plan:  Consisting  of 
the  following 
Fidelity  mutual 
funds) 

(value  as  of 
7/17/97) 

$376,429.02 

a.  Magellan 

(value  as  of 
7/17/97) 

$109,344.84 

b.  Equity  Income 

(value  as  of 
7/17/97) 

$107,729.92 

c .  Investment 
Grade  Bond 

(value  as  of 
7/17/97) 

$  29,540.80 

d.  Overseas 

(value  as  of 
7/17/97) 

$  39,604.18 

e.  Retirement 
Money  Market 

(value  as  of 
7/17/97) 

$   9,301.59 

f .  Contraf und 

(value  as  of 
7/17/97) 

$  80,907.69 

3 .  Interest  in 
Brown  &  Wood 
Defined  Benefit 
Plan 

(value  as  of 
3/31/97) 

$   2,915.75' 

TOTAL 

MISCELLANEOUS 

ASSETS 

$413,336.34 

TOTAL  ASSETS 

$841,447.11 

LIABILITIES 

$  19,008.89 

I .  Loans  and 
Indebtedness 

'  The  Plan  is  being  terminated  effective  as  of  March  31,  1997, 
and  once  a  determination  letter  has  been  received  from  the 
Internal  Revenue  Service,  a  distribution  will  be  made  to  all 
participants  of  their  accrued  benefits. 


BWNY2/.  1/99990/00004/1785  July  18.  1997  4:13pm 


663 


1 .  Dime  Savings 
Bank 

Mortgage  on 
Cooperative 
Apartment  located 
at  415  East  52nd 
Street,  New  York, 
New  York  {value  as 
of  7/16/97) 

$  19, 008.89 

2.  Credit  card, 
short  term  debt 
(more  than  31  days 
duration) 

$       0.00 

3.  Other 

$       0.00 

TOTAL  LIABILITIES 

$  19,008.89 

BWNY2/.  1/99990/00004/1785  July  18.  1997  4:13pm 


NOMINATIONS  OF  STANLEY  MARCUS  (U.S. 
CIRCUIT  JUDGE);  RODNEY  W.  SIPPEL,  NOR- 
MAN K.  MOON,  ANN  L.  AIKEN,  AND  JEROME 
B.  FRIEDMAN  (U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGES) 


TUESDAY,  OCTOBER  28,  1997 

U.S.  Senate, 
Committee  on  the  Judiciary, 

Washington,  DC. 
The  committee  met,  pursuant  to  notice,  at  10:32  a.m.,  in  room 
SD-226,   Dirksen   Senate   Office   Building,   Hon.    Orrin   G.    Hatch 
(chairman  of  the  committee)  presiding. 
Also  present:  Senators  Grassley,  Ashcroft,  and  Durbin. 

OPENING  STATEMENT  OF  HON.  ORRIN  G.  HATCH,  A  U.S.  SEN- 
ATOR FROM  THE  STATE  OF  UTAH,  CHAIRMAN,  COMMITTEE 
ON  THE  JUDICIARY 

The  Chairman.  If  we  could  begin,  I  would  appreciate  it.  We  have 
a  number  of  very  important  judgeships  to  be  filled  and  a  number 
of  excellent  candidates  and  nominees  here  today. 

Today,  we  will  move  first  with  Stanley  Marcus,  of  Florida,  to  be 
U.S.  circuit  judge  for  the  eleventh  circuit.  I  am  very  familiar  with 
Mr.  Marcus  and  I  have  a  very  high  opinion  of  him,  and  I  look  for- 
ward to  going  through  a  few  questions  with  him. 

Then  on  the  district  court  level,  we  will  go  in  alphabetical  order. 
We  will  start  with  Ann  L.  Aiken,  of  Oregon,  to  be  U.S.  district 
judge  for  the  District  of  Oregon;  then  Jerome  B.  Friedman,  of  Vir- 
ginia, to  be  U.S.  district  judge  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Virginia; 
Norman  K.  Moon,  of  Virginia,  to  be  U.S.  district  judge  for  the 
Western  District  of  Virginia;  Rodney  W.  Sippel,  of  Missouri,  to  be 
U.S.  district  judge  for  the  Eastern  and  Western  Districts  of  Mis- 
souri. So  we  will  have  a  total  of  five  nominees  today. 

Do  we  have  our  Senators  here  from  Florida? 

[No  response.] 

The  Chairman.  I  think  what  we  will  do  is,  move  in  the  order  of 
these  judges,  but  we  will  also  have  the  Senators  that  are  here 
today  give  their  testimony  for  and  on  behalf  of  their  nominees,  and 
we  will  wait  until  they  get  here. 

Let  us  move  ahead,  then,  with  Ann  Aiken,  of  Oregon.  I  see  both 
Senators  are  here.  Would  you  gentlemen  care  to  make  some  re- 
marks about  Ms.  Aiken? 

Senator  Wyden,  we  will  go  with  you  first. 

(665) 


666 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  RON  WYDEN,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM  THE 

STATE  OF  OREGON 

Senator  Wyden.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  Mr.  Chairman,  let 
me  begin  by  expressing  a  special  thanks  and  my  gratitude  to  you 
for  placing  Judge  Ann  Aiken  on  the  committee's  schedule  today.  I 
know  of  no  committee  or  no  chairman  who  holds  a  heftier  workload 
than  you  do,  and  I  just  want  you  to  know  that  I  am  very  grateful 
for  all  of  your  assistance,  and  particularly  the  good  counsel  that 
you  have  given  me  in  the  consideration  of  Oregon's  judges. 

The  Chairman.  Well,  thank  you,  Senator  Wyden.  I  am  very 
pleased  with  the  support  of  you  Oregon  Senators  for  Ann  Aiken, 
and  I  think  it  weighs  really  heavily  in  her  behalf 

Senator  Wyden.  Mr.  Chairman,  before  presenting  the  name  of 
Judge  Ann  Aiken  to  the  committee,  I  would  also  like  to  publicly 
thank  my  colleague.  Senator  Smith,  for  his  extensive  efforts  on  be- 
half of  this  nominee.  He  has  joined  me  earlier  this  year  in  request- 
ing that  President  Clinton  re-nominate  Judge  Aiken,  after  her 
nomination  did  not  reach  the  Senate  floor  in  October  1996. 

He  has  spoken  with  many  of  our  Senate  colleagues  about  the 
judge's  qualifications,  and  I  just  want  the  committee  to  know  that 
Senator  Smith  has  been  vociferous  in  his  support  of  the  judge  every 
step  of  the  way  and  it  has  been  a  pleasure  to  work  with  him. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  will  be  brief  this  morning,  but  it  is  a  great 
honor  to  present  to  the  committee  the  nam_e  of  Judge  Ann  Aiken 
to  be  a  U.S.  district  judge  for  the  State  of  Oregon.  Her  journey  to 
be  before  the  committee  today  has  been  long,  and  not  just  in  terms 
of  the  3,000  miles  she  has  traveled,  but  through  a  nomination  proc- 
ess that  began  in  1993  with  the  bipartisan  support  of  the  entire 
Oregon  congressional  delegation. 

And  it  is  fair  to  say,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  the  judge's  support  for 
this  position  literally  spans  the  entire  political  spectrum.  For  exam- 
ple, all  living  former  presidents  of  our  State  bar  association,  eight 
Democrats  and  eight  Republicans,  are  on  record  supporting  the 
judge's  candidacy. 

Her  dedication,  intelligence,  and  integrity  has  won  her  broad 
support  from  Oregon's  law  enforcement  community,  including 
many  district  attorneys  in  our  State,  the  Oregon  State  Police  Offi- 
cers Association,  and  our  attorney  general.  And  it  is  my  view  that 
these  many  endorsements  that  she  has  received  are  pouring  in  be- 
cause of  the  hard  work  and  thoroughness  that  has  marked  her  ca- 
reer to  date. 

Judge  Aiken  is  an  individual  who  somehow  manages  to  squeeze 
hours  out  of  minutes.  Not  only  does  she  maintain  a  rigorous  judi- 
cial schedule,  but  the  list  of  task  forces  she  has  chaired  and  boards 
she  has  served  on  numbers  in  the  dozens.  She  has  been  particu- 
larly active  and  innovative  in  the  cause  of  juvenile  justice.  And  on 
top  of  all  of  this  extensive  work,  she  has  still  found  time  to  raise 
five  sons. 

I  am  particularly  pleased  to  recommend  her  because  of  her  ex- 
pertise on  family  law  issues,  from  how  the  law  and  communities 
can  work  together  to  prevent  the  breakup  of  families  to  dealing 
with  the  rising  caseloads  of  abused  youngsters  and  requiring  ac- 
countability from  youthful  offenders. 


667 

Of  special  note  is  her  leadership  in  the  founding  of  the  Relief 
Nursery.  This  program  has  brought  together  in  Lane  County,  in 
our  State,  the  entire  community — Republicans,  Democrats,  busi- 
ness leaders,  lawyers,  doctors — to  provide  a  service  for  families 
that  are  finding  it  very  difficult  to  stay  together.  The  successes  of 
the  Relief  Nursery  were  profiled  by  Peter  Jennings  on  "World  News 
Tonight,"  and  I  can  tell  you  I  have  been  to  this  program  and  what 
they  are  accomplishing  with  youngsters  in  crisis  is  just  extraor- 
dinary. 

In  conclusion,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  think  that  Judge  Aiken  will  bring 
to  the  Federal  bench  the  same  energy,  drive,  and  integrity  that  she 
has  brought  to  her  work  as  a  State  judge  and  as  a  specialist  in 
family  law.  So  I  want  to  thank  you  again,  Mr.  Chairman,  for  mov- 
ing us  to  this  point  in  the  process.  Your  patience  and  your  aid  has 
been  particularly  helpful  to  me,  and  I  very  much  hope  that  now  the 
committee  will  complete  the  nomination  process  and  move  Judge 
Aiken's  name  to  the  floor  before  the  Congress  adjourns  this  year. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Ron  Wyden  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Ron  Wyden 

Mr.  Chairman:  Let  me  begin  by  expressing  a  special  thanks  and  my  gratitude  to 
you  for  placing  Judge  Ann  Aiken  on  the  Committee's  schedule  today  as  the  session 
draws  to  a  close.  I  know  of  no  Committee  or  Chairman  who  carries  a  heftier  work- 
load than  you,  and  I'm  very  grateful  for  both  the  immense  amount  of  time  and  good 
counsel  you  have  given  me  in  the  consideration  of  Oregon's  needs  on  the  Federal 
bench. 

Before  presenting  Judge  Aiken  to  the  Committee,  I  would  also  like  to  publicly 
thank  my  colleague,  Senator  Gordon  Smith  for  his  extensive  efforts  on  behalf  of  this 
nominee.  He  joined  me  earlier  this  year  in  requesting  that  President  Clinton  re- 
nominate Judge  Aiken  after  her  nomination  did  not  reach  the  Senate  floor  in  Octo- 
ber of  1996.  He  has  spoken  with  our  colleagues  and  vociferously  supported  Judge 
Aiken  every  step  of  the  way,  and  it  is  a  pleasure  to  be  working  with  him. 

Mr.  Chairman,  it  is  a  great  honor  to  present  to  this  Committee  the  name  of  Judge 
Ann  Aiken  to  be  a  United  States  District  Judge  for  the  District  of  Oregon.  Her  jour- 
ney to  be  before  the  Committee  today  has  been  long — not  just  in  terms  of  the  3,000 
miles  she's  traveled  from  Oregon,  but  also  in  terms  of  a  nomination  process  that 
began  in  1993  with  the  strong  bipartisan  support  of  the  Oregon  Congressional  dele- 
gation. 

Judge  Ann  Aiken's  supporters  for  this  position  span  the  political  spectrum.  All  liv- 
ing former  presidents  of  our  state  Bar  Association,  eight  Democrats  and  eight  Re- 
publicans are  on  record  supporting  her  candidacy.  Her  dedication,  intelligence,  and 
integrity  has  won  her  broad  support  from  Oregon's  law  enforcement  community  in- 
cluding many  district  attorneys  throughout  our  state,  the  Oregon  State  Police  Offi- 
cers' Association  and  our  state  Attorney  General. 

It  is  my  view  that  the  many  endorsements  are  pouring  in  because  of  the  hard 
work  and  thoroughness  that  has  marked  her  career  to  date. 

It  is  certain  that  Ann  Aiken  is  a  woman  who  knows  how  to  squeeze  hours  out 
of  a  minute.  Not  only  does  she  maintain  a  rigorous  judicial  schedule,  but  the  list 
of  task  forces  she  has  chaired  and  Boards  she  has  served  on  in  the  past  couple  years 
number  in  the  dozens.  She  has  chaired  a  Subcommittee  of  the  Governor's  Task 
Force  on  Juvenile  Justice  and  served  on  the  Steering  Committee  and  the  Board  of 
Directors  of  the  Court  Appointed  Special  Advocates  (CASA)  Program.  On  top  of  all 
this,  somehow  she  stiU  finds  time  to  raise  five  sons. 

When  Judge  Aiken  began  her  legal  career,  she  made  family  law  her  area  of  exper- 
tise. Today,  she  is  known  throughout  the  State  as  one  of  the  leading  figures  on  fam- 
ily law  issues — from  how  law  and  communities  can  work  together  to  prevent  the 
break  up  of  families,  to  how  to  deal  with  the  rising  case  loads  of  abused  children, 
to  requiring  accountability  from  young  offenders. 

Of  particular  note  is  her  leadership  in  the  founding  the  "Relief  Nursery."  With 
this  project  she  brought  together  the  entire  community — business  leaders,  lawyers, 
doctors,  even  Republicans  and  Democrats — to  provide  a  service  for  families  that 
were  about  to  crack  apart.  Recently  in  fact,  the  successes  of  the  Relief  Nursery  in 
keeping  families  together  were  profiled  by  Peter  Jennings  in  "World  News  Tonight." 


668 

I  am  certain  that  Judge  Aiken  will  bring  to  the  federal  bench  the  same  intensity, 
drive  and  integrity  that  she  has  brought  to  her  work  as  a  State  Judge  and  as  a  spe- 
cialist in  family  law.  I  want  to  again  thank  the  Chairman  for  moving  us  to  this 
point  in  the  process,  and  I  urge  the  committee  to  complete  the  nomination  process 
and  move  Judge  Aiken's  name  to  the  floor  before  Congress  adjourns  this  year. 

The  Chairman.  Well,  thank  you,  Senator  Wyden.  Your  support 
means  a  great  deal  to  this  committee  and  we  appreciate  the  co- 
operation you  have  given  to  the  committee. 

Senator  Smith. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  GORDON  SMITH,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  OREGON 

Senator  SMITH.  Senator  Hatch  and  members  of  the  committee,  I 
ask  unanimous  consent  that  my  statement  be  entered  in  the 
record. 

The  Chairman.  Without  objection,  we  will  put  it  in  the  record. 

Senator  Smith.  I  would  like  to  speak  from  the  heart  and  from 
my  experience  with  Ann  Aiken.  Under  your  counseling.  Senator 
Hatch,  I  have  visited  with  every  member  of  the  Republican  mem- 
bership of  this  committee  to  discuss  Ann  Aiken,  how  I  know  her 
personally,  and  why  I  believe  she  is  qualified  to  be  a  U.S.  district 
court  judge. 

I  first  met  Ann  Aiken  in  1993.  We  served  together  on  the  Gov- 
ernor's juvenile  justice  task  force.  Out  of  that  task  force  came  some 
of  the  toughest  juvenile  crime  laws  in  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica. On  that  committee,  Ann  Aiken  was  a  star.  I  came  to  respect 
her  opinion  and  to  value  her  as  a  person. 

While  there  are  some  cases  that  cause  concern  for  some  of  you, 
I  believe  if  you  review  the  totality  of  her  record,  you  will  see  a 
tough,  fair  judge  and  someone  who  would  do  credit  to  the  U.S.  dis- 
trict court.  I  invite  and  encourage  you  to  ask  all  the  tough  ques- 
tions you  can  of  this  woman. 

Finally,  I  would  like  to  present  a  qualification  that  some  may 
view  as  irrelevant,  or  even  politically  incorrect.  Ann  Aiken  is  the 
mother  of  five  sons.  I  want  you  to  know  that  any  woman  who  can 
raise  five  sons,  with  a  busy  professional  schedule,  in  my  view,  will 
have  the  requisite  amount  of  fairness  and  firmness  to  be  an  excel- 
lent judge.  Ann  Aiken  can  be  my  judge  any  day. 

The  Chairman.  Those  sons  look  pretty  good  to  me. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator  Smith.  I  don't  want  that  fact  to  be  overlooked  in  your 
decision  as  to  how  you  will  vote,  and  I  ask  that  you  be  tough  in 
your  questions  of  her,  and  I  ask  for  your  support. 

I  thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  each  member  of  this  committee. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you.  Senator. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Smith  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Gordon  H.  Smith 

Mr.  Chairman,  and  Members  of  the  Judiciary  Committee,  I  thank  you  for  this  op- 
portunity to  introduce  Judge  Ann  L.  Aiken  of  Eugene,  Oregon,  nominee  for  the  U.S. 
District  Court.  I  commend  Senator  Hatch  for  his  leadership  in  moving  Judge  Aiken's 
nomination  forward,  and  for  his  continued  commitment  to  filling  the  vacancies  on 
the  federal  bench. 

I  would  also  like  to  recognize  Judge  Aiken's  family  who  are  here  today.  Her  hus- 
band, James  Klonoski  and  five  boys—Jake,  Nick,  Zach,  Sam  and  Chris.  It's  a  pleas- 


669 

ure  to  have  you  all  here  today,  and  to  join  my  colleagues  Senator  Wyden  and  Con- 
gressman DeFazio  in  support  of  this  nomination. 

Judge  Aiken's  service  as  a  District  Court  and  Circuit  Court  Judge  for  the  State 
of  Oregon  reflects  her  strong  commitment  to  her  community  and  to  her  State.  In 
1993,  I  served  with  Ann  on  the  Governor's  Task  Force  on  Juvenile  Justice.  Together, 
we  worked  to  redefine  the  way  Oregon  addresses  juvenile  crime  by  focusing  on 
intervention  and  prevention  programs  to  deter  criminal  behavior. 

Judge  Aiken  has  been  nothing  less  than  forthright  throughout  this  process,  and 
has  indicated  her  willingness  to  answer  any  questions  the  members  of  the  Commit- 
tee may  have  with  respect  to  her  record.  I  have  found  her  honest  and  compelling 
which  is  why  I  stand  beside  her  today. 

Mr.  Chairman,  it  has  been  said  that  Judge  Aiken  represents  the  people  and  the 
personality  of  Oregon.  A  dedicated  wife  and  mother  of  five  young  boys.  A  role-model 
in  her  professional  life  and  in  her  community.  To  put  it  simply,  she's  forthright, 
she's  faithful,  and  a  fine  nominee  for  the  federal  court.  I  am  proud  to  stand  in  sup- 
port of  her  nomination,  and  encourage  my  colleagues  to  report  it  favorably  to  the 
floor  of  the  United  States  Senate. 

Thank  you  Mr.  Chairman,  and  members  of  the  Committee  for  your  consideration. 

The  Chairman.  Judge  Aiken,  this  is  certainly  a  tribute  to  you  to 
have  two  distinguished  Senators  both  energetically  acting  on  your 
behalf,  and  I  personally  appreciate  both  of  them  and  we  will  look 
forward  to  asking  you  some  questions. 

Thank  you  both  for  coming.  We  really  appreciate  you  coming. 

We  will  now  turn  to  Senator  Mack,  of  Florida.  Do  you  know  if 
Senator  Graham,  is  coming? 

Senator  Mack.  Yes,  he  is. 

The  Chairman.  We  will  accommodate  him  when  he  gets  here. 

Senator  Mack.  The  subway  is  down  again,  so  I  hope  he  is  not 
caught  on  it. 

The  Chairman.  OK.  Well,  we  are  glad  to  have  you  here  and  we 
look  forward  to  hearing  your  testimony  on  Judge  Marcus. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  CONNIE  MACK,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  FLORIDA 

Senator  Mack.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman  and  members  of  the 
committee.  I  want  to  thank  you  for  this  opportunity  to  introduce 
Judge  Stanley  Marcus  to  the  committee  and  thank  you  once  again 
for  your  overall  responsiveness  to  the  needs  of  Florida's  judiciary. 

Florida's  judicial  nominees  have  enjoyed  swift  passage  from  nom- 
ination to  confirmation  this  year,  and  the  committee  is  to  be  com- 
mended for  its  fine  work.  And,  Mr.  Chairman,  we  do  appreciate 
that  efibrt.  It  has  meant  a  great  deal  to  the  State  of  Florida. 

I  have  to  say  at  the  outset  that  I  have  never  been  more  enthu- 
siastic in  my  support  for  a  circuit  court  nominee  than  I  am  for 
Judge  Marcus.  This  is  a  nominee  which  the  Senate  can  be  proud 
to  confirm,  and  I  am  confident  that,  if  confirmed.  Judge  Marcus 
will  leave  the  appellate  bench  someday  with  a  proud  legacy  of  judi- 
cial precedent  which  maintains  the  integrity  of  our  legal  system 
and  provides  justice  for  those  who  come  before  him. 

Judge  Marcus  was  first  appointed  to  the  Federal  bench  at  the 
district  court  level  by  President  Reagan  in  1985  after  being  rec- 
ommended by  Senator  Paula  Hawkins.  He  has  done  an  excellent 
job  presiding  in  the  Southern  District  of  Florida  since  that  time. 

Back  in  1989,  when  faced  with  an  earlier  vacancy  on  the  elev- 
enth circuit  Court  of  Appeals,  I  recommended  Judge  Marcus  for 
that  position.  Although  I  was  disappointed  at  the  time  that  Judge 


670 

Marcus  was  not  nominated,  I  am  truly  thrilled  that  he  is  being  con- 
sidered for  this  position  today. 

Judge  Marcus  can  be  described  as  one  of  those  judges  who  is 
genuinely  loved  and  respected  by  attorneys  of  all  sides  of  the  issues 
in  the  south  Florida  legal  community.  He  possesses  a  superior  in- 
tellect and  a  wonderful  disposition,  a  priceless  combination.  I  know 
from  previous  confirmation  hearings  that  courtesy  is  a  characteris- 
tic highly  valued  by  this  committee.  Judge  Marcus  possesses  this 
in  abundance.  He  is  friendly,  well-liked,  and  easily  approachable. 

Even  though  there  is  widespread  happiness  and  support  for 
Judge  Marcus  because  of  his  nomination,  it  is  mixed  with  a  real 
sadness  by  those  who  will  miss  his  presence  on  the  Southern  Dis- 
trict bench.  The  Miami  Herald  called  Judge  Marcus  an  exemplar 
of  the  law. 

Judge  Marcus  would  also  bring  to  the  appellate  bench  a  reputa- 
tion for  being  tough  on  crime,  something  that  is  imperative  to  the 
future  well-being  of  our  State.  Prior  to  his  service  on  the  bench. 
Judge  Marcus  was  the  chief  of  the  Detroit  strike  force  in  the  Orga- 
nized Crime  and  Racketeering  Section  of  the  Department  of  Jus- 
tice. His  excellent  service  in  that  position  further  adds  to  the 
weight  of  evidence  in  support  of  Judge  Marcus'  fitness  for  the  ap- 
pellate bench. 

I  am  so  pleased  to  be  here  today  to  have  the  opportunity  to  intro- 
duce Judge  Marcus.  It  has  been  a  joy  to  interact  with  him  through- 
out the  years,  and  I  expect  to  continue  to  hear  great  things  about 
the  legal  career  of  Judge  Stanley  Marcus. 

I  urge  the  committee's  and  the  Senate's  swift  confirmation  of 
Judge  Marcus,  and  I  thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

The  Chairman.  Well,  thank  you,  Senator  Mack. 

Senator  Graham. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  BOB  GRAHAM,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  FLORIDA 

Senator  Graham.  Mr.  Chairman  and  members  of  the  committee, 
thank  you  for  this  opportunity  for  Senator  Mack  and  I  to  introduce 
not  only  an  outstanding  jurist,  but  also  a  man  that  we  have  both 
come  to  know  as  a  friend  and  as  a  pillar  of  the  civic  and  legal  com- 
munity of  our  State. 

I  would  like  to  join  Senator  Mack  in  expressing  my  appreciation 
to  this  committee  for  the  attention  and  consideration  that  you  have 
given  to  the  nominees  from  Florida.  We  had  a  long  period  in  which 
there  had  been  vacancies,  particularly  at  our  district  court  level. 
Senator  Mack  and  I  are  pleased  to  say  that  today  every  position 
in  Florida's  district  courts  is  filled,  with  the  exception  of  two  judges 
who  have  recently  announced  for  senior  status.  So  we  will  be  before 
you  again. 

The  Chairman.  If  I  might  interrupt  you,  I  think  that  is  largely 
because  of  the  efforts  of  you  two. 

Senator  MACK.  Thank  you. 

The  Chairman.  Both  of  you  have  worked  very  hard  to  nominate 
really  qualified,  good  people  and  the  committee  has  appreciated 
that  very  much. 

Senator  Graham.  Well,  Senator  Mack  and  I  appreciate  your  kind 
remarks,  but  I  also  realize  that  it  is  the  recognition  of  yourself,  Mr. 


671 

Chairman,  and  your  committee  members  of  the  circumstances  in 
our  rapidly  growing  State,  with  some  of  its  special  Federal  judicial 
concerns,  including,  unfortunately,  the  high  level  of  criminal  cases 
generated  by  drug-related  activities  which  are  now  being  served  by 
the  full  Federal  bench.  So  today's  hearing  relatively  shortly  after 
the  nomination  of  Judge  Marcus  is  another  example  of  your  atten- 
tion to  the  needs  in  this  case  of  the  eleventh  circuit. 

I  have  a  full  statement  that  I  would  like  to  file  for  the  record, 
but  just  to  supplement  some  of  the  comments  that  Senator  Mack 
has  already  so  effectively  made,  Judge  Marcus'  career  combines  a 
number  of  elements,  from  his  birthplace  in  New  York  City,  where 
he  served  in  such  disparate  positions  as  on  the  city's  Bureau  of 
Budget  and  Housing  Maintenance  and  as  a  caseworker  in  the  State 
Department  of  Social  Services  and  as  a  legal  clerk  and  assistant 
U.S.  attorney. 

He  has  brought  that  broad  experience,  first,  to  the  U.S.  attor- 
ney's office  in  Michigan,  where  he  initially  served  on  and  later  led 
in  the  Detroit  strike  force  that  was  established  to  fight  organized 
crime  in  Michigan.  His  steady  rise  through  the  Department  of  Jus- 
tice soon  led  him  to  Miami  where,  in  1982,  President  Reagan  ap- 
pointed Judge  Marcus  as  the  U.S.  attorney  for  Florida's  Southern 
District.  This  commenced  15  years  of  service  which  continues  today 
to  the  people  of  our  State  through  the  Federal  judiciary. 

Judge  Marcus'  record  of  judicial  service  began  in  1985  when  he 
was  nominated  on  the  recommendation  of  Senator  Hawkins  and 
confirmed  as  Federal  district  judge  for  Florida's  Southern  District. 
As  Senator  Mack  has  said,  since  that  time  he  has  consistently  been 
recognized  as  a  fair,  dedicated  jurist  who  brings  out  the  best  in  the 
lawyers  who  appear  before  him  and  in  the  other  judges  with  whom 
he  serves  in  a  collegial  relationship. 

He  has  continued  his  interest  in  academic  law,  serving  as  profes- 
sor of  trial  advocacy  at  the  Brooklyn  Law  School  this  year.  He  has 
had  a  positive  influence  on  the  guidance  of  a  number  of  young  at- 
torneys who  have  worked  with  him  or  been  influenced  by  his  judi- 
cial actions.  Judge  Marcus  has  consistently  received  the  highest 
recognition  of  members  of  the  bar  who  have  appeared  before  him. 
He  has  received  in  various  forms  the  appreciation  of  the  citizens 
of  New  York  State,  Michigan,  and  Florida  for  his  three  decades  of 
service  to  the  people. 

I  join  Senator  Mack  in  urging  the  speedy  consideration  and  con- 
firmation of  the  next  judge  to  the  U.S.  Court  of  Appeals  for  the 
Eleventh  Circuit,  Judge  Stanley  Marcus. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you,  Senator. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Graham  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Bob  Graham 

Good  morning.  Chairman  Hatch,  Senator  Leahy,  members  of  the  Senate  Judiciary 
Committee,  it  is  an  enormous  honor  to  introduce  Judge  Stanley  Marcus  for  your 
consideration  as  the  next  member  of  the  U.S.  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Eleventh  Cir- 
cuit. 

Before  I  extol  Judge  Marcus'  outstanding  qualifications  and  virtues,  I  want  to 
thank  the  Chairman  and  the  Ranking  Member  for  their  prompt  and  thorough  re- 
view of  nominations  affecting  my  home  state  of  Florida. 

In  the  last  ten  months,  the  Senate  Judiciary  Committee  has  interviewed — and  the 
full  Senate  has  confirmed — two  judges  to  fill  vacancies  in  Florida's  Southern  Judi- 
cial District,  a  new  United  States  Attorney  for  the  Southern  District,  and  most  re- 


672 

cently,  a  federal  judge  for  Florida's  increasingly  crowded  Middle  Judicial  District. 
For  the  first  time  in  several  years,  Florida  has  no  pending  federal  district  court 
nominations,  a  turn  of  events  that  is  a  testament  to  your  leadership  and  welcome 
news  for  members  of  the  Florida  federal  judicial  community. 

All  of  the  Florida  nominees  that  you  have  examined  and  approved  this  year  have 
exhibited  certain  traits  that  are  critical  to  quality  judicial  performance.  They  have 
been  outstanding  legal  professionals  whose  service  has  earned  them  the  respect  and 
admiration  of  their  peers.  Their  qualifications  have  demonstrated  a  wide  range  of 
legal,  professional,  and  academic  interests  and  experiences.  They  have  been  dedi- 
cated public  servants  and  community  leaders.  And  they  have  appeared  before  this 
committee  with  the  bipartisan  support  of  Senator  Mack,  myself,  and  Floridians  of 
every  political  background. 

In  Stanley  Marcus,  President  Clinton  has  nominated  someone  who  may  be  at  the 
top  of  this  impressive  class  of  highly  regarded  Florida  judicial  nominees.  For  more 
than  three  decades.  Judge  Marcus  has  done  more  than  just  perform  quality  legal 
and  judicial  service.  He  has  virtually  redefined  the  standard  for  what  it  means  to 
be  a  highly  skilled  federal  prosecutor  and  an  outstanding  judge. 

Stanley  Marcus'  public  service  roots  lie  in  his  birthplace  of  New  York  City.  Be- 
tween 1967  and  1978,  he  served  the  people  of  New  York  almost  continuously — in 
the  city's  Bureaus  of  the  Budget  and  Housing  Maintenance,  as  a  Caseworker  in  the 
state  Department  of  Social  Services,  and  as  a  legal  clerk  and  Assistant  U.S.  Attor- 
ney in  the  Eastern  Judicial  District.  His  only  hiatus  from  this  service  were  the 
years  he  spent  at  Harvard  University  Law  School,  in  the  United  States  Army,  and 
gaining  valuable  private  sector  experience  at  a  New  York  law  firm. 

At  the  U.S.  Attorney's  Office,  Stanley  Marcus  quickly  gained  a  reputation  as  a 
highly  effective  prosecutor.  In  1978,  he  was  assigned  to  the  U.S.  District  Attorney's 
Office  in  Detroit  as  part  of  the  "Detroit  Strike  Force"  that  had  been  established  to 
fight  organized  crime  in  Michigan.  Two  years  later,  he  had  been  elevated  to  Chief 
Prosecutor  on  that  Strike  Force. 

His  steady  rise  through  the  ranks  of  the  Justice  Department  soon  led  him  to 
Miami.  In  1982,  President  Reagan  appointed  Judge  Marcus  as  the  United  States  At- 
torney for  Florida's  Southern  District,  launching  his  more  than  fifteen  years  of  serv- 
ice to  the  people  of  South  Florida. 

Stanley  Marcus'  record  of  judicial  service  began  in  1985,  when  he  was  nominated 
and  confirmed  as  a  federal  district  judge  in  Florida's  Southern  Judicial  District. 
Since  then,  he  has  been  consistently  recognized  as  a  fair,  dedicated  jurist  who 
brings  out  the  best  in  both  the  lawyers  who  appear  before  him  and  the  other  judges 
who  work  with  him. 

And  since  Judge  Marcus  was  appointed  a  Professor  of  Trial  Advocacy  at  Brooklyn 
Law  School  in  1997,  his  positive  influence  and  guidance  is  now  being  applied  to  the 
next  generation  of  legal  professionals. 

Mr.  Chairman,  throughout  his  career,  Stanley  Marcus  has  impressed  his  peers 
with  his  legal  and  prosecutorial  skills,  won  plaudits  from  lawyers  and  fellow  judges 
alike  as  a  fair  and  highly  intelligent  jurist,  and  received  the  appreciation  of  citizens 
from  New  York  to  Michigan  to  Florida  for  his  nearly  three  decades  of  service  to  city, 
state,  and  country.  I  urge  his  speedy  approval  as  the  next  judge  in  the  U.S.  Court 
of  Appeals  for  the  Eleventh  Circuit. 

The  Chairman.  I  think,  Judge  Marcus,  it  certainly  weighs  very 
heavily  in  your  behalf  to  have  these  two  excellent  Senators  here 
speaking  for  you,  and  I  have  no  doubt  you  will  have  an  easy  con- 
firmation, as  far  as  I  am  concerned. 

Thank  you  both  for  being  here.  We  appreciate  you  both  being 
here.  It  is  high  praise  for  Judge  Marcus. 

We  will  now  turn  to  our  two  Virginia  Senators.  Both  of  them  are 
here  and  have  two  judicial  nominees  on  the  agenda,  so  we  will  be 
happy  to  hear  first  from  the  senior  Senator,  Senator  Warner,  and 
then  we  will  turn  to  you,  Senator  Robb. 

Senator  Warner.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman  and  members  of  the 
committee.  I  think  that  while  protocol  says  the  senior  Senator  goes 
first,  my  distinguished  friend  and  colleague  was  the  moving  person 
in  bringing  these  nominations  to  the  attention  of  the  President  and 
therefore  I  would  like  to  defer  and  let  you  speak  first  and  then  I 
will  follow. 


673 

The  Chairman.  That  will  be  fine  with  the  committee. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  CHARLES  S.  ROBB,  A  U.S.  SENATOR 
FROM  THE  STATE  OF  VIRGINIA 

Senator  Robb.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  I  thank  my  distin- 
guished senior  colleague.  I  might  add  at  the  outset  that  he  and  I 
have  worked  together  on  these  nominations,  as  we  have  on  many 
other  things,  and  I  very  much  appreciate  the  relationship  that  we 
have  had  and  continue  to  have  between  our  two  ofilces. 

I  would  also,  Mr.  Chairman,  like  to  thank  you  and  the  members 
of  the  committee  for  scheduling  this  particular  hearing.  I  know 
that  there  are  many  demands  on  your  schedule,  and  your  expedi- 
tious inclusion  of  particularly  Judge  Moon,  who  was  nominated 
more  recently,  at  this  time  so  that  we  have  an  opportunity  to  get 
these  nominees  confirmed  before  we  adjourn  is  very,  very  much  ap- 
preciated. 

I  should  suggest  at  the  outset  that  I  was  assisted  initially,  and 
my  senior  colleague  ultimately,  in  the  selection  of  both  of  the  nomi- 
nees for  the  Eastern  and  Western  Districts  of  Virginia,  respec- 
tively, by  panels  of  jurists  and  lawyers  in  their  respective  jurisdic- 
tions. 

I  am  going  to  ask  unanimous  consent,  if  I  might,  to  have  a  longer 
statement  included  in  the  record  that  more  fully  describes  the  dis- 
tinguished careers  of  both  of  these  fine  judges. 

The  Chairman.  Without  objection,  we  will  put  all  statements  in 
the  record. 

Senator  RoBB.  I  might  add  that  in  each  case  they  have  a  long 
and  distinguished  career  on  the  bench,  and  in  each  case  they  have 
been  selected  at  each  level  by  their  other  circuit  court  judges  or 
their  other  panel,  in  the  case  of  the  court  of  appeals,  to  be  the  chief 
judge  at  each  level  in  which  they  have  participated,  which,  it  seems 
to  me,  is  a  very  important  testimony,  at  least,  to  the  collective 
judgment  of  the  peers  with  whom  they  have  served. 

Very  briefly,  the  President  has  nominated  Judge  Jerry  Friedman 
to  be  U.S.  district  judge  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Virginia.  He  is 
currently  the  chief  judge  of  the  Virginia  Beach  Circuit  Court.  He 
has  served  on  that  court  since  1991,  as  chief  judge  since  1994.  He 
was  previously  a  judge  on  the  Virginia  Beach  Juvenile  and  Domes- 
tic Relations  Court.  He  served  from  1985  to  1991,  and  he  was  chief 
judge  of  that  particular  court  for  four  years. 

He  received  his  law  degree  from  Wake  Forest  in  1969  and  his  un- 
dergraduate degree  from  ODU  in  1965.  His  wife,  Sandra,  is  with 
him.  I  hope  that  at  the  appropriate  time,  Mr.  Chairman,  you  would 
recognize  his  wife,  as  well  as  the  wife  of  Judge  Moon,  Barbara,  who 
is  also  here. 

I  will  also  describe,  if  I  may,  very  briefly  Judge  Moon's  back- 
ground. He  is  on  the  Virginia  Court  of  Appeals,  which  incidentally 
was  created  during  the  time  that  I  had  the  privilege  to  serve  as 
Governor.  He  has  been  on  there  from  the  beginning.  He  has  been 
chief  judge  since  1993.  He  has  a  particular  record  in  eliminating 
case  and  publication  backlog  that  had  troubled  the  court  before  he 
became  chief  judge. 

He  is  a  visiting  lecturer  in  trial  advocacy  at  the  University  of 
Virginia  Law  School  since  1975  and  was  the  recipient  of  the  Wil- 


674 

Ham  J.  Brennan,  Jr.  Award  for  dedication  to  teaching  trial  advo- 
cacy. Prior  to  that,  he  was  chief  judge  of  the  Lynchburg  Circuit 
Court  from  1974  to  1985,  and  chief  judge  from  1982  to  1984.  He 
has  three  degrees  from  the  University  of  Virginia,  a  master  of  laws 
in  1988,  a  J.D.  in  1962,  and  a  bachelor  of  arts  in  1959.  As  I  say, 
he  is  accompanied  by  his  wife,  Barbara,  and  has  a  son,  Norman, 

Jr. 

Mr.  Chairman  and  members  of  the  committee,  I  am  enthusiastic 
in  recommending  both  of  these  distinguished  jurists  for  your  con- 
sideration, and  I  am  very  grateful  to  my  friend  and  senior  col- 
league. Senator  Warner,  for  his  assistance  in  making  this  rec- 
ommendation from  the  Virginia  delegation  unanimous. 

I  would  now  yield  to  my  distinguished  senior  colleague. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Robb  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Charles  S.  Robb 

Mr.  Chairman,  it  gives  me  a  great  deal  of  pleasure  to  present  for  confirmation 
two  nominees  for  the  federal  bench  from  Virginia,  Judge  Jerry  Friedman  to  fill  the 
vacancy  in  the  Eastern  District  and  Judge  Norman  Moon  to  fill  the  vacancy  in  the 
Western  District. 

Before  I  do  so,  however,  Mr.  Chairman,  I'd  like  to  thank  you  for  scheduling  both 
of  these  nominees  for  today's  hearing.  It  eliminates  a  substantial  uncertainty  in 
their  lives,  and  will  help  us  fill  two  vacancies  in  Virginia  where  the  work  is  piling 
up. 

Jerry  Friedman  and  Norman  Moon  did  not  know  each  other  personally  prior  to 
each  being  nominated  to  the  federal  bench.  However,  they  have  been  in  close  contact 
since  their  nominations,  and  have  become  fast  friends.  So  when  this  process  is  con- 
cluded, we  will  have  two  new  federal  judges  and  one  new  set  of  friends.  Not  a  bad 
outcome. 

And  it  is  easy  to  understand  how  they've  grown  close,  because  they  are  similar 
in  many  respects.  Both  have  dedicated  themselves  to  serving  the  public,  Judge 
Friedman  for  12  years  as  a  trial  judge  and  Judge  Moon  for  more  than  ten  years 
as  a  trial  judge  and  12  years  on  Virginia's  Court  of  Appeals.  Both  have  earned  the 
admiration  of  their  colleagues  who  chose  them  to  be  Chief  Judge  of  their  respective 
courts,  a  position  demanding  increased  responsibility  and  commitment.  And  both 
are  well  respected  in  the  legal  community,  which  views  them  both  as  thoughtful, 
intelligent  and  fair. 

Judge  Friedman  currently  serves  as  Chief  Judge  of  the  Circuit  Court  of  Virginia 
Beach.  His  peers  on  the  bench  have  elected  him  twice  to  be  Chief  Judge,  which 
highlights  the  faith  they  have  in  his  abilities.  Prior  to  his  work  on  the  Circuit  Court, 
Judge  Friedman  distinguished  himself  in  one  of  the  toughest  assignments  in  the  , 
Virginia  judicial  system  as  a  judge  in  the  Juvenile  and  Domestic  Relations  court, 
where  he  was  also  selected  to  be  Chief  Judge.  He  graduated  from  Old  Dominion 
University  in  1965  and  received  his  law  degree  from  Wake  Forest  University  in 
1969.  He  is  here  with  his  wife,  Sandra,  who  also  serves  the  public  as  a  school  teach- 
er in  Southeastern  Virginia.  Judge  Friedman  has  earned  a  reputation  as  a  hard- 
working, evenhanded  and  courteous  judge  whose  deliberative  approach  creates  con- 
fidence that  justice  will  be  served  in  his  court.  Judge  Friedman  was  selected  from 
a  group  of  highly-respected  candidates  who  were  interviewed  by  a  committee  headed 
by  former  U.S.  Senator  Bill  Spong,  who  passed  away  three  weeks  ago.  In  my  view. 
Bill  Spong  represented  the  best  a  public  servant  has  to  offer:  he  was  honorable, 
made  the  tough  decisions,  and  did  what  he  thought  was  right  despite  the  con- 
sequences. I  expect  Judge  Friedman  will  stand  as  a  living  testament  to  those  fine 
qualities  of  public  service  embodied  by  Senator  Spong. 

Judge  Moon  has  similarly  had  a  distinguished  career  in  public  service.  He  has 
served  on  the  Virginia  Court  of  Appeals  since  1985,  when  it  was  first  created.  In 
1993  he  was  selected  Chief  Judge,  and  during  his  tenure  the  court  has  eliminated 
its  case  backlog  despite  the  increase  in  filings,  and  its  publications,  which  had  been 
eight  months  behind,  were  brought  current.  Prior  to  being  elevated  to  the  appellate 
court,  he  served  more  than  ten  years  as  a  trial  judge,  where  he  also  served  as  Chief 
Judge.  During  his  illustrious  career,  he  has  touched  many  in  the  judicial  system, 
both  as  a  judge  and  as  a  visiting  professor  teaching  trial  advocacy  at  the  University 
of  Virginia  School  of  Law,  where  he  has  received  three  degrees.  Judge  Moon  earned 
a  Master  of  Laws  degree  in  1988,  which  he  added  to  the  Bachelor  of  Laws  he  re- 


675 

ceived  from  the  University  in  1962  and  the  undergraduate  degree  he  received  in 
1959.  He  has  been  teaching  the  course  in  trial  advocacy  at  the  University  since 
1975,  and  this  year  he  received  the  William  J.  Brennan,  Jr.  Award  for  his  dedication 
and  contributions  to  the  teaching  of  trial  advocacy.  His  wife,  Barbara,  is  also  here 
today.  The  judicious  decisions  he  has  rendered,  the  students  he  has  taught,  and  the 
courts  he  has  run  are  all  a  testament  to  his  wisdom  and  his  dedication  to  justice. 
Judge  Moon  is  one  of  the  most  widely  respected  jurists  in  the  Commonwealth,  and 
I  have  no  doubt  that  the  federal  judiciary  will  benefit  by  adding  him  to  their  ranks. 
Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  I  look  forward  to  swift  confirmation  of  both  of 
these  fine  candidates. 

The  Chairman.  Senator  Warner. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  JOHN  W.  WARNER,  A  U.S.  SENATOR 
FROM  THE  STATE  OF  VIRGINIA 

Senator  Warner.  Mr.  Chairman,  first,  we  want  to  thank  you,  the 
ranking  member  and  other  members  of  the  committee  for  hstening 
to  the  petitions  of  my  colleague  and  myself  to  bring  up  these  two 
outstanding  jurists. 

We,  the  two  of  us,  and  I  am  sure  other  Senators  likewise,  spend 
a  great  deal  of  time  on  the  question  of  judicial  nominations.  I  think 
that  function  of  a  U.S.  Senator  in  the  constitutional  advise  and 
consent  process  has  certainly  no  higher  calling,  that  duty,  and  we 
spend  a  great  deal  of  time  on  it. 

I  could  summarize  Judge  Moon  by  simply  saying  a  decade  ago, 
Mr.  Chairman,  I  recommended  him  for  the  Federal  bench.  And 
time  didn't  permit  to  get  him  on  at  that  point,  so  here  he  is  recy- 
cled again  10  years  later.  So  I  don't  know  that  I  need  to  add  much 
more  about  Judge  Moon,  except  the  legislature  of  the  month  in  our 
general  assembly,  the  senior  man,  was  a  college  classmate  of  mine. 
He  has  known  Judge  Moon  all  his  life,  and  I  just  wanted  to  read 
a  very  brief  quote  from  Lacey  Putney,  a  delegate  in  the  Virginia 
General  Assembly. 

He  said,  "Judge  Moon's  excellent  judicial  temperament  and  his 
keen  intellect  have  contributed  greatly  to  the  outstanding  reputa- 
tion he  has  earned  for  intellectual  honesty,  fairness,  and  equity." 
I  don't  know  of  a  higher  tribute  to  be  paid  to  a  jurist. 

Likewise,  Judge  Friedman — there  was  a  fierce  competition  for 
this  particular  slot,  and  I  know  my  colleague  and  I  weighed  very 
carefully  the  viewpoints  of  a  diversity  of  citizenship  and  jurists  and 
others  in  our  State.  And  I  think  it  is  to  Judge  Friedman's  credit 
that  he  came  out  in  the  minds  of  many  as  the  best  qualified  person 
at  this  time,  because  he  is  known  for  his  fairness  and  his  compas- 
sion and  mastery  of  the  law.  As  one  person  said,  he  is  tough,  he 
is  analytical. 

So  we  bring  before  the  U.S.  Senate  and  this  committee  two  out- 
standing Virginia  public  servants  to  take  on  the  very  important  re- 
sponsibility of  the  Federal  bench. 

I  thank  the  committee. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you,  Senator. 

Senator  ROBB.  Mr.  Chairman,  could  I  just  add  one  word? 

The  Chairman.  Sure. 

Senator  ROBB.  I  made  reference  to  the  fact  that  we  had  been  as- 
sisted by  judicial  selection  panels  in  considering  all  of  the  nomi- 
nees, or  all  of  those  who  were  interested  or  had  been  nominated  by 
various  bar  associations  and  others.  The  first  panel  that  I  had 


676 

asked  to  assist  us  was  led  by  our  late  colleague,  Senator  William 
Spong. 

Bill  Spong  was  kind  enough  to  head  that  group  up.  As  many  of 
our  colleagues  know,  he  passed  away  about  3  weeks  ago,  but  this 
was  his  final  contribution  to  the  public  service  that  these  two 
judges  both  exemplify.  Many  of  the  superlatives  and  adjectives  that 
I  did  not  use  in  describing  them  are  included  in  the  formal  state- 
ment that  I  have  submitted. 

With  that,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  thank  you  again  for  holding  this 
hearing  and  I  wholeheartedly  recommend,  with  my  senior  col- 
league, both  Judge  Friedman  and  Judge  Moon  for  your  consider- 
ation and  confirmation. 

Senator  Warner.  I  will  put  my  statement  in  the  record. 

The  Chairman.  Without  objection. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Warner  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  John  Warner 

Mr.  Chairman,  members  of  the  Committee.  It  is  a  distinct  privilege  for  me  to  be 
here  this  morning  before  you  to  introduce  two  of  Virginia's  most  distinguished  ju- 
rists. 

Both  Judge  Norman  K.  Moon  and  Judge  Jerome  B.  Friedman  are  men  of  uncom- 
mon integrity  and  talent.  Both  are  held  in  the  highest  esteem  among  their  col- 
leagues and  citizens  of  our  Commonwealth. 

I  will  be  brief  this  morning,  but  I  do  want  to  say  a  few  words  about  each. 

With  respect  to  Judge  Moon,  some  on  the  committee  may  recall  my  long-standing 
support  for  his  appointment  to  the  Federal  bench.  Some  16  years  ago,  I  rec- 
ommended Judge  Moon  as  one  supremely  qualified  for  the  vacancy  on  the  U.S.  Dis- 
trict Court  for  the  Western  District  of  Virginia. 

Today,  I  am  just  as  convinced  as  I  was  then,  that  Judge  Moon  is  one  this  commit- 
tee should  approve  for  elevation  to  the  Federal  bench  without  qualification. 

I  want  to  share  with  the  committee  words  written  by  a  long-time  friend  and  col- 
lege roommate,  Lacey  Putney,  in  behalf  of  Judge  Moon.  His  words  go  a  long  way 
to  summing  up  the  way  many  of  us  in  Virginia  feel  about  Judge  Moon. 

"Judge  Moon's  excellent  judicial  temperament  and  his  keen  intellect  have  contrib- 
uted greatly  to  the  outstanding  reputation  he  has  earned  for  intellectual  honesty, 
fairness  and  equity  *  *  *." 

Since  1985,  Judge  Moon  has  served  on  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia,  and  since 
1993  he  has  served  as  that  court's  chief  judge.  His  court  has  handled  a  record  level 
of  filings  and  eliminated  a  substantial  case  backlog. 

From  1974  to  1985,  Judge  Moon  served  on  the  24th  Judicial  Circuit  of  Virginia, 
including  service  as  chief  judge  from  1982  to  1984. 

The  bottom  line  is  that  Judge  Moon  brings  nearly  a  quarter  century  of  bench  ex- 
perience. He  is  seasoned  and  talented.  He  has  built  a  remarkable  career  that  would 
make  him  a  tremendous  credit  to  the  Federal  judiciary. 

I  won't  bore  members  of  the  committee  with  a  detailed  accounting  of  Judge 
Moon's  resume,  I  simply  will  say  that  he  is  accomplished  as  a  jurist,  a  teacher,  a 
family  man,  and  as  a  tremendous  contributor  to  his  community.  Without  question, 
if  approved  by  this  committee  and  the  Senate,  Judge  Moon  will  serve  with  uncom- 
mon distinction  and  dedication. 

And  those  words,  "uncommon  distinction  and  dedication"  bring  me  to  my  thoughts 
about  Judge  Friedman,  who  appears  today  before  you  as  the  candidate  for  the  va- 
cancy on  the  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Virginia. 

Like  Judge  Moon,  Judge  Friedman's  record  as  a  jurist  is  impeccable. 

Respect  for  Judge  Friedman  runs  deep  in  Virginia's  Eastern  District  because  he 
is  a  superior  legal  intellect  with  a  keen,  straightforward  judicial  temperament. 

Judge  Friedman  has  over  12  years  as  a  trial  judge,  and  like  Judge  Moon,  he  has 
received  tremendous  support  from  his  colleagues  who  know  him  best,  in  addition  to 
strong  endorsements  from  the  Virginia  Bar  Association  and  the  Virginia  State  Bar. 

Jiidge  Friedman  is  known  for  his  fairness,  compassion,  and  mastery  of  the  law. 
He  is  tough  and  analytical. 

In  1991  he  was  elected  to  the  Virginia  Beach  Circuit  Court,  and  since  1994  he 
has  served  as  that  bench's  chief  judge.  From  1985  to  1991  he  served  as  judge  of  the 
Virginia  Beach  Juvenile  and  Domestic  Relations  District  Court. 


677 

Judge  Friedman  will  make  an  excellent  addition  to  the  Federal  judiciary  and 
should  be  approved  by  the  committee  and  confirmed  by  the  Senate.  His  talents  and 
reputation  speak  for  themselves. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  thank  you  for  scheduling  today's  hearings  and  for  the  oppor- 
tunity to  address  you  and  the  committee.  These  gentlemen  are  deserving  of  the  com- 
mittee's approval. 

The  Chairman.  We  appreciate  both  of  you  being  here,  and  I 
think  it  is  great  praise  for  both  of  these  judicial  nominees  and  we 
appreciate  it. 

We  will  conclude  with  the  two  Senators  from  Missouri,  who  are 
both  here.  We  will  turn  first  to  the  senior  Senator,  Senator  Bond, 
and  then  Senator  Ashcroft. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  CHRISTOPHER  S.  BOND,  A  U.S.  SENATOR 
FROM  THE  STATE  OF  MISSOURI 

Senator  Bond.  Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  appre- 
ciate very  much  your  scheduling  the  hearing  and  giving  Mr.  Rod- 
ney Sippel  the  opportunity  to  appear  before  you  today. 

I  advise  that  Congressman  Gephardt  wanted  to  be  here  today 
and  join  in  presenting  Mr.  Sippel,  but  other  commitments  out  of 
Washington  prevent  him  from  being  with  us. 

One  of  the  honors,  of  course,  of  serving  as  the  senior  Senator 
from  Missouri  is  to  present  to  my  colleagues  outstanding  can- 
didates for  service  on  the  Federal  bench,  and  I  believe  Rodney 
Sippel  is  such  a  candidate.  He  has  an  exceptional  public  record, 
and  many  Missourians  have  told  me  of  his  ability  and  the  fact  that 
they  think  he  will  serve  the  Federal  judiciary  with  distinction  and 
honor. 

Mr.  Sippel  is  a  native  Missourian,  born  in  Jefferson  City,  raised 
in  St.  Louis;  received  high  academic  honors  at  the  University  of 
Tulsa  and  at  Washington  University,  where  he  gained  his  legal  de- 
gree. He  currently  is  with  the  firm  of  Husch  and  Eppenberger  in 
St.  Louis,  and  briefly  served  as  an  administrative  assistant  for 
Congressman  Gephardt  during  the  103d  and  104th  Congress.  He 
also  served  on  the  staff  of  my  predecessor.  Senator  Eagleton. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  commend  you  and  the  committee  for  the  fine  job 
of  screening  rigorously  the  candidates  for  the  Federal  judiciary  to 
ensure  that  only  exceptional  individuals  with  a  healthy  view  of  the 
role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  are  confirmed.  And  I  believe  that  you 
are  doing  that  well  and  I  think  that  we  need  to  look  for  candidates 
who  will  serve  in  the  courtroom  and  show  a  mastery  of  the  issues 
over  which  they  preside. 

Mr.  Sippel  has  the  experience  necessary.  He  started  as  a  litigator 
trying  lawsuits  on  behalf  of  the  Bi-State  Development  Agency, 
sometimes  having  30  to  40  cases  pending  at  one  time.  Over  the 
years,  as  his  legal  practice  evolved,  he  has  litigated  extensively  in 
the  Federal  district  court  and  handled  a  variety  of  criminal,  civil 
and  antitrust  issues.  In  addition  to  his  private  practice,  he  has 
worked  to  improve  the  Missouri  Legal  Services  Program  and  as- 
sisted the  victims  of  the  flood  of  1993. 

I  believe  Mr.  Sippel  is  a  respected  and  experienced  member  of 
the  Missouri  legal  community,  with  a  healthy  respect  for  the  role 
of  the  judiciary,  and  I  think  he  has  the  broad  experience  necessary 
to  serve  on  the  Federal  court.  We  very  much  appreciate  your  con- 


678 

sidering  him  today  and  hope  that  after  hearing  him  that  you  will 
be  able  to  move  his  confirmation  promptly. 

Thank  you  very  much  for  your  attention. 

The  Chairman.  Well,  thank  you,  Senator  Bond. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Bond  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Christopher  S.  Bond 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  thank  the  Committee  for  scheduhng  this  hearing  and  giving  Mr. 
Sippel  the  opportunity  to  appear  before  you  today.  Before  I  proceed,  I  advise  that 
Congressman  Gephardt  wanted  to  be  here  today  to  join  me  in  introducing  Rodney 
Sippel  to  the  Committee  but  had  another  commitment  out  of  Washington  and  will 
be  unable  to  join  us. 

One  of  the  honors  of  serving  as  senior  Senator  from  Missouri  is  to  introduce  my 
colleagues  on  the  Judiciary  Committee  to  outstanding  candidates  for  service  on  the 
Federal  Bench  in  Missouri.  In  Rodney  Sippel,  I  believe  I  am  introducing  such  a  can- 
didate today.  Mr.  Sippel  has  amassed  an  exceptional  record  as  a  public  servant  and 
an  attorney  and  I  have  heard  from  several  Missourians  that  Mr.  Sippel  is  a  very 
gifted  attorney  who  will  serve  the  federal  judiciary  with  distinction  and  honor. 

As  a  few  words  of  introduction,  Mr.  Sippel  is  a  native  Missourian.  He  was  bom 
in  Jefferson  City  and  raised  in  the  St.  Louis  area.  He  earned  an  undergraduate  de- 
gree in  political  science  and  economics  from  the  University  of  Tulsa  and  a  legal  de- 
gree from  Washington  University  in  St.  Louis,  graduating  with  impressive  records 
from  both  institutions.  After  graduating  from  law  school.  Rod  Sippel  joined  the  St. 
Louis  firm  of  Husch  &;  Eppenberger,  where  he  is  currently  a  partner.  Mr.  Sippel 
briefly  left  private  law  practice  to  serve  as  Administrative  Assistant  for  Congress- 
man Gephardt  during  the  103d  and  104th  Congress.  He  also  served  on  the  staff  of 
my  predecessor,  the  Honorable  Thomas  Eagleton. 

The  honor  of  introducing  candidates  for  the  judiciary  is  proceeded  by  the  respon- 
sibility of  ensuring  that  only  the  fittest  of  candidates  are  elevated  to  this  position. 
I  believe  the  Chairman  of  this  Committee  has  done  a  fine  job  in  rigorously  screening 
candidates  to  ensure  that  only  exceptional  individuals  with  a  healthy  view  of  the 
role  of  the  federal  judiciary  in  our  system  of  government  are  confirmed  to  sit  on  the 
federal  bench.  I  also  believe  that  when  we  review  qualifications  of  candidates  to 
serve  on  the  federal  district  court,  we  should  be  looking  for  candidates  who  have 
distinguished  themselves  in  the  courtroom  and  have  achieved  a  mastery  of  the 
issues  over  which  they  will  preside.  Such  judges  are  essential  to  managing  the  dif- 
ficult federal  dockets  in  a  productive  and  professional  manner. 

As  I  said  moments  ago,  distinguished  members  of  the  Missouri  legal  community 
have  made  it  known  that  Mr.  Sippel  is  a  smart  and  talented  lawyer,  he  has  earned 
the  respect  of  his  colleagues  and  there  is  consensus  in  the  legal  community  that  he 
will  make  an  exceptional  jurist. 

As  a  young  attorney,  Mr.  Sippel  cut  his  teeth  as  a  litigator.  He  litigated  civil  suits 
on  behalf  of  the  Bi-State  Development  Agency,  the  local  transit  authority,  at  times 
having  upwards  of  thirty  to  forty  cases  pending  on  the  docket  of  the  Circuit  Court 
for  the  City  of  St.  Louis.  One  must  become  a  master  at  procedural,  jurisdictional 
and  evidentiary  issues  with  tremendous  courtroom  skills  to  succeed  in  this  environ- 
ment. By  all  accounts  Mr.  Sippel  is  a  successful  litigator. 

Over  the  years,  his  legal  practice  has  evolved.  Mr.  Sippel  has  litigated  extensively 
in  federal  district  court.  He  has  handled  a  variety  of  criminal,  civil  and  antitrust 
issues  and  represented  some  of  the  most  respected  members  of  the  St.  Louis  commu- 
nity. In  addition  to  his  private  practice,  Mr.  Sippel  has  given  an  admirable  amount 
of  his  time  to  his  community;  he  has  worked  to  improve  the  Missouri  Legal  Services 
program  and  he  assisted  the  victims  of  the  great  flood  of  1993  navigate  the  various 
federal  programs  for  flood  victim  assistance.  Mr.  Sippel  is  also  a  husband  and  a  fa- 
ther. 

In  summation,  I  have  concluded  that  Mr.  Sippel  is  a  respected  and  experienced 
member  of  the  Missouri  legal  community.  Throughout  his  career,  he  has  displayed 
a  commitment  to  excellence  and  professionalism.  During  this  process  he  has  dis- 
played a  healthy  respect  for  the  role  of  the  judiciary  in  our  system  of  government. 
He  has  broad  experience  in  federal  court,  accumulating  experience  that  will  make 
him  a  credit  to  the  bench. 

I  am  appreciative  of  the  Chairman  for  considering  this  nomination  today. 

The  Chairman.  Senator  Ashcroft. 


679 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  JOHN  ASHCROFT,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  MISSOURI 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Mr.  Chairman,  thank  you  very  much  for  call- 
ing upon  me  to  support  the  nomination  of  the  senior  Senator  and 
to  echo  his  remarks  about  what  a  pleasure  it  is  to  introduce  Mr. 
Rodney  Sippel,  of  Kirkwood,  MO,  to  the  committee. 

As  you  can  tell  from  his  resume — and,  of  course,  the  committee 
has  a  great  deal  of  information  about  him — Mr.  Sippel  is  a  distin- 
guished and  accomplished  attorney  with  extensive  experience  liti- 
gating in  the  Federal  court  system.  He  is  an  honors  graduate  of  the 
University  of  Tulsa  and  of  the  Washington  University  School  of 
Law  in  St.  Louis.  He  has  put  together  a  distinguished  career  in  pri- 
vate practice,  but  has  been  willing  to  take  time  out  from  his  pri- 
vate practice  to  serve  the  public. 

He  is  uniquely  qualified  as  a  result  of  his  awareness  both  of  the 
private  law  community  and  of  the  need  to  have  an  understanding 
of  what  happens  in  the  Congress  and  in  the  development  of  law  by 
the  representatives  of  the  people.  Most  recently,  he  served  in  the 
St.  Louis  office  of  Congressman  Gephardt. 

I  have  been  particularly  impressed  by  the  high  esteem  in  which 
Mr.  Sippel  is  held  by  members  of  both  the  plaintiff  and  defense 
bars,  and  by  people  on  both  sides  of  the  political  aisle.  He  has  a 
well-deserved  reputation  for  integrity  and  one  for  maintaining  his 
composure,  for  being  calm  even  during  intense  times  of  litigation. 
Judicial  temperament,  in  my  judgment,  is  so  important  to  the  suc- 
cessful operation  of  our  court  system. 

Mr.  Sippel  is  a  civic-minded  individual  dedicated  to  the  ideal  of 
public  service.  He  has  served  the  public  both  by  working  with  the 
people's  elected  representatives,  as  I  have  indicated,  but  also  by 
dedicating  himself  to  pro  bono  activities.  The  President  has  recog- 
nized these  qualities  through  this  nomination  and  has  given  Mr. 
Sippel  another  opportunity  to  serve  the  public,  which  1  believe  is 
appropriate. 

I  believe  that  Mr.  Sippel  understands  the  proper  role  of  a  Fed- 
eral judge.  He  is  an  excellent  lawyer.  He  also  has  an  appreciation 
for  both  the  awesome  power  and  the  limited  jurisdiction  of  a  Fed- 
eral judge.  In  an  important  international  business  dispute  that  he 
litigated  in  the  Federal  court  in  St.  Louis  involving  Lloyd's  of  Lon- 
don, Mr.  Sippel  convinced  the  Federal  court  to  restrain  itself  from 
issuing  a  temporary  restraining  order  against  a  letter  of  credit. 

That  sounds  like  an  esoteric  concern,  but  there  are  times  when 
the  judiciary  needs  to  restrain  itself,  to  be  restrained,  and  to  under- 
stand the  limits  of  its  authority.  And  I  am  sure  that  Mr.  Sippel  will 
exercise  that  same  restraint  as  a  judge  that  he  urged  upon  the 
court  as  a  litigator.  A  number  of  people  for  whom  I  have  great  re- 
spect have  endorsed  Mr.  Sippel  and  they  confirmed  to  me  that  he 
has  the  temperament  and  the  restraint  and  modesty  to  be  an  effec- 
tive legal  representative  of  the  people  as  a  member  of  the  Federal 
bench. 

I  support  Mr.  Sippel's  nomination  and  I  look  fonvard  to  today's 
hearing  which  will  provide  the  rest  of  the  committee  a  better  sense 
of  the  quality  that  Mr.  Sippel  would  bring  and  his  dedication  to  the 
rule  of  law  for  which  he  has  stood. 

I  thank  the  chairman  for  this  opportunity. 


680 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you  both.  This  has  been  an  excellent 
hearing  so  far  because  we  have  unanimity  among  Senators  in  these 
respective  States.  So,  that  makes  our  job  a  little  bit  easier.  We  ap- 
preciate both  of  you  and  it  is  great  praise  for  Mr.  Sippel  to  have 
your  support. 

Senator  Ashcroft,  I  am  going  to  ask  you  to  chair  the  rest  of  this 
hearing.  I  have  to  go  to  a  chairmen's  meeting  and  I  will  turn  over 
the  gavel  to  Senator  Ashcroft.  I  am  counting  on  him  to  ask  some 
tough  questions  and  we  will  move  on  from  there. 

Senator  Ashcroft  [presiding].  I  thank  the  chairman  for  his  con- 
duct of  the  hearing  up  until  this  point.  It  will  now  be  our  pleasure 
to  hear  from  nominees  and  we  will  first  start  with  the  nominee  for 
the  Eleventh  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals,  Stanley  Marcus,  a  judge 
from  the  Southern  District  of  Florida. 

Judge  Marcus,  if  you  would  come  forward,  please?  Judge  Marcus, 
would  you  please  raise  your  right  hand? 

Do  you  swear  that  the  testimony  you  shall  give  in  this  hearing 
shall  be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so 
help  you  God? 

Judge  Marcus.  I  do. 

Senator  Ashcroft.  Thank  you.  Judge.  You  may  be  seated. 

Judge,  we  would  be  very  pleased  to  have  you  make  some  initial 
remarks,  including  an  introduction  of  members  of  your  family  who 
have  accompanied  you  to  this  hearing  today. 

TESTIMONY  OF  STANLEY  MARCUS,  OF  FLORIDA,  TO  BE  U.S. 
CIRCUIT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  ELEVENTH  CIRCUIT 

Judge  Marcus.  Mr.  Chairman  and  Senator  Durbin,  I  am  deeply 
honored  to  be  a  nominee  for  this  position,  for  the  Court  of  Appeals 
for  the  Eleventh  Circuit.  I  really  have  no  statement,  would  be 
happy  to  answer  your  questions,  but  would  like  to  introduce  my 
wife,  Judith  Marcus,  if  I  could,  to  you. 

Thank  you. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  ASHCROFT 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Thank  you,  Ms.  Marcus.  Thank  you  very 
much  for  coming. 

Judge  Marcus,  a  couple  of  weeks  ago  in  California,  in  the  Ninth 
Circuit  Court  of  Appeals,  the  court  set  aside  the  law  of  the  State 
of  California  relating  to  term  limits  for  members  of  the  General  As- 
sembly of  California  and  other  elected  officials  there  based  on,  ac- 
cording to  the  opinion  of  the  court,  the  sense  of  the  court  or  idea 
or  thought  of  the  court  that  the  voters  had  inadequate  information 
when  they  enacted  their  term  limits  rules  for  California. 

In  your  judgment,  is  the  thought  that  a  court  would  arrive  at, 
thinking  that  the  people  of  a  State  were  not  adequately  or  appro- 
priately informed  or  were  ignorant  about  the  issues — would  that  be 
an  appropriate  judicial  basis  for  overturning  an  initiative  enacted 
by  the  people  of  the  State? 

Judge  Marcus.  It  seems  to  me,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  a  Federal 
judge  would  step  down  the  road  of  setting  aside  an  initiative  of  the 
people  with  extreme  caution  and  great  care.  We  put  our  faith  in 
the  people.  The  people  are  sovereign.  The  Federal  courts  are  surely 
the  least  representative  branch  of  Government,  and  so  we  must  act 


681 

with  great  care,  caution  and  discretion  when  we  address  issues  of 
that  kind. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Well,  would  the  ignorance  of  the  people  be 
appropriate  grounds  upon  which  to  set  aside  the  will  of  the  people 
which  had  been  expressed  through  their  votes  in  an  initiative  proc- 
ess? 

Judge  Marcus.  I  put  my  faith  in  the  people  to  understand  fully 
what  they  do,  Senator. 

Senator  Ashcroft.  Less  than  2  weeks,  a  Federal  appellate  judge 
urged  President  Clinton  to  admit  his  mistake  of  judgment  and  re- 
nounce the  military  "don't  ask,  don't  tell"  policy.  He  also  com- 
mented that  the  policy's  constitutionality  is  highly  suspect.  These 
remarks  were  made  at  a  ceremony. 

Do  you  think  it  is  appropriate  for  a  Federal  judge  to  advise  the 
President  in  such  settings,  in  off-the-bench  remarks? 

Judge  Marcus.  I  think  not.  My  own  view  is  that  when  we  take 
the  oath  as  a  Federal  judge,  it  is  extremely  important  that  we  are 
careful  to  remain  within  the  confines  of  the  judiciary,  as  embodied 
in  article  III  of  the  Constitution,  and  ought  to  speak  with  great 
care  and  discretion,  particularly  about  matters  of  public  con- 
troversy and  debate. 

Senator  Ashcroft.  For  the  last  quarter  century,  there  has  been 
a  series  of  cases  relating  to  the  rights  of  States  and  to  the  residual 
capacity  of  States  to  enact  laws  and  the  deliberating  or  otherwise 
calling  into  question  the  efficacy,  power,  or  the  limited  scope  or  na- 
ture of  the  10th  amendment  to  the  Constitution. 

Do  you  believe  that  there  are  any  areas  in  which  the  Constitu- 
tion reserves  exclusive  jurisdiction  to  States,  or  is  it  your  view  that 
any  time  the  Congress  acts  it  automatically  preempts  the  States' 
capacity? 

Judge  Marcus.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  Constitution  is  a  docu- 
ment, a  brilliant  document  of  limited  government.  It  provides  for 
limited  and  explicit  powers  for  the  executive,  legislative  and  judi- 
cial branches  of  Government.  And  beyond  that,  it  leaves  to  the 
States  and  the  people  the  power  to  decide. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Judge,  are  there  any  rights  that  you  think 
exist  for  Americans  protected  by  the  courts  which  do  not  appear  in 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  that  should  be  protected  by 
the  Federal  courts? 

Judge  Marcus.  I  think  the  Constitution  is  a  brilliant  document, 
perhaps  the  most  brilliant  document  crafted  in  the  name  of  govern- 
ment. It  enumerates  rights  and  powers  with  deliberation  and  care, 
and  I  think  it  pretty  much  got  it  right. 

Senator  Ashcroft.  So  you  don't  believe  there  are  rights  that  you 
would  need  to  find  or  create  in  the  Constitution  that  aren't  explic- 
itly meant  there? 

Judge  Marcus.  I  do  not. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Do  you  believe  that  the  Constitution  is  a  liv- 
ing document  that  is  growing  and  that  there  will  be  rights  that  will 
suddenly  appear  in  the  Constitution  or  will  arise  in  the  Constitu- 
tion as  a  result  of  enlightened  members  of  the  judiciary  and  the 
public  in  the  future,  or  do  you  believe  that  the  rights  that  are  ex- 
pressed therein  in  the  words  of  the  Constitution  are  the  limits  of 
the  rights  that  should  be  expressed? 


682 

Judge  Marcus.  I  think  the  language  and  text  is  clear  and  it  is 
explicit  and  we  are  bound  by  what  it  says. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  In  the  event  there  were  to  be  rights  which 
the  culture  felt  should  be  added  to  those  rights  enjoyed  by  the 
members  of  the  society,  would  it  be  appropriate  for  the  judiciary  to 
add  those  rights  in  judicial  decisions? 

Judge  Marcus.  I  think  not.  I  think  that  there  is,  of  course,  the 
power  to  amend  the  Constitution  if  the  people  and  their  represent- 
ative officials  believe  that  that  is  appropriate.  I  do  not  believe  that 
it  is  the  role  of  the  judge  or  the  court,  however,  to  substitute  its 
judgment  for  the  judgment  of  the  legislative  body. 

Senator  Ashcroft.  So  it  is  your  view  that  judges  cannot  amend 
the  Constitution,  except  through  their  elected  representatives? 

Judge  Marcus.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Durbin. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  DURBIN 

Senator  DURBIN.  Thank  you,  Senator  Ashcroft. 

Judge,  thank  you  for  joining  us  today.  I  am  a  relatively  new 
member  of  this  panel.  I  have  been  here  a  year  and  I  have  the  high- 
est respect  for  my  colleague  from  Missouri.  We  disagree  on  a  num- 
ber of  political  issues.  I  am  afraid  that  if  I  would  take  his  line  of 
questioning  and  engage  in  a  debate  on  those  issues,  it  wouldn't  be 
in  the  best  interests  of  your  confirmation  or  moving  this  issue 
along  today,  and  so  I  won't. 

I  will  ask  one  question,  though.  The  Constitution  never  mentions 
the  word  "privacy,"  and  yet  when  it  comes  to  so  many  areas  of  in- 
terpretation, the  courts  have  said  Americans  have  a  right  to  be  left 
alone,  have  a  right  not  to  be  harassed  by  their  government,  and 
have  a  right  to  make  individual  decisions. 

So  absent  that  word  "privacy,"  if  you  are  going  to  take  a  strict 
construction  of  the  Constitution,  where  do  you  find  refuge  for  the 
conclusion  that  we  should  be  left  alone? 

Judge  Marcus.  I  think  the  Supreme  Court  has  spoken,  and  spo- 
ken clearly  on  the  subject,  and  has  repeatedly  spoken  about  the 
issue  of  privacy  and  I  think  that  its  pronouncements  bind  us  all. 
I  think  they  have  found  a  right  to  privacy  in  a  variety  of  amend- 
ments to  the  U.S.  Constitution  and  have  spoken  in  a  variety  of 
fields,  including  marriage  and  procreation,  the  right  to  raise  your 
children  and  educate  them  as  you  see  fit.  And  I  think  that  these 
principles  have  been  clearly  enunciated  and  repeatedly  upheld  by 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States. 

Senator  DURBIN.  At  the  risk  of  getting  us  both  in  trouble  with 
the  majority  on  the  committee,  I  will  move  on  to  another  question. 
Let  me  ask  you  about  the  Federal  Sentencing  Guidelines. 

Judge  Marcus.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  DuRBiN.  As  a  district  court  judge,  you  have  dealt  with 
those  quite  a  bit.  What  is  your  opinion  of  the  Sentencing  Guide- 
lines? 

Judge  Marcus.  We  have  had  an  experience  for  the  last  8  or  9 
years  and  have  sentenced  many  thousands  of  defendants  under  it 
in  the  Southern  District  of  Florida.  My  own  experience  is  that  the 
Sentencing  Guidelines  have  worked  well.  I  think  they  have  accom- 


683 

plished  three  things  that  they  were  really  designed  to  do;  first,  to 
compress  disparity  in  sentence;  second,  to  build  in  greater  predict- 
ability and  certainty  in  the  sentencing  process;  and,  third,  to  re- 
quire district  judges  to  give  the  reasons  or  explicate  the  rationale 
for  its  rulings  and  to  take  into  account  a  wide  variety  of  cir- 
cumstances that  the  Congress  and  Sentencing  Commission  thought 
ought  properly  to  be  taken  into  account — relevant  conduct,  role  in 
the  offense,  prior  criminal  record,  and  so  on.  My  own  experience  is 
that  the  Sentencing  Guidelines  have  worked  well. 

Senator  DURBIN.  If  you  are  confirmed  as  an  appellate  judge,  at 
some  point  you  may  be  faced  with  applying  a  Supreme  Court  prece- 
dent which  you  do  not  personally  agree  with.  Would  you  consider 
yourself  bound  by  the  precedent  or  your  conscience,  and  how  would 
you  make  that  call? 

Judge  Marcus.  I  believe  that  when  you  take  the  oath  as  a  judge, 
you  are  bound  to  support,  uphold,  and  defend  the  Constitution  and 
laws,  and  you  are  bound  to  follow  the  precedent  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Thank  you,  judge. 

Judge  Marcus.  Thank  you. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  I  want  to  thank  you  very  much  for  appearing 
before  the  committee  and  for  coming,  and  we  look  forward  to  an  op- 
portunity to  act  on  your  nomination  in  the  Senate  as  a  whole. 

Judge  Marcus.  Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman.  Thank 
you.  Senator  Durbin. 

Senator  AsHCROFT.  The  committee  will  proceed  now  by  asking 
the  other  nominees  to  come  forward  together,  if  you  would,  please, 
and  so  would  you  please  all  approach  the  witness  table — ^Ann  Lou- 
ise Aiken,  Rodney  W.  Sippel,  Jerome  B.  Friedman,  and  Norman  K. 
Moon. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  have  a  statement  from  Senator 
Leahy  in  support  of  Ann  Aiken  which  I  would  ask  permission  to 
be  entered  into  the  record. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Without  objection,  it  is  so  ordered. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Leahy  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Patrick  J.  Leahy 

I  commend  the  Chairman  for  holding  this  confirmation  hearing  for  judicial  nomi- 
nees this  morning  and  for  noticing  a  second  session  for  tomorrow.  If  we  are  able 
to  proceed  with  these  13  nominees  the  Committee  will  make  some  progress  toward 
reducing  the  backlog  of  judicial  nominees  pending  before  the  Committee  and  await- 
ing their  hearings. 

I  am  particular  delighted  to  see  Ann  L.  Aiken  included  this  morning.  She  is  nomi- 
nated to  fill  a  judicial  emergency  vacancy  and  was  first  nominated  in  November 
1995,  almost  two  years  ago.  She  had  a  confirmation  hearing  in  September  1996.  I 
hope  that  the  Committee  will  now  proceed  without  dela}'  to  consider  her  nomination 
as  well  as  the  nominations  of  Clarence  Sundram  and  Judge  Sonia  Sotomayor  and 
the  other  nominees  participating  today.  We  should  be  moving  promptly  to  fill  the 
vacancies  plaguing  the  federal  courts. 

While  I  am  encouraged  that  the  Committee  is  today  proceeding  with  a  hearing 
on  these  five  nominees,  there  remains  no  excuse  for  the  Committee's  delay  in  con- 
sidering the  nominations  of  such  outstanding  individuals  as  Professor  William  A. 
Fletcher,  Judge  James  A.  Beaty,  Jr.,  Judge  Richard  A.  Paez,  Ms.  M.  Margaret 
McKeown,  and  Ms.  Susan  Oki  Mollway,  to  name  just  a  fev/  of  the  outstanding  nomi- 
nees who  have  all  been  pending  all  year  vidthout  so  much  as  a  hearing.  Professor 
Fletcher  and  Ms.  Mollway  had  both  been  favorably  reported  last  year.  Judge  Paez 
had  a  hearing  last  year  but  has  been  passed  over  so  far  this  year. 


684 

After  this  hearing,  the  Committee  will  still  have  pending  before  it  almost  40  nomi- 
nees in  need  of  a  hearing  from  among  the  73  nominations  sent  to  the  Senate  by 
the  President  during  this  Congress.  From  the  first  day  of  this  session  of  Congress, 
this  Committee  has  never  had  pending  before  it  fewer  than  20  judicial  nominees  for 
hearings.  The  Committee's  backlog  had  doubled  to  more  than  40. 

Many  of  these  nominations,  including  that  of  Ms.  Aiken  for  the  District  Court  in 
Oregon,  were  before  us  last  Congress,  during  the  election  year  slowdov/n,  and  have 
had  to  be  renominated  by  the  President.  The  vacancies  for  which  they  are  nomi- 
nated have  not  been  filled  but  persist  for  periods  now  reaching  years.  The  Commit- 
tee still  has  pending  before  it  10  nominees  who  were  first  nominated  during  the  last 
Congress,  including  Ms.  Aiken  and  four  others,  who  had  been  pending  since  1995. 
Thus,  while  I  am  delighted  that  we  are  moving  more  promptly  with  respect  to  some 
of  the  nominees  being  considered  today,  I  remain  concerned  about  the  other  vacan- 
cies and  other  nominees. 

At  the  snail's  pace  that  the  Committee  and  the  Senate  are  proceeding  with  judi- 
cial nominations,  we  are  not  even  keeping  up  with  attrition.  When  we  adjourned 
last  Congress  there  were  64  vacancies  on  the  federal  bench.  After  the  confirmation 
of  22  judges  in  10  months,  there  has  been  a  net  increase  of  28  vacancies,  an  increase 
of  almost  50  percent  in  the  number  of  federal  judicial  vacancies.  Thus,  vacancies 
have  been  increasing  not  decreasing  over  the  course  of  this  year  and  the  vacancy 
crises  remains.  The  Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  has  called 
the  rising  number  of  vacancies  "the  most  immediate  problem  we  face  in  the  federal 
judiciary." 

I  commend  Senator  Hatch's  effort  to  hold  two  days  of  hearings  this  week  and  to 
accelerate  the  pace  at  which  nominations  are  moved  through  the  Committee.  Unfor- 
tunately, this  is  only  the  seventh  confirmation  hearing  for  judicial  nominees  that 
the  Committee  has  convened  all  year.  By  this  time  two  years  ago,  the  Committee 
had  held  10  confirmation  hearings  involving  46  judicial  nominees.  And,  unfortu- 
nately, no  regular  Executive  Business  Meeting  of  the  Committee  has  been  noticed 
for  this  week.  Accordingly,  the  Committee  will  not  have  an  opportunity  to  report 
any  judicial  nominees  or  the  nomination  of  Bill  Lee  to  be  Assistant  Attorney  Gen- 
eral for  the  Civil  Rights  Division. 

I  have  urged  those  who  have  been  stalling  the  consideration  of  these  fine  women 
and  men  to  reconsider  their  action  and  work  with  us  to  have  the  Committee  and 
the  Senate  fulfil  its  constitutional  responsibility.  Those  who  delay  or  prevent  the  fill- 
ing of  these  vacancies  must  understand  that  they  are  delaying  or  preventing  the  ad- 
ministration of  justice.  Courts  cannot  try  cases,  incarcerate  the  guilty  or  resolve  civil 
disputes  without  judges.  The  mounting  backlogs  of  civil  and  criminal  cases  in  the 
dozens  of  emergency  districts,  in  particular,  are  growing  more  critical  by  the  day. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Would  you  nominees  please  raise  your  right 
hands?  Do  you  swear  that  the  testimony  you  shall  give  in  this 
hearing  shall  be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the 
truth,  so  help  you  God? 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  I  do. 

Judge  Moon.  I  do. 

Judge  Aiken.  I  do. 

Judge  Friedman.  I  do. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Thank  you  very  much.  You  may  be  seated. 

Senator  Durbin,  I  will  turn  to  you  to  begin  the  questioning  here. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  DURBIN 

Senator  DURBIN.  Let  me  say  at  the  outset,  Mr.  Chairman,  that 
Mr.  Sippel  is  a  personal  friend  and  acquaintance  from  the  St.  Louis 
area,  where  I  was  born,  and  I  am  happy  to  see  him  before  this  com- 
mittee today  and  am  happy  to  support  his  nomination. 

I  will  start  with  you,  Mr.  Sippel,  for  the  record. 

TESTIMONY  OF  RODNEY  W.  SIPPEL,  OF  MISSOURI,  TO  BE  U.S. 
DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  EASTERN  AND  WESTERN  DIS- 
TRICTS OF  MISSOURI 

Mr.  Sippel.  I  am  sure  everyone  else  appreciates  that.  [Laughter.] 


685 

Senator  DURBIN.  You  have  kind  of  taken  the  short  straw  in 
terms  of  alphabetical  preference  here. 

Your  biography  indicates  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice  in 
the  Missouri  and  Illinois  U.S.  district  courts  and  U.S.  court  of  ap- 
peals. In  your  personal  opinion,  what  have  been  the  major  dif- 
ferences in  your  practice  between  the  State  and  Federal  courts? 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  The  Federal  courts — certainly,  the  Eastern  District 
of  Missouri — have  been  much  more  aggressive  in  alternative  dis- 
pute resolution,  early  intervention  in  a  case  in  order  to  manage  the 
case,  often  to  a  more  successful  and  early  settlement  to  the  benefit 
of  the  parties  and  saving  a  lot  of  expense.  And  I  think  that  is  a 
very  worthy  and  good  result  in  terms  of  the  difference  between  the 
State  and  the  Federal  benches  in  Missouri. 

Senator  Durbin.  One  other  thing  I  note  in  your  background  is 
an  extensive  civil  experience,  civil  litigation  experience,  which  has 
been  noted  by  Senators  Bond  and  Ashcroft.  As  a  Federal  district 
judge,  though,  you  will  be  faced  with  many  criminal  cases  and  I 
would  like  to  ask  you  what  steps  you  will  be  taking  to  familiarize 
yourself  with  the  criminal  practice. 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  When  I  was  first  nominated,  I  met  with  the  chief 
judge  of  the  eastern  district  and  several  of  the  other  sitting  judges 
and  actually  raised  this  issue  with  them  and  have  hopefully  alerted 
them  to  that  need  that,  as  with  any  profession,  I  need  to  learn  and 
grow.  And  they  were  very  supportive  and  felt  that  in  pretty  short 
order  that  the  nature  of  not  being  familiar  with  the  criminal  side 
of  the  practice  would  be  something,  if  I  devoted  myself  to,  I  would 
be  able  to  accomplish. 

Senator  DURBIN.  We  are  finding  in  many  areas  of  Illinois,  and 
I  don't  know  if  it  is  the  case  in  Missouri,  that  because  of  some — 
how  do  I  put  this — because  of  vacancies  on  the  bench,  we  have  seen 
some  of  our  judges  who  have  had  to  focus  more  on  the  criminal  side 
because  of  these  deadlines  that  they  face  in  considering  motions 
and  moving  cases  along.  I  don't  know  if  that  is  the  case  in  Mis- 
souri. 

Do  you  happen  to  know  what  the  backlog  is  and  what  the  usual 
time  is  between  filing  and  taking  a  case,  for  example,  to  civil  trial? 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  It  is  still  less  than — the  eastern  district  sort  of  tracks 
cases.  When  you  first  file  it,  you  have  to  notify  the  court  as  to  what 
track  you  are  on — 12,  18,  or  24  months.  It  is  unusual  now  for  a 
case  to  still  be  pending  more  than  2  years  and  it  is  common  for  a 
case  to  be  tried  within  a  year,  year-and-a-half.  So,  that  backlog — 
and  I  think  in  large  part  due  to  the  effective  use  of  magistrate 
judges — has  not  been  an  issue  in  the  Eastern  District  of  Missouri. 

Senator  DURBIN.  You  were  involved  in  setting  up  a  pro  bono 
practice  at  your  law  firm  and  I  would  like  to  ask  you  if  you  could 
relate  to  the  committee  what  your  experience  was  in  organizing 
that  practice. 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  It  was  a  voluntary  pro  bono  program,  but  it  was  well 
received  by  the  attorneys  in  the  firm.  There  was  a  great  need  lo- 
cally for  pro  bono  assistance  by  attorneys,  especially  for  women  in 
abusive  marriages  who  could  not  afford  an  attorney  and  needed 
help  getting  through  the  system.  And  it  has  been  very  worthwhile 
both  for  attorneys  and  those  who  received  the  benefit  of  those  sen/- 
ices. 


686 

Senator  DURBIN.  Thanks,  Mr.  Sippel. 

Judge  Moon,  I  note  that  you  are  a  professor,  in  addition  to  a 
number  of  other  things  on  the  professional  level  that  you  have 
done,  and  teach  a  trial  advocacy  course.  Is  that  correct? 

TESTIMONY  OF  NORMAN  K.  MOON,  OF  VIRGINIA,  TO  BE  U.S. 
DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  WESTERN  DISTRICT  OF  VIRGINIA 

Judge  Moon.  Yes. 

Senator  DURBIN.  How  long  have  you  done  that? 

Judge  Moon.  Twenty-one  years. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Can  you  give  me  your  impression  of  law  stu- 
dents today  and  their  preparation  for  practice  and  your  experience 
with  these  same  students  once  members  of  the  bar  as  trial  advo- 
cates? 

Judge  Moon.  Well,  I  think  it  is  much  better  today  because  the 
law  schools  have  put  greater  emphasis  on  practice  courses.  When 
I  was  in  law  school,  there  was  only  one  trial  advocacy  class  for  the 
whole  law  school  student  body.  Today,  there  are  probably  six  or 
more  each  semester,  so  that  most  all  students  have  an  opportunity 
to  go  through  these  courses.  I  think  there  is  much  more  emphasis 
in  the  CLE  programs  on  trial  advocacy  than  there  was,  say,  20 
years  ago. 

This  was  spurred  on  mostly  by  Chief  Justice  Burger's  comment 
that  50  percent  of  the  lawyers  who  practiced  were  incompetent, 
and  I  think  that  caused  a  great  impetus  for  trial  advocacy  being 
taught  in  the  law  schools  and  the  bar  getting  involved. 

Senator  Durbin.  Your  service  has  been  at  the  State  court  level. 
What  do  you  perceive  to  be  the  real  difference  between  the  State 
bench  and  the  Federal  bench,  to  which  you  are  seeking  appoint- 
ment? 

Judge  Moon.  Well,  relative  to  the  fact — the  major  difference,  I 
think,  that  would  take  place  in  Virginia — and  Virginia  may  be 
unique — the  use  of  summary  judgment  in  the  Federal  court  is 
much  more  extensive  than  in  the  State  court.  In  Virginia,  it  is  very 
hard  to  get  summary  judgment  on  any  issue,  the  statutes  and  rules 
that  prohibit  the  use  of  depositions  and  affidavits  for  summary 
judgment.  So  I  anticipate,  other  than  the  jurisdiction  and  some  of 
the  substantive  issues  such  as  bankruptcy,  that  type  of  thing — but 
I  think  that  the  actual  practice — the  major  difference  will  be  the 
use  of  summary  judgment. 

Senator  DURBIN.  My  last  question  of  you  in  this  round,  and  then 
I  will  defer  to  Senator  Ashcroft  and  ask  the  other  two  nominees  in 
the  second  round,  can  you  describe  for  the  committee  the  substance 
of  your  work  on  the  Com.mission  on  Family  Violence  Prevention? 

Judge  Moon.  Well,  I  have  been  on  that  commission  for  several 
years  now,  and  basically  we  have  met  very  frequently  and  consid- 
ered— the  committee  was  more  or  less  started  by  the  chief  justice 
of  our  court,  of  our  supreme  court,  who  took  a  special  interest  in 
this  subject.  The  legislature  subsequently  turned  it  into  a  legisla- 
tive commission  and  reappointed  all  the  members  the  chief  jus- 
tice— most  of  those  members. 

We  have  met  for  about  2  years.  We  have  studied  legislation.  We 
have  tried  to  get  a  handle  on  how  much  domestic  violence  there 
was.  A  great  deal  of  legislation  has  come  out  of  that  committee.  I 


687 

can't  say  that  I  can  take  any  credit  for  any  particular  item  that  is 
coming  out,  but  at  this  point  I  am  Chair  of  a  committee  that  is  try- 
ing to  come  up  with  a  way  to  allow  persons  who  are  being  stalked 
to  establish  a  residence  so  that  they — not  like  the  witness  protec- 
tion program,  but  at  least  they  will  be  able  to  have  addresses,  be 
able  to  vote,  have  their  mail  sent  to  a  location  so  that  the  stalker 
hopefully  will  not  be  able  to  locate  them. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Judge,  in  the  interest  of  avoiding  family  ten- 
sion, my  staff  reminds  me  that  I  should  ask  you  to  introduce  your 
family  and  friends  who  are  present  here  today. 

Judge  Moon.  OK.  Well,  sir,  thank  you.  My  wife,  Barbara,  is  with 
me  and  I  would  like  to  present  her. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Glad  to  have  you  here.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Mr.  Sippel. 

Mr.  Sippel.  My  wife,  Mary,  is  here,  and  good  friends  Spencer  and 
Carol  Dickerson.  Thank  you  for  the  opportunity  to  introduce  them. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Thanks,  and  I  am  sure  Senator  Ashcroft  will  af- 
ford the  same  opportunity  to  the  other  nominees. 

Senator  Ashcroft.  I  certainly  will,  and  it  was  my  neglect — my 
staff  had  also  prompted  me — that  I  forgot  to  allow  the  nominees  to 
do  so.  So  we  will  not  ask  you  to  do  it  twice,  and  I  would  invite 
Judge  Aiken  to  introduce  her  family  that  is  here  and  then  Mr. 
Friedman  to  do  the  same,  please. 

TESTIMONY  OF  ANN  L.  AIKEN,  OF  OREGON,  TO  BE  U.S. 
DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  DISTRICT  OF  OREGON 

Judge  Aiken.  Thank  you.  I  would  like  to  introduce  my  husband, 
James  Klonoski;  my  oldest  son,  Jstke,  who  is  holding  my  youngest 
son,  Christopher.  Samuel  Klonoski  is  seated  over  there,  raising  his 
hand;  Nicholas,  my  No.  2  son;  and  my  No.  3  son,  Zachary,  behind 
my  husband.  And  I  have  a  number  of  friends,  and  I  won't  take  the 
committee's  time  to  introduce  them,  who  are  also  here. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Well,  thank  you  very  much  for  coming. 

Jerome  Friedman,  please  introduce  those  who  are  with  you. 

TESTIMONY  OF  JEROME  B.  FRIEDMAN,  OF  VIRGINIA,  TO  BE 
U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  EASTERN  DISTRICT  OF  VIR- 
GINIA 

Judge  Friedman.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  would  like  to  in- 
troduce my  wife,  Sandra;  almost  29  years  and  if  I  made  a  mistake, 
I  am  in  big  trouble.  She  is  a  history — a  government  teacher  teach- 
ing 12th  grade  advanced  placement  government  students,  and  I 
know  it  is  a  thrill  for  her  to  be  here  personally,  but  also  profes- 
sionally. 

Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  ASHCROFT 

Senator  Ashcroft.  Thank  you  very  much. 

I  would  begin  by  asking  a  question  of  Judge  Aiken,  from  Oregon. 
Judge,  how  do  you  feel  the  role  of  a  Federal  judge  would  differ  from 
that  of  a  State  judge,  a  responsibility  which  you  now  hold? 

Judge  Aiken.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  have  appreciated  the  role  as  a 
State  court  judge.  Federal  courts  have  different  issues,  more  com- 
plex issues,  resources  available  to  it  to  decide  cases  early,  to  make 


688 

a  difference  with  alternative  dispute  resolution.  We  have  had  in 
our  Federal  court  a  very  active  use  of  magistrates,  and  Judge 
Hogan,  who  is  our  presiding  judge,  has  been  tremendously  respon- 
sible for  keeping  the  docket  moving  with  enormous  use  of  settle- 
ment conferences.  So  I  look  forward  to  using  all  those  tools  that  are 
ready  and  available  in  Oregon  in  our  district  court. 

Senator  Ashcroft.  In  responding  to  a  questionnaire  of  the  com- 
mittee, you  indicated  that  crime  often,  quote,  "stems  from  cycles  of 
abuse  and  neglect,  drug  and  alcohol  use,  and  poor  education."  How 
would  these  conclusions  which  you  reach  affect  your  approach  to 
criminal  statutes  and  sentencing  decisions? 

Judge  Aiken.  Well,  Mr.  Chair,  the  sentencing  guidelines  and  the 
requisites  for  imposing  sentences  are  set  out  by  statute  and  I  follow 
those.  Oregon  has  sentencing  guidelines  within  the  State  and  I  fol- 
low those  guidelines  and  understand  that  that  is  a  determination 
made  by  the  legislative  body. 

In  taking  a  look  at  what  are  the  roots  of  crime,  those  issues  are 
addressed  in  sentencing  guidelines,  as  well  as  with  treatment  pro- 
grams that  are  adjunct  to  the  guidelines  once  individuals  are  in 
sentenced  positions.  I  can't  help  but  notice  those  are  the  issues  that 
I  see  as  individuals  come  before  me,  but  guidelines  dictate  what 
the  sentences  will  be. 

Senator  AsHCROFT.  Has  your  experience  as  the  chief  clerk  of  the 
State  legislature  given  you  any  insights  concerning  the  value  of 
legislative  history  in  interpreting  statutes? 

Judge  Aiken.  It  was  a  privilege  to  hold  that  job.  It  was  a  non- 
partisan position  where  I  had  an  opportunity  to  see  the  inside  of 
the  legislature  in  Oregon.  I  believe  legislative  history  is  an  impor- 
tant tool  in  looking  at,  as  you  go  through  the  analysis  of  a  statute 
or  a  constitutional  issue,  to  make  a  determination.  It  certainly  isn't 
the  first  thing  you  look  at,  but,  if  necessary,  I  feel  well-equipped 
to  be  able  to  read  and  understand  legislative  history  and  to,  to  the 
best  of  my  ability,  use  that  legislative  history  in  guiding  me  in 
making  a  decision  within  the  confines  of  a  case. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  In  interpreting  a  law,  if  the  legislative  his- 
tory conflicts  with  the  words  expressed  in  the  law,  which  should 
prevail? 

Judge  Aiken.  The  law. 

Senator  AsHCROFT.  Do  you  feel  that  there  are  any  rights  that  do 
not  exist  in  the  Constitution  which  ought  to  be — that  exist  inde- 
pendent of  the  Constitution? 

Judge  Aiken.  No,  sir.  The  Constitution  is  one  of  the  most  ele- 
gantly written  documents.  The  words  of  the  Constitution  are  clear. 
It  expresses  the  rights  that  are  given.  I  find  no  need  to  look  beyond 
those  express  words  and  the  document  itself. 

Senator  AsHCROFT.  Mr.  Friedman,  I  asked  earlier  a  question  of 
Judge  Marcus  about  initiatives  enacted  by  voters  in  various  areas. 
I  don't  know  whether  Virginia  has  such  a  potential.  Do  you  know 
if  that  is  the  case  in  Virginia,  whether  the  voters  exercise  the  right 
to  bring  into  existence  statutes  by  initiative? 

Judge  Friedman.  Not  as  they  do  in  California,  no,  Mr.  Chair- 
man. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  The  10th  amendment  to  the  Constitution  re- 
serves to  States  certain  powers,  all  powers  not  enumerated  to  the 


689 

Federal  Government.  Do  you  view  the  10th  amendment  as  being  a 
viable  part  of  the  Constitution,  and  do  you  respect  the  right  of 
States  to  have  exclusive  jurisdiction  in  some  areas? 

Judge  Friedman.  I,  certainly,  do  feel  it  is  a  viable  part  of  the 
Constitution  and  there  are  certain  areas,  obviously,  that  the  States 
have  to  get  involved  with  and  I  have  no  problem  with  that  concept, 
in  very  limited  areas. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Are  there  any  issues,  such  as  capital  punish- 
ment, on  which  you  find  yourself  in  substantial  disagreement  with 
the  laws  of  the  United  States  so  that  it  would  be  difficult  for  you 
to  apply  the  law  in  an  impartial  manner? 

Judge  Friedman.  Absolutely  not.  The  Supreme  Court  has  de- 
cided capital  punishment  issues  and  I  have  absolutely  no  problem 
in  adhering  to  those  decisions  and  upholding  the  death  penalty. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  In  the  event  that  you  were  to  have  a  personal 
disagreement  with  the  kind  of  sentence  that  the  guidelines  re- 
quired, be  it  capital  punishment  or  otherwise,  what  would  your  re- 
sponse— how  should  you  conduct  yourself? 

Judge  Friedman.  Well,  the  guidelines  were  established  by  the 
legislative  body.  It  is  my  opinion  that  the  judges,  and  certainly  I, 
if  confirmed,  would  adhere  to  the  guidelines  and  follow  the  guide- 
lines. There  are  some  discretionary  areas  of  the  guidelines  and  in 
those  areas  the  court  would  exercise  its — and  I  would  exercise  my 
discretion. 

But  as  Judge  Marcus  eloquently  put  it  earlier,  the  guidelines  are 
there  for  very  good  reasons,  and  certainly  I  would  have  no  problem 
in  exercising  my  sentences  in  accordance  with  the  guidelines. 

Senator  Ashcroft.  Thank  you  very  much.  I  see  my  time  is  ex- 
pired. 

It  is  time  for  your  second  round.  Senator  Durbin. 

questioning  by  senator  durbin 

Senator  Durbin.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Well,  Judge  Aiken,  I  am  impressed  that  anyone  from  Oregon 
might  know  where  Somonauk,  IL,  is.  I  note  here  that  you 

Judge  Aiken.  I  have  been  there. 

Senator  Durbin.  You  have  some  family  connection  there? 

Judge  Aiken.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  Durbin.  Yes.  Let  me  ask,  if  I  might,  you  have  served  on 
a  juvenile  justice  commission,  have  you  not? 

Judge  Aiken.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  DURBIN.  And  how  long  a  period  of  time  did  you  serve  on 
that? 

Judge  Aiken.  It  was  approximately  2  years  and  it  concluded  with 
legislation  that  created  new  juvenile  beds  in  our  State  and  created 
a  new  Oregon  Youth  Authority  that  essentially  brought  juvenile 
justice  into  its  own,  taking  it  out  of  child  protection  services  and 
making  its  own  entity,  and  that  commission  now  is  complete. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Was  it  a  good  experience? 

Judge  Aiken.  It  was  a  tremendous  experience. 

Senator  Durbin.  What  did  you  learn  serving  on  that  commission 
that  was  new  to  you  that  you  didn't  know  going  in  or  might  have 
surprised  you? 


690 

Judge  Aiken.  It  was  an  opportunity  to  look  across  the  State  and 
see  what  issues  were  facing  rural  and  urban  parts  of  the  commu- 
nities. It  gave  us  a  chance  to  come  together  and  try  to  balance  how 
resources  could  be  better  allocated  for  youth  and  to  come  across 
with  consistency  on  how  we  would  address  issues  of  juvenile  crime. 

I  think  what  is  interesting  is,  as  a  commission,  there  was  great 
unanimity  about  a  need  to  address  this  issue,  and  to  address  it 
firmly  and  to  get  on  with  it  and  make  the  task  force  not  only  just 
a  report,  but  a  reality.  And  we  were  very  successful  in  not  only  cre- 
ating juvenile  beds,  but  boot  camps  and  regional  academies. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Did  you  have  a  chance  as  a  member  of  that 
commission  to  meet  face  to  face  with  young  men  or  women  who 
had  been  accused  of  juvenile  crime? 

Judge  Aiken.  Absolutely.  We  were  in  the  institutions.  We  trav- 
eled across  the  State  in  programs  that  came  before  the  committee. 
We  worked  both  in  urban  areas,  rural  areas.  I  think  we  were  all 
incredibly  impressed  with  what  the  young  people  who  were  housed 
in  the  training  schools  had  to  tell  us,  what  would  have  been  helpful 
to  stop  their  ending  up  in  that  program.  It  was  a  tremendous  expe- 
rience. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Did  it  change  your  viewpoint  as  a  judge  in 
terms  of  how  to  handle  cases  involving  juvenile  justice? 

Judge  Aiken.  It  reminded  me  that  we  need  just  as  parents  to  be 
consistent  and  we  need  to  be  swift  in  discipline,  and  in  this  in- 
stance responding  when  a  crime  is  committed.  In  my  community, 
we  aren't  able  to  file  juvenile  cases  unless  a  felony  has  been  com- 
mitted, so  we  will  have  offenders  who  have  had  multiple  mis- 
demeanors and  no  action  taken.  And  I  think  that  is  not  the  mes- 
sage we  need  to  be  giving  to  the  young  people. 

Senator  E  JRBIN.  Thank  you. 

Mr.  Friedman,  your  background,  of  course,  is  serving  as  a  judge 
on  a  circuit  court  in  Virginia  Beach.  You  are  not  embarking  on  an 
effort  to  enter  the  Federal  structure  of  justice  in  this  country.  How 
do  you  see  that  as  a  different  challenge,  or  is  it  a  different  chal- 
lenge? 

Judge  Friedman.  It  is  a  different  challenge,  certainly,  because 
some  of  the  decisions  that  Federal  judges  make  affect  so  many  peo- 
ple. On  the  State  court  level,  the  decisions  we  make  in  many  cases, 
and  in  most  cases,  I  would  say,  affect  the  individuals  before  you. 
But  in  Federal  cases,  a  decision  could  have  wide  ramifications  for 
numerous  classes  of  people  or  people.  So  I  think  that  is  one  of  the 
major  differences. 

Senator  Durbin.  Senator,  I  would  like  to  close  this,  if  I  might, 
by  asking  each  of  the  nominees  a  question  I  always  ask  nominees 
in  Illinois  when  they  would  like  to  ascend  to  the  Federal  bench  and 
it  is  one  that  they  usually  are  surprised  at,  but  now  that  I  am  ask- 
ing it  for  the  first  time,  I  think  every  nominee  before  us  will  antici- 
pate it. 

But  what  is  the  last  book  that  you  read.  Judge  Aiken? 

Judge  Aiken.  The  last  book  that  I  read?  I  am  in  the  middle  of 
about  three  different  books. 

Senator  DURBIN.  You  sound  like  me. 

Judge  Aiken.  The  last  book  I  completed  was  actually  the  most 
recent  Grisham  book  that  came  out,  very  frankly. 


691 

Senator  DURBIN.  It  figures. 

Judge  Aiken.  Yes. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Judge  Friedman. 

Judge  Friedman.  "The  Tenth  Justice." 

Senator  DURBIN.  Very  good. 

Judge  Moon. 

Judge  Moon.  The  last  one  I  read  was  on  a  plane,  "Donnie 
Brasco,"  the  FBI  agent  who  infiltrated  the  Mafia. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Great. 

Mr.  Sippel. 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  Reagan's  speechwriter,  Peggy  Noonan's  book,  "Life, 
Liberty  and  the  Pursuit  of  Happiness." 

Senator  Durbin.  You  can  see  his  political  background  that  he 
would  be  preparing  himself.  Senator,  for  this. 

Thank  you  very  much. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Judge  Moon,  are  there  any  rights  not  enumerated  in  the  Con- 
stitution that  you  believe  should  be  added  to  the  Constitution? 

Judge  Moon.  No,  sir.  I  know  of  none. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Do  you  believe  that  the  Constitution  is  a  liv- 
ing document  which  expands  and  grows  to  meet  new  cir- 
cumstances, or  that  if  it  is  to  be  amended,  it  has  to  be  amended 
by  the  terms  of  the  Constitution  through  one  of  the  amendment 
techniques? 

Judge  Moon.  I  believe  it  must  be  amended  through  the  normal 
procedure  set  forth  in  the  Constitution. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Are  there  any  issues,  such  as  capital  punish- 
ment, that  you  might  be  required  to  be  involved  with  as  a  judge 
which  as  a  matter  of  conscience  you  could  not  be  involved  with? 

Judge  Moon.  No,  sir,  there  are  no  issues. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Mr.  Sippel,  are  there  any  issues  with  which 
you  might  be  required  to  deal  as  a  Federal  judge  on  which  you 
have  such  a  substantial  disagreement  with  the  law  of  the  United 
States  that  it  would  make  it  difficult  for  you  to  operate  as  a  judge? 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  Mr.  Chairman,  the  answer  to  that  is  no. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Are  there  any  rights  that  you  think  it  would 
be  necessary  for  you  to  develop  in  the  Constitution  which  do  not 
exist  as  part  of  the  Constitution  now? 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  No,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Mr.  Sippel,  you  will  be  working  in  a  jurisdic- 
tion that  has  a  substantial  heritage  of  initiative  efforts  and  you 
have  worked  with  them  in  prior  cases.  Have  you  read  the  Ninth 
Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  decision  regarding  the  term  limits  in  the 
State  of  California? 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  I  have  not  read  that  decision,  Mr.  Chairman.  As  you 
know,  in  Missouri  we  did  have  initiative  adoption  of  term  limits  for 
State  representatives  and  State  senators  which  is  in  force. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Do  you  think  it  would  be  appropriate  for  judi- 
cial officers  to,  from  the  perspective  of  the  bench,  sort  of  try  to  fig- 
ure out  whether  or  not  people  had  made  an  informed  decision  and 
sustain  an  initiative,  or  whether  they  weren't  adequately  informed 
and  as  a  result  to  set  aside  a  decision  based  on  the  fact  that  the 
voters  were  ignorant? 


692 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  I  am  at  a  loss  to  be  able  to  defend  that  analysis.  I 
think  in  any  initiative  petition,  you  start  out  not  with  just  a  pre- 
sumption that  it  is  valid,  but  an  overwhelming  presumption  that 
is  enforceable  because  the  people  have  spoken,  and  it  is  not  for  a 
Federal  judge  to  substitute  their  judgment  for  that  of  the  will  of 
the  people. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  On  what  grounds  could  an  initiative  statute 
be  set  aside? 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  I  can't  think  of  any.  In  Missouri  State  law,  there  are 
occasions  where  the  language  has  been  a  cause,  but  that  is  a  State 
court  issue.  I  can't  think  of  any  Federal  grounds  under  which  that 
would  happen. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  I  should  have  said  any  grounds  other  than 
constitutional  grounds. 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  Well,  absolutely.  I  can't  think  of  any,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  If  there  were  an  initiative,  though,  to  deprive 
Missouri  citizens  of  their  right  to  speak  freely? 

Mr.  SiPPEL.  Well,  certainly,  then,  contrary  to  the  express  lan- 
guage of  the  Constitution,  it  would  be  the  court's  obligation  to  up- 
hold the  Constitution. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Judge  Moon,  the  10th  amendment  has  been 
the  subject  of  substantial  debate.  Do  you  think  the  10th  amend- 
ment is  viable  or  are  you  among  the  scholars  who  believe  that  the 
10th  amendment  has  sort  of  suffered  so  much  from  attrition  that 
atrophy  is  about  to  pronounce  its  final  demise? 

Judge  Moon.  I  think  it  is  very  viable. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  So  you  think  there  are  areas  in  which  the 
State  does  have  the  exclusive  right  to  govern? 

Judge  Moon.  Yes,  sir,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  do. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Let  me  thank  each  of  you  for  coming  today. 
I  appreciate  the  fact  that  you  are  here  and  that  you  have  brought 
members  of  your  families  with  you  and  other  individuals  who  ex- 
press their  support  for  you.  You  are  all  to  be  commended  for  having 
members  of  the  U.S.  Senate  ardent  in  your  behalf. 

There  are  committee  members  who  are  absent  today  whose  inter- 
est could  be  expressed  by  way  of  written  questions  for  you.  I  would 
urge  you,  in  the  event  that  you  are  the  recipient  of  additional  inter- 
rogatories in  writing,  that  you  would  respond  to  them  as  quickly 
as  possible.  I  believe  there  is  going  to  be  an  additional  effort  to 
move  individuals  through  the  process  before  the  end  of  our  delib- 
erations during  this  calendar  year  and  that  could  be  just  in  the 
next  several  weeks.  So  I  offer  that  suggestion  of  your  prompt  atten- 
tion to  those  items  because  the  sooner  those  kinds  of  responses 
could  be  received,  in  the  event  there  are  written  questions,  the 
more  likely  it  is  that  your  situation  can  be  acted  on  by  the  Senate 
as  a  whole. 

Senator  Durbin,  anything  further? 

Senator  DURBIN.  No,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Without  further  proceedings,  then,  I  would 
thank  each  of  you  for  your  appearance  here  and  look  forward  for 
an  opportunity  to  act  on  your  measures  before  the  U.S.  Senate. 

Thank  you. 

[Whereupon,  at  11:44  a.m.,  the  committee  was  adjourned.] 

[Submissions  for  the  record  follow:] 


693 

SUBMISSIONS  FOR  THE  RECORD 


y^ITFRTTONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 

I.   BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used.) 

Stanley  Marcus. 

Address:  List  current  place  of  residence  and  office 
address (es) . 

Office:    United  States  District  Court 
Southern  District  of  Florida 
301  North  Miami  Avenue,  5th  Floor 
Miami,  FL  33128 

Home:      Miami,  Florida 

Date  and  place  of  birth. 

March  27,  1946 
New  York,  New  York 

Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's 
name).   List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and 
business  address (es). 

I  have  been  married  to  Judith  Sue  Rosenbaum  since 
January  1,  1972. 

She  currently  is  employed  as  an  assistant  librarian  at: 

Temple  Beth  Am 

5950  North  Kendall  Drive 

Miami,  Florida  33156 

She  is  also  employed  part-time  as  a  sales  representative 

at: 

Williams-Sonoma 
8888  S.W.  136  Street 
Miami,  Florida  33176 

Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have 
attended,  including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees  received, 
and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

Queens  College  of  the  City  University  of  New  York,  Flushing, 
NY,  September  1963  -  June  1967  (including  Summer  1964); 
B.A.  (June  1967) (Magna  Cum  Laude) . 


45-964  98-23 


694 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


Harvard  Law  School,  Cambridge,  Massachusetts,  September  1967 
-  November  1968,  September  1969  -  June  1971;  J.D.  (June 
1971)  (leave  of  absence  taken  to  satisfy  military 
service  obligation  -  U.S.  Army,  Nov.  1968-July  1969). 

Employment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or 
professional  corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other 
enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations, 
nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were 
connected  as  an  officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor,  or 
employee  since  graduation  from  college. 


Year   Name  of  Employer 

1967    Bureau  of  the  Budget, 
City  of  New  York 

1968&   Dept.  of  Rent  &  Housing 

1969   Maintenance,  City  of  New  York 


1968 


Bennett  Bros.  Inc. 


N.Y. 


Position 
Research  Intern 


Law  Clerk 
Order  Filler 


1968  Hobart  Maintenance  Corp.,  N.Y.    Taxi  Driver 

1968- 

1969  Dept.  of  Social  Svcs.,  N.Y.       Caseworker 

1969  U.S.  Army,  Ft.  Bragg,  N.C.        Soldier 

1970  Strook,  Strook  &  Lavan,  N.Y.      Law  Clerk 

1971-   U.S.  District  Court  Law  Clerk 

1973    Eastern  District  of  N.Y. 

Hon.  John  R.  Bartels 

U.S.  District  Judge 


1974-  Botein,  Hayes,  Sklar  & 
1975  Herzberg,  New  York 

1975-  United  States  Attorney's  Office 
1978  Eastern  District  of  New  York 

1978-  United  States  Dept.  of  Justice, 

1982  Detroit  Strike  Force,  Organized 
Crime  and  Racketeering  Section 


Law  Firm  Associate 


Asst.  United  States 
Attorney 

Special  Attorney  and 
Deputy  Chief,  and 
Chief 


695 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


1982-   United  States  Attorney's  Office   United  States 
1985   Southern  District  of  Florida      Attorney 

1985-   United  States  District  Court     United  States 
Present    Southern  District  of  Fla.       District  Judge 

1997    Brooklyn  Law  ^chool,  N.Y.        Professor  of 

Trial  Advocacy 

7.  Military  Service;  Have  you  had  any  military  service?   If  so, 
give  particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of  service, 
rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 

Yes. 

U.S.  Army 

Active  Duty:  March  8,  1969  -  July  12,  1969 

Reserve  Duty:  October  28,  1968  -  October  27,  1974 

Rank  E4 

Serial  No.  ER12779852 

Honorably  Discharged:   July  12,  1969 

8.  Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships, 
honorary  degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you 
believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

Phi  Beta  Kappa 

Magna  Cum  Laude.  Queens  College,  City  University  of  New  York 

A.  Joseph  Geist  Law  Scholarship,  Queens  College, 
City  University  of  New  York 

Member  and  President  of  Pi  Sigma  Alpha,  National  Political 
Science  Honor  Society,  Queens  College, 
City  University  of  New  York 

9.  Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or 
judicial-related  committees  or  conferences  of  which  you  are 
or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of  any 
offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Federal  Bar  Association  -  Florida  Chapter,  1982-present; 
Member  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Federal  Bar 
Association's  local  chapter,  1982-1985. 


696 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


Association  of  the  Bar  of  the  City  of  New  York,  1974 

The  Florida  Bar,  1985 

Judicial  Conference  of  the  United  States 

Federal-State  Jurisdiction  Committee  Member  (1988-1992)  and 
Chair  (May,  1992  -  September,  1995) 

Ad  Hoc  Committee  on  Violence  Against  Women  (Chair) ,  1992- 
1994 

National  Conference  on  State-Federal  Judicial  Relationships 
(1991-1992) 

Southern  District  of  Florida 

Executive  Committee  (1994-Present) 

Magistrate's  Committee  (Chair)  (1986-1992) 

Security  Committee  (1995-Present) 

Civil  Justice  Advisory  Committee  (1991-1996) 

Budget  Committee  (1996-present) 

Rules  Committee  (1989-1995) 

Judicial  Council  of  the  Eleventh  Circuit 

Education  Committee  (1997) 

Committee  on  Pattern  Jury  Instructions  of  the  District 

Judges  Association  of  the  Eleventh  Circuit 

(1996-Present) 

Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you 
belong  that  are  active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies. 
Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

I  belong  to  no  organization  active  in  lobbying  before  public 
bodies.   I  am  a  member  of  Temple  Zion,  Miami,  Florida. 

Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been 
admitted  to  practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if 
any  such  memberships  lapsed.   Please  explain  the  reason  for 
any  lapse  of  membership.   Give  the  same  information  for 
administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission  to 
practice. 

Court  Date  of  Admission 


697 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


Appellate  Division  of  the 

Supreme  Court  of  State  of  New  York      May  1972  Term 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for 

the  Second  Circuit  November  7,  1974 

United  States  District  Court  for  the 

Southern  District  of  New  York  May  14,  1974 

United  States  District  Court  for  the 

Eastern  District  of  New  York  May  14,  1974 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for 

the  Eleventh  Circuit  February  3,  1983 

Supreme  Court  of  Florida  January  8,  1985 

12.   Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates 

of  books,  articles,  reports,  or  other  published  material  you 
have  written  or  edited.   Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee. 
Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues 
involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.   If  there  were 
press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily 
available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

1)  Speech  to  Citizens  Crime  Watch  Luncheon,  May  10,  1982. 

2)  A.  Messerschmidt,  "Dade,  U.S.  Team  Up  to  Prosecute 
Aliens,"  The  Miami  Herald,  June  3,  1982,  p.  1-B. 

3)  Speech  to  Cuban  American  Bar  Association, 
June  22,  1982. 

4)  Speech  to  Sigma  Delta  Chi,  June  23,  1982. 

5)  Speech  to  Tower  Forum,  June  24,  1982. 

6)  Speech  to  Corporate  Counsel  Association  of  Dade  County, 
August  20,  1982. 

7)  Speech  to  Federal  Bar  of  Broward  County, 
February  18,  1983. 

8)  P.  Slevin,  "Murders  by  Aliens  Targeted,"  The  Miami 
Herald,  April  8,  1983,  p.  1-B. 


698 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


9)  Speech  for  Law  Day  U.S.A.,  April  29,  1983. 

10)  Statement  of  Stanley  Marcus,  United  States  Attorney, 
Southern  District  of  Florida,  Before  the  U.S.  Senate 
Drug  Enforcement  Caucus;  Subcommittee  on  Security  and 
Terrorism  Committee  on  the  Judiciary;  and  the 
Subcommittee  on  Western  Hemisphere  Affairs.  Committee 
on  Foreign  Relations.  United  States  Senate. 

April  30,  1983,  and  transcript  of  remarks  to  the 
Committee. 

11)  J.  McGee,  "Castro  Backs  Drug  Traffic,  U.S.  Claims," 
The  Miami  Herald,  May  1,  1983,  p.  1-A. 

12)  Speech  to  The  Miami  Citizens  Against  Crime, 
June  7,  1983. 

13)  H.  Silva,  "U.S.  Crackdown  Costing  Smugglers  Cash  and 
Assets,"  The  Miami  Herald,  June  8,  1983,  p.  3-B. 

14)  International  Society  of  barristers,  Vol.  18,  No.  3, 
July  1983,  "The  War  Against  South  Florida  Crime," 

by  Stanley  Marcus. 

15)  Speech  to  Tiger  Bay  Club,  August  18,  1983. 

16)  Statement  of  Stanley  Marcus,  United  States  Attorney, 
Southern  District  of  Florida,  Before  the  Select 
Committee  on  Narcotics  Abuse  and  Control ,  House  of 
Representatives ,    October  12,  1983. 

17)  Statement  of  Stanley  Marcus,  United  States  Attorney, 
Southern  District  of  Florida,  Before  the  Subcommittee 
on  Crime,  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  House  of 
Representatives.  October  14,  1983. 

18)  Speech  to  The  Miami  Citizens  Against  Crime, 
October  26,  1983. 

19)  Speech  to  Dade  County  Outstanding  Citizens  Award 
Luncheon,  October  27,  1983. 

20)  Speech  to  Financial  Institutions  Security  Association, 
March  15,  1984. 


699 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


21)  Statement  of  Stanley  Marcus,  United  States  Attorney, 
Southern  District  of  Florida,  Before  the  Senate 
Permanent  Subcommittee  on  Investigations, 

March  21,  1984. 

22)  Statement  of  Stanley  Marcus,  United  States  Attorney, 
Southern  District  of  Florida,  Before  the  Senate 
Subcommittee  on  Alcoholism  and  Drug  Abuse, 

May  10,  1984. 

23)  S.  Marcus,  "How  Drug  Money  Can  Corrupt  Us,"  The  Miami 
Herald,  May  20,  1984,  p.  1-E. 

24)  Speech  to  the  FDIC,  May  30,  1984. 

25)  Speech  at  Second  Annual  Commercial  Maritime  Seminar, 
June  8,  1984. 

26)  Speech  to  International  Association  of  Journalists  & 
Editors,  June  9,  1984. 

27)  Testimony  Before  the  Governor's  Commission  on  Drug  and 
Alcohol  Concerns,  September  12,  1984. 

28)  Speech  to  Grand  Jury  Association  of  Florida, 
November  1,  1984. 

29)  Speech  Before  the  Coral  Gables  Bar  Association, 
November  21,  1984. 

30)  Speech  to  Leadership  Florida  Conference, 
January  18,  1985. 

31)  Speech  to  National  Association  of  Former  United  States 
Attorneys,  Scottsdale,  Arizona,  March  30,  1985. 

32)  Speech  to  Miami  Beach  Bar  Association,  June  11,  1985. 

33)  International  Society  of  Barristers,  Vol.  21,  No.  2, 
April  1986,  "Public  Confidence  in  Criminal  Justice," 
by  Stanley  Marcus. 

34)  Federal  Sentencing  Reporter,  Vol.  6,  No.  1,  July/August 
1993,  "Substantial  Assistance  Motions:  What  is  Really 
Happening?",  by  Judge  Stanley  Marcus,  United  States 
District  Court,  Southern  District  of  Florida. 


700 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


35)  State-Federal  Judicial  Observer.  No.  4,  December  1993, 
"Obiter  Dictum  -  Erosion  of  Public  Confidence  in 
Criminal  Justice  System  Is  Source  of  Increased 
Federalization  of  Crime,"  by  Judge  Stanley  Marcus, 
United  States  District  Court,  Southern  District  of 
Florida. 

36)  Statement  of  the  Honorable  Stanley  Marcus,  Chairman, 
Judicial  Conference  Committee  on  Federal-State 
Jurisdiction,  Before  the  United  States  House  of 
Representatives,  Subcommittee  on  Intellectual  Property 
and  Judicial  Administration.  Committee  on  the 
Judiciary.  May  26,  1994. 

37)  Eleventh  Circuit  Pattern  Jury  Instructions  (Criminal 
Cases)  1997;  edited,  revised  and  updated  by  Judges 
Hodges  (Chair) ,  Marcus,  Hancock,  Butler,  Vinson, 
Edenfield  and  Carnes  (Committee  on  Pattern  Jury 
Instructions  of  the  District  Judges  Association  of  the 
Eleventh  Circuit) . 

13.  Health:  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?   List  the 
date  of  your  last  physical  examination. 

I  am  in  excellent  health;  August  1997. 

14.  Judicial  Office;  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial 
offices  you  have  held,  whether  such  position  was  elected  or 
appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each 
such  court. 

I  am  a  United  States  District  Judge  for  the  Southern 
District  of  Florida.   I  was  appointed  by  the  President  and 
began  serving  on  August  16,  1985. 

The  district  courts  have  jurisdiction  of  civil  and  criminal 
actions  arising  under  the  Constitution,  laws  or  treaties  of 
the  United  States. 

If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  (1) 
citations  for  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you  have 
written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or 
where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant  criticism 
of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3)  citations 
for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional 
issues,  together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court 


701 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


rulings  on  such  opinions.   If  any  of  the  opinions  listed 
were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the 
opinions. 

(1)   Citations  for  ten  most  significant  opinions: 

1.  Telectron,  Inc.  v.  Overhead  Door  Corp.,  116  F.R.D.  107 
(S.D.   Fla.  1987). 

2.  White  V.  Wainwriaht.  632  F.Supp.  1140  (S.D.  Fla.  1986), 
aff 'd.  809  F.2d  1478  (11th  Cir.),  cert,  denied.  483 
U.S.  1044  (1987). 

3.  Consol.  Gas  Co.  of  Fla.  v.  City  Gas  Co.  of  Fla..  665  F. 
Supp.  1493  (S.D.  Fla.  1987),  aff 'd,  880  F.2d  297  (11th 
Cir.),  reh'g  granted  and  opinion  vacated  by  889  F.2d 
264  (11th  Cir.  1989),  opinion  reinstated  on  reh'g  en 
banc  by  912  F.2d  1262  (11th  Cir.  1990),  judgment 

vacated  by  499  u.s.  9i5  (i99i). 

4.  U.S.  V.  Benefield,  874  F.2d  1503  (11th  Cir. 
1989) (double  jeopardy),  Marcus,  J.,  sitting  by 
designation,  writing  for  the  panel. 

5.  Carnival  Cruise  Lines.  Inc.  v.  Oy  Wartsila  AB.  159  B.R. 
984  (S.D.  Fla.  1993) . 

6.  Bennett  v.  United  States.  102  F.3d  486  (11th  Cir. 
1996),  Marcus,  J.,  sitting  by  designation,  writing  for 
the  panel. 

7.  Austin  V.  Blue  Cross  and  Blue  Shield  of  Alabama.  903 
F.2d  1385  (11th  Cir.  1990),  Marcus,  J.,  sitting  by 
designation,  writing  for  the  panel. 

8.  U.S.  V.  Camacho,  739  F.  Supp.  1504  (S.D.  Fla.  1990). 

9.  Doe  V.  State  of  Fla.  Judicial  Qualifications 
Commission,  748  F.  Supp.  1520  (S.D.  Fla.  1990). 

10.  Costa  Crociere,  S.p.A.  v.  Rose,  939  F.  Supp.  1538  (S.D. 
Fla.  1996). 

(2) :  Summary  of  and  citations  for  all  appellate  opinions 
where  district  court  decisions  were  reversed  or 
affirmed  with  significant  criticism: 


702 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


Seminole  Tribe  of  Florida  v.  State  of  Florida,  801  F. 
Supp.  655  (S.D.  Fla.  1992),  rev'd  by  11  F.3d  1016  (11th 
Cir.  1994),  aftid,  116  S.Ct.  1114  (1996). 

An  Indian  tribe  sued  the  State  of  Florida  in 
federal  district  court  under  the  Indian  Gaining 
Regulatory  Act  ("IGRA")  seeking  to  require  the  state  to 
negotiate  in  good  faith  to  enter  into  a  Tribal-State 
Compact  governing  conduct  of  gaming  activities  on 
tribal  lands  within  the  state.   The  state  sought 
dismissal  of  the  action  under  the  Eleventh  Amendment, 
contending  that  the  provision  of  IGRA  which  granted 
district  courts  jurisdiction  over  any  cause  of  action 
arising  from  the  failure  of  a  state  to  negotiate  in 
good  faith  under  the  terms  of  the  statute  was  beyond 
the  power  of  Congress  to  mandate. 

Based  upon  the  Supreme  Court's  binding  decision  in 
Pennsylvania  v.  Union  Gas  Co. ,  490  U.S.  1  (1989),  which 
held  that  Congress  had  the  power  and  authority  under 
Article  I  to  regulate  commerce  and  thus  could  override 
a  state's  Eleventh  Amendment  sovereign  immunity,  the 
district  court  denied  the  motion  to  dismiss  the  action, 
noting  that  Congressional  power  over  Indian  affairs  is 
plenary  and  that  the  Indian  Commerce  Clause  and  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Clause  are  both  in  Article  I,  §  8, 
cl.  3.   (The  district  court  later  ruled  on  the  merits 
that  Florida  had  fulfilled  its  obligation  to  negotiate 
in  good  faith.   116  S.Ct.  at  1122  n.6.) 

On  appeal,  the  Eleventh  Circuit  reversed  and 
remanded  the  case  to  the  district  court  with 
instructions  to  dismiss  the  action.   In  an  opinion  in 
which  the  court  forecast  the  future  invalidity  of  the 
Union  Gas  decision  and,  finding  that  the  passage  of 
IGRA  had  not  created  an  entitlement  for  the  tribe,  the 
court  ruled  that  IGRA  had  been  based  only  on  the  Indian 
Commerce  Clause,  not  the  Interstate  Commerce  Clause, 
and  held  that  to  be  an  insufficient  basis  on  which  to 
abrogate  the  state's  sovereign  immunity  under  the 
Eleventh  Amendment. 

On  review,  the  Supreme  Court  noted  that  its  Union 
Gas  decision  allowed  no  principled  distinction  in  favor 
of  the  states  to  be  drawn  between  the  Indian  Commerce 
Clause  and  the  Interstate  Commerce  Clause  and  that  the 
decision  had  created  confusion  and  was  essentially  out 

10 


703 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


of  line  with  its  earlier  precedents.   The  Court 
therefore  reconsidered  Union  Gas,  concluded  that  it  had 
been  wrongly  decided  and  overruled  its  own  prior 
precedent  on  which  the  district  court  had  relied. 
Consequently,  the  Court  affirmed  the  finding  that 
Congress  had  not  possessed  the  power  to  abrogate  the 
state's  Eleventh  Amendment  protection. 

2.    Linder  v.  Calero  Portocarrero.  747  F.  Supp.  1452  (S.D. 
Fla.  1990),  aff d  in  part  and  rev'd  in  part.  963  F.2d 
332  (11th  Cir.  1992) . 

Survivors  of  an  American  citizen  who  was  alleged 
to  have  been  tortured  and  killed  in  Nicaragua  by  anti- 
government  forces  in  the  midst  of  a  civil  war  in 
Nicaragua  brought  civil  action  in  federal  court  in 
Miami  against  anti-government  organizations  and 
leaders,  charging  the  defendants  with  civil  conspiracy 
and  wrongful  death,  battery,  intentional  infliction  of 
emotional  distress,  violation  of  Geneva  Conventions, 
international  law  and  other  treaties.   The  district 
court  granted  defendants'  motion  to  dismiss  the 
complaint,  finding  that  the  plaintiffs'  claims  were 
non-justiciable  due  to  operation  of  the  political 
question  doctrine  and  that  neither  customary 
international  law  nor  the  Geneva  Conventions  provided  a 
private  right  of  action.   The  court  noted  the  intimate 
link  between  the  activities  of  the  contras  and  the 
political  branches'  policy  toward  Nicaragua  —  "an 
inquiry  which  would  surely  involve  efforts  to  uncover 
the  nature  of  the  relationship  between  United  States 
policy  and  the  actions  of  the  contras"  —  and  found 
that  the  "actions  of  the  contras  should  be  called  into 
question,  if  at  all,  by  the  political  branches  of 
government  to  whom  the  conduct  of  foreign  affairs  is 
trusted. " 

On  appeal,  the  Eleventh  Circuit  reversed  one 
narrow  portion  of  the  district  court's  ruling,  while 
affirming  other  parts  of  the  order  of  dismissal.   The 
court  pointed  out  that  the  plaintiffs  were  raising  on 
appeal  a  much  more  focused  issue  than  those  raised  in 
the  broad-based,  33-page  complaint  adjudicated  by  the 
district  court,  and  concluded  that  the  amended 
complaint  contained  within  its  allegations  a  narrow 
issue  of  Florida  tort  liability  upon  which  relief  might 
be  granted. 

11 


704 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


3.  Von  Stein  v.  Brescher,  696  F.  Supp.  606  (S.D.  Fla. 
1988),  rev'df  904  F.2d  572  (11th  Cir.  1990). 

The  managing  agent  of  a  shopping  center  brought  a 
civil  rights  action  against  a  county  sheriff  and  three 
deputies,  alleging  that  the  publicized  arrest  of  the 
agent  for  leasing  premises  with  knowledge  that  they 
would  be  used  for  prostitution  was  without  probable 
cause  and  that  the  press  conference  by  the  sheriff  had 
been  staged  to  provide  favorable  publicity  for  a  re- 
election campaign  and  had  caused  injury  to  the  agent's 
reputation  and  business.   The  district  court  held  that 
the  sheriff  and  deputies  were  not  entitled  to  qualified 
immunity  as  a  matter  of  law  in  connection  with  the 
agent's  arrest  and  allowed  the  case  to  be  presented  to 
a  jury,  which  found  for  the  plaintiff. 

On  appeal  the  Eleventh  Circuit  reversed  the  jury's 
award  for  the  plaintiff /managing  agent.   The  Court 
reasoned  that,  even  though  the  charges  against  the 
plaintiff  had  not  been  prosecuted  by  the  State 
Attorney,  the  arrest  based  upon  those  charges,  for  a 
violation  of  a  Florida  misdemeanor,  was  grounded  on 
"arguable"  probable  cause.   The  Court  discounted  the 
facts  that  the  managing  agent  originally  had  brought  to 
the  attention  of  the  sheriff  the  suspected  prostitution 
activities,  had  then  cooperated  in  the  investigation 
and  had  been  seeking  legal  advice  about  his  right  to 
evict  the  tenants  at  the  time  the  sheriff  arrested  him 
for  honoring  a  lease  after  learning  that  the  leased 
premises  were  being  used  for  prostitution.   Thus,  the 
Court  found  that  the  defendants  were  entitled  to 
qualified  immunity  with  respect  to  the  illegal  arrest 
claim. 

4.  U.S.  v.  Boole,  689  F.  Supp.  1121  (S.D.  Fla.  1988)  (en 
banc) ,  vacated  in  light  of  Mistretta  v.  United  States. 
488  U.S.  361  (1989) . 

After  the  Sentencing  Guidelines  ("SG")  , 
promulgated  by  the  United  States  Sentencing  Commission 
("Commission")  pursuant  to  the  passage  of  the 
Sentencing  Reform  Act  ("SRA")  ,  were  implemented  and 
became  effective  November  1,  1987,  a  number  of 
defendants  challenged  the  SRA  and  SG  as 
unconstitutional  on  a  variety  of  grounds.   The  district 
judges  in  the  Southern  District  of  Florida  decided  to 

12 


705 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


consolidate  those  challenges  and  hear  the  issue  en 
banc.      Following  extended  oral  argument  and  conference, 
a  majority  (13  judges)  of  the  court  voted  to  hold  the 
SG  unconstitutional  and  Judge  Marcus  was  selected  to 
write  the  opinion  for  the  majority.   In  that  opinion, 
the  en  banc   court  determined  that  the  method  by  which 
the  SG  had  been  developed  and  implemented  through  a 
Commission,  whose  membership  by  statutory  command 
included  Article  III  judges,  violated  the  separation  of 
powers  doctrine,  which  prohibits  judges  from  making  the 
laws  they  are  then  called  upon  to  adjudicate.   The 
court  found  that  the  SG  were  substantive  and  not 
procedural  laws,  and  that  the  SRA  reposed  legislative 
and  executive  functions  within  the  judicial  branch, 
thus  conferring  rule-making  authority  upon  the 
judiciary. 

The  government  appealed  the  decision  and  although 
there  is  no  published  order  or  table  noting  its 
reversal,  the  order  was  reversed  by  the  Eleventh 
Circuit  because  the  impact  of  the  district  court's  en 
banc   order  was  overruled  by  the  subsequent  decision  of 
the  Supreme  Court  in  Mistretta,    in  which  the  Court 
found  that  the  Sentencing  Guidelines  were 
constitutional  and  that  the  SRA  did  not  violate  either 
the  prohibition  against  excessive  delegation  or  the 
separation  of  powers  doctrine. 

Jones  v.  City  of  Key  West,  Fla.,  679  F.  Supp.  1547 
(S.D.  Fla.  1988),  rev'd,  888  F.2d  1328  (11th  Cir. 
1989) . 

A  citizen  and  resident  of  Key  West  filed  a  civil 
rights  action  against  the  city  and  its  mayor, 
contending  that  his  First  and  Fourteenth  Amendment 
rights  were  violated  when  he  was  silenced,  arrested  and 
removed  from  a  city  commission  meeting  during  his 
scheduled  presentation  at  a  public  meeting.   Following 
a  bench  trial  the  district  court  held  that  the  mayor's 
action  in  interrupting  the  citizen's  presentation, 
chastising  him  for  his  "outbursts,"  and  having  him 
forcibly  removed  from  the  chamber  and  arrested  were  not 
authorized  by  city  ordinance  and  that  the  mayor  was  not 
entitled  to  qualified  immunity  for  silencing  the 
speaker  based  upon  the  content  of  his  speech. 


13 


706 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


Both  the  city  and  the  mayor  appealed,  but  the  city 
dismissed  its  appeal  before  the  case  was  considered  by 
the  Eleventh  Circuit.   The  court  reversed  the  judgment 
against  the  mayor  on  the  basis  that  his  actions  in 
attempting  to  confine  the  speaker  to  the  agenda  item  at 
the  city  commission  meeting  and  having  the  citizen 
removed  from  the  chamber  when  he  became  disruptive 
constituted  a  judgment  call  by  the  mayor  and  was  a 
reasonable  time,  place  and  manner  regulation  of  speech 
which  did  not  violate  citizen's  First  Amendment  rights. 

6.  U.S.  Philips  Corp.  v.  Windmere  Corp.,  680  F.  Supp.  361 
(S.D.  Fla.),  rev'd,  861  F.2d  695  (Fed.  Cir.  1989). 

A  razor  manufacturer  holding  a  patent  for  a  rotary 
electric  shaver  brought  a  trademark  infringement  action 
against  a  competitor,  who  filed  a  counterclaim  for 
unfair  competition  and  monopoly  in  the  rotary  razor 
market  in  violation  of  the  Sherman  Act.   The  district 
court  granted  a  directed  verdict  for  the  manufacturer 
on  the  antitrust  claim,  finding  that  the  competitor  had 
not  presented  sufficient  evidence  of  acquisition  by  the 
manufacturer  of  monopoly  power  via  predatory  pricing 
and  certified  the  issue  for  appeal  under  Rule  54(b)  and 
28  U.S.C.  §  1292 (b) . 

Because  of  the  existence  of  the  patent  issue  in 
the  case,  the  appeal  was  heard  by  the  Federal  Circuit, 
even  though  the  patent  issue  was  not  contested  on  the 
appeal.   The  Federal  Circuit  reversed  and  remanded  the 
matter  for  trial  on  the  antitrust  counterclaim,  finding 
that  the  facts  presented  a  close  case  which  should  have 
been  presented  to  a  jury. 

(Following  re-trial  on  remand  and  a  second  appeal, 
the  parties  entered  into  a  settlement,  the  appeal  was 
remanded  and  the  second  verdict  vacated.   See  971  F.2d 
728  (Fed.  Cir.  1992),  cert,  dismissed  as  improvidently 
granted.  510  U.S.  27  (1994).) 

7.  U.S.  V.  Fuentes.  (May  26,  1993),  aff'd  in  part  and 
vacated  and  remanded  in  part,  991  F.2d  700  (11th  Cir. 
1993)  . 

Three  defendants  were  charged  with  credit  card 
offenses  and  entered  pleas  of  guilty  to  various  counts. 
All  three  appealed  their  subsequent  sentences  and 

14 


707 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


raised  various  grounds.   The  court  of  appeals  affirmed 
the  sentence  as  to  one,  vacated  a  portion  of  a 
restitution  order  and  affirmed  the  sentence  as  to  a   , 
second,  and  vacated  the  sentence  of  the  third  and 
remanded  for  resentencing.   One  issue  argued  on  appeal 
challenged  the  interpretation  of  a  Sentencing  Guideline 
("SG")  not  previously  discussed  in  the  case  law  of  the 
Circuit,  based  upon  an  amendment  to  the  SG.   The  court 
held  that  a  defendant  who  admitted  to  joining  a 
conspiracy  to  deal  in  stolen  credit  cards  could  not  be 
held  responsible  for  losses  to  victims  from  a  co- 
defendant's  use  of  stolen  credit  cards  (acts  committed 
in  furtherance  of  the  conspiracy)  which  the  court  found 
were  acts  not  reasonably  foreseeable  by  the  particular 
defendant.   With  regard  to  the  second  defendant,  as  to 
whom  a  portion  of  the  order  requiring  forfeiture  was 
vacated  by  the  court,  the  government  admitted  that  the 
presentence  report  contained  a  miscalculation  which  had 
not  been  flagged  for  the  district  court. 

Merrill  Lynch.  Pierce,  Fenner  &  Smith,  Inc.  v.  Cohen,, 
1993  WL  593998  (S.D.  Fla.  Sept.  24,  1993),  (NO.  93- 
0915-CIV-MARCUS) ,  rev ' d ■  62  F.3d  381  (11th  Cir.  1995). 

Plaintiff  stock  brokerage  firm  sued  for 
declaratory  and  injunctive  relief,  seeking  to  enjoin 
arbitration  action  which  had  been  filed  by  investors 
with  the  National  Association  of  Securities  Dealers 
pursuant  to  an  arbitration  clause  in  their  contract. 
Defendant  investors  filed  a  motion  to  compel 
arbitration  and  to  stay  the  district  court  action 
pending  arbitration.   The  motion  was  assigned  to  a 
magistrate  judge  who  recommended  that  it  be  granted. 

The  factual  question  which  had  to  be  resolved 
centered  around  whether  the  statute  of  limitation  under 
the  arbitration  agreement  had  been  tolled  by  the 
alleged  fraudulent  concealment  of  the  facts  giving  rise 
to  the  dispute  between  the  parties.   Relying  upon 
authority  from  the  Eleventh  Circuit,  the  district  court 
determined  that  the  matter  was  one  which  should  be 
resolved  by  the  arbitrator,  adopted  the  recommendation 
of  the  magistrate  judge,  and  denied  the  plaintiff's 
motion  for  a  temporary  injunction  and  discovery,  and 
dismissed  the  case. 


15 


708 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


On  appeal  the  Eleventh  Circuit  reversed  and 
remanded  the  matter  for  further  proceedings,  holding 
that  the  question  of  whether  the  investors'  claims  were 
time  barred  was  for  the  district  court  to  resolve  in 
order  to  determine  whether  arbitration  was  called  for. 
In  so  ruling  the  appeals  court  distinguished  its  own 
precedent  on  which  the  district  court  had  relied. 

9.  U.S.  V.  Huppert,  aff'd  in  part  and  rev'd  in  part,  917 
F.2d  507  (11th  Cir.  1990). 

A  defendant  was  charged  with  and  convicted  of  two 
counts  of  obstruction  of  a  grand  jury  in  connection 
with  its  investigation  into  allegations  of  money 
laundering  by  this  defendant.   Defendant  had  engaged  in 
cash  for  check  transactions  with  coin  and  precious 
metal  dealers.   When  two  of  the  dealers  were  subpoenaed 
to  appear  before  the  grand  jury,  defendant  tried  to 
convince  them  to  identify  a  third  man  as  the  person 
with  whom  they  had  dealt  in  the  scheme.   The  sentencing 
guideline  applicable  to  the  offense  level  for 
obstruction  of  justice  contained  a  cross-reference  to  a 
guideline  for  the  offense  of  accessory  after  the  fact, 
which  cross-reference  the  district  court  applied  in 
setting  defendant's  sentence. 

On  appeal,  the  Eleventh  Circuit  rejected  several 
challenges  to  the  convictions,  but  reversed  the 
sentence  and  remanded  the  case  for  resentencing.   The 
Court  based  its  reasoning  upon  the  fact  that  defendant 
had  been  attempting  to  aid  himself  and  not  another,  and 
thus  the  court  determined  that  the  accessory  after  the 
fact  guideline  could  not  be  used  logically  in  this 
situation.   (The  particular  guideline  provision 
subsequently  was  amended  to  nullify  the  effect  of  this 
decision. ) 

10.  3M  Health  Care  Ltd.  v.  Grant,  rev'd.  908  F.2d  918  (11th 
Cir.  1990) . 

A  transshipper  of  pharmaceutical  products  through 
the  foreign  trade  zone  at  Port  Everglades,  Florida, 
brought  suit  against  the  state  of  Florida  and  others, 
seeking  declaratory  and  injunctive  relief  from 
compliance  with  Florida's  Drug  and  Cosmetic  Act  with 
regard  to  plaintiff's  warehousing  activities  in  the 
foreign  trade  zone.   The  district  court  granted  summary 

16 


709 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 

judgment  to  the  defendants,  finding  that  the  riorida 
act  was  a  valid  exercise  of  its  police  power  which  was 
not  preempted  by  federal  law. 

On  appeal,  the  Eleventh  Circuit  reversed  and 
remanded  the  case  for  the  entry  of  summary  judgment  in 
favor  of  the  plaintiff.   The  Court  held  that  the 
federal  Foreign  Trade  Zone  Act,  19  U.S.C.  §§  81a,  et 
seg.,  was  intended  to  facilitate  the  use  of  U.S. 'ports 
for  transshipment  of  foreign  goods  in  foreign  commerce. 
Thus,  the  Court  held  that  the  Federal  Act  preempted  the 
Florida  Drug  and  Cosmetic  Act,  Fla.  Stat.  §  499.001,  et 
seg. ,  and  that  the  State  Act  required  unnecessary 
regulation  of  goods  in  which  the  state  had  no  interest, 
as  applied  to  the  warehousing  of  pharmaceuticals  being' 
transshipped  to  Latin  America  through  the  Port 
Everglades  Foreign  Trade  Zone. 

11-   U.g.  V-  R^mos,  remanded,  45  F.3d  1519  (llth  Cir.  1995). 

Defendant  was  tried  and  convicted  of  possessing 
cocaine  with  intent  to  distribute.   Prior  to  trial 
defendant  sought  an  order  from  a  magistrate  judge  that 
he  be  permitted  under  Federal  Rule  of  Criminal 
Procedure  15  to  take  a  deposition  in  Medellin, 
Colombia,  of  a  potential  witness  who  was  alleged  to  be 
in  a  position  to  provide  exculpatory  testimony.   The 
magistrate  judge  granted  the  motion,  but  reconsidered 
and  denied  it  upon  the  government's  motion  for 
reconsideration  which  pointed  out  that  defendant  could 
only  locate  the  witness  through  an  unknown  third  party 
and  that  the  Assistant  United  States  Attorney  would  be 
in  danger  if  she  had  to  travel  to  Colombia  under  such 
circumstances.   The  defendant  was  then  tried  and 
convicted  without  the  testimony  of  the  potential 
witness  who  had  been  deported  before  the  defendant 
filed  his  first  motion  and  who  refused  to  return  to 
give  testimony  at  trial. 

Noting  that  the  defense  had  never  proffered  to  the 
district  court  the  substance  of  the  testimony  it  deemed 
material  to  its  defense,  the  appeals  court  remanded  the 
matter  to  the  district  court  to  hear  the  defense 
proffer,  evaluate  whether  it  would  be  exculpatory  and 
if  so  to  allow  the  deposition  to  go  forward,  after 
which  the  district  court  would  be  in  a  position  to 
determine  whether  to  grant  a  new  trial. 

17 


710 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


12.   Fioretti  v.  Massachusetts  General  Life  Ins.  Co..  892  F. 

Supp.  1492  (S.D.  Fla.  Sept.  24,  1993),  (NO.  90-6530- 

CIV-MARCUS) ,  aff 'd.  53  F.3d  1228  (11th  Cir.  1995), 
cert,  denied.  116  S.  Ct.  708  (1996). 

A  beneficiary  of  a  life  insurance  policy  sued  the 
insurer  after  his  claim  for  benefits  had  been  denied  on 
the  ground  that  the  policy  had  been  procured  by  fraud. 
The  district  court  held  that  the  imposter  exception 
applied  to  defeat  the  general  rule  that  an 
incontestability  clause  in  a  policy  prohibits  the 
defense  of  fraud  in  the  inducement,  in  this  case  fraud 
by  the  insured  who  had  arranged  for  an  imposter  to 
submit  to  a  blood  test  to  conceal  the  insured's  chronic 
illness.   In  reaching  its  decision  about  whether  the 
incontestability  clause  or  relevant  state  law  statutes 
would  bar  the  insurer's  pleading  of  fraud  in  the 
inducement  under  the  "imposter  exception,"  the  district 
court  was  faced  with  a  conflict  of  laws  question  and 
had  to  determine  which  state  law  to  apply.   After 
surveying  the  possible  applicable  laws  of  the  states  of 
Florida,  New  York  and  New  Jersey,  the  court  determined 
that  it  did  not  need  to  resolve  the  choice  of  laws 
problem  because  the  laws  of  all  three  states  would  not 
bar  proof  of  the  use  of  an  imposter  despite  the 
incontestability  clause,  and  thus  entered  judgment  for 
the  insurer. 

On  appeal  the  Eleventh  Circuit  affirmed  the 
judgment,  but  criticized  the  district  court  for  failing 
to  decide  which  law  applied,  and  determined  that  the 
applicable  law  was  that  of  Florida,  which  would  have 
applied  New  Jersey  law,  which  in  turn  would  have 
allowed  the  insurer  to  rescind  the  policy  under  the 
facts  of  the  case. 

(3) :  Significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional 
issues: 

1.  U.S.  V.  Benefield.  874  F.2d  1503  (11th  Cir. 
1989) (double  jeopardy),  Marcus,  J.,  sitting  by 
designation,  writing  for  the  panel. 

2.  U.S.  V.  Falcon,  930  F.  Supp.  1510  (S.D.  Fla.  1996). 

3.  U.S.  V.  Falcon.  930  F.  Supp.  1518  (S.D.  Fla.  1996). 


18 


711 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


4.  U.S.  V.  Falcon,  957  F.  Supp.  1572  (S.D.  Fla .  1996). 

5.  U.S.  V.  Peralta,  930  F.  Supp.  1523  (S.D.  Fla.  1996). 

6.  Reyes-Vasquez  v.  United  States,  865  F.  Supp.  1539  (S.D. 
Fla.  1994) . 

7.  U.S.  V.  Kowalik,  809  F.  Supp.  1571  (S.D.  Fla.  1992), 
aff d.  12  F.3d  218  (11th  Cir.  1993). 

8.  Seminole  Tribe  of  Florida,  v.  State  of  Florida,  801  F. 
Supp.  655  (S.D.  Fla.  1992),  rev ' d ,  11  F.3d  1016  (11th 
Cir.  1994),  aff 'd.  116  S.  Ct .  1114  (1996). 

9.  In  Re  Grand  Jury  Subpoena  Dated  Nov.  12,  1991,  792  F. 
Supp.  1423  (S.D.  Fla.  1992). 

10.  In  Re  Grand  Jury  Subpoena  Dated  Nov.  12.  1991.  792  F. 
Supp.  1431  (S.D.  Fla.  1992). 

11.  U.S.  v.  Reyes,  782  F.  Supp.  609  (S.D.  Fla.  1992). 

12.  Telesat  Cablevision.  Inc.  v.  City  of  Riviera  Beach,  773 
F.  Supp.  383  (S.D.  Fla.  1991). 

13.  Doe  v.  State  of  Florida  Judicial  Qualification  Comm. , 
748  F.  Supp.  1520  (S.D.  Fla.  1990). 

14.  Linder  v.  Calero  Portocarrero.  747  F.  Supp.  1452  (S.D. 
Fla.  1990),  aff'd  in  part  and  rev'd  in  part.  963  F.2d 
332  (11th  Cir.  1992)  . 

15.  U.S.  v.  Ortiz.  738  F.  Supp.  1394  (S.D.  Fla.  1990). 

16.  U.S.  V.  Camacho,  739  F.  Supp.  1504  (S.D.  Fla.  1990). 

17.  Doe  V.  Supreme  Court  of  Florida,  734  F.  Supp.  981  (S.D. 
Fla.  1990). 

18.  Cash  Inn  of  Dade,  Inc.  v.  Metropolitan  Dade  County,  706 
F.  Supp.  844  (S.D.  Fla.  1989). 

19.  U.S.  v.  So)coloff.  696  F.  Supp.  1451  (S.D.  Fla.  1988). 

20.  U.S.  V.  Bogle.  689  F.  Supp.  1121  (S.D.  Fla.  1988)  (en 
banc)  vacated  in  light  of  Mistretta  v.  United  States, 
488  U.S.  361  (1989) . 

19 


712 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


21.  CRS  Inc.  V.  Smith.  681  F.  Supp.  794  (S.D.  Fla.  1988). 

22.  Jones  v.  City  of  Key  West.  Fla..  679  F.  Supp.  1547 
(S.D.  Fla.  1988),  rev'd.  888  F.2d  1328  (11th  Cir. 
1989)  . 

23.  Cikora  v.  Wainwriaht.  661  F.  Supp.  813  (S.D.  Fla. 
1987),  aff 'd,  840  F.2d  893  (11th  Cir.  1988). 

24.  U.S.  V.  Puliese.  671  F.  Supp.  1353  (S.D.  Fla.  1987). 

25.  Hernandez  v.  Wainwriaht.  634  F.  Supp.  241  (S.D.  Fla. 
1986),  aff 'd,  813  F.2d  409  (11th  Cir.  1987). 

26.  White  V.  Wainwriaht.  632  F.  Supp.  1140  (S.D.  Fla. 
1986),  aff 'd.  809  F.2d  1478  (11th  Cir.),  cert,  denied. 
483  U.S.  1044  (1987) . 

27.  McLaughlin  v.  Metropolitan  Dade  County,  Case  No.  96- 
074  5-Civ-Marcus  (S.D.  Fla.,  Oct.  23,  1996) (Unpublished 
Order  Granting  Defendant  Summary  Judgment) (opinion 
attached  as  Exhibit  A) . 

16.  Public  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices 
you  have  held,  other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the 
terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected  or 
appointed.   State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful 
candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

None. 
None. 

17.  Legal  Career: 

a.    Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and 

experience  after  graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and 
if  so,  the  name  of  the  judge,  the  court,  and 
the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the 
addresses  and  dates; 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms 
or  offices,  companies  or  governmental 


20 


713 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected, 
and  the  nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 


Tnclusive  Dates 
9/71  -  10/73 


4/74  -  6/75 


6/75  -  1/78 


2/78  -  3/82 


Names  of  Employers, 
Associates,  etc. 

Hon.  John  R.  Bartels 

(deceased  1997) 

U.S.  District  Judge 

Eastern  District  of  N.Y. 

U.S.  Courthouse 

225  Cadman  Plaza  East 

Brooklyn,  NY  11201 

Botein,  Hayes,  Sklar  & 

Herzberg  (since  disbanded) 
200  Park  Avenue 
New  York,  NY  10166 

Asst.  U.S.  Attorney 
Eastern  District  of  N.Y. 
225  Cadman  Plaza  East 
Brooklyn,  NY  11201 

(David  G.  Trager, 
then-U.S.  Attorney  - 
1974-1978; 

now  U.S.  District  Judge 
Eastern  District  of  N.Y. 
225  Cadman  Plaza  East 
Brooklyn,  NY  11201; 
718-260-2510) 

Special  Attorney  and 
Deputy  Chief  (Promoted  to 
Chief  in  1980) 
Detroit  Strike  Force 
U.S.  Organized  Crime  & 
Racketeering  Section 
231  Lafayette,  Room  940 
Federal  Building 
Detroit  MI  48226 

(David  Margolis, 
then-Chief,  U.S.  Dept.  of 
Justice,  Organized  Crime  & 
Racketeering  Section; 


Name  of  Practice 

Law  Clerk  to 

U.S.  District  Judge 


Law  Firm  Associate 
(approx.  75  attys) 


Dept.  of  Justice 
Trial  Prosecutor 
(Major  Crimes  Unit, 
Political  Corruption 
Unit) 


Dept.  of  Justice 
(Eastern  District  of 
Michigan  & 
Western  District 
of  Michigan)  Super- 
vised staff  of  10 
lawyers  &  agents 
from  a  variety  of 
federal  and  state 
law  enforcement 
agencies. 


21 


714 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


3/82  -  8/85 


now  Associate  Deputy 

Attorney  General, 

950  Pennsylvania  Ave. ,  NW 

Washington,  DC  20530; 

202-514-4945) 

(then-U.S.  Attorney  -  James 
K.  Robinson  -  Eastern  Dist. 
of  Michigan;  now  Dean  at 
Wayne  State  Law  School, 
468  W.  Ferry,  Detroit,  MI  48202; 
(313-577-3933);  subsequent 
U.S.  Attorney  Richard  Rossman  - 
Eastern  District  of  Michigan, 
now  in  practice  at  the  firm  of 
Pepper,  Hamilton  &  Scheetz, 
100  Renaissance  Center, 
Detroit,  MI  4824  3; 
313-259-7110) 


United  States  Attorney 

Southern  District  of 

Florida 

155  S.  Miami  Avenue 

Room  7  00 

Miami,  FL  33130 

299  E.  Broward  Blvd. 

Room  2  02B 

Ft.  Lauderdale,  FL  33301 


701  Clematis  Street 

West  Palm  Beach,  FL  33401 


Dept.  of  Justice 
Presidential  Appt. 
as  Chief  Law 
Enforcement  Officer 
in  So.  Dist.  of  Fla. 
including  directly 
supervising  a  staff 
of  more  than  100 
lawyers  (4  major 
divisions  — 
Criminal,  Civil, 
Appellate  and  Lands- 
plus  Organized  Crime 
Strike  Force)  with 
offices  established 
in  Miami,  Ft. 
Lauderdale  and  West 
Palm  Beach,  FL,  and 
total  staff  in 
excess  of  200. 


8/85  -  Present   U.S.  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 
301  N.  Miami  Avenue 
Miami,  FL  33128 


22 


715 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


1.  What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law 
practice,  dividing  it  into  periods  with  dates  if 
its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 

2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention 
the  area,  if  any,  in  which  you  have  specialized. 

From  1975  until  I  became  a  U.S.  District  Judge  in  1985, 
I  represented  the  people  of  the  United  States  as  a 
prosecutor  for  the  Department  of  Justice  in  New  York, 
Michigan  and  Florida.   The  major  part  of  my  practice  as 
an  attorney  was  as  a  federal  prosecutor,  following  a 
stint  in  private  practice  in  New  York  City,  where  my 
work  as  an  associate  in  a  large  commercial  law  firm  was 
in  general  civil  practice,  more  particularly  in 
commercial  litigation. 

My  clients  included  a  variety  of  federal  investigative 
and  regulatory  agencies,  such  as  the  Federal  Bureau  of 
Investigation,  the  Drug  Enforcement  Administration,  the 
Immigration  and  Naturalization  Service,  the  Internal 
Revenue  Service,  the  United  States  Coast  Guard,  the 
United  States  Army,  the  United  States  Department  of 
Treasury,  the  United  States  Secret  Service,  the  United 
States  Customs  Service,  the  Federal  Deposit  Insurance 
Corporation,  and  a  variety  of  other  agencies  and 
departments  of  the  federal  government. 

Since  August  of  1985,  I  have  served  as  United  States 
District  Judge  in  the  Southern  District  of  Florida. 

1.  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally, 
or  not  at  all?   If  the  frequency  of  your 
appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such 
variance,  giving  dates. 

In  New  York  and  Michigan,  I  appeared  in  the  various 
federal  courts  regularly.   In  Florida,  I  appeared  in 
court  regularly,  but  not  as  frequently  as  in  New  York 
and  Michigan. 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts; 

(b)  state  courts  of  record; 

(c)  other  courts. 


23 


716 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


The  overwhelming  bulk  of  my  court  appearances  had  been 
in  Federal  Court  in  the  district  courts  in  New  York, 
Detroit,  Grand  Rapids  and  Southern  Florida,  as  well  as 
in  the  respective  Circuit  Courts  of  Appeal.   I  also 
appeared  in  the  State  Courts  of  New  York  while  an 
associate  at  the  law  firm  of  Botein,  Hays,  Sklar  and 
Herzberg  in  1974-75. 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil; 

(b)  criminal. 

A  very  large  percentage  of  my  personal  in-court 
appearances  had  been  in  criminal  matters  and 
prosecutions,  except  in  that  described  in  question 
number  17. c. 2.  above.   In  addition,  I  supervised  a 
staff  of  approximately  20  Assistants  in  the  Civil 
Division  and  Lands  Division,  United  States  Attorney's 
Office,  who  appeared  regularly  on  civil  and  land 
condemnation  matters  on  my  behalf. 

4 .  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you 
tried  to  verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than 
settled) ,  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

I  tried  many  criminal  cases  in  the  federal  courts  in 
New  York,  Michigan  and  Florida  as  chief  counsel  and  as 
co-counsel.   The  trials  included  a  wide  variety  of 
matters  such  as  conspiracy,  tax  fraud,  bank  fraud, 
embezzlement,  mail  fraud,  wire  fraud,  extortion, 
bribery,  narcotics  violations,  and  racketeering. 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury; 

(b)  non-jury. 

The  bulk  of  these  trials  were  to  a  jury. 

Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated 
matters  which  you  personally  handled.   Give  the  citations, 
if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and  date 
if  unreported.   Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of 
each  case.   Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you 
represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of 
the  case.   Also  state  as  to  each  case: 

24 


717 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or 
judges  before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  The  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers 
of  co-counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the 
other  parties. 

(1)   1982-1983.   U.S.  V.  Great  American  Bank  of  Dade 
County.  Case  No.  82-720-Cr-EPS  (United  States  District  Judge 
Eugene  P.  Spellman,  U.S.  District  Court,  Southern  District  of 
Florida,  now  deceased),  the  bank  corporation  and  three  of  its 
employees  were  charged  with  a  conspiracy  to  defraud  the  United 
States,  more  particularly  with  numerous  felony  counts  involving 
the  failure  to  file  required  Currency  Transaction  Reports  with 
the  Treasury  Department  concerning  cash  transactions  totaling 
almost  $100  million.   In  addition,  the  bank  was  charged  as  an 
unindicted  co-conspirator  in  three  interrelated  indictments,  U.S. 
V.  Kattan,  et  al. .  Case  No.  82-721-Cr-JAG;  U.S.  v.  Interfil, 
Inc. ■  Case  No.  82-723-Cr-JCP;  and  U.S.  v.  Piedrahita.  Case  No. 
82-722-Cr-JE,  which  collectively  charged  twelve  other  defendants 
with  crimes  related  to  those  against  the  bank  and  its  employees. 

I  personally  supervised  the  investigation  and 
prosecution  of  the  Bank  as  corporate  defendant,  including  making 
the  decision  to  seek  an  indictment  after  reviewing  all  the  facts 
in  the  case,  drafting  a  large  portion  of,  and  signing  the 
charging  instrument.   I  supervised  the  pre-trial  proceedings  and 
helped  draft  the  Government's  brief  on  a  major  suppression  issue. 
Finally,  I  personally  conducted  as  lead  counsel  for  the  United 
States  the  extensive  negotiations  which  resulted  in  the  entry  of 
pleas  of  guilty  by  the  defendant.  Great  American  Bank  of  Dade 
County  (through  its  subsequently-acquired  owner,  the  Harnett 
Bank)  to  multiple  felony  charges  of  failure  to  file  the  required 
currency  reports  involving  cash  deposits  of  $673,450,  $837,530, 
$685,500  and  a  series  of  transactions  totaling  $34,413,789.26. 
The  corporate  defendant  bank  was  fined  by  the  Honorable  Eugene  P. 
Spellman,  a  total  of  $500,000,  with  the  fine  suspended  as  to 
$125,000  on  one  count.   I  also  argued  various  matters  before  the 
District  Court  relating  to  the  bank,  along  with  my  co-counsel, 
then-Assistant  United  States  Attorney  Gregory  Baldwin.   (Various 
bank  employees  also  entered  pleas  of  guilty  to  various  counts  and 
a  number  of  defendants  in  the  related  cases  entered  pleas  of 
guilty  to  certain  counts.) 

This  case  was  significant  in  contributing  to  the 
prosecution  of  narcotics  smuggling  and  the  ancillary  problem  of 
massive  money  laundering  of  narcotics  dollars  through 

25 


718 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


institutions  of  finance  and  commerce  in  this  region.   This 
prosecution  and  other  money-laundering  investigations  in  the 
Southern  District  of  Florida  served  to  highlight  the  importance 
of  compliance  with  the  reporting  requirements  of  the  currency 
laws. 

Counsel  for  the  bank  were: 

Earl  Hadlow,  Esq.  (now  deceased) 
Mahoney,  Hadlow  &  Adams 
P.O.  Box  4099,  Jacksonville,  FL  32201 
(904)  354-1100 

Michael  Madigan,  P.C. 
Suite  400 

1333  New  Hampshire  Avenue,  NW 
Washington,  DC  20036 
(202)  887-4017 

Co-counsel  for  the  United  States  were: 

Gregory  A.  Baldwin 

(then)  Assistant  United  States  Attorney 
(now)  Holland  and  Knight 
701  Brickell  Avenue,  Suite  3000 
Miami,  FL  33131 
(305)  374-8500 

Linda  Collins  Hertz 
Assistant  United  States  Attorney 
99  N.E.  4th  Street 
Miami,  FL  33132 
(305)  536-3011 
(305)  446-0977 

Carol  Wilkinson 

Assistant  United  States  Attorney 

505  South  Second  Street,  Suite  200 

Ft.  Pierce,  FL  34950 

(561)  466-0899 

(2)   1983-1984.   In  In  re  Grand  Jury  Proceedings,  the 
Bank  of  Nova  Scotia,  Case  No.  83-1  (WPB)  GJ-JCP  (United  States 
District  Judge  James  C.  Paine,  Southern  District  of  Florida) ,  a 
federal  grand  jury  in  the  Southern  District  of  Florida  was 
conducting  a  combined  tax-narcotics  investigation  and  had 
received  information  sufficient  to  cause  it  to  inquire  into  and 

26 


719 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


compel  the  production  of  off-shore  bank  records  from  a  foreign 
bank,  the  Bank  of  Nova  Scotia,  doing  business  within  the  Southern 
District  of  Florida. 

A  Federal  Grand  Jury  sitting  in  the  Southern  District 
of  Florida  issued  a  subpoena  to  the  Miami  agency  of  the  Bank  of 
Nova  Scotia,  seeking  the  production  of  financial  records  located 
in  its  Cayman  Islands  and  Bahamas  branches.   The  bank  objected, 
claiming  that  the  Bank  Secrecy  Acts  in  those  island  nations 
prohibited  it  from  complying  with  the  subpoena  authorized  by  the 
United  States  Court. 

The  U.S.  Attorney's  Office  sought  to  have  the  court 
compel  compliance.   After  giving  the  bank  opportunity  to  respond, 
the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of 
Florida,  held  the  bank  in  contempt  and  imposed  a  coercive  fine  of 
$25,000  for  each  day  that  the  bank  failed  to  produce  these 
documents. 

In  the  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Eleventh 
Circuit,  various  entities,  including  the  governments  of  Canada, 
Great  Britain  and  the  Cayman  Islands,  filed  aniiEi  curiae  briefs 
on  the  side  of  the  bank.   After  initial  review,  the  appeals  court 
remanded  the  matter  for  further  consideration  by  the  district 
court,  including  allowing  the  amici  to  participate  and  state 
their  views.   In  re  Grand  Jury  Proceedings,  the  Bank  of  Nova 
Scotia,  722  F.2d  657  (11th  Cir.  1983). 

I  personally  directed  and  participated  in  all  aspects 
of  the  remand,  including  interviewing  witnesses  from  the 
Departments  of  Justice  and  State,  planning  strategy,  supervising 
all  written  responses  and  drafting  substantial  portions  of  the 
briefs.   My  involvement  also  included  personally  coordinating  all 
of  the  Government's  responses  with  both  the  Department  of  State 
and  the  Department  of  Justice  and  making  all  major  litigation 
decisions.   After  the  Honorable  James  C.  Paine  granted  the 
Government's  motion  to  impose  a  cumulative  fine  of  $1,825,000, 
additional  briefing  before  the  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for 
Eleventh  Circuit  was  required.   I  wrote  and  edited  substantial 
portions  of  the  brief  filed  by  the  Government  in  the  Eleventh 
Circuit. 

The  Government's  position  was  adopted  on  appeal.   In  re 
Grand  Jury  Proceedings,  the  Bank  of  Nova  Scotia.  740  F.2d  817 
(11th  Cir.  1984),  and  the  Supreme  Court  denied  certiorari  review 
on  January  8,  1985,  469  U.S.  1106  (1985). 


27 


720 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


Opposing  counsel  were: 

Parker  Thomson,  Esq. 

(counsel  for  the  Governments  of  the  Cayman  Islands 
and  the  United  Kingdom) 
Thomson  Muraro,  et  al. 
1  SE  Third  Avenue,  Suite  1700 
Miami,  FL  33131 
(305)  350-7200 

Danforth  K.  Newcomb,  Esq. 

(counsel  for  the  Bank  of  Nova  Scotia) 

Shearman  &  Sterling 

153  East  53rd  Street 

New  York,  NY  10022 

(212)  848-4184 

William  Sadowski,  Esq.  (now  deceased) 
(counsel  for  the  Bank  of  Nova  Scotia) 
Akerman,  Senterfitt  &  Eidson 
Suite  405,  1401  Brickell  Avenue 
Miami,  FL  33131 
(305)  372-1364 

Andreas  F.  Lowenfeld,  Esq. 

(counsel  for  the  Government  of  Canada) 

40  Washington  Square  South 

New  York,  NY  10012 

(212)  598-2321 

Herschal  Sparks,  Esq. 

(counsel  for  Canadian  Bankers'  Association) 

Hughes  Hubbard  &  Reed 

201  S.  Biscayne  Blvd.,  Suite  2500 

Miami,  FL  33131 

(305)  358-1666 

Co-counsel  with  me  were: 

Linda  Collins  Hertz 

Assistant  United  States  Attorney 

99  N.E.  4th  Street 

Miami,  FL  33132 

(305)  536-3011 

(305)  446-0977 


28 


721 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


Andrea  Simonton 

Assistant  United  States  Attorney 

500  East  Broward  Boulvard,  7th  Floor 

Ft.  Lauderdale,  FL  33301 

(954)  356-7255 

Thomas  Blair 

(then)  Assistant  United  States  Attorney 
1322  S.W.  Seahawk  Way 
Palm  City,  FL  34990 

(561)  220-7899 

Lawrence  H.  Sharf 

(then)  Assistant  United  States  Attorney 

111  Hicks  Street,  #21E 

Brooklyn,  NY 

(718)  852-0345 

(3)   1982-1983.   In  U.S.  V.  Guillot-Lara ,  et  al.,  Case 
No.  82-643-Cr-JE  (United  States  District  Judge  Joe  Eaton, 
Southern  District  of  Florida) ,  the  14  named  defendants  were 
charged  with  various  counts  of  drug  importation  and  conspiracies 
and  attempts  to  import  both  methaqualone  and  marijuana.   The 
gravamen  of  the  charges  were  that  the  defendants  would  smuggle 
large  quantities  of  narcotics  from  South  America  to  the  United 
States  using  Cuba  as  a  source  of  protection  and  resupply  for  the 
movement  of  narcotics  from  South  America  to  the  United  States. 
The  indictment  charged  that  this  illegal  activity  was  made 
possible  because  of  the  direct  involvement  of  several  high- 
ranking  Cuban  officials  who  were  indicted  in  Miami  as  part  of  the 
plot.   Included  as  defendants  were:  Fernando  Ravelo-Renedo,  the 
Cuban  Plenipotentiary  Ambassador  to  Colombia  at  the  time  of  the 
crime;  Gonzalo  Bassols-Suarez,  Minister-Counselor  of  the  Cuban 
Embassy  in  Colombia;  Aldo  Santamaria-Cuadrado,  a  member  of  the 
Central  Committee  of  the  Communist  Party  of  Cuba  and  Vice-Admiral 
in  the  Cuban  Navy;  and  Rene  Rodriguez-Cruz,  a  member  of  the 
Central  Committee  of  the  Communist  Party  of  Cuba  and  President  of 
the  Cuban  Institute  of  Friendship  with  the  People  (I.C.A.P.),  a 
Cuban  government  agency  which  oversees  the  activity  of  foreign 
visitors  in  Cuba. 

I  personally  and  directly  supervised  the  conduct  of 
this  investigation  because  of  its  extreme  sensitivity  to  law 
enforcement  and  issues  of  diplomacy  and  the  ramifications  which 
emerged  from  the  case.   My  involvement  included  complete  review 
of  all  facts,  assessment  of  the  case,  drafting  the  indictment, 
making  the  decision  to  file  American  criminal  charges  against 

29 


722 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


foreign  government  officials,  and  coordination  of  federal  efforts 
with  the  Departments  of  Justice  and  State.   The  Cuban  officials 
were  not  apprehended;  a  number  of  other  defendants  also  charged 
in  the  case  were  prosecuted  by  my  co-counsel: 

Richard  Gregorie 

Assistant  United  States  Attorney 

99  N.E.  4th  Street 

Miami,  FL  33132 

(305)  536-5435 

before  the  Honorable  Joe  Eaton,  United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Southern  District  of  Florida. 

This  case  was  also  the  subject  of  extensive  testimony 
which  I  gave  on  April  30,  1983,  before  the  U.S.  Senate  Drug 
Enforcement  Caucus;  the  Subcommittee  on  Security  and  Terrorism  of 
the  Senate  Judiciary  Committee:  and  the  Subgommittee  on  Western 
Hemisphere  Affairs  of  the  Senate  Foreign  Relations  Committee. 

(4)   1982-1983.   In  U.S.  V.  Carlos  Cruz,  Case  No.  82- 
733-Cr-WMH  (United  States  District  Judge  William  M.  Hoeveler, 
Southern  District  of  Florida) ,  the  United  States  Marshal  for  the 
Southern  District  of  Florida  was  charged  with  conspiracy  to 
defraud  the  United  States  and  to  bribe  the  Federal  Warden  of  the 
Metropolitan  Correctional  Center  in  Miami  and  five  counts  of 
bribery  of  a  public  official,  the  Federal  Warden.   In  U.S.  v. 
Carlos  Cruz,  Case  No.  83-47-Cr-WMH,  the  Marshal  was  also  charged 
with  five  counts  of  perjury  before  the  federal  grand  jury  which 
was  investigating  the  bribery  matter.   The  facts  uncovered  in 
this  case  revealed  an  extensive  pattern  of  corruption  involving 
the  office  of  the  United  States  Marshal. 

I  supervised  personally  and  directly  as  Chief  Counsel, 
the  entire  investigation  and  prosecution  and  conducted  the 
significant  pre-trial  litigation  which  resulted  in  the  indictment 
and  conviction  of:  Carlos  Cruz,  the  United  States  Marshal  for  the 
Southern  District  of  Florida;  Seymour  Klosky,  co-conspirator  and 
state  official  with  the  Florida  Department  of  State;  and  Merle 
Gottlieb,  also  a  co-conspirator  and  the  father  of  the 
incarcerated  defendant  who  was  the  object  of  the  bribe  plot. 
Klosky  and  Gottlieb  each  entered  pleas  of  guilty  to  one  felony 
count  of  bribing  a  federal  official.   I  also  personally  conducted 
the  trial  of  Mr.  Cruz  before  the  Honorable  William  M.  Hoeveler, 
and  a  jury  in  April  1983,  along  with  my  co-counsel,  then- 
Assistant  United  States  Attorney  Kevin  March.   Toward  the 
completion  of  the  Government's  case,  the  defendant  entered  pleas 

30 


723 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


of  guilty  to  the  conspiracy  to  bribe  count  and  to  one  count  of 
bribery  of  a  federal  official.   The  United  States  Marshal  was 
sentenced  to  a  term  of  imprisonment  for  one  year  and  one  day. 

Before  he  was  to  report  to  begin  serving  his  sentence, 
the  defendant  moved  to  vacate  his  plea,  alleging  that  he  had  not 
been  "of  sound  mind"  and  had  received  ineffective  assistance  of 
counsel  from  his  lawyer.   Elaborate  post-trial  hearings  were  held 
by  the  Court  and  I  testified  in  that  connection  on  September  6, 
1983,  concerning  my  observations  of  and  conversations  with  the 
defendant  on  the  day  of  the  plea.   The  court  subsequently  denied 
the  defendant's  motion  and  he  served  his  sentence.   No  appeal  was 
taken  by  Mr.  Cruz. 

The  defendant,  Carlos  Cruz,  was  represented  at  trial 
by: 

Jon  W.  Burke,  Esq. 
616  S.W.  12th  Avenue 
Miami,  PL  33134 
(305)  858-6000 

and  subsequently  at  the  post-sentencing  hearing  by: 

Theodore  Sakowitz 

(then)  Federal  Public  Defender 
301  N.  Miami  Avenue 
Miami,  FL  33128 

(305)  350-6900 

My  co-counsel  were: 

Kevin  March 

Assistant  United  States  Attorney 

Middle  District  of  Florida 

500  Zack  Street,  #400 

Tampa,  FL  33602 

(813)  274-6000 

Linda  Collins  Hertz 
Assistant  United  States  Attorney 
99  N.E.  4th  Street 
Miami,  FL  33132 
(305)  536-3011 
(305)  446-0977 


31 


724 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


The  Marshal's  co-defendant,  Seymour  Klosky,  was 
represented  by: 

Edward  Shohat,  Esq. 
800  Brickell  Avenue,  Penthouse  2 
Miami,  FL  33131 
(305)  358-7000 

and  Merle  Alan  Gottlieb  was  represented  by: 

Paul  Lazarus,  Esq. 

2455  East  Sunrise  Boulevard,  Suite  805 

Ft.  Lauderdale,  FL  33304 

(954)  940-7190 

(5)  and  (6)  1979.   U.S.  v.  Ouasarano  and  Vitale,  Case  - 
No.  Cr.  79-80644,  involved  an  extensive  organized  crime 
investigation,  which  I  directed  and  supervised  over  a  period  of 
some  two  and  one-half  years,  involving  tax  fraud,  racketeering 
and  extortion,  arising  out  of  the  illegal  take-over  of  a  series 
of  interconnected  cheese  manufacturing  companies  in  the  Midwest 
and  Michigan,  by  among  others,  defendants  Raffaele  Quasarano 
("Jimmy  Q")  and  Peter  Vitale,  who  were  the  hidden  beneficial 
owners  of  the  manufacturing  facilities.   Following  a  lengthy 
trial  which  I  conducted  as  chief  counsel  for  the  United  States 
before  the  Honorable  Robert  E.  DeMascio,  United  States  District 
Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Michigan,  the  case  ended  in  a 
mistrial  because  of  a  hung  jury.   Subsequently  both  defendants 
entered  pleas  of  guilty  to  the  central  racketeering  charges 
before  Judge  DeMascio  and  each  was  sentenced  to  incarceration  for 
four  years  and  fined  a  substantial  sum  of  money. 

Subsequently,  in  a  related  case  arising  out  of  the  same 
investigation  into  the  ownership  and  control  of  a  number  of 
legitimate  business  enterprises  in  the  Midwest  in  the  area  of 
manufacturing  facilities,  trash  hauling  and  banking,  in  U.S.  v. 
Barbara,  et  al. ,  Case  No.  Cr.  79-80655,  Peter  Vitale,  Paul  Vitale 
and  Joseph  Barbara,  Jr. ,  were  charged  with  conspiracy  to  defraud 
the  United  States  by  making  false,  fictitious  and  fraudulent 
statements  to  the  Internal  Revenue  Service  in  connection  with  a 
plot  to  conceal  the  true  ownership  of  a  large  Detroit-based 
trash-hauling  company  subsequently  purchased  by  a  publicly-traded 
national  waste  treatment  company.   Following  extensive  pre-trial 
pleadings  and  litigation,  Paul  Vitale  and  Barbara  each  entered 
pleas  of  guilty  to  the  second  indictment  before  the  Honorable 
Thomas  P.  Thornton,  United  States  District  Court,  Eastern 
District  of  Michigan.   Peter  Vitale  and  Quasarano  each  entered 

32 


725 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


pleas  of  guilty  before  Judge  DeMascio  to  the  aforementioned 
racketeering  charge  and  to  the  conspiracy  to  defraud  the  Internal 
Revenue  Service  charge  as  set  out  in  the  former  indictment. 

Opposing  counsel  were: 

N.D.  Deday  LaRene,  Esq. 

(for  Raffaele  Quasarano) 

2000  City  National  Bank  Building 

Detroit,  MI  48226 

(313)  962-3500 

Albert  J.  Kreiger,  Esq. 
(for  Peter  Vitale) 
1899  S.  Bayshore  Drive 
Miami,  FL  33133 
(305)  854-0050 

Peter  J.  Bellanca,  Esq. 
(for  Peter  and  Paul  Vitale) 
20480  Vernier  Road 
Harper  Woods,  MI  48225 
(313)  882-1100 

Neal  Bush,  Esq. 

(for  Joseph  Barbara,  Jr.) 

719  Griswald 

Detroit,  MI  48226 

(313)  962-1177 

My  co-counsel  was: 

Keith  E.  Corbett 

(then)  Special  Attorney 
Detroit  Strike  Force 
940  Federal  Building 
Detroit,  MI  48226 

(313)  226-7252 

(7)   1979.   Also  arising  out  of  the  same  lengthy 
inquiry  was  the  case  of  U.S.  v.  State  Bank  of  Eraser.  Case  No. 
79-80442,  where  the  corporate  entity,  the  bank  itself,  was 
charged  in  three  felony  counts  with  wilfully  filing  false  bank 
entries,  reports  and  transactions  with  intent  to  deceive  the 
Federal  Deposit  Insurance  Corporation.   In  the  companion  case  of 
U.S.  V.  Beck,  Case  No.  79-80463,  Edgar  Beck,  the  State  Bank  of 
Eraser's  President,  Chief  Executive  Officer  and  principal 

33 


726 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


shareholder,  was  charged  with  knowingly  filing  fraudulent  and 
false  statements  in  connection  with  the  bank's  corporate  income 
tax  return,  his  own  individual  tax  returns,  along  with 
embezzlement  and  misapplication  of  bank  funds,  and  with  knowingly 
making  false  bank  entries,  reports  and  transactions  with  the 
F.D.I.C.   The  bank  entered  pleas  of  guilty  and  was  convicted  of 
the  criminal  charges  in  September  1979  before  the  Honorable 
Robert  E.   DeMascio,  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern 
District  of  Michigan,  and  was  fined  by  the  Court.   Bank  President 
Beck  entered  guilty  pleas  to  four  felony  counts  before  the 
Honorable  Ralph  B.  Guy,  Jr. ,  then-United  States  District  Court, 
Eastern  District  of  Michigan  (now  Circuit  Judge,  U.S.  Court  of 
Appeals  for  the  Sixth  Circuit),  in  April  1980,  was  sentenced  to 
incarceration  for  two  years  and  was  fined  a  substantial  sum  of 
money. 

Opposing  counsel  were: 

F.  Lee  Bailey,  Esq. 

(for  Edgar  Beck) 

1400  CentrePark  Blvd.,  Suite  909 

West  Palm  Beach,  FL  33401 

(561)  687-3700 

James  A.  Smith,  Esq. 

(for  the  State  Bank  of  Eraser) 

Bodman,  Longley  &  Dahling 

34th  Floor,  100  Renaissance  Center 

Detroit,  MI  48243 

(313)  259-7777 

I  was  chief  counsel  for  the  Department  of  Justice  on  all  of  these 
related  prosecutions. 

(8)   1975.   In  U.S.  v.  Cristenfeld,  Case  No.  75-Cr-896. 
Marvin  Cristenfeld  was  Chairman  of  the  Nassau  County  New  York 
Democratic  Committee  and  then-Commissioner  of  the  Nassau  County 
Board  of  Elections.   He  was  charged  with  and  convicted  of  Hobbs 
Act  violations  of  extortion  by  the  wrongful  use  of  fear  of 
economic  loss  and  under  color  of  official  right,  bribery  and 
Travel  Act  violations,  conspiracies  to  defraud  the  United  States 
and  the  filing  of  false  and  fraudulent  tax  returns  in  connection 
with  a  massive  corruption  inquiry  into  the  operations  of  the 
Chairman  of  the  Nassau  County  Democratic  Party.   On  June  24, 
1976,  he  was  convicted  on  all  counts  after  jury  trial  before  the 
Honorable  Orin  Judd  (now  deceased) ,  United  States  District  Judge, 
Eastern  District  of  New  York,  who  sentenced  him  to  concurrent 

34 


727 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


terms  of  incarceration  of  six  months  and  fined  him  $2,000.  I 
tried  this  case  as  co-counsel  along  with: 

Kenneth  Kaplan 

(then)  Assistant  United  States  Attorney 

Eastern  District  of  New  York 

(now)  Kaplan  &  Katzberg 

767  Third  Avenue,  26th  Floor 

New  York,  NY  10017 

(212)  750-3100 

The  defendant  Marvin  Cristenfeld  appealed  his 
conviction  to  the  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Second 
Circuit  (Case  No.  76-1312) ,  raising  serious  issues  about  the 
scope  of  the  federal  bribery  and  extortion  statutes  involving 
political  party  officials.   I  wrote  the  brief  and  argued  the  case 
for  the  Government  before  the  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Second 
Circuit.   The  convictions  were  affirmed  per  curiam  in  an 
unpublished  opinion. 

Counsel  for  the  defendant  were: 

Raymond  Bernhard  Gruenwald,  Esq.  and 

Michael  Gillen,  Esq. 

Gruenwald,  Turk,  Gillen  &  Caliendo 

then  at  233  Broadway 

New  York,  NY  10007 

(no  current  listing  for  names,  address  or 

telephone  number) 

Mr.  Gruenwald  argued  the  appeal  for  the  defendant;  Mr.  Gillen 
tried  the  case  for  the  defendant.  My  co-counsel  on  the  brief 
filed  with  the  Court  of  Appeals  were: 

Edward  R.  Korman 

(then)  Assistant  United  States  Attorney 

(now)  United  States  District  Judge 

Eastern  District  of  New  York 

225  Cadman  Plaza  East 

Brooklyn,  NY  11201 

(718)  260-2470 

Kenneth  Kaplan 

(then)  Assistant  United  States  Attorney  "< 

Eastern  District  of  New  York 

(now)  Kaplan  &  Katzberg 

767  Third  Avenue,  26th  Floor 

35 


728 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


New  York,  NY  10017 
(212)  750-3100 

Robert  Katzberg 

(then)  Assistant  United  States  Attorney 

(now)  Kaplan  &  Katzberg 

767  Third  Avenue,  26th  Floor 

New  York,  NY  10017 

(212)  750-3100 

David  G.  Trager 

(then)  United  States  Attorney 

(now)  United  States  District  Judge 

Eastern  District  of  New  York 

225  Cadman  Plaza  East 

Brooklyn,  NY  11201 

(718)  260-2510 

(9)   In  U.S.  V.  McGrathf  558  F.2d  1102  (2d  Cir.  1977), 
cert,  denied,  434  U.S.  1064  (1978),  the  case  was  tried  before  the 
Honorable  Henry  Bramwell,  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Eastern  District  of  New  York,  by  other  Assistant  United  States 
Attorneys  in  Brooklyn,  New  York.   The  defendant,  John  McGrath, 
then  the  Park  Maintenance  Supervisor  of  the  Long  Island  State 
Park  Commission  of  New  York,  was  convicted  of  extorting  illegal 
payments  from  two  truck  operators  in  return  for  parkway  towing 
contracts,  in  violation  of  the  extortion  and  bribery  provisions 
under  the  Federal  Hobbs  Act,  tax  evasion  and  filing  false  tax 
returns.   I  wrote  and  prepared  the  appellate  brief  filed  with  the 
United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Second  Circuit  on  behalf 
of  the  Government;  co-counsel  on  the  brief  was: 

Stanley  A.  Teitler 

(then)  Assistant  United  States  Attorney 

(now)  299  Broadway 

New  York,  NY 

(212)  233-8031 

Opposing  counsel  were: 

Leonard  Meiselman,  Esq. 

John  J.  Reilley,  Esq. 

Meiselman,  Boland,  Reilley  &  Pittoni 

54  Willis  Avenue 

Mineola,  NY  11501 

(516)  248-2400 


36 


729 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


(10)  Joint  Federal/State  Homicide  Task  Force,  1982. 
In  order  to  address  the  serious  problem  of  violent  crime  in  the 
Southern  District  of  Florida,  I,  along  with  Janet  Reno,  then- 
State  Attorney  for  the  Eleventh  Judicial  Circuit  of  Florida, 
created,  organized,  implemented  and  supervised  a  Joint 
Federal/State  Homicide  Task  Force  here  in  Dade  County  in  1982. 
By  the  creation  of  this  Joint  Task  Force,  some  100  defendants 
charged  with  homicide  in  state  court  were  prosecuted  by  federal 
prosecutors  and  Assistant  State  Attorneys  in  Dade  County  Circuit 
Court.   In  each  phase  of  the  Homicide  Task  Force,  certain 
homicide  cases  and  defendants  residing  in  Dade  County  who  were 
illegal  or  otherwise  undocumented  aliens  were  designated  to  be 
tried  in  State  Court  by  a  team  of  State  prosecutors  and  Assistant 
United  States  Attorneys.   The  federal  prosecutors  were  "cross 
designated"  as  State  Assistants  to  permit  them  to  appear  in  State 
Court . 

In  Phases  I  and  II  of  this  Task  Force,  a  total  of  73 
defendants  were  targeted,  of  which  61  were  found  guilty,  five 
were  found  not  guilty,  two  were  adjudged  insane,  one  was 
dismissed,  and  two  were  nolle  pressed.   In  Phase  III  of  the  Joint 
Task  Force,  the  Task  Force  prosecuted  some  4  0  additional 
defendants  in  homicide  cases. 

The  creation  and  implementation  of  this  Joint 
Federal/State  Homicide  Task  Force  by  Ms.  Reno  and  the  United 
States  Attorney  represented  a  joint  effort  to  combine  federal  and 
state  law  enforcement  resources  in  a  novel  way. 

Ms.  Reno  is  now  Attorney  General. 

In  addition,  the  following  members  of  the  legal 
community  have  had  recent  contact  with  me: 

1)  Roberto  Martinez 

Colson  Hicks  Eidson,  et  al. 

200  South  Biscayne  Boulevard,  Suite  4700 

Miami,  FL  33131 

(305)  373-5400 

2)  Martin  Steinberg 
Holland  &  Knight 

701  Brickell  Avenue,  Suite  3000 
Miami,  FL  33131 
(305)  374-8500 


37 


730 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


3)  Daniel  Pearson 
Holland  &  Knight 

701  Brickell  Avenue,  Suite  3000 
Miami,  FL  33131 
(305)  374-8500 

4)  Thomas  E.  Scott 
United  States  Attorney 
Southern  District  of  Florida 
99  N.E.  4th  Street,  8th  Floor 
Miami,  FL  33132 

(305)  536-5401 

5)  Karen  Amlong 
Amlong  &  Amlong 

500  N.E.  4th  Street,  2nd  Floor 
Ft.  Lauderdale,  FL  3  3  301 
(954)  462-1983 

6)  Elizabeth  Du  Fresne 
Steel,  Hector  &  Davis 

200  South  Biscayne  Boulevard,  #4000 
Miami,  FL  33131 

(305)  577-2855 

7)  Charles  E.  Senatore 
Securities  &  Exchange  Commission 
1401  Brickell  Avenue,  Suite  200 
Miami,  FL  33131 

(305)  982-6332 

8)  Leon  B.  Kellner 
3053  "Q"  Street,  NW 
Washington,  DC  20006 
(202)  785-9700 

9)  James  Joseph  Kenny 
Kenny  Nachwalter,  et  al. 
1100  Miami  Center 

201  South  Biscayne  Boulevard 
Miami,  FL  33131 

(305)  373-1000 

10)  Rudolph  F.  Aragon 
Aragon  Martin,  et  al. 

2699  South  Bayshore  Drive,  Penthouse 
Miami,  FL  33133 
(305)  858-2900 


38 


731 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


11)   Chesterfield  Smith 
Holland  &  Knight 
701  Brickell  Avenue,  Suite  3000 
Miami,  FL  33131 
(305)  374-8500 

Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal 
activities  you  have  pursued,  including  significant 
litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters 
that  did  not  involve  litigation.   Describe  the  nature  of 
your  participation  in  this  question,  please  omit  any 
information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege 
(unless  the  privilege  has  been  waived.) 

In  1988,  I  was  chosen  by  Chief  Justice  Rehnquist  to  serve  as 
a  member  of  the  Federal-State  Jurisdiction  Committee  of  the 
Judicial  Conference  of  the  United  States.   In  May  1992,  the 
Chief  Justice  appointed  me  to  serve  as  Chair  of  the 
Committee,  a  position  I  filled  until  my  tenure  expired  in 
September  1995.   In  that  capacity,  I  had  the  opportunity  to 
represent  the  Judicial  Conference  in  connection  with  pending 
legislation  that  affected  the  federal  judiciary  and  involved 
the  intersection  between  federal  and  state  jurisdiction. 
During  this  time  the  Committee  was  composed  of  federal 
judges  and  the  Chief  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Courts  of 
Texas,  California,  Virginia  and  Ohio.   My  position  as  Chair 
also  required  me  to  meet  regularly  with  and  attend  the 
formal  meetings  of  the  State  Conference  of  Chief  Justices 
and  to  work  with  them  in  areas  of  interest  common  to  both 
the  state  and  federal  courts.   As  an  outgrowth  of  my  work  on 
behalf  of  the  Federal-State  Jurisdiction  Committee,  Chief 
Justice  Rehnquist  also  appointed  me  to  serve  as  Chair  of  the 
Ad  Hoc  Committee  on  Violence  Against  Women,  1992-1994. 

On  a  number  of  occasions  I  served  at  the  request  of  then 
Chief  Judge  Gerald  Bard  Tjoflat  in  planning  the  education 
programs  for  the  Annual  Eleventh  Circuit  Judicial 
Conferences.   I  am  also  a  member  of  the  Committer  on  Pattern 
Jury  Instructions  of  the  District  Judges  Association  of  the 
Eleventh  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals,  which  was  asked  by  Judge 
Tjoflat  to  edit,  revise  and  update  the  pattern  jury 
instructions  for  use  throughout  the  Circuit. 

Finally,  Chief  Judge  Hatchett  has  appointed  me  to  serve  as  a 
member  of  the  Education  Committee  of  the  Judicial  Council  of 
the  Eleventh  Circuit. 

39 


732 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


From  the  summer  of  1994  to  the  present,  I  have  served  the 
district  court  as  a  member  of  a  four- judge  executive 
committee  whose  responsibility  it  is  to  make  decisions  about 
the  administration  of  the  Court.   I  have  also  been  selected 
by  the  Chief  Judge  to  serve  as  a  member  of  the  District 
Court's  Security,  Budget  and  Rules  Committees,  the  Civil 
Justice  Advisory  Committee,  and,  for  six  years,  I  chaired 
the  Court's  Magistrate's  Committee. 


40 


733 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts 
from  deferred  income  arrangements,  stock,  options, 
uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which  you 
expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships, 
professional  services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers, 
clients,  or  customers.   Please  describe  the  arrangements  you 
have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial 
or  business  interest. 

None. 

Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of 
interest,  including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in 
determining  these  areas  of  concern.   Identify  the  categories 
of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to 
present  potential  conf licts-of-interest  during  your  initial 
service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

I  am  unaware  of  any  areas  of  financial  concern  that  would 
represent  any  potential  conflict  of  interest.   However,  I  am 
mindful  of  the  provisions  of  Title  28,  U.S.C.  §§  455  and 
144,  and  the  Canons  of  Judicial  Ethics. 

Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue 
outside  employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during 
your  service  with  the  court?   If  so,  explain. 

No. 

List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the 
calendar  year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current 
calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees,  dividends, 
interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and 
other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so, 
copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report,  required  by  the 
Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  attached  Financial  Disclosure  Report  for  1997. 
See  attached  Financial  Disclosure  Report  for  1996. 

Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement 
in  detail  (Add  schedules  as  called  for) . 

See  attached  form. 


734 


FINANCIAL     DISCLOSURE     REPORT 

FOR    CALENDAR    YEAR    1996 


r.^oi. 


e*..    p 


1      Person   Reporting    (Last    name,     first,    middle    initial! 

MARCUS,     STANLEY 

2      Court    or   organization 

U.S.    COURT   OF   APPEALS    FOR 
THE    ELEVENTH    CIRCUIT 

3      Date   o(    Report 

9  /23/97 

i    '      ^"    "  ^    'scn!or%caJu=';'^Ml|is"rl!r5udges"!ndIcai.<r 

U.S.    CIRCUIT    COURT   NOMINEE 

i      Report   Type    (check,   appropriate    type) 
^No.i„at.on,    Oace9^2^     9  7 

6       Reporting    Period 

■  1  a  'SI-  SI  2a  97 

1    301    North   Miami    Avenue 

:   5th    Floor 

;   Miami,    Florida    33128 

e      On   the   basis   of    the    informatjon   contained   in   this   Report   and 
any   modifications   pertaining    thereto,     it    is.     in  my  opinion. 
in   compliance   with   applicable    laws    and    regulations 

1                         IMPORTANT  NOTES:  The  instruclions  accompanying  this  form  must  be  followed.     Complete  all  parts, 
!                         checkmg  the  NONE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable  information.     Sign  on  last  page. 

H 


POSITIONS.      (Reporting  individual  only,  see  pp  9D  of  Instructions.) 

POSITION  NAME    OF    ORGANIZATION/ENTITY 

NONE       (No  reportable  positions) 


I.      AGREEMENTS.      (Reporting  individual  only,  see  pp.  14-17  of  Instruclions.) 

DATE  PARTIES    AND    TERMS 


NONE       (No  reportable  agreements) 


III.      NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME.      (Reporting  individual  and  spouse;  see  pp.  18-25  of  Instructions.) 


n 


1997 


SOURCE    AND    TYPE 
NONE       (No  reportable  non-investment  income) 


Professor-Triai   Advocacy   Course-Broolclyn   Law   School        g     7,000 

(May-July    1997) 
Wi lliams -Sonoma ,    Inc.     (S) 


Temple    Path   Am    ( S) 


735 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 

MARCUS,  STANLEY 


9  /23  /97 


IV.      REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS    •  iransportalion,  lodging,  food,  enlcrtainmcnl. 

(Includes  ihosc  lo  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheticals  "(S)"  and  "(DC)"  to  indicate  reportable 
reimbursements  and  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  26-29  of  Instructions  ) 
SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


D 


NONE       (No  such  reportable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 


Brooklyn  Law  School 


May-July  1997,  Coach  air  fare  and  lodging 
at  Brooklyn  Law  School  Dormitory  (May  28, 
June  2,  9,  16,  23,  June  30-July  9). 


OTHER  GIPTS.       (Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheticals  "(S)"  and  "(DC)"  to 
indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively    See  pp.  30-33  of  Instructions.) 
SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


Q 


NONE       (No  such  reportable  gifts) 


VI.      LIABILITIES.       (Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible 
for  Uability  by  using  the  parenthetical  "(S)"  for  separate  liability  of  the  spouse,  "(J)"  for  joint  liability  of 
reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  "(DC)"  for  liability  of  a  dependent  child.  See  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE' 


NONE       (No  reportable  liabihlies) 


L-550.001-S100,00 


P2-$S.000.001 


01-S2SO.OOO 


736 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 

STANLEY  MARCUS 


ce  of   Report 

9/23/97 


VII.   Page    1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS    -  income,  value,  transacllons  (Includes  those  of  spouse 
and  dependent  children.  See  pp.  37-54  of  Inslruclions.) 


.. 

Description   of    Assets 
(including    crust    assets) 

cate   where   applicable,    owner   of 
asset    by   using    the   parenthetical 

during 
reporting 
period 

Gross  value 
at    end  of 
reporting 
period 

^ 

ansactions   during    reporting   period 

vng    individual    and    spouse.     '(SI       for 
separate    ownership   by   spouse.     "(DC)" 
for   ownership   by   dependent    child 

exempt    from  prior   disclosure 

Code' 

Type 
d^v^    ■ 

Code*' 

(21 

11) 

^Type 

buy'  leil. 
merger, 
redemp- 

I(    not   exempc    from  disclosure 

Dace: 
Day 

Value2 

Code 

(J-P) 

Code 
(A-H) 

(51 
Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
{if   private 

NONE         (NO   reportable 

J  First   Union 
Miami .    FL   Checkina 

A 

Int 

J 

T,   ' 

,T.    Rowe   Price    Sraall-Cai 
"Value   Mutual    Fund   -    IR 

'    A 

Div 

J 

T 

Baltimore.   MU^„„ 
J  Vanguard    Index    500, 
Mutual    Fund    -    IRA, 

A 

Div 

J 

T 

,  FiMm  g?f^gftp!'v°wi 

IH    A 

Div 

J 

T 

Fidelity    SoftWCom  Mutui 
'Fund-IRA,    Cin.,    OH 

1 
A 

Div 

J 

T 

U.S.    Treasury   Note 
'  99    NV    30 

B 

Int 

K 

T 

Coca   Cola    Common    Stock 
'Stanley  Marcus,    Cust. 

A 

Div 

J 

T 

6  Young   Stovall    &    Co. 

A 

Div 

J 

T 

^Dell    Computer   tommon   S< 
Jonathan    (son)    &    Juditl 

k' 

A 

Div 

J 

T 

Buy 

8/1 

J 

j^Marcus    (spouse) 

» 

- 

.3 

„ 

" 

1. 

- 

,s 

icir^t^B.?"-  rMoTo.%dro.o     ■    aniorjo! 

.500   C-S2.S01-SS 

.000       D.SS 
Hl-Sl 

Ol-SlS.OOO                            E-S1S.001-SS0,000 
OOO.OOl-SS.OOO.OOO        K2.SS.000.001    or  more 

^-'--v    UM^ihB^^.....  ^a. 

DOl'S5,O0O?O00' 

1-SlOO.OOO 

M.S100.001-S250.000      N-S250, 001  - 5S0O.  000 

]cS'?5V"^    8:K^ift;e                   5:S^^r" 

S-Assesment                          T-Cash/Market 
M-Estimated 

737 


FIKANCIAL   DISCLOSURE    REPORT     (cont'd) 


STANLEY    MARCUS 


9/23/97 


Vin.  ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS  (Indicate  pan  of  Report.) 

My   son,    Jonathan  Marcus'    bank   account    (NationsBank-Savings)  -listed   in 

Part   VII,    line   7,    on   my    1996   Annual    Report   dated   5/12/97,    is    now  below 
the   value   that   requires   reporting. 


IX.  CERTIFICATION. 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  §  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Commiliee  on  Judicial 
Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  mquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory  function  in  any  litigation 
during  the  period  covered  by  this  report  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  rmancial  interest,  as  defmed  m 
Canon  3C(3)(c).  m  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  cerxif>'  that  all  information  given  above  (mcludmg  mformalion  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent  children,  if  any)  is 
accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  trot  reponed  was  withheld  because  ii  met 
applicable  statutory  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure 

1  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honorana  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been  reponed  are 
m  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C. A.  app  4.  §  501  ei   seq  ,  5  U.S  C.  §  7353  and  Judicial  Conference  regulations 


Signature 


^l/JLaAMy^ 


%!_ 


u^  ^f  f-; 


NOTE:      ANY  INDIVIDUAL  WH6  KNOWINGLY  AND  WILFULLY  FALSIFIES  OR  FAILS  TO  FILE  THIS  REPORT  MAY  BE 
SUBJECT  TO  CrVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U.S.C   App  4.  §  104.) 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS: 

Mail  signed  original  and  3  additional  copies  to: 

Comminee  on  Financial  Disclosure 

Administrative  Office  of  the 

United  States  Courts 

/. 

Suite  2-301 

One  Columbus  Circle.  N.E., 

Washington,  D.C.  20544 

738 


FINANCIAL     DISCLOSURE     REPORT 

FOR  CALENDAR  YEAR  19  96 


MARCUS,  STANLEY 


U.S.  DISTRICT  COURT 
SOUTHERN  DISTRICT  OF  FLORIDA 


5/12/97 


U.S.    District   Judge    -Active   Status      — 


1/1,961231^6 


Office   Addr 


301  North  Miami  Avenue 

5th  Floor 

Miami,    Florida    33128 


!wing   Officer 


IMPORTANT  NOTES:  The  instruclions  accompanying  this  form  must  be  followed      Complete  ail  pans, 
checking  the  NONE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable  information      Sign  on  last  page 


POSITIONS.      (Reporting  mdividual  only;  see  pp.  9-13  of  Instructions.) 


Q 


POSITION 
NONE       (No  reportable  positions) 


NAME    OF    ORGANIZATION/ENTITY 


II.      AGREEMENTS.      (Rcportingindividualonly,  see  pp.  14-17  of  Instructions.) 

DATE  PARTIES    AND    TERMS 

X  NONE       (No  reportable  agreements) 


III.     NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME.      (Reporting  individual  and  spouse;  see  pp.  18-25  of  Instructions.) 

DATE  SOURCE   AND   TYPE 

NONE       (No  reportable  non-investment  income) 
1996  Williams-Sonoma,    Inc.     (S) 


1996 


Temple   Beth  Am    (S) 


739 


FIKANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


tc   ol    Person   Reporting 

MARCUS,     STANLEY 


5/12/97 


V.      REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS  -■  iransporlalion.  lodging,  food,  cnlcrlainmcnl 

{Includes  ihosc  lo  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parcnlheiicals  '(S)"  and  "(DC)'  10  indicate  reportable 
reimbursements  and  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively  Sec  pp  2(i  2')  of  Instructions.) 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


Q 


NONE       (No  such  reportable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 


OTHER  GIFTS.       (Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheticals  "(S)"  and  "(DC)'  to 
indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp  30-33  of  Instructions.) 
SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


Q 


NONE       (No  such  reportable  gifts) 


LIABILITIES.       (Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible 
for  liability  by  u.sing  the  parenthetical  "(S)"  for  separate  liability  of  the  spouse,  "(J)"  for  joint  liability  of 
reporting  mdividual  and  spouse,  and  "(DC)"  for  liability  of  a  dependent  child.  See  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE' 


H 


NONE       (No  reportable  habililies) 


J-S15,000or  less  K-SIS . 001 -SSO. 000   L=S50. 001 -SlOO, 000   M-SlOO. 001 -S2S0. 000   N-S2S0 , 001 -SSO 

O-S500.001-$1.000,000        PI- S 1.000. 001 -S5, 000. 000  P2-S5, 000. 00 1-S2S. 0  00.000 


740 


rihANCIAL    DISCLOSURE    REPORT 


MARCUS ,     STANLEY 


5   A2   fil 


II.   Page   1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS -•  income,  value,  Iransaclions  (Includes  those  of  spouse 
and  dependent  children  See  pp  37-54  of  Instructions.) 


Description  of    Assets 
[including   crust    assets) 

Indicate   where   applicable,    owner   of 
Che   asset    by   using    the   parenthetical 

during 
reporting 
period 

reporting 
period 

Transactions   during    reporting   period 

ing    individual    and   spouse.     '(Sl^    for 

Code 

Type 
-tnXo- 

Code"' 

Value 
Method! 

lO-ui 

b.jy.    sel;, 
n,;rge-.  . 

^tS' 

If    not    exempt    from  disclosure                  | 

for   ownership   by   dependent    child, 
exempt    from  prior   disclosure 

Date 

(31 

Value2 
Code 

{41 

Identity   of 

NONE          INo    reportable 

First   Union 
'    Miami,    Fl    Checking 

A 

Int 

J 

T 

2    Nations    Bank,    Miauni,    F 

L    A 

Int 

J 

T 

Close 

T.    Rowe    Price    Small-Ca 
^    Value    Mutual    Fund 

P 
A 

Div 

J 

T 

^  ssep'^guSa'^jR^j"' 

A 

Div 

J 

T 

^    FideSi^ty°B?':'Chp   Growt 
'    Mutual    Fund    IRA,    Cin. , 

h 
A 

Div 

J 

T 

Fidelity   SoftWCom   Mutu 
'    Fund,     IRA,    Cin.,    OH 

al 
A 

Div 

J 

T 

Nations    Bank    (Savings) 
Miami,    FL    (son) 

A 

Int 

J 

T 

U.S.    Treasury  Note 
°    99    NV    30 

B 

Int 

K 

T 

'    Intel   Common   Stock 

A 

Div 

J 

T 

Sold 

>/24 

J 

C 

ju Alliance   Tech   Mutual 
Fund    CL.A 

A 

Div 

J 

T 

Sold 

)/24 

J 

A 

Coca   Cola   Common    Stock 
Stanley   Marcus,    Cust. 

A 

Div 

J 

T 

for   Jonathan  Marcus    (s 

on) 

Young   Stovall    &    Co. 
(Alliance  Honey  Mkt   Fu 

A 
nd) 

Div 

J 

T 

Buy 

>/24 

\c^'^^'^-  ^^Vi^l^l..      ■      ?:|!6?°J^?^i!%oS1?6"—  S:!|i"SJo=J5i°??.ooo.ooo    S^UI:SSS:^^?-r^r. 

'-'  — ■    iiiiSj5;»ff6»sSo.„oo  ?j!iL°§s.°Hi»Hr-°°'-"°°-°°°  "^»°^s§!o?f^?.i°Soo^ir-"-° 

;ci?'?5r^=        8:Sggriltie                                     J-Cosc.re.t    estate  only,                                   S:???!^^^                       T.ea.h/«ar.,t 

741 


FINANCIAL    DISCLOSURE    REPORT     (cont'd) 


MARCUS ,     STANLEY 


5/12/97 


Vni.  ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS  (Indicate  pan  of  Report.) 


1)    Chase   Federal,    Miami,    FL 
Savings    (son) 


Bank   was   acquired   by   Nations    Bank,    Miami,    FL, 
Savings   Account    transferred    to   Nations    Bank; 
Suu   Sue-.    VII    (17). 


IX.  CERTIFICATION. 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U  S  C  §  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No  57  of  the  Advisory  Commmee  on  Judicial 
Activiiies.  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry.  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory  function  in  any  litigation 
during  the  period  covered  by  this  repon  ui  which  I.  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  financial  interest,  as  defined  in 
Canon  3C(3)(c).  m  the  outcome  of  such  litigation 

I  certify  that  all  information  given  above  (mcluding  information  pertauung  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent  children,  if  any)  is 
accurate,  tme.  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  inforraaiion  not  reported  was  withheld  because  it  met 
applicable  stanitory  provisions  permittmg  non-disclosure 

1  further  certify  that  earned  mcome  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been  reported  are 
in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C  A.  app.  4,  §  501  et   seq  ,  5  U  S  C   §  7353  and  Judicial  Conference  regulations. 


Signature 


fkjLKMu, 


12,  Ml 


NOTE:      ANY  INDIVIDUAL  WHO  KNOWINGLY  AND  WILFULLY  FALSIFIES  OR  FAILS  TO  FILE  THIS  REPORT  MAY  BE 
SUBJECT  TO  CIVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U  S  C    App  4,  §  104.) 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS: 

Mail  signed  original  and  3  additional  copies  to: 

Commiaee  on  Financial  Disclosure 

Administrative  Office  of  the 

United  Slates  Courts 

t:- 

Suite  2-301 

■  r 

One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E., 

Washington,  DC.  20544 

742 

FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORTH 


Provide  a  complete,  cunent  financial  net  worth  statement  which  itemizes  in  detail 
all  assets  Qncluding  bank  accounts,  real  estate,  secuhties.  trusts,  invesimenu,  and  odier  financial 
holdings)  all  liabilities  Onduding  debts,  mongages,  loans,  and  other  financial  obligations)  of 
youiself,  youi  spouse,  and  other  immediate  membcts  of  your  household. 


ASSETS 

UABILmES                                        1 

f'fcK  oa  hiod  and  in  b«nkx 

ax 

3)1 0 

"/o 

Nom  p«yiblt  ID  hinh  ifrnrad 

1 

U^.  Govcnimca  ucaniio-«dd 
idicdule 

r\ 

oeo 

00 

Nolet  p«yibk  10  bmlo-unssascd 

],ia«rf  ifmrif*!    irfri  >rhff1\ilr 

^s 

°iy^ 

4o 

I4eles  piyible  to  iclitiTci 

Unlisted  Mcurities— «dd  idudule 

Nolo  payable  lo  oibcn 

1 

Accoonis  tnd  notts  reoeiviblc: 

Aceouu  aad  bOk  due 

1 

Due  from  nlAtivcs  and  frunds 

Unpaid  income  tax 

1 

Due  bom  oihen 

Other  unpaid  lax  and  iniercat 

! 

Doubtful 

•chedidc 

/Vg 

A'fi 

vv 

Real  csute  owned— add  schedule 

-2.?t> 

OOo 

or) 

Chanel  nion(a(ca  and  otlis  liem  pay- 
able 

Real  estaie  mortgages  receivable 

Cl 

Auut  and  other  perrooal  pro  perry 

;^t> 

'^r 

oo 

Fprl^ir.<.  U\oA4u{huiA\ 

ns> 

tf-0 

Catb  value -life  insurance 

Other  aiseu-ilcinixe: 

HorJ'^  Tncr^(i>Ct>lie4e  Fnc^ra/t^ 

7 

(^7 

W 

. 

' 

I 

m 

oil 

H'i 

NdWoith 

X'^lo 

s-y<j 

ni 

Total  AueU 

3SC 

S"?! 

a^{ 

Total  liabilitia  and  net  «ath 

55T 

>r?l 

2/ 

COl^TINGENT  IXtBILITIES 

GENERAL  INFORMATION 

As  cadoner.  comaker  or  guanncor 

An  any  aaaea  pledf  cd7  (Add  Khad- 
ole.)                  t/gS 

On  leases  or  coDincts 

An  yoo  defmdanl  in  any  iniu  or  lef  al 
aetioai7             d/ ^ 

Legal  Oiinu                                         i^f\ 

Have  you  eret  taken  binbnpiey?  A/o 

Provuioo  tor  Federal  Income  Tax     C'^^TTt^ 

1    Other  fpccUl  debt                                        kt  A 

1 

1 

' 

1 

743 


Schedules  to  Financial  Statement 

Re:   Stanley  Marcus 

SSN#  112-34-24X7 

U.S.  Government  Securities 

Nations  Securities 

7.75%  Treasury  Bond  -  Due  11/99  $  27.000.00 

Listed  Securities 

50.398  shares  -  Coca  Cola  C.  3,014.30 

In  name  of  Stanley  Marcus,  Custodian  for 
Jonathan  Marcus,  Son 

15  shares  -  Dell  Computers  C.  1,477.50 

In  name  of  Jonathan  and  Judith  Marcus 

I.R.A.  Accounts 

Fidelity  Select  Software  4,132.36 

Fidelity  Blue  Chip  Growth  8,625.40 

T.  Rowe  Price  Small  Cap  Fund  4,847.80 

Vanguard  Index  Trust  500  6,851.04 

$  28.948.40 

Real  Estate  Owned 

Residence:   Miami,  Florida 

Current  estimated  value  $250,000.00 

Mortgaged:  See  below 

Real  Estate  Mortgages  Payable 

First  Mortgage  on  Residence: 

GE  Mortgage  Services  $126,436.67 

Home  Equity  Line: 

NationsBank  21,854.77 

Perkins  (Student  Loan^  (Elizabeth  Marcus)  750. OP 

$149.041.44 


744 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a 
political  campaign?   If  so,  please  identify  the  particulars 
of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the 
campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

No. 


42 


745 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


III,   GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar 
Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for 
"every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence  or 
professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in 
serving  the  disadvantaged."   Describe  what  you  have  done  to 
fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances 
and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

As  a  district  judge  I  have  not  engaged  in  any  pro  bono 
activity,  but  as  a  member  of  our  Court's  Civil  Justice 
Advisory  Committee,  I  worked  with  District  Judge  Lenore  C. 
Nesbitt,  the  Committee,  and  the  Court,  in  establishing  a 
Voluntary  Lawyers'  Project  to  provide  legal  support  for 
indigent  litigants  in  non-Criminal  Justice  Act  cases,  which 
include,  for  example,  a  variety  of  claims  arising  under 
Title  VII,  Age  Discrimination  Act,  Americans  With 
Disabilities  Act,  claims  of  ownership  in  civil  forfeiture, 
non-prisoner  §  1983  civil  rights  litigation,  and  Freedom  of 
Information  Act  cases.   The  project  has  received  the 
voluntary  services  of  lawyers  in  this  district  and  appears 
to  be  a  real  and  working  solution  to  an  old  and  vexing 
problem. 

I  also  expended  substantial  time  over  a  seven-year  period  in 
service  of  the  Judicial  Conference  of  the  United  States.   I 
served  from  1988-1992  as  a  member  of  the  Federal-State 
Jurisdiction  Committee  of  the  Judicial  Conference.   In  1992, 
Chief  Justice  Rehnquist  appointed  me  to  serve  as  Chair  of 
that  same  committee,  a  position  I  held  until  the  term 
expired  in  September  of  1995.   In  this  capacity  I 
represented  the  Judicial  Conference  in  connection  with 
legislation  that  affected  the  federal  judiciary  and  involved 
the  intersection  between  federal  and  state  jurisdiction.   As 
an  outgrowth  of  this  work,  the  Chief  Justice  also  appointed 
me  to  serve  from  1992  to  1994  as  Chair  of  the  Ad  Hoc 
Committee  on  Violence  Against  Women,  which  also  required 
extensive  time  commitments. 

I  have  further  served  the  judiciary  as  a  member  of  a  number 
of  other  committees.  I  was  appointed  to  committees  to  plan 
the  education  programs  for  the  Eleventh  Circuit's  Annual 
Judicial  Conference.  I  served  on  the  Committee  on  Pattern 
Jury  Instructions,  appointed  to  edit,  revise  and  update  the 
standard  instructions  used  throughout  the  Circuit.  For  the 
past  three  years,  I  have  served  the  district  court  as  a 

43 


746 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


member  of  a  four- judge  executive  committee,  which  meets 
weekly  to  make  decisions  about  the  administration  of  the 
court.   I  have  also  served  the  district  court  as  a  member  of 
its  Security,  Budget,  and  Rules  Committees,  the  Civil 
Justice  Advisory  Committee,  and  I  chaired  the  Magistrate's 
Committee  for  six  years. 

2.  The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of 
Judicial  Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge 
to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that  invidiously 
discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.   Do 
you  currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any 
organization  which  discriminates  —  through  either  formal 
membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of 
membership  policies?   If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership. 
What  you  have  done  to  try  to  change  these  policies? 

No. 

3.  Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to 
recommend  candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts? 
If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?   Please  describe 
your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process, 
from  beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led 
to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you 
participated) . 

I  am  unaware  of  the  involvement  of  any  selection  commission 
in  connection  with  this  nomination.   I  was  recently  asked  by 
the  Office  of  Counsel  to  the  President  to  fill  out  a 
judicial  questionnaire,  and  was  invited  to  an  interview  by 
representatives  of  the  Department  of  Justice  and  the 
Counsel's  Office  in  July  1997.   I  also  had  occasion  to  be 
interviewed  by  representatives  of  the  FBI  and  the  ABA. 

4.  Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a 
judicial  nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal 
issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be 
interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case, 
issue,  or  question?   If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

No. 

5.  Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism 
involving  "judicial  activism." 


44 


747 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal 
government,  and  within  society  generally,  has  become  the 
subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.   It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism 
that  alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of 
the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have 
been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem- 
solution  rather  than  grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the 
individual  plaintiff  as  a  vehicle  for  the 
imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to 
broad  classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad, 
affirmative  duties  upon  governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening 
jurisdictional  requirements  such  as  standing  and 
ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon 
other  institutions  in  the  manner  of  an 
administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities. 

The  judicial  branch  by  its  very  nature,  armed  with  neither 
sword  nor  purse,  derives  its  power  entirely  from  its  legitimacy 
with  the  people,  from  the  widespread  belief  that  it  does  not  more 
nor  less  than  apply  the  known  and  established  law  to  real  and 
actual  controversies.   If  the  people  come  to  believe  that  the 
courts  are  overreaching  the  boundaries  of  the  law  and  in 
circumstances  that  may  not  justify  judicial  intervention  of  any 
kind,  the  people  will  withdraw  their  support  from  the  judicial 
process  exposing  the  nation  to  the  great  danger  of  lawlessness. 
In  a  democracy,  the  judicial  branch  —  the  one  branch  that  does 
not  directly  derive  its  power  from  the  democratic  process  — 
must,  to  preserve  its  effectiveness  under  the  Constitution, 
scrupulously  limit  the  exercise  of  its  power  to  real  cases  ripe 
for  decision.   Moreover,  its  remedies  must  be  calculated  to  pose 
the  minimum  feasible  judicial  interference  that  will  still 
achieve  a  fair  resolution.   This  is  not  to  say  that  broad 
judicial  remedies  are  always  wrong,  but  they  certainly  can  be 

45 


748 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


wrong  often.   Where  such  remedies  are  clearly  necessary  to  the  ' 
vindication  of  fundamental  constitutional  rights,  they  may  be 
unavoidable.   Where,  as  in  most  situations,  broad  remedies  are 
not  indispensable,  resort  to  such  remedies  will  tend  inevitably 
to  detract  from  the  democratic  character  of  our  society  and  the 
proper  role  of  the  courts.   The  brilliance  of  our  constitutional 
system  is  that  the  simple,  narrow  and  precise  case-by-case 
enforcement  of  the  rights  and  obligations  it  has  spawned  will  in 
itself  tend  to  the  creation  of  a  just  society. 


46 


749 


Judge  Stanley  Marcus 

United  States  District  Judge 

Southern  District  of  Florida 


EXHIBIT  A 
ATTACHMENT  TO  QUESTION  15  (3)  27. 


750 


UNITED  STATES  DISTRICT  COURT 
SOUTHERN  DISTRICT  OF  FLORIDA 


CASE  NO.  96-074 5-CIV-MARCUS 


ROBERT  A.  Mclaughlin, 

et  al. , 

Plaintiffs, 


METROPOLITAN  DADE 
COUNTY, 


ORDER 


FILFD  By    /jL/J     "  D' CJ 

OC?  2  ^  1996   ' 


Defendant. 


-/ 


THIS  CAUSE  comes  before  the  Court  upon  the  Defendant's  Motion 
for  Summary  Judgment,  filed  August  26,  1996,  and  the  Plaintiffs' 
Cross-Motion  for  Summary  Judgment  on  Liability,  filed  September  10, 
1996.  Both  of  these  motions  are  ripe  for  resolution,  and  the  Court 
took  brief  argument  on  them  at  the  pre-trial  conference  on  October 
22,  1996.  After  a  thorough  review  of  the  record  and  pleadings,  and 
being  otherwise  advised  in  the  premises,  the  Defendant's  motion 
must  be  and  is  GRANTED.   The  Plaintiffs'  cross-motion  is  DENIED. 

I. 

This  litigation  concerns  the  enforcement  of  a  Florida  statute 

that,  among  other  things,  prohibits  any  use  of  a  public  street  in 

a  manner  that  creates  a  hazard  to  motorists  or  pedestrians.   This 

statute,  codified  at  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406(1),  provides  in  pertinent 

part : 

It  is  unlawful  to  make  any  use  of  the  right- 
of-way  of  any  state  transportation  facility, 
including  appendages  thereto  ...  in  any 
manner  that  interferes  with  the  safe  and 
efficient  movement  of  people  and  property  from 


751 


place  to  place  on  the  transportation  facility. 
Failure  to  prohibit  the  use  of  right-of-way  in 
this  manner  will  endanger  the  health,  safety 
and  general  welfare  of  the  public  by  causing 
distractions  to  motorists,  unsafe  pedestrian 
movement  within  travel  lanes,  sudden  stoppage 
or  slowdown  of  traffic,  rapid  lane  changing 
and  other  dangerous  traffic  movement, 
increased  vehicular  accidents,  and  motorist 
injuries  and  fatalities.  Such  prohibited  uses 
include,  but  are  not  limited  to,  the  free 
distribution  or  sale  of  any  merchandise, 
goods,  property  or  services;  the  solicitation 
for  charitable  purposes,  the  servicing  or 
repairing  of  any  vehicle,  except  the  rendering 
of  emergency  service;  the  storage  of  vehicles 
being  serviced  or  repaired  on  abutting 
property  or  elsewhere;  and  the  display  of 
advertising  of  any  sort  .... 

(emphasis  added).   Fla.  Stat.  §334.03(22)  defines  "right-of-way"  as 

"land   in  which  the  state,   the  department,   a   county,   or  a 

municipality  owns  the  fee  or  has  an  easement  devoted  to  or  required 

for  use  as  a  transportation  facility."   Fla.  Stat.  §334.03(31) 

defines   "transportation   facility"   as   "any   means   for   the 

transportation  of  people  and  property  from  place  to  place  which  is 

constructed,  operated,  or  maintained  in  whole  or  in  part  from 

public   funds."    A  violation   of   the   statute   constitutes   a 

misdemeanor  of  the  second  degree.   Fla.  Stat.  §337.406(4). 

A. 

The  facts  giving  rise  to  this  lawsuit  were  set  out  during  an 

evidentiary  hearing  conducted  on  May  2,  1996  in  conjunction  with 

the  Plaintiffs'  motion  for  preliminary  injunction.'   Testimony  at 


'The  parties  agree  that  the  record  developed  during  the  May 
2nd  evidentiary  hearing  may  be  considered  in  resolving  the 
pending  summary  judgment  motions.   Relatively  little  has  been 
added  to  the  record  since  that  time,  and  neither  party  has 


752 


the  May  2nd  hearing  established  the  following:  Plaintiffs  Michael 
Vance,  Eric  Seralnick  and  Robert  A.  McLaughlin  sell  flowers  and 
other  floral  products  within  the  boundaries  of  Metropolitan  Dade 
County.  Vance  sells  flowers  in  northeast  Dade  County,  typically  at 
the  intersection  of  Ives  Dairy  Road  and  Biscayne  Boulevard,  both  of 
which  are  state  roads.  When  selling  flowers  on  the  street,  Vance 
waits  until  the  traffic  light  turns  red  and  the  stopped  vehicles 
back  up  six  car  lengths.  At  that  point  he  walks  between  the  lanes 
of  traffic,  displaying  arrangements  of  flowers  to  drivers  and 
passengers  who  are  seated  in  the  vehicles,  and  carrying  change  in 
his  pocket  or  hands.  Vance  testified  that  he  could  not  recall  ever 
walking  in  front  of  a  moving  vehicle,  and  could  not  recall  ever 
seeing  an  accident  involving  a  flower  vendor. 

On  Thanksgiving  Day,  1995,  Vance  was  taken  aside  by  Lieutenant 
Joseph  McGillivray,  an  officer  with  the  Intracoastal  District  of 
the  Metro-Dade  Police  Department.  McGillivray  advised  Vance  that 
he  could  not  sell  flowers  on  a  state  road.  At  the  time  McGillivray 
approached  Vance,  Vance  was  standing  on  the  sidewalk.  Several 
weeks  later,  McGillivray  again  approached  Vance  while  Vance  was  on 
the  sidewalk,  and  warned  him  that  he  could  not  sell  flowers  on  a 
state  road.  At  some  point  in  late  February  or  early  March  of  1996, 
McGillivray  confronted  Vance  while  he  was  sitting  on  a  bucket  of 
flowers  on  private  property.  McGillivray  advised  him  that  if  he 
continued  to  sell  flowers  on  the  street  in  violation  of  section 


introduced  evidence  to  contradict  or  rebut  testimony  presented  at 
the  hearing. 


753 


337.406,  he  would  be  arrested  and  not  permitted  to  secure  his 
release  on  bond.  McGillivray  testified  at  the  May  2nd  hearing 
that,  on  this  and  other  occasions,  he  had  observed  Vance  in  the 
roadway  after  the  light  turned  green,  delaying  traffic  and  causing 
motorists  to  honk  their  horns  in  frustration. 

Seralnick,  like  Vance,  sells  flowers  to  motorists  at  the 
intersection  of  Biscayne  Boulevard  and  Ives  Dairy  Road  as  well  as 
other  locations  in  northeastern  Dade  County.  He  has  sold  flowers 
on  the  street  for  the  past  two  years.  His  practice  is  to  stand  at 
the  start  of  the  median  while  waiting  for  a  red  light.  Once  the 
light  turns  red,  he  walks  between  lanes  of  traffic  at  the  beginning 
of  the  line  of  stopped  cars.  As  soon  as  the  light  turns  green,  he 
moves  back  to  the  median,  walks  to  the  head  of  the  intersection  and 
waits  for  the  next  red  light.  Seralnick  testified  that  he  has 
never  walked  in  front  of  a  moving  vehicle,  and  has  never  seen  an 
accident  involving  a  flower  vendor.  He  added  that  each  transaction 
takes  no  more  than  a  couple  of  seconds,  and  that  if  he  is  unable  to 
complete  a  transaction  before  the  light  turns  green,  he  will  walk 
away  from  the  sale. 

On  or  about  January  26,  1996,  Seralnick  was  arrested  and  given 
a  notice  to  appear  for  an  alleged  violation  of  section  337.406. 
Margaret  Romero,  a  Metro-Dade  police  officer  assigned  to  the 
Intracoastal  district,  made  the  arrest.  At  the  May  2nd  hearing, 
Romero  testified  that,  when  she  arrested  Seralnick,  he  was  making 
use  of  a  state  road  in  a  manner  that  interfered  with  the  safe  and 
efficient  movement  of  people  and  property.    She  had  observed 


754 


Seralnick  selling  flowers  on  the  street,  walking  among  cars  stopped 
in  the  two  westbound  left-turn  lanes  of  northbound  Biscayne 
Boulevard  at  the  intersection  with  Ives  Dairy  Road.  According  to 
Romero,  when  the  traffic  light  for  the  left-turn  lanes  turned 
green,  Seralnick  was  still  in  the  road,  which  delayed  the  progress 
of  cars  through  the  turn  and  forced  a  number  of  vehicles  that 
ordinarily  would  have  made  it  through  the  light  to  wait  for  the 
next  green.  Romero  explained  that,  once  Seralnick  saw  her,  he 
stepped  onto  the  median,  at  which  time  she  effected  the  arrest. 
Romero  explained  that  she  was  not  monitoring  the  intersection  for 
the  purpose  of  arresting  flower  vendors  or  any  other  vendors,  but 
rather  as  part  of  her  normal  routine  during  "down  time"  when  she 
was  not  responding  to  a  call  elsewhere. 

McLaughlin  supplies  the  flowers  that  are  sold  by  Vance  and 
Seralnick.  He  drops  off  bunches  of  flowers  at  various  street 
corners,  where  they  are  picked  up  by  flower  vendors.  He  returns  to 
these  corners  at  the  end  of  the  day,  and  picks  up  whatever  flowers 
have  not  been  sold.  McLaughlin  testified  that  he  has  cautioned 
Vance  and  Seralnick  not  to  interfere  with  moving  traffic,  and  that 
he  has  never  observed  one  of  his  vendors  obstruct  a  vehicle.  He  is 
not  aware  of  an  accident  involving  a  vendor  or  an  instance  where  a 
car  had  to  swerve  to  avoid  a  vendor.  McLaughlin  added  that  he  has 
observed  Vance  and  Seralnick  walk  away  from  sales  when  it  appeared 
that  the  transaction  could  not  be  completed  before  the  light  turned 
green.  According  to  McLaughlin,  the  practice  of  soliciting  in  the 
middle  of  streets  in  Dade  County  has  been  going  on  as  long  as  he 


755 


can  remember. 

Lieutenant  McGillivray  testified  that  he  has  seen  Seralnick, 
Vance  and  others  selling  flowers  at  the  intersection  of  Ives  Dairy 
Road  and  Biscayne  Boulevard,  both  of  which  he  described  as  heavily 
traveled  roads.  McGillivray  has  warned  individuals  about 
violations  of  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406  on  many  occasions,  based  on 
activities  at  that  intersection  and  at  other  locations  in  his 
district.  McGillivray  said  he  has  never  given  a  warning  unless  he 
felt  the  individual  was  interfering  with  the  safe  and  efficient 
movement  of  people  and  property  by  wandering  between  lanes  of 
traffic  and  causing  a  delay.  When  questioned  on  cross-examination, 
McGillivray  stated  unequivocally  that  he  would  not  arrest  someone 
under  section  337.406  unless  he  believed  that  the  individual  was 
obstructing  traffic. 

McGillivray  noted  that  the  activities  of  the  Plaintiffs  and 
others  have  generated  complaints  from  neighborhood  citizen  groups. 
According  to  McGillivray,  when  vendors  are  in  the  street  after  the 
light  turns  green,  drivers  are  forced  to  decrease  their  speed, 
change  lanes  or  swerve  to  avoid  hitting  them.  The  delays  caused  by 
the  presence  of  vendors  also  agitates  drivers  in  cars  further  back 
in  the  line,  who  start  to  yell  or  honk  their  horns.  McGillivray 
said  he  has  observed  accidents,  near-accidents  and  traffic  tie-ups 
result  from  the  activities  of  on-street  vendors  and  solicitors  who 
walk  between  lanes  of  traffic  at  busy  intersections.  He  said  that 
he  recalls  incidents  where  drivers  have  jammed  on  their  brakes  ard 
honked  their  horns  in  order  to  avoid  collisions  with  vendors, 


756 


because  of  uncertainty  as  to  whether  the  vendors  would  walk  to  the 
left  or  the  right  in  order  to  avoid  the  rush  of  traffic.  He  has 
observed  cars  forced  to  wait  at  green  lights  to  allow  vendors 
additional  time  to  reach  the  sidewalk  or  median.  McGillivray 
explained  that  the  presence  of  vendors  and  other  solicitors  in  the 
street  causes  anxiety  to  the  many  elderly  drivers  in  the  area  who 
become  frightened  or  unsettled  when  unfamiliar  persons  approach 
their  cars.  The  anxieties  of  these  elderly  drivers  exacerbate  the 
multiple  safety  and  traffic  flow  problems  that  already  exist  on 
Biscayne  Boulevard  and  Ives  Dairy  Road. 

Like  McGillivray,  Officer  Romero  testified  that  she  has 
observed  accidents,  near-accidents  and  traffic  jams  as  a  result  of 
the  activities  of  vendors  who  sell  their  goods  in  the  street  in 
violation  of  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406.  She  stated  that  she  has  made 
arrests  under  the  statute  at  the  intersection  of  Ives  Dairy  Road 
and  Biscayne  Boulevard,  as  well  as  at  other  locations  in  Dade 
County.  Romero  explained  that  she  has  never  made  an  arrest  or 
issued  a  warning  under  this  statute  unless  she  saw  a  dangerous 
condition  or  a  disruption  to  traffic  (except  in  instances  involving 
older  pedestrians) .  According  to  Romero,  when  she  observes  an 
apparent  violation  of  section  337.406,  she  gives  the  violator  a 
warning,  and  advises  him  that  he  will  be  arrested  if  he  continues 
to  obstruct  traffic. 

Vance,  Seralnick  and  McLaughlin  testified  that  they  have  seen 
vendors  for  the  Miami  Herald,  as  well  as  panhandlers  and 
representatives  of  charitable  groups  and  political  organizations, 


757 


engage  in  solicitation  on  state  roads  in  the  vicinity  of  Ives  Dairy 
Road  and  Biscayne  Boulevard.  Nevertheless,  according  to  the 
Plaintiffs,  they  have  never  seen  Metro-Dade  police  officers  arrest 
or  warn  these  individuals  for  violating  the  law.  Officer  Romero 
testified,  without  contradiction,  that  she  has  warned  and  arrested 
individuals  other  than  flower  vendors  for  violations  of  Fla.  Stat. 
§337.406.  Lieutenant  McGillivray  added  that  although  he  has  not 
arrested  or  warned  individuals  other  than  flower  sellers,  officers 
under  his  command  have  done  so.  McGillivray  explained  that  most  of 
the  vendors  who  used  to  sell  their  wares  on  the  street  no  longer  do 
so,  as  a  result  of  Metro-Dade's  enforcement  of  section  337.406.  He 
explained  that  charitable  groups  sometimes  attempt  to  solicit 
contributions  while  standing  in  the  roadway,  but  that  these  groups 
either  leave  the  area  or  move  to  the  sidewalk  after  being  advised 
of  the  applicable  laws  and  regulations. 

Both  McGillivray  and  Romero  acknowledged  that  they  have  not 
enforced  section  337.406  against  vendors  of  the  Miami  Herald  or 
other  newspapers.  According  to  McGillivray,  the  officers  in  his 
district  have  refrained  from  enforcing  the  statute  against  Herald 
vendors  because  of  a  bulletin  from  the  Police  Department's  legal 
staff,  which  expressed  concern  about  the  constitutionality  of 
applying  a  former  version  of  section  337.406  to  newspaper  sales. 
McGillivray  and  Romero  testified  that  Metro-Dade  officers  do  not 
arrest  flower  vendors  on  the  basis  of  the  content  of  their  message 
or  their  race,  religion  or  political  beliefs.  Indeed,  both 
McGillivray  and  Romero  testified  that  they  are  not  aware  of  the 

8 


45-964  98  -  9S 


758 


race,  religion  or  political  beliefs  of  the  Plaintiffs,  and  have 
never  overheard  the  substance  of  Plaintiffs'  remarks  to  motorists 
while  selling  their  goods. 

B. 

Plaintiffs  filed  their  complaint  on  March  18,  1996,  along  with 
a  motion  for  preliminary  injunction  pursuant  to  Rule  65  of  the 
Federal  Rules  of  Civil  Procedure.^  The  complaint  arises  under  42 
U.S.C.  §1983,  and  seeks  a  declaration  that  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406  is 
overbroad  and  unconstitutional  as  applied  or  selectively  enforced 
in  violation  of  the  First  and  Fourteen  Amendments  to  the  United 
States  Constitution.  Plaintiffs  request  an  injunction  prohibiting 
enforcement  of  the  statute,  damages  and  other  relief. 

The  Plaintiffs  moved  for  a  hearing  on  their  request  for  an 
injunction  in  an  emergency  motion  dated  April  4,  1995.  The  parties 
appeared  for  a  status  conference  on  April  15,  1996,  at  which  time 
the  Court  scheduled  the  parties  for  an  evidentiary  hearing.  At  the 
hearing  on  May  2nd,  the  Court  took  testimony  from  five  witnesses 
and  listened  to  oral  argument  on  the  outstanding  motions.  In  a 
lengthy  Order  dated  May  6,  1996,  the  Court  denied  Plaintiffs' 
motion  for  preliminary  injunctive  relief,  finding  no  likelihood  of 
success  on  the  merits.  First,  the  Court  held  that  section  337.406 
is  not  facially  unconstitutional,  because  it  is  narrowly  tailored 
to   serve   the   State   of   Florida's   significant   interest   in 


^The  complaint  initially  named  the  State  of  Florida  as  a  co- 
Defendant.   In  the  May  6th  Order,  however,  we  dismissed  the 
claims  against  the  State  on  Eleventh  Amendment  grounds. 


759 


facilitating  traffic  flow  and  ensuring  the  safety  of  motorists  and 

pedestrians.   Second,  the  Court  held  that  section  337.406  was  not 

unconstitutional  as  applied  to  the  Plaintiffs  and  their  customary 

method  of  selling  flowers,  because  Plaintiffs  had  failed  to  show 

that  their  practice  could  never  violate  the  statute  or  give  rise  to 

the  concerns  that  led  to  its  enactment.   Third,  the  Court  found  no 

persuasive  evidence  that  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406  was  being  selectively 

enforced  against  flower  vendors. 

II. 

The  standard  to  be  applied  in  reviewing  summary  judgment 

motions  is  stated  unambiguously  in  Rule  56(c)  of  the  Federal  Rules 

of  Civil  Procedure: 

The  judgment  sought  shall  be  rendered 
forthwith  if  the  pleadings,  depositions, 
answers  to  interrogatories  and  admissions  on 
file,  together  with  the  affidavits,  if  any, 
show  that  there  is  no  genuine  issue  as  to  any 
material  fact  and  that  the  moving  party  is 
entitled  to  a  judgment  as  a  matter  of  law. 

It  may  be  entered  only  where  there  is  no   genuine  issue  of  material 

fact.   Moreover,  the  moving  party  has  the  burden  of  meeting  this 

exacting  standard.   Adickes  v.  S.H.  Kress  &  Co.,  398  U.S.  144,  157 

(1970) .   As  the  Eleventh  Circuit  has  explained: 

In  assessing  whether  the  movant  has  met  this 

burden,  the  courts  should  view  the  evidence        ^.£, 

and  all  factual  inferences  therefrom  in  the 

light  most  favorable  to  the  party  opposing  the 

motion.   Adickes,  398  U.S.  at  157,  90  S.  Ct. 

at   1608;   Marsh,   651   F.2d   at   991.     All 

reasonable  doubts  about  the  facts  should  be 

resolved  in  favor  of  the  non-movant.  Casey 

Enterprises  v.  Am.  Hardware  Mutual  Ins.  Co., 

655  F.2d  598,   602   (5th  Cir.   1981).    If  the 

record  presents  factual  issues,  the  court  must 


10 


760 


not  decide  them;  it  must  deny  the  motion  and 
proceed  to  trial.    Marsh,  651  F.2d  at  991; 

Lighting   Fixture   &   Elec. Supply Qq_. ^Ll. 

Continental  Ins.  Co. ,  420  F.2d  1211,  1213  (5th 
Cir.  1969) .  Summary  judgment  may  be 
inappropriate  even  where  the  parties  agree  on 
the  basic  facts,  but  disagree  about  the 
inferences  that  should  be  drawn  from  these 

facts.   Lighting  Fixture  &  Elec. Supply  Co. , 

420  F.2d  at  1213.  If  reasonable  minds  might 
differ  on  the  inferences  arising  from 
undisputed  facts,  then  the  court  should  deny 
summary  judgment.  Impossible  Electronics,  669 
F.2d  at  1031;  Croley  v.  Matson  Navigation  Co., 
434  F.2d  73,  75  (5th  Cir.  1970). 

Moreover,  the  party  opposing  a  motion  for 
summary  judgment  need  not  respond  to  it  with 
any  affidavits  or  other  evidence  unless  and 
until  the  movant  has  properly  supported  the 
motion  with  sufficient  evidence.  Adickes[ ] , 
398  U.S.  at  160  .  .  .;  Marsh,  651  F.2d  at  991. 
The  moving  party  must  demonstrate  that  the 
facts  underlying  all  the  relevant  legal 
questions  raised  by  the  pleadings  or  otherwise 
are  not  in  dispute,  or  else  summary  judgment 
will  be  denied  notwithstanding  that  the 
non-moving  party  has  introduced  no  evidence 
whatsoever.  Brunswick  Corp.  v.  Vineberg,  370 
F.2d  605,  611-12  (5th  Cir.  1967).  See  Dalke 
V.  Upjohn  Co. ,  555  F.2d  245,  248-49  (9th  Cir. 
1977)  . 

demons  v.  Dougherty  County,  684  F.2d  1365,  1368-69  (11th  Cir. 

1982);  see  also  Amey,  Inc.  v.  Gulf  Abstract  &  Title,  Inc.,  758  F.2d 

1486,  1502  (11th  Cir.  1985),  cert,  denied,  475  U.S.  1107  (1986). 

The  United  States  Supreme  Court  has  provided  significant 

additional  guidance  as  to  the  evidentiary  standard  which  trial 

courts  should  apply  in  ruling  on  a  motion  for  summary  judgment: 

[The  summary  judgment]  standard  mirrors  the 
standard  for  a  directed  verdict  under  Federal 
Rule  of  Civil  Procedure  50(a),  which  is  that 
the  trial  judge  must  direct  a  verdict  if, 
under  the  governing  law,  there  can  be  but  one 
reasonable   conclusion   as   to   the   verdict. 


11 


761 


Brady   v.   Southern R, Co^,   320   U.S.   476, 

479-80,  64  S.  Ct .  232,  234,  88  L.  Ed.  239 
(1943)  . 

Anderson  v.  Liberty  T.obhy .  Inc..  477  U.S.  242,  250  (1986).   The 

Court  in  Anderson  further  acknowledged  that  "[t]he  mere   existence 

of    a    scintilla    of    evidence    in    support    of    the    position    will    be 

insufficient;     there    must    be    evidence    on    which     the    jury    could 

reasonably     find     for     the     [non-movant]  ."         Id.  at  252   (emphasis 

added) .   In  determining  whether  this  evidentiary  threshold  has  been 

met,  the  trial  court  "must  view  the  evidence  presented  through  the 

prism  of  the  substantive  evidentiary  burden"  applicable  to  the 

particular  cause  of  action  before  it.    Id-  at  254.    If  the 

non-movant  in  a  summary  judgment  action  fails  to  adduce  evidence 

which  would  be  sufficient,  when  viewed  in  a  light  most  favorable  to 

the  non-movant,  to  support  a  jury  finding  in  his  favor,  summary 

judgment  may  be  granted.   Id.  at  254-55. 

In  a  companion  case,  the  Supreme  Court  declared  that  a 

non-moving  party's  failure  to  prove  an  essential  element  of  his 

claim  renders  all  factual  disputes  as  to  that  claim  immaterial  and 

requires  the  granting  of  summary  judgment: 

In  our  view,  the  plain  language  of  Rule  56(c) 
mandates  the  entry  of  summary  judgment  .  .  . 
against  a  party  who  fails  to  make  a  showing 
sufficient  to  establish  the  existence  of  an 
element  essential  to  that  party's  case,  and  on 
which  that  party  will  bear  the  burden  of  proof 
at  trial.  In  such  a  situation,  there  can  be 
"no  genuine  issue  as  to  any  material  fact," 
since  a  complete  failure  of  proof  concerning 
an  essential  element  of  the  nonmoving  party's 
case  necessarily  renders  all  other  facts 
immaterial.  The  moving  party  is  "entitled  to 
judgment  as  a  matter  of  law"  because  the 


12 


762 


nonmoving  party  has  failed  to  make  a 
sufficient  showing  on  an  essential  element  of 
her  case  with  respect  to  which  she  has  the 
burden  of  proof. 

Celotex  Corp.  v.  Catrett,  477  U.S.  317,  322-23  (1986)  (emphasis 

added).   We  measure  the  parties'  cross-motions  for  summary  judgment 

against  these  standards. 

III. 

Plaintiffs   now   concede   that   section   337.406,   properly 

interpreted,  is  constitutional  on  its  face.   P'tiff.  Resp. ,  at  8. 

Nevertheless,   they  renew  their  argument  that  the  statute  is 

unconstitutional  as  applied  to  them  and  their  customary  method  of 

selling  flowers.   In  our  May  6th  Order,  we  rejected  the  Plaintiffs' 

argument  on  this  point  in  the  following  terms: 

The  Plaintiffs'  next  argument  concerns  whether 
Fla.  Stat.  §337.406  is  unconstitutional  as 
applied  to  the  Plaintiffs'  conduct  in  selling 
flowers  on  streets  in  North  Dade.  The  issue 
here  is  not  whether,  in  any  specific  instance, 
one  of  the  Plaintiffs  did  or  did  not  violate 
the  statute.  Rather,  the  issue  is  whether 
selling  flowers  in  the  manner  that  the 
Plaintiffs  do  makes  application  of  the  statute 
to  them  —  as  opposed  to  others  — 
unconstitutional,  because  (1)  their  speech 
warrants  special  protection  or  (2)  the  manner 
in  which  the  Plaintiffs  sell  their  flowers  is 
such  that  enforcing  the  statute  against  them 
could  never  serve  the  significant  state 
interests  that  give  rise  to  the  section 
337.406. 

The  Plaintiffs  do  not  —  and  cannot  — 
argue  that  the  speech  element  of  selling 
flowers  is  somehow  entitled  to  a  higher 
measure  of  constitutional  protection  than  the 
speech  associated  with  selling  sandwiches  or 
sunglasses  or  engaging  in  other  commercial 
transactions.  Moreover,  the  evidence 
establishes   that   the   practice   of   mixing 


13 


763 


pedestrian  flower-sellers  with  temporarily 
stopped  motor  vehicles  will,  in  some  if  not 
all  instances,  "pose  a  safety  hazard  [and] 
cause  delays  and  disruptions  to  traffic  as 
vehicles  become  detained  at  traffic  lights 
while  drivers  fumble  for  money  and  vendors 
provide  change."  [News  &  Sun  Sentinel  Co.  V. 
QSX,  702  F.  Supp.  891,  900  (S.D.  Fla.  1988)]. 
In  the  case  at  bar.  Lieutenant  McGillivray  and 
Officer  Romero  testified  to  the  various 
hazards  actually  created  by  vendors  who  peddle 
their  wares  while  walking  between  lanes  of 
traffic  at  red  lights.  These  hazards  include 
drivers  swerving  to  avoid  accidents,  drivers 
slamming  on  their  brakes  to  avoid  collisions 
with  vendors  or  other  cars,  and  drivers  who 
become  agitated  at  the  presence  of  strangers 
near  their  car  window  or  at  vendors'  apparent 
nonchalance  in  stepping  off  the  road  once  the 
light  turns  green. 

Vance  and  Seralnick  testified  that  they 
have  never  been  involved  in  an  accident  as  a 
result  of  their  flower  selling,  and  that  they 
try  to  conduct  their  business  in  a  manner  that 
is  not  dangerous  and  does  not  delay  traffic. 
This  evidence  is  not  compelling,  however.  As 
the  Eight  Circuit  noted  under  similar 
circumstances  in  [Acorn  v.  St.  Louis  CQUntV, 
930  F.2d  591,  596  (8th  Cir.  1991)]: 

The  fact  that  there  was  no  evidence 
of  Acorn's  solicitors  being  hurt  is 
of  no  probative  value.  The 
government  need  not  wait  for 
accidents  to  justify  safety 
regulations.  Nor  is  it  sufficient 
for  Acorn  to  show  that  its 
particular  practices  are  safe  if  the 
practice  of  in-the-roadway 
solicitation  generally  is  dangerous. 
It  is  the  regulation's  relationship 
"to  the  overall  problem  that  the 
government  seeks  to  correct,"  not 
its  necessity  in  Acorn's  particular 
case,  that  determines  its  validity. 

The  evidence  does  not  establish  that  the 
Plaintiffs'  practice  of  selling  flowers  by 
weaving  between  lanes  of  traffic  while  cars 
are  stopped  at  red  lights  —  and  stepping  off 


14 


764 


to  the  sidewalk  or  median  once  the  light  turns 
green  —  is  at  all  times  compatible  with  the 
State's  need  to  ensure  traffic  safety  and 
prevent  unreasonable  delay  to  motorists.  It 
is  inevitable  that  this  practice  will,  on 
occasion,  be  unsafe  or  disruptive,  no  matter 
how  cautious  or  considerate  the  Plaintiffs 
might  be.  Indeed,  on  this  limited  record,  the 
evidence  establishes  that  Vance  and  Seralnick 
do  not  always  conduct  their  business  in  the 
innocuous  manner  that  they  suggest.  Officer 
Romero  testified  that,  when  she  arrested 
Seralnick,  he  had  been  lingering  in  the  left- 
turn  lanes  after  the  traffic  light  turned 
green,  causing  a  delay  that  limited  the  number 
of  cars  able  to  complete  the  turn  before  the 
light  turned  red  again.  Lieutenant 
McGillivray  testified  that  he  has  observed 
Vance  remaining  on  the  street  after  the  light 
turned  green,  disrupting  traffic^  and  causing 
cars  to  honk  their  horns.  Under  these  facts 
and  circumstances,  the  Plaintiffs  have  not  met 
their  burden  of  showing  that  the  enforcement 
of  section  337.406  against  them  could  never 
serve  the  State  of  Florida's  interest  in 
preventing  interference  with  the  movement  of 
people  and  property  on  state  roads. 

Order,  at  23-26  (citations  to  factual  findings  omitted) . 

The  principal  basis  for  the  Plaintiffs'  opposition  to  summary 

judgment  is  their  supposition  that,  as  far  as  the  County  is 

concerned,  the  Plaintiffs'  customary  method  of  selling  flowers  can 

never  be  carried  out  in  a  manner  that  does  not  violate  the  statute. 

According  to  the  Plaintiffs,  the  County  is  prepared  to  arrest 

flower  vendors  without  regard  to  whether  their  conduct  in  any 

particular  instance   "interferes  with  the  safe  and  efficient 

movement  of  people  and  property."   Thus,  they  seek  "protection  from 

this  [C]ourt  to  prevent  officers  of  Dade  County  from  enforcing  a 

new  policy  of  the  County  to  make  arrests  of  flower  vendors, 

regardless  of  whether  plaintiffs  obstruct  traffic  or  otherwise 

15 


765 


interfere  in  the  free  flow  of  traffic."   P'tiff.  Resp. ,  at  1. 

This  argument  is  unconvincing.  To  begin  with,  the  record  does 
not  support  the  Plaintiffs'  belief  that  Metro-Dade  police  are 
arresting  flower  vendors  under  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406  without  regard 
to  the  limitations  of  the  statute.  The  Defendant  acknowledges  for 
purposes  of  its  motion  that  "some  arrests  occurred  although  the 
accused  was  able  to  return  to  the  median  island  or  the  shoulder 
before  the  light  turned  green  and  traffic  began  to  move."  Def. 
Mot.,  at  2.  There  is  no  evidence,  however,  that  these  arrests  were 
made  without  a  sufficient  basis  for  the  arresting  officer  to 
believe  that  the  accused  was  "interfer  [  ing]  with  the  safe  and 
efficient  movement  of  people  and  property."  During  the  May  2nd 
evidentiary  hearing.  Officers  McGillivray  and  Romero  stated 
unequivocally  that  they  would  not  cite  an  individual  for  a 
violation  of  the  statute  unless  they  felt  that  the  individual  was 
obstructing  the  flow  of  traffic  or  pedestrians.  See  Order  of  May 
6,  1996,  at  6-8.  Plaintiffs  have  come  forward  with  no  record 
evidence  to  suggest  that  Metro  Dade  officers  regularly  are  abusing 
the  statute,  or  have  a  policy  of  making  arrests  under  section 
337.406  without  probable  cause  to  believe  that  an  infraction  has 
occurred. 

The  Plaintiffs  call  our  attention  to  what  appears  to  be  a  Dade 
County  arrest  form  dated  January  2,  1996.  See  P'tiff.  Resp.,  at 
exh.  6.  The  arrest  form,  executed  by  an  Officer  Ankney,  charges 
Plaintiff  Seralnick  with  violations  of  two  Florida  statutes: 
section  337.406,  and  a  separate  provision  for  "doing  business 

16 


766 


without  a  license."  The  narrative  portion  of  the  report  explains 
that  Seralnick  was  observed  "walking  along  the  roadway  for  the 
purpose  of  selling  merchandise."'  Plaintiffs  seem  to  suggest  that 
this  police  report,  standing  alone,  is  sufficient  to  create  a 
triable  issue  of  fact  on  the  question  of  whether  the  County  has  a 
policy  of  enforcing  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406  without  regard  to  whether 
a  violation  of  the  statute  has  taken  place.  We  disagree.  Absent 
meaningful  details  about  the  circumstances  leading  to  the  arrest, 
it  is  impossible  for  us  to  ascertain  whether  the  arresting  officer 
had  cause  to  believe  Seralnick  was  "interfering  with  the  safe  and 
efficient  movement  of  people  and  property"  at  the  time  of  his 
arrest.  Moreover,  even  affording  this  police  report  the  weight 
that  Plaintiffs  suggest,  the  record  falls  short  of  establishing  a 
policy  or  pattern  of  making  arrests  pursuant  to  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406 
without  regard  to  the  statute's  limitations. 

The  heart  of  the  Plaintiffs'  argument  is  their  opposition  to 
the  County's  assiamption  that  there  can  be  an  interference  "with  the 
safe  and  efficient  movement  of  people  and  property"  even  in 
situations  where  vendors  are  able  to  leap  onto  the  median  or 
sidewalk  before  the  light  turns  green.    Plaintiffs  once  again 


Although  Plaintiffs  refer  in  passing  to  deposition 
testimony  concerning  this  arrest,  no  testimony  is  cited  in  the 
briefs,  and  the  deposition  transcript  is  not  in  the  record. 
Thus,  Plaintiffs'  statement  that  "[i]n  his  deposition  testimony 
officer  Ankney  stated  that  he  was  unaware  that  this  statute  had 
been  declared  unconstitutional  .  .  .."is  not  competent  evidence. 
P'tiff.  Resp.,  at  3 .   We  note,  however,  that  the  version  of 
section  337.406  on  the  books  in  January,  1996  had  not   been 
declared  unconstitutional  by  any  Court. 

17 


767 


insist  that  they  sell  their  goods  in  a  manner  that  does  not  create 

a  hazard  to  vehicles  or  pedestrians.   They  also  stress  that  Metro- 

Dade  Police  cannot  recount  a  single  instance  where  an  accident 

resulted  from  their  conduct.   But  as  this  Court  suggested  in  its 

May  6th  Order,  no  reasonable  trier  of  fact  could  find  that  the 

Plaintiffs'  customary  practice  of  weaving  between  lanes  of  traffic 

while  cars  are  stopped  at  red  lights  —  and  attempting  to  step  off 

to  the  sidewalk  or  median  once  the  light  turns  green  —  could  never 

"interfere  with  the  safe  and  efficient  movement  of  people  and 

property."   See  Order,  at  2  5-2  6.   Even  in  situations  where  the 

Plaintiffs  managed  to  step  off  to  the  median  or  sidewalk  before  the 

light  turned  green,  an  officer  could  conclude  that,  under  the 

circumstances,   the   Plaintiffs'   presence   in   the   roadway   had 

threatened  to  undermine  the  safe  and  efficient  movement  of  people 

and  property.   See  Def.  Mot.,  at  4  (noting  that  individuals  who 

engage  in  on-the-roadway  solicitation  "distract  drivers  from  .  .  . 

watching  the  intersection  and  being  alert  to  move  when  the  light 

changes,  and  thereby  create  probable  cause  to  believe  that  traffic 

is  thereby  impeded") .   As  the  Eighth  Circuit  observed  in  Acorn  v. 

:,  798  F.2d  1260  (9th  Cir .  1986): 

Unlike  oral  advocacy  of  ideas,  or  even  the 
distribution  of  literature,  successful 
solicitation  requires  the  individual  to 
respond  by  searching  for  currency  and  passing 
it  along  to  the  solicitor.  Even  after  the 
solicitor  has  departed,  the  driver  must  secure 
any  change  returned,  replace  a  wallet  or  close 
a  purse,  and  then  return  proper  attention  to  i.  z 
the  full  responsibilities  of  a  motor  vehicle 
driver.  The  direct  personal  solicitation  from 
drivers  distracts   them  from  their  primary  duty 

18 


768 


to  watch  the  traffic  and  potential  hazards  in 
the  road,  observe  all  traffic  control  signals 
or  warnings,  and  prepare  to  move  through  the 
intersection . 

789  F.2d  at  1269;  see  also  City  of  Baton  Rouge  876  F.2d  at  498 

(quoting  this  language) .   In  City  of  Phoenix,  as  in  City  of  Baton 

Rouae .  the  Court  of  Appeals  applied  these  principles  to  uphold 

against   First   Amendment   challenge   municipal   ordinances   that 

effectively  banned  all  roadway  solicitations,  whether  or  not  they 

"interfered  with  the  safe  and  efficient  movement  of  people  and 

property."   These  cases  reflect  the  courts'  ambivalence  with  the 

notion  that  no  obstruction  of  pedestrian  or  vehicular  traffic 

exists  so  long  as  the  individual  making  the  solicitation  is  able  to 

step  off  the  roadway  when  the  light  turns  red.   This  Court  shares 

that  ambivalence,  and  is  unpersuaded  by  Plaintiffs'  suggestion  that 

Fla.   Stat.   §337.406   cannot   constitutionally   be   applied   in 

situations  where  they  are  not  found  in  the  roadway  at  the  precise 

moment  vehicular  traffic  resumes. 

To  reiterate,  the  question  for  purposes  of  determining  whether 

a  statute  is  unconstitutional  as  applied  is  not  whether  it  has  been 

applied  properly  in  any  particular  instance;  rather,  we  must  ask  if 

the   statute   could   ever  be   applied   constitutionally   to   the 

Plaintiffs'  customary  practice.   See,  e.g. ,  County  of  St.  Louis, 

930  F.2d  at  596.   The  answer  to  this  question  is  clear.   Even 

assuming  that  the  Plaintiffs  invariably  are  able  to  leap  onto  the 

median  or  sidewalk  before  the  light  turns  green   (a  factual 

predicate  not  supported  by  the  record) ,  no  reasonable  trier  of  fact 


19 


769 


could  disagree  that  their  presence  in  the  roadway  at  certain  points 

while  the  light  is  red  may  create  a  risk  of  undermining  the  safe 

and  efficient  movement  of  people  and  property  on  the  road,  within 

the  meaning  of  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406.   No  genuine  issue  remains, 

therefore,  as  to  whether  the  statute  is  unconstitutional  as  applied 

to  the  Plaintiffs'  customary  method  of  selling  flowers.   Metro-Dade 

police  are  entitled  to  enforce  the  statute  on  a  case-by-case  basis; 

and  to  the  extent  that  one  of  the  Plaintiffs  believes  that,  in  a 

particular  instance,  he  has  been  arrested  without  probable  cause, 

section  1983  provides  an  altogether  satisfactory  vehicle  for  relief 

from  that  incident. 

Vance  and  Seralnick  next  reprise  their  argument  that  Fla. 

Stat.  §337.406  is  being  selectively  enforced  against  them.   As 

support  for  this  contention.  Plaintiffs  once  again  highlight  the 

County's  practice  of  enforcing  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406  against  flower 

sellers,  but  not  against  vendors  of  the  Miami  Herald.   As  noted  in 

the  May  6th  Order,  however,  this  fact  does  not  establish  selective 

enforcement: 

In  order  to  establish  a  claim  for  selective 
enforcement,  a  plaintiff  must  show  (1)  he  has 
been  singled  out  for  prosecution  among  others 
similarly  situated  who  commit  the  same  offense 
and  (2)  the  singling  out  was  invidious  or  done 

in  bad  faith.   £££  Geaneas  v. Willets,  911 

F.2d  579,  587  (11th  Cir.  1990),  cert,  denied 

sub. nom,     499  U.S.  955  (1991);  Fillingim  v. 

Boone,  835  F.2d  1389,  1399  (11th  Cir.  1988); 
United  States  v.  Lichenstein,  610  F.2d  1272, 
1281  (5th  Cir.  1980)  (listing  racial  and 
religious  discrimination  as  examples  of 
impermissible  considerations) .  The  burden  of 
proof  in  making  a  prima  facie  showing  of 
selective  prosecution  has  been  characterized 


20 


770 


as  "heavy."  Fillingim,  835  F.2d  at  1399 
(citing  United  States  v.  Johnson.  577  F.2d 
1304,  1308  (5th  Cir.  1978)).  These  cases 
reflect  the  principle  that  even  the  conscious 
exercise  of  some  selectivity  in  enforcement  of 
a  statute  is  not  in  and  of  itself  a 
constitutional  violation.  Oyler  v.  Boles,  368 
U.S.  488,  450  (1962);  Owen  v.  Wainwright,  806 
F.2d  1519  (11th  Cir.  1986),  cert,  denied  sub, 
nom.,     481    U.S.    1071     (1987) . 

The  Plaintiffs  allege  that  the  section  337.406 
has  been  applied  selectively  by  Dade  County. 
See  Compl.  at  517  (asserting  that  "while 
plaintiffs  and  others  selling  flowers  to 
motorists  have  been  arrested  and  threatened 
with  arrest  by  officers  of  the  Dade  County 
Police  Department  other  vendors,  and 
specifically  vendors  of  the  Miami  Herald,  a 
local  newspaper,  have  not  been  so  harassed  or 
threatened  with  arrest,  and  have  been 
specifically  permitted  to  sell  newspapers  at 
the  same  locations  where  plaintiffs  have  been 
deprived  of  the  right  to  sell  their 
products")  .  All  three  of  the  Plaintiffs 
testified  that  they  were  not  aware  of  anyone 
other  than  a  flower  vendor  being  arrested  for 
a  violation  of  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406. 
McGillivray  and  Romero,  however,  stated 
unequivocally  that  Metro-Dade  officers  have 
arrested  or  warned  others  for  apparent 
violations  of  the  statute.  Moreover, 
McGillivray  and  Romero  made  plain  that  they 
would  not  make  an  arrest  under  the  statute 
unless  they  genuinely  believed  that  the 
individual,  whatever  his  activity,  was  causing 
a  delay  or  creating  a  safety  hazard.  Although 
the  evidence  establishes  that  officers  do  not 
arrest  newspaper  vendors,  McGillivray 
explained  that  this  policy  is  based  not  a 
desire  to  limit  all  speech  other  than  that 
contained  in  newspapers,  but  rather  a  good 
faith  belief  that  such  arrests  or  citations 
would  be  incompatible  with  the  First 
Amendment . 

These  facts  make  clear  that  the 
Plaintiffs  have  not  been  singled  out  for 
enforcement  and  that  flower  vendors  are  not 
targeted  on  the  basis  of  the  content  of  their 
speech.   We  stress  that  the  pertinent  question 


21 


771 


is  whether  the  Plaintiffs  —  and  flower  sellers 
in  general  —  were  the  subject  of  selective 
enforcement,  and  whether  the  decision  to 
target  these  vendors  (as  opposed  to  others 
violating  the  statute)  was  done  in  bad  faith 
or  for  an  invidious  motive.  Thus,  the  mere 
fact  that  Metro  Dade  Police  officers  did  not 
arrest  or  warn  Miami  Herald  vendors  does  not, 
in  and  of  itself,  establish  that  the  officers 
selected  the  flower  vendors  for  impermissible 
reasons  or  on  the  basis  of  their  message.  At 
all  events,  the  record  evidence  plainly  does 
not  support  the  Plaintiffs'  contention  that 
Fla.  Stat.  §337.406  was  enforced  solely 
against  flower  vendors.  The  Plaintiffs'  Equal 
Protection  claim  is,  therefore,  without 
foundation. 

Order,  at  26-28  (emphasis  added)  (citations  to  factual  findings 

omitted).^   Plaintiffs  have  introduced  no  persuasive  new  evidence 

or  case  law  to  support  their  selective  enforcement  claim,  which 

continues  to  rest  on  the  mistaken  assumption  that  the  County's 

reluctance  to  enforce  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406  against  newspaper  vendors 

establishes  the  selectivity  of  its  enforcement  of  the  statute 

against  all  other  offenders. 


^Testimony  at  the  May  2nd  hearing  established  that  the 
County's  concern  about  enforcing  section  337.406  against 
newspaper  vendors  stems  from  the  Judge  Hastings'  decision  in  Cox. 
In  CoXf  the  court  held  that  the  former  version  of  section  337.406 
was  unconstitutional,  in  the  context  of  a  case  brought  by  the 
publisher  of  various  newspapers  who  argued  that  the  statute 
abridged  First  Amendment  free  press  rights.   Shortly  after  Cox, 
in  a  memorandum  dated  June  8,  1989,  the  Police  Legal  Bureau 
advised  officers  that  enforcement  of  the  statute  was  to  be 
immediately  discontinued.   See  P'tiff.  Resp.,  at  exh.  1. 
Subsequent  to  the  date  of  this  memorandum,  the  language  of 
section  337.406  was  revised  and  narrowed  in  an  effort  to  avoid 
any  perceived  constitutional  infirmities.   See  Order  of  May  6, 
1996,  at  18  n.6.   The  issue  of  whether  section  337.406,  in  its 
present  form,  may  be  constitutionally  enforced  against  newspaper 
vendors  is  not  before  this  Court,  and  Plaintiffs'  argument  that 
newspaper  vendors  create  every  bit  as  much  of  a  safety  risk  as 
other  roadside  vendors  is  of  no  moment  here. 


22 


772 


Plaintiffs  do  cite  a  February  12,  1996  memorandum  from  Robert 

Diers,  a  Lieutenant  with  the  Special  Operations  Unit,  to  certain 

police  personnel.   The  memorandum  states  the  following: 

We  have  received  numerous  complaints  reference 
illegal  flower  vendors  in  the  area  of  Ives 
Dairy  Road  and  Biscayne  Boulevard,  and  Miami 
Gardens  Drive  and  Biscayne  Boulevard. 

As  well  as  being  illegal,  these  vendors  take 
customers  away  from  legitimate  business  owners 
who  pay  rent  and  taxes  in  order  to  operate 
their  businesses.  They  also  present  a  traffic 
hazard  to  motorists  who  have  to  stop  because 
another  motorist  is  obstructing  traffic  to 
make  a  purchase  from  the  vendor.  It  should 
also  be  noted  that  many  of  these  vendors  have 
outstanding  bench  warrants  for  failing  to 
appear  in  court  for  previous  vending  arrests. 

Please  assign  a  unit  from  your  squad  to 
investigate  these  vendors  and  take  the 
appropriate  enforcement  action.  Attached  is  a 
copy  of  Legal  Bulletin  95-4,  which  lists  the 
County  Ordinances  and  Florida  State  statutes 
that  are  applicable  to  these  situations. 

P'tiff.  Resp. ,  at  exh.  5. 

Plaintiffs  highlight  this  memorandum  as  evidence  that  the 

County  is  arresting  flower  vendors  not  because  they  threaten 

motorist  and  pedestrian  safety,  but  rather  because  they  are  drawing 

business  from  local  merchants.   The  record  plainly  does  not  support 

this  accusation,  nor  the  concomitant  assumption  that  arrests  are 

being  made  even  if  the  Plaintiffs  are  not  obstructing  pedestrian  or 

vehicular  traffic.   Moreover,  a  claim  of  selective  enforcement 

requires  proof  that  "the  selection  was  deliberately  based  upon  an 

unjustifiable  standard  such  as  race,  religion  or  other  arbitrary 

classification."   Oyler ,  368  U.S.  at  456;  cf.  United  States  v. 


23 


773 


Armstrong,  —  U.S.  — ,  116  S.  Ct.  1480,  1486-87  (1996)  (holding  that, 
to  establish  a  claim  of  selective  prosecution  based  on  race,  the 
defendant  must  meet  a  "demanding  standard"  and  produce  "clear 
evidence"  that  similarly  situated  individuals  of  a  different  race 
were  not  prosecuted) .  The  Diers  memorandum  does  not  constitute 
significant  proof  of  the  kind  of  invidious  motive  that  gives  rise 
to  a  constitutional  violation,  and  Plaintiffs  cite  no  case  law  to 
the  contrary.  Indeed,  Plaintiffs  concede  that  "[i]n  this  case, 
flower  vendors  are  [not]  a  'suspect  class.'"  P'tiff.  Resp. ,  at  10. 
For  all  of  the  foregoing  reasons,  no  reasonable  trier  of  fact 
could  conclude  that  Fla.  Stat.  §337.406  is  being  applied  in  an 
unconstitutionally  restrictive  or  selective  manner.  The  Plaintiffs 
ask  us  to  rule  that  they  "are  entitled  as  a  matter  of  law  to  sell 
flowers  to  motorists  stopped  in  the  street,  so  long  as  they  do  not 
obstruct  traffic."  P'tiff.  Resp.,  at  6.  But  what  Plaintiffs  seek 
is  nothing  more  or  less  than  what  the  statute  permits  now.  The 
essence  of  Plaintiffs'  objection  is  their  belief  that  their 
customary  sales  practice  does  not  obstruct  traffic,  and  can  never 
give  rise  to  the  safety  and  efficiency  concerns  that  led  to  the 
statute's  enactment.  But  absent  some  persuasive  indication  that 
their  method  of  selling  flowers  can  never  create  a  safety  hazard  or 
interfere  with  the  smooth  passage  of  vehicles  or  pedestrians,  or 
that  Metro-Dade  officers  have  a  policy  of  regularly  arresting 
individuals  even  if  they  have  no  probable  cause  to  believe  that  an 
offense  has  occurred,  it  is  not  for  us  to  enjoin  the  County  from 
enforcing  an  otherwise  constitutional  law.   The  Plaintiffs  remain 

24 


774 


free  to  sell  flowers  on  state  roads;  they  simply  may  not  do  so  in 
a  manner  that  violates  a  state  statute. 

Accordingly,  it  is  hereby 

ORDERED  AND  ADJUDGED  that  the  Defendant's  motion  for  summary 

judgment  is  GRANTED,  and  the  Plaintiffs'  cross-motion  is  DENIED. 

All  other  pending  motions  are  DENIED  AS  MOOT.   The  Defendant  shall 

submit  a  proposed  Order  of  Final  Judgment  within  ten  (10)  days  of 

the  date  of  this  Order. 

DONE  AND  ORDERED  in  Miami,  this  "^'^^   day  of  October, 

1996. 


STANLEY  MAReeS 

UNITED  STATES  DISTRICT  JUDGE 


copies  to: 
counsel  of  record 


25 


775 


I.   BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

1.  Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used.) 
Rodney  W.  Sippel 

2.  Address:   List  current  place  of  residence  and  office 
address (es) . 

Home:        Kirkwood,  Missouri 

Office:      Husch  &  Eppenberger 

100  North  Broadway,  Suite  1300 
St.  Louis,  Missouri   63102 

3.  Date  and  place  of  birth. 

July  26,  1956;  Jefferson  City,  Missouri 

4.  Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's 
name).   List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and 
business  address (es). 

Married; 

Mary  (Manning)  Sippel 

Nurse 

Cardinal  Glennon  Children's  Hospital 

14  65  South  Grand  Boulevard 

St.  Louis,  Missouri  63104 

5.  Education:   List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have 
attended,  including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees 
received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

Washington  University  School  of  Law 

St.  Louis,  Missouri 

Dates  Attended:  August,  1978  through  Decerober,  1981 

Degree:  J.D.,  December,  1981 

University  of  Tulsa 

Tulsa,  Oklahoma 

Dates  Attended:  August,  1974  through  June,  1978 

Degree:  B.S. ,  with  Honors,  June,  1978 


Employment  Record:   List  (by  year)  all  business  or 
professional  corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other 
enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and 


STL-E3e592.10 


776 


organizations,  nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms, 
with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer,  director, 
partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  from 
college. 

1978  Employee,  Hational  Museum  of  Transport 

to  3015  Barrett  Station  Road 

June,  1979       St.  Louis,  Missouri   63122 


June,  1979 

to 

May,  1980 


Staff  Assistant 

Office  of  U.  S.  Senator 

Thomas  F.  Eagle ton 

1520  Market 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63102 


May,  1980 

to 

November,  1980 


Field  Director 

Eagleton  Campaign  Committee 

7701  Clayton  Road 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63105 


November,  1980 

to 

March,  1982 


Staff  Assistant 
Office  of  U.S.  Senator 

Thomas  F.  Eagleton 
1520  Market 
St.  Louis,  Missouri   63102 


March,  1982 

to 

December,  1988 


Associate 

Husch  &  Eppenberger 

100  North  Broadway,  Suite  1300 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63102 


January,  1989 

to 

/^ril  1993 


Partner 

Husch  &  Eppenberger 

100  North  Broadway,  Suite  1300 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63102 


May,  1993        Administrative  Assistant 

to  Congressional  Office  of  U.S.  Congressman 

October,  1995    Richard  A.  Gephardt 

11140  South  Towne  Square  #201 
St.  Louis,  Missouri   63104 

October,  1995    Partner 

to  Vice-chairman  Litigation  Department 

Present  Husch  &  Eppenberger 

100  North  Broadway,  Suite  1300 
St.  Louis,  Missouri   63102 


STL-538S92.10 


777 


Military  Service:   Have  you  had  any  military  service?   If 
so,  give  particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of 
service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of 
discharge  received. 

No. 

Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships, 
honorary  degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that 
you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

Eagle  Scout 

University  of  Tulsa 

Phi  Eta  Sigma  (Freshman  Honorary  Society) 
Omicron  Delta  Kappa  (Leadership  Honorary  Society) 
Mortar  Board  (Scholarship/Leadership  Honorary 

Society) 
W.V.  Holloway  Prize  in  Political  Science 
Outstanding  Senior  Award,  1978 
Rhodes  Scholar  Nominee 

Washington  University  School  of  Law 

Order  of  the  Barristers 
Moot  Court  National  Competition  Team 

International  Law  Moot  Court  National  Competition  Team: 
•   National  Semi-Finalist 

Bar  Associations:   List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or 
judicial-related  committees  or  conferences  of  which  you 
are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates 
of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Bar  Association  of  Metropolitan  St.  Louis 
Missouri  Bar  Association 
American  Bar  Association 


10.  Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you 
belong  that  are  active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies. 
Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 


Lobbying:        None 


-  3  - 


STL-536592.10 


778 


other : 

St.  Louis  Zoo  Friends:  since  approx.  1992 
St.  Louis  Art  Museum:  since  approx.  1992 

University  of  Tulsa  Alumni  Association:  since  1978 

•  served  as  St.  Louis  Coordinator 

•  served  on  National  Board  of  Directors 

KETC/Channel  9  (Public  Television  Station) : 
currently  a  member  and  have  been  a  member 
in  other  years . 

11.  Court  Admission:   List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been 
admitted  to  practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses 
if  any  such  memberships  lapsed.   Please  explain  the 
reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.   Give  the  same 
information  for  administrative  bodies  which  require 
special  admission  to  practice. 

Missouri  Supreme  Court,  1982 

United  States  District  Court 

for  the  Eastern  District  of  Missouri,  1982 

United  States  District  Court 

for  the  Southern  District  of  Illinois,  1987 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals 
for  the  Eighth  Circuit,  1984 

12.  Published  Writings:   List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates 
of  books,  articles,  reports,  or  other  published  material 
you  have  written  or  edited.   Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee. 
Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues 
involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.   If  there 
were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily 
available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

As  part  of  a  CLE  publication  ^^For  the  Defense:  Limiting 
Damages  in  Missouri",  I  wrote  a  chapter  "Discovery 
Techniques  for  the  Defense . " 

I  have  also  written  an  outline  on  Noncompetition  Agreements 
under  Missouri  Law,  which  has  been  distributed  at  CLE's  as 
a  hand-out. 


-  4 

STL-538592.10 


779 


13.  Health:   What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?   List 
the  date  of  your  last  physical  examination. 

Excellent.   May,  1996. 

14.  Judicial  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  judicial 
offices  you  have  held,  whether  such  position  was  elected 
or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of 
each  such  court. 

None 

15.  Citations:   If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide: 

(1)  citations  for  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you 
have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for 
all  appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed 
or  where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant 
criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and 

(3)  citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or 
state  constitutional  issues,  together  with  the  citation 
to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.   If  any  of 
the  opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please 
provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

N/A 

16.  Public  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  public 
offices  you  have  held,  other  than  judicial  offices, 
including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions 
were  elected  or  appointed.   State  (chronologically)  any 
unsuccessful  candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

None 

17.  Legal  Career: 

a.       Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and 
experience  after  graduation  from  law  school 
including: 

1.      whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge, 
and  if  so,  the  name  of  the  judge,  the 
court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you 
were  a  clerk: 

I  did  not  serve  as  a  clerk. 


-  5  - 


STL-S36E92.10 


780 


whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so, 
the  addresses  and  dates; 

I  have  never  practiced  alone. 

the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law    ' 
firms  or  offices,  companies  or 
governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have 
been  connected,  and  the  nature  of  your 
connection  with  each. 

March,  1982  to  Decen±)er,  1988 

Associate 

Husch  &  Eppenberger 

100  North  Broadway,  Suite  1300 

St.  Louis,  Missouri  63102 

January,  1989  to  April,  1993 

Partner 

Husch  &   Eppenberger 

100  North  Broadway,  Suite  1300 

St.  Louis,  Missouri  63102 

•  1988-1991  -  Chairman 
Hiring  Committee 

•  1989-1993  -  Coordinator 
Volunteer  Lawyer  Program 

May,  1993  to  October,  1995 

Administrative  Assistant 

Congressional  Office  of 

U.S.  Congressman  Richard  A.  Gephardt 

11140  South  Towne  Square  #201 

St.  Louis,  Missouri  63104 

October,  1995  to  Present 

Partner 

Husch  &  Eppenberger 

100  North  Broadway,  Suite  1300 

St.  Louis,  Missouri  63102 

•  Vice  Chairman  -  Litigation 

Department 

•  Compensation  Committee 


What  has  been  the  general  character  of 
your  law  practice,  dividing  it  into 

-  6  - 


STL-538592.10 


781 


periods  with  dates  if  its  character  has 
changed  over  the  years. 

I  have  handled  hundreds  of  litigation 
matters  ranging  from  personal  injury 
claims  to  RICO  and  antitrust  cases. 

My  practice  has  evolved  from  defense  of 
p>ersonal  injury  cases  to  complex 
commercial  litigation  during  the  past  15 
years . 

Upon  graduation  from  law  school,  I  joined 
the  St.  Louis  law  firm  of  Husch  & 
Eppenberger.   My  initial  focus  was 
defense  of  personal  injury  cases.   The 
primary  client  in  these  matters  was  the 
Bi-State  Development  Agency  (the  local 
p\iblic  transportation  authority)  .   From 
1985  through  1968,  I  was  the  supervising 
attorney  for  Bi-State  cases  assigned  to 
Husch  &  Eppenberger.   At  any  given  time, 
I  handled  a  docket  of  at  least  30  to  40 
personal  injury  cases  pending  in  the 
Circuit  Court  of  the  City  of  St.  Louis. 
The  nature  of  the  personal  injury  cases 
ranged  from  "soft  tissue"  injuries  to 
wrongful  death  cases .   The  volume  of 
personal  injury  cases  I  was  handling 
dictated  that  I  was  on  the  trial  docket 
on  almost  a  weekly  basis. 

Even  while  I  was  managing  a  substantial 
personal  injury  caseload,  I  always 
handled  a  few  commercial  cases  for 
lending  institutions.   As  the  number  and 
complexity  of  the  commercial  cases  grew, 
my  practice  shifted  over  time  toward  a 
commercial  litigation  practice.  This 
transition  also  shifted  the  focus  of  my 
practice  from  the  state  courts  to  the 
federal  courts.   For  exanple,  my  personal 
injury  docket  of  30  to  40  cases  was 
typically  pending  in  the  Circuit  Court 
for  the  City  of  St.  Louis.   Today,  I  do 
not  have  a  single  case  pending  in  the 
City  Circuit  Court.   Rather,  the 
commercial  cases  I  am  currently  handling 


-  7  - 

STL-536592.10 


782 


are  almost  exclusively  pending  in  the 
United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Eastern  District  of  Missouri  or  other 
federal  courts . 

Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and 
mention  the  areas,  if  any,  in  which  you 
have  specialized. 

My  current  coinmercial  litigation  practice 
includes  cases  involving  federal 
antitrust  law,  the  Uniform  Commercial 
Code,  lender  liability,  non-compete 
agreements  and  Lanham  Act  claims 
(primarily  disputes  over  counterfeit 
merchandise) .   During  the  past  year,  my 
clients  have  primarily  been  the  General 
Electric  Capital  Corporation  and  Lloyd's 
of  London  in  commercial  matters,  and  the 
St.  Louis  Convention  and  Visitors 
Commission  in  its  antitrust  case  against 
the  National  Football  League. 

Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently, 
occasionally,  or  not  at  all?  If  the 
frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court 
varied,  describe  each  such  variance,  giving 
dates. 

During  the  first  seven  years  of  my 
practice,  I  was  in  court  on  a  weekly  basis. 
As  my  practice  evolved  from  personal  injury 
defense  (primarily  state  court  cases)  to 
complex  commercial  defense  (primarily 
federal  court  cases)  my  court  appearances 
became  less  frequent. 

What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts:   60% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record;   35% 

(c)  other  courts.   5% 

What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil;   99% 

(b)  criminal.   1% 


S7L-63e59:.10 


783 


4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of 
record  you  tried  to  verdict  or  judgment 
(rather  than  settled) ,  indicating  whether 
you  were  sole  counsel,  chief  counsel,  or 
associate  counsel. 

I  have  handled  at  least  15  cases  to 
verdict  or  judgment.   Six  of  these  cases 
were  jury  trials.   I  was  sole  counsel  in 
four  jury  trials  and  six  bench  trials. 
The  remaining  cases  were  tried  as  an 
associate  or  co-counsel. 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury;   40% 

(b)  non-jury.   60% 

18.     Litigation:   Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated 
matters  which  you  personally  handled.   Give  the 
citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket 
number  and  date  if  unreported.   Give  a  capsule  summary  of 
the  substance  of  each  case.   Identify  the  party  or 
parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail  the 
nature  of  your  participation  in  the  litigation  and  the 
final  disposition  of  the  case.   Also  state  as  to  each 
case : 

a.  the  date  of  representation; 

b.  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge 
or  judges  before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

c.  the  individual  name,  addresses  and  telephone 
numbers  of  co-counsel  and  of  principal  counsel 
for  each  of  the  other  parties. 


Hardin  v.  Lloyd's  of  London,  4 : 96CV02252GFG, 
United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern 
District  of  Missouri.   The  Honorable  Judge  George 
F .  Gunn ,  Jr . 

I  was  co-counsel  for  the  defendant  Lloyd's  of 
London . 

SUMMARY:   Plaintiffs  "Names"  sought  to  enjoin 
payment  of  letters  of  credit  issued  to  Lloyd's  of 


-  9  - 


STI.-536592.10 


784 


London  as  security  for  insurance  underwriting 
risks  made  by  the  plaintiff  ^Names"  at  Lloyd's  of 
London . 

The  case  presented  issues  relating  to:  i)  the 
limited  circumstances  under  which  a  letter  of 
credit  may  be  enjoined;  ii)  enforcement  of  venue 
selection  provisions;  and  iii)  collateral 
estoppel . 

The  original  petition  was  filed  in  state  court.  I 
removed  the  action  to  the  United  States  District 
Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Missouri. 
Briefs  were  filed  and  oral  arguments  heard  on  the 
request  for  a  Teir^orary  Restraining  Order  on 
November  15,  1996. 

RESULT:   Plaintiffs'  request  for  a  TRO  was  denied 
and  Lloyd' s  was  permitted  to  collect  the  money  due 
pursuant  to  the  terms  of  the  letters  of  credit. 

OTHER  COUNSEL: 

Mr.  Stephen  H.  Rovak 
Sonnenschein,  Nath  £  Rosenthal 
One  Metropolitan  Square 
Suite  3000 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63102 
Telephone:  (314)  241-1800 
Counsel  for  Plaintiffs 

CO-COUNSEL: 

Mr.  Alex  Bartlett 

Husch  &  Eppenberger 

235  East  High  Street 

Jefferson  City,  Missouri  (65101 

Telephone:  (573)  635-9118 

Co -Counsel  for  Lloyd' s 

E.  Bruce  Nangle,  et  al .  v.  Mark  Twain  Bank,  Adv. 
No.  87-0029-BKC-JJB,  United  States  Bankruptcy 
Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Missouri.   This 
case  is  still  active  although  it  has  been  pending 
since  1987, 

I  serve  as  sole  counsel  for  the  defendant  Mark 
Twain  Bank. 


10 


STL-53e59i.lO 


785 


SUMMARY:   Plaintiffs  claim  that  Mark  Twain  Bank 
violated  the  Uniform  Fiduciaries  Law  in  making 
certain  loans  to  a  Missouri  limited  partnership, 
Crossroads  USA  Limited  II,  causing  injury  to  the 
plaintiffs  who  were  limited  partners  in  the 
partnership. 

The  substantive  issue  in  this  case  was  whether  and 
under  what  circumstances  the  Bank  owed  a  fiduciary 
duty  under  the  Uniform  Fiduciaries  Law  to  limited 
partners  in  making  a  loan  to  a  limited 
partnership.  Additionally,  this  was  a  case  of 
first  impression  regarding  the  applicable  statute 
of  limitations  for  claims  arising  under  the 
Uniform  Fiduciary  Law. 

RESULT:  Summary  Judgment  was  entered  for  Mark 
Twain  Bank.   See,  In  re  Lauer,  97  Bkty.  Rptr.  544 
(Bkty.  E.D.Mo.  1989).   The  judgment  was  upheld  by 
the  District  Court.   The  United  States  Court  of 
Appeals  for  the  Eighth  Circuit  recently  remanded 
the  case  for  further  proceedings. 

OTHER  COUNSEL: 

Mr.  Steve  Hamburg 

Summers,  Compton,  Wells  &  Hamburg,  P.C. 

8909  Ladue  Road 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63124 

Telephone:  (314)  991-4999 

Counsel  for  Defendant  Lauer; 

Mr.  Michael  D.  Stokes 
1215  Pine  Street 
St.  Louis,  Missouri   63103 
Telephone:  (314)  621-3743 
Counsel  for  Plaintiffs 


3.    Calvin  Klein  Jeanswear  Company  v.  Venture  Stores, 
Inc. ,  Cause  No.  4:96CV01263,  United  States 
District  Court.   The  Honorable  Judge  E.  Richard 
Webber . 

I  was  co-counsel  for  plaintiff,  Calvin  Klein 
Jeanswear  Company. 


-  11 


786 


SUMMARY:   Calvin  Klein  filed  a  Complaint  for 
trademark  infringement  seeking  injunctive  relief 
arising  out  of  the  alleged  sale  of  counterfeit  or 
"seconds/irregular"  tee  shirts  by  Venture  Stores 
as  first  quality  Calvin  Klein  merchandise. 

The  primary  issue  in  this  case  was  whether  Venture 
Stores  was  selling  counterfeit  or  "second" 
merchandise  as  first  quality  Calvin  Klein 
merchandise.   TRO  hearing  was  commenced  in  May, 
1996.   Settlement  discussions  precluded  the 
submission  of  the  claim  to  the  court  for  judgment. 

RESULT:  A  consent  agreement  was  negotiated  and  its 
implementation  is  the  subject  of  ongoing 
discussions. 

COUNSEL: 

Mr.  Loel  Seitel 

Law  Offices  Marc  F.  Desiderio 

45  Birch  Street 

Englewood  Cliffs,  New  Jersey   07632 

Telephone:  (201)  568-3003 

Co-Counsel  for  Plaintiff 

Mr.  Alan  Nemes 

Kalish  &  Gilster 

500  North  Broadway,  Suite  1200 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63102 

Telephone:  (314)  436-1331 

Counsel  for  Venture 

Thera-Kinetics ,  Inc.  v.  Dan  Mecklenberg. ,  Cause 
No.  4:95CV2283JCH,  United  States  District  Court 
for  the  Eastern  District  of  Missouri.   The 
Honorable  Jean  C.  Hamilton. 

I  was  sole  counsel  for  defendant  former  employee 
Dan  Mecklenberg. 

SUMMARY:  Complaint  filed  by  former  employer  sought 
relief  for  breach  of  contract,  trade  secrets  and  a 
non-compete  agreement. 

The  primary  issues  in  this  case  focused  on 
traditional  non-compete  issues  relating  to  the 
existence  of  an  employer's  "protectable  interest" 

-  12  - 


STL-53eS92.10 


787 


in  the  goodwill  of  its  customers  balanced  against 
an  employee's  right  to  seek  new  employment.   The 
case  also  involved  choice  of  law  issues  and 
traditional  unfair  competition  issues. 

RESULT:  Case  was  settled  in  May  of  1996, 

OTHER  COUNSEL: 

Mr.  Harry  W.  Wellford,  Jr. 

Thompson  Coburn 

1  Mercantile  Center 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63101 

Telephone:  (314)  552-6000 

Counsel  for  Plaintiff. 

Stewart,  et  al .  v.  Fry,  et  al . ,  Cause  No.  84-4325, 
United  States  District  Court  for  the  Southern 
District  of  Illinois.   The  Honorable  Judge  James 
L .  Foreman . 

I  was  sole  counsel  for  former  Bank  Officers  and 
Directors,  including  former  Bank  President  Thomas 
E .  Fry ,  Jr . 

SUMMARY:   Plaintiff  purchased  "control"  of  the  Ina 
State  Bank  through  a  stock  purchase.   The  Bank 
failed  shortly  after  the  purchase.   Plaintiff  sued 
the  sellers  and  the  Bank's  former  Board  of 
Directors  for  securities  fraud  and  common  law 
fraud.  Discovery  in  this  case  and  the  companion 
cases  proceeded  almost  full  time  for  approximately 
one  year. 

The  primary  issue  was  the  nature  and  extent  of  the 
duty  to  disclose  and  whether  the  former  Board  of 
Directors  failed  to  fully  disclose  the  financial 
condition  of  the  Bank  during  plaintiff's  due 
diligence  examination  of  the  Bank.   Discovery  and 
depositions  of  Bank  officers,  auditors, 
accountants  and  FDIC  personnel  continued  virtually 
full-time  for  more  than  one  year  spanning  a  period 
of  time  from  1984  through  1985. 

RESULT:   Case  resulted  in  a  favorable  settlement 
for  defendants  when  the  companion  case  against  the 
policy  carrier  was  settled. 

-  13  - 


STL-53e592.10 


788 


OTHER  COUNSEL: 

Mr.  John  A.  Klobasa 

Kohn,  Shands,  Elbert,  Gianoulakis  &  Giljijm 

1  Mercantile  Center 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63101  . 

Telephone:  (314)  241-3963 

Counsel  for  Plaintiff 

Mr.  Terrance  J.  Good 

Lashly  &  Baer 

714  Locust 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63101 

Telephone:  (314)  621-2939 

Counsel  for  Co-Defendant  Accounting  Firm 

Ms.  Susan  Bennett  Green,  Law  Clerk 

The  Honorable  John  R.  Gibson 

837  U.S.  Court  House 

811  Grand 

Kansas  City,  Missouri   64102 

Telephone:  (816)  426-3169 

Counsel  for  Co-Defendant  Bank  Directors 

Mr.  Kent  Knickmeyer 

Thompson  Coburn 

1  Mercantile  Center 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63101 

Telephone:  (314)  552-6000 

Counsel  for  Co-Defendant  Bank  Director. 

COMPANION  CASES:   FDIC  v.  Withers,  et  al . ,  Cause 
No.  85-4070,  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Southern  District  of  Illinois;  F  &  D  Company  of 
Maryland  v.  Fry,  et  al . ,  Cause  No.  89-3070,  United 
States  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of 
Illinois. 


C.I.T.  V.  Duncan  Grading  &  Construction,  Inc.,  Cause 
No.  82-0305(2),  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Eastern  District  of  Missouri.   The  Honorable  Chief 
Magistrate  Judge  David  D.  Noce. 

I  was  co-counsel  for  C.I.T.  at  trial  and  briefed  and 
argued  the  appeal  in  the  United  States  Court  of  Appeals 
for  the  Eighth  Circuit. 


-  14  - 


311-538592.10 


789 


SUMMARY:   C.I.T.,  a  commercial  lender,  sought  payment 
due  on  a  promissory  note  and  security  agreement 
including  attorneys'  fees  and  costs  of  repossessing  the 
pledged  equipment.   Despite  defendants'  refusal  to  pay 
the  amounts  due  under  the  promissory  note  and  hiding 
the  collateral,  defendant  claimed  that  the  conduct  of 
the  repossession  and  the  sale  of  repossessed  equipment 
was  not  "commercially  reasonable"  under  the  Uniform 
Commercial  Code. 

The  fundamental  issue  in  this  case  was  whether  CIT's 
sale  of  the  collateral  was  commercially  reasonable 
under  Article  9,  Section  504,  of  the  Uniform  Commercial 
Code. 

This  case  was  tried  to  verdict  in  a  one  day  trial  in 
December,  1982. 

RESULT:   Trial  court  determined  that  C.I.T.  complied 
with  the  requirements  of  Article  9  of  the  Uniform 
Commercial  Code  and  entered  judgment  for  the  balance 
due  to  C.I.T.   The  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for 
the  Eighth  Circuit  upheld  the  trial  verdict.   See 
C.I.T.  Corporation  v.  Duncan  Grading  &  Construction, 
Inc.,  739  F.2d  359  (8"  Cir.  1984). 

OTHER  COUNSEL: 

Mr.  David  Lander 

Thompson  Coburn 

1  Mercantile  Center 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63101 

Telephone:  (314)  552-6000 

Trial  Co-Counsel; 

Mr.  Sidney  Rubin 

230  South  Bemiston 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63105 

Telephone:  (314)  862-6000 

Counsel  for  the  Defendant. 


Horseshoe  Entertainment,  a  Louisiana  Limited 
Partnership,  and  Robinson  Property  Group  Limited 
Partnership,  Cause  No.  4:96CV00695,  United  States 
District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of 
Missouri.   The  Honorable  Charles  A.  Shaw. 


-  15  - 


STL-53e592.10 


790 


I  was  lead  counsel  for  General  Electric  Capital 
Corporation. 

SUMMARY:   Horseshoe  Entertainment  sought  to 
recover  a  prepayment  premium  previously  paid  to  GE 
Capital.   Horseshoe  claimed  that  a  loan  officer  at 
GE  Capital  had  orally  agreed  to  waive  any 
prepayment  premium  under  certain  conditions.   GE 
Capital  denied  any  such  agreement  and  relied  on 
Missouri's  newly  enacted  statute  of  frauds 
governing  credit  agreements  (§432.045  R.S.Mo. 
(1994))  whereby  credit  agreements  may  not  be 
amended  except  in  writing  upon  compliance  with  the 
statute. 

This  was  a  case  of  first  impression  under 
Missouri's  statute  of  frauds  governing  credit 
agreements . 

The  Court  determined  that  the  statute  of  frauds 
governing   credit  agreements  precluded  any  action, 
including  promissory  estoppel  and  fraud,  arising 
out  of  an  oral  amendment  to  a  credit  agreement. 

RESULT:   Summary  judgment  for  GE  Capital  was 
granted  on  February  21,  1997. 

OTHER  COUNSEL: 


Mitchell  A.  Margo,  Esq. 

Green,  Schaaf  £  Margo,  P.C. 

7733  Forsyth  Boulevard 

Suite  800 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63105 

Telephone:  (314)  862-6800 

Facsimile:  (314)  862-1606 

Counsel  for  Plaintiff  Horseshoe  Entertainment 


Pohlmann  v.  Bil-Jax,  Inc. ,  Cause  No.  932-8665,  Circuit 
Court  for  the  City  of  St.  Louis,  Missouri.   Trial 
Judge:  The  Honorable  Circuit  Judge  James  Edwards. 

I  was  co-counsel  at  trial  for  defendant  Bil-Jax.   I 
handled  expert  and  damages  testimony  at  the  trial .   The 
jury  trial  lasted  one  week  during  April  of  1996. 


-  16  - 


£TL-5je592.10 


791 


SUMMARY:   Plaintiff  Pohlmann  suffered  a  crushed  left 
leg  and  ankle  in  a  fall  from  a  scaffold  allegedly 
manufactured  by  defendant.   The  plaintiff  alleged  that 
the  scaffold  was  unreasonably  dangerous  as  designed. 
The  extent  of  plaintiff's  injuries  and  resulting 
damages  were  disputed. 

The  primary  medical  issues  presented  by  this  case 
related  to  the  causation  of  plaintiff's  alleged 
permanent  injuries  and  future  medical  expenses. 

RESULT:   Jury  verdict  for  plaintiff  Pohlmann.   The 
trial  court  ordered  a  remittitur  of  damages  or  re-trial 
on  the  issue  of  damages  only.   The  case  is  presently  on 
appeal  to  the  Missouri  Court  of  Appeals. 

OTHER  COUNSEL: 

Matthew  D.  Menghini 

Husch  &  Eppenberger 

100  North  Broadway,  Suite  1300 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63102 

Telephone:  (314)  421-4800 

Co-Counsel  for  Defendant 

Mr.  John  J.  Allan 
8000  Maryland  Avenue,  Suite  1000 
Clayton,  Missouri   63105 
Telephone:  (314)  725-4545 
Counsel  for  Plaintiff 


Wilson,  et  al .  v.  Purdy,  et  al . ,  Cause  No.  914- 
00135,  Circuit  Court  for  the  City  of  St.  Louis, 
Missouri.   The  Honorable  Judge  Edward  M.  Peek. 

I  was  sole  counsel  for  newly  elected  members  of 
the  City  of  St.  Louis  School  Board. 

SUMMARY:   This  case  was  a  challenge  to  the 
election  results  in  City  of  St.  Louis  School  Board 
election  in  April,  1991.   Despite  losing  the  City 
wide  election  by  more  than  8,000  votes,  the 
unsuccessful  candidates  claimed  that  sufficient 
irregularities  existed  in  election  results  to 
warrant  new  election. 


-  17  - 


£71,-536592.10 


792 


RESULT:   As  provided  for  under  Missouri's  election 
law  statutes,  defendants  demanded  and  received  an 
insnediate  trial.   After  a  one  day  hearing, 
judgment  was  entered  for  defendants  and  the 
election  results  were  upheld. 

OTHER  COUNSEL: 

Mr.  Edward  R.  Joyce 
1108  Olive  Street 
St.  Louis,  Missouri   63101 
Telephone:  (314)  241-2317 
Counsel  for  Plaintiffs ; 

Mr.  Leo  V.  Garvin 

Anderson  &  Gilbert 

7800  Forsyth  Boulevard,  6""  Floor 

P.  O.  Box  50210 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63105 

Telephone: (314)  721-2777 

Counsel  for  City  Election  Board. 


10 .   Trigg,  et  al .  v.  Leader  Motors,  Inc.,  et  al . , 

Cause  No.  892-01066,  Circuit  Court  for  the  City  of 
St.  Louis,  Missouri.   The  Honorable  Circuit  Judge 
Jack  L.  Koehr. 

I  was  sole  counsel  for  the  defendant  automobile 
dealer.  Leader  Motors  in  the  trial  court  during 
the  class  action  certification  hearings. 

SUMMARY:   Plaintiff  sought  to  certify  a  class 
action  against  defendant  car  dealer.  Leader 
Motors,  Inc.,  and  the  Ford  Motor  Company  for 
alleged  orsl  misrepresentations  by  different 
salesmen  in  the  sale  of  used  rental  cars  as 
"program"  or  "executive  driven"  cars . 

The  primary  issue  in  the  case  was  whether 
different  oral  misrepresentations  by  different 
salesmen  to  different  parties  at  different  times 
could  be  certified  as  a  class  action  under 
Missouri  law. 

The  class  certification  issues  were  argued  at  a 
series  of  hearings  held  on  February  6,  1991  and 
March  20,  1991,  and  on  January  27,  1992. 

-  18  - 


STL-53e592.10 


793 


A  Writ  of  Prohibition  was  filed  in  the  Missouri 
Court  of  ^peals  on  January  30,  1992.   The 
Missouri  Supreme  Court  accepted  transfer  on 
September  22,  1992. 

RESULT:  Trial  court  certified  the  class  action. 
The  Missouri  Court  of  Pippoals   reversed  the  trial 
court.   The  Missouri  Supreme  Court  reversed  the 
Court  of  ;^peals  and  upheld  the  original  trial 
court  ruling. 

OTHER  COUNSEL: 

Mr,  Jim  Virtel 

Armstrong  Teasdale  Schlafly  £  Davis 

One  Metropolitan  Square 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63102 

Telephone:  (314)  621-5070 

Counsel  for  Ford  Motor  Company; 

Mr.  Jeff  Lowe 

Gray  &  Ritter 

701  Market  Street 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63101 

Telephone:  (314)  241-5620 

Counsel  for  Plaintiff. 


In  addition  to  the  lawyers  identified  in  the  cases 
above,  the  following  lawyers  have  had  recent 
contact  with  me: 

Mr.  Mike  Reid 

Missouri  Ethics  Commission 

P.  O.  Box  1254 

Jefferson  City,  Missouri   65102 

Telephone:  (573)  721-2020 

Toll  Free:  (800)  392-8660 

Mr.  Rodney  D.  Brown 

Region  Counsel 

General  Electric  Capital  Corporation 

Commercial  Equipment  Financing 

44  Old  Ridgebury  Road 

Danbury,  Connecticut   06810 

Telephone:  (203)  796-1064 


-  19 

S71.-63B592.10 


794 


Mr.  Mike  Wolff 

Professor  of  Law 

St.  Louis  University  Law  School 

3700  Lindell  Boulevard 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63108 

Telephone:  (314)  977-2774 

Mr.  Richard  E.  Haferkamp 
Rogers,  Howell  &  Haferkamp,  L.C. 
7733  Forsyth,  #1400 
Clayton,  Missouri   63105 
Telephone:  (314)  727-5188 

Mr.  Frank  J.  Elpers 

Elpers  &  Inman,  P.C. 

601  Market  Street 

P.  O.  Box  404 

Ste.  Genevieve,  Missouri   63670 

Telephone:  (573)  883-5000 

Mr.  Bradley  A.  Winters 

Thompson  Coburn 

One  Mercantile  Center 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   63101 

Telephone:  (314)  552-6000 

Mr.  Richard  A.  Riezman 
Riezman  £  Blitz,  P.C. 
120  South  Central  Avenue 
Clayton,  Missouri   63105 
Telephone:  (314)  727-0101 

The  Honorable  Edward  L.  Filippine 
319  U.S.  Court  &  Custom  House 
1114  Market  Street 
St.  Louis,  Missouri   63101 
Telephone:  (314)  539-3623 

The  Honorable  Catherine  D.  Perry 
U.  S.  Court  &  Custom  House 
1114  Market  Street 
St.  Louis,  Missouri   63101 
Telephone:  (314)  539-6192 


-  20  - 


STL-53e592.10 


795 


Mr.  Richard  P.  Magurno 

Senior  Vice  President  and  General  Counsel 

Trans  World  Airlines,  Inc. 

One  City  Centre;  515  North  6th  Street 

St.  Louis,  Missouri   10549 

Telephone:  (314)  589-3000 

19.   Legal  Activities:   Describe  the  most  significant  legal 

activities  you  have  pursued,  including  significant  litigation 
which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did  not 
involve  litigation.   Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation 
in  this  question,  please  omit  any  information  protected  by  the 
attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the  privilege  has  been 
waived. ) . 

I  have  had  the  opportunity  to  handle  a  number  of  matters  which 
I  believe  served  to  enhance  the  St.  Louis  Metropolitan 

Communi  ty . 

I  handled  the  legal  aspects  of  ballot  proposition  campaigns 
which  sought  to  enhance  the  economic  stability  of  St.  Louis' 
Forest  Park  (Proposition  P  in  1992)  and  a  bond  issue  to  expand 
Lambert  St.  Louis  Airport  (Proposition  L  in  1991)  . 

I  was  intimately  involved  in  the  negotiations  between  the  City 
of  St.  Louis  and  Trans  World  Airlines  which  allowed  TWA  to 
emerge  from  bankruptcy  protection  (the  first  time)  in  1993. 
The  result  of  those  negotiations  also  gave  the  City  of  St. 
Louis  more  control  over  the  future  of  the  airport. 

I  am  also  proud  of  the  role  that  I  have  played  in  mentoring  and 
training  a  large  number  of  associates  at  Husch  &  Eppenberger. 

In  addition  to  the  above,  there  is  no  other  "legal  activity" 
that  compares  to  my  experience  in  the  adoption  of  our  son.   An 
adoption  is  obviously  an  intensely  personal  experience.   But  as 
a  lawyer,  I  experienced  the  legal  system  from  a  different  point 
of  view.    To  lawyers,  the  courthouse  and  the  courtroom  become 
familiar  places,  like  old  friends.   As  a  party  to  a  legal 
proceeding,  even  an  adoption,  the  courthouse  becomes  an 
intimidating  place  where  your  future  hangs  in  the  balance. 
Even  in  our  adoption  proceedings,  where  the  result  was  never 
really  in  doubt,  the  uncertainty  was  unsettling. 

While  the  experience  did  not  change  the  substantive  *^practice 
of  law"  for  me,  I  know  I  am  a  better  lawyer  as  a  result  of  my 
experience  as  a  "party"  to  my  son's  adoption. 


21  - 


STL-536592.10 


796 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

1.  List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated 
receipts  from  deferred  income  arrangements,  stock, 
options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits 
which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business 
relationships,  professional  services,  firm  memberships, 
former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.   Please  describe 
the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the 
future  for  any  financial  or  business  interest. 

By  reason  of  my  prior  and  present  association  with  Husch 
&  Eppenberger,  I  participate  in  the  Husch  &  Eppenberger 
Profit  Sharing  Plan  and  Trust  of  which  all  my  401  (k) 
monies  are  currently  invested  with  the  American  Bar 
Association  Members  Retirement  Program.   My  interest  in 
the  plan  is  fully  vested  and  any  future  earnings  or 
payments  I  would  receive  are  governed  by  federal  law. 

By  reason  of  my  prior  employment  by  the  United  States 
Congress,  I  am  a  participant  in  the  United  States 
Government  Thrift  Savings  Plan.   My  interest  in  the  plan 
is  fully  vested  and  any  future  earnings  or  payments  are 
governed  by  federal  law. 

I  do  not  qualify  for  any  retirement  benefits  from  the 
Federal  Employees  Retirement  System. 

2.  Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of 
interest,  including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in 
determining  these  areas  of  concern.   Identify  the 
categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that 
are  likely  to  present  potential  conf licts-of-interest 
during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which  you 
have  been  nominated. 

My  affiliation  as  a  partner  at  Husch  £  Eppenberger  and 
confidential  knowledge  of  specific  pending  cases  will 
present  conflict  issues  at  least  until  those  specific 
cases  are  resolved. 

I  will  engage  in  a  case  by  case  analysis  of  each  case 
that  might  come  before  me  to  determine  if 
disqualification  under  28  USC  §455  is  appropriate.   I 
will  follow  the  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  in  reviewing  any 
case  for  potential  conflicts  of  interest. 

-  22  - 

STL-S3eS92.10 


797 


3.  Do  you  have  any  plans,  cominitinents,  or  agreements  to 
pursue  outside  employment,  with  or  without  compensation, 
during  your  service  with  the  court?   If  so,  explain. 

No 

4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during 
the  calendar  year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the 
current  calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees, 
dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents, 
honoraria,  and  other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you 
prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure 
report,  required  by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978, 
may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  attached  Financial  Disclosure  Report 

5.  Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth 
statement  in  detail  (Add  schedules  as  called  for) . 


6. 


See  attached  Net  Worth  Statement 


Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a 
political  campaign?   If  so,  please  identify  the  particulars 
of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the 
campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

In  1980,  I  was  a  Field  Director  in  Thomas  F.  Eagleton's 
re-election  campaign  to  the  United  States  Senate.   I  was 
responsible  for  general  campaign  activity  in  portions  of 
the  St.  Louis  area  and  Southeast  Missouri. 

In  1992,  I  was  involved  in  Robert  L.  Holden' s  campaign  for 
Missouri  State  Treasurer  as  a  general  unpaid  advisor. 

I  have  not  otherwise  been  personally  involved  or  employed 
by  or  served  in  an  official  capacity  in  any  other  political 
campaigns.   I  have  served  as  paid  legal  counsel  for  several 
campaign  committees,  primarily  related  to  ethics  issues. 

Z  have  served  as  paid  legal  counsel  for  the  following 
campaign  committees  relating  to  ballot  propositions: 

1.      Proposition  O  (ballot  proposition  for  the 
construction  of  facilities  for  the 
Olympic  Festival  in  St.  Louis)  in  1992 


-  23  - 


STL-S3e592.10 


798 


Proposition  P  (ballot  proposition  to  fund 
support  for  Forest  Park)  in  1992 

Proposition  L  (ballot  proposition  for  a  bond 
issue  for  expansion  of  Lambert  Airport) 
in  1991 

Proposition  A  (referendum  relating  to  the 

expansion  of  St.  Louis  Art  Muse\am)  in  1992 


-  24  - 

STL-E3e592.10 


799 


FINANCIAL     DISCLOSURE     REPORT 

FOR    CALENDAR    YEAR  /ii9S}'    1996 


1.    P«r«on  Reporting    lUat   nan.,    tint,    nMddli    Inltl.ll 
Slppal,   Rodney  W. 

United   states  District  Court 

for   the   Eastern  District  o£  Missouri 

3 .    Date  of   Report 
5     /16    /     97 

^.    Tltl«       (Arilcl*    III    3u<)a*c    indicate   acti^'o   or 

sanaer  status;    haqtscrats    judges    indicate 
Cull*   or  psrt'tlmi) 

United  States  District;  Judge   -  Nominee 

5-    ficporc    Tjrpe    (eheO    appropriate    type) 

X    Noeiination.    Date  S    /1V97 

Initial      Juvnual      Final 

S.    Reportina    Period  . 
1    n  /96  -12/3V96 

7.    Oianbcrs   or  OCCicc   Address 

100  N.    Jroadway,   Suite  1300 
St.    Louis     MO     63102 

t.    on   c>ie    basis   of    the    information    contained    in    this    Report    ond 
any  voditicstlons   pcrcainirM  theicco.    It    is.    in  eiy  opinion, 
in  cootpliancc  with  applicable    lavs   and  regulations. 

ReviavUig  Olflcer                                                                                Hate 

IMPORTANT  NOTES.  The  insirucuons  accompanying  this  form  miut  be  followed.     Complete  all  parts, 
checlsing  the  NONE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable  ioformation      Sign  on  last  page. 

L     POSITIONS.      (Reporting  individual  only;  see  pp.  9-13  oflnstructioQS.) 

POSITION  NAME    OF    ORGANIZATION/ENTITY 

NONE      (No  reportable  positions) 

Partner Huseh  &  Eppenbereer 


II.     AGREE.MENTS.      (Reporting  individual  only;  sec  pp  14-17  of  Instructions.) 

DATE  PARTIES    AND   TERMS 


n 


NONE       (No  rcporlabic  agrccmcnis) 
Huach  &  Eppcnberger  Trnployee  Profit  Sharing  Plan  &  Trust  (currencly  invested 


the  ABA  Retirement   ProBram) 


1996 


Kusch  &  Eppenbergcr  parcnershlp  Income   and  redemption  of  partnership 


interest  as   determined  by  partnership  agreement  upon  temination 
Ilia      NON-INXTSTMENT  INCOME.      (Rcponing  mdividual  and  spouse;  see  pp.  18-Z5  of  Instructions.) 

DATE  SOURCE  AND  TYPE  ^GROSS  ^  INC(^^ 


n 


1996   &   1997 


NONE       (No  reportable  oon-inveslmeiii  income) 


Cardinal  Glcnnon  Children's  Hospital 


-LM 


Husch  &  Eppenberger  (Income) 


$157,000  (annt 

$ 

$. 

$ 


800 


FINANCIAL    DISCLOSURE    REPORT 


Sippel,   Rodney  W. 


5/16  /97 


VII.  Page  1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS  -  income,  value,  transactions  (Includes  those  of  spouse 

and  dependent  children  See  pp.  37-54  of  Instraclioos.) 


-r  ';  'v.  ._;■.  (including    LT-u3t   asSftrs}  - '.    ■  ^'■ 
:^;lndic»CB:^vhere  -applicable,',  o^ciT^f -- 

.   .*1J>      for^Dlnr  owT%«r8Klp^oI    report-*^ 
•  J.ng  indiviguAl.  »n4,  fipCTUse/' •  (S)*    fcr 
^,iot  o-ncrshlp_by.dcpendtnt,cAll£)...  . 
.,.'-■-;  pi.ce  "(Xl  •"ifceV 'i3!:^  -i'ssVc'  - 
,';';'.J.^0Aerapt.-frOHi  prior .-diSclDaure.-^       ■; 

.'.-,nf;:peE;ioa..f". 

■    repon-lt^g 

■  -   ,  •    ;■',   ■  .-  ■--'-!.'            0                           I           1     ""  "  "J 

■Ml),:. 

Codi  - 

IA-«). 

■'-•■■ur.-  ■ 
div  ,-  ■ 

■   U  1  ■ 

':.  ' 
.VtLiue: 
Code  - 

(J-.p)- 

111  • 

■"type*  - 

b.^^.lal, 

.      ,jr    not    «emp'.   fr=ci  discloaurt  .'          ,.] 

n.tl'. 

■       Ql 

Vilue2 
code. 

-(a-Pi 

CiilQ 
Code, 
I*-- Ml 

.    ■      -.IdebCity   ol  .  . 
,„  .btfvtr/tcllor ' 
>.  ■'.;,  <ir;private,4'      ^ 

NONj£^^   (Mo   rap.rtj^l. 

(E  X  E  M 

P  T) 

»    ABA  WlCk) 

M 

I 

'    Manning   Services   Scock   {S) 

D 

Div. 

K 

u 

'    Exxon  Coimon  stocK   (J) 

A 

Dlv. 

J 

I 

<    Zoom  Telephonies  Common   Stock   (J) 

A 

Dlv. 

J 

I 

5    Alil  Comraon  Stock   (J) 

A 

Blv. 

J 

T 

St.    Louis  Teachers 
'    Credit  Union    (s) 

A 

Int. 

J 

T 

Mark  Twain  Bank 
St.    Louis.   MO    (J) 

A 

Int. 

J 

I 

■ 

' 

ic 

- 

13 

" 

» 

" 

1< 

1 

" 

It 

^>■^£^if"£,^£;i   ,J:lii«SSi»f;^?;:cn.     ,  |:a6'Sli^L'lilS%oo.     g:i!ol°J.!°.«iS?Soo.o.o    ^Jk^'^IJJ|i%SS%.=.  i 

^^' :fS-%^?-'li  .■..,,■  5:5U6?S?i«r.^HS=..o.  :^ll!6"?Ji'fo'i;:?SUo  ^:SI5e»?i;i%!^Si«S5o      '-»---^="»:"«  ^ 

■  '  -';j^^c^'''«i"^°^'"=  8:Jss"vi*i.             SiSih^"*' """ ""''''  S:j;usr!S5 '  "            T-c,i>/«.rx« 

801 


FINANCIAL    DISCLOSURE    REPORT 


Name    of    fcrson  Xcporclng 

Slppcl,   Rodney  w. 


/"    /     97 


IV.     REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS  -  U«nsportiIion,  lodgiag,  food,  emcruinmenl. 

(iDcludcs  those  to  spouse  snd  dependcBt  children,  use  tie  parentheiicali  "(S)'  and  '(DC)"  to  indicalc  reportable 
reimbursements  and  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respcuively.  Sec  pp.  26-29  of  Instructions  ) 

nSgypCE  DESCRIPTION 

NONE      (No  such  reportable  retmbunemcDt^  or  gifts) 


D 


OTHER  GIFTS.       (Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheiicals  "(S)*  and  "(I^C)'  to 
indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  30-33  of  Instructions.) 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION  V-JVLUE 

NONE       (No  such  reportable  gifts) 

n. $ 

s 

5 

S 


VI.     LIABILITIES.       (Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  respofuibic 
for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  '(S)'  for  separate  liability  of  the  spouse,  *(J)*  for  joint  liability  of 
reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  "(DC)"  for  liability  of  a  dependent  child.  Sec  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 

CREPIIOg  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE- 


□ 


NONE      (No  reponable  liabilities) 


SIS. 001  •  SSO.DOO        I.  -  SSO.OOl  -  SIOO. 
SSOO.ODl  -  51.000.000    P  -  More  th*n  SJ . 00 


802 


Fn©NCIAL  DISCLOSURE   REPORT 


NaiTE  of  Psrscvi  Rcpsrting 
Sippel,   Rodney  W. 


Qa^e  o£  Report 
5/16/   97 


Vm.  ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  or  EXPLANATIONS   (Indicate  part  of  Rrport.) 


K.  CERTIFICATION. 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C  §  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Comminee  on  Judicial  Activiiio, 
and  to  the  best  of  my  biowiedge  al  the  time  after  reasonable  Inquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory  fvinction  in  any  litigation  during  the 
period  covoBi  by  this  report  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  finarKia!  interst,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3XcX 
in  th;  outcome  of  such  litigation 

I  certify  thai  all  informaion  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent  children,  if  any)  is  accurate, 
true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  thai  any  informaiion  vet  reported  was  withheld  because  it  met  applicable 
statutoo'  provisions  permining  non-disclosure. 

I  fijrther  certify  that  eamexJ  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been  reported  are  In 
compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.CA.  agp.  7,  §  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C  §  7353  and  Judicial  Conference  regulations 


Signature  _ 


b^ 


-WHO 


US  CA.  svp.  7,  §  501  et.  seq., 


^fXOuj  lb) 


99?- 


NOTE;   />lNY  INDrVTOU/iJ.  \W)0  KNOWINGLY  AND  WILFULLY  FALSIHES  OR  FAILS  TO  HLE  THIS  REPORT  MAY  BE  SUBJECT 
TO  CIVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U.S.CA  APR  6,  §  104.) 


RLING  INSTRUCTIONS: 
Mail  signed  original  and  3  additional  copies  to' 


CommiOee  on  Financial  [>isdosure 
Administialive  OflRcE  of  the 

United  Stales  Courts 
One  Columbus  Cirde,  N.E,  Suite  2-301 
Washington.  DC  20S44 


803 


A  ONE- PAGE  FINANCIAL  STATEMENT  -  NET  WORTH  DOCUMENT  IS 
AFTER  PARAGRAPH  5  AND  BEFORE  SECTION  III. 


-  25  - 

STL-S36592.10 


804 

FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORTH 


Provide  a  compleu,  current  rinancial  net  worth  siaiement  which  itemiKj  in  detail 
ill  assets  (including  bank  accounts,  reaJ  estate,  securities,  trusts,  invesanents,  and  other  rmanciaJ 
holdings)  aU  liabilities  (including  debts,  mongages,  loans,  and  other  financial  obligations)  of 
yourself,  your  spouse,  and  other  immediate  memben  of  your  household. 


ASSETS 

UABUJnEs                         1 

Cuh  oe  hmd  wi  in  bvOu 

23 

000 

Kouj  payibW  IS  banSd-MCuid 

2 

267 

VS.  Ce«unmcoi  Mouilia-t^ 
Khedulc 

KoKi  piytbk  10  btnki-uniKURd 

Littad  uanitt-tM  KheduU 

24 

uo 

Koui  piytbk  le  rtluiva 

Unliitftd  ie£iriUei-4dd  t<>ic4jU 

52 

400 

Koiu  piyiblt  10  otfttn 

Aeeooiu  tnd  M'^ii  re£<iviblt: 

AccouflU  >nd  biUi  dut 

4 

000 

^t  tnffl  nlttjvci  t/td  fivndi 

Unptid  income  tu  due  6/15/97 

13 

500 

Due  (rem  eihcti 

Oiiu  unpaid  lu  and  initi««( 

Doubtful 

Rial  ciuic  roon{i|ci  piyiblc-idd 
Ktxdula 

223 

900 

Rul  wuu  eimcd-tdd  idtedult 

310 

000 

Oiaod  atonmci  and  olha  liani  pay- 
abb 

X»)  nuu  mori|i|ti  tectivtbU 

^ha  4<b(*-itemiu: 

38 

500 

Advance  Carpet 

4 

200 

Cwh  vtluc-lifi  intiuwict 

U 

007 

Otiict  uitu-iumiu: 

tOKk) 

149 

105 

, 

U.S.  GoveriOTcnt  Thrift  Savings  Plai 

7 

500 

Tool  babOitioi 

247 

867 

NaWottt 

361 

985 

Tout  AiMU 

609 

)52 

Total  GabOitkat  and  M(  weitk 

609 

852 

C0NT1NCEN7  UASOITIES 

CE^TIUL  ISrORMAnON 

Ai  udorxr,  eomikw  or  fuuulor 

0 

An  any  awu  ptadgatfT  (Add  Khod- 
vk.) 

Nol 

Ob  biMi  or  oennca 

0 

An  you  dcfcodant  is  tay  iBiu  or  Ictil 
•ciioaaT 

No 

Lcfil  Cliiini 

0 

K>v«  y«g  r>fi  ttl-ce  buifauplcy? 

No 

PteoiiJMi  fof  F«l<tiJ  lnccm<  Tu 

0 

OvhR  ipuitl  d«b< 

0 

_ 

__ 

_ 

-^ 

1  Pledge  of  automobile  is  reflected  in  Notes  Payable  to  Bank  -  Secured 


805 

RODNEY  and  MARY  SIPPEL 
ACCOUNT  VALUATION* 

NO.  OF  MARKET 

SHRS.  SECURITY  VALUE* 

100  AT&T  $    3,375 

100  ARAKIS  ENERGY  CORP.  $       365 

200  EXXON  CORP.  $11,700 

32  LUCENT  TECHNOLOGIES,  INC.  $    2.000 

800  ZOOM  TELEPHONICS,  INC.  $    6,700 


$24,140 


*As   of  close  of  .business   5/6/97;    subject   to  murJcet  flncn*tion. 


806 


Unlisted  Securities: 


Manning  Services,  Inc.  $  20,000 

Husch  &  Eppenberger  partnership  interest  $   32,400 

Real  Estate  Owned; 

Kirkwood,  Missouri  63122  $  310,000 

Real  Estate  Mortgages  Payable; 

Countrywide  Homes  Loans  (on  residence)  $  223,900 

P.  0.  Box  67009 

Dallas,  Texas   75267-0009 


807 


III.  GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar 
Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls 
for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence 
or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate 
in  serving  the  disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have 
done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  specific 
instances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

Legal  Services  for  Eastern  Missouri  Volunteer  Program: 

In  response  to  a  request  by  Legal  Services  of  Eastern 
Missouri  and  Husch  &  Eppenberger' s  managing  partner,  I 
started  and  organized  a  program  by  which  the  firm  began 
accepting  "referrals"  on  a  pro  bono  basis  from  Legal 
Services.   From  1990  through  1993,  I  supervised  the  firm's 
pro  bono  programs.   Specifically,  I  supervised  and  handled 
at  least  33  domestic  matters  for  indigent  individuals  in 
abusive  marriages.   My  work  included  drafting  motions  and 
petitions  for  protection,  and  court  appearances  as  needed. 

Flood  of  1993: 

During  the  Flood  of  1993,  I  coordinated  community  outreach 
efforts  as  part  of  my  job  responsibilities  with 
Congressman  Gephardt.   This  outreach  included  involving 
and  coordinating  efforts  with  the  Legal  Services  of       •! 
Eastern  Missouri.   I  also  dealt  with  a  large  number  of 
regulatory  issues  presented  by  FEMA  and  HUD,  and  other 
federal  agencies,  during  the  disaster  and  the  subsequent 
recovery  efforts . 

Campaign  to  enhance  the  public  perception  of  Missouri's 
Judges : 

Circuit  Court  Judges  in  Missouri's  metropolitan  areas  as 
well  as  all  Missouri  Court  of  Appeals  and  Supreme  Court 
Judges  are  selected  pursuant  to  what  is  known  to  as  the 
"Missouri  Plan".   Under  the  Missouri  Plan  judges  are 
selected  by  a  non-partisan  court  commission  and  then 
appointed  by  the  Governor.   A  judge  continues  to  serve 
subject  to  a  "retention"  vote  of  the  people.   Judges  stand 
for  retention  on  a  separate  judicial  ballot,  without  party 
designation.   The  issue  submitted  to  the  electorate  is 
whether  the  particular  judge  should  be  retained  in  office 
by  a  vote  of  yes  or  no. 


-  26  - 

STL-53e592.10 


808 


In  1992  I  assisted  in  an  educational  cainpaign  sponsored  by 
the  Missouri  Bar  to  educate  the  public  about  the  Missouri 
Plan  and  the  judiciary  in  general.   No  individual  judge's 
retention  was  advocated.   The  goal  was  to  enhance  the 
overall  public  perception  of  Missouri's  judicial  branch  of 
government. 

Missouri  Valley  Athletic  Conference: 

I  served  as  a  volunteer  during  the  past  seven  seasons  at 
the  annual  Missouri  Valley  Conference  Basketball 
Tournament  held  in  St.  Louis. 


2.  The  American  Bar  Association's  Conunentary  to  its  Code  of 
Judicial  Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a 
judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that 
invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or 
religion.   Do  you  currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged, 
to  any  organization  which  discriminates  -  through  either 
formal  membership  requirements  or  the  practical 
implementation  of  membership  policies?   If  so,  list,  with 
dates  of  membership.   What  you  have  done  to  try  to  change 
these  policies? 

No 

3.  Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to 
recommend  candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts? 
If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?  Please  describe 
your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process, 
from  beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances  which 
led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you 
participated) . 

No.   I  provided  inaterials  to  Congressman  Richard  A. 
Gephardt  similar  to  materials  provided  to  the  ABA  and  the 
Senate  Judiciary  Committee.   I  was  then  interviewed  by 
Congressman  Richard  A.  Gephardt.   Congressman  Gephardt 
forwarded  the  background  materials  which  I  provided  to  him 
to  Senator  Christopher  Bond  and  Senator  John  Ashcroft.   On 
February  6,  1997,  I  met  with  staff  members  for  Senator  Bond 
and  Senator  Ashcroft.   Since  that  time,  I  have  provided 
materials  to  and  met  with  representatives  of  the  United 
States  Department  of  Justice,  the  Federal  Bureau  of 
Investigation,  and  the  American  Bar  Association. 


-  27  - 

STL-63e592.10 


809 


Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a 
judicial  nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific  case, 
legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably 
be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case, 
issue,  or  question?   If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

No 

Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism 
involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal 
government,  and  within  society  generally,  has  become  the 
subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.   It 
has  become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic 
criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has 
usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and 
levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism" 
have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem- 
solution  rather  than  grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the 
individual  plaintiff  as  a  vehicle  for  the 
imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to 
broad  classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad, 
affirmative  duties  upon  governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening 
jurisdictional  requirements  such  as  standing  and 
ripeness;  and 

c.      A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon 
other  institutions  in  the  manner  of  an 
administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities . 

There  is  no  role  for  "judicial  activism"  in  the  Federal 
judiciary.   "Judicial  activism"  undermines  the 
appropriate  balance  of  authority  among  the  three  branches 
of  our  Federal  government. 


-  28  - 

STL-53e592.10 


810 


It  is  important  to  remember  that  the  fundamental  legal 
doctrine  of  stare  decisis   controls  the  decisions  of  the 
District  Court.   The  p>ersonal  opinion  of  a  District  Court 
Judge  of  what  the  law  should  be  must  be  set  aside  and  the 
previous  holdings  of  appellate  courts  must  be  followed. 
As  a  result,  the  proper  scope  of  the  District  Court's 
authority  is  to  apply  the  law  to  the  facts  of  the  cases 
which  are  properly  before  the  court. 

Further,  while  the  District  Court  has  an  obligation  to 
protect  individual  rights  and  liberties,  the  Court  should 
not  do  so  by  sitting  as  a  ^^super  legislature,"  or  by 
substituting  the  Court's  judgment  for  that  of  the 
Legislative  and/or  Executive  branches. 

Additionally,  each  case  must  be  initially  reviewed  to 
determine  whether  Federal  jurisdiction  exists.   Cases 
which  properly  belong  in  state  courts  should  be  dismissed 
or  remanded  as  the  procedure  dictates.   This  initial 
analysis  is  important  because  it  allows  the  District 
Court  to  not  only  preserve  the  appropriate  balance  of 
power  among  the  branches  of  the  Federal  government,  but 
also  preserve  the  appropriate  jurisdictional  authority 
among  the  state,  local  and  Federal  governments. 

In  order  to  avoid  unnecessary  and  far  reaching  opinions, 
it  is  also  important  for  the  District  Court  to  determine 
whether  the  parties  have  standing  to  bring  the  claims 
presented  and  whether  such  claims  are  ripe  for 
adjudication. 


-  29  - 

571.-536592. 10 


811 


OUESTIONMAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 
I.   BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

1.  Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used). 
Norman  Kenneth  Moon 

2.  Address:  List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address(es). 

Residence: 
Lynchburg,  Virginia 

Office: 

Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia 

Central  Fidelity  Bank  Building 

18th  Floor 

Ninth  and  Main  Streets 

Lynchburg,  Virginia  24504 

Office  Mailing  Address: 
Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia 
Post  Office  Box  657 
Lynchburg,  Virginia  24505 

3.  Date  and  place  of  birth. 

November  4,  19  36 
Lynchburg,  Virginia 

4.  Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name).  List 
spouses  occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  address(es). 

Barbara  Wooldridge  Moon 

Not  employed  outside  our  home. 

5.  Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including 
dates  of  attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

University  of  Virginia  School  of  Law 

Master  of  Laws  (Judicial),  1986  -  1988;  Degree:  May  22,  1988 

University  of  Virginia  School  of  Law 

Bachelor  of  Laws,  1959  -  1962;  Degree:  June  3,  1962 

University  of  Virginia 

Bachelor  of  Arts,  1955  -  1959;  Degree:  June  2,  1959 

6.  Employment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional 
corporations,  companies,  firms  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships, 
institutions  and  organizations,  nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms, 
with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer,  director,  partner, 
proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  from  college. 


812 


Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia:  Judge,  January  1,  1935  -  present;  Chief 
Judge,  May  1,  1993  -  present.  (I  was  re-elected  to  serve  a  second  term  as 
Chief  Judge,  beginning  May  1,  1997). 

Twenty-fourth  Judicial  Circuit  of  Virginia:  Judge,  April  15,  1974  - 
December  31,  1984;  Chief  Judge,  July  1,  1983  -  December  31,  1984. 

Edmunds,  Williams,  Robertson,  Sackett,  Baldwin  &  Graves:  Partner,  January 
1,  1970  -  April  15,  1974. 

Air  Pollution  Control  Board  of  the  City  of  Lynchburg:  Chairman,  July  1, 
1972  -  April  15,  1974.  I  was  appointed  to  the  Board  by  the  City  of 
Lynchburg  City  Council  and  elected  by  the  other  board  members  as  chairman 
for  this  unpaid  position. 

Williams,  Robertson  &  Sackett:  Associate,  June  4,  1962  -  December  31,  1966 
(except  during  military  service);  Partner,  January  1,  1967  -  December  31, 
1969. 

United  States  Army,  1st  Battalion,  35th  Artillery:  First  Lieutenant, 
February  17,  1963  -  January  28,  1965. 

State  Farm  Mutual  Automobile  Insurance  Company:  Claims  adjuster,  June  1  - 
August  3,  1961. 

Wooldridge  Motor  Company:  Car  salesman,  June  1  -  August  15,  1960. 

Hoco  Oil  Company:  Service  station  attendant,  June  1  -  August  15,  1959. 

Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give 
particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial 
number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 

Yes,  I  served  in  the  military. 

Date:   February  17,  1963  -  January  28,  1965 

Branch  of  service:   U.S.  Army  (Artillery) 

Rank:  1st  Lieutenant 

Serial  No:   05207642 

Present  Status:   Retired 

Discharge:   Honorable 

Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees, 
and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to 
the  Committee. 

William  J.  Brennan,  Jr.  Award,  awarded  by  University  of  Virginia  School  of 
Law  for  excellence  in  teaching  trial  advocacy,  1997. 

William  Folkes  Scholarship,  University  of  Virginia,  1955-59. 

Intermediate  Honors,  University  of  Virginia,  1957. 

Norman  K.  Moon 


813 


Raven  Society,  1958. 
Omicron  Delta  Kappa,  1958. 

9.  Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related 
committees  or  conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give 
the  titles  and  dates  of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

National  Council  of  Chief  Judges,  Executive  Committee:  Treasurer  1996  - 
present.  Secretary  1995-96,  member  1993  -  present. 

Virginia  Bar  Association,  Judicial  Section:  Vice  Chairman  1997,  member 
1995  -  present. 

Judicial  Council  of  Virginia:  1993  -  present. 

State-Federal  Judicial  Council  for  Virginia:  1993  -  present. 

Boyd-Graves  Conference,  Steering  Committee:  1986  -  present. 

Judicial  Conference,  Judicial  Administration  Committee:  Chairman  1985-87. 

Model  Jury  Instructions  Committee:  Chairman  1983-86,  member  1981-86. 

Committee  to  Draft  the  Rules  for  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia:  1983- 
84. 

Virginia  State  Bar:  1962  -  present. 

E-thics  Committee,  Sixth  District:  Chairman  1972-74,  memiier  1971-74. 

Virginia  Bar  Association. 

Judiciary  Committee:  1972-74. 

Insurance  Committee:  1969-74. 

Young  Lawyers  Section:  Southside  Regional  Vice-President  1968-69, 
member  1963-73. 

American  Bar  Association:  1972  -  present. 

national  Institute  of  Trial  Advocacy:  1996  -  present. 

Aaarican  Judicature  Society:  1974  -  present. 

Institute  of  Judicial  Administration:  1985  -  present. 

10.  Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are 
active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies.  Please  list  all  other 
organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

Lobbying  Groups : 

Commission  on  Family  Violence  Prevention  (previously  Commission  Against 

Norman  K.  Hoon 


814 


Ooasstic  Violence):  1993  -  present. 

Virginia  Bar  Association:  1962  -  present. 

Aaarican  Bar  Association:  1972  -  present. 

Other  Memberships: 

National  Council  of  Christians  &  Jews:  Board  Member  1989-94. 

Poakland  Baptist  Church:  Finance  Committee  1992-93,  Executive  Committee 
Chairaan  1989-90,  Board  of  Deacons  1971-73,  1987-89. 

Thirteen  Club:  November  20,  1974  -  present  (no  bylaws). 

John  Lynch  Society:  1967  -  present  (no  bylaws). 

Court  Admission;  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to 
practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  membership 
lapsed.  Please  explain  the  reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the 
same  information  for  administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission 
to  practice. 

Supreme  Court  of  Virginia  -  June  4,  1962 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of  Virginia  -  June 
7,  1965 

Onited  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Fourth  Circuit  -  October  7,  1972 

United  States  Supreme  Court  -  May  29,  1967 

Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books, 
articles,  reports,  or  other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited. 
Please  supply  one  copy  of  all  ptiblished  material  not  readily  available  to 
the  Committee.  Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on 
issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.  If  there  were  press 
reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you,  please 
supply  them . 

VIRGINIA  MODEL  JURY  INSTRUCTIONS  (Micbie  1986)  (four  volumes,  updated 
annually)  (contributed  to  the  1981-86  voltunes) . 

A  Proposal  to  Simplify  Virginia  Burdens  of  Proofs,  12  George  Mason  Law 
Review  1  (1989) . 

Virginia  Bar  Association,  Continuing  Legal  Education:  Tips  for  Getting  the 
Judge   to  Try  Your  Case  and  Hot   You    (July  18,  1997)  (handout). 

I  have  made  some  informal  talks  that  touched  on  constitutional  law  and 
legal  policy.   I  spoke  from  notes. 

See  Attachment  A  ("Publications")  for  a  copy  of  the  article,  the  CLE 
handout,  and  speech  notes. 

Health;  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  your 
last  physical  examination. 

Norman  K.  Moon 


815 


I  am  in  excellent  health.  I  had  my  last  physical  examination  on  July  3, 
1997. 

14.  Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have 
held,  whether  such  position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of 
the  jurisdiction  of  each  such  court. 

Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia,  Chief  Judge,  1993  -  present.  Judge,  1985  - 
present.  (I  was  re-elected  by  the  members  of  the  Court  to  serve  a  second 
term  as  Chief  Judge,  beginning  May  1,  1997).  I  was  elected  to  the  Court 
by  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia.  The  Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia  is 
an  intermediate  court  of  appeal  with  jurisdiction  over  appeals  from 
criminal  cases  in  which  capital  punishment  was  not  imposed,  domestic 
relations  cases,  worker's  compensation  cases,  and  administrative  agency 
appeals  that  were  first  appealed  to  a  circuit  court. 

Twenty-fourth  Judicial  Circuit  of  Virginia,  Chief  Judge,  1983-84,  Judge, 
1974-85.  I  was  elected  to  the  Court  by  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia 
and  was  elected  Chief  Judge  by  the  other  judges  in  the  circuit.  The 
Circuit  Courts  of  Virginia  are  trial  courts  of  general  jurisdiction. 

15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  judge,  provide:  (1)  citations  for  the 
ten  most  significant  opinions  you  have  written;  (2)  a  short  suxamary  of  and 
citation  for  all  appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or 
where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your 
substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3)  citations  for  significant 
opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues,  together  with  the 
citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the 
opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the 
opinions . 

(1)  The  ten  most  significant  opinions  I  have  written. 

Williams  v.  Williams.  24  Va .  App.  778,  485  S.E.d  651  (1997). 

Walton  v.  Commonwealth,  24  Va .  App.  757,  485  S.E.2d  641  (1997). 

Mills  V.  Commonwealth,  24  Va .  App.  95,  480  S.E.2d  746  (1997). 

Horen  v.  Commonwealth.  23  Va .  App.  735,  479  S.E.2d  553  (1997). 

Tench  V.  Commonwealth.  21  Va .  App.  200,  462  S.E.2d  922  (1995). 

Barfield  v.  Commonwealth.  20  Va .  App.  447,  457  S.E.2d  786  (1995). 

Hughes  v.  Commonwealth,  18  Va .  App.  510,  446  S.E.2d  451  (1994). 

Broady  v.  Commonwealth,  16  Va .  App.  281,  429  S.E.2d  468  (1993). 

Farmer  v.  Commonwealth.  12  Va .  App.  337,  404  S.E.2d  371  (1991). 

Jones  V.  Colonial  Williamsburg  Foundation,  10  Va .  App.  521,  392  S.E.2d  848 
(1990) . 

(2)  A  short  summary  of  and  citation  for  all  appellate  opinions  where  my 

Norman  K.  Moon 


816 


decisions  were  reversed  or  where  my  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant 
criticism  of  my  substantive  or  procedural  rulings. 

Cases  I  decided  as  a  circuit  court  judge  in  Virginia's  24th  Judicial 
Circuit  (none  of  which  were  written  decisions)  which  were  reversed  by  the 
Supreme  Court  of  Virginia: 

1)  Alls  v.  Alls,  Circuit  Court  of  Campbell  County  (June  15,  1975) 
reversed  by  Alls  v.  Alls.  216  Va .  13,  216  S.E.2d  16  (1975). 

As  trial  judge  in  a  divorce  proceeding,  I  awarded  a  husband  a 
divorce  on  the  ground  of  desertion  and  awarded  him  custody  of  the  couple's 
child.  The  Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  I  erred  in  finding  that  a 
wife's  departure  from  the  family  home  one  day  after  her  suit  for  divorce 
alleging  cruelty  was  filed,  constituted  desertion  on  the  wife's  part,  for 
one  spouse  is  not  guilty  of  legal  desertion  in  separating  from  the  other 
after  the  institution  of  a  suit  for  divorce  or  during  its  pendency.  The 
Supreme  Court  also  ordered  that  the  custody  determination  be  reconsidered. 

2)  Early  Settlers  Ins.  Co.  v.  Jordan,  Circuit  Court  of  Nelson  County 
(June  13,  1975)  reversed  by  Early  Settlers  Ins.  Co.  v.  Jordan,  217  Va . 
462,  229  S.E.2d  871  (1976). 

Plaintiff  was  injured  by  his  contact  with  his  car  which  he  was 
driving  when  the  car  struck  a  tree.  His  father's  insurance  policy 
provided  medical  coverage  if  plaintiff  was  struck  by  an  automobile.  I 
held  that  bis  injury  was  covered.   The  Supreme  Court  reversed. 

3)  Watson  v.  Shepard.  Circuit  Court  of  Campbell  County  (Nov.  24,  1976) 
reversed  by  Watson  v.  Shepard,  217  Va .  538,  229  S.E.2d  897  (1976). 

As  a  trial  judge,  I  denied  a  petition  by  the  natural  mother  to 
regain  custody  because  she  was  unfit.  I  allowed  adoption  by  the 
"psychological  parents"  who  had  custody  of  the  child  and  their  own  child, 
who  looked  upon  the  adoptive  child  as  its  sibling.  The  Supreme  Court 
reversed,  holding  that  it  was  error  to  approve  adoption  by  a  couple  while 
they  were  divorcing.  The  Court  held  that  the  irrevocable  step  of 
terminating  the  natural  parent's  rights,  even  though  no  question  was 
raised  about  the  adoptive  parents'  fitness  as  parents,  should  not  be  taken 
at  a  time  when  the  adoptive  parents  were  separated  and  their  marital 
problems  were  unsettled. 

4)  Cole  v.  Waynesboro,  Circuit  Court  of  the  City  of  Waynesboro  (July  8, 
1976)  reversed  by  Cole  v.  Waynesboro,  218  Va .  827,  241  S.E.2d  765  (1978). 

Landowner  challenged  a  grant  of  a  special  use  permit  to  allow 
construction  of  a  ten-story  apartment  building  for  elderly  and  handicapped 
residents  in  a  block  zoned  for  general  business  and  residential  use.  As 
trial  judge,  I  entered  judgment  against  the  landowners,  upholding  the 
granting  of  the  permit  because  the  evidence  did  not  show  that  the  city 
clearly  abused  its  power  in  exercising  its  legislative  power.  The  Supreme 
Court  had  previously  held  this  to  be  the  standard.  Byrum  v.  Board  of 
Supervisors.  217  Va.  37,  225  S.E.2d  369  (1976). 

Reversing  my  decision,  the  Supreme  Court  held  that  not  withstanding 

Norman  K.  Moon 


817 


the  issuance  of  a  special  permit  a  legislative  action  must  comport  with 
good  zoning  practices  or  the  purpose  of  the  city  ordinances. 

5)  Baker  v.  Commonwealth.  Circuit  Court  of  Campbell  County  (July  25, 
1978)  reversed  by  Baker  v.  Commonwealth,  No.  781235  (Va.  Apr.  13,  1979). 

Baker,  a  prisoner,  was  convicted  of  escape.  On  appeal,  it  was 
determined  that  he  was  prosecuted  under  the  wrong  escape  statute  because 
he  was  technically  a  prisoner  in  a  jail  not  a  part  of  the  Department  of 
Corrections. 

6)  Woodson  V.  Lynchburg  Div ■  of  Social  Servs.,  Circuit  Court  of  the  City 
of  Lynchburg  (Sept.  23,  1980)  reversed  by  Woodson  v.  Lynchburg  Div.  of 
Social  Servs. ,  223  Va .  235,  288  S.E.2d  410  (1982). 

As  a  trial  judge,  I  terminated  the  residual  parental  rights  to  the 
illegitimate  child  of  a  biological  father  and  authorized  the  social 
service  agency  to  place  the  child  for  adoption.  The  father,  who  had  not 
supported  the  child  or  had  any  meaningful  contact,  had  numerous  other 
illegitimate  children  whom  he  was  not  supporting.  The  father  intervened 
in  the  proceeding  after  the  natural  mother  was  found  unfit  and  was  about 
to  have  her  parental  rights  terminated.  I  believed  his  intention  was  to 
delay  adoption  and  to  leave  the  child  in  the  custody  of  the  unfit  mother. 

The  Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  that:  (1)  the  statute 
permitting  termination  of  parental  rights  of  a  parent  or  parents  who, 
without  good  cause,  have  been  unwilling  or  unable  within  a  reasonable 
period  to  remedy  substantially  the  conditions  which  led  to  the  child's 
foster  care  placement  eliminated  the  necessity  for  specific  finding  of 
parental  unfitness  in  termination  proceedings  between  parents  and  social 
service  agencies;  (2)  finding  that  the  factors  listed  in  the  statute  exist 
is  tantamount  to  a  finding  of  parental  unfitness;  and  (3)  where  an 
unmarried  father  was  not  offered  services  of  a  rehabilitative  agency  prior 
to  the  termination  of  his  parental  rights,  order  would  be  reversed  and 
father  would  be  given  the  opportunity  to  show  what  progress  he  could  make 
with  the  assistance  of  rehabilitative  agencies  toward  establishing,  within 
a  reasonable  period,  a  suitable  home  for  the  child  subject  to  the 
termination  order. 

7)  Kern  v.  Freed  Co.,  Circuit  Court  of  Nelson  County  (Jan.  8,  1980) 
reversed  by  Kern  v.  Freed  Co. ,  224  Va.  678,  299  S.E.2d  363  (1982). 

As  trial  court  judge,  I  held  that  a  homeowner  was  indebted  to  the 
seller  on  the  sale  of  household  appliances  and  entered  judgment 
accordingly.  The  Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  that  a  principal  is  not 
bound  when  an  agent  acts  beyond  its  authority  and  that  no  unjust 
enrichment  was  shown  in  an  implied  contract  to  pay  for  goods. 

8)  School  Board  v.  Hurley.  Circuit  Court  of  Amherst  County  (Apr.  29, 
1983)  reversed  by  School  Board  v.  Burley,  225  Va .  376,  302  S.E.2d  53 
(1983)  . 

Vendors  brought  suit  against  school  board  for  specific  performance 
for  sale  of  real  estate.  As  trial  judge,  I  held  that  under  the  facts  and 
circumstances  of  the  case,  the  school  board  was  estopped  from  interposing 
as  a  defense  that  the  contract  was  not  in  writing  and  was  therefore 

Norman  K.  Moon 


818 


8 

unenforceable.  I  ordered  specific  performance.  The  Supreme  Court 
reversed,  holding  that  an  oral  contract  for  the  purchase  of  land  by  a 
school  board  under  former  Code  Sec.  22-150  (now  superseded  by  Code  Sec. 
22.1-128)  is  ultra  vires  and  void  and  that  there  was  no  estoppel  against 
the  Board  to  raise  defense  of  lack  of  writing. 

9)  Pierce  v.  Martin.  Circuit  Court  of  Campbell  County  (Oct.  24,  1980) 
reversed  by  Pierce  v.  Martin.  230  Va .  94,  334  S.E.2d  576  (1985). 

Truck  driver  sued  car  driver  for  contribution  to  recover  one-half  of 
amounts  paid  by  the  truck  driver  to  the  car  passengers  in  settlement  of 
the  injury  claims.  I  entered  judgment  for  truck  driver.  The  Supreme 
Court  reversed  in  part  and  affirmed  in  part,  holding  that  some,  but  not 
all,  of  the  injured  parties  were  prohibited  by  their  own  testimony  from 
recovering  against  the  defendant. 

Cases  decided  by  a  three-judge  panel  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia 
in  which  I  wrote  the  decision  for  the  panel  and  the  decision  was  reversed 
by  either  the  Court  of  Appeals  sitting  en  banc  or  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Virginia: 

1)  National  Linen  Service  v.  McGuinn,  3  Va .  App.  73,  343  S.E.2d  42  (1986) 
reversed  by  National  Linen  Service  v.  McGuinn,  5  Va .  App.  265,  362  S.E.2d 
187  (1987)  (en  banc) . 

The  Court  of  Appeals  en  banc  affirmed  the  decision  of  the  Workers' 
Compensation  Commission  and  reversed  my  panel  decision.  The  Court  held 
that  the  commission  correctly  determined  that  because  of  the  employer's 
failure  to  execute  and  file  a  memorandum  of  agreement,  its  payment  of 
compensation  to  the  employee  for  a  period  of  thirteen  months,  and  its 
failure  to  contest  the  compensability  of  the  injury,  the  employer  could 
not  be  placed  in  a  better  position  than  it  would  have  been  in  had  it 
complied  with  the  provisions  of  Code  Sec.  65.1-93.  The  Court  further  held 
that  there  was  credible  evidence  to  support  the  commission's  finding  that 
the  employee  reasonably  believed  that  he  was  entitled  to  compensation 
because  the  employer  paid  benefits  for  thirteen  months  without  executing 
a  memorandum  of  agreement. 

2)  Clinebell  v.  Commonwealth,  3  Va .  App.  362,  349  S.E.2d  676  (1986) 
reversed  in  part  by  Clinebell  v.  Commonwealth,  235  Va .  319,  368  S.E.2d  263 
(1988) . 

We  held  that  certain  hearsay  statements  of  a  child  victim  under 
Virginia  law  were  inadmissible  to  impeach  the  child's  testimony.  The 
Supreme  Court  adopted  a  new  exception  to  the  hearsay  rule  and  reversed. 

3)  Hill  City  Trucking  v.  Christian,  7  Va .  App.  78,  371  S.E.2d  572  (1988) 
reversed  by  Hill  City  Trucking  v.  Christian,  238  Va.  735,  385  S.E.2d  377 
(1989) . 

This  was  a  worker's  compensation  claim  in  which  Christian,  a  long- 
distance truck  driver,  was  shot  by  robbers  who,  pretending  to  be  police 
officers,  stopped  his  truck  at  3:00  A.M.  on  a  deserted  road.  We  held  that 
the  injury  arose  out  of  a  risk  of  Christian's  employment  and  was 

Norman  K.  Moon 


819 


compensable.  The  Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  that  the  risk  of  being 
robbed  and  shot  at  3:00  A.M.  on  a  highway  was  not  proven  to  be  greater  for 
a  truck  driver  than  the  ordinary  citizen,  and  thus  the  injury  did  not 
arise  out  of  a  risk  of  his  employment. 

4)  Jimenez  v.  Commonwealth,  10  Va .  App.  277,  392  S.E.2d  822  (1990) 
reversed  by  Jimenez  v.  Commonwealth.  241  Va .  244,  402  S.E.2d  678  (1991).* 

Jimenez  was  charged  and  tried  for  the  statutory  offense  of 
defrauding  a  person  under  a  construction  contract.  One  of  the  elements  of 
the  charged  offense  was  that  the  victim  had  made  demand  for  repayment  in 
writing.  The  Commonwealth  failed  to  prove  a  written  demand.  On  appeal, 
we  held  that  because  Jimenez  did  not  object  to  the  finding  instruction  and 
the  evidence  was  sufficient  to  prove  the  crime  of  obtaining  money  by  false 
pretenses,  of  which  he  was  found  guilty,  he  was  barred  on  appeal  from 
raising  as  an  issue  the  Commonwealth's  failure  to  prove  that  a  letter  was 
sent  by  the  victim  demanding  repayment.  The  Supreme  Court  reversed, 
holding  that  Jimenez  had  been  convicted  of  an  offense  that  was  not  a 
crime. 

5)  Campbell  v.  Commonwealth,  13  Va .  App  33,  409  S.E.2d  21  (1991)  reversed 
by  Campbell  v.  Commonwealth,  14  Va .  App.  988,  421  S.E.2d  652  (1992)  (en 
banc)  . 

Defendant  was  convicted  of  forging  a  public  record.  On  appeal  he 
argued  that  the  trial  court  erred  in  instructing  the  jury.  The  panel 
decision  held  that  he  could  not  raise  the  issue  because  he  had  not 
objected  to  the  instruction.  Reversing  my  panel  decision,  the  Court  of 
Appeals  en  banc  held  that  the  trial  court  erred,  and  that  the  ends  of 
justice  exception  to  Rule  SA:18  allowed  the  Court  to  consider  the  issue  on 
appeal . 

6)  Commonwealth  v.  Woodward,  17  Va .  App.  526,  438  S.E.2d  77  (1993) 
reversed  by  Commonwealth  v.  Woodward,  249  Va .  21,  452  S.E.2d  656  (1995). 

We  held  that  an  injured  prisoner,  who  had  signed  a  contract  of 
employment  with  the  Virginia  Department  of  Highways,  was  covered  by 
worker's  compensation.  The  Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  that  a 
prisoner  was  legally  incompetent  to  contract;  therefore,  he  was  not 
employed  under  a  contract  of  hire  and  was  ineligible  for  compensation. 

7)  Cem  Fahrettin  Curmak  v.  Commonwealth  of  Vircrinia,  No.  0037-94-2  (Va. 
Ct.  App.  Mar.  14,  1995)  (memorandum  opinion)  reversed  by  Cem  Fahrettin 
Curmak  v.  Commonwealth,  No.  950975  (Va.  Feb.  16,  1996)  (per  curium). 

We  affirmed  the  circuit  court  decision  refusing  to  order  a  bill  of 
particulars.  The  Supreme  Court  reversed. 

8)  Braithwaite  v.  Commonwealth,  No.  0790-94-2  (Va.  Ct .  App.  Aug.  15, 
1995)  reversed  by  No.  0790-94-2  (Va.  Ct.  App.  Apr.  23,  1996)  (en  banc) 
(order) . 

Panel  held  that  lying  on  a  pillow  with  a  large  revolver  and  drugs 
beneath  it  was  sufficient  circumstantial  evidence  to  support  conviction  of 

Norman  K.  Moon 


820 


10 

possession  of  a  firearm  and  drugs .  The  Court  of  Appeals  en  banc  adopted 
the  panel  dissent,  holding  that  evidence  was  insufficient  to  support 
conviction. 

Cases  decided  by  a  three-judge  panel  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia 
in  which  I  voted  with  the  majority  of  the  panel  but  did  not  write  the 
decision  and  the  decision  was  overturned  by  either  the  Court  of  Appeals 
sitting  en  banc  or  the  Supreme  Court  of  Virginia: 

1)  Lambert  v.  Commonwealth.  No.  0438-86-3  (Va.  Ct .  App.  Apr.  9,  1987) 
reversed  by  Lambert  v.  Commonwealth,  No.  870469  (Va.  Mar.  18,  1988). 

The  Supreme  Court  reversed  our  determination  that  Lambert  had  not 
timely  filed  his  notice  of  appeal  in  the  trial  court. 

2)  Johnson  v.  Chesterfield,  5  Va .  App.  15,  359  S.E.2d  833  (1987)  reversed 
by  Johnson  v.  Chesterfield,  237  Va .  180,  376  S.E.2d  73  (1989). 

We  affirmed  the  Industrial  Commission  and  held  that  the  injury 
sustained  by  a  claimant  who  fell  down  steps  while  turning  was  compensable 
under  the  Workers'  Compensation  Act.  The  Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding 
that  traversing  steps  was  not  a  risk  of  employment  and  was  not,  therefore, 
compensable . 

3)  Llamera  v.  Commonwealth,  No.  0322-90-4  (Va.  Ct .  App.  June  4,  1991) 
(memorandum  opinion)  reversed  by  Llamera  v.  Commonwealth,  243  Va .  262,  414 
S.E.2d  597  (1992)  . 

We  affirmed  the  trial  court  order  which  found  the  defendant  guilty 
of  possession  with  intent  to  distribute  cocaine.  The  Supreme  Court 
reversed,  holding  that  prejudicial  error  occurred  when  a  police  officer 
was  allowed  to  testify  over  objection  that  in  bis  opinion,  the  quantity  of 
cocaine  "would  suggest"  that  the  owner  of  the  cocaine  was  a  person  who 
sold  cocaine  and  that  such  quantity  was  inconsistent  with  personal  use, 
thereby  expressing  an  opinion  on  the  ultimate  issue  in  the  case. 

4)  Stevenson  v.  City  of  Falls  Church,  No.  1956-89-4  (Va.  App.  Apr.  23, 
1991)  (memorandum  opinion)  reversed  by  Stevenson  v.  City  of  Falls  Church. 
243  Va.  434,  416  S.E.2d  435  (1992). 

A  police  officer  found  the  defendant  asleep  inside  a  motor  vehicle, 
behind  the  steering  wheel,  with  the  key  in  the  ignition.  When  the  officer 
woke  the  defendant,  it  was  apparent  to  her  that  the  defendant  was 
intoxicated.  Defendant  was  charged  and  convicted  with  drunk  driving  under 
the  city's  drunk  driving  ordinance.  On  appeal  we  affirmed,  holding  that 
the  defendant  was  the  "operator"  of  his  car  within  the  meaning  of  the 
relevant  statute,  because  he  was  in  actual  physical  control  of  the  motor 
vehicle. 

The  Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  that  for  the  purposes  of  the 
city  ordinance,  which  invoked  statutory  definitions  from  the  Virginia 
Code,  an  "operator"  of  a  vehicle  does  not  include  an  intoxicated  occupant 
of  a  car  who  is  merely  seated  behind  its  steering  wheel  with  the  key  in 
the  ignition  switch. 


Norman  K.  Moon 


821 


11 

5)  Reid  V.  Reid.  14  Va .  App.  505,  419  S.E.2d.  398  (1992)  reversed  by  Re id 
V.  Reid,  245  Va .  409,  429  S.E.2d.  208  (1993) 

We  held  that  husband  could  seek  restitution  of  spousal  support  paid 
pursuant  to  an  order  that  had  been  reversed.  The  Supreme  Court  held  that 
trial  court  did  not  have  statutory  or  inherent  authority  to  order 
restitution  of  spousal  support  already  paid. 

6)  Henrico  County  School  Board  v.  Bohle.  14  Va .  App.  801,  421  S.E.2d  8 
(1992)  reversed  by  Bohle  v.  Henrico  County  School,  246  VA.  30,  431  S.E.2d 
36  (1993). 

We  reversed  a  decision  of  the  Workers'  Compensation  Commission 
suspending  an  employee's  benefits  until  such  time  as  the  employee  had 
incurred  a  specified  sum  of  compensation  benefits  and  expenses  computed 
based  upon  the  amount  of  the  net  third-party  recovery.  We  held  that  under 
the  circumstances,  the  commission  erred  in  determining  both  the  amount  at 
which  further  benefits  would  accrue  and  the  method  by  which  further 
benefits  would  be  calculated. 

The  Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  that  the  Court  of  Appeals 
applied  the  wrong  method  for  apportioning  attorney's  fees  and  expenses 
when  payment  of  compensation  benefits  had  been  suspended  following  a 
settlement  between  the  employee  and  the  third-party  tortfeasor. 

7)  In  re  Baskins.  16  Va .  App  241,  430  S.E.2d  555  (1993)  reversed  by 
Jamborsky  v.  Baskins.  247  Va .  506,  442  S.E.2d  636  (1994). 

A  juvenile  filed  application  for  a  writ  of  prohibition  to  prevent 
the  circuit  court  from  trying  him  as  an  adult  on  felony  charges.  We  held 
that:  (1)  date  of  "receipt"  of  a  case  from  the  juvenile  court,  as 
contemplated  by  statute  providing  that  circuit  court  should,  within  21 
days  after  receipt  of  case  from  juvenile  court,  enter  an  order  either 
remanding  the  case  to  the  juvenile  court  or  advising  the  attorney  for  the 
CoBUBonwealth  that  he  may  seek  an  indictment,  was  the  date  the  circuit 
court  takes  physical  possession  and  control  of  the  file  from  the  juvenile 
court,  and  (2)  the  statute  was  mandatory. 

The  Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  that:  (1)  compliance  with  the 
21-day  time  period  provided  in  the  statute  setting  the  procedure  for 
transfer  of  the  juvenile  to  the  circuit  court  for  trial  as  an  adult  was 
directory  and  procedural  rather  than  mandatory  and  jurisdictional,  and  (2) 
the  juvenile  did  not  suffer  any  prejudice  as  a  result  of  the  three-day 
delay  in  the  circuit  court's  assumption  of  jurisdiction  over  his  felony 
charges . 

8)  Kelley  v.  Kellev.  17  Va .  App.  93,  435  S.E.2d  421  (1993)  (en  banc) 
reversed  by  Kelley  v.  Kelley,  248  Va .  295,  449  S.E.2d  55  (1994). 

Husband  appealed  the  decision  of  the  circuit  court  that  invalidated 
a  portion  of  a  property  settlement  agreement  that  previously  had  been 
incorporated  into  the  divorce  decree.  We  held  en  banc  that  upon  passage 
of  twenty-one  days  from  the  entry  of  the  final  decree,  the  trial  court 
lacked  jurisdiction  to  modify  the  terms  of  the  decree. 

The  Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  that  because  the  property 
settlement  agreement  involved  the  rights  of  children  to  support,  and  such 
rights  cannot  be  impinged  by  contract,  the  decree  was  void  and  could  be 
attacked  and  vacated  in  any  court  at  any  time,  directly  or  collaterally. 

Norman  K.  Moon 


822 


12 


9)  Bottoms  V.  Bottoms.  18  Va .  App .  481,  444  S.E.2d  276  (1994)  reversed  by 
Bottoms  V.  Bottoms,  249  Va .  410,  457  S.E.2d  102  (1995). 

He  held  that  the  evidence  was  insufficient  to  support  a  trial 
judge's  decision  that  a  lesbian  mother  was  an  unfit  parent  and  his  award 
of  custody  of  her  biological  child  to  her  mother.  The  Supreme  Court  held 
that  the  evidence  was  sufficient  to  support  the  trial  court's  finding  of 
unfitness,  reversed  the  Court  of  Appeals,  and  reinstated  the  trial  court 
decision. 

10)  Barrett  v.  Commonwealth,  18  Va .  App.  773,  447  S.E.2d  243  (1994) 
reversed  by  Barrett  v.  Commonwealth,  250  Va .  243,  462  S.E.2d.  109  (1995). 

We  held  that  a  police  officer,  who  observed  Barrett's  truck  stopped, 
turned  around  and  went  to  inquire  if  help  was  needed  and  then  saw  the 
truck  slowly  moving  with  its  wheels  partially  on  the  shoulder  of  the  road 
and  partially  in  the  road,  had  the  right  to  stop  the  truck  in  the  exercise 
of  the  "community  caretaker  function"  articulated  in  Cadv  v.  Dombrowski, 
413  U.S  433  (1973).  The  Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  that  the 
circumstances  did  not  justify  the  stop. 

11)  Stenrich  Group  v.  Jemmott,  No.  1910-94-2  (Va.  Ct .  App.  April  4,  1995) 
(memorandum  opinion)  reversed  by  Stenrich  v.  Jemmott,  251  Va .  186,  467 
S.E.2d  795,  17  O.S.H.  Cas.  (BNA)  1573  (1996). 

We  held  that  credible  evidence  supported  a  finding  that  Jemmott 's 
carpal  tunnel  syndrome  was  a  condition  characterized  as  a  "disease."  The 
Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  that  job-related  impairments  resulting 
from  cumulative  trauma  caused  by  repetitive  motion,  however  labeled  or 
however  defined,  are,  as  a  matter  of  law,  not  compensable  under  the 
present  provisions  of  the  Workers'  Compensation  Act. 

12)  Donald  v.  Fairfax  County  Dept .  of  Hum.  Dev . ,  20  Va .  App.  155,  455 
S.E.2d  740  (1995)  (en  banc)  reversed  by  P'airfax  County  Dept.  of  Hum.  Dev. 
V.    Donald.  251  Va.  227,  467  S.E.2d  803  (1996). 

In  child  abuse/neglect  proceeding,  sitting  en  banc,  we  reversed  the 
trial  court's  denial  of  attorney  fees  and  remanded  for  determination  of 
reasonable  attorney  fees.  Holding  that  the  appeal  from  the  trial  court 
was  untimely,  the  Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  that  attorney  fees  could 
only  be  awarded  in  matters  "properly  before"  the  court,  and  that  when  an 
appeal  was  not  taken  within  ten  days  of  the  trial  court's  final  order,  the 
matter  was  not  "properly  before"  the  circuit  court  and  therefore  fees 
could  not  be  awarded. 

13)  Allen  V.  Commonwealth.  20  Va .  App.  630,  460  S.E.2d  248  (1995) 
reversed  by  Allen  v.  Commonwealth,  252  Va.  105,  472  S.E.2d  277  (1996). 

We  affirmed  the  decision  of  the  trial  court,  holding  that  the 
appellant  had  waived  his  double  jeopardy  objections. 
On  grant  of  limited  review,  the  Supreme  Court  reversed. 

14)  Griswold  v.  Commonwealth.  21  Va .  App.  22,  461  S.E.2d  411  (1995)  (en 
banc)  reversed  by  Griswold  v.  Commonwealth.  252  Va.  113,  472  S.E.2d  789 

Norman  K.  Moon 


823 


13 

(1996) . 

Defendant  was  convicted  in  the  trial  court  of  driving  under  the 
influence  of  alcohol  after  having  previously  been  convicted  of  a  like 
offense.  On  appeal,  sitting  en  banc,  we  affirmed  the  trial  court.  The 
Supreme  Court  reversed,  holding  that  (1)  the  defendant's  prior  misdemeanor 
DUI  conviction  was  invalid  because  defendant  had  not  been  properly 
represented  by  counsel;  (2)  allowing  the  jury  to  convict  the  defendant 
based  on  a  prior  invalid  conviction  was  reversible  error;  but  (3) 
defendant's  other  unrepresented  misdemeanor  conviction  for  which  defendant 
spent  no  time  in  jail  was  valid. 

(3)  Citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional 
issues: 

Williams  v.    Williams.  24  Va .  App.  778,  485  S.E.d  651  (1997). 

Walton  V.  Commonwealth.  24  Va .  App.  757,  485  S.E.2d  641  (1997). 

Horen  v.  Commonwealth.  23  Va .  App.  735,  479  S.E.2d  553  (1997). 

Tench  v.  Commonwealth.  21  Va .  App.  200,  462  S.E.2d  922  (1995). 

Hall  V.  Commonwealth,  12  Va .  App.  972,  406  S.E.2d  674  (1991). 

16.  Public  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you  have  held, 
other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether 
such  positions  were  elected  or  appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any 
unsuccessful  candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

I  was  Chairman  of  the  Air  Pollution  Control  Board  of  the  City  of  Lynchburg 
from  its  inception  on  July  1,  1972  until  April  15,  1974.  I  was  appointed 
to  the  Board  by  the  City  of  Lynchburg  City  Council  and  elected  by  the 
other  board  members  as  chairman. 

17 .  Legal  Career: 

a.     Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after 
graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name  of 
the  judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a 
clerk; 

I  did  not  serve  as  a  clerk. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addressed  and 
dates; 

I  did  not  practice  alone. 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices, 
companies  or  governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have  been 
connected,  and  the  nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 

Norman  K.  Moon 


824 


14 

June  4,  1962  to  December  31,  1969  -  Williams,  Robertson  &  Sackett, 
709  Krise  Building,  Lynchburg,  Virginia  24503  (from  January  1  to 
December  31,  1969,  the  address  was  816  Main  Street,  Lynchburg, 
Virginia  24503).  I  was  an  associate  with  the  firm  except  during  the 
two  years  spent  in  the  Army.  I  became  a  partner  on  January  1,  1967. 
On  January  1,  1970,  the  firm  of  Williams,  Robertson  &  Sackett  merged 
and  became  Edmunds,  Williams,  Robertson,  Sackett,  Baldwin  &  Graves, 
of  which  I  was  a  partner  until  April  15,  1974,  when  I  became  a  judge 
for  the  24th  Judicial  Circuit. 

1.  What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice, 
dividing  it  into  period  with  dates  if  its  character  has 
changed  over  the  years? 

The  majority  of  my  practice  involved  tort  litigation  in  which  I 
primarily  represented  defendants.  During  the  last  three  years  of  my 
practice,  I  was  also  involved  in  employment  discrimination  cases  and 
frequently  consulted  with  business  clients  regarding  their 
compliance  with  federal  employment  law.  I  practiced  before  both 
state  and  federal  courts. 

On  April  15,  1974,  I  became  a  judge  for  the  24tb  Judicial  Circuit  of 
Virginia.  I  was  elected  Chief  Judge  by  the  other  judges  in  the 
circuit  on  July  1,  1983  and  served  in  that  capacity  until  my 
selection  to  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia  on  January  1,  1985. 
On  May  1,  1993,  I  was  elected  by  the  other  members  of  the  court  to 
serve  as  Chief  Judge,  and  I  continue  to  serve  in  that  capacity. 

2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the  areas, 
if  any,  in  which  you  have  specialized. 

A  typical  client  was  the  insured  of  a  liability  insurance  company. 
With  my  partners,  1  regularly  represented  State  Farm  Mutual 
Automobile  Insurance  Company,  Allstate  Insurance  Company,  The 
Travelers  Insurance  Company,  Lumbermens  Mutual  Insurance  Company, 
and  Royal  Globe  Insurance  Company.  We  also  represented  the  Southern 
Railway  Company,  the  C  &  O  Railroad  Company,  and  the  Lynchburg 
Transit  Company.  From  1962  to  1963,  before  my  military  service,  I 
defended  mostly  property  damage  claims,  did  some  real  estate  work, 
and  defended  indigent  persons  charged  with  crimes. 

From  1965  to  1969,  I  specialized  in  representing  defendants  in 
personal  injury  litigation.  After  1970,  in  addition  to  the  other 
insurance  companies,  I  represented  several  major  employers  in  labor 
natters,  principally  discrimination  claims.  Among  my  clients  were 
Babcock  &  Wilcox  Company,  General  Electric  Company,  Gould  National 
Battery  Company,  Limitorque  Corporation,  and  the  City  of  Lynchburg. 

1.  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at 
all?  If  the  frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court  varied, 
describe  each  such  variance,  giving  dates. 

Yes.  From  the  beginning  of  my  practice  I  appeared  in  court 
frequently . 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 


Norman  K.  Moon 


825 


15 

(a)  Federal  courts:  Approximately  twenty  percent  of  my  time 
in  court  was  in  federal  courts,  but  less  than  twenty  percent 
of  my  cases  were  federal  cases. 

(b)  State  courts  of  record:   Seventy-five  percent. 

(c)  Other  courts:   Five  percent. 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil:   Ninety  percent. 

(b)  criminal:   Five  percent. 

(c)  other:   Five  percent. 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to 
verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether 
you  were  sole  counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

I  tried  approximately  two  hundred  cases  to  verdict  or  judgment.  In 
seventy-five  percent  of  them,  I  was  sole  counsel.  In  fifteen 
percent,  I  was  chief  counsel,  and  in  ten  percent,  I  was  associate 
counsel . 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  were: 

(a)  jury:   Sixty  percent. 

(b)  non-jury:   Forty  percent. 

Litigation;  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you 
personally  handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and 
the  docket  number  and  date  if  unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the 
substance  of  each  case.  Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you 
represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  the 
litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.  Also  state  as  to  each 
case  (a)  the  date  of  representation;  (b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the 
name  of  the  judge  of  judges  before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and  (c) 
the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co-counsel  and  of 
principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 

1.     Cox  v.  Babcock  &  Wilcox  Co.,  471  F.2d  13  (4th  Cir.  1972). 

Summary  of  substance  of  case: 

Calvin  A.  Cox  brought  a  class  action  against  Babcock  &  Wilcox 
Company,  claiming  that  he  personally  had  been  discriminated  against 
on  account  of  his  race  in  both  his  hiring  and  firing.  Be  also 
claimed  that  he  was  a  proper  person  to  represent  the  class 
consisting  of  others  similarly  discriminated  against. 

Significance  of  case: 


No  man  K.  Moon 


826 


16 

The  case,  although  not  uniquely,  stands  for  the  proposition  that 
although  there  may  be  an  overall  pattern  of  discrimination,  all 
persons  within  the  discriminated  class  are  not  entitled  to  recovery 
unless  they  were  personally  discriminated  against.  It  was  the  first 
significant  employment  discrimination  case  in  the  area. 

Party  I  represented: 

Babcock  &  Wilcox  Company. 

Mature  of  my  participation: 

On  behalf  of  Babcock  &  Wilcox  I  conducted  all  of  the  discovery, 
prepared  for  trial,  and  tried  the  case  in  bifurcated  proceedings. 
I  was  assisted  by  Babcock  &  Wilcox's  corporate  counsel  in  discovery 
and  trial  preparations . 

Trial  Decision: 

An  advisory  jury  found  in  favor  of  Babcock  &  Wilcox.  The  trial 
court  entered  judgment  for  the  defendant  which  was  appealed  to  the 
Fourth  Circuit . 

Appellate  Decision: 

The  Fourth  Circuit  affirmed  the  trial  court  but  provided  that  some 
person,  other  than  Cox,  appropriate  to  represent  the  class  could 
intervene  to  represent  the  class. 

a)  Dates  of  Trial:    November  9,  1971  -  November  10,  1971; 

Deceaiber  13,  1971  -  December  14,  1971. 

b)  Name  of  Court  and  Judge: 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of  Virginia, 
Lynchburg  Division,  before  the  Honorable  H.  Emory  Widener. 

c)  1)     Names,  address,  and  phone  number  of  co-counsel: 

John  R.  Lewis 

Assistant  General  Counsel,  Babcock  &  Wilcox  Technologies,  Inc. 

Route  7  26,  Mt .  Athos 

Lynchburg,  Virginia  24506 

(804)  522-5021 

2)     Names,  address,  and  phone  number  of  counsel  for  other  parties: 

Trial: 

Charles  M.L.  Mangum 
2058  Garfield  Street 
Lynchburg,  Virginia  24501 
(804)  845-3431 

Henry  B.  Binton 

RD2360 

Worchester,  Vermont  05682 

(802)  828-3168 

Norman  K.  Moon 


827 


17 

Appaal: 

William  L.  Robinson 

Dean,  University  of  District  of  Columbia 

4250  Connecticut  Avenue 

4th  Floor,  Washington  D.C.  20008  > 

(202)  274-7400 

2.     Anderson  v.  Denny.  365  F.  Supp.  1254  (W.D.  Va .  1973). 

Suaaary  of  substance  of  case: 

Denny  directed  the  plaintiffs,  Mrs.  Anderson  and  Mrs.  Long,  to 
vacate  their  apartments.  Both  were  served  with  unlawful  detainer 
warrants. 

The  suit  challenged  the  constitutionally  of  Virginia's  eviction 
proceedings . 

Significance  of  case: 

Virginia  eviction  procedures  held  to  be  constitutional. 
Party  I  represented: 

L.  John  Denny. 

Nature  of  my  participation: 

I  served  as  chief  counsel  and  handled  all  of  the  federal  court 
proceedings . 

Trial  Decision: 

Judgment  for  the  defendant. 
Appellate  Decision: 

The  case  was  not  appealed. 

a)  Date  of  Trial:    August  7,  1973. 

b)  Name  of  Court  and  Judge: 

The  case  was  tried  in  the  United  States  District  Court, 
Charlottesville  Division,  before  the  Honorable  James  C.  Turk. 

c)  1)     Names,  address,  and  phone  numbers  of  co-counsel: 

John  A.  Dezio 
414  E.  Jefferson  Street 
Charlottesville,  Virginia  22902 
(804)  295-4138 

Dezio  handled  collateral  state  court  proceedings. 

2)     Names,  address,  and  phone  number  of  counsel  for  other  parties: 

Norman  K.  Moon 


828 


18 

Por  Anderson  and  Long: 

Ronald  R.  Tweel 
Suite  300,  500  Court  Square 
Charlottesville,  Virginia  22902-0298 
(804)  977-3390 

3.     Howell  V.  San  Miguel.  Mo.  71-C-4S-L  (W.D.  Va .  Sept.  17,  1973). 

Summary  of  substance  of  case: 

Howell,  a  guest  in  San  Miguel's  car,  sustained  a  head  injury  when 
San  Miguel  lost  control  of  his  car  and  it  overturned. 

Significance  of  case: 

The  District  Court  upheld  the  constitutionality  of  Virginia's  gross 
negligence  statute  applicable  to  guests  who  sued  their  host  drivers. 

Party  I  represented: 

Peter  Frank  San  Miguel. 

Matur*  of  ay  participation: 

Z  represented  the  defendant  during  discovery,  briefing  of  the 
coastitutional  issue,  and  trial. 

Trial  Decision: 

Jury  verdict  for  the  defendant. 
Appellate  Decision: 

The  case  was  not  appealed. 

a)  Date  of  Trial: 
September  17,  1973 

b)  Name  of  Court  and  Judge: 

U.  S.  District  Court,  Western  District  of  Virginia,  Lynchburg 
Division,  before  the  Honorable  James  C.  Turk. 

c)  1)     Names,  address,  and  phone  number  of  co-counsel: 
Hone. 

2)     Mames,  address,  and  phone  number  of  counsel  for  other  party: 

Barl  C.  Dudley,  Jr. 
tfilliams,  Connolly  t   Calif ano 
1000  Hill  Building 
Washington,  D.C.   20006 

Mom  at  University  of  Virginia  School  of  Law 

Honutn  K.  Moon 


829 


19 

580  Massie  Road 
Charlottesville,  VA   22903 
(S04)  924-8813 

4.     Mrs.  Giles  County  Kitchen,  Inc.  v.  National  Biscuit  Co..  No.  68-C- 
386-L  (W.D.  Va.  Apr.  7,  1971). 

Summary  of  substance  of  case: 

Mrs.  Giles  County  Kitchen,  Inc.,  a  processor  of  salads  and  sandwich 
spreads,  purchased  from  National  Biscuit  Company  pimentos  which  were 
used  in  production  of  pimento  cheese.  After  customers  complained  of 
glass  in  their  pimento  cheese,  Mrs.  Giles  recalled  and  destroyed  all 
of  the  pimento  cheese  in  stock  and  on  the  shelves  of  its 
distributors.  The  suit  alleged  that  the  glass  was  in  the  pimentos 
and  thus  Nabisco  breached  its  warranty  and  was  negligent  in  the 
processing  of  its  pimentos. 

Significance  of  case: 

The  questions  in  the  case  were  whether  the  glass  came  from  Nabisco 
pimentos,  whether  Nabisco  was  negligent  in  its  processing,  the 
reasonableness  of  Mrs.  Giles  in  destroying  all  of  the  pimentos  in 
stock  and  on  the  store  shelves,  and  the  measure  of  damages. 

Party  I  represented: 

National  Biscuit  Company. 

Nature  of  my  participation: 

I  conducted  most  of  the  discovery  and  shared  in  the  trial  with  Henry 
M.  Sackett,  Jr. 

Trial  Decision: 

There  was  a  verdict  for  the  plaintiff  in  the  sum  of  $17,277.60. 
Appellate  Decision: 

The  case  was  not  appealed. 

a)  Date  of  Trial: 
April  6-7,  1971. 

b)  Name  of  Court  and  Judge: 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of  Virginia, 
Lynchburg  Division,  before  the  Honorable  H.  Emory  Widener,  Jr. 

c)  1)     Name,  address,  and  phone  number  of  co-counsel: 
Henry  M.  Sackett,  Jr.  (deceased). 

2)  Name,  address,  and  phone  number  of  counsel  for  other  parties: 
S.J.  Thompson,  Jr.  (deceased) . 

Norman  K.  Moon 


830 


20 

5.     United  Services  Automobile  flss'n  v.  Epperson,  No.  68-C-27-L  (W.D. 
Va.  June  2,  1969) . 

Summary  of  substance  of  case: 

In  a  declaratory  judgment  action,  USAA  sought  a  determination  of 
whether  it  must  provide  coverage  to  Robert  H.  Epperson,  Jr.,  a 
former  insured,  who  was  ineligible  to  be  reinsured  but  had 
represented  himself  to  a  USAA  agent  as  being  an  insured  and  thus 
obtained  a  confirmation  of  insurance  coverage.  When  USAA  discovered 
that  Epperson  was  not  entitled  to  be  reinsured,  its  agent  by 
telephone  notified  him  that  his  coverage  was  not  in  force.  Within 
twenty-four  hours,  Epperson  was  involved  in  an  automobile  accident 
seriously  injuring  a  number  of  persons.  Epperson  denied  that  he  was 
notified  that  he  had  no  coverage. 

Significance  of  case: 

The  case  established  that  an  insurer  is  not  required  to  provide 
coverage  to  one  who  obtained  coverage  knowing  that  he  was  not 
entitled  to  be  insured,  where  the  insurer,  upon  discovery  of  its 
mistake,  forthwith  notified  the  person  that  he  was  not  covered. 

Party  I  represented: 

United  Service  Automobile  Association. 

Nature  of  my  participation: 

I  was  sole  counsel  in  the  case.  I  conducted  the  discovery,  deposed 
the  witnesses,  helped  negotiate  settlement  of  the  collateral  state 
court  personal  injury  cases,  and  represented  USAA  at  the  final 
hearing. 

Trial  Decision: 

There  was  a  determination  that  USAA  did  not  provide  coverage  to 
Robert  H.  Epperson,  Jr. 

Appellate  Decision: 

The  case  was  not  appealed. 

a)  Date  of  Trial: 
June  2,    1969. 

b)  Name  of  Court  and  Judge: 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of  Virginia, 
Lynchburg  Division.  (Final  hearing  of  case  was  in  the  United  States 
District  Court  at  Richmond,  Virginia,  before  the  Honorable  John 
HacKenzie) . 

c)  1)     Name,  address,  and  phone  number  of  co-counsel: 

None. 


No  rman  K .  Moon 


831 


21 

2)     Name,  address,  and  phone  number  of  counsel  for  other  par-ties: 

For  Robert  B.  Epperson,  Jr.: 

Paul  H.  Coffey,  III 

CCR  Title 

1134  Thomas  Jefferson  Road 

Forest,  Virginia  24551 

(804)  525-0041 

For  Virginia  Farm  Bureau  Insurance  Company: 

S.J.  Thompson,  Jr.  (deceased) 

For  Aetna  Casualty  &  Surety  Company  and  Edward  Houston  Moore: 

William  Rosenberger,  Jr. 

1915  Quarry  Road 
Lynchburg,  Virginia  24503 

(804)  384-3681 

For  the  Injured  Parties: 

For  Clyde  Washington  Fincham,  Sr.,  Administrator,  Phillip 
Eugene  Kerr,  and  George  Westley  Kerr: 

W.H.  Overbey,  Jr. 
Courthouse  Square 
Rustburg,  Virginia  24588 
(804)  332-5155 

For  Carlton  G.  Meador,  Administrator,  Brenda  K.  Meador,  and 
Linda  Fay  Meador: 

Thomas  L.  Phillips 
Irongate  At  Spring  Hill 
Rustburg,  Virginia  24588 
(804)  821-5022 

Lacey  E.  Putney 
305  Otey  Street 
Bedford,  Virginia  24523 
(540)  586-0080 

6.     Estate  of  John  G.  Hamilton,  Jr.  v.  Stapleton,  No.  70-C-45-L  (W.D. 
Va.  Apr.  12,  1971) . 

Summary  of  substance  of  case: 

This  was  a  wrongful  death  action  arising  out  of  an  automobile 
accident.  John  G.  Hamilton,  Jr.  was  a  resident  of  Patrick  Henry 
Boys  Plantation  and  had  substantially  been  abandoned  by  bis  mother 
who  would  have  benefited  from  a  plaintiff's  verdict. 

Significance  of  case: 

The  questions  were  whether  Stapleton  was  driving,  whether  he  was 
guilty  of  gross  negligence,  and  whether  any  part  of  a  recovery 

Norman  K.  Moon 


832 


22 

should  be  awarded  to  his  mother. 
Party  I  represented: 

George  Warren  Stapleton  (the  driver) . 

Nature  of  my  participation: 

I  was  sole  counsel  for  the  defendant.  I  conducted  the  discovery  and 
tried  the  case. 

Trial  Decision: 

There  was  a  verdict  for  the  plaintiff  in  the  sum  of  $15,500. 
Appellate  Decision: 

The  case  was  not  appealed. 

a)  Date  of  Trial: 
April  12,  1971. 

b)  Name  of  Court  and  Judge: 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of  Virginia, 
Lynchburg  Division,  before  the  Honorable  Ted  Dalton  (deceased) . 

c)  1)     Name,  address,  and  phone  number  of  co-counsel: 
None. 

2)     Name,  address,  and  phone  number  of  counsel  for  other  party: 

W.H.  Overbey,  Jr. 
Courthouse  Square 
Rustburg,  Virginia  24588 
(804)  332-5155 

7.     Travelers  Indemnity  Co.  v.  Michigan  Mutual  Liability  Co.,  259  F. 
Supp.  606  (W.D.  Va.  1966). 

Summary  of  substance  of  case: 

The  issue  was  whether  Michigan  Mutual,  which  had  issued  a  fleet 
policy  to  a  Virginia  insurer  specifically  covering  an  automobile 
driven  by  the  Virginia  insurer's  employee,  was  subject  to  Virginia's 
uninsured  motorist  provisions. 

Significance  of  case: 

It  established  that  a  fleet  insurer  must  provide  primary  uninsured 
motorist  coverage  for  the  driver  of  its  insured  vehicles  and  that 
the  insurer  of  the  driver's  personal  vehicle  only  must  provide 
excess  coverage  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  the  policy. 

Party  I  represented: 

Norman  K.  Moon 


833 


23 

Travelers  Indemnity  Company. 

Nature  of  my  participation: 

I  solely  represented  The  Travelers  Indemnity  Company,  conducted  the 
discovery,  filed  a  memorandum  of  law,  tried,  and  argued  the  case. 

Trial  Decision: 

Decision  in  favor  of  Travelers  Indemnity  Company  and  Fidelity  and 
Casualty  Company  of  New  York. 

Appellate  Decision: 

The  case  was  not  appealed. 

a)  Date  of  Trial:   July  29,  1966. 

b)  Name  of  Court  and  Judge: 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Western  District  of  Virginia, 
Lynchburg  Division,  before  the  Honorable  A.D.  Barksdale  (deceased). 

c)  1)     Names,  address,  and  phone  number  of  co-counsel: 
None . 

2)     Names,  address,  and  phone  number  of  counsel  for  other  parties: 

For  Travelers  Indemnity  Company: 

S.J.  Thompson,  Jr.  deceased 

For  Michigan  Mutual  Liability  Company: 

R.W.  Duling  .      ,      i 

800  E.  Marshall  Street 
Richmond,  Virginia  23219 
(804)  780-6511 

For  Robert  F.  Lawhorne,  Clarence  George,  Jr.,  and  State  Farm  Mutual 
Automobile  Insurance  Company: 

Shuler  A.  Kizer  (deceased) 

William  T.  Robey,  III 

131  W.  21st  Street  i.     :  r  - 

Buena  Vista,  Virginia  24416 

(540)  261-2575  ■=■     -     y  ■    ^    . 

8.     Sun  Oil  Co.  V.  Lawrence.  213  Va .  596,  194  S.E.2d  687  (1973). 

Summary  of  substance  of  case: 

Dale  Lynn  Lawrence,  an  employee  of  an  independent  service  station 
dealer  that  sold  Sun  Oil  products,  sustained  an  injury  during  the 
course  of  his  employment.  His  direct  employer  had  no  worker's 
compensation  insurance.   Lawrence  filed  a  claim  in  the  Industrial 

Norman  K.  Mooa 


834 


24 

Commission  of  Virginia  (now  Worker's  Compensation  Commission) 
claiming  that  he  was  a  statutory  employee  of  Sun  Oil  because  Sun  Oil 
operated  four  service  stations  in  Virginia  which  had  employees  doing 
the  same  type  of  work  that  he  did. 

Significance  of  case: 

Distributors,  who  also  bad  minimal  retailing  operations,  were  held 
not  thereby  to  be  a  statutory  employer  liable  for  worker's 
compensation  claims  from  the  employees  of  all  the  independent 
dealers  who  purchased  and  sold  the  distributors'  products. 

Party  I  represented: 

Sun  Oil  Company . 

Nature  of  my  participation: 

I  represented  Sun  Oil  before  the  Deputy  Commissioner,  and  later 
before  the  Full  Commission.  I  appealed  the  case  to  the  Supreme 
Court,  wrote  the  brief,  and  argued  the  case. 

Irial  Decision: 

The  Industrial  Commission  found  in  favor  of  Lawrence  and  assessed 
attorney's  fees  against  Sun  Oil  for  defending  the  proceedings 
"without  reasonable  grounds." 

Appellate  Decision: 

The  Supreme  Court  of  Virginia  reversed  the  decision  and  dismissed 
the  claim. 

a)  Date  of  Trial:   March  5,  1973. 

b)  Name  of  Court  and  Judge: 

The  Industrial  Commission  of  Virginia,  by  the  Honorable  M.E  Evans, 
Commissioner,  and  later  by  the  Full  Industrial  Commission. 

The  case  was  appealed  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  Virginia. 

c)  1)     Names,  address,  and  phone  number  of  co-counsel: 
None. 

2)     Names,  address,  and  phone  number  of  counsel  for  other  parties: 

For  Lawrence: 

Robert  L.  Dolbeare 
700  East  Main  Street 
Richmond,  Virginia  23219 
(804)  780-2900 

For  the  employer: 

Marshall  Frost  (deceased) 

Norman  K.  Moon 


835 


25 

Younger  v.  Appalachian  Power  Co..  214  Va.  662,  202  S.E.2d  866 
(1974). 

ry  of  substance  of  case: 

There  were  four  plaintiffs  in  the  case,  all  insured  by  State  Fara 
Mutual  Automobile  Insurance  Company,  whose  automobiles  at  different 
times  struck  and  damaged  wooden  electric  line  poles  owned  by 
Appalachian  Power  Company.  Appalachian  Power  Company  contended  that 
its  poles  did  not  depreciate,  and  therefore,  no  depreciation  should 
be  recognized  in  its  recovery  for  damages.  We  were  able  to 
demonstrate  that  the  poles  did  have  a  certain  life  expectancy  that 
Appalachian  Power  Company  had  admitted  to  under  other  circumstances. 

Significance  of  case: 

The  case  established  that  Virginia  trial  courts  should  recognize 

that  power  line  poles  depreciate.  The  case  set  a  formula  for 

determining  depreciation  and  other  damages  to  electric  power  and 

telephone  companies  whose  property  was  damaged  as  the  result  of 
negligence . 

Party  I  represented: 

All  four  defendants. 

Nature  of  my  participation: 

I  had  the  cases,  which  were  pending  in  various  circuit  courts, 
consolidated  and  tried  in  the  Circuit  Court  for  the  City  oJF 
Lynchburg.  I  was  the  sole  attorney  in  the  case.  After  a  verdict 
for  Appalachian,  I  appealed  the  case  to  the  Supreme  Court,  wrote  the 
brief  for  the  appellants,  and  argued  the  case  before  the  Supreme 
Court. 

Trial  Decision: 

There  was  a  verdict  for  the  plaintiffs. 

Appellate  Decision: 

The  Supreme  Court  reversed  the  trial  court  and  remanded  for  a  new 
trial. 

a)  Date  of  Trial: 

December  13,  197  2. 

< 

b)  Name  of  Court  and  Judge: 

Circuit  Court  for  the  City  of  Lynchburg,  before  the  Honorable 
William  W.  Sweeney. 

c)  1)     Names,  Address,  and  Phone  No  of  Co-Counsel: 
None. 

2)     Names,  address,  and  phone  number  of  counsel  for  other  parties: 


Norman  K.  Moon 


836 


26 

For  Appalachian  Power  Company: 

William  Rosenberger ,  Jr. 
1915  Quarry  Road 
Lynchburg,  Virginia  24503 
(804)  384-3681 

10.   Woody  V.  Commonwealth,  214  Va .  296,  199  S.E.2d  529  (1973). 

Suamary  of  substance  of  case: 

Woody  was  charged  with  burglary  as  an  accessory  before  the  fact. 

Significance  of  case: 

It  established  that  a  juvenile  witness  is  subject  to  the  same  scope 
of  cross-examination  as  any  other  witness  and  that  publication 
prohibitions  relating  to  juvenile  records  may  not  override  the 
constitutional  right  to  cross-examination. 

Party  I  represented: 

Charles  P.  Woody. 

Matura  of  my  participation: 

I  was  sole  counsel  in  the  case.  I  investigated  and  tried  it  and 
appealed  it  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  Virginia. 

Trial  Decision: 

There  was  a  verdict  for  the  Commonwealth. 
Appallata  Decision: 

Ravarsed  and  reaanded. 

a)  Dates  of  Trial: 
Bmptmmbar   8,  1972. 

b)  Haaa  of  Court  and  Judge; 

Circuit  Court  for  the  City  of  Lynchburg,  before  the  Honorable  O. 
Raymond  Cundif f  (deceased) . 

c)  1)    Names,  address,  and  phone  number  of  co-counsel: 
Nona. 

2)     Names,  address,  and  phone  number  of  counsel  for  other  parties: 

Trial i 

Royston  Jester,  Jr.  (deceased) 

Appeal : 

Norman  K.  Mooa 


837 


27 

Linwood  T.  Wells,  Jr. 
Assistant  Attorney  General 

101  North  Eighth  Street 
Richmond,  Virginia  23219 

(804)  786-4642 

Because  the  majority  of  the  cases  are  more  than  five  years  old,  here  are 
the  names,  addresses  and  phone  numbers  for  twelve  members  of  the  legal 
comaunity  who  have  had  recent  contact  with  me: 

John  R.  Alford 
2306  Atherholt  Road 
Post  Office  Box  6360 
Lynchburg,  Virginia  24505 
(804)  846-2731 

Mary  V.  Barney 
7  IS  Court  Street 
Post  Office  Box  739 
Lynchburg,  Virginia  2450S 
(804)  528-0411 

Edwin  R.  Burnette,  Jr. 
Suite  400,  800  Main  Street 
Post  Office  Box  958 
Lynchburg,  Virginia  24505 
(804)  846-9000 

Judge  Saa  W.  Coleman,  III 
109  North  8th  Street 
Rich»>nd,  Virginia  23219-2305 
(804)  371-2458 

John  B .  Falcone 
801  Main  Street 
Post  Office  Box  957 
Lynchburg,  Virginia  24505 
(804)  528-1058 

Judge  Johanna  L.  Fitzpatrick 
Suite  200,  10201  Main  Street 
Fairfax,  Virginia  22030-2403 
(703)  359-1158 

A.  David  Hawkins 
Courthouse  Square 
Post  Office  Box  38 
Rustburg,  Virginia  24588 
(804)  332-S15S 

Justice  Barbara  Milano  Keenan 
Suite  SOI,  2101  Parks  Ave. 
Virginia  Beach,  Virginia  2345 1 
(757)  491-S472 

Arelia  S.  Langhorne 
2700  Langhorne  Road 
Post  Office  Box  2453 

Homan  K.  Moon 


838 


28 


Lynchburg,  Virginia  24501 
(804)  528-1S60 

Daniel  J.  Meador,  Professor  of  Law  Emeritus 

University  of  Virginia  School  of  Law 

580  Massie  Road 

Charlottesville,  Virginia  22903-1789 

(804)  924-3947 

Kent  Sinclair 

Suite  104,  1928  Arlington  Blvd. 
Post  Office  Box  S104 
Charlottesville,  Virginia  22903 
(804)  924-4689 

Kenneth  S  White 
Suite  400,  800  Main  Street 
Post  Office  Box  958 
Lynchburg,  Virginia  24505 
(804)  846-9000 


Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have 
pursued,  including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial 
or  legal  nmtters  that  did  not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of 
your  participation  in  this  question,  please  omit  any  information  protected 
by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  privilege  has  been  waived) . 

Boyd-Graves  Conference,  Steering  Committee:  1986  -  present. 

The  Boyd  Graves  Conference  studies  issues  relating  to  Virginia  civil 
procedure.  It  makes  recommendations  to  the  General  Assembly  for  statutory 
changes  and  makes  recommendations  to  the  Virginia  Supreme  Court  for  rule 
changes  that  would  affect  civil  procedure. 

Judicial  Conference,  Judicial  Administration  Committee:  Chairman,  1985-87. 

The  Judicial  Administration  Committee  studies  issues  affecting  the 
administration  of  justice  in  the  Conunonwealth  of  Virginia.  It  studies 
legislation  pending  before  the  General  Assembly  that  would  affect  the 
administration  of  justice  and  recommends  to  the  Judicial  Conference 
whether  the  Conference  should  ask  the  Judicial  Council  to  support  or 
oppose  the  legislation. 

Model  Jury  Instructions  Committee:  Chairman,  1983-86;  Member,  19  81-86. 

The  Model  Jury  Instruction  Committee  drafted  model  jury  instructions  to  be 
used  in  Virginia  criminal  and  civil  cases.  The  committee  is  a  standing 
committee  that  reviews  statutory  changes  and  judicial  decisions  that 
require  amendment  of  the  instructions.  The  committee  prepares  annual 
supplements  reflecting  changes  in  the  instructions. 

Committee  to  Draft  the  Rules  for  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia:  1983- 
84. 

The  committee  drafted  proposed  rules  of  court  that  were  approved  by  the 
Judicial  Council  and  the  Supreme  Court  of  Virginia  to  be  used  in  the  Court 
of  Appeals  of  Virginia  which  started  operation  January  1,  1985. 

Norman  K.  Moon 


839 


29 

Virginia  State  Bar:  1962  -  present. 

The  Virginia  State  Bar  is  the  governing  body  of  the  legal  profession  in 
Virginia.  Every  practicing  lawyers  is  required  to  belong  and  judges  are 
ex  officio  members.  The  Virginia  State  Bar  conducts  continuing  legal 
education  programs.  I  have  lectured  or  have  been  a  panel  member  at  its 
programs . 

Ethics  Committee,  Sixth  District:  Chairman,  1972-74;  Member,  1971-74. 

The  Committee  investigates  charges  of  professional  misconduct  and  made 
recommendations  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  Virginia  concerning  whether 
disciplinary  action  should  be  taken  against  accused  lawyers. 

Virginia  Bar  Association:  1968  -  present. 

The  Virginia  Bar  Association  is  a  voluntary  organization  of  Virginia 
lawyers  and  judges  who  serve  as  ex  officio  members.  The  Bar  Association 
conducts  continuing  legal  education  programs.  I  have  lectured  or  have 
been  a  panel  member  at  its  programs. 

Young  Lawyers  Section,  Southside  Area:  Vice-President,  1968-69;  Member 
1963-73. 

The  Young  Lawyers  Section  prepared  and  distributed  handbooks  for  young 
lawyers  and  presented  programs  in  the  public  schools.  The  committee  also 
initiated  a  program  for  presenting  Liberty  Bell  Awards  to  non-lawyers  who 
had  made  a  substantial  contribution  to  the  respect  for  and  maintenance  of 
the  rule  of  law.  During  my  tenure  as  Piedmont  Regional  Vice-President,  I 
directed  the  Liberty  Bell  Award  program  and  the  high  school  educational 
programs . 


Norman  K.  Mooa 


840 


30 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred 
income  arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other 
future  benefits  which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business 
relationships,  clients,  or  customers.  Please  describe  the  arrangements 
you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or 
business  interest. 

I  have  a  401 (k)  Plan,  its  value  being  $100,826.  I  am  eligible  to 
withdraw  the  amount  without  penalty.  The  source  of  the  funds  I 
contributed  to  this  401 (K)  was  from  my  employment  with  the  law  firm  of 
Edmunds,  Williams,  Robertson,  Sackett,  Baldwin  &  Graves,  which  employment 
terminated  April  15,  197  4.  The  Keogh  Plan  which  the  law  firm  bad  was 
invested  with  Central  Fidelity  Bank.  I  rolled  over  into  a  401 (K)  with 
United  Services  Automobile  Association,  Cornerstone  Strategy  Fund. 

I  have  a  vested  interest  in  the  Virginia  Supplemental  Retirement 
System  by  virtue  of  my  employment  as  a  judge  in  the  State  of  Virginia 
Judiciary  System.  The  vested  amount  in  the  plan  today  is  $  $119,114. 
Should  I  retire  from  the  Virginia  Judiciary  System,  I  am  eligible  to 
receive  benefits  of  up  to  seventy-five  percent  of  the  average  of  my  last 
three  years  salary  which  would  be  81,936  annually. 

Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including 
the  procedure  you  will  follow  in  determining  these  area  of  concern. 
Identify  the  categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are 
likely  to  present  potential  conf licts-of-interest  during  your  initial 
service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

I  would  follow  the  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct.  If  I  perceive  any  interest, 
real  or  apparent,  in  any  matter  before  the  court,  I  will  recuse  myself. 
The  only  potential  conflict  I  can  imagine  occurring  during  my  initial 
service  would  come  from  an  appellant  filing  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus  in  the 
district  court  who  previously  had  an  appeal  reviewed  by  the  Court  of 
Appeals  when  I  was  a  judge.  I  would  recuse  myself  form  consideration  of 
the  writ  of  habeas  corpus. 

Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside 
employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the 
court?   If  so,  explain. 

I  am  committed  to  teach  trial  advocacy  at  the  University  of  Virginia  Law 
School  at  the  Fall  1997  session  and  Spring  1998  session.  Compensation  is 
at  $4,000  for  each  session.  Should  I  be  appointed  and  confirmed  for  this 
position,  and  there  are  no  legal  prohibitions  or  conflicts  with  my 
judicial  duties,  I  would  anticipate  keeping  my  commitment. 

List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  that  calendar  year 
preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all 
salaries,  fees,  dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents, 
honoraria,  and  other  items  exceeding  $500.00  or  more.  (If  you  prefer  to 
do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report  required  by  the  Ethics  in 
Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

Please  see  Attachment  B  ("Financial  Disclosure  Report"). 

Norman  K.  Moon 


841 


31 

Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail  (Add 
schedules  as  called  for) . 

Please  see  Attachment  C  ("Financial  Statement:  Net  Worth") 

Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign? 
If  so,  please  identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the 
candidate,  dates  of  the  campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

From  1965  to  1974,  I  was  involved  in  almost  every  political  election  in 
Lynchburg,  frequently  as  a  campaign  manager  for  one  of  the  candidates. 
For  most  of  that  time,  I  was  a  member  of  the  City  Democratic  Committee. 
I  managed  both  Lynchburg  senatorial  campaigns  for  William  B.  Spong,  Jr., 
in  1966  and  1972.  In  1966,  I  served  as  Co-Chairman  of  the  Byrd-Spong 
ticket.  I  managed  William  Battle's  1969  Lynchburg  campaign  for  Governor, 
as  well  as  Andrew  Miller's  1973  campaign  for  Attorney  General. 


Noman  K.  Moon 


842 


32 

QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 

III.   GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

Aa  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association'  s 
Coda  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  'every  lawyer,  regardless  of 
professional  prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to 
participate  in  serving  the  disadvantaged.*  Describe  what  you  have  done  to 
fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances  and  the  amount 
of  time  devoted  to  each. 

I  comply  with  the  canons  of  judicial  ethics  which  prohibit  any  such 
participation  or  solicitation. 

The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct 
states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any 
organization  that  invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex  or 
religion.  Do  you  currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged  to  any 
organization  which  discriminates  --  through  either  formal  membership 
requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership  policies?  If 
so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.  What  you  have  done  to  try  to  change 
these  policies? 

I  do  not  own  membership  in  any  organization  that  discriminates  on  the 
basic  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  I  belonged  to  Boonsboro  County  Club  from 
1968  to  1996.  I  believe  that  the  club  discriminated  into  the  1970s.  In 
1984  following  an  incident  calling  into  question  the  Club's  policy,  a 
formal  resolution  of  non-discrimination  was  adopted.  To  the  best  of  my 
knowledge  a  clear  policy  of  non-discrimination  has  existed  since  then. 
During  the  entire  time  I  was  a  member  of  the  club,  I  advocated  to  members 
of  the  board  that  the  club  pursue  a  policy  of  non-discrimination.  I  was 
one  of  the  persons  who  sponsored  the  first  African-American  for  membership 
and  was  instrumental  in  persuading  him  to  join. 

Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend 
candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it  recommend 
your  nomination?  Please  describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial 
selection  process,  from  beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances 
which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you  participated) . 

Senator  Robb  appointed  a  commission  to  review  nominations.  It  is  my 
understanding  that  the  commission  recommended  me.  When  Judge  Jackson  Riser 
announced  that  he  was  taking  senior  status,  I  contacted  several  members  of 
the  bar  and  asked  them  to  sound  out  others  members  of  the  bar  to  determine 
if  my  candidacy  would  be  favorably  looked  upon  by  the  lawyers  who 
practiced  before  me  as  a  trial  judge  before  I  went  on  the  Court  of 
Appeals.  They  reported  that  the  bar  was  generally  enthusiastic.  These 
bar  members  also  approached  former  State  Senator  Elliott  Schewel  and 
former  Congressman  Watkins  H.  Abbitt  to  determine  if  they  could  support  my 
candidacy.  When  they  reported  they  could,  I  decided  to  apply  for  the 
position.  As  a  candidate,  I  have  also  been  reviewed  by  the  Department  of 
Justice,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigations,  and  the  American  Bar 
Association. 

Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee 
discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner 

Norman  K.  Moon 


843 


33 
that  could  reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such 
case,  issue,  or  questions?   If  so,  please  explain  fully. 
No. 

Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial 
activism. " 

The  role  of  the  Federal  Judiciary  within  the  Federal  government,  and 
within  society  generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy 
in  recent  years.  It  has  become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic 
criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of  the 
prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  'judicial  activism'  have  been  said  to 
include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather 
than  grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  tne  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff 
as  a  vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders 
extending  to  broad  classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative 
duties  upon  governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional 
requirements  such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other 
institutions  in  the  manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing 
oversight  responsibilities. 

Judicial  activism  is  an  attack  upon  the  prerogatives  of  the 
legislative  and  executive  branches.  Courts  should  grant  full  legal  relief 
to  litigants,  but  when  courts  become  unduly  creative  in  their  remedies 
they  upset  the  balance  of  power  between  the  branches  of  the  government. 
Furthermore,  the  law  is  always  best  created  by  the  legislative  branch. 
The  legislature  has  the  ability  to  investigate  and  develop  laws  which  are 
most  compatible  with  society's  needs  and  beliefs.  Ideally,  the  law  should 
be  so  clear  that  if  the  parties  can  agree  upon  the  facts,  then  a  good 
lawyer,  with  reasonable  certainty,  can  predict  the  outcome  of  a  dispute 
without  going  to  trial.  The  law,  as  enacted  by  the  legislature,  carries 
with  it  a  presumption  of  regularity.  When  a  judge  fails  to  follow 
precedent  or  unduly  expands  the  law,  he  not  only  does  an  injustice  to  one 
immediate  party,  but  encourages  litigation  that  would  not  have  been 
brought  had  the  judge  complied  with  stare  decisis . 


Norman  K.  Moon 


844 


38 


ATTACHMENT  B 
Financial  Disclosure  Report 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF 
INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

Question  4. 


Norman  K.   Moon 


845 


AO-IO  IW) 
R€y.»/96 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

Nomination  Report 


Report  Required  by  Ihe  EOtict 
Reform  Acl  0/1989.  Pub  L  No. 
101194.  November  30.  I9S9 
(5  U.S.C.  App.  4  .  Sec.  101112) 


Moon,    Norman  K. 

2.  Court  or  Ofganinlinn 

Western  District   of  Virginia 

3.  Dale  of  Report 

10/03/1997 

4.  TKk            (ArttcU  mjuigei  Imdicau  active  or 

senior  ttaau;  magUtrau  jttdges  indicau 
fitU-  or  pan-time) 

U.S.    Dist.    Court  Judge  Nominee 

S.  Rtiwrl  Ty^  (check  typol 
X     Nominauon,    Dale           /       / 

Initul                 Annual                 rinil 

«.  Refottini  Period 

01/01/1996 

/      / 

7.  CkMlxn  or  OAk*  Kiinm 
Post  Office   Box    657 
Lynchburg,    Virginia   24S0S 

8.  Ou  Ibc  (Hois  or  the  inrocmalioii  cooumed  in  Iba  Rcpoft  ond  ■ay 
modificatioas  peruininc  thereto,  it  if  ia  my  opinioa,  in  aMipliance 
with  appticable  laws  and  regulations. 

Renewina  OfTicer                                                                          D«l« 

MPOKTANT  NOTES:   Ihe  inslmciions  accompanyiiti  this  foim  mmt  be  followed.    CompUu  oU  pcitt. 

I.    POSITIONS      meportlmi  littUMiul  only. 

POSITION 

NONE  (No  reponable  p«itio<u.) 
Chief   Judge 


e  pp.  9-13  o/  Ittstructions) 


□ 


NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION  /  ENTITY 


Court   of   Appeals   of  Virginia 


2  Locturar 


University  of  Virginia  School   of   Law 


n.     AGREEMENTS  l1lepoRlii(MMdwilai<y.«rp)>J4-y7o/h«n<c«Mi,l 

DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


n 


NONE   (No  rtpoftabla  a((«eiaeau.) 


Virginia  Supplemental  Retirement  System   (no  control) 


in.    NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME 
DATE 


□ 


dtepoeUng  individual  and  tpoure;  see  pp.  18-25  o/Instruaioiu.) 

PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


NONE   (Ho  wportabto  noo-ioveitmeal  income.) 
I  1997  Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia,    salary  YTD 


GROSS  INCOME 

(yourt,  not  apooae'i) 


2  1997 


tJVA  School   of   Law,    Trial   Ad  Lecturer,    salary  YTD 


1996 


Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia,  salary 


Wh   School  of  Law,  Trial  Ad  Lecturer,  lalary 


Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia,  salary 


8,000.0'^ 


107,151.01 


846 


!     Name  of  P«non  Reponing 

FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT  1   Moon,    Norman  K. 


Due  of  Report 

10/03/1997 


IV.    REIMBURSEMENTS    and    GIFTS    -  tnuporuuon.  lodging,  food.  emcfUiiimeai. 

fincludes  those  to  tpome  and  dependent  ehildrm;  use  the  paremheacals  '(S) '  and  '0C) '  to  mdicau  reponabU  reimbunemenu  and  glJU  received  by  tptmu 
and  dependent  chitdren.  respectively.    See  pp.  26-29  of  Im 


SOURCE 

NONE  {No  nich  rcpotubk  retmbunementi  or  gifU) 


DESCRIPTION 


V.    OTHER  GIFTS 

(Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheticals  '(S)  *  and  '(DC)  '  to  indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children, 
respectively.   See  pp.  30-33  oflnstructioru.) 


□ 


SOURCE 

NONE   (No  nich  raporuble  gifts) 


DESCRIPTION 


VI.    LIABILITIES 

(Includts  those  of  spouse  and  dependera  children:  iruhcme  where  appUcabU.  perzon  responsible  for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  '(Sj  'for  separate 
liability  of  the  spouse,  '(J)  'for  joint  liability  of  reporang  individual  and  spouse,  and  '(DC)  'for  liability  of  a  dependent  child.    See  pp.  34-36  oflru 


CREDITOR 

NONE    (No  repoiuble  liabililiei) 


DESCRIPTION 


VALUE  CODE' 


1   First  Federal  Sav. 

&  Loan 

(J) 

2  Creetar  Bank 

3  American  Expreee 

^ 

5 

6 

^ 

Mortgage  on  personal  residence 


Personal  line  of  credit 


Charge  Card 


'VALCODESJ  =  $15.000orleii  K-J15.001-$50,(XXI  L  =  S50.001  lo  $100,000  M  =  $100.001-S250.000  N  =  $25O.OOl-$50O,OOO 

D=$500.001-$1.000,000    PI  =$1.000,001-$5.000,000    P2  =  $5.000.001-J25,000.000    P3  =  S15.0CO,001-J50.000.aOO    P4 =$50.000,00 1  ot  more 


847 


Name  of  Penon  Reporting 
FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT  I    Moon,    Norman    K. 


Dale  of  Report 

10/03/1997 


VII.  Page     IINVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS 


-  income,  value,  iransacaons  fincludes  those  of  spouse  and 
dependent  children.   See  pp.  37'S4o/Ini 


A. 
Dcfcription  of  AueU 

Injicale  where  appUcabU.  owner  of 
At  asset  try  ustng  the  pareruhetical 
'(J)'/orjotru  owr\tnhip  of  reporting 
inji\iduai  and  spouse.  '(S)  'for  sep- 
erou  ownership  by  spouse ,  '(DC)' 
Jbr  ownership  by  depejtdeiu  child. 

Place  '(XI '  after  each  asset 
exempt  from  prior  disclosure. 

B 

Income 

during 

reporting 

period 

C. 

Grois  value 

■t  end  of 

reporting 

period 

D. 

Tranuclions  during  reporting  period 

(1) 

Ami. 

Code 

(A- 

C2) 
Type 
(e.g.. 
dividend. 

inlereit) 

(1)    m 

(1) 
Type 

(e.g.. 
buy,  Kll. 
merger, 
redemp- 
lion) 

If  not  exempl  from  discloture 

Code 
(J-P) 

MeUiod 

Code 

(Q-W) 

(2) 
Dale: 
Monlh- 
D.y 

(3) 

Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

Gain 
Code 
(A-H) 

(S) 

Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
(if  private 
tnoaaction) 

j     NONE  (no  repoiuble  iacome.iueu.  or 

I  USAA  401(K}   Account   -   Cornerstone 
Strategy   Fund 

E 

Dividend 

L 

T 

EXEMPT 

2  USAA  Account   -  Cornerstone  Mutual 
Fund 

C 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

3  Lynchburg  property.    Lot 

None 

K 

T 

EXEMPT 

i  Crestar  Bank  Checking  Account    •! 
{Jl 

None 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

^5  Crestar  Bank  Checking  Account    K2 

IJ) 

None 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

6  Crestar   Bank  Money  Market  Account 
{SI 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

T  Centrai    Fidelity  Bank  Money 
Market  Account    (S) 

A 

Interest 

K 

T 

EXEMPT 

e  First    Federal   SSL  Money  Market 
Account    ( S ) 

B 

K 

T 

EXEMPT 

9  One  Valley  Bank  CD    (SI 

D 

Interest 

L 

T 

EXEMPT 

10  Nations    Bank   CD    (SI 

D 

Interest 

L 

T 

EXEMPT 

11  Central    Fidelity  Bank   CD    (SI 

"^ 

Interest 

L 

T 

EXEMPT 

12  Crestar   Bank  CD   11    IS) 

C 

Interest 

L 

T 

EXEMPT 

13  Crestar   Bank   CD    12 

B 

Interest 

K 

T 

EXEMPT 

14    First   Federal    Bank   Corp.    Common 
Stock    (SI 

B 

Dividend 

L 

T 

EXEMPT 

ISOne  Valley  Bank   Common   Stock    (SI 

B 

Dividend 

K 

T 

EXEMPT 

16  Bristol    Myers    Squibb   Common    Stock 

(SI 

A 

Dividend 

"^ 

T 

EXEMPT 

n  Mobil    Oil    Common    Stock    (SI 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

llnc/GainCote:  A=S1.000orleii                     B=$l,001-$2.500                  C=$2,301$5.0OO                       D=$3.0Ol-$15.0OO                     E-$15.001-$50.000 
(Col.  B1.D4)      F=J50.001-$100.000              O=J100,001-JI.000.000        H1=J1. 000.00 1-$5. 000.000       H2=$5,000.0Ol  of  more 

2VilCode.;         J-$I5.000or  lea                   K-S15.OOI-S50.000               L=$50.0Ol-S10O.0O0              M=S10O.O01-S230.0OO            N-$25O.OOl-$50O.OOO 
(Col,Cl.D3)     O-$S00.001-J1.000.000        P1-S1.000.001.J5.000.000  P2=$5.000.001-$25.000.000  P3=$25.0O0.0Ol-$30.0OO.0OO  P4.$50.0O0.0Ol  ormore 

3  Val  Mlh  Codes:  Q- Appraisal                            R-Cost  (real  esuie  only)                             S-Aisesstienl                                    T-Caih/Maikel 
(Col.C2)             U-Book  Value                         V=Olher                                                    W=EHinme<i 

848 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Reponing 

Moon,     Norman    K. 


Date  of  Report 

10/03/1997 


-  income,  value,  transacaons  {includes  those  of  spouse  and 

VII.  Page     2  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS     ^p^,«c*yu«n   &,pp  J7-«<,//»„™:p««.> 


A. 

Descriplion  of  AsaeU 

Indicau  where  appUcabU.  owner  of 
the  asset  by  using  the  parenthetical 
'(J}'forjoiru  ownership  of  reporting 
individual  and  spouse ,  '(S)'forMep- 
erale  ownership  by  spouse .  '{DC}' 
for  ownership  by  dependent  child. 

Place  '00  '  after  each  asset 
exempt  from  prior  disclosure. 

B. 

Income 
during 
reponing 
period 

C 

Gross  value 

at  end  of 

reporting 

period 

D. 

Tiansaciions  dunng  repotting  penod 

(1) 

Aim. 
Code 
(A- 
H) 

0) 

Type 

(eg. 

dividend, 

rem  or 

interest) 

(1) 

Value 
Code 
<J-P) 

Q) 

Value 

Method 

Code 

(Q-W) 

(1) 

Type 

(e.g.. 

buy,  sell. 

merger, 

redemp- 

tioD) 

If  not  exempt  from  disclosure 

Date: 
Month- 
Day 

(3) 

Value 
Code 
(IP) 

(4) 
Gain 
Code 
(AH) 

(5) 

Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
Of  private 
transaction) 

tranuctiont) 

18  Coca    Cola    Common    Stock    (SI 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

19  Campbell    County   property,     52.6 

None 

K 

S 

EXEMPT 

20  Amherst   County    Parcel    » 1     (S) 

None 

J 

S 

EXEMPT 

21  Amherst   County    Parcel    »2     'SI 

None 

J 

s 

EXEMPT 

.22  Note,    creditor   Barbara   W.    Moon, 
debtor   Donald   P.    Brooks    (SI 

C 

Interest 

K 

T 

EXEMPT 

23  Great    Dames    Investment    Club       iSl 

A 

Dividend 

*^ 

T 

EXEMPT 

24  Virginia   Supplemental    Retirement 
System 

None 

M 

T 

EXEMPT 

I  toc/G»in Codes:  A=$1.000orleii                     B=$l.O01-S2.3O0                  C=$2.501-S5.0O0                       D=S5.00I-S15.000                     E=S13.OOI-$50.O0O 
(Col  BI.  D4)       F-$30.001-$100.000               G=$100.001.S1.000,000         HI=SI.OOO.OOI-S5.000.000        H2=$5.000.00I  ormore 

2V»lCo<k«:         J=$I  5.000  or  IcM                    K=$15.0Ol-$50.O0O              L=J50.00I-$100.000              M=$100.00I-$250.000           N=S230,001-$iOO.OOO 
(CoI.CI.D3)     O=$500.00»-$1.000.000        P1=$I.OOO,OOI-$5.000.000  P2=$5.000.0Ol.$25.00O.OO0  P3=$25.0O0.O0I-J50.0O0.OO0  P4=$50.0OO.OOl  orn»ore 

3  Val  Mth  Codes;  Q=AppraiMl                            R=Cost  (real  esuie  only)                            S=Assessmeni                                     T=C*sh/Markel 
(CoLC2}            U-Book  Value                         VOther                                                    W-Estimaied 

849 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nime  of  Penon  Reporting 

Moon,    Norman   K. 


Dale  of  Report 

10/03/1997  1 


(Ind)ca(e  pan  of  report.) 


Vin.     ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS. 

NONE    (No  addilionai  infonnatioo  or  explanauons.) 
VII-A 

Campbell  County  property,  52.64  acres,  assessed  value  is  $24,483.00 
Amherst  County  property.  Parcels  #1  and  ((2  are  assessed  together  at  $1,200. 


850 


NHBofPlciiaaRcponinc  DMcofRqxxl 

FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT         Moon,    Nonnan   K.  '    10/03/1997 

SECTION  HEADING,     n-hcu.  i>«i  of  i.p«u) 

SECTION    3.    NON-INVESTMEKT    INCOME     (confd.)  • 

Li.    Date  Parties   and  Terms  Gross    Income 


UVA  School  of   Law,    Trial  Ad  Lecturer,    salary 


851 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nime  of  Person  Repotting 
Hoon,    Norman  K. 


Date  of  Report 

10/03/1997 


IX.    CERTinCATION 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
Judicial  Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory 
function  in  any  litigation  during  the  period  covered  by  this  report  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children 
had  a  financial  interest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  the  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent 
children,  if  any)  is  accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  reported 
was  withheld  because  it  met  applicable  statutory  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  bee 
reported  are  in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C.  app.  4,  section  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  7353  and  Judicial 
Conference  regulations. 


Signature 


_^ 


X^>^. 


W7/f7 


Any  individual  who  knowingly  and  wilftiUy  falsifies  or  fails  to  file  this  report  may  be  subject  to  civil 
and  criminal  sanctions  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  Section  104). 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS 

Mail  original  and  three  additional  copies  to: 

Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 
Administrative  OfTice  of  the  United  States  Courts 
One  Columbus  Circle.  N.E. 
Suite  2-301 
Washington,  D.C.  20S44 


852 


39 


ATTACHMENT  C 

Financial  Statement 

Net  Worth 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF 
INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 


Question  5. 


Norman   K.    Moon 


853 


FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORTH 


1                                              ASSETS                                               1 

1                                          LIABILITIES                                          II 

Cash  on  hand  and  in  banks 

73 

600 

Notes  payable  to  banks  -  secured 

0 

U.S.  GoTemment  securities  -  add 
schedule 

1 

000 

Notes  payable  to  banks  - 
unsecured 

0 

Listed  securities  -  add  schedule 

137 

346 

Notes  payable  to  relatives 

0 

Unlisted  securities  -  add  schedule 

16 

220 

Notes  payable  to  others 

0 

Accounts  and  notes  receivable 

0 

Accounts  and  bills  due 

SCO 

Due  from  relatives  and  friends 

0 

Unpaid  income  tax 

0 

Due  from  others 

3 

000 

Other  unpaid  tax  and  interest 

0 

Doubtful 

0 

Real  estate  mortgages  payable  - 
add  schedule 

83 

400 

Real  estate  owned  -  add  schedule 

460 

683 

Chattel  mortgages  and  other 
liens  payable 

0 

Real  estate  mortgages  receivable 

64 

500 

Other  debts  -  itemize: 

Autos  and  other  personal 
property  -  approximately 

155 

000 

Crestar  Bank  credit  line 

17 

000 

Cash  value  -  life  insurance  - 
approximately 

8 

000 

American  Express 
Nations  Bank  Credit  Card 

6 

3 

000 
600 

Other  assets  -  itemize: 

Crestar  Bank  Credit  Card 

5 

000 

USAA  401(K)  Account, 
Cornerstone  Strategy  Fund 

100 

826 

USAA  Savings  Bank  Credit 
Card 

5 

000 

Virginia  Supp.  Ret.  System 

119 

114 

Total  liabilities 

120 

500 

USAA  Account,  Cornerstone 
Strategy  Fund 

7 

722 

Net  worth 

1 

337 

Oil 

Certificates  of  Deposit 

310 

000 

Total  liabilities  and  net  worth 

1 

457 

511 

Total  Assets 

1 

457 

511 

CONTINGENT  LLVBILITIES 

GENERAL  INFORMATION 

As  endorser,  comaker  or 
guarantor 

0 

Are  any  assets  pledges?  (Add 
schedule) 

No 

On  lease  or  contracts 

0 

Are  you  a  defendant  in  any  suits 
or  legal  actions? 

No 

Legal  claims 

0 

Have  you  ever  taken 
bankruptcy? 

No 

Noman  K.    Moon 


45-964    98-28 


854 


Provision  for  Federal  Income 
Tax 

0 

Other  special  debt 

0 

OUESTIOKWAIRE    FOR    JTTOICIAL    NOMINEES 
FINANCIAL    STATEMENT    -    NET    WORTH 


SCHEDULES 


U.S.  Govemaent  securities: 

-  fifteen  $200  Series  EE  savings  bonds,  value  $100  each,  total  value  $1,500 
Listed  securities; 

-  Coca  Cola  Common  Stock,  16  shares,  value  $982 

-  Mobil  Oil  Common  Stock,  200  shares,  value  $14,912 

-  Bristol  Myers  Squibb  Common  Stock,  200  shares,  value  $17,237 

-  One  Valley  Bank  Common  Stock,  1047  shares,  value  $38,215 

-  First  Federal  Bank  Corporation  Common  Stock,  2000  Shares,  value  $66,000 

Unlisted  securities: 

-  <3reat  Dames  Investment  Club,  1/15  interest  in  present  portfolio  value  of 

$243,303.72  consisting  of: 

AT&T,  258.513  shares 

Abbott  Labs,  302.201  shares 

Biomet,  100  shares 

Bristol  Myers  Squibb,  231.7761  shares 

Cisco  Systems,  200  shares 

Coco  Cola,  272.919  shares 

Dieboid  Inc.,  250  shares 

DuPont,  241.6838  shares 

Exxon,  217.249  shares 

PFVA  Financial  Corp.,  100  shares 

OE,  315.2276  shares 

Oiilette  Co.,  100  shares 

H.J.  Heinz,  191.0035  shares 

Lucent  Technologies,  117.4194  shares 

McDonalds,  100  shares 

Microsoft,  200  shares 

Phillip  Morris,  338.203  shares 

Motorolla  Inc.,  100  shares 

Sara  Lee  Corp.,  151.4552  shares 

Washington  Gas  &  Light,  113.2778  shares 

Real  estate  owned: 

*  Personal  residence,  Lynchburg,  Virginia,  value  $395,000 

-  Lot  adjacent  to  personal  residence,  value  $40,000 

-  Campbell  County  property,   52.64  acres,   Campbell  County,   Virginia, 

assessed  value  of  $24,483.00 

-  Amherst  County  property,  two  parcels,  1.5  acres,  assessed  together  at 

value  of  $1,200 


Norman  K.  Moon 


855 


SCHEDDLES    -    PAGE    TWO 

LIABILITIES 

Raal   estate   mortgages   payable: 

-    Personal     residence,     origioal    mortgage    $100,000,     IS    year    tern,     6.75% 
interest    rate,    $83,955.06    presently    owed 


No  man  K.    Moon 


856 


ODESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 

1.  Full  Name:   Ann  Louise  Aiken 

2.  Address:   Residence:  2510  Highland  Drive,  Eugene,  OR   97403 

Office:  Lane  County  Courthouse,  125  East  8th 
Avenue,  Eugene,  OR   97401 

3.  Date  and  place  of  birth. 
December  29,  1951  in  Salem,  Oregon 

4.  Martial  Status:   List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name 
and  business  address. 

Married  to  James  Richard  Klonoski,  Professor  Emeritus  of 
Political  Science,  University  of  Oregon,  Eugene,  Oregon. 
Retired  from  tenured  position  December  15,  1994. 

5.  Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have 
attended,  including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees  received, 
and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

a.  Juris  Doctor,  1976-1979 
University  of  Oregon  School  of  Law 
Eugene,  Oregon 

Degree  Received:   May  19,  1979 

b.  Master  of  Arts,  Political  Science,  1975-1976 
Rutgers  University 

New  Brunswick,  New  Jersey 

Degree  Received:   October  1,  1976 

c.  Bachelor  of  Science,  Political  Science,  1970-1974 
University  of  Oregon 

Eugene,  Oregon 

Degree  Received:   August  1974 

d.  School  of  Nursing,  Summer  of  1972 
Oregon  Health  Sciences  University, 
Portland,  Oregon 

6.  Employment  Record:   List  (by  year)  all  business  or 
professional  corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other 
enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations, 
nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were 
connected  as  an  officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor,  or 
employee  since  graduation  from  college. 


857 


a.  Circuit  Court  Judge       February  1993-Present 

b.  District  Court  Judge      July  1988-January  1993 

c.  Attorney  October  1983-July  1988 
Thorp,  Dennett,  Purdy,  Golden  &  Jewett  PC 

d.  Chief  Clerk  December  1982-August  1983 
House  of  Representatives 

e.  Fundraiser/Field  Staff    August  1982-November  1982 
Kulongoski  for  Governor 

f.  Attorney  August  1980-August  1982 
Sahlstrom  &  Dugdale  PC 

g.  Law  Clerk  August  1979-August  1980 
Hon.  Edwin  E.  Allen 

h.   Law  Clerk  (part  time)      1978  -  1979 
Public  Defender  Services,  Inc. 

i.   Law  Clerk  (part  time  and  concurrent  to  above) 
May  1978  -  January  1979 
Legal  Counsel  to  the  Governor 

j.   Office  Clerk/Lobbyist     February  1977  -  July  1977 
Democratic  Party  of  Oregon 

k.   Researcher  July  1977  -  September  1977 

University  of  Oregon  School  of  Law 

1.   Organizer  July  1977  -  September  1977 

Jarl  Associates 

m.   Office  Clerk  1976  -  1977 

Democratic  Party  of  Oregon 

n.   Researcher  One  week  December  1976 

Office  of  Congressman  James  Weaver 

o.   Staff  July  1976  -  November  1976 

Weaver  For  Congress  Committee 

p.   Administrative  Assistant   May  1976  -  July  1976 
Office  of  Congressman  James  Weaver 

q.   Administrative  Assistant   December  1974  -  July  1975 
Speaker  Pro  Tern  Albert  Densmore 

r.   Salesclerk  January  1975  -  December  1974 

Jas-Ko-Skiing  &  Sport,  Inc.   **  Out  of  Business 

s.   Field  Staff  August  1974  -  November  1974 

Betty  Roberts  for  U.S.  Senate 

(2) 


858 


7.  Military  Service:   Have  you  had  any  military  service?   If 
so,  give  particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of 
service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge 
received. 

None 

8.  Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships, 
honorary  degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that 
you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

Eagleton  Fellowship  at  Rutgers  University,  1975-76 

Health,  Education  &  Welfare  (H.E.W.)  Public  Service 
Education  Fellowship,  Rutgers  University,  1975-76 

Outstanding  Young  Oregonian  for  Lane  County,  1989 

Outstanding  Young  Oregonian,  1989 

Outstanding  Service  Award  as  a  Lane  County  District 
Judge,  1993  -  Awarded  by  the  Chair  of  the  Lane  County 
Board  of  Commissioners 

Recipient  of  the  Woman  of  Achievement  Award,  199  3 
Presented  by  the  State  of  Oregon  Commission  for  Women 

Certificate  of  Appreciation,  April,  1994  -  Presented  by 
the  United  States  Department  of  Justice,  Office  of 
Justice  Programs  for  outstanding  dedication  and  service 
on  behalf  of  crime  victims 

The  White  Rose,  Woman  of  Achievement  Award,  199  5 
Presented  by  the  March  of  Dimes,  Lewis  &  Clark  Chapter 

9.  Bar  Associations:   List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or 
judicial-related  committees  or  conferences  of  which  you 
are  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates 

of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Judicial  Branch  (Appointments  by  Chief  Justice  Wallace 
Carson) : 

a)  Member,  State  Court  Study  Advisory  Committee,  appointed 
August  1994.  (Authorized  by  OBRA  1993  to  study  how 
courts  handle  proceedings  related  to  foster  care  and 
adoption. ) 

b)  Member,  Advisory  Committee  on  Budget  Matters  for  the 
Judicial  Department,  chaired  by  the  Hon.  Greg  Foote, 
1991-94 

—  Member,  Subcommittee  on  Legislative  Matters,  1991-94 
--  Member,  Subcommittee  on  Staffing,  1991-94 

—  Member,  Subcommittee  on  Retirement,  1991-94 


(3) 


859 


c)  Member,  Judicial  Conference  Committee  on  Retirement, 
1991-Present 

d)  Member,  Judicial  Conference  Committee  on  Family  and 
Juvenile  Law,  1991-Present 

e)  Member,  Oregon  State  Bar  Association,  1980-Present 

—  Member,  Judicial  Administration  Committee,  1982-85 

f)  Member,  Lane  County  Bar  Association 

—  Lobbyist  on  behalf  of  the  Lane  County  Bar 
Association,  1981 

—  Member,  Judicial  Administration  Committee, 
1989-Present 

—  Member,  Lane  County  Board  of  Directors,  1981-8  3 

—  Chair,  Judicial  Administration  Committee,  1990-92 

—  Member,  Pro  Bono  Committee,  1991-92 

—  Member,  Law  Day  Committee,  1987-88;  1991-92 

—  Member,  Juvenile  Law  Committee,  1992-94 

—  Member,  Family  Law  Committee,  1992-94 

—  Member,  Nominating  Committee,  1990-94 

—  Member,  Alternative  Dispute  Resolution 
Committee,  1995-present 

—  Member,  Federal  Court  Committee,  1995-present 

—  Member,  Family  and  Juvenile  Law,  1995-present 
Member,  Steering  Committee 

g)  Team  Leader,  Roland  K.  Rodman  Inn  of  Court,  Eugene 
Chapter,  1990-Present 

h)    Member,  Governor's  Task  Force  on  Juvenile  Justice, 
1994-Present 

—  Co-chair,  Sub  Committee  III  (Dependency 
jurisdiction/Juvenile  court  authority  and 
function/Substantive  law  and  procedures  for  delinquent 
youth  13  years  old  and  under) 

i)    Vice  Chair,  State  of  Oregon  Juvenile  Justice 
Advisory  Committee,  1989-91 

j)    Charter  Member,  Oregon  Women  Lawyers,  1990-Present 
--  Director,  Board  of  Oregon  Women  Lawyers,  1990-91 

k)    Secretary,  Circuit  Judges'  Association,  1993-94 

1)    Treasurer,  Circuit  Judges'  Association,  1994-95 

m)    Member,  Steering  Committee  for  Court  Appointed  Special 
Advocate  Program  (CASA) ,  1993 

n)    Member,  CASA  Board  of  Directors,  1994-96 


(4) 


860 


o)    Member,  Lane  County  Domestic  Violence  Council, 
1993-94 

—  Member,  Subcommittee  on  Criminal  Justice, 
1993-94 

—  Member,  Subcommittee  on  Civil  Justice,  1993-94 

p)    Member,  Lane  County  Bar  Association  Committee  on 

Racial/Ethnic  Issues  in  Judicial  System,  1994-present 

q)    Member,  Governor's  Commission  on  Pregnant  Substance 
Abusers,  1990-91 

r)    Member,  The  National  Council  of  Juvenile  and  Family 
Court  Judges,  1994-Present 

10.  Other  Memberships:   List  all  organizations  to  which  you 
belong  that  are  active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies. 
Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

I  belong  to  the  following  organizations  that  are  active  in 
lobbying: 

a)  Oregon  Circuit  Court  Judges'  Association 

b)  Oregon  Judicial  Conference 

c)  The  Relief  Nursery 

d)  State  Court  Study  Advisory  Committee 

I  belong  to  the  following  other  organizations: 

a)  YMCA--family  membership 

b)  Advisory  Board  to  the  Junior  League  of  Eugene 

c)  Roland  K.  Rodman  Inn  of  Court 

d)  International  Women's  Forum 

e)  American  Leadership  Forum 

f)  Oregon  Women  Lawyers  Association 

g)  Lane  County  Women  Lawyers  Association 

h)    Parent  Teacher  Organization  for  Fox  Hollow  French 

Immersion  School 

i)    Parent  Teacher  Organization  for  Roosevelt  Middle  School 

j)    Parent  Teacher  Organization  for  International  High 

School  at  South  Eugene  High  School 

11.  Court  Admission:   List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been 
admitted  to  practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if 
any  such  memberships  lapsed.   Please  explain  the  reason  for 
any  lapse  of  membership.   Give  the  same  information  for 
administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission  to 
practice. 

Supreme  Court  of  Oregon,  1980 

United  States  Federal  Court,  1981 


(5) 


861 


12.  Published  Writings;   List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates 
of  books,  articles,  reports,  or  other  published  material  you 
have  written  or  edited.   Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee. 
Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues 
involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.   If  there  were 
press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily 
available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

Report  of  the  Governor's  Commission  on  School  Funding  Reform 
entitled  "Small  Steps  to  a  Distant  Goal."  Chaired  by  Robert 
Ridgley. 

Report  of  the  Governor's  Commission  on  Pregnant  Substance 
Abusers.   Chaired  by  the  Honorable  Betty  Roberts. 

A  subcommittee  report  entitled  "Effective  Advocacy  for 
Dependent  Children:   A  Systems  Approach"  prepared  by 
Subcommittee  3  of  the  Governor's  Task  Force  on  Juvenile 
Justice.   Chaired  by  Attorney  General  Theodore  R. 
Kulongoski . 

Report  of  Governor's  Task  Force  on  Juvenile  Justice. 
Chaired  by  Attorney  General  Theodore  R.  Kulongoski. 

13.  Health:   What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?   List  the 
date  of  your  last  physical  examination. 

Excellent.   February  27,  1995. 

14.  Judicial  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  judicial 
offices  you  have  held,  whether  such  position  was  elected  or 
appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each 
such  court. 

Lane  County  Circuit  Court  Judge,  1993  to  present.   Appointed 
by  Governor  Barbara  Roberts,  February,  1993,  and  sworn  in 
March  15,  1992.   Elected  to  the  Lane  County  Circuit  Court 
May  1994,  to  serve  a  six  year  term  commencing  January  1, 
1995.   This  is  the  general  jurisdiction  trial  court  in 
Oregon. 

Lane  County  District  Court  Judge,  1988  to  1992.   Appointed 

by  Governor  Neil  Goldschmidt,  May  1988,  and  sworn  in  July  7, 

1988.   Reappointed  to  fill  a  term  beginning  January  1,  1989. 

Elected  to  the  District  Court  May  1990,  to  serve  a  six  year 

term  beginning  January  1991.   The  District  Court  is  a  court 
of  limited  jurisdiction  consisting  of  civil  claims  not 

exceeding  $10,000.00,  misdemeanor  criminal  matters,  traffic 
violations  and  small  claims. 


(6) 


862 


15.   Citations:   If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide: 

(1)  citations  for  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you  have 
written.   If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were  not  officially 
reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

In  the  Oregon  district  and  circuit  courts,  the  standard 
practice  is  for  judges  to  make  findings  of  fact  and 
conclusions  of  law  on  the  record  rather  than  prepare  written 
opinions  in  the  event  of  an  appeal.   The  appellate  courts 
use  a  transcript  of  the  trial  and  the  briefs  submitted  by 
the  parties  to  decide  the  issues  on  appeal.   Therefore,  with 
the  exception  of  an  opinion  letter  I  wrote  in  City  of  Eugene 
V.  David  Henry  Miller,  case  no.  90-50053,  aff 'd,  114  Or. 
App.  271,  835  P. 2d  144  (1992),  I  do  not  have  any  written 
opinions. 

(2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all  appellate 
opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or 

where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant  criticism 
of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings; 

State  of  Oregon  v.  David  Allen  Gilbertson,  Case 
No.  89-20630,  conviction  affirmed;  judgment  vacated  and 
case  remanded  to  reconsider  probation  conditions  4a  and 
4b,  101  Or.  App.  241,  789  P. 2d  19  (1990)  (per  curiam 
opinion) .   Defendant  was  convicted  on  a  charge  of 
telephonic  harassment.   I  suspended  imposition  of 
sentence  and  placed  Defendant  on  probation.   I  informed 
Defendant  of  the  conditions  of  probation,  including 
restrictions  on  drug  and  alcohol  use.   The  Court  of 
Appeals  concluded  that  condition  4a,  which  required 
Defendant  to  abstain  from  the  use  of  intoxicants,  was 
inconsistent  with  condition  4b,  which  prohibited 
Defendant  from  "using  intoxicants  to  excess."   The 
Court  of  Appeals  held  that  there  was  a  basis  for 
imposing  the  restrictions,  but  remanded  for 
clarification  of  the  inconsistent  terms  of  probation. 

State  of  Oregon  v.  Gary  Warren  Johnson,  Case  No. 
88-20829,  aff'd  in  part;  vacated  in  part,  96  Or.  App. 
641,  773  P. 2d  812  (1989)  (per  curiam).   While  on 
probation,  Defendant  committed  criminal  mischief  in  the 
third  degree  and  disorderly  conduct.   I  revoked 
Defendant's  probation,  imposed  a  fine,  and  sentenced 
him  to  a  period  of  incarceration.   Additionally,  I 
ordered  "Defendant  shall  be  rereferred  to  Lane  County 
Mental  Health  for  evaluation  and  treatment."   On 
appeal,  the  state  argued  that  the  court  should  treat 
the  mental  health  rereferral  as  a  "sentencing  judge's 
nonbinding  recommendation  that  Defendant  submit  to 
mental  health  treatment."   The  Court  of  Appeals  held 
that  the  mental  health  rereferral  exceeded  the  maximum 
sentence  allowed.   ORS  138.500.   The  court  upheld  the 
case  in  all  other  respects. 

(7) 


863 


state  of  Oregon  v.  Mehran  Montazer,  Case  No.  10-93- 
07185,  conviction  affirmed;  remanded  for  resentencing, 
133  Or.  App.  271,  891  P. 2d  662  (1995).   Defendant  was 
convicted  of  sexual  abuse  in  the  first  degree.   I 
sentenced  Defendant  as  an  8-1,  using  Oregon's 
sentencing  guidelines,  which  has  a  presumptive  sentence 
of  16  to  18  months.   I  stated  that  Defendant's  term  of 
imprisonment  was  "not  to  exceed  eighteen  months." 
Defendant  argued  that  the  trial  court  erred  in 
admitting  certain  evidence  and  in  not  sentencing  him  to 
a  definite  term  of  imprisonment.   The  Court  of  Appeals 
held  that  a  range  is  not  a  presumptive  sentence  and 
that  the  trial  court  did  not  err  in  admitting  the 
evidence.   Therefore,  the  court  upheld  the  conviction 
but  remanded  so  that  the  trial  court  could  sentence  the 
defendant  to  a  definite  term  of  incarceration.   On 
remand,  the  defendant  was  sentenced  to  18  months  in 
prison. 

State  of  Oregon  v.  Sindy  Lynn  Lyman,  Case  No.  10-93- 
02538,  judgment  vacated  and  case  remanded  after 
reconsidering  its  earlier  decision,  133  Or.  App.  600, 
891  P. 2d  24  (1995),  affirming  without  opinion  a 
conviction  for  possession  of  a  controlled  substance. 
The  Court  of  Appeals  ordered  the  trial  court  to  make 
further  findings  regarding  the  tenants'  authority  to 
enter  defendant's  upstairs/ front  room,  accompanied  by 
law  enforcement,  without  defendant's  permission.   134 
Or.  App.  212,  894  P. 2d  1219  (1995).   The  appellate 
court  also  ordered  the  trial  court  to  make  a  ruling  on 
defendant's  motion  to  suppress  consistent  with  those 
findings.   On  remand,  the  defendant  advised  the  court 
that  the  tenants  did  not  have  authority  to  enter  the 
defendant's  private  premises  without  her  permission, 
and  the  state  did  not  oppose.   Therefore,  the  state 
moved  to  dismiss  the  indictment  and  judgment,  and  the 
court  granted  the  motion. 

State  of  Oregon  v.  Morton/Evans,  reversed  and  remanded 
on  charges  against  defendant  Morton,  but  otherwise 
affirmed,  137  Or.  App.  228,  904  P. 2d  631  (1995)  (en 
banc) .   These  cases  were  consolidated  for  appeal 
because  the  state  raised  the  same  legal  issue  in  both 
cases.   Both  defendants  moved  to  suppress  evidence 
seized  from  an  arrest  made  pursuant  to  an  allegedly 
unauthorized  warrant.   The  warrant  was  based  on 
Morton's  failure  to  appear  on  a  citation  for  a  traffic 
infraction.   While  the  police  were  arresting  Morton  on 
the  warrant,  a  plastic  container  fell  from  her  jacket. 
She  denied  ownership  and  knowledge  of  the  container. 
The  detective  found  a  controlled  substance  and  drug 
paraphernalia  in  the  container.   The  officer  then 
arrested  Evans,  who  was  with  Morton,  and  searched  him. 


(8) 


864 


The  trial  court  granted  Morton's  motion  to  suppress 
because  the  statute  cited  as  the  basis  for  the  warrant 
only  authorizes  warrants  for  failure  to  appear  on 
traffic  crimes,  not  traffic  infractions.   The  trial 
court  also  found  the  arrest  of  Evans  was  unlawful 
because  there  was  no  testimony  showing  that  the  state 
had  probable  cause  to  arrest  Evans. 

The  Court  of  Appeals  found  that  the  warrant  was  void 
because  the  statute  only  authorized  warrants  in  cases 
involving  traffic  crimes;  nonetheless,  because  Morton 
had  disclaimed  any  and  all  interest  in  the  container, 
she  had  no  legal  standing  to  challenge  its  seizure. 
Id.  at  234,  231-32.   Thus,  the  court  reversed  and 
remanded  on  charges  against  Morton. 

As  for  Evans,  the  appellate  court  held  the  warrant  for 
Morton's  arrest  was  unlawful;  the  state  failed  to  argue 
at  trial  that  Evans  lacked  standing  to  contest  the 
seizure  of  the  container;  and  a  lack  of  standing 
argument  against  Morton  does  not  preserve  the  same 
argument  against  Evans.   Id.  at  237.   Therefore,  the 
trial  court  did  not  err  in  granting  Evans'  motion  to 
suppress. 

(3)   citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  and  state 
constitutional  issues,  together  with  the  citation  to 
appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions. 

City  of  Eugene  v.  David  Henry  Miller,  case  no.  90- 
50053,  aff 'd,  114  Or.  App.  271,  835  P. 2d  144  (1992. 
Defendant  demurred  on  first  amendment  and  equal 
protection  grounds. 

The  following  is  a  list  of  attorneys  who  have  appeared 
before  me  in  either  circuit  or  district  court: 

1.  Jan  T.  Baisch,  Paulson  &  Baisch  Trial  Lawyers  PC,  1000 
SW  Broadway,  Suite  1660,  Portland,  OR   97205. 
Telephone  503-226-6361. 

2.  Larry  A.  Brown,  Brown,  Roseta,  Long  &  McConville,  210 
Northbank  Building,  44  Club  Road,  Eugene,  OR   97401. 
Telephone  503-686-1883. 

3.  Win  Calkins,  Calkins  &  Calkins,  1163  Olive  Street, 
Eugene,  OR   97401.   Telephone  503-345-0371. 

4.  Don  E.  Corson,  Johnson,  Clifton,  Larson,  &  Corson,  PC, 
975  Oak  Street,  Suite  800,  Eugene,  OR   97401. 
Telephone  503-484-2434. 

5.  Robert  Eraser,  Luvaas,  Cobb,  Richards  &  Eraser,  PC, 
#300  Forum  Building,  777  High  Street,  Eugene,  OR 
97401.   Telephone  503-484-9292. 

(9) 


865 


6.  David  L.  Jensen,  Jensen,  Fadeley  &  Elmore,  PC,  1399 
Franklin  Blvd.,  Suite  220,  Eugene,  OR   97403. 
Telephone  503-342-1141. 

7.  Shaun  McCrea,  McCrea,  PC,  1147  High  Street,  Eugene,  OR 
97401.   Telephone  503-485-1182. 

8.  Terri  Wood,  804  Pearl  Street,  Eugene,  OR   97401, 
Telephone  503-484-4171. 

9.  Bruce  E.  Smith,  Cleaves,  Swearingen,  Larsen,  Potter, 
Scott  &  Smith,  975  Oak  Street,  Suite  800,  Eugene,  OR 
97401.   Telephone  503-686-8833. 

10.  William  G.  Wheatley,  Jaqua  &  Wheatley,  PC,  825  E.  Park 
Street,  Eugene,  OR   97401.   Telephone  503-686-8485. 

16.  Public  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices 
you  have  held,  other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the 
terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected 
or  appointed.   State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful 
candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

Democratic  Party  Precinct  Person,  1984 

Delegate  to  the  1984  Democratic  Convention  in  San  Francisco, 

California 

Appointed  and  elected  Chief  Clerk,  House  of  Representatives, 
State  Capital,  Salem,  Oregon,  December  1982  to  August  1983 

17.  Legal  Career: 

a.    Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and 
experience  after  graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so, 
the  name  of  the  judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of 
period  you  were  a  clerk; 

Law  Clerk,  1979-1980 

Honorable  Edwin  E.  Allen,  Presiding  Judge,  Lane  County 

Circuit  Court,  125  E.  8th  Avenue,  Eugene,  OR   97401 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the 
addresses  and  dates; 

No,  I  did  not  practice  as  a  sole  practitioner. 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or 
offices,  companies  or  governmental  agencies  with 
which  you  have  been  connected,  and  the  nature  of 
your  connection  with  each; 


(10) 


866 


Associate  Attorney,  1980-1982 

Sahlstrom  &  Dugdale,  PC,  915  Oak  Street,  Suite  300, 

Eugene,    OR   97  4  01 

Fundraiser/Field  Staff,  Kulongoski  for  Governor 
August  to  November  1982 

Chief  Clerk,  House  of  Representatives,  1983 
Oregon  State  Capitol 
Salem,  OR   97310 

Associate  Attorney,  1983-1988 

Thorp,  Dennett,  Purdy,  Golden  &  Jewett  PC, 

644  North  "A"  Street,  Springfield,  OR   97477 

District  Court  Judge,  Lane  County,  1988-93 
Lane  County  Courthouse 
125  E.  8th  Avenue 
Eugene,  OR   97401 

Circuit  Court  Judge,  Lane  County,  1993-Present 
Lane  County  Courthouse 
125  E.  8th  Avenue 
Eugene,  OR   97401 

1.    What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law 
practice,  dividing  it  into  periods  with  dates  if 
its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 

My  practice  with  the  firm  of  Sahlstrom  and  Dugdale,  PC, 
in  1981-82  consisted  primarily  of  family  law  matters. 
I  tried  dozens  of  cases  for  the  firm  in  the  two  years  I 
worked  there.   In  addition,  I  tried  and  assisted  in 
some  personal  injury  matters  and  several  criminal 
cases.   Predominantly,  my  cases  involved  custody  and 
visitation  issues.   Occasionally,  I  handled  a  matter  in 
juvenile  court  for  a  long-standing  client  and  an 
adoption. 

In  the  late  summer  of  1982,  I  took  a  leave  from  the 
practice  of  law  to  serve  as  a  fundraiser  and  field 
staff  person  on  gubernatorial  candidate  Ted 
Kulongoski 's  campaign  staff.   After  the  campaign  ended, 
I  was  nominated  by  the  Speaker  and  elected  by  the  full 
membership  of  the  House  of  Representatives  of  the 
Oregon  Legislature  to  serve  as  Chief  Clerk.   My 
responsibilities  included  overseeing  the  clerk's  staff, 
publication  of  daily  schedules  and  calendar, 
maintaining  the  journal  of  all  proceedings,  and  serving 
as  the  body's  parliamentarian. 

Following  the  end  of  the  1983  legislative  session,  I 
was  hired  by  Thorp,  Dennett,  Purdy,  Golden  &  Jewett, 
PC,  to  take  over  the  firm's  Domestic  Law  practice. 


(11) 


867 


During  the  years  at  the  firm,  I  handled  a  range  of 
domestic  matters  from  simple  dissolutions  to  complex 
domestic  matters  that  included  substantial  amounts  of 
property  and  assets.   In  addition,  I  assisted  several 
of  the  partners  in  general  litigation  preparation.   I 
co-counseled  work  in  a  variety  of  areas  including 
criminal  law,  municipal  law,  and  general  civil 
litigation. 

In  1988  Governor  Neil  Goldschmidt  appointed  me  to  fill 
a  vacancy  on  the  Lane  County  District  Court  bench.   A 
year  later,  upon  the  recommendation  of  the  Oregon 
Supreme  Court's  chief  justice,  I  served  as  presiding 
judge  for  the  district  court.   As  such,  I  managed 
thousands  of  cases  and  worked  closely  with 
constituencies  of  the  court  to  ensure  timely  and 
economical  resolution  of  pending  cases.  I  also  shared 
responsibility  for  arraignments  and  sentencing.   I 
continued  in  that  capacity  until  my  appointment  to  the 
Lane  County  Circuit  Court  in  1993. 

As  a  circuit  court  judge,  I  hear  a  variety  of  civil  and 
criminal  matters.   Additionally,  in  my  first  year  on 
the  circuit  court  bench,  I  presided  over  out  of  custody 
circuit  court  arraignments  and  served  as  a  primary 
sentencing  judge.   Most  recently,  I  am  serving  as  the 
managing  show  cause  judge  and  back-up  juvenile  judge. 

Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention 
the  areas,  if  any,  in  which  you  have  specialized. 

My  specialty  was  complex  domestic  matters  and  child 
custody  cases.   My  former  clients  included  men  and 
women  from  every  economic  condition,  state  criminal 
defendants,  private  individuals,  and  municipalities. 

c.    1.   Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally, 
or  not  at  all?   If  the  frequency  of  your 
appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such 
variance,  giving  dates. 

I  tried  cases  on  a  fairly  regular  basis.   I  was 
generally  scheduled  to  try  4-5  cases  per  month  with  the 
expectation  most  would  settle.   In  addition,  I 
generally  had  court  hearings  on  the  show  cause  docket 
weekly  to  resolve  pendente  lite  orders.   In  the 
practice  of  family  law,  the  majority  of  cases 
are  resolved  through  settlement  negotiations,  which 
was  the  result  with  most  of  my  cases. 

2.    What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in 

(a)  Federal  courts  —  0% 

(b)  State  courts  of  record  —  99% 

(c)  Other  courts  —  1% 

(12) 


868 


3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was 

(a)  Civil  —  90% 

(b)  Criminal  —  10% 

4 .  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you 
tried  to  verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than 
settled) , indicating  whether  you  were  sole  counsel, 
chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

I  cannot  tell  you  the  number  of  cases  I  tried  to 

verdict  or  judgment,  however,  I  would  estimate  that 

I  tried  2  or  3  per  month  in  the  seven  years  I  was  in 
private  practice, 

5.    What  percentage  of  these  trials  was 

(a)  Jury  —  2% 

(b)  Non-jury  —  98% 

Litigation:   Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated 
matters  which  you  personally  handled.   Give  the  citations, 
if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and  date 
if  unreported.   Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of 
each  case.   Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you 
represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of 
the  case.   Also  state  as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation: 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or 
judges  before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers 
of  co-counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the 
other  parties. 

I  was  in  private  practice  for  seven  years  before  coming 
on  the  bench.   From  1980-82  I  worked  for  Sahlstrom  & 
Dugdale  in  Eugene,  Oregon.   From  1983-88  I  worked  for 
Thorp,  Dennett,  Purdy,  Golden  &  Jewett,  P.C.  in 
Springfield,  Oregon.   At  both  firms,  my  area  of 
practice  was  family  law.   In  family  law  cases,  the  goal 
is  to  reach  a  reasonable  resolution,  preferably  out  of 
court,  so  most  of  my  cases  settled  prior  to  trial. 
From  those  cases  that  did  not  settle,  I  have  picked  ten 
that  I  believe  are  fairly  representative  of  the  kinds 
of  family  law  matters  I  routinely  handled.   I  tried  all 
of  these  cases  in  Lane  County  Circuit  Court  as  the 
attorney  of  record.   Child  custody,  child  and  spousal 
support,  insurance,  income  tax  exemptions  for  dependent 
children,  and  property  distribution  were  the  issues  in 
all  of  these  cases. 


(13) 


869 


In  Sharon  I.  Callahan  v.  Daniel  Callahan.  15-81-00196, 
tried  on  October  21,  1981  before  the  Honorable  Edwin  E. 
Allen,  I  represented  the  Petitioner  Sharon  I.  Callahan. 
Opposing  counsel  was  David  West,  whose  address  and 
telephone  number  are  Suite  215,  500  W.  8th  St., 
Vancouver,  WA   98660;  (206)  737-0415.   Callahan  is 
significant  because  it  was  the  first  case  tried  in  Lane 
County  under  the  child  support  guidelines  set  out  in 
Smith  V.  Smith,  290  Or.  675,  626  P. 2d  342  (1981).   The 
Smith  court  stated  that  child  support  should  be  figured 
by  a  ratio  of  the  non-custodial  parent's  income  to  thfi 
income  of  the  custodial  parent.   I  won  custody  for  the 
Petitioner  and  spousal  and  child  support  from  the 
Respondent. 

In  Josephina  E.  Pereyra  v.  Gregorio  P.  Pereyra.  15-85- 
04876,  tried  from  February  5-12,  1986  and  on  February 
17,  1986  before  the  Honorable  F.  Gordon  Cottrell,  I 
represented  the  Respondent  Gregorio  P.  Pereyra. 
Opposing  counsel  was  James  M.  O'Kief  of  Morris  & 
O'Kief,  whose  address  and  telephone  number  are  Suite 
350,  400  Country  Club  Road,  Eugene,  OR   97401;  503-344- 
4010.  This  was  a  complex  child  custody  matter  with 
allegations  of  abuse.   Despite  an  explicit  statutory 
provision  prohibiting  the  court  from  giving  weight  to 
the  mother  for  the  very  reason  she  is  the  mother,  in 
1986  it  was  still  difficult  for  a  father  to  prevail. 
The  young  age  of  the  little  girl  in  this  case  made  an 
award  of  custody  to  my  client,  the  father,  even  more 
doubtful.   Nearly  fifty  witnesses  testified  in  a  week 
long  trial.   At  the  conclusion  of  the  trial  the  judge 
took  the  case  under  advisement  for  almost  six  weeks. 
Ultimately,  the  judge  awarded  custody  to  my  client. 

In  Sharon  Lavelle  Willis  v.  Larry  Dean  Willis.  15-85- 
08624,  tried  on  April  4,  1986  and  between  April  8-11, 
1986  before  the  Honorable  Maurice  Merten,  I  represented 
the  Respondent  Larry  Dean  Willis.   Opposing  counsel  was 
E.  B.  Sahlstrom,  whose  address  and  phone  number  are 
P.O.  Box  10427,  Eugene,  Oregon   97440;  (503)  687-1718. 
This  was  a  complex  custody  case  involving  two  young 
boys  close  in  age,  one  of  whom  was  adopted  and  had 
learning  disabilities.   The  wife  was  diagnosed  with 
bipolar  disorder  (manic  depression) .   The  parties  owned 
an  ultralight  airplane  business,  which  the  wife 
ransacked  and  destroyed.   Due  to  the  mother's  potential 
to  cause  harm,  obtaining  custody  for  the  father  was 
essential  to  the  well-being  of  the  boys.   The  day  after 
my  client  was  awarded  custody,  he  died  in  a  mysterious 
ultralight  plane  crash.   A  guardian  was  named  for  the 
boys  and  many  of  the  issues  from  the  dissolution 
proceeding  were  revisited. 


(14) 


870 


In.   Donald  D.  StaTaleton  v.  Sharon  Ann  Sfcapleton.  15-85- 
03273,  tried  on  December  11,  1985,  December  13,  1985, 
and  between  December  17-20,  1985  before  the  Honorable 
Maurice  Merten,  1  represented  the  Respondent  Sharon  Ann 
Stapleton.   Opposing  Coiinsel  was  Idnda  Wilson,  whose 
address  and  phone  number  are  1397  Willamette  St., 
Eugene,  OR  97401;  (503)  343-1242-   This  case  was 
complex  becaxise  the  parties  had  substantial  assets 
including  interest  in  a  timber  operation.   I  brought  in 
an  accountant  to  "audit"  the  business  records  and 
provide  an   expert  opinion  on  the  value  of  the  parties' 
interest.   X  then  presented  a  sixty— page  trial 
memoreLndum  outlining  all  of  the  assets  and  interests. 
Petitioner's  counsel  claimed  the  assets  were  so 
encumbered  that  the  value  was  substantially  lower  than 
our  expert's  opinion.   Judge  Merten  ruled  in  favor  of 
my  client. 

In  Geoffrey  S.  SJTrnnons  v.  c^^^^>^^  f>*>n  T,  SiTrnnonSr  15-82- 
04151,  tried  between  March  20-22,  1984,  before  the 
Honorable  George  Woodxich,  I  represented  the 
Petitioner.   Opposing  cotinsel  was  Doug  McCool,  whose 
address  and  phone  number  are  400  Country  Club  Road, 
Suite  210,  P.O.  Box  7372,  Eugene,  OR   97401;  (503)  485- 
8114.   Doug  Dennett,  Dennett  &  Fredericlcs,  P.O.,  199  E. 
5th  Avenue,  Eugene,  OR  97401;  (503)  345-4704,  and  I 
were  CO— counsel  in  an   action  to  modify  a  dissolution 
decree.   By  applying  the  analysis  set  out  in  two  cases 
that  I  had  argued  before  the  Oregon  Court  of  Appeals, 
Carter  v.  Carter,  54  Or.  App.  86,  634  P. 2d  265  (1981) 
and  Schaffer  v.  Schaffer,  57  Or.  App.  43,  643  P. 2d  1300 
(1982) ,  I  was  able  to  convince  the  court  that  the 
support  was  not  property,  but  alimony.   Had  the  court 
found  that  the  support  was  property,  then  the  award 
would  have  been  inalterable,  but  because  the  covurt  held 
that  the  support  was  alimony,  the  court  was  able  to 
consider  the  wife's  present  standard  of  living. 
Respondent  had  remarried  and  was  living  at  a  higher 
standard  of  living  than  she  was  when  she  was  living 
with  our  client.   Consequently,  Petitioner's  spousal 
support  obligation  terminated  by  order  of  the  court. 
Our  client  estimated  that  we  saved  him  approximately 
$100,000. 

In  Sandra  Minasian  Stenius  v.  Ranier  Konrad  Stenius. 
15-83-08690,  tried  between  March  26-28,  1985  before  the 
Honorable  William  Beckett,  I  represented  the  Petitioner 
Sandra  Minasian  Stenius.   Opposing  counsel  was  Laura 
Parrish  of  Hutchinson,  Anderson,  Cox  &  Teising,  P.C., 
whose  address  and  phone  mrmber  aire  P.O.Box  3219, 
Eugene,  OR  97403;  503-485-6162.   Petitioner  was  the 
primary  parent,  maintained  the  home,  cind  contributed 
financially.   Respondent  had  a  long  history  of  alcohol 
abuse  and  unemployment.   Consequently,  Petitioner  was 


(15) 


871 


able  to  overcome  a  rebuttable  presumption  under  Oregon 
law  that  both  parties  equally  contributed  to  the 
marriage,  which  is  a  difficult  presumption  to  overcome. 

In  Sarah  Lynn  Wina  v.  Leonard  David  Wing.  Jr..  77-5638, 
tried  on  January  14,  1986  before  the  Honorable  Greg 
Foote,  I  represented  the  Respondent  Leonard  David  Wing, 
Jr.   Opposing  counsel  were  Jim  Palmer  and  Denise 
Fjordbeck,  whose  addresses  and  phone  numbers  are  Suite 
403,  44  W.  Broadway,  Eugene,  OR   97401;   503-343-8281; 
Department  of  Justice,  450  Justice  Building,  Salem,  OR 
97310;  503-378-6313.   This  was  another  complex  custody 
modification  proceeding.   Petitioner,  the  custodial 
parent,  remarried  and  agreed  to  move  herself  and  her 
two  daughters  to  New  York  with  her  new  husband  without 
giving  notice  to  the  Respondent.   On  behalf  of 
Respondent,  I  moved  for  a  change  of  custody  and  an 
order  restraining  Petitioner  from  removing  the  children 
from  the  state  before  a  hearing  could  be  held.   Judge 
Foote  granted  custody  to  my  client  due  to  a  substantial 
change  in  circumstances.   In  a  later  proceeding  before 
the  Honorable  William  Beckett  on  November  27,  1987,  the 
court  found  that  Ms.  Wing's  changed  status  from 
unemployed  to  employed  coupled  with  my  client's 
increased  need  to  receive  support  amounted  to  a 
substantial  change  in  circumstances.   Again,  my  client 
prevailed,  this  time  overcoming  the  presumption  that  a 
mere  increase  in  income  does  not  satisfy  the  test  of  a 
substantial  change  in  circumstances. 

In  Emma  E.  Boiler  v.  John  J.  Boiler.  87  Or.  App.  550 
(1987),  tried  between  March  5-10,  1986  before  the 
Honorable  George  Woodrich,  I  represented  the  Petitioner 
Emma  E.  Boiler.   Opposing  counsel  was  Russell  D. 
Bevans,  whose  address  and  phone  number  are  Suite  C  17  5, 
895  Country  Club  Road,  Eugene,  Oregon   97401;  (503) 
484-0332.   This  case  represents  the  many  cases 
involving  substance  abuse  and  domestic  violence. 
Respondent  had  a  history  of  drug  and  alcohol  abuse  and, 
on  occasion,  he  physically  and  emotionally  abused  my 
client  and  the  two  children.   Ultimately,   Respondent 
abandoned  Petitioner  and  his  two  children  on  a  rural 
piece  of  property  with  no  means  of  support.   The  court 
agreed  that  my  client  should  receive  the  greater  share 
of  the  assets  in  lieu  of  spousal  support  because 
Respondent  had  not  made  any  temporary  support  payments, 
even  though  the  court  had  ordered  him  to  do  so. 
Respondent  appealed.   I  briefed  and  argued  Petitioner's 
case  before  the  Court  of  Appeals.   The  court  issued  a 
per  curiam  opinion  affirming  the  trial  court  decision 
as  modified.   The  court  modified  one  provision  of  the 
decree  regarding  a  china  cabinet  to  "further  the 
disentanglement  of  the  parties." 


(16) 


872 


In  Christian  Peter  Stehr  v.  Gisela  Hildeaard  Stehr.  15- 
79-00192  tried  on  July  2,  1981  before  the  Honorable 
Maurice  Merten,  I  represented  the  Petitioner.   Opposing 
counsel  was  Doug  McCool,  whose  address  and  phone  are 
400  Country  Club  Road,  Suite  210,  P.O.  Box  7372, 
Eugene,  Oregon   97402;  (503)  485-8114.   The  case  was 
highly  charged,  the  client  was  difficult  to  handle,  and 
the  financial  matters  were  complex.   Opposing  counsel 
was  an  extremely  experienced  attorney.   Mr.  McCool  and 
I  negotiated  at  length.   Finally,  we  reached  a 
resolution  and  put  the  settlement  on  the  record. 
Rather  than  sign  the  decree  prepared  in  accordance  with 
the  settlement  put  on  the  record.  Respondent  moved  to 
set  the  settlement  aside.   After  a  hearing  on  the 
motion,  Judge  Merten  concluded  that  we  had  negotiated 
the  agreement  in  good  faith.   Consequently,  he  signed 
my  proposed  decree. 

In  Pamela  D.  Delker  v.  Thomas  W.  Delker.  No.  15-84- 
07223,  tried  on  October  17  and  18,  1985  before  the 
Honorable  George  Woodrich,  I  represented  the  Petitioner 
Pamela  D.  Delker.  Opposing  counsel  was  Marc  Perrin, 
whose  address  and  phone  number  are  777  High  Street, 
Suite  110,  Eugene,  OR   97401;  503-345-0003.   The  wife 
worked  part-time  at  an  unskilled  position,  took  care  of 
the  young  children  and  managed  the  household.   The 
husband  worked  full  time  with  greater  opportunity  for 
career  advancement  because  his  duties  at  home  were  less 
on  account  of  the  wife  bearing  the  majority  of  those 
responsibilities.   Respondent  contested  Petitioner's 
need  for  and  right  to  the  spousal  and  child  support 
that  would  enable  her  to  provide  adequately  for  their 
minor  children.   Despite  lengthy  settlement 
discussions,  the  case  went  to  trial  and  my  client 
prevailed.   My  client  received  enough  support  to 
complete  the  Forestry  program  at  a  local  community 
college  so  that  she  could  become  self-sufficient  while 
continuing  to  raise  the  children. 

19.   Legal  Activities:   Describe  the  most  significant  legal 
activities  you  have  pursued,  including  significant 
litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters 
that  did  not  involve  litigation.   Describe  the  nature  of 
your  participation  in  this  question,  please  omit  any 
information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege 
(unless  the  privilege  has  been  waived.) 

From  the  time  I  graduated  from  law  school,  I  have  given 
great  attention  to  ways  in  which  the  law  can  and  should 
improve  the  lives  of  children  and  protect  the  well-being  of 
families.   I  developed  a  strong  understanding  of  the  needs 
of  children  and  families  while  practicing  as  a  domestic 


(17) 


873 


relations  attorney.   When  I  was  appointed  to  the  bench,  I 
noted  early  on  that  criminal  activity  was  often  a 
consequence  of  problems  stemming  from  cycles  of  abuse  and 
neglect,  drug  and  alcohol  use,  and  poor  education.   I  also 
realized  that  there  was  a  lack  of  resources  for  defendants 
to  use  to  address  drug  and  alcohol  abuse,  child  abuse  and 
neglect,  lack  of  parenting  skills  and  lack  of  education. 

Governor  Neil  Goldschmidt  and  Governor  Barbara  Roberts 
recognized  my  commitment  to  finding  solutions  to  these 
problems.   They  were  aware,  as  well,  of  my  role  in  bringing 
competing  governmental  entities  and  constituencies  together. 
For  example,  as  presiding  judge  of  the  district  court,  I 
developed  a  jail  arraignment  process  and  model  plea 
negotiation  system  that  saved  countless  dollars  and  time. 
Consequently,  they  appointed  me  to  implement  a  system  that 
would  address  the  increase  in  drug  and  alcohol  affected 
babies;  to  create  a  profile  for  children  at  risk  of  abuse 
and  neglect  and  develop  a  system  for  effectively  intervening 
in  the  families  by  studying  the  factors  that  led  to  the 
deaths  of  thirty-two  children  in  Oregon  in  1992;  to  serve  as 
vice-chair  of  the  Oregon  Juvenile  Justice  Advisory 
Committee;  and  to  participate  in  the  Governor's  Task  Force 
on  Juvenile  Justice. 

Most  recently,  the  Chief  Justice  of  the  Oregon  Supreme  Court 
has  appointed  me  to  the  State  Court  Advisory  Committee 
authorized  under  OBRA  1993  to  study  how  courts  handle 
proceedings  related  to  foster  care  and  adoptions. 
Additionally,  I  co-chaired  a  subcommittee  mandated  to  report 
to  the  1995  Oregon  Legislature  on  what  Oregon  should  do  to 
meet  the  American  Bar  Association  guidelines  for  effective 
representation  of  children  in  dependency  cases.   I  enjoyed  a 
strong  working  relationship  with  William  Wheatley,  immediate 
past  president  of  the  Oregon  State  Bar,  who  served  as  a 
member  of  the  committee. 

On  a  local  level,  I  am  a  former  member  of  the  Commission  on 
Children  and  Families  for  Lane  County  charged  with  devising 
a  long-term  strategic  plan  for  the  healthy  development  of 
children  and  families.   Over  the  last  eight  years,  I  have 
served  in  various  capacities  on  the  Board  of  the  Lane  County 
Relief  Nursery,  which  is  dedicated  to  finding  and 
implementing  effective  methods  for  intervening  in  the  lives 
of  high  risk  families. 


(18) 


874 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 


List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts 
from  deferred  income  arrangements,  stock,  options, 
uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which  you 
expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships, 
professional  services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers, 
clients,  or  customers.   Please  describe  the  arrangements  you 
have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial 
or  business  interest. 

I  am  a  member  of  the  Public  Employees  Retirement  System. 

Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of 
interest,  including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in 
determining  these  areas  on  concern.   Identify  the 
categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that 
are  likely  to  present  potential  conf licts-of-interest  during 
your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been 
nominated 

I  will  fully  comply  with  28  U.S.C.  §  455.   I  will  recuse 
myself  from  any  proceeding  in  which  I  have  an  actual  or 
apparent  conflict.   I  do  not  foresee  any  categories  of 
litigation  or  financial  arrangements  that  will 
present  a  potential  conflict  of  interest. 

Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue 
outside  employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during 
your  service  with  the  court? 

No 

List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the 
calendar  year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current 
calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees,  dividends, 
interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and 
other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more.   (If  you  prefer  to  do 
so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report,  required  by 
the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted 
here. ) 

See  attached  Financial  Disclosure  Form  AO-10  incorporated  by 
reference  herein. 

Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement 
in  detail  (add  schedules  as  called  for) . 

See  attached  forms. 

Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a 
political  campaign?   If  so,  please  identify  the  particulars 
of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the 
campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

(19) 


875 


1.  Betty  Roberts  for  Governor,  1973-1974 

I  served  as  the  University  of  Oregon  campus  coordinator  for 
the  Lane  County  campaign  and  at  some  point  in  the  Fall  of 
1993,  I  was  named  co-chair  of  the  Lane  County  Campaign.   My 
responsibilities  included  organizing  and  supervising  all  the 
canvassing,  lawn  signs,  local  fundraising  events,  staffing 
the  headquarters  and  local  advance  work.   The  campaign 
manager  was  Leonard  Bergstein  and  I  ran  Lane  County  as  a 
volunteer. 

2.  Betty  Roberts  for  U.S.  Senate,  1974 

Senator  Wayne  Morse  died  in  the  summer  of  1974  and  Betty 
Roberts  was  selected  by  the  State  Central  Committee  to 
replace  the  Senator.   The  campaign  hired  me  to  assist  with 
the  field  organization.   I  lived  and  worked  out  of  Portland. 
Later  in  the  campaign,  I  was  reassigned  as  the  candidate's 
driver  and  personal  staff.   I  worked  from  August,  1994 
through  the  general  election  on  the  first  Tuesday  in 
November,  1974. 

3.  Kulongoski  for  U.S.  Senate,  1980 

I  was  a  volunteer  in  the  campaign  in  Lane  County.   I  stuffed 
envelopes  and  performed  general  office  work  for  the  campaign 
with  my  new  baby,  Jake,  over  a  six  week  period  before  the 
November  1980  election.   Linda  Lynch  was  the  County 
Coordinator. 

4.  Kulongoski  for  Governor,  1982 

In  December  1981,  Ted  Kulongoski  decided  to  run  for  Governor 
and  came  to  tell  me  in  my  hospital  room  where  I  had  just 
given  birth  to  my  second  son.   I  performed  volunteer  work 
under  Linda  Lynch,  County  Organizer,  throughout  the  primary 
and  during  the  summer.   In  the  late  summer,  the  campaign 
needed  staff  and  asked  me  to  consider  the  job.   I  commuted 
to  Portland  initially  to  do  scheduling,  but  was  reassigned 
to  fundraising  and  field  work. 

5.  Neil  Goldschmidt  for  Governor,  1986 

In  1986,  Neil  Goldschmidt  called  a  group  together  to  decide 
whether  he  should  run  for  Governor.   My  husband  and  I  were 
included  in  the  discussion.   I  worked  as  a  volunteer 
throughout  the  primary  and  was  named  one  of  three  Lane 
County  co-chairs  for  the  general  election.   My 
responsibilities  included  grassroots  organization,  staffing 
the  office,  advance,  lawn  signs,  and  participation  in  the 
local  fundraising  activities.   The  other  co-chairs  were 
Dorothy  Chase  and  Maury  Jacobs  (now  deceased) . 

6.  Hans  Linde  for  the  Supreme  Court,  1984 

Justice  Linde  was  challenged  in  his  re-election  to  the 
Oregon  Supreme  Court.   As  a  former  student,  he  asked  for  my 
help.   I  was  a  volunteer  coordinator  of  the  local  lawn  sign 
effort. 


(20) 


876 


7.  Debra  Ehrman  for  City  Council,  1984 

I  served  on  the  steering  committee  for  Debra  Ehrman 's 
successful  city  council  race.   I  volunteered  to  canvas, 
helped  with  lawn  signs,  mailings  and  did  some  fundraising. 

8.  Jim  Weaver  for  Congress,  1976 

I  served  as  a  field  organizer  for  Mr.  Weaver's  congressional 
campaign.   My  responsibilities  included  managing  volunteers, 
advancing  the  candidate,  coordinating  lawn  signs  and 
canvassing. 

9.  As  a  precinct  committee  person  and  part  time  office 
staff  to  the  Democratic  party,  I  did  volunteer  work  for 
dozens  of  legislative,  local  and  statewide  races.   I  would 
canvass  a  precinct,  stuff  envelopes  or  help  with  campaign 
strategy. 


(21) 


877 


III.  GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar 
Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for 
"every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence  or 
professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in 
serving  the  disadvantaged."   Describe  what  you  have  done  to 
fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances 
and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

Guest  Lecturer,  Interdisciplinary  Doctoral  Program  Seminar, 
College  of  Education  Division  for  Special  Education  and 
Rehabilitation,  Professor  Dan  Close.   (Lectured  yearly 
since  1988) . 

Guest  Lecturer,  Foundations  of  Disability  (Master's 
Program) ,  College  of  Education  Division  for  Special 
Education  and  Rehabilitation,  Professor  Dan  Close. 

Guest  Lecturer,  Psychology  of  Exceptional  Children  (Master's 
Program) ,  College  of  Education  Division  for  Special 
Education  and  Rehabilitation,  Professor  Dan  Close. 
(Lectured  twice  yearly  from  1988  to  1993)  . 

Guest  Lecturer,  Supreme  Court  and  Civil  Rights  and  Civil 
Liberties,  Department  of  Political  Science,  University  of 
Oregon,  Professor  James  Klonoski. 

Courthouse  Tours/Mock  Trials.   Since  1988,  I  have 
presided  over  the  Thurston  High  School  mock  trial 
sponsored  by  the  Honor  Society.   The  event  is  a  popular 
school  activity  that  requires  hundreds  of  volunteer  hours  on 
the  part  of  local  lawyers  and  teachers.   The  mock  trial  is 
featured  in  an  all  school  performance  and  has  expanded  to 
two  trials. 

In  addition,  I  have  coordinated  literally  hundreds  of 
school  tours  for  elementary  through  secondary  school 
students.   During  my  term  on  the  Law  Day  Committee,  we 
conducted  a  four  hour  in  service  day  for  middle  and  high 
school  social  science  teachers.   This  informal  arrangement 
has  been  extremely  popular. 

As  a  member  of  the  Lane  County  Bar  Association  Pro  Bono 
Committee,  I  recommended  the  creation  of  the  Andrew  Clement 
Pro  Bono  Award.   The  award  was  named  after  my  colleague 
following  his  death  after  serving  two  months  on  the  Lane 
County  District  Court.   The  award  is  given  annually  to  an 
individual  for  exceptional  pro  bono  service  to  person  of 
limited  means. 

I  have  been  involved  in  the  Relief  Nursery,  which  is  an 
effective  family-centered  program  aimed  at  ending  the 
devastating  cycle  of  child  abuse  and  neglect.   The 


(22) 


878 


therapeutic  preschool  and  family  services  have  been  a 
lifeline  to  so  many  people  in  Lane  County.   The  therapeutic 
preschool  serves  170  children  a  week  and  many  more  families 
through  outreach  and  the  drug  and  alcohol  programs. 
Families  with  children  at  risk  of  serious  abuse  and  neglect 
are  served  by  highly  trained  staff  cind  teachers  who  are 
literally  changing  the  lives  of  families  daily.   (The  Relief 
Nursery  has  been  replicated  in  Portland,  Klamath  Falls, 
Cottage  Grove  and  we  are  in  the  beginning  stages  of 
negotiations  with  Deschutes  and  Marion  Counties) . 

In  July  of  1993,  the  Relief  Nursery  consolidated  the  four 
classrooms  located  in  donated  church  space  around  town  and  a 
fifth  site  which  housed  the  administrative  staff  into  a  new 
13,000  square  foot,  1.9  million  dollar  building  designed 
specifically  to  meet  the  needs  of  our  families.   The 
building  has  been  described  as  the  "finest  children's 
facility  in  Oregon". 

I  serve  on  the  steering  committee  of  the  Court  Appointed 
Special  Advocates  (CASA)  program.   Starting  in  January  1994, 
we  created  the  program,  hired  two  staff  directors,  wrote 
three  grants  (received  funding  for  two) ,  recruited  140 
applicants,  and  screened  and  trained  our  first  class  of 
volunteers.   This  program  means  children  and  families  will 
have  a  true  public  advocate  to  ensure  they  receive 
appropriate  services  and  court  intervention  to  arrive  at  a 
permanent  family  placement.   Most  recently  Gwyneth  Hamacker, 
Program  Coordinator,  has  requested  that  I  serve  on  the  CASA 
of  Lane  County  Foundation  Board  to  ensure  the  smooth  growth 
of  the  program. 

I  have  supervised,  as  well,  a  cadre  of  young  people  who  have 
given  volunteer  time  for  the  Courts  under  my  supervision 
each  year.   Since  1988,  I  have  had  4  to  6  students  from 
various  high  schools  participate  in  a  structured  yet 
flexible  community  service  project.   Four  of  the  students 
were  so  experienced  and  talented  that  they  have  been  paid 
judicial  employees  between  semesters  at  college  and  over  the 
summer.   The  split  is  approximately  about  half  women  and 
half  men.   I  maintain  contact  with  each  student  and  have 
appreciated  all  they  have  given  the  judicial  system  as 
volunteers. 

I  also  serve  as  a  mentor  for  students  at  the  University  of 
Oregon  School  of  Law  and  Roosevelt  Middle  School.   I  have 
been  involved  in  these  programs  since  my  appointment  to  the 
bench. 


2.    The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of 

Judicial  Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge 
to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that  invidiously 
discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.   Do 


(23) 


879 


you  currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any 
organization  which  discriminates  --  though  either  formal 
membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation 
of  membership  policies? 


3.    Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to 

recommend  candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts? 
If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?   Please  describe 
your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process, 
from  beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led 
to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you 
participated) . 

A  Judicial  Selection  Advisory  Committee  appointed  by  members 
of  Oregon's  congressional  delegation  and  Governor  Barbara 
Roberts  was  convened  to  conduct  interviews  and  recommend 
candidates  for  nomination.   The  committee  was  comprised  of 
twelve  lawyers  and  two  state  court  judges.   The  committee 
included  members  of  racial  minorities.   There  were  three 
past  presidents  of  the  Oregon  State  Bar. 

The  committee  reviewed  the  written  applications  of  all 
applicants  and  selected  13  finalists  to  be  interviewed. 
Background  checks  were  done  by  committee  members  on  the 
finalists  prior  to  interviews.   On  October  21,  1994,  and 
October  22,  1994,  interviews  of  the  finalists  were 
conducted.   Following  the  interviews  the  committee 
recommended  four  names  to  Oregon's  Congressional  delegation 
for  nomination. 

Congressman  Ron  Wyden  and  Governor  Barbara  Roberts  conducted 
a  second  round  of  interviews.   Thereafter,  Congressman  Wyden 
consulted  with  all  members  of  the  Oregon  Congressional 
delegation  and  Governor  Roberts  and  prepared  the  letter  to 
President  Clinton  recommending  my  name.   In  addition,  I  have 
been  interviewed  by  a  panel  of  attorneys  at  the  Department 
of  Justice,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation,  and  a 
representative  of  the  American  Bar  Association. 

4.  Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a 
judicial  nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal 
issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be 
interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case, 
issue,  or  question? 

No 

5.  Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism 
involving  "judicial  activism". 


(24) 


880 


The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal 
government,  and  within  society  generally,  has  become  the 
subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.   It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism 
that  alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of 
the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have 
been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution 
rather  than  grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual 
plaintiff  as  a  vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far- 
reaching  orders  extending  to  broad  classes  of 
individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad, 
affirmative  duties  upon  governments  and  society; 

d.  a  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening 
jurisdictional  requirements  such  as  standing  and 
ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon 
other  institutions  in  the  manner  of  an  administrator 
with  continuing  oversight  responsibilities. 

The  role  of  the  judiciary  in  American  government  is  to 
decide  justiciable  cases  and  controversies.   Congress 
decides  the  limits  of  a  federal  court's  jurisdiction.   The 
judiciary's  primary  task  is  to  apply  the  law  created  by 
Congress.   In  doing  so,  the  judiciary  should  always  abide  by 
the  constitutional  requirements  for  standing,  invoke  the 
prudential  doctrines  of  mootness  and  ripeness,  and  rely  on 
case  law  precedents. 

Always  the  judiciary  should  consider  whether  the  issue 
before  the  court  is  a  political  question  better  left  to  the 
other  branches  of  government  for  resolution.   When  applying 
these  doctrines  of  justiciability,  a  federal  district  court 
judge  should  limit  her  ruling  to  the  grounds  necessary  for 
resolving  the  controversy. 

To  make  the  ruling,  a  federal  district  court  judge  in  Oregon 
should  first  consider  the  relevant  legal  precedent  of  the 
Ninth  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  and  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court.   Second,  a  federal  district  court  judge  should 
fashion  a  resolution  that  takes  into  account  the 
preferability  of  legislative  and  executive  solutions  and  the 
constitutional  guarantees  of  individual  freedom,  limited 
government,  private  property,  and  the  Bill  of  Rights. 


(25) 


881 


FINANCIAL     DISCLOSURE     REPORT 

FOR  CALENDAR  YEAR  19  95//^^^ 


Rcporc  Acquired  bv  the  E 
~ Act  of  1969.  Pub 


rJ?S™ 


November  Jo 


Aiken,,  Ann  L. 

U.S.    District  Court,,  Oregon 

12  .17  ,95 

Article   HI  Judge   (Active) 

S      Report    Type     (check    Appropriate    type! 
JL    Nomination.    Date         /      / 
Initial       __   Annual      Final 

6.    Reporting    Period 

1  /1/96-12/1&96 

Lane  County  Courthouse 

125  E.   eth  Avenue,,   Eugene,,  OR  97401 

e      On    Che    basis    of    the    information    contained    in    this    Report    and 
any   modifications    pertaining    thereto,     it    is,     in   my  opinion, 
in   compliance    with    applicable    laws    and    regulations. 

Reviewing   Officer                                                                                 Date 

IMPORTANT  NOTES  The  instructioni  accompanying  Ihis  form  musl  be  followed      Coraplele  ail  parts, 
checking  ihc  NONE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable  information.     Sign  on  last  page. 

I.      POSITIONS.      (Reporting  individual  only,  see  pp  9- 13  of  Instructions  ) 

POSITION  NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION/ENTITY 

NONE      (No  reportable  positions) 


Director 


Rplipf    Niirspry    f  NInn-prnf  i  t- )    Rn^irri    nf    ni  rof  hnrg 
Rpljpf    tvliir.qpry    f  Nnn-prnf  i  t- 1    RnArd   nf    9t-Pi.r.=<rHg 


II.     ACREEMF.NTS.      (Rcponmg  individual  only,  see  pp  14-17  oflnslruclions  ) 
DATE  PARTIES    AND    TERMS 


n 


NONE      (No  reportable  agreements) 
1995-96  F>iihli(-   Rmplnypp<;   Rot-irpmpnl-   .qydt-pm    fP.F   R..';.)    fnr   ^hp   q^-a^o  ^f  n,-o^r^r. 


ill.      NON-IN\TSTMENT  INCOME.      (Reporting  individual  and  spouse,  see  pp   18  25  of  Instructions  ) 


n 


1995-iqqfi 


SOURCE    AND    TYPE 
NONE       (No  reportable  non-investment  income) 

State  Board  of  Higher  Educal:ion-State  of  Oregon 


HROSS    INCOM 


F.fAtp    nf    nrpgnn-.TnHirial     Rr.^nr-h 


1995-1996  Public   Employees   Retirement  System   (P.E.R.S.) 


882 


REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS  -■  transportation,  lodging,  food,  entertainment 

(Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children,  use  the  parentheticals  "(S)"  and  "(DC)"  to  indicate  reportable 
reimbursements  and  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively  See  pp  26-29  of  Instructions  ) 
SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


□ 


NONE       (No  such  reportable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 


OTHER  GIFTS.       (Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children,  use  the  parcnihclrcals  "(S)"  and  "(DC)'  to 
indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively   Sec  pp  30-33  of  Instructions ) 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


Q 


NONE       (No  such  reportable  gifts) 


s 


LIABILITIES.       (Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible 
for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  "(S)"  for  separate  liability  of  the  spouse,  "(J)"  for  joint  liability  of 
reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  "(DC)"  for  liability  of  a  dependent  child    See  pp  34  36  of  Instructions ) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE' 


NONE       (No  reportable  liabilities) 


883 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Aiken/,  Ann  L. 


i2A7   /96 


VII.  Page  1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS -- income,  value,  transactions  (Includes  those  of  spouse 

and  dcpendenl  childreo.  See  pp.  37-54  of  InsCructioas.) 


D«scripcion  o£   Assets 
(includlns   crust   •ssettl 

Indicate  where   applicable,    owner  o( 
the   asset   by  using   the  parentheticsl 
•IJl-    lor   lolnt  oJnerahlp  of   report- 
ing   Individual   and   spouse.    '(SI*    for 
separate  ownership  by  apouse      •(DCl- 
for  ownership  by  dependent   child. 

Place    -Kl*   after   each  asset 
e«eiept    from  prior  disclosure. 

during 
repomng 

c 

Gross   value 
at   end  of 
reporting 

Transac 

Ions  dur 

ing   reporting  period 

1 

111 

Code 

(A-M) 

111 

Type 

111 

Value 
Code 
IJ-PI 

121 

Value 

KethodJ 

Code 

lO-xl 

111 
Type 

bu^'iell, 
merger. 

redemp- 

If   not   exempt   from  disclosure                 | 

121 

Day 

HI 

Value! 
Code 
(J-PI 

Kl 

Code 
(A-H 

ISI 
Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
(it   private 

NONE         (No   reportable 

U-Lane-O  Credit  Union 
'Savings  (DC) 

A 

INT 

J 

T 

U-Lane-0  Credit  Union 
'savings   (DC) 

A 

INT 

J 

T 

0-LaneHD  Credit  Union 
'savings   (DC) 

A 

INT 

J 

T 

U-Lane-0  Credit  Union 
'Savings   (DC) 

A 

INT 

J 

T 

U-Lane-0  Credit  Union 
''Savings   (DC) 

A 

INT 

J 

T 

Teachers   Insurance  Annuity 
'Association   (TIAA   (S) 

D 

DIV 

K 

E 

Oppenheimer  Funds 
' Investment  Account 

C 

DIV 

L 

T 

U-Lane-0  Credit  Union 
'(J) 

A 

INT 

K 

T 

9  Common  Stock -$tate  Bank 
Saunemin/    Illinois 

A 

NONE 

J 

U 

I.R.A.    (Jackson  National 
"Life) 

C 

DIV 

K 

T 

^p.R.E.F.    (Equity  Account) 

F 

DIV 

K 

T 

u 

11 

.. 

IS 

le 

1' 

1, 

'  is^r?^f"s/r^5i,   ^:iii°§§.°[o'ii§.ooo     r.ihr.r.oHiii^.o    i:ii.r.o\\iyroo..ooo  Ersirfihis  ii^?s°ooo 

'  ^lircSr!.  .  Di,    i:moT..'lo'nto.ooo    S:ni6°SJ,'?o1?:?SS.ooot:^?i°t^SM'?S6°?So      -s'oo— -"""° 

1      v.,ue^K..0d,C0des.       g-Jpprais.l^                                  J.Cost.re.l    estate    only,    S-Xs.es^nt                                         X.C.Sh.»ar.,t | 

884 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE   REPORT 


Hane  of  Person  Reporting 
Aiken/,   Ann  L. 


Date  of  Report 
12/17/96 


Vni.   ADDmONALINFORMATION  or  EXPLANATIONS.   (Indicale  pan  of  Report.) 

1.     Pursuant  to  my  mother's  will,,   I  hold  the  stock  but  my  father  receives  the  dividpnrt-s 
from  the  stock  until  his  death. 


DC  CERTIFICATION. 

In  compliance  wiih  ihe  provisions  of  28  U  S  C  §  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No  57  of  (he  Advisory  Commiiiee  on  Judicial  Aciivmes, 
and  10  ihe  best  of  my  knowledge  ai  ihc  time  aAer  reasonable  inquiry.  I  did  nol  perform  any  adjudicatory  function  in  any  liiigaiion  during  the 
pcnod  covered  by  this  report  in  vvhich  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  financial  interest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3Q3Xc), 
in  the  outcome  of  such  liligalioa 

I  certify  thai  all  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent  childrea  if  any)  is  accurate, 
true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  infomiallon  not  reported  was  withheld  because  it  met  applicable 
statutory  provisions  permitting  norxjisclosure. 

I  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employmenl  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been  reported  are  in 
compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  USC  A  app  7,  §  501  el  seq  ,  5  U.SC  §  7353  and  Judicial  Conference  regulations 

NOTE    ANY  INDIVIDUAL  WHO  KNOWINGLY  AND  WILFULLY  FALSIRES  OR  FAILS  TCHnLE THIS  REPORT  MAY  BE  SUBJECT 
TO  CIVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U  S  C  A  APP  6,  §  104  ) 


RLING  INSTRUCTIONS: 

Mail  signed  onginal  and  3  additional  copies  to  Committee  on  Financial  Dsclosure 

Administrative  Office  of  iJie 

United  Stales  Courts 
One  Columbus  Orcle,  N  E ,  Suite  2-301 
Washington.  DC   20544 


885 

FINANCIAL  STATCNtENT 
NET  WORTH 


Provide  a  complete.  currcJit  financial  net  worth  statement  which  itemizes  in  detail 
all  assets  (including  bank  accounts,  real  estate,  securities,  trusts,  investments,  and  other  financial 
holdings)  all  liabilidcs  (including  debts,  mortgages,  loans,  and  other  financial  obligadons)  of 
yourself,  your  spouse,  and  other  immediate  members  of  your  household. 


1                                                 ASSETS 

liaehxties 

Cuh  on  h&A^  and  in  buikx 

8 

50C 

00 

Nolei  payable  10  banlri-tr cured                  1         7 

000 

00 

VS.  Govanmcm  t£cundes— «^ 

sc^ed^lc 

Nofej  payable  to  banks -4uuecured 

4 

500 

00 

I  inni  teauiaci-Add  schedule 

Noui  payable  to  rclazivcs 

UnUltcd  Kcwnuc^-Ailj  tche^le 

Notd  payable  to  others 

AocovtiXs  aiuj  notes  re^xivible: 

Aocounti  and  billi  doc 

Due  from  i^ltivei  tad  friends 

Unpaid  i»»me  bu 

D\ic  from  oiheri 

Oibex  onpaid  tax  artd  ifltcrut 

Doubtful                                                    ^ 

Keal  eauie  moil^ajci  payable— a^ 

ached  ule 

244 

873 

00 

R<aJ  csui£  ovow^a^d  sche^lc 

332 

280 

00 

able 

KuJ  nwc  montHd  receivable 

Other  debu-itcnuze: 

Aatoi  and  other  penoo^  properly 

50 

1 
000  00 

Credit  Cards 

6 

750 

00 

Cuh  value -life  inmranoe 

13 

000  00 

Olhcr  uieb-iumi2e: 

Oppenheimer  Funds  Investment 
AECount 

75 

000' 00 

TIAA/CREF 

65 

000 

90 

PERS  (Jim-approxitnately) 

191 

000 

00 

Total  babtLties 

263 

123 

00 

PERS  (Ann-approximately) 

63 

000 

00 

Net  Worrh 

564 

657 

00 

TculAoeu   (See  attached  also) 

827 

780 

00 

Tola!  LabUidu  and  i>et  wonh 

827 

780 

00 

CONTINGENT  UABIUTIES 

CENTRAl,  INFORMATION 

Ai  cn^rter.  comaker  or  fuuvitcr 

None 

Are  ary  ai«u  plodgejl?  (Add  tehod- 
ulc.) 

No 

On  kxut  o;  contrxru 

None 

Art  yoo  defendant  in  any  stuts  or  le|il 

aedorj'' 

No 

L>|iJ  Qaimi 

None 

Hive  )TOi  oa  taken  banluupci? 

No 

ftoriiion  for  Federal  Income  Tax 

None 

O-Jkt  ipcclal  debt 

None 

_ 

886 


*  OTHER  ASSETS  CONTINUED 


IRA  (Arm-approximately)  $  28,000.00 

Shares:  State  Bank  of  Sauneniin,  Illinois  (Family  Owned  Bank)  $    2,000.00 

Public  Employees  Retirement  System  (PERS).  My  husband  retired 
December  1 5,  1994.  He  began  drawing  a  monthly  defined  benefit  of 
$3,200.00  in  January  1995.  (Life  annuity  with  100%  survivorship). 

**REAL  ESTA TE  OWNED 

2510  Highland  Drive,  Eugene,  OR  (Residence)  $332,280.00 


887 


QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  .niDICIAL  NOMINFFS 
I.  BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

Full  name  ( include  any  former  names  used.) 

Jerome  Barry  Friedman 
"Jerry" 

Address:  List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address(es). 

Residence; 

Virginia  Beach,  VA  23456 

Office: 

Circuit  Court  Judges'  Office 
2305  Judicial  Blvd. 
Building  10,  Fourth  Floor 
Virginia  Beach,  VA  23456 

Date  and  place  of  birth. 

February  19,  1943 
Newark,  New  Jersey 

Marital  Status  ( include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name).  List  spouses 
occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  address(es). 

Sandra  Katz  Friedman 
Teacher 

Kempsville  High  School 
5194  Chief  Trail 
Virginia  Beach,  VA 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


888 


Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates 
of  attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

9/65  to  6/69  -  Wake  Forest  School  of  Law  -  Degree  J.D.  6/69 
''''Please  note  that  I  had  to  leave  school  for  one  year  due  to  illness  of  my  father  in 
order  to  help  my  parents.     I  was  supposed  to  graduate  in  1968  and  most 
correspondence  from  law  school  indicates  that  I  was  in  the  Class  of  1968, 
although  I  graduated  in  1969. 

9/61  to  6/65  -  Old  Dominion  University  -  Degree  B.S.  in  Finance  6/65 

Employment  Record;  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional  corporations, 
companies,  firms  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and 
organizations,  nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were 
connected  as  an  officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since 
graduation  from  college. 

\ 
Summer  6/65  -  8/65  -  Shoe  Salesman 
Hofheimer  Shoe  Company 
Norfolk,  VA 

Summer  7/66  to  9/66  -  Taxi  Driver 
Norfolk  Taxi  Company 
Norfolk,  VA 

Summer  1967  -  Worked  in  Winston-Salem,  North  Carolina  for  Attorney  Walter 
Holton,  who  is  now  deceased. 

1/68  to  5/68  -  Management 
Astro  TV  (My  father's  business) 
Norfolk,  VA 

5/68  to  1/69  -  Trust  Administrator 
First  Union  National  Bank 
Grreensboro,  NC 

Est.  6/69  to  9/70  -  Assistant  Trust  Officer 
First  Union  National  Bank 
Greensboro,  NC 

Jerome  B.  Friedman 


889 


9/70  to  1/71  -  Associate  in  Law  Firm 
Steingold  &  Steingold 
Norfolk,  VA 

1/71  to  5/71  -  Associate  in  Law  Firm 
Shapero,  Levine  &  Abraham 
Norfolk,  VA 

5/71  to  12/71  -  Associate  in  Law  Firm 
Shapero  &  Levine 
Norfolk,  VA 

1/72  to  1/74  -  Partner  in  Law  Firm 
Shapero,  Levine  &  Friedman 
Norfolk,  VA 

1/74  to  12/82  -  Partner  in  Law  Firm 
Levine  &  Friedman 
Virginia  Beach,  VA 

1/83  to  6/85  -  Partner  in  Law  Firm 

Pender  &  Coward 

Virginia  Beach,  VA  ' 

6/85  to  1/91  -Judge.  Juvenile  &  Domestic  Relations  District  Court 
Juvenile  &  Domestic  Relations  District  Court 
Virginia  Beach,  VA 

1/91  to  Present  -  Circuit  Court  Judge 
Circuit  Court  Judges'  Office 
Virginia  Beach,  VA 

7.  Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give  particulars, 
including  the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of 
discharge  received. 

No. 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


890 


8.  Honors  and  Awards;  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees,  and 
honorary  society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the 
Committee. 

During  my  senior  year  at  Old  Dominion  University  I  was  elected  first  runner  up 
as  Mr.  Troubadour  for  general  achievements.  At  Wake  Forest  I  was  elected 
District  President  of  Phi  Alpha  Delta  Law  Fraternity. 

9.  Bar  Associations;  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related  committees 
or  conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and 
dates  of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

I  was  a  member  of  the  Virginia  Beach  Bar  Association,  Norfolk  and  Portsmouth 
Bar  Association,  Virginia  State  Bar,  Virginia  Bar  Association,  Virginia  Trial 
Lawyers  Association  and  the  American  Bar  Association  while  I  practiced  law. 
I  now  hold  judicial  memberships  in  some  of  the  above  groups.  I  also  previously 
held  a  judicial  membership  in  the  I'anson-Hoffman  American  Inns  of  Court.  I 
am  a  member  of  the  Judicial  Conference  of  Virginia. 

Prior  to  becoming  a  judge,  I  was  a  member  of  the  2nd  District  Grievance 
Committee  of  the  Virginia  State  Bar  from  1983  to  1985. 

10.  Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are  active  in 
lobbying  before  public  bodies.  Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you 
belong. 

At  this  time  I  do  not  belong  to  any  organization.  Some  of  the  bar  groups  listed  in 
question  number  9  may,  on  a  small  scale,  lobby  in  the  Virginia  General  Assembly. 

11.  Court  Admission;  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice, 
with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  membership  lapsed.  Please  explain 
the  reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same  information  for 
administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission  to  practice. 

Upon  passing  the  bar  exam  in  1969, 1  was  admitted  to  practice  in  all  state  courts 
in  Virginia.  I  was  also  admitted  to  practice  before  the  United  States  District 
Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Virginia  on  March  22, 1971,  and  United  States 
Court  of  Appeals,  4th  Circuit,  on  August  15, 1975. 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


891 


12.  Published  Writings;  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books,  articles, 
reports,  or  other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.  Please  supply 
one  copy  of  all  published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.  Also, 
please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law 
or  legal  policy.  If  there  were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily 
available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

I  have  not  written  any  articles  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge.  I  have  made  speeches 
to  Bar  groups,  civic  groups,  high  school  and  college  classes;  however,  I  do  not 
have  copies  of  the  speeches  and  did  not  retain  my  notes. 

13.  Health;  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  your  last 
physical  examination. 

My  health  is  fine.  My  last  complete  physical  examination  was  about  one  year  ago. 
I  had  a  partial  examination  on  March  24, 1997. 

14.  Judicial  Office;  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have  held,  whether 
such  position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of 
each  such  court. 

■Tulv  1985  to  Januarv  1991 

Judge  -  Virginia  Beach  Juvenile  and  Domestic  Relations  District  Court 

I  was  elected  by  the  Virginia  General  Assembly  for  a  full  six  year  term.   This 

court  hears  all  cases  involving  juveniles,  either  as  defendants  or  victims  to 

conclusion.    In  some  cases  this  court  determines  probable  cause  for  felonies. 

Abuse  and  neglect  cases  are  heard  including  termination  of  parental  rights.  The 

court  determines  support  and  custody  matters  not  associated  with  a  divorce. 

January  1991  to  Present 

Judge  -  Virginia  Beach  Circuit  Court. 

I  was  appointed  for  an  interim  statutory  term  to  this  court  by  Governor  L. 

Douglas  Wilder  until  the  next  session  of  the  General  Assembly.  At  that  session 

the  General  Assembly  elected  me  for  a  full  eight  year  term.  The  Circuit  Court 

is  Virginia's  court  of  general  jurisdiction  and  is  a  court  of  record. 

15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  judge,  provide:  (1)  the  following  are  the  ten 
most  significant  opinions  I  have  written.  The  opinions  are  attached.  (2)  a  short 
summary  of  and  citation  for  all  appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were 

Jerome  B.  Friedman 


892 


reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your 
substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  (3)  citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal 
or  state  constitutional  issues,  together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings 
on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were  not  ofTicially  reported,  please 
provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

(1)  the  following  are  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  I  have  written.  The 
opinions  are  attached. 

Wilshire  Credit  Corporation  v.  H.  Webster  Brown 
Docket  No.;  CL96-2103 

Johnny  E.  White  v.  James  L.  Miller  and  Gary  Samuel  White 
Docket  No.:  CH96-3555 

Robert  L.  Johnson.  Executor,  etc..  et  al  v.  George  S.  Walsh  and  A.  Jackson 

Mason 

Docket  No.:  CL96-2077 

Russell  H.  Carter  v.  Food  Lion.  Inc. 
Docket  No.;  CL95-1048 

Pamela  M.  Veit  Administratrix  of  the  Estate  of  Andre  Maurice  Veit  v.  Lakeside 
Construction  Corporation,  et  al 
Docket  No.:  CL94-3087 

Robert  E.  Hudson  v.  First  Union  National  Bank  of  Virginia 
Docket  No.:  CH96-1380 

Charles  W.  Austin.  Jr.  v.  Norris  <&  St.  Clair.  P.C. 
Docket  No.:  CH95-632 

Kiera  Inman  Redd,  et  al  v.  Commonwealth  of  V^irginia 
Docket  No.:  CL95-3248 

Arlene  M.  McCord.  Administratrix  v.  John  C.  Gribble.  d/b/a/  G«&G  Cycle 

Works,  et  al 

Docket  No.:  CL94-900 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


893 


Frances  C.  Hayes  v.  Hamid  Hambaz 
Docket  No.:  CL94-1367 

(2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citation  for  all  appellate  opinions  where  your 
decisions  were  reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant 
criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings; 

Although  I  have  been  affirmed  many  times  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  Virginia  and 
the  Court  of  Appeals  of  Virginia  in  published  and  unpublished  opinions,  the 
following  is  a  brief  description  of  all  reversals  by  these  courts: 

Cohn-Phillips.  Ltd.  v.  Marina  Shores.  Ltd.,  Marina  Shores.  Ltd.  v.  Cohn-Philips. 
Ltd..  246  Va.  222,  435  S.E.  2d  136  (1993).  This  case  involved  a  breach  of  a  lease, 
tortious  interference  and  civil  conspiracy.  The  Supreme  Court  ruled  that  I 
should  have  granted  the  possession  to  Marina  Shores,  Ltd.  because  the  lease  was 
breached  by  Cohn-Phillips,  Ltd.  for  not  paying  rent  on  time.  I  ruled  that  Cohn- 
Phillips,  Ltd.  did  not  breach  the  terms  of  the  lease  when  rent  was  tendered  by 
them  late. 

Curtis  A.  Brandon  v.  Commonwealth  of  Virginia,  22  Va.  App.  82,  467  S.E.  2d  859 
(1996).  When  this  robbery  case  was  first  tried,  during  the  cross-examination  of 
a  prosecution  witness,  the  Commonwealth's  Attorney  strongly  objected  to  a 
question  about  the  witness'  alleged  conviction  of  rape  in  the  Juvenile  and 
Domestic  Relations  District  Court.  The  Commonwealth's  Attorney  indicated  to 
me  that  this  witness  was  very  important  to  the  Commonwealth  and  since  the 
question  had  been  asked  improperly,  he  asked  me  to  declare  a  mistrial.  After 
some  thought,  I  did.  Prior  to  the  next  trial,  the  defendant's  attorney  moved  that 
this  matter  be  dismissed  on  double  jeopardy  grounds.  I  denied  the  motion  and  the 
defendant  was  tried  and  convicted.  The  Court  of  Appeals  reversed  stating  that 
I  should  have  allowed  the  cross-examination  in  order  to  show  bias.  The  Court 
ruled  that  the  record  did  not  support  the  Commonwealth's  claim  of  manifest 
necessity  for  a  mistrial  to  be  declared. 

David  A.  Parker  Enterprises  v.  Templeton.  251  Va.  235,  467  S.E.  2nd  488  (1996). 
The  Supreme  Court,  in  a  5  to  2  opinion,  ruled  that  I  should  not  have  allowed  two 
doctors  to  testify  that  in  their  opinion  a  motor  boat  propeller  was  rotating  when 
the  plaintiff  was  injured. 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


894 


Dan  L.  Harris  v.  Citv  of  Virginia  Beach.  19  Va.  App.  214,  450  S.E.  2d  401  (1994). 
The  defendant  was  driving  a  motor  vehicle  and  was  involved  in  two  accidents 
about  a  mile  apart.  One  police  officer  charged  the  defendant  with  reckless 
driving  and  another  charged  the  defendant  with  driving  under  the  influence.  The 
defendant  was  found  guilty  in  another  court  of  reckless  driving.  I  found  the 
defendant  guilty  of  the  DUI.  The  Court  of  Appeals  reversed  my  conviction  in 
accordance  with  Virginia  Code  Section  19.2-294.1,  stating  that  both  offenses  grew 
out  of  the  same  continuous,  uninterrupted  course  of  operation  of  the  motor 
vehicle. 

E.  Hawlev  Brooks  v.  Carolvn  M.  Rogers.  18  Va.  App.  585,  445  S.E.  2d  725 
(1994).  The  Court  of  Appeals  affirmed  most  of  my  rulings  in  this  cause.  They 
reversed  my  decision  to  impute  some  extra  income  to  Mr.  Brooks  and  remanded 
the  cause  for  redetermination  of  child  support. 

Monette  Hoffman  v.  Joseph  A.  Love.  245  Va.  311,  427  S.E.  2nd  357  (1993).  In 
this  4  to  3,  decision  the  Supreme  Court  ruled  that  although  liability  was  admitted, 
I  should  have  allowed  the  jury  to  decide  whether  the  plaintiff  was  entitled  to 
punitive  damages  based  on  the  defendant's  intoxication. 

Christopher  Associates.  L.P.  v.  J.C.  Sessions.  Jr..  et  al..  245  Va.  18,  425  S.E.  2nd 
795  (1993).  The  Supreme  Court  ruled  that  I  wrongly  construed  a  certain  term 
of  a  real  estate  contract. 

Mary  Ellen  Guilfovie  v.  Joseph  Charles  Guilfovle.  95  Vap.  Unp  0561941  (1995). 
The  Court  of  Appeals  affirmed  many  rulings,  but  reversed  my  lump  sum  spousal 
award  in  favor  of  periodic  spousal  support.  They  also  said  there  should  be  a 
division  of  a  certain  certificate  of  deposit. 

Walter  Lee  Cherry.  Jr.  v.  Commonwealth  of  Virginia.  21  Va.  App.  132,  462  S.E. 
2nd  574  (1995).  The  Court  of  Appeals  affirmed  this  case.  One  judge  dissented 
stating  that  he  believed  the  search  of  the  defendant's  house  exceeded  the  scope  of 
the  anticipatory  search  warrant  and  was  unreasonable  under  the  Fourth 
Amendment. 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


895 


(3)  citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues, 
together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of 
the  opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the 
opinions. 

Curtis  A.  Brandon  v.  Commonwealth  of  Virginia.  22  Va.  App.  82,  467  S.E.  2d. 
859  (1996). 

16.  Public  Office;  State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you  have  held,  other  than 
judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were 
elected  or  appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies  for 
elective  public  office. 

None. 

17.  Legal  Career: 

a.         Describe    chronologically   your    law    practice   and    experience    after 
graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name  of  the 
judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

No. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addressed  and  dates; 
No. 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices,  companies  or 
governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected,  and  the 
nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 

9/70  to  1/71  -  Associate  in  Law  Firm 

Steingold  &  Steingold 

Norfolk,  VA  * 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


896 


1/71  to  5/71  -  Associate  in  Law  Firm 
Shapero,  Levine  &  Abraham 
Norfolk,  VA 

5/71  to  12/71  -  Associate  in  Law  Firm 
Shapero  &  Levine 
Norfolk,  VA 

1/72  to  1/74  -  Partner  in  Law  Firm 
Shapero,  Levine  &  Friedman 
Norfolk,  VA 

1/74  to  12/82  -  Partner  in  Law  Firm 
Levine  &  Friedman 
Virginia  Beach,  VA 

1/83  to  6/85  -  Partner  in  Law  Firm 
Pender  &  Coward 
Virginia  Beach,  VA 

6/85  to  1/91  -  Judge.  Juvenile  &  Domestic  Relations  District  Court 
Juvenile  &  Domestic  Relations  District  Court 
Virginia  Beach,  VA 

1/91  to  Present  -  Circuit  Court  Judge 
Circuit  Court  Judges'  Office 
Virginia  Beach,  VA 

What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice,  dividing 
it  into  period  with  dates  if  its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 

General  practice  with  an  emphasis  in  civil  litigation  (plaintiff  and 
defense),  real  estate,  domestic  relations,  criminal,  collections, 
bankruptcy. 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


897 


2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the  areas,  if  any, 
in  which  you  have  specialized. 

I  represented  some  insurance  companies  such  as  Old  Republic 
Insurance  Company  and  The  Hartford  and  some  small 
corporations.  Most  clients  were  average  people  in  the  general 
practice  of  law. 

1.  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at  all?  If 
the  frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each 
such  variance,  giving  dates. 

Generally,  I  appeared  in  court  two  to  three  days  a  week. 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts; 
Approximately  10% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record; 

Approximately  45%  .e, , 

(c)  other  courts. 
Approximately  45% 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil; 
80% 

(b)  criminal; 
15% 

Jerome  B.  Friedman 


898 


(c)       other; 
5% 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to  verdict  or 
judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

Since  I  have  been  a  judge  for  12  years  this  is  difficult  to  answer. 
My  best  recollection  over  the  years  is  about  50  cases,  mostly  as  chief 
counsel. 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  were: 

(a)  jury; 

10% 

(b)  non-jury. 

90% 

18.  Litigation;  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you 
personally  handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket 
number  and  date  if  unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of 
each  case.  Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail 
the  nature  of  your  participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the 
case.  Also  state  as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  of  judges  before 
whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co- 
counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


899 


Herbert  Cherry  v.  Paul  Robinett  and  Portsmouth  General  Hospital 
Portsmouth  Circuit  Court 
Docket  No.:  L79-956  (1979) 
Presiding  Judge:  Lester  E.  Schlitz 

This  was  a  serious  and  difficult  medical  malpractice  case.  I  filed 
suit  against  a  very  prominent  surgeon  and  the  hospital.  The 
negligence  alleged  occurred  during  and  after  surgery  to  remove  a 
tumor  from  Mrs.  Cherry's  thyroid  gland.  There  was  a  protracted 
medical  malpractice  review  panel  hearing  and  we  prevailed. 
Shortly  before  trial  this  case  was  settled  for  $400,000.00.  Mrs. 
Cherry  remained  in  a  coma  until  she  died  several  months  after  the 
settlement.  I  was  lead  counsel  for  the  plaintiff  and  co-counsel  was 
Glenn  McClanan,  Esquire,  Kempsville  Professional  Center,  425 
South  Witchduck  Road,  Virginia  Beach,  VA  23462,  (757)  497-9451. 
Opposing  counsel  was  Thomas  J.  Harlan,  Jr.,  Esquire,  1200 
Dominion  Tower,  999  Waterside  Drive,  Norfolk,  VA  23510.  His 
phone  number  is  (757)  625-8300. 

Robert  James  Drury  v.  Catherine  C.  Drury 

Virginia  Beach  Circuit  Court 

In  Chancery  No.:  CH84-2198:  Ended  #  :  C2322-84  (1984) 

Presiding  Judge:  Kenneth  N.  Whitehurst,  Jr. 

Commissioner  in  Chancery;     Edward  T.  Caton,  P.  O.  Box  6, 

Virginia  Beach,  VA  23458,  (757)  428-4681 

This  was  an  interesting  and  important  divorce  case  because  it  was 

probably  the  first  equitable  distribution  case  in  Virginia  Beach. 

There  were  no  legal  precedents  in  Virginia  at  that  time  and  I  had 

to  rely  mostly  on  New  Jersey  law.  The  court  did  not  agree  with  my 

argument  concerning  equitable  distribution.  My  client,  Mr.  Drury, 

did  not  want  to  appeal  the  ruling.  Several  years  later  the  statute 

was  changed  and  with  the  change  we  would  have  prevailed.    The 

case  was   heard   by  the  Commissioner   in   Chancery   and   the 

exceptions  which  were  filed  to  the  Commissioner's  Report  were 

heard  by  Judge  Whitehurst.     Opposing  counsel  was  Glenn  R. 

Croshaw,  Esquire,  One  Columbus  Center,  Suite  1010,  Virginia 

Beach,  VA  23466,  (757)  628-5625.  I  was  the  only  counsel  for  Mr. 

Drury. 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


900 


Commonwealth  v.  Danny  Lea 
Norfolk  Circuit  Court 
Docket  No.:  F77-1198  (1977) 
Presiding  Judge:  Alfred  W.  Whltehurst 

This  was  a  high  profile  murder  case.  The  defendant  and  some 
others  killed  a  man  on  a  bridge  and  threw  him  into  the  water.  After 
several  days  of  trial,  the  jury  convicted  the  defendant  of  second 
degree  murder  and  not  first  degree  murder.  We  were  able  to  prove 
that  the  defendant  was  intoxicated  and  not  capable  of 
premeditation.  I  was  sole  counsel  for  Mr,  Lea.  He  thought  his 
conviction  for  second  degree  murder  was  a  victory.  Representing 
the  Commonwealth  of  Virginia  was  Lawrence  Lawless  who  is  now 
a  General  District  Court  Judge  in  Norfolk,  811  East  City  Hall 
Avenue,  Norfolk,  Virginia  23510,  (757)  664-2583. 

Mildred    S.    Bales,    in    her    own     right.    Mildred     S.    Bales. 
Administratrix  of  the  Estate  of  Benny  E.  Bales  v.  Old  Republic  Life 
Insurance  Company 
Hampton  Circuit  Court 
Docket  No.;    9500(1971) 
Presiding  Judge:  Nelson  T.  Overton 

This  was  an  emotional  trial  involving  litigation  over  the  proceeds  of 
a  group  mortgage  life  insurance  policy  against  my  client.  Old 
Republic  Life  Insurance  Company.  The  plaintiff  was  the  wife  of  the 
decedent.  We  alleged  that  Mr.  Bales,  a  police  officer,  falsely 
answered  questions  of  a  material  nature  relating  to  his  health.  This 
case  was  important  because  the  Supreme  Court  of  Virginia  clarified 
the  issue  of  our  proper  burden  of  proof.  We  did  not  prevail  at  trial, 
but  the  Supreme  Court  of  Virginia  reversed  and  remanded  the  case 
because  the  judge  improperly  instructed  the  jury  on  the  burden  of 
proof.  My  partner  at  the  time,  William  Shapero,  and  I  tried  the 
case.  When  we  argued  the  case  before  the  Virginia  Supreme 
Court,  Mr.  Shapero  argued  first  and  I  made  the  rebuttal  argument. 
Mr.  Shapero  later  became  a  judge  in  the  Norfolk  General  District 
Court  and  is  now  retired  and  lives  in  Florida.  His  address  is  2701 
N.  Ocean  Boulevard,  Apt.  E-406,  Boca  Raton,  Florida  33431,  and 
his  phone  number  is  (561)  391-5435.  Opposing  counsel  was 
George  C.  Overman,  Esquire,  739  Thimble  Shoals  Boulevard,  Suite 

Jerome  B.  Friedman 


901 


507,  Newport  News,  VA  23606,  (757)  873-1188.  The  Virginia 
Supreme  Court  cite  is.  Old  Republic  Life  Insurance  Company  v. 
Mildred  S.  Bales,  etc..  et  al.  213  Va.  771  (1973). 

James  M.  Walker.  Lenore  Walker.  Pealage  P.  Walker.  IV.  v.  Grace 
Walker  Schmucker 
Norfolk  Circuit  Court 

Docket  No.:  C80-1180;  Ended  U:  C1350-81  (1980) 
Presiding  Judge;  Thomas  R.  McNamara 
My  client  was  the  trustee  of  a  testamentary  trust  created  by  her 
mother.  The  remaindermen  of  the  trust  filed  a  bill  for  declaratory 
judgment  alleging  the  trust  purposes  had  been  accomplished  and 
asked  that  the  trust  be  terminated  and  the  trust  property  be 
delivered  to  them.  My  client  asserted  that  the  trust  should  not  be 
terminated.  A  major  issue  in  this  case  was  whether  this  trust  was 
active  or  passive.  We  lost  this  case  at  trial  but  successfully  appealed 
and  the  Supreme  Court  of  Virginia  reversed  the  trial  court  and 
entered  final  judgment  for  my  client.  I  was  the  only  counsel  for  my 
client.  Opposing  counsel  was  Stanley  G.  Bryan,  Esquire,  801  S. 
South  George  Washington  Highway,  Chesapeake,  Virginia  23323. 
The  Virginia  Supreme  Court  cite  is,  Grace  Walker  Schmucker  v. 
Pealage  P.  Walker.  IV.  et  al.  226  Va.  582  (1984). 

James  E.  &  Janet  Walker  v.  Chester  &  Gloria  Gifford 
United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Virginia 
Docket  No.:  C/A  78-344-N  (1978) 
Presiding  Judge:  J.  Calvitt  Clarke,  Jr. 

This  was  a  case  filed  under  Title  42  U.S.C.  §  1982,  Discrimination 
under  the  Federal  Fair  Housing  Law.  My  clients  were  black  and 
attempted  to  rent  a  house  from  the  defendants  who  were  well  known 
business  people  in  the  area.  The  evidence  at  trial  was  that  once  the 
defendants  determined  that  my  clients  were  black,  they  declined  to 
rent  their  house  to  them.  At  one  point,  there  was  a  third  party 
defendant,  Woodard  Realty  Company,  that  was  dismissed  from  the 
case  prior  to  trial.  This  case  was  a  bench  trial  and  the  judge  found 
for  plaintiff.  The  plaintiff  was  awarded  compensatory  damages  in 
the  amount  of  $2,000.00,  punitive  damages  in  the  amount  of 
$1,000.00,  attorney's  fees  in  the  amount  of  $1,000.00,  and  all 
taxable  costs.  Although  this  was  not  a  large  verdict,  the  issues  were 

Jerome  B.  Friedman 


902 


very  significant.  I  was  sole  counsel  for  the  plaintiffs.  Counsel  for 
the  Giffords  was  originally  Robert  G.  Jones,  Esquire,  whose  address 
is  128  South  Lynnhaven  Road,  Suite  100,  Virginia  Beach,  Virginia 
23452,  and  his  phone  number  is  (757)  486-0333.  Mr.  Jones 
withdrew  from  the  case  and  the  Giffords  were  represented  at  trial 
by  Michael  S.  Weisberg,  Esquire,  whose  address  is  101  West  Plume 
Street,  Suite  5,  Norfolk,  Virginia  23510  and  his  phone  number  is 
(757)  622-7740. 

John  W.  Gee  v.  City  of  Norfolk,  a  municipal  corporation.  H.  I. 
Watkins.  W.I.  Moore.  Dwight  Minyard  and  Charles  D.  Grant. 
Chief  of  Police 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Virginia 
Docket  No.;  CA82-753  -  N  (1982) 
Presiding  Judge;  Walter  E.  Hoffman 

This  was  a  police  brutality  suit  filed  under  Title  42  U.S.C.  §  1983. 
The  case  was  a  two-day  jury  trial.  The  jury  found  in  favor  of  the 
defendants.  Prior  to  trial  on  December  22,  1982,  defendants.  City 
of  Norfolk  and  Charles  D.  Grant,  Chief  of  Police,  were  dismissed 
from  the  case  by  consent  order.  My  client  was  hurt  rather 
seriously;  however,  liability  was  difficult  to  prove.  We  felt  it  was 
important  that  the  judge  allow  the  issues  to  go  to  the  jury,  but 
unfortunately  their  verdict  was  for  the  defendant.  I  was  sole 
counsel  for  the  plaintiff.  Philip  R.  Trapani,  Esquire,  was  the 
attorney  for  all  of  the  defendants.  His  address  is  Office  of  the  City 
Attorney,  908  City  Hall  Building,  Norfolk,  VA  23510,  and  his 
telephone  number  is  (757)  664-4529 

Susan  Adams  v.  United  States  of  America 

United  States  District  Court  of  the  Eastern  District  of  Virginia 

Docket  No.:  CA79-606-N  (1979) 

Presiding  Judge;  J.  Calvitt  Clarke,  Jr. 

This  was  a  suit  filed  under  Title  28  U.S.C.  §  2671,  the  Federal  Tort 

Claims  Act.  It  was  a  personal  injury  suit  which  alleged  negligence 

during  surgery.    The  case  never  went  to  trial.    A  stipulation  for 

compromise  settlement  was  presented  to  the  Court  on  February  26, 

1980,  and  an  order  dismissing  the  case  based  on  the  stipulation  was 

entered  on  April  3,  1980.  I  was  sole  counsel  for  the  plaintiff  in  the 

case.  The  U.  S.  Attorney,  Justin  W.  Williams,  and  Assistant  U.  S. 

Jerome  B.  Friedman 


903 


Attorney  John  F.  Kane  represented  the  defendant.  The  address  for 
the  U.  S.  Attorney's  Office  is  101  West  Main  Street,  World  Trade 
Center,  Suite  8000,  Norfolk,  Virginia  23510,  and  the  phone  number 
is  (757)  441-6331.  However,  Justin  W.  Williams  is  now  with  the 
U.S.  Attorney's  Office  in  Alexandria.  Misaddress  is  2100  Jamieson 
Avenue,  Alexandria,  Virginia  22314,  and  his  phone  number  is  (703) 
299-3700. 

William  Charles  Simpson,  individually  and  trading  as  Simpson 
Home  Improvement  Co.  v.  Clarence  Love 
Virginia  Beach  Circuit  Court 
Docket  No.;  16932  Ended  No.:  20145  (1971) 
Presiding  Judge:  George  W.  Vakos 

This  was  a  breach  of  contract  case.  The  plaintiff  was  seeking  as 
damages  the  amount  owed  on  the  contract  for  home  improvement 
work  performed  at  the  defendant's  residence.  The  defendant  filed 
a  counterclaim  claiming  that  plaintiff  failed  to  complete  such  work 
and  sums  of  money  were  expended  to  correct  defective  work  that 
had  been  performed.  The  case  was  tried  before  a  jury  and  the  jury 
found  in  favor  of  the  defendant  on  the  plaintiffs  motion  for 
judgment,  and  found  in  favor  of  the  plaintiff  on  the  defendant's 
counterclaim.  Neither  side  received  any  monetary  award.  When 
we  tried  to  settle  this  case,  Ms.  Brydges  and  I  recommended  to  our 
clients  exactly  what  the  jury  ultimately  did.  A  significant  issue 
arose  in  this  two-to-three  day  trial  involving  possible  heart 
problems  incurred  by  the  defendant  because  of  the  aggravation  he 
had  during  the  time  the  parties  were  having  their  problems. 
Originally,  Aldine  J.  Coffman,  Jr.,  Esquire,  represented  the 
plaintiff.  I  was  substituted  as  counsel  and  solely  represented  the 
plaintiff  at  trial.  Janet  B.  Brydges,  Esquire,  represented  the 
defendant.  Her  address  is  1369  Laskin  Road,  Virginia  Beach,  VA 
23451,  and  her  phone  number  is  (757)  428-6021. 

Robert  M.  Cole  v.  Hardees  Food  Systems.  Inc. 

Virginia  Beach  Circuit  Court 

Docket  No.:  L-4479;  Ended  No.;  23431  (1971) 

Presiding  Judge:  George  W.  Vakos 

Mr.  Cole  alleged  that  his  supervisors  at  Hardees  in  South  Carolina 

defamed  him  when  they  fired  him  for  taking  money  without  their 

Jerome  B.  Friedman 


904 


permission  while  he  was  an  employee.  There  was  extensive 
discovery.  This  case  was  very  important  to  my  client  because  of  the 
potential  ramifications  if  they  lost  including  adverse  publicity.  If  I 
recall  correctly,  this  case  was  settled  just  prior  to  trial  for  a  very 
small  sum  for  economic  reasons.  I  was  sole  counsel  for  Hardees. 
Glenn  B.  McClanan,  Esquire,  was  counsel  for  plaintiff.  His  address 
is  425  South  Witchduck  Road,  Virginia  Beach,  Virginia  23462-3614. 
His  phone  number  is  (757)  497-9451. 

Please  find  listed  below  the  names,  addresses  and  phone  numbers  of  12  members 
of  the  legal  community  who  have  had  recent  contact  with  me. 

Mary  M.  Kellam,  Esquire 
Slipow,  Robusto  &  Kellam,  P.C. 
2625  Princess  Anne  Road 
P.  O.  Box  6304 
Virginia  Beach,  VA  23456 
(757)  427-5094 

Glenn  R.  Croshaw,  Esquire 
Willcox  &  Savage,  P.C. 
One  Columbus  Center,  Suite  1010 
Virginia  Beach,  VA  23466-1888 
(757)  628-5625 

Moody  E.  Stallings,  Jr.,  Esquire 
Stallings  &  Richardson 
2101  Parks  Avenue 
Suite  801,  Pavilion  Center 
Virginia  Beach,  VA  23451 
(757)  422-4700 

Richard  G.  Brydges,  Esquire 
Brydges,  Mahan  &  O'Brien,  P.C. 
1369  Laskin  Road 
Virginia  Beach,  VA  23451 
(757)428-6021 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


905 


John  Franklin,  III,  Esquire 
Taylor  &  Walker,  P.C. 
1300  First  Virginia  Tower 
555  Main  Street 
Norfolk,  VA  23514 
(757)  625-7300 

Hunter  W.  Sims,  Jr.,  Esquire 
Kaufman  &  Canoles,  P.C. 
One  Commercial  Place 
P.  O.  Box  3037 
Norfolk,  VA  23514 
(757)  624-3272 

Jerrauld  C.  Jones,  Esquire 
Jones  &  Carlson 
Suite  300,  125  St.  Paul's  Blvd. 
Norfolk,  VA  23510-2708 
(757)  627-6568 

James  O.  Broccoletti,  Esquire 
Zoby  &  Broccoletti,  P.C. 
6663  Stoney  Point  South 
Norfolk,  VA  23502 
(757)  466-0750 

Robert  J.  Humphreys,  Esquire 
Commonwealth's  Attorney 
2305  Judicial  Blvd.,  BIdg.  lOB 
Second  Floor,  Judicial  Center 
Virginia  Beach,  VA  23456 
(757)  427-8978 

Peter  T.  Legler,  Esquire 
Office  of  the  Public  Defender 
Municipal  Center 
Virginia  Beach,  VA  23456 
(757)  427-4657 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


906 


Fay  F.  Spence,  Esquire 
Spence  &  Whitlow 
1630  Dominion  Tower 
999  Waterside  Drive 
Norfolk,  VA  23510 
(757)  624-9649 

Charles  R.  Hofheimer,  Esquire 
Charles  R.  Hofheimer,  P.C. 
Ocean  Plaza  Corporate  Center 
303  34th  Street,  Suite  8 
Virginia  Beach,  VA  23451 
(757)  425-5200 

19.  Legal  Activities;  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have  pursued, 
including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that 
did  not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this 
question,  please  omit  any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege 
(unless  privilege  has  been  waived). 

I  handled  some  interesting  social  security  appeals,  one  involving  carpel  tunnel 
syndrome,  and  we  prevailed.  I  have  also  handled  over  100  real  estate  closings, 
some  of  which  were  very  unusual  and  time  consuming.  In  addition,  there  were 
many  interesting  and  complicated  divorce  matters  and  most  settled  without 
contested  hearings.  While  in  practice  I  served  on  the  Virginia  State  Bar's  Second 
District  grievance  committee. 

I  was  Chief  Judge  for  four  years  in  the  Juvenile  and  Domestic  Relations  District 
Court.  While  I  was  Chief  Judge  I  implemented  a  CASA  program,  a  driving 
school  for  juveniles  and  their  parents,  and  a  street  law  program.  I  have  been 
Chief  Judge  of  the  Circuit  Court  since  July  1,  1994.  The  Chief  Judge  is 
responsible  for  handling  numerous  administrative  matters,  dealing  with  local 
governing  bodies,  budgets,  assignments  of  cases  and  some  personnel  matters. 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


907 

QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 

II.  FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred  income 
arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits 
which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  clients,  or 
customers.  Please  describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated 
in  the  future  for  any  financial  or  business  interest. 

Under  the  JRS  Retirement  System,  if  I  continued  In  my  present  position,  it  is 
estimated  that  my  retirement  benefits  on  February  1,  1999  would  be 
approximately  $4,850.00  per  month.  Early  retirement  benefits  can  be  collected 
beginning  at  age  55.  At  this  time,  if  confirmed  by  the  Senate,  I  do  not  know 
whether  I  will  request  early  benefits  upon  reaching  age  55. 

Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including  the 
procedure  you  will  follow  in  determining  these  area  of  concern.  Identify  the 
categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present 
potential  conflicts-of-interest  during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which 
you  have  been  nominated. 

As  far  as  I  know  there  should  be  no  conflict  of  interest.  I  have  always  followed 
the  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  and  will  continue  to  do  so. 


3.  Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside 
employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court? 
If  so,  explain. 

No. 

4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  that  calendar  year 
preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all 
salaries,  fees,  dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and 
other  items  exceeding  $500.00  or  more.  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the 
financial  disclosure  report  required  by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978, 
may  be  substituted  here.) 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


908 


My  income  and  my  wife's  income  and  any  interest  received  from  savings  account 
and  bonds  are  the  sources  of  all  income  received.  See  attached  Financial 
Disclosure  Report. 

Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail  (Add 
schedules  as  called  for). 

See  Attached  Statement. 

Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign?  If  so, 
please  identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of 
the  campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

I  worked  at  the  polls  for  one  or  two  local  political  candidates  approximately  IS 
years  ago.  I  have  never  been  on  anyone's  campaign  staff.  Prior  to  becoming  a 
judge,  I  probably  have  not  contributed  more  than  $300.00  to  all  candidates  I 
supported.  I  have  not  been  involved  in  politics  at  all  since  becoming  a  judge. 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


909 

QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 
III.  GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

1.  An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's  Code 
of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  serving 
the  disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities, 
listing  specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

While  practicing  law  I  always  was  on  various  court  appointed  lists  to  represent 
indigent  defendants.  I  was  a  cub  scout  den  leader  for  two  years.  I  was  a  member 
of  the  Rotary  Club  for  several  years.  I  served  on  the  Board  of  Directors  for 
Temple  Israel  for  many  years  and  the  Hebrew  Academy  of  Tidewater  as  Vice 
President.  While  a  judge  in  Juvenile  and  Domestic  Relations  District  Court,  I 
was  a  mentor  in  a  program  established  by  the  school  system  for  three  years. 

2.  The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct 
states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization 
that  invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex  or  religion.  Do  you 
currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged  to  any  organization  which  discriminates  — 
through  either  formal  membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation 
of  membership  policies?  If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.  What  you  have 
done  to  try  to  change  these  policies? 

I  have  never  belonged  to  any  such  organizations.  For  several  years  while  I 
practiced  law  and  until  approximately  1986, 1  was  a  member  of  the  Rotary  Club. 
At  that  time  only  males  were  allowed  membership.  Several  years  after  I  resigned 
from  the  club,  the  Rotary  Club  began  admitting  females. 

3.  Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates  for 
nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination? 
Please  describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from 
beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and 
Interviews  in  which  you  participated). 

Senator  Robb  selected  a  screening  committee  and  I,  along  with  others,  appeared 
before  it  in  January,  1997.  I  was  one  of  three  recommended.  The  Senator 
arrived  at  a  list  of  five  candidates  and  I  was  included.  The  Norfolk-Portsmouth 

Jerome  B.  Friedman 


910 


Bar  Association  rated  me  and  two  others  as  "highly  qualified."  (Note:  This  bar 
association  has  about  1500  members).  I  was  recommended  by  the  Virginia  Bar 
Association,  the  Virginia  Trial  Lawyers  Association,  and  the  Virginia  Women's 
Attorneys  Association.  The  most  important  bar  recommendation  was  from  the 
Virginia  State  Bar.  The  five  candidates  were  interviewed  by  and  entire 
committee  in  February  1997.  I,  along  with  two  others,  were  given  their  highest 
endorsement  On  March  15, 1997, 1  had  a  very  thorough  interview  with  Senator 
Robb  in  Washington  before  he  recommended  me.  In  addition,  the  Department 
of  Justice,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation  and  the  American  Bar  Association 
have  completed  their  respective  evaluations  concerning  my  candidacy.  On  June 
10, 1997, 1  had  a  meeting  with  Senator  John  W.  Warner  in  Washington. 

4.  Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee 
discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that 
could  reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue, 
or  questions?  If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

No. 

5.  Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  Judiciary  within  the  Federal  government,  and  within 
society  generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent 
years.  It  has  become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that 
alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other 
branches  and  levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than 
grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a 
vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad 
classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duties 
upon  governments  and  society; 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


911 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional 
requirements  such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions 
in  the  manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities. 

A  judge  has  to  make  many  difficult  decisions.  It  can  be  especially  difHcult  when 
the  law,  as  applied  to  a  particular  state  of  facts,  results  in  what  appears  to  be  a 
harsh  or  unfair  result.  It  is  at  those  times  the  temptation  can  arise  to  "bend"  or 
"creatively  interpret"  the  law  in  order  to  achieve  a  more  palatable  result.  It  is 
my  firmly  held  belief  that  when  a  judge  gives  into  such  a  temptation,  he  crosses 
the  line  from  being  a  judge  (whose  job  it  is  to  apply  the  law)  to  becoming  a 
legislator  (whose  job  it  is  to  create  the  law). 

After  12  years  as  a  judge,  I  am  well  aware  that  sometimes  it  is  difficult  to 
interpret  what  the  law  is  or  the  meaning  of  the  statutes.  That  is  when  the  trial 
court  judge  must  rely  on  well-established  rules  of  statutory  construction  and  stare 
decisis,  always  with  the  goal  of  carrying  out  the  intention  of  the  legislature.  It  is 
never  proper  for  a  judge  to  use  a  case  before  him  to  advance  his  own  personal 
social  agenda. 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


912 


nNANOAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORTH 


Provide  a  complete,  current  financial  net  worth  statement  which  itemizes  in  detail  all  assets  (including  bank  accounts,  real 
estate,  securities,  trusts,  investments,  and  other  financial  holdings)  all  liabilities  (including  debts,  mortgages,  loans,  and  other 
financial  obligations)  of  yourself,  your  spouse,  and  other  immediate  members  of  your  household. 


ASSETS 


LIABILITIES 


Cash  on  hand  and  in  banks 


Notes  payable  to  banks  -  secured 


U.S.  Government  securities  -  add 
schedule  -  see  schedule  "A" 


Notes  payable  to  banks  - 
unsecured 


Listed  securities  -  add  schedule 


Notes  payable  to  relatives 


Unlisted  securities  -  add  schedule 


Notes  payable  to  others 


Accounts  and  notes  receivable 


Accounts  and  biUs  due 


Due  from  relatives  and  friends 


Unpaid  Income  tax 


Due  from  others 


Other  unpaid  tax  and  interest 


Real  estate  mortgages  payable  - 
add  schedule  -  see  schedule  **E** 


Real  estate  owned  -  add  schedule  - 
see  schedule  "B" 


260,000 


Chattel  mortgages  and  other  liens 
payable 


Real  estate  mortgages  receivable 


Other  debts  -  itemize: 


Autos  and  other  personal  property 
-  approximately 


Pledge  to  Temple  Israel 


4,000 


Cash  value  -  life  insurance  - 
approximately 


5,000 


Balance  due  on  leased  automobile 
-  approximately 


Other  assets  -  itemize:  see  schedule 
"C 


215,034 


Balance  due  on  auto  and  home 
insurance 


See  schedule  "D" 


Pledge  due  United  Jewish 
Federation 


Total  Uabilities 


232,420 


329,114 


561,534 


Total  liabilities  and  net  worth 


561,534 


CONTINGENT  UABfLITIES 


GENERAL  INFORMATION 


As  endorser,  comaker  or 
guarantor 


Are  any  assets  pledges?  (Add 
schedule) 


On  lease  or  contracts 


Are  you  a  defendant  in  any  suits 
or  legal  actions? 


Legal  claims 


Have  you  ever  taken  bankruptcy? 


Proviston  for  Federal  Income  Tax 


Other  special  debt 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


913 


QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIA!.  NOMINEES 
FINANCIAL  STATEMENT  -  NET  WORTH 

SCHEDULE  A 

U.  S.  Savings  Bonds  $3,000.00 

U.  S.  Treasury  Note  -  My  wife  just 

purchased  at  auction  in  May,  1997.  $10,000.00 


$13,000.00 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


914 


QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  .nJDICIAL  NOMINEES 
FINANCIAL  STATEMENT  -  NET  WORTH 

SCHEDULE  B 

Personal  residence  owned  with 

my  wife  -  approximate  value  $260,000.00 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


915 

\ 

QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 
FINANCIAL  STATEMENT  -  NET  WORTH 

SCHEDULE  r 

Checking  Account  jointly  owned  with 

my  mother  (her  funds)at  Crestar  Bank  $4,800.00 

Money  Market  account  jointly  owned  with 

my  mother  (her  funds)  at  BB«&T  $3,300.00 

Two  Certificates  of  Deposit  jointly  owned  with 

my  mother  (her  funds)  at  Life  Savings  $45,000.00 

Checking  Account  jointly  owned  with  my 

mother-in-law,  Cenit  Bank  $9,900.00 

Money  Market  Account  jointly  owned  with 

my  mother-in-law  (her  funds)  $19,000.00 

Judicial  Checking  Account  at  Signet  Bank. 

Only  to  be  used  for  judicial  purposes,  not  for 

personal  use.  $6,800.00 

Certificate  of  Deposit  at  Cenit  Bank  owned 

jointly  with  my  mother-in-law, 

(her  funds)  and  my  wife.  $39,265.00 

Certificate  of  Deposit  jointly  owned  by  my 

mother-in-law,  (her  funds)  and 

my  wife.  $65,912.00 

Two  Money  Market  Accounts  at  Cenit  Bank 
jointly  owned  by  my  wife  and  mother-in-law, 

(her  funds).  $3,170.00 

$7,695.00 

Money  Market  Account  at  Signet  Bank  jointly 

owned  by  my  wife  and  mother-in-law,  her  funds  $10.192.00 

Total  $215,034.00 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


916 


QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 
FINANCIAL  STATEMENT  -  NET  WORTH 

SCHEDULE  D 

Under  the  JRS  Retirement  System  it  is  estimated  that  my  retirement  benefits  on 
February  1, 1999  would  be  approximately  $4,850.00  per  month. 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


917 


QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 
FINANCIAL  STATEMENT  -  NET  WORTH 

SCHEDULE  E 

Mortgage  on  residence  with 

GE  Capital  Mortgage  Services  Approximately  $172,000,00 


Jerome  B.  Friedman 


NOMINATIONS  OF  JAMES  S.  WARE  (U.S.  CIR- 
CUIT JUDGE);  LYNN  S.  ADELMAN,  CHARLES 
R.  BREYER,  FRANK  C.  DAMRELL,  JR.,  MAR- 
TIN J.  JENKINS,  MICHAEL  P.  McCUSKEY, 
G.  PATRICK  MURPHY,  AND  FREDERICA 
MASSIAH-JACKSON  (U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGES) 


WEDNESDAY,  OCTOBER  29,  1997 

U.S.  Senate, 
Committee  on  the  Judiciary, 

Washington,  DC. 
The  committee  met,  pursuant  to  notice,  at  2:02  p.m.,  in  room 
SD-226,  Dirksen  Senate  Office  Building,  Hon.  Jon  Kyi  presiding. 
Also  present:  Senators  Specter,  DeWine,  Sessions,  Kohl,  Fein- 
stein,  Feingold,  and  Durbin. 

OPENING  STATEMENT  OF  HON.  JON  KYL,  A  U.S.  SENATOR 
FROM  THE  STATE  OF  ARIZONA 

Senator  Kyl.  Good  afternoon.  This  Senate  Committee  on  the  Ju- 
diciary judicial  nominations  hearing  will  now  begin. 

In  order  to  expedite  the  process — we  have  a  lot  of  candidates 
today — we  will  follow  a  procedure  which  will  divide  our  witnesses 
into  three  panels.  The  first  panel  will  be  Members  of  the  Senate 
and  House  who  will  introduce  candidates.  Sometimes  in  the  past, 
we  have  had  the  candidates  come  forward  at  the  same  time.  We 
will  not  do  that  this  afternoon.  We  will  hear  the  Members  of  the 
House  and  Senate  first. 

Then  the  second  panel  will  be  the  bulk  of  the  candidates  who  will 
come  forward  and  be  seated  at  the  table  and  I  will  administer  the 
oath  at  that  time  to  all  of  the  candidates  and  then  proceed  to  ask 
questions  seriatim.  In  that  second  panel,  we  will  begin  with  a 
nominee  for  circuit  court.  The  third  panel  will  do  the  same  with 
nominees  for  the  district  court,  and  the  fourth  panel  will  consider 
a  district  court  nominee  who  was  carried  over  from  a  hearing  yes- 
terday. 

We  will  necessarily,  because  of  the  presence  of  certain  Senators 
and  absence,  take  these  nominees  not  necessarily  in  any  particular 
order  but  as  the  Members  of  the  House  and  Senate  appear. 

I  might  also  indicate  to  the  people  who  are  in  the  audience  that 
we  might  be  able  to  use  a  little  judicial  help  here  on  the  Senate 
floor.  We  are  in  a  bit  of  a  procedural  snafu  at  the  moment  and  I 
do  not  expect  that  we  will  have  any  votes,  but  there  will  be  Sen- 

(919) 


920 

ators  missing  as  a  result  of  what  is  occurring  and  there  are  also 
some  Senators  who  are  occupied  elsewhere. 

Finally,  in  order  to  conclude  our  hearing  today  in  an  expedited 
way,  I  would  ask  all  witnesses  to  be  very  brief,  if  you  would, 
please.  I  learned  very  early  on  in  my  judicial  career  that  when  you 
are  ahead,  the  best  thing  to  do  is  to  keep  it  short  and  sit  down. 
I  think  all  of  these  witnesses,  by  virtue  of  their  qualifications,  are 
certainly  ahead  by  virtue  of  their  being  here  today  and  so  I  would 
urge  all  the  witnesses  to  be  brief  in  their  presentations. 

We  have  Senators  from  some  of  the  States  who  are  present  here, 
and  since  both  Senators  from  Wisconsin  are  here,  let  me  call  upon 
Senator  Kohl  and  Senator  Feingold  to  make  their  introduction  here 
first. 

Senator  Kohl. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  HERBERT  KOHL,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  WISCONSIN 

Senator  KOHL.  Senator  Kyi,  Mr.  Chairman,  let  me  thank  you  for 
holding  this  hearing  so  promptly  and  let  me  take  this  opportunity 
to  tell  you  why  Lynn  Adelman,  the  President's  nominee  for  the 
U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin,  is  such 
a  fine  choice  to  fill  the  vacancy  created  when  Judge  Curran  took 
senior  status. 

First,  Lynn  Adelman  has  a  record  of  unquestioned  skill  and  un- 
equaled  experience  in  his  30  years  of  practice.  His  dedication,  his 
hard  work,  and  his  intelligence  have  been  displayed  in  both  civil 
and  criminal  cases  before  the  Wisconsin  Supreme  Court  and  before 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States. 

Second,  Lynn  Adelman  has  spent  a  life  devoted  to  public  service. 
He  has  dedicated  a  great  deal  of  his  professional  time  to  disadvan- 
taged clients,  and  rather  than  pursue  his  private  practice  full  time, 
he  has  simultaneously  served  in  public  office.  As  a  State  senator 
for  20  years,  much  of  the  time  serving  as  chairman  of  the  Judiciary 
Committee,  Adelman  has  championed  the  causes  of  families,  crime 
victims,  and  government  accountability. 

Of  course,  a  few  have  suggested  that  legislators  generally  should 
not  be  trusted  to  serve  as  judges  or  that  Mr.  Adelman,  who  has  al- 
ways held  strong  opinions,  will  not  be  able  to  resist  making  law 
from  the  bench.  In  fact,  precisely  the  opposite  is  true.  Like  so  many 
former  elected  officials  who  have  proved  themselves  worthy  Federal 
judges,  people  like  Charles  Evans  Hughes,  William  Howard  Taft, 
and  the  current  District  Court  Judges  Bob  Warren  and  John 
Chabazz  of  Wisconsin,  Lynn  Adelman  understands  the  distinction 
between  judges  and  legislators.  The  role  of  a  judge  is  to  enforce  and 
to  interpret  laws  and  not  to  make  them. 

Based  on  this  outstanding  record,  Lynn  Adelman  received  high 
marks  from  the  nonpartisan  commission  that  Senator  Feingold  and 
I  established  with  the  State  bar  and  his  nomination  has  bipartisan 
support,  including  the  endorsement  of  Wisconsin's  Republican  Gov- 
ernor Tommy  Thompson.  Although  they  have  not  always  seen  eye 
to  eye.  Governor  Thompson  wrote  that,  "Lynn  is  thoughtful,  fair, 
and  open  minded,  as  well  as  someone  who  is  sensitive  to  and  has 
respect  for  the  principle  of  separation  of  powers."  Adelman  under- 


921 

stands  the  proper  role  of  each  branch  of  government.  Mr.  Chair- 
man, I  request  that  the  Governor's  letter  be  placed  in  the  record. 

Senator  Kyl.  Without  objection,  so  ordered. 

[The  letter  of  Governor  Thompson  follows:! 

GrOVERNOR,  STATE  OF  WISCONSIN, 

March  21,  1997. 
Hon.  Herbert  H.  Kohl, 
U.S.  Senator,  Hart  Senate  Office  Building, 
Washington,  DC. 
Hon.  Russell  D.  Feingold, 
U.S.  Senator,  Hart  Senate  Office  Building, 
Washington,  DC. 

Dear  Senator  Kohl  and  Senator  Feingold:  I  am  writing  to  express  my  support 
for  the  appointment  of  State  Senator  Lynn  Adelman  to  fill  the  Judicial  vacancy  in 
the  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin. 

I  have  worked  with  Lynn  Adelman  for  many  years  both  in  my  capacities  as  Gov- 
ernor and  as  State  Representative.  He  is  thoughtful,  fair  and  open-minded.  He  is 
also  independent,  and  a  very  hard  worker. 

As  a  State  Senator  and  a  lawyer,  Lynn  Adelman  has  had  a  distinguished  career. 
For  the  past  twenty  years  Lynn  has  led  Wisconsin's  efforts  to  combat  drunk  driving. 
He  authored  the  state's  comprehensive  drunk  driving  law  which  has  saved  many 
lives. 

Lynn  Adelman  has  also  been  an  effective  advocate  for  crime  victims.  He  authored 
an  amendment  to  the  Wisconsin  Constitution  to  protect  the  rights  of  crime  victims. 
He  has  also  championed  legislation  aimed  at  compensating  crime  victims,  ensuring 
them  access  to  the  criminal  justice  system,  and  protecting  them  from  reprisals. 

For  many  years,  Lynn  Adelman  has  served  as  the  Chair  of  the  Senate  Judiciary 
Committee.  In  that  capacity  he  has  demonstrated  that  he  is  an  able  and  skilled  leg- 
islative craftsman.  For  example,  recently  Ljmn  crafted  an  anti-stalking  law  that  sat- 
isfied both  battered  women  concerned  about  their  safety  and  pro-life  activists  wor- 
ried that  the  law  might  limit  their  right  to  demonstrate  peacefully. 

While  we  do  not  always  agree,  I  have  worked  vdth  L5mn  Adelman  on  many  issues. 
For  example,  we  have  worked  together  to  enact  a  number  of  important  anti-crime 
measures.  During  may  first  term  as  Governor,  Lynn  helped  to  enact  what  has  come 
to  be  known  as  the  "Life  Means  Life"  law.  For  many  years  a  life  sentence  in  Wiscon- 
sin was  not  really  a  life  sentence  because  of  the  way  in  which  the  parole  system 
worked.  I  proposed  permitting  judges  to  set  specific  dates  for  parole  eligibility  so 
that  a  life  sentence  would  truly  be  a  life  sentence.  Lynn  served  on  the  conference 
committee  which  approved  the  final  version  of  the  bill,  and  he  actively  worked  for 
its  passage.  Since  this  law  was  enacted,  hundreds  of  dangerous  offenders  have  re- 
mained in  prison,  and,  as  a  result,  Wisconsin  is  a  safer  place. 

Lynn  Adelman  and  I  also  worked  together  in  an  effort  to  fight  drug  use  in  Wiscon- 
sin. In  1989,  I  called  a  special  session  of  the  legislature  and  proposed  a  sweeping 
bill  that  increased  penalties  for  possession  of  heroin,  cocaine,  and  other  drugs.  My 
bill  also  established  drug  courts  in  Milwaukee  County  and  contained  numerous 
other  anti-crime  and  anti-drug  provisions.  Lynn  worked  with  me  to  ensure  this  bill 
was  enacted. 

In  1993,  I  proposed  an  omnibus  crime  bill  to  address  the  problem  of  gang-related 
crime  and  a  number  of  other  criminal  justice  problems.  Lynn  Adelman  worked  vdth 
me  to  help  pass  this  bill. 

LjTin  Adelman  was  the  only  Senate  Democrat  to  vote  for  my  1995-97  state  budget 
because  it  provided  property  tax  relief  to  Wisconsin  residents.  He  was  one  of  only 
three  Senate  Democrats  to  support  construction  of  a  new  stadium  for  the  Milwaukee 
Brewers  because  he  believed  it  was  essential  to  keep  major  league  baseball  in  Wis- 
consin. He  is  one  of  only  a  handful  of  Democrats  who  has  consistently  supported 
my  welfare  reform  initiatives  over  the  years,  and  he  voted  for  W-2  because  he  be- 
lieved it  was  an  effective  step  toward  eliminating  dependency. 

Ljrnn  Adelman  is  sensitive  to  and  has  respect  for  the  principle  of  the  separation 
of  powers.  He  understands  the  proper  role  of  each  branch  of  government. 

I  am  pleased  to  support  Lynn  Adelman  for  appointment  to  the  federal  bench.  If 
I  can  provide  you  with  any  additional  information,  please  do  not  hesitate  to  contact 
me. 

Sincerely, 

Tommy  G.  Thompson,  Governor. 


922 

Senator  KOHL.  Finally,  let  me  conclude  on  a  personal  note.  My 
family  has  known  the  Adelman  family  for  over  30  years  and  I  have 
known  Lynn  personally  for  more  than  20.  I  know  that  he  has  the 
capacity,  integrity,  and  the  skill  that  will  make  him  a  valuable  ad- 
dition to  the  bench.  I  look  forward  to  his  testimony  and  to  his 
speedy  confirmation  and  I  thank  you  for  this  opportunity,  Mr. 
Chairman. 

Senator  ASHCROFT.  Thank  you,  Senator  Kohl. 

Senator  Feingold. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  RUSSELL  D.  FEINGOLD,  A  U.S.  SENATOR 
FROM  THE  STATE  OF  WISCONSIN 

Senator  Feingold.  Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman. 

It  is  such  a  pleasure  to  hear  the  fine  words  of  my  senior  col- 
league, Senator  Kohl,  on  behalf  of  Lynn  Adelman.  I  want  to  join 
in  those  words. 

I  was  extremely  pleased  to  hear  of  President  Clinton's  choice  of 
Lynn  Adelman  from  the  various  names  that  were  submitted  to 
him.  After  Senator  Kohl  and  I  received  the  recommendations  of  the 
committee,  we  asked  to  look  at  this  issue.  I  believe  that  when  the 
members  of  this  committee  have  an  opportunity  to  hear  Lynn 
Adelman's  record  and  to  hear  from  him  directly,  you  will  reach  the 
same  conclusion  that  Senator  Kohl  and  President  Clinton  and  peo- 
ple all  across  Wisconsin  and  I  have  reached,  and  that  is  that  Lynn 
Adelman  will  be  an  exemplary  jurist  for  the  citizens  of  Wisconsin 
and  for  the  country. 

Lynn  Adelman  was  bom  in  Milwaukee  and  is  a  graduate  of 
Princeton  University  and  Columbia  Law  School.  He  graduated  with 
honors  from  both  of  these  excellent  institutions.  After  a  brief  period 
working  in  New  York,  he  returned  to  Wisconsin  and  began  what 
to  this  day  has  been  a  career  of  dedicated  public  service  to  the  peo- 
ple of  our  State. 

Lynn  worked  in  private  practice  in  Wisconsin  beginning  in  1972 
and  continues  to  do  so  today  as  a  partner  in  the  Milwaukee  law 
firm  of  Adelman,  Adelman,  and  Murray.  His  wife,  Elizabeth,  is  also 
a  partner  in  this  successful  firm. 

He  was  elected  in  1977  to  the  Wisconsin  State  Senate  for  the 
28th  District.  In  the  20  years  that  Lynn  has  represented  that  dis- 
trict, he  has  been  a  leading  voice  in  the  Wisconsin  legislature.  I  can 
tell  you  this  because  I  served  with  him  myself  for  10  of  those  years 
as  a  member  of  the  Wisconsin  State  Senate  and  as  one  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Wisconsin  State  Senate  Judiciary  Committee,  which  he 
chaired. 

Lynn's  legislative  record  and  commitment  to  the  people  of  his 
district  and  the  State  of  Wisconsin  has  earned  him  a  great  deal  of 
bipartisan  praise.  I  just  want  to  reiterate  what  Senator  Kohl  said. 
He  has  been  warmly  and  strongly  endorsed  by  our  very  prominent 
Republican  Governor  Tommy  Thompson,  who  writing  in  support  of 
the  nominee,  again,  I  want  to  repeat,  characterized  Lynn  Adelman 
as  thoughtful,  fair,  and  open  minded.  The  Governor  notes  how  he 
and  Lynn  worked  hand  in  hand  to  ensure  the  passage  of  important 
legislation,  ranging  from  anticrime  and  antidrug  legislation  to  wel- 
fare reform.  I  think  that  is  a  significant  bipartisan  statement. 


923 

As  I  mentioned  earlier,  Lynn  is  also  a  very  successful  attorney. 
During  the  20  years  he  has  served  in  the  Wisconsin  Senate,  he  has 
continued  to  practice  law.  During  his  legal  career,  Lynn  has  ap- 
peared frequently  in  both  criminal  and  civil  cases  in  both  State  and 
Federal  courts  and  Lynn's  considerable  skills  also  resulted  in  him 
arguing  a  case  before  the  U.S.  Supreme  Court  in  1993.  At  the  same 
time,  he  has  been  very  respected  in  the  State  legislature. 

Mr.  Chairman,  in  light  of  your  admonition  that  our  remarks 
should  not  be  too  long  if  we  are,  indeed,  ahead,  which  I  believe  we 
are  on  this  issue,  let  me  ask  that  the  remainder  of  my  statement 
be  placed  in  the  record. 

Senator  Kyl.  Without  objection. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Feingold  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Senator  Russell  D.  Feingold 

I  am  pleased  today  to  join  with  my  colleague,  Senator  Kohl,  in  recommending 
Lynn  Adelman  to  this  Committee  for  confirmation  to  the  federal  judiciary.  I  was 
pleased  to  see  President  Clinton  choose  Lynn  Adelman's  name  from  the  three  for- 
warded to  him  by  the  nominations  committee  that  Senator  Kohl  and  I  have  estab- 
lished to  review  potential  nominees  for  Wisconsin's  federsd  bench. 

I  believe  that  when  the  Members  of  this  Committee  have  an  opportunity  to  review 
Lynn  Adelman's  record  and  to  hear  from  him  directly,  you  will  reach  the  same  con- 
clusion that  Senator  Kohl,  President  Clinton,  people  all  across  Wisconsin  and  I  have 
reached.  That  being  that  Lynn  Adelman  will  be  an  exemplary  jurist  for  the  citizens 
of  Wisconsin. 

Lynn  Adelman  was  bom  in  Milwaukee  and  is  a  graduate  of  Princeton  University 
and  Columbia  Law  School.  He  graduated  cum  laude  from  both  of  these  excellent  in- 
stitutions. After  a  brief  period  working  in  New  York,  Lynn  returned  to  his  native 
Wisconsin  and  began  what  to  this  day  has  been  a  career  of  dedicated  public  service 
to  the  people  of  our  State.  Lynn  worked  in  private  practice  in  Wisconsin  beginning 
in  1972  and  continues  to  do  so  today  as  a  partner  in  the  Milwaukee  law  firm  of 
Adelman,  Adelman  and  Murray.  His  wife  Elizabeth  is  also  a  partner  in  this  success- 
ful firm. 

In  1977,  Lynn  was  elected  to  the  Wisconsin  State  Senate  for  the  28th  District. 
In  the  twenty  years  that  Lynn  has  represented  the  28th  District,  he  has  been  a 
leading  voice  in  the  Wisconsin  Legislature.  During  his  tenure  in  the  Wisconsin  Sen- 
ate, Lynn  has  served  on  the  Judiciary  Committee  and  chaired  that  important  panel 
on  two  separate  occasions,  first  from  1979  through  1993,  and  then  again  from  1995 
until  today.  I  had  the  distinct  honor  of  serving  with  Lynn  for  ten  years  while  I  was 
a  Wisconsin  State  Senator  and  worked  with  him  on  the  Judiciary  Committee. 

Lynn's  legislative  record  and  commitment  to  the  people  of  his  district  and  the 
State  of  Wisconsin  has  earned  him  bi-partisan  praise.  In  fact.  Republican  Governor 
Tommy  Thompson,  writing  in  support  of  this  nominee,  characterized  Lynn  Adelman 
as  ".  .  .  thoughtful,  fair  and  open-minded  .  .  ."  The  Governor  goes  on  to  note  how 
he  and  Lynn  worked  hand  in  hand  to  ensure  the  passage  of  important  legislation 
ranging  from  anti-crime  and  anti-drug  legislation  to  welfare  reform.  This  bi-partisan 
praise  is  a  significant  statement  and  illustrates  what  those  of  us  who  have  known 
and  worked  with  Lynn  all  know.  That  being  that  during  his  career,  he  has  always 
placed  the  best  interests  of  the  people  of  Wisconsin  above  politics  and  partisanship. 

Lynn's  efforts  have  also  garnered  him  recognition  from  many  civic  groups  as  well. 
In  1995,  for  example,  he  received  the  Lifetime  Achievement  Award  for  Leadership 
Against  Drunk  Driving  from  Mothers  Against  Drunk  Driving.  Lynn  has  also  been 
a  tireless  leader  in  the  fight  to  set  high  standards  of  ethics  in  government.  His  hard 
work  has  resulted  in  open  records  laws  and  ethical  codes  for  elected  officials.  Ljoin's 
work  in  this  important  area  has  helped  to  preserve  and  ensure  the  integrity  of  rep- 
resentative government  in  the  State  of  Wisconsin. 

As  I  mentioned  earlier,  Lynn  is  also  a  successful  attorney.  During  the  twenty 
years  he  has  served  in  the  Wisconsin  Senate,  he  has  continued  to  practice  law.  Dur- 
ing his  legal  career,  Lynn  has  appeared  in  both  criminal  and  civil  cases,  in  both 
State  and  federal  courts.  Lynn's  considerable  skills  also  resulted  in  him  arguing  be- 
fore the  United  States  Supreme  Court  in  1993.  At  the  same  time  he  has  been  an 
influential  leader  in  the  State  senate,  he  has  also  been,  and  continues  to  be,  a  sig- 
nificant and  well-respected  voice  in  the  Wisconsin  legal  community. 


924 

Mr.  Chairman,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  Ljmn  Adelman's  career  makes  him 
well  suited  to  sit  on  the  federal  judiciary.  He  has  served  with  distinction  in  the  leg- 
islative branch  and  understands,  first-hand,  the  constitutionally  based  principle  of 
separation  of  powers — a  principle  which  is  essential  to  preserving  our  democratic 
form  of  government. 

His  considerable  experiences  in  the  courtroom  will  also  be  an  asset  to  him  on  the 
bench.  He  has  a  unique  understanding  of  our  legal  system  which  will  provide  him 
with  the  temperament  necessary  to  treat  everyone  who  comes  before  him  with  the 
respect  they  deserve  and  should  expect  from  all  judges.  In  short,  he  has  all  the  tools 
necessary  to  serve  the  people  of  Wisconsin  with  distinction.  As  that  is  the  standard 
that  has  marked  his  illustrious  career  to  date,  I  have  no  doubt  it  will  continue  to 
do  so  following  his  confirmation. 

I  want  to  congratulate  Lynn  and  Elizabeth  and  their  family  on  this  nomination. 
The  people  of  Wisconsin,  in  my  view,  deserve  nothing  less  than  the  best  when  it 
comes  to  those  who  sit  on  the  federal  bench  in  our  State.  I  believe  Lynn  Adelman 
meets  this  high  standsird.  I  give  my  strongest  possible  support  for  the  nomination 
of  Lynn  Adelman  and  I  look  forward  to  working  with  you  and  other  Members  of  the 
Committee  as  this  nomination  moves  through  the  Committee  and  the  fiill  Senate. 

Thank  you. 

Senator  Feingold.  I  would  also  like  to  ask  that  in  addition  to 
the  letter  from  Governor  Thompson,  which  Senator  Kohl  had 
placed  in  the  record,  I  have  a  number  of  letters  of  support  from 
people  all  across  our  State,  Democrats  and  Republicans  alike,  in- 
cluding Jim  Doyle,  our  attorney  general,  and  many  of  Lynn's  Sen- 
ate colleagues,  such  as  Republican  State  Senator  Michael  Ellis.  I 
ask  that  these  letters  be  placed  in  the  record  at  this  time. 

Senator  Kyl.  Without  objection,  so  ordered. 

[Senator  Feingold  submitted  the  following  letters:] 


925 


COPY 


United  States  District  Court 

Oiamttrs  of  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin 

John  W.  Reynolds  296  U.S.  Courthouse  (4 14)  297-31 88 

Judge  517  E.  Wisconsin  Ave.  fax  (414)  297-3191 

Milwaukee,  Wisconsin  53202-4583 


January  9,  1997 


WISCONSIN  FEDERAL  NOMINATING  COMMISSION 

Dear  Commissioners: 

I  am  pleased  to  be  able  to  recommend  and  attest  to  the 
qualifications  of  Lynn  Adelman  for  the  vacancy  on  this  court.  I  have 
known  Lynn  for  almost  thirty  years,  during  which  time  he  has 
practiced  law  in  this  court,  devoted  his  life  to  public  service  as  a 
member  of  the  State  Senate,  and  he  has  been  a  good  friend.  He  is 
a  very  capable  and  dedicated  human  being. 

He  would  bring  to  the  position  not  only  the  dedication  and 
commitment  to  justice,  but  a  judicial  temperament  and  a  sensitivity 
to  the  rights  of  human  beings.  And  so,  it  is  a  pleasure  for  me  to 
recommend  him  for  this  position. 


Sincerely  yours. 


^-^t^"^  «^-<3i>-^Y--.-*^C4- 


John  W.  Reynolds 
Judge 


926 


STATE  OF  WISCONSIN 
DEPARTMENT  OF  JUSTICE 


JAMES  E.  DOYI-E  '  '■*  £"<•  State  Capitol 

ATTORNEY  GENERAL  PO.  Boi  7857 

Madison.  WI   53707-7857 
Bumeatta  L.  Bridge  608^66-1221 

Deputy  Attoroey  General  V/TTY  608/267-8902 


January  13,  1997 


Wisconsin  Federal  Nominating  Commission 

Dear  Committee  Members: 

I  understand  that  Lynn  Adelman  has  expressed  an  interest  in 
being  appointed  as  a  federal  judge  for  the  U-S.  District  Court, 
Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin.  I  have  known  Mr.  Adelman  for  many 
years,  as  a  lawyer,  a  legislator  and  a  friend. 

As  an  attorney  in  private  practice,  I  worked  together  with  Mr. 
Adelman  on  several  matters.  As  Attorney  General,  I  have  been  on 
the  opposite  side  from  Mr.  Adelman  in  a  number  of  important  issues. 
Most  notably,  Mr.  Adelman  and  I  argued  the  opposing  positions 
before  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  in  State  v.  Mitchell,  the 
challenge  to  Wisconsin's  hate  crimes  statute. 

Mr.  Adelman  is  an  attorney  of  great  skill,  creativity  and 
tenacity.  His  legal  work,  as  a  litigator,  writer  and  legislator, 
manifests  his  strong  commitment  to  the  Constitution.  While  a 
strong  litigator,  he  has  always  shown  courtesy  and  respect  for  the 
other  side.  He  has  an  inquisitive  mind  with  the  ability  to  clearly 
analyze  a  legal  issue.   I  believe  that  he  would  be  a  fine  judge. 

Mr.  Adelman' s  legislative  career  has  also  shown  his  devotion 
to  the  law.  He  has  been  the  main  architect  of  Wisconsin's  statutes 
designed  to  curb  drunk  driving;  he  has  been  the  acknowledged 
legislative  leader  in  the  area  of  open  meetings  and  public  records; 
he  has  been  committed  to  ensuring  that  Wisconsin  courts  are 
accessible  to  the  people  of  this  state - 

Thank  you  for  your  consideration-  If  I  can  provide  any 
further  information,  please  let  me  know. 


Sincerely 


JED : j  s 


927 


January  17.  1997 

Wisconsin  Federal  Nominating  Committee 

Dear  Members  of  the  Committee: 

It  is  my  understanding  that  your  office  is  currently  in  the  process  of  screening  candidates  to 
fill  a  vacancy  on  tlie  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin.  I  am  writing 
to  strongly  encourage  the  consideration  of  Wisconsin  State  Senator  Lynn  Adflman  for  an 
appointment  to  this  Court. 

The  Wisconsin  Coalition  Against  Domestic  Violence  has  been  involved  in  policy 
development  at  the  state  legislative  level  lor  over  llfteen  years.  We  have  promoted  passage  of 
victims  rights'  laws  as  well  as  proposals  to  provide  safety  and  protection  for  battered  women  and 
their  children.  There  have  been  occasions  when  our  opinions  as  victims  rights'  advocates  and  those 
of  Senator  Adelman  have  differed.  However,  Senator  Adelman  has  been  consistent  in  his 
representation  of  the  position  that  we  will  never  gain  rights  for  one  segment  of  society  by  taking 
away  the  rights  of  another  segment  of  society.  His  reputation  for  being  a  friend  of  the  Constitution 
precedes  him  wherever  he  goes.  Senator  .Adelman  has  always  maintained  integrity,  regardless  of 
the  power  and  influence  of  the  opposing  view. 

We  have  worked  with  (and  sometimes  in  opposition  of)  Senator  Adelman  on  a  number  of 
occasions.  With  each  experience  we  ha\'e  left  with  a  greater  appreciation  and  respect  for  the  need 
to  balance  the  constitutional  rights  of  all  persons.  This  was  evident  as  we  worked  on  developing  a 
"stalking  law"  for  Wisconsin.  After  intense  negotiations  with  many  powerfiil  groups,  it  was  Senator 
Adelman's  revision  that  gained  our  support  and,  in  the  end,  passage.  Regardless  of  whether  or  not 
his  stand  was  popular,  it  always  reflected  the  need  to  acknowledge  the  rights  of  all  participants  in 
our  system  of  justice. 

The  Wisconsin  Coalition  Against  Domestic  Violence  wholeheartedly  endorses  Senator 
Adelman's  consideration  for  a  federal  judgeship.  If  he  is  selected,  our  only  regret  will  be  our  loss 
of  a  fine  statesman  in  the  Wisconsin  State  Senate. 


^•^    ^^^ 


1400  EAST  WASHINGTON  AVENUE  1  SUITE  232  |  MADISON.  WISCONSIN  53703 
608|255|0539  |  FAX: 608(255 | 3560 


928 


UNIVERSITY    OF 

WISCONSIN 

MADISON 


February  25,  1997 

Wisconsin  Federal  Nominating  Commission 
c/o  George  Brown 
State  Bar  of  Wisconsin 
402  W.  Wilson  St. 
Madison,  WI  53703 

Dear  Members  of  the  Commission, 

Wisconsin  State  Senator  Lynn  Adelman  asked  if  I  would  write  to 
the  Commission  to  describe  my  experience  in  working  with  him  on 
substantive  legal  issues.   I  am  happy  to  do  so. 

Over  the  past  five  or  ten  years  I  have  had  several 
opportunities  to  work  closely  with  Sen.  Adelman  on  criminal  law 
issues.  He  has  taken  a  strong  interest  in  several  questions  of 
substantial  importance,  such  as  the  revision  of  sexual  assault 
laws,  modification  of  the  so-called  rape  shield  statute,  and  review 
of  the  need  for  legislation  relating  to  battered  spouses.  On  each 
occasion.  Sen.  Adelman's  interest  and  understanding  of  the 
substantive  issues  has  impressed  me  very  favorably.  He  has  shown 
a  solid  grasp  of  complex  legal  issues  and  an  ability  to  engage  in 
the  often  difficult  work  of  translating  policy  judgments  into 
statutory  language  that  will  carry  them  out.  This  indicated  to  me 
not  only  a  high  degree  of  interest  and  commitment,  but  also  the 
ability  of  a  first-rate  lawyer  to  understand  challenging  problems 
and  to  propose  solutions  for  them.  Of  equal  importance,  he  showed 
great  fairness  in  attempting  to  balance  the  interests  of  victims 
and  defendants. 

My  experience  with  Sen.  Adelman  has  been  limited  to  working 
with  him  on  criminal  law  issues  like  those  mentioned  above.  With 
respect  to  those  issues.  Sen.  Adelman  has  demonstrated  substantive 
knowledge  and  legal  ability  that  indicates  he  would  be  well 
qualified  to  address  then  as  a  federal  district  judge. 

Sincerely, 

David  E.  Schultz  \) 
Associate  Dean 
Professor  of  Law 


Continuing  Education  and  Outreach 
Law  School 

975  Bascom  Mall,  Room  2348        Madison,  WI  53706-1399        608/262-3833         1-800-355-5573         FAX;  608/263-3472 


929 


MllllfSllLrOO      ■  ^?:  -  OFFICE:   1840  N.  FARWELL  AVENUE  (SUITE  400)  MILWAUKEE,  Wl  53202 
I  I  WQU  t\CC     /-TfeS..  PHONE:  14141  273-2515 


POLICF 


Bradley  OeBraska  William  P.  Ward  Patrick  Doyle  > 

President  Vice-Presidenl  Secretary/Treasurer 

A^SOf  iSfrlOn  ^^-*^^«^  Trustees: 

'    »«-'»-'>-'^'*-'LIV^II         <3^,c;-  Gary  J.  Brazgel      John  P.  Harrington     Edward  Heidemann     James  Nisiewicz 

Local  »2I  lUPA-AFL-CIO  David  Stelter  Michael  J.  Zivicki 

Office  Secretaries: 
Debra  Schneider  Candy  Mahler 

FAX:  (414)  273-7237 


COPY 


March    17,    1997 


Senator  Herb  Kohl 
330  Hart  Senate  Office  Building 
Washington,  DC   20510 
Attention:   Jon  Liebowitz 

Senator  Russell  D.  Feingold 
502  Hart  Senate  Office  Building 
Washington,  DC   20510 
Attention:   Susanne  Martinez 

Dear  Messrs.  Kohl  and  Feingold: 

This  is  to  let  you  know  of  our  support  for  the 
appointment  of  Lynn  Adelman  to  the  vacant  judicial  post  in 
the  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin.   Our  organization  knows 
Lynn  Adelman  well  both  as  a  senator  and  as  an  attorney  who 
has  frequently  represented  police  officers. 

Lynn  Adelman  would  make  an  outstanding  district  court 
judge.   He  is  a  street-smart,  no-nonsense  type  of  person. 
He  is  tough  on  crime,  and  he  would  follow  the  law.   You  can 
be  sure  the  Lynn  Adelman  would  not  be  a  judicial  "activist." 
He  has  great  respect  for  the  law  and  for  the  proper  roles  of 
the  different  branches  of  government. 

If  I  can  provide  any  additional  information  please  do 
not  hesitate  to  call. 


Sincerely, 

MILWAUKEE  POLICE  ASSOCIATION 


Bradley  DeBraska 

President 

Local  #21,  lUPA,  AFL-CIO, 


930 
Karen  M.  Ordinans 

Milwaukee  County 

Chairman 
County  Board  of  Supervisors 


March  25,  1997 


The  Honorable  Mr.  Clinton 
President  of  the  United  States  of  America 
1600  Pennsylvania  Avenue 
Washington,  D.C.  20515 


Dear  President  Clinton: 

1  am  writing  to  express  my  support  of  the  nomination  of  Wisconsin  State  Senator  Lynn  Adelmjin 
to  the  United  States  District  Court  -  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin. 

I  have  known  Senator  Adelman  for  ten  years  and  have  always  found  him  to  be  hard  working, 
honest  and  fair.  The  qualities  that  have  made  him  an  excellent  lawmaker—  analytical  thinking, 
balance,  and  a  commitment  to  the  common  good-will  serve  him  well  in  the  Judiciary.  The  type 
of  unbiased,  thoughtfiil  deliberation  that  Lynn  has  brought  to  the  legislature  will  be  an  asset  on 
the  Federal  bench. 

While  the  State  of  Wisconsin  will  miss  his  leadership  and  expertise,  the  United  States  of 
America  will  gain  a  genuine  public  servant  who  values  her  Constitution  and  the  rights  and 
responsibilities  of  her  citizenry.  I  give  Lynn  Adelman  my  endorsement  and  respectfully  request 
that  you  give  every  consideration  to  his  nomination. 


Sincerely, 

Karen  M.  Ordinans 

Chairman 

Milwaukee  County  Board  of  Supervisors 

KMOswr 

^OpWi  201,  COUMCHpU5E  •.  901  NORTH  9TH  STREET  •  MILWAIJKEE,  WISCONSIN  53233  •  TELEPftbNE  ^f^'^i?!  VFAjH^iri??^ 


Slwnft 
LeverGlt  F.  Baldwin 


March  26,  1997 


931 


County  ol  Milwaukee 

Office      of      the      Sheriff 

821  West  State  Street  •  Milwaukee,  Wisconsin  53233  •  414-278-4766 


/ 


The  President 

The  White  House 

1 600  Pennsylvania  Avenue 

Washington,  DC    20500 

Dear  Mr  President: 

I  am  writing  in  support  of  Senator  Lynn  Adelman's  candidacy  for  appointment  to  a  federal 
judgeship  in  Milwaukee 

1  have  personally  known  Lynn  Adelman  for  many  years  and  highly  recommend  him  for  this 
position    The  Senator  would  bring  honesty,  integrity  and  compassion  to  the  Federal  Bench 

Any  consideration  you  can  give  toward  the  Senator's  appointment  would  be  greatly  appreciated 

Respectfully  yours, 

Leverett  F.  Baldwin,  Sheriff 
Milwaukee  County,  Wisconsin 

LFB/jmk 

cc:   Senator  Lynn  Adelman 


Service  to  the  Community  Since  1835 


932 


PATRICK  T  SHEEOr 

ChMlJudge 

Tslephone    (414)278-51 12 

THOMAS  P.  OOHERnr 

0«puty  ChMt  Judge 
Talaphone    (414)276-5113 

FREO  R.  COOPER 

Distilct  Court  Administmor 
ralaphont    (414)278  5113 

MICHAEL  G.  NEIMON 

Assl.  Omhd  Coud  Administralor 

T1«phon«    (414)278-5113 


STATE  OF  WISCONSIN 

FIRST  JUDICIAL  DISTRICT 

MILWAUKEE  CX)UNTY  COURTHOUSE 
901  NORTH  NINTH  STREET,  ROOM  609 
MILWAUKEE.  WISCONSIN  53233-1425 

FAX  (414)  223-1264 

March  27.  1997 


Mr.  Charles  Ruff 
Counsel  to  the  President 
The  White  House 
Washington,  D.C. 

Dear  Mr.  Ruff: 


I  have  known  Lynn  Adelman  for  many  years.  At  this  time,  I  know  he  has  been  in 
practice  for  29  years;  and  I  believe  that  I  have  had  dealings  with  him  during  all  those  years. 
Lynn  is  an  excellent  State  Senator  and  an  excellent  attorney.  Lynn  practices  in  all  areas  of  law 
and  does  an  extremely  creditable  job. 

Also,  I  have  had  opportunities  to  examine  his  briefs,  and  they  are  done  in  a  scholarly 
manner.    I  certainly  believe  that  he  would  be  an  asset  to  any  court. 

In  addition,  his  interest  in  the  administration  of  justice  is  laudatory.  This  is  a  prerequisite 
of  a  good  ju^g^iSday. 

1  free  to  call  upon  me  if  you  wish  further  information. 

Very  truly  ygt^s, 

j^Patrick  T.  Shed^y 
Chief  Judge 


PTS:mm 


933 


Assembly  Speaker 
BEN   BRANCEL 


April  2,  1997 


Mr  Charles  Ruff 

Office  of  Wfiite  House  Counsel 

The  Wfiile  House 

IGOO  Pfinnsylvania  Avenue.  N  W 

Wasfiiogton,  DC    P0500 

Dear  Mr.  Ruff 

Tttis  letter  serves  to  endorse  the  nomination  of  Senator  I  ynn  Adolrnan  to  fill  tin; 
vacancy  on  the  United  States  District  Court  in  the  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin 

I  have  served  in  the  Legislature  with  State  Senator  Lynn  Adelman  for  many 
years.   Altfiough  we  differ  on  many  issues,  Senator  Adelman  would  bring  to  the  court 
much  experience    Lynn  is  a  legislator  and  an  attorney  who  not  only  does  his 
homework,  researching  issues  in  depth,  but  is  able  to  articulate  his  position  well 
The  experience  he  has  gamed  serving  on  the  Senate  Judiciary  Committee  as  well  as  m 
Ills  private  law  practice  would  be  an  asset  to  the  court.   Lynn  certainly  has  the 
qualifications  and  credentials  needed  to  be  a  federal  judge. 

Please  know,  that  if  President  Clinton  decides  to  nominate  I  ynn  Adelman  to  fill 
the  vacancy  in  the  Eastern  District,  I  will  do  whatever  I  can  to  insure  his  spr^edy 
confirmation. 


Very  truly  yours, 


Ben  Brancel 
Speaker 


BB; 


cc:   U.S.  Senator  Russell  i  eingold 
U  S  Senator  Herbert  Kohl 


'.•L    ■   Poji  Or^ict   Bo"  n*»*i7.  ' 


934 


33rd  District  Marga|fe|SA|yFarrOW state  senator 


April  3,  1997 

Mr.  Charles  Ruff 
Counsel  to  the  President 
The  White  House 
1600  Pennsylvania  Avenue 
Washington,  DC.  20500 

Dear  Mr.  Ruff: 

As  a  leader  in  the  Republican  caucus  of  Wisconsin's  State  Senate  and  as  a  local  official 
prior  to  this  role,  I  have  known  Lynn  Adelman  as  an  individual  who  is  dedicated  to  the 
law  and  its  significance  in  the  lives  of  our  citizens.  He  has  been  a  zealous  defender  of  the 
rights  of  people  in  the  manner  in  which  law  and  government  affects  their  lives. 

His  Senate  district  is  contiguous  to  mine  and  we  have  worked  together  on  a  number  of 
issues  in  a  true  bipartisan  manner. 

I  would  encourage  your  serious  consideration  of  him  for  an  appointment  to  the  Federal 
Bench  in  this  district. 

Sincerely, 


Senator  Mifgaret  Farrow 
Republican  Caucus  Chair 


OFFICE:  PC    Box  7882.  Madison.  WI  53707-7882  •  608-266-9174  •  Toll-free.  1-800-863-8883  •  E-mail:  Sen.Farrow<9lcgis.slatt.wi  US 

LEGISLATIVE  HOTUNE  (toll-ftce):  I -800-362-WlSC  (9472) 

Pilnlcd  on  Recycled  Paper 


935 


Wisconsin  Senate  Assistant  Republican  Leader 

Senator  Brian  O.  Rude 

-ApnlTI7T997 

Charles  Ruff 
Counsel  to  the  President 
The  White  House 
Washington,  DC  20500 

Dear  Mr.  Ruff: 

I  am  writing  to  you  today  on  behalf  of  State  Senator  Lynn  Adelman,  my  colleague  in  the 
Wisconsin  State  Senate.  I  support  the  nomination  of  Senator  Adelman  for  the  position  of  District 
Court  Judge  in  the  Eastern  District  of  the  State  of  Wisconsin.  I  believe  Senator  Adelman  would  be  an 
excellent  choice  for  this  position. 

I  am  a  Republican  State  Senator,  while  Senator  Lynn  Adelman  is  a  Democrat.  We  differ  on 
many  issues,  and  bring  different  philosophies  to  our  work  in  the  Legislature  and  to  the  political  process 
in  general    Yet,  1  admire  Senator  Adelman  for  his  tenacity,  his  honesty,  his  incredible  level  of  energy 
and  hard  work,  and  most  of  all  for  his  willingness  to  speak  out  for  the  issues  he  believes  in.  The 
qualities  1  have  seen  in  his  legislative  work  are  qualities  which  I  believe  would  translate  into  an 
excellent  background  for  the  judiciary,  specifically  for  the  position  of  District  Court  Judge  in  the 
Eastern  District. 

Senator  Adelman  has  never  been  one  to  shy  away  from  tough  or  controversial  issues.  He  votes 
his  conscience,  even  when  it  is  clear  he  is  in  a  distinct  minority    There  are  times  when  his  actions  in 
Legislature  are  very  unpopular,  and  yet  he  always  carries  through  with  the  causes,  concerns  and 
philosophies  he  believes  in.  This  dedication  to  principle,  philosophy  and  values  would  serve  Senator 
Adelman  well  were  he  to  become  a  judge. 

Thank  you  for  the  opportunity  to  comment  on  this  nomination.  I  believe  you  would  find 
Senator  Adelman  to  be  a  thoughtful  and  effective  judge.   It  would  be  a  fitting  tribute  to  his  many  years 
of  service  to  the  people  of  Southeastern  Wisconsin  if  he  were  to  continue  that  service  by  becoming  a 
judge.  I  think  he  would  be  a  very  strong  appointment  which  would  be  universally  praised  on  both  sides 
of  the  aisle  and  by  the  people  of  our  state. 


I  would  welcome  the  opportunity  to  personally  discuss  the  appointment  of  Senator  Lynn 
Adelman  to  this  distinguished  post.  . 


Briarr  D.  Rude 
State  Senator 
BDR/mq 

Madison  Office   PO   Box  7882.  Madison.  Wl  53707  7882  ■  (608)  266  54901  Fax   (608)  267  5173 

OiSIf kl  OITicc    llSSIh  Avenue  South.  §4 14.  La  Ctosse.  Wl  54601-40181(608)  789  4607 

Toll  free    I  (800)  385  3385  I  E  mail   Sen  Rude@leeis  stair  wi  ii< 


936 


Executive  Director 

Jan  Steinbergs 


Wisconsin  Troopers'  Association,  inc. 

PO  Box  769  •  East  Troy.  Wl  53120 
1-800-2321392 


April?,  1997 


Charles  Ruff  Counsel  to  the  President 
White  House 
1600  Pennsylvania  Ave 
Washington,  DC.  20510 


Dear  Mr.  Ruff, 

1  has  come  to  my  attention  that  Wisconsin  State  Senator  Lynn  Adelman  is  under  consideration 
for  appointment  to  the  judicial  vacancy  in  the  Eastern  District    While  I  do  not  always  agree  with 
Senator  Adelman's  position  on  various  issues,  I  do  know  him  to  be  an  individual  of  uncommon 
deiermmation,  integrity,  courage  and  hard  work.  His  reputation  as  a  fighter  against  all  odds  has 
me  conclude  that  he  is  a  person  of  powerful  commitment.  If  the  criteria  for  selection  include  any 
of  the  above.  Senator  Lynn  Adelman  would  be  the  choice. 


Sincerely, 


/j 
//Jan  Steinbergs 


NTC 


Proud  Member  of  the  National  Troopers  Coalition 


937 


MICHAEL  G.  ELLIS 

SENATE  REPUBLICAN  LEADER 


I9TH  SENATE  DISTRICT 


April  8,  1997 


Charles  Ruff 
Counsel  lo  the  President 
1600  Pennsylvania  Avenue 
Washington,  DC  20500 

Dear  Mr.  Ruff; 

I  am  writing  to  offer  my  recommendation  and  support  for  Wisconsin  State  Senator  Lynn  Adelman  for  the 
appointment  to  District  Court  Judge  in  the  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin 

Lynn  Adelman  and  I  have  been  colleagues  in  the  Wisconsin  Legislature  for  more  than  20  years    We 
belong  to  different  political  parties  and  we  have  not  always  seen  eye  lo  eye  on  the  issues  we  have  debated 
over  the  years    Whether  or  not  we  have  agreed  on  a  particular  issue,  however,  I  have  always  considered 
Lynn  lo  be  a  highly  principled,  honest  and  intelligent  public  servant 

Lynn  Adelman  possesses  an  independent,  but  decidedly  principled,  spirit  that  I  believe  makes  him  uniquely 
qualified  lo  be  a  judge    This  has  been  demonslraled  repeatedly  as  he.  a  good  Democrat,  has  been  elected 
and  reelected  by  a  heavily  Republican  constituency 

In  the  Legislature.  Lynn  Adelman  always  judges  an  issue  on  its  ments  before  considering  partisan  matters. 
He  has  been  a  Senate  leader  in  such  areas  as  demanding  high  ethical  standards  for  government  and 
protecting  free  speech  and  other  civil  liberties 

I  believe  Lynn  Adelman  has  all  the  qualifications  and  more  to  serve  as  a  federal  judge.  I  am  convinced  he 
is  as  deserving  of  this  appointment  as  anyone  else  you  may  consider  Lynn  Adelman  will  make  a  fine  judge 
and  I  do  not  hesitate  lo  offer  my  strong  recommendation  for  such  an  appointment. 


Thank  you  for  your  consideration    If  you  have  any  further  questions,  please  let  me  know. 


MICmCLTi  ELLIS 
Republican  Leader 
Wisconsin  State  Senate 


MGE/mfb 


The  Honorable  Senator  Orin  Hatch 
The  Honorable  Senator  Herbert  H  Kohl 
The  Honorable  Senator  Russell  D   Feingold 


Home  OfTice:   101  West  Canal  Street.  Neenah.  WI  54956  •  414-?a9-480l 
Capitol  Omce:  P  O.  Box  7882.  Madison.  Wl  53707-7882  •  608-266-0718 


938 


Wisconsin.  State  Senator 

April  8,  1997 


Mr.  Charles  Ruff 
Counsel  to  the  President 
White  House 

1600  Pennsylvania  Avenue 
Washington,  D.C.  20500 

Dear  Mr.  Ruff: 

I  am  a  Republican  State  Senator  representing  the  northern  portion  of  Milwaukee  County 
and  parts  of  Waukesha,  Washington  and  Ozaukee  Counties.  Lynn  Adelman  and  I  have 
worked  together  in  the  state  legislature  for  over  six  years.  I  have  the  highest  regard  for 
his  legal  expertise  and  integrity.  Lynn  would  be  an  astute,  conscientious  and  effective 
judge  on  the  United  States  District  Court,  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin. 

During  our  time  in  the  legislature  together,  Lynn  and  I  have  had  our  disagreements  yet  I 
respect  his  vast  knowledge  of  judiciary  and  consumer  matters.  Lynn  has  been  a 
passionate  and  articulate  advocate  for  consumers  and  open  government.  He  is  one  of  the 
few  practicing  attorneys  in  the  Senate  and  brings  an  applied  knowledge  to  many  laws 
being  debated. 

In  addition,  the  fact  that  he  has  been  re-elected  five  times  to  a  conservative.  Republican 
majority  district  speaks  highly  of  his  respect  from  and  ability  to  work  with  people  from 
all  political  persuasions. 

Lynn  Adelman  is  a  consummate  student  and  practitioner  of  good  law  and  good 
government.  I  have  every  reason  to  believe  that  he  will  continue  to  uphold  the  highest 
standards  of  law  in  a  court.  His  unique  perspective  as  a  lawmaker  and  practicing  attorney 
make  him  an  excellent  candidate  for  the  opening  on  the  U.S.  District  Court. 

Sincerely, 

Alberta  Darling  0 

State  Senator 
g""  Senate  District 

'^°°°'"«~  Cjpliol  otikt: pymaonto:  Hoa»: 

Educailon  and  niunclal  Inslllullons.  Chair  PC  Bo»  7882  PO  Box  1 7952  1325  Wtel  Dun  Road 

Judiciary  Madison.  Wisconsin.  53707-7882  MIlwaukM.  Wl  532I7<I952  River  Hills.  Wisconsin.  53217 

Business.  Economic  Development  Phone,  608-266-5830  Phone;  414-352-7877  414052-0390 

and  Urban  Allairs  Fax    608-266-7038  Fax:  414-352  2818 

Slate  &  Federal  Relations  Toll-tree   l-80t>^63-l  113 
Joint  Committee  lor  the  Review  ol 


939 


REPRESENTATIVE 


FOTI 

Assembly 
Majority  Leader 


April  8.  1997 

Mr.  Charles  Ruff 

Office  of  the  White  House  Counsel 

The  White  House 

1600  Pennsylvania  Avenue,  N.W. 

Washington.  D.C.  20500 

Dear  Mr.  Ruff: 


Legislative  Hotline: 

I  (8001  362  9472 


Home: 

1117  DicWNS  Diuvi 

OcONOMOwoc.  Wl  S3066 

(4M)  567-5324 


This  letter  endorses  the  nomination  of  State  Senator  Lynn  Adelman  to  fill 
the  vacancy  on  the  United  States  District  Court  in  the  Eastern  District  of 
Wisconsin. 

Through  his  tenure  in  the  State  Legislature,  I  have  had  the  opportunity  to 
work  with  Senator  Adelman  on  several  issues  facing  Wisconsin.  I  have 
found  Senator  Adelman  to  be  a  judicious  legislator  who  is  responsive  to 
his  constituents.  In  addition,  he  has  consistently  demonstrated  a  zealous 
attention  to  detail  that  serves  him  well  as  a  legislator  and  as  an  attorney. 
His  talents  and  strengths  would  match  the  requirements  of  a  federal  judge. 


Sincerely, 


Madison  Office: 

Room  215  West 
SlATl  Catitoi 


STEVE  FOTI 

Wisconsin  State  Representative 

Assembly  Majority  Leader 


Daniel  M.  Finley 

County  Executive 


940 


Waukesha 

COUNTY 

OFFICE  OF  COUNTY  EXECUTIVE 


Aprils,  1997 


Charles  Ruff 
Counsel  to  the  President 
The  Whitehouse 
Washington,  D.C. 

Dear  Mr.  Ruff: 

1  am  pleased  to  offer  my  strong  recommendations  on  behalf  of  Wisconsin  State  Senator 
Lynn  S.  Adelman  for  appointment  to  the  position  of  District  Court  Judge  in  the  Eastern  District 
of  Wisconsin.  He  will  make  an  outstanding  jurist. 

Senator  Adelman  has  long  been  a  champion  of  open  government  and  justice  related 
issues.  Wisconsin  state  government  reflects  the  many  victories  that  Senator  Adelman  has  won  in 
making  us  more  open  and  responsive  to  the  people  and  to  the  rights  of  individuals. 

He  has  served  Waukesha  County  well  in  the  Wisconsin  State  Senate.  He  has,  for  the 
better  part  of  his  time  in  public  office,  been  the  only  Democratic  representative  from  this  highly 
Republican  County.  He  has  always  persevered  because  of  his  strong  record  of  service  to  his 
constituents  and  thoughtful  law  making.  As  a  Republican  myself,  1  am  proud  to  support  his 
nomination. 

If  I  can  offer  any  further  help  to  you  in  this  selection  process,  please  don't  hesitate  to 
contact  me.  Senator  Adelman  has  been  a  great  champion  in  his  career  for  the  cause  of  good  and 
open  government  and  would  make  an  excellent  jurist  for  the  Eastern  District. 

Sincerely, 

Daniel  M.  Finley  / 

County  Executive         u 

DMF:sh 


1320  Pewaukee  Road 

Waukesha.  Wisconsin  53188 

(414)  548-7902 

Fax:  (414)  548-7913 

TDD   (414)  548-7903 


941 


SCOTT  KLUG 

SlCOW  OS"*'- WiKON! 


COMMERCE  COMMITTEE 


Congrfgg  of  tt)c  Unitfb  ^tatc£^ 

jK^ousc  o(  i^cprcsrntatibcs 
JBSHagljington.  ffiC  20515^902 


April   9,    1997 


Mr.  Charles  Ruff 

Counsel  to  the  President 

The  White  House 

1600  Pennsylvania  Avenue,  N.W. 

Washington,  D.C.   20500 

Dear  Mr.  Ruff: 

I  am  writing  on  behalf  of  State  Senator  Lynn  S.  Adelraan. 
Senator  Adelraan  has  been  recommended  to  the  President  for 
nomination  to  a  federal  district  judgeship  for  Wisconsin's 
eastern  district. 

Senator  Adelraan  has  served  in  the  Wisconsin  State 
Legislature  since  1976.   During  that  time,  he  has  been  a  member 
of  the  Senate  Judiciary  Committee,  where  he  has  earned  a 
reputation  as  a  strong,  aggressive  advocate  of  the  judicial 
system.   He  is  widely  recognized  as  someone  who  is  hard  working 
and  scholarly.   He's  willing  to  extend  a  cooperative  hand  to  find 
a  balance  in  making  public  policy  decisions  and  has  the  kind  of 
studious  teraperament  that  would  make  him  an  excellent  judge. 

Thank  you  for  your  time  and  consideration  of  my  comments. 

Sincerely, 


,^l>u^  ■ 


PLEASe  RESPOND  TO 

□    1113  Lo«Gwo«iM  Mouse  Orrm  Buio 
WASKmcTOM.  OC  205 15-4902 
(?02)  J»-»06 


Q     16  No*»rH  Ca»ihoh  Si 
Room  600 
Maoison.WI  53^03 
<608l 2S7-9200 


THIS  STATIONERY  PRINTED  ON  PAPER  MADE  Of  RECYCLED  FIBERS 


942 


LEE     SHERMAN     DREYFUS 
G  OV  E  R  N  O  R 
1979  -   1983 


1  » / S    -    1983 


^i^ 


^..  -^    ^^^  ^^^^^^     ^U/.^.,<^/Z^ 


^'^^^^    -^^^-E.^^^    ^^     .feit.,^  ^^^4"^^   ,      ^     y^ 


943 


'^^U^ ct^j^c     ^-u^  .^^^    ^<^^,.^^*i^:f^^^ .^^*^  ^  y&cz.^^^^ 


THOMAS  E.  PETRI 


944 


Congress  of  tfjc  WinittXt  States 

^oujfe  of  JRcprcsfentatitjEg 

OTaStjington.  30«t  20515^906 


April  14,  1997 


Charles  Ruff 

Counsel  to  the  President 

The  White  House 


Dear  Mr.  Ruff, 


I  am  writing  to  support  the  candidacy  of  Lynn  Adelman  for  appointment  to  the  US 
District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin.  I  have  known  Lynn  for  nearly  twenty 
years  and  have  worked  closely  with  him  for  three  of  those  years. 

While  Lynn  and  I  have  our  political  differences,  he  has  my  respect. 

Lynn  Adelman  is  honest,  bright  and  conscientious.  I  believe  he  has  the  brc.idth  of 
experience,  intellect  and  judgment  to  be  a  fine  judge  for  the  Eastern  District. 

I  strongly  urge  you  to  recommend  his  selection  by  the  President. 


Petri 
Member  of  Congress 


945 


Wisconsin  Professional  Pouce  Associahon 


April  16,  1997 


The  Homxsble  Russell  D.  Feingold 
United  Sutes  Senate 
S02  Hart  Sonats  Office  Building 
Washington,  DC    205KM904 

Dear  Senator  Feingold: 

On  behalf  of  tbe  7000  members  d(\tbe 
this  opportunity  to  recommend  S< 
Appeals  seat  for  the  7th  Circuit 


'olicc  Association,  I  want  to  take 
e  vacant  United  States  Court  of 


We  have  worked  with  Smator/Aoelman  ^f^^SS^KI^  for,a>ntl^^ber  of  years  aixl  as  an  advocate. 
We  have  found  him  to  be  a  coilsti^tiouS,lnj^^^^m'iMe  t^^iA^  with  groups  of  people  with 
diverse  points  of  view  aiKlreaciikamtet^uspA,     '(^c. 


Here  in  Wisconsin,  Senalor  Adehnan  hkk^^ 
urge  you  to  sedously  consider  him  for  tfae^ 

Thank  you  for  yotv  considetalion. 

~"     Sinoerely. 

John  B.  Chaiewicz 
President,  WPPA 

JEC:jep 

cc:     Senator  Adebnan 


L  man  of  sincerity  and  integrity.  We 
I  of  Appeals  Position. 


Ceiunl  Openbons:  7  N.  Pindoiey  Street  f220  •  M<<iuon,  Wl  S37CD  •  (tOB)  2S603M  •  1-800-367-8838 
Lm  Enfrwra>efU  Employee  Relations:  9730  W.  Bluemnind  R<Md  •  Vtbuwatou.  Wl  S3Z26  •  (414)  257-4000  •  1-aOO-236-«00? 


946 


Professional  Fire  Fighters  of  Wisconsin,  Inc. 

7  North  Pinckney  Street  •    Suite  135  •    Madison,  Wl  53703-2840  •   608/251-5832 

Fax  608/251-8707 


MarkD.  Zeier  Michael  Dobish  Rick  Gale 

state  President  State  Vice  President  State  Sec.  Treas 


April  17,  1997 


CHARLES  RUFF 
COUNSEL  TO  THE  PRESIDENT 
THE  WHITE  HOUSE 
WASHINGTON   DC 


Dear  Mr.  Ruff: 

It  is  with  great  entfiusiasm  that  I  write  to  express  the  recommendation  of  the 
Professional  Fire  Fighters  of  Wisconsin  for  State  Senator  Lynn  Adelman  for  the  position 
of  District  Courl  Judge  in  the  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin. 

We  have  worked  well  with  Senator  Adelman  throughout  his  long  and  distinguished 
career  in  the  Wisconsin  State  Legislature.  He  has  been  a  tireless  advocate  for  working 
people,  and  has  authored  landmark  legislation  in  the  fields  of  ethics,  marital  property 
and  open  records. 

His  public  service  background  alone  would  not  be  sufficient,  however,  to  recommend 
him  for  a  position  as  a  District  Court  Judge.  As  an  attorney.  Senator  Adelman  has 
demonstrated  the  courage  and  commitment  to  stand  up  for  his  progressive  phnciples. 
His  leadership  in  such  cases  as  the  overtuming  of  the  "gag  rule"  for  public  employes, 
and  the  challenges  to  the  bail  and  hate  crime  provisions  of  state  law,  establish  his  legal 
credentials  very  well. 

We  are  honored  that  you  would  consider  our  opinion  on  this  matter,  and  we  urge  you  to 
strongly  consider  Senator  Adelman  for  this  position. 


Sincerely, 

Mark  D.  Zeier 
State  President 


947 


R05ENZWEI(3 


State  Senator.  5th  Senate  District 


April  28,  1997 

Charles  Ruff 

Counsel  to  the  President 

The  White  House 

1600  Pennsylvania  Avenue 

Washington,  DC.  20500 

Dear  Mr.  Ruff; 

1  heartily  recommend  Wisconsm  State  Senator  Lynn  Adelman  for  appointment  to  the 
United  States  District  Court's  l:asicrn  District  of  Wisconsin  judgeship. 

Though  Senator  Adelman  and  I  sii  on  opposite  sides  of  the  partisan  aisle,  I  have  greatly 
admired  his  independence  aiui  sense  of  fairness  during  my  15  years  in  the  Wisconsin 
Legislature   His  ability  to  Lonsidcr  all  sides  of  an  issue  without  preconceptions  or 
personal  bias  would  be  a  line  assei  on  the  federal  bench.  He  brings  the  demeanor  of  a 
judge  to  eacli  legislative  session  aiul  hearing,  and  he  commands  the  same  measure  of 
respect.  No  Wisconsin  lawmaker  kiuiws  more  about  the  law. 

Lynn  Adelman's  appointment  would  be  applauded  by  conservatives  and  liberals. 
Republicans  and  Democrats  alike  He  merits  your  utmost  consideration. 

Sincerely 


vZ5      V^ 

PEGGY  KOSENZWEIG  "^  O 


PEGGY  Kq^ENZWEIG 
Slate  Senator  -  Wisconsin 
5th  District 

PR/rs 


Slate  Capitol  PO   Box  /882.  Madison.  Wl  53707-7882       608  266-2512 
6236  Upper  ParkMit  North    Wauwalosa.  Wl  53213       414  258  4664 


948 


Fred  Risser 


:?!JU^ 


President 
Wisconsin  State  Senate 


May  I,  1997 


Charles  Ruff 

Counsel  to  the  President 

The  White  House 

1600  Pennsylvania  Avenue 

Washington,  DC    20500 

Dear  Mr.  Ruff, 


I  am  writing  to  express  my  strong  support  for  the  appointment  of  Lynn  Adelman  to  the 
judicial  vacancy  in  the  United  States  District  Court  in  the  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin. 

I  have  served  with  Senator  Adelman  in  the  Wisconsin  Senate  since  he  was  first  elected  in 
1976    During  most  of  that  time,  I  have  also  served  as  President  of  the  Senate.  While  Lynn  has 
chaired  the  Judiciary  Committee,  he  has  been  an  integral  part  of  the  Democrats'  leadership  team 
in  the  Senate  and  I  have  worked  closely  with  him  m  developing  our  caucus'  legislative  agenda.  I 
have  always  found  Lynn  to  be  a  thoughtful  and  hard-working  legislator  deeply  committed  to 
Democratic  principles,  and  I  think  that  Lynn  will  make  an  excellent  federal  judge. 

Although  Senator  Adelman  will  be  sorely  missed  in  the  legislature  for  his  attention  to 
detail  and  ability  to  forge  compromises  on  difficult  issues,  his  talents  and  background  certainly 
qualify  him  to  serve  as  a  judge.   I  am  pleased  to  provide  any  additional  information  about  Senator 
Adelman's  qualifications  for  the  federal  bench. 


jx3>--i 


Risser 

Senator 
Senate  District 


P.O  Box  7882,  Madison.  WI  53707-7882   • 


(608)  266-1627  E-Mail:   Sen.Risser@legis.state.wi.us   •    Fax  (608)  266-1629 

Prtnled  on  recycled  paper 


949 


COUNTY  EXECUTIVE 
JEAN  M   JACOBSON 


RACINE   COUN 

,      '931 

730  VVisconsm  Avenue 
53403 


PHONE  4M-636-31 18 

Racine. County  Courthouse  Toll  Free 

1-800-242-4202 


May  1,  1997 


Charles  Ruff 

Counsel  to  the  President 
White  House 
Washington,  D.C. 

Dear  Mr.  Ruff: 

I  am  writing  to  endorse  the  appointment  of  Lynn  Adelman  to  serve  as  a 
judge  in  the  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin.    State  Senator  Adelman  is 
thoughtful,  hard-working  and  honest.    He  has  served  our  district  with 
distinction  in  the  State  legislature,  and  he  would  serve  with  distinction  as  a 
federal  judge. 

Thank  you  for  your  consideration  of  my  recommendation. 


Very  truly  yours. 


Jean  M.  Jacobson 
County  Executive 


Racine  County  Uses  lOO°/o  Recycled  Paper 


4S.QA^      QB 


950 


State  of  Wisconsin 
Lieutenant  Gk)vernor  sco«  McCaiium 

Ijculcnajii  Governor 
State  Capitot.  Room  22  East   •   Madisoa,  Wisconsin  53  AJ2 
608/266  3516          Fax  267  3571 


Mays,  1997 


Charles  Ruff.  Counsel  to  the  President 

The  White  House 

West  Wing.  2""  Roor 

1600  Pennsyivaiua  Avenue.  N  W 

Washington.  D  C  20iOO 

Dear  Mr  Ruff 

1  am  writing  to  reconrxnend  State  Senator  Lynn  S  Adelnun  for  appointment  to  the 
United  Stales  District  Coun  for  the  F-astem  District  of  Wisconsin    Senator  Adelman's 
background  and  expenence  make  him  eminently  qualified  for  this  judgeship 

I  have  known  I.ynn  Adelman  since  1976  when  we  both  were  elected  to  the 
Wisconsin  State  Senate    Through  the  last  several  years  Senator  Adelman  has  served  as 
chairman  or  ranking  minority  leader  of  the  Senate  committees  related  to  the  judiciary 
Furthermore,  he  has  long  been  actrve  in  revising  and  updating  the  laws  of  this  state 
Cuncntly.  he  is  working  toward  the  recodification  of  Wisconsin's  criminal  laws    Lynn 
Adelman's  intellect  and  abilities  are  respected  by  his  colleagues  on  both  sides  of  the  aisle 

Given  his  long  and  distinguished  service  to  the  State  of  Wisconsin  and  his 
thorough  knowledge  of  the  law,  I  beheve  Lynn  Adelman  is  an  excellent  and  logicaJ 
candidate  for  the  federal  bench    Therefore,  I  urge  the  Clinton  Administration  to  give 
Senator  Lynn  S  Adelman  scnous  consideration  for  appointment  to  the  I )  S  Distnct  Court 
for  the  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin 

Thank  you  for  your  attention  to  this  matter 


/^incerely, 

l^^con  McCallum 
lieutenant  Governor 


951 

Senator  Kyl.  The  Chair  will  announce  at  this  time  that  the 
record  will  remain  open  for  3  days  for  submission  of  any  material 
that  the  members  would  like  to  submit. 

On  the  assumption  that  these  are  the  two  introductions  of  Mr. 
Adelman,  Mr.  Adelman,  would  you  please  stand  so  at  least  we  can 
all  see  who  these  nice  words  have  been  spoken  about.  We  will  call 
you  forward  in  a  moment.  I  thank  both  of  the  Senators  from  Wis- 
consin for  that  introduction. 

Since  we  have  another  member  of  the  committee,  and  I  see  at 
least  one  House  Member,  from  the  State  of  Illinois  for  the  purpose 
of  making  introductions  of  the  Illinois  nominees,  Senator  Durbin, 
could  I  ask  you  to  make  the  next  introduction,  please? 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  RICHARD  J.  DURBIN,  A  U.S.  SENATOR 
FROM  THE  STATE  OF  ILLINOIS 

Senator  DuRBlN.  Mr.  Chairman,  can  Congressman  Evans  join  me 
at  this  point? 

Senator  Kyl.  Yes;  he  certainly  can.  Representative  Evans  from 
Illinois,  as  well. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman  and  members  of  the 
Judiciary  Committee.  It  is  my  pleasure  to  introduce  to  you  two 
nominees  for  the  Federal  district  courts  in  Illinois,  Michael 
McCuskey  and  Pat  Murphy.  Judge  Michael  McCuskey  is  the  nomi- 
nee for  the  central  district  and  Pat  Murphy  is  the  nominee  for  the 
southern  district.  Both  men  possess  the  necessary  qualities  to 
make  outstanding  judges. 

In  an  effort  to  abbreviate  my  remarks,  to  follow  the  chairman's 
admonition,  I  would  only  add  that  Senator  Carol  Moseley-Braun 
and  I  went  through  an  extensive  process,  entertaining  nominees 
from  across  the  State  for  the  various  vacancies,  and  after  their 
clearance  by  a  commission,  professional  commission,  we  narrowed 
it  down  to  these  two  finalists  in  central  and  southern  Illinois,  I 
think  for  good  reason. 

I  think  they  bring  more  than  legal  ability  to  the  job.  Mike 
McCuskey  is  well  known  throughout  central  Illinois  and  Peoria  for 
his  work  with  children  in  local  grade  schools  and  reading  projects 
and  also  with  senior  citizens.  Pat  Murphy,  we  came  to  learn  during 
the  course  of  our  review  of  his  background.  He  is  not  only  a  veteran 
but  really  gives  of  himself  unstintingly  on  behalf  of  veterans  and 
he  has  a  policy  in  his  office — ^you  do  not  make  much  money  with 
this  policy,  but  he  has  given  local  veterans  pro  bono  representation 
whenever  they  walk  through  the  door. 

Indeed,  if  you  hear  their  stories,  you  can  understand  why  Sen- 
ator Carol  Moseley-Braun  and  I  were  so  impressed.  Pat  Murphy 
was  born  and  raised  in  Marion,  IL.  He  enlisted  in  the  Marine 
Corps  at  the  age  of  17.  He  arrived  in  Vietnam  to  celebrate  his  18th 
birthday,  where  he  served  a  tour  of  duty  as  an  enlisted  man  in  the 
1st  Marine  Corps  weapons  platoon.  When  he  returned  to  Illinois, 
he  earned  his  college  degree  and  law  degree  with  the  help  of  the 
G.I.  bill,  and  after  both  his  parents  passed  away,  he  helped  to  raise 
his  four  younger  siblings,  although  as  he  puts  it,  they  all  raised  one 
another. 

Since  beginning  to  practice  law,  Mr.  Murphy  has  tried  almost 
100  cases  before  juries  and  another  200  before  the  bench.  He  has 


952 

represented  banks,  municipalities,  school  boards,  insurers,  and  in- 
dividuals in  both  civil  and  criminal  matters.  Mr.  Murphy  is  mar- 
ried and  has  three  children.  I  am  sorry  that  they  could  not  be  here 
with  him  today.  Two  are  in  school,  one  of  them  has  to  be  at  work, 
and  Mrs.  Murphy  is  at  home  keeping  an  eye  on  the  kids. 

Mike  McCuskey's  story  is  no  less  impressive.  For  the  last  9 
years,  he  has  served  as  a  State  court  judge,  for  2  years  a  circuit 
judge  in  the  10th  judicial  district,  and  since  1.990,  been  a  justice 
with  the  Third  District  Appellate  Court.  Born  in  Peoria,  before 
going  to  law  school,  he  worked  for  the  local  high  school  as  a  history 
teacher  and  a  baseball  coach.  During  law  school,  he  paid  his  bills 
by  working  as  a  security  guard.  After  graduating,  he  started  his 
own  law  firm. 

Judge  Mike  McCuskey  has  an  extraordinary  reputation.  I  am 
sure  that  Senator  Carol  Moseley-Braun  was  struck,  as  I  was,  by 
the  type  of  people  who  came  forward  to  say,  this  man  is  fair,  he 
is  firm,  he  has  exactly  the  kind  of  temperament  that  we  need  on 
the  Federal  bench.  His  family  could  not  be  with  him  today,  but  he 
has  a  wife  and  two  children  and  the  children  are  in  school  and  his 
wife  is  home  with  them. 

I  am  pleased  to  introduce  these  two  individuals  and  to  defer  to 
my  colleague  here.  She  will  reiterate,  I  am  sure,  the  need  to  fill 
these  vacancies  as  quickly  as  possible.  In  the  Southern  and  Central 
District,  we  have  four  judges  allocated  for  each  and  two  vacancies 
in  each  of  the  districts,  so  they  have  been  declared  judicial  emer- 
gencies. I  think  it  is  very  important  that  we  move  forward  as 
quickly  as  we  can  and  I  am  pleased  that  we  could  bring  two  such 
qualified  nominees  to  the  committee  for  consideration. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you  very  much.  Senator  Durbin. 

We  are  now  joined  by  Senator  Moseley-Braun.  Would  you  like  to 
make  the  next  introduction? 

Senator  Moseley-Braun.  I  would,  Mr.  Chairman.  However,  Con- 
gressman Evans,  who  is  here  to  speak  on  behalf  of  the  nominees, 
has  a  vote  on  the  House  side  and  I  would  just  as  soon  let  him  go 
forward. 

Senator  KVL.  I  would  be  happy  to  defer  to  Lane  Evans. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  LANE  EVANS,  A  REPRESENTATIVE  IN 
CONGRESS  FROM  THE  STATE  OF  ILLINOIS 

Mr.  Evans.  Thank  you.  Senator.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

I  am  very  proud  to  be  here  to  testify  in  support  of  the  nomination 
of  Michael  McCuskey  for  U.S.  district  judge  for  the  Central  District 
of  Illinois.  I  have  known  him  for  over  16  years  as  a  former  constitu- 
ent, as  a  lawyer,  and  as  a  judge.  I  believe  he  possesses  the  skills 
and  background  we  seek  in  Federal  judges. 

The  Peoria  Journal  Star  called  his  performance  as  judge  of  the 
10th  Judicial  Circuit  of  Illinois  exceptional.  He  was  recognized  for 
running  a  fast-paced  courtroom.  He  has  worked  long  hours  to  re- 
duce the  backlog  of  criminal  cases.  He  dispensed  tough  sentences 
and  always  considered  the  rights  of  victims.  He  insisted  on  court- 
room order,  but  he  was  also  known  for  his  engaging  personality. 

These  qualities  are  the  reasons  he  received  the  highest  score  of 
all  attorneys  in  21  Illinois  counties  in  a  poll  of  candidates  for  the 
appellate   and   supreme   court  judge   positions.   On   the   appellate 


953 

bench,  Judge  McCuskey  has  continued  to  display  great  legal  skill 
and  made  important  contributions  to  the  administration  of  justice. 

In  1991,  the  supreme  court  appointed  Judge  McCuskey  to  the  ad- 
ministrative committee  of  the  Illinois  court.  He  also  was  selected 
to  serve  as  presiding  judge  of  the  third  appellate  district  during 
1993.  His  public  speaking  appearances,  particularly  in  the  area  of 
criminal  law,  demonstrate  the  high  respect  fellow  judges  and  the 
bar  have  for  his  skills  and  legal  ability.  A  graduate  of  high  school 
with  only  a  senior  class  of  16  students,  he  knows  the  value  of  hard 
work.  A  former  teacher  and  coach,  he  understands  the  importance 
of  rules  and  the  impact  law  has  on  citizens  and  communities. 

He  is  an  excellent  choice  for  the  Federal  bench.  I  salute  my  two 
Senators  for  nominating  him  and  I  know  he  will  be  a  great  judge. 
Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you  very  much.  Representative  Evans. 

Senator  Moseley  Braun. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  CAROL  MOSELEY-BRAUN,  A  U.S. 
SENATOR  FROM  THE  STATE  OF  ILLINOIS 

Senator  Moseley-Braun.  Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman. 

I  am  very  pleased  to  be  here  this  afternoon  as  the  Senate  Judici- 
ary Committee  considers  the  nominations  of  G.  Patrick  Murphy 
and  Michael  McCuskey,  both  nominees  for  the  U.S.  District  Court 
of  Illinois.  These  two  men  represent  the  highest  caliber  of  public 
servants.  They  are  here  today  because  they  possess  the  legal  cre- 
dentials, the  experience,  and  temperament  necessary  to  serve  as 
Federal  judges.  I  believe  that  their  broad  legal  backgrounds  will 
help  them  serve  the  litigants  of  Illinois,  as  well. 

As  you  may  know,  Mr.  Chairman,  Senator  Durbin  and  I  estab- 
lished a  judicial  nominations  commission  to  help  us  locate  the  most 
qualified  persons  to  fill  vacancies  on  the  Central,  Southern,  and 
Northern  District  courts.  The  commission  publicized  the  U.S.  dis- 
trict court  vacancies  widely,  thoroughly  considered  the  question- 
naires of  all  the  applicants,  extensively  interviewed  and  inves- 
tigated the  candidates,  and  recommended  three  candidates  to  us 
for  each  of  the  two  vacancies.  After  this  extensive  process,  our  per- 
sonal interviews,  we  personally  interviewed  the  finalists  for  each 
vacancy  and  we  were  pleased  to  forward  to  the  President  the 
names  of  Mr.  Murphy  and  Judge  McCuskey. 

As  you  have  heard  already,  G.  Patrick  Murphy  is  a  Vietnam  vet- 
eran whose  level  head  and  sound  moral  judgment  have  shaped  his 
legal  reputation.  During  his  19  years  in  private  practice,  Mr.  Mur- 
phy has  displayed  outstanding  legal  expertise  in  both  the  Federal 
and  State  courts.  Colleagues,  former  adversaries,  judges,  and  em- 
ployees alike  hold  him  in  extremely  high  regard,  both  personally 
and  professionally.  He  has  always  shown  a  deep  respect  for  the  law 
and  an  acute  ability  to  make  tough  decisions. 

As  a  judge  in  the  Illinois  court  system  since  1988,  Michael 
McCuskey  has  earned  a  reputation  for  being  tough,  but  fair.  He  is 
known  statewide  as  being  the  first  judge  from  Peoria  to  sentence 
a  criminal  to  Peoria's  boot  camp.  Throughout  his  legal  career, 
Judge  McCuskey  has  displayed  the  highest  standards  of  personal 
honesty  and  professional  ethics.  In  the  courtroom,  his  manner  is  el- 


954 

oquent,  his  opinions  are  well  organized  and  well  written,  and  he  in- 
sists on  moving  his  docket  along. 

While  their  backgrounds  may  differ,  these  men  share  a  common 
desire  to  give  back  to  their  communities.  They  are  both  well  known 
for  their  community  outreach  and  their  public  service.  In  the 
course  of  their  nomination,  I  came  to  know  Mr.  Murphy  as  an  avid 
worker  for  the  American  Red  Cross  and  someone  who  has  a  passion 
for  working  with  and  for  children.  Judge  McCuskey,  in  kind,  is 
known  throughout  central  Illinois  for  his  immense  volunteer  work 
on  veterans'  issues. 

The  challenges  that  these  two  men  will  face  are  formidable. 
Every  district  in  our  State,  in  Illinois,  is  facing  serious  problems  as 
a  result  of  not  operating  with  a  full  bench  and  the  Southern  and 
Central  Districts  are  no  exception.  In  the  Southern  District,  the 
Chief  Judge  has  not  been  able  to  hold  a  civil  trial  for  over  a  year, 
and  even  as  I  speak  to  you,  a  major  civil  trial  is  being  delayed  in 
the  Central  District,  again,  because  of  understaffmg  of  the  bench. 

I  am  confident,  however,  that  Judge  McCuskey  and  Mr.  Murphy 
understand  the  challenges  that  they  face  and  that  they  have  the 
qualifications,  the  temperament,  and  the  compassion  necessary  to 
meet  those  challenges. 

I  want  to  thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman,  sincerely  for  calling  these 
nominations  forward.  For  all  of  what  goes  on  around  the  nomina- 
tions process,  the  fact  is  that  the  American  people  need  to  have 
these  positions  filled  so  that  the  judiciary  can  do  what  it  is  sup- 
posed to  do,  which  is  to  administer  justice  and  recognizing  the  dis- 
tinction between  the  legislative  branch  and  the  judicial  one,  rec- 
ognizing that  they  are  kind  of  two  different  orbits.  The  fact  is  that 
this  particular  orbit  really  does  touch  the  lives  of  Americans  in  a 
particular  way  and  the  people  of  our  State,  of  all  the  States  that 
are  involved  with  this  nominations  process,  deserve  to  have  these 
nominations  acted  upon  expeditiously. 

So  I  want  to  thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman,  for  calling  these  nomina- 
tions forward,  for  moving  them  forward.  It  is  a  step  in  the  direction 
of  getting  the  Federal  bench  filled  with  competent,  qualified,  and 
good  people  who  will  see  to  it  that  the  laws  of  this  country  are  fair- 
ly administered  and  appropriately  administered  for  all  the  people. 
Thank  you. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you.  Senator  Moseley-Braun.  You  have  my 
assurance,  and  I  am  sure  I  speak  for  the  chairman  of  the  full  com- 
mittee, that  the  purpose  for  this  hearing  today  is  to  get  this  process 
moving  to  the  next  step  so  that  we  can  proceed  to  get  the  nominees 
confirmed,  at  least  voted  on  confirmation  as  quickly  as  possible. 

Senator  Moseley-Braun.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Kyl.  I  should  also  mention  that  Congressman  Ray 
LaHood  has  been  detained  on  the  floor.  His  statement  of  introduc- 
tion will  be  submitted  for  the  record. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Mr.  LaHood  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Hon.  Ray  LaHood,  a  Representative  in  Congress 
From  the  State  of  Illinois 

Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman,  for  allowing  me  to  be  present  here  today  for  the  nomi- 
nation of  Judge  Michael  McCuskey  to  the  federal  judiciary.  I  believe  Judge 
McCuskey  will  be  an  outstanding  addition  to  the  ranks  of  the  federal  judiciary,  and 
it  is  truly  an  honor  to  be  here  to  provide  introductory  remarks. 


955 

Judge  McCuskey,  who  is  a  lifelong  resident  of  Illinois,  has  tirelessly  and  selflessly 
served  his  community  well  as  a  teacher,  an  advocate,  lawyer  and  a  judge.  All  of 
these  experiences  will  serve  him  well  as  a  member  of  the  federal  judicial  branch. 
His  legal  background  includes  service  as  the  Marshall  County  Public  Defender,  Cir- 
cuit Judge  of  the  10th  Judicial  Circuit,  and  his  present  position  as  a  Judge  of  the 
Third  District  Appellate  Court.  In  1991,  in  recognition  of  his  hard  work,  he  received 
the  Illinois  Public  Defender  Association's  Award  of  Excellence  and  Meritorious  Serv- 
ice. His  service  as  a  felony  court  judge  in  Peoria,  Illinois  earned  him  a  listing  in 
"Who's  Who  in  Law  Enforcement."  In  addition,  he  is  the  senior  member  of  the  Ad- 
ministrative Committee  of  the  Illinois  Appellate  Court  and  was  Chairman  of  the  Ap- 
pellate Court  Executive  Committee. 

Judge  McCuskey's  public  service  has  not  been  limited  to  the  legal  arena.  From 
1989  to  1995  he  was  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  Central  Illinois 
Chapter  of  the  American  Red  Cross.  He  also  serves  as  a  member  of  the  Peoria 
League  of  Women  Voters  and  the  Peoria  Rotary  Club.  And,  before  attending  the  law 
school  at  Saint  Louis  University,  he  taught  history  and  coached  baseball  at  Ottawa 
Township  High  School. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  am  proud  to  join  my  distinguished  colleagues  in  the  Senate,  Sen- 
ators Carol  Moseley-Braun  and  Dick  Durbin  in  introducing  Judge  McCuskey  to  your 
committee.  If  Judge  McCuskey's  past  service  is  any  indication,  and  it  should  be,  we 
will  all  benefit  greatly  from  his  confirmation  to  the  federal  bench.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Kyl.  Could  I  ask  these  two  nominees  now  to  stand?  First 
of  all,  Judge  McCuskey,  would  you  stand?  Thank  you  very  much. 
We  will  hear  from  you  more  in  just  a  moment.  And  Mr.  Murphy, 
Mr.  Patrick  Murphy?  Great.  Thank  you  for  those  fine  statements 
of  introduction. 

Now,  since  we  have  Senators  from  two  other  States,  Senator 
Feinstein  being  a  member  of  the  committee,  I  am  going  to  ask  her 
for  the  first  nomination  and  then  we  will  see  what  other  members 
come  forward  at  that  time.  Senator  Dianne  Feinstein.  Senator 
Boxer,  please  take  one  of  those  chairs.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Feinstein. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  DIANNE  FEINSTEIN,  A  U.S.  SENATOR 
FROM  THE  STATE  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Senator  Feinstein.  Thank  you  very  much.  Senator  Kyl  and  Sen- 
ator DeWine,  Senator  Feingold.  I  want  to  begin  by  thanking  Chair- 
man Hatch  for  scheduling  these  hearings.  I  am  very  appreciative, 
and  I  am  honored  and  delighted  to  recommend  to  the  committee 
three  district  judges  and  one  Federal  appellate  court  nominee  from 
my  home  State,  California. 

Let  me  just  begin  alphabetically  with  the  two  that  I  nominated 
to  the  President,  the  first  being  Charles  Breyer,  known  as  Chuck 
Breyer.  He  has  a  broad  range  of  experience  in  both  criminal  and 
civil  law.  He  is  extremely  well  qualified  for  the  appointment.  He 
served  as  a  special  prosecutor  during  Watergate.  He  has  prosecuted 
violent  felons  for  7  years  as  an  assistant  D.A.  in  San  Francisco  and 
he  has  worked  to  reduce  youth  violence  as  the  current  chairman  of 
the  Juvenile  Probation  Commission  of  San  Francisco.  He  is  also  ex- 
perienced in  civil  trials  and  he  is  a  partner  of  a  top  law  firm. 

He  graduated  cum  laude  from  Harvard  in  1963.  He  earned  his 
J.D.  from  Boalt  Hall,  the  University  of  California,  in  1966.  He 
clerked  for  Judge  Oliver  Carter  in  the  district  court  in  northern 
California  for  a  year  following  his  graduation.  From  1967  to  1972, 
he  was  assistant  district  attorney  for  the  city  and  county  of  San 
Francisco,  something  my  daughter  has  been,  where  he  prosecuted 
more  than  50  felony  trials,  including  numerous  homicide  cases.  He 


956 

returned  to  the  district  attorney's  office  in  1979  to  serve  as  the 
chief  assistant,  where  he  supervised  90  attorneys. 

He  was  appointed  by  Archibald  Cox  to  serve  as  Assistant  Special 
Prosecutor  on  Watergate  from  1973  to  1974.  During  his  2  years  in 
Washington,  he  also  conducted  grand  jury  proceedings  into  crimi- 
nal allegations  of  abuse  of  power  by  White  House  employees.  He 
has  served  with  his  present  law  firm,  Coblentz,  Cahen,  McCabe, 
and  Breyer,  since  1975,  except  for  a  1-year  leave  of  absence  for  the 
return  to  the  D.A.'s  office.  His  practice  focuses  primarily  on  com- 
plex litigation  matters,  both  civil  and  criminal,  in  both  the  State 
and  Federal  courts. 

I  mentioned  he  served  as  president  of  the  Juvenile  Probation 
Commission.  He  was  recommended  to  that  spot  by  the  San  Fran- 
cisco Superior  Court. 

His  strong  record  as  a  prosecutor  has  earned  him  the  respect  of 
many  law  enforcement  officers.  Of  the  finalists  recommended  to  me 
for  this  appointment,  Charles  Breyer  was  the  No.  1  choice  of  the 
California  Narcotics  Officers  Association  and  he  was  also  endorsed 
by  the  San  Francisco  Police  Officers  for  this  position. 

He  is,  quite  simply,  an  outstanding  man,  a  proven  leader,  and  a 
person  of  high  integrity.  I  am  very  proud  to  recommend  him  to  this 
committee. 

I  would  also  like  to  recommend  Frank  Damrell  to  the  members 
of  the  committee  in  hopes  that  he  will  be  confirmed  to  serve  on  the 
Federal  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California.  Mr. 
Damrell  is  widely  respected  in  the  Central  Valley  and  Sacramento 
areas  of  our  State.  His  30-year  career  in  the  legal  profession  has 
included  both  extensive  experience  in  civil  courts  and  several  years 
of  criminal  trial  experience  as  a  deputy  district  attorney  and  a  dep- 
uty attorney  general  in  California. 

After  graduating  from  Yale,  he  returned  to  California  from  1965 
to  1967,  worked  as  a  State  deputy  attorney  general  in  the  San 
Francisco  office.  In  only  his  second  year  in  the  office,  he  was  the 
first  deputy  assigned  to  the  newly  created  consumer  fraud  unit.  In 
1966,  he  moved  back  to  his  home  town  of  Modesto  and  became  a 
senior  trial  deputy  in  the  Stanislaus  County  district  attorney's  of- 
fice. He  has  handled  numerous  jury  trials,  including  three  murder 
trials,  during  his  time. 

From  1968  to  1980,  he  opened  his  own  law  office,  which  is  prob- 
ably the  largest  law  firm  in  the  Central  Valley.  Over  the  years,  the 
Damrell  firm  has  grown  to  become  one  of  the  most  respected  legal 
firms  in  the  State.  The  practice  is  primarily  civil,  with  a  broad 
range  of  business  litigation  matters. 

Since  1988,  his  legal  practice  has  focused  again  on  complex  busi- 
ness litigation.  His  clients  include  publicly  owned  corporations, 
closely  held  family  corporations,  public  entities,  and  individuals. 
Their  businesses  include  farming,  trucking,  food  processing, 
wineries,  construction,  and  manufacturing  companies,  distributor- 
ships, and  professional  corporations.  He  has  also  had  specific  expe- 
rience in  securities  fraud  and  antitrust  law. 

Former  Senator  John  Danforth  wrote,  and  I  quote, 

Frank  has  all  the  qualifications  that  are  important  for  the  bench.  He  is  smart, 
he  is  experienced,  he  is  sensible,  and  he  is  dedicated  to  doing  good.  He  has  no  trace 


957 

of  what  could  become  "federalitis",  and  he  is  not  the  kind  of  person  who  would  use 
his  position  to  grind  some  personal  or  political  ax. 

Former  Agriculture  Secretary  Dick  L3mg  wrote,  "Frank  Damrell 
is  exceptionally  well  qualified  to  serve  in  this  post.  *  *  *  I  believe 
[he]  will  be  an  outstanding  judge."  And  it  goes  on  and  on,  Mr. 
Chairman.  Ann  Veneman,  the  secretary  of  the  California  Depart- 
ment of  Food  and  Agriculture,  is  a  supporter,  as  are  presiding 
Judge  Hugh  Rose  of  the  Stanislaus  County  Superior  Court,  Sheriff 
Les  Weidman  of  Stanislaus  County— and  I  would  like  to  submit  for 
the  record  a  number  of  letters  supporting  his  candidacy. 

Senator  Kyl.  Without  objection,  those  letters  will  be  considered 
a  part  of  the  record.  •  ■ 

[Senator  Feinstein  submitted  the  following  letters:] 


958 


SIAIE   Of    CALIFORNIA 

DEPARTMENT  OF  FOOD  AND  AGRICULTURE 

1220  N  Street,  Rm.  409 
Sacramento,  CA  95814 
(916)  654-0433 


January  17, 1997 


The  Honorable  Dianne  Feinstein 
United  State  Senator 
525  Market  Street,  Suite  3670 
San  Francisco,  CA  94105 

Dear  Senator  Feinstein: 

It  was  ruce  to  see  you  this  week  in  Mcinteca  during  your  visit  with  the 
victims  of  our  recent  floods. 

As  you  well  know,  an  advisory  committee  has  submitted  Frank  Damrell's 
name  to  your  office  for  consideration  of  an  appointment  to  the  United  States 
District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California.    I  believe,  Frank  would  be  an 
extraordinary  choice  to  fill  this  vacancy  on  the  bench. 

I  have  personally  and  professionally  known  Frank  Damrell  for  over 
twenty  years.  1  am  routinely  impressed  by  Frank's  ethical  nature,  sound 
judgment  and  professional  ability. 

Frank  is  exceptionally  learned  in  the  law.  He  began  his  career  as  a  Deputy 
Attorney  General  in  San  Francisco  and  returned  home  to  Modesto  to  work  for 
Stanislaus  County  as  a  Deputy  District  Attorney  where  he  prosecuted  numerous 
felony  jury  trials. 

In  1968,  Frank  began  a  solo  law  practice  that  has  grown  to  become  one  of 
the  premier  law  practices  in  the  San  Joaquin  Valley,  with  a  current  staff  of  18 
attorneys.  Frank  has  practiced  in  federal  courts  and  also  has  a  strong  knowledge 
of  public  policy  issues.  Throughout  each  of  his  professional  accomplishments, 
Frank  has  demonstrated  the  highest  level  of  ethics  and  personal  integrity. 

Yet,  there  is  no  other  accomplishment  that  Frank  is  more  proud  of  than 
his  own  commitment  to  his  family  cmd  community.  Frank  is  a  dedicated 
husband,  father  and  grandfather.    He  is  also  a  leader  of  his  community, 
contributing  both  time  and  resources  to  numerous  Stanislaus  County  charitable 
organizations  and  causes. 

I  am  reminded  that  since  1945,  only  two  Stemislaus  County  residents  have 
been  appointed  to  the  federal  bench.  In  fact,  the  last  federal  appointment  to  the 
bench  from  Stanislaus  County  was  over  17  years  ago. 

1  have  enclosed  a  recent  Modesto  Bee  profile  on  Frank  that  I  feel  accurately 
details  his  spirit  and  commitment.  I  believe  Frank  would  serve  the  United  States 
District  Court  with  distinction  and  honor.  I  would  appreciate  your  consideration 
on  this  matter. 


Sincerely, 


Enclosure 


959 


>..■  Mcd.Mo  n,~,. 


l)«:,nil»>    1'..   I '.I' 


A  dream  believer 


Daim^ell 
turns  vision 
into  reality 


Frank  C   Damrcll  Jr  s 
favonte  photographs  sil  tn 
frBmes  in  his  home 
ibrarj-   Here  is  Frank  Damreil 
!nledaming  Jimmy  Carter  in  his 
iTonl  yard  on  Wyciiffe  There  he 
IS  shaking  hands  v,"ilU  Joe 
Montana,  talking  to  Muhammad 
^1.  posing  with  Jerry  Brown, 
eaiing  dinner  with  President 
Clinton 

The  diplomas  are  reserved  for 
his  office  walls.  Damreil.  58,  is  a 
lawyer,  a  graduate  of  Yale  Law 
School   He  has  one  of  the  largest 
law  practices  in  the  Central 
Valley  The  five-siory  office 
building  he  buUt  three  years  ago 
in  downiowTi  Modesto  is  named 
after  his  father.  Fraak  C. 
Damreil  Sr  .  who  was  a  labor 
law  and  tnaJ  anomey  and 
Stanislaus  County  judge 

Family  portraits  hang  on 
nearly  every  wall  of  lus  home 
and  his  office  There's  his  great- 
grandfather, who  came  west  to 
California  in  1849.  and 
innumerable  photos  of  Damrell's 
wife,  four  children,  vwo 
grandchildren  and  dog  Bo 

Ask  anyone  who  knows  him 
w'ell.  and  thcyll  say  Frank 
Damreil  is  a  famih  man  and  a 
lawyer  wth  fncnds  in  high 
places   Moreover,  he's  a  thinker, 
an  unassuming  man  of  vision 
and  action,  which  is  something 
that  can't  be  captured  in  a 
picture  frame 

"To  me.  Frank  is  a 
Renaissance  man."  says  Rav 
Simon,  a  county  super\'isor  who 
has  been  a  fncnd  for  .3S  years 
"I've  never  known  .inyonc  with 
an  interest  m  so  ni.nny  things 
And  for  Frank,  there  is  no  such 
thing  as  a  casual  mieresi  " 

There's  a  sens,  ,,i  Dnmrcll's 
vision  in  downtc.wr  Modesto  —  I 
Street  in  paniiu:,i:    For  Damrcll. 
I  Street  is  more  man  a  pan  of 
the  onginal  alph.:hi  t  grid   It  is  a 
symbol  for  Mod.  ■.!.,  s 


p        .    _  'Bart  Ari  VoaThe  Bf 

f-ranK  c.  Damreil  Jr.'s  Interests  and  loves  are  captured  on  the  walls  of  his  Modesto  home 


revitalLZation  And  it  is  more 

After  all.  Frank  Damreil 
stancd  his  lite  just  off  I  Street 

V. Title  Damreil  was  grovnng  up 
in  old  Modesto  dunng  the  post- 
World  War  II  years,  he  would 
stand  at  one  end  of  the  long, 
tree  lined  1  Street  at  dusk  with 
his  sister   Mane,  and  his  dog. 
Mickey  They  would  watch  their 
father  make  his  sidewalk 
commute  from  hf;  office  at  lOth 
and  I  to  the  house  with  the  from 
yard  flagpole  on  Kimble  Street 
For  the  young  Damrcll.  I 

and  Ih<-  small  town  blocks 


1  eilhc 


*h(il 


ed  hi: 


.  erteci  world  There  was 
tlu-  hospital  where  he  was  born, 
the  streets  where  he  plaved  ball 
the  ni.;\or  s  house  where  his 
(athr-r  talked  politics,  the 

S'-c  B.ick  Pag.?  Vision 


NEWSMAKERS 


This  is  another  in  an 
occasional  series  protilmg 
people  who  make  the 
news 

Name:  Frank  C   Damreil 
Jr 

Age    58 

Job    Aiiorney  wMh 
Damrcll.  Nelson,  Schnmp 

PaM'OS  and  Ladme 
Years  m  profession   3i 
Educalion.  Gradua":'  of 
>.-,io  Law  School  Umversirv 
n)  California  at  Befkcici,   and 
Modesio  High  School  Also 
jiinnded  Sacred  He-n 


Novilale  seminary  and  Sanl 
Clara  Untversity 

Family.  Wile.  Ludy 
Damretl,  sons.  Frank  Damro 
III  and  Jim  Damreil.  ■ 
daughters.  Ua  Damrell- 
McKeon  and  Anne  Damreil 
grandchildren  Cap  and 
Kalhenne.  stsief.  Mane 
GallQ 

Favorite  book:  Carl 
Sandburg  s    Lincoln  ' 

Favorite  music:  Classic.- 
especaify  MozaT 

Favorite  person  Irom 
history    ADfaham  Lmcolr' 

Favorite  leisure  activity 
Atlending  San  Francsco 
49er  games 

Persons  he  most 
admires:  Faihc-:  Gary  Sm<'.t 
and  Mo:Mer  Teresa 


960 


grammar  school,  the  movie 
theater  and  the  library 

Fifty  years  since  his  first 
vigilant  watch  over  1  Street, 
Damrell  lakes  in  the  view  from 
his  fifth-floor  luxury  law  office  al 
16th  and  I  streets   He  can  see  the 
rooftops  of  nearly  every 
downtown  store  and  office 
building,  the  pmnacle  of  the 
McHenry  Mansion  —  and  I 
Street,  still  lined  with  trees 

"Growing  up,  this  street  was 
the  center  of  my  universe,"  he 
says.  "In  my  mind,  it  is  still  the 
heart  of  old  Modesto,  but  the 
downtown  has  lost  a  lot  of  its 
luster.  Somehow,  I  feel  an 
obligation  to  preserve  it.  If  we  let 
the  downtown  decay,  our 
identity  as  a  community  is  at 
risk,  and  that  affects  the  soul  of 
everyone." 

What  an  unexpected  twist  for 
a  man  who  spends  his  days 
practicing  civil  law  and  business 
litigation  to  talk  about  a  street 
with  such  passion,  to  link  it  with 
something  as  vast  as  a 
"communal  soul." 

But  in  Damrell's  world.  I 
Street  is  an  icon  —  one  that  led 
him  out  of  town  after  high 
school  graduation  and  brought 
him  back  again  as  an  adult  — 
and  more  importantly,  one  that 
has  an  impact  on  the  entire 
community. 

Four  years  of  silence 

When  Damrell  left  Modesto 
after  high  school  in  1955.  he 
went  to  Santa  Clara  University. 
After  a  year,  he  changed  his 
course  in  a  way  that  few  people 
do.  He  dropped  out  of  school  to 
lead  a  secluded  life  at  Sacred 
Heart  Novitate,  a  Jesuit 
seminary  in  Los  Gatos.  where  he 
studied  to  become  a  pnest. 
While  there,  he  wasn't  allowed 
to  go  home,  not  at  Chnstmas  or 
Easier  or  even  when  his  only 
sister  mamed  Robert  Gallo. 

The  seminary  experience  is 
one  he  shares  with  Jerry  Brown. 
who  had  been  his  roommate  at 
Santa  Clara 

"The  seminary  was  an  intense    . 
education,  an  experience  shaped 
by  a  certain  era  of  Catholicism, 
which  IS  largely  faded  from  the 
world  today."  Brown  says  "We 
lived  a  life  of  poverty,  chastity, 
obedience  and  spiritual  reading 
It  was  a  world  apart,  where 
friendships  were  developed  and 
perspectives  adapted  " 

Damrell  hears  how  Brown 
descnt>es  the  experience  and 
chuckles  "We  didn't  just  sit 
around,  meditating,  reading  and 
speaking  Latin  We  worked  the 
fields  and  harvested  grapes  " 


Still,  it  was  unlike  anything  he 
had  ever  experienced  in  his 
pnvileged  upbringing 

"Seminary  life  would  be  pretty 
foreign  for  anyone.  especiaJly  for 
a  fellow  like  me  coming  out  of 
Modesto  in  1955  " 

After  four  years.  Brown  and 
Damrell  realized  they  weren't 
cut  out  for  the  cloistered  life. 
Both  enrolled  at  the  University 
of  California  at  Berkeley  and 
then  went  on  to  Yale  Law 
School. 

Brown,  of  course,  eventually 
became  governor  of  California 
and  twice  ran,  unsuccessfully, 
for  president.  Today  he  lives  in 
Oakland  and  does  a  radio  talk 
show  called  "We  The  People." 

And  Damrell?  He,  too,  sought 
a  more  worldly  alternative  to  the 
priesthood.  The  theological 
training  led  to  law  —  his  father's 
profession  —  which  brought  him 
back  to  Modesto. 

Politics,  law  and  family 

Like  Brown.  Brown's  father 
and  his  own  father,  Damrell  was 
drawn  to  politics,  both  as  a 
lawmaker-lobbyist  and  as  a 
campaign  activist. 

During  the  John  F.  Kennedy 
presidential  campaign,  he  had  a 
chance  to  talk  to  Kennedy  when 
the  candidate  flew  in  to  Moffett 
Field  with  Brown's  father,  Pat, 
who  was  governor. 
The  invitation  to  Kennedy's 
inauguration  that  followed  is  one 
of  Damrell's  greatest  keepsakes, 
but  it  wasn't  his  springboard  to 
the  Democratic  Party.  He  had 
decided  on  his  party  allegiance 
long  before  meeting  Kennedy. 

"1  grew  up  thinking  it  was 
perfectly  logical  to  be  a 
Democrat,"  he  says  "It  was  the 
party  of  my  father  and  of 
Roosevelt  and  Truman  and 
Kennedy.  They  cared  for  the 
little  guy.  the  forgotten  person, 
the  oeople  left  behind." 

Over  the  years,  Damrell  stayed 
behind  the  scenes  in  politics. 
never  running  for  office  himself 
Instead  he  walked  precincts  zmd 
held  fund-raisers  in  his  home  for 
numerous  Democratic 
candidates,  such  as  Brown  and 
his  sister.  Kathleen  Brown.  Vic 
Fazio.  Tony  Coelho  and  Dianne 
Feinslein.  When  former 
President  Jimmy  Carter  came  to 
Modesto  in  1980.  the  Damrells 
had  a  Fourth  of  July  fundraiser 
in  their  yard 

Today,  while  partisan  lines 
have  blurred,  Damrell  still  is  a 
Democrat 

"I  suppose  it's  something 
that's  part  of  my  life,  part  of  my 
family's  life  and  part  of  the 


tradition  that  1  cany  out  for  my 
father.  I'm  a  Democrat  and  I 
always  will  be  a  Democrat." 

That  doesn't  mean  he  doesn't 
have  Republicans  for  fnends. 
Has  has  many.  Ann  Veneman, 
for  one,  says  she  and  Damrell 
call  each  other  the  day  after 
every  election.  She  is  state 
secretary  of  agriculture  and 
daughter  of  the  late  John 
Veneman,  assemblyman  and 
assistant  secretaty  of  health, 
education  and  welfare. 

"We're  from  two  different 
parties,  but  we  have  a  strong 
bond  when  it  comes  to  talking 
about  politics,"  Veneman  says. 
"Our  tradition  is  to  call  each 
other  on  the  phone  after  every 
election  to  hash  out  the  details." 

Veneman  was  the  first  woman 
attorney  hired  by  Damrell's  law 
firm.  She  worked  there  for  sever 
years  before  she  went  to  work  ai 
deputy  secretary  for  the  U.S. 
Department  of  Agriculture 
during  the  Bush  presidency. 

"Somehow,  I  became  part  of 
the  Damrell  family  while  I 
worked  at  the  firm."  she  says. 
'I've  been  gone  nine  years  now, 
and  it's  never  changed." 

As  a  colleague,  Veneman  saw 
several  sides  of  Damrell. 

"Frank  works  very  hard.  When 
he's  engaged  in  a  case,  he  works 
night  and  day.  He's  a  big-picture 
thinker,  and  he's  very  dedicated 
to  his  work." 

Law,  after  all,  holds  an  even 
greater  interest  to  Damrell  than 
politics. 

"In  law,  you're  given  a  set  of 
facts  that  are  new,  you  learn 
about  a  business,  devise 
strategies,  and  it's  kind  of  like  a 
mystety  or  a  detective  story,"  he 
says  "There's  a  spirit  of 
competition  and  an  intellectual 
challenge  of  ideas,  which 
ultimately  is  what  the  law  is 
about  —  and  from  that, 
hopefully,  the  truth  emerges  ' 

Certainly.  Damrell's  firm  has 
been  successful  With  18 
anomeys.  it  is  one  of  the  largest 
firms  in  the  Central  Valley. 
Damrell  staned  the  fuTn  in  1968 
when  he  moved  back  to  Modesto 
with  his  wife,  Ludy  Dykzeul,  a 
nurse  whose  family  had 
migrated  to  Oakdsje  after 
working  with  the  Dutch 
underground  during  World  War 
U.  After  Damrell  Sr.,  known 
even  to  his  grandchildren  as 
The  Judge."  retired  from  the 
Stanislaus  County  Superior 
Court  bench,  he  joined  his  son  in 
the  firm 

Mane  Gal\o.  Damrell's  sister, 
describes  her  brother  as  a  chip 


961 


off  the  old  block  Their  father 
died  in  1988.  rwo  days  after  the 
death  of  their  mother,  Honora 
Mae  Damrell 

"My  father  had  a  deep,  true 
love  for  his  community,  and  my 
brother  loves  this  town,  too.  He 
cares  about  people  deeply.  At 
the  same  time,  there's  a 
whimsical  kid  in  him." 

Damrell,  an  early  riser,  reads 
four  papers  every  morning  and 
often  attends  Mass  before  he 
goes  to  the  office.  He  loves 
books,  travel,  classical  music, 
the  arts  and  the  San  Francisco 
49ers.  He  went  to  the  very  first 
49er  game  in  1946  when  he  was 
8  yecirs  old. 

Frank  and  Ludy  raised  four 
children  in  their  rambling  home 
on  WycUffe  Drive.  Now  they  are 
empty-nesters.  Ludy  Damrell 
keeps  busy  as  a  volunteer  at  the 
Parent  Resource  Center,  a 
facility  that  worits  to  prevent 
child  abuse.  She  also  sings  in  the 
choir  and  teaches  children  at  SL 
Joseph's  Cathobc  Church. 

Their  two  older  children  live  in 
Modesto.  Frank  Damrell  IH  is  a 
stockbroker.  He  and  his  wife, 
Gayle,  have  two  children.  Cap 
and  Katherine.  Lia  Damrell- 
McKeon  is  married  to  a  cattle 
rancher,  Alex  McKeon,  and  is 
the  commuiuty  resources 
director  for  the  Center  for 
Human  Services.  The  two 
youngest  children  are  in  college 
—  Anne  at  Santa  Clara 
University  and  Jim  at  Notre 
Dame  University  Law  School. 

All  four  say  their  father 
encouraged  them  to  give 
something  back  to  their 
communilies- 

"Dad  instilled  in  us  the 
responsibility  we  have  to  our 
community,"  says  Frank  III.  who 
spent  three  months  working  in 
an  orphanage  with  Mother 
Teresa  in  India  "After  I  had 
graduated  from  college,  he 
encouraged  me  to  do  some 
spinruaJ  introspection  beyond 
the  annual  retreats  we  took 
together  to  a  Benedictine 
monastery  That's  when  I 
decided  to  go  to  India." 

Ua  remembers  her  father's 
talks  —  life's  lessons  at  the 
dinner  table,  more  serious 
discussions  in  the  library,  and 
now.  conversations  over  coffee 
at  her  farmhouse  m  Oakdale 
"He's  constantly  motivating 
us,"  she  says  "He  recently  gave 
me  the  book,  "The  Road  Less 
Traveled.'  He  tells  us  we  can  be 
anythmg  we  want  to  be.  I  think 
he  has  a  deep  understandmg  of 
what  that  is  about  " 


Damrell  laments  some  of  the 
family  trade-offs  he  made  over 
the  years. 

"When  I  was  younger,  I  was 
involved  in  more  boards  than  I 
could  count,"  he  says  "I  was 
heavily  involved  in  politics  and  I 
sf>ent  a  good  deal  of  my  time  in 
Washington  and  Sacramento  " 

Says  Lia,  "He  tells  us  all  the 
time  about  how  he  regrets  not 
being  with  us  more  while  we 
were  teen-agers." 

Maybe  iha:  i  why  he  hearkens 
back  to  I  Street,  li  t."eps  him 
closer  to  home 

Downtown  rebirth 

Damrell  sees  not  just  the 
ghosts  of  his  past  along  1  Street, 
but  the  future  —  a  place  where 
there's  a  permanent  farmers 
market  and  an  art  gallery  that 
isn't  relegated  to  the  basement 
of  the  McHenry  Museum. 

"We  need  a  place  for  public 
art.  which  is  something  we  can 
all  enjoy.  We  need  to  make  a 
permanent  home  for  the 
Modesto  Symphony.  We  need  to 
celebrate  the  talent  we  have  in 
our  community." 

He's  working  on  these 
projects,  and  if  his  friends  are 
right,  he'll  find  a  way  to  make 
them  happen. 

"Frank  is  a  very  persuasive 
guy,  and  his  heart  is  in  the  nghi 
place."  says  the  Rev.  Gary  Smith, 
a  friend  from  Modesto  High 
School.  Smith,  a  Jesuit  pnest, 
has  a  jaiJ  ministry  and  works 
with  the  homeless  in  Portland. 
Ore 

"He  knows  how  to  wheel  and 
deal  with  people,  and  I  use  that 
term  in  the  best  possible  sense 
He's  driven  by  the  big  picture. 
and  that's  a  pretty  tough  thing  lo 
argue  with." 

Consider  the  story  of 
McClatchy  Square  Damrell  saw 
the  quarter-acre  comer  with  its 
abandoned  gas  pumps  as  the  last 
open  space  on  I  Street,  a  place 
where  people  could  sit  on  park 
benches  in  a  public  rose  garden 
Altera  reception  m  1991,  he 
stood  on  the  front  steps  of 
McHenry  Mansion  and  talked  to 
the  chairman  of  McClatchv 
Newspapers  about  donating  the 
land,  owned  by  The  Modesto 
Bee,  for  a  city  park. 

"1  wasn't  going  to  let  that  one 
gel  away,"  Damrell  says.  "I  was 
gomg  to  stay  with  it,  no  maner 
what  it  took  " 

It  took  two  years  of 
persuasion,  but  McClatchy 
donated  the  property,  and  for 
the  next  four  years.  Damrell,  city 


officials  and  others  worked  to 
raise  the  $135,000  to  turn  the  lot 
into  a  park. 

Damrell  takes  little  credit. 
"One  of  my  happiest  days  was 
takmg  this  picture  with  the 
construction  workers  who 
donated  their  time  to  work  on 
the  park.  They  are  the  heroes. 
My  vision  without  their  sweat 
wouldn't  mean  much  " 

There's  more  to  be  done 
downtown,  of  course,  and 
Damrell  believes  the  city  and 
county  need  to  get  together  to 
rebuild  the  city  core.  He  is  a 
public  member  of  the  City 
County  Facilities  Committee, 
which  had  studied  downtown 
redevelopment  proposals. 
Meanwhile,  Damrell  is 
working  on  ariother  project,  an 
idea  he  spawned.  It  is  a  plaza  to 
honor  filmmaker  George  Lucas 
at  the  Five  Points  intersection  at 
McHenry  Avenue.  Construction 
is  expected  to  begin  in  the 
spring.  A  focal  point  will  be  a 
life-size  bronze  sculpture  of  two 
teen-agers  in  early  '60s  clothing 
and  a  '57  Chevy,  representative 
of  the  era  of  cruise  celebrated  in 
the  Lucas  film,  "American 
Graffiti." 

The  George  Lucas  Plaza 
projea  shows  how  Damrell 
operates  when  he  gets  an  idea, 
says  Mayor  Dick  Lang. 

"Frank  initiates  the  spark  that 
ignites  the  fire  under  us,"  the 
mayor  says.  "He  has  a  vision  that 
few  people  share,  and  he  will 
take  that  on  as  a  personal  task 
and  challenge.  He  initiates 
callmg  together  panies  that  he 
thinks  will  be  interested  in 
participating  and  before  you 
know  it,  you've  got  a  committee 
and  they're  off  and  running." 

That's  why,  Lang  says,  "When 
Frank  calls,  you  listen." 

As  usual,  DamreU  is  modest 
but  articulate. 

"One  thing  leads  to  another," 
he  says  "You  find  these 
treasures  in  your  community, 
like  George  Lucas,  who  grew  up 
in  Modesto,  and  you  realize  we 
need  lo  celebrate  them  because-     • 
that's  what  gives  our  community 
identity  That's  a  reflection  of 
our  communal  soul  " 

There  it  is  again.  Community. 
Soul. 

DamreU  leans  back  in  his 
leather  chair  and  takes  off  his 
glasses.  He  pauses  for  a 
moment. 

"What  it  comes  down  to  is  that 
rd  like  to  do  something  that  has 
permanence,  to  leave  a  legacy.  I 
think  I  can  do  that  in  our 
community.  1  think  I  can  do  that 
on  I  Street  —  and  beyond." 


962 


E.  &  J.   GALLO    WINERY     •     Modesto.  California 


OFFICE  •/!*«  CHAIRMAN 


January  17,  1997 


The  Honorable  Dianne  Feinstein 
525  Market  Street,  Suite  3670 
San  Francisco,  CA   94105 

Dear  Dianne: 

I  have  been  advised  that  Frank  Darorell,  Jr. 
is  being  considered  for  a  possible  appointment  to  the 
United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District 
of  California. 

I  have  known  Mr.  Damrell  for  many  years.   I 
greatly  value  his  abilities  as  an  attorney  and  have 
found  his  judgement  and  integrity  to  be  of  the  highest 
order. 

I  believe  he  would  be  an  outstanding  choice 
for  this  most  important  office. 


Ernest  Gallo 
EG:om 


963 

JAN  2  7  1997 


CongreEfsf  of  ttjc  Winitth  ^tatc£( 
J^ougf  o(  Eeprt£(Entatibc£( 

(B®ast)ington,  ©C  20515 


January  21,  1997 


The  Honorable  Dianne  Feinstein 

525  Market  Street 

Suite  3670 

San  Francisco,  California  94 105 

Dear  Senator  Feinstein, 

We  wiite  to  you  on  behalf  of  Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr.  and  urge  your  highest  consideration  for  his 
appointment  to  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California 

Frank  Damrell  distinguished  himself  as  a  graduate  of  U.C.  Berkeley  and  Yale  Law  School,  then 
went  on  to  become  a  prosecutor  as  the  Deputy  Attorney  General  in  San  Francisco  and  as  a  Senior 
Deputy  District  Attorney  for  Slanislaw  County. 

His  private  law  practice  now  consists  of  eighteen  attorneys  with  offices  in  Modesto,  Sacramento, 
and  Oakdale  California    He  has  admission  to  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  and  the  U.S. 
District  Court  of  California 

Frank  Damrell's  depth  of  knowledge  on  the  issues  of  agriculture,  education,,  energy, 
transportation,  and  business-related  litigation  is  unsurpassed 

He  and  his  wife,  Lidwiena,  have  raised  four  outstanding  children  while  simultaneously  committing 
themselves  to  their  community  which  is  legendary  in  the  Central  Valley.  Frank  Damrell's 
affiliations  and  activities  read  like  a  "who's  who"  of  citizen  leadership.  We  are  enclosing  a  copy  of 
this  honor  roll  of  service  for  your  perusal 

Not  since  1979  has  any  individual  been  appointed  to  serve  from  this  region  to  the  U  S  District 
Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California 


964 


The  appointment  of  Frank  Damrell  would  bring  great  distinction  to  the  court,  be  a  noble  addition 
to  our  nation's  system  of  jurisprudence,  and  would  validate  what  we  and  people  of  The  Valley 
already  know  and  deeply  appreciate      that  Frank  Damrell  is  an  extraordinary  human  being 
and  a  man  of  great  intellect,  integrity  and  accomplishment 


We  are  very  proud  to  support  him 


W33 


965 


United  States  Department  of  the  Interior 

OFHCE  OF  THE  DEPUTY  SECRETARY 
Washington.  DC  20240 


f'tB  1 2  1997 


January' 21,  1997 


Honorable  Dianne  Feinstein 

United  States  Senate 

Washington,  D.C.   20510  i 

Dear  Senator  Feinstein: 

Frank  Damrell  has  been  recommended  for  a  judgeship  in  the  Sacramento  district.   He  is  well 
qualified,  well  known,  and  well  suited  for  the  appointment.   Since  we  have  both  worked  with 
Frank  for  many  years,  I  am  sure  you  already  know  that  he  would  be  a  good,  solid 
confirmabie  appointee. 

Please  give  Frank  your  flill  consideration. 


Garamendi 
Deput>'  Secretary 


966 


m 


Bank  of  America 


Kathleen  Brown 
January  21,1 037  Somor  vice  President  & 

•^  '  Managlno  Director 

Sales  and  Markahng  Investment 
Managamant  Services  Group 

The  Honorable  Dianne  Fcinstcin 

525  Market  Street 

Suite  3fi70 

San  Francisco,  CA   94  1 0? 


Dear  E|ia)bn||;/\A./^N-^ 


1  am  \wTiting  to  urge  you  lo  nominate  Frank  Damrell  for  an  appointment  to  the  United 
States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California. 

I  have  Jovown  Frank  since  he  and  my  brother,  Jerry,  joined  the  Sacred  Heart  Novitiate 
over  40  years  ago.  Thus,  I  speak  with  some  authority  about  his  character  for  the  court 
and  his  judicial  temperament. 

Frank  is  above  all  a  man  <if  integrity,  intelligence  and  loyalty.  He  is  a  family  man,  a 
thinker  and  a  doer.   He  h;is  devoted  his  life  to  the  prachcc  of  law  and  to  serving  his 
community.   Unlike  many  who  simply  give  their  name,  Frank  gives  his  time,  his 
resources  and  his  heart  to  the  causes  which  he  supports. 

Frank  has  deep  roots  in  the  Eastern  District  and  a  track  record  of  serving  the  p>cople  in 
that  community.  He  would  represent  the  Court  with  honor  and  distinction  and  make 
you  proud  that  he  was  your  noimnec. 

As  recently  noted  in  an  article  in  the  Modesto  Bee,  Frank  Damrtll  is  "an  unassuming 
man  of  vision  and  action,  which  is  something  that  cannot  be  captured  in  a  picture 
frame."  I  enthusiastically  urge  your  affirmative  consideration  for  his  nomination. 


KB/lou 


Bank  o(  Amenca  National  Trust  and  Savings  Association 

555  S  Flower  Street  Suite  5000  Los  Angeles,  CA  90071    Phone  213/228-5887  Fax  213/228-9824 


967 


WA 

LIES  I     NOSSAUAN 

LOS  ANQELES 

TM 

IRTY. FIRST   FLOOR 

I4> 

SOI 

UTH    FIOUEROA    iTR 

EET 

OS 

aCl.CS     CA     toon    1 

(J1JI  tij  rooo 

IWViMt 
SUITC    HOO 

<02 

11 

101 

VON   KADUAN   AVEN 

UE 

IRV 

INE.   CA  OJTISIOOT 
(T14|  (33'TtOO 

(.AW   OFFICES 

NOSSAMAN,  GUTBNER,  KNOX  &  ELLIOTT,  LLP 

TMIBTY. FOURTH  FLOOR 

SO  CALIFORNIA  STREET 

SAN  FRANCISCO.  CALIFORNIA    94111-4712 

TELEPHONE     I41SI  JOS   3«00 

FACSIMILE     (41SI  S9a'243a 


January  22,  1997 


JOHN  T.  KNOX 
iRREN  C  ELLK 
OF  COUNSEL 


411111-111 


The  Hon.  Dianne  Feinstein 
United  States  Senate 
SH-331  Hart  Senate  Office  Building 
Washington.  DC  20510-0504 

Dear  Dianne: 


RE: 


U.S.  District  Court  -  Eastern  District 
Frank  Damreli.  Jr. 


Here  is  a  candidate/applicant  who  is  willing  to  give  up  a  most  prominent,  most 
successful  law  practice  in  Central  Caiifomia  to  serve.  And  here  is  a  most  qualified  lawyer  who, 
bar  none,  is  a  most  wonderful,  thoughtful,  decent,  and  fair  human  being.  These  are  not  fancy 
adjectives;  they  are  simple  true  statements. 

Obviously  Frank  is  a  friend.  During  a  recent  chat  he  mentioned  a  possible 
Judgeship  and  I  volunteered  to  write  to  you.  Please  note  UCB  and  Yale  Law  School,  note  the 
broad  expanse  of  his  volunteer  service  and  of  course  his  very  significant  Party  activities. 

I  know  you  know  Frank  but  for  your  files  I  enclose  a  personal  and  legal 
biography.  His  would  be  a  great  appointment  and  a  great  addition  to  the  Federal  Bench  in 
California. 

Respectfully  yours, 


William  T.  Bagley 


WTB/hm 

Enclosures 

cc 


San  Francisco  Office 
Frank  C.  Damreli 


SF\97021CX>41 


968 

VTTA 
FRANK  C.  DAMREM..  .m 
PERSONAL:  Wife: 


Lidwiena  J.  Damrell 
Children  and  Spouses: 

Frank  C.  Damrell  III  and  his  wife.  Gaylc 

AJida  Damrell  McKeon  and  her  husband.  Alex 

Anne  Marie  Damrell 

James  Brockton  Damrell.  who  is  a  law  student  at  Notre  Dame 


EDUCATION:  Santa  Clara  University'  1955-56 


Sacred  Heart  Novitiate,  Los  Gates,  Calif.,  a  Roman  Catholic  seminary 
for  the  Jesuit  Order  1956-60 

University  of  Califonua.  Berkeley  1961  B.A. 

Yale  Law  School  1964  L.L.B. 


PROFESSIONAL  ADMISSIONS 
AND  AFFILIATIONS: 

Stale  Bar  of  California 
Unjted  Slates  Supreme  Court 
U.S.  District  Courts  of  California 

American  Bar  Association 
Sunislaus  County  Bar  Association 
Federal  Bar  Association 


PROFESSIONAL 
mSTORV: 

Upon  graduation  &om  law  school,  1  spent  four  years  as  a  prosecutor,  first  as  a  Deputy  Attorney 
General  in  San  Francisco  and  then,  upon  my  return  lo  Modesto,  as  a  Senior  Deputy  District 
Attorney  for  Stanislaus  County  where  I  had  numerous  felony  jury  trials,  including  two  murder  trials. 

I  commenced  my  private  law  practice  as  a  sole  practitioner  in  1968,  and  our  firm  now  consists  of 
1 8  attorneys  v-nih  offices  in  Modesto,  Sacramento,  and  Oakdale,  California;  My  law  practice  has 
been  unusually  multi-faceted  and  covers  a  wide  spectrum  of  clients  and  cases.  The  following  is  a 
brief  profile  of  the  histor>'  of  my  practice. 

For  approxmiately  the  first  twelve  years,  my  practice  was  devoted  exclusively  lo  trial  work.  This 
included  criminal  defense,  plaintiffs  personal  mjur,'  and  busmess-relaied  litigation  1  also  was 
engaged  m  state  and  federal  appellate  court  practice. 

Between  1978  and  1988,  in  addition  lo  my  trial  practice,  I  spent  substantia]  time  m  Washington, 


969 


D  C  ,  as  an  attorney  and  lobbyist  on  behalf  of  California  public  and  educational  entities,  agricultural 
associations,  and  the  energy  and  transportation  industry.  1  appeared  before  both  the  House  and 
Senate  Agriculture  Conamittees  and  the  House  Interior  and  Senate  Energy  Committees  and  worked 
with  several  federal  departments  and  agencies.  During  this  same  period,  1  also  represented  corporate 
clients  before  stale  legislative  committees  and  slate  agencies  in  Sacramento. 

Since  1988. 1  have  devoted  my  practice  to  complex  business  litigation  matters  in  both  federal  and 
state  courts.  My  clients  include  publicly  ov-Tied  corporations,  closely  held  family  corporations, 
public  entities  and  individuals.  My  business  clients  include  various  wineries,  distributorships, 
farming  enierpnses.  trucking,  food  processing,  construction  and  manufacturing  companies. 

The  balance  of  my  trial  practice  involves  litigation  relating  to  antitrust  law  and  securities  fraud  1 
have  been  both  lead  counsel  and  co-lead  counsel  in  class  actions  filed  in  federal  and  state  couns. 
My  clients  in  these  cases  include  private  and  public  entities,  such  as  Stanislaus  County. 

All  of  the  above  litigated  matters  involve  an  e.xtensive  law  and  motion  practice,  as  well  as 
comprehensive  pre-trial  orders,  discover}'  plans,  and  ultimately  arbitration  or  court  and  jury  trials. 


AFFILIATIONS  AND  ACTIVITIES: 

Santa  Clara  University  Law  School  Board  of  Regents  (1986-94) 
Sanu  Clara  University  Law  School  Board  of  Visitors  (1983-94) 
Chair  of  Stanislaus  County  International  Friendship  Committee  with  France  and  Portugal 

(1990-97) 
Chair  of  "I"  Street  Renaissance  Comminee  (City  of  Modesto)  (1990-97) 
Chair  of  McCIaichy  Square  Citizens  Committee  (Cit>' of  Modesto) )  1994-95) 
Chair,  George  Lucas  Plaza  Project  Comminee  (Cit)'  of  Modesto)  (1996-97) 
Public  Member,  City-County  Public  Facilities  Committee  (1996-97) 
Member  of  Citizens  Study  Group  (sponsored  by  The  Modesto  Bee)  to  study  the  "Valley  of 

the  Poor"  (1996) 
Chair  of  the  California  Slate  Consumer  Advisor)'  Council  (1975-80) 
Member  of  the  California  Slate  Consumer  Advisory  Council  (1973-80) 
President  of  the  Consumer  Federation  of  California  (1972-76) 
Delegate,  Democratic  Conventions  (1976,  1980) 
Democratic  National  Comminee  (1980) 
Member  of  Board  of  Central  Catholic  High  School  Foundation 
Member  of  Board  of  Directors  of  Pacific  Institute  for  Communit)'  Organizations 
County  Co-Chair  of  "Keep  the  Promise"  campaign  (University  of  Calif ,  Berkeley) 
Member  of  the  Board  of  Directors,  California  Farmer  Consumer  Information  Comminee 
Chair  of  the  Stanislaus  County  Consumer  Protection  Comminee 
Chair  of  the  Cir\'  of  Modesto  Crime  Study  Comminee 

Member  of  Citizens  for  Public  Safety  Comminee  (Proposition  172) 

Member  of  the  Board  of  Directors,  Stanislaus  County  Legal  Assistance 

Member  of  the  Sickle  Cell  Anemia  Foundation  Board 

Member  of  Board  of  Directors  of  Learning  by  Earning 

President  of  the  Sportsmen  of  Stanislaus 

Chair  of  the  March  of  Dimes,  Stanislaus  County 

Ti«^urcr  of  the  Modesto  City  Schools  Bond  Campaign  for  Johar^sen  High  School 

Member  of  ihe  Board  of  Directors  of  the  Modesto  Symphony 

Member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  Stanislaus  Creative  Arts  Council 

Vice  President  of  the  Big  Brothers  of  Greater  Modesto 


970 


GOVERNOR'S  OFFICE 


January  23.  1997 


The  Honorable  Dianne  Feinstein 
525  Market  Street,  Suite  3670 
San  Francisco,  CA  94105 

Dear  Senator  Feinstein: 

It  has  come  to  my  attention  that  Frank  Damrell,  an  attorney  and  lifelong  resident  of  Modesto 
has  been  nominated  for  appointment  to  the  United  States  District  Coun  for  the  Eastern  District  of 
California.  I  have  known  Mr.  Damrell  for  several  years  in  many  capacities  -  as  a  member  of  the 
Community,  as  a  wife  of  a  Superior  Coun  Judge,  and  as  the  former  Mayor  of  the  Qty  of  Modesto. 
He  has  exhibited  all  the  quahties  and  experience  which  will  qualify  him  to  become  a  seasoned  and 
thoughtful  District  Court  Judge,  able  to  apply  his  p)erspective  and  understanding,  as  well  as  his 
knowledge  of  the  law  to  the  cases  and  decisions  which  will  come  before  him. 

Frank  Damrell  has  demonstrated  a  consistent  commitment  to  the  community  and  has  often 
used  his  knowledge  of  the  law  and  government  to  serve  it  As  a  prosecutor  in  the  Attorney  General's 
office,  and  as  a  Deputy  District  Attorney,  Frank  represented  the  people's  interest  in  law  enforcement 
He  has  represented  a  broad  array  of  clients  on  a  wide  range  of  legal  issues  and  has  demonstrated  a 
record  of  success  in  legal  representation  of  some  very  complicated  cases.  But  more  than  that,  Frank 
Damrell  has  always  been  available  to  assist  in  community  projects.  He  has  worked  quietly,  often 
behind  the  scenes  to  see  that  the  often  underrepresented  members  of  the  community  received  a  voice 
and  assistance  when  needed. 

While  1  served  in  elected  office,  and  as  Mayor  of  Modesto,  Frank  provided  assistance  in 
government  and  legal  issues,  and  supported  the  City  whenever  needed. 

Though  we  are  of  different  political  parties,  I  know  Frank  Damrell  to  be  balanced  and  fair, 
concerned  and  compassionate,  respectful  and  knowledgeable  about  the  law,  its  intent  and  application. 

I  am  sure  there  will  be  many  qualified  applicants  for  this  position,  I  can  think  of  none  who 
will  bring  more  to  the  position  and  be  a  greater  credit  to  you  and  to  the  Nation.  You  may  certainly  feel 
free  to  contact  me  if  you  need  more  information  on  this  important  decision. 

Sincerely, 


C^^? 


Carol  G.  Whiteside 
Director 
Intergovernmental  Affairs 


Governor  Pete  V/iLSON     •    Sacramento.  California  95814     •    (916)445-284  1 


971 


Bryan  Cave  ulp 

WAfiHtN(7Tr>N.   0£ 
xcw  voBK.  NCW  •<>«•<  ONE     METTKOPOLJTAN     SQUARE,    SUITE    360 

wA^fiftS  CITY,  -^lasouni 
OVERLAND  P«RK.  lcxu£  ST.    LX>Ul8,     MISSOURI    e3102-27SO 


(314)    e&9-3000 

"*  PAC8I 

RVTNC,  CAU^OnNl* 


LXae  ANOEL&S  .  CAUrORMI* 

-       _  P*C8IMI1_E:    t3l4)  2S 


JOHN  C.  DANFORTH 


January  23.  1997 


The  Honorable  Dianne  Feinstein 
United  States  Senate 
Washmgton,  D.C.  20510 

Dear  Dianne: 

I  underetand  that  you  are  considering  Frank  Damrell  for  nomination  to  the  Federal 
District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California.  In  my  opinion  he  would  be  an  excellent 
choice. 

Frank  was  one  of  my  closest  friends  at  Yale  Law  School,  and  we  have  kept  in  touch  since 
then.  He  is  bright,  and  beyond  his  obvious  credentials,  I  can  tell  you  that  he  is  a  good  person. 
He  has  character  and  good  values.  Also,  he  has  a  great  sense  of  humor  and  an  abihty  to  laugh  at 
himself^  which  is  preventative  medicine  to  that  dread  disease  of  the  Federal  bench,  "Federahtis." 

I  am  certain  that  being  a  Federal  judge  would  be  a  financial  sacrifice  for  Frank  It  would 
also  be  an  opportunity  for  him  to  be  of  service  to  the  country  and  to  people,  which  is  consistent 
with  his  motives. 

It  was  good  to  see  you  at  the  farewell  party  for  departing  Senators.  Best  wishes  to  you  in 
your  efforts  to  rebuild  the  center  of  the  Senate. 

Sincerely,  f 


V^ 


NANCY  PELOSI 

eiH  DiSTRICT,  CALIFORNIA 


450  GoaXN  Gati  AvtNuE 

>.CA  94102-3460 
.18)556-4662 


972 

Congres^s^  of  tijc  Winitth  B>tatt^ 

J^ougt  of  Ecpre£(EntatibE£( 
2iaaaSt)ington.  IBC  20515-0508 

January  28,  1997 


COMMITTEE  ON  APPROPRIATIONS 

SUBCOMMmtES 
L*BOR-H£ALn<  AND 

Human  Stnvicts-EooCATiON 

f0.t.GN  0^..,>c,NS,  E.PCT  FlNAMONC 

AND  RtLAnO  PbOCHAJMS 

PERMANENT  SELECT  COMMITTEE 
ON   INTELLIGENCE 


COMMITTEE  ON  STANDARDS 
OF  ^ICIAL  CONDUCT 

The  Honorable  Dianne  Feinstein  ^  te«oup"-^cwN^CH*m° 

Office  of  Senator  Dianne  Feinstein  <f^         atlargewhip 

525  Market  Street  ^  " 

Suite  3670 

San  Francisco,  CA  94105 

Dear  Ser^^rO^stein: 

Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr.  has  expressed  an  interest  in  an  appointment  to  the  United  State 
District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California.  I  understand  that  you  will  soon 
recommend  your  nominee  to  President  Clinton  and  I  hope  you  will  give  Frank  Damrell 
serious  consideration. 

Frank  Damrell  is  eminently  qualified  for  this  appointment.  Prior  to  his  private  practice, 
Frank  served  at  a  Deputy  Attorney  General  in  San  Francisco  and  as  a  Senior  Deputy 
District  Attorney  for  Stanislaus  County.  He  began  his  private  law  practice  in  1968  as 
sole  practitioner  and  the  fimn  currently  has  1 8  attorneys  and  two  offices. 

Frank  has  experience  in  trial  work  including  criminal  defense,  plaintiffs  personal  injury 
and,  recently,  antitrust  law  and  securities  fraud.  Frank  has  worked  in  Washington,  D.C. 
as  an  attomey  and  lobbyist  and  has  appeared  before  the  House  and  Senate  Agriculture 
Committees  and  the  House  Interior  and  Senate  Energy  Committees. 

Frank  Damrell  is  a  well  respected  member  of  his  field  and  of  the  community  and  would 
be  an  asset  to  the  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Califomia.  I  am  pleased 
to  give  his  candidacy  my  highest  recommendation. 

Thank  you  for  your  consideration  of  Frank  Damrell's  qualifications. 


Sincerely, 


n 


;y  pelo^ 


NANCY 

Member  of  Congress 


NP:ljp 


THIS  STATIONERY  PRINTED  ON  PAPER  MADE  OF  RECYCLED  FIBERS 


973 


COMMrTTEES 
APPROPRIATIONS 

Senate 


California  Legislature 


INSURANCE 
LOCAL  GOveRNMCNT 
NATURAL  RESOURCES 
ft  WILDLIFE 

TRANSPORTATION 


SENATOR 
PATRICK  JOHNSTON 


January  28,  1997 

The  Honorable  Diane  Feinstein 

United  States  Senate 

525  Market  Street 

Suite  3670 

San  Francisco,  Calif.,  94105 

Dear  Senator  Feinstein: 

You  have  before  you  a  number  of  applications  from 
individuals  requesting  your  nomination  to  President  Clinton 
for  an  appointment  to  the  United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Eastern  District. 

It  is  my  understanding  that  Frank  C.  Damrell  Jr.  is  one 
of  those  who  has  submitted  his  name  for  consideration. 

In  my  opinion  Frank  possesses  all  of  stellar  qualities 
of  a  federal  court  judge,  namely:  legal  scholarship,  judicial 
temperment,  intellectual  and  personal  integrity,  a  strong 
work  ethic,  and  an  abiding  commitment  and  loyalty  to  his 
community  and  country. 

His  interest  in  che  law  was  born  from,  his  early  childhood 
observations  and  admiration  of  his  father's  legal  career.   As 
you  may  know,  the  senior  Frank  Damrell 's  history  of  legal  and 
judicial  service  to  the  citizens  of  the  Central  Valley  of 
California  is  highly  regarded  and  chronicled  in  local  and 
statewide  records.   After  many  years  in  private  practice 
advocating  the  causes  of  labor,  Frank's  father  spent  years  on 
the  Superior  Court  before  leaving  the  bench  to  return  to  private 
practice  with  Frank  Jr. 

Frank's  education  at  Santa  Clara,  U.C.  Berkeley,  and  Yale 
Law  School  gave  him  a  strong  foundation  upon  which  to  build  a 
well  deserved  reputation  as  both  legal  scholar  and  a  formidable 
litigator . 

For  almost  30  years  Frank  has  dedicated  himself  to  all 
facets  of  the  law.   He  spent  years  as  a  criminal  prosecutor. 
In  civil  practice  he  earned  a  well  deserved  reputation  as  a 
superb  trial  lawyer  in  complex  business  litigation  cases  in 


974 


both  federal  and  state  courts.   Before  state  and  federal 
regulatory  boards  and  commissions,  as  well  as  in  a  lobbying 
capacity,  he  has  earned  the  respect  and  admiration  of  those 
he  has  appeared  before.   His  hallmark  is  preparation  and  a 
dogged  determination  to  achieve  results  by  finding  consensus 
through  creative  thinking. 

Members  of  the  local  bench  and  bar  associations  attest 
to  Frank's  outstanding  reputation  for  integrity  and  ethical 
conduct  in  professional  and  personal  dealings.   It  is  a 
reputation  that  is  well  deserved. 

Most  people  who  have  accomplished  as  much  as  Frank  has 
during  his  career,  would  be  content  to  retire  or,  at  the 
very  least,  reduce  their  work  schedule  considerably. 
Frank's  work  in  the  law  gives  meaning  to  his  life.   Being  a 
federal  court  judge  would  bring  additional  meaning  and,  I 
believe  usher  in  a  greater  period  of  service,  from  Frank,  to 
his  community. 

,   If  a  judge  should  have  both  a  knowledge  of  the  law  and 
the  comtnunity  that  he  serves,  Frank  is  eminently  qualified. 

Frank  was  born  and  raised  in  the  Central  Valley.   He  and 
his  wife,  Ludy,  are  recognized  throughout  the  area  for  their 
unflagging  commitment  to  charitable  and  civic  causes.   The 
depth  and  breadth  of  their  volunteer  efforts  is  unequaled. 

The  quality  of  the  Eastern  District  bench  will  be  richly 
enhanced  by  the  addition  of  Frank  Damrell  Jr. 


I  mo,st  strongly  recommend  his  nomin 
of  the  United  States  for  this  appointme 


Sincer 


ion  to  the  President 


PJ:rls 


975 


ia«nM^ai^  ^/^n^  CCnc^t/'  i-Zica^ 


V^d.-+J«A^     ^'\"^         Mf4Ai:v|-,       V-5^^       J)oVTNA-tl\, 

Jic^C_^JL^^^,u^    ^  S/:i<^  vr*|     U^    Seen  • 


976 

SANTA       CLARA       UNIVERSITY 


OFFICE  OF  THE  PRESIDENT 

Febmary6,  1997 

The  Honorable  Dianne  Feinstein 
525  Market  Street,  Suite  3670 
San  Francisco.  CA  94105 

Dear  Senator  Feinstein: 

It  is  my  understanding  that  Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr.  is  being  considered  for  an  appointment  to  the 
United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California.  I  am  pleased  to  write  in 
support  of  his  appointment. 

I  have  known  Frank  for  many  years  and  can  speak  of  both  his  legal  and  personal  qualities.  His 
legal  experience  has  been  extensive  and  varied,  from  public  prosecutor  at  the  State  and  county 
level  to  private  practice  involving  criminal  defense,  personal  injury  and  for  the  last  nine  years 
complex  business  litigation  in  both  Federal  and  State  courts.  His  experience  has  given  him  both 
a  practical  and  theoretical  appreciation  of  the  law  and  its  complexities  and  he  is  highly  regarded 
by  his  peers  in  the  legal  profession. 

For  some  ten  years  of  his  private  practice  he  also  spent  time  in  Washington  as  an  attorney  and 
lobbyist  for  a  number  of  public  and  educational  entities,  agricultural  associations  and  the  energy 
and  transportation  industry.  As  a  result  he  has  appeared  before  a  number  of  congressional 
committees  and  dealt  with  various  federal  departments  and  agencies. 

On  the  more  personal  level.  Frank  has  been  an  active  member  of  his  community  serving  on 
numerous  civic  and  county  commissions  and  being  heavily  involved  in  a  vanety  of  ways  with 
charity  and  not  for  profit  groups  in  the  Modesto  area.  He  served  for  eight  years  as  a  member  of 
the  University' 's  Board  of  Regents,  the  chief  advisory  board  to  the  President.  In  that  capacity  he 
made  thoughtful  observations  and  suggestions  on  almost  any  item  under  discussion  and  proved 
himself  one  of  the  most  valuable  members  of  the  Board.  He  is  a  person  of  principled  judgement 
and  high  moral  character  who  has  always  looked  to  the  common  good  of  his  commuruty  rather 
than  individual  gain  or  personal  advancement.  His  personal  and  professional  standards  are  of  the 
highest  caliber. 

Frank  has  both  the  professional  background  and  the  personal  integnty  to  make  an  outstanding 
federal  judge    1  am  pleased  to  recommend  him  with  enthusiasm  and  without  reservation  for  your 
consideration. 

Sincerely, 


-Kyo^d^v^J 


Paul  Locatelli,  S.J. 
President 

SANTA  CLARA  CALIFORNIA  950S3  000'       (d08)  5S4   4100 


977 


SAN   FRANCISCO  49[RS 


f  ^6  1  2  1997 


SUPER  BOWL  CHAMPIONS 
XVI,  XIX.  XXIII.  XXIV.  XXIX 


Carmeo  A  Policy 
President 


Admimstraltve  Office 

Mane  P  DeBanolo  Sports  Centre 

4949  Centennial  Boulevani 

Santa  Clara.  California  95054-1229 

Telephone  408/ 562-4949 

fax  408/  727-4937 


February  7,  1997 


Senator  Dianne  Feinstein 
United  States  Senate 
331  Hart  Senate  Office  Building 
Washington,  D.C.    20510 

Dear  Senator  Feinstein, 

Please  accept  this  letter  as  an  unequivocal  endorsement  of  Attorney  Frank  C. 
Damrell,  Jr.  who  is  seeking  your  support  for  an  appointment  to  the 
U.S. District  Court  in  the  Northern  Division  of  California.  Frank  is  an 
outstanding  attorney,  a  phenomenal  family  man  and  a  major  contributor  to  the 
well  being  of  his  diverse  community.  He  and  his  wonderful  wife  have  reared 
four  beautiful  and  successful  children  who  are  a  credit  to  their  parents, 
themselves  and  the  State  of  California. 

You  will  be  able  to  notice  from  the  attached  Vita  Summary  that  Attorney 
Damrell's  professional  and  public  commitments  are  the  essence  of  his  life. 
This  letter  is  not  intended  to  be  a  vehicle  for  the  delivery  of  voluminous  detail. 
I  simply  wanted  to  acquaint  you  with  the  fact  that  Frank  is  truly  an 
outstanding  person  who  is  worthy  of  your  consideration  and  trust.  1  would 
appreciate  the  opportunity  to  provide  you  with  specific  examples  of  why  1  feel 
so  strongly  about  this  man  and  will  therefore  call  your  administrative  assistant 
and  try  to  schedule  a  personal  telephone  conversation  according  to  your 
convenience. 


Please  let  Gail  and  me  know  when  you  will  be  in  the  Bay  Area  so  that  we  can 
attempt  to  sequester  a  small  portion  of  your  precious  time  and  enjoy  your 
company  in  the  City.  We  truly  appreciated  being  included  in  the  Holiday 
Reception  at  your  home  and  we  were  able  to  rekindle  contacts  with  people  we 
hadn't  seen  for  a  period  of  time.  Thank  you  for  always  thinking  of  us  and 
being  so  gracious.  We  wish  you  a  healthy  and  happy  1997  and  many  more 
to  come. 


Very  truly  yours 


Carmen  A.  Policy 
President 


CAP/fjd 

fei02O77.lu 


978 


OFFICE  OF  THE 

DISTRICT  ATTORNEY 


JAMES  C.  BRA2ELTON 
District  Attorney 


CounHoose    HlhAISO'eets 
PO.  Bca442       Modasto,  Calltomla  9S3S3       Tef  (209)  S2S-SS50       Fax  (209)  S25-5S4S 


February  14,  1997 


Sena'tor  Diane  Felnstein 
United  States  Senate 
331  Hart  Building 
Washington   DC   20510 


Dear  Senator  Feinstein: 


Re:   Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr. 


I  have  learned  that  Modesto  attorney  Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr. 
has  been  mentioned  as  a  candidate  for  appointment  to  a  Federal 
judgeship.   I  would  enthusiastically  urge  such  an  appointment. 

As  I  am  sure  you  are  aware,  Mr.  Damrell  is  a  life-long 
Modesto  resident.   Hie  family  has  strong  roots  in  the  community, 
his  father  having  been  a  judge  on  the  Superior  Court  bench  for 
many  years.   Mr.  Damrell  and  his  wife  have  been  very  active  in 
community  affairs  including  a  great  deal  of  charitable  endeavors. 
Recently,  Mr.  Damrell  was  instrumental  in  the  development  of  a 
beautiful  park  near  the  downtown  area  of  Modesto. 

Mr-  Damrell  and  his  associates  are  easily  recognized  as  the 
most  prestigious  law  firm  in  Stanislaus  County  and  perhaps  the 
entire  San  Joaquin  Valley.   Although  the  Damrell  firm  handles 
very  little  criminal  law,  I  have  had  many  contacts  with  Mr. 
Damrell  and  other  attorneys  in  his  office.   I  am  highly  impressed 
with  the  character  and  professionalism  of  Mr.  Damrell  and  his 
staff. 

Mr.  Damrell  certainly  possesses  all  of  the  qualities  and 
experience  required  of  a  Federal  Judge.   I  am  confident  that  Mr. 
Damrell  would  be  a  very  valuable  addition  to  the  Federal  bench. 


JCB/ks 


979 


Sherif 


PO  B0XSS8/  1100  rsTHeei 

MOOESTO.  CAIIFOHNIA  K3S4 

TCLEwoftE  (2091  ses«ise 


artment 


LES  WEIDMAN 


STANISLAUS  COUNTY 


February  14,  1997 


United  States  Senator  Dianne  Feinstcin 
1 1 30  O  Street,  Ste.  2446 
Fresno,  CA  93721 

Re:  Frank  Damrell,  Jr. 

Dear  Senator  Feinstcin: 

I  am  writing  to  virge  yoiir  favorable  consideration  for  the  appointment  of  Frank  Damiell,  Jr. 

to  the  Federal  Court  Bench.  I  have  known  Frank  personally  and  professionally  for  more  than  20 

years. 

Frank  is  a  highly  respected  lawyer  and  notable  community  leader  in  the  Central  Valley.  He  has 
earned  this  respect  with  honesty  and  integrity  and  has  the  judicial  tempci^ment  necessary  for  this 
distinguished  position.  He  is  immensely  qualified  to  serve  based  on  his  prior  experiences  which 
date  back  to  very  humble  beginnings  as  a  young  County  criminal  prosecutor. 

Due  to  time  constraints,  I  have  taken  the  liberty  of  garnering  the  support  from  Stanislaus  County 
District  Attorney  Jim  Brazelton,  Merced  County  Sheriff  Tom  Sawder,  and  San  Joaquin  County 
Sheriff  Baxter  Dunn  for  the  appointment  of  Frank  Damrell,  Jr.  to  Federal  Judgeship. 


1  look  forward  to  our  professional  relationship. 


Sincerely, 


UES  WEIDMAN,  Sheriff-Coroner 
Stanislaus  County 


LW:bjb 

cc;    District  Attorney  Jim  Brazelton 

Sheriff  Baxter  Durui 

Sherifl  Tom  Sawyer 


"KEEPING  THE  PEACE  SINCE  1854' 


exw-TTTEE  ew  OULES  -wo  tDM|.r:T1UTVM 


980 


WLnitet  ^tate£^  Senate 

WASHINGTON,  DC  20510-0604 
(302)224-3841 

February  26, 1997 


The  Honorable  William  Jefferson  Clinton  . 

President  of  the  United  States 

The  White  House 

1600  Pennsylvaiua  Avenue  ■ 

Washington,  D.C.  20050 

Dear  Mr.  President: 

I  enthusiastically  submit  the  name  of  Frank  Damrell,  Jr.  for  nomination  to  the  Federal ' 
District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California.  It  is  my  hope  that  you  will  forward  his 
name  to  the  United  States  Senate  for  confirmation  in  the  very  near  future. 

Mr.  Damrell  is  widely  respected  in  the  Central  Valley  and  Sacramento  areas  of  the 
Eastern  District.  His  SO-year  career  in  the  legal  professional  has  included  both  extensive 
cjcperience  in  civil  courts  and  several  years  of  criminal  trial  experieiKe  as  a  Deputy  District 
Attorney  and  a  Deputy  Attorney  General  in  California.  After  a  careful  and  thorough 
interview  process,  I  can  say  that  Frank  Damrell,  Jr.  is  exceptionally  well  qualified  for  this 
position  and  would  be  an  outstanding  addition  to  the  federal  court. 

As  a  managing'pattner  and  president  of  the  Modesto  law  firm  of  Damrell,  Nelson, 
Schrimp,  Pallios  &  Ladine,  Frank  Dariirell  has  personally  litigated  a  wide  range  of  civil  cases 
that  will  undoubtedly  prepare  him  for  issues  confronting  the  Eastern  District.  In  order  to  give 
a  complete  description  of  his  noteworthy  legal  career,  I  want  to  outline  some  of  his  specific 
accomplishments: 

♦  '  After  graduating  from  Yale  Law  School,  Mr.  Damrell  returned  to  his  native  California 

'and  from  1965  to  1967  worked  as  a  State  Deputy  Attorney  General  in  the  San 
Francisco  OfGce.  In  only  his  second  year  in  the  office,  he  was  the  first  deputy 
assigned  to  the  newly-created  Consumer  Fraud  Unit. 

♦  In  1 966,  he  moved  back  to  his  hometown  of  Modesto  and  became  a  senior  trial  deputy 
in  the  Stanislaus  County  District  Attorney's  office.  He  handled  numerous  jury  trials, 
including  three  murder  trials,  during  this  time 


FRESMOO'nCE-  ,  LOS*NOEL£sa*F1C£.  Sjlh  OIEGO  OFFICE 

uxiVSiatr^  11111  ftmMtaKAlM  TWSfKn 

BunH4e  Ouritlt  8wn  10K) 

F«M>.C*ar|1  LtaAM]aa.CAIQaZS  SM0MaCA9f101 

lamot-ius  (au)>t«.>3ao  itisiDi^'iz 


981 


♦  From  1968  to  1980,  Mr.  Damrell  opened  his  own  law  office.  Over  the  years,  the 

Damrel!  finn  has  grov-Ti  to  become  one  of  the  most  respected  legaJ  firms  in  the  State. 
His  firm's  practice  is  primarily  civil,  with  a  broad  range  of  business  litigation  matters. 

♦  From  1980  to  1988,  Mr.  Damrell's  legal  practice  expanded  and  he  became  involved 
in  a  number  of  major  public  and  private  projects.  He  became  counsel  for  projects 
such  as  several  public  power  plants  undertaken  by  local  irrigation  districts  and  public 
utilities;  the  development  and  funding  of  the  Superconducting  Super  Collider  by  the 
University  of  California;  and  several  large  real  estate  developments. 

♦  Since  1988,  Mr.  Damrell's  legal  practice  has  focused  again  on  complex  business 
litigation.  His  clients  include  publicly-o\^'ned  corporations,  closely  held  family 
corporations,  public  entities,  and  individuals.  Clients  include  wineries,  farming 
enterprises,  tracking,  food  processing,  construction,  and  manufacturing  companies, 
distributor  ships  and  professional  corporations.  He  has  also  had  specific  experience 
in  securities  fi-aud  and  antitrust  law. 

Frank  Damrell  knows  California.  I  have  provided  so  many  details  about  Mr. 
Damrell's  legal  career,  becaiis:  I  wanted  to  make  sure  you  had  a  sense  of  his  comprehensive 
experience.  It  is  also  important  to  note  that  he  is  one  of  the  most  respected  lawjers  v.^th  high 
ethical  standards.  He  is  a  hands-on  leader  with  proven  courtroom  experience.  And  his 
additional  ejqjerience  in  the  area  of  criminal  law  makes  him  the  perfect  candidate  for  this 
position.  I  hope  you'll  agree  and  appoint  him  in  the  near  future. 

Mr.  Damrell's  varied  list  of  clients  has  also  given  him  strong  bi-partisan  support 
among  California  and  national  leaders.  I  have  attached  for  your  review  letters  I  have 
obtained  as  of  today.  Koteuonhy  letters  of  endorsements  include  those  &om  Former  United 
States  Senator  Jack  Danforth,  California  Agriculture  Secretary  Ann  Vencman,  Stanislaus 
County  Sheriff  Les  Weidman,  Modesto  County  District  Attorney  James  Brazelton, 
Univcrsitv'  of  Cahfomia  regent  Bill  Bagley,  Ernest  Ga^Io  of  E  &  J  Gallo  Winery,  Dcput>' 
Secretary  of  Interior  John  Ga.'arr.endi,  San  Francisco  49eTs'  President  Carmen  Policy,  State 
Senator  Patrick  Johnston,  former  State  Treasurer  Kathleen  Brown,  and  six  members  of 
California's  Congressional  delegation. 

Seldom  does  one  Califomiar.  generate  such  broad-besed  and  bi-partisan  support.  As 
these  letters  indicate,  Mr.  Damrel!  also  has  extraordinar>-  support  among  tfie  law  enforcement 
community.  He  is  their  No.  1  choice  for  this  position,  according  to  verbal  comments  by 
office  received  fi-om  the  major  law  enforcement  organizations. 

I  hope  you'll  agree  with  this  recommendation.  You  won't  be  disappointed.  I  am 
certain  Frank  Damrell,  Jr.  wil!  serve  on  the  judiciary  with  great  distinction.  Please  let  me 
know  if  I  can  be  of  any  further  assistance. 


1 
me  Feinstein 
United  States  Senator 


45-964    98  -  ^:> 


982 


Leon  E.  Panetta 

P  O-  Box  42  Carmel  Valley.  California  93924 


April  15,  1997 


The  Honorable  William  Jefferson  Clinton 

President  of  the  United  States 

The  White  House 

1600  Pennsylvania  Avenue 

Washington,  D.C.  20050 

Dear  Mr.  President: 

I  wish  to  recommend  the  name  of  Frank  Damrell,  Jr.  for  nomination  to  the  Federal 
District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California. 

Frank  Damrell  has  a  30-year  career  in  the  legal  profession  which  includes  both 
extensive  experience  in  civil  courts  as  well  as  several  years  of  criminal  trial  experience  as  a 
Deputy  District  Attorney  and  a  Deputy  Attorney  General  in  California.  In  1968  he  started 
hjs  law  practice  in  Modesto  and  his  firm  has  expanded  since  then  to  18  attorneys  with 
offices  in  Modesto,  Sacramento  and  Oakdale,  California.  Mr.  Damrell  has  spent  a 
substantia]  amount  of  time  in  Washington  DC  as  a  lobbyist  on  behalf  of  California  public 
and  educational  entities,  agricultural  associations,  the  energy  and  transportation  industry 
and  worked  with  several  federal  departments  and  agencies  on  behalf  of  these  interests. 

Mr.  Damrell  is  known  for  being  a  Democrat  who  tries  to  find  bipartisan 
cooperation  which  is  further  evidenced  by  the  broad-based  and  bi-partisan  support  for  his 
nomination  to  the  Federal  Court.  With  his  solid  record  of  community 
involvement  and  a  reputation  for  being  a  key  player  in  helping  those  in  need  and  the 
community  at  large.  I  believe  that  Frank  Damrell  has  the  personal  qualities  as  well  as  the 
legal  experience  needed  to  be  an  understanding  but  independent  decision  maker  with  any 
issue  that  would  come  before  him  as  a  Federal  Distnct  Court  Judge. 

Thank  you  for  your  consideration  of  Frank  Damrell,  Jr.  for  this  Federal  District  Court 
position. 


^__^  Panetta 

LEP:  CO 


983 


JAMES  R.  DIGNAN,  C.P.A. 

2225  Plaza  Parkway  C-3 

Modesto,  California  95350 

(209)  544-2093 

(209)  526-6109  Fax 


April  17,  1997 


Senator  John  Ashcroft 
Committee  on  the  Judiciary 
224  Dirksen ^Senate  Office  Bldg 
Washington, -'.iDC   20510-6275 

Dear  Senatojf* Ashcroft :      ^ 

'J 
I  am  writijigS  to  offer  my  personal  recommBndation  in  behalf  of  Mr.  Frank  Damrell 

of  Modesto,  falifornia  to  the  Federal  Court  Bench. 

I  have  known. and  worked  with  Frank  both  personally  and  professionally  for  the 
last  ,J:hirteen  years  and  I  can  attest  to  his  integrity,  his  professionalism, 
and  his  great  concern  for  the  entire  community.  ^ 

Frank'  is  a  successful  business  person  and  has  created  one  of  the  most  presti- 
gious law  firms  in  the  Central  Valley  of  California.   He  is  a  solid  Catholic 
and  an  outstanding  husband  and  father.  1  cannot  recommend  him  highly  enough 
for  such  a  special  appointment. 

With  all  the  possibilities  of  other  individuals  being  considered  for  Federal 
judgeship,  Frank  is  a  conservative  American,  with  strong  moral  roots  and  has 
demonstrated  the  highest  standards  of  honesty  and  integrity. 

Thanking  you  for  your  attention  to  this  possible  nomination.   I  am  confident 
that  Mr.  Frank  Damrell  would  be  a  very  valuable  appointment  to  the  Federal 
Court  Bench. 

Very  truly  yours. 


984 


/\MADOR  Valley  High  School 

A  Califoniia  Distinguished  School 

1155  Santa  Rita  Road-  Pleasanton.  CALif=ORNi  a  94566-6176 

(510)846-2818  •  FAX  (510)  462-6333 


MlCMAEl  O'Uahv 


April  21,  1997 


Diane  Feinstein,  United  States  Senator 
331  Hart  Senate  Office  Building 
Washington,  D.C.   20510 


Dear  Senator  Feinstein: 

I  am  vriting  in  regard  to  your  recent  nomination  of  Franlc 
Damrell,  Jr.  to  the  Federal  District  Court  in  Northern 
California.  I  have  l<nown  Mr.  Damrell  on  a  personal  basis  for 
forty  years.  Congratulations  on  an  extremely  wise  choice. 

I  have  taught  Civics  in  California  for  the  past  thirty-three 
years.  Therefore,  I  am  well  aware  of  hov  the  system  worlds.  I 
realize  that  Mr.  Damrell's  association  with  the  Gallo  family 
and  business  could  create  an  obstacle  in  this  nomination.  I 
do  not  have  any  connection  to  the  Gallo's,  nor  have  I  ever 
had  need  for  Mr.  Damrell's  professional  services.  I  )cnow 
Frank  only  as  a  friend  and  as  a  person  of  impeccable 
character . 

I  would  be  more  than  happy  to  testify  in  Mr.  Damrell's 
behalf  if  it  was  felt  that  I  could  be  of  sone  benefit. 
Though  coming  to  VJashington  would  create  a  fev;  challenges  as 
I  am  in  a  v;heelchair ,  I  would  be  more  than  willing  to  do  so 
at  my  own  expense.  I  Icnow  of  Fran)< '  s  interest  and  concern 
in  a  broad  spectrum  of  social  issues,  and  in  the  plight  of 
people  less  fortunate  than  hir.i.  Please  htve  ycur  office 
contact  me  if  I  can  be  of  any  help  in  this  matter. 

Thank  you. 


Sincerely, 


Everett  J.  (Skip)  Mohatt 

939  Kolln  St. 
Pleasanton,  CA   94566 


UMrirn   Si  iiodi    Diumn 


MAftC   ^OCH^ 

L  JUKTICC 


985 


Cmtrt  nf  ^Appeal 

MARATHON  PUAZA   -  SOl^H  TOwCA 

303  SECOND  S  1  WU.  I.  3UITC  QOO 

BAN  FBANCISCO,  CA  0AIO7 

AprU23, 1997 


The  President 
The  White  House 
Washington,  DC  20500 

Re:  Frank  C.  namrell.  Jr. 

Dear  Mr.  President: 

This  letter  is  btended  as  corroboration  of  the  soundness  of  Senator  Diannc 
Fcinstcin's  nomination  of  Frank  C.  Damrell  for  appointment  by  you  to  the  U.S.  District 
Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California. 

1  have  known  Frank  and  his  family  well  for  over  forty  years.  It  aU  began  in  1955 
when  he  checked  into  college  and  I  was  assigned  as  hi.s  senior  counselor.  His  work, 
abilities,  achievements  and  professionalism  arc  all  matters  of  which  T  have  personal, 
hands  on,  knowledge  and  profound  admiration.  They  don't  make  them  any  better  in  life 
or  in  law  than  Frank.  In  my  judgment  his  appointment  to  the  federal  judiciary  at  any 
level  will  greatly  enhance  the  reputation,  integrity  and  intelligence  of  our  nation's  coints. 

^parcntly,  the  only  criticism  of  Senator  f  einstein's  choice  is  that  somehow 
Frank's  sister's  husband's  father  will  influence  his  judicial  decisions.  That  curious 
conclusion  is  bottomed  solely  on  a  letter  of  recommendation  by  which  praised  Frank's 
judgment  and  integrity  as  being  of  ihe  "highest  order."  A.s  I  know  you  arc  aware  that  is 
also  the  reputation  of  the  letter  writer,  F.mesi  Gallo.  In  my  line  of  work  we  characterize 
such  appeals  to  prejudice  as  frivolous.  1  urge  you  to  do  the  same. 


Sincerely, 


Marc  B  Poche 


cc:  Senator  Dianne  Feinstein 
Jonathan  Yarowsky,  Rsq. 
bcc:  Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr. 


TOTAL  P. 01 


986 


BOARD  OF  SUPERVISORS 

llOOHSTREET  MODESTO,  CALIFORNIA  95354  (209)525-4445 


RAYMOND  CLARK  SIMON 
District  Four 


Apnl24,  1997 

The  President 

The  White  House 

Washineion,  D  C  20500  ~ 

Dear  Mr  President 

t 
I  am  \^Titine  to  you  on  behalf  of  Frank  Damrell  who  is  Senator  Feinstein's  nominee  to  fill  a  vacant  Federal 
District  Court  Judgeship  in  Cahfomia 

I,  as  a  Republican  official  in  local  government  have  enthusiastically  endorsed  Mr  Damrell's  nomination  to 
this  high  position 

I  was,  however,  appalled  to  see  an  article  in  the  Los  Angeles  Times  inferring  that  his  nomination  might  be 
a  conflict  because  of  his  familial  relationship  to  the  distinguished  Gallo  family 

It  is  patently  ndiculous  to  believe  that  Mr  Damrell  would  not  recuse  himself  if  any  conflict  might  arise  over 
any  Gallo  association 

1  have  known  Frank  Damrell  for  24  years  and  he  is  an  individual  of  the  highest  integrity  and  morals  His 
standing  in  our  community  as  a  quality  lawyer  is  unchallenged  FLs  contributions  to  the  social,  political  and 
economic  welfare  of  our  community  are  well  known  and  respeaed  He  is  truly  a  person  who  desires  to  serve 
his  community  and  his  fellow  man 

I  was  also  deeply  offended  about  the  inferences  in  that  article  thai  the  Gallo  family  would  orchestrate  any 
interference  in  judicial  matters  In  the  24  years  of  my  elected  public  service,  the  Gallo  family  has  never 
demanded  of  me  preferential  treatment  in  my  conduct  of  affairs  that  may  have  effected  them 

I  feh  compelled  to  write  this  letter  after  reading  the  article  in  order  to  convey  a  viewpoint  expressed  to  me 
a  number  of  times  over  the  past  weeks  by  individuals  in  our  local  community  It  seems  strange  that  the  Los 
Angeles  area  would  take  such  an  interest  in  this  issue  by  interviewing  people  known  to  have  little  or  no 
knowledge  of  the  Gallo  family  and/or  Mr  Damrell  as  well  as  some  individuals  in  the  article  who  have  had 
their  own  personal  difficulties  with  the  winer>'  business  I  can  assure  you  that  these  people  are  in  the 
minority 

I  would  sincerely  hope  that  you  would  look  favorably  upon  his  noTnination  because  he  is  one  individual  who 
will  never  embarrass  his  stipponers  in  this  endeavor  to  serve 


\     Sincerely 


V-> 

ay  Simon 

Supervisor,  Fourth  District 

Stanislaus  County 

RS/gh 

CO         Jonathan  Yarowsky  -  Special  Associate  Counsel  of  the  President 


987 


^upprtor  (Court  of  thf  ^latc  of  (Halifornia 


COUNTY  Of  STANISl  AUS 


mCC-ES^O  CALiCOflNI*  9!Jii 


huGm  BOSE  III  juoo« 


TEcEPHONt 

(209)  525-6<2S 


April  25.  1997 


The  President 
The  White  House 
Wa-hington,  D  C     20500 

re:    Nomination  of  Frank  Damrell  to  the  vacancy  at  the  US  District  Court  for  the 
Eastern  District  of  California 

Dear  Mr  President; 

This  letter  is  written  in  support  of  Mr  Frank  Damrell  for  the  above-referenced  position 

By  way  of  background  I  am  the  presiding  judge  of  the  Stanislaus  County  Superior  Court 
and  have  been  on  the  bench  for  21  years    I  have  known  Mr  Damrell  since  we  were  in  the  District 
Attorney's  Office  together  in  1966    I  was  his  supervisor  and  had  the  pleasure  of  supervising  his 
handling  of  complex  criminal  and  civil  litigation.  He  has  been  a  member  of  our  local  legal 
coi.omunity  since  then  and  I  have,  of  course,  observed  him  in  and  out  of  the  courtroom  over  these 
maoy  years 

Mr  Damrell  is  a  highly  respected  and  valued  member  of  our  local  bar  association  and  our 
community  at  large.  He  has  outstanding  experience  as  a  trial  law^'er    His  ethics  are  above 
reproach    A  recent  article  with  a  I-os  Angeles  Times  by-line  questioned  his  appointment  as  a 
result  of  the  marriage  of  his  sister  to  Robert  Gallo,  president  of  the  Gallo  Winery    Mi  Damrell 
indicates  that  he  would  recuse  himself  on  any  case  involving  the  Gallos  or  any  other  case  where 
there  would  be  even  the  appearance  of  impropriety.  There  is  no  question  that  he  would  so  do  and 
to  suggest  otherwise  is  absurd    He  has  even  represented  Fred  Franzia  of  the  Franzia  Winery  (a 
Gallo  competitor)  in  wine  litigation 

He  has  ideal  judicial  temperament    He  is  even-handed  and  fair  with  moderate  views    With 
his  educational  background,  his  experience  at  the  California  Attorney  General's  Office,  our 
Di>trict  Attorney's  Office,  and  his  varied  civil  trial  experience  Mr  Damrell  is  eminently  qualified 
to  sit  on  the  Federal  bench  and  would  be  outstanding  in  that  position    I,  without  reservation,  urge 
his  appointment. 

If  there  are  any  questions  I  may  answer  I  would  be  pleased  to  do  so. 

Very  truly  yours, 


?GH  ROSE  IIlTPresiding  Judge 
Stanislaus  County  Superior  Court 


HR/dd 


cc    Jonathan  'Varowsky,  Esq 
Ftank  Damrell,  Jr 


fTT'e^  H  OOOOHAM 


Ser  ator  Diane  Feinstein 
United  States  Senate 
Ha>t  Senate,  Room  331 
Wa-.hington,  DC    20510 


988 


LAW  OFFICES 

SHUGHART 
THOMSON 
&  KILROY 

A  pTxyftjsioiMji  CorpQTouon 

Twelve  Wyandone  Pb«» 

120  «-ejT  12*  Street 

Koiuoi  Qir.  MUjouiI  MI05-1»J9 

(616)^213355 

FAX  (816)  3740509 

32  Coiponte  WocKk.  Suite  1 100 

V225  bdien  C™«1  Palwty 

Oxeriind  Put  fUrea:  66210-2011 

(9131  «1  3355 

FAX  (»U)  ■151-3361 


WCAlBOt  »c^-To- 


nUAtSTllA-CCAOMOKU 


April  25,  1997 


Re: 


Frank  C  Damrell,  Jr. 

United  States  District  Court  Nominee 


De^ir  Senator  Feinstein: 


This  is  a  completely  unsolicited  letter,  I  have  just  learned  that  you  have  nominated  Frank  C 
Da.nrell,  Jr.  to  fill  a  vacancy  on  the  United  States  District  Court  in  Sacramento,  California. 

I  have  recently  finished  a  lengthy  trial  defending  my  client,  Rubbermaid  Incorporated,  in  a 
lawsuit  in  which  Mr  Damrell  was  the  attorney  for  the  plaintiffs.  I  must  .'lay  that  he  is  an  absolutely 
OuVstanding  candidate  for  the  Federal  bench  I  found  Mr  Damrell  to  be  extremely  bright;  his  legal 
theories  and  legal  work  were  outstanding  He  was  a  lawyer  of  total  and  unimpeachable  integrity. 
Al'iiough  we  had  never  met  before  the  case  was  filed  (because  I  practice  in  Missouri  and  he  practices 
in  California),  I  soon  learned  that  his  word  was  his  bond,  nothing  during  the  two  years  of  pre-trial 
discovery  nor  the  three  weeks  in  the  San  Francisco  courtroom  of  the  Honorable  William  Orrick  (in 
a  hard-fought  jury  trial)  ever  occurred  which  gave  me  the  slightest  concern  about  his  honesty,  his 
integrity  or  his  character 

I  am  certainly  pleased  to  learn  that  he  has  been  nominated  for  such  an  important  position,  and 
would  feel  remiss  in  my  duties  as  an  officer  of  the  Court  if  I  didn't  express  my  profound  and 
unqualified  support  for  his  nonination.  I  ui^  favorable  action  by  the  Senate  Judiciary  Committee 
on  his  nomination 


y^ty  truly  yours. 


GEORGE  E  LEONARD 


Gi-Xbl 

cc         Senator  Christopher  Bond 


989 


CITY  of  MODESTO 

Richard  A.  Lang,  Mayor     -                                   801  llth  Street,  p.  O.  Box  642,  Modesto,  CA  95353 
(209)  577-5230        FAX  (209)  571-5128 p-PD  (209)  526-9211  Hearing  and  Spetch  Impaired  only) 

April  30,  1997 
The  President 
The  White  House 
Washington  D.C.   20500 

Dear  Mr.  President: 

Those  of  us  who  reside  in  the  Central  Valley  of  California  are  a 
very  proud  and  hard-working  group  of  people.  We  are  very  pleased 
when  "one  of  our  own"  is  recognized  for  achievement  in  whatever 
profession  or  field  they  choose.  Such  was  the  case  when  Frank 
Damrell  was  nominated  for  a  federal  judgeship.  Senator  Feinstein 
said  it  all  when  she  suggested  that  Frank  Damrell  was  "eminently 
qualified"  to  sit  on  the  federal  bench.  I  can  say  with  great 
certainty  that  we  totally  agree. 

Frank  Damrell  has  distinguished  himself  in  legal  circles  and  has 
all  the  necessary  attributes  to  effectively  serve  on  the  federal 
bench.  People  of  all  political  persuasions  are  behind  Frank 
Damrell  one  hundred  percent  because  of  what  he  represents  and  the 
level  of  professionalism  that  he  has  exhibited  over  these  many 
years . 

Recently  there  was  an  article  in  the  Los  Angeles  Times  and  the 
Modesto  Bee  in  which  they  inferred  that  his  connection  to  the  Gallo 
family  through  marriage  may  in  some  way  hinder  his  objectivity  on 
the  bench.  Nothing  could  be  further  from  the  truth.  In  fact, 
Frank  Damrell  has  been  ultra-conscious  when  taking  part  in  any 
discussions  regarding  the  Gallo  family  and  their  interests.  As  a 
federal  judge  he  would  simply  step  down  in  all  issues  that  were  , 
even  remotely  connected  to  the  Gallo  family  or  their  business 
interests . 

The  community  of  Modesto  and  the  entire  northern  San  Joaquin  Valley 
urge  you  to  proceed  with  the  nomination  of  Frank  Dcuurell  for  the 
federal  judgeship.  I  assure  you  that  America's  interests  will  be 
best  served  by  such  an  appointment. 

Mr.  President,  as  you  know,  one  of  the  most  important  legacies  of 
any  President  is  the  type  and  quality  of  people  he  appoints  to  the 
federal  bench.  You  have  here  a  unique  and  special  opportunity  to 
serve  your  administration  and  country  well  by  the  appointment  of 
Frank  Damrell. 


Very  truly  yours. 


'(ylcA-^ 


Richard  A.  Lang 
Mayor 


RALrlas 


Jonathan  Yarowsky,  Esq. 

Special  Associate  Counsel  to  the  President 

The  White  House 

130  Old  Executive  Building 

Washington,  D.C.   20500 


990 


^u^etiar  (Exxvai 

eiAINE  WATTERS  COUNTY  OF  SOMOMA 

JUDQE  HALL  OF  JUSTICE 

COURTROOM  11  900  ADMINISTRATION  DRIVE 

(707)  627-2964  8AMTA  ROSA.  CALIFORNIA  95403 
FAX  (707)  527-1163 


May  1,  1997 

The  President  . 
The  White  House 
Washington;  D.C  20500 

Re:  Appointment  of  Franlc  C  Damrell  to  the  U.S.  Distria  Courts  Eastern  District  of 
California 

Dear  Mr.  President 


This  letter  is  written  in  strong  support  of  Franlc  C  Damrell,  an  outstanding  candidate  for  the 
U.S.  District  Gsurt,  Eastern  District  of  California.  This  ietcer  is  unsolicited.  Rather,  when  I 
learned  from  a  newspaper  article  of  his  nomination,  I  volunteered  to  support  his  candidacy 
solely  out  of  a  desire  to  see  a  highly  qualified  attorney  appointed  to  the  federal  bench. 

I  am  a  lifelong  Democrat,  and  a  1 992  Governor  Pete  Wilson  appointee  to  the  SOToma  County 
Superior  Court.  As  a  trlai  attorney,  my  background  was  exclusively  in  dvil  litigation,  mostly 
complex  business  cases. 

Thus  It  was  with  great  interest  that  In  July  1993  I  was  assigned  as  trial  Judge  to  try  a 
muitiminion  dollar,  legally  complex  case  between  large  wineries.  Frank  Damrell  represented 
the  Franzla  family,  owners  of  the  J  F)  Bronco  Winery,  which  after  a  loigthy  Jury  trial  was 
awarded  $2.5  million  for  the  financial  damages  It  suffered  when  Glen  Ellen  Winery  {now 
owned  by  HeuHeln)  terminated  a  six-year  business  relatiOTship.  It  was  no^  however,  a  one- 
sided victory  for  the  Franzias.  The  Jury  also  ordered  the  Franzias  to  pay  $  1 .5  million  to  the 
Benzlger  farnily,  owners  of  Glen  Ellen  Winery,  for  finandal  Injuries  inflicted  on  Glen  Ellen  whai 
the  Franzias  refused  to  deUver  bulk  wine  after  the  breakup  of  their  btisiness  relationship  in 
1991. 

The  point,  of  course,  is  not  who  won  (though  It  b  clear  the  Franzias  came  out  on  top)  so 
much  as  the  excdient  lawyering  1  observed  in  Frank  Damrell  throughout  the  case.  Despite 
representing  what  might  charitably  be  termed  a  'difficuh^  client  Frank  was  able  to  maintain 
as  much  client  control  as  possible  under  the  circumstances.  Frank  dkplayed  a  keen  grasp 
of  difficult  legal  concepts,  submitted  well-wrftten,  incisive  briefe  and  conducted  himself  »rtth 
calm  decorum,  even  when  provoked  by  his  opponents.  .  In  short,  I  observed  in  Frank  many 
qualities  one  needs  as  a  Judge:  intelligence,  good  writing  skills,  fairness,  patience,  the  ability  to 
communicate,  decisiveness,  open-mfndedness,  dignity  and  honesty.  He  was  also  extremely 
well  prepared. 

Mr.  Presideit,  I  higher  recommend  Frank  Damrell  for  Judge  on  the  U.S.  Distria  Court, 
Central  Distria  of  California.  The  residoits  of  that  district,  will,  I  am  sure,  be  forever  grateful 
for  your  appointment  of  someone  of  his  stature. 

Very  truly  yours. 


Elaine  Watters 


cc:  Hon.  Dianne  Feinstein 
Jonathan  Yarowsky,  Esq. 


991 


31559  Lobo  Canyon  Rd. 
Agoura,  California  91376 
Tel  (818)  735-6640 


June  11,  1997 


Senator  Orrin  Hatch 
Committee  on  the  Judiciar> 
224  Dirksen  Senate  Office  Building 
Washington,  D.C.  20510-6275 

Dear  Senator  Hatch: 

I  am  v^Titing  to  express  mv  unqualified  support  for  Frank  DamrcU's  nomination  to 
the  Federal  Court  Bench. 

I  was  able  to  witness  Mr.  Damrell's  legal  skills  fuTSt  hand  when  he  represented  our 
corporation  in  Northern  California  several  years  ago.  He  effectively  mediated  a 
seemingly  "intractable"  dispute  in  a  manner  that  satisfied  all  parties. 

Prior  to  working  \vith  him,  1  knew  him  only  by  reputation;  afterward  1  felt  he 
more  than  deserved  plaudits  he  received  from  associates  in  the  legal  community.  He  sized 
up  the  case  quickly  and  solved  it  much  sooner  than  1  had  anticipated  anyone  could. 

Mr.  Damrell's  rcstime  speaks  for  itself  His  extensive  community  activities  round 
out  an  impressive  profe.<;.s)ona]  profile.  ObN-iously,  he  has  spent  a  great  deal  of  time 
getting  to  know  the  people  in  his  diverse  community. That  is  ju.st  one  reasons  why  I 
believe  he  would  make  an  excellent  judge 

As  you  know.  I  am  a  lifelong  Republican.  Obviously,  partisanship  is  not  an  issue 
here.  T  support  Frank  Damrcll  because  he  impresses  me  as  being  a  man  who  weighs 
matters  carefully.  I  also  believe  he  would  exercise  judicial  restraint  in  his  rulings. 

Again.  I  urge  you  to  confirm  Frank  Damreirs  nomination  to  the  Federal  Court  Bench 

^--¥t5nrs  truly. 


oJr^ 


Patrick  J.  Frawlev,  Jr 


992 


RD 

RESOURCE 
DEVELOPMENT 


August  29,  1997 

Senator  Urrin  Hatch 

131  Russell  Senate  Office  Building 

Washington,  DC   20510 

Re:   Pending  appointment  of  Frank  Uamrel 1  to  Federal  Court 

Dear  Senator  Hatch: 

I  am  a  lifelong  member  of  the  Republican  Party,  dating  back  to  my 
first  Eisenhower  rally  that  1  attended  in  the  early  1950's. 

I  am  also  a  longtime  (30  years)  friend  and  associate  of  Mr.  Frank 
Damrel !  whose  Federal  Court  appointment  rests  with  your 
comm  i  t  tee . 

Frank  is  one  of  the  most  honorable  gentlemen  that  I  know.  He 
ranks  at  the  very  top  of  the  attorney  roster  in  our  community,  he 
knows  the  law  and  he  is  a  very  fair  businessman. 

Frank  has  made  major,  consistent  contributions  to  out  community, 
supporting  each  and  every  project  which  has  enhanced  our  city  of 
Modesto . 

Perhaps   the  only   negative   that   1   can  share  is   when   he   is 

confirmed   it  will  mean  that   Modesto  has  lost  one  of  its  finest 

citizens  to  the  city  of  Sacramento.  We  do  not  have  enough  Frank 
Damrells  in  this  town  and  we  will  miss  him. 


He  has  my  ver^  highest  endorsement 
\lBry     tr  uM  y 


R  i  chard  Hag 


2020  STANDIFORD  AVE  ,  BLDG   E-1 
MODESTO.  CA  95350 


TEL  (209)  527-7466 
FAX  (209)  527-7565 


COMMITTtf  OH  ACAICULTVWt 


993 


SUBCOMtrmi  OM  LfVCSTOOl.  OAmr. 
AMD  ^OULTDV 


iiACOMMrrm  on 

ICONOMIC  OIKnYm.  NATUIUl. 

ftaOUfias.  AMD  RtOUUTOflT  A^AIKS 

»«J»COMMnTH0« 

NATlOMAk  zeCUKVf.  •ifrCIINAnOMAL 


GARY  A.  CONDIT 

18th  Disttuct,  Caupornia 

OIiragrtHB  nf  tljc  Untteii  Blat^a 
Kouae  of  EepreBentatineB 

Sq>tembcr  2,  1997 


OtSTBICT  OMKM. 


OO  is<w  SniKT.  twTt  c 

Moeai}-  CAIBK4 

Oni  071114 


Senator  Oiiin  G.  Hatch 
Senate  Judiciary  Committee  Chairman 
135  Russell  Seiwte  Office  Building 
Washington,  DC  2051O-W02 


Dear  Senator  Hatch: 

We  respectfully  request  you  confirm  the  nomination  of  Frank  Damrell,  Jr.,  to  the  Federal 
District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California. 

As  elected  officials,  both  Democrat  and  Republican,  rqjresenting  California's  Central  Valley, 
we  can  personally  attest  to  Mr.  Damrell's  integrity,  his  commitment  to  the  law,  and  his  ability 
to  work  with  others.  Frank  will  be  the  kind  of  judge  of  which  all  of  us  will  be  proud.  He 
shares  our  values  and  our  history.  That  is  why  his  nomination  for  this  post  has  won  universal 
praise,  including  that  of  law  enforcement. 

We  know  Frank  Damrell,  and  are  convinced  he  will  establish  a  record  as  federal  judge  that 
you,  and  the  Judiciary  Committee  will  find  exceptional.  His  common  sense,  his  hard  work, 
his  sense  of  fairness,  will  serve  well  the  people  of  the  Valley,  and  the  nation. 

We  urge  you  to  act  positively  and  swiftly  on  Mr.  Damrell's  nomination.  All  of  us  are 
available  to  you  and  your  staff  should  you  have  questions  or  desire  any  infontiation. 


GARY  A.  <^^IT 
Member  of  Congress 


County  Board  of  Supervisors 


ths  statunmy  nMTU  Ok  pATfn  UADE  OF  otCrcuo  mens 


994 


Senator  Hatch 

09/02/97 

Pagc:2 


RICHARD  MONTEITH 
California  State  Senator 


DENNIS  CARDOZA 
OilifoxniB  St«te  Assemblytnxm 


LES  WEIDMAN 
Stanislaus  County  Sheriff 


A^ 


TOM  MAYFIELD,  CHAIRMAN 
Stanislaus  County  Supervisor 


'AUL  CARUSO 
Stanislaus  County  Supervisor 


ICHARD  LANG 
Mayor,  City  of  Modesto 


BRAZELTON 
'Stanislaus  County  District  Attorney 


ILD.  ChWiRMAN  nick  BLOM 


NICK  BLOM 

Stanislaus  County  Supervisor 


(3^ 


PAT  PAUL 

Stanislaus  County  Supervisor 


GAC/jm 


995 

Richard  Lyng 

September  15.  1997 


Hon  Orrin  G.  Hatch 
Chairman.  Senate  Judiciar>'  Comminee 
131  Russell  Senate  Office  Buildmg 
Washington.  D.C.  20510 

Dear  Mr  Chairman: 

I  am  writing  to  you  today  as  an  old  friend  who  wishes  you  to  know  of  my 
•  strong  support  for  the  confirmation  of  Frank  Damrell.  Jr.  to  be  U.S.  District  Court 
Judge  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California. 

i 

Frank  Damrell  is  exceptionally  well  qualified  to  ser\'e  in  this  important 

'^judicial  post  As  a  life-time  resident  of  Modesto.  California,  who  was  privileged 
'to  serve  in  high  level  positions  at  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture 
'(Secretary-,  1969-1972).  1  believe  Frank  Damrell  will  be  an  outstanding  judge  in 
■  one  of  the  most  sicnificani  courts  in  the  United  States. 


Best  personal  regards. 
Richard  Lyng 


829  Brady  Avenue      •      Modesto,  Californio  95352 


996 


Western  Growers  Association 

Struing  the  Califomlo  and  Arizona  Frvsh  Produce  Industry 
Ocl0ber22,1997 


The  HoDonble  Jon  Kyi 

United  States  Ssnite 

Hmt  SmBTf  Office  Building  Fscsimile  TimsmiMJon 

Wtshington.  DC  205 10-0204  (202)  22&-1239 

Dear  Senator  Kyi: 

It  is  with  a  greet  deal  of  plceswc  thit  I  em  writing  to  strongly  recommend  that  you  coniiim  the 
appoiotmem  of  Fnnk  Dimrell,  Jr.  to  the  United  States  Distria  Court  for  tbe  Eaitcra  District  of 
Califoraia. 

In  my  view,  Frank  Datmell  has  severai  unique  qualities  that  will  make  him  die  perfect  Eastern 
Distria  Ccun  Judge.  His  extensive  legal  practice  spaiming  ova  30  yean  has  taken  him  from 
duties  as  a  California  Deputy  Attorney  OMeral  and  Depxity  District  Attorney  to  a  Washington, 
D.  C.  agricultural  lobbyist,  to  the  head  of  his  ovvn  law  firm  headquartered  in  Modesto,  Colifort^a. 
He  has  great  judgment,  enjoys  ajudicial  demeorwr,  and  it  one  of  the  more  ethical  people  I  have 
had  the  pleasure  to  know. 

Not  unimportant  to  me  or  to  Western  Growers  Associarioo,  Frank  possesses  great  knowledge 
about  California  agriculture.  His  firm  represents  many  agricultural  enteiptises  and  has 
represented  agricultural  interests  both  in  Sacramento  and  in  Washington,  DC    This  familiarity 
with  sgricuhure,  combitted  with  his  wied  legal  experiences,  makes  him  ideally  suited  for  the 
Eastern  District  appointment  which  handles  numerous  agricultural  matters.  Frank  is  also 
community  m'^'^'^  and  has  geDciousty  devoted  much  of  his  time  to  civic  aad  charitable 
activities. 

Frank  Dsmiell  truly  deserves  your  support  for  a  well  earned  nomination  and  confirmation. 
Please  give  Frank  your  strongest  consideration  when  he  is  before  the  Senate  Judiciary  Commitue 
for  confirmation. 


DAVID  L.  MOORE 
Presidem 

be  I     Thomas  OIHere 

Mulling  Atldttss:  P.O.  Bax  2/30.  Ne^pan Beoth.  CA  92658  •  Stretrr  Addnrsr  17620  Firc/i  St..  fnilir.  CA  926N 
(714)  iM-lOO()  •  FAX.  (714)  863-9028  •  Irutnin  Addreu:  hrrp:ll»y,-KMgu.<.om 
e-d  SiOIOi©  MblLS^I  UdflrtB      2.6.    ZP-    ""^ 


997 

^:  Valley 


y 


Heart  """•'•^ 


1S40  Florida  Avenue 


Modesto,  CA  9S3S0 


Associates  ^AZ:'dV. 

medical  group.  Inc.  Fax  pos)  579-7246 


To:  Hon.  Orrin  G  Hatch 

13 1  Russell  Senate  0£5ce  Building 
Waihington,  D.C.  20510 
1(202)224-5251 

Fm.:  L.  Stephen  Endsley  MJ3. 
Valley  Heart  A£sc>ciates 


Dear  Senator  OfUr  ft  Hatch, 

I  am  writing  this  unsolicited  letter  to  support  the  confirmation  of  Frank  C.  Damrcll  Jr.  to  be  a 
Federal  Judge  in  the  Eastern  District  of  California.  I  have  known  Frank  Danircll  for  about  fifteen 
years  in  his  role  as  a  leader  in  community  and  charitable  causes. 

rve  discussed  with  him  often  about  solving  problems  in  our  community  and  his  love  of  the  law.  I 
have  found  him  to  be  serious,  honest,  and  hard  working,  dedicated  to  people  and  helping  solve 
their  problems.  I  find  him  to  be  highly  knowledgeable  about  the  law,  but  with  a  sensitive  touch 
about  people  and  their  issues.  I  would  strongly  recommend  him  to  the  Federal  Bench. 

For  your  rnformation  I  am  not  associated  politically  to  him,  or  have  no  business  or  legal 
relationships  with  Frank  Damrell. 


Sincerely, 

L.  Stephen  Endsley  M.D. 


998 

Senator  Feinstein.  I  thank  you. 

In  addition  to  Chuck  Breyer  and  Frank  Damrell,  Senator  Kyi, 
there  are  two  other  candidates,  and  I  know  my  colleague  will  par- 
ticularly speak  on  one.  However,  I  do  want  to  recommend  to  the 
committee  Judge  James  Ware,  the  administration's  nominee  for  the 
Ninth  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals.  I  am  delighted  that  this  is 
calendered.  As  you  know,  over  one-third  of  that  bench  is  vacant.  Its 
cases  have  grown  dramatically  and  there  are  real  problems. 

He  is  a  fellow  Stanford  alumnus.  He  went  to  Stanford  Law 
School  in  1972.  He  served  as  a  member  of  the  Stanford  Board  of 
Trustees.  He  attended  Compton  College,  earned  his  B.A.  degree 
from  California  Lutheran  University  in  1969,  and  has  served  in  the 
Army  Reserve. 

He  has  been  a  State  and  Federal  judge.  In  1990,  he  was  ap- 
pointed by  President  George  Bush  to  the  U.S.  District  Court  for  the 
Northern  District,  a  position  which  he  currently  holds.  Prior  to 
that,  he  served  for  2  years  on  the  Superior  Court  for  Santa  Clara 
County.  Before  his  judicial  appointment,  Judge  Ware  had  15  years 
of  experience  in  private  practice,  including  significant  in-court  ex- 
perience. 

I  will  leave  to  Senator  Boxer  her  nominee,  Judge  Martin  Jenkins, 
but  I  just  want  to  say  that  at  the  same  time  Senator  Boxer's  com- 
mittee was  screening  him,  mine  was  as  well,  and  she  beat  us  to 
the  punch.  I  can  assure  you  that  Martin  Jenkins  is  also  well  quali- 
fied, and  I  will  leave  the  specifics  to  my  friend  and  colleague.  Sen- 
ator Boxer. 

[Additional  remarks  of  Senator  Feinstein  follows:] 

Additional  Remarks  of  Senator  Dianne  Feinstein 

I  wish  to  note  for  the  record  that  the  statement  given  above  predated  pubUc  dis- 
closure that  Judge  Ware  fabricated  a  critical  incident  in  his  past.  I  would  like  to 
file  for  the  record  an  article  that  appeared  in  the  Washington  Post  on  November 
7,  1997. 

[From  the  Washington  Post  Nov.  7,  1997] 

U.S.  Judge  Admits  Lie,  Withdraws  as  Nominee 

APPEALS  COURT  CHOICE  CLAIMED  HE  WAS  BROTHER  OF  YOUTH  SLAIN  IN  1963 

(By  Joan  Biskupic) 

A  federal  judge  withdrew  his  name  from  consideration  for  a  California-based  ap- 
peals court  seat  yesterday  after  he  admitted  lying  about  being  the  brother  of  a  black 
youth  shot  to  death  after  a  1963  church  bombing  in  Birmingham. 

U.S.  District  Judge  James  Ware,  a  1990  trial  court  appointee  of  President  George 
Bush  who  had  been  nominated  by  President  Clinton  for  a  seat  on  the  9th  U.S.  Cir- 
cuit Court  of  Appeals,  said  yesterday,  "I  regret  my  lack  of  honesty." 

The  Birmingham  tale  had  become  a  signature  of  Ware,  51,  as  he  rose  through  the 
legal  profession.  In  many  public  appearances,  he  claimed  that  he  was  the  older 
brother  of  Virgil  Ware,  13,  who  was  shot  by  two  white  teenagers  in  the  aftermath 
of  the  notorious  Sixteenth  Street  Baptist  Church  bombing,  in  which  four  black  girls 
were  killed. 

"When  I  went  through  the  death  of  my  brother  I  came  very  close  to  becoming 
someone  who  could  hate  with  a  passion,"  he  said  in  a  1994  interview  with  the  San 
Jose  Mercury  News.  "What  happened  to  me  was  a  defining  experience,  a  turning 
point  in  my  life."  In  a  talk  this  year,  he  vividly  recalled  riding  his  bike  to  a  football 
game  with  Virgil  on  the  handlebars  when  the  shots  were  fired:  "The  shots  knocked 
us  off  the  side  of  the  road,  and  he  died  there  by  the  side  of  the  road." 

Ware's  nomination,  put  forward  by  Clinton  in  June,  had  not  run  into  any  prob- 
lems until  this.  White  House  counsel  Charles  F.C.  Ruff  said  yesterday  the  adminis- 


999 

tration's  overriding  response  to  Ware's  extraordinary  admission  was  one  of  sadness. 
"An3^ime  a  man  who  has  had  a  distinguished  career  is  caught  up  in  a  situation  like 
this,"  RufT  said,  "you  can't  help  but  feel  sad."  He  said  he  did  not  know  how  the  false- 
hood had  remained  undetected  through  background  checks. 

Ware  did  not  return  phone  calls  to  his  San  Jose  office  late  yesterday  but  acknowl- 
edged to  the  Associated  Press  earlier  in  the  day  that  he  had  lied.  In  a  letter  to  the 
White  House,  he  wrote,  "I  am  deeply  committed  to  the  cause  of  civil  rights  and  do 
not  wish  to  be  seen,  as  is  being  suggested,  as  using  the  unfortunate  tragedy  which 
befell  Virgil  Ware  as  trjang  to  better  myself  at  someone  else's  expense." 

He  first  admitted  the  lie  after  the  Brimingham  News  pubhshed  a  story  yesterday 
in  which  family  members  of  the  slain  youth  disputed  the  judge's  claims. 

The  Birmingham  News  quoted  Virgil  Ware's  real  brother,  also  named  James,  as 
sajing,  "I  couldn't  believe  a  judge  would  do  something  like  that,  being  a  man  of  the 
law.  I  think  it  was  wrong.  He  was  trying  to  better  himself  off  somebody  else's  grief" 

According  to  the  Birmingham  News,  James  Ware,  the  brother  of  Virgil,  has 
worked  for  an  Alabama  coal  mining  company  for  20  years. 

The  episode  also  was  another  peculiar  twist  for  the  9th  Circuit,  which  with  its 
liberal-leaning  rulings,  had  been  a  constant  target  by  conservatives  on  Capitol  Hill 
and  the  circuit  most  often  reversed  by  the  Supreme  Court.  Anyone  nominated  to  the 
court — covering  nine  western  states— draws  particular  attention,  but  usually  for  his 
or  her  legal  decisions. 

Ware's  reputation  appeared  solid.  A  graduate  of  Stanford's  law  school,  he  was  a 
state  judge  in  California  from  1988  to  1990,  when  he  was  appointed  to  the  trial 
court  for  the  northern  district  of  California. 

As  word  of  his  fabrication  spread  yesterday,  senators  from  both  parties  urged  him 
to  withdraw.  Sen.  Dianne  Feinstein  (D-Calif),  who  earlier  had  supported  Ware's 
nomination,  called  his  admission  "a  very  serious  matter.  This  does  not  appear  to  be 
a  youthful  indiscretion  or  misunderstanding  about  a  tragic  event  that  happened 
many  years  ago." 

Ware,  who  was  bom  in  Birmingham,  said  he  was  in  the  city  during  the  racial  up- 
heaval of  1993.  He  told  the  Associated  Press,  "My  father  had  told  me  he  had  a  son 
about  my  age  with  another  woman  whose  name  was  James.  At  one  time  he  told  me 
she  had  another  child  named  Virge.  He  told  me  that  we  were  related  to  other  Wares 
in  Birmingham.  I  did  suffer  the  death  of  a  sister  by  shooting  at  about  this  same 
time.  I  used  my  tenuous  connection  with  the  Wares  and  my  own  feeling  of  loss  as 
a  basis  for  malang  a  speech  about  Virgil  Ware's  death. 

"After  a  great  deal  of  soul  searching,  I  request  that  my  nomination  be  withdrawn 
from  consideration  for  appointment  to  the  Ninth  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  at  this 
time.  I  am  sorry  that  my  misstatements  about  my  background  have  caused  such  un- 
intended consequences." 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you  very  much,  Senator  Feinstein. 

I  would  note  that  Representative  Gary  Condit  also  planned  to  be 
here.  He,  too,  has  been  on  the  House  floor,  but  he  has  submitted 
a  statement  of  introduction  for  Frank  Damrell  and  that,  of  course, 
will  be  included  in  the  record. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Mr.  Condit  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Hon.  Gary  A.  Condit,  a  Representative  in  Congress 
From  the  State  of  California 

I  want  to  thank  you  and  the  committee  for  the  opportunity  to  appear  before  you 
today. 

I'm  here  to  urge  your  confirmation  of  my  friend,  Frank  Damrell,  to  the  United 
States  Federed  Court. 

Mr.  Damrell  is  well  known  to  the  people  of  California's  central  valley.  He  and  his 
family  have  established  a  long  record  of  community  service  and  commitment. 

Mr.  Damrell's  nomination  for  this  position  is  supported  by  all  the  California  state 
legislators  representing  our  area — Democrats  and  Republicans  alike. 

In  addition,  our  law  enforcement  and  local  government  officials  also  urge  Frank's 
confirmation.  For  us  in  the  valley,  the  nomination  of  Frank  Damrell  is  not  con- 
troversial. Rather,  we  view  it  as  expected,  and  overdue.  That  is  why  his  nomination 
has  such  universal  support. 

Frank  Damrell  will  bring  fairness,  common  sense,  and  independence  to  the  bench. 
Frank  Damrell  will  prove  to  be  an  exceptional  jurist  for  California  and  the  nation. 


1000 

It  is  also  important,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  this  nomination  move  swiftly  through  the 
process.  The  federal  court  in  Sacramento  will  soon  be  engaging  in  what  is  expected 
to  be  a  lengthy  trial  in  the  unibomber  case. 

The  commitments  of  this  trial  will  delay  other  federal  court  activity  in  the  East- 
em  District.  Moving  this  appointment  swiftly  is  essential  to  addressing  the  judicial 
backlog  facing  our  district. 

I  respectfully  request  your  committee's  positive  consideration  of  Mr.  Damrell's 
nomination. 

Senator  Kyl.  Might  I  ask  these  three  people  who  have  been 
mentioned  right  now  to  stand?  Let  me  start  with  Mr.  Breyer.  Mr. 
Breyer,  would  you  please  stand,  and  we  will  have  you  come  for- 
ward in  just  a  moment.  Next,  Mr.  Frank  Damrell.  Thank  you,  sir. 
And  finally.  Judge  James  Ware.  Judge,  we  will  call  you  forward  as 
the  next  panel,  all  by  yourself. 

But  first,  let  me  ask  Senator  Boxer  now  to  make  her  statements 
of  introduction. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  BARBARA  BOXER,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Senator  Boxer.  Thank  you  so  much.  Let  me,  before  my  col- 
league leaves,  compliment  her  on  her  recommendations  to  the 
President.  I  happen  to  know  Frank  Damrell  and  Chuck  Breyer 
quite  well  and  they  are  fine  human  beings.  They  will  make  great 
judges.  I  am  very,  very  pleased  that  they  are  here  today.  I  send 
them  my  best  wishes. 

I  also  want  to  add  my  words  on  behalf  of  Judge  Ware.  I  think 
it  is  really  crucial  we  move  on  that  ninth  circuit.  We  have  a  third 
of  those  seats  that  are  vacant.  This  is  a  great  choice. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  am  so  proud  to  be  here  today  to  introduce  Judge 
Martin  Jenkins  for  the  U.S.  District  Court  in  the  Northern  District 
of  California.  Senator  Feinstein  alluded  to  him,  and  I  know  she  is 
going  to  the  Senate  floor  because  we  have  to  be  there  to  fight  for 
McClellan  Air  Force  Base,  so  I  will  say  goodbye  to  her  and  see  her 
on  the  floor. 

I  wanted  to  say  that  Judge  Martin  Jenkins,  this  was  kind  of  a 
race  because  Senator  Feinstein's  group  thought  he  was  a  great 
choice  and  my  group  did,  as  well,  and  we  did  come  out  first.  I 
would  ask  if  he  would  stand  at  this  point,  and  I  think  his  dad  is 
with  him.  Would  his  dad  stand,  as  well?  We  are  so  proud  that  you 
could  be  here. 

Senator  Kyl.  Senator  Boxer,  you  beat  me  to  the  punch.  For 
those  who  have  not  introduced  families,  I  am  going  to  give  you  all 
that  opportunity  in  just  a  moment,  so  do  not  think  I  forgot.  But 
thank  you.  Senator  Boxer. 

Senator  Boxer.  Good.  I  recommended  Judge  Jenkins  to  the 
President  on  May  5,  1997,  because  I  found  him  to  be  eminently 
qualified  for  the  position,  as  did  my  northern  district  judicial  advi- 
sory committee.  Judge  Jenkins  has  a  distinguished  legal  career. 
Currently,  he  serves  as  a  California  State  Superior  Court  judge  in 
Alameda  County.  He  was  appointed  to  that  position  by  Republican 
Governor  Pete  Wilson. 

For  years  prior  to  his  service  on  the  State  superior  bench,  he 
served  as  an  Alameda  County  Municipal  Court  judge,  having  been 
appointed  by  Republican  Governor  George  Deukmejian  in  1989. 
Judge  Jenkins  received  his  Juris  Doctorate  degree  from  the  Univer- 


1001 

sity  of  San  Francisco  School  of  Law  and  his  undergraduate  degree 
from  the  University  of  Santa  Clara. 

Early  in  his  career,  he  was  a  deputy  district  attorney  in  Alameda 
County  and  an  attorney  for  the  U.S.  Department  of  Justice  in  the 
Civil  Rights  Division  for  2  years  under  President  Reagan.  Prior  to 
his  service  as  Municipal  Court  judge,  he  was  an  attorney  for  Pacific 
Bell. 

For  years.  Judge  Jenkins  has  been  involved  in  numerous  profes- 
sional activities.  He  was  appointed  to  the  prestigious  California 
State  Federal  Judicial  Council  by  Chief  Justice  Ronald  George.  Ad- 
ditionally, he  is  a  member  of  the  California  Supreme  Court's  Advi- 
sory Committee  on  Judicial  Ethics  and  has  been  active  in  a  variety 
of  education  activities  for  judges,  lawyers,  and  law  students. 

Judge  Jenkins  has  also  been  involved  in  numerous  community 
activities.  He  was  appointed  to  the  Board  of  Regents  for  the  Uni- 
versity of  Santa  Clara,  as  well  as  to  the  Board  of  Governors  for  the 
University  of  San  Francisco  School  of  Law.  He  sits  currently  on  the 
Board  of  Directors  for  the  University  of  San  Francisco  "Street  Law 
Project"  and  has  been  active  in  his  church,  working  with  young 
adults. 

Mr.  Chairman,  this  is  a  man  who  has  support  from  Republicans 
and  Democrats  alike.  I  urge  the  members  of  this  distinguished 
committee  to  vote  Judge  Jenkins  out  of  committee  in  hopes  that 
the  full  Senate  may  have  the  opportunity  to  act  quickly  on  his 
nomination.  I  think  that  his  intelligence,  his  judicial  temperament, 
his  broad  experience  in  professional  life  and  community  service  and 
his  deep  commitment  to  justice  qualify  him  to  serve  the  people  of 
California  and  the  people  of  this  Nation  with  great  distinction,  and 
I  so  appreciate  this  opportunity  to  introduce  such  a  fine  human 
being  to  you.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you  very  much,  Senator  Boxer. 

We  have  now  a  final  panel  from  Pennsylvania.  We  will  be  calling 
the  judicial  candidates  forward  after  we  have  finished  with  our 
Members  of  the  House  and  Senate. 

Senator  Rick  Santorum,  Congressman  Tom  Foglietta,  and  Con- 
gressman Chaka  Fattah,  and  I  believe  that  Senator  Specter  may  be 
here  later,  so  we  will  go  forward  with  the  panel.  This  is  for  the 
nomination  of  Frederica  Massiah-Jackson.  Let  me  begin.  Senator 
Santorum,  with  your  statement  of  introduction. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  RICK  SANTORUM,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 

Senator  Santorum.  Thank  you.  Senator.  I  would  say  that  Judge 
Massiah-Jackson  has  an  impressive  lineup  of  a  Senator,  a  Con- 
gressman, and  an  Ambassador  all  here. 

Senator  Kyl.  An  Ambassador-in-waiting. 

Senator  Santorum.  An  ambassador-in-waiting,  all  here  to  intro- 
duce her  to  the  committee.  Let  me  say  also  that  Senator  Kyl  men- 
tioned that  Senator  Specter,  I  am  sure,  if  he  is  not  here  in  time 
to  introduce  her  before  she  is  here,  has  certainly  been  very  active 
in  supporting  Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Senator  Specter  and  I  have 
been  requesting .  the  committee  to  hold  a  hearing  to  consider  her 
nomination. 


1002 

Usually,  I  play  second  fiddle  to  Senator  Specter,  and  so  anticipat- 
ing that,  I  do  not  have  any  of  the  judge's  credentials  in  fi'ont  of  me, 
because  he  usually  goes  through  that.  So  I  apologize  in  advance  for 
that. 

But  I  do  know  she  was  raised  in  Philadelphia  and  attended  col- 
lege there  and  was  elected  to  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  at  Phila- 
delphia in  1983,  where  she  served  initially  in  the  criminal  division 
and  then  later  about  an  equal  amount  of  time  in  the  civil  division 
in  the  Philadelphia  courts. 

As  the  committee  knows.  Senator  Specter  and  I  have  set  up  a 
nonpartisan,  I  believe,  very  much  unbiased  committee  to  review 
nominees  for  all  of  the  district  courts  in  Pennsylvania.  We  now 
have  four  vacancies  in  the  eastern  district  and  our  committee  met 
and  convened  and  recommended  three  recommendations  for  each  of 
the  positions  open. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson  was  recommended  as  qualified  by  the 
committee.  We  have,  as  I  said,  very  rigorous  committee  qualifica- 
tions and  she  met  those  qualifications,  and  as  a  result,  I  am  glad 
the  committee  has  moved  forward,  given  our  recommendation  from 
our  committee  and  Senator  Specter's  and  my  recommendation  to 
hold  a  hearing  on  Judge  Jackson.  I  know  there  was  some  hold-up 
on  that,  but  I  am  glad  that  Senator  Hatch  and  the  committee  has 
decided  to  move  forward  and  to  give  discussion. 

I  am  going  to  be  very  candid,  and  I  know  the  committee  has 
some  concerns.  Senator  Specter  and  I  have  the  very  strong  feeling 
that  the  judge  should  be  here  to  be  able  to  hear  those  concerns  and 
respond  to  those  concerns,  and  so  I  am  very  pleased  that  the  com- 
mittee decided  to  hold  this  hearing  and  give  the  judge  the  oppor- 
tunity to  be  heard  on  her  record  and  on  her  accomplishments. 

I  thank  the  committee  for  their  consideration  and  recommend  ac- 
tion. Thank  you. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you  very  much.  Senator  Santorum. 

Congressman  Foglietta. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  THOMAS  M.  FOGLIETTA,  A  REPRESENTA- 
TIVE IN  CONGRESS  FROM  THE  STATE  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 

Mr.  Foglietta.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  Let  me  say  at  the 
outset  that  I  am  pleased  to  be  here  before  a  committee  that  you 
are  chairing,  after  having  served  with  you  for  so  many  years  on  the 
Armed  Services  Committee  over  in  the  other  body. 

Second,  let  me  say  that  although  I  have  been  nominated  as  the 
Ambassador  to  Italy  and  confirmed  by  your  honorable  body,  I  am 
happy,  in  a  way,  that  I  have  not  been  sworn  in  yet  because  it  gives 
me  the  opportunity  to  be  here  before  you  to  tell  you  that  I  am  not 
only  pleased  but  I  am  honored  to  recommend  to  you  Frederica 
Massiah-Jackson,  an  eminent  jurist  for  your  confirmation  as  a 
member  of  the  U.S.  District  Court  for  Eastern  Pennsylvania. 

Judge  Jackson  has  the  qualities  that  I  respect,  the  qualities  that 
I  think  that  we  need  in  jurists  on  our  Federal  bench.  She  is  a  per- 
son of  great  intellect.  She  has  a  keen  commitment  and  a  keen  un- 
derstanding of  the  law,  and  most  importantly,  justice  and  how  jus- 
tice is  to  be  dispensed.  She  believes  with  every  iota  of  energy  and 
soul  in  her  body  that  she  believes  in  equal  justice  for  all  persons. 


1003 

regardless  of  their  race,  regardless  of  their  financial  condition,  and 
regardless  of  their  position  in  life. 

She  has  served  on  the  Philadelphia  Court  of  Common  Pleas  since 
1983,  and  during  that  time,  she  has  certainly  earned  the  respect 
of  her  peers  on  the  bench,  members  of  the  bar  throughout  Philadel- 
phia, and  most  importantly,  the  citizens  of  Philadelphia  during 
those  years.  Her  knowledge  of  the  law  and  her  very,  very  high  ethi- 
cal standards  are  evidenced  by  her  service  on  the  Board  of  Gov- 
ernors, the  Pennsylvania  Bar  Association,  and  the  hearing  commit- 
tee of  the  Disciplinary  Board  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Pennsyl- 
vania. 

She  has  served  on  many,  many  other  committees,  working  with 
the  community  in  the  city  of  Philadelphia  to  try  to  alleviate  the 
suffering  that  so  many  of  the  citizens  of  our  city  have  because  of 
their  financial  situation — training  programs  for  young  people,  edu- 
cational programs,  so  many  of  the  things  that  I  admire  in  an  indi- 
vidual, but  most  importantly,  admire  in  a  judge  who  has  so  many 
other  responsibilities  and  time-consuming  duties,  that  she  gives  of 
her  time  and  of  herself  for  these  wonderful,  wonderful  causes. 

So  I  really  deem  it  an  honor  to  be  able  to  join  my  good  friends. 
Senator  Rick  Santorum,  Congressman  Chaka  Fattah,  and  I  see  just 
arrived  my  very  dear  friend  and  colleague  for  many,  many  years. 
Senator  Arlen  Specter,  in  their  praise.  I  am  happy  to  be  able  to  join 
them  in  their  praise  and  their  support  to  respectfully  urge  that  you 
and  your  committee  consider  favorably  Judge  Massiah  Jackson  for 
her  confirmation  to  the  district  court. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you  very  much,  Representative  Foglietta. 

Senator  Specter,  a  distinguished  member  of  the  committee,  has 
arrived  and  if  it  is  all  right  with  you.  Congressman,  we  will  defer 
to  the  senior  Senator. 

Mr.  Fattah.  Absolutely. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  ARLEN  SPECTER,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 

Senator  SPECTER.  Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman. 

We  are  having  Governmental  Affairs  hearings  right  down  the 
corridor  and  I  had  intended  to  wait  until  Judge  Massiah-Jackson 
came,  but  when  I  heard  that  Senator  Santorum  and  Congressman 
Foglietta  and  Congressman  Fattah  were  here,  I  came  right  over.  I 
did  not  want  to  be  absent  during  this  important  part  of  the  pro- 
ceeding. 

We  had  a  hearing  for  Judge  Frederica  Massiah-Jackson  in  Phila- 
delphia, attended  by  Senator  Santorum,  Senator  Biden,  and  myself, 
and  all  the  testimony  at  that  time  was  very  positive  about  her.  The 
key  witness  for  Judge  Massiah-Jackson,  in  my  opinion,  is  Mayor 
Rendell.  He  was  the  district  attorney  during  the  first  3  years  of  her 
tenure  and  he  has  been  the  Mayor  for  the  last  5  years  of  her  tenure 
and  was  in  Philadelphia  at  the  time  and  attests  to  her  strong 
qualifications  as  a  judge. 

He  pointed  out  that,  of  all  of  the  matters  taken  under  her  sen- 
tencing issue,  that  only  one  was  appealed,  and  on  that,  she  was 
sustained.  I  know  that  Mayor  Rendell  is  tough  on  sentencing  be- 
cause I  taught  him.  He  was  an  assistant  district  attorney  in  Phila- 
delphia. I  gave  Ed  Rendell  his  first  job,  as  an  assistant  district  at- 


1004 

torney,  when  he  graduated  from  law  school  in  1967.  He  was  a 
tough  prosecutor,  was  chief  of  the  Homicide  Division. 

So  I  make  these  remarks  just  briefly.  I  would  like  to  have  admit- 
ted into  the  record  a  letter  which  was  sent  to  Senator  Hatch  on  the 
subject. 

Senator  Kyl.  Without  objection. 

[The  letter  of  Senator  Specter  follows:] 


1005 


United  States  Senate 


GRAIN  G.  HATCH.  UTAH  CHAIRMAN 

STBOM  THURMOND.  SOUTH  CAROUNA 

CHARLES  E  GRASSLEY.  tOWA 

ARLEN  SPECTER.  PENNSYLVANIA  JOSEPH  R  8I0EN,  Jtt..  DELAWARE 

FRED  THOMPSON.  TENNESSEE  HERBERT  KOHL,  WISCONSIN 

JON  KYL.  ARIZONA  0<ANNE  FEINSTEIN.  CALIFORNIA 

MIKE  OeWINE.  OHIO  RUSSELL  D  FElNGOLD.  WISCONSIN 

JOHN  ASHCROFT.  MISSOURI  RICHARD  J-  DURBIN.  ILUNOIS 

Je^f^Is^^STa^'^'iS^"""*  B06ERTGToflRic£.u.  new  jersey  COMMITTEE  ON  THE  JUDICIARY 

WASHINGTON,  DC  20510-6275 

OctolDer  8,   1997 
The   Honorable   Orrin   Hatch 
Chairman,    Senate   Judiciary   Committee 
United   States   Senate 
Washington,    DC   20510 

Dear    Orrin: 

On  Friday,  October  3,  Senator  Biden,  Senator  Santorum  and  I  conducted  a  hearing 
which  lasted  a  little  over  two  hours  in  Philadelphia  concerning  the  qualifications  of 
Judge  Frederica  Massiah- Jackson . 

Ten  witnesses  appeared  who  voiced  strong  support  for  Judge  Massiah- Jackson. 
Five  of  the  witnesses  were  Common  Pleas  Judges  who  know  her  work  in  detail.   They 
were:  President  Judge  Alex  Bonavitacola,  Administrative  Judge  John  Herron,  Judge  John 
Young,  Judge  Richard  Klein  and  Judge  Victor  DiNubile. 

The  testimony  as  to  Judge  Massiah- Jackson' s  sentencing  record  was  summed  up  by 
President  Judge  Bonavitacola  who  said  that  her  comparisons  with  the  statutory  guideline 
ranged  from  70%  to  86%  over  the  years  when  the  statistics  were  maintained  compared  to 
a  72%  to  82%  rating  for  the  other  Philadelphia  Common  Pleas  Judges. 

President  Judge  Bonavitacola  characterized  Judge  Massiah-Jackson' s  record  as 
"excellent . " 

The  other  five  witnesses,  including  Clifford  Haines,  Chancellor  of  the 
Philadelphia  Bar  Association,  also  testified  in  strong  support  of  Judge  Massiah-Jackson. 

While  Mayor  Rendell  could  not  be  present  because  of  a  prior  commitment  in  Salt 
Lake  City,  he  had  advised  in  advance  of  the  hearing  that  he  thought  Judge  Massiah- 
Jackson  had  an  exemplary  record  on  sentencing.  He  stated  that  he  was  District  Attorney 
during  the  first  three  years  of  her  tenure;  that  lie  was  very  concerned  about  sentencing 
and  that  he  was  satisfied  with  her  sentencing  record. 

Mayor  Rendell  further  noted  that  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  had  only  had  one  appeal 
taken  from  the  District  Attorney's  office  based  on  her  sentencing  and  on  that  one,  she 
was  affirmed. 

With  this  letter,  I  am  enclosing  prepared  statements  from  Mayor  Rendell,  Clifford 
Haines,  President  Judge  Alex  Bonavitacola,  Judge  Richard  Klein  and  Samuel  Evans, 
Chairman,  AFNA  National  Education  k   Research  Fund. 

Police  Commissioner  Richard  Neal  declined  our  invitation  to  testify  saying  that 
he  had  nothing  to  say  one  way  or  another.  District  Attorney  Lynne  Abraham  also  declined 
our  invitation. 

In  advance  of  the  hearing,  we  had  invited  people  to  come  if  they  had  anything 
adverse  or  favorable  to  say. 

There  was  no  adverse  witness . 

I  believe  it  is  very  important  that  we  have  a  prompt  hearing  on  Judge  Massiah- 
Jackson  so  that  Senators  are  in  a  position  to  make  a  decision  on  her  nomination  before 
we  adjourn  in  mid-November. 


Thanks  very  much  for  yOMj:  consideration  of  this  request 


Enclosures 
HAND  DELIVER 


ion  or  tnis  request .     .       j    ^^  ,     ^ 

L     ....    ,.  /try    A/^n^T     ^^^*-^*^ 


1006 

Senator  Specter.  I  think  a  hearing  is  important.  I  have  heard 
comments  about  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  raising  questions  as  to 
sentencing,  and  that  is  inevitable  when  you  have  a  person  on  the 
bench  for  a  long  period  of  time.  I  have  said  that  anybody  who  has 
anything  to  say,  let  them  come  forward.  Let  us  hear  what  they 
have  to  say.  Let  us  make  an  evaluation.  Let  us  have  a  hearing. 

The  reason  that  Senator  Santorum  and  Senator  Biden  and  I 
went  to  Philadelphia  was  to  give  people  a  chance  to  come  in  and 
speak  up,  and  they  have  a  chance  to  have  a  hearing  now.  Let  us 
see  what  the  facts  are. 

I  am  going  to  excuse  myself  now,  Mr.  Chairman,  to  go  back  to 
Governmental  Affairs.  I  will  return  when  Judge  Massiah-Jackson 
is  up  for  questioning. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you  very  much,  Senator  Specter. 

Congressman  Fattah. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  CHAKA  FATTAH,  A  REPRESENTATIVE  IN 
CONGRESS  FROM  THE  STATE  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 

Mr.  Fattah.  Thank  you,  and  let  me  thank  the  two  Senators  from 
the  great  State  of  Pennsylvania,  Senator  Specter  and  Senator 
Santorum,  for  pursuing  this  nomination.  It  is  a  great  honor  for  me 
to  be  supportive  of  President  Clinton's  nominee  for  one  of  the  va- 
cancies in  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania. 

As  Senator  Santorum  mentioned,  there  are  a  number  of  vacan- 
cies there,  but  a  vacancy  that  has  existed  since  the  inception  of  the 
court  is  that  with  this  nomination,  this  would  be  the  first  time  that 
an  African-American  woman  would  serve  in  that  capacity. 

Now,  Judge  Jackson  is  extraordinarily  qualified.  I  think  you  will 
find  through  this  hearing  process  that  any  concerns  raised  about 
her  record  are  being  raised  by  people  who  are  not  informed.  She 
has  handled  thousands  of  cases,  and  as  Senator  Specter  has  just 
indicated,  there  was  only  one  appeal  and  that  was  sustained. 

So  I  think  that  this  hearing  process  will  provide  an  opportunity 
for  light  to  be  shone  onto  her  record.  It  is  one  in  which  all  who  re- 
side in  our  great  State  are  extraordinarily  proud  and  I  want  to  just 
join  with  my  colleagues  in  urging  this  committee  to  favorably  rec- 
ommend to  the  full  committee  and  to  the — I  used  to  serve  in  the 
Senate  in  Pennsylvania  and  we  called  ourselves  the  "upper  cham- 
ber" in  comparison  to  the  House.  Here,  it  is  only  referred  to  as  the 
"other  chamber." 

So  whatever  the  case  may  be,  I  am  sure  that  the  wisdom  of  the 
Senate  will  be  pointed  out 

Senator  Kyl.  Flattery  will  get  you  everywhere.  [Laughter.] 

Mr.  Fattah  [continuing].  In  terms  of  this  nomination  and  I  do 
appreciate  the  time  and  consideration  that  this  committee  is  pro- 
viding to  my  constituent  for  this  hearing. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you  very  much  for  that.  In  fact,  all  of  the 
introductory  statements,  of  course,  have  been  very  fine  statements. 

Judge  Jackson,  would  you  please  stand  so  everybody  here  can  see 
you.  We  will  be  calling  you  forward  after  a  bit,  too.  Thank  you  very 
much.  And  thank  you  very  much  to  the  panel. 

I  hope  that  this  process  will,  as  I  said,  enable  us  to  conclude  this 
hearing  today.  I  apologize  for  not  having  each  of  the  people  who 


1007 

were  introduced  at  the  table  when  the  introductions  were  being 
made,  but  I  think  this  will  expedite  the  process. 

Let  me  now  call  James  J.  Ware,  Judge  Ware  of  California,  to 
come  forward  and  be  the  first  panel.  He  is  nominated  for  the  U.S. 
Circuit  Court,  the  ninth  circuit.  Mr.  Ware,  will  you  please  stand 
and  be  sworn  first? 

Do  you  swear  that  the  testimony  you  give  in  this  hearing  shall 
be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so  help 
you  God? 

Judge  Ware.  I  do. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you.  Please  be  seated. 

Judge,  if  you  would  like  to  make  any  kind  of  a  statement,  you 
are  welcome  to  do  that.  Otherwise,  the  committee  will  begin  its 
questioning.  I  see  that  my  colleague  has  departed,  so  it  may  be  me 
asking  you  the  questions,  but  you  are  welcome  to  make  a  state- 
ment if  you  would  like,  and  I  would  also  like  you  when  you  are 
done  to  introduce  the  members  of  your  family  who  might  be  here 
or  anyone  else  you  would  like  to  introduce. 

TESTIMONY  OF  JAMES  S.  WARE,  OF  CALIFORNIA,  TO  BE  U.S. 
CIRCUIT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  NINTH  CIRCUIT 

Judge  Ware.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  do  not  have  a  pre- 
pared statement,  but  I  would  wish  to  take  this  opportunity  to  ac- 
knowledge the  absence  of  my  wife,  Susan,  who  would  very  much 
wish  to  be  here,  and  my  son,  Jeremy.  They  are  home  in  Mountain 
View,  CA.  But  I  am  fortunate  that  my  daughter,  Carlie,  who  is  a 
sophomore  at  Yale,  was  able  to  fly  down  from  New  Haven  to  be 
with  me  here  today. 

Senator  Kyl.  Welcome  to  the  committee. 

Judge  Ware.  I  also  would  wish  to  acknowledge  the  presence  of 
Jan  White,  who  is  a  local  attorney  here  in  Washington,  a  classmate 
of  mine  from  Stanford.  We  just  had  our  reunion  at  Stanford  and 
she  came,  as  well,  to  be  supportive. 

questioning  by  senator  kyl 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you  for  coming.  We  appreciate  the  attend- 
ance of  all  of  the  people  in  the  audience,  friends  and  family  alike. 

Judge,  you  come  highly  recommended.  You  have  had  some  won- 
derful statements  said  about  you  and  it  is  the  intention  of  the  com- 
mittee, and  I  know  I  speak  for  the  chairman  in  indicating  it  is  our 
intention  to  try  to  fill  these  positions.  The  ninth  circuit  is  the  cir- 
cuit of  my  State,  as  well,  and  we  understand  how  important  it  is 
to  fill  these  positions,  so  you  certainly  have  our  commitment  to  try 
to  move  this  along  as  quickly  as  possible. 

Let  me  ask  you  a  couple  of  questions.  If  other  members  arrive, 
then,  of  course  I  will  call  upon  them  to  do  so. 

In  a  recent  article,  you  criticize  the  operation  of  mandatory  mini- 
mum sentences  as  inconsistent  with  the  sentencing  guidelines 
scheme.  Specifically,  you  wrote,  and  I  am  quoting  now,  "The  judi- 
cial branch,  charged  with  imposing  a  sentence  according  to  law,  is 
empowered  to  exercise  its  discretion  to  modify  rigid  rules  if  war- 
ranted by  circumstances  in  a  particular  case."  That  was  in  the  arti- 
cle, "A  Clash  of  Sentencing  Policies:  Sentencing  Guidelines  Versus 
Mandatory  Minimums." 


1008 

Do  you  believe  that  if  the  sentencing  guidelines  would  prescribe 
a  sentence  below  a  mandatory  minimum  sentence,  that  you  could 
ignore  the  statutory  minimum? 

Judge  Ware.  No,  Senator.  I  should  say,  it  was  not  a  recent  arti- 
cle. It  was  an  article  written  very  soon  after  the  guidelines  had 
been  passed.  It  had  an  invitation  to  write  a  piece  for  a  meeting  of 
the  State  Bar  of  California  at  one  of  the  annual  meetings.  There 
was  going  to  be  a  discussion  of  the  sentencing  guidelines  and  I  was 
asked  to  write  a  piece  to  be  submitted  to  provoke  a  discussion 
about  the  guidelines  and  how  the  policies  of  the  guidelines  com- 
pared with  those  of  mandatory  minimums. 

Senator  Kyl.  I  appreciate  the  correction  for  the  record.  Could  you 
give  us  a  rough  time  frame  of  when  that  was  written,  then? 

Judge  Ware.  I  believe  it  was  around  1990.  The  guidelines  came 
into  effect  in  the  mid-1980's  and  this  was  an  article  that  was  sub- 
mitted in  approximately  1990. 

Senator  Kyl.  Could  you  explain,  then,  your  view  of  what  a  judge 
should  do  when  the  guidelines  and  the  mandatory  minimums 
clash? 

Judge  Ware.  Well,  there  is  no  clash,  quite  frankly.  The  manda- 
tory minimum  sentence,  if  it  is  required  by  law,  is  the  one  that  a 
court  must  impose.  I  would  follow,  and  I  have  followed,  the  law  in 
that  respect  in  the  sentences  that  have  been  handed  down  by  me 
during  my  tenure  as  a  district  judge. 

Senator  Kyl.  And  I  gather  it  would  be  your  intention  to  continue 
to  do  so? 

Judge  Ware.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  Kyl.  In  the  absence  of  controlling  precedent,  how  would 
you  characterize  your  approach  to  interpreting  the  Constitution? 

Judge  Ware.  Well,  in  the  absence  of  precedents,  I  presume  that 
I  would  be  involved  in  applying  the  Constitution  to  a  statute  of 
some  sort.  It  is  my  belief  that  statutes  passed  by  Congress  should 
be  presumed  constitutional.  If  there  are  no  cases  upon  which  I 
could  rely  construing  that  statute,  I  would  do  my  best  to  find  as 
closely  analogous  a  situation  that  would  apply  to  the  case.  And  in 
any  event,  I  would  attempt  to  try  to  decide  the  case  as  I  believe 
the  Supreme  Court  would  decide  it  if  the  case  were  before  it. 

Senator  Kyl.  For  those  who  are  not  schooled  in  the  law,  that  is 
kind  of  a  quick  question,  properly  answered,  because,  of  course,  in 
every  case  the  lawyers  argue  that  there  is  some  precedent  of  some 
kind  or  some  statutory  or  other  reference  to  which  the  judge  can 
make  for  a  decision,  and  I  appreciate  that  answer. 

Can  you  think  of  cases  that  you  think  were — and  I  am  talking 
now  in  the  area  of  constitutional  law — where  strictly  as  a  matter 
of  first  impression,  do  you  think  the  U.S.  Supreme  Court  improp- 
erly departed  from  the  text  or  the  meaning  or  history  of  the  U.S. 
Constitution? 

Judge  Ware.  Well,  it  is  difficult  to  think  of  a  recent  case.  In  our 
history,  I  would  bring  to  mind  the  case  of  Plessy  v.  Ferguson,  which 
is  a  case  where  the  U.S.  Supreme  Court  endorsed  the  separate  but 
equal  doctrine.  Quite  frankly,  I  believe  that  the  Supreme  Court,  in 
making  that  decision,  was  attempting,  in  its  own  view,  to  interpret 
the  constitution.  But  since  that  case  and  over  time,  we  have  come 
to  a  position  where  the  Supreme  Court  has  indicated  that  separate 


1009 

but  equal  is  inherently  unequal.  That  is  now  the  law  of  the  land 
and  that  is  the  law  which  I  apply. 

Senator  Kyl.  And,  of  course,  as  a  member  of  the  circuit  court  of 
appeals,  it  is  your  obligation  to  apply  the  law  as  interpreted  by  the 
Supreme  Court. 

Let  me  ask  you  a  question  about  an  issue  that  is  becoming  im- 
portant in  recent  years  and  ask  you  to  set  forth  your  views  on 
whether,  when  there  is  no  evidence  of  past  acts  of  employment  dis- 
crimination directed  at  either  identifiable  individuals  or  any  par- 
ticular minority  groups,  and  no  evidence  that  members  of  a  par- 
ticular minority  group  are  underrepresented  in  an  employer's  work 
force,  whether  an  employee  may,  under  the  Equal  Protection 
Clause  of  the  14th  amendment  or  title  VII  of  the  1964  Civil  Rights 
Act,  use  race,  national  origin,  or  gender  as  the  basis  for  employ- 
ment decisions. 

Judge  Ware.  You  said  whether  an  employee  may.  I  presume  you 
meant  employer. 

Senator  Kyl.  I  misspoke.  Employer,  you  are  right. 

Judge  Ware.  The  case  that  I  would  bring  to  mind  in  response  to 
your  question  is  the  Adarand  decision  of  the  U.S.  Supreme  Court, 
which,  to  my  understanding,  holds  that  in  the  absence  of  past  acts 
of  discrimination,  race  may  not  be  used,  that  it  is  a  suspect  classi- 
fication and  that  it  is  subject  to  strict  scrutiny,  the  highest  con- 
stitutional standard  available,  and  it  must  be  measured  against 
whether  there  is  a  compelling  governmental  interest.  But  in  the  ab- 
sence of  a  case  of  past  discrimination,  where  race  is  being  used  to 
remedy  that,  that  race  may  not  be  used  as  a  basis. 

Senator  Kyl.  And  that  is  the  standard  that  you  would  apply? 

Judge  Ware.  That  is  the  standard  I  would  apply. 

Senator  Kyl.  There  being  no  other  Senators  here,  I  will  ignore 
the  red  light  and  proceed.  But  what  I  would  like  to  do  is,  instead 
of  asking  you  all  the  questions  which  have  been  prepared  by  mem- 
bers and  staff  of  various  members,  perhaps  ask  one  more,  since 
Senator  Kohl  is  now  here,  and  then  submit  a  couple  of  questions 
for  the  record  for  you  to  answer.  Let  me  just  ask  you  one  more 
question,  and  then  if  Senator  Kohl  has  questions,  I  will  call  upon 
him. 

Please  state  your  best  independent  legal  judgment,  irrespective 
of  existing  U.S.  precedent  on  the  constitutionality  of  capital  punish- 
ment. 

Judge  Ware.  Capital  punishment  is  constitutional,  Mr.  Chair- 
man, and  that  is  the  law  as  enunciated  to  us  by  the  Supreme  Court 
and  I  have  no  personal  or  philosophical  beliefs  that  would  in  any 
way  interfere  with  my  applying  capital  punishment.  I  would  not  re- 
joice at  the  prospect,  but  in  a  proper  case,  I  would  not  hesitate  to 
oblige. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Senator  Kohl,  do  you  have  questions  for  the  witness? 

Senator  KOHL.  No. 

Senator  Kyl.  There  are,  as  I  said,  a  variety  of  other  questions, 
but  frankly,  based  upon  the  answers  to  the  questions  that  you  have 
provided  thus  far,  all  of  which  exhibit  a  very  sound  understanding 
of  the  law  as  I  understand  it  and  a  desire  to  apply  the  law  as  enun- 
ciated by  the  Supreme  Court,  which  is  the  duty  of  a  member  of  the 


1010 

circuit  court,  I  would  prefer  simply  to  submit  these  other  questions 
for  the  record.  They  are  not  unlike  the  questions  that  I  have  just 
been  asking  and  that  way  we  can  move  on  to  some  of  these  other 
nominees. 

I  want  to  tell  the  people  in  the  audience 

Judge  Ware.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Senator  Kyl.  If  I  could,  while  you  are  just  seated  here.  The  effort 
here,  and  you  have  heard  reference  to  it  by  a  couple  of  the  Sen- 
ators, to  urge  the  Senate  to  hurry  up  and  get  some  nominees  ap- 
proved, confirmed,  so  that  these  individuals  can  take  their  position 
on  the  bench,  is  well  taken  and  our  effort  here  today  is  to  try  to 
expedite  that  process. 

I  fear  that  our  effort  could  be  misinterpreted  as  a  lack  of  interest 
in  each  individual  nominee  and  in  rushing  through,  without  ade- 
quately considering  factors  pertinent  to  their  nomination  or  an  un- 
willingness to  listen  to  them  and  to  hear  them,  I  want  to  assure 
all  of  the  people  in  the  audience  that  that  is  absolutely  not  the 
case,  that  to  the  extent  we  proceed  quickly  through  this  hearing, 
it  is  because  of  the  qualifications  of  the  nominees,  that  they  have 
satisfied  the  preliminary  tests  that  the  administration  and  that  the 
Senate  staff  and  that  the  members  themselves  have  applied  to  the 
nominations  and  that  the  lack  of  questions  is  really  a  testament  to 
their  qualifications  and  to  the  probability  that  the  committee  will 
act  quickly  on  the  nomination. 

So  please  do  not  take  our  failure  to  hold  the  witnesses  here  for 
1  hour  and  subject  them  to  a  long  line  of  excruciating  questions 
here  as  a  lack  of  interest  but  rather  a  confirmation  of  the  signifi- 
cant qualifications  that  they  bring,  and  certainly.  Judge  Ware,  that 
applies  in  your  case. 

Judge  Ware.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Kyl.  Senator  Kohl,  do  you  have  anything  else? 

Senator  KOHL.  No. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you  very  much  for  your  presence  here  and 
we  will  look  forward  to  seeing  you  again. 

The  next  panel  is  a  large  panel,  and  let  me  ask  each  of  you  to 
please  come  to  the  table — Mr.  Lynn  Adelman,  of  Wisconsin,  nomi- 
nated to  be  U.S.  district  judge  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Wiscon- 
sin; Mr.  Charles  Breyer,  of  California,  to  be  U.S.  district  judge  for 
the  Northern  District  of  California;  Mr.  Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr.,  of 
California,  to  be  U.S.  district  judge  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Cali- 
fornia; Judge  Martin  J.  Jenkins,  of  California,  to  be  U.S.  district 
judge  for  the  Northern  District  of  California;  Judge  Michael  P. 
McCuskey,  of  Illinois,  to  be  U.S.  district  judge  for  the  Central  Dis- 
trict of  Illinois;  and  Mr.  G.  Patrick  Murphy,  of  Illinois,  to  be  U.S. 
district  judge  for  the  Southern  District  of  Illinois.  Please  stand  and 
raise  your  right  hand. 

Do  you  swear  the  testimony  you  shall  give  in  this  hearing  shall 
be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so  help 
you  God? 

Mr.  Adelman.  I  do. 

Mr.  Breyer.  I  do. 

Mr.  Damrell.  I  do. 

Judge  Jenkins.  I  do. 

Judge  McCuskey.  I  do. 


1011 

Mr.  Murphy.  I  do. 

Senator  Kyl.  Senator  Kohl  has  asked,  Mr.  Adelman,  that  we 
begin  the  questioning  with  you.  I  might  say  prehminarily  that  be- 
cause of  the  size  of  the  panel,  when  I  ask  you  questions,  I  may  ask 
it  of  one  and  then  ask  each  of  the  members  of  the  panel,  in  turn, 
to  respond  to  that  same  question.  But  there  may  be  one  or  two 
questions  that  are  unique  to  individual  nominees,  and,  therefore, 
we  can  certainly  handle  it  that  way. 

Mr.  Adelman,  let  me  begin  with  you  and  Senator  Kohl  can  begin 
the  questioning. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  KOHL 

Senator  KoHL.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Mr.  Adelman,  would  you  give  us  some  of  the  background  in  your 
life,  your  family  experience,  some  of  your  philosophy  which  leads 
you  here  today  to  want  to  be  a  Federal  judge  and  which  makes  you 
feel  that  you  would  be  a  good  Federal  judge? 

Senator  Kyl.  May  I  interrupt  for  just  a  moment?  I  forgot  to  ask 
each  of  these  nominees  to  introduce  friends  and  family  who  are 
here,  and  since  that  is  probably  pertinent  to  that  question  you  just 
asked,  let  me  ask  Mr.  Adelman,  first  of  all,  to  introduce  the  mem- 
bers of  his  friends  or  family  here  who  he  would  like  to  introduce, 
and  may  I  also,  then,  ask  each  of  the  other  members  of  the  panel 
to  do  the  same  and  then  we  will  return  to  that  question,  Mr. 
Adelman,  if  that  is  all  right  with  you.  Senator  Kohl. 

TESTIMONY  OF  LYNN  S.  ADELMAN,  OF  WISCONSIN,  TO  BE  U.S. 
DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  EASTERN  DISTRICT  OF  WISCONSIN 

Mr.  Adelman.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  First,  I  would  like  to 
introduce  my  wife,  Betty,  Betty  Adelman,  who  is  also  my  law  part- 
ner, and  my  mother,  Edie  Adelman,  and  my  father,  OUie  Adelman, 
and  my  brother,  Craig  Adelman. 

Senator  Kyl.  Welcome  to  all  of  you.  I  gather  you  are  the  senior 
partner  in  the  firm.  [Laughter.] 

Thank  you.  Mr.  Breyer. 

TESTIMONY  OF  CHARLES  R.  BREYER,  OF  CALIFORNIA,  TO  BE 
U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  NORTHERN  DISTRICT  OF 
CALIFORNIA 

Mr.  Breyer.  Thank  you  very  much.  I  would  like  to  introduce  my 
wife,  Sydney  Goldstein,  and  my  son,  Joseph  Goldstein-Breyer,  and 
my  daughter,  Kate  Goldstein-Breyer,  and  also  my  godson,  Collin 
Streck,  who  is  here. 

Senator  Kyl.  Great.  All  of  you,  welcome. 

TESTIMONY  OF  FRANK  C.  DAMRELL,  JR.,  OF  CALIFORNIA,  TO 
BE  U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  EASTERN  DISTRICT  OF 
CALIFORNIA 

Mr.  Damrell.  Mr.  Chairman,  let  me  introduce  my  wife, 
Lidwiena,  my  son,  Jim,  who  is  a  third-year  law  student  at  Notre 
Dame,  my  daughter,  Ann.  Two  children  of  ours  could  not  make  it, 
Frank  and  Alida.  They  are  in  California.  I  have  some  friends  here 
in  Washington  who  have  also  attended  the  hearing  I  would  like  to 
introduce,  as  well. 


1012 

Senator  Kyl.  Please. 

Mr.  Damrell.  First,  close  family  friend,  Ann  Veneman,  who  is 
the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  for  the  State  of  California.  Charlie 
McBride,  Cheryl  Shelby,  and  Mel  Herwitz. 

Senator  Kyl.  Welcome  to  all  of  you,  and  to  Notre  Dame,  good 
luck. 

Judge  Jenkins. 

TESTIMONY  OF  MARTIN  J.  JENKINS,  OF  CALIFORNIA,  TO  BE 
U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  NORTHERN  DISTRICT  OF 
CALIFORNIA 

Judge  Jenkins.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  would  like  to  intro- 
duce my  father,  James  Jenkins,  and  a  close  family  friend  I  have 
known  for  about  25  years,  Mr.  Jim  Gilyard,  and  right  behind  him, 
I  have  some  relatives  from  Philadelphia  who  have  journeyed  here 
today.  I  have  a  cousin.  Can  you  stand,  Jeff  Junior,  and  Jeff  Junior's 
father,  Jeff  Senior,  and  his  wife,  Angela,  and  their  new  child,  Jerry, 
who  are  right  outside.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Kyl.  Great.  Thank  you  very  much  and  welcome  to  all  of 
you. 

Judge  McCuskey. 

TESTIMONY  OF  MICHAEL  P.  McCUSKEY,  OF  ILLINOIS,  TO  BE 
U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  CENTRAL  DISTRICT  OF  ILLI- 
NOIS 

Judge  McCuskey.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Unfortunately,  as  Senator  Durbin  mentioned,  my  wife,  Brenda, 
and  my  son,  Ryan,  who  is  a  3-year-old,  cannot  be  here,  and  my 
daughter,  Melinda,  has  mid-terms  at  Southern  Illinois  University, 
so  I  have  no  one  from  my  family,  but  I  do  have  some  friends  I 
would  like  to  introduce,  if  possible. 

Senator  Kyl.  Please. 

Judge  McCuskey.  Bill  and  Tilla  Hancock,  who  live  here  in  the 
District.  Bill  is  originally  from  my  area  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  and 
his  wife  are  both  lawyers  and  have  resided  here  in  the  District  for 
many  years. 

Senator  Kyl.  Welcome  to  both  of  you. 

Judge  McCuskey.  Could  I  ask,  Mr.  Chairman,  if  Congressman 
LaHood  was  going  to  be  here  and  also  give  introductions  today,  and 
the  last  time  I  noticed,  he  was  in  the  chair  presiding  over  the 
House  of  Representatives.  Will  he  be  afforded  the  opportunity  in 
the  next  3  days  to  file  remarks? 

Senator  Kyl.  Absolutely.  In  fact,  I  was  handed  a  note  that  he 
could  not  be  here  because  of  that.  His  statement  and  any  other  in- 
formation that  he  would  like  to  submit  will,  of  course,  be  made  a 
part  of  the  record. 

Judge  McCuskey.  Thank  you  very  much.  I  appreciate  the  bipar- 
tisan support. 

Senator  Kyl.  That  is  the  way  this  process  has  to  work. 

Mr.  Murphy. 


1013 

TESTIMONY  OF  G.  PATRICK  MURPHY,  OF  ILLINOIS,  TO  BE  U,S. 
DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  SOUTHERN  DISTRICT  OF  ILLINOIS 

Mr.  Murphy.  Good  afternoon,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  am  here  alone, 
but  I  trust  my  children  are  in  school  and  diligently  applying  them- 
selves and  my  wife  is  working.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Kyl.  Great.  Thank  you. 

Now,  Senator  Kohl  had  asked  Mr.  Adelman  a  question.  Please 
proceed. 

Mr.  Adelman.  I  practiced  law  for  30  years  and  served  as  a  legis- 
lator. I  see  serving  as  a  judge  as  a  continuation  of  public  service. 
I  think  that  the  role  of  a  judge  would  be  much  different  than  the 
roles  I  have  played  in  the  past,  but  I  think  my  experience  as  a 
State  legislator  has  made  me  very  sensitive  to  the  doctrine  of  sepa- 
ration of  powers  and  to  the  limited  role  of  a  judicial  officer. 

Senator  Kohl.  One  other  question,  Mr.  Adelman.  Many  people 
are  concerned  that  there  is  too  much  confidentiality  in  litigation 
today,  and  altogether  too  often  secrecy  agreements  prevent  real 
dangers  to  public  safety  from  being  disclosed.  For  example,  settle- 
ment agreements  often  require  a  plaintiff  injured  by  a  defective 
product  to  take  a  vow  of  silence  even  though  the  product  is  still 
being  used  by  the  public. 

My  question  to  you  is  before  signing  a  protective  order  to  con- 
fidentiality agreement  regarding  the  public  health  or  safety,  would 
you  carefully  scrutinize  whether  such  secrecy  is  needed?  How  im- 
portant do  you  think  this  issue  is? 

Mr.  Adelman.  I  think  it  is  very  important.  I  would  carefully 
scrutinize  whether  a  secrecy  agreement  was  warranted  and  I  would 
apply  the  law  as  it  existed  in  the  Seventh  Circuit  and  provided  by 
the  Supreme  Court. 

Senator  Kohl.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Adelman.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chair- 
man. 

Senator  Kyl.  Senator  Feingold. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  FEINGOLD 

Senator  FEINGOLD.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Mr.  Adelman,  in  addition  to  your  successful  law  practice,  you 
served  with  distinction  in  the  Wisconsin  State  Senate  for  20  years, 
but  obviously  the  role  of  the  legislature  is  much  different,  but 
equally  important  as  that  of  the  judiciary. 

Would  you  please  share  with  the  committee  your  understanding 
of  the  separation  of  powers  and  how  your  role  will  be  different  on 
the  bench  than  in  the  Wisconsin  State  Senate? 

Mr.  Adelman.  It  will  be  very  different.  As  a  legislator,  one  is  a 
policymaker.  As  a  judge,  one  decides  cases  before  them  fairly  based 
only  on  the  facts.  Judges  do  not  make  policy,  and  the  policymaking 
is  the  province  of  the  other  branches  and  I  am  very  sensitive  to 
that  limitation. 

Senator  FEINGOLD.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Durbin. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  DURBIN 

Senator  DURBIN.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 


1014 

Judge  McCuskey,  we  often  wrestle  with  the  issue  of  sentencing 
guideHnes,  and  clearly  those  guidelines  have  been  established  at 
the  Federal  level.  You  have  probably  dealt  with  the  same  phenome- 
non in  State  law.  I  would  like  to  hear  your  experience  and  thoughts 
on  sentencing  guidelines,  what  you  feel  about  those  in  terms  of 
your  practice  on  the  bench. 

Judge  McCuskey.  Well,  one  of  the  things  that  strikes  me  is  that 
my  entire  law  practice  has  been  in  a  determinant  sentence  situa- 
tion. When  Governor  Thompson  came  into  office,  Illinois  moved  to 
determine  its  sentences.  So  we  are  not  a  parole  State.  We  do  not 
have  extremely  large  parameters  in  sentencing,  maybe  not  as  nar- 
row as  the  Federal  sentencing  guidelines,  but  we  have  a  statute  in 
Illinois  that  narrows  the  range  of  sentences  for  judges.  And  that  is 
what  I  grew  up  with  as  an  attorney,  as  a  circuit  judge,  and  now 
in  reviewing  sentences. 

The  Federal  sentencing  guidelines  may  contain  a  narrower  range 
for  a  Federal  district  judge,  but  I  am  certainly  used  to  working 
within  guidelines  and  realize  that  the  power  of  the  judiciary  is  lim- 
ited by  statute  and  that  we  must  look  at  the  statute  and  apply  the 
appropriate  sentence  to  the  facts. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Mr.  Murphy,  your  practice  as  an  attorney  has 
been  on  the  other  side  of  the  bench,  and  one  of  the  issues  that  I 
can  recall  from  my  own  private  practice  of  great  interest  was  judi- 
cial temperament.  We  are  looking  for  people  who  are  firm  and  fair 
and  get  about  their  business.  I  would  like  you  to  reflect  on  the 
judges  that  you  practiced  before  without  naming  names  and  talk 
about  the  elements  or  qualities  that  you  think  are  important  if  you 
are  successful  in  being  confirmed  to  the  Federal  bench. 

Mr.  Murphy.  Senator  Durbin,  Mr.  Chairman,  in  practicing  in 
front  of  many  judges,  Federal  and  State,  all  over  the  Midwest,  I 
have  been  in  front  of  judges  that  were  just  extremely  difficult.  They 
were  difficult  for  the  lawyers,  they  were  difficult  for  the  litigants, 
and  they  were  difficult  for  the  people  that  worked  around  them. 

On  the  other  hand,  I  have  been  around  judges  who  were  gra- 
cious, courteous,  professional,  and  moved  the  cases  along.  Some 
people,  it  seems,  have  a  personality  such  that,  if  given  power,  they 
do  not  handle  it  well,  and  when  they  don't,  it  makes  the  litigation 
process  much  more  difficult  than  it  should  be.  It  is  very  important, 
I  think,  for  a  judge  to  be  firm,  but  courteous. 

If  there  is  one  virtue  that  comes  to  me  naturally,  it  is  humility, 
and  if  anyone  knows  anything  about  my  background,  you  would 
know  there  are  a  hundred  reasons  why  that  is  the  case.  I  have 
served  with  men  in  war.  I  believe  I  understand  how  to  get  along 
with  people  and  work  with  people  and  lead  people,  and  I  know  that 
I  can  be  courteous  and  firm  at  the  same  time  and  I  think  that  is 
critical,  particularly  in  the  Federal  courts. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Judge  McCuskey,  since  you  have  had  this  op- 
portunity, without  being  self-critical,  could  you  comment  on  this 
element  of  a  judge's  performance? 

Judge  McCuskey.  I  think  that  judicial  temperament  is  the  single 
most  defining  quality  of  a  judge.  Congressman  Evans  paid  me  a 
compliment  and  I  had  even  forgotten  about  it.  In  1990,  800  lawyers 
rated  my  qualifications  as  a  circuit  judge  in  the  21  counties  when 
I  ran  for  the  appellate  court  and  I  received  the  highest  score  on 


1015 

legal  ability.  But  what  made  me  feel  the  best  was  I  received  the 
highest  score,  an  exceptionally  qualified  rating,  on  judicial  tem- 
perament, which  was  my  highest  score. 

I  think  that  a  judge  in  the  decisionmaking  qualities  has  to  han- 
dle what  I  call  the  four  F's.  You  have  to  be  fast,  you  have  to  be 
fair,  you  have  to  be  firm,  and  a  judge  must  be  friendly.  People  do 
not  always  enjoy  litigating  cases.  Jurors  certainly  don't  like  lengthy 
Federal  district  court  jury  duty,  and  we  have  to  remember  that  the 
people  come  before  a  court  and  look  to  the  judge  for  an  attitude. 
And  if  that  attitude  is  not  fair  and  friendly,  that  is  what  they  take 
home,  that  is  what  they  tell  people  about  the  system.  And  I  think 
it  is  my  responsibility  to  make  them  have  the  best  feeling  about 
the  court  experience  and  what  happens  in  the  courtroom. 

Senator  Durbin.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  will  add  in  closing  that  Mr. 
Murphy  here  received  a  very  kind  and  generous  letter  from  Judge 
Phil  Gilbert,  who  is  a  Federal  district  court  judge  in  the  southern 
district.  Judge  Gilbert  was  appointed  under  a  Republican  adminis- 
tration. I  knew  his  father  when  his  father  was  a  Republican  State 
senator.  It  is  a  wonderful  family. 

And  Judge  Gilbert  had  the  highest  praise  for  Pat  Murphy,  who 
practiced  before  him,  for  his  knowledge  of  the  law  and  his  fairness, 
too.  And  I  don't  want  this  to  continue  to  sound  like  a  cheering  sec- 
tion, but  both  Senator  Carol  Moseley-Braun  and  I  are  very  proud 
to  present  these  nominees. 

Thank  you. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you,  Senator  Durbin. 

In  order  to  make  this  not  appear  to  be  too  easy,  let  me  ask  Mr. 
Adelman  a  question,  if  I  could.  In  the  October  1993  issue  of  Wis- 
consin Lawyer  magazine,  you  authored  an  article  titled  "Wisconsin 
Should  Not  Reverse  140  Years  of  History  by  Reinstating  the  Death 
Penalty."  In  that  article,  you  enumerated  a  list  of  arguments 
against  the  death  penalty,  including  that  it  disproportionately  ap- 
plied to  racial  minorities,  it  is  arbitrarily  imposed,  it  does  not  effec- 
tively deter  future  crimes,  it  is  unduly  expensive,  and  it  reflects 
badly  on  the  United  States  vis-a-vis  other  Western  democracies. 

Given  your  forceful  personal  opposition  to  the  death  penalty,  do 
you  believe  you  can  effectively  and  fairly  decide  capital  cases  on  the 
Federal  bench? 

Mr.  Adelman.  Yes,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  do.  In  that  article,  I  was 
serving  as  an  advocate  of  a  legislative  position  which  has  actually 
been  the  law  in  Wisconsin  for  many,  many  years.  However,  my  job 
as  a  judge  would  be  very  different  and  it  would  be — the  Supreme 
Court  has  found  that  the  death  penalty  is  constitutional.  It  would 
be  my  job  to  uphold  the  law  as  a  district  court,  and  there  is  nothing 
in  my  personal  beliefs  that  would  in  any  way  impair  me  from  fol- 
lowing the  law  as  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  and  the  seventh 
circuit. 

Senator  Kyl.  So  notwithstanding  those  personal  views,  you 
would  apply  the  law  and,  if  necessary,  in  appropriate  cir- 
cumstances, be  willing  to  apply  the  death  penalty? 

Mr.  Adelman.  That  is  correct. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you.  May  I  just  ask  if  any  of  the  other  mem- 
bers of  the  panel  have  a  personal  or  moral  position  which  would 
not  enable  them  to  apply  the  death  penalty,  if  warranted,  in  an  ap- 


1016 

propriate  case?  And  if  you  don't,  then  I  will  take  your  silence  as 
a  statement  that  you  would  not  have  such  a  problem. 

[No  response.] 

Senator  Kyl.  Mr.  Breyer,  since  I  don't  think  anyone  has  picked 
on  you  yet,  in  the  absence  of  controlling  precedent,  how  would  you 
characterize  your  approach  to  interpreting  the  Constitution? 

Mr.  Breyer.  Well,  again,  let  me  say  that  I  think  that  you  would 
take  a  look  at  the  case  in  front  of  you.  If  it  were  a  State  statute 
or  an  initiative,  you  would  start  with  the  fact  that  there  is  a  pre- 
sumption of  constitutionality,  that  the  State  legislature  or  that  the 
public,  the  people  and  the  voters,  have  enacted  a  constitutional  en- 
actment. 

Second,  I  think  you  have  to  take  a  look  at  the  plain  meaning  of 
what  it  is  that  they  are  saying,  and  then,  if  necessary,  if  you  have 
to  go  for  a  further  analysis,  in  those  rare  cases  then  I  think  you 
could  take  a  look  at  legislative  intent. 

Senator  Kyl.  Let  me  ask  if  any  of  you  on  the  panel  feel  con- 
strained to  add  anything  or  whether  that  answer  essentially  ex- 
presses your  view  of  how  you  would  interpret  cases  as  well.  And 
if  you  don't  add  anything,  I  will  assume  that  your  response  would 
be  roughly  along  the  same  lines. 

[No  response.] 

Senator  Kyl.  All  right.  I  asked  a  case  before  of  Judge  Ware  and 
let  me — Mr.  Damrell,  I  forgot  whether  you  have  been  asked  a  ques- 
tion or  not,  but  we  will  just  go  right  down  the  line  here.  This  had 
to  do  with  the  affirmative  action  issue  that  I  asked  Judge  Ware 
and  my  question  was  where  there  is  no  evidence  of  past  acts  of  em- 
ployment discrimination  directed  at  either  identifiable  individuals 
or  particular  minority  groups,  and  no  evidence  that  members  of  a 
particular  minority  group  are  underrepresented  in  an  employer's 
work  force,  then  may  the  employer,  under  the  equal  protection 
clause  of  the  14th  amendment  and  title  VII  of  the  Civil  Rights  Act, 
use  race,  national  origin,  or  gender  as  the  basis  for  emplojrment  de- 
cisions? 

Mr.  Damrell.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  could  simply  say  I  agree  with 
what  Judge  Ware  said,  but  I  think  I  could  at  least  add  to  that  my 
own  personal  words,  and  that  is  that  I  would  follow  the  Adarand 
case.  It  would  appear  that  based  on  that  case,  any  race-based  clas- 
sification must  be  strictly  construed,  strictly  scrutinized,  and  if 
there  is  found  to  be  a  compelling  interest,  which  there  wouldn't  ap- 
pear to  be  in  this  factual  context,  then,  of  course,  it  would  be  very 
narrowly  construed.  But  I  would  think  Adarand  would  control 
under  those  circumstsinces. 

Senator  Kyl.  Do  any  of  you  have  anything  you  would  like  to  add 
to  that?  And  if  you  do  not,  I  will  assume  that  your  answer  would 
be  roughly  the  same  as  Judge  Ware  and  Mr.  Damrell. 

[No  response.] 

Senator  Kyl.  All  right.  Well,  Judge  Jenkins,  let  me  ask  you  one 
question,  since  I  don't  think  you  have  been  asked  a  question  yet, 
and  then  we  will  wrap  this  up.  This  has  to  do  with  fifth  amend- 
ment takings  under  the  Constitution.  Of  course,  the  amendment 
provides  that  private  property  may  not  be  taken  by  the  government 
for  public  use  without  payment  of  just  compensation  to  the  owner. 


1017 

Would  you  state  for  us  your  best  independent  legal  judgment  on 
whether  a  property  owner  is  entitled  to  just  compensation  when 
the  Government,  through  wetlands  designation  or  through  other 
land  use,  environmental,  or  endangered  species  statues  or  regula- 
tions, for  example,  substantially  limits  or  prohibits  an  owner's 
other  lawful  use  or  development  of  his  or  her  property? 

Judge  Jenkins.  Mr.  Chairman,  my  understanding  of  the  U.S.  Su- 
preme Court  precedent  in  that  regard  is  that  it  certainly  is  possible 
that  that  could  be  construed  as  a  taking.  There  are  several  dif- 
ferent standards.  One  is  that  if  the  limited  use  of  the  property  in 
question  has  substantially  and  materially  impacted  alternative 
uses,  then,  in  fact,  that  would  be  a  public  taking  for  which  com- 
pensation would  be  due. 

Senator  Kyl.  Do  any  of  you  have  a  different  understanding  of  the 
law  or  would  you  like  to  add  anything  to  that  answer? 

[No  response.] 

Senator  Kyl.  Senator  Kohl,  do  you  have  any  additional  ques- 
tions? 

Senator  KOHL.  Just  one  request  of  you. 

Senator  Kyl.  Sure. 

Senator  KOHL.  Senator  Leahy  has  asked  that  his  statement  be 
made  part  of  the  record  and  I  recommend  that  it  be  done. 

Senator  Kyl.  Certainly.  Without  objection. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Leahy  follows:] 

Prepared  statement  of  Senator  Patrick  J.  Leahy 

I  commend  the  Chairman  for  holding  this  confirmation  hearing  for  judicial  nomi- 
nees this  afternoon.  This  is  the  second  hearing  held  for  judicial  nominees  in  two 
days  and  if  we  are  able  to  proceed  with  these  13  nominees,  the  Committee  will 
make  some  progress  toward  reducing  the  backlog  of  judicial  nominees  pending  be- 
fore the  Committee  and  awaiting  their  hearings. 

I  want  to  apologize  to  Lynn  Adelman,  who  I  understand  was  told  to  fly  to  Wash- 
ington Monday  evening  and  to  be  available  for  a  hearing  on  Tuesday  morning  at 
which  he  was  not  included. 

I  am  delighted  to  see  Judge  Ware  included  at  today's  hearing.  He  is  another  of 
the  well-qualified  nominees  for  a  judicial  emergency  vacancy  on  the  Ninth  Circuit 
Court  of  Appeals.  That  circuit  is  being  forced  to  operate  without  10  judges,  which 
are  more  than  one-third  of  the  Court.  The  Senate  received  Judge  Ware's  nomination 
over  four  months  ago.  It  was  received  before  the  nomination  of  Ronald  Oilman  and 
three  months  before  the  nomination  of  Stanley  Marcus,  yet  each  of  them  has  had 
a  hearing  and  Mr.  Oilman  was  reported  by  the  Committee  on  October  10. 

While  I  am  encouraged  that  the  Committee  is  today  proceeding  with  a  hearing 
on  these  eight  nominees,  there  remains  no  excuse  for  the  Committee's  delay  in  con- 
sidering the  nominations  of  such  outstanding  individuals  as  Professor  William  A. 
Fletcher,  Judge  James  A.  Beaty,  Jr.,  Judge  Richard  A.  Paez,  Ms.  M.  Margaret 
McKeown,  and  Ms.  Susan  Oki  Mollway,  to  name  just  a  few  of  the  outstanding  nomi- 
nees who  have  all  been  pending  all  year  without  so  much  as  a  hearing.  Professor 
Fletcher  and  Ms.  Mollway  had  both  been  favorably  reported  last  year.  Judge  Paez 
had  a  hearing  last  year  but  has  been  passed  over  so  far  this  year.  Professor  Fletch- 
er, Judge  Paez  and  Ms.  McKeown  are  all  nominees  for  judicial  emergency  vacancies 
on  the  Ninth  Circuit,  as  well. 

After  this  hearing,  the  Committee  will  still  have  pending  before  it  over  30  nomi- 
nees in  need  of  a  hearing  from  among  the  73  nominations  sent  to  the  Senate  by 
the  President  during  this  Congress.  From  the  first  day  of  this  session  of  Congress, 
this  Committee  has  never  had  pending  before  it  fewer  than  20  judicial  nominees  for 
hearings.  The  Committee's  backlog  had  doubled  to  more  than  40  and  will  dip  below 
40  with  this  week's  hearings  for  13  of  those  nominees. 

The  Committee  still  has  pending  before  it  10  nominees  who  were  first  nominated 
during  the  last  congress,  including  five  who  have  been  pending  since  1995.  Thus, 
while  I  am  delighted  that  we  are  moving  more  promptly  with  respect  to  some  of 


1018 

the  nominees  being  considered  today,  I  remain  concerned  about  the  other  vacancies 
and  other  nominees. 

I  hope  that  the  Committee  will  now  proceed  without  delay  to  consider  these  nomi- 
nations as  well  as  the  nominations  of  Clarence  Sundram  and  Judge  Sonia 
Sotomayor  and  the  other  nominees  who  participated  in  yesterday's  hearing.  We 
should  be  moving  promptly  to  fill  the  vacancies  plaguing  the  federal  courts.  Twenty- 
two  confirmations  in  a  year  in  which  we  have  witnessed  115  vacancies  is  not  fulfill- 
ing the  Senate's  constitutional  responsibility. 

At  the  end  of  Senator  Hatch's  first  year  chairing  the  Committee,  1995,  the  Senate 
adjourned  having  confirmed  58  judicial  nominations  and  leaving  only  49  vacancies. 
This  year  the  Senate  has  confirmed  less  than  half  of  the  number  confirmed  in  1995 
but  will  adjourn  leaving  almost  twice  as  many  judgeships  vacant. 

At  the  snail's  pace  that  the  Committee  and  the  Senate  are  proceeding  with  judi- 
cial nominations  this  year,  we  are  not  even  keeping  up  with  attrition.  When  Con- 
gress adjourned  last  year,  there  were  64  vacancies  on  the  federal  bench.  In  the  last 
10  months,  another  50  vacancies  have  occurred.  Thus,  aft;er  the  confirmation  of  22 
judges  in  10  months,  there  has  been  a  net  increase  of  28  vacancies,  an  increase  of 
almost  50  percent  in  the  number  of  current  federal  judicial  vacancies.  Judicial  va- 
cancies have  been  increasing,  not  decreasing,  over  the  course  of  this  year  and  there- 
in lies  the  vacancy  crisis.  The  Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  has 
called  the  rising  number  of  vacancies  "the  most  immediate  problem  we  face  in  the 
federal  judiciary." 

I  commend  Senator  Hatch's  effort  to  hold  two  days  of  hearings  this  week  and  to 
accelerate  the  pace  at  which  nominations  are  moved  through  the  Committee.  Unfor- 
tunately, this  is  only  the  eighth  confirmation  hearing  for  judicial  nominees  that  the 
Committee  has  convened  all  year. 

Since  no  regular  Executive  Business  Meeting  of  the  Committee  was  noticed  for 
this  week  and  none  has  yet  been  noticed  for  next  week,  which  may  be  our  last  be- 
fore adjournment,  the  Committee  may  not  have  an  opportunity  to  report  any  of  the 
13  fine  judicial  nominees  who  participated  in  hearings  this  week  or  the  nomination 
of  Bill  Lee  to  be  Assistant  Attorney  General  for  the  Civil  Rights  Division. 

I  have  urged  those  who  have  been  stalling  the  consideration  of  these  fine  women 
and  men  to  reconsider  and  to  work  with  us  to  have  the  Committee  and  the  Senate 
fulfill  its  constitutional  responsibility.  Those  who  delay  or  prevent  the  filing  of  these 
vacancies  must  understand  that  they  are  delaying  or  preventing  the  administration 
of  justice.  Courts  cannot  try  cases,  incarcerate  the  guilty  or  resolve  civil  disputes 
without  judges.  The  mounting  backlogs  of  civil  and  criminal  cases  in  the  dozens  of 
emergency  districts,  in  particular,  are  growing  more  critical  by  the  day. 

Senator  Kyl.  Senator  Feingold. 

Senator  FEINGOLD.  No,  thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Kyl.  Senator  Durbin. 

Senator  Durbin.  I  have  no  other  questions. 

Senator  Kyl.  Well,  again,  they  all  passed  the  test,  you  see,  and 
I  think  it  unnecessary  for  us  to  continue  to  ask  questions.  We  may 
want  to  submit  some  questions  for  the  record.  Other  members  who 
can't  be  here  may  want  to  do  that. 

But  in  view  of  the  distinction  of  these  nominees  and  the  quali- 
fications that  they  have  each  brought  to  their  nomination,  I  don't 
think  it  necessary  to  continue  the  oral  examination  here.  Therefore, 
unless  any  other — Senator  Sessions,  I  know  you  have  just  joined 
us,  but  if  you  have  no  questions  of — I  know  I  am  catching  you  off 
guard — of  this  panel,  we  are  pretty  well  through,  I  think. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  don't  think  I  have  any  ques- 
tions at  this  time.  I  might  want  to  submit  a  written  question,  but 
I  don't  have  anything  now. 

Senator  Kyl.  Well,  let  me  thank  all  of  you  again.  You  are  distin- 
guished nominees  and  we  hope  we  can  get  through  the  confirma- 
tion process  very  quickly.  Thank  you  very,  very  much. 

Now,  our  final  panelist  is  Judge  Frederica  Massiah-Jackson. 
Would  you  please  come  forward?  I  will  just  leave  you  standing  as 


1019 

I  administer  the  oath,  if  I  could.  We  will  wait  until  it  kind  of  clears 
here  a  little  bit. 

Do  you  swear  the  testimony  you  shall  give  at  this  hearing  shall 
be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so  help 
you  God? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes,  Senator,  I  do. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you.  Please  be  seated. 

I  should  by  way  of  explanation  note  that  Judge  Jackson  was  to 
be  on  the  panel  yesterday.  We  have  carried  her  over  to  today.  Sen- 
ator Specter  wanted  to  be  here  and  we  are  hoping  that  he  can  come 
back.  And  I  must  announce  I  have  an  appointment.  I  will  have  to 
leave  in  approximately  7  minutes,  so  I  would  like,  if  I  could,  begin 
questioning  and  then  turn  the  gavel  over  to  Senator  Sessions  or 
whoever  else  might  be  here  to  continue  the  hearing  to  conclusion. 

TESTIMONY  OF  FREDERICA  A.  MASSIAH-JACKSON,  OF  PENN- 
SYLVANIA, TO  BE  U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  EASTERN 
DISTRICT  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Kyl.  Let  me  begin  by  asking  you,  Judge  Jackson,  to  in- 
troduce members  of  your  family  or  friends  who  might  be  here  so 
that  we  can  see  them. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes,  Senator.  My  brother,  Louis 
Massiah,  is  here  from  Philadelphia  today. 

Senator  Kyl.  Welcome. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  And  my  husband  was  not  able  to  be 
here  today,  with  the  change  in  schedule.  My  daughter,  who  is  a 
freshman  at  Wesleyan  University,  is  in  the  middle  of  mid-terms. 
And  my  son,  who  is  a  freshman  at  Carver  High  School  for  Engi- 
neering and  Science,  is  in  the  middle  of  mid-terms.  So  neither  one 
of  them  were  able  to  join  us  today,  but  they  all  extend  their  greet- 
ings and  thanks  for  you  and  the  Senate  giving  me  this  opportunity 
to  be  here.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Kyl.  Thank  you.  Now,  if  you  would  like  to  make  any 
kind  of  a  statement,  please  do  so.  Otherwise,  I  will  just  begin  some 
questioning,  if  that  would  be  acceptable. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Senator — Mr.  Chairman,  I  do  not  have 
a  statement. 

questioning  by  senator  kyl 

Senator  Kyl.  All  right.  Let  me  ask  you,  you  have  heard  the  ques- 
tions that  I  have  asked  other  panelists  specifically  relating  to  dis- 
crimination cases,  to  capital  punishment,  to  takings,  and  to  decid- 
ing cases  where  there  may  be  a  lack  of  precedent  or  an  unclear 
precedent.  You  have  heard  the 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes. 

Senator  Kyl  [continuing].  Answers  that  have  been  given  by  both 
the  circuit  court  and  district  court  nominees.  In  order  to  save  some 
time,  do  you  have  any  different  answers  or  anything  you  would  like 
to  add  to  any  of  those  answers? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  No,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  listened  carefully 
to  what  Judge  Ware,  as  well  as  the  other  panelists  had  to  say  and 
I  agree  with  what  their  position  was. 


1020 

Senator  Kyl.  All  right.  Let  me  ask  you  now  some  specific  ques- 
tions. In  each  case,  as  you  know,  we  have  some  general  questions 
and  then  some  specific  questions  that  may  in  some  respect  rep- 
resent criticism  or  writings  or  the  like  in  your  record. 

Now,  it  is  my  understanding  that  copies  of  material  relating  to 
cases  that  you  submitted  to  the  committee — that  this  material  was 
reviewed  by  you,  and  among  those  materials  was  the  transcript  of 
a  case  in  which  you  used  profanity  in  open  court.  Would  you  please 
tell  the  committee  whether  you  believe  that  conduct  of  that  nature 
is  consistent  with  proper  demeanor  of  a  sitting  judge  and  whether 
there  was  any  action,  any  ethics  action  taken  or  any  sanction  ac- 
tions taken  as  a  result  of  that  comment? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Mr.  Chairman  and  Senator  Specter, 
Senator  Sessions,  I  made  a  mistake.  It  was  my  first  or  second  year 
on  the  bench  and  I  did  make  an  intemperate  comment  at  a  side 
bar  proceeding.  While  it  was  in  open  court,  it  was  at  a  side  bar 
talking  to  counsel.  I  apologized  profusely  to  that  attorney,  and  I  be- 
lieve in  her  mind,  in  my  mind,  it  has  been  resolved.  We  have 
worked  together  since  then.  I  was  admonished  by  our  judicial  re- 
view board  for  using  intemperate  language  at  the  side  bar  proceed- 
ing. 

Senator  Kyl.  Now,  my  understanding  is  that  that  case  was  in 
1985.  Is  that  your  recollection? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  It  was  early — it  was  either  1984  or 
1985,  but,  yes.  Senator. 

Senator  Kyl.  And  is  that  the  only  instance  in  which  you  have 
used — to  your  recollection,  that  you  have  used  such  language  on 
the  bench? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  may  have,  you  know,  mumbled  some- 
thing to  myself,  but  in  open  court,  as  far  as  I  can  recall,  to  any  par- 
ticular individual,  that  would  be  the  best  of  my  recollection,  yes. 

Senator  Kyl.  And  in  the  particular  case  that  I  was  speaking  of, 
I  don't  know  the  circumstances.  Did  you  believe  that  the  behavior 
of  the  attorney  to  whom  you  spoke  was  disrespectful  or  incorrect? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  There  is  never  an  occasion  when  the 
behavior  of  an  attorney  would  warrant  the  kind  of  language  that 
I  used,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Kyl.  OK,  thank  you.  In  a  case  of  Commonwealth  v.  Don- 
ald Powell,  the  Commonwealth's  brief  on  appeal  indicates  that  you 
wrote  letters  to  both  the  district  attorney's  office  and  to  the  appel- 
late court  in  an  effort  to  discourage  or  dismiss  the  government's  ap- 
peal. Do  you  think  it  is  appropriate  for  a  judge  to  express  such 
strong  opinions  that  he  or  she  is  viewing  as  acting  as  an  advocate? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Mr.  Chairman,  my  recollection  of  that 
case  was  I  had  an  interest  in  judicial  economy.  I  had  ordered  a  new 
trial  and  it  seemed  to  me  that  rather  than  waiting  for  3  hours — 
I  am  sorry — for  3  years  on  appeal,  that  a  new  trial  could  have  been 
ordered  within  a  matter  of  weeks  or  within  the  next  30  days.  I  had 
ordered  a  new  trial,  so  I  simply  wanted  to  go  forward  with  that. 

Senator  Kyl.  Well,  what  instances  do  you  think  it  is  appropriate 
for  a  judge  to  attempt  to  discourage  a  party  from  exercising  a  right 
to  appeal? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Oh,  it  is  not  appropriate  for  a  judge  to 
be  an  advocate  under  any  circumstances.  I  simply  wanted  to  try 


1021 

and  move  on  with  that  case  so  that  defendant  could  have  another 
trial. 

Senator  Kyl.  I  am  going  to  ask  you  one  more  question  and  then 
I  will  have  to  excuse  myself  and  turn  the  Chair  over  to  Senator 
Specter. 

In  a  case  of  Commonwealth  v.  Jerome  Gray,  which  involved  a  de- 
fendant who  had  beaten  his  girlfriend  in  1989  so  severely  that  she 
had  to  be  taken  to  a  hospital  where  she  was  admitted  for  three 
cracked  ribs,  a  collapsed  lung  and  ruptured  spleen  which  had  to  be 
removed,  the  police  report  shows  that  the  defendant's  record  check 
revealed  that  he  had  five  prior  arrests.  You  gave  him  24  months' 
reporting  probation,  presumably  no  jail  time. 

Could  you  explain  the  reasoning  in  that  particular  case? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  What  is  that,  24  month,  2  years'  proba- 
tion? 

Senator  Kyl.  Yes,  24  months'  probation. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Mr.  Chairman,  to  the  best  of  my  recol- 
lection, the  victim  was  not  available  to  testify  in  court.  I  believe 
that  person  had  died  some  time  between  the  time  of  the  offense 
and  the  time  of  the  trial.  I  have  to  only  assume  that  based  on  that 
factor,  I  considered  that  as  part  of  the  sentence  because  I  would 
have  sentenced  within  the  guidelines,  or  certainly  given  expla- 
nations as  to  why  I  sentenced  outside  the  guidelines.  I  simply  don't 
know  that  specific  set  of  circumstances  for  that  sentence. 

[Pause.] 

Senator  Kyl.  I  have  explained  to  Senator  Specter  where  we  are 
in  the  proceedings  here.  Please  allow  me  to  excuse  myself.  Again, 
I  want  to  thank  all  of  the  members  of  the  famJly  and  friends  who 
are  here,  Judge  Jackson,  and  I  will  turn  the  hearing  now  over  to 
Senator  Specter. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Specter  [presiding].  Judge  Jackson,  Senator  Kyl  is  say- 
ing that  because  I  am  the  senior  Senator  remaining,  but  I  am  going 
to  yield  to  Senator  Sessions  for  two  reasons.  One  is  he  was  here 
earlier  and,  second,  he  is  not  the  Senator  from  your  State.  So  I 
think  it  might  be  a  better  line  for  Senator  Sessions  to  question  you 
now. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  Thank  you.  Senator  Durbin  maybe 

Senator  Specter.  Senator  Durbin,  do  you  want  to  contest  that 
sequencing? 

Senator  Durbin.  No.  I  think  it  is  a  good  idea. 

Senator  Specter.  Senator  Sessions. 

questioning  by  senator  SESSIONS 

Senator  SESSIONS.  On  the  matter  of  the  Jerome  Gray  case,  some- 
times there  are  reasons,  I  know,  that  judges  would  rule  the  way 
they  did.  But  are  you  saying  that  the  district  attorney  had  agreed 
to  this  lighter  sentence  because  of  a  lack  of  being  able  to  prove  the 
case,  or  did  you  impose  this  sentence  over  the  objection  of  the  pros- 
ecutor or  with  the  prosecutor's  consent? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Senator,  I  have  no  recollection  of  why 
the  sentence  was  imposed  as  it  was  imposed. 

Senator  Sessions.  You  just  don't  have  a  recollection? 


1022 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  accept  the  fact  that  it  may  have  been 
2  years  of  probation,  but  I  don't  know  what  the  circumstances  of 
that  particular  incident  or  the  background  of  the  defendant  which 
would  cause  that  sentence.  I  just  don't  know.  My  record  on  these 
types  of  cases  is  very,  very  clear.  I  take  these  cases  very  seriously. 

Senator  Sessions.  Would  you  say — were  there  sentencing  guide- 
lines in  Pennsylvania  and  this  would  fall  out  of  that  guideline? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Senator,  I  don't  know  enough  about  the 
background,  but,  yes,  we  do 

Senator  SESSIONS.  He  had  four  prior  arrests  or  charges.  That 
would  probably  fall  outside  of  the  guideline,  would  it  not? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Well,  the  sentencing  guidelines  take 
into  effect — take  into  account  convictions.  I  don't  know  how  many 
convictions  that  person  had.  He  may  have  been  arrested  a  mul- 
titude of  times,  but  I  just  don't  know  the  number  of  convictions.  I 
really  don't  know. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  I  would  like  to  follow  up  a  little  bit — I  hate 
to;  I  think  we  just  need  to 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Sure. 

Senator  SESSIONS  [continuing].  On  the  comments  you  made  that 
you  have  apologized  for.  I  think  that  is  a  fact  that  I  will  consider, 
and  I  know  there  was  some  disciplinary  action  taken  for  mis- 
behavior by  you  in  that  regard. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes. 

Senator  Sessions.  What  troubled  me  a  little  bit  about  it — it 
seemed  to  me  it  was  a  little  more  than  that.  Maybe  it  was  at  a  side 
bar,  but  you  said  to  Ms.  McDermott,  referring  to  the  prosecutor, 
"Would  you  shut  your  blank  mouth." 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes,  Senator. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  And  then  when  asked  about  it  by  the  Phila- 
delphia Inquirer,  you  said,  quote,  "Maybe  I  would  suggest  that  it 
offended  Ms.  McDermott,  but  I  can't  imagine  the  defendant  was  of- 
fended." Do  you  recall  saying  that  to  the  newspaper? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  have  confidence  in  the  Philadelphia 
Inquirer. 

Senator  Sessions.  Well,  I  guess  my  point  is  that  suggests  that 
you  weren't  too  contrite  or  apologetic  about  it,  at  least,  at  that 
point. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Oh,  I  was  very  contrite  and  I  did,  in 
fact,  apologize  to  Ms.  McDermott. 

Senator  Sessions.  It  was  in  the  Burgos  case,  I  believe,  you  re- 
sponded to  a  prosecutor's  motion  with  the  following  comment,  "I 
don't  give  a  blank."  Do  you  recall  that? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  agree  with  what  you  are  saying,  but 
I  don't  specifically  recall  it.  Senator. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Senator  Sessions,  is  that  a  case  in  the  memo? 
I  am  trying  to  follow  your  questions. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  Yes,  sir.  I  have  the  title  of  the  case  Common- 
wealth V.  Burgos,  B-u-r-g-o-s. 

Senator  Specter.  B-u-r-g-o-s? 

Senator  SESSIONS.  Yes.  I  am  not  sure  that 

Senator  SPECTER.  Well,  I  will  ask  the  staff  if  they  can  find  that 
for  me. 


1023 

Senator  SESSIONS.  As  a  prosecutor  myself  and  having  worked 
with  investigators  and  prosecuted  cases,  I  know  it  is  a  tough  job. 
The  defense  lawyers  earn  their  pay  many  times  being  very  aggres- 
sive, but  it  is  really  frustrating  if  the  judge  takes  sides  against  you, 
too.  And,  to  me,  in  a  lifetime  Federal  appointment.  Federal  judici- 
ary, we  have  to  be  sure  that  you  will  give  the  State  a  fair  trial, 
as  well  as  the  defendant  a  fair  trial.  It  is  particularly  true,  since 
the  government  can't  appeal.  So  they  have  no  right  of  appeal,  so 
a  judge — the  prosecutors  are  at  the  mercy,  for  the  most  part,  of  a 
Federal  judge's  ruling. 

In  Commonwealth  v.  Ruiz,  you  acquitted  a  man  accused  of  pos- 
sessing $400,000  worth  of  cocaine,  it  is  reported  to  me,  because  you 
did  not  believe  the  testimony  of  two  undercover  officers.  In  an  ear- 
lier case,  you  pointed  out  those  same  undercover  officers  to  a  public 
courtroom  and  told  the  onlookers  to  "take  a  good  look  at  the  under- 
cover officers  and  watch  yourself." 

Do  you  recall  that  and  do  you  have  an  explanation  for  that? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Senator,  my  recollection  of  the  Ruiz 
case — and  I  have  submitted  a  written  response  to  the  committee 
about  that  news  article — is  that  there  was  a  question  about  wheth- 
er or  not  the  defendant  actually  owned  the  house  or  lived  in  the 
house  where  the  drugs  were  found,  and  there  was  a  question  about 
his  actual  possession  of  the  drugs. 

I  have  the  highest  regard  for  law  enforcement  officers.  Over  the 
years  when  I  was  in  criminal  court — and  as  you  know,  it  has  been 
over  6  years  since  I  have  sat  in  criminal  court,  but  over  those  years 
and  the  more  than  4,000  cases  that  I  handled  involving  criminal 
matters,  I  have  developed  a  tremendous  respect  for  police,  for  the 
prosecutors,  and  for  law  enforcement  units. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  If  you  are  confirmed  as  a  Federal  judge,  pros- 
ecutors are  pretty  much  at  the  mercy  of  a  Federal  judge  and  the 
judge  cannot  be  removed  or  have  their  pay  docked  or  anything  like 
that.  And  so  I  think  it  is  important  for  us  to  feel  comfortable  that 
they  will  get  a  fair  trial. 

With  regard  to  that  issue,  I  was  troubled  and  thought  it  extraor- 
dinary that  most  of  the  cases  you  tried,  the  defendants  waived  a 
jury  trial  and  asked  to  be  tried  by  you  without  a  jury.  In  my  expe- 
rience, most  defendants  feel  like  they  will  have  a  better  chance — 
a  jury  has  to  be  unanimous,  all  12.  There  is  always  a  chance  on 
any  case  that  one  of  those  three  will  say  no  and  they  won't  be  con- 
victed. That  would  indicate  to  me  that  you  have  a  reputation  as  not 
being  very  tough  on  crime. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Well,  I  appreciate  your  concern,  Sen- 
ator. In  Philadelphia,  unlike  any  other  part  of  Pennsylvania,  actu- 
ally, we  have  a  special  program  called  our  criminal  list  or  Felony 
Waiver  Program.  The  majority  of  our  cases  in  Philadelphia — we  are 
so  overwhelmed  with  our  criminal  calendar,  the  majority  of  our 
cases  are  handled  in  this  Felony  Waiver  Program  where  the  de- 
fendants, with  their  attorneys,  even  before  arraignment,  I  believe, 
or  some  early  stage  of  the  proceeding  many  months  or  even  years 
before  trial,  they  make  a  decision  that  they  want  to  have  their  trial 
without  a  jury. 

And  during  my  first  3  years  on  the  bench,  I  would  get  a  list. 
There  were  10  courtrooms  of  judges  with  a  list  of  10  to  15  cases 


1024 

each  day  and  I  would  hear  10  to  15  cases  each  day  either  by  trial 
or  by  plea  or — ^but  the  defendants  were  not  permitted  to  have  a 
jury  trial. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  When  they  made  that  filing  at  that  time 
under  the  case  processing  procedure  in  the  court,  was  it  known 
that  you  would  be  the  judge? 

Judge  Massiah -Jackson.  Oh,  no.  All  new  judges  go  to  felony 
waiver  unit. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  I  guess  what  I  am  saying  is  when  a  person 
waived  a  jury  trial,  would  they  know  whether  it  would  be  tried  by 
you  or  some  other  judge? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  They  would  not  know.  They  simply 
elect  to  go  to  a  specific  program,  and  that  program  was  called  the 
Felony  Waiver  Program  and  that  is  where  I  sat  for  the  first  3 
years. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  My  time  is  up,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Specter.  Senator  Sessions,  if  you  want  more  time,  why 
don't  you  take  some  more? 

Senator  SESSIONS.  I  would  ask  a  couple  of  more  questions,  I 
think. 

Search  and  seizure  and  rulings  from  the  bench  can  be  devastat- 
ing to  a  prosecutor's  case.  This  is  what  is  reported,  as  I  understand 
the  facts,  in  Commonwealth  v.  Jenkins.  The  police  arrived  at  the 
scene  of  an  armed  robbery  within  minutes.  They  were  given  de- 
tailed descriptions  of  the  robbers  and  told  the  subjects  had  run 
north  on  a  particular  street.  The  descriptions  were  broadcast  over 
the  radio. 

Soon  thereafter,  other  police  officers  arrested  a  black  male 
matching  the  description  IV2  blocks  from  the  crime.  When  ap- 
proached by  the  police,  the  subject  withdrew  a  roll  of  cash  from  his 
pocket  and  threw  it  on  the  ground.  When  it  came  before  you  on  a 
motion,  you  ruled  that  probable  cause  to  arrest  did  not  exist  and 
suppressed  the  stolen  cash.  You  also  suppressed  the  in-court  and 
out-of-court  identifications.  In  your  findings  of  fact,  you  suggested 
that  the  police  stopped  the  subject  simply  because  he  was  a  black 
male  running  on  the  streets  in  Philadelphia. 

Would  you  like  to  comment  on  that  and  explain  that  case? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes,  Senator.  My  recollection  of  that 
case  is  that  the  only  description  that  was  given  was  black  male, 
black  jacket,  and  there  was  a  codefendant,  black  male,  blue  jacket. 
That  was  my  recollection. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  Of  course,  he  was  IV2  blocks  away.  He  was 
apparently  running  and  a  roll  of  cash  fell  out  of  his  pocket.  Would 
that  not  give  an  officer  a  basis  to  make  an  investigatory  stop? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Senator,  the  appellate  court  agreed 
with  you  and  I  was  reversed. 

Senator  Sessions.  Another  case  that  troubled  me,  because  this 
kind  of  thing  can  happen  in  any  court — a  defendant  was  charged 
with  robbery — and  this  case  is  Commonwealth  v.  Hicks,  H-i-c-k-s — 
involving  theft  and  receiving  stolen  property,  aggravated  assault, 
and  simple  assault.  The  defense  made  a  motion  for  a  continuance 
because  the  police  officer  was  not  available  to  testify,  apparently, 
for  the  defense,  even  though  he  had  been  subpoenaed. 


1025 

You  ruled  that  the  officer  was  under  the  State's  control  and 
forced  the  State  to  nol  pros  the  case.  When  the  prosecutor  refused 
to  nol  pros  the  case,  you  dismissed  the  charges  against  them,  and 
that  ruling  was  reversed  by  the  court  of  appeals.  The  appellate 
court  noted  that  the  prosecution  was  ready  to  try  the  case  and  that 
the  only  motion  before  the  court  was  a  defense  request  for  a  con- 
tinuance. 

You  could  have  simply  granted  the  defense  motion  to  continue  in- 
stead of  dismissing  the  cases,  it  seemed  to  me,  and  apparently  the 
appellate  court  thought  so.  Do  you  have  any  comment  or  expla- 
nation on  that  situation? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  No,  Senator,  I  don't.  I  overwhelm- 
ingly— of  the  4,000  cases  that  I  tried — and  as  you  indicated,  many 
of  them  were  bench  trials.  The  defendants  went  to  jail.  There  were 
convictions  and  they  are  serving  substantial  time. 

Senator  Specter.  Senator  Sessions,  that  is  the  Hicks  case? 

Senator  SESSIONS.  The  Hicks  case,  H-i-c-k-s. 

Those  were  some  cases  that,  to  me — I  am  concerned  not  that — 
I  am  concerned  that  it  suggests  a  pattern  of  lack  of  sufficient  re- 
spect for  the  prosecutor's  responsibilities,  burdens  and  problems  as 
much  as  it  does  the  defendant's  burdens  and  constitutional  rights 
and  burdens. 

As  I  say,  so  often  the  prosecution  may  never  get  a  chance  to  ap- 
peal. If  you  keep  certain  evidence  out  and  there  is  a  jury  verdict 
of  acquittal,  there  may  be  no  appeal,  or  a  ruling  on  an  evidentiary 
motion  that  can  deny  critical  evidence  and  once  a  verdict  has  been 
rendered  and  jeopardy  is  attached,  the  prosecutor  has  no  right  to 
appeal. 

So  those  are  my  concerns  there  and  I  wanted  to  ask  you  about 
those.  I  think  I  agree  with  you  that  the  kind  of  language  we  re- 
ferred to  here  is  not  acceptable  on  the  bench,  and  if  you  were  to 
be  confirmed,  I  would  hope  that  you  would  adhere  to  that.  We  sim- 
ply have  to  maintain  decorum  and  respect  in  a  court  of  law. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  agree. 

Senator  SESSIONS.  The  judge  has  got  to  give  a  fair  shake  to  both 
the  prosecutor  and  their  problems,  as  well  as  the  defendant. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Senator,  I  would  like  to  reassure  you 
and  the  entire  committee  that  I  take  this  position  very  seriously. 
This  process  has  been  a  very  humbling  one  and  there  is  no  ques- 
tion in  my  mind  that  I  would  not  disappoint  you. 

I  believe  that  I  have  a  very — the  track  record  indicates  that  of 
the  60-some  appeals  that  took  place  during  the  time  I  was  in  crimi- 
nal court,  55  of  those  appeals  were  from  defendants  who  thought 
their  sentence  was  too  long  or  that  they  were  wrongfully  convicted. 
And  I  don't  believe  that  a  close  reading  of  my  record  would  indicate 
any  pattern,  but  I  do  understand  your  concerns.  Thank  you. 

Senator  Sessions.  I  don't  know  if  the  prosecutor  can  appeal  a  life 
sentence,  can  he? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes. 

Senator  Sessions.  Or  if  they  do,  they  are  reluctant  to  do  so  in 
a  lot  of  instances.  But  defendants  will  certainly  take  their  oppor- 
tunity to  appeal  one  they  consider  too  heavy. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Thank  you. 


1026 

Senator  Sessions.  I  think,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  is  what  I  would 
Uke  to  ask  about  at  this  point. 

Senator  Specter.  Well,  thank  you  very  much.  Senator  Sessions. 
Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Thank  you. 
Senator  Specter.  Senator  Durbin. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  DURBIN 

Senator  Durbin.  Thank  you  very  much.  I  appreciate  your  being 
here  today,  and  I  would  just  like  to  ask  three  very  brief  questions. 
I  think  there  is  an  express  concern,  as  I  mentioned  to  the  Illinois 
nominees,  about  judicial  temperament,  and  I  am  comfortable  with 
the  responses  that  you  have  given  to  Senator  Sessions  about  mis- 
takes you  have  made. 

Let  me  ask  you,  have  you  ever  been  disciplined  by  bar  associa- 
tions or  others  beyond  this  one  reference  that  was  made? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Oh,  no.  Senator,  just  that  one  time.  I 
learned  my  lesson. 

Senator  DURBIN.  We  all  do  make  mistakes. 

The  second  question  relates  to  your  reversal  rate  and  I  have  been 
trying — in  reading  the  responses  which  you  have  given  here,  you 
have  said  that  you  considered  about  4,000  different  cases  in  your 
career  as  a  judge. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes. 

Senator  Durbin.  According  to  the  information  given  to  the  com- 
mittee, some  95  were  appealed,  but  those  were  95  civil  cases,  if  I 
am  not  mistaken. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  No.  That  was  criminal  and  civil. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Criminal  and  civil? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes. 

Senator  DURBIN.  And  of  those,  14  were  reversed  in  whole  or  in 
part,  is  that  correct? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  That  is  correct,  14  overall,  criminal 
and  civil. 

Senator  Specter.  May  interrupt  just  a  minute.  Senator  Durbin? 

I  am  going  to  make  a  couple  of  comments.  Senator  Sessions  has 
to  leave.  I  just  wanted  to  make  a  couple  of  comments  before  Sen- 
ator Sessions  left,  and  I  am  looking  at  all  of  these  documents  for 
the  first  time.  In  the  Jenkins  case,  which  was  a  suppression  mat- 
ter, there  was  an  appellate  right  in  that  case.  If  evidence  is  sup- 
pressed, under  Pennsylvania  procedure — and  I  think  generally,  but 
know  Pennsylvania  procedure — there  is  a  right  of  appeal,  so  that 
that  order  was  taken  up  on  appeal  and  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  was 
reversed.  So,  that  was  an  appellate  issue. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  That  is  right. 

Senator  Specter.  And  on  the  case — and  I  am  just  taking  a  look 
at  this  case  of  Commonwealth  v.  Hicks,  and  I  think  we  ought  to 
make  this  brief  a  matter  of  the  record,  and  also  the  Hicks  judg- 
ment. 

[The  brief  and  the  judgment  referred  to  follow:] 


1027 


CCMilOHWEALTH   OF    PENNSYLVAfJi; 
Appellant 


ROBERT    HICKS, 


Appellee 


IN  THE  SUPERIOR  COURT  Or 
PENNSYLVANIA 


No.  2004  Philadelphia  1987 


Appeal  from  the  Order  entered  June  12,  1987,  in 
the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Philadelphia  County, 
Criminal,  No.  86-10-180-182. 


BEFORE:   McEWEN,  OLSZEWSKI,  and  CERCONE ,  JJ. 


MEMORANDUM: 


FILED    AUG  - 1 1388 


The  Commonwealth  appeals  from  an  order  dismissing  charges 
against  appellant,  asserting  that  the  trial  court  abused  its 
discretion  in  dismissing  the  charges.  We  agree  that  the  trial 
court  abused  its  discretion  and,  therefore,  we  reverse  the  order 
of  the  lower  court  and  remand  the  case  for  further  proceedings. 

On  September  13,  1986,  appellant  was  arrested  and  charged 

with   robbery,   theft,   receiving   stolen   property,   aggravated 

assault  and  simple  assault  as  the  result  of  an  attack  that  took 

place  on  September  6,  1986.  Following  a  preliminary  hearing  on 

October  2,  1986,  appellant  was  bound  for  trial  on  all  charges. 

Several  defense  continuances  and  a  crowded  court  docket  delayed 

the  trial  until  June  12,  198*^.  On  that  date,  counsel  appeared 

before  the  Honorable  Frederica  Massiah-Jackson  and  the  following 

dialogue  ensued: 

[BY  THE  COURT]:   Robert  Hicks,  what's  the  status 
of  the  Commonwealth? 


1028 


MS.  SUTTER  [FOR  THE  COMMONWEALTH]:   We  are  reaay. 
Judge. 

THE  COLTRT:   What's  the  status  of  the  defense? 

MR.    CHEW    [DEFENSE    COUNSEL]:   We    need    a 
continuance.  Your  Honor. 

THE  COURT:   I  can't  hear  you. 

MR.  CHEW:   Your  Honor,  we  need  a  continuance  to 
get  the  police  officer  in. 

THE  COURT:   I  thought  the  Commonwealth  subpoenaed 
the  police  officer. 

MR.  CHEW:   Well,  apparently  he  didn't  receive  it 
or  there  was  some  foul  up  somewhere. 

THE  COURT:   Ms.  Sutter. 


MS.  SUTTER:  I  did  subpoena  the  officer.  Mr.  j 
Chew  asJced  me  to  do  so  and  yesterday  our  court 
notices  go  over  at  2:30  in  the  afternoon  and  at 
about  1:30  I  put  it  in  the  batch  that  gets  taken 
over  here  to  Courr  Attendance.  I  put  it  in  the 
notice  and  apparently  the  officer  is  on  his 
regular  day  off. 

N.T.  6/12/87  at  2-3.  The  court  officer  then  informed  the  judge 
that  he  had  contacted  the  police  officer's  supeirvisor  at  the  24th 
District^  and  was  told  that  no  cour^  notice  was  received  by 

^  In  the  original  notes  of  testimony  the  court  officer  stated 
that  he  called  the  24th  Police  District  to  verify  receipt  of  the 
subpoena.  N.T.  6/12/87  at  4.  During  the  proceedings,  the  court 
also  referred  to  the  officer's  district  as  the  "24th."  Id-  at  8. 
After  the  charges  were  dismissed,  the  Commonwealth  noted  in  a 
motion  for  reconsideration  that  the  police  officer  was  assigned 
to  the  25th  Police  District,  not  the  24th  District.  According  to 
the  record,  the  trial  court  then  contacted  the  the  court  clerk. 
Acting  upon  the  court's  request,  the  clerk  drafted  a  latter  dated 
July  9,  1987,  and  filed  of  record  on  July  13,  1987,  in  which  he 
states  that  he  had  called  the  2Sth  Police  District,  Also,  in  a 
letter  to  the  court  stenographer  dated  July  9th.  the  judge  noted 
her  own  recollection  that  the  court  officer  had  telephoned  the 
25th  Police  District  and  requested  that  the  stenographer  review 
(continued  on  next  page) 


1029 


thaz  office.  The  court  officer  spaced  t.lac  personnel  at  Cour": 

Attendance  also  informed  hisi  Ciat  no  court  notice  was  received. 

Id.  at  3-4.   Thereafter,  the  court  stated: 

THE  COURT:   This  case  is  going  to  be  marked  as  a 
Commonwealth  request  for  continuance. 


MS.  SUTTER:  Well,  Judge,  (defense]  counsel  asked 
me  to  subpoena  him.  I  did  it  at  counsel's 
request. 

THE  COURT:  No,  no;  according  to  —  this  is  a 
witness  under  the  control  of  the  Commonwealth, 
solely  and  exclusively  under  the  control  of  the 
Commonwealth.  There  is  no  way  for  a  police 
officer  to  come  to  court  unless  the  District 
Attorney  brings  that  person  to  court- 

MS.  SUTTER:  That  is  not  correct.  Judge.  Defense 
attorneys  subpoena  police  officers  all  the  time^ 

THE  COURT:  But  under  this  particular 
circumstance  this  witness  is  under  control  of  the 
Commonwealth  because  you  have  taken  it  upon 
yourself  to  subpoena  him. 


This  case  is  almost  eight  months  old.  It's 
going  to  be  a  Commonwealth  request  and  I  assure 
you,  Ms.  Sutter,  you  will  lose  on  Rule  1100 
because  the  Commonwealth  request  to  March  of  1988 
is  way,  way  beyond  180  days. 


(continued  from  previous  page) 

the  notes  of  the  proceeding.  In  response  to  the  judge's  letter, 
the  stenographer  "corrected  the  error  in  the  transcription"  by 
changing  the  references  to  the  "24th  District"  to  the  "25th 
District."   See  Correction  by  court  reporter  dated  7/13/87. 

We  offer  no  comment  on  this  sequence  of  events  as  the  judge 
later  acknowledged  the  Commonwealth's  documentation  that  a 
subpoena  had  indeed  been  issued  to  the  police  officer.  Sfi* 
Opinion  denying  the  Commonwealth's  motion  for  reconsideration 
dated  1/4/88  at  12-13. 


1030 


Well,   Connonwealtli,   the   defendant   is   in 
custody  as  a  result  of  this  case  and  now  you  are 

going  to  make  him  wait  until  April  of  '88  rthe 
next  available  trial  date]. 


We  can't  let  a  man  sit  in  custody  until  April 
of  '88  when  the  Comnonwealth  didn't  do  what  it 
was  supposed  to  do. 


Well,  we  can  nolle  pros  [the  case].  .  .  . 
And  then  if  the  Comnonwealth  gets  the  witness, 
we'll  give  it  a  trial  date.  That's  what  we'll  do 
then.  I  can't  let  somebody  sit  in  jail.  We 
don't  know  if  he's  guilty  or  not. 

MS.  SUTTER:   I'm  ready  to  proceed,  Judge. 

THE  COURT:   But  you  didn't  bring  in  the  Defense 
witness   and   he's   under   your   control.   .  .  .^ 
Well,   it  can't  be  any  plainer  than  that,  Ms. 
Sutter.   Nolle  pros,  Robert  Hicks. 

MS.  SUTTER:   Judge,  I  will  not  make  a  motion  to 
the  Court  to  nolle  pros. 

THE  COURT:   It's  made  on  the  Court's  own  motion. 

MS.  SUTTER:   You  mean  then  you.  are  discharging 
the  case.   I  think  that's  the  difference. 


I'm  not  going  to  nolle  pros.  I '_m  ready  for 
trial.   I'd  like  the  record  to  reflect  that. 

THE  COURT:  You  didn't  bring  in  the  witness. 
That's  the  third  case  on  today's  list.  Discharged 
then.  Fine.  It's  got  to  be  discharged.  I  was 
going  to  give  you  the  opporttinity  for  a  nolle 
pros,  Ms.  Sutter,  and  if  you'd  like  to,  you  could 
take  it.  I  don't  want  to  let  you  lose  the 
opportunity.  Then  once  you  get  the  Defense 
witness  and  your  Commonwealth  witnesses  together, 
you  could  petition  for  a  new  trial  date,  but  with 
a  discharge,  you  the  Commonwealth  won't  have  that 
opportunity  again.  * 


1031 


td.  ac  5-12.  Having  disc^arqed  the  case,  the  trial  judce 
-id")ourned  court.  A  notation  on  the  docket  sheet  reflected  that 
the  trial  court  disniissed  the  case  because  a  Commonwealth  witness 
failed  to  appear. 

On  July  9,  1987,  the  commonwealth  filed  a  motion  for 
reconsideration,  presenting  documentation  that  the  Commonwealth 
had  indeed  subpoenaed  the  police  officer.  The  lower  court 
refused  to  hold  a  hearing  on  the  natter  but,  in  an  opinion 
denying  the  motion,  stated  that  the  charges  had  been  dismissed 
because  the  "Court  simply  did  not  believe  that  the  Commonwealth's 
attorney  had  subpoenaed  the  necessary  police  witness."  Opinion 
filed  1/4/88  at  9.  The  court  refused,  however,  to  reinstate  the 
charges,  finding  that  the  Commonwealth  had  "abandoned  and  Waived 
its  opportunity  and  responsibility  to  reinstate  the  charges"  by 
declining  the  court's  invitation  to  nolle  pros  tiie  charges.  I^. 
at  13  (emphasis  in  original) .  This  timely  appeal  by  the 
Commonwealth  followed. 2 

Having  carefully  reviewed  the  record,  we  are  unable  to 
determine  the  basis  for  the  trial  court's  decision  to  discharge 
the  defendant.  Indeed,  the  trial  court  was  unable  to  justify  its 
decision  by  citation  to  rule  or  law.^  According  to  the  record, 

2  Although  the  appeal  was  filed  31  days  after  the  order  was 
entered,  the  appeal  is  timely  because  the  final  day  for  filing 

the  appeal  was  a  Sunday.  See  Commonwealth  v.  Revrai.  Pa. 

,   ,   532   A. 2d   1,   10   (1987)   (excluding  weekends  and 

holidays  pursuant  to  1  Pa.C.S.  §1908  when  computing  a  time  period 
under  the  Rules  of  Criminal  Procedure) . 

^  A  court  may  not  on  its  own  motion  enter  a  nolle  pros  pursuant 
to  Pa.R.Crim.P.  313;  such  a  request  is  only  made  upon  the  motion 
of  the  attorney  for  the  Commonwealth.  Commonwealth  v-  Lord.  23  0 
(continued  on  next  page) 


1032 


however,  the  only  request  presented  to  the  courr  was  one  fav  the 
dc  .  ise  for  a  continuance.  Pursuant  to  Pa.R.Crim.P.  301,  such  a 
request  nay  be  heard  and  granted  "in  the  interests  of  justice" 
if  "the  reasons  justifying  the  granting  or  denial  of  the 
continuance"  are  contained  in  the  record.  Nothing  in  the  record 
evidences  a  ruling  on  the  merits  of  the  defense  request  for  a 
continuance  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Rule  301.  When 
the  police  officer  failed  to  appear,  the  court  should  have  either 
ruled  upon  the  defense  motion  or  formally  attempted  to  secure  the 
officer's  attendance.  The  sua  sponte  dismissal  of  the  charge, 
however,  was  in  error. 

Further,  we  decline  to  accept  the  conclusior^  that  by 
rejecting  the  court's  recommendation  to  nolle  pros  the  charges, 
the  Commonwealth  "chose'*  to  accept  a  discharge  of  the  case.  As 
we  noted  above,  the  only  motion  before  the  court  was  a  defense 
request  for  a  continuance.  Contrary  to  the  statement  by  the 
court,  the  Commonwealth  had  repeatedly  asserted  that  it  was  ready 
to  try  the  case  that  day;  it  never  requested  a  dismissal  of  the 
case.  Consequently,  the  Commonwealth  did  not  "choose"  to  have 
the  charges  dismissed. 

We  also  reject  the  court's  determination  that  the 
Commonwealth  must  accept  the  consequences  of  dismissal  of  the 


(continued  from  previous  page) 

Pa. super.   96,   n.   3,   326   A. 2d   455,   458   n.   3   (1974). 

Similarly,  pursuant  to  Pa.R.Crim.P.  315,  the  court  nay  dismiss  a 
case  "[u)pon  motion"  by  defense  counsel  where  the  Connonwealth 
has  failed  to  file  an  indictment  or  ^information  within  a 
reasonable  time. 


1033 


cfiAvqes  because  it  assumed  the  responsibiiity  for  the  wic.-.ess's 
appearance  at  trial.  **  In  this  regard,  we  again  stress  that 
according  to  the  record,  the  Comnonweaith  was  prepared  for  trial 
despite  the  officer's  absence.  Under  the  circumstances  present 
here,  disnissal  of  the  charges  was  a  drastic  remedy  given  chat  a 
continuance  could  have  been  granted.  £i.  Cowwonvealth  v.  Vn«;r 
348  Pa. Super.  297,  502  A. 2d  216  (1985)  (dismissal  of  charges  was 
inappropriate  remedy  for  discovery  violation  when  a  continuance 
would  have  been  appropriate) . 

Further,  we  find  irrelevant  any  implication  that  the  due 
diligence  of  the  Commonwealth  was  being  tested  pursuant  to  the 
mandate  of  Pa.R.Crim.P.  1100.  Simply  stated,  no  request  for  Rule 
1100  relief  was  before  the  court.  See  Commonwealth  v.  Bulling. 

331  Pa. Super.   84,   ,   480  A. 2d  254,   261   (1984)   (Rule  1100 

claim  waived  if  no  motion  to  dismiss   is   presented  by  the 
defense) . 

In  any  event,  we  would  reverse  the  order  dismissing  the 
charges  even  if  we  accepted  the  lower  court's  erroneous  theory 
that  a  discharge  is  warranted  where  the  Commonwealth  fails  to 
sulspoena  a  defense  witness.  The  uncontroverted  evidence  of 
record  shows  that  the  Comnonweaith  did,  in  fact,  subpoena  the 
defense  witness  but  that  the  officer  was  on  an  extended  vacation 


*  This  is  not  to  say,  however,  that  the  Commonwealth  may 
purport  to  subpoena  a  witness  for  the  defense  and  then 
deliberately  fail  to  do  so.  Instantly,  the  record  shows  that  the 
Commonwealth  agreed  to  issue  a  subpoena  as  a  matter  of 
professional  courtesy;  the  record  also  shows  that  such  a  subpoena 
was,  in  fact,  timely  issued  but  the  the  officer  was  vacationing 
at  the  time  and  failed  to  receive  it. 


1034 


at  the  ti-e  and  failed  t=  personally  receive  it.  Hence,"  t^e 
Lower  court's  reasoning  tor  disnissing  the  case  is  underr.inei. 
Indeed,  the  lower  court  acknowledged  the  Connonwealth ' s  proc: 
that  the  subpoena  had  been  issued  and  admitted  that  the 
"Commonwealth  could  have  easily  met  its  burden"  at  a  Rule  lioo 
hearing.   Opinion  dated  1/4/88  at  IS. 

Finally,  we  reject  the  trial  court's  suggestion  that  t.ne 
order  dismissing  the  charges  could  not  be  reconsidered  and 
reinstated  because  the  Commonwealth  had  insisted  on  appealing  the 
order  rather  than  accepting  the  courr's  recommendation  to  nolle 
pros  the  case. 5  it  is  well-established  that  the  Commonwealth 
has  the  right  to  appeal  from  the  dismissal  ot    a  charge.  See . 

e.g.  ■  CoTnwonwealth  v.  Revtai.  Pa.  ,  532  A. 2d  1  (1987); 

COTtiwonwealth  v.  Wjmberlv.  488  Pa.  169,  411  A. 2d  1193  (1979). 

For  the  reasons  stated  above,  the  order  dismissing  the 
charges  is  reversed,  the  charges  are  reinstated  and  the  case  is 
remanded  for  further  proceedings.  Jurisdiction  is  relinquished. 


^  The  court  expressed  some  concern  that  double  jeopardy  would 
have  attached.  This  concern  is  misplaced.  The  further 
prosecution  of  a  defendant  is  not  barred  by  the  double  jeopardy 
clause  if  a  dismissal  was  granted  on  grounds  unrelated  to  a 
factual  finding  of  guilt  or  innocence.  Commonwealth  v-  Adans. 
349  Pa. Super.  200,  ,  502  A. 2d  1345,  1352  (1986). 


1035 


COMMONWEALTH    OF    PENNSVLVANIA, 

Appellant 


ROBERT  HICKS, 


Appellee 


IIJ  THE  SUPERIOR  COURT  -OF 
PEMNSYLVANIA 


No.  2004  Philadelphia  1987 


JUDGMENT 


On  Consideiutton  Whoieof,  it  is  now  here  ordered  and  adjudged  by  this  Court 
that  the  judgment  of  the  Court  of  Conunon  Fleas  of  '  FHUADELFHIA  County 

be,  and  the  same  is  hereby  THE  OKBER  DISMISSING  THE  CHARGES  IS  REVEHSED. 

TH?  CHARGES  ARE  REINSTATED  AND  THE  CASE   IS  REMANDED  FOR  FURTHER  PROCEEDINGS. 
JTOISDICTION  RELINQUISHED. 

Bt  tbe  Court: 


PnaTHONOT. 


na»^-         AUGUST    1.     1988 


1036 

Senator  Specter.  I  am  only  looking  at  this  for  the  first  time,  and 
apparently  Judge  Jackson  suggested  a  nol  pros.  The  prosecutor  re- 
fused to  do  so.  Judge  Jackson  dismissed  the  case.  There  was  an  ap- 
peal taken  and  there  was  a  reversal,  which  raises  a  question  in  my 
mind  as  to  whether  there  isn't  double  jeopardy  here,  but  the  court 
ruled  that  on  the  totality  of  these  facts,  there  was  a  legal  issue 
raised.  So  they  reversed  her  there  and  the  case  went  back  for  trial. 

I  don't  need  to  get  into  the  question  of  whether  there  had  been 
a  trial  on  the  merits.  If  you  went  to  trial,  then  you  couldn't  have 
an  appeal,  but  they  treated  it  as  a  legal  error  and  she  was  reversed 
and  the  case  went  back  for  trial,  so  that  the  Commonwealth  had 
its  rights  of  appeal  in  both  of  these  cases. 

I  just  wanted  to  point  that  out. 

Senator  Sessions.  You  are  a  very  knowledgeable  prosecutor  and 
I  think  those  are  good  points  to  make.  And  I  didn't  mean  to  suggest 
that  these  could  not  have  been  appealed.  I  think  it  came  in  my 
questioning  that  there  had  been  reversals. 

But,  Mr.  Chairman,  what  I  am  saying  is  that  these  are  the  ones 
that  have  been  in  the  record  that  we  know  about.  They  raise  trou- 
bling questions  about  an  approach  to  criminal  law.  My  point  is  that 
there  are  many  rulings  in  the  midst  of  a  trial  that  we  will  never 
see  in  the  appeals  books  because  they  are  not  appealable  by  the 
prosecutor.  That  is  what  is  really  dangerous.  If  you  can  get  an  ap- 
peal, an  error  by  a  judge  can  always  be  corrected.  But  as  to  the 
prosecutor  particularly,  they  are  vulnerable  to  rulings  for  which 
they  may  never  have  a  right  to  appeal. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Senator,  you  are  absolutely  right.  Evidentiary 
rulings  are  not  appealable  and  acquittals  are  not  appealable.  It  is 
a  relatively  rare  judicial  ruling  which  is  appealable,  and  when  you 
raise  a  question  inquiring  as  to  whether  there  is  a  pattern,  1  re- 
spect your  line  of  inquiry  on  that.  I  just  wanted  before  you  left  to 
raise  these  two  procedural  issues  because  you  and  I  are  both  law- 
yers and  have  had  some  experience  in  the  field,  you  with  a  loftier 
position.  You  were  attorney  general.  I  was  just  a  prosecutor. 

Senator  Sessions.  I  am  not  sure  which  is  more  lofty.  You  han- 
dled a  lot  more  cases  that  I  did,  I  am  sure. 

Senator  Specter.  Well,  you  do  if  you  are  in  Philadelphia. 

Senator  Durbin. 

Senator  DuRBiN.  Senator  Specter,  let  me  just  say  as  a  former  de- 
fense attorney,  it  is  great  to  hear  two  prosecutors  at  odds  here. 

Senator  Specter.  I  noticed  you  kept  quiet. 

Senator  DURBIN.  My  final  question  to  you  relates  to  an  experi- 
ence I  had  in  Chicago  recently  when  I  spent  a  day  with  some  Chi- 
cago policemen  on  some  of  the  meanest  streets  in  our  town.  And 
I  talked  about  drug  arrests  and  the  like,  and  they  told  me  stories 
about  taking  their  arrests  down  to  the  State's  attorney's  office  and 
then  to  the  court.  And  we  talked  a  little  bit  and  they  said,  of 
course,  there  was  one  judge,  who  I  won't  name — they  said  it  is  just 
hopeless  when  you  go  before  that  judge;  you  are  never  going  to 
prosecute  a  drug  case  in  front  of  that  judge,  and  every  defense  at- 
torney knows  it  and  does  their  best  to  get  in  that  courtroom. 

I  want  to  make  sure  that  the  record  is  clear  here  if  there  was 
any  impression  created  that  you  were  the  forum  where  defense  at- 


1037 

torneys  would  race  to  because  they  felt  that  they  would  always  get 
a  break  or  could  be  hopeful  that  they  would  get  better  treatment. 

Can  you  shed  some  light  on  your  experience  in  that  regard  deal- 
ing with  drug  prosecutions  or  any  serious  criminal  prosecutions? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Well,  over  those  8  years  when  I  have 
sat  in  criminal  court,  a  total  of  4,000  cases — several  hundred  of 
them  were  drug  prosecutions  and  the  majority  of  those  prosecu- 
tions were  convictions;  the  same  with  other  violent  offenses — rob- 
beries; burglaries;  rapes;  you  know,  aggravated  assaults.  And  I 
have  already  submitted  to  the  committee  my  computer  printouts, 
the  raw  data  of  the  numbers  and  statistics  relating  to  sentencing, 
as  well  as  to  the  convictions.  But  there  is  no  question.  Senator,  the 
overwhelming  majority — you  know,  85,  90  percent  were  convictions, 
yes. 

Senator  DURBIN.  Well,  thank  you  for  your  testimony  and  I  appre- 
ciate it.  I  note  that  you  received  high  marks  from  former  Senator 
WofTord,  as  well  as  Senator  Specter  and  Congressman  Foglietta.  I 
have  the  highest  respect  for  all  three  of  those  and  I  am  glad  you 
came  before  our  committee.  Thank  you. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Thank  you. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  SPECTER 

Senator  Specter.  Judge  Jackson,  I  am  going  to  ask  you  a  num- 
ber of  questions  because  this  record  is  going  to  be  reviewed,  per- 
haps, by  a  number  of  people,  so  that  I  believe  that  there  ought  to 
be  as  full  a  record  as  we  can  make  on  the  relevant  matters,  al- 
though there  are  limitations.  It  is  now  3:47  and  I  have  a  4  o'clock 
conference,  which  has  just  been  put  off  for  30  minutes,  and  the 
Governmental  Affairs  hearing  I  just  left  on  campaign  finance  re- 
form, and  some  appointments  are  waiting  in  the  anteroom,  which 
is  par  for  the  course.  But  this  is  a  matter  which  I  think  we  ought 
to  develop  the  record  on  just  a  bit. 

Senator  Kyi  told  me  that  he  had  explored  with  you  briefly  judi- 
cial philosophy  and  I  would  like  to  go  over  a  bit  of  that.  I  could 
not  be  here  at  the  very  start. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Right,  yes. 

Senator  Specter.  There  is  a  lot  of  concern  about  activist  judges, 
whether  judges  are  going  to  make  law  as  opposed  to  interpreting 
the  law.  And,  obviously,  that  is  a  subject  that  you  know  a  lot  about 
on  the  philosophical,  ideological  level. 

How  would  you  characterize  yourself  as  a  judge  with  respect  to 
strict  construction,  broad  construction?  Do  you  believe  a  judge 
should  very  narrowly  interpret  the  law  without  a  view  to  making 
law? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  believe  that  a  judge 
should  be  very  narrow  in  constructing  precedent,  in  constructing 
the  particular  case  that  is  in  front  of  me.  It  is  inappropriate,  with 
the  separation  of  powers,  for  a  judge  to  try  and  make  the  law. 
Rather,  our  role  is  to  apply  the  law  that  the  legislature  has  en- 
acted. 

Senator  Specter.  All  right.  Now,  could  you  specify  an3rthing  in 
your  career  which  would  support  your  action  in  support  of  those 
principles? 


1038 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Well,  Mr.  Chairman,  in  following  the 
sentencing  guidelines,  that  is  legislation  from  our  State  legislature 
which  I  follow.  And  imposing  mandatory  minimum  sentences — that 
is  legislation  from  our  State  legislature  which  I  follow. 

Senator  Specter.  Senator  Kyi  told  me  that  he  had  asked  you 
about  the  death  penalty,  and  there  have  been  references  in  some 
of  the  materials  about  some  speeches  you  have  made  on  the  death 
penalty.  The  death  penalty  is  the  law  of  Pennsylvania.  As  a  judge, 
have  you  enforced  the  law  of  Pennsylvania  as  written? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes,  I  have  enforced  the  law.  I  have 
not  had  the  occasion  up  to  this  point  to  impose  a  death  penalty  be- 
cause I  have  not  sat  in  our  homicide  program  in  Philadelphia, 
which  certainly,  as  you  know,  is  a  separate  subdivision  of  the 
criminal  division. 

In  the  speeches,  I  was  specifically  asked  by  our  State  legislature 
to  give  comments  of  the  practical  effects  of  the  death  penalty,  and 
I  do  so  at  their  request.  But  I  have  nothing  in  my  personal  philoso- 
phy which  would  prevent  me  from  imposing  the  death  penalty  if 
called  upon  to  do  so. 

Senator  Specter.  Would  you  amplify  what  you  said  by  way  of 
personal  philosophy  on  the  death  penalty? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  The  State  legislature  was  considering 
certain  crime  bills  in  Pennsylvania  and  invited  several  judges,  as 
well  as  other  individuals,  to  come  forward  and  present  testimony. 
And  I  simply  quoted  from  one  of — a  former  Supreme  Court  Justice 
indicating  his  opinion  on  the  death  penalty  and  I  specifically  said 
that  we  do  not  want  to  coddle  criminals.  I  said  that  in  the  same 
speech.  I  take  a  very  strong  view  on  law  enforcement  and  keeping 
crime  off  the  streets. 

Senator  Specter.  The  question  has  arisen  as  to  your  sentencing, 
and  we  have  a  lot  of  statistics  and  I  am  always  very  leery,  frankly, 
of  citing  statistics.  In  hearings,  we  cite  facts  without  the  kind  of 
precision  which  has  to  go  on  in  the  courtroom.  But  the  record  that 
has  been  presented  to  me  shows  that  in  1984  you  had  551 — these 
are  criminal  cases;  1985,  736  cases;  1986,  653  cases;  1987,  591 
cases;  1988,  241  cases;  1989,  354  cases;  1990,  447  cases;  1991  says 
"N/A,"  apparently  meaning  not  applicable;  1992  to  1995,  60  to  100 
cases  a  year,  and  then  in  1996,  200  civil  dispositions. 

The  total  on  the  specific  cases  from  1984  to  1990—1  totaled  3,573 
cases,  and  you  have  referred  to  more  than  4,000  cases.  What  is 
your  best  evaluation  or  approximation  as  to  the  total  number  of 
criminal  cases  you  have  tried? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  From  January  1984  through  December 
of  1991,  I  think  it  is  about  4,000. 

Senator  Specter.  Are  all  those  waiver,  that  is  nonjury  cases? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Most  of  them  were,  yes. 

Senator  Specter.  Do  you  sit  on  jury  trial  rooms  ever? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Oh,  yes;  oh,  yes,  very — there  were  oc- 
casions when  defendants  requested  jury  trials  and  I  did  sit  on  jury 
trials. 

Senator  Specter.  How  many  jury  trials  did  you  sit  on,  if  you  can 
quantify  that? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  On  the  criminal  side,  probably  less 
than  10;  on  the  civil  side,  every  week,  one  a  week,  since  1991. 


1039 

Senator  Specter.  Well,  when  you  had  the  jury  trials,  were  you 
in  a  specific  jury  trial  room? 

Judge  Massi  AH -Jackson.  I  was  in  a  room  where  a  defendant 
could  request  a  jury  trial,  yes. 

Senator  Specter.  Do  they  still  have  the  procedure  in  Philadel- 
phia of  having  waiver  rooms  where  you  may  not  ask  for  a  jury 
trial? 

Judge  Massiah- Jackson.  Oh,  yes.  During — ^yes. 

Senator  Specter.  And  jury  trial  rooms  where  you  may  ask  for 
a  jury? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes. 

Senator  Specter.  But  you  don't  have  to  ask  for  a  jury? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  That  is  correct,  yes,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Specter.  Now,  the  issue  was  raised  as  to  whether  you 
were  a  lenient  sentencer  because  people  were  more  interested  in 
trying  to  you  on  a  waiver.  When  you  sat  in  jury  trial  rooms,  how 
frequently  did  the  defendants  ask  for  a  jury  trial,  contrasted  with 
how  frequently  did  they  seek  to  waive  a  jury  trial? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Most  of  the  times,  the  defendants  ei- 
ther waived  their  jury  trial  or  they  pled  guilty. 

Senator  Specter.  In  the  jury  trial  room? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  Specter.  But  you  did  try  some  jury  cases? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Oh,  yes;  oh,  yes. 

Senator  Specter.  Do  you  have  any  judgment  or  sense  as  to  why 
they  asked  for  jury  trials  in  those  cases? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  No,  no,  Mr.  Chairman.  There  were 
many  judges.  I  think  the  defendants  were  simply  trying  to  get  their 
cases  moving  and  that  was  a  way  to  do  it. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Well,  why  did  the  defendants  ask  for  jury 
trials  in  the  cases  where  they  asked  for  them? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  have  no  idea.  I  didn't  explore  that 
with  them. 

Senator  SPECTER.  According  to  information  provided — and  this  is 
from  your  records.  I  have  asked  how  many  appeals  were  taken  as 
to  your  cases  and  the  information  you  have  provided  says  that 
there  were  95  appeals  filed  with  the  Superior  Court  of  Pennsyl- 
vania and  you  were  reversed  in  whole  or  in  part  14  times.  Is  that 
accurate? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  That  is  correct;  over  14  years,  that  is 
correct. 

Senator  Specter.  Were  you  ever  reversed  on  a  sentence? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Not  to  my  knowledge.  It  is  just  the  one 
time,  in  1995  or  1996. 

Senator  SPECTER.  On  a  sentence? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  On  a  sentence.  I  was  not  reversed.  I 
was  affirmed  on  a  sentence. 

Senator  Specter.  Mayor  Rendell  told  me  that  you  were  never  re- 
versed on  a  sentence.  Do  you  think  he  was  wrong? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  was  not  reversed  on  a  sentence.  I  was 
appealed  on  that  sentence  that  one  time. 

Senator  Specter.  OK,  but  the  question  was  reversed.  Judge 
Jackson,  not  appealed. 


1040 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  apologize.  To  the  best  of  my  knowl- 
edge, I  have  never  been  reversed. 

Senator  SPECTER.  There  was  one  case  where  there  was  an  appeal 
from  your  sentence. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Right. 

Senator  Specter.  And  on  that  case,  you  were  not  reversed? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  That  is  correct.  I  apologize. 

Senator  Specter.  So  Mayor  Rendell  is  not  wrong? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  No,  no,  he  is  not. 

Senator  Specter.  OK.  Judge  Jackson,  had  you  been  informed 
prior  to  coming  here  today  that  you  would  be  asked  questions 
about  any  specific  cases? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  had  a  general  knowledge  of  some  of 
the  cases. 

Senator  Specter.  Did  you  know,  for  example,  you  would  be 
asked  about  the  Jenkins  case  which  involved  this  question  about 
identification  suppression? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes. 

Senator  Specter.  You  knew  you  would  be  asked  about  that? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes. 

Senator  Specter.  How  did  you  know  you  would  be  asked  about 
that? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  received  information  from  the  De- 
partment of  Justice. 

Senator  Specter.  Did  you  know  you  would  be  asked  about  the 
Burgos  case? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes,  yes. 

Senator  Specter.  So  you  had  an  opportunity  to  prepare  on  that 
case? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes,  I  did,  Senator. 

Senator  Specter.  You  have  been  questioned  about  language 
which  you  used  in  two  cases.  Judge  Jackson.  On  the  one  case 
which  was  involved  with  Ms.  McDermott 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes. 

Senator  Specter  [continuing].  That  case  was  taken  to  the  Judi- 
cial Board  of  Inquiry  and  Review? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  That  is  correct. 

Senator  Specter.  And  who  took  the  case  to  that  board? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  As  far  as  I  know,  she  did.  I  don't  know. 
They  don't  tell  us  who  brings 

Senator  Specter.  And  was  there  a  hearing  on  that  case  on  the 
record? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  No,  simply  a— just  a  letter  submitted. 

Senator  Specter.  And  was  any  sanction  imposed  on  you  for  that? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  received  a  letter  indicating  I  was  ad- 
monished for  using  intemperate  language  at  a  side  bar  proceeding, 
just  a  letter. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Have  you  ever  used  that  word  in  open  court 


smce 


9 


Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  No,  Senator. 

Senator  Specter.  Have  you  ever  used  that  word  in  any  judicial 
proceeding  other  than  in  open  court? 
Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  No,  Senator. 


1041 

Senator  Specter.  Ms.  Jackson,  you  have  already  apologized  for 
it,  but  I  think  that  there  may  be  some  greater  interest.  And  I  don't 
want  to  unduly  prolong  it  and  I  have  accepted  your  apology,  as  far 
as  I  am  concerned,  but  I  think  others  might  be  interested  in  a  little 
fuller  explanation. 

Why  did  you  say  that?  I  know  it  is  a  long  time  ago  and  I  read 
in  the  record  that  you  were  perturbed  and  that  counsel  was  push- 
ing you,  and  lawyers  do  that  to  judges  and  judges  do  respond.  But 
why  did  you  use  that  kind  of  language? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  don't  have  an  answer.  I  was  frus- 
trated. Senator,  and  it  just  blurted  out. 

Senator  Specter.  Senator  Thurmond  always  asks  nominees  for 
the  bench — I  heard  him  do  this  for  the  first  time  when  Judge — she 
wasn't  a  judge — when  Carol  Mansman  was  up  in  1982  with 
Stapleton,  and  Senator  Thurmond  said,  "Do  you  promise  to  be  cour- 
teous?" And  I  thought  to  myself,  what  kind  of  a  question  is  that? 
What  does  he  expect  them  to  say?  And  they  said,  "yes." 

And  he  said  in  his  inimitable  southern  accent,  "Do  you  promise 
to  be  courteous?"  And  they  said,  "yes."  And  then  he  said,  "Because 
the  more  power  a  person  has,  the  more  courteous  that  person  has 
to  be."  And  I  have  come  to  view  those  statements  as  very,  very  pro- 
found statements,  and  when  Senator  Thurmond  is  not  here  I  al- 
ways repeat  Senator  Thurmond's  admonition  to  nominees.  Many, 
after  the  fact,  have  told  me  how  they  think  about  Senator  Thur- 
mond's admonition. 

You  were  challenged  on  your  language  in  another  case,  the — see, 
they  told  you  about  these  cases  before  you  got  here,  but  they  didn't 
tell  me  about  the  cases  before  I  got  here.  Judge  Jackson.  And  if 
they  had,  it  wouldn't  have  done  any  good;  I  would  have  waited 
until  I  got  here  anjrway. 

The  Ruiz  case  where  you  said  "I  don't  give  a  blank" — why  did 
you  use  that  expression? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  believe  that  was  something  I  mum- 
bled under  my  breath  that  I  was  just  tired. 

Senator  Specter.  Well,  it  says  here  she  said,  quote,  "In  a  staged 
whisper  while  motioning  the  court  reporter  to  stop  recording, 
quote,  'I  don't  give  a  blank.'"  Have  you  ever  said  that  again? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  No,  I  have  not.  Senator. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Why  did  you  say  that? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  have  to  say  I  don't  specifically  re- 
member that  incident  and  I  don't  know  why.  I  guess  I  was 

Senator  SPECTER.  Is  the  language  pretty  tough  in  the  Court  of 
Common  Pleas  in  Philadelphia? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  It  is  very  tough.  I  have  learned  words 
that  I  never  knew  before  I  was  a  judge. 

Senator  Specter.  How  could  that  be.  Judge  Jackson?  You  grew 
up  in  Philadelphia. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  grew  up  on  the  streets  of  north  Phila- 
delphia, but  I  was — 

Senator  Specter.  I  didn't  know  there  were  any  words  that 
weren't  used  in  Philadelphia,  especially  on  the  streets  of  north 
Philadelphia. 


1042 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  was  blessed  with  a  family  and  strong 
support  and  I  was  not — I  didn't  live  on  the  streets,  as  many  of  the 
defendants  and  the  victims  did. 

Senator  Specter.  Judge  Jackson,  I  want  to  make  a  part  of  the 
record  for  you  the  memorandum  which  has  quite  a  number  of  other 
cases  in  it  which  you  have  not  been  questioned  about.  But  before 
I  do,  the  Hicks  case — why  did  you  force  the — do  you  recall  the 
Hicks  case  where  you,  in  effect,  forced  the  prosecutor  to  go  on  trial? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes.  It  was  my  recollection  that  had 
been  continued  several  times  earlier  by  the  prosecution  and  I  made 
a  ruling  on  what  we  call  our  rule  1100,  or  speedy  trial  issue,  saying 
the  defendant  had  not  come  to  trial  on  time. 

Senator  Specter.  Well,  you  could  have  dismissed  the  case  based 
on  that. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  That  is  what  I  did  do.  I  dismissed  it 
based  on  rule  1100. 

Senator  Specter.  You  dismissed  the  case  based  on  an  1100  rul- 
ing? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Yes,  and  that  is  why- 


Senator  Specter.  Do  you  have  your  opinion  in  the  case,  because 
I  don't  have  it  before  me  here? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  don't  believe  I  do.  I  don't  what 
the 

Senator  Specter.  I  was  district  attorney  when  that  rule  was  put 
into  effect.  It  started  out  being  270  days.  Then  it  was 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Now,  it  is  180. 

Senator  Specter.  We  did  it  for  a  brief  period  of  time  to  give  us 
an  adjustment  period  of  270  later.  It  was  180. 

Why  did  they  reverse  if  the  180  days  had  run? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  It  is  my  recollection,  Senator,  that  the 
superior  court  felt  that  there  should  have  been  one  more  oppor- 
tunity for  that  defendant  to  go  to  trial. 

Senator  Specter.  Well,  but  there  is  no  mention  here  of  the  180 
days.  Well,  if  this  issue  is  to  be  carried  further,  it  may  be  that  we 
will  need  a  further  statement  from  you.  I  don't  know  that  we  will. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  OK. 

Senator  Specter.  And  I  want  to  make  available  to  you  a  memo- 
randum which  has  a  number  of  cases  which  you  haven't  been  asked 
about  today. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  OK. 

Senator  Specter.  But  I  would  like  for  you  to  review  your  records 
and  be  in  a  position  to  respond  on  these  matters  if  anybody  wants 
to  know  about  them. 

On  a  total  number  of  cases  of  more  than  4,000,  and  95  appeals 
and  14  reversals,  there  may  not  be  an  issue  relating  to  pattern  of 
conduct,  or  somebody  may  raise  an  issue  of  pattern  of  conduct.  So 
I  think  you  ought  to  be  prepared  to  deal  with  that. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  OK. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Why  do  you  want  to  be  a  Federal  judge.  Judge 
Jackson? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  believe  that  I  do  have  the  tempera- 
ment, the  intellect  and  the  ability  to  move  from  the  State  court  to 
the  Federal  court.  I  enjoy  the  law  and  I  feel  that  the  Federal  bench 
will  give  me  an  opportunity  to  deal  with  the  complex  issues  that 


1043 

are  involved  in  the  law,  rather  than  the  rush  that  we  go  through 
on  the  State  court. 

Senator  SPECTER.  You  are  tired  of  being  rushed? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  would  like  to  have  time  to  reflect  on 
serious  and  complex  issues. 

Senator  Specter.  Your  background  will  be  different  on  the  U.S. 
District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania  than  any 
other  judge  there  now.  Do  you  know  the  judges'  lunch  room  is  at 
the  Federal  court? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  have  visited  there,  I  believe. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Have  you  had  lunch  there? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  One  time,  I  believe. 

Senator  SPECTER.  Somebody  said  you  would  add  a  new  dimen- 
sion to  the  lunch  room. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  don't  know  what  that  means. 

Senator  Specter.  It  means  they  have  conversations  at  lunch, 
they  talk,  and  that  you  would  bring  a  little  different  back- 
ground  

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  I  eat  at  my  desk  now. 

Senator  Specter  [continuing].  To  the  lunch  room. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Well 

Senator  SPECTER.  I  have  had  lunch  there.  They  could  use  some 
differing  backgrounds.  They  don't  need  any  Senators,  but  they 
could  use  some  differing  backgrounds. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Thank  you,  Senator. 

Senator  Specter.  Also,  the  food  is  not  so  good. 

I  am  going  to  just  take  a  minute  to  talk  to  one  of  the  lawyers 
here. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Sure. 

[Pause.] 

Senator  SPECTER.  In  the  case  of  Commonwealth  v.  Jahon,  the  de- 
fendant, so  I  am  told,  was  charged  with  first-degree  aggravated  as- 
sault, an  offense  that  carries  a  mandatory  sentence,  and  you  found 
him  guilty  of  second-degree  aggravated  assault,  a  charge  that  does 
not  carry  a  mandatory  sentence.  You  found  the  defendant  used  his 
body  as  a  deadly  weapon  in  an  effort  to  satisfy  the  deadly  require- 
ment of  the  second-degree  offense.  The  transcript  states  that  you 
said  the  defendant,  quote,  "used  his  body  by  bumping  the  victim 
with  his  stomach  and  then  tossing  him  with  his  hands,"  close 
quote. 

Are  you  able  to  explain  your  reasoning  in  that  case? 

Judge  JVLassiah -Jackson.  For  the  verdict? 

Senator  Specter.  For  the  verdict  or  your  statement. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  It  is 

Senator  Specter.  Do  you  recollect  the  case? 

Judge  ]VIassi  AH -Jackson.  Yes. 

Senator  Specter.  OK.  If  you  recollect  the  case,  then  I  think  it 
is  a  fair  question. 

Judge  IMassiah-Jackson.  OK. 

Senator  Specter.  Go  ahead. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Oh,  yes.  In  Pennsylvania  at  the  time — 
and  I  don't  know  if  the  case  law  has  changed  since  those  years,  but 
there  was  a  real  question  as  to  whether  or  not  one  punch  or  one 
hit  is  sufficient  to  sustain  a  verdict  of  aggravated  assault  of  the 


1044 

first  degree.  And  so  I  found  the  defendant  guilty  of  F-2,  a  felony 
of  the  second  degree. 

Senator  Specter.  Well,  did  you  deliberately  ignore  evidence  of  a 
greater  charge  to  find  the  defendant  guilty  of  a  lesser  charge  to 
avoid  the  necessity  for  a  mandatory  sentence?  I  think  that  is  the 
import  of  the  committee  question? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  No,  no,  Senator.  I  don't  look  at  the  sen- 
tence when  I  am  listening  to  the  case.  I  consider  the  facts  of  the 
case  before  I  impose  whatever  the  degree  of  guilt  is.  Just  as  a  jury 
would  not  be  considering  a  sentence  before  the  trial  is  over,  I  don't 
do  that  either. 

Senator  Specter.  Excuse  me? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  Just  as  a  jury  would  not  consider  a 
sentence  before  a  trial  is  over,  as  a  sitting  judge  at  a  bench  trial, 
I  don't  consider  the  sentence. 

Senator  Specter.  Judge  Jackson,  are  you  saying  that  in  all  cases 
you  isolate  those  facts  and  never  consider  whether  there  is  a  man- 
datory sentence  to  be  imposed  if  you  make  a  finding  of  guilt  of  a 
certain  category? 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  That  is  what  I  do.  I  listen  to  the  facts 
and  make  a  decision  based  on  the  facts  that  are  in  front  of  me. 

Senator  Specter.  All  right.  We  are  going  to  make  these  ques- 
tions available  to  you,  and  we  will  make  a  part  of  the  record  the 
Commonwealth's  brief  in  the  case  of  Commonwealth  v.  Patrick  Jen- 
kins,'^ and  the  opinion  of  the  court  in  Commonwealth  v.  Hicks,^  su- 
perior court,  1987,  and  a  memorandum  dated  November  7,  1988,3 
and  the  5  pages  which  is  an  extract  of  a  larger  memo  made  for  the 
chairman  of  the  committee.  And  it  is  with  respect  to  this  larger 
memorandum  that  we  are  asking  you  to  take  a  look  at  it  and  be 
in  a  position  to  respond  to  questions  about  the  balance  of  the  cases, 
if  that  need  should  arise. 

Judge  Massiah-Jackson.  OK,  thank  you. 

[An  extract  of  the  memorandum  referred  to  above  follows:] 


1  Retained  in  Committee  files. 

2  See  p.  1027. 

3  Retained  in  Committee  files. 


1045 

Nomination  of  Judge  Massiah-Jackson 

Committee's  Review  of  certain  cases: 

Included  among  the  numerous  materials  reviewed  for  the  above-named  nominee  are 
the  following  cases:    Commonwealth  v.  Willie  Hannibal:   Commonwealth  v.  Donald  Powell; 
Commonwealth  v.  Patrick  Jenkins  and  Phillip  Mavberry;    Commonwealth  v   Norman 
Nesmith;  Commonwealth  v.  Gregory  Johnson;  Commonwealth  v.  Flovd  Decker; 
Commonwealth  v.  Jerome  Gray  Commonwealth  v  Jav  Hahn;  Commonwealth  v.  Edward 
Baker    Below  is  an  excerpt  or  a  summary  of  specific  matters  in  each  of  these  cases. 

In  Commonwealth  v  Willie  Hannibal,  during  a  discussion  with  the  prosecution,'  page 
1 7  of  the  transcript; 

Ms.  McDermott:  For  the  record.  Your  Honor  ~ 

THE  COURT:  That's  all  I  want  to  hear  from  you  right  now. 

Ms.  McDermott;  I  request  that  the  Court  ~ 

THE  COURT:  Keep  your  mouth  shut  at  this  point  because  we  are  trying  to  deal  with 
this  defendant's  right  to  have  a  trial,  and  that  is  why  we  are  here.   Just  stop  talking. 

Ms.  McDermott:  Your  Honor,  with  all  due  respect  — 

THE  COURT:  You  won  your  motion    Please  keep  quiet,  Ms  McDermott. 

Ms.  McDermott:  Your  Honor,  1  can't  — 

THE  COURT:  Please  keep  quiet,  Ms.  McDermott 

Ms.  McDermott:  Will  I  be  afforded  — 

THE  COURT:    Ms  McDermott,  will  you  shut  your  fucking  mouth 


'In  Hannibal,  the  defendant  decided  at  the  last  minute  to  not  plead  guilty  to  narcotics 
and  assault  charges,  choosing  instead  to  go  to  trial.    After  some  discussion,  the  defense  stated 
that  they  were  not  ready  to  try  the  case  because  their  witnesses  were  not  present.    The 
Commonwealth  argued  that  it  was  ready  to  proceed  and  the  Assistant  District  Attorney 
objected  to  a  continuance. 


/Il    OA/I       QO        1A 


1046 


Footnote  6  in  the  Commonwealth's  brief  in  the  case  of  Commonwealth  v.  Donald 
Powell  implies  that  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  tried  to  persuade  the  Commonwealth  to  dismiss  its 

appeal.    That  note  states  in  pertinent  part: 

*  ♦  * 

Initially,  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  refused  to  give  the  Commonwealth  a  thirty-day 
continuance  so  that  the  Commonwealth  could  decide  whether  to  appeal  her  new 
trial  order,  informing  the  assistant  district  attorney  that  if  the  Commonwealth 
did  appeal  she  would  "deal  with  that  if  it  comes  to  that.    There  are  a  variety  of 
ways  to  deal  with  it."   Those  "ways"  apparently  included  her  letter  to  the 
Commonwealth  suggesting  that  the  appeal  be  discontinued,  her  subsequent 
letter  to  this  Court,  after  the  Commonwealth  indicated  it  would  proceed  with 
the  appeal,  demanding  that  the  President  Judge  be  informed  if  the 
Commonwealth  withdrew  before  disposition;  her  Opinion  filed  in  this  matter,  in 
which  she  recharacterized  the  legal  issue  in  an  attempt  to  obfuscate  the  plain 
appealability  of  her  order;  and  finally,  her  "recommendations"to  this  Court  [the 
appellate  court]  that,  upon  dismissing  the  appeal,  it  (1)  assess  costs  of  the 
appeal  against  the  Commonwealth;  (2)  order  that  the  charges  against  defendant 
be  dismissed  if,  upon  retrial,  defendant  cannot  locate  his  missing  witness  (who 
refused  his  request  to  appear  at  his  preliminary  hearing  and  who  could  not  be 
found  at  trial)  and  (3)  order  that  the  time  between  .    (the  date  of  the 
Commonwealth's  response  to  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  indicating  that  it  would 
proceeds  with  this  appeal)  and  defendant's  new  trial  be  counted  against  the 
Commonwealth  for  Rule  1100  purposes  [Pennsylvania  Speedy  Trial  Act]." 

In  the  Commonwealth's  brief  of  the  case  of  Commonwealth  v.  Patrick  Jenkins  and 
Phillip  Mavberrv.  the  government  appealed  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  finding  that  probable  cause 
to  arrest  defendants  did  not  exist,  and  her  suppression  of  evidence  and  her  suppression  of  the 
victim's  identification  of  the  defendant.    In  arguing  that  the  judge  mistakenly  found  that  the 
officers  had  stopped  the  defendant  because  he  was  simply  a  black  man  the  Commonwealth 
cited  the  Judge's  comment  that  relied  on  popular  "movies"  rather  than  evidence  before  the 
court 

Apparently,  because  Officer  Blanche  did  not  testify  at  the  hearing,  the  court  felt 
free  to  suggest,  in  its  findings  of  fact,  that  the  officers  stopped  Patrick  Jenkins 
simply  because  he  was  a  running  black  male  in  Philadelphia.    As  support  for 
this  "factual  finding,"  the  court  cited  a  movie  (Opinion,  Finding  of  Fact  No. 
30;  R.  21a).  Despite  this  injection  of  racial  overtones  in  a  case  where  none 
existed,  the  testimony  of  other  officers  on  the  scene  was  more  than  sufficient 
that  both  officers  were  acting  properly  pursuant  to  Officer  McLaughlin's  police 
radio  broadcast. 

Commonwealth's  brief,  Page  21,  n.  10. 


1047 


In  the  case  of  Commonwealth  v.  Norman  Nesmith.  the  defendant  was  charged  with  7 
criminal  violations  [simple  assault,  aggravated  assault,  criminal  conspiracy;  recklessly 
endangering  another  person;  accident  involving  death  or  personal  injury  -  duty  to  stop, 
identify  self  and  render  assistance;  simple  assault,  aggravated  assault]  and  waived  jury  trial. 
Defendant  was  found  guilty  by  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  of  seven  of  the  above  offenses  on  May 
23,  1991;  however,  she  allowed  defendant  to  remain  free  and  reduced  his  $10,000  bail  bond 
to  "release  on  his  own  recognizance."   Over  the  next  three  years,  his  sentencing  was  deferred 
approximately  13  times  during  which  time  he  reported  to  the  court  and  paid  various  amounts 
restitution  to  the  victims  as  ordered.    When  defendant  was  finally  sentenced  on  July  14,  1994, 
he  received  2  years  probation  only  to  run  concurrently  for  all  seven  convictions  well  below 
any  standard  guideline  range.    Furthermore,  because  defendant  had  a  extensive  prior  record  he 
would  have  been  eligible  for  a  sentence  in  the  aggravated  range. 

The  District  Attorney's  Office  appealed  the  sentence  of  two  years  probation,  but  lost 
on  appeal  because  the  state  sentencing  guidelines  are  discretionary  only.^ 

Commonwealth  v.  Gregory  Johnson,  defendant  was  charged  with  robbery  first  degree; 
theft,  receiving  stolen  property,  violation  Uniform  Firearm  Act;    possession  instrument  of 
crime.    Defendant  waived  jury  trial  and  was  found  guilty  of  offenses  by  judge  on  April  26, 
1990.    Sentencing  was  deferred  until  June  5,  1990.    Judge  Massiah-Jackson  found  the 
defendant  guilty  of  the  lesser  included  offense  of  Robbery  in  the  Second  Degree. 

Commonwealth  v.  Floyd  Decker,  defendant  was  charged  with  robbery  first  degree,  and 
criminal  conspiracy,  and  other  offenses    Defendant  confessed  that  he  participated  in  robbery 
along  with  two  other  individuals  by  driving  get-away  car  from  scene.    The  other  individuals 
robbed  the  victim  at  gun  point  and  forced  victim  to  relinquish  his  possessions:  $200.00 
glasses,  and  sneakers.    Defendant  was  charged  with  First  Degree  Robbery.    Judge  Massiah- 
Jackson  found  the  defendant  guilty  of  misdemeanor  theft,  unlawful  taking,  and  criminal 
conspiracy  only.    Defendant  received  12  months  of  probation  on  each  charge  to  run 
concurrently  with  one  another. 

In  the  case  of  Commonwealth  v.  Jerome  Gray,  victim  was  taken  to  hospital  for  three 
cracked  ribs,  collapsed  lung,  ruptured  spleen  [which  had  to  be  removed]  as  a  result  of  being 
beaten  by  the  defendant  [her  live-in  boyfriend  of  4  years  ]  on  December  15,  1989.    Victim 
was  discharged  from  hospital  on  January  5,  1990.    Sometime,  around  February  27,  1990,  after 
her  hospital  release,  the  victim  called  the  police  to  report  that  the  defendant  had  threatened  to 


^The  appeals  court  held  that  the  guidelines  were  not  intended  to  trump  judicial 
discretion  and  that  it  was  not  an  abuse  of  discretion  for  the  judge  to  consider  defendant's 
remorse  [by  his  payment  of  approximately  $4,000  in  restitution  to  the  victims],  nor  was  it 
unreasonable  for  her  to  consider  that  all  prior  convictions  were  misdemeanor  offenses  [simple 
assault  and  sentenced  to  1 1  1/2  to  23  month  in  county  jail],  or  that  the  victim  had  a  blood 
alcohol  level  of  .2  when  she  stepped  in  front  of  defendant's  car  and  was  hit. 


1048 


kill  her,  and  had  come  over  to  her  house.    An  arrest  warrant  was  issued,  and,  thereafter, 
defendant  turned  himself  in  to  law  enforcement  on  March  1,  1990.    Defendant  denied  striking 
victim  with  his  fists  and  stated  that  she  was  hurt  as  a  result  of  a  fall  during  an  argument. 

Defendant  waived  jury  trial,  and  opted  for  bench  trial  on  charges:    Recklessly 
Endangering  Another  Person,  Terroristic  Threats,  Aggravated  Assault  First  Degree;  Simple 
Assault.    On  May  14,  1991,  he  was  found  guilty  of  REAP,  Aggravated  Assault  Second 
Degree,  and  Simple  Assault,  and  acquitted  of  other  charges.   The  defendant  was  given  a 
sentence  of  24  months  reporting  probation.    Later,  on  October  24,  1 99 1 ,  defendant  violated 
his  probation  and  was  given  a  sentence  of  between  1 1  1/2  months  and  23  months. 

In  Commonwealth  v.  Jay  Hahn.  the  defendant  was  accused  of  injuring  a  78  year  old 
male.    Defendant  was  parking  his  car  in  frony  of  victim's  house,  when  victim  requested  that 
he  park  somewhere  else  because  he  was  waiting  for  his  wife  to  return  from  the  grocery  store. 
Defendant  told  victim  to  "Go  Fuck  Yourself  and  got  out  of  the  car    Defendant  then  threw 
victim  face  first  onto  the  concrete  steps  in  front  of  a  house.    Victim  had  to  be  treated  at  a 
hospital  for  a  broken  nose,  and  received  stitches  for  other  facial  injuries 

Defendant  was  charged  with  Recklessly  Endangering  Another  Person  [REAP], 
Misdemeanor  in  the  Second  Degree,  Aggravated  Assault,  Second  Degree,  Simple  Assault. 
Defendant  waived  jury  trial.    On  February  15,  1991,  he  was  found  guilty  of  charges.    His  bail 
was  revoked  and  his  sentencing  was  deferred  until  April  30,  1991.    He  was  given  a  sentence 
of  between  6  months  and  23  months.    Defendant  was  paroled  that  same  day  from  his 
sentence. 

Second  Degree  Aggravated  Assault  does  not  require  a  mandatory  sentence,  unlike  a 
charge  of  First  Degree    In  order  to  convict  a  defendant  of  a  charge  of  Second  Degree  a 
deadly  weapon  must  be  used.    Page  28  of  the  Hahn  transcript  shows  that  Judge  Massiah- 
Jackson  found  that  the  defendant's  body  was  a  deadly  weapon. 

THE  COURT:  I  think  that  the  way  Mr  Hahn  used  his  body  by  bumping  him 
with  his  hands  would  either  be  considered  a  deadly  weapon,  the  choice  Mr. 
Knochak  [defense  counsel]  is  yours  and  your  client,  or  it  was  reckless  conduct 
under  circumstances  manifesting  extreme  indifference  to  the  value  of  a  78  year 
old  person's  life    So  that's  the  choice 

Defendant's  parole  was  revoked  on  October  13,  1992  because  the  defendant  violated 
his  conditions  and  the  remainder  of  his  time  was  reinstated.    On  November  2,  1993,  he  was 
again  recommended  for  parole  after  having  served  21  months,  despite  committing  an 
infraction  [fighting  while  in  prison]  for  which  he  received  14  days  punitive  segregation. 

In  Commonwealth  v  Edward  Baker,  the  defendant  robbed  his  victim  at  knife  point 
and  took  $284.00.    He  was  charged  with  Robbery,  criminal  conspiracy.  Theft,  Possessing 
Instruments  of  Crime;  Possessing  Concealed  Weapon;  Recklessly  Endangering  Another 


1049 


Person;  Terroristic  Threats;  Simple  Assault.     Defendant  waived  jury  and  proceeded  to  bench 
trial.    He  was  adjudged  guilty  of  Criminal  Conspiracy,  Theft,  Concealed  Weapon  charges,  and 
not  guilty  of  Simple  Assault,  Terroristic  Threats,  REAP.    Defendant  had  an  extensive  prior 
criminal  history  including  charges  of  statutory  rape,  multiple  assaults,  larceny,  starting  from 
1 97 1 ,  [last  offense  charged  prior  to  offenses  in  this  case  were  in  1 989]  defendant  sentenced  to 
2  1/2-5  years. 


Sentencing  Information  Received  From  Pennsylvania  Sentencing  Commission 

The  Pennsylvania  Sentencing  Commission  data  shows  that  Judge  Massiah-Jackson's 
sentencing  falls  most  often  within  the  standard  guideline  range.    It  is  comparable  to  that  of 
other  Philadelphia  judges.    However,  the  information  also  shows  that  when  she  has  departed 
from  the  standard  guideline  range  she  has  deviated  below  the  guidelines  by  over  98%,  and  has 
deviated  only  1.26%  above  the  guidelines.    This  sentencing  deviation  is  comparable  to  other 
Philadelphia  and  Pennsylvania  judges  around  the  state. 

According  to  the  Philadelphia  Sentencing  Commission,  it  is  mandatory  that  judges 
report  their  sentencing  information  to  the  Commission.    However,  a  comparison  of  the 
number  of  criminal  cases  reported  to  the  commission  against  the  information  received  from 
the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  showing  the  number  of  criminal  cases  handled  by  Judge  Massiah- 
Jackson  reveals  a  huge  discrepancy.    For  example,  the  information  received  from  the  Court 
shows  that  she  handled  over  500  criminal  cases  for  most  years.    In  contrast,  the  Commission 
reports  total  criminal  cases  handled  as  follows:  1985-56;  1986-153,  1988-54;  1989-107;  1990- 
145;  1991-89.    At  the  suggestion  of  the  Director  of  the  Commission,  the  information  received 
from  the  Commission  for  each  of  the  years  reported  was  combined  in  order  to  have  enough 
data  to  analyze. 

Criminal  case  information  received  from  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  shows  that  for 
the  years  that  Judge  Massiah-Jackson  served  on  the  criminal  bench  [1984  to  1991]  she 
handled  very  few  jury  trials  —  less  than  20  total  —  compared  to  the  thousands  of  cases  that 
she  tried  non-jury. 


1050 

Senator  Specter.  Thank  you  all  very  much,  and  that  concludes 
our  hearing. 

[Whereupon,  at  4:10  p.m.,  the  committee  was  adjourned.] 
[Submissions  for  the  record  follow:] 


1051 


SUBMISSIONS  FOR  THE  RECORD 


I    BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

1.  Full  name:  (Include  any  former  names  used.) 

Willie  James  Ware.  The  name  I  currently  use  is  James  Ware.  I  also  use  Jim 
Ware.  In  the  past  I  used  W.  James  Ware. 

2.  Address:  (List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  addresses). 

Office:  United  States  Courthouse 

280  South  First  Street 
San  Jose,  CA  95113 
(408)  535-5454 

Home:  Mountain  View,  CA  94040 

3.  Date  and  place  of  birth 

November  2,  1946;  Birmingham,  Alabama 

4.  Marital  Status:  (Include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name.)  List  spouse's 
occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  addresses. 

Married;  Susan  Ware  (nee  Susan  Stoll) 
Deputy  County  Counsel 
Santa  Clara  County  Counsel's  Office 
70  W.  Hedding  Street,  E.  Wing,  Fl.  9 
San  Jose,  CA  95110 

5.  Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates 
of  attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 


Institution 

Compton  College 

California  Lutheran 
University 

Stanford  Law  School 


Dates  of  Attendance 
1/65-6/66 

9/66-6/69 

9/69-6/72 


Degree  or  reason 
for  leaving 

Transferred  to  four-year 
institution 

B.A. 1969 

J.D. 1972 


1052 


Employment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional  corporations, 
companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and 
organizations,  nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were 
connected  as  an  officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since 
graduation  ft'om  college. 


YEAR  ORGANIZATION 

1969  The  American  Lutheran  Church 

East  Palo  Alto 


POSITION 

Guide  (I  led  inner  city 
teens  on  backpacking  trips 
through  the  Sierras  and 
counseled  them  on 
personal  development) 


1969 


Stanford  University 


University  Library 
Worker  (Work-Study 
Program) 


1970  O'Melvany  &  Myers 

Law  Offices 
Los  Angeles,  California 


Summer  Associate 


1970  United  States  Army 

Fort  Knox,  Kentucky 


Active  Duty  Reserves 
Basic  Training 


1971  United  States  Army 

Fort  Lewis,  Washington 


Active  Duty  Reserves 
Advanced  Basic  Training 


1971  Kadison,  Phelzer,  Woodard  &  Quinn 

Law  Offices 
Los  Angeles,  California 


Summer  Associate 


1972  United  States  Army 

Fort  Gordon,  Georgia 


Active  Army  Reserve 
Military  Police  School 


1973-81 


United  States  Army  Reserve 
San  Jose,  California 


Inactive  Army  Reserve 
Military  Police 


1972-77  Blase,  Valentine  &  Klein 

Law  Offices 
Palo  Alto,  California 


Associate  Attorney 


1973-83  Urban  Coalition 

Mid  Peninsula  Chapter 
Fair  Housing  Program 


Member 
Volunteer  Attorney 


1977-88  Blase,  Valentine  &  Klein 

(Now  Ritchey,  Fisher,  Whitman  &  Klein) 

Law  Offices 

Palo  Alto,  California 


Partner/Shareholder 


1053 


1980 


California  Lutheran  University 
Thousand  Oaks,  California 


Visiting  Professor 
Administration  of  Justice 
&  Business  Departments 


1980-82  YMCA 

Palo  Alto  Area 

Law  Offices 

Palo  Alto,  California 


Member 

Board  of  Directors 


1983-88 


Stanford  University 


Member 

Board  of  Trustees 


1984-86 


Stanford  University  Hospital 


Member 

Board  of  Trustees 


1988-90 


1990- 
present 

1990- 
present 


State  of  California 
County  of  Santa  Clara 

Martin  Luther  King  Papers  Project 
Stanford  University 

United  States  Government 


Judge 
Superior  Court 

Member 
Advisory  Board 

United  States  District 
Judge,  Northern  District 
of  California 


1991-93  American  Leadership  Forum 

Silicon  Valley  Chapter 


1993-96 


California  Lutheran  University 
Thousand  Oaks,  California 


Member 

Board  of  Directors 

Member 

Board  of  Regents 


1992- 
present 


Lincoln  Law  School  of  San  Jose    f 
San  Jose,  California 


1996-  Santa  Clara  University 

present  School  of  Law 

Santa  Clara,  California 


Member 
Faculty 

Member 
Adjunct  Faculty 


1054 


Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give  particulars, 
including  the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of 
discharge  received. 

Dates:  September  1972  -  December  1972 

Branch:  United  States  Army 

Active  Duty  for  Training 
Military  Police  School 
Fort  Gordon,  Georgia 

Rank:  Second  Lieutenant 

Serial  No.:       416-58-1395 

Status:  Graduated 

Discharge:       Honorable  Discharge  from  Active  Duty 
Dates:  1973-1987 

Branch:  United  States  Army  Reserve 

Rank:  Captain 

Serial  No.:  416-58-1395 

Status:  Discharged  upon  completion  of  service  -  1987 

Discharge:  Honorable 

Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships, 

honorary  degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of 

interest  to  the  Committee. 


Doctor  of  Laws  (Honorary  Degree) 

California  Lutheran  University 

Fulbright  Fellowship  for  Lectures  on  American  Legal 
System  in  the  Middle  East 

Fellowship  by  the  German-Marshall  Fund  to  study  at 
Atlantik-Bruecke  Conference  in  West  Berlin 

Martindale-Hubbel  Law  Directory,  a. v.  rating 


1997 

1996 

1987 
1987 


1055 


Community  Service  Award,  Urban  Coalition  1982 

Award  from  the  International  Academy  of  Trial  Lawyers  for 

Appellate  Advocacy  1970 

Graduated  Most  Outstanding  Senior 

California  Lutheran  University  1969 


Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related  committees  or 
conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates 
of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 


American  Bar  Association  Member 

Santa  Clara  County  Bar  Member 

Association 


1973-88 
1973-88 


Palo  Alto  Area  Bar  Association  Member 

Charles  Houston  Bar  Association       Member 


Santa  Clara  County  Bar  Member 

Association 


Board  of  Trustees 


1972-88 

1974- 
present 

1981-82 


Santa  Clara  County  Bar 
Association 


Member 


Judicial  Evaluation 
Committee 


1981-82 


Palo  Alto  Bar  Association 


Chairman 


Law  for  Laymen 
Committee 


1983-84 


United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Northern  District  of 
California 


Member 


Merit  Selection  Panel 
for  recommending 
individuals  for 
appointment  to  a 
position  as  a 
Magistrate  Judge 


1982 


Administrative  Office  of  the 
United  States  Courts 


Chairman 


Chambers  and 
Courtroom  Umbrella 
Group  for 
Automation  and 
Technology 


1992-97 


1056 


Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Ninth  Chairman 

Circuit 

Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Ninth  Member 

Circuit 


Committee  on  Model  1995- 

Jury  Instructions  present 

Task  Force  on  Race,  1995- 

Religion  and  Ethnic  present 
Fairness 


United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Northern  District  of 
California 


Chairman 


Local  Rules 
Committee 


1994- 
present 


United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Northern  District  of 
California 


Member 


Space  Committee 


1994- 
present 


United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Northern  District  of 
California 


Member 


Court  Technology 
Committee 


1994- 
present 


United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Northern  District  of 
California 


Member 


Unappropriated 
Funds  Committee 


1997- 
present 


Santa  Clara  County  Superior 
Court 


Member 


Long  Range  Planning 
Committee 


1988-89 


Santa  Clara  County  Superior 
Court 


Member 


Research  Attorneys 
Review  Committee 


1988-89 


Santa  Clara  County  Superior 
Court 


Member 


Computerization  of 
the  Court  Committee 


1988-89 


1057 


10.        Other  Memberships:    List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are  active  in 
lobbying  before  public  bodies.  Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you 
belong. 

I  am  not  a  member  of  any  organization  that  is  active  in  lobbying  before  public 
bodies. 

I  am  a  member  of  the  following  organizations: 

California  Lutheran  University  Alumni  Association 

Stanford  Law  School  Alumni  Association 

Martin  Luther  King  Papers  Project  Advisory  Committee 

American  Leadership  Forum  Senior  Fellows 

Federal  Judges  Association 

Lincoln  Law  School  of  San  Jose  Faculty 

Santa  Clara  University  Adjunct  Faculty 

Charles  Houston  Bar  Association-Judicial  Council 


11.        Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice, 
with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed    Please 
explain  the  reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same  information  for 
administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission  to  practice. 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals 

For  The  Ninth  Circuit  1972 

United  States  District  Court 

Northern  District  of  California  1972 

Central  District  of  California  1973 

Eastern  District  of  California  1975 

California  Supreme  Court  1972 


1058 


12.        Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books,  articles, 

reports,  or  other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.  Please  supply  one 
copy  of  all  published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.  Also, 
please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law 
or  legal  policy    If  there  were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily 
available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

Books 

Co-author,  California  Residential  Landlord-Tenant  Practice.  CEB  1986  (Excerpt 
attached  as  Exhibit  "A-1"). 

Sole  author,  Chapter  29  "Selection  of  Tenants,"  California  Residential  Landlord- 
Tenant  Practice.  CEB  1986  (See  copy  attached  as  Exhibit  "A-1"). 

Articles 

"Adopting  an  Educator  Habit  of  Mind:  Modifying  What  It  Means  to  'Think  Like  a 
Lawyer',"  45  Stanford  Law  Review.  1993  (See  copy  attached  as  Exhibit  "A-2"). 

"A  Clash  of  Sentencing  Policies:  Sentencing  Guidelines  Versus  Mandatory 
Minimums,"  State  Bar  of  California.  1993  (See  copy  attached  as  Exhibit  "A-3"). 

"An  Assessment  of  the  California  Drug  Diversion  Program,  CAJC  Forum.  Oct/Nov 
1974  (See  copy  attached  as  Exhibit  "A-4"). 

"Earning  the  Daubert  Seal  of  Approval  for  Expert  Witnesses,"  ABTL  Newsletter, 
1995  (See  copy  attached  as  Exhibit  "A-5"). 

Speeches 

I  often  speak  to  various  community  and  legal  groups  regarding  the  administration 
of  justice.  The  speeches  are  extemporaneous  and  are  not  published.  In  all  speeches,  I 
adhere  to  the  Canons  of  Judicial  Conduct.  Copies  of  formal  speeches  I  have  given  are 
attached  as  Exhibit  "A-6" 


1059 


13.  Health:  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  your  last 
physical  examination. 

Excellent. 

My  last  physical  was  March  28, 1997. 

14.  Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have  held, 
whether  such  position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the 
jurisdiction  of  each  such  court 

From  October  1988  until  October  1990  I  served  as  Judge  of  the  Santa  Clara  County 
Superior  Court  The  California  Superior  Court  is  the  court  of  general  jurisdiction  in  the 
State  of  California. 

In  October,  1990  I  was  appointed  by  President  George  Bush  to  the  position  of 
District  Judge  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Northern  District  of  California. 
The  United  States  District  Court  derives  its  jurisdiction  from  Article  lH  of  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States  to  the  extent  authorized  by  Congress.  The  Congressional  grant  of 
jurisdiction  for  the  District  Court  is  found  in  Title  28  of  the  United  States  Code  Sections 
1331,  1332,  1346,  1367  and  1441.  I  currently  serve  as  a  District  Judge. 


1060 


15.        Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  (1)  citations  for  the  ten  most 
significant  opinions  you  have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate'  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or  where  your  judgment 
was  affirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings; 
and  (3)  citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues, 
together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the 
opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

(1)  The  ten  most  significant  opinions  I  have  written  are  as  follows.  Copies  of  the 
unpublished  opinions  are  attached  as  Exhibits  "B" 

(a)  Earle  v.  State  Farm  Fire  &  Casualty  Company.  935  F.Supp.  1076  (N.D.  Cal.  1996) 

(b)  Yukivo  Ltd.  v.  Shiro  Watanabe.  1996  WL  756803  (N.D.  Cal.  1996)    (See  copy  attached 
as  Exhibit  "B-1") 

(c)  Wiener  v.  NEC  Electronics.  Inc..  1995  WL  429204  (N.D.  Cal.  1995)  (See  copy  attached 
as  Exhibit  "B-2") 

(d)  Bell  Atlantic  Business  Systems  Services.  Inc.  v.  Hitachi  Data  Systems  Corp.. 

1995  WL  798932  (N.D.  Cal.  1995)  (See  copy  attached  as  Exhibit  "B-3") 
1995  WL  798935  (N.D.  Cal.  1995)  (See  copy  attached  as  Exhibit  "B-3") 

(e)  Bell  Atlantic  Business  Systems  Services.  Inc.  v.  Hitachi  Data  Systems  Corp.. 

1995  WL  836331  (N.D.  Cal.  1995)  (See  copy  attached  as  Exhibit  "B-4") 

(0  Engler  v.  City  of  San  Jose  et  al..  1995  WL  767816  (N.D.  Cal.  1995)  (See  copy  attached  as 
Exhibit  "B-5") 

(g)  U.S.  V.  Hopkins.  1996  WL  61152  (N.D.  Cal.  1996);  1996  WL  101195  (N.D.  Cal.  1996) 
(See  copy  attached  as  Exhibit  "B-6") 

(h)  George,  et  al.  v.  UXB  International.  Inc..  1996  WL  241624  (N.D.  Cal.  1996)  (See  copy 
attached  as  Exhibit  "B-7") 

(i)  Wilson  V.  United  States.  1996  WL  297051  (N.D.  Cal.  1996)  (See  copy  attached  as  Exhibit 
"B-8") 

(j)  Nordvke  v.  County  of  Santa  Clara.  933  F.Supp.  903  (N.D.  Cal.  1996) 


10 


1061 


(2)  A  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all  appellate'  opinions  where  my  decisions  were 
reversed  or  where  my  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your  substantive  or 
procedural  rulings  are  as  follows: 

(Copies  of  the  unpublished  opinions  are  attached  as  Exhibits  "C") 

Unless  otherwise  indicated,  citations  are  to  the  Federal  Reporter,  3rd  Series.  Any 
Ninth  Circuit  decision  issued  without  a  published  opinion  is  identified  as  a  "Decision 
Without  Published  Opinion"  and  is  attached  as  an  Exhibit. 

If  the  appeal  was  from  a  written  order  in  a  file  which  is  still  maintained  by  the 
Clerk's  Office,  I  have  also  included  a  copy  of  the  order.  Some  appeals  were  taken  from 
rulings  made  on  the  record  during  trial  or  from  the  entire  trial  record  which  is 
voluminous,  or  from  orders  which  are  no  longer  contained  in  the  files  of  the  Clerk  of 
Court.  Trial  records  not  maintained  are  archived  at  the  Federal  Records  Center.  I  am  in 
the  process  of  obtaining  the  records  archived  from  the  Federal  Records  Center. 

(a)  Yukiyo.  Ltd.  v.  Shiro  Watanabe.  et  al.  No.  97-1115  (Fed.  Cir.  1997)  (  Decision  Without 
Published  Opinion) 

Yukiyo  is  a  multi-district  patent  litigation  action  in  which  Plaintiff  is  the 
assignee  of  a  patent  for  the  fabrication  of  porcelain  restorations.  The 
inventor  named  in  the  patent  is  Dr.  Gerald  McLaughlin.  Plaintiff  filed 
a  series  of  lawsuits  against  various  dental  laboratories  throughout  the 
United  States  alleging  that  the  labs  infringed  the  patent  for  porcelain 
restorations.  Phase  One  of  the  trial,  the  validity  of  the  patent,  was  tried 
before  a  jury.  The  jury  returned  a  verdict  in  favor  of  Plaintiff,  finding 
that  the  patent  was  valid.  On  a  motion  for  judgment  as  a  matter  of  law, 
or  for  a  new  trial,  the  Court  found  that  the  verdict  was  not  supported 
by  the  evidence  in  the  case.  Rather,  the  Court  found  that  the  undisputed 
evidence  at  trial  proved  that  the  patent  was  invalid  because,  prior  to  the 
filing  of  the  patent  application,  articles  were  published  in  professional 
journals  disclosing  the  method  claimed  in  the  patent  for  fabricating 
porcelain  restorations.  Therefore,  the  Court  entered  judgment  in  favor 
of  Defendants.  On  appeal,  the  federal  circuit  determined  that  there  was 
substantial  evidence  to  support  the  jury  findings  and  that  the  Court's 
decision  to  grant  judgment  as  a  matter  of  law  was  improper. 

(See  copies  of  my  order,  as  well  as  the  Federal  Circuit's  order,  attached  as  Exhibits 
"C-1") 

(b)  United  States  v.  Clinton  Watson.  1997  WL  367384  (9th  Cir.  1997) 

(Published  Opinion,  Not  Yet  Available  in  F.3d). 

Defendant  was  tried  and  convicted  by  a  jury  for  cellular  telephone  cloning. 
Prior  to  trial,  the  Court  granted  Defendant's  motion  to  suppress  evidence 


11 


1062 


obtained  by  the  government's  seizure  of  a  safe  Trom  Defendant's  home.  The 

Court  ruled  that  the  safe  had  been  improperly  seized  and  that  neither  the  safe 

nor  its  contents  could  be  used  at  trial.  However,  during  Defendant's  opening 

statement,  reference  was  made  to  the  illegal  seizure  of  the  safe.  Based  on 

such  statement,  the  Court  permitted  the  government  to  question  its  witness  about 

such  seizure.  Although  Defendant's  conviction  was  affirmed  on  appeal,  the 

Court  was  criticized  for  permitting  evidence  regarding  the  seizure  of  the  safe 

to  be  introduced  during  the  government's  case-in-chief,  since  it  found  that 

the  door  had  not  been  opened  by  opening  statement  remarks,  since  such 

remarks  are  not  evidence  in  the  case. 

(See  copy  of  the  Ninth  Circuit  opinion  attached  as  Exhibit  "C-2") 

(c)  Reynolds  v.  Gomez.  108  F.3d  338  (9th  Cir.  1997)  (Decision  Without  Published  Opinion) 

Petitioner  Lee  Anthony  Reynolds  filed  a  habeas  petition,  claiming  that  he 
was  denied  a  fair  trial  because  his  co-defendant  was  shackled  during  various 
portions  of  the  trial.  Petitioner  also  alleged  that  identification  evidence  was 
impermissibly  admitted,  that  details  of  a  prior  robbery  conviction  were 
impermissibly  admitted,  and  that  an  omission  in  the  jury  instructions 
rendered  them  constitutionally  inadequate.  The  district  court  denied  his 
petition.  The  Ninth  Circuit  vacated  the  district  court's  judgment  and 
remanded  the  case  only  as  to  whether  the  shackles  denied  Reynolds  his  right 
to  a  fair  trial. 

(See  copies  of  my  order,  as  well  as  the  Ninth  Circuit's  opinion,  attached  as  Exhibits 
"C-3") 

(d)  Moore  v.  Gerstein.  107  F.3d  16  (9th  Cir.  1996)  pecision  Without  Published  Opinion) 

Pro  se  plaintiff  Judy  Moore  sued  Dr.  Gerstein  under  Section  1983,  alleging 
that  she  had  been  subjected  to  an  unconstitutional  seizure  and  detention  at  a 
mental  treatment  facility  for  48  hours.  The  district  court  dismissed  the  claim 
because  Plaintiff  had  not  alleged  facts  showing  that  Gerstein  "acted  with 
malicious  intent  or  was  grossly  negligent"  in  order  to  overcome  Gerstein's 
entitlement  to  qualified  immunity.  The  Ninth  Circuit  reversed  because  the 
trial  court  had  applied  an  incorrect  standard  for  qualified  immunity,  and 
because  the  defense  of  qualified  immunity  was  not  established  on  the  face  of 
the  complaint. 

(See  copies  of  my  order,  as  well  as  the  Ninth  Circuit's  opinion,  attached  as  Exhibits 
"C-4") 

(e)  Logan  v.  Gomez.  81  F.3d  169  (9th  Cir.  1996)  (Decision  Without  Published  Opinion) 

Logan,  a  California  state  prisoner,  filed  a  petition  for  habeas  corpus  relief, 
asserting  that  his  due  process  rights  were  violated  because  he  was  shackled 
during  his  trial.  The  trial  court  denied  the  petition.  The  Ninth  Circuit  found 

12 


1063 


that  the  shackling  was  prejudicial  and  could  have  tipped  the  balance  in  this 
closely  decided  case.  The  Ninth  Circuit  vacated  and  remanded  the  matter 
for  the  district  court  to  conduct  an  evidentiary  hearing  on  the  petition. 
(See  copies  of  my  order,  as  well  as  the  Ninth  Circuit's  opinion,  attached  as  Exhibits 
"C-5") 

(0  Kimes  v.  Stone.  84  F.3d  1121  (9th  Cir.  1996) 

Plaintiffs  brought  a  Section  1983  action  against  a  superior  court  judge  and 
several  attorneys.  Plaintiffs  alleged  that  the  defendants  conspired  against 
them  to  "overturn"  a  jury  verdict,  thus  depriving  plaintiffs,  without  due 
process  of  law,  of  property  they  would  have  otherwise  received  from  their 
father's  estate.  The  trial  court  granted  defendants'  motion  to  dismiss, 
relying  on  Cal.  Civ.  Code  §  47(b),  which  immunizes  parties  involved  in 
litigation  from  civil  liabilities  for  communications  made  in  the  course  of  that 
litigation.  The  Ninth  Circuit  affirmed  the  trial  court's  dismissal  in  favor  of 
defendant  Judge  Stone  and  reversed  the  dismissal  in  favor  of  the  attorney 
defendants.  The  Ninth  Circuit  reasoned  that  conduct  by  persons  acting 
under  color  of  state  law  which  is  wrongful  under  Section  1983  cannot  be 
immunized  by  state  law. 
(See  copy  of  my  order  attached  as  Exhibit  "C-6") 

(g)  United  States  v.  Mallorv.  No.  95-10352,  (9th  Cir.  1996)  (No  Published  Opinion) 

Defendant  pled  guilty  to  conspiracy  to  manufacture  methamphetamine  and 
for  carrying  an  altered  firearm  in  the  commission  of  a  conspiracy  to 
manufacture  methamphetamine.  The  trial  court  accepted  the  guilty  plea, 
but  deferred  deciding  whether  to  accept  the  plea  agreement  until  a  later  date. 
Subsequently,  Defendant  filed  a  motion  to  withdraw  his  guilty  plea  and  a 
motion  to  dismiss  the  superseding  indictment.  The  trial  court  denied  the 
motions,  accepted  the  guilty  plea,  and  sentenced  Defendant  to  288  months 
imprisonment.  The  Ninth  Circuit  held  that  the  trial  court  abused  its  "* 

discretion  in  denying  Defendant's  motions,  and  accordingly  reversed  the 
Defendant's  convictions  and  remanded  the  matter  to  the  trial  court  so  that 
Defendant  could  enter  a  new  plea. 

(See  copies  of  my  order,  as  well  as  the  Ninth  Circuit's  opinion  attached  as  Exhibits 
"C-7") 

(h)  IBM  V.  Zachariades  et  al.  70  F.3d  1278  (9th  Cir.  1995)  (Decision  Without  Published 
Opinion) 

IBM  sued  Dr.  Zachariades  for  breach  of  an  employment  agreement, 
contending  that  he  wrongfully  refused  to  assign  seven  patents  to  IBM.  On 
summary  judgment,  the  trial  court  held  that  IBM's  claims  were  time  barred 
because  the  statute  of  limitations  for  all  of  IBM's  claims  commenced  with  the 
issuance  of  the  first  of  the  patents-in-suit  in  May  1986.  The  Ninth  Circuit 


13 


1064 


held  that  a  separate  limitations  period  began  to  run  upon  the  issuance  of 
each  patent  to  Zachariades. 

(See  copies  of  my  order,  as  well  as  the  Ninth  Circuit's  opinion,  attached  as  Exhibit 
"C-8") 

(i)  Jensen  v.  County  of  Santa  Clara.  69  F.3d  544  (9th  Cir.  1995)  (Decision  Without 
Published  Opinion) 

Plaintiff  sought  damages  from  the  County  and  Instar  Pest  Consultant  for 
injuries  allegedly  resulting  from  pesticide  exposure  in  the  work  place.  The 
district  court  dismissed  PlaintifTs  eighteen  personal  injury  claims  against 
Instar  as  time-barred  by  California's  one-year  statute  of  limitations  for 
personal  injury  actions,  California  Civil  Procedure  Code  Section  340(3).  On 
appeal,  the  Ninth  Circuit  reversed,  holding  that  Plaintiffs  personal  injury 
claims  were  not  time  barred  because  her  complaint  was  filed  within  one  year 
from  the  time  she  discovered  the  cause  of  her  injury. 

(See  copies  of  my  order,  as  well  as  the  Ninth  Circuit's  opinion,  attached  as  Exhibits 
"C-9") 

G)  U.S.  Fidelity  &  Guaranty  Co.  v.  Riggs.  51  F.3d  284  (9th  Cir.  1995)  (Decision  Without 
Published  Opinion) 

Defendant  Mr.  Riggs  was  found  to  be  negligent  as  an  architect  in  this 
insurance  contribution  action.  The  Ninth  Circuit  reversed  judgment  and 
remanded  the  matter  to  the  district  court  for  further  proceedings  to  allocate 
responsibility  between  Mr.  Riggs  in  his  capacity  as  a  homeowner  and  Mr. 
Riggs  as  an  architect.  The  matter  was  also  remanded  for  a  determination  of 
reasonable  attorney's  fees. 

(See  copies  of  my  order,  as  well  as  the  Ninth  Circuit's  opinion,  attached  as  Exhibits 
"C-10") 

(k)  Bud  Antle.  Inc.  v.  Barbosa.  45  F.3d  1261  (9th  Cir.  1994) 

Bud  Antle,  Inc.  ("Bud  Antle")  sued  the  members  and  executive  secretary  of 
the  California  Agricultural  Labor  Relations  Board  ("ALRB"),  claiming  that 
the  National  Labor  Relation  Act  ("NLRA")  ousts  the  ALRB  of  jurisdiction  to 
adjudicate  various  unfair  labor  practice  charges  which  were  pending  before 
the  state  board  at  the  time.  Bud  Antle  sought  injunctive  relief  to  prohibit  the 
ALRB  from  continuing  its  proceedings.  The  district  court  concluded  that  the 
NLRA  did  not  preempt  ALRB's  jurisdiction  over  the  charges.  The  district 
court  also  held  that  it  was  required  to  abstain  pursuant  to  Younger  v.  Harris. 
401  U.S.  37,  91  S.Ct.  746,  27  L.Ed.  669  (1971).  The  Ninth  Circuit  reversed, 
reasoning  that  the  "Garmon  preemption,"  named  for  San  Diego  Building 
Trades  Council  v.  Garmon.  359  U.S.  236,  79  S.Ct.  773,  3  L.Ed.2d  775  (1959), 
preserved  the  primary  jurisdiction  of  the  NLRB  by  prohibiting  the  states 
from  regulating  activities  that  are  at  least  arguably  protected  by  §7  of  the 


14 


1065 


NLRA  or  arguably  prohibited  by  §8  of  that  statute.  Accordingly,  the  Ninth 
Circuit  also  held  that  the  second  prong  of  the  Younger  doctrine  test,  that  the 
state  proceedings  implicate  important  state  interests,  was  not  met. 
(See  copy  of  my  order  attached  as  Exhibit  "C-11") 

(1)  Berg  V.  Leason.  32  F.3d  422  (9th  Cir.  1994) 

After  successfully  defending  himself  in  a  federal  court  action  alleging 
violations  of  federal  securities  and  racketeering  laws.  Berg  brought  a 
malicious  prosecution  action  in  state  court.  Defendant  removed  the  action  to 
federal  court  on  the  basis  of  federal  question  jurisdiction.  The  district  court 
declined  to  remand  the  case.  The  Ninth  Circuit  reversed,  holding  that  a 
malicious  prosecution  claim  did  not  arise  under  federal  law  simply  because 
one  element  required  proof  that  the  underlying  federal  action  was  legally 
untenable. 

The  files  of  the  Clerk's  Office  containing  the  underlying  record  have  been 
archived.  Therefore,  no  copy  of  my  order  is  attached  at  this  time.  Once  the 
records  have  been  retrieved  from  the  Federal  Records  Center,  I  will  submit  a 
copy  of  this  order. 

(m)  Kanemoto  v.  Reno.  41  F.3d  641  (Fed.  Cir.  1994) 

Kanemoto,  a  United  States  citizen  of  Japanese  ancestry,  appealed  to  the 
district  court  the  Office  of  Redress  Administration's  denial  of  her  claim  for 
restitution.  The  government  moved  to  dismiss  the  complaint  or  transfer  the 
case  to  the  Court  of  Federal  Claims,  contending  that  because  Kanemoto 
sought  monetary  damages  from  the  United  States  in  excess  of  510,000,  the 
Tucker  Act,  28  U.S.C.  §1491,  precluded  jurisdiction  in  the  district  court.  In 
pertinent  part,  the  trial  court  denied  the  government's  motion  to  transfer 
reasoning  that  Kanemoto  did  not  seek  "monetary  damages,"  but  rather 
"reparation  payments"  incidental  to  her  claim  for  equitable  relief.  On 
appeal,  the  Ninth  Circuit  reversed,  holding  that  a  case  which  seeks 
reparation  payments  falls  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  Federal 
Claims  under  the  Tucker  Act. 
(See  copy  of  my  order  attached  as  Exhibit  "C-12") 

(n)  United  States  v.  Saldana.  12  F.3d  160  (9th  Cir.  1993) 

The  Government  and  Saldana  entered  into  a  plea  agreement  providing  that 
Saldana  would  plead  guilty  to  three  charges  of  cocaine  distribution,  and  in 
exchange,  the  Government  would  move  to  dismiss  the  twelve  remaining 
charges  for  food  stamp  fraud.  The  plea  agreement  also  required  Saldana  to 
stipulate  to  certain  facts  for  purposes  of  the  sentencing  guidelines.  The 
presentence  report  calculated  a  base  offense  level  of  twelve  and  a  two  level 
reduction  for  Saldana's  acceptance  of  responsibility,  for  a  total  offense  level 
of  ten.  The  Government  challenged  the  presentence  report  for  disregarding 

15 


1066 


the  twelve  food  stamp  counts  in  calculating  the  base  ofTense  level.  The 
district  court  held  that  it  had  the  discretion  to  decide  whether  it  would  take 
into  consideration  the  stipulated  food  stamp  counts  in  determining  the 
offense  level,  and  it  declined  to  do  so.  The  Ninth  Circuit  vacated  the  district 
court's  decision  and  remanded  for  resentencing  of  Saldana,  holding  that  the 
trial  court  had  an  obligation  under  the  Sentencing  Guidelines  to  consider  the 
stipulated  facts  establishing  the  food  stamp  fraud  offenses  in  determining  the 
base  offense  level. 

The  files  of  the  Clerk's  Office  containing  the  underlying  record  have  been 
archived.  Therefore,  no  copy  of  my  order  is  attached  at  this  time.  Once  the 
records  have  been  retrieved  from  the  Federal  Records  Center,  I  will  submit  a 
copy  of  this  order. 

(o)  Murphy  v.  T.  Rowe  Price  Prime  Reserve  Fund  et  al.  8  F.3d  1420  (9th  Cir.  1993) 

Plaintiff,  the  executor  of  an  account  holder's  estate,  sued  the  defendant 
investment  company  for  the  interest  accrued  on  funds  from  an  uncashed 
check  issued  to  close  out  the  account.  One  of  the  plaintiffs  theories  for 
recovery  was  that  the  investment  company  was  bound  by  an  oral  agreement 
to  return  all  but  18  percent  of  the  interest.  The  investment  company 
countered  that  the  purported  agreement  was  unenforceable  for  lack  of 
consideration  because  the  company  had  a  clear  statutory  right  to  retain  the 
interest.  Without  deciding  whether  there  had  in  fact  been  an  oral  agreement, 
the  district  court  held  that  Plaintiffs  claims  were  legally  invalid  and 
therefore  did  not  constitute  consideration  for  the  alleged  oral  agreement. 

The  Ninth  Circuit  reversed,  reasoning  that  the  district  court  erred  in 
equating  the  potential  validity  of  the  Plaintiffs  claim  ex  ante  with  its  own  ex 
post  conclusion  as  to  the  merits  of  the  claim.  Further,  the  Court  held  that 
under  California  law,  a  relinquishment  of  a  colorable  claim  constitutes  valid 
consideration;  that  Plaintiffs  claim  was  colorable;  and  therefore,  the 
agreement  was  not  completely  invalid. 
(See  copy  of  my  order  attached  as  Exhibit  "C-13") 

(p)  United  States  v.  $434.097.70  In  U.S.  Currencv.  1  F.3d  1247  (9th  Cir.  1993)  (Decision 
Without  Published  Opinion) 

In  this  civil  asset  forfeiture  proceeding,  the  Ninth  Circuit  held  that  the  trial 
court  erred  in  its  application  of  the  doctrine  of  issue  preclusion. 

In  the  first  forfeiture  proceeding,  the  district  court  found  probable  cause  to 
forfeit  the  cash  and  an  automobile  seized  from  a  drug  dealer  named  Michael 
Miroyan.  The  decision  was  appealed,  and  the  Ninth  Circuit  held  that  the 
district  court  had  improperly  exercised  in  rem  jurisdiction  over  the  cash 
because  the  cash  had  already  been  the  subject  of  state  forfeiture  proceedings. 
On  the  merits,  the  Ninth  Circuit  upheld  the  district  court's  finding  of 
probable  cause  for  the  forfeiture  of  the  automobile.  After  the  appeal,  the 

16 


1067 


United  States  re-filed  the  forfeiture  action  against  the  cash.  The  district 
court  ruled  in  favor  of  the  government's  motion  for  summary  judgment  on 
the  grounds  that  Miroyan  had  already  had  a  "full  and  fair"  opportunity  to 
litigate  the  issue  of  probable  cause  in  the  first  forfeiture  action.  The  Ninth 
Circuit  reversed. 
(See  copy  of  the  Ninth  Circuit's  opinion  attached  as  Exhibit  "C-14") 

The  files  of  the  Clerk's  Office  containing  the  underlying  record  have  been 
archived.  Therefore,  no  copy  of  my  order  is  attached  at  this  time.  Once  the 
records  have  been  retrieved  from  the  Federal  Records  Center,  I  will  submit  a 
copy  of  this  order. 

(q)  Martin  by  and  through  Martin  v.  United  States.  984  F.2d  1033  (9th  Cir.  1993) 

Jennifer  Martin  was  abducted  and  raped  while  on  an  outing  from  a  day  care 
center  operated  by  the  government.  Her  claim  for  negligent  supervision 
went  to  trial  and  she  was  awarded  S200,000  in  economic  damages  and 
S600,000  in  non-economic  damages.  On  appeal,  the  government  argued  that 
the  trial  court  incorrectly  determined  that  California  Civil  Code  Section 
1431.2(a),  which  mandates  apportionment  of  non-economic  damages,  does 
not  apply  to  actions  where  one  tortfeasor  is  intentional  and  the  other  is 
negligent.  The  Ninth  Circuit  reversed,  holding  that  Section  1431.2(a)  applied 
to  any  personal  injury  action. 
(See  copy  of  my  order  attached  as  Exhibit  "C-15") 

(r)  Payne  v.  Robert  Borg.  Warden.  982  F.2d  335  (9th  Cir.  1992) 

Petitioner  Payne  was  found  guilty  in  state  court  of  first  degree  murder  and  of 
a  special  circumstance  that  the  murder  was  committed  during  the  course  of  a 
burglary.  Payne  filed  a  petition  for  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  contesting  only 
the  validity  of  the  special  circumstance  finding,  which  resulted  in  a  sentence 
of  life  imprisonment  without  the  possibility  of  parole.  The  district  court 
granted  habeas  relief,  finding  that  there  was  insufficient  evidence  to  prove, 
beyond  a  reasonable  doubt,  that  Payne  had  the  necessary  intent  to  support 
his  special  circumstance  conviction.  The  Ninth  Circuit  reversed. 

The  files  of  the  Clerk's  Office  containing  the  underlying  record  have  been 
archived.  Therefore,  no  copy  of  my  order  is  attached  at  this  time.  Once  the 
records  have  been  retrieved  from  the  Federal  Records  Center,  I  will  submit  a 
copy  of  this  order. 


(s)  Atari  Corporation  v.  Ernest  &  Whinnv.  981  F.2d  1025  (9th  Cir.  1992) 

Atari  initiated  a  plan  to  acquire  Federated.  Atari's  chief  financial  officer, 
Greg  Pratt,  attempted  to  evaluate  Federated's  finances  and  came  to  the 
belief  that  Federated's  assets  were  overstated.  Even  so,  Pratt  was  not  sure  of 
this  fact  without  an  audit  and,  therefore,  he  proceeded  with  the  deal.  After 

17 


1068 


the  deal  was  closed  the  results  of  Coopers  and  Lybrand's  audit  were  released 
identifying  adjustments  of  S43  million  dollars,  resulting  in  a  reduction  of 
Federated's  net  worth  by  S33  million.  Atari  sued  Federated's  auditors  for 
violations  of  RICO.  The  district  court  ruled  that  the  indemnification 
provision  of  the  parties'  agreement  did  not  provide  for  indemnification  for 
expenses  arising  out  of  an  action  brought  by  Atari,  but  only  for 
indemnification  for  suits  brought  by  third  parties.  The  Ninth  Circuit 
reversed. 

The  files  of  the  Clerk's  Office  containing  the  underlying  record  have  been 
archived.  Therefore,  no  copy  of  my  order  is  attached  at  this  time.  Once  the 
records  have  been  retrieved  from  the  Federal  Records  Center,  I  will  submit  a 
copy  of  this  order. 


18 


1069 


15(3).  Citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues,  together  with 
the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions  are  as  follows: 

(a)  Nordyke  v.  County  of  Santa  Clara.  933  F.  Supp.  903  (N.D.  Cal.  1996);  110  F.3d  707 
(1997) 

(b)  Wilson  V.  United  States.et  al..  1996  WL  297051  (N.D.  Cal.  May  31,  1996);  1995  WL 
77506  (N.D.  Cal.  1995);  878  F.  Supp.  1324  (N.D.  Cal.  1995)  (See  copies  of  my  unpublished 
decisions  attached  as  Exhibit  "B-8");  60  F.3d  1411  (9th  Cir.  1995) 

(c)  George  v.  UXB  International.  Inc..  1996  WL  241624  (N.D.  Cal.  1996)  (See  copy 
attached  as  Exhibit  "B-7") 

(d)  United  States  v.  Hopkins.  1996  WL  101195  (N.D.  Cal.  1996);  1996  WL  61152  (N.D. 
Cal.  1996)  (See  copies  attached  as  Exhibit  "B-6") 

(e)  Engler  v.  City  of  San  Jose.  1995  WL  767816  (N.D.  Cal.  1995)  (See  copy  attached  as 
Exhibit  "B-5") 

(0    Helmet  Law  Defense  League  v.  State  of  California.  1996  WL  297038  (N.D.  Cal.  1996) 
(See  copy  attached  as  Exhibit  "B-9") 

(g)    Hunter  v.  Vasquez.  1995  WL  429242  (N.D.  Cal.  1995)  (See  copy  attached  as  Exhibit 
"B-10") 

(h)  Choice  Hotels  International.  Inc.  v.  Patel.  1994  WL  706270  (N.D.  Cal.  1994);  1994  WL 
621668  (N.D.  Cal.  1994)  (See  copies  attached  as  Exhibit  "B-11") 

(i)  Ridgewav  v.  Flagstar  Corp..  1994  WL  665243  (N.D.  Cal.  1994);  1994  WL  665414  (N.D. 
Cal.  1994);  1994  WL  665250  (N.D.  Cal.  1994);  1994  WL  564571  (N.D.  Cal.  1994);  1994  WL 
525553  (N.D.  Cal.  1994)  (See  copies  attached  as  Exhibit  "B-12") 

(j)    Yin  V.  State  of  California.  1994  WL  594043,  5  NDLR  P  470  (N.D.  Cal.  1994)  (See  copy 
attached  as  Exhibit  "B-13");  95  F.3d  864  (1996) 

(k)  Nanut  v.  Kimberly-Clark  Corp..  1994  WL  570561  (N.D.  Cal.  1994)  (See  copy  of  my 
unpublished  decision  attached  as  Exhibit  "B-14");  1996  WL  344607  (9th  Cir.  1996)  (See 
copy  of  the  Ninth  Circuit  opinion  attached  as  Exhibit  "B-15") 

(I)    Mission  Oaks  Mobile  Home  Park  v.  City  of  Hollister.  788  F.  Supp.  1117  (N.D.  Cal. 
1992);  989  F.2d  359  (1993) 


19 


1070 


16.        Public  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  public-offices  you  have  held,  other 
than  judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions 
were  elected  or  appointed    State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies 
for  elective  public  office. 

Other  than  judicial  ofTice,  I  have  held  no  elected  public  ofTices.  From  1983  until 
1988  I  was  a  Notary  Public  of  the  State  of  California.  Notary  Publics  are  appointed  by  the 
Secretary  of  State  of  the  State  of  California.  I  did  not  renew  my  commission  after  I  was 
appointed  Judge  of  the  Santa  Clara  County  Superior  Court. 

I  have  not  been  an  unsuccessful  candidate  for  elective  public  office. 

17        Legal  Career: 

a.  Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after 

graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name 
of  the  judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were 
a  clerk; 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and 
dates; 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices, 
companies  or  governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have 
been  connected,  and  the  nature  of  your  connection  with 
each. 

After  graduating  from  law  school  and  fulfilling  my  active  duty  military 
requirement,  I  became  an  associate  attorney  with  the  law  firm  of  Blase,  Valentine  &  Klein, 
a  Palo  Alto  law  firm  which  was  founded  in  1965.  I  joined  the  firm  as  an  associate  in 
December  1972.  I  became  a  partner  in  January  1977.  I  remained  with  the  firm  until  my 
appointment  to  the  Superior  Court  in  November  1988.  At  some  time  after  I  left  the  firm 
and  after  the  firm's  senior  partner  retired,  the  firm  changed  its  name  to  Ritchey,  Fisher, 
Whitman  &  Klein.  The  current  address  of  the  law  firm  is: 

Ritchey,  Fisher,  Whitman  &  Klein 
A  Professional  Corporation 
1717  Embarcadero  Road 
Palo  Alto,  California  95050 


1.  What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law 

practice,  dividing  it  into  periods  with  dates  if  its 
character  has  changed  over  the  years? 


20 


1071 


2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention 

the  areas,  if  any,  in  which  you  have  specialized. 

My  practice  involved  significant  in-court  experience  in  federal  and  state  courts, 
primarily  in  Northern  California.  I  also  handled  major  commercial  arbitrations  and 
mediations,  as  well  as  other  alternative  methods  of  dispute  resolution.  I  represented 
individuals,  partnerships  and  publicly  traded  and  privately  held  corporations  in  a  wide 
variety  of  business  litigation  matters. 

I  gained  significant  experience  in  handling  intellectual  property  and  unfair 
competition  cases  (representing  both  employers  and  former  employees),  wrongful 
termination  of  employment  cases  (also  representing  both  employers  and  former 
employees),  construction  disputes,  breach  of  warranty  cases,  and  partnership  and 
corporate  dissolution  disputes.  My  legal  work  in  technical  fields  included  cases  of  license 
termination  and  royalty  disputes,  semiconductor  and  computer  trade  secret  disputes,  and 
the  professional  liability  defense  of  architects,  engineers  and  geologists. 

During  the  first  seven  years  of  my  practice  (1973-1980),  criminal  defense,  involving 
felonies  and  misdemeanors,  comprised  approximately  one-third  of  my  caseload.  Most  of 
the  criminal  cases  were  assigned  to  my  ofTice  through  the  San  Mateo  County  Bar 
Association  Private  Defender  Program.  An  illustrative  case  was  People  v.  Haysbert.  a 
defendant  convicted  of  possession  of  a  large  quantity  of  cocaine  for  distribution.  I  was  sole 
defense  counsel.  The  case  was  tried  before  a  jury.  Judge  Robert  E.  Carey,  San  Mateo 
County  Superior  Court,  presiding.  Haysbert  was  convicted. 

Although  the  primary  nature  of  my  practice  was  business  litigation,  I  represented 
plaintiffs  in  civil  rights  cases  on  a  pro  bono  basis. 

c.  1.  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or 

not  at  all?  If  the  frequency  of  your  appearances  in 
court  varied,  describe  each  such  variance,  giving 
dates. 

I  appeared  in  court  on  a  regular  basis.  During  the  early  years  of  my  practice,  it  was 
not  uncommon  for  me  to  try  several  cases  during  any  given  year.  During  the  last  half  of 
my  practice,  the  complexity  of  the  cases  led  to  fewer  trials. 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts;  30% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record,      70%  ^^.^^ 

(c)  other  courts.  0% 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigatn 

(a)  civil,  90% 

(b)  criminal.  10% 


21 


1072 


4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you 

tried  to  verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than  settled), 
indicating  whether  you  were  sole  counsel,  chief 
counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

During  the  course  of  my  sixteen  years  of  practice,  I  tried  approximately  IS  cases  to 
verdict  or  judgment. 

I  tried  12  cases  to  verdict  or  judgment  as  sole  counsel 

I  tried  1  case  to  verdict  as  chief  counsel 

I  tried  2  cases  to  verdict  as  associate  counsel 


What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury;  40% 

(b)  non-jury.  60% 


18.        Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you 

personally  handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket 
number  and  date  if  unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the-substance  of  each 
case.   Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you  represented,  describe  in  detail  the 
nature  of  your  Participation  In  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case. 
Also  state  as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before 
whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  The  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co- 
counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 


22 


1073 


CASE  No.  1:  Mary  Sullivan.  M.D.  v.  The  Sequoia  Hospital  District 

COURT:  United  States  District  Court  for  the 

Northern  District  of  California 

CITATION:  [Unreported,  Docket  No.  C  87-5127  SC] 

JUDGE:  Honorable  Samuel  Conti 

450  Golden  Gate  Avenue 
San  Francisco,  California  94102 
(415)  522-2077 

CLIENT:  Anesthesiologist  Group  of  Sequoia  Hospital 

I  served  as  lead  counsel. 


ASSOCIATE 
COUNSEL: 


James  Wagstaffe 

Cooper,  White  &  Cooper 

201  California  Street 

San  Francisco,  California  94111 

(415) 433-1900 


OPPOSING 
COUNSEL: 


DATE: 


Clyde  Butts 

1225  Alpine  Road,  Suite  204 
Walnut  Creek,  CA  94696 
(415)  943-1850 

1987-88 


DESCRIPTION: 

I  represented  a  group  of  anesthesiologists  who  were  members  of  the  medical  staff  at 
Sequoia  Hospital.  My  clients  were  sued  by  Dr.  Sullivan,  another  anesthesiologist  on  the 
hospital  staff.  Dr.  Sullivan  claimed  that  my  clients  and  the  Sequoia  Hospital,  which  she 
also  sued,  conspired  to  restrict  her  privileges.  She  claimed  that  the  restrictions  were 
imposed  to  restrict  competition  by  physicians  who  were  not  members  of  the  medical  group, 
in  violation  of  federal  and  state  antitrust  and  civil  rights. 

I  was  a  key  draftsman  and  strategist  in  a  motion  for  summary  judgment  to  dispose 
of  the  case  prior  to  trial.  The  joint  defense  motion  demonstrated  that  the  restrictions  about 
which  Dr.  Sullivan  complained  were  placed  upon  her  by  a  Medical  Review  Board,  which 
determined  that  the  restrictions  were  appropriate  after  two  life-threatening  incidents 
occurred  involving  patients  of  Dr.  Sullivan.  The  case  required  the  Court  to  resolve 
whether  physicians  taking  actions  pursuant  to  medical  review  proceedings  enjoyed  a 
qualified  privilege  against  the  type  of  claims  brought  by  Dr.  Sullivan. 

Judge  Conti  granted  judgment  was  entered  in  favor  of  all  defendants. 


23 


CASE  No.  2: 

COURT: 

CITATION: 

JUDGE: 

OPPOSING 
COUNSEL: 


CLIENT: 


DATE: 


1074 

Ampex  V.  Tandon  Corporation 
Santa  Clara  County  Superior  Court 
[Unreported  -  Docket  No.  557299] 
Honorable  Peter  Anello  (now  deceased) 


James  N.  Penrod 

B.  Thomas  French 

Hassard,  Bonnington,  Rogers  &  Huber 

50  Fremont  Street,  Suite  3400 

San  Francisco,  CA  94105 

(415)  543-6444 

William  C.  Morison-Knox 
Pillsbury,  Madison  &  Sutro 
P.O.  7880 

San  Francisco,  CA  94120 
(415)  983-1000 

Tandon  Corporation 
I  served  as  lead  counsel. 

1984-86 


DESCRIPTION: 

This  was  a  lawsuit  by  Ampex  alleging  that  Tandon  had  infringed  trade  secrets  and 
proprietary  information.  The  alleged  stolen  technology  involved  methods  for  placing  a 
thin  magnetic  layer  on  hard  disks  so  that  these  disks  could  be  used  to  store  information  for 
use  in  computers. 

I  managed  a  team  of  four  attorneys  and  three  paralegals.  To  prepare  for  the  case,  I 
was  required  to  acquire  a  working  knowledge  of  the  technology  for  manufacturing 
computer  "hard  disks,"  the  metallic  media  used  in  "hard  disk  drives"  for  storage  of  data. 
The  case  also  involved  complex  legal  issues  with  respect  to  whether  certain  skills  or 
information  acquired  by  an  engineer  while  working  with  one  employer  could  be  used  by 
the  engineer  while  employed  at  a  subsequent  employer. 

As  a  means  of  settlement,  a  minitrial  was  conducted  before  Judge  Anello  on  the 
issue  of  the  ownership  of  the  technology.  A  ruling  by  Judge  Anello  that  a  substantial 
amount  of  the  disk  coating  skills  and  information,  which  Ampex  claimed  to  be  proprietary, 
was  in  the  public  domain  led  to  a  settlement  of  the  case  favorable  to  Tandon  Corporation. 


24 


CASE  No.  3: 
COURT: 
CITATION: 
JUDGE: 


CLIENT: 


1075 

Daggett  Assembly  v.  Union  Street  Investment  Co. 

San  Francisco  Superior  Court 

[Unreported  -  Docket  No.  Unavailable] 

Honorable  John  Dearman 
San  Francisco  Superior  Court 
633  Folsom  Street 
San  Francisco,  California  94107 
(415)  554-5790 

Daggett  Assembly 

I  served  as  sole  counsel 


OPPOSING 
COUNSEL: 


DATE: 


James  H.  Pooley 

Fish  &  Richardson 

2200  Sand  Hill  Road 

Menlo  Park,  California  94025 

(415)  322-5070 

1982-84 


DESCRIPTION: 

This  was  a  lawsuit  in  which  I  represented  a  general  contractor  in  an  action  against 
the  owner/developer  of  a  San  Francisco  Victorian  building  for  recovery  of  the  balance 
owed  for  construction  fees.  The  case  was  factually  and  legally  complex  because,  in  the 
course  of  the  project,  the  owner  decided  to  restore  the  exterior  of  the  building  so  that  it 
would  be  historically  accurate  but  wished  to  have  an  ultra-modern  interior.  These  changes 
doubled  the  cost  of  construction  and,  because  they  were  made  during  the  period  of 
construction,  they  also  delayed  the  time  of  completion. 

When  the  construction  was  completed,  the  owner  refused  to  pay  the  contractor  and 
asserted  a  SI  million  cross-complaint,  claiming  that  the  delay  had  caused  him  to  miss  a 
"market  window"  and  had  caused  him  to  incur  substantial  interest  expenses. 

The  case  was  tried  to  a  jury,  which  returned  a  full  verdict  for  my  client,  the 
plaintiff.  The  jury  awarded  nothing  to  the  defendant  on  the  cross-complaint. 


25 


CASE  No.  4: 

COURT: 

CITATION: 

JUDGE: 

OPPOSING 
COUNSEL: 


CLIENT: 


DATE: 


1076 

Servamatic  Solar  Systems  v.  Eleanor  Garcia 
Santa  Clara  County  Superior  Court 
[Unreported  -  Docket  No.  Unavailable] 
(Settled  before  assignment  to  a  Judge) 


Richard  GofT 

Heller,  Ehrman,  White  &  McAulifTe 

333  Bush  Street 

San  Francisco,  CA  94104 

(415)  772-6000 

Eleanor  Garcia,  Class  Representative 
I  served  as  sole  counsel  for  the  Class 

1982-84 


DESCRIPTION: 

I  represented  Eleanor  Garcia,  who  had  purchased  a  solar  hot  water  heater  ("solar 
system")  from  Servamatic.  Mrs.  Garcia  refused  to  pay  for  the  solar  system  because  it  did 
not  perform  as  the  salesman  had  represented.  Servamatic  sued  her  in  Municipal  Court  to 
collect.  She  retained  me  to  defend  her.  The  sales  literature  that  she  had  been  given  stated 
that  she  would  experience  energy  cost  savings  that  were  grossly  disproportionate  to  her 
actual  savings.  These  misrepresentations  were  apparently  a  standard  practice  in  all  sales 
by  Servamatic. 

I  removed  the  case  to  Superior  Court  and  filed  a  cross-complaint,  alleging  a  class 
action  against  Servamatic  for  consumer  fraud  in  the  sales  of  solar  systems.  Servamatic 
settled  the  case  on  the  eve  of  a  hearing  on  my  motion  to  certify  the  class.  The  motion 
contained  declarations,  photographs  and  documents  demonstrating  that  Servamatic 
systematically  misrepresented  that  its  system  would  supply  75%  of  a  consumer's  annual 
PG&E  costs  on  a  68-degree  day.  In  fact,  the  test  used  by  Servamatic  to  calculate  this  75% 
savings  was  done  in  the  middle  of  the  Arizona  desert  on  a  99-degree  day. 

Under  the  terms  of  the  settlement,  Servamatic  was  required  to  rebate  to  each 
customer  the  difference  between  the  price  of  the  system  and  its  fair  market  value. 


26 


1077 


CASE  No.  5: 
COURT: 

CITATION: 
JUDGE: 


CLIENT: 


Jenine  Perrignon  et  al.  v.  Bergen  Brunswig  Corp. 

United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Northern  District  of  California 

(1978)  77  FRD  455,  Docket  No.  C  77-0069  CR 

Honorable  Charles  Renfrew  (Now  Retired) 

LeBoef,  Lamb,  Greene  &  MacKae 

1  Embarcadero  Center 

San  Francisco,  California  94111 

(415) 951-1100 

Jenine  Perrignon 

I  served  as  co-counsel 

Lead  Counsel 
Paul  C.  Valentine 
400  Capitol  Mall 
Sacramento,  California  95814 
(916)  449-3948 


OPPOSING 
COUNSEL: 


DATE: 


Howard  R.  Lloyd,  Jr. 
Hoge,  Fenton,  Jones  &  Appel 
60  South  Market  Street 
San  Jose,  CA  95113 
(408)  287-9501 

Chris  A.  Tarkington 

Tarkington,  O'Connor  &  O'Neill 

One  Market  Plaza 

Spear  Street  Tower 

19th  Floor 

San  Francisco,  CA  94105 

(415)  777-5501 

1977-78 


DESCRIPTION: 


I  represented  Mrs.  Perrignon  and  her  daughter  in  an  action  for  violation  of  their 
rights  to  privacy  and  intentional  infliction  of  emotional  distress  by  Mrs.  Perrignon's 
former  employer.  Mrs.  Perrignon's  home  was  burglarized.  She  received  harassing  and 
threatening  telephone  calls  and  her  home  and  office  telephone  lines  were  tapped.  The 
lawsuit  alleged  that  these  acts  were  done  at  the  direction  of  the  defendant  to  discourage 
Mrs.  Perrignon  from  cooperating  with  U.  S.  Senate  investigators.  A  subcommittee  of  the 
Senate  was  investigating  whether  governmental  officials  responsible  for  awarding  contracts 


1078 


for  the  administration  of  Medicare  and  Medicaid  programs  were  being  paid  kickbacks  by 
companies  in  exchange  for  contract  awards.  A  subsidiary  of  Bergen  Brunswig  was  the 
target  of  the  investigation.  Mrs.  Perrignon  was  employed  at  the  Bergen  Brunswig 
subsidiary  and  saw  checks  for  large  amounts  of  money  made  out  to  government  officials. 

The  case  involved  complex  issues  of  federal  and  state  privacy  and  agency  laws.  The 
case  was  tried  to  a  jury.  However,  it  was  settled  favorably  to  my  client,  the  plaintiff,  before 
it  was  submitted  for  decision. 

--0- 

CASE  No.  6:  People  v.  Superior  Court  (Ho) 

COURT:  San  Mateo  County  Superior  Court 

CITATION:  (1974)  1 1  Cal.  3d  59 

JUDGE:  Honorable  Gerald  E.  Ragan 

CLIENT:  Lawrence  Ho 

I  served  as  sole  counsel. 


OPPOSING 
COUNSEL: 


DATE: 
DESCRIPTION: 


Rodney  J.  Blonien 

Office  of  the  California  Attorney  General 

[Mr.  Blonien's  current  business  address] 
Whitman,  Breed,  Abbott  &  Morgan 
1121  L.  Street  No.  507 
Sacramento,  California  95814 
(916)  441-4242 

1973-74 


I  represented  Mr.  Ho,  a  defendant  charged  with  possession  of  drugs.  Since  this  was 
his  first  offense,  he  was  eligible  to  have  his  case  "diverted"  from  the  criminal  justice  system 
under  Penal  Code  Section  1000.2,  a  statute  which  went  into  effect  on  the  day  of  Mr.  Ho's 
arrest.  Under  the  program,  first  offenders  would  be  placed  on  pre-trial  probation  for  a 
period  of  time.  If  they  successfully  completed  the  program,  the  charges  would  be  expunged 
and  they  would  be  treated  as  if  no  criminal  charges  had  been  brought  against  them. 

I  requested  the  court  to  admit  Mr.  Ho  to  the  diversion  program.  The  court  decided 
to  grant  my  motion.  However,  the  statute  gave  the  prosecutor  the  power  to  veto  the 
judge's  decision.  When  the  prosecutor  vetoed  the  diversion,  I  argued  that  the  provisions 
allowing  a  prosecutorial  veto  were  unconstitutional  as  a  violation  of  the  separation  of 
powers  provision  of  the  California  Constitution.  The  trial  judge  agreed  with  my  argument 

28 


1079 


and  ordered  diversion.  The  prosecutor  appealed. 

The  case  was  appealed  to  the  California  Court  of  Appeal.  However,  because  the 
case  involved  an  important  issue  of  California  constitutional  law,  it  was  taken  for  hearing 
by  the  California  Supreme  Court.  I  argued  the  case  on  appeal  to  the  California  Supreme 
Court.  The  Supreme  Court  sustained  my  argument  that  once  the  prosecutor  has  exercised 
the  prosecutor's  discretion  to  charge  an  offense,  all  proceedings  with  respect  to  disposition 
of  the  case  are  judicial  in  nature  and  may  not  be  made  the  subject  of  a  prosecutorial  veto. 
The  California  Supreme  Court  declared  unconstitutional  those  provisions  of  Section  1000.2 
giving  the  prosecutor  a  veto.  (The  statute  was  subsequently  amended  by  the  California 
Legislature  to  delete  the  unconstitutional  provision.) 

-0- 

CASE  No.  7:  Jupiter  Engineering  v.  Union  Carbide 

COURT:  San  Mateo  County  Superior  Court 

CITATION:  [Unreported;  Docket  No.  1  Civ.  49045] 

JUDGE:  Honorable  G.  Brooks  Ice  (Retired) 

CLIENT:  Union  Carbide  Corporation 

I  served  as  lead  counsel. 


OPPOSING 
COUNSEL: 


DATE: 


Vincent  P.  Finigan 

Brobeck,  Phleger  &  Harrison 

One  Market  Plaza  Spear  Street  Tower 

San  Francisco,  CA  94105 

(415) 442-0900 

1979-80 


DESCRIPTION: 

Jupiter  Engineering  sued  Union  Carbide  for  damages  resulting  from  an  allegedly 
defective  railroad  carload  of  defective  thermoplastic  resin  called  "polysulfone."  Jupiter 
used  the  polysulfone  resin  to  manufacture  plastic  coffee-makers.  Jupiter  claimed  that 
defects  in  the  polysulfone  caused  coffee  makers  to  delaminate  and  fail  during  use.  Jupiter 
claimed  that  in  one  instance  the  delamination  caused  a  short-circuit  in  the  electrical  system 
in  the  coffee  maker,  which  caused  it  to  overheat  and  caused  an  oflice  fire. 

On  behalf  of  Union  Carbide,  we  filed  a  cross-complaint  for  recovery  of  the  price  of 
the  product.  By  tracing  the  batch  numbers  to  other  customers  who  purchased  this 
particular  polysulfone  and  through  expert  analysis  of  retained  samples,  we  proved  that  the 
resin  was  not  defective.  We  showed  that  delamination  of  the  coffee-makers  was  caused  by 


29 


1080 


an  aerosol  spray  used  by  Jupiter  to  prevent  the  molded  parts  from  sticking  to  the  injection 
molding  machine.  Union  Carbide  had  supplied  Jupiter  and  its  other  customers  with  a 
warning  against  use  of  this  particular  mold  release  spray.  The  case  was  tried  for  two  weeks 
before  a  jury,  which  returned  a  defense  verdict. 

I  also  represented  Union  Carbide  on  an  appeal  by  Jupiter  to  the  1st  Appellate 
District,  Division  4,  No.  I  CFV  49045.  The  judgment  was  sustained  in  all  respects. 

-0- 

CASE  No.  8:  Julius  and  Hertha  Kessler  v.  Las  Hadas  Apartments 

COURT:  United  States  District  Court  for  the 

Northern  District  of  California 

CITATION:  [Unreported,  Docket  No.  C  80-3716  SW] 

JUDGE:  Honorable  Spencer  Williams 

280  South  First  Street 
San  Jose,  California  95113 
(408)  535-5355 

CLIENTS:  Julius  and  Hertha  Kessler 

I  served  as  sole  counsel. 


OPPOSING 
COUNSEL: 


DATE: 


Bronson,  Bronson  &  McKinnon 
Bank  of  America  Center 
555  California  Street 
San  Francisco,  CA  94104 
(415)  986-4200 

1975-76 


DESCRIPTION: 

The  Kesslers,  who  are  Jewish,  were  tenants  in  the  Las  Hadas  Apartments.  The 
owners  hired  a  new  manager.  Coincidental  to  the  hiring  of  the  new  manager,  the  Kesslers 
started  to  experience  harassment.  They  were  told  that  their  minor  great  grandson  could 
not  stay  overnight  in  their  apartment,  a  restriction  which  was  not  placed  on  other  tenants. 
Furthermore,  their  complaints  about  broken  fixtures  were  ignored.  One  day,  when  they 
were  at  the  pool  in  the  apartment  complex  with  their  great  grandson,  the  manager  ordered 
the  child  out  of  the  pool.  When  the  Kesslers  questioned  the  manager,  she  told  them  that 
the  hours  for  children  in  the  pool  had  been  changed  to  Saturdays  only.  When  Mr.  Kessler 
protested  the  new  rule,  words  were  exchanged  with  the  manager,  who  said  that  she  wished 
Mr.  Kessler  had  been  killed  in  a  gas  chamber.  This  caused  Mr.  Kessler,  an  immigrant 
from  Poland  and  an  internee  in  a  concentration  camp,  and  his  wife  to  suffer  emotional 


30 


1081 


distress. 

Believing  that  they  were  being  discriminated  on  the  basis  of  their  religion  and 
ethnicity,  the  Kesslers  complained  to  a  nonprofit  fair  housing  agency.  The  agency  sent 
"testers"  to  the  apartment,  posing  as  potential  tenants.  Black,  Jewish  and  white  testers 
investigated  the  practices  at  the  apartment  complex.  The  differential  treatment  of  the 
testers  led  the  agency  to  conclude  that  the  complex  treated  white  apartment-seekers 
differently  from  black  and  Jewish  apartment-seekers.  The  case  was  referred  to  me  as  a 
volunteer  attorney. 

On  behalf  of  the  Kesslers,  I  filed  an  action  in  the  district  court  claiming  a  violation 
of  the  1968  Civil  Rights  Act  by  Las  Hadas  Apartments.  Judge  Williams  refused  to  allow 
the  testimony  of  the  testers  on  the  ground  that  treatment  of  prospective  apartment-seekers 
was  not  relevant  to  alleged  discriminatory  treatment  of  existing  tenants.  The  jury  returned 
a  verdict  in  favor  of  the  defendants. 

I  represented  the  Kesslers  on  appeal  from  the  judgment  on  the  ground  that  it  was 
error  for  the  trial  court  to  refuse  to  permit  the  fair  housing  testers  to  testify.  The  case  was 
settled  by  a  consent  decree  under  which  Las  Hadas  agreed  to  eliminate  the  rules  which 
were  the  source  of  the  conflict,  and  the  appeal  was  dismissed. 

-0~ 

CASE  No.  9:  Rainer  Schuiz  v.  Computer  Curriculum  Partnership 

COURT:  Santa  Clara  County  Superior  Court 

CITATION:  [Unreported-Docket  No.  unavailable] 

JUDGE:  Honorable  Tsketsugu  Takei  (Retired) 

CLIENT:  Rainer  Schuiz 

I  served  as  sole  counsel. 


OPPOSING 
COUNSEL: 


DATE: 


Sherwood  M.  Sullivan 
Hopkins  &  Carley 
ISO  Almaden  Boulevard 
San  Jose,  CA  95113 
(408)  286-9800 

1982-83 


DESCRIPTION: 

I  represented  Mr.  Schuiz,  a  member  of  a  real  estate  investment  partnership.    The 

31 


1082 


corporate  general  partner  attempted  to  terminate  his  interest  under  a  provision  of  the 
partnership  agreement.  However,  the  termination  notice  was  defective  under  the  provisions 
of  the  agreement.  Consequently,  Mr.  Schuiz  did  not  receive  notice  of  deadlines  for  taking 
actions  to  protect  certain  rights  given  to  him  as  a  partner.  In  addition,  even  if  his  interest  was 
properly  terminated,  we  contended  that  the  partnership  accounting  was  defective  and  the 
appraisal  of  his  interest  substantially  understated.  The  case  was  estimated  to  require  one  week 
to  try.  I  made  a  motion  to  bifurcate  the  case  in  order  to  first  have  a  trial  on  the  issue  of  the 
effectiveness  of  the  notice  before  proceeding  to  a  trial  on  the  complex  issues  of  evaluating  the 
worth  of  his  interest.  The  second  issue  would  not  need  to  be  reached  if  improper  notice  had 
been  given.  The  court  granted  the  bifurcation  motion. 

After  one  day  of  trial,  the  court  ruled  that  the  notice  was  ineffective  to  terminate  Mr. 
Schuiz'  partnership  interest.  Consequently,  Mr.  Schuiz  was  able  to  retain  his  partnership 
interest  and  the  complex  and  time-consuming  appraisal  issues  were  rendered  moot. 

-0- 

CASE  No.  10:  Motorola  Computer  Systems  v.  Phoenix  Leasing 

COURT:  Santa  Clara  County  Superior  Court 

CITATION:  [Unreported  -  Docket  No.  621947] 

JUDGE:  Honorable  Homer  Thompson  (deceased) 

CLIENT:  Motorola  Computer  Systems 

I  served  as  sole  counsel. 


OPPOSING 
COUNSEL: 


DATE: 


John  Graham 

Frandzel  &  Share 

8383  Wilshire  Boulevard  Suite  400 

Beverly  Hills,  CA  90211 

(213)  852-1000 

1986-87 


DESCRIPTION: 

Phoenix  Leasing  purchased  computer  equipment  from  Motorola  Computer  Systems, 
a  wholly  owned  subsidiary  of  Motorola,  Inc.,  for  lease  to  customers  of  Phoenix  Leasing. 
Motorola  leased  equipment  to  these  same  customers  directly.  In  order  to  avoid  confusion  by 
customers  as  to  whom  payment  should  be  sent.  Motorola  collected  all  payments  and  remitted 
to  Phoenix  Leasing  its  pro  rata  share.  In  the  course  of  auditing  the  account.  Motorola 
determined  that  it  had  overpaid  Phoenix  Leasing  S4.6  million  beyond  what  was  owed  to  it. 
When  Phoenix  Leasing  was  advised  of  the  mistake  and  of  Motorola's  intention  to  adjust  the 
account  between  the  two  companies  to  correct  the  overpayment.  Phoenix  Leasing  objected  and 
claimed  that  the  payment  was  actually  owed  to  it.  Motorola  advised  Phoenix  Leasing  that  no 


32 


1083 


further  payments  would  be  made  on  the  account  until  the  overpayment  was  exhausted.  In 
retaliation.  Phoenix  Leasing  notined  Motorola  customers  to  send  all  lease  payments  directly 
to  Phoenix  Leasing. 

Motorola,  Inc.,  was  an  existing  client  of  my  law  firm.  I  was  retained  to  represent 
Motorola.  I  filed  a  motion  for  a  preliminary  injunction  to  prevent  Phoenix  Leasing  from 
contacting  or  collecting  from  Motorola's  customers.  Judge  Thompson  granted  the  motion. 

Because  of  the  complexity  of  the  case,  it  was  referred  to  Retired  Judge  J.  Barton  Phelps, 
as  a  Special  Master  for  all  discovery  disputes.  In  the  course  of  proceedings  before  the  Special 
Master,  the  parties  were  able  to  reach  a  settlement  of  the  case.  Retired  Judge  Phelps  may  be 
contacted  at: 

J.  Barton  Phelps 

1755  Embarcadero  Road 

Palo  Alto,  California  94303 

(415) 858-1414 

19.  Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have  pursued, 
including  significant-litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that 
did  not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question, 
please  omit  any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the 
privilege  has  been  waived.) 


1992 


Association  of  Business  Trial 

Lawyers 

Annual  Seminar 


Panel  Participant 

Alternative  Dispute  Resolution  in 

the  Federal  Courts 


1992 


1993 


California  Continuing  Education 

of  the  Bar 

Federal  Practice  Program 

American  Intellectual  Property 
Law  Association 
Mid-Winter  Institute 


Judicial  Faculty  Participant 


Panel  Member 

New  Developments  in  Intellectual 

Property  Law 


1993 

ALI-ABA 

Seminar 

1994- 

Chairman 

present 

1995 

United  States/Jordan  Legal  Study 

Project 

1994- 

Committee  on  Model  Jury 

present 

Instructions  for  the  Ninth  Circuit 

Panel  Member 

New  Directions  in  Antitrust  Law 

Local  Rules  Committee 

U.S.  District  Court 

Northern  District  of  California 

Judicial  Participant 


Member  and  current  Chairman 


33 


1084 


n.  FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 


1.  List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred  income 
arrangements,  stock,. options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits 
which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  professional 
services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please 
describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any 
financial  or  business  interest. 

I  do  not  anticipate  receiving  any  income  From  previous  business  relationships, 
professional  services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers,  clients  or  customers.  I 
currently  receive  income  as  an  adjunct  faculty  member  at  Lincoln  Law  School  of  San  Jose 
and  the  Santa  Clara  University  School  of  Law  for  teaching  one  evening  class. 

2.  Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including  the 
procedure  you  will  follow  In  determining  these  areas  of  concern.  Identify  the 
categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present 
potential  conflicts-of-interest  during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which 
you  have  been  nominated. 

I  will  follow  the  Judicial  Code  of  Conduct  with  respect  to  the  resolution  of  any 
potential  conflict-of-interest.  I  am  unaware  of  any  categories  of  litigation  or  flnancial 
arrangement  that  are  likely  to  present  potential  connicts-of-interest  during  my  initial 
service  in  the  position  of  Circuit  Judge. 

3.  Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside 
employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court? 
If  so,  explain. 

If  permitted  by  the  Chief  Judge  of  the  Circuit,  I  plan  to  continue  to  teach  a  class  on 
Civil  Procedure  at  the  Santa  Clara  University  School  of  Law  in  its  Evening  Division.  The 
class  meets  for  two  and  one-half  hours,  once  a  week  between  September  and  May.  I 
receive  a  modest  compensation  for  teaching. 

4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar  year 
preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all 
salaries,  fees,  dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and 
other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial 
disclosure  report,  required  by-the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be 
substituted  here ) 

See  AO-10  Report  attached  as  Exhibit  "D" 


34 


1085 


5.  Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail  (Add  schedules  as 
called  for). 

See  attached  Exhibit  "E" 

6.  Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign?  If  so, 
please  identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of 
the  campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

In  the  1968  presidential  campaign,  I  was  a  regional  organizer  for  former  President 
Richard  M.  Nixon.  During  1968, 1  worked  as  a  consultant  to  the  Minority  Affairs 
Committee  of  the  Republican  National  Committee.  At  various  times,  I  have  worked  as  a 
local  campaign  worker  in  the  Congressional  campaigns  of  Tom  Kuechel,  Pete  McCloskey, 
Tom  Campbell,  Don  Edwards  and  in  the  Supervisorial  campaign  of  Anna  Eshoo.  I  have 
held  no  official  campaign  position. 


35 


1086 


III      GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

,  1.         An  ethical  Consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's  Code 
of  Professional  responsibility  calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  Workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  serving 
the  disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities, 
listing  specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

As  described  above,  up  until  my  judicial  appointment,  I  was  a  member  of  the 
Stanford  University  Board  of  Trustees.  As  a  Trustee,  I  participated  in  numerous  meetings 
and  conferences  designed  to  improve  the  quality  of  education  for  disadvantaged  students. 
Approximately  one-third  of  my  time  was  devoted  to  Stanford  or  educational  matters  while 
serving  as  a  Trustee.  This  was  one  of  the  most  rewarding  experiences  I  have  ever  had. 

I  am  a  participant  in  the  Santa  Clara  County  Department  of  Education  "Adopt  A 
School"  Program.  The  goals  of  this  program  are  to  increase  knowledge  and  understanding 
of  the  fundamental  principles  and  processes  of  our  legal  system  among  elementary  and 
high  school  teachers  and  students  and  to  increase  opportunities  for  students  to  interact 
with  positive  adult  role  models.  I  have  adopted  and  regularly  participate  with  three 
schools  in  Santa  Clara  County. 

From  1980  until  19S2, 1  was  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  Palo  Alto 
Area  YMCA.  I  am  still  a  Sustaining  Member. 

I  attend  United  Methodist  Church  in  Los  Altos,  CA,  led  by  Rev.  John  Dodson. 

My  interest  in  civil  rights  litigation  led  me  to  serve  as  a  volunteer  attorney  in  a  pro 
bono  program  to  represent  victims  of  housing  discrimination.  From  1973  until  1983, 1 
represented  numerous  plaintifls  in  approximately  70  fair  housing  cases.  Most  of  the  cases 
were  filed  in  the  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Northern  District  of  California. 

As  a  result  of  my  work,  the  fair  housing  program  in  which  I  participated  was 
approved  by  the  Board  of  Governors  of  the  California  State  Bar  as  a  Certified  Lawyer 
Reference  Service. 

The  extensive  experience  in  federal  procedure  which  I  gained  early  in  my  career, 
through  my  participation  in  litigation  of  fair  housing  cases,  was  extremely  beneficial  to  me 
later  in  my  career  when  my  practice  came  to  involve  litigation  of  intellectual  property  cases 
in  federal  court. 

2.  The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  states  that 

it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that  invidiously 
discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you  currently  belong,  or  have  you 
belonged,  to  any  organization  which  discriminates  —  through  either  formal  membership 
requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership  policies? 

No. 


1087 


If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.  What  you  have  done  to  try  to  change  these 
policies? 


3.  Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates  for 
nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination? 
Please  describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from 
beginning  to  and  (including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and 
interviews  in  which  you  participated). 

I  am  unaware  of  a  formal  commission.  In  March,  1997  I  received  a  call  from  Chief 
Judge  Procter  Hug  inquiring  about  my  interest  in  being  considered  for  a  position  as  a 
circuit  judge.  I  told  him  of  my  interest.  Afterward,  I  wrote  a  letter  to  President  Clinton 
requesting  consideration.  I  have  been  interviewed  by  ofTicials  of  the  Justice  Department, 
the  Office  of  the  White  House  Counsel,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigations  and  the 
American  Bar  Association. 

4.  Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee 
discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  marmer  that 
could  reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue, 
or  question?  If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

No. 

5.  Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  judicial  activism.' 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal  government, 
and  within  society  generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing 
controversy  in  recent  years.  It  has  become  the  target  of  both 
popular  and  academic  criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial  branch 
has  usurped-many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels 
of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "Judicial  activism"  have  been 
said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem- 
solution  rather  than  grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the 
individual  plaintiff  as  a  vehicle  for  the  imposition  of 
far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad  classes  of 
individuals; 

c  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad, 

affirmative  duties  upon  governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  ioosening 


1088 


jurisdictional  requirements  such  as  standing  and 
ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon 

other  institutions  in  the  manner  of  an  administrator 
with  continuing  oversight  responsibilities. 

As  the  term  is  described  above,  judges  should  not  be  "activist."  The  function  of  the 
judiciary  is  to  decide  the  cases  presented  to  the  court.  The  decisions  should  be  made 
strictly  according  to  the  facts  of  the  cases  and  the  applicable  laves.  Judges  should  not  make 
decisions  based  upon  fear  or  favor.  In  the  exercise  of  discretion,  judges  should  act 
conservatively. 


38 


AO-IOtM) 

R»v.  e/9e 


1089 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

Nomination  Report 


Rtpoit  Required  by  ffi»  EtfKcs 
Relorm  Act  of  19S9,  Pub  L  No. 
101-194.  November  30.  »989 
(5 use.  App.  4 .  Sec.  101-112) 


n  Reporting      (Last  name.  *st  mk**.  mmaO 
WAiui,     JAMES     . 

2.  Court  or  Organlutlon 

O.S.    COURT    07    APPEALS,     9TH    CIR 

).  Date  o(  Report 
07/01/1997 

4.  Title           (Article  III  Judges  Indhale  active  or 

senior  stetvs:  me^strele  Judges  IntScete 
fui-  orpart-Ome} 

O.S.    CIRCUIT   JUDGE 

6.  Report  Type  (check  type) 

X     Non,ln^     M.     06,'27/1997 

Initial        Annual       Final 

6.  Reporting  Period 

01/01/1996 

to 
06/27/1997 

7.  Chamber*  or  Office  Addms 
U.S.    COURTHOUSE 

280    SOUTH    FIRST    STREET 

San  Jose,    California  95113 

t.  On  ttie  basis  of  the  Informallon  contained  In  this  Report  and  any 
modifications  pertaining  thereto,  it  Is  In  my  opinion.  In  compliance 
with  applicable  laws  and  regulations. 

IMPORTANT  NOTES:  The  Instivcttons  accompanying  tilts  form  must  be  fotowed.  Complete  at  parts, 
cfiecking  the  NONE  box  for  eacti  section  wtiere  you  tiave  no  reportable  information.  Sign  on  ttte  last  page. 

NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION  /  ENTITY 


I.    POSITIONS      (Repotting InrtvMual onlf.  see  pp.  9-13  of  InstnicHons) 

□  POSITION 

NONE  (No  reportable  positions.) 

^  Member  of  Governing  Board  California  Lutheran  University 


AGREEMENTS     (Reporting  IndMdual  only:  see  pp.14-17  of  instructions.) 

DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


□ 


NONE    (No  repoftable  sgreements.) 


NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME 
DATE 


□ 


(Reporting  indr/idual  and  spouse:  see  pp.  1S-25  of  Instructions.) 
PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


NONE    (No  reportable  norvlnvestment  Income.) 
1   1996  LINCOLN    LAW    SCHOOL-COMPENSATION   AS    INSTRUCTOR 


GROSS  INCOME 

(yours,  not  spouse's) 


3,140.00 


2  8/1S/96   University  of  Santa  Clara  Law  School-Instructor 


5,777.76 


1090 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 
WARE,    JAMES    . 


Date  of  Report 
07/01/1997 


IV.   REIMBURSEMENTS   and   GIFTS     -  transportation,  lodging,  food,  entertainment 


( 


thoss  to  spouse  and  dependent  chidnn:  use  the  perenthedcels  '{S}'  and  '(DC)'  to  indcate  nportabia  nimtHjrsements  and  yits  received  by  spouse 
endent  ct)idren.  respectively.  See  pp.  26-29  of  Instnjctions.) 


D 


SOURCE 

NONE  (No  such  reportable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 


DESCRIPTION 


^  Exempt 


V.    OTHER  GIFTS 

(lnckid9S  thosB  to  spouse  and  dependent  chkinn;  usa  thm  pannlhedcals  '(S)'  and  '(DC)'  to  bxicata  othar  ^fts  ncwvad  by  spouse  and  dapandant  chidran. 
nspacOvaty.  Saa  pp.  dO-JO  of  Instructions.) 


n 


SOURCE 
NONE   (No  sucb  reportable  gilts) 


DESCRIPTION 


VI.    LIABIUTIES 

Qnciudas  thosa  of  spousa  and  dapandant  chidran;  indcata  wtmra  appicabla.  parson  /wponsbto  tbr  labtty  by  using  ttta  paranthaUca/  '(S) '  for  saparata 
iabStyofO)aspous».'(J)' for  joint  tabtty  of  rapoftng  kxSviduai  and  spousa.  and 'ipC)'   foriabSty  ot  a  dapandant  chid.  Saa  pp.  24-36  of  Instructions.) 


H 


CREDITOR 

NONE    (No  reportable  MiObae) 


DESCRIPTION 


VALUE  CODE* 


■VALCOOES:J>S1S.000orlm«  K>$1 5,001 -SSO.CXX)  L-SSO.OOI  to  $100,000  M*$1 00.001  .$250,000  N-$250.001  .$500,000 

0=$S00.00141 .000.000    PI  Ml  .000.001  .$5,000,000    P2^$5.000.001.«25.ao0.a00    P3=$25.000.001 -$50,000,000    P4=$50.000,001  or  mora 


1091 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nanw  o(  Person  Reflating 
WARE,     JAMES     . 


Date  or  Report 
07/01/1997 


VII.  Page 


-  IncofTw.  valuB.  transactions  findudes  those  of  spouse  and 
1  INVESTMENTS  and    TRUSTS      dependent  chidnn.  See  pp.  37-54  of  instructions.) 


A. 
^ptk»  or  Assets 

Indcatv  when  apfiMcabie.  owner  of 
the  essel  by  using  me  perenthedcal 

B. 

during 
reporting 

C. 

Gross  value 
at  end  or 
reporting 

0. 

Transactions  during  reporting  period 

'(J)'  tor  joint  ovmerzhip  of  reporting 
Intfvlduat  and  spouse,  '(S)'  for  sep- 
erete  ownen/tlp  by  spouse,  •(DC)' 
tor  ownership  by  dependent  chid. 

PItce  '00'  alter  each  asset 
exempt  from  prior  dKclosure. 

(1) 

Arrt. 

Cod 

a 

(A- 

H) 

(2) 

Type 
(e.g.. 
dividend, 
rent  or 
Interest) 

(f) 
Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

(2) 

Value 

Methoc 

Code 

(Q-W) 

(1) 
Type 
(eg., 
buy,  sen, 
merger, 
redemp- 
tion) 

ir  no*  exempt  from  disclosure 

(2) 
Date: 
Month- 
Day 

P) 

Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

{*) 

Gain 

Code 

(A-H) 

(5) 
Identity  or 

buyer/seller 
or  private 
transaction) 

NONE  (no  reportable  lncome,assets.  or 
transactions) 

1  Dean  Hlcter   IRA 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

Exempt 

2  USAA  IRA 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

Exempt 

3  General  Motors 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

Exempt 

r          in  Codes:  A-$I,000  or  less                      B-Sl.OOl-K.JOO                  C-K.50I-J5.000                       I>S5.001-$13,000                      E-SIJ.OOI^SSO.OOO 
,D4)      F-$30,001-J:00,000              0-$100,001-JI.OOO.OOO        HI-$1,000,001-$3.000,000       [U-53.000.001  or  more 

JValCoda:         J-J  15,000  or  leas                    K-$13.0Ol-S50,OOO               L-$50,0Ol-$10O.0OO              M-$I0O.0Ol.$23O.OOO            N-S230.001 -$300,000 
(CoLCl.D3)     0-$300,001-SI,000.000        Pl-J1.000,001-$3,000,000  P2-$3,000.001-J23,000,000  P3-$23,000,001-$30,000.000  P4-$30.00O.0OI  or  more 

3  Val  Mth  Codes:  Q-Appt»iMl                             R=Cosl  (real  estate  only)                             S-Assessmem                                     T=Cash/MaAel 
(CoLC2)             U-Book  Value                          VOther                                                     W=EsliimIed 

1092 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Penon  Reporting 
WARE,    JAMES    . 


Date  of  Report 
07/01/1997 


IX.    CERTIFICATION 

compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
Judicial  Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knovs^ledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  not  perfonfn  any 
adjudicatory  function  in  any  litigation  during  the  period  covered  by  this  report  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or 
dependent  children  had  a  financial  interest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  the  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or 
dependent  children,  if  any)  is  accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any 
information  not  reported  was  wnthheld  because  it  met  applicable  statutory  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which 
have  been  reported  are  in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C.  app.  4,  section  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  7353  and 
Judicial  Conference  regulations. 


'ignature . 


(L 


Y 


(a  Ja^fJi — 


ilffV 


Note: 


Any  individual  who  knowingly  and  wilfully  falsifies  or  fails  to  file  this  report  may  be  subject  to  civil 
and  criminal  sanctions  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  Section  104). 


FILING  INSTRUCnONS 

Mail  original  and  three  additional  copies  to: 

Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 
Administrative  Office  of  the  United  States  Courts 
One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E. 
Suite  2-301 
Washington,  D.C.  20544 


1093 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  at  Panon  Raporting 
WARE,     JAMES     . 


VIW.     ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS. 

NONE    (No  addltionaJ  Inromatian  or  explarations.) 


one  of  Report 
07/01/1997 


(Indicate  part  or  report.) 


1094 

FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORTH 


Provide  a  complete,  current  financial  net  worth  statement  which  itemizes  in  detail  all  assets  (including  bank 
accounts,  real  estate,  seciuilies,  trusts,  investments,  and  otlier  financial  holdings)  all  liabilities  (including  debts, 
mortgages,  loans,  and  other  financial  obligations)  of  yourself,  your  spouse,  and  other  immediate  members  of  your 
household. 


ASSETS 

LIABILITIES 

Cash  on  hand  and  in  banks 

$4,300 

Notes  payable  to  banks-secured 

0 

U.S.  Govenunent  securities- 
Schedule  1 

150 

Notes  payable  to  banks-unsecured 

0 

Listed  Securities-Schedule  2 

70 

Notes  payable  to  relatives 

0 

Unlisted  secunties-Schedule  3 

31,000 

Notes  payable  to  others 

0 

Accounts  and  notes  receivables: 

Accounts  and  bills  due 

0 

Due  from  relatives  and  friends 

85,000 

Unpaid  income  ta.\ 

0 

Due  from  others 

0 

Other  unpaid  ta.\  and  interest 

0 

Doubtfiil 

0 

Real  estate  mortgages  payable- 
Schedule  5 

325.000 

(.eal  estate-Schedule  4 

715,000 

Chattel  mortgages  and  other  liens 
payable 

65.000 

Autos  and  other  personal  property 

55,000 

Other  debts-itemize: 

Cash  value-life  insurance 

10,000 

Consumer  Credit 

20,000 

Other  assets-itemize: 

Education  Loans 

40,000 

Boat 

30,000 

Household  Furnishings  &  Personal 
Effects 

200,000 

Total  Liabilities 

450.000 

Net  Worth 

595,520 

Total  Assets 

1,045,520 

Total  liabilities  and  net  worth 

1.045,520 

CONTINGENT  LIABILITIES 

GENERAL  INFORMATION 

As  endorser,  comaker  or  guarantor 

None 

Are  any  assets  pledged? 

No 

On  leases  or  contracts 

None 

Are  you  defendant  in  any  suits  or  legal 
actions'' 

Yes  (See 

Biographical 

Questionnaire) 

Legal  Claims 

None 

Have  you  ever  taken  bankruptcy? 

No 

revision  for  Federal  Income  Tax 

Payroll 
Withholding 

Other  special  debt 

None 

1095 


SCHEDULE  1 


United  States  Savings  Bond 
Face  Amount 
Current  Cash  Value 


$250.00 
150.00 


SCHEDULE  2 


Common  Stock  General  Motors 

2  Shares  (Approximate  Value) 


70.00 


SCHEDULE  3 

Thrift  Savings  Plan 
IRA  Account 

Dean  Witter 

USAA  Mutual  fund 

$15,000 

9,000 
7,000 

SCHEDULE  4 

1223  Arbor  Court 

Estimated  Fair  Market  Value 
R  Ranch  Time  Share 

$700,000 
15,000 

SCHEDULE  5 

Great  Western  Savings  &  Loan 

$325,000 

1096 


I.   BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

1.  Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used.) 
Lynn  S .  Adelman 

2.  Address:   List  current  place  of  residence  and  office. 

Home:      Waterford,  Wisconsin 

Office:    Adelman,  Adelman  &  Murray,  S.C.  law  firm 

308  East  Juneau  Avenue,  Milwaukee,  WI   53202 

3.  Date  and  place  of  birth. 
October  1,  1939,  Milwaukee,  WI . 

4.  Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's 
name).   List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and 
business  address  (es). 

Married  since  April  23,  1976  to  Elizabeth  (maiden  name 
Halmbacher)  Adelman.   She  is  an  attorney  and  partner  in 
Adelman,  Adelman  &  Murray,  S.  C,  308  East  Juneau  Avenue, 
Milwaukee,  WI   53202. 

5.  Education:   List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have 
attended,  including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees  received, 
and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

Princeton  University,  A.B. ,  1961. 
Attended  1957-61,  A.B.  received  1961 

Columbia  University  Law  School,  L.L.B.,  1965. 
Attended  1962-65,  L.L.B.  received  1965 

6.  Employment  Record:   List  (by  year)  all  business  or 
professional  corporations,  companies,  firms  or  other  enterprises, 
partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations,  nonprofit  or 
otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were  connected  as  an 
officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since 
graduation  from  college. 

1961-1962:   Sales,  Kirby  Distributing  Company,  Trenton,  NJ. 


1097 


1962:   Management  trainee,  Holland  Laundry/  Philadelphia, 
PA. 

Suiraner,  1963:   Law  Clerk,  Law  firm  of  Pellettieri  fi 
Rabstein,  Trenton,  NJ. 

Sununer,  1964:   Law  clerk  to  Attorney  John  Pratt,  National 
Council  of  Churches,  New  York,  NY. 

1965-1966:   Research  assistant  to  Professor  Monrad  G. 
Paulsen,  Columbia  University  Law  School,  New  York,  NY  10027. 

1966:   Law  clerk  to  Attorney  Richard  H.  Kuh,  New  York,  NY. 

1967-1968:   Trial  attorney.  Legal  Aid  Society,  Criminal 
Courts  Division,  New  York,  NY. 

1968-1972:   Sole  practitioner.  Law  Office  of  Lynn  S. 
Adelman,  New  York,  NY. 

1972-1973:   Associate,  Law  Office  of  Coffey,  Lerner  & 
Murray,  Milwaukee,  WI . 

1973-1978:   Partner,  Law  Office  of  Lerner  &  Adelman, 
Milwaukee,  WI . 

1978-1983:   Sole  practitioner.  Law  Office  of  Lynn  Adelman, 
Milwaukee,  WI . 

1983-1988:   Partner,  Law  Office  of  Adelman  &  Adelman, 
Milwaukee,  WI . 

1988  to  present:   Partner,  Law  Firm  of  Adelman,  Adelman  & 
Murray,  S.  C,  Milwaukee,  WI . 

1977-Present:   Wisconsin  State  Senator,  28th  Senate 
District,  State  Capitol,  Madison,  WI . 

Military  Service:   Have  you  had  any  military  service?   If 
so,  give  particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of 
service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge 
received. 

None. 


1098 


Honors  and  Awards:   List  any  scholarships,  fellowships, 
honorary  degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you 
believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

Graduated  cum  laude  from  Princeton  University  and  cum 
laude  from  Columbia  Law  School . 

Award  from  Legal  Action  of  Wisconsin  for  outstanding 
pro  bono  publico   service  as  a  dedicated  attorney  and  public 
servant  (1994) . 

Freedom  of  Information  Award  for  contribution  to 
freedom  of  the  press  and  First  Amendment  rights  from  the 
Wisconsin  Society  of  Professional  Journalists  (1990) . 

Leadership  Award  for  tireless  efforts  in  setting  high 
ethical  standards  for  Wisconsin  state  government  from  Common 
Cause  of  Wisconsin  (1988) . 

Lifetime  Achievement  Award  for  Leadership  Against  Drunk 
Driving  from  Mothers  Against  Drunk  Driving  (1995) . 

Sheridan-McCabe  Memorial  Award  for  service  in  the 
consumer  interest  from  the  Wisconsin  Chapter  of  the  Consumer 
Federation  of  America  (1987) . 

Eunice  Edgar  Award  for  Lifetime  Achievement  on  behalf 
of  civil  liberties  from  the  Wisconsin  Chapter  of  the 
American  Civil  Liberties  Union  (1994) . 

Award  for  work  on  behalf  of  people  with  disabilities 
from  Full  Citizenship  Initiative  of  Waukesha  County  for 
(1990) . 

Full  of  Heart  Award  for  being  a  good  employer  from  the 
Wisconsin  Chapter  of  9  to  5,  Inc.  (1991). 

Conservationist  of  the  Year  from  the  Waukesha  County 
Conservation  Alliance  (1991) . 

Award  for  contributions  to  community  based  corrections 
from  Wisconsin  Corrections  Coalition  (1992) . 

Clean  16  Award  for  work  on  behalf  of  the  environment 
from  Wisconsin  Environmental  Decade  (numerous  times  between 
1977-1994) . 


1099 


9.  Bar  Associations:   List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or 
judicial-related  committees  or  conferences  of  which  you  are 
or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of  any 
offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Wisconsin  Bar  Association,  1972-present. 

Wisconsin  State  Senate  Judiciary  Conunittee,  1977-present, 
Chair  1979-1993;  1995-present . 

Wisconsin  Judicial  Council,  1979-1993;  1995-present. 

10.  Other  Memberships:   List  all  organizations  to  which  you 
belong  that  are  active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies. 
Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

a .  None . 

b.  Temple  Emanuel -Waukesha,  Wisconsin,  Racine  County  and 
Wisconsin  Democratic  Party,  Waukesha  Environmental  Action 
League,  Greendale  Historical  Society,  Little  Muskego  Lake 
Association,  New  Berlin  Prospect  Lions  Club  and  American 
Jewish  Committee. 

11.  Court  Admission:   List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been 
admitted  to  practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if 
any  such  memberships  lapsed.   Please  explain  the  reason  for 
any  lapse  in  membership.   Give  the  same  information  for 
administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission  to 
practice . 

Admitted  to  practice  in  the  State  of  New  York,  1967 
(membership  lapsed  when  I  moved  to  Wisconsin  but  has  been 
renewed) . 

Admitted  to  practice  in  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Southern  District  of  New  York,  1969. 

Admitted  to  practice  in  State  of  Wisconsin,  1972;  admitted 
to  practice  in  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern 
District  of  Wisconsin,  1972;  Court  of  Appeals  for  Seventh 
Circuit,  1972;  United  States  Supreme  Court,  1992. 

12.  Published  Writings:   List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates 
of  books,  articles,  reports  or  other  published  material  you 
have  written  or  edited.   Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee. 


1100 


Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues 
involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.   If  there  were 
press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  readily  available 
to  you,  please  supply  them. 

Bad  Lavs  Make  Hard  Cases:      Hate   Crime  Lavs  and   the 
Supreme  Court's   Opinion   in  Wisconsin   v.  Mitchell,    29  Gonzaga 
Law  Review  1  (1994) . 

Child  Abuse  Reporting  Legislation,    Some  Legislative 
History,    34  George  Washington  Law  Review  482  (1966) . 

Departures  from   the   Uniform  Marital  Property  Act 
Contained  in   the  Wisconsin  Marital  Property  Act,    68 
Marquette  Law  Review  390  (1985) . 

Introduction,  69  Marquette  Law  Review  159  (1986) , 
Volume  dedicated  to  articles  on  drunk  driving. 

Should  Wisconsin   Lover   the  Blood  Alcohol   Content   to    . 08 
for  Driving  Under   the   Influence?   Yes,    Wisconsin  Counties 
Magazine  (May,  1992) . 

Revriting  the  Crime  Lavs   is  a   Precondition   of    'truth  in 
sentencing' ,    Wisconsin  Lawyer  (June,  1997). 

Campaign  Finance  Reform,    Wisconsin  Medical  Journal 
(May,  1997) . 

The  Presumption  of  Release   in  Bail   Decisions,    Wisconsin 
Lawyer  (July,  1989) . 

A  Study  of  James  Weldon  Johnson,    Journal  of  Negro 
History,  Vol  LII,  p.  128  (1967). 

Wisconsin   Should  Not  Reverse   140   Years  of  History  by 
Reinstating   the  Death  Penalty,    Wisconsin  Lawyer  (May,  1993) . 

13.   Health:   What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?   List  the 
date  of  you  last  physical  examination. 

Good.   1997. 


1101 


14.  Judicial  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  judicial 
offices  you  have  held,  whether  such  position  was  elected  or 
appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each 
such  court. 

None. 

15.  Citations :   If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:   (1) 
citations  for  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you  have 
written;  (2)  a  short  sununary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decision  were  reversed  or 
where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant  criticism 
of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3)  citations 
for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional 
issues,  together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court 
rulings  on  such  opinions.   If  any  of  the  opinions  listed 
were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the 
opinions . 

Not  applicable. 

16.  Public  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices 
you  have  held,  other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the 
terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected  or 
appointed.   State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful 
candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

I  have  been  Wisconsin  State  Senator,  28th  Senate  District 
since  1977.   I  was  first  elected  in  November,  1976  and  re- 
elected in  1980,  1984,  1988,  1992  and  1996. 

I  ran  unsuccessfully  for  the  House  of  Representatives  in 
November  1974  in  the  9th  Congressional  District  and  in  the 
1982  and  1984  Democratic  primaries  in  the  4th  Congressional 
District. 

17 .  Legal  Career: 

a.    Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and 

experience  after  graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  of  a  judge,  and  if  so, 
the  name  of  the  judge,  the  court  and  the  dates  of 
the  period  you  were  a  cleric;   No 

2.  whether  your  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the 
addresses  and  dates;   See  No.  3  below 


1102 


the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or 
offices,  companies  or  governmental  agencies  with 
which  you  have  been  connected,  and  the  nature  of 
your  connection  with  each; 

1965-1966:   Research  assistant  to  Professor  Monrad 
G.  Paulsen,  Columbia  University  Law  School,  435 
West  116th  Street,  New  York,  NY  10027. 

1966:   Law  clerk  to  Attorney  Richard  H.  Kuh,  now 
at  555  5th  Avenue,  New  York,  NY  10017. 

1967-1968:   Trial  attorney.  Legal  Aid  Society, 
Criminal  Courts  Division,  100  Centre  Street,  New 
York,  NY  10013. 

1968-1972:   Law  Office  of  Lynn  S.  Adelman,  401 
Broadway,  New  York,  NY  10013. 

1972-1973:   Law  Office  of  Coffey,  Lerner  &  Murray, 
152  West  Wisconsin  Avenue,  Milwaukee,  WI   53202. 

1973-1978:   Law  Office  of  Lerner  &  Adelman,  152  W. 
Wisconsin  Avenue,  Milwaukee,  WI   53202. 

1978-1983:   Law  Office  of  Lynn  Adelman,  411  East 
Mason  Street,  Milwaukee,  WI   53202  and  1840  North 
Farwell,  Milwaukee,  WI   53202. 

1983-1988:   Law  Office  of  Adelman  &  Adelman,  828 
North  Broadway,  Milwaukee,  WI   53202. 

1988  to  present:   Law  Firm  of  Adelman,  Adelman  & 
Murray,  S.  C,  308  East  Juneau  Avenue,  Milwaukee, 
WI   53202. 

1977-Present:   Wisconsin  State  Senator,  28th 
Senate  District,  State  Capitol,  Madison,  WI 
53702. 

What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law 
practice,  dividing  it  into  periods  with  dates  if 
its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 

1967-1972  practice  was  primarily  a  criminal  trial 
practice. 


1103 


1972-1997  practice  has  been  approximately  75% 
civil  and  25%  criminal . 

2.    Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention 
the  areas,  if  any,  in  which  you  have  specialized. 

I  represent  individuals,  non-profits  and  small 
businesses.   In  the  cases  involving  individuals  I 
do  primarily  personal  injury  and  criminal  work.   I 
have  been  involved  in  many  cases  involving 
constitutional  issues.   I  have  a  number  of 
business  clients  and  my  business  practice  is 
primarily  a  litigation  practice.   I  also  do 
considerable  work  in  the  area  of  administrative 
law,  particularly  zoning. 

1.  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally 
or  not  at  all?   If  the  frequency  of  your 
appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such 
variance,  giving  dates. 

Frequently. 

2.  What  percentage  of  the  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts; 
10% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record; 
80% 

(c)  other  courts. 

Local  administrative  agencies  -  10% 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil; 
75% 

(b)  criminal. 
25% 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you 
tried  to  verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than 
settled) ,  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

;i^proximately  80  cases  tried  to  judgment  in  which 
I  was  sole  or  lead  counsel . 


1104 


5.    What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury; 
12% 

(b)  non-jury. 
88% 

Litigation:   Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated 
matters  which  you  personally  handled.   Give  the  citations, 
if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and  date 
if  unreported.   Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of 
each  case.   Identify  the  party  of  parties  whom  you 

represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the 
case.   Also  state  as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or 
judges  before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  the  individual  name,  addresses  and  telephone 
numbers  of  co-counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for 
each  of  the  other  parties. 

1.  Wisconsin   v.    Mitchell,    113  S.Ct.  2194  (1993).   This 
case  involved  a  challenge  to  the  Wisconsin  hate  crime  law. 
I  filed  an  amicus  curiae  brief  in  the  Wisconsin  Supreme 
Court  arguing  that  the  law  punished  thought  in  violation  of 
the  First  Amendment.   The  Wisconsin  Supreme  Court  held  that 
the  law  was  unconstitutional  and  relied  heavily  on  my  brief. 
I  then  became  Todd  Mitchell's  lawyer  and  argued  the  case  in 
the  United  States  Supreme  Court  on  April  21,  1993.   The 
Supreme  Court  reversed  the  decision  of  the  Wisconsin  Supreme 
Court.   Co-counsel  were  Kenneth  Casey,  161  W.  Rockwell 
Street,  Jefferson  WI  53549,  (414)  674-2800;  Pamela 
Moorshead,  400  North  Executive  Drive,  Brookfield,  WI   53005, 

(414)  821-5559;  Susan  Gellman,  138  South  Third  Street, 
Columbus,  OH  43215,  (614)  280-1000.   Opposing  counsel  was 
Attorney  General  James  Doyle,  State  Capitol,  Madison,  WI 
53702,  (608)  266-1221. 

2.  Citizens   Utility  Board,    et  al.    v.    Klauser,    194  Wis.  2d 
484  (1995).   As  lead  counsel,  I  represented  the  plaintiffs 
in  a  challenge  to  the  Governor's  attempt  to  execute  a 
"write-in"  veto.   I  brought  the  case  to  the  Wisconsin 
Supreme  Court  on  an  original  jurisdiction  theory,  which  is 
used  when  cases  raise  significant  public  issues.   The 
Governor  struck  an  appropriation  amount  in  the  budget  bill 

9 


1105 


of  $350,000  and  wrote  in  a  different  amount,  $250,000.   The 
Supreme  Court,  in  a  4-3  decision,  upheld  the  write-in  veto 
of  an  appropriation  amount.   I  argued  the  case  in  the 
Wisconsin  Supreme  Court  on  April  26,  1995.   Opposing  counsel 
was  Alan  Lee  of  the  Attorney  General's  Office,  123  West 
Washington  Avenue,  Madison,  WI   53702,  (608)  266-0020. 

3.  Risser,    et   al.    v.    Klauser,    207  Wis.  2d  177  (1997). 
This  case  also  involved  a  challenge  to  the  Governor's 
partial  veto  power  and  was  also  brought  as  an  original 
action.   As  lead  counsel,  I  represented  several  legislators 
and  citizens.   Here,  the  Governor  attempted  a  write-in  veto 
of  a  non-appropriation  aunount,  namely  an  amount  of  revenue 
bonding  authority.   The  Governor  deleted  the  amount  set  by 
the  legislature  and  wrote  in  a  figure  $40  million  dollars 
lower.   The  Supreme  Court  held  in  a  4-3  decision  that  the 
Governor  exceeded  the  scopt  of  the  write-in  power  authorized 
in  Citizens   Utility  Board   and  struck  down  the  Governor's 
attempted  veto.   This  is  an  historic  case  for  it  is  the 
first  veto  case  that  the  Supreme  Court  decided  in  favor  of 
the  legislative  branch  of  government.   Opposing  counsel  were 
Bruce  Harms  and  Michael  Modi  of  2  East  Mifflin  Street, 
Madison,  WI   53701,  (608)  257-5661.   I  argued  the  case  in 
the  Wisconsin  Supreme  Court  on  October  29,  1996. 

4.  Joni  B.    and  Richard  S.    v.    State   of  Wisconsin; 
Malmstadt,    et  al.    v.    State   of  Wisconsin,    202  Wis.  2d  1 

(1996) .   In  this  case,  I  represented  two  parents  and  seven 
Milwaukee  County  trial  judges,  including  Chief  Judge  Patrick 
Sheedy  (telephone  (414)  278-5112)  in  a  challenge  to  a 
Wisconsin  statute  prohibiting  courts  from  appointing  lawyers 
for  parents  in  cases  involving  alleged  neglect  of  children. 
Our  position  was  that  the  statute  violated  both  the 
separation  of  powers  principle  and  due  process  of  law.   The 
Supreme  Court  ruled  unanimously  in  our  favor  on  both 
grounds.   I  argued  this  case  in  the  Wisconsin  Supreme  Court 
on  May  3,  1996.   Co-counsel  were  David  Harth,  150  E.  Oilman 
Street,  Madison,  WI   53701,  (608)  258-4210;  and  Paula  Doyle, 
121  South  Hamilton  Street,  Madison,  WI   53703,  (608)  255- 
6627.   Opposing  counsel  was  Michael  Modi  of  2  East  Mifflin 
Street,  Madison,  WI   53701,  (608)  257-5661. 

5.  Demmith   v.  Wisconsin  Judicial   Conference,    166  Wis.  2d 
649  (1992).   As  lead  counsel,  I  represented  the  plaintiff  in 
a  challenge  to  the  misdemeanor  bail  schedule  used  throughout 
Wisconsin  to  set  bail  at  night  and  on  weekends  when  judges 

10 


1106 


are  unavailable.   The  plaintiff  was  held  for  five  days  in 
the  Milwaukee  County  jail  on  money  bail  for  a  minor  traffic 
case.   He  had  no  previous  record  and  substantial  ties  to  the 
community.   The  plaintiff's  contention  was  that  the  bail 
schedule  did  not  conform  to  the  statutory  requirement  that 
money  bail  could  not  be  imposed  except  to  ensure  the 
defendant's  return  to  court.   The  Wisconsin  Supreme  Court 
unanimously  upheld  the  plaintiff's  challenge  and  required 
the  Judicial  Conference  to  promulgate  a  new  bail  schedule. 
I  argued  this  case  in  the  Wisconsin  Supreme  Court,  which  had 
original  jurisdiction,  on  January  3,  1992.   Co-counsel  was 
Evelyn  Mazack,  17  South  Fairchild  Street,  Madison,  WI 
53707,  (608)  264-8574.   Opposing  counsel  was  Ray  Taffora,  1 
South  Pinckney,  Suite  900,  Madison,  WI  53703,  (608)  257- 
3501. 

6.  Wisconsin  Prof.    Police  Assoc,    v.  Public  Service 
Commission,    205  Wis.  2d  60  (Ct.  App.  1996).   As  lead 
counsel,  I  represented  a  number  of  organizations  and 
individuals  concerned  about  the  loss  of  privacy  involved  in 
Caller  I.D.  telephone  service.   The  staff  of  the  Public 
Service  Commission  had  made  recommendations  adverse  to  my 
clients.   I  challenged  the  recommendations,  and  the  case  was 
tried  before  a  hearing  examiner  employed  by  the  Commission. 
The  three-member  Commission  upheld  the  recommendation  of  its 
staff.   The  Circuit  Court  of  Dane  County  (Hon.  Moria 
Krueger)  reversed  the  decision  of  the  Public  Service 
Commission.   The  Public  Service  Commission  appealed  to  the 
Wisconsin  Court  of  Appeals,  which  reinstated  the  decision  of 
the  Public  Service  Commission  (Dyckman  J.).   I  argued  the 
case  in  the  Court  of  Appeals  on  June  25,  1996.   Opposing 
counsel  was  Steve  Levine,  610  Whitney  Way,  Madison,  WI 
53707,  (608)  267-2890.   The  Wisconsin  Supreme  Court  denied 
my  petition  for  review. 

7.  Barnett  v.  Wisconsin  Ethics  Board,    817  F.  Supp.  67 
(E.D.  Wis.  1993).   This  case  involved  a  challenge  to  a 
statute  known  as  the  "gag  law"  which  prohibited  state 
employees  from  making  requests  to  legislators  for 
appropriations  for  their  agencies.   As  lead  counsel,  I 
represented  the  plaintiff,  a  professor  at  the  University  of 
Wisconsin-Milwaukee  who  sought  a  declaratory  judgment  that 
the  law  violated  his  First  and  Fourteenth  Amendment  rights. 
The  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of 
Wisconsin  (Hon.  John  W.  Reynolds)  granted  declaratory  relief 
striking  down  the  law.  The  case  was  decided  on  briefs.   The 

11 


1107 


opposing  counsel  was  Assistant  Attorney  General  Alan  Lee, 
123  West  Washington  Avenue,  Madison,  WI   53702,  (608)  266- 
0020. 

8.  United  States  v.  Hasivar,    299  F.Supp  1053  (1969).   I 
was  counsel  for  the  defendants  in  this  federal  criminal 
case.  The  charge  was  that  the  defendants  assaulted  federal 
narcotics  agents  by  intervening  in  an  altercation  between 
the  agents  and  other  individuals.  I  argued  two  sets  of 
motions  in  this  case.   First,  I  successfully  argued  for  a 
lengthy  adjournment  on  the  grounds  that  necessary  witnesses 
would  be  unavailable  because  of  pending  charges  against 
them.   Later,  I  moved  to  dismiss  the  indictment  because  the 
statute  making  it  a  crime  to  assault  federal  employees 
omitted  employees  of  the  Bureau  of  Narcotics  and  Dangerous 
Drugs.   The  Federal  District  Court  (Hon.  Dudley  Bonsai) 
dismissed  the  indictment.   I  argued  the  dispositive  motion 
in  1970.   The  Government  sought  a  direct  appeal  to  the 
Supreme  Court  bypassing  the  2nd  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals. 
Ultimately,  I  persuaded  the  Government  to  drop  the  appeal. 
The  opposing  counsel  was  Sterling  Johnson  now  United  States 
District  Judge  in  the  Southern  District  of  New  York,  40 
Centre  Street,  New  York,  NY   (212)  791-1140. 

9.  PecJt  V.  Meda-Care  Ambulance,    156  Wis.  2d  662  (Ct.  App. 
1990) .   In  this  case.  Peck,  a  lawyer,  sued  Meda-Care  for 
legal  fees.   I  represented  Meda-Care  which  counterclaimed, 
alleging  negligence.   Peck's  alleged  negligence  consisted, 
among  other  things,  of  violating  the  Code  of  Professional 
Responsibility  by  being  a  witness  in  the  same  case  in  which 
he  served  as  counsel.   After  a  jury  trial  in  August,  1989, 
the  Circuit  Court  (McMahon,  J.)  set  aside  the  verdict  and 
granted  Meda-Care  summary  judgment.   The  Court  of  Appeals 
(Fine,  J.)  reversed.   The  Wisconsin  Supreme  Court  denied  a 

petition  for  review.   The  case  raised  the  issue  of  the 
relationship  between  the  Rules  of  Professional 
Responsibility  and  the  standard  of  care  in  a  malpractice 
case  against  a  lawyer.   The  case  is  widely  discussed  at 
seminars  for  lawyers  concerning  ethical  issues.   The 
opposing  counsel  was  John  DeStefanis,  1011  North  Mayfair 
Road,  Milwaukee,  WI   53226,  (414)  257-1800. 

10.  Krug   v.  Zeuske,    199  Wis.  2d  406  (Ct.  App.  1996)   This 
case  involved  a  successful  challenge  to  five  state  statutes 
that  appropriated  over  $300,000  to  road  building 
contractors .   As  lead  counsel ,  I  represented  a  number  of 

12 


1108 


legislators,  taxpayers  and  local  government  officials,  who 
contended  that  the  payments  constituted  "extra  compensation" 
to  the  contractors  in  violation  of  Article  IV,  Section  26, 
of  the  Wisconsin  Constitution,  which  prohibits  the 
legislature  from  granting  "any  extra  compensation  to  a... 
contractor  after  the  services  have  been  rendered  or  the 
contract  has  been  entered  into."   After  a  hearing  in  /^ril 
of  1995,  the  trial  court  (Northrup  J.)  granted  summary 
judgment  for  the  defendants.   The  Court  of  Appeals  (Eich 
C.J.)  reversed  and  held  that  the  statutes  were 
unconstitutional.   The  case  was  decided  on  briefs.   Opposing 
counsel  were  Assistant  Attorney  General,  Gerald  S.  Wilcox, 
123  West  Washington  Avenue,  Madison,  WI   53707,  (608)  267- 
2222  and  Carl  Sinderbrand,  2  East  Gilman  Street,  #300, 
Madison,  WI   53701,  (608)  257-5335. 

In  addition  to  the  foregoing,  the  following  individuals 
are  familiar  with  my  legal  abilities:   Attorney  General 
James  Doyle,  State  Capitol,  Madison  WI   53702,  (608)  266- 
1221;  Judge  James  Gramling,  951  North  7th  Street,  Milwaukee, 
WI   53233,  (414)  278-3800;  Chief  Judge  Patrick  Sheedy,  901 
North  Ninth  Street,  Milwaukee,  WI   53233,  (414)  278-5112; 
Chief  Justice  Shirley  Abrahamson,  231  East  State  Capitol, 
Madison,  WI   53702,  (608)  266-1885;  Judge  Fred  Kessler,  3432 
North  Shepard  Avenue,  Milwaukee,  WI   53211,  (414)  332-6647; 
Judge  Robert  Landry,  224  5  West  Greenwood  Road,  Milwaukee,  WI 
53209,  (414)  228-1914;    Assistant  Attorney  General  Alan 
Lee,  123  West  Washington  Avenue,  Madison  WI   53707,  (608) 
266-0020;  Attorney  David  Harth,  150  East  Gilman  Street, 
Madison  WI   53701,  (608)  258-4210;  Attorney  Paula  Doyle,  121 
South  Hamilton  Street,  Madison  WI   53703,  (608)  255-6627; 
Attorney  Ken  Casey,  161  West  Rockwell  Street,  Jefferson  WI 
53549,  (414)  674-2800. 

19.   Legal  Activities:   Describe  the  most  significant  legal 
activities  you  have  pursued,  including  significant 
litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters 
that  did  not  involve  litigation.   Describe  the  nature  of 
your  participation  in  this  question,  please  omit  any 
information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege 
(unless  the  privilege  has  been  waived.) 

Other  important  legal  activities  in  which  I  have  been 
involved  fall  into  three  broad  categories:   building  a 
successful  law  firm,  handling  a  variety  of  significant  cases 
other  than  those  identified  in  the  answer  to  question  18  and 


13 


1109 

shaping  Wisconsin  law  as  a  state  senator. 

Building  a  Law  Firm. 

I  have  been  primarily  responsible  for  the  creation, 
development  and  management  of  the  law  firm  of  Adelman, 
Adelman  &  Murray.   This  firm  has  grown  from  two  lawyers  to 
ten  lawyers  in  the  last  thirteen  years.   I  have  had  the 
experience  of  building  a  small  business  and  meeting  a 
payroll .   This  experience  has  given  me  a  good  sense  of  the 
concerns  of  small  businessmen  and  of  ordinary  people  who 
have  legal  problems.   This  "real  world"  experience  will  be 
an  asset  to  me  as  a  judge. 

Shaping  Wisconsin  Law  as  a  State  Senator. 

As  a  state  senator  I  have  had  a  substantial  impact  on 
Wisconsin  law.   As  chair  of  the  Senate  Judiciary  Committee 
from  1979-1993  and  again  from  1996-Present,  I  have  shaped 
legislation  concerning  the  civil  and  criminal  justice 
systems.   My  job  as  chair  has  been  to  ensure  that  any  bill 
which  left  the  committee  was  defensible  as  policy  and 
technically  sound. 

In  addition,  I  have  been  the  principal  author  of 
numerous  important  laws.   Some  of  these  laws  are  listed 
below  under  appropriate  categories . 

Making  government  more  accountable  to  citizens. 

•  Ethics  code  for  state  and  local  public  officials.   This 
code  creates  strict  standards  of  conduct  for  public 
officials  and  requires  full  disclosure  of  significant 
economic  interests. 

•  Lobbying  law  which  establishes  the  principle  that 
public  officials  can  take  nothing  of  value  from 
lobbyists  or  principals.   The  law  also  requires  full 
disclosure  of  expenditures  designed  to  influence 
government  action. 


Wisconsin  open  records  law.   This  law  establishes  the 
presumption  that  all  government  records  are  accessible 
to  the  public  and  creates  an  enforcement  procedure. 


14 


1110 


Laws  Protecting  Public  Safety  While  Respecting  Individual 
Rights. 

•  Amendment  to  Wisconsin  Constitution  prohibiting  further 
expansion  of  gambling. 

•  Amendment  to  Wisconsin  Constitution  delineating  the 
rights  of  victims  of  crimes.   This  is  a  balanced 
measure  which  promotes  participation  of  victims  in  the 
judicial  process  but  protects  the  rights  of  defendants. 

•  Wisconsin  drunk  driving  law.   This  law  establishes  an 
objective  standard,  defining  drunk  driving  provides 
strong  penalties  for  violations  and  requires 
appropriate  education  and  treatment  for  all  drunk 
drivers . 

•  Anti-stalking  legislation.   I  crafted  a  compromise 
between  anti-domestic  violence  and  pro-life  groups  by 
persuading  both  groups  to  agree  to  the  model  anti- 
stalking  law  proposed  by  the  National  Institute  of 
Justice. 

•  A  law  which  provides  that  subpoenas  rather  than  search 
warrants  be  used  to  obtain  personal  papers  from  persons 
not  suspected  of  any  wrongdoing. 

•  Comprehensive  reform  of  municipal  court  procedures. 
This  law  stresunlines  procedures  for  prosecuting 
municipal  violations  while  protecting  the  rights  of 
defendants . 

Judicial  Council  Bills. 

The  Wisconsin  Judicial  Council  is  an  agency  of  the  Supreme 
Court  the  purpose  of  which  is  to  propose  improvements  in 
judicial  procedures.   I  have  been  a  member  of  the  Council 
for  over  15  years.    I  sponsored  and  defended  all 
legislation  which  came  out  of  the  Council  including  major 
changes  in  laws  regarding  venue,  statutes  of  limitation, 
guardians  ad  litem,  appellate  practice,  probate,  peremptory 
writs,  contempt  of  court,  judge  substitution,  the  insanity 
defense,  small  claims  procedure,  sentencing,  restitution  and 
earnings  garnishment. 


15 


1111 


Laws  Regarding  Families. 

•  The  Wisconsin  marital  property  law  establishes  the 
principle  that  marriage  is  an  economic  partnership  and 
recognizes  the  economic  contribution  that  a  non-wage 
earning  spouse  makes  to  a  marriage. 

•  A  reform  of  police  and  prosecutorial  procedures  in 
handling  domestic  violence  cases.   The  law  is  designed 
to  get  police  to  arrest  and  prosecutors  to  prosecute 
cases  of  spousal  abuse. 

•  Paternity  law  making  HLA  blood  test  admissible  in 
evidence  thereby  improving  capacity  to  identify  fathers 
and  collect  child  support. 

•  Laws  which  establish  the  rights  of  adoptees,  cut  red 
tape  in  adoption  of  foreign  children  and  improve 
procedures  in  adoption  cases. 


16 


1112 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 


List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts 
from  deferred  income  arrangements,  stock,  options, 
uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which  you 
expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships, 
professional  services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers, 
clients,  or  customers.   Please  describe  the  arrangements  you 
have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial 
or  business  interest. 

1.  Wisconsin  Deferred  Compensation  Plan,  value  of  interest 
is  approximately  $80,000,  payable  on  separation  from  state 
service. 

2.  Wisconsin  Retirement  System,  value  of  interest  is 
approximately  $175,000,  payable  in  form  of  annuity  after 
separation  from  state  service. 

3.  IRA  Account  at  Everen  Securities,  approximate  value  of 
$40,000. 

4.  Adelman,  Adelman  &  Murray,  S.C.,  accrued  bonus,  buy-out 
of  interest  in  law  firm,  value  will  be  determined  and  paid 
out  within  one  year. 

5.  Rent  from  premises  at  308  East  Juneau  Avenue, 
Milwaukee,  WI  53202,  $45,000  per  year. 

6.  Mortgage  due  from  Milwaukee  School  of  Engineering  on 
property  at  1202  North  Broadway,  Milwaukee,  WI   53202 
payable  by  January,  1998.   Amount  due  is  $38,000. 


Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of 
interest,  including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in 
determining  these  areas  of  concern.   Identify  the  categories 
of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to 
present  potential  conflicts  of  interest  during  your  initial 
service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

I  will  follow  the  appropriate  rules,  guidelines  and  canons 
of  ethics  to  resolve  any  potential  conflicts  of  interest, 
including  the  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct.   I  will  make  full 
disclosure  and/or  recuse  myself  where  appropriate.   Because 
my  financial  involvements  are  relatively  limited  I 


1113 


anticipate  few,  if  any,  conflicts. 


Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue 
outside  employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during 
your  service  with  the  court?   If  so,  explain. 

No. 


List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the 
calendar  year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current 
calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees,  dividends, 
interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria  and 
other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more.   (If  you  prefer  to  do 
so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report,  required  by 
the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted 
here . ) 

See  Financial  Disclosure  Report  attached  hereto. 


Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement 
in  detail  (Add  schedules  as  called  for) . 

See  attached  Net  Worth  Statement. 


Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a 
political  campaign?   If  so,  please  identify  the  particulars 
of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  campaign, 
your  title  and  responsibilities. 

Candidate  for  state  senate  1976,  1980,  1984,  1988,  1992  and 

1996. 

Candidate  for  Congress  1974,  1982  and  1984. 


1114 


FINANCIAL     DISCLOSURE     REPORT 

FOR    CALENDAiJ    YEAR     19  96 


Raporl.  Jcwijef  bv  ch«  tchic. 


I       Tcraon    Report  1.09    IL^ac    r\«m« .     fi  rai .    middle     .n.el*" 

Adelman,   Lynn  S. 

J      Cowct    or   OrgAnlE^don 

District  Court   - 

Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin 

>      Date  of    R.pott 
09  /  09/     97 

\-    Title       (Article    III    Judges    i.'vdic-te    active    or 
full-    or   pArt-clnel 

U.S.    District  Judge  Nominee 

s      Report   Type    (check   Appropr Ktc   type! 
JL  Nclwion.    0«e        /      / 
Initi«l      Mutual      F.Ml 

6      Reporting   Pcnoo 

i'i'96    yq/g? 

7      Chambera   or  Office    Address 

308  East  Juneau  Avenue 
Milwaukee  WI     53202 

a      On   the   b*ilf   of   the    inCorsation   contained    In   thie   Report   .Ad 
jny  nodi(ic«tLOn9   pertaining   thereto,    vt    t«      In  my  opinion. 
\n   compliance    -ith   applicable    lawj    jnd    ccgwlaeiona 

Revle«inq  OCIioec                                                                                 Date 

IMPORTANT  NOTCS;  The  instruclioni  accompanying  this  form  must  be  followed      Coraplclc  all  parts, 
checking  the  NONTt  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable  iaformalion      Sign  on  last  page. 

I       POSITIONS.      (Reporting  individual  only^,  see  pp  913  of  Instructions.) 

POSITION  NAME    OF    ORGAN  I ZATrON/ENTITY 

X  NONE       (No  rcporcablc  posiuons) 


State  Senator 


State  of  Wisconsin 


Adelman,   Adelman  &  Murray  S.C. 


II.      AGREEMENTS.      (Reporting  iml.vidual  only,  sec  pp   11.) 7  of  Instructions.) 
DATE  PARTIES    7VND    TERMS 


n 


NONE       (No  reportable  agreements) 

Sum  certain  will   be  paid  out  within  one  (1)  year. 


III.     NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME.     (Reporting  individual  and  spouse;  sec  pp  18  25  of  Instructions.) 
DATE  SOURCE   AND   TYPE 


a 

1995 
1995 


1995 


iqqfi 


1996 


1996 
1996 


NONE       (No  reportable  oon  invcstoent  tneomc) 

State  of  Wisconsin  -   legislative  salary 
Adelman.   Adelman  f.  Hurray  S.r.    -   s^ilary  and   rent 


Spouse  employed  as  attorney  for  firm  of  Adelman.  Adelman 

&  Murray  S.C. 
State  of  V.'isconsin  -   legislative  salary 


Adelman.  Adelman  &  Murray  S.C.   -  salary  and  rent 

Milwaukee  School  of  Engineering  (sale  of  building) 
Spouse  employed  as  attorney  for  firm  of  Adelman.  Adelman 
&  Murray  S.C. 


nRO.qs    INCOME 


%       38,000 
$- 125.000 


s..  iB.onn 

20.000 
fi(  down  payment 


1115 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSITRE  REPORT 


Jamc   or    Person   Rsportinq 

Adelman,   Lynn  S. 


09/  09^   97 


rV.     REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS     transpotuiion.  lodging,  food,  cmertainmein 

(locludci  those  10  spouse  »nd  dcpcodcnl  children;  use  the  paicnIhelicAU  "(S)'  «nd  "(DC)'  to  mdiciie  repotlable 
reimburscmcots  wid  gifts  teceived  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively  See  pp.  26  29  of  Insiruclioos.) 
SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 

NONE       (No  such  reportable  rcunbursemeDts  or  gifts) 


Exempt 


u 


V.      OTHER  GIFTS.       (Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dcpcndcnl  children;  use  the  parcnihcilcals  "(S)'  and  -(DC)"  to 
indicate  other  gifts  icccivtd  by  spouse  and  dependent  cluldren,  rcspcaivcly.  Sec  pp  30-33  of  Iiislruclions  ) 
SOLTRCE  DESCRIPTION 

NONE       (No  such  reportable  gifts) 

Exempt _    S- 

$. 

. s_ 


s_ 


VI.      LIABILITIES.       (Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dcpcndcnl  children,  indicate  \»hcrc  applicable,  person  responsible 
for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  '(S)'  for  separate  liability  of  the  spouse, '())'  for  joint  liability  of 
reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  '(DC)'  for  Lability  of  a  dependent  child.  Sec  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions  ) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE* 


m 


NONE       (No  reportable  liabilities) 


■T-91S,000  or  lc>s  K-$ls,a 

0-J50Q.001-S1.,«00,000  Pl-Sl.O 

W-$<t.OO«.601-»i0,e»0.00D      K-tS». 


1116 


FIMANCIAL  DISCLOStJRE  REPORT 


NifiK   oC    P«r«on  Report  in 

Adelman,  Lynn  S. 


o«te  of  Katiort 

09  /  09/  97 


Vtl.  Page   t  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS  •   income.  v»luc.  transactions  (Includes  iho^^c  of  spouse 
and  dependent  children  Sec  pp  17  S<l  of  Instructions.) 


OcactiPCLOn   of    Ajsacca 
(IncluiJins   cruit   <a>et>l 

Indicate    -here   applicable.    o-Acr    of 
Che    aasct    by  uatng    Che    prtrenchet .cal 
•(Jl-    for    lo.ne    o«c>erah\p  of    ceporc 
xnq    Individual    and    rpooat.    "(SI'    lor 

for    ownership    by   Sep';ndenc    child 
eiMpc   froo  prior  d.acloaurc 

Ick:o-«: 

reporting 
per  LOd 

C 

Croaa   -alue 

ac    end  of 

reporcinij 

period 

Transacclona   durln9   reporting  period 

(11 
AOL.l 

Code 

d^.' 

(11 

value 
Code 
(J-Pl 

value 

Hoc  hod  1 

Codr 

lO-") 

(11 
Type 

buy!    lell. 

tt    ru>c   exc«vc    froai  dtacloaurc                 1 

(21 
0.y 

valued 

Code 

(J-Pl 

O»lol 
Code 
(n-«l 

(SI 
Tdencity  of 
buyer/acllcc 
(if   private 
trutaaocloni 

NONE          (HO    raporcable 
crantacclona) 

EX£ 

Tipt 

'  Amcap  Fund,   Inc.       (J) 

D 

div. 

D 

T 

J  Delaware  Group 
Value  Fund        fJ) 

n 

div. 

n 

T 

Limited   Term 
Municioal    Fund        M) 

int. 

1 

T 

'  MFS   Fund        (J) 

c 

int. 

L 

T 

■•  Morgan  Stanley  Fund        (J) 

^  Washington  Mutua 1 
Fund        (.)! 

B 

div . 

L 
M 

T 

D 

div. 

T 

,   Growth  Fund 
nf  Amprica        (.1) 

0 

div. 

M 

T 

u  Templeton  Emerging 
Markpf<;    Fi.nri         (.1) 

B 

div. 

J 

T 

Paul    Halmbacher 
Family  Trust       (S) 

NO   INC 

IMF 

(see 

nil) 

Huerto  Kico  Electric 
'"Power  Authority 

NO 

NCOME 

K 

T 

>• 

" 

11 

» 

IS 

» 

.' 

'• 

1    Ir>c/Cau<  Cda     A.S1.0OO  or    less 

tCol.   Bi.M)         r«$sa.ooi-sioo.ooo 

S-J'lS'l"    *°°    C-SJ.SOl-SS.OOO      O.SS.OOISIS.OOO                             K.SIS.OOI-SSO.OOO 
C-51Q0.001-S1.000.000                                  Kl-;i.  O0O,O0l-SS.  000. 000          H2>$S.OOO.00A   or   fOre 

J  val   cda:               J-SIS.OOO   or    leaa 
(Col-  C1.03I         o-isoo,ooi-ci.ooo.ooo 

PJ-52S.000.001JSO.000 

K-SIS.OOI.SSO.OOO      L.550.001-J101.000      K-SlOO . 00 1 . 5 JSO, 000      ■-: JSO. 001 -SSOO. 000 

...    "-j'lOoo.Soi.ss.ooo.ooo                            pj-ss.ooo.oSi-sSs.ooo.ooo 

.000      P«-iS0.00a.001    or    KOre 

1   Val   Mth   Cd.        0-«pi>rii.al 
IOpX-    C71                   U-Book  Vjl>.e 

K-Ca<c(real   eseaco  cnly)                                   S-*»««a«Kt«                        T.<U»h/Mar*« 
v.oUxr                                  ,'                                     «;ctuuc«d 

^ 

1117 


FINANCIAL    DiaCLOSCTRE    REPORT     (COnC'd) 


Adelman,  Lynn  S. 


O't.    ot    Kept 

09/09/97 


vm.  ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS  (indict,  part  of  Report.) 

My  spouse   is  a  beneficiary  of   the  Paul   Halmbacher  Family  Trust.      This  Trust   is 


presently  in  probate  and  will   probably  be  distributed  within  the  next  sixty  days. 

The  Trust  consists  primarily  of  stocks. 

IX.  CliRTIFICATION. 

lo  compliance  with  (he  provisions  of  28  U.S  C  §  455  aiid  of  Advisory  Opinion  No  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on  JudjctaJ 
Acuviucs.  and  to  iJic  best  of  my  IcQowicdgc  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry.  1  did  twt  pcii'oiTn  any  adjudicatory  function  in  any  litigation 
dunnfi  Ibc  period  covered  by  this  rcpon  id  wluch  I.  my  spouse,  or  ray  minor  or  dependent  childfcn  had  a  ruiancial  imcresl.  as  defined  m 
CaooD  3C(3)(c).  in  the  outcome  of  such  liiiEalion 

I  certify  that  all  information  given  above  (includine  mformation  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent  children,  if  any)  n 
accurate,  true,  and  cwrapleie  to  the  best  of  my  tnowlcdgc  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  reported  was  withheld  because  it  met 
applicable  statutory  provisions  permittmg  iwn  disclosure 


I  further  ocnily  that  camed  income  from  cmtside  employment  and  honoraiia  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been  reported  are 
in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U  S  C.A   app  4.  §  SOI  et   set)  .  5  U.S.C.  {  7353  and  Judicial  Conference  tcgulatiofu. 


Sigalure        «^-^^vAAs        (^XjZlJM'^JJIA 


'lull 


Vf(/f7 


NOTE:     ANY  INDIVIDUAL  WHO  KNOWINGLY  AND  WILFULLY  FALSIFIES  OR  PAILS  TO  FILE  THIS  RETORT  MAY  BE 
SUBJECT  TO  CrVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U  S  C   App  4,  $  104.) 


PILING  INSTRUCTIONS: 

Miit  signed  ori^al  and  3  additiomil  c»pics  (o 

Cammiaer  on  FinandU  Disclosnic 

UxuieU  StaK«  Coons    . 

Stiitei-IOl 

Ctae  ahmibm  eittJe.-fl^E,., 

•  .;.:.   .;._-i::r ;;.■•■     •                                     ■  .                                                  .-':       ..,' 

.W«simi^,T).C:;  r^] ': 

•«~;-  -lAins..;^  -              .                           ..    -■     _.  rill'   '""■■;: 

.:-.-    .■     -    i.^-^i,-  ■:-      .^-i:-^....:-  '-;  --■-•.:::;" 

1118 


FINANCIAL  STATEMENtr 
NET  WORTH 


GENERAL  INFORMATION 
Are  any  assets  pledged? 


Are  you  a  defendant  in  any 
suits  or  legal  actions? 


Have  you  ever  taken 
bankruptcy? 


Liabilities 


Cash  on  hand  and  in  banks 

U.S.  Government  Securities- 
add  schedule 

Listed  securities-add 
schedule 

Unlisted  securities  - 
add  schedule 

Accounts  t    notes  receivable 
(Shepherd  Express  Newspaper) 
Due  from  relatives  and 

friends 
Due  from  others 
Doubtful 

Real  estate  owned  - 
add  schedule 

Real  estate  mortgages 

receivable 
Autos  and  other 

personal  property 
Cash  value  -  life  insurance 
Other  assets-itemized 

State  Pension 

Deferred  Compensation 

IRA 
Spouses  beneficial  interest 

in  Paul  Halmbacher  Family 

Trust  and  Estate  of  Dorothy 

Halmbacher,  presently  in 

probate 


877,000 


None 
2,000 


None 
None 
None 


400,000 


20,000 
None 

175,000 
80,  000 
40,000 


Notes  payable  to  banks-secured 

Notes  payable  to  banks-unsecured 

Notes  payable  to  relatives 

Notes  payable  to  others 

Accounts  i    bills  due 

Unpaid  income  tax 
Other  unpaid  tax  s  interest 
Real  estate  mortgages  payable- 
add  schedule 

Chattel  mortgages  and  other 

liens  payable 
Other  debts 


None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 
None 


None 
None 


Total  Assets 


2,242,000 


Total  Liabilities 


NET  WORTH 

CONTINGENT  LIABILITIES 


2,242, 000 
None 


NET  WORTH 


TOTAL  LIABILITIES  & 
NET  WORTH 


2,242,000 


2,242,000 


1119 


SCHEDULE  1  -  MUTUAL  FUNDS  &  SECURITIES 


Amcap  Fund  $   140,000 

Delaware  Group  Value  Fund  116,000 

Growth  Fund  of  America  158,000 

Limited  Term  Municipal  Fund  90,000 

MFS  Fund  107,000 

Washington  Mutual  Investors  Fund  150,000 

Templeton  Emerging  Markets  Fund  15,000 

Morgan  Stanley  Asian  Growth  Fund  71,000 

Puerto  Rico  Electric  Power  Authority  30,000 


TOTAL  $   877,000 


REAL  ESTATE  SCHEDULE 


Residence : 

Waterford,  Wisconsin  $200,000 

Office  Building: 

308  East  Juneau  Avenue,  Milwaukee,  WI  53202       $200,000 


Total  $400,000 


1120 


III.   GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 


An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar 
Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for 
"every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence  or 
professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in 
serving  the  disadvantaged."   Describe  what  you  have  done  to 
fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances 
and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

I  do  a  substantial  amount  of  pro  bono   work  almost  all  of 
which  is  designed  to  serve  the  disadvantaged.   I  spend  about 
20%  of  my  professional  time  on  cases  which  benefit  the 
disadvantaged.   Many  of  the  cases  discussed  previously  are 
of  this  type.   For  example,  the  case  of  Demmi th   v.    Wis. 
Judicial   Conference,    166  Wis.  2d  649  (1992)  benefitted  all 
indigent  defendants  charged  with  minor  offenses.   The 
purpose  of  my  efforts  was  to  eliminate  a  bail  schedule  which 
imposed  money  bail  on  poor  people  even  when  it  was 
unnecessary  to  ensure  their  return  to  court. 

Similarly,  the  purpose  of  the  case  of  Joni  B. ,    et  al.    v. 
State,  202  Wis.  2d  1  (1996)  was  to  ensure  that,  where 
appropriate,  courts  can  appoint  lawyers  for  parents  of 
children  who  are  subject  to  CHIPS  proceedings.   Such  parents 
are  usually  poor  and  otherwise  disadvantaged.   In  both  the 
Demmi  th  and  Joni  B.    cases  my  work  was  volunteered. 

I  also  do  pro  bono   work  in  more  ordinary  cases.   For 
example,  I  recently  represented  a  young  man  with  AIDS  in  a 
very  difficult  personal  injury  case  largely  because  he 
needed  a  lawyer.   Similarly,  I  recently  represented  a  high 
school  student  who  was  wrongly  denied  a  college  scholarship 
because  of  the  negligence  of  the  Milwaukee  School  District. 
In  both  cases  the  work  required  far  exceeded  the  potential 
compensation.   I  took  both  cases  because  I  thought  I  could 
help  ensure  that  justice  was  done. 

I  also  encourage  all  the  lawyers  in  my  firm  to  do  pro  bono 
work. 

I  have  also  tried  to  serve  the  disadvantaged  as  a 
legislator.  I  have  worked  hard  on  such  issues  as  child  abuse    / 
prevention  and  domestic  abuse  prevention  which  are  important 
to  disadvantaged  persons.   I  have  been  involved  in  efforts 


1121 


to  improve  state  health  insurance  programs.   I  have  also 
supported  an  effective  Public  Defender  System  in  Wisconsin. 

The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of 
Judicial  Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge 
to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that  invidiously 
discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex  or  religion.   Do  you 
currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization 
which  discriminates  --  through  either  formal  membership 
requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership 
policies?   If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.   What  have 
you  done  to  try  to  change  these  policies? 

No. 


Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to 
recommend  candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts? 
If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?   Please  describe 
your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process, 
from  beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led 
to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you 
participated) . 

Yes,  yes.   In  January,  1997,  I  learned  that  there  would  be  a 
vacancy  in  the  Eastern  District  of  Wisconsin.   I  applied  for 
the  position.   I  was  asked  to  submit  an  application  to  the 
Wisconsin  Federal  Nominating  Commission  established  by 
Senators  Kohl  and  Feingold.   This  Commission  was  chaired  by 
the  Dean  of  the  Marquette  Law  School  and  consisted  of  two 
appointees  by  the  State  Bar  and  four  by  each  of  the 
senators.   I  was  asked  to  fill  out  a  questionnaire  and  was 
interviewed  by  the  Commission.   I  was  one  of  five  candidates 
recommended  by  the  Commission.   In  addition,  my 
qualifications  and  background  have  been  reviewed  by  the 
Department  of  Justice,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation, 
and  the  American  Bar  Association. 


Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a 
judicial  nominee  discussed  with  you  an  specific  case,  legal 
issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be 
interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue 
or  question?   If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

No. 


1122 


Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism 
involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal 
government,  and  within  society  generally,  has  been  subject 
to  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.   It  has  become 
the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that 
alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of  the 
prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have 
been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem- 
solution  rather  than  grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the 
individual  plaintiff  as  a  vehicle  for  the 
imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to 
broad  classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad, 
affirmative  duties  upon  governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening 
jurisdictional  requirements  such  as  standing  and 
ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon 
other  institutions  in  the  manner  of  an 
administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities . 

The  role  of  the  courts  is  to  adjudicate  cases  between 
litigants.   Courts  are  not  legislatures,  and  they 
should  not  legislate.   As  one  who  has  served  as  a 
legislator,  I  am  sensitive  to  the  differences  between 
the  legislative  and  judicial  functions.   Judges  ought 
to  resist  each  of  the  above-described  tendencies  toward 
judicial  activism.   Judges  should  scrupulously  respect 
the  limits  of  judicial  power.   The  role  of  a  judge  is 
to  decide  cases  correctly,  based  on  the  facts. 


1123 


I  eiin  also  sensitive  to  the  different  duties  of  the 
three  branches  of  government  because,  as  a  lawyer,  I 
have  worked  on  many  cases  involving  separation  of 
powers  issues.   It  is  important  for  judges  to  pay 
careful  attention  to  the  separation  of  powers 
principle.   This  means  that  judges  should  understand 
that  policy-making  is  the  province  of  the  legislative 
and  executive  branches  of  government,  not  the  judicial 
branch . 

Moreover,  judges  must  be  sensitive  to  such  doctrines  as 
standing,  ripeness  and  abstention  which  serve  the 
function  of  keeping  courts  from  resolving  issues  which 
may  not  be  properly  before  them.   These  doctrines 
reflect  the  important  proposition  that  District  Courts 
are  courts  of  limited  jurisdiction. 

Because  of  my  work  as  a  legislator  and  my  work  as  a 
lawyer  in  cases  involving  conflicts  between  branches  of 
government,   I  have  a  highly  developed  sense  of  the 
appropriate  roles  of  the  different  branches  of 
government  and  particularly  of  the  limited  role  of  the 
judicial  branch. 


1124 

I.   BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLICO 
Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used.) 

Charles  Roberts  Breyer 

Address:  List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address(es). 

Home:  San  Francisco,  CA 

Office:  Coblentz,  Cahen,  McCabe  &  Breyer 

222  Kearny  Street,  7th  Floor 
San  Francisco,  CA  94108 

Date  and  Place  of  Birth. 

Novembers,  1941;  San  Francisco,  California 


Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name). 
List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and  business 
address(es). 


Married. 
Spouse: 


Sydney  Goldstein 
Executive  Director 
City  Arts  &  Lectures. 
1415  Green  Street 
San  Francisco,  CA  94109 


Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended, 
including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees 
were  granted. 


Colleges  and 

Law  Schools  Attended 

Frpm 

IQ 

Degree 
Received 

Harvard  College 

Boalt  Hall, 

University  of  California 

1959 
1963 

1963 
1966 

A.B.  cum  laude 
in  economics 
(June  1963) 

LLB.  (June  19( 

-1- 


1125 


6.        Employment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional 

corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships, 
institutions  and  organizations,  nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including 
firms,  with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer,  director,  partner, 
proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  from  college. 

Employment: 

Summer  1963 

Playground  Director 

San  Francisco  Unified  School  District 

San  Francisco,  California 

Summer  1964 

Law  Clerk 

Lewis  &  Rouda 

San  Francisco,  California 

Summer  1965 

Group  Leader 

Experiment  in  International  Living 

Putney,  Vermont 

August  1966-Julv  1967 

Law  Clerk  to  Judge  Oliver  J.  Carter 

Chief  Judge 

U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Northern  District  of  California 

July  1967-September  1967 

U.S.  Army  Reserve 
Fort  Ord,  California 

October  1967-December  1967 

Juvenile  Hall  Project 

Legal  Aid  Society  of  San  Francisco 

December  1967-Auaust  1973 

Assistant  District  Attorney 

San  Francisco  District  Attorney's  Office 

August  1973-November  1974 

Assistant  Special  Prosecutor 
Watergate  Special  Prosecution  Force 
Department  of  Justice,  Washington,  D.C. 


-2- 


1126 


December  1974  to  December  1979 

Jacobs,  Sills  &  Coblentz 

(now  Coblentz,  Cahen,  McCabe  &  Breyer) 

San  Francisco,  California 

1979 

Chief  Assistant  District  Attorney 
City  and  County  of  San  Francisco 

1980  to  Present 

Coblentz,  Cahen,  McCabe  &  Breyer 
San  Francisco,  California 


Board  of  Directors.  Non-Profit  Organizations: 
1977 

Travelers  Aid 
1979 

Spring  Opera 
1980 

Friends  of  the  San  Francisco  Public  Library 
1983-1985 

Northern  California  Chapter  of  the  American  Civil  Liberties  Union 
1986-1989 

Lawyers  Committee  for  Human  Rights 
1996-1997 

Lawyers  Committee  for  Human  Rights,  Advisory  Council 
1995-Present 
San  Francisco  Conservation  Corps 


1127 


7.  Military  Service:  Have  you  liad  any  military  service?  If  so,  give 
particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial 
number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 

1966-1972— U.S.  Amfiy  ER  1 9856060 
1966-1969— P.F.C. 

1969-1972 — Captain,  Judge  Advocate  General's  Corps. 
Honorable  Discharge 

8.  Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary 
degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you  believe  would 
be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

I  have  received  citations  in  connection  with  my  services  as  Assistant 
District  Attomey  and  Assistant  Special  Prosecutor.  I  am  also  a  Fellow  of 
the  American  College  of  Trial  Lawyers,  a  recognition  conferred  by  my 
peers  in  the  practice  of  trial  law.  I  was  selected  as  a  lawyers' 
representative  to  the  Judicial  Conference  of  the  Ninth  Circuit  from  1989  to 
1991 .  In  my  youth  I  was  an  Eagle  Scout  and  the  recipient  of  the  Harvard 
College  Hansen  Award. 

9.  Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related 
committees  or  conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member 
and  give  the  tities  and  dates  of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in 
such  groups. 

American  Bar  Association,  1975  to  present. 

San  Francisco  Bar  Association,  1975  to  present. 

Chairperson,  Ethical  Considerations  in  the  Prosecution  and  Defense  of 
Criminal  Cases  (American  Bar  Association),  1976-1982. 

Member,  Advisory  Committee  to  the  United  States  District  Court,  Northem 
District  of  California.  Tnis  committee,  established  by  Act  of  Congress, 
was  appointed  by  the  judges  of  the  District  Court  to  serve  as  an  advisory 
committee  on  the  implementation  of  the  "Speedy  Trial  Act"  (1975). 

Member,  Penal  Reform  Committee,  San  Francisco  Bar  Association, 
(1970). 

San  Francisco  Civil  Investigative  Grand  Jury  (1975). 

San  Francisco  Juvenile  Probation  Commission  (1996). 

Co-Chair,  Special  Bar  Committee,  San  Francisco  Bar  Association, 
investigation  of  San  Francisco  District  Attome/s  office  (1976). 

American  College  of  Trial  Lawyers,  Federal  Rules  of  Criminal  Procedure 
Committee  (1997). 


1128 


10.  other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that 
are  active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies.  Please  list  all  other 
organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

(a)  Lobbying: 

American  Bar  Association 
American  College  of  Trial  Lawyers 
State  Bar  of  California 

San  Francisco  Bar  Association 

***** 

(b)  Other: 

California  Tennis  Club  (Copy  of  By-Laws  attached  as  Exhibit  A) 

11.  Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to 
practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such 
memberships  lapsed.  Please  explain  the  reason  for  any  lapse  of 
membership.  Give  the  same  information  for  administrative  bodies 
which  require  special  admission  to  practice. 

U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Northem  District  of  Callfomla.  1966 

U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Central  District  of  California,  1980 

U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Southem  District  of  Callfomla,  1982 

U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California,  1985 

U.S.  District  Court  for  the  District  of  Columbia,  1973 

U.S.  District  Court  for  the  District  of  Kansas,  1987 

U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Northem  District  of  Illinois,  1985 

U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Southem  District  of  New  Yori<,  1988 

U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Northem  Mariana  Islands,  1986 

U.S.  Tax  Court,  1978 

U.S.  Supreme  Court,  1974 

U.S.  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Ninth  Circuit,  1966 

Califomla  Supreme  Court,  1966 

12.  Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books, 
articles,  reports,  or  other  published  material  you  have  written  or 
edited.  Please  supply  one  copy  of  all  published  material  not  readily 
available  to  the  Committee.  Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all 
speeches  by  you  and  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal 
policy.  If  there  were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are 
readily  available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

Over-crowding  In  the  San  Francisco  County  Jail  published  in  the  San 
Francisco  Bar  Association  Journal  (1970).  (Unable  to  locate  a  copy.) 


1129 


PUBLICATION 

DATE 

TitLE 

San  Francisco  Chronicle 

5/16/82 

Condemning  the  U.S. 
Justice  System  (Book 
Review) 

San  Francisco  Chronicle 

9/12/82 

A  Country  Lawyer's  Fear 
of  Rejection  (Book 
Review) 

San  Francisco  Chronicle 

12/18/83 

Two  Versions  of  A 
Lawyer's  Art  (Book 
Review) 

San  Francisco  Chronicle 

1983 

Legal  Victory  At  Nearly 
/^y  Cost  (Book  Review) 

San  Francisco  Chronicle 

4/1/84 

Constitutional  "Niceties" 
Were  Just  Inconvenient 
(Book  Review) 

San  Francisco  Chronicle 

6/2/85 

Flawed  Study  of  a 
Murderer  (Book  Review) 

San  Francisco  Chronicle 

7/30/89 

The  Power  of  Life  and 
Death  (Book  Review) 

San  Francisco  Chronicle 

12/3/89 

A  Pursuit  of  Justice 
(Book  Review) 

San  Francisco  Chronicle 

2/25/90 

A  Supremely  Pragmatic 
Court  (Book  Review) 

San  Francisco  Chronicle 

3/13/91 

Medical  Testimony  with  a 
Novel  View  (Book 
Review) 

San  Francisco  Chronicle 

5/19/91 

"Chutzpah"  Is  His  Middle 
Name  (Book  Review) 

San  Francisco  Chronicle 

12/1/91 

Washington's  Power 
Lawyer  (Book  Review) 

San  Francisco  Civil  Investioath/e 

Grand  Jury 

Grand  Jury  Reports 

1975 

The  Office  of  the  Mayor 

Grand  Jury  Reports 

1975 

San  Francisco  Police 
Department 

Grand  Jury  Reports 

1975 

Sheriffs  Department 

Grand  Jury  Reports 

1975 

Strike  Report 

45    964    1694 


1130 


Grand  Jury  Reports 

1975 

Electronic  Data 
Processing 

Grand  Jury  Reports 

1975 

The  Art  Commission 

Grand  Jury  Reports 

1975 

San  Francisco's  Legal 
Services 

Grand  Jury  Reports 

1975 

Minority  Report  on  the 
Office  of  the  District 
Attorney 

Copies  of  the  above-referenced  materials  are  attached  as  Exhibit  B. 

13.  Health:  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of 
your  last  physical  examination. 

Excellent.  May  28,  1997 

14.  Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have 
held,  whether  such  position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a 
description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each  such  court 

None. 


15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  (1)  citations  for 
the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you  have  written;  (2)  a  short 
summary  of  and  citations  for  all  appellate  opinions  where  your 
decisions  were  reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with 
significant  criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and 
(3)  citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional 
issues,  together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such 
opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported, 
please  provide  copses  of  the  opinion. 

Not  Applicable. 

16.  Public  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you  have 
held,  other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and 
whether  such  positions  were  elected  or  appointed.  State 
(chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies  for  elective  public 
office. 

In  1975  I  was  appointed  by  the  Presiding  Judge  of  the  Superior  Court  to 
serve  as  a  member  of  the  San  Francisco  Civil  Investigative  Grand  Jury. 
We  issued  detailed  reports  on  local  governmental  operations,  including 
the  County  jail  facilities,  management  of  the  Controller's  Office,  and  the 
Public  Health  Service.  The  term  of  service  was  for  one  year. 


-7- 


1131 


In  1994  I  was  appointed  by  Frank  Jordan,  Mayor  of  the  City  and  County  of 
San  Francisco  to  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  San  Francisco 
Conservation  Corps.  My  term  of  service  is  through  1998. 

In  1996  I  was  appointed  by  the  Mayor  of  San  Francisco,  upon  the 
recommendation  of  the  San  Francisco  Superior  Court,  to  the  Juvenile 
Probation  Commission  for  a  four-year  tenm.  I  presently  serve  as  the 
President  of  the  Commission.  This  Commission  sets  policy  for  the 
administration  of  the  Juvenile  Justice  System.  The  term  of  service  is 
March  1996  through  January  15,  2000. 

17.      Legal  Career: 

(a)       Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience 
after  graduation  from  law  school  including: 

(1)       whether  you  served  as  a  clerk  to  a  judge  and,  if  so,  the 
name  of  the  judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period 
you  were  a  cleric; 

August  1966-Julv  1967 

Law  Clerk  to  Judge  Oliver  J.  Carter 

Chief  Judge 

U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Northern  District  of  California 


(2)  whether  you  practiced  alone  and,  if  so,  the  addresses 
and  dates. 

I  have  never  practiced  as  a  sole  practitioner. 

(3)  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices, 
companies  or  governmental  agencies  with  which  you 
have  been  connected,  and  the  nature  of  your  connection 
with  each; 

October  1967-December  1967 

Juvenile  Hall  Project 

Legal  Aid  Society  of  San  Francisco 

1663  Mission  Street 

San  Francisco,  California  94103 

I  served  as  counsel  to  indigent  juveniles  at  the  Youth 
Guidance  Center  in  proceedings  before  Court 
commissioners  and  Superior  Court  judges. 


1132 


December  1967-Auaust  1973 

Assistant  District  Attorney 

880  Bryant  Street 

San  Francisco  District  Attorney's  Office 

San  Francisco,  California  94103 

I  served  as  trial  counsel  representing  the  State  of  California 
in  the  prosecution  of  criminal  offenses,  both  misdemeanors 
and  felonies.  These  offenses  ranged  from  traffic  offenses  to 
multiple  homicides,  for  which  the  death  penalty  was 
imposed.  I  tried  over  50  felony  jury  trials  and  was  certified 
as  a  criminal  law  specialist  by  the  State  Bar  of  Califomia. 

Auoust  1973-November  1974 

Assistant  Special  Prosecutor 
Watergate  Special  Prosecution  Force 
Department  of  Justice,  Washington,  D.C. 

I  was  the  second  chair  in  the  prosecution  of  the  White 
House  "plumbers"  for  violation  of  the  civil  rights  of  Dr.  Louis 
Fielding.  I  also  conducted  grand  jury  proceedings  into  illegal 
wiretaps  and  illegal  campaign  contributions. 

December  1974  to  December  1979 

Jacobs,  Sills  &  Coblentz 

(now  Coblentz,  Cahen,  McCabe  &  Breyer) 

222  Keamy  Street,  7th  Floor 

San  Francisco,  Califomia 

I  joined  the  firm  in  December  1974,  and  became  a  partner  in 
1975.  Since  that  date  I  have  specialized  in  civil  and  criminal 
complex  litigation. 

1979 

Chief  Assistant  District  Attomey 
City  and  County  of  San  Francisco 
880  Bryant  Street 
San  Francisco,  California  94103 

1980-Present 

Coblentz,  Cahen,  McCabe  &  Breyer 
222  Keamy  Street,  7th  Floor 
San  Francisco,  California  94108 


-9- 


U33 


(b)  (1 )       What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law 

practice,  dividing  it  into  periods  with  dates  If  Its 
character  has  changed  over  the  year? 

And 

(2)       Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  areas 
If  any,  In  which  you  have  specialized. 

I  have  a  general  litigation  practice  specializing  in  the  trial  of 
cases.  From  1967  to  1974  as  a  prosecutor,  I  appeared  in 
court  on  a  daily  basis  and  was  certified  by  the  State  Bar  of 
California  as  a  criminal  law  specialist.  Upon  entering  private 
practice,  I  have  represented  defendants  in  criminal  matters 
with  an  emphasis  on  "white  collar"  offenses.  In  civil  matters 
I  have  tried  a  wide  variety  of  cases  including  matters  relating 
to  construction  defects,  tnjsts  and  estates,  securities, 
entertainment  law  and  real  estate.  I  have  no  "typical"  client. 
My  clientele  ranges  from  private  individuals  to  publicly-held 
corporations  and  financial  institutions. 

(c)  (1 )       Did  you  appear  In  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not 

at  all?  If  the  frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court 
varied,  describe  each  such  variance,  giving  date. 

I  have  appeared  in  court  frequently  throughout  my  practice 
As  an  Assistant  District  Attomey,  I  appeared  in  court  daily. 
As  a  private  practitioner,  I  appear  at  least  once  a  week  and 
more  often  if  I  am  in  trial. 

(2)  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  were  In: 

(a)  federal  courts:  60% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record:     30% 

(c)  other  courts:  10% 

(3)  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil:  50% 

(b)  criminal:       50% 

(4)  State  the  number  of  cases  In  courts  of  record  you  tried 
to  verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than  settled),  Indicating 
whether  you  were  sole  counsel,  chief  counsel,  or 
associate  counsel. 

I  have  tried  between  75  to  100  jury  trials  as  an  Assistant 
District  Attomey  serving  as  sole  counsel.  As  a  private 
practitioner,  I  have  tried  numerous  cases  along  with  co- 
counsel. 


-10- 


1134 


(5)       What  percentage  of  these  trial  were: 


(a)  jury: 

(b)  non-jury: 


(Approximately)  75% 
25% 


18.      Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which 
you  personally  handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were 
reported,  and  the  docket  number  and  date  if  unreported.  Give  a 
capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of  each  case.  Identify  the  party  or 
parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case. 
Also  state  as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges 
before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co- 
counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 

United  States  v.  John  P.  Ehrlichman.  et  a!..  546  F.2d  910  (D.C.  Cir.  1977). 

Judge:  Opposing  Counsel: 


Honorable  Gerhard  A.  Gesell 
(deceased) 


William  Snow  Frates 

4745  South  West  76th  Terrace 

Miami,  PL 

305/666-2553 

Co-Counsel: 

William  H.  Merrill 
(Address  Unknown) 


Henry  L.  Hecht 
University  of  California 
Boalt  Hall.  School  of  Law 
Berkeley,  CA 
510/642-1787 

As  a  Watergate  Assistant  Special  Prosecutor,  I  tried  high  govemment 
officials  for  conspiracy  to  violate  the  civil  rights  of  Dr.  Lewis  Fielding 
(psychiatrist  to  Daniel  Ellsberg,  an  author  of  the  Pentagon  Papers).  This 
case,  which  involved  the  White  House  "Plumbers" — G.  Gordon  Liddy, 
Howard  Hunt,  David  Young  and  Egil  Krogh — and  Special  Assistant  to  the 
President,  Charles  Colson — demonstrated  that  no  purported  "National 
Security"  defense  excuses  the  violation  of  a  citizen's  rights.  The  Grand 
Jury  proceedings  lasted  eight  months  and  the  trial  lasted  one  month.  I 
was  second  chair.  All  defendants  were  convicted  in  July  of  1974. 


-11- 


1135 


There  were,  of  course,  numerous  other  activities  investigated  in 
connection  with  this  matter,  including  the  use  of  wiretaps  on  the  press, 
attempts  to  stop  the  publication  of  the  Pentagon  Papers,  and  improper 
contacts  by  the  White  House  with  the  judiciary  in  an  effort  to  influence  the 
court.  This  case,  in  which  the  verdict  was  obtained  before  President 
Nixon's  resignation,  brought  to  public  view  a  multitude  of  governmental 
abuses  of  power. 


People  of  the  State  of  Califomia  v.  Sandoval.  San  Francisco  Superior 
Court  Case  Numbers  78G58,  78331 

Judge:  Opposing  Counsel: 

Honorable  Robert  J.  Drewes  John  Nash 

(deceased)  P.O.  Box  22032 

San  Francisco,  CA  94122 

[No  telephone  number  available] 

In  1972  I  prosecuted  Enrique  Sandoval  on  two  counts  of  murder.  The  trial 
lasted  approximately  four  months  with  the  jury  retuming  verdicts  of  guilty 
on  both  counts.  Upon  completion  of  the  penalty  phase,  the  defendant 
was  sentenced  to  death.  This  case  was  the  first  capital  judgment 
rendered  by  a  San  Francisco  jury  in  more  than  10  years.  I  was  sole 
government  counsel.  Subsequently,  in  People  v.  Anderson.  6  Cal.  3d  628 
(1972)  the  Califomia  Supreme  Court  nullified  all  capital  sentences. 
Mr.  Sandoval  was  then  sentenced  to  life  in  Imprisonment. 


People  of  the  State  of  Califomia  v.  Poole.  San  Francisco  Superior  Court 
Case  Number  82901 

Judge:  Opposing  Counsel: 

Honorable  John  Ertola  (Ret.)  Joe  R.  McCray 

433  Turi<  Street 
San  Francisco,  CA  94102 
415/775-3900 

As  an  Assistant  District  Attomey,  I  prosecuted  Junious  Poole  for  the 
murder  of  a  police  officer.  The  trial  lasted  approximately  2  months  in 
which  the  defense  of  diminished  capacity  was  presented.  After  extensive 
psychiatric  testimony,  this  defense  was  rejected  by  the  jury.  The 
defendant  was  sentenced  to  life  imprisonment. 

People  of  the  State  of  Califomia  v.  Simmons.  San  Francisco  Municipal 
Court 

No  Judge  Opposing  Counsel: 

Stanley  J.  Friedman 
13255  San  Pablo  Avenue 
San  Pablo,  CA  94806 
510/215-7888 


-12- 


1136 


As  Chief  Assistant  District  Attorney  in  1979, 1  presented  evidence  to  the 
Grand  Jury  of  laundering  of  political  contributions  by  the  defendant.  This 
investigation  covered  a  six-month  period,  at  which  time  the  Grand  Jury 
returned  an  indictment  to  which  the  defendant  plead  guilty.  This  was  the 
first  case  brought  in  San  Francisco  involving  violation  of  the  laws  relating 
to  the  reporting  of  political  contributions. 

United  States  v.  David  Weiss  (N.D.  Cal.  1988,  Case  Number  CR  88 
20047  WAI). 


Judge: 

Honorable  William  A.  Ingram 
United  States  District  Court 


Opposing  Counsel: 

Terry  Lee 

Santa  Clara  District  Attorney's  Office 

70  West  Hedding  Street 

San  Jose,  CA  95110 

408/299-7503 


People  of  the  State  of  California  v.  Weiss  (Santa  Clara  County  Superior, 
Case  Number  603123). 


Honorable  John  S.  Pasco 
Santa  Clara  Municipal  Court 


Opposing  Counsel: 

William  Larsen 

Santa  Clara  District  Attorney's  Office 

70  West  Hedding  Street 

San  Jose,  CA  95110 

408/299-7503 


In  1988,  Weiss,  charged  with  income  tax  evasion,  was  the  contractor  for 
the  San  Jose  Transit  Mall.  He  was  the  target  of  investigations  conducted 
by  more  than  ten  govemmental  agencies  and  had  acquired  an  extremely 
negative  reputation  in  the  community.  The  grand  jury  investigation  was 
two  years  in  duration  and  the  trial  lasted  several  months.  Weiss  was 
acquitted  because;  in  my  opinion,  the  jury  followed  the  law  and  did  not 
permit  the  community's  feelings  to  influence  the  verdict.  In  the  companion 
state  cases,  after  lengthy  motions,  there  was  a  dismissal  of  the  principal 
charges  by  the  District  Attomey. 


Donna  L.  Whitnev.  et  al.  v.  David  W.  Mitchell,  et  al..  State  of  Minnesota, 
County  of  Hennepin,  Court  File  No.  89-15980 


Judge: 

Honorable  Thomas  H.  Carey 
Judge  of  the  District  Court 
for  Hennepin  County 


Opposing  Counsel: 

Herbert  Stern 
David  Stone 
Stem  &  Greenberg 
75  Livingston  Avenue 
Roseland,  NJ  07068 
201/535-1900 


-13- 


1137 


Co-Counsel: 

Richard  G.  Wilson 

Maslon,  Edelman,  Bomian  &  Brand 

3300  Nonwest  Center 

Minneapolis,  MN  55402 

612/672-8200 

This  legal  malpractice  matter  involved  a  claim  in  excess  of  fifty  million 
dollars.  Pre-trial  matters  consumed  many  months,  including  summary 
adjudication  and  motions.  The  court  followed  the  unusual  procedure  of 
requiring  counsel  to  preview  their  opening  statements  before  "opposing" 
counsel  and  clients.  Subsequent  to  this  presentation,  the  matter  settled. 


Estate  of  Elvis  Presley  v.  Col.  Tom  Parker.  Court:  Labor  Commissioner, 
State  of  California,  Case  Number  4-82. 

Opposing  Counsel: 

Edmund  S.  Schaffer 

1801  Century  Park  E.,  Ste.  2222 

Los  Angeles.  CA  90067 

310/522-1707 

Co-Counsel: 

L.  Peter  Parcher 
Parcher,  Hayes  &  Liebman 
500  Fifth  Avenue 
New  York,  NY  10010 
212/382-0200 


!  was  retained  by  the  Presley  Estate  to  bring  this  case  against  the  late 
artist's  unlicensed  manager,  requiring  disgorgement  of  all  fees  received 
during  the  manager's  representation  of  the  artist.  The  case  incorporated 
the  doctrine  set  forth  in  Buchwald  v.  Katz  8  Cal.3d  493  (1972),  in  which  I 
participated  on  behalf  of  the  Jefferson  Airplane  once  the  case  was 
remanded  for  trial.  These  cases  protected  the  rights  of  artists  who  are 
often  ill-equipped  to  exercise  control  over  their  commercial  benefits.  I  was 
co-counsel  with  L  Peter  Parcher  in  these  matters  which  ultimately  settled 
without  a  hearing. 


-14- 


1138 


Max  Sobel  Wholesale  Liquors  v.  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue  630 
F.2d  670  (9th  Cir.  1980)  C.J.  Choy.  Tang  and  D.J.  Reed. 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for      Opposing  Counsel: 

the  Ninth  Circuit 

Edward  B.  Simpson 
Internal  Revenue  Service 
160  Spear  Street,  9th  Fl. 
San  Francisco,  CA  94105 
415/744-9208 


My  client  included  the  cost  of  promotional  merchandise  (extra  bottles  of 
liquor)  in  the  cost  of  goods  sold  although  the  sale  of  this  promotional 
merchandise  was  in  violation  of  state  liquor  laws.  The  9th  Circuit  upheld 
the  tax  court's  ruling  that  the  Revenue  Code  is  neutral  in  its  application  of 
accounting  practices.  Thus,  even  if  the  sale  of  the  promotional 
merchandise  was  illegal,  it  was  not  for  the  taxing  authorities  to  attempt 
either  directly  or  indirectly  to  enforce  state  laws  which  are  criminal  in 
nature.  I  served  as  trial  counsel  with  my  tax  partner  in  the  tax  court  in  a 
two-day  trial  and  as  the  advocate  before  the  9th  Circuit. 


United  States  v.  Harris.  (N.D.  Cal.  1991,  Case  Number  CR  90-0456  CAL). 

Judge:  Opposing  Counsel: 

Honorable  Charles  A.  Legge  Scott  McKay 

United  States  District  Court  Department  of  Justice 

Northern  District  of  California  950  Pennsylvania  Avenue,  N.W. 

Washington,  D.C.  20530 

202/514-2000 

Co-Counsel: 

Robert  P.  Feldman 
Wilson,  Sonsini,  et  al. 
650  Page  Mill  Road 
Palo  Alto,  CA  94304 
415/493-9300 

Jeff  Chanin 

Keker  &  Van  Nest 

710  Sansome  Street 

San  Francisco,  CA  94111-1704 

415/391-5400 


My  client,  Ronald  Schultz,  was  accused  of  bribing  a  foreign  ofTicial  in  an 
effort  to  obtain  a  contract  for  telephone  equipment  in  violation  of  the 


-15- 


1139 


Foreign  Corrupt  Practices  Act.  The  significance  of  this  case  lies  in  the 
degree  of  preparation  required  in  order  to  defend  against  a  two-year 
governmental  investigation  spanning  three  continents.  After  a  three-week 
presentation  by  the  Government  of  its  case  in  chief,  the  Court  directed 
verdicts  of  acquittal  as  to  all  defendants. 


People  of  Micronesia.  Inc.  et  al.  v.  Continental  Airlines.  Inc..  et  al.  U.S. 
District  Court  for  the  Northern  Mariana  Islands,  Civil  Action  No.  85-0002. 


Judge:  Opposing  Counsel: 

Honorable  Alfred  Laureta  Peter  Donnici 

Saipan,  CNMI  Dennis  Ken/vin 

Donnici,  Kenwin  &  Donnici 
One  Post  Street,  Suite  2450 
San  Francisco,  CA  94104-5228 
415/986-8881 

Co-Counsel: 

Donald  C.  Williams 
Carismith,  Wichman,  Case,  Mukai 
and  Ichiki 
P.O.  Box  241  CHRB 
Saipan,  CNMI  96950 
671/322-3455/56 

In  1985,  a  default  was  entered  against  Continental  Airiines  based  upon  a 
complaint  seeking  more  than  fifty  million  dollars  in  damages.  I  was 
retained  for  the  purpose  of  seeking  relief  from  the  default    Our  motion  to 
set  aside  the  default  required  two  extensive  hearings  before  the  Court 
over  a  six  month  period.  Prior  to  the  Court's  ruling  on  our  motion,  the 
matter  was  settled. 


19.      Legal  Activities;  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you 
have  pursued,  including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress 
to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did  not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the 
nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question,  please  omit  any 
information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the 
privilege  has  been  waived). 

I  have  represented  clients  on  numerous  occasions  who  were  under 
investigation  for  alleged  criminal  activities.  Many  of  these  matters  did  not 
result  in  indictment. 

In  addition  to  representing  clients,  I  believe  that  my  teaching  is  of  some 
significance  in  serving  the  legal  community.  Fifteen  years  ago,  along  with 
two  of  my  colleagues,  developed  a  course  for  lawyers  on  the  subject  of 


-16- 


1140 


trial  preparation.  This  course,  under  the  auspices  of  the  California 
Continuing  Education  of  the  Bar,  has  been  given  every  other  year  since  its 
inception.  We  present  our  program  which  is  entitled  "Preparing  a  Case  for 
Trial  in  the  Last  One  Hundred  Days"  throughout  Northern  California. 

I  also  have  participated  in  panel  discussions  under  the  auspices  of  the 
Practicing  Law  Institute,  Hastings  College  of  Trial  Advocacy,  Harvard  Law 
School  Evidence  Project  and  the  California  Association  of  Business  Trial 
Lawyers.  All  these  services  were  provided  on  a  eeq  bono  basis. 


-17- 


1141 


II    FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  rPUBLIC^ 


List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from 
deferred  income  arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted 
contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which  you  expect  to  derive  from 
previous  business  relationships,  professional  services,  firm 
memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please 
describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the 
future  for  any  financial  or  business  interest 

See  attached  Exhibit  C. 


Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest, 
including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in  determining  these  areas  of 
concern.  Identify  the  categories  of  litigation  and  financial 
arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present  potential  conflicts-of-interest 
during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been 
nominated. 

I  believe  a  full  disclosure  to  litigants  and  their  counsel  of  any  relationship, 
business  or  othenwise,  should  be  made  at  the  first  available  opportunity.  I 
would  follow  the  procedure  for  resolving  potential  conflicts  set  forth  in  the 
Canon  of  Ethics  and  applicable  judicial  procedures.  I  would  not  hear 
matters  involving  my  law  firm. 


Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue 
outside  employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your 
service  with  court?  If  so,  explain. 

None. 


List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar 
year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year, 
including  all  salaries,  fees,  dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties, 
patents,  honoraria,  and  other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more.  (If  you 
prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report,  required  by 
the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  attached  Exhibit  D. 


Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail 
(add  schedules  called  for). 

See  attached  Exhibit  E. 


-18- 


1142 


Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political 
campaign?  If  so,  please  identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign, 
including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the  campaign,  your  title  and 
responsibilities. 

No. 


-19- 


1143 
III    GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 


1 .  An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar 
Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every 
lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence  or  professional 
workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  serving  the 
disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these 
responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time 
devoted  to  each. 

I  am  presently  on  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  San  Francisco 
Conservation  Corps  and  provide  legal  sen/ices  to  that  organization. 

The  San  Francisco  Conservation  Corps  is  a  non-profit  job  training  and 
education  program  serving  youth  ages  12-24.  Program  participants, 
called  Corpsmembers  and  Junior  Corpsmembers,  develop  job  skills, 
academic  and  leadership  abilities,  and  environmental  awareness  as  they 
serve  the  diverse  communities  of  San  Francisco  through  their  work  on  a 
variety  of  education,  conservation  and  community  service  projects.  These 
individuals  also  participate  in  education  programs  which  include  academic 
enrichment  studies,  leadership  development,  GED  preparation  for  adults, 
environmental  education,  and  computer  training. 

In  1996  I  was  appointed  by  the  Mayor  of  San  Francisco,  upon  the 
recommendation  of  the  San  Francisco  Superior  Court,  to  the  Juvenile 
Probation  Commission  for  a  four-year  term.  I  presently  serve  as  the 
President  of  the  Commission.  This  Commission  sets  policy  for  the 
administration  of  the  Juvenile  Justice  System,  which  addresses  the 
problems  of  disadvantaged  youth. 

2.  The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial 
Conduct  states  that  It  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold 
membership  in  any  organization  that  invidiously  discriminates  on 
the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you  currently  belong,  or  have 
you  belonged,  to  any  organization  which  discriminates — ^through 
either  formal  membership  requirements  or  the  practical 
implementation  of  membership  policies?  If  so,  list,  with  dates  of 
membership.  What  you  have  done  to  try  to  change  these  policies? 

In  1 967, 1  joined  a  San  Francisco  social  club  known  as  "The  Family"  as  a 
participant  in  their  performing  arts  (singing)  section.  In  the  late  1980s,  I 
advocated  a  change  in  the  gender  discrimination  policy.  Unfortunately, 
this  policy  was  not  discontinued,  and  I  resigned  in  1990. 

3.  Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend 
candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it 
recommend  your  nomination?  Please  describe  your  experience  in 
the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from  beginning  to  end 
(including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and 
interviews  in  which  you  participated). 


-20- 


1144 


Senator  Dianne  Feinstein  established  a  Judicial  Selection  Commission  to 
interview  candidates  for  this  position.  I  have  been  interviewed  by  a  sub- 
committee of  two  members,  and  then  by  the  full  commission  on  two 
separate  occasions.  I  understand  that  my  name  was  fonwarded  to 
Senator  Feinstein  in  1994  and  again  this  year  for  her  consideration.  Upon 
the  fonwarding  of  my  name  on  both  occasions,  I  was  interviewed  by 
Senator  Feinstein.  After  my  name  was  forwarded  to  the  President,  I  was 
interviewed  by  the  Department  of  Justice,  the  Federal  Bureau  of 
Investigation,  and  the  Standing  Committee  on  Federal  Judiciary  of  the 
American  Bar  Association. 


4.        Has  anyone  involved  In  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial 
nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or 
question  in  the  manner  that  could  reasonably  be  interpreted  as 
asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue,  or  question?  If  so, 
please  explain  fully. 

No. 


Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving 
"judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal  government,  and 
within  society  generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing 
controversy  in  recent  years.  It  has  become  the  target  of  both 
popular  and  academic  criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial  branch 
has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels 
of  government. 

(a)  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather 
than  grievance-resolution? 

(b)  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff 
as  a  vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders 
extending  to  broad  classes  of  individuals; 

(c)  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duties 
upon  governments  and  society; 

(d)  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional 
requirements  such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 

(e)  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other 
institutions  in  the  manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing 
oversight  responsibilities. 

I  believe  that  the  judge's  job  is  to  apply  and  to  uphold  the  law,  following 
the  Constitution,  the  statutes  as  written  by  Congress,  and  applicable  rules 
and  regulations — all  as  interpreted  by  governing  precedent.  This  latter 
role  is  the  role  the  Constitution  foresees  for  a  judge;  it  is  the  role  that  he  or 
she  promises  to  play  in  the  oath  of  office.  A  judge  fulfills  this  role  by 
discharging  his  or  her  judicial  duties  with  integrity  and  objectivity. 

-21- 


1145 


I  also  believe  that  a  judge  should  interpret  statutes,  apply  case  law,  and 
administer  the  law  in  individual  cases,  with  an  eye  to  the  basic  purposes 
of  the  law— Congress's  ultimate  purpose  in  respect  to  statutes;  and  the 
basic  purpose  of  a  precedent  or  rule  or  regulation  as  well. 


-22- 


1146 


CALIFORNIA 

TENNIS 

CLUB 


BY-  LAWS 


Founded  in  1884 


1147 

ARTICLE  I 

NAME  AND  PURPOSE 

SECTION  1.     Name  and  Purpose. 

The  corporation  shall  be  known  as  the  CaUfornia  Tennis  Club,  hereinaf- 
ter referred  to  as  "the  Club."  The  purpose  of  the  Club  Is  to  promote 
the  game  of  tennis  by  providing  tennis  and  social  facilities  principally 
for  its  Members. 

SECTION  2.     Non- Profit. 

The  Club  is  a  non-profit  corporation  organized  under  the  Non-Profit 
Corporation  Law  of  the  State  of  California. 

ARTICLE  II 

MEMBERSHIP 
SECTION  1.     Classiiication. 
Membership   of   the   Club   shall  consist  of  the  following  classifications: 

A.  REGULAR  MEMBERS.  Regular  Members  are  those  men  and  women, 
age  eighteen  (18)  or  over  (excluding  Junior  Members),  who  are 
admitted  into  Regular  Membership  in  the  Club.  The  total  number 
of  Regular  Members  shall  not  exceed  four  hundred  seventy-five 
(475);  however,  a  marginal  temporary  increase  in  said  number  re- 
sulting from  reinstatement  to  Regular  Membership  of  Non-Resident 
Members  a»  provided  in  these  By-laws  may  be  allowed  at  the 
discretion  of  the  Board  of  Directors.  A  Regular  Member  shall  pay 
such  initiation  fee,  dues,  other  charges  and  assessments  as  may  be 
established  for  Regular  Members  from  time  to  time  by  the  Board  of 
Directors . 

B.  REGULAR/I  MEMBERS.  The  total  number  of  Regular/I  Members 
shall  not  exceed  twenty-five  (25).  Regular/I  Members  are  entitled 
to  full  Membership  privileges,  including  voting  rights,  except  they 
may  play  tennis  at  the  Club  only  eighteen  (18)  times  in  any  calen- 
dar year.  Unlike  Social  Members,  however.  Regular/I  Members 
may  play  tennis  without  being  guests  of  Regular  Members  (or  Dther 
Regular/I  Members)  and  may  bring  their  own  guests.  Dues  in  this 
category  shall  be  set  midway  between  Regular  Membership  dues 
and  Social  Membership  dues.  In  addition,  a  Regular/I  Member 
shall  pay  such  other  charges  and  assessments  as  may  be  estab- 
lished for  Regular/1  Members  from  time  to  time  by  the  Board  of 
Directors. 

A  Regular  Member  in  good  standing  may,  at  any  time  and  for  any 
reason,  request  transfer  to  Regular/I  Membership  status  by  giving 
a  written  request  to  the  Board  of  Directors.  Provided  that  there 
are  fewer  than  twenty-five  (25)  Regular/I  Members  at  the  time, 
the  Board  shall  immediately  grant  the  request.     A  Regular  Member 


By-Laws 


1148 


making  such  transfer  must  remain  in  Regular/I  status  for  at  least 
one  year.  Thereafter,  said  Member  may  request  the  Board  of 
Directors  to  reinstate  him  or  her  to  Regular  Membership  status. 
Said  Member  shall  not  be  required  to  make  a  formal  reapplication 
nor  shall  said  Member  be  required  to  pay  any  additional  initiation 
fee.  Provided  that  said  Member  is  in  good  standing  at  the  time  of 
requesting  reinstatement,  said  Member  shall  be  immediately  re- 
admitted as  a  Regular  Member  or,  if  there  are  no  openings  for 
additional  Regular  Members  at  that  time,  the  name  of  said  Member 
shall  be  immediately  placed  on  the  list  of  those  waiting  to  be 
admitted  as  Regular  Members  as  is  provided  in  Subsection  2(G)  of 
this  Article  II. 

C.  SPECIAL  SENIOR  PENDING  VACANCY.  Individuals  accepted  to 
Regular  Membership  in  the  Club  for  whom  openings  are  not  avail- 
able may  elect  to  become  a  Special  Senior  Pending  Vacancy  while 
awaiting  an  opening.  The  total  number  of  Special  Seniors  Pending 
Vacancy  shall  not  exceed  twenty-five  (25).  Members  in  this  cate- 
gory are  entitled  to  full  Social  Membership  privileges,  including 
voting  rights,  and  to  use  of  the  courts  during  specific  limited 
hours  of  play  as  set  by  the  Board  of  Directors.  Members  in  this 
category  who  violate  the  time  limitations  on  playing  privileges  shall 
suffer  immediate  expulsion  from  the  Club  and  forfeiture  of  their 
Membership.  Individuals  accepting  Membership  in  this  category 
shall  pay  one-half  the  initiation  fee  then  prevailing  for  Regular 
Membership  and  their  dues  shall  be  set  midway  between  Regular 
Membership  dues  and  Social  Membership  dues.  At  the  time  the 
individual  becomes  a  Regular  Member,  he  or  she  must  pay  the 
remaining  one-half  of  said  initiation  fee.  In  addition.  Members  in 
this  category  shall  pay  such  other  charges  and  assessments  as  may 
be  established  for  this  category  from  time  to  time  by  the  Board  of 
Directors.  At  the  time  the  individual  becomes  a  Regular  Member, 
he  or  she  must  pay  the  remaining  one-half  of  said  initiation  fee. 
In  addition.  Members  in  this  category^  shall  pay  such  other  charges 
and  assessments  as  may  be  establish^4,*  for  this  category  from  time 
to  time  by  the  Board  of  Directors.  When  an  opening  in  Regular 
Membership  occurs  for  a  Special  Senior  Pending  Vacancy,  such 
Member  must  become  a  Regular  Member  by  paying  the  balance  due 
of  his  or  her  initiation  fee  within  a  period  of  thirty  (30)  days 
after  receipt  of  written  notice  from  the  Club  of  such  opening  or 
his  or  her  Membership  in  the  Club  shall  automatically  be  terminated. 

D.  JUNIOR  MEMBERS.  Junior  Members  are  those, men  and  women  who 
have  not  attained  the  age  of  twenty-five  (25),  (excluding  Regular 
Members  who  elected  to  apply  for  Regular  Membership  after  attain- 
ing the  age  of  eighteen  (18)).  No  application  for  Junior  Member- 
ship may  be  made  after  the  eighteenth  (18th)  birthday  of  the 
applicant  and  the  total  number  of  Junior  Members  shall  not  exceed 
one  hundred  eighty-five  (185).  Junior  Members  shall  pay  such 
initiation  fee,  dues,  other  charges  and  assessments  as  may  be 
established  for  Junior  Members  from  time  to  time  by  the  Board  of 
Directors.  Upon  attaining  the  age  of  twenty-five  (25),  Junior 
Members  shall  be  given  the  opportunity  to  apply  to  become  Regular 
Members   as    provided    hereinbelow    in    this   Subsection   1(D);    pro- 


By-Laws 


1149 


vided,  however,  that  any  Junior  Member  may  apply  to  become  a 
Regular  Member  at  any  time  after  attaining  the  age  of  eighteen 
(18)  and  prior  to  reaching  the  age  of  twenty-five  (25)  by  giving 
written  notice  to  the  Membership  Committee.  Promptly  after  re- 
ceipt of  such  notice,  the  Membership  Committee  shall  send  to  the 
applicant  instructions  for  making  an  application  for  Regular  Mem- 
bership status.  Such  application  shall  be  governed  by  the  proce- 
dures and  requirements  set  forth  below  in  Subsections  1(D)(2) 
through  1(0)(5)  of  this  ArUde  II. 

The  procedures  and  requirements  for  a  change  in  status  from  a 
Junior  Member  to  a  Regular  Member  are  as  follows: 

1.  The  Club  shall  send  written  notice  to  each  Junior  Member 
promptly  after  the  twenty-fifth  (25th)  birthday  of  such  Mem- 
ber. This  notice  shall  give  the  Junior  Member  ninety  (90) 
days  to  request  and  complete  an  application  for  change  In 
status  to  Regular  Membership.  In  the  event  that  a  completed 
application  for  Regular  Membership  is  not  received  by  the 
Membershi;^  Committee  from  such  Junior  Member  within  said 
ninety  (90)  day  period  (or  such  longer  period  as  the  Member- 
ship Committee  may  approve  upon  a  showing  of  good  cause), 
such  Member's  Membership  in  the  Club  and  his  or  her  eligibil- 
ity to  advance  to  Regular  Membership  from  Junior  Member 
status  shall  automatically  be  terminated. 

2.  Upon  timely  filing  of  a  completed  application  with  the  Member- 
ship Committee,  the  application  shall  be  processed  In  the  same 
manner  and  using  the  same  criteria  as  for  all  other  applica- 
tions for  Regular  Membership  status  in  accordance  with  the 
admission  procedures  set  forth  in  Subsections  2(B)  through 
2(r)  of  this  Article  II. 

3.  Within  thirty  (30)  days  after  notice  of  approval  of  his  or  her 
application  by  the  Board  of  Directors,  the  applicant  shall 
make  payment  of  at  least  twenty  percent  (20%)  of  the  differ- 
ence between  the  then  current  initiation  fee  for  Regular  Mem- 
bers and  the  amount  of  the  initiation  fee  paid  by  the  appli- 
cant to  become  a  Junior  Member.  If  no  opening  is  then  avail- 
able in  the  Regular  Membership,  the  applicant  will  be  posi- 
tioned on  the  Regular  Membership  waiting  list  In  such  place 
and  in  such  order  of  advancement  as  shall  be  established  by 
resolutions  duly  adopted  by  the  Board  of  Directors^. 

4.  While  waiting  an  opening  to  be  admitted  as  a  Regular  Member, 
the  applicant  shall  have  the  status  of  a  Junior  Pending  Va- 
cancy and  shall  pay  all  dues,  charges  and  assessments  char- 
geable to  Regular  Membership,  and  shall  be  entitled  to  all 
privileges  of  Regular  Membership  except  that  of  voting  in 
Club  elections. 

5.  Upon  advancement  of  the  applicant  to  Regular  Membership, 
the  balance  of  the  required  initiation  fee  shall  be  immediately 
due  and  payable.     At  the  Member's  request,   the  balance  due 


By-Laws 


1150 


may  be  paid  in  equal  monthly  installments  over  a  period  of  up 
to  four  (4)  years;  provided,  however,  that  if  the  Member 
elects  to  pay  the  balance  due  over  a  two  (2)  year  period,  the 
total  payment  required  shall  equal  one  hundred  twenty  per- 
cent (120%)  of  the  balance  due;  if  the  Member  elects  to  pay 
the  balance  due  over  a  three  (3)  year  period,  the  total  pay- 
ment required  shall  equal  one  hundred  thirty  percent  (130%) 
of  the  balance  due;  and  if  the  Member  elects  to  pay  the  bal- 
ance due  over  a  four  (4)  year  period,  the  total  payment  re- 
quired shall  equal  one  hundred  forty  percent  (140%)  of  the 
balance  due. 

SOCIAL  MEMBERS.  Social  Members  are  entitled  to  all  Membership 
privileges  except  use  of  the  tennis-playing  facilities  (which  they 
may  use  only  as  guests  of  Members  who  have  tennis-playing  privi- 
leges). A  Social  Member  shall  be  a  fully  qualified  voting  Member 
of  the  Club  and  entitled  to  election  to  the  Board  of  Directors,  in 
accordance  with  these  ByLaws.  A  Social  Member  shall  pay  such 
initiation  fee,  dues,  other  charges  and  assessments  as  may  be 
established  for  Social  Members  from  time  to  time  by  the  Board  of 
Directors.  The  number  of  Social  Members  shall  not  exceed  ninety- 
five  (95)  although  the  Board  of  Directors  shall  have  authority  to 
increase  the  limit  temporarily  in  order  to  reinstate  Non-Resident  or 
Inactive  Social  Members,  or  to  accommodate  Regular  or  Regular/I 
Members  desirous  of  changing  to  Social  Membership  Status. 

A  Regular  Member  or  Regular/I  Member  in  good  standing  may,  at 
any  time  and  for  any  reason,  request  transfer  from  Regular  or 
Regular/I  Membership  to  Social  Membership  and  shall  be  entitled  to 
reinstatement  to  such  Member's  former  Membership  category  as 
provided  below  in  this  section  1(E). 

Should  any  Social  Member,  other  th^n  one  who  was  a  Regular  ')r 
Regular/I  Member  immediately  before  ^becoming  a  Social  Member, 
transfer  to  Regular  Membership,  th«  additional  initiation  fee  shall 
consist  of  the  difference  between  the  Social  Member's  original 
initiation  fee  and  the  Regular  Membership  initiation  fee  in  existence 
at  the  time  of  transfer. 

Any  Social  Member  who  was  a  Regular  or  Regular/I  Member  immedi- 
ately before  becoming  a  Social  Member  and  who  has  remained  in 
Social  Membership  status  for  at  least  one  year  may  thereafter 
request  reinstatement  to  his  or  her  former  Membership  category  by 
giving  a  written  request  for  reinstatement  to  .the  Board  of  Direc- 
tors. Such  Member  shall  not  be  required  to  make  a  formal  reappli- 
cation  nor  shall  said  Member  be  required  to  pay  any  additional 
initiation  fee.  Provided  that  said  Member  is  in  good  standing  at 
the  time  of  requesting  reinstatement,  said  Member  shall  be  imme- 
diately readmitted  as  a  Regular  or  Regular/I  Member  or,  if  there 
are  no  openings  for  additional  Regular  or  Regular/1  Members  at 
that  time,  the  name  of  said  Member  shall  be  immediately  placed  on 
the  list  of  those  waiting  to  be  admitted  as  Regular  or  Regular/I 
Members  as  is  provided  in  Subsection  2(G)  of  this  Article  II. 


By-Laws 


1151 


NON-RESIDENT  MEMBERS.  A  Regular,  Regular/I,  or  Social  Mem- 
ber, whose  principal  residence  is  at  least  one  hundred  (100)  miles 
away  from  the  Club,  may  elect  to  become  a  Non-Resident  Member 
by  giving  a  written  notice  to  the  Board  of  Directors  explaining  the 
reason  for  the  requested  change  in  Membership  status.  Such 
Non-Resident  Members  shall  pay  dues  of  not  less  than  fifty  percent 
(50%)  of  the  dues  in  their  former  Membership  category  hnd  such 
other  charges  and  assessments  as  may  be  established  for  Non- 
Resident  Members  from  time  to  time  by  the  Board  of  Directors. 
Non-Resident  Members  shall  be  entitled  to  all  privileges  of  their 
former    Membership    classification    with    the    exception    of    voting. 

If  the  principal  residence  of  a  Non-Resident  Member  changes  so 
that  said  Non-Resident  Member  no  longer  qualifies  for  Non- 
Resident  Membership,  said  Non-Resident  Member  shall  so  notify  the 
Board  of  Directors  within  thirty  (30)  days  of  such  change.  Any 
Non-Resident  Member  failing  to  notify  the  Board  of  such  change  in 
accordance  with  this  provision  shall  be  subject  to  having  his  or 
her  Membership  in  the  Club  revoked.  Effective  as  of  the  date  of 
such  change,  'the  Non-Resident  Member  shall  be  required  to  pay 
this  full  amount  of  the  dues  and  other  charges  payable  by  indi- 
viduals in  the  category  of  Membership  to  which  the  Non-Resident 
Member  will  be  returning. 

Non-Resident  Members  in  good  sunding  will  immediately  be  eligible 
for  reinstatement  to  their  former  Membership  category  upon  giving 
the  required  written  notice  of  change  of  principal  residence  to  the 
Board  of  Directors  and  approval  of  reinstatement  by  the  Board  of 
Directors.  Provided  said  Member  is  in  good  standing  at  the  time 
he  or  she  makes  a  request  for  reinstatement,  said  Member  shall  be 
immediately  readmitted  to  Membership  in  his  or  her  former  Member- 
ship category.  However,  if  there  are  no  openings  in  such  Mem- 
bership category  at  that  time  and  the  Board  of  Directors  does  not 
exercise  its  discretion  to  increase  temporarily  the  maximum  allowed 
number  of  Members  in  such  category  under  Subsections  1(A)  or 
1(E)  of  this  Article,  the  Board  shall  place  the  Member  in  the 
temporary  status  of  Non-Resident  Member  Pending  Change  of 
Status  to  Regular,  Regular/I  or  Social  Membership,  and  the  name 
of  said  Member  shall  then  have  priority  on  the  waiting  list  over  all 
other  applicants  for  the  Membership  category  to  which  said  Member 
is  returning.  During  any  such  period  of  temporary  status,  said 
Member  shall  pay  the  dues,  charges  and  assessments  payable  by  a 
Member  in  the  Membership  category  to  which  he  or  she  is  waiting 
to  return:  and  said  Member  shall  have  all  of  the  privileges  of  a 
Member  in  such  Membership  category. 

INACTIVE  MEMBERS.  The  Board  of  Directors  has  the  discretion 
to  grant  Inactive  Member  status  to  any  Member  of  the  Club  for  any 
reason  deemed  appropriate  by  the  Board.  If  Inactive  Member 
status  is  granted,  the  Member  so  affected  must  remain  in  said 
status  for  a  minimum  of  six  (6)  months.  An  Inactive  Member  shall 
have  all  of  the  privileges  of  such  Member's  former  Membership 
category  except  tennis-playing  privileges.  An  Inactive  Member 
shall  pay  dues  which  shall  be  not  less  than  fifty  percent  (50%)  of 


By-Laws 


1152 


Ihe  dues  in  such  Member's  former  category,  and  such  olher  char- 
ges and  assessments  as  may  be  established  for  Inactive  Members 
from  lime  to  time  by  the  Board  of  Directors. 

Inactive  Members  may  be  reinstated  to  the  Membership  category 
held  at  the  time  of  being  granted  inactive  Member  status  upon 
written  application  to  and  approval  by  the  Board  of  Directors,  but 
only  as  openings  occur  within  the  specified  limits  of  the  appropri- 
ate Membership  category.  If  there  is  no  opening  at  the  time  for 
an  additional  Member  in  the  Membership  category  to  which  an 
Inactive  Member  is  eligible  to  return,  the  name  of  said  Member 
shall  be  Immediately  placed  on  the  list  of  those  waiting  to  be 
admitted  into  such  Membership  category  as  is  provided  in  Subsec- 
tion 2(G)  of  this  Article.  II 

H.  SPECIAL  MEMBERS.  The  Board  of  Directors  shall  have  authority 
to  grant  Special  Membership  to  outstanding  amateur  or  professional 
tennis  players,  high  government  officials,  foreign  diplomats,  or 
distinguished  public  figures.  Except  for  outstanding  tennis  play- 
ers, no  Special  Membership  shall  be  available  to  permanent  resi- 
dents of  the  nine-county  San  Francisco  Bay  Area. 

Each  Special  Membership  shall  be  granted  for  a  period  not  to 
exceed  one  year,  subject  to  annual  renewal  on  review  and  approval 
by  the  Board  of  Directors.  Payment  of  the  initiation  fee  or  a  por- 
tion thereof  may  be  waived  by  the  Board  of  Directors,  but  the 
dues  of  a  Regular  Member  (and  such  other  charges  and  assess- 
ments as  may  be  established  for  Special  Members  from  time  to  time 
by  the  Board  of  Directors)  shall  be  paid  by  each  Special  Member 
throughout  the  term  of  such  Membership. 

I.  LIFE  MEMBERS.  Any  Member  who  has  beeif  a  dues-paying  Mem- 
ber for  fifty  (50)  years  may  elect  to  Convert  to  this  Membership 
Status.  Life  Members  shall  not  have*  (o  pay  dues,  nor  shall  they 
be  subject  to  any  Board  of  Directors  imposed  charges  or  assess- 
ments. Life  Members  shall  be  voting  Members  and  shall  have  full 
tennis- playing  privileges. 

SECTION  2.     Admission  Procedures. 

A.  For  an  applicant  to  receive  an  application  form,  a  written  request 
must  be  made  to  the  Membership  Committee  by.  tivo  (2)  Club  Mem- 
bers in  good  standing. 

B.  When  the  application  form  has  been  issued,  completed  by  the 
applicant,  and  filed  with  the  Membership  Committee,  the  name  of 
the  applicant  shall  be  posted  on  the  Club  bulletin  board  for  a 
period  of  thirty  (30)  days  and  transmitted  in  writing  to  the  Club 
Membership. 

C.  Should  the  Board  of  Directors  receive  from  ten  (10)  or  more  Regu- 
lar, Regular/I  or  Social  Members  signed  and  stated  objections  to 
the  application  within  thirty  (30)  days  after  posting,  the  appli- 
cation will  be  rejected.     The  applicant  may  reapply  on  approval  of 


By-Laws 


1153 


the  Board  of  Directors,  provided  that  an  interval  of  at  least  twelve 
(12)  months  shall  have  elapsed  since  the  original  rejection. 

D.  After  the  thirty  (30)  day  posting  period,  provided  that  the  appli- 
cation has  not  been  rejected  as  provided  in  Section  2(C)  above, 
the  Membership  Committee  shall  review  the  application,  interview 
the  applicant  and  submit  its  recommendation  to  the  Board  of  Direc- 
tors. 

E.  Should  the  recommendation  of  the  Membership  Committee  be  affirm- 
ative, the  Board  of  Directors  shall  vote  upon  the  application  at  its 
next  regular  meeting.  Should  two  (2)  or  more  Directors  vote 
negatively  on  the  application,  the  application  will  be  denied  and 
may  not  oe  reconsidered  before  an  interval  of  twelve  (12)  months. 

r.  Should  the  vote  of  the  Board  of  Directors  be  affirmative,  the  name 
of  the  applicant  will  be  placed  in  its  proper  sequence  on  the 
admission  waiting  list. 

G.  Regular/I  Members  eligible  to  be  readmitted  to  Regular  Member- 
ship, Social  Members  eligible  to  be  readmitted  to  Regular  or  Regu- 
lar/I  Membership  and  Inactive  Members  eligible  to  be  readmitted  to 
Regular,  Regular/I  or  Social  Membership  as  provided  in  Section  1 
of  this  Article  II,  for  whom  openings  are  not  available  in  the  ap- 
propriate Membership  category  when  such  Member  becomes  eligible 
to  be  readmitted,  shall  be  placed  on  the  appropriate  waiting  list 
above  (and  shall  thereby  have  priority  over)  all  Non-Member 
Applicants  on  said  list.  In  addition,  any  Non-Resident  Members 
eligible  to  be  readmitted  to  Social,  Regular  or  Regular/I  Member- 
ship shall  at  all  times  be  placed  or  remain  above  and  thereby  have 
priority  over  all  other  Members  then  or  thereafter  placed  upon  the 
waiting  list  for  such  Member's  former  Membership  category.  As 
between  Soci^  Members,  Regular/l  Members-  and  Inactive:  Members 
whose  names  are  placed  on  the  waiting  list  for  an  opening  in  any 
Membership*  category,  priority  on  the  waiting  list  shall  be  given  to 
the  Member  making  the  .  earliest  request  or  application  for  rein- 
suteroent  as  determined  by  the  date  of  recejpt  thereof  by  the 
Board  of  Directors.  Likewise,  as  between  two  (2)  or  more  Non- 
Resident  Members,  priority  at  the  top  of  the  appropriate  waiting 
list  shall  be  given  to  the  Non-Resident  Member  whose  notification 
of  change  of  principal  residence  is  first  received  by  the  Board  of 
Directors. 

SECTION  3.     InitiaUon  Fees. 

Before  becoming  a  Member  in  good  standing  entitled  to  the  privileges  of 
the  Club,  the  newly  elected  Member  must  pay  the  required  initiation  fee 
within  thirty  (30)  days  after  notice  of  election  to  Membership  has  been 
mailed  to  the  post  office  address  entered  on  the  application  form. 
Exception:  Junior  Members  advancing  to  Regular  Membership  may 
arrange  for  installment  payments  as  stipulated  in  Subsection  1(D)  of 
this  Article  II. 


By-Laws 


1154 


SECTION  4.     Membership  Rights. 

Membership  In  the  Club  shall  be  non-proprietary.  Upon  a  Member's 
death  or  other  termination  of  Membership,  all  rights  of  such  Member 
and/or  his  or  her  heirs  shall  terminate. 

SECTION  5.     Disciplinary  AcUon. 

Any  Member  considered  guilty  of  unbecoming  or  offensive  conduct,  or 
dishonesty,  or  who  fails  to  abide  by  Club  rules  and  regulations,  may  be 
requested  by  the  Board  of  Directors  by  means  of  registered  mall  to 
appear  before  the  Board  for  a  private  discussion  of  the  conduct  prompt- 
ing the  request.  The  Member  shall  be  notified  of  the  conduct  under 
consideration  and  that  he  or  she  has  the  right  to  present  any  facts  or 
testimony  by  way  of  defense,  excuse  or  mitigation  of  said  conduct. 
The  aforementioned  notice  to  the  Member  shall  be  given  not  less  than 
fifteen  (15)  days  prior  to  said  discussion.  Should  the  conduct  or 
attitude  of  such  Member  be  considered  Intransigent  or  unacceptable,  the 
Board  of  Directors  may,  by  majority  vote,  expel  or  suspend  such  Mem- 
ber and  such  action  shall  be  final  and  without  recourse  on  the  part  of 
such  Member. 

ARTICLE  III 

FINANCIAL  MATTERS 

SECTION    1.      Changes    in    Dues,    Initiation   Fees,   and   Other  Charges. 

The  Board  of  Directors  shall  have,  at  all  times,  the  power  to  Increase 
or  decrease  Initiation  fees,  dues  and  other  charges  of  all  classes  of 
Membership  and  within  any  class  of  Membership,  provided  that  at  least 
thirty  (30)  days'  notice  In  writing  of  any  Increase  or  decrease  shall  be 
given  all  Members.  , 

The  Board  of  Directors  may  also  levy  assessments  to  meet  the  require- 
ments of  the  Club.  The  Members  shall  not  be  per^nally  liable  for  such 
assessments  but  If  any  Member  falls  to  pay  any  assessment  within  the 
time  prescribed,  his  or  her  Membership  shall  automatically  be  forfeited 
without  further  notice. 

SECTION  2.     Payment. 

Monthly  dues  of  all  classes  of  Membership  shall  be  payable  In  advance, 
together  with  any  Indebtedness  Incurred  during  the  pirevlous  month.  If 
payment  of  dues,  fees,  charges  and  other  Indebtedness  Is  not  made  In 
full  on  or  before  the  twenty-first  (21st)  day  of  the  month  for  which  the 
dues  are  billed,  they  shall  become  past  due  and  the  Member  shall  be 
informed  in  writing  by  the  Club. 

SECTION  3.     Delinquencies. 

A.  If  all  indebtedness  to  the  Club,  including  new  charges  and  dues, 
has  not  been  paid  by  the  fifteenth  (15th)  day  of  the  month  suc- 
ceeding the  past  due  month,  the  amount  thereof  shall  become 


By-Laws 


1155 


delinquent,  and  persona]  notice  of  the  same  must  be  given  by  the 
Manager  in  writing  to  all  delinquent  Members  and  their  names 
posted  at  the  Club;  and  if  any  Member  shall  not  make  payment 
within  ten  (10)  days  after  the  receipt  of  such  notice,  such  Member 
shall  be  barred  from  use  of  the  Club.  Reinstatement  at  any  time 
within  three  (3)  months  thereafter  may  be  made  by  the  affirmative 
vote  of  a  majority  of  the  Board  of  Directors  and  payment  in  full  of 
the  amount  due  plus  a  ten  percent  (10%)  penalty  on  the  delinquent 
amount.  If  payment  in  full  of  the  delinquent  amount  does  not 
occur  within  said  three-month  period,  such  Member's  Membership 
will  be  terminated. 

Personal  notice  shall  be  deemed  to  have  been  given  to  any  Member 
when  mailed  by  certified  mail  to  the  Member's  last  known  address. 
During  the  period  the  Member  is  barred  from  the  use  of  the  Club, 
the  delinquent  Member  shall  be  charged  with  monthly  dues,  other 
charges  and  assessments  and  the  applicable  penalty. 

B.  The  Board  of  Directors  may,  upon  a  showing  of  good  cause, 
extend,  limit  or  deny  credit  to  any  Member  or  defer  termination  of 
Membership  of  a  delinquent  Member  for  such  time  and  under  such 
conditions  as  it  deems  appropriate. 

ARTICLE  IV 

OBLIGATIONS  AND  PRIVILEGES 

SECTION  1.     Resignations. 

Any  Member  who  is  not  indebted  to  the  Club  may  resign  his  or  her 
Membership.  Members  wishing  to  resign  must  so  notify  the  Board  in 
writing .  Should  such  written  notification  be  received  prior  to  the 
twentieth  (20th)  day  of  the  month,  the  resignation  will  become  effective 
at  the  end  of  that  month  on  condition  that  any  outstanding  charges 
must  be  paid  by  the  resigning  Member  by  the  twenty-first  (21st)  day  of 
the  following  month.  Resigning  Members  whose  accounts  are  not  cleared 
by  that  date  shall  be  subject  to  monthly  dues  until  their  account  is 
cleared;  however,  they  shall  not  be  entitled  to  any  of  the  privileges  of 
Membership  following  the  effective  date  of  their  resignation. 

SECTION  2.     Family  Social  Privileges. 

The  immediate  household  family  of  any  Member  shall  be  entitled  to  the 
social  privileges  of  the  Club,  but  only  when  accompanied  by  such 
Member. 

SECTION  3.     Tennis-Playing  Guests. 

A.  Members  with  tennis-playing  privileges  may  invite  guests,  not 
exceeding  three  (3)  in  number  at  any  one  time,  to  play  tennis 
upon  paying  the  prescribed  fee  for  each  guest  and  provided  that 
such  guests  play  in  the  company  of  the  host  Member.  No  indivi- 
dual may  be  a  playing  guest  more  than  eighteen  (18)  times  in  any 
calendar  year. 


By-Laws 


1156 


B.  Members  shall  register  their  guests  by  name  prior  to  playing. 
Failure  to  do  so  will  result  in  a  penalty  equivalent  of  three  (3) 
times  the  prescribed  guest  fee,  and  repeated  occurrences  of  such 
failure  shall  be  considered  cause  for  disciplinary  action  by  the 
Board . 

C.  Tennis-playing  privileges  may  be  granted  to  non-resident  guests 
upon  written  application  initiated  by  a  Member  and  approval  of  the 
Board  of  Directors  or  the  Club.  These  privileges  shall  entitle  the 
holder  to  the  privileges  of  the  Club  for  a  period  of  one  month. 
Each  such  guest  shall  pay  in  advance  1-1/2  times  the  Regular 
Member  monthly  dues  for  all  persons  twenty-five  (25)  and  over 
and  1-1/2  times  the  Junior  monthly  dues  for  persons  under  the  age 
of  twenty  five  (25).  Renewal,  extension,  or  reissue  of  these 
privileges  shall  be  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  Board  of  Direc- 
tors, and  shall  in  no  event  exceed  six  (6)  months  in  any  given 
five  (5)  year  period. 

D.  Members  inviting  guests  or  applying  for  guest  privileges  shall  be 
responsible  for  all  debts  to  the  Club  incurred  by  their  guests  and 
for  all  damage  done  by  them. 

E.  The  Board  of  Directors  shall  have  the  right  to  make  special  rules 
for  guests  involved  in  tournament  play.  It  shall  likewise  prescribe 
the  rules  governing  the  inviting  of  guests  to  the  Club  for  social 
purposes  only. 

SECTION  4.     Compensation  of  a  Member,  Director,  or  Officer. 

No  Member,  director,  or  officer  shall  receive  any  salary  or  compensation 
from  the  Club  for  services  or  expenses  except  where  authorized  by  the 
Board  of  Directors  in  writing. 

SECTION  5.     Address  Changes.  .*  » 

•  ; 

All  Members  must  immediately  notify  the  Club  of  any  change  of  address, 
and  failure  to  do  so  shall  constitute  a  waiver  of  any  right  to  notice 
provided  by  these  By-laws  and  rules  of  the  Club. 

ARTICLE  V 

DIRECTORS  AND  OFFICERS: 
POWERS,  DUTIES,  AND  MEETINGS.;, 

SECTION  1.     General. 

1'he  management  of  the  affairs  of  the  Club  shall  be  vested  in  a  Board  of 
Directors  consisting  of  nine  (9)  of  its  resident  Members  one  (1)  of 
whom  may  be  a  Social  Member.  Three  (3)  Directors  are  to  be  elected 
each  year  serving  for  three  (3)  years  each.  In  addition  .th$.Boat:d  may 
delegate  the  day-to-day  management  of  the  Club  to  a  Manager  who  shall 
be  an  employee  of  the  Club.  The  Club  year  for  purposes  of  accounts, 
reports  and  terms  of  office  shall  be  the  calendar  year. 


10  By-Laws 


1157 


SECTION  2.     Powers. 

The  Board  of  Directors  shall  have  all  powers  not  inconsistent  with  the 
laws  of  the  State  of  California  and  the  By-laws  of  the  Club,  to  establish 
rules  for  Club  and  court  use,  and  to  control  and  manage  the  affairs 
and  property  of  the  Club,  subject,  however,  to  the  following  restric- 
tions: 

A.  The  Board  of  Directors  shall  have  no  authority  to  subject  the 
property  of  the  Club  to  any  mortgage,  lien,  or  other  encumbrance 
without  first  obtaining  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  the  voting 
Members  of  the  Club  of  the  proposed  action. 

B.  Even  though  no  encumbrance  is  imposed  on  the  Club,  the  Board  of 
Directors  shall  have  no  authority  to  subject  the  Club  to  an  indebt- 
edness or  expenditure  in  excess  of  $25,000,  except  for  maintenance 
or  resurfacing  of  tennis  courts,  without  prior  approval  of  a  major- 
ity of  the  voting  Members  of  the  Club.  The  debt  limit  of  $25,000 
is  intended  to  be  exclusive  of  indebtedness  presently  existing  or 
any  remaining  portion  thereof. 

C.  The  Board  of  Directors  shall  have  no  authority  to  acquire  by  pur- 
chase or  otherwise  any  real  property  for  an  amount  exceeding 
$25,000,  or  to  dispose  of  any  real  property  of  the  Club  for  an 
amount  exceeding  $1,000,  unless  such  transaction  has  first  been 
approved  by  a  majority  of  the  voting  Members  of  the  Club. 

D.  The  Board  of  Directors  shall  have  no  authority  to  liquidate  or 
distribute  the  assets  of  the  Club,  or  to  dissolve  the  Club,  unless 
at  least  eighty-five  percent  (85%)  of  the  voting  Members  of  the 
Club  have  first  approved  such  action. 

SECTION  3.     Duties. 

A.      The  President  shall: 

1).  preside  at  all  meetings  of  the  Board  of  Directors  and  of  the 
Club,  shall  call  such  meetings  as  are  herein  provided,  shall 
see  that  these  By-laws  and  such  rules  and  regulations  as  may 
be  adopted  by  the  Board  of  Directors  are  enforced,  shall  su- 
pervise generally  the  affairs  of  the  Club,  and  shall  make  an 
annual  report  to  the  general  Membership. 

2).  sign  jointly  with  the  Secretary  or  Treasurer  all  contracts, 
bonds  and  other  instruments  in  writing  which  have  first  been 
approved  by  the  Board  of  Directors. 

3).  shall  appoint  chairpersons  of  standing  committees  who  shall  be 
Members  of  the  Board,  subject  to  confirmation  by  the  Board 
and  shall  be  an  ex-officio  Member  of  said  committees.  Chair- 
persons of  committees  shall  by  February  1st  of  each  year, 
submit  to  the  Board  a  list  of  their  committee  Members  for 
approval  of  the  Board.  In  particular,  the  Membership  Com- 
mittee shall  consist  of  not  less  than  eight  (8)  Members,  of 
whom  at  least  two  (2)  shall  be  Directors. 

By-Laws  H 


1158 


B.  The  Vice  President  shall  perform  all  the  duties  of  the  President  in 
the  tatter's  absence  or  inability  to  serve. 

C.  The  Secretary  shall  keep  a  record  of  all  proceedings  of  the  Board 
of  Directors  and  of  the  Club.  If  both  the  President  and  the 
Vice-President  are  absent,  the  Secretary  shall  call  the  meeting  to 
order  and  a  temporary  chairperson  shall  be  chosen. 

D.  The  Treasurer  shall  have  charge  of  the  funds  of  the  Club,  and 
shall  be  responsible  for  the  keeping  of  proper  records  of  all  re- 
ceipts and  disbursements  of  the  Club  funds  and  proper  accounts  of 
its  assets,  liabilities,  expenses  and  income. 

SECTION  4.     Meetings. 

A.  The  Board  of  Directors  shall  hold  at  least  three  (3)  regular  meet- 
ings each  quarter.  Regular  or  special  meetings  may  be  called  at 
any  time  on  order  of  the  President  or  two  (2)  Directors.  Each 
Director  shall  be  given  notice  of  such  meeting  at  least  one  (1)  day 
prior  to  the  day  of  the  meeting,  either  orally  or  in  writing.  The 
minutes  of  all  Directors'  meetings  and  all  meetings  of  the  Members, 
on  being  read  and  approved,  shall  be  conclusive  on  the  question 
of  service  of  notice.  Five  (5)  Directors  shall  constitute  a  quorum. 
No  action  may  be  taken  by  the  Board  without  a  quorum  and  a 
majority  vote  of  those  present  shall  be  required  for  the  Board  to 
take  any  action. 

B.  The  Annual  Meeting  of  the  Club  shall  be  held  in  November  on  a 
date  to  be  set  by  the  Board  of  Directors.  Twenty-five  (25)  Mem- 
bers entitled  to  vote  shall  constitute  a  quorum  and  a  majority  vote 
of  those  present  shall  be  required  for  the  Membership  to  take  any 
action.  i  , 

ARTICLE  VI*  • 

NOMINATING  COMMITTEE 

SECTION  1.     Selection. 

The  Nominating  Committee  shall  consist  of  five  (5)  voting  Members. 
The  Chairperson  shall  be  the  most  recent  past  Pf^esident  of  the  Club 
who  is  not  a  Member  of  the  Board  of  Directors!  .-The  election  of  the 
four  (4)  remaining  members  of  the  Nominating  Committee  shall  be  con- 
ducted in  accordance  with  the  following  rules: 

A.  Any  voting  Member  is  eligible  for  election,  provided  that  no  Mem- 
ber may  at  the  same  time  serve  on  the  Board  of  Directors  and  the 
Nominating  Committee. 

B.  Nominating  Committee  Members  shall  serve  for  one  (1)  calendar 
year,  and  are  not  eligible  for  re-election  until  after  the  lapse  of 
one    (I)   year   from   the   year   thai    they   served   on    the  Committee. 


12  By-Laws 


1159 


C.  Nominations  shall  be  made  from  the  floor  at  the  Annual  Meeting. 
If  more  than  four  (4)  Members  are  nominated,  voting  shall  be  by 
secret  ballot  of  all  voting  Members  present  at  the  meeting.  Each 
voting  Member  may  cast  four  (4)  votes  but  may  not  cast  more  than 
one  (1)  vote  for  any  one  (1)  candidate.  The  four  (4)  candidates 
receiving  the  largest  number  of  votes  shall  be  declared  elected. 
Two  (2)  Judges  of  Election  shall  be  appointed  by  the  President  to 
count  the  ballots  and  announce  the  results  thereof. 

0.  Should  any  Member  of  the  Nominating  Committee  cease  to  be  a 
Member  of  the  Club,  or  should  a  vacancy  in  the  Committee  other- 
wise occur,  prior  to  the  completion  of  such  Committee's  duties  as 
herein  provided,  such  vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  appointment  by 
the  Board  of  Directors. 

SECTION  2.     Responsibilities. 

The  Nominating  Committee,  prior  to  the  Annual  Meeting,  shall  invite 
voting  Members  of  the  Club  to  submit  recommendations  for  candidates 
for  the  Board  of  Directors.  Such  recommendations  may  be  submitted  in 
writing  if  the  Member  prefers.  The  Nominating  Committee  shall  then 
submit  a  number  of  nominees  at  least  equal  to  the  number  of  vacancies 
on  the  Board  of  Directors  to  be  filled  for  the  ensuing  calendar  year. 
The  names  selected  by  the  Nominating  Committee  shall  be  posted  on  the 
bulletin  board  of  the  Club  at  least  three  (3)  weeks  prior  to  the  Annual 
Meeting.  These  names  shall  be  designated  as  nominations  of  the  Nomi- 
nating Committee. 

ARTICLE  VII 

ELECTIONS 

SECTION  1.     Board  of  Directors. 

A  ballot  containing  names  of  candidates  selected  by  the  Nominating 
Committee  shall  be  circulated  by  mail  to  the  voting  Members  at  least 
three  (3)  weeks  prior  to  the  Annual  Meeting,  with  a  request  that  the 
ballots  be  returned  at  least  five  (5)  days  prior  to  the  Annual  Meeting. 
Space  shall  be  provided  on  the  ballot  for  write-in  candidates. 

A.  Two  (2)  Judges  of  Election  shall  be  appointed  by  the  President. 
They  shall  count  and  certify  the  ballots,  and  report  the  results  of 
the  election  to  the  incumbent  President,  who  shall  publish  the 
results. 

B.  In  case  two  (2)  or  more  candidates  shall  have  received  an  equal 
number  of  votes,  and  all  cannot  be  elected,  selection  shall  be  made 
by  secret  ballot  at  the  Annual  Meeting. 

C.  Directors  shall  not  be  eligible  for  reelection  until  after  a  lapse  of 
one  (1)  year  after  the  expiration  of  their  term  of  office,  except  as 
provided  below.  Vacancies  occurring  on  the  Board  of  Directors 
from  any  cause  other  than  expiration  of  a  Director's  term  shall  be 
filled  by  vole  of  the  Board.     In   the  event  a  Director  resigns,   or 


By-Laws  13 


1160 


when  for  any  reason  a  substitule  Director  is  elected  by  the  Board, 
the  substitution  shall  be  for  the  unexpired  term  of  the  Director 
replaced,  and  Directors  selected  in  this  manner  .may  be  renomi- 
nated dt  the  expiration  of  their  term. 

SECTION  2.     Officers. 

At  the  November  meeting,  the  Board  of  Directors  shall  elect  a  President 
from  the  Members  of  the  Board  who  have  one  or  two  years  remaining  to 
serve.  Also  before  the  Annual  Meeting,  and  following  the  election  of 
the  new  President  the  six  continuing  Directors,  the  three  outgoing 
Directors  and  the  three  newly  elected  Directors  shall  elect  a  Vice- 
President,  Secretary  and  Treasurer  from  among  the  Directors  who  will 
be  serving  during  the  forthcoming  year. 

ARTICLE  VIII 

AMENDMENTS  AND  APPEALS 

SECTION  1.     Amendments. 

A.  Adoption. 

Power  to  repeal  or  amend  any  of  these  By-laws  and  to  adopt  new 
By-laws  is  delegated  to  the  Board  of  Directors.  This  power  shall 
not  be  exercised  in  any  case  except  upon  three  (3)  weeks'  written 
notice  mailed  to  each  voting  Member  of  the  Club  at  his  or  her  last 
known  address.  Such  notice  shall  briefly  describe  the  subject 
matter  of  any  By-law  intended  to  be  repealed  or  adopted,  and  if  it 
is  intended  to  amend  the  By-laws,  a  brief  description  of  the  amend- 
ment. A  copy  of  the  existing  By-law^  ^hall  be  forthwith  posted 
upon  the  bulletin  board  and  made  avai^^l^le  to  any  voting  Member 
upon  request.  With  respect  to  amendments,  a  copy  of  the  By-law 
as  it  will  read  when  amended  shall  also  be  posted  on  the  bulletin 
board  and  delivered  to  any  voting  Member  upon  request. 

B.  Objections. 

If  at  least  twenty-five  (25)  voting  Members,  before  the  meeting  of 
the  Board  of  Directors  at  which  these  By-laws  are, to  be  repealed, 
adopted  or  amended ,  notify  the  President  in  wibiting  that  they 
object  to  the  repeal,  adoption  or  amendment,  these  By-laws  shall 
not  be  repealed,  adopted  or  amended  except  by  majority  vote  of 
the  Members  who  vote  in  a  mail  ballot.  Within  twenty  (20)  days 
after  the  objection  is  filed,  ballots  will  be  mailed  to  all  voting 
Members.  The  ballot  shall  contain  the  text  of  the  challenged 
By-Law  changes;  brief  statements  (less  than  250  words)  for  and 
against  the  changes  to  be  written,  respectively,  by  a  proponent 
and  an  opponent  selected  by  the  President;  the  deadline  set  by 
the  Board  for  return  of  the  ballots  (which  shall  be  at  least  twenty 
(20)  days  after  the  ballot  is  mailed  to  the  voting  Members).  Only 
those  ballots  which  are  marked  and  returned  to  the  President  at 
the  Club  by  the  specified  deadline  will  be  counted  as  votes  in  the 
referendum.     In  the  absence  of  such  objection,  the  Board  of 


14  ^  By-Laws 


1161 


Directors  shall  have  the  power,  at  said  meeting,  to  repeal,  adopt 
or  amend  any  By-laws  described  in  the  notice  mailed  to  all  voting 
Members  in  accordance  with  such  notice. 

SECTION  2.     Appeals. 

The  decision  of  the  Board  of  Directors  is  final  with  respect  to  all  inat- 
ters  within  its  power,  including  the  interpretation  of  its  rules  and 
By-laws,  subject,  however,  to  an  appeal  of  voting  Members  which  meets 
the  following  requirements: 

A.  The  appeal  shall  be  considered  only  if  at  least  twenty-five  (25)  of 
the  voting  Members  shall  file  a  written  appeal  with  the  President 
within  ten  (10)  days  after  the  publication  of  the  challenged  deci- 
sion of  the -Board  of  Directors.  If  such  an  appeal  is  filed,  the 
Board  of  Directors  shall  submit  the  challenged  decision  to  a  refer- 
endum by  mail  of  the  Membership. 

B.  If  two-thirds  (2/3)  of  the  voting  members  vote  to  reverse  the 
decision  of  the  Board  of  Directors,  the  Board  shall  reverse  the 
decision  in  question.  If  less  than  two- thirds  (2/3)  vote  to  reverse 
the  decision,  the  decision  shall  stand. 


By-Laws  15 


1162 

[EXCERPT] 


COBLENTZ,  CAHEIM,  McCABE  &  BREYER,  LLP 
AMENDED  AND  RESTATED 
PARTNERSHIP  AGREEMENT 
AS  OF  NOVEMBER  9,  1995 


VIII. 
PAYMENTS  TO  A  TERMINATED  PARTNER 
8.1  (a)  A  "Terminated  Partner"  shall  mean  any  partner  whose 
Partnership  interest  has  been  terminated,  whether  by  withdrawal  (including  disability), 
expulsion  or  by  operation  of  bankruptcy  under  Section  VII  above,  death  or  retirement, 
and  shall  include  the  successors  in  interest  of  a  deceased  partner  or  in  the  case  of  a 
professional  corporation,  the  sole  shareholder  of  any  corporate  partner  or  the 
successor  in  interest  thereto. 


9999/408.N2 

11/13/95  l2. 


1163 


(b)  A  Terminated  Partner  shall  not  remove  from  the  Partnership 
premises  any  Partnership  property  and  shall  promptly  deliver  to  the  Partnership  all  of 
the  Partnership  property  in  his/her  possession. 

8.2  The  Partnership's  Profits  and  Losses  for  the  portion  of  the  fiscal  year 
in  which  a  Terminated  Partner  terminates  shall  be  determined  on  an  interim  closing  of 
the  books  method  on  the  date,. the  Partnership  year  closes  with  respect  to  the 
Terminated  Partner.  In  the  event  a  Terminating  Partner's  date  of  termination  is  other 
than  the  last  day  of  the  month,  the  date  upon  which  the  Partnership  shall  close  its 
books  with  respect  to  the  terminated  partner  shall  be  either  (i)  the  last  day  of  the 
month  which  immediately  precedes  the  month  in  which  such  termination  occurs  or 
(ii)  the  actual  date  upon  which  the  Terminated  Partner's  partnership  interest 
terminates,  in  the  sole  discretion  of  the  partnership  (or,  in  the  case  of  that  partner's 
bankruptcy,  the  date  of  the  bankruptcy  filing)  ("Valuation  Date").  All  Profits  and 
Losses  shall  be  allocated  to  the  capital  accounts  of  the  partners  as  though  such 
interim  closing  of  the  books  constituted  the  end  of  the  Partnership's  fiscal  year.  For 
purposes  of  the  preceding  sentence,  the  Partnership's  Profits  and  Losses  for  such 
period  shall  reflect  as  operating  expenses  of  the  Partnership  all  items  of  accrued 
expenses,  prepaid  expenses,  and  other  i*ems  required  in  accordance  with 
Section  706(d)(2)  of  the  Internal  Revenue  Code  of  1986,  as  amended.  In  addition, 
accrued  expenses  shall  specifically  include  a  reasonable  provision  for  accrual  of  a  pro- 
rata share  of  typical  year  end  expenses,  and  any  other  expenses  which  are  not 
incurred  equally  throughout  the  year,  including,   but  not  limited  to,  employee 


9999/408.N2 

11/13/96  13- 


1164 


compensation,  fringe  benefits  and  bonuses,  and  preparation  of  Partnership  tax  and 
pension  returns.  The  stationery  and  supplies  on  hand  shall  not  be  included  in  prepaid 
expenses.  Any  life  insurance  (specifically  including  insurance  on  the  life  of  the 
deceased  partner  for  the  purpose  of  calculating  that  partner's  interest)  shall  be  carried 
at  its  cash  surrender  value  and  not  at  its  maturity  value. 

8.3  Upon  terminatipfi  of  a  partner,  other  than  a  partner  subject  to  the 
provisions  of  Article  X,  the  Terminated  Partner  shall  sell,  and  the  continuing 
Partnership  shall  purchase,  the  Terminated  Partner's  interest  in  the  Partnership  as  of 
the  Valuation  Date  for  a  purchase  price  equal  to  the  sum  of  the  following  items,  as 
determined  pursuant  to  Section  8.4  hereof: 

(a)  The  Terminated  Partner's  capital  account  as  of  the  Valuation 
Date; 

(b)  One-half  ( 1  /2)  of  the  Terminated  Partner's  Percentage  of  all 
accounts  receivable  as  of  the  Valuation  Date;   and 

(c)  One-half  ( 1  /2)  of  the  Terminated  Partner's  Percentage  of  all 
contingency  matters  and  statutory  fee  probate  estates  as  of  the  Valuation  Date,  as 
provided  in  Section  8.4(c). 

(d)  In  the  event  the  Partnership  has  either  fixed  or  contingent 
liabilities  as  of  the  Valuation  Date  in  excess  of  $25,000  which  are  not  included  on  the 
balance  sheet  (other  than  salaries  but  including  any  obligation  owing  to  any  other 
Terminated  Partner),  said  purchase  price  shall  be  reduced  by  an  amount  equal  to  the 
Terminated  Partner's  Percentage  of  such  liability,  provided  that  said  purchase  price 


9999/408.N2 

11/13/95  14. 


1165 


shall  not  be  less  than  the  Terminated  Partner's  capital  account  as  of  the  Valuation 
Date.  If  such  liability  is  contingent,  the  amount  of  such  reduction,  if  any,  shall  be 
determined  at  such  time  that  the  liability  becomes  fixed  and  the  Partnership  may  in  its 
discretion  establish  a  reasonable  reserve  for  such  contingent  liability.  Rent  payable 
for  the  Partnership's  offices  for  the  three  (3)  months  immediately  following  the 
Valuation  Date  shall  be  considered,  as  a  liability  of  the  Partnership;  provided,  if  such 
three  (3)  month  period  falls  within  a  period  when  Partnership  office  rent  is  waived  or 
substantially  reduced  (a  "free  rent"  period),  the  liability  for  rent  shall  be  determined  as 
if  rent  was  payable  during  the  free  rent  period  at  the  rate  payable  immediately  after 
the  expiration  of  the  free  rent  period.  Any  Partnership  furniture  or  equipment  leases 
shall  be  considered  as  a  liability  (but  not  as  an  asset)  and  valued  at  an  amount  equal 
to  three  (3)  months  rent,  pursuant  to  said  lease. 

8.4  (a)  The  "capital  account"  of  a  Terminated  Partner's  interest  in  the 
Partnership  shall  mean  the  capital  account  determined  in  accordance  with  the 
customary  method  of  keeping  the  books  of  account  of  the  Partnership  and  after  all 
allocations  of  Profits  and  Losses  for  the  interim  period  of  the  fiscal  year  as  determined 
under  Section  8.2.  The  determination  of  the  partner's  capital  accounts  shall  be  made 
on  a  review  basis  by  the  accountants  regularly  employed  by  the  Partnership,  shall  be 
conclusive  on  all  parties  thereto  and  the  Terminated  Partner  shall  bear  his/her 
Percentage  of  such  expense. 

(b)       Accounts  receivable,  where  used  herein,  shall  mean  the 
amount  of  billed  but  unpaid  fees  for  legal  services  (excluding  client  costs  advanced) 


9999/408.N2 

11/13/95  15. 


1166 


rendered  by  the  Partnership  as  of  the  Valuation  Date,  to  the  extent  that  such  accounts 
receivable  are  collected  by  the  Partnership  within  twelve  (1 2)  months  of  the  Valuation 
Date. 

(c)  Contingency  matters  shall  mean  the  prorated  amount  of  any 
contingency  fees  to  the  extent  collected  by  the  Partnership  after  the  Valuation  Date 
with  respect  to  written  contingericy  fee  agreements  in  existence  prior  to  the  date  of 
the  partner's  termination.  Such  fees  shall  be  prorated  as  follows:  The  total  fee  shall 
be  multiplied  by  a  fraction,  the  numerator  of  which  is  the  total  value  of  all  attorney 
and  paralegal  time  expended  on  such  matter  from  its  commencement  until  the 
Valuation  Date,  and  the  denominator  of  which  is  the  total  value  for  all  attorney  and 
paralegal  time  expended  on  such  matter  from  its  commencement  until  its  conclusion. 
Fees  for  statutory  fee  probate  estates  shall  be  prorated  in  the  same  manner,  after 
taking  into  account  any  partial  payments.  Payments  due  hereunder  shall  be  made 
within  thirty  (30)  days  after  receipt  by  the  Partnership  of  any  payments  for  such 
matters. 

(d)  Attached  hereto  as  Exhibit  B  is  the  calculation  of  the 
payment  to  a  hypothetical  Terminated  Partner  whose  termination  occurs  in  December, 
1 993.  Each  partner  acknowledges  that  he  or  she  has  reviewed  said  Exhibit  B  and 
understands  how  such  payment  was  determined. 

8.5  As  used  in  this  Article  8,  a  Terminated  Partner's  Percentage  shall  be 
that  existing  at  the  time  of  termination.  A  Terminated  Partner's  Percentage  shall  not 


9999/408.N2 

11/13/95  16. 


1167 


be  increased  as  a  result  of  the  termination  of  any  other  partner  during  the  same  fiscal 
year. 

8.6   (a)  Only  a  Terminated  Partner  who  has  been  a  member  of  the 

Partnership  for  a  period  of  forty-eight  (48)  months  or  more  prior  to  termination  shall 
be  entitled  to  full  payment  under  this  Section  8  for  the  Terminated  Partner's  interest 
in  accounts  receivable  and  contingency  matters  of  the  Partnership  as  of  the  date  of 
termination. 

(b)  With  respect  to  a  Terminated  Partner  who  has  not  completed 
the  aforesaid  48  month  period,  the  following  schedule  of  percentage  vesting  in 
accounts  receivable  and  contingency  matters  shall  apply: 

NUMBER  OF  COMPLETE  MONTHS  AS  PARTNER  VESTING 

0-5  0% 

6-12  20% 

12-24  40% 

24-34  60% 

36-48  80% 

In  the  event  that  a  Terminated  Partner  is  not  entitled  to  full  payment  for  the 
Terminated  Partner's  Percentage  in  accounts  receivable  and  contingency  matters,  then 
such  partner's  responsibility  for  liabilities,  either  fixed  or  contingent  existing  prior  to 
said  Terminated  Partner's  entry  into  the  Partnership  shall  be  limited  to  the  amount  of 
his/her  vested  percentage.  However,  said  Terminated  Partner  shall  be  responsible  for 


9999/408.N2 

11/13/9S  17. 


1168 


any  and  all  liabilities  arising  on  or  after  said  Terminated  Partner's  entry  into  the 
Partnership  until  the  date  of  such  partner's  termination. 

8.7    The  Partnership  shall  pay  for  the  purchase  of  the  Terminated  Partner's 
interest  (i.e.,  the  Purchase  Price)  as  follows: 

(a)  80%  of  the  estimated  Purchase  Price  shall  be  paid  in  the  form  of 
monthly  installments  of  $7,500^. beginning  at  the  end  of  the  tirst  month  following 
termination,  including  interest  at  the  prime  interest  rate  as  announced  on  the  first  day 
of  each  calendar  quarter  by  The  Wall  Street  Journal  on  the  reducing  balances  of  the 
Terminated  Partner's  capital  account,  but  without  interest  on  the  balance  of  any  other 
amounts  owed  to  the  Terminated  Partner.  The  first  payments  made  to  the  Terminated 
Partner  shall  be  applied  toward  the  purchase  of  the  Terminated  Partner's  capital 
account. 

(b)  The  final  20%,  adjusted  to  reflect  actual  receivables  and  any  other 
appropriate  updates  to  the  calculation,  shall  be  paid  on  the  first  anniversary  of  the 
termination  date. 

(c)  Notwithstanding  anything  herein  to  the  contrary,  however,  in  no 
event  shall  the  Partnership  be  obligated  to  pay  in  the  aggregate  under  Section  8.7(a) 
more  than  (i)  $7,500  per  month  to  Terminated  Partners  during  such  time  as  the 
Partnership  is  not  making  payments  to  any  other  Terminated  Partners  whose 
termination  date  precedes  the  date  of  this  Agreement,  or  (ii)  $10,000  per  month 
during  such  time  as  the  Partnership  is  making  payments  to  other  Terminated  Partners 
whose  termination  date  precedes  the  date  of  this  Agreement.  If  the  monthly  payment 


9999/408.N2 

11/13/95  18. 


1169 


to  Terminated  Partners  would  exceed  $7,500  or  $10,000,  as  applicable,  but  for  the 
immediately  preceding  sentence,  such  monthly  payments  shall  be  reduced  pro  rata, 
(d)  Notwithstanding  the  foregoing,  the  Partnership  may  elect  to  pay 
the  Purchase  Price  owed  to  a  Terminated  Partner  by  assigning  to  him  an  interest 
(which  may  be  less  than  100%)  in  one  or  more  receivables  not  older  than  60  days 
from  clients  of  the  firm  which  puthorize  the  transfer  of  any  of  their  files  to  the 
Terminated  Partner. 

8.8  For  purposes  of  determining  the  Terminated  Partner's  interest  in  the 
Partnership,  other  than  as  specifically  provided  above,  no  adjustment  shall  be  made 
to  the  book  value  of  the  fixed  assets,  including  but  not  limited  to  art,  equipment,  or 
tenant  improvements  and  intangibles  owned  by  the  Partnership.  In  addition,  the 
omission  of  any  provision  in  this  Article  8  for  valuation  of  Partnership  goodwill  and 
work  in  progress  (other  than  contingency  matters)  is  deliberate.  Each  partner 
knowingly  waives  the  right  to  receive  payment  on  termination  as  a  partner  any  amount 
for  such  partner's  interest  in  (i)  the  goodwill  of  the  Partnership,  and  (ii)  the  work  in 
progress  of  the  Partnership  (other  than  as  provided  herein). 

8.9  All  payments  under  Section  8.3(a)  above  to  a  Terminated  Partner  are 
intended  to  be  payments  for  the  Terminated  Partner's  interest  in  the  Partnership 
property  under  Section  736(b)(1)  of  the  Internal  Revenue  Code  of  1 986  as  amended. 
All  payments  for  such  Partner's  interest  (other  than  such  partner's  capital  account) 
under  Section  8.3(b)  and  8.3(c)  are  intended  to  be  income  payments  under 
Section  736(a)  of  the  Internal  Revenue  Code  of  1 986  as  amended.  The  partners  agree 


9999/40S.N2 

11/13/9B  19- 


1170 


not  to  take  a  position  inconsistent  with  this  Section  in  relation  to  their  individual 
federal  and  state  income  tax  returns  with  respect  to  payments  under  this  Article. 

IX. 

LIFE  AND  DISABILITY  INSURANCE 
9.1  The  Partnership  may  e^Jts  expense  carry  life  and  disability  insurance  on 
each  partner  naming  the  Partnership  as  beneficiary  in  any  amount  to  reduce  the 
burden  on  the  Partnership  for  the  payments  to  the  partner's  estate  and  to  compensate 
the  Partnership  for  the  loss  of  the  partner's  services.  The  estate  of  a  deceased  partner 
shall  have  no  interest  in  such  insurance  proceeds.  Larger  amounts  of  insurance  may 
be  carried  by  a  partner  at  his/her  discretion  and  at  his/her  expense.  In  addition,  in  the 
event  that  the  Partnership  carries  insurance  on  a  partner  and  designates  as  the 
beneficiary  the  deceased  partner's  estate  or  heirs-at-law,  then  the  amount  of  such 
payment  to  such  beneficiary  shall  be  deemed  for  purposes  of  this  Agreement  as  a 
credit  against  the  Partnership's  obligation  to  pay  the  purchase  price  of  a  Terminated 
Partner's  interest. 

X. 

SPECIAL  PROVISIONS 
10.1    Notwithstanding  anything  herein  to  the  contrary,  it  is  agreed  that  with 
respect  to  Allen  E.  Broussard,  (i)  his  entire  compensation,  including  payments,  if  any, 
upon  withdrawal   shall  be  fixed  from  time  to  time  by  the  Compensation  Committee 

y    X    X 

9999/408.N2 


11/13/95 


20. 


1171 


TO  36  /rOJUSTED  FOR  ACTUAL  IS94  RECEIPTS  ON  RECEIVABIES  AS  Of  12/31/93  ANO  VALUE  OF 
CONTINOENCr  ANO  STATUTORY  FEE  PROBATE  MATTERS  ON  THE  BOOKS  AS  OF  12/31/93. 

Per  paragraphs  8.3  and  8.4  of  Partiwnhip  Agneinant  at  of  January  1,  1994 

Partnarahlp  Valuation  For  A 1YFICAL  PARTNER 

Valuation  Date:  12/31/93 

Effective  Ownenhlp  S  a<  of  1/1/93:  X382% 


Collectible  Fees  Receivable  at  of  Valuation  Date: 

XSOWNE 


Ifa'-'Cno  holf  <1/I)  of  tre  Term  nat'd  PalWi® 
*/r.*«  Ofthe  Voluotian  Oow 


'  Pannofthip  has  ehher^^tKedl^ 
X  ''s  of  ite,OOClvAiclpu^m^ 
J  ony«bTrg«d<)Sti'<i'^nSjfPi 
!  b«  reduced  by  <i^  ofMur^S 
ty  proVKled  thet  aalif  purfi^ 
fT^«ii«^cBpTteUK^cou6tii*Ip*J^ 


For  purposes  of  this  iduttration  GabiCtiea  were  taken  from  12 
Item 


a  Month's  Rent 

3  Month's  Equipment  Lease 

Totel  Non  Balance  Sheet  Liabilities: 

AT  OWNERSHIP  PERCENTAGE  = 
NET  VALUE  AS  OF: 


^,4(bl  Accounn  receivable.  v4«r««i!i!ij  hertin^^ 
^ua!r>o  client  costs  Mvanced)  rendered  b^tlKJ^^ 


^^^fctlw  Valuation  date,  to  the  extentliia^^"^'^^^ 
^^mfttliiftheVatuationOate  ■ 


For  purposes  ol  this  estimate,  this  value  was  calculated  as:  Total  fees  receivable  al  12y3I/9  3  ((2.163,6831 
leas  an  over  120  days  past  due  (749.7401:  the  actual  payout  wia  be  based  on  doUars  collected  in 
1994  on  recehrables  as  ol  12/31/93. 


NOTE:    Shaded  i 


i  quoted  directly  from  Partnership  Agreement. 


EXHIBIT       B 


1172 


Nomination  Report 


ncpan  luqmrtd  by  tite  EOitcM 
Kfff>mAatifl9»9.PubLNo. 
101-194.  nntmberiO.  1919 
(SV.S.C.App.4.Sec  Ul-lli) 


I*  Pcfioa  Rcportint        (Last  fi 
Breyer,   Charles  R. 


r.Jtnr,  middle  InUal) 


2.  Crart  or  Oftanlxatiaa 

U.S.  District  Court 
N.D.  of  California 


3.Datceritc|iait 
07/25/1997 


i.  kepoctiiit  Mod ' 

01/01/1996 
la 

06/30/1997 


4.  Too  (AnIcU  mjudget  Indlaac  aca\K  or 

untor  aatus;  magtaraie  Judge*  tndtcau 
^- or  pcn-limt) 

OS  District  Judge,  Nominee 


5.  Report  IVpe  (duck  type) 

X    No«J«.tioo,    DM   07mtUl17 


7.  ChanUicfi  or  Office  Address 

222  Kearny  Street,  7th  Floor 

San  Francisco,  Ca.    94108 


8.  On  the  basis  of  the  loforputioa  ronfifafd  la  lUs  Report  end  way 
mmfificatioas  pertilnlnt  thereto.  It  b  fai  niy  opinion,  la  complUuicc 
%viUi  opplicsble  lam  and  regnlatinm. 


Reiiewinf  Officer 


lUIVKTANT  NOTES:  The  Imtnictlonx  accompanyint  Ms  form  mua  bt  JdlUmtd.  CompUu  all  para, 
duektng  the  NONE  box  for  «athiecttOH¥4\ert  you  have  r\oreporubUU\formadan.  Sgn  on  the  lass  page. 


NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION  /  ENTITY 


I.    POSITIONS      (Kepoitlng  Indlvlduol  only;  lee  pp.  9-n  tiflnjtructloas) 

POSITION 

NONE  (No  reporuble  posilioiu.) 

^  Partner  Coblentz,  Cahen,  McCabe  6  Breyer  (CCMSB) 


2  Trustee 


Edward  6  Dorian  Goldstein  Trust 


Helen  Roberts  Trust 


n.     AGREEMENTS  ateponlng  individual  onfy;  tee pp.l4-l7tirtial7uetlons.) 

DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


n 


NONE    (No  fcpoitable  igreemenu.) 
I   12/31/97 


2  Current 


Termination  Agreement  -  CCM&B  (no  control) 
CCMGB  -  Pension  and  Profit  Sharing  Plan 


in.    NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME 
DATE 


□ 


NONE    (No  repOfUble  ooo-iovetfineBC  in 


(Reporting  Individual  tmd  spouse;  tee  pp.  19-23  o/tnstruettons.) 

PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


City  Arts  &  Lectures,    Inc.    (S) 


GROSS  INCOME 

(youn.  no!  cpotue'i) 


3   1995 


CCMfiB  partnership  income 


City   Arts   &   Lectures    (S) 


COl&B  partnership   income 


450,000.00 


A30.000.00 


1173 


HNANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT      Breyer,    Charles   R. 


I  07/25/1997 


VII.  Page     4  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS 


—  tncamc,  vtdue,  Inmsaetioni  (Unetudcs  those  oftpoase  end 
dependent  cMldren.   Set  pp.  J7-S4o/tnstnsctions.J 


A. 

Deacripltoa  of  Asset* 

Indlcau  m^rt  appUccbU,  oviner  of 
ihe  esstt  by  using  du  partnthetical 

B. 

Income 

during 

period 

C. 

Grass  value 

SI  end  or 

repodiflf 

period 

0. 

Tniissctioas  during  reponin;  period 

Ui^vtduat end tpouse,  '(Sj'Jorup- 
tnae  «¥mnJtlp  by  spouie,  '(DC)  ' 

Place  '00  '  (tfUr  rach  asset 
exempt  from  prior  disclosure. 

(1) 

Am. 

Cnic 

(A- 

H) 

(2) 

Type 

(«.!.. 

RMOr 

iottml) 

(1) 

Value 

Code 

a-n 

(J) 

Value 

Method 

Code 

«}-W) 

(1) 
TjTK 
(e.f.. 
buy,  seU, 
meixer, 
redemp- 
tion) 

If  nM  etenipt  bom  diackMure                                                     1 

(2) 
Date: 
Monlli- 
Dsy 

0) 

Value 

Code 

a-P) 

«) 
Osln 
Code 
(A-H) 

(5) 

Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
Cr  private 
iranssction) 

NONE  (no  refKHUble  lacoincasseu,  or 
traasaclioos} 

EXEMPT 

S2  Condo,    Silverado,    Callfornlji 

None 

N 

H 

53  Apartment,    Comstock  Apartments, 
San    Francisco,    California 

None 

0 

H 

5<  Charles  Breyer   40lk  Account 

S5  Hlqhmark  Money  Market    Fund 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

S6US  Treasury  Strips,    Due 
11/15/2000 

None 

K 

T 

51  US  Treasury  Strips,    Due   2/15/2001 

None 

M 

T 

Se  US  Treasury  Strips,    Due   5/15/2001 

None 

K 

T 

59  Alia    Sub.    Deb.    5. 0001,    due 
5/01/2006 

B 

Interest 

K 

T 

60  Masco  Corp   5.500%,    due   2/15/2012 

B 

Interest 

K 

T 

61  Park   Electro  Chem   5.5001,    due 
3/01/2006 

B 

Interest 

K 

T 

62  TCI    communications,    preferred 
stock 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

63Abbott    tabs,    conmon   stock 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

64  Aictouch  Communications,    common 
stock 

None 

K 

T 

65  Allegiance  Corp,      common   stock 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

66Afflerlcan   Greeting   Corp,    common 
stock 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

67  Amerltech   Corp,    common   stock 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

68  AMP    Inc,       common   stock 

A 

Dividend 

K 

T 

lliicA3ainCoila:A-tl.000orlas                      B-SI.0OI-SXJO0                  OS2J0|.S}.000                       O-$3.00l-$l3.000                      E-SI5.00I-S50.000 
(C<iLBI.D4)      F-S30.0OI-SI0O.0O0              0-SI  00.00  l-t  1.000.000        HI -SI, 000.00  l-S3.000.000       H]-S5.000.00l  ormon 

]VaICo<lec         J-SI  3.000  or  tea                    K-SI3.aOI-S30.000               L-J50.00I -SI  00.000              M-SI00.0ai-S130.000            N-S25a,OOI-$500.aOa 
(ColCl.D3)     O-S300.001-Sl.000.000        PI -SI. 000.00 1-S3.000.a00  Pl-$5.000.00l-$23.000.000  P3-S23.a00.0ai-S30.000.0a0  P4-S30.aOO.a01  or  more 

3ValMlhColec  Q-Appnisal                            RH^M  (real  cslaU  only)                            S-AascsancM                                     r-CoMMtiba 
(ColCJ)             U-BookVd»e                         V-OOier                                                     W-&»iinatel 

1174 


CHARLES  R.  BREYER  FINANCIAL  STATEMENT— NET  WORTH 


Assets 

Cash  on  hand  and  in  banks 

$100,000 

U.S.  Government  Securities 

None 

Listed  securities  (see  schedule) 

$286,050 

Unlisted  securities  (see  schedule) 

$920,000 

Accounts  and  notes  receivable: 

Dues  from  relatives  and  friends 

None 

Due  from  others 

None 

Doubtful 

None 

Real  Estate  Owned 

$3,007,500 

Real  estate  mortgages  receivable 

None 

Autos  and  other  personal  property 

$75,000 

Cash  value-life  insurance 

$97,500 

Other  assets — itemized: 

Profit-Sharing  Sharing  Plan 

$1,285,000 

Total  Assets 

$5,771,050 

1175 


Contingent  Liabilities 


As  endorser,  comarker  or  guarantor 

On  leases  or  contracts 

Legal  Claims 

Provision  for  Federal  Income  Tax 

Other  special  debt 


No 
No 
No 
No 
No 


Liabilities 

Notes  payable  to  banks — secured  None 

Notes  payable  to  banks — unsecured  None 

Notes  payable  to  relatives  None 

Notes  payable  to  others  $260,000 

Accounts  and  bills  due  $10,000 

Unpaid  income  tax  None 

Other  unpaid  tax  and  interest  None 

Real  estate  mortgages  payable — see  schedule  $1,1 19,000 

Chattel  mortages  and  other  liens  payable  None 

Other  debts  None 

TOTAL  LIABILITIES  $1,389,000 


Net  Worth 


$4,382,050 


1176 
General  Information 

Are  any  assets  pledged?  No,  except  for  mortgages 

Are  you  a  defendant  in  any  suits  or  legal  actions?        No 
Have  you  ever  taken  bankruptcy?  No 


1177 


PHARLES  BREYER 

ATTACHMENT  To  FINANCJAL  STATEMENT 

AS  OF  JUNE  36. 1997 


USTEO  SECURITIES: 

CAUF  PUBUC  WORKS  COLLEGE  SAVINGS  PROGRAM 

WESTERN  INVESTMENT  REAL  ESTATE  TRUST 

NIKE 

BAYVIEW  FEDERAL 

RRST  BANK  SYSTEMS 

COKE  COLA 

PACIFIC  GAS  AND  ELECTRIC 

CAUF  ST  DEPT  OF  TRAN  SER  A 


135,000 
7.500 
1.200 
13,000 
46,600 
12.000 
26,400 
44.350 


286,050 


On-listed  Securities : 

FRESNO  INDUSTRIAL  PARK,  GENERAL  PARTNERSHIP 
AIRPORT  COUSEUM,  UMTTED  PARTNERSHIP 
392  FALLON  STREET.  GENERAL  PARTNERSHIP 
BACHARACH  RAPHAEL,  GENERAL  Partaershlp 


675.000 
15,000 
15,000 
15,000 


REAL  ESTATE 


920.000 


PERSONAL  RESIDENCE.  SAN  FRANCISCO 
SECOND  HOME,  LARKSPUR 
SKI  CABIN.  NORDEN 
COMMERICAL  RENTAL,  FRESNO 


1,950,000 

950,000 

7.500 

100.000 


REAL  ESTATE  LOANS 


3.007.500 


.PERSONAL  RESIDENCE.  SAN  FRANaSCO,  Ist  Nationwide  Mortgage 
.SECOND  HOME.  LARKSPUR,    Countrywide  Home  Loans 
COMMERICAL  RENTAL,  FRESNO,   Wells   Fargo   Bank 
FRESNO  INDUSTRIAL  PARK.  GENERAL  PARTNERSHIP.  BREYER  SHARE, 
Roberts-Packer  partnership  interest 


507.000 

407,000 

20,000 

185,000 


1.119,000 


U78 


UNITED  STATES  TAX  COURT  Jq       ^^V^ 


s 
^84 


Docket  No.  13834-84 


CHARLES  R.  BREYER  and 
SYDNEY  GOLDSTEIN, 

Petitioners, 

V. 

COMMISSIONER  OF  INTERNAL  REVENUE, 
Respondent. 

ANSWER 
THE  RESPONDENT,  in  cUiswer  to  the  petition  filed  in  the 
cibove-entitled  case,  admits,  denies  and  alleges  as  follows; 
1  and  2.   Admits. 

3.  Admits,  and  alleges  for  clarification  that  the 
negligence  penalty  is  asserted  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of 
I.R.C.  §6653 (a)  of  the  Internal  Revenue  Code  of  1954. 

4.  Denies. 

5.  (A)  (1)   Admits. 

(2)  Denies. 

(3)  Admits. 

(4)  Denies. 
(B)  (1)   Denies. 

6.  Denies. 

7.  FURTHER  ANSWERING  the  petition,  respondent  alleges 
that  the  claimed  charitable  contribution  is  disallowed  because 
petitioners  have  not  satisfied  the  provisions  of  either  I.R.C. 
i  170(f) (3) (B) (iii)  or  I.R.C.  §  170  (h) (4) (B) (ii)  in  that 
petitioners  have  not  substantiated  that  the  building  located 


1179 


at  2661  Clay  Street,  San  Francisco,  California  is  located 
in  a  restricted  historic  district  (as  defined  in  I.R.C.  § 
48(g) (3) (B) )  and  is  certified  by  the  Secretary  of  the 
Interior  as  being  of  historic  significance  to  the  district. 

8.   FURTHER  ANSWERING  the  petition,  the  respondent 
alleges  that  the  petitioners'  request  for  attorneys'  fees 
is  premature  because  the  petitioners  have  not  established 
their  status  as  a  prevailing  party  as  required  by  section 
7430 (a)  of  the  Internal  Revenue  Code  of  1954  and  Rule 
34 (b)  of  the  Rules  of  Practice  and  Procedure  of  the 
United  States  Tax  Court  and  that  Rule  34 (b)  also  provides 
that  a  claim  for  reasoneible  litigation  costs  shall  not 
be  included  in  the  petition  in  a  deficiency  or  liability 
action. 

WHEREFORE,  it  is  prayed: 

1)  That  the  relief  sought  in  the  petition  be  denied; 

2)  That  the  deficiency  in  income  tax  for  the  taxable 
year  1980,  as  set  forth  in  the  statutory  notice,  be  in  all 
respects  approved; 

3)  That  the  addition  to  tax  for  the  taxable  year  1980 
under  the  provisions  of  I.R.C.  §  6653(a),  as  set  forth  in  the 
statutory  notice  be  in  all  respects  approved. 


-2- 


1180 


4)   That  the  Court  determine  that  the  petitioners* 

request  for  attorneys'  fees  under  I.R.C.  §  7430  is  premature. 

FRED  T.  GOLDBERG,  JR. 

Chief  Counsel 

Internal  Revenue  Service 


Dated:  JUL  0  3  1984 


By: 


(S»gned)  Eugene  H.  Ciranni  \  £?Y— 

EUGENE  H.  CIRANNI 
Assistant  District  Counsel 


OF  COUNSEL: 

BENJAMIN  C.  SANCHEZ 

Regional  Counsel 
THEODORE  GARELIS 

Attorney 
Internal  Revenue  Service 
Two  Embarcadero  Center,  Suite  900 
San  Francisco,  California  94111 
Tel.  No.  (415)  556-7855 


-3- 


1181 


CERTIFICATE  OF  SERVICE 

This  is  to  certify  that  a  copy  of  the  foregoing  paper 
was  served  on  Jeffry  A.  Bernstein,  Esq. ,  by  mailing  the  same 
oi^    JUL  0  3  1984     in  a  postage-paid  wrapper  addressed  to 
him  at  Coblentz,  Cahen,  McCabe  &  Breyer,  35th  Floor,  One 
Embarcadero  Center,  San  Francisco,  California   94111. 

This  is  to  further  certify  that  the  original  of  the 
aforementioned  paper  was  mailed  to  the  Tax  Court  on 


JUL  0  S  684 

Dated:    jul  o3  1984 


THEODORE  GARELIS 


Attorney 


1182 


UNITED  STATES  TAX  COURT 


Charles  R.  Breyer  and 
Sydney  Goldstein, 


Petitioners, 


vs. 


Commissioner  o£  Internal  Revenue, 
Respondent . 


F' 


UNITED  STATES 
TAX  COURT 

n  n  (73 
'OCT  2  1985 


Docket  No.  13834-84 


PETITIONERS'  MOTION  FOR  CONTINUANCE 
Petitioners  Charles  R.  Breyer  and  Sydney  Goldstein,  pur- 
suant to  Rule  134  of  the  Rules  of  the  Tax  Court,  request  the 
Court  to  grant  a  Continuance  in  the  above-captioned  case  and 
state  the  following  as  reasons  therefor: 

1.  This  case  has  been  calendered  at  the  session  of  the 
Court  beginning  November  12,  1985  in  San  Francisco,  California; 

2.  Petitioners  have  met  with  Mr.  Ken  Laverty,  IRS 
Appellate  Conferee  and  in  response  to  the  meeting  Petitioners 
have  been  actively  obtaining  various  factual  material  to  support 
their  position  and  to  clarify  the  issues.   These  materials  have 
been  submitted  to  the  IRS,  but  petitioners  need  additional  time 
to  obtain  other  supporting  material. 

3.  This  case  contains  complex  factual  issues  including 
an  issue  regarding  the  valuation  of  property  contributed  to  a 
qualified  charity.   Negotiations  are  in  progress  with  the  IRS 


2934-001 


U.S.  TAX  COURT 

GRANTED 

OCT  0  4  1985 
(Sijped)    ARTHUR  L.  NIMS, 

JUOCt 


1183 


Appellate  Conferee  and  it  would  be  an  unnecessary  utilization  of 
the  resources  of  the  Court  and  of  counsel  were  this  case  to  be 
tried  at  this  time  rather  than  allowing  the  parties  the  oppor- 
tunity to  settle. 

4.  Counsel  for  Petitioners  will  not  be  available  for 
trial  since  he  will  be  out  of  the  country  on  a  business  trip 
conunencing  the  end  of  October  and  extending  through  the  trial 
date. 

5.  This  motion  was  discussed  with  Mr.  Ken  Laverty,  IRS 
Appellate  Conferee  and  he  has  indicated  no  objection  to  this 
Continuance  being  granted.   Counsel  for  Respondent  has  indicated 
that  he  is  opposed  to  a  Continuance  being  granted. 

6.  Petitioners  have  not  received  any  prior  Continuance 
of  the  trial  in  this  case. 

7.  In  the  event  an  adverse  decision  is  proposed  by  the 
Court,  Petitioners  request  a  telephone  conference  with  the  Court. 

For  the  foregoing  reasons,  it  is  respectfully  submitted 
that  the  Petitioners  cannot  adequately  prepare  for  trial  nor  ade- 
quately present  its  case  if  this  matter  should  remain  on  the 


2. 

2934-001 


1184 

November  12,  1985  trial  calendar.   Therefore,  the  Motion  should 
be  granted. 

Dated:   September  30,  1985 

Mfry  A.  Bemstem 

Je£fry  A.  Bernstein,  Counsel 

for  Petitioners 

COBLENTZ,  CAHEN,  McCABE  &  BREYER 

35th  Floor,  One  Embarcadero  Center 

San  Francisco,  California  94111 

(415)  391-4800 


3. 

2934-001 


1185 


CERTIFICATE  OF  SERVICE 

This  is  to  certify  that  a  copy  of  the  foregoing 
paper  was  served  on  Benjamin  C.  Sanchez,  Esq.  and  Theodore 
Garelis,  Esq.,  by  mailing  the  same  on  September  30,  1985 
in  a  postage-paid  wrapper  addressed  to  them  at  Internal 
Revenue  Service,  160  Spear  Street,  San  Francisco,  CA  94105. 

This  is  to  further  certify  that  the  original  of 
the  aforementioned  paper  was  mailed  to  the  Tax  Court  on 
September  30,  1985. 

Jefhy  A.  Bernstein 

Dated:   September  30,  1985         JEFFRY  A.  BERNSTEIN 

Attorney 


1186 


CHARLES  R.  BREYER  and 
SYDNEY  GOLDSTEIN 


%.  ^^^^ 


'U. 


^ 


■^SX 


Docket  No.  13834-8A 


Pet Icloners, 

V. 

COMMISSIONER  OF  INTERNAL  REVENUE, 

Respondent. 

DECISION 

Pursuant  to  agreement  of  the  parties  in  the  above-entitled 
case,  it  is  I 

ORDERED  and  DECIDED:   That  there  is  a  deficiency  in  income 
tax  due  from  the  petitioners  for  the  taxable  year  1980  in  thej 
amount  of  $4,704.00. 

That  there  is  no  addition  to  the  tax  due  from  the  petitioners 
for  the  taxable  year  1980,  under  the  provisions  of  section  6653(a) 
of  the  Internal  Revenue  Code  of  1954. 

(Signed)  SAMUa  B.  STERfiETT 
Judge. 


Entered:  <(0V  2  5  t985 


It  is  hereby  stipulated  that  the  Court  may. enter  the  foregoing 
decision  in  the  above-entitled  case. 

It  is  hereby  stipulated  that,  effective  upon  the  entry  of 
this  decision  by  the  Court,  petitioners  waive  the  restrictions 
contained  in  section  6213(a)  of  the  Internal  Revenue  Code  of 
1954  prohibiting  assessment  and  collection  of  the  deficiencies 
(plus  statutory  interest)  until  the  decision  of  the  Tax  Court 
has  become  final. 


By: 


FRED  T.  GOLDBERG,  JR. 

Chief  Counsel 

Internal  Revenue  Service 


^^RNSTEIN 
t'Co/yis^el /fdr    Petitioner 
^ColJlifntfe ,'   Cahen,    McCabe    &    Breyer 

35rth    Floor,    One    Embarcadero    Center 

San    Francisco,    CA      94111 

Tel.  No.  (415)  391-4800 


^VV.i.^-^ 


EUGHNE  H.  CIRANNI 
As^stant  District  Counsel 
Internal  Revenue  Service 
160  Spear  Street,  Room  504 
San  Francisco,  CA   94105 
Tel.  No.  (415)  974-9271 


Dated : 


/  i 


-^d 


Dated: 


'//?/ts 


1187 


UNITED  STATES  TAX  COURT 


CHARLES  R.  BREYER  and 
SYDNEY  GOLDSTEIN, 

Petitioners, 


COMMISSIONER  OF  INTERNAL  REVENUE, 
Respondent. 


Docket  No. 


-  \..  kLAA  COURT 


1303/f--di^ 


PETITION 

Petitioners  hereby  petition  for  a  redetermination  of  the 
deficiency  set  forth  by  the  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue  in 
his  Notice  of  Deficiency  (Service  Symbols:  411 -Field- 90D  San 
Francisco),  dated  February  17,  1984,  and  as  the  basis  for  their 
case  allege  as  follows: 

1.   Petitioners  are  husband  and  wife  with  legal  resi- 
dence now  at  2661  Clay  Street,  San  Francisco,  California  94115- 
Petitioners'  Social  Security  Numbers  are  as  follows: 

Breyer      -  562-48-3508 
Goldstein   -  550-66-0013 

Petitioners  timely  filed  a  joint  income  tax  return  for  the 

calendar  year  1980  with  the  Office  of  the  Internal  Revenue 

Service  at  Fresno,  California. 

// 


1188 


2.  The  Notice  of  Deficiency  (a  copy  of  %»hich,  including 
so  much  of  the  statement  and  schedules  accompanying  the  notice  as 
is  material ,  is  attached  and  marked  Exhibit  A) ,  was  mailed  to  the 
Petitioners  on  February  17,  1984,  and  was  issued  by  the  Office  of 
the  Internal  Revenue  Service  at  San  Francisco,  California. 

3.  The  deficiencies,  as  determined  by  the  Commissioner, 
are  in  income  taxes  for  the  calendar  year  1980  in  the  amotint  of 
$25,793.00  plus  a  negligence  penalty  of  $1,290.00,  all  of  which 
amounts  are  in  dispute. 

A.   The  determination  of  tax  set  forth  in  the  said 
notice  of  deficiency  is  based  upon  the  following  errors: 

(A)  The  Commissioner  erred  in  determining  that  the 
Petitioners  are  not  entitled  to  a  charitable  deduction  of 
$48,000  for  a  contribution  of  property  because  Petitioners 
have  not  established  that  the  property  had  any  value. 

(B)  The  Commissioner  erred  in  determining  that 
Petitioners  are  subject  to  a  penalty  under  Section  6653(a) 
(I.R.C.)  for  negligence  or  intentional  disregard  of  the 
rules. 

5.   The  facts  upon  which  Petitioners  rely,  as  the  basis 
of  their  case,  are  as  follows: 

(A)    (1)   Petitioners  are  the  owners  of  the  house 
("Property")  in  which  they  reside  and  which  Is  located  at 
2661  Clay  Street,  San  Francisco,  California. 
// 


2. 


1189 


(2)  The  Property  has  been  determined   to  be  an 
architecturally  significant  structure. 

(3)  In  1980  Petitioners   contributed  a 
preservation  easement   interest  in  the  Property  to  the 
Foundation  for  San  Francisco's  Architecttiral  Heritage 
("Foundation"),   a  tax-exempt  public  charitable  organization 
and  such  contribution  was  accepted  by  the  Foundation. 

(4)  The  fair  market  value  of  the  contributed 
preservation  easement  was  determined  by  an  independent 
appraiser,    to  be   $48,000,    which  amount  was   properly  deducted 
as  a  charitable   contribution  by  Petitioners   in  their  1980 
income  tax  return  pursuant   to  Section  170    (I.R.C.). 

(B)         (1)     Petitioners  have  not  been  negligent  in 
their  actions  nor  have  they  intentionally  disregarded  the 
rules.      Accordingly,    the   imposition  of  any  penalties   pursuant 
to   section  6653(a)    is    improper. 
6.      Affirmative  Defense. 

Respondent's   erroneous   determination  that   said 
contribution  had   no  value  was  made  without  Respondent  making  any 
effort   to  discuss   or  meet  with  Petitioners  or  their  represent- 
atives  and  without   reviewing   the  supporting   appraisals   and 
documentation.      Respondent's  representatives  have  denied 
Petitioners    their   right   to   exhaust   their  administrative   remedies, 
resulting   in  undue   prejudice  and  cost   to   Petitioners.      Such 
// 


1190 


denial  of  Petitioners'  right  to  exhaust  their  administrative 
remedies  is  contrary  to  Respondent's  rules  and  polices. 

WHEREFORE,  Petitioners  pray  that  this  Court  may  try  this 
case  and  determine  that  there  are  no  deficiencies  in  income  taxes 
and  that  no  penalties  should  be  imposed  and  to  give  such  other 
and  proper  relief,  including  costs  and  attorneys  fees  as  in  the 
premises  the  Court  may  deem  fit  and  proper. 


Dated:   May  lj_,    1984 


JZFFI 

GQPiiENTfz  /  CAHEN ,    McCABE   St  BREYER 

One  /Enparcadero  Center 

35th  ^loor 

San  Francisco,    California   94111 

(415)    391-4800 


4. 


1191 


T&x  Year  Bidea          Def  iciencj'             Penclty  - 

Section 

&H1 

?3(fl) 

Deceuciec  31,  1980  S 

_25,793.00     S 

1,290 

.00 

s 

s 

s 
s 

s 

$ 

s 

-  ?. 

S 

s 

$ 

s 

s 

5 

s 

s 

s 

$. 

S 

s 

s 

s 

s 

s 

$ 

s 

s 

s 

I'i^ 


CEHTIFIED  IML  Person  to  Contact: 

Charles  K.   Breyer  Hotioes  Unit 

Syoney  Goldstein  Contact  Telephone  NCinfcer: 

2661  Qay  Street  (415)  556-0294 

San  Francisco,  CA  94115 

Dear  Ta^cpayer: 

Vfe  have  determined  that  there  is  a  deficiency  (increase)  in  j-our  inoorae  tax  as  diown  above 
This  letter  is  a  ICTICE  OF  DEFlCIENCir  sent  to  you  as  required  bj'  law. .  Bie  enclosed  stateaen 
dKVS  hew  we  figured  the  deficiencj'. 

If  you  want  to  contest  tliis  deficiency  in  court  before  niakijig  any  peynent,  you  have  90  day 
from  tiie  above  nailing  date  of  this  letter  (150  days  if  addressed  to  you  outside  of  the  Unite 
States)  to  file  a  petition  with  the  United  States  Tax  Court  for  a  reoetencination  of  the  def i 
ciency.  "Qie  petition  ^wuld  be  filed  with  the  United  States  Tax  Court,  400  Secona  Street  H7. 
Washington,  D.C.  20217,  and  the  oopi'  of  this  letter  should  be  attached  to  the  petition.  TJ: 
tine  in  vrtiich  you  nust  file  a  petition  with  the  Court  (90  or  150  days  as  the  cSase  laay  be)  i 
fixed  hj  law  and  ihe  Court  cannot  consider  your  dsg  if  your  petition  is  filfifl  late^  If  thi 
letter  is  addressed  to  both  a  husband  and  wife,  and  both  want  to  petition  the  Tax  Court,  hot 
nust  sign  the  petition  or  each  nust  file  a  separate,  signed  petition. 

If  you  dispute  not  more  than  $5,000  for  any  one  tax  year,  a  siii^lified  procedure  is  pr< 
vided  bi'  the  "Hax  Court  for  sraali  tax  cases.  You  can  obtain  inforraation  about  this  procedure,  . 
well  as  a  petition  fora  you  can  use,  bi'  writing  to  the  Clerk  of  the  United  States  Tax  Court  ; 
400  Second  Street  W.,     VJashington,  D.C.  20217.   You  should  do   this  pcoiaptly  if  you  intend 
file  a  petition  with  the  Tax  Court. 

If  you  decide  not  to  file  a  petition  with  the  Tax  Court,  we  would  ajyreciate  it  if  y 
would  sign  and  return  the  enclosed  waiver  forrc.  This  will  permit  us  to  assess  the  d^icien 
quickly  and  will  limit  the  accuraulation  of  interest.  "Hie  enclosed  addressed  envelope  is  f 
your  convenience.  If  you  decide  not  to  sign  and  return  the  statement  and  you  do  not  tiiae 
petition  the  Tax  Court,  t^ie  law  requires  us  to  assess  and  bill  you  for  the  deficiency  after 
days  from  the  above  mailing  date  of  this  letter  (150  days  if  this  letter  is  euldressed  to  y 
outside  the  United  States) . 

If  you  have  any  questions,  please  contact  the  person  **ose  nane  and  telepiione  nunbef  c 
shOrm  above. 

Sincerely  yours, 

Roscoe  L.  Egger,  Jr. 
Conmissioner 

Enclosures:  '^  "TTjiOml  ^^^ 

Copy  of  this  letter  I'dchael  Sassi        'T^ 

Vfaiver  District  Director  ^ 

Bwelope 

P.  O.  Box  35040,  San  Francisco,  California    94102                             Foro  5601   (Rev.  6-79) 

Exhibit   A 


1192 


^  It  is  cctenained  that  part  or  the  uncertai'cent  of  t*:::  for  the  taxable 
":  year(s)  shown  on  Fora  556'i  is  due  to  negligence  or  intentional  disrecard 
1  of  rules  end  regulations.  Consequently r  the  5  per  centum  addition  to  tas 
«i  tax  provided  bi'  section  6S53(a)  of  the  Interral  Revenue  Cede  is 
':  asserted  for  this  year  (s) . 


1193 


Foon  5278 

(Rev.  M*v  ISS2I 

0«o*rim«At  ot  ti»«  Tr«4iw«v  -  Inwrn..  R««««»«  &••*.<• 

Statement  —  Income  Tax  Changes 

Rtfturn  Form  No 

/ 

Hmvmitt  ol  Taxpiyerdl 

p^  Notice  ol  Oclicrtncv                     Q  Other  ttptdtyl 
D  Settlement  Computation 

Tax  Yean  Ended 

. 

1.    Adiimnwnti  lo  lncom« 

*'  <LontYl^VJtlorv-^  -  nor\-C/i'-.»^ 

4>  46,ax:-.oo 

\ 

b. 

\ 

c 

\ 

d. 

\ 

«. 

\ 

1. 

\ 

«' 

\ 

2.    T«al  adjuftfneflts 

t'  4ft,CCO..0O 

\ 

3.    a.   O  T«x«W«  lnco(n«                                 Q  Adiutted  grou  tneofn« 
b.   At  (hown  in:                                               ^  Tia  table  incono 

D  Prellmlnarv  l«ner         O  Not««  of  delkitncv          iS,"""""  ••  ••'«> 

^.,bM.OO 

^ 

4.    O  Taublt  income  u  ceviud                                    ^  Ta>  lebK  income 
O  Adjuttad  flrosi  Income  as  revised                              as  revtied 

^/y.-^Sf.oo 

\ 

6.    Taa  Irom                 Q  Tan  tables                              OT4Xfate 
(31  Schedule  TC                              icieduies 

^  3^1,263,00 

\ 

6.    Allcfnativc  ux  if  ac 

\ 

\ 

7.    Corfcctcdtax  liability  r'esser  of  ;.>»  5  or  £; 

i  3'1,36.'',  00 

\ 

8     Us> 

•-    fc>»iticrv\    rrn ViO^n-^vi     Creciv^ 

s'o.fxa 

\ 

credits 
toac/A-/ 

b.    rnvexrrvnv    tzvx    Crp,iiV 

•83.00 

\ 

c     Rrt,^.i,'W^■n.-^\     Cr^f'axu     O-lvViV- 

l<^^.oc^ 

\ 

9.    BalarKa  (Iin4  7  l^u  mmovna  on  linn  fia  ^trough  8c/ 

*>    3«1.0-i5.C6 

\       ■ 

■.    TtK  fiom  rvcoinpuling  pnof  vra'  *nv«sifntfni  credit 

\ 

10.   PItn 

b.  Self-encMovmeni  tas 

\ 

e. 

\ 

1 1 .    Total  corrected  income  tax  liabilitr  >/">*  9  plus  tmounit  on  hnti 
tCt  Mnwgn  lOcI 

^  -Ho.^.  00 

\ 

12.    TotH  ux  shown  on  return  or  at  praviousir  adjusted 

*.     ;  5,2'/:?,  00 

V 

13.    Increase  or  (dacrenal  in  tax  Idilltrtnct  6ant«an  linn  1 1  and  12/ 

t.     2fJ,7^i.OO 

•- 

14.    Addition,  to  «h«  tax //.stedfiefow/f^y^y^^s^      j;^   i.tilXvil\ 


/,>10.CO     (*25. 103 .00  X  5 %) 


Form  5278   (Rev.S«2l 


1194 


UNITED  STATES  TAX  COURT 

WASHINGTON.  D.C.  20217 
June  3,  1985 


CHARLES  R.  BREXER  AHD  SYDNEY  GOLDSTEIR 


Docket  No.: 


13834-8A 


I'etUUmer. 


Trial  On:        Hoveaber  12,   1985 


COMMISSIONER  OF  INTERNAL  REVENUE, 

Reispandmt.f    Trial  At:  Room  2021,  Federal  Building 

and  Courthouse 
450  Golden  Gate  Avenue 
San  Francisco,  California  94102 


NOTICE  SETTING  CASE  FOR  TRIAL 


The  parties  are  hereby  notifled  that  the  above-entitled  case  is  set  for  trial  at  the  Trial  Session  beginning  on 
the  date  indicated  above. 

The  calendar  for  that  Session  will  be  called  at  10:00  a.m.  on  that  date  and  both  parties  are  expected  to  be 
present  at  that  time  and  be  prepared  to  try  the  case.  YOUR  FAILURE  TO  APPEAR  MAY  RESULT  IN  DISMISSAL 
OF  THE  CASE  AND  ENTRY  OF  DECISION  AGAINST  YOU. 

Your  attention  is  called  to  the  Court's  requirement'  that,  if  the  case  cannot  be  settled  on  a  mutually  satisfactory  basis, 
the  parties. before  trial. must  agree  in  writing  to  all  facts  and  all  documents  about  which  there  should  be  no  disagreement. 
Therefore,  the  parties  should  contact  each  other  promptly  and  cooperate  fully  so  that  the  necessary  steps  can  be  taken  to 
comply  with  this  requirement.  YOUR  FAILURE  TO  COOPERATE  MAY  ALSO  RESULT  IN  DISMISSAL  OF  THE 
CASE  AND  ENTRY  OF  DECISION  AGAINST  YOU. 


If  there  are  a  number  of  cases  to  be  tried,  the  Court  will  fix  the  time  of  each  trial  at  the  end  of  the  calendar  call.  The 
Court  makes  every  effort  to  suit  the  convenience  of  the  petitioners  in  fixing  trial  times,  but  because  of  conflicting  requests 
received  from  petitioners,  the  flnal  determination  of  trial  times  must  rest  in  the  Court's  discretion. 


(^^^^y^ 


Clerk  of  the  Court 


To:  Counsel  for  Respondent 


To: 


Jeffrey  A.  Bernstein 

((XBLEHTZ,  CAHEN,  MC  CABE 

AND  BREYER) 

One  Embarcadero  Center,  35th  Floor 

San  Francisco,  CA  9A111 


JUW7    J985 


Fann40-SF 
(October  I  onn 


1195 


UNITED  STATES  TAX  COURT 


CHARLES  R.  BREYER  and 
SYDNEY  GOLDSTEIN. 


Petitioners , 


COMMISSIONER  OF  INTERNAL 
REVENUE 


Respondent . 


F 


UNITED  STATEa 
TAX  COURT 

n     n       r73 
MAY  14  1984 


Docket  No.-J_333Lj-d'v 


REQUEST  FOR  PLACE  OF  TRIAL 


Petitioners  hereby  request  that  trial  of  this  case  be 
held  in  San  Francisco,  California. 

Dated:   May   /(  ,  1984 


Jeffry  A.  Bernstein,  Esq. 
Coblentz,  Cahen,  McCabe  6e  Breyer 
35th  Floor,  One  Embarcadero  Center 
San  Francisco,  CA   94111 


PLEASE  tTiNiJ  ONLY  ORIGIWAL'  ^HD    ' 
r  -;.    '  Vi  Jr  PEilliOM  {RULE  34(d)) 
C.  LESIGNATION  OK  Plj\CE  OF  TRIAU 
(RULE  140(b)).  .  .. 


U.S.  TAX  COURT    '«tfi| 

GRANTED  '( 

f^AY  1 4  1SS4 


mmON  SERVED  ON  RESPONOFWr_ 
FILING  FEE  ALSO  ACKHOWLEDGEO 


MAY  18  1984 


1196 


.  X^    1^     d  ^t^  f'rn  I  ned     Th^tft^^    no<^<^!~^    <^OT^'fc"^"'P^     olgn'meei 


6t>    A.  cmrtfotbie.    Gpnmbuho/i      in    -ftTe.   amconf-  of-    •»4g,ooo     ha 


JO.,...HTe.    Q/TlCOfTr     of     >4-g^.OOQ, 


1197 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  OUESTIONNATRF, 

I.     BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used) 

Frank  Cadmus  Damrell,  Jr. 

Address:  List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address(es) 

Office:  Damrell,  Nelson,  Schrimp,  Pallios  &  Ladine 

1601  I  Street,  Fifth  Floor 
Modesto,  California  95354 

Home:  Modesto,  California 

Date  and  place  of  birth. 

July  6,  1938,  Modesto,  California 

Marital  Status    (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name).    List  spouse's 
occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  address(es). 

Lidwiena  Josephina  Dykzeul  Damrell 

Housewife  and  volunteer  at  Parent  Resource  Center  (county-wide  agency  which  serves 

families  to  prevent  child  abuse  and  to  provide  parent  and  family  mentoring). 

Education:    List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates  of 
attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

College  and  Law  Schools  Attended  Dates  Degree  Received 

University  of  Santa  Clara*  1 955-60 

University  of  California,  Berkeley  1960-61  B.A.,  1961 

Yale  Law  School  1961-64  L.L.B.,  1964 

*Entered  a  Roman  Catholic  Seminary,  Sacred  Heart  Novitiate,  which  was  affiliated 
with  Santa  Clara  University,  to  study  for  the  priesthood.  I  remained  a  student  there 
until  leaving  the  seminary  in  1960  to  complete  my  undergraduate  studies  at  U.C. 
Berkeley. 


1198 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 


6.  Employment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional  corporations, 
companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations, 
nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer, 
director,  partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  from  college. 

1962  E.  &  J.  Gallo  Law  Department,  Modesto,  CA  (summer) 

1963  Community  Progress  Inc.  Legal  Service,  New  Haven,  CT  (summer) 

1 964  State  of  California  Attorney  General's  Office,  Law  Clerk 

1 965-66  State  of  California  Attorney  General's  Office,  Deputy  Attorney  General 

1966-68  Stanislaus  County  District  Attorney's  Office,  Deputy  District  Attorney 

1 968-70  Law  Office  of  Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr.,  Sole  Practitioner 

1 970-76  Damrell  &  Damrell,  Partner 

1 976-90  Damrell,  Damrell  &  Nelson,  Partner 

1 990-present  Damrell,  Nelson,  Schrimp,  Pallios  &  Ladine,  President 

1 992-present  Tlie  Shannon  Company,  Managing  General  Partner 

7.  Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give  particulars,  including 
the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 

None 

8.  Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees,  and 
honorar}'  society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

None 

9.  Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related  committees  or 
conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of 
any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

California  Bar  Association 

American  Bar  Association  -  Antitrust  Section  and  Litigation  Section 
Federal  Bar  Association 
Stanislaus  County  Bar  Association 
Stanislaus  County  Women  Lawyers'  Association 
State  Bar  Disciplinary  Hearing  Board 

Senator  Feinstein's  Advisory  Committee  for  the  United  States  District  Court,  Eastern  District 
of  California 

10.  Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are  active  in 
lobbying  before  public  bodies.  Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 


1199 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 

Aside  from  the  California  State  Bar  Association,  I  am  aware  of  no  such  organization  that  is 
active  in  lobbying. 

Other  Organizations 

Sportsmen  of  Stanislaus,  a  family  athletic  club.  A  copy  of  its  bylaws  is  attached  as  Exhibit 

"A." 

11.  Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice,  with 
dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed.  Please  explain  the 
reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same  information  for  administrative 
bodies  which  require  special  admission  to  practice. 

1 965  Supreme  Court  of  California 

1 965  United  States  District  Court,  Eastern  District  of  California 

1 965  United  States  District  Court,  Northern  District  of  California 

1 965  United  States  Court  of  Appeals,  Ninth  Circuit 

1979  United  States  Supreme  Court 

1980  United  States  District  Court,  Central  District  of  California 

12.  Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books,  articles,  reports  or 
other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.  Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.  Also,  please  supply  a  copy 
of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.  If  there 
were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you,  please 
supply  them. 

Commentary  on  the  Rules  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of 
California,  which  is  in  the  final  editing  stage  for  publication  in  1997.  The  publisher  is 
Michie  Parker  Publications,  P.O.  Box  9040,  Carlsbad,  CA  9201 8-9040.  A  copy  of  the  draft 
is  attached  as  Exhibit  "B." 

13.  Health:  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  your  last  physical 
examination. 

It  is  excellent.  My  last  physical  examination  was  January  23, 1997. 


1200 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 


14.  Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have  held,  whether  such 
position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each  such 
court. 

None 

15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  (1)  citations  for  the  ten  most 
signiricant  opinions  you  have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was 
affirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3) 
citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues,  together  with 
the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed 
were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

Not  applicable. 

16.  Public  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you  have  held,  other  than 
judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected 
or  appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies  for  elective  public 
office. 

I  spent  several  years  as  a  member  (1973-80)  and  as  Chair  (1975-80)  of  the  California  State 
Consumer  Advisory  Council,  the  advisory  committee  to  the  State  Department  of  Consumer 
Affairs.  I  was  appointed  by  Governors  Reagan  and  Brown. 

17.  Legal  Career: 

a.         Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after  graduation 
from  law  school  including: 

1 .  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name  of  the  judge, 
the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

I  did  not  clerk  for  a  judge. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and  dates; 

Yes,  fi-om  1968  to  1970,  I  was  a  sole  practitioner  at  820  12th  Street  in 
Modesto,  California. 


1201 


SENATE  JLDICIARY  COMNflTTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE 


Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr. 


the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  Ian  firms  or  ofiices,  companies  or 
governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected,  and  the 
nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 


Employer 


Damreli,  Nelson,  Schrimp 

Pallios  &  Ladine 
1601  I  Street  and  1625  I  Street,  Modesto 

Damreli,  Damrell  &  Nelson 

1 625  I  Street  and 

911  13th  Street,  Modesto,  CA 

Damrell  &  Damrell 

911  13th  Street,  Modesto 

Law  Offices  of  Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr. 
820  12lh  Street 

Stanislaus  County 
11 00  I  Street,  Modesto 

State  of  California 

Office  of  the  Attorney  General 

50  Fremont  St.,  #300,  San  Francisco 


Position 

Cit> 

Dates 

President 

Modesto,  CA 

1990-97 

Managing  Partner/ 
President 

Modesto.  CA 

1976-90 

Managing  Partner 

Modesto,  CA 

1970-76 

Sole  Practitioner 

Modesto,  CA 

1968-70 

Deputy  District 
Attorney 

Modesto,  CA 

1966^8 

Deputy  Attorney 
General 

San  Francisco,  CA 

1965-66 

State  of  California 

Office  of  the  Attorney  General 

50  Fremont  St.,  #300,  San  Francisco 


Law  Clerk 


San  Francisco,  CA      1964 


What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice,  dividing  it 
into  periods  with  dates  if  its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 

1965-1968 

Upon  graduation  from  law  school,  I  spent  four  years  as  a  prosecutor,  first  as 
a  Deputy  Attorney  General,  then  as  a  Senior  Deputy  District  Attorney  for 
Stanislaus  County.  As  a  Deputy  Attorney  General,  I  was  just  assigned  to  the 
Criminal  Appeals  Division  where  I  was  responsible  for  approximately  50 
appeals,  including  a  number  of  Habeas  Corpus  Writs.  During  my  last  year. 


1202 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 


I  was  assigned  as  the  first  Consumer  Fraud  Deputy  for  the  San  Francisco 
office.  In  that  capacity,  I  filed  several  injunctive  actions  in  the  San  Francisco 
Superior  Court  and  conducted  evidentiary  hearings.  As  a  Deputy  District 
Attorney,  I  tried  numerous  criminal  jury  trials  (including  three  murder  trials). 
I  also  conducted  a  number  of  preliminary  hearings  and  misdemeanor  juries 
as  well. 

1968-80 

I  commenced  my  private  law  practice  as  a  sole  practitioner  in  1 968.  Initially, 
my  practice  was  exclusively  trial  work.  I  tried  a  number  of  jury  and  bench 
trials,  primarily  personal  injury,  criminal  defense,  and  family  law  matters. 
After  several  years,  however,  my  litigation  practice  became  more  business- 
related.  When  my  father  retired  from  the  Superior  Court  in  1 970,  he  joined 
me  in  the  practice  of  law.  Soon  thereafter,  Duane  Nelson  joined  our  firm  out 
of  law  school.  He  remains  a  partner  to  this  day.  In  1 980,  our  firm  grew  to 
ten  lawyers  with  a  satellite  office  in  Los  Angeles  to  assist  several  important 
business  clients  who  were  headquartered  in  the  Los  Angeles  area. 

1980-1988 

By  1 980  several  California-based  business  clients  had  asked  me  to  assist  their 
Washington,  D.C.  counsel.  As  a  result,  during  this  period,  I  spent 
considerable  time  in  Washington,  D.C.  as  an  attorney  and  lobbyist  on  behalf 
of  California  public  and  educational  entities,  agricultural  associations,  and  the 
energy  and  transportation  industry.  I  appeared  before  both  the  House  and 
Senate  Agriculture  Committees  and  the  House  Interior  and  Senate  Energy 
Committees  and  worked  with  several  federal  agencies.  On  several  occasions 
during  this  time,  I  also  represented  corporate  clients  before  state  legislative 
committees  and  state  agencies. 

I  also  represented  corporations  and  institutions  relating  to  large  capital 
projects.  The  following  are  some  examples  of  projects  in  California.  I  was 
retained  by  the  University  of  California  regarding  the  possible  location  in 
California  of  the  Superconducting  Super  Collider.  This  involved 
representation  of  the  University  with  local  citizens  groups  and  communities 
in  San  Joaquin  County.  I  also  represented  the  University  in  its  efforts  to 
obtain  fiinding  for  the  project  from  the  State  of  California,  Congressional 
support,  and  a  favorable  decision  from  the  U.S.  Department  of  Energy.  I  also 
was  retained  by  a  New  York-based  venture  capital  group  to  provide  legal 
counsel  for  the  development  of  a  resource  recovery  project,  which  would 
incinerate  California's  waste  tires  to  produce  electric  energy.    It  was  the 


1203 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 

largest  facility  of  its  kind  in  the  United  Slates.  Our  firm  was  retained  under 
my  direction  to  prepare  contracts,  to  obtain  local,  state  and  federal  permits, 
and  to  work  with  bond  counsel  and  underwriters  counsel  regarding  the 
issuance  and  sale  of  bonds  to  finance  the  project.  The  project  was 
successfully  completed.  Our  fum  represented  the  same  client  regarding  the 
development  of  a  resource  recovery  facility.  This  one  utilized  rice  hulls  and 
straw  for  energy  production.  I  also  represented  the  builder  and  operator  of 
the  Stanislaus  County  Waste  Energy  Facility,  the  largest  of  its  kind  in 
California.  This  facility  was  constructed  in  Stanislaus  County  to  bum  all 
solid  waste  fi-om  the  Cit>'  of  Modesto  and  surrounding  communities.  Again, 
I  directed  the  preparation  of  contracts,  obtained  local  and  state  permits  and 
assisted  bond  counsel  regarding  issuance  and  sale  of  bonds  to  finance  the 
project.  In  addition,  I  was  engaged  to  represent  several  clients  in  the 
development  of  severed  large  real  estate  projects. 

1988-present 

Our  fuTO  now  consists  of  1 8  attorneys  with  offices  in  Modesto,  Sacramento, 
and  Oakdale,  California.  My  law  practice  is  multi-faceted  and  covers  a  wide 
spectrum  of  clients  and  cases.  In  1988, 1  decided  to  devote  full-time  energy 
to  my  practice  in  California.  While  on  occasion  I  represent  clients  in  disputes 
with  state  and  federal  regulatory  agencies,  I  have  generally  confined  my 
recent  legal  practice  for  the  most  part  to  major  litigated  matters. 

For  the  last  ten  years,  I  have  spent  virtually  all  of  my  time  on  complex 
business  litigation  in  both  federal  and  state  courts.  My  clients  include 
publicly  owned  corporations,  closely  held  family  corporations,  public  entities 
and  individuals.  Such  clients  include  wineries,  farming  enterprises,  trucking, 
food  processing,  construction  and  manufacturing  companies,  distributorships, 
and  professional  corporations. 

Another  significant  aspect  of  my  trial  practice  involves  litigation  relating  to 
securities  fi^ud  and  antitrust  law.  I  have  been  both  lead  counsel  and  co-lead 
counsel  in  several  federal  class  actions.  My  clients  in  these  cases  include 
individuals,  as  well  as  private  and  public  entities.  Such  cases  involve  an 
extensive  law  and  motion  practice,  as  well  as  comprehensive  pre-trial  orders 
and  discovery  plans.  Essentially,  most  securities/antitrust  litigation  is  usually 
resolved  after  pre-trial  motions,  hearings,  and  extensive  discovery. 

2.         Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the  areas,  if  any,  in 
which  you  have  specialized. 


1204 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 


Agricultural  associations  -  Administrative  law.  Congressional  lobbying 
Agricultural  production  companies  -  Business  litigation,  administrative  law 
Construction  -  Construction  and  real  estate  litigation,  lender  liability  litigation 
Consumer  product  manufacturers  -  Administrative  law,  business  litigation 
Food  processing  -  Administrative  law,  administrative  mandamus, 
environmental  law  ' 
Public  entities  -  Antitrust  litigation,  state  administrative  proceedings, 

Congressional  lobbying 
Resource  recover>'  companies  -  Administrative  law,  business  litigation, 

environmental  law 
Retail  store  companies  -  Business  litigation,  advertising  laws,  liability  defense 

litigation 
Wineries  -  Business  litigation,  administrative  law,  state  and  federal  alcoholic 

beverage  laws  and  regulations 

In  addition,  from  time  to  time,  I  represent  or  advise  numerous  individual  and 
business  clients  I  have  known  for  years,  some  for  a  lifetime,  on  a  variety  of 
business-related  legal  problems. 

Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at  all?  If  the 
frequency  of  your  appearance  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such 
variance,  giving  dates. 

1965-1980 

Initially,  most  of  my  litigation  experience  was  in  state  courts  and  state 
agencies.  As  a  state  prosecutor  and  as  a  private  litigator,  I  appeared 
frequently  in  court  on  law  and  motion  matters  and  bench  and  jury  trials. 
From  time  to  time  throughout  this  period,  I  conducted  trials  in  federal  court 
and  represented  clients  before  state  appellate  courts  and  in  state 
administrative  hearings. 

1980-1988 

Through  much  of  the  1980s,  I  spent  considerable  time  in  Washington,  D.C., 
on  behalf  of  various  clients.  As  discussed  above,  during  this  time  period  I 
was  engaged  as  counsel  for  a  number  of  major  public  and  private  capital 
projects.  They  included  several  resource  recovery  projects;  a  dispute  relating 
to  off-shore  oil  leases  in  the  Santa  Barbara  Channel  on  behalf  of  a  consortium 
of  independent  oil  companies;  several  public  power  projects  undertaken  by 
local  irrigation  districts/public  utilities;  the  purchase  of  Conrail  by  a  major 
transportation     company;     the     development     and     frinding    of    the 

8 


1205 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr. 


Superconducting  Super  Collider  by  the  University  of  California;  the 
development  of  federal  marketing  orders  for  California  table  grapes;  and 
several  large  real  estate  developments.  In  addition,  I  also  W£is  retained  to 
represent  several  California  agricultural  associations  and  food  processing  and 
manufacturing  companies  relating  to  a  variety  of  legal,  administrative,  and 
legislative  issues.  As  a  result,  for  a  period  of  time,  my  litigation  practice  was 
somewhat  limited.  Nevertheless,  I  made  a  number  of  appearances  on  behalf 
of  clients  in  state  courts  and  before  administrative  bodies  and  occasional!)'  in 
federal  court. 

1988-present 

I  resumed  a  full-time  business  litigation  practice,  which  has  recently  become 
primarily  focused  in  the  federal  courts  of  the  Eastern,  Northern  and  Central 
Districts  of  California.  However,  since  1988,  I  have  also  made  frequent 
appearances  in  state  court  as  well. 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  Federal  courts:  20% 

(b)  State  courts  of  record:  65% 

(c)  Other  courts:   15% 

As  noted  above,  my  practice  has  increasingly  involved  federal  court 
matters. 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  Civil:  90% 

(b)  Criminal:   10% 

1965-80 

In  my  early  years  of  practice  as  a  prosecutor,  all  litigated  matters  were 
crimina].  My  first  several  years  in  private  practice  1  also  defended  a 
number  of  criminal  matters. 

1980-present 

Since  1980  my  practice  has  been  virtually  all  civil  in  nature. 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to  verdict 
or  judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether  you  were 


A^  Qf.A      oo      -3n 


1206 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 

sole  counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

Trials  as  sole  counsel  -  approximately  100 
Trials  as  chief  counsel  -  approximately  1 5 
Trials  as  associate  counsel  -  approximately  1 5 

1965-80 

During  my  years  as  a  prosecutor,  I  conducted  numerous  jur>'  and 
bench  trials  as  well  as  approximately  40  criminal  appeals  and  writs. 
In  private  civil  practice  the  nimiber  of  trials  decreased  as  their 
complexity'  grew. 

1980-present 

Increasingly,  I  act  as  chief  coimsel  with  several  attorneys  assisting  me 
in  ver}'  complex  matters. 

5.         What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  Jur>:  25% 

(b)  Non-jur>:  75% 

18.  Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  signiHcant  litigated  matters  which  you  personally 
handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and  date 
if  unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summar>  of  the  substance  of  each  case.  Identify'  the 
party  or  parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.  Also  state  as  to  each 
case: 

a.  the  date  of  representation; 

b.  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before  whom  the  case 
was  litigated;  and 

c.  the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co-counsel  and  of 
principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 

1.         Bronco  Wine  Co.  v.  Bureau  of  Alcohol,  Tobacco  and  Firearms,  el  al. 

Summar\':  In  October  1 996,  the  Bureau  of  Alcohol,  Tobacco  and  Firearms  summarily  and 
without  notice  seized  32,000  cases  of  Rutherford  Vineyards  brand  wine  from  our 
client.    I  was  chief  counsel  assisted  by  several  law  firms  in  Sacramento,  San 


10 


1207 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 

Francisco.  Washington,  D.C.  and  New  York  City.  The  ATF  claimed  the  label  was 
in  violation  of  27  C.F.R.  4.39(i)  which  provides  that  wine  sold  under  brand  names 
incorporating  the  names  of  viticultural  areas  must  be  produced  from  the  viticultural 
area.  After  months  of  negotiations,  Bronco  filed  an  action  for  injunctive  relief 
alleging  violation  of  due  process  of  the  Fifth  Amendment  and  the  federal  APA 
(Administrative  Procedures  Act).  A  hearing  was  held  on  a  temporar>'  restraining 
order,  and  the  court  denied  the  application.  An  amended  complaint  has  been  filed 
adding  the  denial  of  due  process  on  grounds  that  4.39(i)  violates  1 5  U.S.C.  1 052(a) 
(the  Lanham  Act),  which  implements  the  provisions  of  the  recently  enacted  Uruguay 
Round  Agreement  Act,  19  U.S.C.  3501,  et  seq.  There  has  been  considerable 
discovery.  I  have  conducted  virtually  all  depositions  and  most  hearings  on  behalf  of 
the  plaintiff  The  challenge  to  the  federal  wine  label  regulations  based  on  U.S. 
trademark  law  has  attracted  wide-spread  interest  throughout  California's  wine 
industr>'  and  has  been  discussed  in  various  trade  journals  and  magazines.  As  a  result, 
the  industr)'  has  formed  a  special  committee  to  study  the  matter  as  the  issue  affects 
literally  hundreds  of  wine  labels. 

a.  1 996-present 

b.  Counsel  for  Plaintiff 

Court:  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  District  of  California.  Eastern  District    Case  No 
CV-F-96-6354  REC  DLB 
Judge:  Hon.  Robert  E.  Coyle 

c-  OppQ?ing  CQun?el:    Daniel  E.  Bensing,  U.S.  Attorney's  Office,  1130  O  Street, 

Fresno,  CA  93721,  Phone  (209)  498-7272 

2.         Hardy  Soderholm  and  Cheryl  Soderholm  v.  Rubbermaid.  Inc. 

SMmmarx':  This  case  was  filed  on  behalf  of  Hardy  and  Cheryl  Soderholm  against  Rubbermaid, 
Inc.,  in  the  United  States  Dismct  Court  for  the  Northern  District  of  California  for 
several  hundred  thousand  dollars  for  fraud,  negligent  misrepresentation  and  punitive 
damages.  1  was  chief  counsel  and  handled  some  30  depositions  in  California, 
Colorado,  Ohio,  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey.  I  also  and  handled  numerous  motions 
including  a  motion  to  dismiss,  summary  judgment  and  some  15  motions  in  limine. 
The  jury  trial  lasted  three  weeks  and  resulted  in  a  verdict  for  the  defendant. 
Rubbermaid  falsely  represented  to  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Soderholm  that  it  supported 
Plaintiffs  business  plan  to  franchise  "Everything"  Rubbermaid  stores.  Upon  the 
successfiil  completion  of  a  test  program.  Plaintiffs  intended  to  own  a  number  of  such 
stores  themselves.  Rubbermaid  failed  to  disclose  to  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Soderholm  its 
intention  to  go  into  the  corporate  retail  business  itself  and  to  use  the  Soderhohns' 
single  store  as  a  test  for  its  own  corporate  program.    Rubbermaid  withdrew  its 

11 


1208 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 


support  of  the  Soderholms"  store  after  they  had  invested  their  life  savings  in  the 
business  plan.  The  case  presented  a  challenge  to  this  corporation's  conduct  in 
defrauding  and  misleading  these  individual  entrepreneurs  to  their  substantial 
detriment  for  the  benefit  of  the  corporation.  Legal  issues  related  to  fraud, 
promissory  estoppel,  breach  of  contract,  breach  of  third  party  beneficiary  contract, 
admissibility  of  hearsay  evidence,  expert  and  lay  opinion  testimony,  and  character 
evidence,  determination  of  the  proper  measure  of  damages  for  fraud  and  tortious 
interference  with  contractual  relations  and  economic  advantage. 

a.  1994-1996 

b.  Counsel  for  Plaintiffs 

Court:  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  District  of  California,  Northern  District,  Case  No. 

C94-3583 

Judge:  Hon.  William  H.  Orrick 

c.  Opposing  Counsel:  George  E.  Leonard,  Esq.,  Shugharl,  Thomson  &  Kihoy,  Twelve 
Wyandotte  Plaza,  120  W.  12th  Street,  Kansas  City,  MO  64105-1929,  Phone  (816) 
421-3355 

3.         Bronco  Wine  Co.  et  a!.,  adw  Glen  Ellen,  ef  al. 

Summar\':  This  was  a  cross-complaint  filed  in  Sonoma  County  Superior  Court  on  behalf  of  the 
California  wine  distributor  of  Glen  Ellen  wines,  the  largest  selling  Chardonnay  wine 
in  America,  for  wrongful  termination  of  a  distributorship,  which  claimed  damages 
for  failure  of  plaintiff  to  honor  bulk  wine  contracts.  The  case  was  widely  reported 
in  the  wine  trade  press  since  it  involved  important  industry  issues  relating  to  wine 
distributorship  and  long-term  wine  supply  agreements.  I  was  chief  counsel  and 
conducted  virtually  all  discover}'  and  motions,  as  well  as  the  jury  trial,  on  behalf  of 
the  plaintiff.  The  pre-trial  motions  included  demurrers,  motions  for  injunctive  relief, 
summary  judgment,  and  some  25  motions  in  limine.  The  jury  trial  lasted  three 
months  and  resulted  in  a  verdict  on  the  cross-complaint  for  $2.5  million,  as  well  as 
a  verdict  against  the  cross-complainant  for  several  million  dollars. 

a.  1990-1993 

b.  Counsel  for  Defendant  Bronco  Wine  Co. 

Court:  Sonoma  County  Superior  Court,  Case  No.  187834 
Judge:  Hon.  Elaine  Waters 

c.  Opposing  Counsel:  Robert  R.  Cross,  Esq.,  Broad,  Schultz,  Larson  &  Wineberg,  One 
California  Street,  14th  Floor,  San  Francisco,  CA  941 1 1-5482,  Phone  (415)  986-0300 

12 


1209 

SENATE  JL^DICIAR'^'  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 

4.  5.  Martinelli  <&  Co.  v.  Department  of  Conservation,  et  al. 

Surwnao':  There  was  a  complaint  for  writ  of  mandate  and  permanent  injunction  against  the 
Department  of  Conservation  of  the  State  of  California.  At  issue  was  enforcement  of 
a  recently  enacted  Beverage  Container  Recycling  and  Litter  Reduction  Act  (knov^n 
as  the  "Bottle  Bill")  against  a  major  California  fruit  juice  manufacttirer,  S.  Martinelli 
&  Co.,  without  hearing  or  opportunity  to  explain  its  legal  position  that  it  was  legally 
exempt  from  the  Bottle  Bill.  I  was  chief  counsel  in  this  matter.  The  State  contended 
Martinelli 's  product  was  no  different  than  a  soft  drink  such  as  Coke  or  Pepsi. 
Martinelli  was  ordered  to  relabel  over  300,000  cases  of  juice  which  had  been 
packaged  before  the  enactment  of  the  Bottle  Bill.  In  addition,  Martinelli  was  ordered 
to  relabel  over  a  million  bottles  of  its  products  and  pay  nearly  $300,000  in 
redemption  fees.  A  hearing  was  held  before  Superior  Court  Judge  Cecily  Bond  in 
Sacramento.  The  case  was  important  to  the  fruit  juice  industry.  At  the  hearing  I 
established  that  California's  Food  &  Drug  Law  and  parallel  provisions  of  Federal  law 
exempted  undiluted  fi^it  juice  from  the  definition  of  "soft  drink."  As  a  result,  the 
court  enjoined  the  enforcement  of  the  Bottle  Bill  against  undiluted  fruit  juice 
products,  and  Martinelli  in  particular.  1  was  chief  counsel  in  this  matter. 

a.  1987-1991 

b.  Counsel  for  Plaintiff 

Court:  Sacramento  County  Superior  Court,  Case  No.  364946 
Judge:  Hon.  Cecily  Bond 

c-  Opposing  Counsel:    Charles  Getz,  Esq.,   Attorney  General's  Office,  50  Fremont 

Street,  Suite  300,  San  Francisco,  CA  94105-2239,  Phone  (415)  703-1308 

5.  C.  Mondavi  &  Sons  v.  The  Bureau  of  Alcohol,  Tobacco  and  Firearms,  et  al. 

Sumrpar>':  In  June  1 997,  the  Bureau  of  Alcohol,  Tobacco  and  Firearms  (ATF)  issued  a  cease  and 
desist  order  against  C.  Mondavi  &  Sons,  which  operates  the  Charles  Krug  Winery, 
the  oldest  winery  in  the  Napa  Valley.  C.  Mondavi  &  Sons  does  business  under  the 
name  CK  Mondavi.  ATF  claimed  that  CK  Mondavi  brand  wines  were  labeled  in 
violation  of  27  C.F.R.  Section  4.39(k),  which  is  part  of  the  Federal  Alcohol 
Administration  Act  (FAA  Act).  Section  4.39(k)  prohibits  any  statements  or 
representations  on  wine  labels  which  indicate  an  origin  other  than  the  true  place  of 
origin  of  the  wine.  Since  1995,  CK  Mondavi  brand  wines  have  been  made  from 
grapes  grown  throughout  the  State  of  California,  however,  the  labels  contain 
references  to  the  "Napa  Valley,"  the  location  of  the  winery.  As  a  result  of  the  ATF's 
cease  and  desist  order,  the  Mondavi  family  was  prohibited  from  selling  their  CK 
Mondavi  brand  wines  in  interstate  commerce  and  conducting  any  further  bottling 
activities  at  a  substantial  loss  to  the  winery.  After  several  unsuccessfiil  attempts  at 

13 


1210 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 


resolving  the  matter  through  discussions  with  ATF,  C.  Mondavi  &  Sons  filed  an 
action  in  the  United  State  District  Court  for  the  Northern  District  of  California  for 
injunctive  relief  alleging  violations  of  the  due  process  clause  of  the  Fifth  Amendment 
and  the  federal  Administrative  Procedure  Act  (APA).  The  hearing  on  Mondavi's 
application  for  a  temporarj'  restraining  order  was  held  on  Thursday,  July  3.  The 
Court  postponed  its  ruling  on  the  TRO  and  continued  the  matter  pending  further 
settlement  discussions  between  the  parties.  The  parties  have  now  negotiated  a 
settlement  of  most  issues  and,  in  all  likelihood,  will  reach  a  final  settlement 
agreement  within  the  next  month.  I  have  conducted  all  of  the  settlement  negotiations 
wth  the  ATF  and  its  counsel. 

a.  1997 

b.  Counsel  for  Plaintiff 

Court:  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  District  of  California,  Northern  District,  Case  No. 

97-2375  SBA 

Judge:  Hon.  Saundra  B.  Armstrong 

c.  Opposing  Counsel:  Joann  Swanson,  Esq.,  U.S.  Attorney's  Office,  Northern  District, 
450  Golden  Gate  Avenue,  San  Francisco,  CA  94102,  Phone  (415)  556-1 126. 

6.  Cal-Lina  v.  Congleton 

Summar\':  This  involves  a  complex  serious  of  business  transactions  between  Cal-Lina,  Inc.  and 
Vem  and  Carol  Congleton  regarding  the  purchase  of  real  property,  a  loan  of 
$325,000.00  by  Cal-Lina  to  the  Congletons  and  an  agreement  to  develop  and  market 
a  patented  braking  system  for  the  trucking  industry.  I  was  chief  counsel  in  the  matter. 
Eventually,  the  Congletons  filed  for  protection  under  the  bankruptcy  laws.  In 
addition  to  claims  filed  b)'  Cal-Lina  against  the  debtors,  Cal-Lina  sought  relief  fi-om 
an  automatic  stay  to  pursue  its  rights  to  enforce  a  state  court  judgment  for  unlawful 
detainer.  A  hearing  was  held  first  to  determine  whether  the  debtors'  legal  and 
equitable  interest  in  the  real  property  was  terminated  under  1 1  U.S.C.  365.  The 
judge  granted  relief  fi-om  the  automatic  stay,  and  trial  was  held  for  claims  for 
possession  of  the  real  property  in  question  and  claims  against  Cal-Lina  for  certain 
monies  owed  to  the  debtors.  Cal-Lina  prevailed  on  all  issues. 

a.  1988 

b.  Counsel  for  Cal-Lina 

Court:  U.S.  Bankruptcy  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of  California,  Case  No.  988- 

02504,  M88-0619 

Judge:  Hon.  J.  W.  Hedrick,  Jr. 

14 


1211 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 

c-  Qpposine  Ccwnsgl:    Cliff  McGhee,  Esq.,  1130  L  Street,  Suite  B,  Modesto  CA 

95354,  Phone (209)  577-8000 

7.  MidCal  Aluminum.  Inc.  v.  Baxter  Rice  as  Director  of  the  Department  of  Alcoholic  Beverage 
Control  of  the  State  of  California:  California  Retail  Liquor  Dealers  Association.  Intervenor 

Summ9ry:  This  case  was  a  mandamus  action  filed  by  MidCal  Aluminum,  a  subsidiar>'  of  E.  & 
J.  Gallo  Winery,  challenging  Califomia's  Liquor  Fair  Trade  Law  as  a  violation  of  the 
Sherman  Act  I  was  sole  counsel  through  the  state  appellate  process  and  then  ser\'ed 
as  co-counsel  when  the  petition  of  writ  of  certiorari  was  filed  in  the  U.S.  Supreme 
Court.  The  essence  of  the  challenge  was  that  the  State  of  California  had  no  vital 
interest  or  oversight  of  setting  the  retail  price  of  wine.  Essentially,  absent  a  clearly 
articulated  state  policy,  the  California  wine  retailers  were  engaging  in  price  fixing  in 
violation  of  Section  One  of  the  Sherman  Act.  After  filing  of  briefs  by  Petitioner,  the 
State  of  California,  and  Intervenor,  California  Retail  Liquor  Dealers  Association,  and 
after  oral  argument,  Justice  Robert  Puglia  issued  an  alternative  writ  of  mandate 
commanding  the  stay  of  enforcement  of  the  wine  price  posting  provisions  of  the 
California  Alcoholic  Beverage  Control  Act.  After  further  briefing  and  oral  argument, 
the  appellate  court  rendered  a  imanimous  decision  finding  Califomia's  Alcoholic 
Beverage  Control  Law  in  violation  of  the  Sherman  Act  and  issued  the  peremptor}' 
writ.  {MidCal  Aluminum.  Inc.  v.  Rice  (1979)  90  Cal.App.3d  979).  A  petition  for 
rehearing  was  denied.  Inter\'enor  then  petitioned  the  California  Supreme  Court  for 
hearing.  Upon  issuance  of  a  stay  by  the  intermediate  appellate  court,  Intervenor  then 
petitioned  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  for  issuance  of  a  writ  of  certiorari.  The 
Supreme  Court  issued  the  writ.  Jack  Owens  of  the  law  firm  of  Orrick  Herrington 
became  lead  counsel  at  this  time.  Mr.  Owens  argued  the  case  before  the  Supreme 
Court.  In  an  opinion  rendered  by  Justice  Powell,  the  United  States  Supreme  Court 
found  that  California  Alcoholic  Beverage  Act  violated  the  Sherman  Act.  (California 
Retail  Liquor  Dealers  Association  v.  MidCal  Aluminum,  Inc.,  445  U.S.  97  (1980)). 
MidCal  is  the  landmark  antitrust  case  defining  the  state  action  doctrine. 

a.  1978 

b-  Co-counsel  for  MidCal  Aluminum:  Co-Counsel:  Jack  Owens,  E.  &  J.  Gallo  Winery, 

P.O.  Box  1 130,  Modesto,  CA  95353  (209)  579-3791 

Court:  Court  of  Appeal  of  the  State  of  California,  Third  Appellate  District,  Case  No. 
3  CIV  17992 
Judge:  Hon.  Robert  Puglia 

c.  Opposing  Counsel:  Attomevs  for  Defendant:  L.  Stephen  Porter  and  George  J.  Roth, 

Attorney  General's  OfRce,  555  Capitol  Mall,  Suite  350,  Sacramento,  CA  95814, 
Phone  (916)  445-6221;  Attomev  for  Intervenor:  William  T.  Chidlaw,  Point  West 

15 


1212 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 

Executive  Centre,  1455  Response  Road,  Suite  191,  Sacramento,  CA  95815,  Phone 
(916)920-0202 

8.  G   W.  Hume  Company,  Zack  C.  Monroe,  et  al.  v.  Merchants  Refrigerating  Company  of 
California:  Intervenor:  California  Freestone  Peach  Assn. 

Summan':  My  client,  G.  W.  Hume  Company,  was  a  major  cannery  which  had  filed  for 
protection  under  Chapter  XI  of  the  Bankruptcy  Act  after  an  action  had  been  filed  in 
Superior  Court  alleging  negligence  in  the  processing  of  a  large  quantity  of  peaches 
forfi-eezing.  I  was  sole  counsel  for  Hume.  Hume  was  one  of  California's  primary 
processors  of  canned  peaches.  G.  W.  Hume  delivered  over  80,000  cases  of  canned 
peaches  to  be  quick  frozen  at  Merchant  Refiigerating  Company  for  delivery  to 
various  U.S.  miliiar)'  installations.  This  represented  a  significant  portion  of  the  1970 
peach  crop.  The  peaches  spoiled  during  the  fi-eezing  process.  As  a  result,  claims 
were  filed  by  the  California  Freestone  Peach  Association  against  Hume  for 
improperly  canning  the  peaches  .  After  Hume  filed  for  bankruptcy  protection,  Hume 
filed  a  claim  for  damages  negligence  against  Merchants  for  failure  to  properly  fi-eeze 
the  peaches.  The  matter  was  litigated  over  a  period  of  several  weeks.  Several  food 
processing  experts  testified,  and  numerous  witnesses  testified  on  both  sides  as  to 
harvesting,  processing  and  freezing  of  peaches.  The  court  found  in  favor  of  Hume 
and  found  Merchants  liable  for  damages  caused  by  its  negligence  and  breach  of 
implied  warranty. 

a.  1971-72 

b.  Counsel  for  Plaintiff 

Court:   Stanislaus  County  Superior  Court,  Case  No.  1 1 1 123  and  U.S.  Bankruptcy 

Court  Case  No.  19189 

Judge:   Hon.  William  Zeff  (Superior  Court)  and  Hon.  Fred  Reyland  (Bankruptcy 

Court) 

c.  Opposing  Counsel:  Attorney  for  Defendant:  Jerome  F.  Downs,  Thornton,  Taylor  & 
Downs,  31 1  California  Street,  San  Francisco,  CA  94104,  Phone  (415)  421-8890; 
Attorney  for  Intervenor:  William  J.  Bush,  Hanson,  Bridgett,  Marcus  &  Jenkins, 
Citizens  Building,  One  Keamy  Street,  San  Francisco,  CA  94105,  Phone  (415)  781- 
5500 

9.  Ronald  Davis,  et  al.  v.  Del  Puerto  Hospital,  et  al. 

Summar>':  I  was  Plaintiffs  counsel  for  the  family  of  a  16-year-old  girl  who  was  found  dead  in 
a  bam  on  the  family  ranch  the  morning  after  her  release  fi-om  the  hospital  for  injuries 
sustained  in  an  automobile  accident.  I  was  plaintiffs  trial  counsel.  The  cause  of 
death  was  determined  to  be  trauma  to  the  brain.  The  hospital's  defense  was  that  the 

16 


1213 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONTVAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 

r 

young  woman  died  as  a  result  of  a  fall  in  the  bam  or  foul  play.   After  extensive 
discovery  and  a  lengthy  jury  trial,  the  jury  found  9  to  3  for  the  hospital. 

a.  1978 

b.  Counsel  for  Plaintiffs 

Court:  Stanislaus  Superior  Court,  Case  No.  133579 
Judge:  Hon.  Gerald  V.  Underwood 

c.  Opposing  Counsel:  Mario  Beltrami,  McCormick,  Barstow,  Sheppard,  Coyle  & 
Wayte,  400  Guarantee  Savings  Building,  1171  Fulton  Mall,  Fresno,  CA  93721, 
Phone (209) 442-1 150 

10.        Sueanne  Smith,  et  al.  v.  Nicanor  Villanueva  Munoz,  et  al. 

Summar\':  The  Plaintiff  was  a  teenager  who  was  a  passenger  on  a  motorcycle  operated  by  one 
of  the  defendants.  I  was  plaintiffs  trial  counsel.  The  operator  lost  control  of  the 
motorcycle  in  an  effort  to  brake  the  vehicle.  As  a  result,  Sueanne  Smith's  right  leg 
was  caught  under  the  motorcycle  and  was  extensively  damaged.  The  use  of  her  right 
leg  was  permanently  impaired.  Defendant  Munoz  had  limited  assets  and  insurance; 
however,  during  the  course  of  discovery,  it  was  disclosed  that  the  motorcycle  had 
been  repaired  just  prior  to  the  accident  by  the  Sears  Roebuck  Automobile  Repair 
Center.  The  trial  turned  on  the  issue  of  causation  of  the  repair  work  on  the  apparent 
malfunction  of  the  motorcycle.  After  extensive  testimony  of  various  witnesses, 
including  plaintiffs  expert  engineers,  plaintiff  rested.  Defendant  Sears  Roebuck 
decided  to  pay  Plaintiffs  demand  for  damages  of  several  hundred  thousand  dollars. 

a.  1975 

b.  Counsel  for  Minor  Plaintiff  and  Mother  as  Guardian  ad  Litem 
Court:  Stanislaus  County  Superior  Court,  Case  No.  122433 
Judge:  Hon.  Frank  Pierson 

c.  Opposing  Counsel:  For  Defendant  Munoz:  Cruz  F.  Portillo,  3 1 6  Bank  of  America 
Building,  Stockton,  CA,  (current  address  and  phone  number  unknown);  for 
Defendant  Sears.  Roebuck  &  Co.:  Kroloff,  Belcher,  Smart,  Ford  &  Norris,  1044  N. 
El  Dorado,  Stockton,  CA,  Phone  (209)  478-2000;  for  Defendant  J.V.L.  Enterprises. 
Inc.:  Mayall,  Hurley,  Knutsen,  Smith  &  Green,  37  Hunter  Square  Plaza,  Stockton, 
CA,  Phone  (209)  477-3833;  for  Defendant  Rodnev  Blane  Farrell:  Brunn  &  Lacey, 
928  12th  Street,  Modesto,  CA,  Phone  (209)  521-2133. 

19.        Legal  Activities:    Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have  pursued, 

17 


1214 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr. 


including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did 
not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question,  please 
omit  any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the  privilege 
has  been  waived.) 

1.  County  of  Stanislaus,  a  public  entity,  and  Mary  Grogan,  an  individual,  on  behalf  of 
themselves  and  all  entities  and  persons  similarly  situated  v.  Pacific  Gas  &  Electric 
Co.etal. 

This  was  a  complaint  filed  in  the  United  Slates  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of 
California  on  behalf  of  California  ratepayers  against  PG&E  and  its  subsidiaries  for  violation 
of  federal  and  state  antitrust  laws,  which  claimed  damages  of  nearly  one  billion  dollars 
compensatory  damages  in  addition  to  treble  damages.  The  complaint  alleges  that  PG&E  and 
its  subsidiaries  entered  into  an  illegal  agreement  in  Canada  with  a  cartel  of  Canadian  natural 
gas  producers  to  fix  the  price  of  gas  sold  to  California  businesses  and  consumers  and  to 
preclude  them  from  purchasing  alternate,  lower  cost  Canadian  gas  from  any  other  supply. 
The  pivotal  legal  issues  related  to  the  application  of  the  filed  rate  doctrine  {Keogh  v.  Chicago 
&  K.W.  Railway,  260  U.S.  156  (1922))  and  the  state  action  doctrine  {California  Retail 
Liquor  Dealers  Assn.  v.  Midcal  Aluminum.  Inc..  (445  U.S.  97  (1980)).  The  case  has  been 
closely  followed  throughout  the  natural  gas  industry  by  industrial  users  of  gas  and  the 
California  Public  Utilities  Commission  since  it  involved  significant  issues  relating  to  the 
purchase  and  sale  of  natural  gas.  The  high  cost  of  natural  gas  in  California  is  often  cited  as 
the  reason  that  many  businesses  have  either  left  the  state  or  have  selected  other  states  to  start 
their  operations.  The  case  involved  extensive  briefing  and  oral  argument,  including  motions 
to  dismiss  the  original  and  first  amended  complaints,  as  well  as  subsequent  appellate  briefs 
and  oral  argument.  The  Ninth  Circuit  affirmed  the  District  Court's  decision  to  grant  a 
12(b)(6)  motion  on  the  fu-st  amended  complaint.  Plaintiffs  intend  to  file  a  petition  for  writ 
of  certiorari  in  the  United  States  Supreme  Court.  The  State  of  California  intends  to  join  as 
an  amicus  petitioner  in  this  matter. 

2.  Betty  L  Annoni.  et  al.  v.  Gottschalks,  Inc. 

Gottschalks  owns  a  chain  of  department  stores  through  California.  This  case  was  a  class 
action  filed  in  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  on  behalf  of  a  class  of 
individual  purchasers  of  Gottschalks,  Inc.  common  stock  against  Gottschalks,  Inc.,  several 
of  its  officers  and  directors,  Ernest  and  Young,  the  company's  accountant,  and  various 
underwriters  of  the  company's  public  offerings  for  violations  of  Sections  11,12  and  15  of 
the  Securities  Act  of  1933,  Section  10b  of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934  and  Rule 
lOb-5,  as  well  as  various  state  law  causes  of  action,  which  claimed  several  millions  dollars 
in  comp>ensatory  and  punitive  damages.  The  case  was  widely  reported  throughout  Northern 
California  since  the  case  involved  serious  wrongdoing  on  the  part  of  a  large,  local  retailer  and 
its  individual  officers  and  directors.  Many  residents  throughout  California  lost  substantial 


18 


1215 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr. 


amounts  of  money  when  the  price  of  Gottschalks'  stock  dropped  upon  the  announcement  by 
the  company  that  it  had  misstated  the  true  condition  of  the  company  and  made  false  and 
misleading  statements  regarding  its  Voluntary  Employee  Benefits  Association  Plan. 
Criminal  proceedings  were  initiated  against  various  officers  of  the  company.  The  pre-trial 
motions  included  multiple  hearings  on  motions  to  dismiss.  The  case  was  settled  in  favor  of 
the  plaintiff  class  for  an  amount  in  excess  of  $5  million. 

3.  Bronco  'V^'ine  Company  /  California  Department  of  Agriculture  /  Annual  Grape  Crush 
Report  Administrative  Action 

Each  year  wineries  are  required  to  furnish  the  California  Department  of  Food  &  Agriculttire 
(the  "department")  with  certain  information  pertaining  to  the  annual  grape  harvest,  including 
tonnage  and  price  of  grapes  purchased  by  grape  growing  district.  The  department  then 
summarizes  the  information  and  publishes  it  in  an  annual  report  entitled  the  California  Grape 
Crush  Report.  The  department's  authority  to  collect  such  data  and  publish  the  report  is  set 
forth  in  the  State  Food  &  Agriculture  Code.  These  reporting  instructions  were  gradually 
changed  through  a  series  of  private  meetings  with  selected  industry  members  without 
following  formal  rulemaking  procedures. 

While  our  client  continued  to  report  the  same  data  it  had  reported  for  the  past  twent)'  years, 
it  nov\-  found  itself  in  violation  of  the  new  reporting  instructions.  I  claimed  that  the 
department's  newly  adopted  instructions,  in  effect,  created  a  regulatory  scheme  without 
following  the  formal  rulemaking  procedures  and  without  authorization  of  the  enabling 
statute.  When  the  notice  was  given  to  the  department  that  our  client  refused  to  follow  this 
illegal  regulation,  the  department  announced  that  it  would  not  enforce  the  instructions. 
Instead,  the  department  initiated  formal  rulemaking,  proposing  a  regulation  nearly  identical 
to  the  previous  instructions.  Essentially,  the  proposed  instructions  sought  to  change  the 
character  of  the  report  from  a  statistical  tool  to  a  pricing  index  in  direct  contravention  to  the 
enabling  statute.  1  challenged  the  original  changes  to  the  instructions  at  the  administrative 
hearing.  All  segments  of  California's  wine  industry  participated.  The  Administrative  Law 
Judge  concurred  with  our  argument  and  evidence  and  declared  the  proposed  regulation 
invalid. 

4.  University  of  California  /  Superconducting  Super  Collider 

This  involved  an  effort  by  the  University  of  California  to  develop  a  massive  multi-billion 
dollar  scientific  research  facility  encompassing  thousands  of  acres  to  be  build  in  San  Joaquin 
Count}',  California.  The  funding  of  this  project  was  subject  to  Congressional  appropriations 
and  the  selection  of  a  site  among  several  competing  state  universities,  most  notably  Colorado 
and  Texas.  The  University  retained  me  to  coordinate  legal  aspects  of  the  project  with  state 
and  local  agencies.  It  became  necessary  to  conduct  meetings  with  commimity  groups 
throughout  California's  Central  Valley,  to  meet  with  members  of  California's  Governor's 
office  and  legislature  regarding  the  extent  of  state  funding  and  support,  and  to  coordinate  the 

19 


1216 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  DamreU.  Jr. 

lobbying  activity  with  various  firms  in  Wasiiington. 

5.         Coachella  Valley  Table  Grape  Growers  Association 

During  the  1980s,  I  was  involved  in  several  Congressional  lobbying  efforts  on  behalf  of  both 
public  and  private  entities,  including  local  public  utilities,  a  major  transportation  company, 
and  agricultural  organizations.  An  example  of  one  such  effort  is  the  Coachella  Valley  Table 
Grape  Growers  Association. 

The  Coachella  Valley  is  located  in  the  Palm  Spring/Indio  region  of  Riverside  County  in 
Southern  California.  Because  of  unique  climate  and  soil  conditions,  the  Coachella  Valley 
produces  the  fu-st  and  largest  crop  of  America's  table  grapes.  It  faced  competition  from  table 
grapes  from  Mexico  which  did  not  meet  the  same  quality  standards  as  the  American  grapes. 
As  a  result,  I  was  retained  to  draft  and  lobby  a  federal  marketing  bill  which  would  require 
Mexican  table  grapes  to  meet  the  same  quality  standards  as  American  grapes.  As  a  result, 
I  was  engaged  over  a  twelve-month  period  (1)  preparing  testimony,  (2)  meeting  with 
members  and  staff  revising  legislation  drafts,  (3)  meeting  with  representatives  of  U.S. 
Agriculture  Department  and  U.S.  State  Department,  and  (4)  negotiating  with  Government 
of  Mexico  and  the  Washington  law  firm  of  Arnold  &  Porter.  In  1983,  Congress  passed  the 
bill  which  enacted  the  federal  marketing  order  for  Coachella  Valley  table  grapes. 


20 


1217 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr. 

II.     FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

1.  List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred  income 
arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which 
you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  professional  services,  firm 
memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please  describe  the 
arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or 
business  interest. 

Upon  termination  of  my  employment,  the  firm  will  purchase  my  shareholder  interests  in  the 
firm  pursuant  to  a  firm  shareholder  agreement.  There  are  several  contingent  fee  class  action 
matters  pending.  If  fees  are  realized  in  these  matters,  I  wall  receive  a  percentage  of  the  fees 
earned  by  our  firm  that  will  be  set  prior  to  my  departure. 

It  is  my  present  intention  to  remain  as  a  general  partner  in  The  Shannon  Company.  I  would 
continue  to  receive  income  derived  from  rents  from  the  property  owned  by  Sharmon.  My 
wife  and  I  would  continue  to  own  an  office  building  currently  leased  from  which  we  derive 
rental  income. 

I  expect  to  continue  as  a  trustee  for  a  Gallo  family  trust,  the  beneficiaries  of  which  are  my 
nieces  and  nephews.  I  receive  no  compensation  as  trustee  and  undertake  this  responsibility 
solely  as  a  family  member. 

I  would  recuse  myself  from  all  matters  in  which  the  above  parties  or  entities  or  interests  are 
involved. 

2.  Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including  the  procedure 
you  will  follow  in  determining  these  areas  of  concern.  Identify  the  categories  of 
litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present  potential  conflicts-of- 
interest  during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

I  will  recuse  myself  from  any  matters  which  include  any  clients  of  my  firm  or  members  of 
my  firm,  as  well  as  the  litigants  or  attorneys  involved  in  the  cases  specified  in  Answer  1 
above.  I  will  also  recuse  myself  from  any  matters  involving  tenants  of  the  buildings  I  own 
or  have  an  economic  interest  in.  In  all  matters,  1  will  follow  the  guidelines  of  the  Code  of 
Judicial  Conduct. 

3.  Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside  employment, 
with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court?  If  so,  explain. 

No. 

21 


1218 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr. 


List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar  year  preceding 
your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees, 
dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and  other  items  exceeding 
$500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report,  required 
by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  attached  financial  disclosure  report  attached  as  Exhibit  "C." 

Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail  (add  schedules  as 
called  for). 

See  attached  net  worth  statement  attached  as  Exhibit  "D." 

Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign?  If  so,  please 
identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the 
campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

Yes.  From  time  to  time  I  have  assisted  candidates  by  hosting  events  and  providing  informal 
advice  to  several  candidates  for  state  and  national  office.  I  may  have  received  honorary  titles 
such  as  County  Chair  or  Co-Chair  or  member  of  a  Steering  Committee,  but  I  had  no  official 
role  in  the  campaigns. 

Jerry  Brown  for  President,  1976  --  Delegate  to  Democratic  National  Convention,  1976 
Jimmy  Carter  for  President,  1980  -  Delegate  to  Democratic  National  Convention,  1980 


22 


1219 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 


III.     GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's  Code  of 
Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "everj-  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  And  some  time  to  participate  in  serving  the 
disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities  listing 
specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

Pro  Bono  Activities 

Parent  Resource  Center 

811  5th  Street 

Modesto,  C A  95351 

Day-to-day  advice  to  volunteer  county-wide  agency  which  serves  families  to  prevent 
child  abuse  and  to  provide  parent  and  family  mentoring.  On  many  occasions  I 
provided  legal  advice  and  personal  assistance  to  the  Center. 

Sickle  Cell  Anemia  Foundation 

c/o  Mel  Williams 

704  Spencer  Avenue 

Modesto,  CA  95351 

Preparation  of  corporate  documents;  review  of  annual  minutes  (1978-92).  I  have 
routinely  proxided  advice  to  the  Foundation's  president  from  time  to  time. 


In  addition,  I  have  supervised  or  provided  pro  bono  legal  services  to  the  following: 

Haven  Women's  Center  of  Stanislaus  County 
619  13th  Street.  Suite  1 
Modesto,  CA  95354 
(209)524-4331 

I  have  supervised  legal  services  including  review  of  pleadings  filed  on  behalf  of 

clients  of  the  Center. 


23 


1220 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 


Central  Valley  Village  Corporation  (a  facility'  for  those  with  limited  physical  fionctions) 

c/o  Madelyn  Amaral 

1030  Elm  Avenue 

Modesto,  CA  95351 

(209)  578-5780 

I  met  with  the  Corporation's  organizers  at  the  inception  of  their  efforts  and  provided 
legal  assistance  including  drafting  of  incorporation  documents,  siting  and  permitting 
of  the  facility. 

St.  Joseph  Church 
1813  Oakdale  Road 
Modesto,  CA  95355 

Provided  legal  counsel  to  parish  priest  from  time  to  time  and  retained  on  pro  bono 

basis  to  advise  relating  to  potential  liabilit)'  issues. 

Townsend  Opera  Players 
P.O.  Box  4519 
Modesto,  CA  95352 
Legal  advice 


Finally,  on  numerous  occasions,  1  advise  individuals  or  groups  of  minimal  or  no  income  in 
legal  matters  for  no  fee. 

Throughout  my  professional  life,  I  have  tried  to  use  my  skills  and  experience  for  the  service 
of  my  community.  The  following  are  some  examples.  Early  in  my  career  I  assisted  in  the 
creation  of  a  Stanislaus  Count}'  Consumer  Complaint  and  Advisory  position.  1  spent  several 
years  as  a  member  and  as  Chair  of  the  California  State  Consumer  Advisory  Council 
(appointed  by  Governors  Reagan  and  Bro\\'n),  the  advisorj'  committee  to  the  State 
Department  of  Consumer  Affairs.  This  department  licenses  and  regulates  much  of  the 
business  and  professional  services  from  pharmacists  to  the  automobile  repair  industry.  The 
Council  reviewed  complaints  from  consumers  and  regulated  business  regarding  the  operation 
of  the  Department  and  made  recommendations  to  both  the  Department  and  the  Governor. 
In  my  capacity  as  President  of  the  California  Consumer  Federation,  I  led  a  state  volunteer 
organization  which  reviewed  all  consumer-  related  legislation  and  policy  for  the  State  of 
California. 

I  have  volimteered  my  time  to  a  variety  of  local  community  endeavors.  These  endeavors 
have  ranged  from  the  arts  to  education  to  social  issues  and  basic  human  needs  such  as  food 
and  shelter.  I  have  regularly  served  and  delivered  food  for  the  needy  and  hosted  nimierous 
ftind-raisers  for  various  charities  which  assist  the  disadvantaged. 

24 


1221 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 


The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  states 
that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that 
invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you  currently  belong, 
or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization  which  discriminates  -  through  either  formal 
membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership  policies? 
If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.  What  you  have  done  to  try  to  change  these 
policies? 

Initially,  the  Sportsmen  of  Stanislaus  was  an  athletic  club  limited  to  adult  male  membership. 
There  were  no  other  restrictions  on  membership.  Since  1985,  it  has  been  open  to  men, 
women  and  families  due,  in  part,  to  efforts  of  our  law  firm  to  expand  the  membership.  I  was 
involved,  as  were  members  of  our  firm,  in  changing  the  bylaws  to  open  membership  to 
women.  I  have  been  a  member  since  1968. 

Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates  for 
nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?  Please 
describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from  beginning  to  end 
(including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you 
participated). 

Yes,  there  is  a  selection  committee. 
Yes,  the  committee  recommended  me. 

In  December  I  was  again  asked  to  serve  as  a  member  of  Senator  Feinstein's  advisory 
committee  for  judicial  appointments  to  the  Eastern  District  of  California.  I  advised  the 
Senator's  Chief  of  Staff  that  I  would  not  be  able  to  serve  as  I  was  considering  applying  for 
a  newly  vacant  position  myself 

I  was  initially  interviewed  by  the  Senator's  Advisory  Committee  in  Sacramento.  I  had  only 
met  one  of  the  committee  members  previously.  I  was  advised  that  I  was  the  only  candidate 
outside  of  the  Sacramento  area.  (Modesto  is  some  70  miles  south  of  Sacramento.)  I  believe 
there  were  four  candidates  recommended  out  of  many  applicants.  I  was  one  of  the  four.  I 
was  then  interviewed  by  Senator  Feinstein.  She  asked  me  a  number  of  questions,  most  of 
which  are  contained  in  this  questionnaire.  When  she  asked  why  I  wished  to  leave  a 
successful  law  practice,  1  recounted  a  similar  question  I  asked  my  father  many  years  ago 
when  he  left  his  law  practice  to  become  a  state  trial  judge.  His  answer  to  me  was  one  word, 
"service."  According  to  my  father,  service  to  others  was  the  highest  form  of  citizenship.  I 
can  think  of  no  greater  honor  for  any  citizen  than  to  serve  our  country  as  a  federal  judge. 

Subsequently,  1  was  involved  in  several  extensive  interviews  by  representatives  of  the 

25 


1222 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell.  Jr. 


Department  of  Justice.  Initially,  I  was  interviewed  individually  on  several  occasions  and 
then  was  the  subject  of  a  lengthy  interview  by  four  representatives  of  the  Department.  I  also 
had  several  lengthy  interviews  with  an  agent  of  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation.  These 
interviews  encompassed  my  entire  professional  life  as  well  as  my  personal  life,  including  my 
association  with  public  activities  and  individuals,  my  travels  and  virtually  every  aspect  of  my 
life  since  my  high  school  years. 

Most  recently,  I  had  a  three-hour  interview  with  a  representative  of  the  Standing  Committee 
on  Federal  Judiciary  of  the  American  Bar  Association.  I  was  questioned  extensively  about 
my  legal  experience,  my  reasons  for  seeking  judicial  office  and  my  academic,  public,  and 
personal  activities. 

Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee  discussed  with 
you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be 
interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue,  or  question?  If  so,  please 
explain  fully. 

No. 

Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciar>'  within  the  Federal  government,  and  within  societ}' 
generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.  It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial 
branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of 
government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than 
grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a 
vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad 
classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciarj'  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duties  upon 
governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional 
requirements  such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 

26 


1223 

SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE Frank  C.  Damrell,  Jr. 


A  tendency  by  the  judiciarj'  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions  in  the 
manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight  responsibilities. 

At  the  core  of  Article  III  jurisdiction  are  the  notions  of  injury  and  causation. 
The  judge  who  strays  from  these  strictures  to  solve  "problems"  tends  to 
personalize  or  politicize  the  judicial  process.  Not  every  problem  is 
susceptible  to  a  judicial  solution.  Without  abdicating  the  role  of  the  federal 
judiciary  to  ensure  compliance  with  the  Constitution,  the  court  must  adliere 
to  the  notion  that  the  business  of  the  federal  district  court  is  to  decide 
controversies,  not  offer  pronunciamentos  for  future  generations.  In  doing  so, 
the  district  court  must,  whenever  possible,  follow  the  path  of  precedent  in  its 
judgment  of  such  controversies. 

A  tendency  to  engage  injudicial  regulation  usurps  the  constitutional  authority 
of  the  other  branches  of  government  and,  in  the  long  run,  undermines  the 
court's  own  authority.  The  more  broad  the  order,  the  more  difficult  the 
compliance  and  enforcement.  In  short,  the  imposition  of  extensive 
affumative  duties  on  litigants  and  the  corresponding  oversight  responsibilities 
of  a  district  court  judge  should  be  avoided. 

Finally,  the  "who"  and  "when"  of  justiciability  are  central  to  federal  court 
jurisdiction.  While  the  distinction  between  standing  and  ripeness  is 
sometimes  blurred,  clearly,  federal  adjudication  must  be  predicated  on 
present  or  imminent  injury  which  is  at  hand  and  ready  for  adjudication.  The 
"loosening"  of  these  basic  requirements  can  only  undermine  the 
Constitutional  mandate  of  Article  III  jurisdiction. 


27 


1224 
I  QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 

I.   BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

1.  Full  Name  (include  any  fonner  names  used.) 

Martin  Joseph  Jenkins 

2.  Address:   List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address(es). 

a.  Residence. 
Oakland,  California 

b.  Office. 

Alameda  County  Superior  Court 
Juvenile  Division,    Dept .    25 
400  Broadway  Street 
Oakland,    California     94607 

3.  Date  and  place  of  birth. 

November  12,    1953;    San  Francisco,    California. 

4.  Marital  Status:  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name). 
List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  address(es). 

I  have  never  been  married  or  divorced.     I  am  a  single  and  I  do 
not  have  any  children. 

5.  Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended, 
including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees  received,  and  the  dates  degrees 
were  granted. 


Colleges  and 

Law  Schools  Attended 

From 

TQ 

Degree 
Received 

City  College  of 
San  Francisco 

1971 

1973 

A. A.  (6/73) 

Santa  Clara  University 

University  of  San 
Francisco  School  of  Law 

1973 
1977 

1976 
1980 

B.A.     History 
(12/96) 

J.D.  (6/80) 

1225 


6.  Rmplnyment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional 
corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships, 
institutions  and  organizations,  nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms, 
with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer,  director,  partner, 
proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  from  college. 

a)  JanuEuy  1977- January  1979;  Seui  Fremcisco  Parks  and 
Recreation  Department,    Part-time  Recreation  Director 

b)  April  1977-AuguBt  1977;  Seattle  Seahawks  Professional 
Football  Team-Professional  Athlete 

c)  May  1979-August  1979;  Alameda  County  District  Attorney's 
Office,    Student  Law  Clerk 

d)  August  1980-July  1983;  Alameda  County  District  Attorney's 
Office,    Student  Law  Clerk  and  Deputy  District  Attorney 

e)  August  1983 -May  1985;  United  States  Department  of 
Justice,  Civil  Rights  Division-Criminal  Section,  Trial 
Attorney 

f)  From  May  1985-December  1989;  Pacific  Bell  Con^any  Legal 
Department,    General  Litigation  Department 

g)  From  December  1989-Jan\iary  24,  1992;  Judge  of  the 
Oakland-Piedmont-Emeryville  Municipal  Court  Judge 

h)  From  January  24,  1992 -Present;  Judge  of  the  Alameda 
County  Superior  Court. 

7.  Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give 
particulars,  including  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial 
number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 

I  have  never  served  in  the  military. 

8.  Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary 
degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be 
of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

a)  John  F.  Kennedy  Scholarship,  University  of 
Santa  Clara  (1973-1975) 

b)  Bronco  Bench  Athletic  Scholarship,  University 
of  Santa  Clara  (1976) 


1226 


c)  National  Collegiate  Athletic  Association, 

Division  II  All  American  Team;  Honorable  Mention  1977 

d)  George  Helmer  Scholarship  Award;  University 
of  San  Francisco  School  of  Law  (1978) 

e)  Judge  Harold  J.  Haley  Award;  "Awarded  annually  to 
the  Dean  emd  Faculty  of  the  University  of 

San  Francisco  School  of  Law  to  the  member 
of  the  Graduating  Class  evidencing  Exceptional 
Distinction  in  Scholarship,  Character 
and  Activities"  (1980) 

f)  United  States  Department  of  Justice  Commendation 
Award;   In  Recognition  of  Outstanding  Service 

to  the  Attorney  General's  Task  Force  on 
Family  Violence  (1984) 

g)  Barrister's  Clxib  of  San  Francisco,  Board  of 
Directors  Award:   For  Exettplary  Contributions 
to  the  Life  of  the  Club  and  to  the  Ideals  of 
Legal  Justice  and  Professional  Service  (1988) 

h)   Abraham  Lincoln  High  School  "Wall  of  Fame  Inductee"  (May 
1996) 

i)    Barrister's  Club  of  San  Francisco,  Board  of 

Directors  Award:   For  Exemplary  Contributions 
to  the  Life  of  the  Club  and  to  the  Ideals  of 
Legal  Justice  and  Professional  Service  (1988)  . 

I  have  also  received  letters  of  commendation  from  the 
Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation,  the  University  of  San 
Francisco  euid  local  high  schools  in  San  Frsincisco  eind 
Oakland . 

Bar  Associations.  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related 
committees  or  conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member 
and  give  the  tides  and  dates  of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such 
groups. 

state  Bar  of  California  (1981-1990) 
American  Bar  Association  (1991-1993) 
Alameda  Co\inty  Bar  Association  (1989-1994) 
California  Judges  Association  (1990-Present) 
Association  of  Business  Trial  Lawyers  (1997-Present) 

3 


1227 


Charles  Houston  Bar  Association  (1982-Present) 

San  Francisco  Bar  Association  Barristers'  Club  (1985-1989) 

Donald  R.  McCullutn  Moot  Court  Board  (1993-Present) 

American  Inns  of  Court,  Earl  Warren  Inn  (1996 -Present) 

University  of  San  Francisco  Law  Assembly  (1994 -Present) 

National  Institute  for  Trial  Advocacy  Teaching  faculty  (1990- 
1993) 

California  Judicial  Council's  Family  and  Juvenile  Law  Advisory 
Committee,  Executive  Committee  Member  (June  1996  to  June  1997) 

Teaching  Faculty-California  Center  on  Judicial  Education  and 
Research  (CJER)  (1990-Present) . 

California  Supreme  Court's  Advisory  Committee  on  Judicial 
Ethics  (March  1995 -November  1996) 

California  State-Federal  Judicial  Council  (November  1996  to 
Present) . 

10.  Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are 
active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies.  Please  list  all  other 
organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

Organizations  which  lobby  before  public  bodies: 

Other  than  the  California  Judges  Association  and  other  bar 
organizations,  I  do  not  belong  to  any  organizations  that  lobby 
before  pxiblic  bodies.  However,  from  June  1996  through  June 
1997,  I  was  a  member  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the 
California  Judicial  Council '  s  Family  and  Juvenile  Law  Advisory 
Committee.  The  Executive  Committee  occasionally  submits 
proposed  legislation  and  apprises  the  legislature  of  the 
impact  of  pending  legislation  on  the  California  Juvenile 
Courts . 

Other  wewberships : 

Santa  Clara  University  Board  of  Regents  (1990-1995) ; 

University  of  San  Francisco  Street  Law  Program,  Board  of 
Directors  (1988-Present) ; 

Prescott -Joseph  Center  For  Community  Enhancement,  Board  of 
Directors  (1995-Present) ; 


1228 


Charles  R.   Lawrence  III  Scholarship  Conimittee   (1985-Present)  ; 

Abraham    Lincoln    High    School    Alumni    Association     (May    1996- 
present) 

Board   of   Directors,    University   of    San   Francisco   Para-Legal 
Studies   Program    (July  1990 -June   1995) ; 

Northern  California   Football   Officiating  Association    (1985- 
1997)  ; 

Collegiate  Officials  Association    (1992-1997) 

1 1 .  Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to 
practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships 
lapsed.  Please  explain  the  reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.  Give 
the  same  information  for  administrative  bodies  which  require  special 
admission  to  practice. 

California    Supreme    Court    and    Intermediate   Appellate    courts 
(May  1981)  ; 

California  Trial   Courts    (May  1981) ; 

United  States  District  Court,   Northern  District  of  California 
(May  1981) ; 

United  States   District   Court,    Eastern  District   of   Wisconsin 
(May  1984)  . 

12.  Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books, 
articles,  reports  or  other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited. 
Please  supply  one  copy  of  all  published  material  not  readily  available 
to  the  Committee.  Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you 
on  issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.  If  there  were 
press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you, 
please  supply  them. 

a)  California  Code  of  Judicial  Ethics  and  Commentary.  (April 
15,  1996); 

b)  Controlling  your  Courtroom:    Voir  Dire  and  Trial 
Management  Workshop,  "Statutes  Related  to  Voir  Dire" 

(September  29,  1992)  . 


1229 


The  final  draft  of  the  California  Code  of  Judicial  Ethics  was 
a  collaborative  effort  with  Ethics  Conmiittee  Members  and  Staff 
Attorneys  from  the  California  Administrative  Office  of  the 
Courts  involved  in  editing  the  Code.  I  have  also  attached  an 
overview  of  California  Statutes  relating  to  the  conduct  of 
Voir  Dire  that  I  routinely  give  to  all  participants  in  my  Voir 
Dire  Workshops.  A  copy  of  the  materials  referenced  above  are 
attached  hereto  as  Exhibit  A. 

13.  Hsiltli:  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  your 
last  physical. 

The  present  status  of  my  health  is  good.  My  last  physical 
examination  was  in  April  1997 . 

14.  Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have 
held,  whether  such  position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description 
of  the  jurisdiction  of  each  such  court. 

In  January  1992,  I  was  appointed  by  Governor  Pete  Wilson  to 
the  Alameda  County  Superior  Court  and  took  my  oath  of  office 
on  January  25,  1992.  The  Superior  Court  is  the  California's 
trial  court  of  general  jurisdiction  where  civil  cases, 
irrespective  of  amount  in  controversy,  and  criminal  felony 
charges  are  litigated.  There  are  no  limitations  on  the 
jurisdictional  reach  of  the  California  Superior  Courts  save 
and  except  those  matters  heard  in  inferior  courts  (i.e., 
municipal  and  justice  courts)  and  those  matters  specifically 
venued  in  the  Federal  Court.  I  was  re-elected  to  my  Superior 
Court  Office  in  an  uncontested  election  and  began  my  new  six 
year  term  on  Jemuairy  1,  1993.  In  November  of  1989,  I  was 
appointed  by  then  Governor  George  Dukemejian  as  a  Judge  of  the 
Oakleuid-Piedmont-Emeryville  Municipal  Court  and  took  my  oath 
of  office  on  December  26,  1989.  California  Municipal  Courts 
are  courts  of  limited  jurisdiction  and,  as  such,  only  civil 
cases  where  the  amount  in  controversy  is  less  thsm  $25,000.00, 
misdemeanor  criminal  trials  and  felony  preliminary  hearings 
are  heard  there.  I  held  my  Municipal  Court  Office  until 
January  24,  1992,  when  I  was  elevated  to  the  Alameda  County 
Superior  Court . 


1230 


15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  (1)  Citations  for 
the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you  have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary 
of  and  citations  for  all  appellate  opinions  where  our  decisions  were 
reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was  affiimed  with  significant 
criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3)  citations  for 
significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues,  together 
with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of 
the  opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies 
of  the  opinions. 

1.        Ten  iDost  significant  written  opinions: 

As  a  Judge  of  the  Superior  Court  I  have  not  typically 
issued  written  rulings  and/or  opinions.  However,  I  was 
assigned  by  Malcolm  Lucas,  Chief  Justice  of  the 
California  Supreme  Court,  to  sit  as  a  Justice  Pro-Tem  at 
the  California  Court  of  Appeal,  First  District-Division 
Three  from  May  1994  through  September  1994.  I  have 
selected  ten  opinions  I  wrote  during  my  tenure  on  the 
Court  of  Appeal  for  your  review.  A  copy  of  the 
unpublished  opinions  referenced  below  are  attached  hereto 
as  Exhibit  B. 

a)  Pamela  R.  DeWitt-Carter  at  al..  v.  Sharon  Sharp.  As  Director. 
etc.T  et  al.,  California  Court  of  Appeal,  First 
Appellate  District-Division  Three,  Case  No. : 
A063985; 

b)  People  V.  Stone,  California  Court  of  Appeal,  First 
Appellate  District-Division  Three  Case  No.: 
A061456.  This  decision  is  piiblished  and  may  be 
found  in  the  decisions  of  the  California  Courts  of 
Appeal,    27   Cal.    App.    3rd  187    (1994); 

c)  Robert    Bushong    v.    Frank    S.    Zolin.    as    Director,    etc.. 

California  Court  of  Appeal,   First  District-Division 
Three,    Case  No.:     A063372; 

d)  Farrell  v.  Wolf.  California  Court  of  Appeal,  First 
District-Division  Three,    Case  No.:      A061337 

e)  Samuel  Rosario  v.  Diamond  Shamrock  Corp.  California 
Court  of  Appeal,  First  Appellate  District-Division 
Three,    Case  No.:   A059644; 


1231 


f)  People  V.  Edward  Sanders.  California  Court  of  Appeal, 
First  Appellate  District-Division  Three,  Case  No.: 
A060819; 

g)  Felzer  v.  Founders  Title  Company.  California  Court  of 
Appeal,  First  Appellate  District-Division  Three, 
Case  No. :  A062989; 

h)  In  re  Jason  Cecil  Bell.  California  Court  of  Appeal, 
First  Appellate  District-Division  Three,  Case  No. : 
A065285; 

i)  People  V.  Jason  Bell.  California  Court  of  Appeal,  First 
Appellate  District-Division  Three,  Case  No.: 
A060970; 

j)  Roger  C.  On.  v.  Raymond  Choy  et  al. .  California  Court 
of  Appeal,  First  Appellate  District -Division  Three, 
Case  No. :   A063285; 

Summary    of    reversals    or    affirmance    with  significant 
criticism: 

People  V.  Ehiong  L. .  California  Court  of  Appeal,  First 
Appellate  District,  Division  Four,  Case  No.:  A074976. 
The  minor,  Duong  L. .  and  several  other  minors  were 
charged  with  First  Degree  Robbery.  After  hearing  the 
evidence,  I  found  the  allegations  true  and  committed  the 
minor  to  our  County  juvenile  camp.  At  the  sentencing 
hearing  I  also  increased  the  minor's  maximum  custody  time 
from  six  to  eight  years  because  he  acted  "In  Concert" 
with  several  other  minors  in  the  commission  of  the 
Robbery.  The  appellate  court  reversed  only  that  part  of 
my  decision  which  siibjected  the  minor  to  an  increase  in 
maximum  custody  time.  The  court  held  that  the  increase 
in  the  minor's  potential  custody  time  violated  his  right 
to  notice  under  the  Due  Process  Clause  inasmuch  as  the 
petition  (complaint)  failed  to  specifically  allege  the 
"In  Concert  Allegation."  A  copy  of  the  appellate  opinion 
in  the  Duong  case  is  attached  hereto  as  Exhibit  C. 

Citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state 
constitutional  rulings: 

1)       People  V.  Stone,  case  No.:  A061456 

First  Appellate  District,  Division  Three,  Case  No. : 
A061456.  This  decision  is  published  and  may  be 
found  in  the  decisions  of  the  California  Courts  of 
Appeal,  27  Cal .  App.  3rd  187  (1994). 

8 


1232 


16.  Public  Office:  State  (chronologically  any  public  offices  you  have  held, 
other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether 
such  positions  were  elected  or  appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any 
unsuccessful  candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

None. 

17.  Legal  Career: 

a.       Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after 
graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  a  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the 
name  of  the  judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period 
you  were  a  clerk; 

I  have  never  clerked  for  a  judge. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and 
dates; 

I  have  never  praticed  as  a  sole  practitioner. 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices, 
companies  or  govermnental  agencies  with  which  you  have 
been  connected,  and  the  nature  of  your  connection  with; 

August  1980 -Jime  19R3 

Alameda  County  District  Attorney's  Office,  1225  Fallon 
Street-9th  Floor,  Oakland  CA.,  94612.  I  was  enployed 
initially  as  a  student  legal  intern  euid  promoted  to  the 
position  of  Deputy  District  Attorney.  As  a  Deputy 
District  Attorney,  I  was  assigned  a  docket  of  criminal 
misdemeanor  and  felony  cases  for  prosecution. 

August  1983 -May  1985 

United  States  Department  of  Justice,  Civil  Rights 
Division-Criminal  Section,  950  Pennsylvania  Avenue  N.W., 
Washington  D.C.  20530.  I  was  hired  as  a  Trial  Attorney 
and  prosecuted  criminal  civil  rights  cases . 


1233 


May  19B5 -December  1989 

Pacific  Bell  Conpany  Legal  Department,  140  New  Montgomery 
Street,  lOth  Floor,  San  Francisco,  California  94105.  I 
was  assigned  to  the  General  Litigation  Department  and 
represented  Pacific  Bell  in  civil  litigation  matters. 

December  19S9-January  1992 

Judge  of  the  Oakland- Piedmont -Emeryville  Municipal  Court, 
661  Washington  Street,  San  FreUicisco,  California  94607. 
As  a  Judge  of  the  Oakland  Municipal  court,  I  presided 
over  misdemeanor  criminal  matters,  felony  preliminary 
hearings  and  civil  cases  where  the  amount  in  controversy 
was  less  than  $25,000.00. 

January  1992  to  Present 

Judge  of  the  Alameda  County  Superior  Court,  1225  Fallon 
Street,  2nd  Floor,  Oakland,  California  94612,  As  a  judge 
assigned  to  California's  trial  court  of  general 
jurisdiction,  I  preside  over  felony  criminal  matters  and 
a  wide  variety  of  civil  matters. 

b.  1.  What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice, 
dividing  it  into  periods  with  dates  if  its  character  has 
changed  over  the  years? 

From  May  1985  through  December  1989,  I  was  an 

attorney  in  the  General  Litigation  Division  of 
Pacific  Bell ' s  Corporate  Legal  Department .  As  cui 
attorney  with  Pacific  Bell,  I  represented  Pacific 
Telesis  and  other  Telesis  subsidiaries  including; 
Pacific  Bell,  Pac-Tel  Mobile  Access  and  Pacific 
Bell  Directory  on  a  wide  variety  of  legal  matters . 
My  practice  involved  litigation  in  the  following 
areas:  contracts,  wrongful  termination,  personal 
injury/product  liedjility  claims,  real  property, 
insurance  coverage,  and  some  debtor  claims  in 
bankruptcy  court. 

In  addition,  I  was  routinely  called  upon  to  provide 
advice  and  counsel  to  Telesis  subsidiaries  in  the 
following  areas:  federal  and  state  court  ordered 
wiretaps,  smd  telephone  fraud  investigations 
conducted  by  Pacific  Bell,  Sprint,  MCI  and  AT&T. 

From  August  1983  through  April  1985,  I  was  en^Jloyed 
as  a  Trial  Attorney  with  the  United  States 
Department  of  Justice,  Civil  Rights  Division, 
Criminal  Section  in  Washington  D.C.  The  Criminal 
Section  is  responsible  for  the  investigation  and 
prosecution  of   federal   criminal   civil   rights 

10 


1234 


violations  in  the  following  areas:  use  of  excessive 
force  under  color  of  state  law,  denial  of  equal 
access  to  public  acconimodations  on  the  basis  of 
race,  and  interference  with  housing  rights  on 
grovmds  of  race  or  religious  affiliation.  As  a 
trial  attorney  with  the  Criminal  Section,  I 
directed  the  investigation  and  prosecution  of 
criminal  civil  rights  from  grand  jury  presentation 
through  pre-trial  motions  euid  trial.  I  also 
represented  the  Government  in  United  States  v. 
Monville  et .  al .  wherein  the  Justice  Department 
successfully  prosecuted  several  defendeuits  for 
conspiring  to  deprive  an  interracial  couple  of 
their  statutory  right,  pursuant  to  42  U.S.C.  3631, 
to  rent  and  occupy  their  home.  The  Monville  case 
was  the  Justice  Department's  first  successful  jury 
prosecution  of  federal  statute,  18  U.S.C.  241, 
where  the  vinderlying  violation  involved  a  statutory 
right  to  housing.   42  U.S.C.  3631. 

During  ray  employment  with  the  Department  of 
Justice,  I  was  selected  by  Assistant  Attorney 
General  Lois  Haight  Herrington  to  serve  as  a  staff 
member  of  "The  United  States  Attorney  General's 
Task  Force  on  Family  Violence."  The  "Task  Force" 
was  commissioned  by  Attorney  General  William  French 
Smith  to  investigate  and  recommend  more  effective 
methods  and  procedures  to  reduce  the  growing 
incidence  of  spousal  abuse,  incest,  child  abuse  and 
elder  abuse  in  the  United  States.  I  worked  with 
prosecutorial  and  other  public  agencies  to  identify 
and  prepare  victims  of  "family  violence"  to  give 
oral  testimony  at  public  hearings  in  New  York  and 
several  other  States.  The  Task  Force's  Report  was 
published  in  1984,  however  I  did  not  participate  in 
writing  or  editing  the  Report . 

From  May  1981  through  July  1983,  I  was  a  Deputy 
District  Attorney  in  the  Alameda  District 
Attorney's  Office.  I  prosecuted  numerous  felony 
cases  involving  allegations  of  rape,  robbery, 
murder,  theft  and  narcotic  offenses.  I  personally 
tried  to  verdict  approximately  50  misdemeanor  emd 
felony  jury  and  bench  trials  during  my  en5)loyment 
with  the  District  Attorney's  Office.  I  also 
clerked  for  the  Alameda  County  District  Attorney 
during  and  after  my  graduation  from  law  school. 


11 


1235 


2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the 
areas,  if  any,  in  which  you  have  specialized? 

In  my  capacity  as  an  attorney  with  the  United 
States  Department  of  Justice  emd  the  Alameda 
District  Attorney's  Office,  I  represented  local  and 
federal  law  enforcement  agencies . 

In  tny  capacity  as  a  litigation  attorney  with 
Pacific  Bell,  I  represented  a  private  investor 
owned  regional  telephone  con^any.  Pacific  Bell  was 
subject  to  regulation  by  the  California  Public 
Utilities  Commission  and  the  Federal  Communication 
Commission. 

1.  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at 
all?  If  the  frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court  varied, 
describe  each  such  variance,  giving  date. 

In  all  of  my  professional  endeavors  as  a  lawyer,  I 
have  regularly  appeared  in  court .  As  a  Deputy 
District  Attorney  in  Alameda  County,  I  appeared  in 
court  every  day.  As  a  Trial  Attorney  with  the 
Department  of  Justice,  I  appeared  in  court  during 
jury  trials  and  on  all  motions  related  to  trial. 
As  an  attorney  with  Pacific  Bell,  I  appeared  in 
court  at  least  once  a  week  and  more  often  when  I 
was  in  trial . 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  were  in  federal 
and/or  state  courts  of  record: 

a)  Pacific  Bell    (1985-1989) ; 
federal  courts:  20% 
state  superior  courts:    70% 
state  municipal  courts:   10% 

b)  United    States    Department  of    Justice     (1983- 
1985) ; 

federal  courts:  100% 

c)  Alameda     County    District     Attorney's     Office 

(1980-1983) 

federal  courts:  0% 

state  superior  courts:  50% 

state  municipal  courts:  50% 


12 


1236 


3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

civil :  60% 

criminal:  40% 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to 
verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether 
you  were  sole  counsel,  chief  coimsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

I  have  personally  tried  in  excess  of  50  cases  to 
verdict  in  state  and  federal  courts  of  record.  I 
have  served  as  sole  counsel  in  the  majority  of  my 
jury  trials;  however  while  en^loyed  with  the 
Department  of  Justice,  I  was  routinely  assigned  co- 
counsel  to  assist  in  the  preparation  cuid  trial  of 
cases. 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  were: 

(a)  jury:  approximately  70% 

(b)  non-jury:  30% 

18.  Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which 
you  personally  handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported, 
and  the  docket  number  and  date  if  unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary 
of  the  substance  of  each  case.  Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you 
represented;  describe  the  detail  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  the 
litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.  Also  state  as  to  each 
case: 

a.  the  date  of  representation; 

b.  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before 
whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

c.  the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co- 
counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 


13 


1237 


Significant  Cases: 

1)  HALEM  V.  PACIFIC  BELL  DTRECTORY 

San  Francisco  Superior  Court,  Case  No.:  865-250 
Type  of  Litigation:   Civil  Jtiry,  Breach  of  Contract 
Trial  Dates:  May  5  through  May  15,  1989 
Judge:  Honorable  Ralph  Flageollet -Civil 
Attorneys : 

For  Pacific  Bell:  Martin  Jenkins. 

For  Plantiff :  Michael  Sorgen,  Attorney  at  Law 

22  2nd  Street-Suite  500,  San  Francisco  Ceilifomia 

94105  (415)  543-5805. 

DESCRIPTION  OF  CASE:  Plaintiff  contracted  with  Pacific 
Bell  Yellow  Pages  Directory  for  a  half  page  advertisement 
in  the  1985  San  Francisco  Directory  under  the  business 
name  "Orient  Express  Rug  Con^any."  When  the  directory 
was  published  in  September  1985,  Plaintiff's  business 
address  and  telephone  number  were  incorrectly  listed. 
Plaintiff  alleged  that  it  suffered  losses  in  excess  of 
$500,000.00,  as  a  result  of  the  erroneous  listing. 
During  the  trial  of  this  matter.  Plaintiff  called  several 
economists  and  marketing  experts  to  substantiate  its 
damages  claim.  I  was  able  to  demonstrate  that  any  chcuige 
in  plaintiff's  gross  profit  was  due  to  the  relocation  of 
Plaintiff's  store  (which  coincided  with  the  release  of 
the  directory)  .  After  a  two  week  trial,  during  which  my 
client  admitted  liability,  the  jury  returned  a  verdict  in 
Plaintiff's  favor  in  the  amount  of  $5000.00. 

2)  PACE.  AKULTAN  A.  HARKINS  v.  PACIFIC  BELL 

San  Francisco  Superior  Court;  Case  No. :  863-466 

Type  of  Litigation:  Breach  of  Contract 

Unfair  Trade  Practices  and  Injunctive  Relief 

Judge:   Ira  Brown 

Period  of  Litigation:   Septeinber  2,    1986 -September  8, 

1987 

Attorneys : 

For  Pacific  Bell  Directory:  Martin  JenJcins 
For  Defendants:  Marshall  Krause,  Krause  &  Baskin, 
1120  Nye  Street-Suite  300,  San  Rafael,  California 
94901,  (415)  456-2500. 

DESCRIPTION  OF  CASE:  Plaintiffs  sought  to  advertise  in 
the  1986  Contra  Costa  Yellow  Pages  Directory  utilizing 
the  logo  "Divorce  for  Men  Only" .  Pacific  Bell  Directory 
refused  to  print  Plaintiffs'  advertisement  on  the  grounds 
that  it  was  discriminatory  in  nature  and  therefore 
proscribed  under  the  California  Civil  Rights  Law-The 
Unruh  Act.   Further,  as  a  publisher,  my  client  asserted 

14 


45-964  98-40 


1238 


its  First  Amendment  right  to  regulate  the  content  of  the 
advertisements  appearing  in  its  Yellow  Pages  Directories . 
Plaintiffs  sued  Pacific  Bell  seeking  injxinctive  relief  to 
con^el  Pacific  to  print  their  advertisement  as  requested. 

After  presentation  of  legal  memoranda  and  extensive  oral 
argument,  Plaintiffs'  request  for  injunctive  relief  was 
denied.  Subsequent  to  Judge  Brown's  ruling,  Plaintiff 
dismissed  the  lawsuit. 

3)     CIMA  INVESTMENTS  v.  PArTPTC  BELL  DIRECTORY 

Sonera  County  Superior  Court ;  Case  No . : 24594 
Type  of  Litigation:   Commercial  Litigation- 
Breach  of  Contract,  Fraud  cmd  Negligence 
Period  of  Litigation:  January  1986-Deceinber  1986 
Judge:   Honorable  Joseph  Hardin 
Attorneys : 

For  Pacific  Bell:  Martin  J.  Jenkins. 
For  Cima   Investments:     Richard  Matranga  of 
Angermillerand  Matranga,  270  S.  Bsuretta  Street  #A, 
Conora,  California  95730,  (209)  533-4955. 

DESCRIPTION  OF  CASE:  Plaintiff,  Cima  Investments,  owner 
of  the  Twaine  Heart  Motel  contracted  for  advertising  in 
the  1985  Pacific  Bell  Tuolumne  Yellow  Pages  Directory 
("Directory") .  When  the  1985  "Directory"  was  published. 
Plaintiff's  advertisement  was  omitted.  Plaintiff  sued  my 
client  for  general  damages  emd  lost  profits  in  the  amount 
of  $100,000.00.  I  filed  a  motion  for  summary  judgment 
see)cing  a  ruling  on  the  enforceability  of  a  limitation  of 
liability  clause  contained  in  Pacific  Bell's  contract 
with  Cima  Investments .  The  limiting  clause  capped 
Plaintiff's  damages,  in  case  of  a  breach,  to  the  amount 
Plaintiff  paid  for  the  advertisement.  This  case  was  of 
particular  significance  to  xay  client  inasmuch  as  there 
had  been  no  previous  judicial  ruling  on  the  validity  of 
the  limiting  clause.  Judge  Hardin  ruled  that  the 
limiting  clause  was  valid  cuid  enforceeible  cuid  entered 
judgment  against  my  client  for  $750.00,  the  cost  of 
Plaintiff ' s  advertisement . 


15 


1239 


4)        UNITED  STATRS  v    HENRY  MONVn.T.F.  FT  AL.. 

United  States  District  Court,  Eastern 

District  of  Wisconsin.   Case  No. :  84-CR-70 

Type  of  Litigation:    Criminal  Federal  Civil  Rights 

Prosecution. 

Charges:  18  USC  Sec.  241;  42  USC  Sec.  3631 

Judge:   Honorable  John  Reynolds. 

Trial  Date{s)  :  September  4,  1984  to  Septeniber  15,  1984. 

Attorneys : 

For  United  States  of  America:   Martin  J.  Jenkins 

and  the  Honorable  Patricia  Gorrence  (formerly  Asst. 

U.S.  Attorney),  United  States  Court  House,  517  East 

Wisconsin  Avenue-Rm  264,  Milwaukee,  WI,  53202  (414) 

297-4165. 

For  Defendants: 

William  Burke,  850  Honey  Creek  Parkway,  Watwautosa 

WI,  53213,  (414)  276-1717; 

Martin  Love,  6525  West  Blue  Mound  Road,  Milwaukee 

WI,  53213  (414)  258-5989; 

Robert  Dvorak,  823  North  Cass  Street,  Milwaukee  WI, 

53202  (414)  273-0373. 

DESCRIPTION  OF  CASE:  In  June  1983,  Mr.  John  Smith,  a 
member  of  the  United  States  Peace  Corps,  purchased  a  home 
in  rural  Crivitz,  Wisconsin,  and  moved  there  with  his 
wife  and  infant  son.  Mr.  Smith,  a  white  male,  and  his 
wife,  a  black  citizen  of  Liberia,  introduced  themselves 
to  their  new  neighbors  after  moving  to  Crivitz .  Shortly 
after  they  moved  into  their  new  home,  the  Smiths  began  to 
receive  threatening  phone  calls--including  one  from  an 
anonymous  caller  who  suggested  that  Mr.  Smith  "take  his 
bride  back  to  Africa."  On  the  evening  of  July  10,  1983, 
the  Defendants  drove  to  the  Smiths'  residence  where  they 
burned  a  five-foot  cross  on  the  Smiths'  front  lawn. 
The  prosecution  of  this  matter  was  particularly  difficult 
as  there  were  no  percipient  witnesses  to  the  cross 
burning.  Agents  of  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation 
were  unable  to  lift  any  latent  finger  prints  from  the 
cross  found  at  the  victims  home.  Several  neighborhood 
children  observed  the  defendeints'  build  a  cross  on  the 
day  of  the  offense.  However,  when  called  to  testify  at 
trial,  these  minors  con^letely  recanted  their  grand  jury 
testimony  after  being  pressured  to  do  so  by  their  parents 
and  friends  of  the  defendants.  After  a  three-week  trial, 
during  which  over  30  witnesses  were  called,  the 
defendants  were  convicted  of  all  charges.  All  defendants 
were  sentenced  to  terms  of  incarceration  in  federal 
prison. 


16 


1240 


5)  JACOBS  V.  PACIFIC  BELL  ET  AL.. 

United  States  District  Court -Northern  District  of 

California;  Case  No.:  C68-7169  EFL 

Type  of  Litigation:   Civil -PersoneQ.  Injury 

Period  of  Litigation:   January-October  1987 

Judge:   Honorable  Eugene  Lynch 

Attorneys : 

For  Pacific  Bell:   Maurtin  J.  Jenkins 

For  Plaintiff:  Stewart  I.  MacKenzie,  3900  New  Park 

Mall  Road,  Newark  CA  94560  (510)  791-8113. 

DESCRIPTION  OF  CASE:  This  case  involved  the  service  of 
a  search  warrant  by  United  States  Customs  Agents.  The 
agents,  in  seeking  to  execute  the  warrant  authorizing  the 
seizure  of  illegal  drugs,  relied  upon  residence 
information  obtained  from  my  client's  non-p\iblished  data 
base.  Plaintiff,  a  resident  at  the  location  where  the 
warrant  was  served,  was  home  when  the  agents  arrived. 
Plaintiff's  complaint  alleged  that  the  Agents  stormed  her 
house  and  illegally  detained  her  and  her  minor  son  during 
the  course  of  their  search.  Plaintiff's  complaint 
further  alleged  that  Pacific  Bell  negligently  provided 
the  "Agents  with  incorrect  address  information -which  led 
to  the  service  of  the  warrant."  On  behalf  of  Pacific 
Bell,  I  moved  to  dismiss  Plaintiff's  corqjlaint  for  lack 
of  subject  matter  jurisdiction  based  upon  Plaintiff's 
failure  to  allege  that  my  client's  action  violated  any 
Federal  Constitutional  Right  or  federal  statute.  After 
extensive  presentation  of  legal  authorities,  the  court 
granted  my  client's  motion  to  dismiss. 

6)  CREATIVE  LEISURE  v.  PACIFIC  BELL  ET  AL.. 

San   Francisco  Superior  Court;  Case  No.:  829-499 

Type   of   Litigation:     Civil -Negligence -Failure   to 

adequately  protect  telephone  facilities 

Judge:   Honoraible  Lucy  McCabe 

Period  of  Litigation:   February  1985  to  May  22,  1987 

Attorneys : 

For  Pacific  Bell:  Martin  J.  Jenkins 
For  Plaintiff:   Robert  Links  of  Berger,  Nadel  & 
Vanelli,   1   California   Street-Suite   2750,   San 
Francisco,  California  94111,  (415)  362-1940 

DESCRIPTION  OP  CASE:  Plaintiff,  a  wholesale  marketer  of 
Hawaiian  and  Mexican  vacation  packages,  conducted  its 
business  with  retail  travel  agents  throughout  the  country 
by  telephone.  Plaintiff  subscribed  to  telephone  service 
with  Pacific  Bell.  Plaintiff  alleged  that  on  several 
occasions  between  September  23,  1982  and  April  13,  1982, 
Pacific  Bell's  underground  CcQjles  were   struck  by 

17 


1241 


contractors  causing  interruptions  in  Plaintiff's 
telephone  service  and  a  corresponding  loss  of  profit. 
Plaintiff  further  alleged  that  my  client  was  responsible 
for  its  loss  of  profits  because  "Pacific  Bell  failed  to 
mark,  when  requested,  the  location  of  its  underground 
cables."  After  extensive  discovery,  I  moved  for  summary 
judgment  on  the  ground  that  ray  client's  lie±)ility,  if 
any,  was  governed  by  California  Public  Utilities  Tariffs 
which  limited  Pacific  Bell's  liability  for  errors  in  the 
provision  of  telephone  service  to  the  cost  of  the  service 
during  the  period  of  interruption.  After  extensive 
briefing  and  oral  argument,  the  Court  grsuited  my  motion 
for  summary  adjudication  of  issues  and  the  matter 
ultimately  settled  on  terms  favoreible  to  my  client. 

7)  PEOPLE  V.  DANE  E  WOODWARD 

Alameda  County  Superior  Court;  Case  No.:  H-2520 

Judge:   Honorable  Jacqueline  Taber 

Type  of  Litigation:  Criminal  Mental  Health  Re-coninitTnent 

Trial  Date(s):   May  20-May  27,  1983 

Attorneys : 

Deputy  District  Attorney:   Martin  Jenkins; 

For  Defendant:   Albert  Wax,  2004  Cedar  Street, 

Berkeley,  California  94709,  (510)  548-9800 

Description  of  Case:  in  ISSI,  Mr.  woodward  allegedly 
assaulted  and  tried  to  rape  thirteen  year  old  Patricia 
Maes.  Mr.  Woodward  was  charged  with  felony  assault  with 
intent  to  commit  rape.  The  con^laint  also  alleged  that 
Mr.  Woodward  had  sustained  a  previous  conviction  for 
molesting  a  two  year  old  girl .  At  trial  several  experts 
opined  that  Mr.  Woodward  suffered  from  Organic  Brain 
Syndrome,  a  condition  that  precluded  him  from  controlling 
his  sexual  cuid  aggressive  desires.  After  several  days  of 
testimony,  the  jury  found  Mr.  Woodward  not  guilty  by 
reason  of  insanity  and  he  was  committed  to  Atascadero 
State  Hospital.  In  January  1983,  just  two  years  after 
his  commitment  to  Atascadero,  Defendant  filed  a  petition 
in  the  Alameda  Superior  Court  seeking  his  release  on  the 
ground  that  his  sanity  had  been  restored  under  Penal  Code 
Section  1026.2.  It  was  at  this  juncture  that  the  case 
was  assigned  to  me  for  trial .  After  a  review  of  the  case 
file  cuid  psychological  reports,  I  concluded  that  Mr. 
Woodward  was  still  a  danger  to  the  community  cind  objected 
to  his  release.  As  such,  Mr.  Woodward's  petition  was  set 
for  jury  trial .  Several  psychiatrists,  psychologist,  and 
members  of  the  defendant's  family  testified  at  the  trial. 
The  jury  concluded  that  Mr.  Woodward  was  "presently  a 
danger  to  himself  and  others"  and  he  was  re -committed  to 
Atascadero . 


18 


1242 


8)  PHQPLE  V.  BELLARD 

Oakland-Piedmont-Bnieryville   Municipal    Court;    Case   No.: 

177434 

Type  of  Litigation:   Criminal  Prosecution. 

Charge:  Penal  Code  Section  245  a-  Assault 

Trial  date(s) :  July  1981 

Judge:  Honoreible  Roderick  Duncan 

Attorneys : 

Deputy  District  Attorney:  Mcurtin  J.  Jenkins 
For  Defendant:  Scott  Sugarman,  Sugeinnan  &  Ccuinon,  1 
Kaiser  Plaza,  Suite  1750,  Oakland,  California  94612 
(510)  465-1932. 

Description  of  Case:  The  victim  was  allegedly  shot  by 
defendant,  Charles  Bellard,  after  a  heated  argument  on  a 
North  Oakland  Street.  The  defendant  shot  the  victim 
because  the  victim  had  informed  law  enforcement 
authorities  that  the  defendant  was  responsible  for  a  rash 
of  burglaries  in  the  City  of  Oakland.  The  victim  was 
rushed  to  the  hospital  after  the  shooting  and  doctors 
determined  that  the  bullet  could  not  be  removed  because 
of  its  proximity  to  the  victim's  spinal  cord.  There  were 
no  independent  witnesses  to  the  shooting.  After  a  trial 
of  approximately  two  weeks,  during  which  the  defendant 
presented  an  alibi  defense,  the  jury  found  the  defendant 
guilty  as  charged  in  July  1981. 

9)  DORRIS  JELAVTCH  v.  PACIFIC  BELL 

San  Francisco  Superior  Court;  Case  No. :  813673 

Type  of  Litigation:   Civil  Litigation-Products 

Liability 

Judge:  Honorable  Stuart  Pollack  for  Motions 

Period  of  Litigation:  September  1983  to  September  1989 

Attorneys : 

For  Pacific  Telephone  and  Telegraph: 

Martin  J.  Jenkins 

For  Plaintiff:   William  Antonioli,  4410  El  Camino 

Real,  Suite  105,  Los  TLLtos,  California  94022,  (415) 

941-5100. 

Description  of  Case :  Plaintiff  Dorris  Jelavich  allegedly 
sustained  a  hearing  loss  while  using  a  cordless  telephone 
manufactured  by  Uniden  Corporation.  Ms.  Jelavich 
complained  of  hearing  a  loud  piercing  noise  just  as  she 
placed  the  receiver  to  her  ear.  Plaintiff's  counsel 
opined  that  the  noise  she  experienced  was  caused  by  the 
repair  of  Pacific  Bell's  switching  equipment  which 
occurred  coterminous  to  her  use  of  the  cordless  phone . 
Plaintiff's  medical  records  established  that  she  had 

19 


1243 


sustained  a  "sensory- neural  hearing  loss"  over  speech 
frequency  rsmge  1000  hertz  to  4000  hertz  as  a  result  of 
this  incident.  Investigation  of  this  matter  revealed 
that  while  several  of  my  client's  customers  experienced 
distracting  noises  during  the  repair  of  my  client's 
switching  equipment,  the  soiinds  emitted  over  my  client's 
network  were  not  of  sufficient  an5)litude  to  cause 
Plaintiff's  injury.  As  a  result  of  my  investigation  this 
case  settled  favorably  for  my  client. 

10)   BAKER  ET  AL.    v.  PACIFIC  BELL  ET  AL.. 

Alameda  Co\inty  Superior  Court,  Case  No.:   H125327 
Type  of  Litigation:  Civil -Personal  Injury 
Period  of  Litigation:  June  1987 -September  1989 
Attorneys : 

For  Pacific  Bell:  Martin  J.  Jenkins 

For  Plaintiffs:    R.  Lewis  Van  Blois,  1  Kaiser 

Plaza,  Suite  2245,  Oakland  CA  94612,   (510)  444- 

1906. 

DESCRIPTION  OF  CASE:  This  wrongful  death  action  was 
brought  by  the  parents  of  Donald  Baker,  Sue  Cox  and  Guy 
Enos  {hereinafter  "minors")  .  The  con^jlaint  in  this 
matter  alleged  "that  the  minors  were  killed  when  a  1965 
Ford  Mustang,  in  which  they  were  passengers,  struck  a 
telephone  pole  owned  and  negligently  placed  on  a  public 
thoroughfare  by  my  client."  I  engaged  in  a  course  of 
discovery  which  established  that  my  client  did  not  own 
nor  have  any  equipment  on  the  pole  in  question  at  the 
time  of  the  accident.  At  the  conclusion  of  discovery, 
Plaintiffs'  counsel  dismissed  my  client  from  the  action. 


20 


1244 


19.  Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  sigmficant  legal  activities  you  have 
pursued,  including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial 
or  legal  matters  that  did  not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of 
your  participation  in  this  question,  please  omit  any  information 
protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the  privilege  has  been 
waived.) 

Legal  Activities: 

As  a  lawyer,  I  participated  in  pro  bone  activities  discussed 
below  in  response  to  Question  1  of  Part  III.,  of  this 
Questionnaire.  As  a  judge,  I  have  taught  in  many  programs 
sponsored  by  a  wide  range  of  organizations.  During  my  tenure 
on  the  Oakland  Municipal  Court,  I  was  asked  by  the  American 
Judicature  Society  (AJS)  to  serve  as  a  panelist  on  its 
National  Pre-Bench  Seminar  held  in  March  1991.  The  purpose  of 
the  seminar  was  to  orient  new  judges  to  ethical  issues,  (i.e. 
ex-parte  contacts  and  rude  and  insolent  behavior  by  attorneys 
and  litigants)  and  to  discuss  appropriate  ways  to  resolve 
them.  The  seminar  was  taped  by  (AJS)  and  the  tape  has  been 
made  available  to  new  judges  across  the  country.  I  have  also 
been  a  member  of  the  teaching  faculty  for  the  California 
Center  on  Judicial  Education  and  Research  (CJER) ,  Teaching 
Faculty  from  1990  to  the  present.  I  have  taught  on  several 
programs  sponsored  by  CJER  including,  but  not  limited  to: 

a)  Controlling  your  Courtroom:  Voir  Dire  and  Trial 
Management  Workshop,  (September  2 9 -October  2,  1992) 

b)  Domestic  Violence  Seminar:  Effective  ways  of  Handling 
Domestic  Violence  Cases,  (October,  1992) 

c)  Wheeler;  Race  and  Gender  Bias  in  the  Exercise  of 
Peremptory  Challenges:  California  Judges  Assn. ,  Midyear 
Conference,  (May  2-4,  1993) 

d)  Criminal  Law  and  Procedure:  Continuing  Judicial  Studies 
Program  (CJSP) ,  Fall  1995 

e)  New  Judges  Orientation:  Ethics  cind  Fairness,  California 
Judges  Education  and  Research  (CJER),  1993-Present . 


21 


1245 


I  was  also  a  member  of  the  California  Supreme  Court's  Advisory- 
Committee  on  Judicial  Ethics.  The  Ethics  Advisory  Committee, 
Chaired  by  Justice  Charles  S .  Vogel  of  the  Second  Appellate 
District,  was  asked  by  the  California  Supreme  Court  to  assist 
the  Court  in  the  development  and  promulgation  of  the 
P-alifnmia  Code  of  Judicial  Ethics.  The  Ethics  Advisory 
Committee  submitted  its  recommendations  to  the  Supreme  Court 
in  Jcmuary  1996,  and  the  Court  approved  the  publication  of  the 
Committee's  proposed  Code  on  April  15,  1996.  In  November 
1996,  I  was  appointed  to  the  California  State-Federal  Judicial 
Council  by  the  Justice  Ronald  George,  Chief  Justice  of  the 
California  Supreme  Court.  The  Judicial  Council  is  con^rised 
of  sitting  judges  from  the  state  and  federal  courts  and 
provides  a  vehicle  for  direct  and  personal  communication 
between  judges  in  these  courts  regarding  matters  of  mutual 
interest  and  concern. 


22 


1246 
II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 


1 .  List  sources ,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred 
income  arrtingements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other 
future  benefits  which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business 
relationships,  professional  services,  firm  memberships,  fonner 
employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please  describe  the  arrangements  you 
have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or  business 
interest? 

I  have  no  financial  arrcuigement ( s )  or  previous  business 
relationships  from  which  I  expect  to  be  compensated  in  the 
future.  I  mcike  monthly  contributions  to  the  California  Judges 
Retirement  System  (CJRS)  and  if  confirmed,  I  will  be  entitled 
to  reimbursement  of  all  contributions  made  to  the  Judges 
Retirement  Program.  I  also  make  monthly  contributions  to  a 
Savings  Plus  Program  which  is  a  deferred  compensation  program 
administered  by  the  State  of  California. 

2.  Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest, 
including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in  determining  areas  of 
concern.  Identify  the  categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements 
that  are  likely  to  present  potential  conflicts-of-interest  during  your 
initial  service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated? 

If  a  potential  conflict-of-interest  arose,  I  would  first 
determine  whether  the  conflict  necessitated  recusal.  If  the 
potential  conflict  did  not  mandate  per  se  recusal,  I  would 
disclose  the  potential  conflict  cind  decide,  after  hearing  the 
parties  concerns,  whether  it  was  appropriate  for  me  to 
continue  hearing  the  matter.  In  order  to  avoid  conflict (s)  of 
interest,  I  would  list  all  of  my  prior  major  clients  euid 
engage  all  parties  in  discussions  that  would  be  reasoncibly 
likely  to  vincover  any  information  that  could  lead  to  a 
conflict  of  interest  and  reassignment  of  the  case. 


Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  purse  outside 
en^)loyment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with 
the  court?  If  so,  explain. 

No. 

23 


1247 


4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar 
year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year, 
including  salaries,  fees,  dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties, 
patents,  honoraria,  and  other  items  exceeding  $500.00  or  more  (If  your 
prefer  to  do  so  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report  required  by  the 
Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  Financial  Disclosure  Report  attached  hereto  as  Exhibit  D. 
I  also  officiate  high  school  and  small  college  football  games . 
I  receive  $45.00  per  game  for  high  school  games  and  $75.00  per 
game  for  small  college  games.  I  earn  approximately  $800.00 
annually  for  officiating  football  games. 

5.  Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail. 
(Add  schedules  called  for) 

See  Attached  Exhibit  E. 

6.  Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign? 
If  so,  please  identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the 
candidate,  dates  of  the  campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities? 

I  have  never  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political 
campaign . 


24 


1248 
III.    GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 


An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar 
Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every 
lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence  or  professional 
workload,  to  tind  some  time  to  participate  in  serving  the 
disadvantaged".  Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these 
responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time 
devoted  to  each. 

For  approximately  five  years  (1985-1989) ,  as  an  attorney  with 
Pacific  Bell,  I  was  a  cotnmittee  member  and  ultimately  co- chair 
of  the  San  Francisco  Barristers'  Clxih  "Can  I  Do  It  Without  a 
Lawyer  Program."  Through  this  program,  the  San  Francisco  Bar 
Association  provides  free  legal  advice  to  indigent  individuals 
in  the  San  Francisco  Bay  Area  in  the  areas  of  landlord- tenant 
law,  consumer  law,  family  law  and  also  presented  role  plays  on 
the  most  effective  means  of  presenting  small  claims  cases.  In 
addition,  from  1981-1989,  as  a  member  of  the  Charles  Houston 
Bar  Association,  I  participated  in  law  day  programs,  and  free 
legal  advice  clinics  annually.  I  am  currently  on  the  Board  of 
Directors  of  the  "Prescott -Joseph  Center  for  Community 
Enhancement.  The  Prescott  Joseph  Center  is  a  non-profit 
entity  that  provides  a  myriad  of  programs  for  seniors  and 
youth  in  the  West  Oakland  Community,  including  but  not  limited 
to  tutorial  programs  for  youth  and  senior  citizen  wellness 
programs.  I  also  serve  as  a  mentor  for  young  adults  at  St. 
Patrick ' s  Church . 


The  American  Bar  Association's  Conmientary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial 
Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  Judge  to  hold  a  membership 
in  any  organization  that  invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race, 
sex  or  religion.  Do  you  currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any 
organization  which  discriminates— through  either  formal  membership 
requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership  policies? 
If  so,  list,  with  the  dates  of  membership.  What  you  have  done  to  try 
to  change  these  policies? 

I  do  not  belong,  nor  have  I  ever  belonged,  to  any  orgeinization 
that  invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex  or 
religion. 

25 


1249 


3.  Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend 
candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it 
recommend  your  nomination?  Please  describe  your  experience  in  the 
entire  judicial  selection  process,  from  begiiming  to  end  (including  the 
circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which 
you  participated). 

I  received  a  letter  from  Senator  Boxer's  office  soliciting 
applications  from  all  persons  interested  in  serving  as  a 
federal  district  court  judge.  I  submitted  an  application  in 
February  1997.  Thereafter,  I  was  interviewed  by  the  Senator's 
judicial  nominations  committee.  The  Committee  selected  me  as 
a  finalist  for  the  position.  I  was  then  interviewed  by  the 
Senator's  Office.  After  my  interview,  I  was  informed  that 
Senator  Boxer  was  going  to  recommend  me  to  President  Clinton 
for  nomination  to  the  Federal  District  Court.  After  my  name 
was  forwarded  to  the  President,  I  was  interviewed  by  the 
Department  of  Justice,  the  American  Bar  Association  emd 
Federal  Bureau  of   Investigation. 

4.  Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial 
nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question 
in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  you  how  you 
would  rule  on  such  a  case,  issue  or  question. 

No. 

5.  Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial 
activism. " 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to 
include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than 
grievance-resolution. 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  enq)loy  the  individual  plaintiff  as 
vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad 
classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duties 
upon  governments  and  society; 

26 


1250 

JUDICIAL  CONFERENCE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 
COMMITTEE  ON  FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE 

Judge  Frank  Magill,  Chair 

Judge  Robert  R.  Beezer  Judge  Ronald  R  Lagueux  One  Columbus  Circle.  NE 

Judge  Garrelt  E  Brown.  Jr  Judge  Alan  D  Lourie  Washington,  D.C.  20544 

Judge  Albert  J.  Engel  Judge  Richard  Mills  Telephone:  (202)  273-4626 

Judge  Marvin  J,  Garbis  Judge  Manuel  L  Real  Facsimile:  (202)  273-1884 

Judge  Richard  W  Goldberg  Judge  Dale  E  SafTels 

Judge  Marvin  Katz  Judge  Frederick  J.  Scullin,  Jr 

Judge  Robert  B  Krupansky  Judge  William  J.  ZIoch 

August  11,  1997 

Honorable  Martin  J.  Jenkins 
Alameda  County  Superior  Court 
Juvenile  Division,  Department  25 
400  Broadway 
Oakland,  CA  94607 

Re:  Nomination  Financial  Disclosure  Filing 

Dear  Judge  Jenkins: 

Thank  you  for  submitting  your  Financial  Disclosure  Report  in  connection  with  your 
appointment  as  a  United  States  District  Judge  in  the  Northern  District  of  California.  I  have 
reviewed  your  nomination  Report  and  wish  to  provide  you  with  the  following  comments  on  Parts 
III  and  VI. 

In  Part  III,  you  must  report  compensation,  other  than  from  the  United  States  Government, 
in  excess  of  $5,000  in  any  of  the  two  calendar  years  prior  to  the  calendar  year  during  which  you 
file  your  first  report.  In  addition,  you  must  include  the  identity  of  each  source  of  such 
compensation  and  a  brief  description  of  the  nature  of  the  duties  performed  or  services  rendered 
by  the  reporting  person  for  each  source.  Please  inform  the  Committee  if  you  had  any  reportable 
compensation  during  the  calendar  year  1995.  You  may  wish  to  refer  to  page  60  of  the 
Instructions. 

In  Part  VI,  line  3,  you  reported  an  automobile  loan  with  "Patelco  Credit  Union."  For  your 
future  reference,  you  are  not  required  to  report  any  loan  that  has  been  secured  by  a  personal 
motor  vehicle.  Please  refer  to  page  35  of  the  Instructions. 

Please  provide  our  Committee  with  three  copies  of  your  response  to  the  second  paragraph 
within  thirty  days.  If  you  should  have  any  questions  about  this  letter,  please  contact  the  Office  of 
the  Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure  at  (202)  273-4626.  Thank  you  for  your  cooperation. 

Sincerely, 


^^nyu^ 


Frank  Magill 
Chair 


1251 


August  19,  1997 


Honorable  Frank  Magi 11 

Chair,  Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 

Judicial  Conference  of  the  United  States 

One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E. 

Washington  D.C. ,  20544 

Re:   Nomination  Financial  Disclosure  Filing 

Dear  Judge  Magi 11 : 

As  requested  in  your  letter  of  August  11,  1997,  by  this  letter 
I  hereby  inform  the  Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure  that  I 
did  earn  income  in  calendar  year  1995,  which  I  inadvertently 
failed  to  disclose  in  Part  III  of  my  1996-97  Financial 
Disclosure  Filing.  My  income  for  calendar  year  1995  is  set 
forth  below: 

SOURCE  AND  TYPE  GROSS  INCOME 

state  of  California 

Superior  Court  Judge  Salary        $99,011.00 

If  you  have  any  further  comments  regarding  my  Financial 
Disclosure  Filing,  I  can  be  reached  at  (510)  268-7384.  Thank 
you  for  your  cooperation  and  assistance  in  this  matter. 


Martin  J.  Jenkins 


mj  /mj  j 


1252 


d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional 
requirements  such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and, 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions 
in  the  manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities. 

It  has  always  been  my  philosophy  to  decide  cases  on  an 
individual  basis  and  issue  rulings  in  accord  with  the  facts 
and  legal  principles  that  govern  each  case.  Strict  adherence 
to  Constitutional  principles  such  as  standing  and  ripeness  is 
important  to  ensure  that  the  court  decides  cases  when,  and 
only  when,  appropriate,  and  any  remedial  relief  prayed  for  is 
granted  only  to  aggrieved  parties.  The  notion  that  judges  may 
use  decisions  in  individual  cases  to  in5)ose  broad  and 
continuing  affirmative  duties  upon  governments  and  agencies 
strikes  at  the  very  heart  of  our  system  of  democracy  and  the 
bedrock  Constitutional  principle:  "Separation  of  Powers." 
Often,  the  solution  to  societal  ills  may  lie  beyond  the 
purview  of  the  particular  statutes  or  Constitutional 
provisions  inpacted  by  the  legal  issues  before  the  court. 
When  judges  reach  beyond  the  applicable  statutes  and  governing 
law  of  their  jurisdiction  to  decide  cases,  they  are  apt  to  run 
afoul  of  and  tip  the  delicate  "Balance  of  Powers"  which  is 
central  to  our  Constitutional  democracy. 


1253 


MARTIN  J.  JENKINS  NET  WORTH  FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
SCHEDULE  D:  "ACCOUNTS  AND  BILLS  DUE/OTHER  DEBTS" 

1.   Accounts  and  bills  due/other  debts: 

a.  Chase  Manhattan  Visa  Account   Balance:   $1300.00 

b.  Bank  of  America 

Mastercard  Account  Balance:   $3500.00 

c .  Bank  of  America 

Visa  Account  Balance:   $4000.00 

d.  American  Express 

Delta  Sky  Miles  Balance:   $1,600.00 

e.  Patelco  Credit  Union  Account*  Balance:   $18,500.00 

♦This  debt  is  shared  by  my  brother  Darrell  Jenkins,  and  my 
sister,  Monica  Jenkins  and  arises  from  the  purchase  of  a  new 
automobile  for  my  father's  birthday  on  October  16,  1995.  Our 
respective  co-pay  is  $248.00  per  month,  on  a  monthly  payment 
of  743.00. 

Total  accounts  and  bills  due:  $28,900.00 


1254 


MARTIN  J.  JENKINS  NETWORTH  FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
SCHEDULE  E:    "REAL  ESTATE  MORTGAGES  PAYABLE" 

1 .   Real  estate  mortgages  payable: 

a.   1347  Bates  Road 

Oakland,  CA  94610 

First  mortgage  holder:   Glendale    Federal    Mortgage 

Corporation 

Balance:       $282,000.00 
Monthly  Payment:      $2117.00 


Second  mortgage  holder: 


First  United  Seirvices  Credit 

Union 

Balance:       $22,000.00 

Monthly  payment:      $419.00. 


Total  monthly  mortgage  paid:   $2536.00 


b.   7  Richards  Circle* 

San  Francisco,  CA  94124 

First  mortgage  holder: 


Second  mortgage  holder: 


Home  Savings  and  Loan  Company 
Balance:       $169,000.00 
Monthly  payment:        $0.00* 

San  Francisco  Employees  Credit 

Union 

Balance:  $24,000.00 

Monthly  payment:  0.00* 


*  I  ovm  this  property  with  Mr.  Jimmie  Gilyard.  Mr. 
Gilyard  makes  all  mortgage  payments  en  this  property.  I 
do  not  receive  any  rental  income  from  this  property  and 
I  do  not  take  any  income  tax  deduction (s)  for  this 
property. 

Total  monthly  mortgage  paid:       $0.00 


Mortgage  liability  for  all  real  estate  owned:     $497,000.00 
Total  monthly  mortgage  paid**:  $2536.00 

**I    only    pay    the    first    and    second   mortgage    on   my    primary 
residence  at  1347  Bates  Road  in  OaJdand. 


1255 
ni.    GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 


1.  An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar 
Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every 
lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence  or  professional 
workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  serving  the 
disadvantaged".  Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these 
responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time 
devoted  to  each. 

For  approximately  five  years  (1985-1989)  ,  as  an  attorney  with 
Pacific  Bell,  I  was  a  committee  member  and  ultimately  co-chair 
of  the  San  Francisco  Barristers'  Clxib  "Can  I  Do  It  Without  a 
Lawyer  Program."  Through  this  program,  the  Sein  Francisco  Bar 
Association  provides  free  legal  advice  to  indigent  individuals 
in  the  San  Francisco  Bay  Area  in  the  areas  of  landlord-tenant 
law,  consumer  law,  family  law  and  also  presented  role  plays  on 
the  most  effective  mesins  of  presenting  small  claims  cases.  In 
addition,  from  1981-1989,  as  a  member  of  the  Charles  Houston 
Bar  Association,  I  participated  in  law  day  programs,  and  free 
legal  advice  clinics  annually.  I  am  currently  on  the  Board  of 
Directors  of  the  "Prescott -Joseph  Center  for  Community 
Enhancement.  The  Prescott  Joseph  Center  is  a  non-profit 
entity  that  provides  a  myriad  of  programs  for  seniors  and 
youth  in  the  West  Oakland  Community,  including  but  not  limited 
to  tutorial  programs  for  youth  and  senior  citizen  wellness 
programs.  I  also  serve  as  a  mentor  for  young  adults  at  St. 
Patrick ' s  Church . 

2.  The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial 
Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  Judge  to  hold  a  membership 
in  any  organization  that  invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race, 
sex  or  religion.  Do  you  currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any 
organization  which  discriminates— through  either  formal  membership 
requirements  or  the  practical  inq>lementation  of  membership  policies? 
If  so,  list,  with  the  dates  of  membership.  What  you  have  done  to  try 
to  change  these  policies? 

I  do  not  belong,  nor  have  I  ever  belonged,  to  amy  organization 
that   invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis   of   race,    sex  or 

religion. 

25 


1256 

3.  Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend 
candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it 
recommend  your  nomination?  Please  describe  your  experience  in  the 
entire  judicial  selection  process,  from  beginning  to  end  (including  die 
circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which 
you  participated). 

I  received  a  letter  from  Senator  Boxer's  office  soliciting 
applications  from  all  persons  interested  in  serving  as  a 
federal  district  court  judge.  I  submitted  an  application  in 
February  1997.  Thereafter,  I  was  interviewed  by  the  Senator's 
judicial  nominations  committee.  The  Committee  selected  me  as 
a  finalist  for  the  position.  I  was  then  interviewed  by  the 
Senator's  Office.  After  ray  interview,  I  was  informed  that 
Senator  Boxer  was  going  to  recommend  me  to  President  Clinton 
for  nomination  to  the  Federal  District  Court.  After  xa/  name 
was  forwarded  to  the  President,  I  was  interviewed  by  the 
Department  of  Justice,  the  Americeui  Bar  Association  and 
Federal  Bureau  of   Investigation. 

4.  Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial 
nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question 
in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  you  how  you 
would  rule  on  such  a  case,  issue  or  question. 

No. 

5.  Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial 
activism. " 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to 
include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than 
grievance-resolution. 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as 
vehicle  for  the  inq>osition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad 
classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duties 
upon  governments  and  society; 

26 


1257 


d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional 
requirements  such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and, 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions 
in  the  manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities. 

It  has  always  been  my  philosophy  to  decide  cases  on  an 
individual  basis  and  issue  rulings  in  accord  with  the  facts 
cuid  legal  principles  that  govern  each  case.  Strict  adherence 
to  Constitutional  principles  such  as  standing  and  ripeness  is 
ittportcuit  to  ensure  that  the  court  decides  cases  when,  and 
only  when,  appropriate,  and  any  remedial  relief  prayed  for  is 
granted  only  to  aggrieved  parties.  The  notion  that  judges  may 
use  decisions  in  individual  cases  to  impose  broad  and 
continuing  affirmative  duties  upon  governments  and  agencies 
strikes  at  the  very  heart  of  our  system  of  democracy  and  the 
bedrock  Constitutional  principle:  "Separation  of  Powers." 
Often,  the  solution  to  societal  ills  may  lie  beyond  the 
purview  of  the  particular  statutes  or  Constitutional 
provisions  iit^jacted  by  the  legal  issues  before  the  court. 
When  judges  reach  beyond  the  applicable  statutes  and  governing 
law  of  their  jurisdiction  to  decide  cases,  they  are  apt  to  run 
afoul  of  and  tip  the  delicate  "Balance  of  Powers"  which  is 
central  to  our  Constitutional  democracy. 


27 


1258 


MARTIN  J.  JENKINS  NET  WORTH  FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
SCHEDULE  D:  "ACCOUNTS  AND  BILLS  DUE/OTHER  DEBTS" 


1.  Accounts  and  bills  due/other  debts: 

a.   Chase  Manhattan  Visa  Account   Balance:   $1300.00 


b.  Bank  of  America 
Mastercard  Account 

c .  Bank  of  America 
Visa  Account 

d.  American  Express 
Delta  Sky  Miles 


Balance:  $3500.00 
Balance:  $4000.00 
Balance:   $1,600.00 


e.   Patelco  Credit  Union  Account*  Balance:   $18,500.00 

♦This  debt  is  shared  by  my  brother  Darrell  Jenkins,  and  my 
sister,  Monica  Jenkins  and  arises  from  the  purchase  of  a  new 
automobile  for  my  father's  birthday  on  October  16,  1995.  Our 
respective  co-pay  is  $248.00  per  month,  on  a  monthly  payment 
of  743.00. 


Total  accounts  and  bills  due: 


$28,900.00 


1259 


EXHIBIT  D:  SENATE  QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL 
NOMINEES,  PART  II,  QUESTION  #4  "1996  FINANCIAL 
DISCLOSURE  REPORT" 


1)    1996  Nomination  Financial  Disclosure  Filing. 


1260 


INANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  oE  Person  Reporting 

Jenkins,  Martin  J. 


Dace  of  Report 

07     /27/97 


I.  Page   1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS  -  income,  value,  transactions  (Includes  those  of  spouse 
and  dependent  children.  See  pp.  37-54  of  Instructions.) 


Description  of  Assets 
lincluding  trust  assets! 

Indicate  where  applicable,    owner  of 
the  asset   by  using   the  parenthetical 

B. 

during 
reporting 
period 

C. 

Gross  value 

at  end  of 

reporting 

period 

Transactions  during  reporting  period 

ing   individual   and  spouse.    MS)'    for 

(11 

Code 
(A-HI 

(21 
div.  . 

(11 

Value: 
Code 

(2} 

Value 

Methods 

Code 

(Q-WI 

buy.    sell, 
merger, 
redemp - 

If  not  exempt   from  disclosure                 | 

Eor  ownership  by  dependent  child. 

Place    -(Xl-   after  each  asset 
exempt   from  prior  disclosure. 

(21 

Date: 

Wonth- 

Day 

(3) 

Value2 
Code 

(41 

Gainl 
Code 
(A-K! 

(S) 
Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
(if  private 
transaction! 

NONE         (No  reportable 

California 

Savings   Plus   Program 

A 

DIV 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

California 

Judges   Retirement   System 

D 

DIV 

L 

T 

EXEMPT 

Bank  of  America 
Savings  Account 

A 

INT 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

United   Services   Credit 
Union  Savings  Account 

A 

INT 

J 

T 

EXEMPT 

Home   Savings   and   Loan 
Mortgage   on  Co-owned  Prop. 

None 

M 

W 

EXEMPT 

Loan  of  $5000.00 

to  Mr.    Sidney   Hughes* 

None 

J 

W 

EXEMPT 

' 

2 

. 

. 

-' 

■' 

' 

' 

1    Inc/Oain   CdS:    A-Sl.OOO   or    less                               B-Sl . 001-S2. 500   CSS. 501-S5, 000      D-S5, 001-S15. 000                           S-SIS. 001-S50.  000 
ICol.Bl.D4l            F-SSO.OOI-SIOO.OOO                          G-SIOO. 001-Sl . 000. 000                               Hl-Sl . 000. 001-SS. 000. 000        H2.S5. 000, 001   or  aore 

2   Val   CdS:                J-SIS.OOO   or    less                             K-SIS. 001-S50 . 000      L-SSO. OOl-SlOO. 000      M-SIOO. 001-S25C. 000      N.S250. 001-S500. 000 
,Col.    CI. 03,            °:!i°|'°gJiJl°i|6°°°o    000      ?i:li6°SS6°§J;'lr°S2r2°°                                      P2.S5 . 000. 001.S2S. 000. 000 

J  Val  Mth  Cds:      0-*Ppraisal                                       R-Cost (real   estate  onlyl                                   S-Assesment                       T-Cash/Market 
(Col.    C2I                 U-BoSk  Value                                     V-Other                                                                         W-Estimated 

1261 


INANCIAL   DISCLOSURE    REPORT    (cont'd) 


4ame    of    Person    Reporting 

Jenkins,   Martin  J. 


<:)iini^i 


III.  ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS  andicate  part  of  Report.) 

art  II.  AGREEMENTS  -  The  balance  in  my  California  Judges  Retirement  Plan  is  approximately 

$60,000.00.   I  expect  that  the  State  of  California  will  reimburse  me  for 

aU — f  nnfT■^hllt-^nng     Tna>^o     ^f     T     am     f- fMi  f  <  rTn  o  rl     Ky     ^^^o     tjonat-o 

'art    VI TTtRTTTTTF";    -    *Tho     HahiHry    .-ofo.-rofl     rr,    here    t-o  f  cT-pnrcg     a     i-ociHgnrp     Thar     T     rn-r,t.7n    ...i' t 

a  friend  of  mine.   I  do  not  receive  any  income  nor  do  I  take  any  tax 

deduction  fnr  rhl'-^  prnpprry. Thlc  prnpprt-y  ig  InrarpH  ar  7  RirharHc  rir 

San  Francisco,  California  94124.   Home  Savings  and  Loan  holds  the  first 

mnrrgagp    anrl     f^an    F^-an^^g^-n    Fmplnyppg    CroAit    Ilni  nn    hnlHg    a     gprnnH    nrnrtga^ 

on   the   Richards   Circle   property. 

**   This   debt   is   shared  by  my  brother,   Darrell   Jenkins   and  my   sister, 

Mnni'ra — Tpnkins Thig    rfpKr    ariipg    frnm    rViP    purrhagp    nf    a    npu 

automobile  for  my  father,  James  Jenkins,  on  October  16,  1995.   Our 

rpgpppM'vp    rn-pay    ppr    mnnrh     1g     $7^H    Ofl 

'art  VII.  INVESTMENTS  AND  TRUSTS  -  *This  refers  to  a  loan  I  made  in  1994  to  Sidney  Hughes,  a 

friend  of  mine  who  was  starting  a  new  business  venture 

at  that  time.   There  is  no  written  agreement  to  verify 

the  loan,  however  I  do  have  the  cancelled  check.   This 
is  an  interest  free  loan  and  to  date  I  have  not  received 

~ (layiiiiinc  in  unoit!  or  in  pare. 

X.  CERTIFICATION. 

In  compHance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  §  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Commiitee  on  Judicial 
xtivities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory  function  in  any  litigation 
uring  the  period  covered  by  this  report  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  financial  interest,  as  defmed  in 
'anon  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent  children,  if  any)  is 
ccurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  reponed  was  withheld  because  it  met 
pplicable  statutory  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

1  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been  reported  are 
1  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C. A.  app.  4,  §  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  §  7353  and  Judicial  Conference  regulations. 

Date  July   27,    1997 

JOTE:     ANY  INDIVIDUAL  WHO  KNOWINGLY  AND  WILFULLY  FALSIFIES  OR  FAILS  TO  FILE  THIS  REPORT  MAY  BE 
lUBJECT  TO  CIVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  §  104.) 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS: 


Mail  signed  original  and  3  additional  copies  to: 


Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 
Administrative  Office  of  the 

United  States  Courts 
Suite  2-301 

One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E., 
Washington,  D.C.  20544 


1262 


FINANCIAL     DISCLOSURE     REPORT 

FOR    CALENDAR   YEAR    19  96 


(5   U.S.C.    App. 


.    Person  Reporting    (Last   name,    firsc.    middle    initial) 

Jenkins,   Martin  J. 

2.    Court   or  Organization 

United   States   District   Court 

3      Date   of    Report 

07   In  /97 

..    Title      {Article    III    judges   indicate  active  or 

senior  status;   ftagistrate   judges   indicate 
full-   or  part-time) 

Article   III   Judge 

5.    Report  Type    (check  appropriate   type) 
_S.  Nomination,    Dace  7    £4/97 
Initial     Annual     Final 

6.    Reporting  Period 

1  /  1/96-  7  /30/97 

'.    Chambers  or  Office  Address 

Alameda  County   Superior   Court 
Juvenile   Division,   Department   25 
AOO   Broadway,    Oakland,    CA     94607 

e.    On  the  basis  of   the    information  contained   in  this  Report  and 
any  modifications  pertaining  thereto,    it    is,    in  my  opinion, 
in  compliance  with  applicable    laws  and  regulations. 

Reviewing  Officer                                                                               Date 

IMPORTANT  NOTES:  The  instructions  accompanying  this  form  must  be  followed.    Complete  all  parts, 
checking  the  NONE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable  information.    Sign  on  last  page. 

POSITIONS.      (Reporting  individual  only;  see  pp.  9-13  of  Instructions.) 


D 


POSITION 
NONE       (No  reportable  positions) 


NAME    OF    ORGANIZATION/ENTITY 


Board   of   Directors-Prescott    Joseph    Center    for   CnTiimiiniry   Knhanr 


Advisory  Board-Center   for   Community   Legal   Education 


AGREEMENTS.      (Reporting  individual  only;  see  pp.  14-17  of  Instructions.) 

)ATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


D 


NONE      (No  reportable  agreements) 


1996  -   97  Collegiate   Officials  Association    ($75.00   per   game   officiated.    11    game   seasoni 

1996-97  Northern   California   Football  Officials   Assn.    (45.00   per   game.    6   gamp   spasnni 

1996-97  California   Judges   Retirement   System    (Reimbursement   of   SfiO.OOO.nn   rnnrrihiirpHI 


I.     NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME.      (Reporting  individual  and  spouse;  see  pp.  18-25  of  InstrucUcns.) 


D 


SOURCE    AND    TYPE 
NONE       (No  reportable  non-investment  income) 

State   of   California,    Superior  Court   Judge.   Alameda   Countv 

Collegiate      Qiflficials  Association    ($75.00   per   game) 


$109.000.00 
$  925.00 


Northern   California   Fobtball  Officials   Assn.    ($45.00   per   game)        $  215.00 

$ 

$ 


1263 


:nAncial  disclosure  report 


Name  of  Person  Reporting 

Jenkins,  Martin  J. 


07 


/"/ 


REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS   -  transporlation,  lodgmg,  food,  entertainment. 

(Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheticals  '(S)'  and  '(DC)'  to  indicate  reportable 
reimbursements  and  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  26-29  of  Instructions.) 

SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


J 


NONE      (No  such  reportable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 


OTHER  GIFTS.      (Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheticals  '(S)'  and  "(DC)"  to 
indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  30-33  of  Instructions.) 

SOURCE        '  DESCRIPTION 


D 


NONE       (No  such  reportable  gifts) 


i.     LIABILITIES.       (Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible 
for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  "(S)"  for  separate  hability  of  the  spouse,  "(J)'  for  joint  Uability  of 
reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  "(DC)"  for  habihty  of  a  dependent  child.  See  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE* 


Z] 


NONE      (No  reportable  liabilities) 


Home  Savings  and  Loan  CorpT 


Mortgage  on  residential  property 
I  Co-ovm  with  a  friend. 


tl*_ 


San  Francisco  Employees  Federal  Credit  Union 2nd  Mortgage  on  home  listed  ahnvp   li* 

Patelco  Credit  Union Auto  loan  on  vehicle  purchased  for  mv  dad    %* 


•Value  Codes 


00.000   P4- 


-$S0.000   L-S50. 
.001-S5.00Q.OOO 


SIOO,001-S2SO.COO   N-S2SO,001-S500.000 


.001-S25.000,00 


1264 


UNITED  STATES  SENATE 

Committee  on  the  Judiciary 

Washington  DC  20510-6275 

Questionnaire  for  Judicial  Nominee 
Michael  Patrick  McCuskey 


I.   BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used.) 

Michael  Patrick  McCuskey 
Michael  P.  McCuskey 
Mike  McCuskey 

Address:  List  current  place  of  residence  and  office 
address (es) . 

Residence: 
Washburn  IL  61570 

Office: 

124  SW  Adams  Street 

Suite  595 

Peoria  IL  61602 

Date  and  place  of  birth. 

June  30,  1948 
Peoria  IL 

Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's 
name).  List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and  business 
address (es) . 

Married  to  Brenda  H.  McCuskey   (Maiden  name  is  Huber) 
Homemaker 

Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have 
attended,  including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees  received,  and 
dates  degrees  were  granted. 

Illinois  State  University,  Normal  IL 

1966-1970 

B.S.  in  Education  June  6,  1970 

Saint  Louis  University  School  of  Law,  St.  Louis  MO 

1972-1975 

Juris  Doctor  May  10,  1975 

Employment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or 
professional  corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other 
enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations. 


i26r 


nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were 
connected  as  an  officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor,  or 
employee  since  graduation  from  college. 

06/01/70-08/31/70:  Employed  as  a  Security  Guard  for 
Hiram  Walker  &  Sons,  Inc.,  Peoria  IL. 

09/01/70-05/31/71:  Employed  as  a  High  School  History 
Teacher  and  Baseball  Coach  at  Ottawa  Township  High  School, 
Ottawa  IL. 

06/01/71-08/31/71:  Employed  as  a  Security  Guard  for 
Hiram  Walker  &  Sons,  Inc.,  Peoria  IL. 

09/01/71-05/31/72:  Employed  as  a  High  School  History 
Teacher  and  Baseball  Coach  at  Ottawa  Township  High  School, 
Ottawa  IL. 

06/01/72-08/31/72:  Employed  as  a  Security  Guard  for 
Hiram  Walker  &  Sons,  Inc.,  Peoria  IL. 

06/01/73-08/31/73:  Employed  as  a  Security  Guard  for 
Hiram  Walker  &  Sons,  Inc.,  Peoria  IL. 

06/01/74-08/31/74:  Employed  as  a  Security  Guard  for 
Hiram  Walker  &  Sons,  Inc.,  Peoria  IL. 

06/01/74-08/31/74:  Employed  as  a  Law  Clerk  for  Michael 
M.  Mihm,  then  State's  Attorney  of  Peoria  County  IL. 

08/01/75-11/30/88:  Partner  in  law  firm  of  Pace,  McCuskey 
&  Galley,  Lacon  IL.   Managing  Partner  from  1980-1988. 

1975-1978:  Member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of 

the  Lacon-Sparland  Emergency  Ambulance  Service,  Lacon  IL. 

06/01/76-11/30/88:  Public  Defender  of  Marshall  County, 
Lacon  IL. 

1977-1981:  Member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of 

the  Quad-County  Counseling  Center  in  Princeton  IL. 

01/78-11/30/88:  Member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of 
the  St.  Joseph's  Nursing  Home,  Lacon  IL. 

01/81-11/30/88:  Member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of 
Evans  Mutual  Insurance  Company,  Varna  IL. 

01/81-11/30/88:  Member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of 
The  First  National  Bank  of  Lacon  IL. 


1266 


12/05/88-12/02/90:  Circuit  Judge  of  the  Tenth  Judicial 
Circuit,  Peoria  IL. 

1989-1995:  Member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of 

the  Central  Illinois  Chapter  of  the  American  Red  Cross, 
Peoria  IL. 

12/03/90-present:  Justice  of  the  Third  District 
Appellate  Court  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  Ottawa  IL. 

1990-present:  Member  of  the  Criminal  Justice 
Advisory  Committee  of  Illinois  Valley  Community  College, 
Oglesby  IL. 

1991-present:  Member  of  Administrative  Committee  of 
the  Illinois  Appellate  Court. 

10/92-present:  Alternate  member  of  the  Appellate 
Division  of  the  Illinois  Industrial  Commission. 

1993:  Member  of  Education  Committee  of  the 

Illinois  Judicial  Conference. 

1994:  Chair  of  the  Executive  Committee  of 

the  Illinois  Appellate  Court. 

1996-present :  Member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of 
the  Illinois  State  University  Alumni  Association,  Normal 
IL. 

1996-present:  Member  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of 
the  Illinois  State  University  Varsity  I-Club,  Normal  IL. 

May  15,  1997-present:  Member  of  Board  of  Directors  of  the 
Illinois  Appellate  Lawyers  Association. 

Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so, 
give  particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank 
or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 

I  have  never  served  in  the  military. 

Honors  and  Awards ;  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships, 
honorary  degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you 
believe  would  be  of  Interest  to  the  Committee. 

The  Illinois  Public  Defender  Association  gave  me  an  award 
at  its  annual  convention  on  May  17,  1991,  which  stated: 
"Award  of  Excellence  and  Meritorious  Service  in 
Recognition  and  Sincere  Appreciation  of  the  Outstanding 
Service  to  the  American  Justice  System  by  Devotion  and 
Duty  to  the  Precepts  of  the  United  States  Constitution". 


1267 


9.  Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or 
judicial-related  committees  or  conferences  of  which  you  are  or 
have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of  any 
offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

I  previously  was  a  member  of  the  American  Bar  Association, 
the  Illinois  Trial  Lawyers  Association,  and  the  American 
Judges  Association. 

Currently,  I  am  a  member  of  the  Illinois  Judges 
Association,  Illinois  State  Bar  Association,  Peoria  County 
Bar  Association,  Marshall  County  Bar  Association,  LaSalle 
County  Bar  Association,  Tazewell  County  Bar  Association, 
American  Inns  of  Court--Abraham  Lincoln  Inn  whore  I  serve 
as  a  Master  of  the  Bench,  and  American  Inns  of  Court-- 
Clarence  Darrow  Inn  where  I  serve  as  a  Master  of  the 
Bench.  I  have  been  the  Treasurer  of  the  Clarence  Darrow 
Inn  since  June  1,  1996. 

I  am  a  member  of  the  ISBA  General  Practice  Section 
Council,  1991-present;  Member  of  the  ISBA  Criminal 
Practice  Section  Council,  1994-present;  Member  of  the  ISBA 
Family  Law  Section  Council,  1997-present;  Elected  Member 
of  the  ISBA  Assembly,  1992-Present;  Member  of  the 
Credentials  Committee  of  the  Assembly,  1996;  Chair  of 
Rules  and  Bylaws  Committee  of  the  Assembly,  June  21,  1997- 
present. 

In  1994-1995,  I  served  on  a  special  ad  hoc  committee  of 
the  ISBA  which  recommended  legislation  to  the  Illinois 
General  Assembly  creating  alternative  drug  treatment 
programs  to  reduce  the  imprisonment  of  non-violent,  first- 
time  drug  offenders.  A  copy  of  the  ad  hoc  committee's 
Rehabilitative  Incarceration  Program  legislation  is 
attached  at  the  end  of  the  questionnaire. 

Also,  I  am  a  member  of  the  convention  committee  of  the 
Illinois  Judges  Association  and  a  member  of  the  Speakers 
Bureau  of  the  Illinois  Judges  Association. 

On  May  15,  1997,  I  was  appointed  to  the  Board  of  Directors 
of  the  Illinois  Appellate  Lawyers  Association. 

10.  Other  Memberships;  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong 
that  are  active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies.  Please  list 
all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

The  League  of  Women  Voters  of  Greater  Peoria  IL,  The 
Illinois  State  Bar  Association,  Illinois  Judges 
Association,  Illinois  State  Troopers  Lodge  #41  of  the 
Fraternal  Order  of  Police,  Illinois  State  Grange-Richland 


1268 


Chapter  (Associate  Member) .  All  of  these  organizations 
lobby  before  public  bodies. 

The  other  organizations  to  which  I  belong  are  as  follows: 

Illinois  State  University  Alumni  Association,  Rotary  Club 
of  Peoria,  Illinois  State  University  Varsity  I-Club, 
Italian  American  Society  of  Peoria  IL  (Honorary  Member), 
Hiram  Walker  Retirees  Club,  Sons  of  the  American  Legion  of 
Lacon  IL,  Ancient  Free  &  Accepted  Mason  of  Illinois-Lacon 
Lodge  #61  of  Lacon  IL,  Ancient  Accepted  Scottish  Rite- 
Valley  of  Peoria  IL,  Mohammed  Temple  A. A. O.N. M.S.  of 
Peoria  IL,  and  the  Illinois  Appellate  Lawyers  Association 
(Honorary  Member). 

The  by-laws  for  these  organizations  are  attached  at  the 
end  of  the  questionnaire. 

11.  Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been 
admitted  to  practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if 
any  such  memberships  lapsed.  Please  explain  the  reason  for 
any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same  information  for 
administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission  to 
practice. 

All  Courts  of  the  State  of  Illinois  -- 
October  15,  1975 

U.S.  District  Court,  Central  District  of  Illinois  -- 
September  11,  1987 

12.  Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of 
books,  articles,  reports,  or  other  published  material  you  have 
written  or  edited.  Please  supply  one  copy  of  all  published 
material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.  Also,  please 
supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving 
constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.  If  there  were  press 
reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to 
you,  please  supply  them. 

McCuskey,  Trend  of  Illinois  Appellate  Court  Opinions  1992- 
1995*;  The  Effect  of  Amended  Supreme  Court  Rule  23  and 
Administrative  Order  MR  No.  10343,  111.  St.  B.  A.  Sec. 
Crim.  Jus.,  Vol.  39,  No.  8  (May  1996);  111.  St.  B.  A.  Sec. 
Gen,  Prac,  Vol.  24,  No.  5  (Apr.  1996).  Corrections  In 
article:  111.  St.  B.  A.  Sec.  Crim.  Jus.,  Vol.  40,  No.  1 
(July  1996);  111.  St.  B.  A.  Sec.  Gen.  Prac,  Vol.  24,  No. 
6  (June  1996). 

McCuskey,  Supreme  Court  Rule  23  --  Brief  Comments  on  the 
New  Changes,  111.  St.  B.  A.  Sec.  Crim.  Just.,  Vol.  38,  No. 


1269 


4  (December  1994);  111.  St.  B.  A.  Sec.  Gen.  Prac . ,  Vol. 
23,  No.  3  (November  1994). 

McCuskey,  Internal  Procedures  of  the  Third  District 
Appellate  Court  --  Docketing  to  Decision,  Appellate  L. 
Rev.,  Winter  1994,  at  18;  111.  St.  B.  A.  Sec.  Gen.  Prac, 
Vol.  22,  No.  5  (May  1994). 

McCuskey,  Appellate  Practice  --  10  Brief  Tips,  Appellate 
L.  Rev.,  Winter  1993,  at  34  (Copy  Attached);  111.  St.  B. 

A.  Sec.  Gen.  Prac,  Vol.  22,  No.  2  (Nov.  1993). 

McCuskey,  The  Recent  Growth  of  Appellate  Review,  111.  St. 

B.  A.  Sec  Gen.  Prac,  Vol.  21,  No.  5  (Apr.  1993). 

McCuskey,  Professionalism  in  the  Practice  of  Law  --  Good 
Advice  from  Honest  Abe,  111.  St.  B.  A.  Sec.  Gen.  Prac, 
Vol.  21,  No.  2  (Nov.  1992). 

See  attached  newspaper  articles.  There  are  no  speeches 
attached  because  I  speak  extemporaneously  without  notes. 

13.  Health;  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the 
date  of  your  last  physical  examination. 

Health:  Excellent. 

Last  Physical  Examination:  May  30,  1997. 

14.  Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices 
you  have  held,  whether  such  position  was  elected  or  appointed, 
and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each  such  court. 

Elected  Judge  of  the  Third  District  Appellate  Court  of  the 
State  of  Illinois  on  November  6,  1990.  The  court  is 
located  in  Ottawa,  IL,  and  handles  all  appeals  from  the 
circuit  courts  of  21  counties  located  in  North  Central 
Illinois.  In  addition,  the  Third  District  Appellate  Court 
hears  appeals  from  various  administrative  bodies  of 
Illinois  government,  including  the  Illinois  Environmental 
Protection  Agency,  the  Illinois  Human  Rights  Commission, 
the  Illinois  Property  Tax  Appeal  Board,  and  the  Illinois 
Commerce  Commission. 

The  only  limitations  upon  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Third 
District  Appellate  Court  are  in  cases  where  the  Circuit 
Court  has  declared  a  statute  unconstitutional  or  where  the 
death  penalty  has  been  imposed.  These  cases  go  directly 
to  the  Supreme  Court  of  Illinois  without  appellate  court 
review. 


1270 


The  Illinois  Supreme  Court  has  appointed  me  to  serve  as  an 
alternate  member  of  the  Appellate  Division  of  the  Illinois 
Industrial  Commission.  This  court  hears  appeals  in  all 
workers'  compensation  cases  filed  in  the  State  of 
Illinois.  As  a  result  of  this  assignment,  I  have  served 
many  times  over  the  years  as  a  member  of  this  five-judge 
court  of  review. 

Elected  Judge  of  the  Tenth  Judicial  Circuit  on  November  8, 
1988.  The  Tenth  Judicial  Circuit  of  the  State  of  Illinois 
is  the  general  trial  court  for  the  counties  of  Peoria, 
Tazewell,  Marshall,  Putnam  and  Stark.  From  1988  to  1990, 
I  was  assigned  to  the  trial  court  in  Peoria  County.  My 
courtroom  assignments  included  Chancery,  Equity, 
Miscellaneous  Remedies,  Municipalities,  Taxation,  Probate 
and  Misdemeanor.  Also  from  1988  to  1990,  the  Chief  Judge 
of  the  Tenth  Judicial  Circuit  would  assign  me  to  handle 
various  cases  in  Marshall,  Putnam  and  Stark  Counties  when 
conflicts  arose  in  those  courts. 

During  1990,  I  served  as  a  Felony  Court  Judge  in  the 
Circuit  Court  of  Peoria  County  IL. 

15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  (1) 
citations  for  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you  have 
written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or  where 
your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your 
substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3)  citations  for 
significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional 
issues,  together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings 
on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were  not 
officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

Explanation  for  15(1): 

1.  People  V.  Lego,  212  111.  App.  3d  6,  570  N.E.2d  402  (1991). 

2.  In  re  B.A.,  284  111.  App.  3d  930,  671  N.E.2d  69  (1996). 

3.  People  V.  Nitz,  285  111.  App.  3d  364,  674  N.E.2d  802 
(1996). 

4.  Dickman  v.  E.I.  Du  Pont,  278  111.  App.  3d  776,  663  N.E.2d 
507  (1996). 

5.  W.R.  Grace  v.  Ensey,  279  111.  App.  3d  1043,  666  N.E.2d  8 
(1996)  . 

6.  Parro  v.  Industrial  Commission,  260  111.  App.  3d  551,  630 
N.E.2d  860  (1993),  aff 'd,  167  111.  2d  385,  657  N.E.  2d  882 
(1995)  . 


1271 


7.  People  V.  Raya,  267  111.  App.  3d  705,  642  N.E.2d  923 
(1994)  . 

8.  In  re  Marriage  of  Elliott,  279  111.  App.  3d  1061,  665 
N.E.2d  883  (1996) . 

9.  People  V.  Perez,  111.  App.  3d  ,  681  N.E.2d  173 

(1997)  . 

10.  People  V.  William  Courtney,  Sr.,  111.  App.  3d  ,  

N.E.2d  (May  30,  1997),  1997  WL  405335. 

Explanation  for  15(2): 

Appellate  opinions  that  I  authored  which  were  reversed  by  the 
supreme  court: 

1.  People  V.  Kilpatrick,  No.  3 — 93 — 0347  (September  9,  1994) 
(unpublished  order  under  Supreme  Court  Rule  23).  Supreme 
Court  citation  -  167  111.  2d  439,  657  N.E.2d  1005  (1995). 
Trial  court  originally  sentenced  defendant  to  consecutive 
terms  of  9  years  for  attempted  murder  and  6  years  for  home 
invasion.  Defendant  filed  a  motion  to  reconsider 
sentence,  arguing  that  consecutive  sentences  were  not 
permissible.  The  trial  court  granted  the  motion  to 
reconsider  and  imposed  a  single  sentence  of  15  years.  The 
appellate  court  affirmed  in  an  unpublished  order.  The 
supreme  court  reversed,  finding  that  the  trial  court  could 
not  increase  a  sentence  once  it  was  imposed  pursuant  to 
section  5--8  —  1(c)  of  the  Unified  Code  of  Corrections  (730 
ILCS  5--8--l(c)  (West  1994)).   Two  justices  dissenting. 

2.  People  V.  Pastewski,  251  111.  App.  3d  358,  622  N.E.2d  69 
(1993).  Supreme  court  citation  -  164  111.  2d  189,  647 
N.E.2d  278  (1995).  The  defendant  was  found  not  guilty  by 
reason  of  insanity.  The  appellate  court  held  that  the 
trial  court  improperly  relied  on  the  extended-term 
sentencing  statute  in  calculating  the  defendant's  maximum 
period  of  commitment  in  a  mental  institution.  The  supreme 
court  reversed,  finding  that  the  trial  court  properly  used 
the  extended-term  statute  in  determining  the  maximum 
period  of  commitment  for  an  insanity  acquittee.  Two 
justices  dissenting. 

3.  Village  of  Bolinqbrook  v.  Citizens  Utilities  Co.,  231  111. 
App.  3d  740,  597  N.E.2d  246  (1992).  Supreme  Court 
citation  -  158  111.  2d  133,  632  N.E.2d  1000  (1994).  The 
Village  filed  complaints  against  the  utility  company 
claiming  it  violated  its  ordinances  prohibiting  the 
unlawful  discharge  of  waste  in  a  natural  outlet.  The 
appellate  court  affirmed  the  trial  court's  dismissal  of 
the  complaints,  finding  that  the  Public  Utilities  Act 

8 


1272 


preempted  the  Village's  ordinances.  The  supreme  court 
reversed,  holding  that  the  Public  Utilities  Act  did  not 
preempt  the  Village's  home  rule  power. 

4.  People  V.  Hundley,  227  111.  App.  3d  1056,  591  N.E.2d  903 
(1992).  Supreme  Court  citation  -  156  111.  2d  135,  619 
N.E.2d  744  (1993).  The  appellate  court  held  that  evidence 
found  during  a  warrantless  inventory  search  of  a  vehicle 
was  properly  suppressed  by  the  trial  court  because  the 
police  officer  did  not  open  a  closed  container  pursuant  to 
a  standardized  State  Police  procedure.  The  supreme  court 
reversed,  finding  that  a  general  order  of  the  Illinois 
State  Police  was  adequate  to  allow  the  warrantless  search. 
Three  justices  dissenting. 

Judgments  made  when  I  was  a  circuit  court  judge  which  were 
reversed  or  vacated  by  the  appellate  court: 

1 .  Jack  Bradley,  Inc.  v.  Department  of  Employment  Security, 
204  111.  App.  3d  708,  562  N.E.2d  345  (1990).  Supreme 
Court  citation  -  146  111.  2d  61,  585  N.E.2d  123  (1991). 
The  plaintiff  provided  persons  to  work  as  food 
demonstrators  for  various  food  vendors  and  retailers. 
These  demonstrators  signed  a  written  contract  stating  they 
were  not  employees  but  were  independent  contractors.  The 
Illinois  Department  of  Employment  Security  determined  that 
the  services  provided  by  the  food  demonstrators  were 
"employment"  for  purposes  of  the  Unemployment  Insurance 
Act.  Accordingly,  the  Department  found  that  the  plaintiff 
owed  for  unpaid  unemployment  contributions .  On 
administrative  review  to  the  circuit  court,  I  reversed  the 
Department's  decision,  finding  it  was  against  the  manifest 
weight  of  the  evidence.  On  appeal,  the  appellate  court 
reversed,  finding  that  the  food  demonstrators  were 
employees  of  the  plaintiff  and  were  not  independent 
contractors.  One  justice  dissented.  The  supreme  court 
agreed  and  affirmed  the  appellate  court. 

2.  People  V.  Randle,  213  111.  App.  3d  1082,  572  N.E.2d  1207 
(1991).  Following  a  jury  trial,  the  jury  found  the 
defendant  not  guilty  of  attempted  murder  but  guilty  of 
armed  violence,  two  counts  of  aggravated  battery,  reckless 
conduct  and  unlawful  use  of  weapons.  I  imposed  concurrent 
terms  of  imprisonment  for  the  five  offenses  the  defendant 
was  found  guilty  of  committing.  On  appeal,  the  appellate 
court  reversed  the  defendant's  convictions,  finding  the 
jury's  verdicts  were  legally  inconsistent  as  the  defendant 
could  not  simultaneously  possess  reckless  and  knowing 
Intent.   The  cause  was  remanded  for  a  new  trial. 

3.  People  V.  Burnside,  212  111.  App.  3d  605,  571  N.E.2d  487 
(1991).    Following  a  jury  trial,  the  defendant  was 


1273 


convicted  of  unlawful  use  of  weapons  by  a  felon  and 
unlawful  possession  of  a  controlled  substance  with  intent 
to  deliver.  I  imposed  sentence  for  the  two  offenses.  On 
appeal,  the  appellate  court  affirmed  the  controlled 
substance  conviction  but  reversed  the  conviction  of 
unlawful  use  of  weapons  by  a  felon.  The  court  found  the 
prosecutor  had  misstated  the  law  in  its  rebuttal  closing 
argument.  The  cause  was  remanded  for  a  new  trial  on  that 
charge.  Also,  because  that  conviction  was  considered  in 
imposing  sentence  for  the  other  offense,  the  cause  was 
also  remanded  for  resentencing  on  the  controlled  substance 
conviction. 

People  V.  Moniqan,  204  111.  App.  3d  686,  561  N.E.2d  1358 
(1990).  Following  a  bench  trial,  the  defendant  was 
convicted  of  home  invasion,  residential  burglary  and 
aggravated  battery.  On  appeal,  the  appellate  court 
reversed  the  defendant's  conviction  of  aggravated  battery 
because  it  was  based  on  the  same  physical  acts  as  the 
conviction  of  home  invasion.  The  sentence  imposed  for 
aggravated  battery  was  vacated.  The  remaining  convictions 
and  sentences  were  affirmed. 

In  re  Estate  of  Smith,  201  111.  App,  3d  1005,  559  N.E.2d 
571  (1990).  After  receiving  a  judgment  in  its  favor,  the 
plaintiff  filed  a  written  motion  seeking  an  award  of 
attorney  fees  and  other  expenses.  I  held  a  hearing  on  the 
motion  and  entered  an  order  denying  an  award  of  fees  and 
expenses.  The  appellate  court  noted  that  the  order  was 
silent  as  to  whether  the  parties  were  given  an  opportunity 
to  introduce  evidence  at  the  hearing.  The  appellate  court 
vacated  my  order  and  remanded  the  cause.  The  court  held 
that  the  trial  court's  order  was  only  entitled  to 
deference  after  the  trial  court  conducted  an  evidentiary 
hearing. 

Fernandez  v.  Marqolis,  201  111.  App.  3d  47,  558  N.E.2d  699 
(1990).  The  plaintiff,  an  of ficer  with  the  Illinois  State 
Police,  filed  a  two-count  complaint  against  the  Director 
of  the  Department  of  State  Police.  Count  I  alleged 
retaliatory  discharge  and  Count  II  alleged  a  failure  to 
follow  the  Department's  termination  procedures.  I 
dismissed  both  counts,  holding  that  the  substance  of  the 
cause  of  action  was  against  the  State  of  Illinois,  and  the 
circuit  court  lacked  jurisdiction  to  hear  the  cause.  The 
appellate  court  affirmed  in  part,  reversed  in  part  and 
remanded.  The  court  held  that  it  was  error  to  dismiss 
Count  II  because  the  plaintiff's  discharge  was  an  unlawful 
act,  which  is  not  immunized  by  the  doctrine  of  sovereign 
immunity  or  by  the  Court  of  Claims  Act.  The  court 
affirmed  my  dismissal  of  Count  I.   The  court  held  that  a 


10 


1274 


claim  for  retaliatory  discharge  is  against  the  State  of 
Illinois  and  must  be  brought  in  the  Court  of  Claims. 

7.  Bowers  v.  Allstate  Insurance  Co.,  192  111,  App.  3d  725, 
549  N.E.2d  21  (1989).  The  plaintiffs  brought  a 
declaratory  judgment  action  against  the  defendant  to 
determine  if  the  automobile  policy  issued  by  the  defendant 
provided  coverage  to  the  plaintiffs  at  the  time  of  an 
accident.  The  defendant  claimed  that  coverage  was  not  in 
effect  at  the  time  of  the  accident  because  the  plaintiffs 
did  not  pay  their  premium  in  full  on  the  due  date.  I 
granted  the  defendant's  motion  for  summary  judgment.  On 
appeal,  the  plaintiffs'  main  argument  was  that  the 
defendant  waived  its  right  to  cancel  the  policy  by 
accepting  late  payments  after  the  cancellation  date.  The 
appellate  court  reversed,  finding  there  were  contested 
facts  concerning  the  waiver  issue.  The  appellate  court 
concluded  that  it  was  a  question  of  fact  whether  or  not 
the  plaintiffs  were  entitled  to  coverage.  As  a  result, 
the  appellate  court  held  that  summary  judgment  was 
improper . 

Explanation  for  15(3): 

1.  People  V.  Perez,  111.  App.  3d  ,  681  N.E.2d  173 

(1997). 

2.  People  V.  William  Courtney,  Sr.,  111.  App.  3d  ,  

N.E.2d  (May  30,  1997),  1997  WL  405335. 

3.  W.R.  Grace  &  Co.  v.  Ensey,  279  111.  App.  3d  1043,  666 
N.E.2d  8  (1996)  . 

4.  People  v.  Nitz,  285  111.  App.  3d  364,  674  N.E.2d  802 
(1996)  . 

5.  In  re  B.A.,  283  111.  App.  3d  930,  671  N.E.2d  69  (1996). 

6.  People  v.  Portuquez,  282  111.  App.  3d  98,  667  N.E.2d  1080 
1996). 

7.  People  V.  Koutsakis,  272  111.  App.  3d  159,  649  N.E.2d  605 
(1995). 

8.  People  V.  Taylor,  259  111.  App.  3d  289,  630  N.E.2d  1331 
(1994). 

9.  Land  &  Lakes  Co.  v.  Illinois  Pollution  Control  Board,  245 
111.  App.  3d  631,  616  N.E.2d  349  (1993). 

10.  People  V.  Kuhfuss,  241  111.  App.  3d  311,  608  N.E,2d  1204 
(1993). 

11 


1275 


11.  People  V.  Leinweber,  234  111.  App.  3d  748,  600  N.E.2d  901 
(1992)  . 

16.  Public  Office;  State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you 
have  held,  other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of 
service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected  or  appointed. 
State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies  for 
elective  public  office. 

Marshall  County  Public  Defender  from  1976-1988.  This 
part-time  position  is  appointed  by  the  Circuit  Judges  of 
the  Tenth  Judicial  Circuit  of  the  State  of  Illinois. 

I  have  never  been  an  unsuccessful  candidate  for  elective 
public  office. 

17.  Legal  Career; 

a.  Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and 
experience  after  graduation  from  law  school 
including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and 
if  so,  the  name  of  the  judge,  the  court,  and 
the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

I  did  not  serve  as  a  clerk  to  a  judge. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the 
addresses  and  dates; 

I  never  practiced  law  alone. 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms 
or  offices,  companies  or  governmental 
agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected, 
and  the  nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 

1975-1988:  Law  Firm  of  Pace,  McCuskey  & 
Galley,  414  Fifth  Street,  P.O.  Box  279, 
Lacon  IL  61540.  I  was  a  partner  in  this 
law  firm. 

1976-1988:  Public  Defender  of  Marshall 
County,  IL,  414  Fifth  Street,  P.O.  Box 
279,  Lacon  IL  61540. 

1988-1990;  Circuit  Judge  of  the  Tenth 
Judicial  Circuit  of  the  State  of 
Illinois,  c/o  Peoria  County  Courthouse, 
324  Main  Street,  Peoria  IL  61602. 

12 


1276 


1990-present:  Justice  of  the  Third 
District  Appellate  Court  of  the  State  of 
Illinois.  The  address  for  the  Third 
District  Appellate  Court  is  1004 
Columbus  Street,  Ottawa  IL  61350.  My 
office  is  located  at  124  SW  Adams 
Street,  Suite  595,  Peoria  IL  61602. 

1.  What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law 
practice,  dividing  it  into  periods  with  dates  if 
its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 

As  a  general  practice  trial  attorney,  I 
handled  all  types  of  litigation  from  small 
claims  to  first  degree  murder.  Additionally, 
I  litigated  real  estate  tax  matters,  social 
security  administration  disability  claims, 
and  unemployment  compensation  cases  before 
administrative  law  judges  throughout  Central 
Illinois.  Also,  I  represented  individuals 
and  businesses  before  the  Internal  Revenue 
Service.  Moreover,  I  had  an  extensive 
general  law  practice  covering  everything  from 
real  estate  to  probate  law.  Finally,  I 
represented  many  municipalities,  townships 
and  school  boards.  The  character  of  my  law 
practice  remained  the  same  from  1975  until  I 
became  a  Circuit  Judge  in  December  1988. 

2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention 
the  areas,  if  any,  in  which  you  have  specialized. 

My  typical  former  clients  included 
corporations  such  as  the  Deneen  River  Company 
of  Lacon,  IL;  The  First  National  Bank  of 
Lacon,  IL;  The  Marshall  County  State  Bank  of 
Varna,  IL;  Illinois  Valley  Savings  &  Loan 
Association  of  Henry,  IL;  The  Daughters  of 
St.  Francis  of  Assisi  of  Lacon,  IL;  St. 
Joseph's  Nursing  Home  of  Lacon,  IL;  Evans 
Mutual  Insurance  Company  of  Varna,  IL; 
Village  of  Sparland,  Village  of  Benson, 
Village  of  Washburn,  City  of  Lacon,  Sparland 
School  District  #3,  as  well  as  numerous 
Individuals  and  businesses  in  all  areas  of 
general  practice.  Also,  I  represented 
defendants  in  criminal  cases. 

While  my  trial  and  law  office  practice 
included  everything  from  A  to  Z  in  the 
general  practice  of  law,  my  principal 
concentration  would   be   in   the   area   of 

13 


1277 


criminal  law,  taxation,  family  law,  real 
estate,  probate,  estate  planning,  as  well  as 
advising  and  representing  the  various 
corporations  and  governmental  agencies  listed 
above. 

1.  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally, 
or  not  at  all?  If  the  frequency  of  your 
appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such 
variance,  giving  dates. 

From  1975  to  1988,  I  appeared  regularly  in 
the  Circuit  Courts  of  Central  Illinois,  as 
well  as  the  Third  District  Appellate  Court. 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts; 

1% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record; 

98% 

(c)  other  courts. 

1%  in  the  Third  District  Appellate 
Court 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil; 

50% 

(b)  criminal. 

50% 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you 
tried  to  verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than 
settled),  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

100-150.  Very  frankly,  at  this  late  date  in 
my  legal  career,  it  is  impossible  to 
determine  the  exact  number.  I  know  that  I 
tried  at  least  one  litigated  matter  during 
each  month  of  my  legal  career.  My  former  law 
office  does  not  maintain  client  records  after 
10  years.  As  a  result,  I  have  been  forced  to 
reconstruct  my  litigation  career  through 
microfilmed  records  obtained  from  various 
circuit  clerks'  offices. 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury; 

10% 

(b)  non-jury. 

90% 


14 


1278 


18.  Litigation;  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated 
matters  which  you  personally  handled.  Give  the  citations,  if 
the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and  date  if 
unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of  each 
case.  Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you  represented; 
describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  the 
litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.  Also  state 
as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation: 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or 
judges  before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  The  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers 
of  co-counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of 
the  other  parties . 

Explanation  for  Case  No.  1: 

Estate  of  Clara  M.  Evans,  Plaintiff,  v.  First  National 
Bank  of  Peoria,  n/k/a  Commerce  Bank,  Executor,  Defendant, 
In  the  Circuit  Court  of  the  Tenth  Judicial  Circuit,  Peoria 
County,  Illinois,  Case  No.  82-P-264.  I  represented  the 
Estate  throughout  the  proceedings  until  I  became  a  Circuit 
Judge  in  December  1988.  Ultimately,  the  Estate  became 
involved  in  litigation  with  the  Internal  Revenue  Service 
which  was  litigated  in  the  United  States  Tax  Court  in  St. 
Louis,  MO,  before  the  Honorable  William  A.  Goffe.  The 
United  States  Tax  Court  case  was  Docket  No.  9010-87,  and 
was  known  as  Illinois  Masonic  Home,  et  al..  Petitioners, 
v.  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue  Service,  Respondent, 
Case  No.  93-TC-15. 

Capsule  Summary: 

Clara  M.  Evans  died  testate  on  April  19,  1982.  The  First 
National  Bank  of  Peoria  was  named  as  the  Executor  in  her 
Last  Will  and  Testament.  The  Bank  employed  me  as  their 
attorney  to  handle  the  probate  of  the  Will  and  give  legal 
advice  during  the  administration  of  the  Estate.  On 
January  19,  1983,  the  Federal  Estate  Tax  Form  706  was 
filed  along  with  a  payment  of  $776,116.63  for  the  Federal 
Estate  Tax  liability.  The  Commissioner  of  the  Internal 
Revenue  Service  conducted  an  audit  of  the  Federal  Estate 
Tax  Return,  and  the  parties  agreed  to  an  additional  tax 
liability  of  $101,392.82.  The  additional  tax  was  paid  on 
March  1,  1985.  The  Commissioner  mailed  an  Estate  Tax 
Closing  Letter,  Form  627,  on  May  13,  1985.  The  period  of 
limitations  for  assessment  of  additional  federal  estate 
tax  expired  on  January  19,  1986.  After  the  expiration  of 
the  statute  of  limitations,  I  advised  the  estate  to 
distribute  the  assets  to  the  beneficiaries.  On  April  3, 
1986,  the  assets  of  the  estate  were  distributed.    On 

15 


1279 


December  17,  1986,  the  Commissioner  executed  a  Reopening 
Memorandum,  Form  4505.  On  January  16,  1987,  the 
Commissioner  issued  statutory  notices  to  the  beneficiaries 
which  assessed  additional  estate  taxes,  penalty  and 
interest. 

I  advised  the  Executor  and  the  beneficiaries  that  the 
Commissioner  was  without  authority  to  reopen  the  estate 
tax  proceedings.  Consequently,  I  advised  the  Executor  and 
the  beneficiaries  not  to  pay  any  additional  estate  taxes, 
penalties  or  interest.  I  concluded  that  case  law 
supported  my  position.  I  believed  the  Commissioner  was 
estopped  from  reopening  the  estate  tax  proceedings  because 
the  assets  of  the  estate  had  been  distributed  after  the 
statute  of  limitations  had  expired. 

Attorney  David  L.  Higgs,  101  SW  Adams  Street,  Suite  800, 
Peoria,  IL  61602,  Telephone:  309/637-4900,  was  hired  by 
the  Executor  and  the  beneficiaries  of  the  Estate  to 
proceed  in  the  United  States  Tax  Court  because  I  was  a 
candidate  for  Circuit  Court  Judge  and  a  potential  witness 
if  the  case  went  to  trial. 

The  counsel  for  the  Commissioner  of  the  Internal  Revenue 
Service  was  David  R.  Reed.  I  have  been  unable  to  obtain 
his  address  or  any  further  information  concerning  his 
present  location. 

Trial  took  place  in  the  United  States  Tax  Court  in  St. 
Louis,  MO,  on  May  16,  17  and  18,  1989.  I  testified  on 
March  17,  1989,  as  a  witness  regarding  the  preparation  of 
the  Federal  Estate  Tax  return.  At  the  time  I  testified, 
I  was  a  Circuit  Court  Judge  in  the  State  of  Illinois. 

Ultimately,  Judge  William  A.  Goffe  ruled  on  August  2,  1989 
in  favor  of  the  beneficiaries  of  the  Estate  and  against 
the  Commissioner  of  the  Internal  Revenue  Service.  The 
citation  of  the  reported  case  is  as  follows:  Illinois 
Masonic  Home  v.  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue,  93  T.C. 
145  (1989).  Please  note  that  the  actual  court  case  was 
designated  93  T.C.  15. 

Explanation  for  Case  No.  2: 

In  the  Matter  of  the  Estate  of  James  Tully,  Deceased,  In 
the  Circuit  Court  of  the  Tenth  Judicial  Circuit,  Marshall 
County,  Illinois,  Case  No.  86-P-48.  I  represented  the 
Catholic  Diocese  of  Peoria,  IL,  and  St.  Joseph's  Nursing 
Home  of  Lacon,  IL,  throughout  the  probate  litigation  and 
during  the  appeal  to  the  Third  District  Appellate  Court  in 
Ottawa,  IL.  The  heirs  of  the  Estate  of  James  Tully, 
Deceased,  filed  a  will  contest  and  were  represented  by 

16 


1280 


Alexander  L.  Haglund,  who  is  now  deceased.  Haglund's 
successor  law  firm  is  the  Feldman  Law  Office,  224  E.  3rd 
Street,  Sterling,  IL  61081,  Telephone:  815/625-7409.  The 
co-executors  of  the  Estate  were:  Lewis  Campbell  and  John 
J.  Wosik.  The  co-executors  were  represented  by  Michael  T. 
Mahoney,  1011  North  2nd  Street;  P.O.  Box  295,  Chillicothe, 
IL  61523,  Telephone:  309/274-5451.  The  will  contest  and 
the  appeal  to  the  Third  District  Appellate  Court  is 
captioned  In  the  Matter  of  the  Estate  of  James  Tully, 
Deceased. 

Capsule  Summary: 

On  March  14,  1979,  James  Tully  executed  his  Last  Will  and 
Testament,  naming  Lewis  Campbell  and  John  J.  Wosik  as  co- 
executors.  Paragraph  Two  of  the  Will  gave  his  residence 
in  Lacon,  IL,  and  its  contents  to  his  niece,  Margaret 
Glassburn.  The  Third  Paragraph  of  the  Will  gave  and 
bequeathed  "to  St.  Joseph's  Nursing  Home  in  Lacon, 
Illinois,  any  and  all  accounts  that  I  may  have  as  savings 
accounts  and/or  certificates  of  deposit  for  my  care  and 
maintenance  during  my  lifetime  and  upon  the  condition  that 
in  the  event  that  there  are  insufficient  funds  that  they 
not  place  any  claim  and/or  lien  against  my  dwelling  house 
hereinabove  mentioned  so  that  the  same  may  be  devised  to 
my  niece,  Margaret  Glassburn,  in  fee  simple  without  any 
encumbrances . " 

The  Will  contained  no  residuary  clause.  James  Tully  died 
on  November  27,  1986.  His  estate  consisted  of  his 
residence  and  approximately  $170,000  in  savings  accounts. 
The  Will  was  admitted  to  probate  on  December  17,  1986. 
The  heirs  of  James  Tully  filed  a  will  contest  and  a 
petition  to  construe  the  will  on  June  12,  1987.  On  behalf 
of  St.  Joseph's  Nursing  Home  and  the  Catholic  Diocese  of 
Peoria,  I  filed  a  motion  to  dismiss  the  Will  Contest  and 
a  motion  for  judgment  on  the  pleadings.  On  July  27,  1987, 
Judge  Robert  Cashen  granted  my  motion  for  judgment  on  the 
pleadings  and  dismissed  with  prejudice  the  petition  to 
construe  the  will.  The  judge  also  granted  my  motion  to 
dismiss  the  will  contest  and  gave  the  heirs  30  days  to 
file  an  amended  complaint. 

The  heirs  filed  a  notice  of  appeal  with  the  Third  District 
Appellate  Court.  The  heirs  claimed  that  the  trial  court's 
order  granting  judgment  was  erroneous. 

On  June  17,  1988,  the  Appellate  Court  issued  an  opinion 
affirming  the  trial  court's  judgment  in  all  respects.  The 
Appellate  Court's  published  opinion  is  cited  as  follows: 
In  re  Estate  of  Tully,  171  111.  App.  3d  286,  525  N.E.2d 
244  (1988). 

17 


1281 


Explanation  for  Case  No.  3: 

In  re  the  Marriage  of  Mary  C.  Gotten,  Petitioner,  Counter- 
Respondent,  Appellant, ' V.  Joseph  A.  Gotten,  Respondent, 
Counter-Petitioner,  Appellee,  In  the  Circuit  Court  of  the 
Tenth  Judicial  Circuit,  Marshall  County,  Illinois,  Case 
No.  82-D-106.  I  represented  Joseph  A.  Cotten,  Respondent, 
throughout  the  trial  proceedings  and  during  the  appeal  to 
the  Third  District  Appellate  Court  in  Ottawa,  IL.  Mary  C. 
Cotten,  Petitioner,  was  represented  by  James  Hatcher, 
Hatcher  &  Rose,  321-A  Main  Street,  Peoria,  IL  61602, 
Telephone:  309/676-1639. 

Capsule  Sununary: 

In  1982,  Mary  Cotten  filed  a  petition  seeking  a  legal 
separation  from  Joseph  Cotten.  I  was  retained  by  Joseph 
Cotten.  I  filed,  on  his  behalf,  a  counter-petition  for 
dissolution  of  marriage.  Eventually,  the  issues  of  legal 
separation  and  dissolution  of  marriage  were  tried  in  the 
Circuit  Court  of  Marshall  County  before  the  Honorable 
Charles  M.  Wilson.  Evidence  was  presented  on  September  12 
and  13,  1984.   Final  argument  was  heard  on  September  27, 

1984.  Judge  Wilson  entered  a  judgment  of  dissolution  of 
marriage  in  favor  of  Joseph  Cotten  on  October  4,  1984.  No 
appeal  was  taken  from  this  judgment. 

All  issues  of  property  and  maintenance  for  Mary  Cotten 
were  tried  before  the  Honorable  James  M.  Bumgarner, 
Retired.  Evidence  was  presented  in  the  Circuit  Court  on 
May  9,  1985;  June  17,  1985;  June  19,  1985  and  August  7, 

1985.  Final  arguments  were  presented  on  September  25, 
1985.  A  final  judgment  was  entered  by  Judge  Bumgarner. 
The  judgment  divided  the  parties'  property  and  denied  Mary 
Cotten 's  claim  for  maintenance  and  reimbursement  of 
attorney  fees.  On  November  6,  1985,  the  trial  court 
denied  Mary  Cotten 's  petition  for  rehearing.  Mary  Cotten 
appealed  the  judgment  to  the  Third  District  Appellate 
Court  in  Ottawa.  Oral  argument  took  place  on  June  19, 
1986. 

On  July  31,  1986,  the  Third  District  Appellate  Court 
issued  an  unpublished  decision  which  affirmed  the  trial 
court  in  all  respects. 

Explanation  for  Case  No.  4: 

Michael  C.  Conness  and  Lucille  V.  Conness, 
Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants,  v.  Bernard  A.  DeRubeis, 

Jr.,    Frank    DeRubeis, and    Melvin    DeRubeis, 

Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs,  In  the  Circuit  Court  of  the 
Tenth  Judicial  Circuit,  Marshall  County,  Illinois,  Case 

18 


1282 


No.  84-LM-188.  I  represented  the  DeRubeis  brothers, 
Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs,  throughout  the  trial 
proceedings.  Michael  C.  Conness  and  Lucille  V.  Conness, 
Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants ,  were  represented  throughout 
the  trial  proceedings  by:  Bruce  Thiemann,  627  Commerce 
Bank  Building,  Peoria,  IL  61602,  Telephone:  309/673-0030. 

Capsule  Summary: 

Plaintiffs  sued  Defendants  for  damages  allegedly  caused  by 
Defendants'  use  of  an  agricultural  easement  across 
Plaintiff's  land.  Defendants  counter-claimed,  seeking 
injunctive  relief  against  Plaintiffs  for  allegedly 
blocking  the  Defendants'  use  of  the  agricultural  easement. 

The  damage  question  was  tried  before  a  jury  on  May  20  and 
21,  1985.  The  issue  of  injunctive  relief  was  heard  solely 
by  James  M.  Bumgarner,  who  was  also  the  trial  judge.  The 
jury  awarded  no  compensatory  damages  to  plaintiffs. 
However,  the  jury  did  award  plaintiffs  punitive  damages  in 
the  amount  of  $500  against  defendant  Frank  DeRubeis. 
Judge  James  M.  Bumgarner  granted  Defendants'  injunctive 
relief  against  Plaintiffs. 

Explanation  for  Case  No.  5: 

People  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  Plaintiff,  v.  Timothy  W. 
Franklin,  Defendant,  In  the  Circuit  Court  of  the  Tenth 
Judicial  Circuit,  Marshall  County,  Illinois,  Case  No. 
80-CF-116.  I  represented  the  Defendant  throughout  the 
trial  proceedings.  The  People  of  the  State  of  Illinois 
were  represented  by  the  State's  Attorney  of  Marshall 
County,  IL.  Donald  D.  Knuckey  was  the  State's  Attorney 
who  initially  charged  Timothy  W.  Franklin  and  assisted  in 
handling  the  extradition  proceedings  in  Canada.  His 
current  address  is:  Marshall  County  Courthouse,  Lacon,  IL 
61540,  Telephone:  309/246-2028.  Edward  Zukosky  was  the 
State's  Attorney  of  Marshall  County  during  1981.  Mr. 
Zukosky  represented  the  People  of  the  State  of  Illinois 
during  the  jury  trial.  His  address  is:  138  Chestnut 
Street,  Wenona,  IL  61377,  Telephone:  815/853-4335. 

Capsule  Summary: 

On  May  27,  1980,  the  defendant  was  charged  with  six  felony 
counts.  The  offenses  alleged  included  rape,  attempted 
murder,  aggravated  battery,  unlawful  restraint  and  two 
counts  of  deviant  sexual  assault.  The  defendant  was  a 
Canadian  citizen  who  lived  in  London,  Ontario  Province, 
Canada.  Franklin  and  a  companion  were  charged  with 
abducting  an  exotic  dancer  from  Peoria  and  taking  her  to 
Marshall  County  where  the  alleged  crimes  occurred  at  a 

19 


1283 


residence  in  rural  Lacon.  As  Marshall  County  Public 
Defender,  I  was  appointed  to  represent  the  defendant  who 
fled  to  Canada  after  the  incident. 

The  defendant  refused  to  waive  extradition.  As  a 
consequence,  international  extradition  proceedings  ensued 
between  the  United  States  of  America  and  the  Canadian 
government.  An  evidentiary  hearing  was  held  in  Ontario 
Province  to  determine  whether  extradition  to  the  United 
States  should  be  granted.  The  victim  and  Marshall  County 
police  authorities  were  required  to  testify  in  Canada. 
Extradition  was  ultimately  granted,  and  the  defendant  was 
extradited  to  the  United  States  for  trial  in  the  State  of 
Illinois . 

The  defendant  was  later  indicted  by  a  Marshall  County 
grand  jury  on  January  14,  1981.  He  was  indicted  for  rape, 
attempted  murder  and  unlawful  restraint.  A  jury  trial 
took  place  on  March  10,  11  and  12,  1981.  It  ended  in  a 
mistrial  when  the  jury  was  unable  to  render  a  verdict.  My 
investigation  revealed  that  only  one  juror  favored 
conviction  on  the  charges  of  rape  and  attempted  murder, 
while  only  one  juror  believed  the  defendant  was  not  guilty 
of  the  offense  of  unlawful  restraint.  Consequently,  prior 
to  re-trial,  the  defendant  entered  into  a  negotiated  plea 
agreement  with  the  State's  Attorney.  The  defendant 
pleaded  guilty  to  unlawful  restraint,  while  the  rape  and 
attempt  murder  charges  were  dismissed.  The  defendant 
agreed  to  a  sentence  of  3  years '  imprisonment  in  the 
Illinois  Department  of  Corrections  and  was  given  credit 
for  310  days  served.  The  trial  proceedings  were  handled 
by  Judge  Edward  E.  Haugens ,  Deceased. 

Explanation  for  Case  No.  6: 

People  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  Plaintiff,  v.  Russell  D. 
Turk,  Defendant,  In  the  Circuit  Court  of  the  Tenth 
Judicial  Circuit,  Tazewell  County,  Illinois,  Case  No. 
79-Y-216.  I  represented  the  Defendant  in  the  circuit 
court  on  the  motion  to  withdraw  his  guilty  plea  and  during 
the  appeal  to  the  Third  District  Appellate  Court.  Erik  I. 
Blanc  was  the  Assistant  State's  Attorney  of  Tazewell 
County  who  handled  the  proceedings  on  behalf  of  the  People 
of  the  State  of  Illinois.  Mr.  Blanc  is  currently  an 
Associate  Circuit  Judge  of  the  Tenth  Judicial  Circuit  and 
can  be  contacted  at:  c/o  Peoria  County  Courthouse,  324 
Main  Street,  Peoria,  IL  61602,  Telephone:  309/672-6047. 

Capsule  Summary: 

Defendant,  Russell  D.  Turk,  was  charged  with  the  felony 
offense  of  theft  over  $150.   He  entered  a  plea  of  guilty 

20 


1284 


to  the  offense.  Sentencing  was  set  for  a  hearing 
approximately  five  weeks  later.  Turk  was  released  on  bond 
with  the  special  condition  that  he  continue  to  reside  at 
the  Stonehedge  Drug  Rehabilitation  Facility  in  Peoria. 
Through  this  portion  of  Turk's  criminal  case,  he  was 
represented  by  Attorney  John  Bernardi,  334  Elizabeth, 
Pekin,  IL  61554,  Telephone:  309/347-7764. 

Turk  failed  to  appear  at  the  sentencing  hearing. 
Moreover,  he  did  not  appear  in  the  circuit  court  until  he 
was  arrested  on  a  different  offense  18  months  later.  I 
entered  my  appearance  as  his  attorney.  I  filed  a  motion 
to  withdraw  the  defendant's  guilty  plea.  The  motion 
claimed  that  Turk  did  not  voluntarily  enter  a  plea  of 
guilty  because  the  trial  court  failed  to  strictly  follow 
the  requirements  of  Illinois  Supreme  Court  Rule  402(b) 
when  it  accepted  the  defendant's  guilty  plea.  On  February 
13,  1981,  following  a  hearing.  Judge  Ivan  L.  Yontz, 
Retired,  denied  my  motion  and  sentenced  the  defendant  to 
an  extended  term  of  7  years'  imprisonment.  I  filed  a 
notice  of  appeal  on  Turk's  behalf. 

The  case  was  orally  argued  in  the  Third  District  Appellate 
Court  during  the  summer  of  1981.  The  issues  on  appeal 
were:  (1)  whether  the  defendant  should  have  been  allowed 
to  withdraw  his  plea  of  guilty  because  of  the  trial 
court's  failure  to  fully  comply  with  Supreme  Court  Rule 
402(b);  and  (2)  whether  the  trial  court's  sentence  was 
excessive. 

On  November  12,  1981,  the  Appellate  Court  affirmed  the 
trial  court  in  an  unpublished  opinion. 

Explanation  for  Case  No.  7: 

Illinois  Valley  Savings  and  Loan  Association,  an  Illinois 
Banking  Corporation,  Plaintiff-Appellee,  v.  Vann  C. 
McPeake  and  Carole  Lee  McPeake,  Defendants,  and  Thomas  J. 
Fallbacher  and  Yolanda  Fallbacher,  Defendants-Appellants, 
In  the  Circuit  Court  of  the  Tenth  Judicial  Circuit,  Putnam 
County,  Illinois,  Case  No.  77-L-73.  I  served  as  co- 
counsel  for  Illinois  Valley  Savings  and  Loan  Association, 
Plaintiff-Appellee,  with  my  partner,  O.  B.  Pace,  Jr., 
Deceased,  during  the  trial  proceedings  and  on  appeal. 
Vann  C.  McPeake  and  Carole  Lee  McPeake,  Defendants,  were 
pro  se  and  ultimately  defaulted  during  the  trial 
proceedings.  Thomas  J.  Fallbacher  and  Yolanda  Fallbacher, 
Defendants-Appellants,  were  represented  in  the  trial  court 
and  on  appeal  by  Attorney  Karl  G.  LaPinske,  Deceased. 


21 


1285 


Capsule  Summary: 

Defendants  Vann  and  Carole  McPeake  built  an  A-frame  home 
on  a  portion  of  Lot  487  in  Lake  Thunderbird  Hills.  The 
McPeakes  negligently  constructed  their  residence  on  part 
of  the  wrong  lot.  The  McPeakes  owned  Lot  486,  while  Lot 
487,  which  was  unimproved,  was  owned  by  defendants,  Thomas 
and  Yolanda  Fallbacher.  The  McPeakes  were  adjudicated 
bankrupt  on  March  24,  1975.  As  a  result  of  their 
bankruptcy,  Illinois  Valley  Savings  and  Loan  Association 
(Illinois  Valley)  received  notice  of  the  bankruptcy 
proceedings  because  they  had  loaned  the  McPeakes  money  to 
construct  the  house  on  Lot  486.  On  July  1,  1975,  the 
Fallbachers  notified  Illinois  Valley  of  the  McPeakes' 
error.  Illinois  Valley  attempted  to  resolve  the  matter 
with  the  Fallbachers  by  way  of  negotiation.  In  the 
meantime,  on  or  about  March  17,  1976,  the  Fallbachers 
acquired  all  of  the  McPeakes'  interest  in  Lot  486  through 
a  quitclaim  deed,  along  with  an  easement  across  that  lot. 

Thereafter,  Illinois  Valley  filed  a  foreclosure  complaint 
against  Lot  486  joining  the  McPeakes  and  Fallbachers  as 
Defendants.  On  June  25,  1979,  Judge  Edward  E.  Haugens, 
Deceased,  granted  Illinois  Valley  summary  judgment.  On 
August  27,  1979,  Judge  Haugens  granted  Illinois  Valley  a 
judgment  of  foreclosure.  The  judge  ordered  the  sale  of 
Lot  486  free  and  clear  of  the  Fallbachers'  recorded 
easement. 

On  September  27,  1979,  the  Fallbachers  appealed  the  trial 
court's  orders.  Oral  argument  took  place  in  the  Third 
District  Appellate  Court  during  the  spring  of  1980.  The 
Appellate  Court  affirmed  the  trial  court  in  a  published 
opinion  filed  August  8,  1980. 

The  case  is  cited  as  follows:  Illinois  Valley  Savings  and 
Loan  Association,  an  Illinois  Banking  Corporation, 
Plaintiff-Appellee,  v.  Vann  C.  McPeake,  Carole  Lee 
McPeake,  Defendants,  Thomas  J.  Fallbacher  and  Yolanda 
Fallbacher,  Defendants-Appellant,  87  111.  App.  3d  39,  409 
N.E.2d  97  (1980) . 

Explanation  for  Case  No.  8: 

In  re  the  Marriage  of  Cheryl  Peros,  Plaintiff,  and  Alex 
Peros,  Defendant,  In  the  Circuit  Court  of  the  Eleventh 
Judicial  Circuit,  Livingston  County,  Illinois,  Case  No. 
76-D-162.  I  represented  the  defendant  in  the  motion  to 
vacate  the  divorce  decree  and  during  his  appeal  to  the 
Fourth  District  Appellate  Court.  The  Plaintiff-Appellee 
was  represented  throughout  the  trial  proceedings  and  on 


22 


1286 


appeal  by  Rodney  H.  Loy,  207  Crestview  Drive,  Pontiac,  IL 
61764,  Telephone:  815/842-6568. 

Capsule  Summary: 

On  June  23,  1977,  Judge  William  T.  Caisley,  Retired, 
entered  a  judgment  of  dissolution  of  marriage 
Incorporating  therein  the  parties'  settlement  agreement. 
Alex  Peros  claimed  that  he  did  not  voluntarily  enter  into 
the  settlement  agreement.  As  a  result,  he  contested  the 
trial  court's  entry  of  the  divorce  decree.  Alex  Peros 
retained  me  to  contest  the  judgment  and  have  the  property 
settlement  agreement  vacated.  On  July  1,  1977,  I  filed  a 
motion  to  vacate  the  judgment.  On  August  10,  1977,  I 
entered  my  appearance,  and  a  hearing  was  held  on  the 
motion  to  vacate  the  judgment.  The  trial  court  denied  my 
motion,  and  I  filed  a  notice  of  appeal  to  the  Fourth 
District  Appellate  Court  in  Springfield,  IL. 

During  the  spring  of  1978,  I  orally  argued  the  case  before 
the  Appellate  Court.  I  argued  that  Alex  Peros  had  been 
denied  his  constitutional  right  to  effective  assistance  of 
counsel.  Based  on  this  claim,  I  asked  the  court  to  vacate 
the  judgment.  The  Appellate  Court  disagreed  with  my 
argument  and  affirmed  the  trial  court. 

The  Appellate  Court  issued  its  unpublished  order  on  April 
21,  1978. 

Explanation  for  Case  No.  9: 

Roger  and  Judy  Hoskins,  Plaintiffs,  v.  Jerry  Abbott, 
Marshall  County  Supervisor  of  Assessments,  Defendant,  In 
the  Circuit  Court  of  the  Tenth  Judicial  Circuit,  Marshall 
County,  Illinois,  Case  No.  76-MR-172.  I  served  as  co- 
counsel  for  the  Plaintiffs  with  my  partner,  O.B.  Pace, 
Jr.,  Deceased.  The  Defendant  was  represented  by  Donald  D. 
Knuckey,  Marshall  County  State's  Attorney,  122  North 
Prairie,  Lacon,  IL  61540,  Telephone:  309/246-2028 

Capsule  Summary: 

Plaintiffs  were  real  estate  taxpayers  whose  property  taxes 
had  been  re-assessed  in  successive  years  by  the  Marshall 
County  Supervisor  of  Assessments.  Our  law  office  filed  a 
complaint  seeking  a  Writ  of  Mandamus  against  the 
Supervisor,  requiring  him  to  rescind  the  real  estate 
assessment.  The  complaint  alleged  that  the  Supervisor 
lacked  legal  authority  to  increase  the  assessed  valuation 
of  plaintiffs'  property  in  a  non-quadrennial  year.  The 
case  was  presented  to  the  Circuit  Court  by  way  of  a 
stipulated  set  of  facts.   As  a  result,  no  evidence  was 

23 


1287 


presented  to  the  court  other  than  the  stipulated  facts  of 

the  parties.  Circuit  Judge  Edward  E.  Haugens,  Deceased, 

ordered  the  Writ  of  mandamus  to  issue  against  the 
Supervisor. 

The  Supervisor  appealed  the  decision  to  the  Third  District 
Appellate  Court.  A  motion  was  made  by  the  Supervisor  to 
transfer  the  case  to  the  Illinois  Supreme  Court.  The 
motion  was  granted  by  the  Supreme  Court.  Oral  argument 
was  heard  during  the  spring  of  1977.  I  participated  in 
all  phases  of  the  litigation,  including  the  proceedings 
before  the  Supreme  Court. 

On  November  30,  1977,  the  Illinois  Supreme  Court  reversed 
the  judgment  of  the  Circuit  Court.  The  decision  was 
published  and  is  cited  as  follows:  Roger  Hoskins,  et  al,. 
Appellees,  v.  Jerry  Abbott,  County  Supervisor  of 
Assessments,  Appellant,  69  111.  2d  20,  370  N.E.2d  514 
(1977). 

Explanation  for  Case  No.  10: 

People  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  Petitioner-Appellee,  v. 
Daryl  Wealer,  Respondent-Appellant,  In  the  Circuit  Court 
of  the  Tenth  Judicial  Circuit,  Marshall  County,  Illinois, 
Case  No.  75-F-274.  Daryl  Wealer,  Respondent-Appellant, 
was  represented  in  the  trial  court  by  my  partner,  O.B. 
Pace,  Jr.,  Deceased.  I  represented  the  Respondent- 
Appellant  on  appeal  to  the  Third  District  Appellate  Court. 
The  People  of  the  State  of  Illinois  were  represented  in 
the  trial  court  and  on  appeal  by  then-Marshall  County 
State's  Attorney,  Robert  A.  Barnes,  Jr.,  who  is  now  a 
Circuit  Judge  in  the  Tenth  Judicial  Circuit.  He  can  be 
contacted  at:  c/o  Peoria  County  Courthouse,  324  Main 
Street,  Peoria  IL  61602,  Telephone:  309/672-6047. 

Capsule  Summary: 

On  September  8,  1975,  Daryl  Wealter,  a  16-year-old  girl, 
burglarized  Owen's  pharmacy  in  Henry,  IL.  Wealer  and  Lori 
Maubach  took  several  thousand  pills  which  they  were  going 
to  sell  in  Peoria.  The  People  filed  a  petition  seeking  to 
have  Daryl  Wealer  declared  a  delinquent  and  a  ward  of  the 
court.  On  December  3,  1975,  after  a  dispositional 
hearing.  Judge  Edward  E.  Haugens,  Deceased,  found  Wealer 
to  be  a  delinquent  child  and  remanded  her  to  the  custody 
of  the  Juvenile  Division  of  the  Illinois  Department  of 
Corrections.  Shortly  thereafter,  I  filed  an  appeal  with 
the  Third  District  Appellate  Court. 

The  appellate  case  was  orally  argued  the  summer  of  1976. 
I  appeared  on  behalf  of  the  minor  and  argued  to  the 

24 


1288 


Appellate  Court  that  the  statutory  requirements  of  the 
Illinois  Juvenile  Court  Act  had  not  been  met. 
Consequently,  I  claimed  that  Judge  Haugens '  dispositional 
order  was  against  the  manifest  weight  of  the  evidence  and 
should  be  reversed  and  remanded  for  a  new  dispositional 
hearing.  The  Appellate  Court  agreed  with  my  argument  and 
reversed  the  trial  court's  dispositional  order. 

The  Appellate  Court's  published  opinion  was  issued  on 
September  29,  1976.  The  opinion  is  cited  as  follows: 
People  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  Petitioner-Appellee,  v. 
Daryl  Wealer,  Respondent-Appellant,  42  111.  App.  3d  479, 
355  N.E.2d  187. 

Professional  reputation  list  of  10-12  members  of  the  legal 
community  who  have  had  recent  contact  with  me: 

Honorable  Michael  M.  Mihm,  Chief  Judge  of  the  United 
States  District  Court  for  the  Central  District  of 
Illinois,  Federal  Building,  100  NE  Monroe,  Peoria  IL 
61602,  Telephone:  309/671-7113 

Honorable  Joe  B.  McDade,  Judge  of  the  United  States 
District  Court  for  the  Central  District  of  Illinois, 
Federal  Building,  100  NE  Monroe,  Peoria  IL  61602, 
Telephone:  309/671-7821 

Honorable  Robert  J.  Kauffman,  Magistrate  Judge  of  the 
United  States  District  Court  for  the  Central  District  of 
Illinois,  Federal  Building,  100  NE  Monroe,  Peoria  IL 
61602,  Telephone:  309/671-7140 

Honorable  Richard  Parsons,  Chief  Federal  Defender  of  the 
Central  District  of  Illinois,  401  Main  Street,  Suite  1500, 
Peoria  IL  61602,  Telephone:  309/671-7891 

Honorable  Tom  M.  Lytton,  Presiding  Justice  of  the  Third 
District  Appellate  Court,  1515  5th  Avenue,  Suite  503, 
Moline  IL  61265,  Telephone:  309/757-9458 

Honorable  Kent  Slater,  Appellate  Judge  of  the  Third 
District  Appellate  Court,  219  North  Randolph  Street,  P.O. 
Box  554,  Macomb  IL  61554,  Telephone:  309/833-1704 

Honorable  John  Gorman,  Chief  Judge  of  the  Tenth  Judicial 

Circuit   of   the   State   of  Illinois,   Peoria   County 

Courthouse,  324  Main  Street,  Peoria  IL  61602,  Telephone: 
309/672-6047 

Honorable  Richard  E.  Eagleton,  Attorney  at  Law  and  Former 
United  States  Attorney  for  the  Central  District  of 
Illinois  and  Retired  Chief  Judge  of  the  Tenth  Judicial 

25 


1289 


Circuit  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  Hinshaw  &  Culbertson, 
456  Fulton,  Suite  298,  Peoria  XL  61602,  309/674-1025 

Honorable  Peter  J.  Paolucci,  Attorney  at  Law  and  Retired 
Chief  Judge  of  the  Tenth  Judicial  Circuit  of  the  State  of 
Illinois,  414  Fifth  Street,  P.O.  Box  279,  Lacon  IL  61540, 
Telephone:   309/246-6775  ' 

Honorable  Kevin  Lyons,  State's  Attorney  of  Peoria  County 
???^^^  County  Courthouse,   324  Main  Street,  Peoria  IL 
61602,  Telephone:   309/672-6900 

Mr.  Robert  V.  Dewey,  President  of  the  Peoria  County  Bar 
Association,  c/o  Heyl,  Royster,  Voelker  &  Allen,  124  SW 

^no^^./V'.^f.^'  ^"^^®  ^°°'  Peoria  IL  61602,  Telephone: 
309/676-0400 

Mr.  Michael  T.  Reagan,  Attorney  at  Law  and  Past  President 
of  the   Illinois  Appellate  Lawyers  Association,   c/o 
Herbolsheimer,  Lannon,  Henson,  Duncan  and  Reagan,  P  c 
433  LaSalle  Street,  Suite  409,  Ottawa  IL  61350 

19-  Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal 
^W4  w^5^f^  ^°"  ^^""^  pursued,  including  significant  litigation 
which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did  not 
involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation 
in  this  question,  please  omit  any  information  protected  by  the 
attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the  privilege  has  been 
waived. ) 

I  am  very  active  in  the  Illinois  State  Bar  Association, 
Illinois  Judges  Association  and  the  American  Inns  of 
Court.  I  spend  numerous  weekends  each  year  attending  Bar 
Association  functions.  I  believe  that  judges  should  give 
as  much  time  as  possible  to  bar  associations  to  assist  in 
the  improvement  of  the  legal  profession.  In  attempting  to 
carry  out  this  mission,  I  participate  in  numerous  Illinois 
State  Bar  Association  Committees  and  frequently  lecture  at 
legal  educational  seminars.  Additionally,  I  attempt  as 
much  as  possible  to  assist  the  law  schools  of  the  State  of 
Illinois  in  preparing  law  students  to  be  advocates  and 
litigators. 

For  the  past  five  years,  I  have  served  the  Illinois 
Appellate  Lawyers  Association  and  the  Illinois  State  Bar 
Association  as  one  of  three  judges  hearing  the  final  oral 
arguments  in  the  All-Illinois  Moot  Court  competition. 
Eight  law  schools  in  the  State  of  Illinois  annually 
participate  in  the  competition  with  the  final  oral 
arguments  being  heard  in  the  Illinois  Supreme  Court  in 
Springfield  IL. 


26 


1290 


Also,  during  the  past  six  years,  I  have  traveled  twice  a 
year  to  Carbondale,  IL,  to  hear  oral  arguments  at  Southern 
Illinois  University  School  of  Law.  Last  November,  I 
judged  the  National  Health  Law  Moot  Court  Competition  for 
Southern  Illinois  University  School  of  Law.  This 
competition  involved  22  law  schools  from  throughout  the 
United  States.  I  have  been  invited  back  to  judge  this 
year's  competition  on  November  7  and  8,  1997. 

II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

1.  List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts 
from  deferred  income  arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted 
contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which  you  expect  to  derive 
from  previous  business  relationships,  professional  services, 
firm  memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers. 
Please  describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be 
compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or  business 
interest. 

State  of  Illinois  Judicial  Retirement  System: 

Pension  at  age  60 
State  of  Illinois  Municipal  Retirement  System: 

Pension  at  age  62 
State  of  Illinois  Deferred  Compensation  Plan 
Fidelity  Investments  --  IRA 
American  Century  Investments  --  IRA 

2.  Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of 
interest,  including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in 
determining  these  areas  of  concern.  Identify  the  categories 
of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to 
present  potential  conf licts-of-interest  during  your  initial 
service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

I  will  strictly  follow  the  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  for 
United  States  District  Court  Judges.  Moreover,  I  believe 
that  I  have  no  potential  conflicts  of  interest  which  would 
affect  my  service  as  a  United  States  District  Court  Judge 
for  the  Central  District  of  Illinois. 

3.  Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue 
outside  employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your 
service  with  the  court?   If  so,  explain. 

No. 

4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  Income  received  during  the 
calendar  year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current 
calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees,  dividends, 
interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and 
other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so, 

27 


1291 


copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report,  required  by  the 
Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  attached  Financial  Disclosure  Report. 

Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in 
detail  (Add  schedules  as  called  for) . 

See  Attached  Net  Worth  Statement  and  Explanation  Schedule. 

Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political 
campaign?  If  so,  please  identify  the  particulars  of  the 
campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the  campaign,  your 
title  and  responsibilities. 

I  have  never  held  a  position  in  a  political  campaign  or 
political  party.  I  did  play  a  role  in  the  1988  and  1990 
primary  and  general  elections  in  Illinois  because  I  was  a 
candidate  for  judicial  office. 

III.   GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar 
Association's  Code  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for 
"every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence  or 
professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in 
serving  the  disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to 
fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances  and 
the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

I  served  on  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  Central  Illinois 
Chapter  of  the  American  Red  Cross  from  1989-1995. 

In  addition,  I  have  served  the  Red  Cross  on  the  Health 
Services  Committee  for  the  past  seven  years,  and  was 
recently  appointed  to  serve  on  the  Safe  Communities 
Advisory  Council. 

I  previously  served  as  a  board  member  of  the  Red  Cross  DUI 
Awareness  Task  Force  which  administered  a  grant  from  the 
Illinois  Department  of  Transportation.  The  grant  was  used 
to  educate  high  school  students  about  the  effects  of 
alcohol.  Mock  crash  scenes  were  re-created  at  various 
high  schools.  The  Illinois  Department  of  Transportation 
and  the  Illinois  State  Police  proclaimed  the  program  a 
success. 

My  American  Red  Cross  activities  consume  approximately  5- 

10  hours  a  month. 


28 


1292 


I  have  served  many  years  as  a  member  and  Chair  of  the 
Minority  Involvement  Task  Force  for  the  Central  Illinois 
Chapter  of  the  American  Red  Cross. 

For  the  past  nine  years,  I  have  served  as  the  Chair  of  the 
Marshall-Putnam  County  Fair  Association  Senior  Citizens' 
Day  Committee.  As  Chair,  I  plan  the  annual  Senior 
Citizens'  Day  entertainment  and  emcee  all  Senior  Citizens' 
activities  during  the  fair.  This  activity  consumes  about 
25  hours  per  year. 

I  serve  on  the  Criminal  Justice  Advisory  Committee  of 
Illinois  Valley  Community  College  in  Oglesby,  IL.  I  have 
served  on  this  Committee  from  1990  to  the  present.  The 
advisory  board  assists  the  Director  of  the  Criminal 
Justice  Department  in  developing  the  public  outreach  of 
the  program.  Also,  I  have  lectured  students  of  the 
college  on  the  importance  of  a  career  in  law  enforcement. 
This  activity  consumes  about  10-15  hours  per  year. 

From  1977-1981,  I  served  on  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the 
Quad-County  Counseling  Center  in  Princeton,  IL.  This 
advisory  board  assisted  psychologists  in  developing  a 
mental  health  treatment  program  in  a  four-county  area  in 
Central  Illinois. 

In  1975,  I  incorporated  the  Lacon-Sparland  Emergency 
Ambulance  Service.  Also,  I  served  three  years  on  the 
Board  of  Directors,  and  I  assisted  raising  funds  for  the 
ambulance  service.  This  volunteer  organization  provides 
the  only  emergency  ambulance  service  available  in  Lacon 
and  Sparland  IL. 

The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of 
Judicial  Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge 
to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that  invidiously 
discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you 
currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization 
which  discriminates  --  through  either  formal  membership 
requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership 
policies?  If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.  What  have 
you  done  to  try  to  change  these  policies? 

No. 

Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to 
recommend  candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If 
so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?  Please  describe  your 
experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from 
beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led  to 
your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you  participated). 


29 


1293 


Yes,  there  is  a  selection  commission  for  the  United  States 
District  Court  for  the  Central  District  of  Illinois.  The 
commission  recommended  my  nomination  to  United  States 
Senators  Carol  Moseley-Braun  and  Dick  Durbin. 

During  the  judicial  selection  process,  I  completed  a 
questionnaire  and  submitted  it  on  March  20,  1997  to  the 
United  States  Senate  Nomination  Commission  for  the  Central 
District  of  the  State  of  Illinois. 

On  May  3,  1997,  I  was  interviewed  in  Springfield  by  the 
United  States  Senate  Nomination  Commission  for  the  Central 
District  of  the  State  of  Illinois. 

On  May  5,  1997,  the  Commission  recommended  to  United 
States  Senators  Carol  Moseley-Braun  and  Dick  Durbin  my 
nomination  for  the  vacancy  on  the  U.S.  District  Court  for 
the  Central  District  of  Illinois. 

On  May  9,  1997,  I  was  interviewed  in  Springfield  by  the 
Illinois  State  Bar  Association  Judicial  Evaluations 
Committee. 

On  May  12,  1997,  I  was  advised  by  the  Illinois  State  Bar 
Association  Judicial  Evaluations  Committee  that  I  was 
found  to  be  well-qualified  for  the  position  of  United 
States  District  Court  Judge  for  the  Central  District  of 
Illinois. 

On  May  13,  1997,  I  was  interviewed  in  Washington,  DC,  by 
United  States  Senators  Carol  Moseley-Braun  and  Dick 
Durbin. 

On  May  19,  1997,  I  was  advised  by  United  States  Senators 
Carol  Moseley-Braun  and  Dick  Durbin  that  they  were  sending 
the  President  of  the  United  States  my  nomination  for  the 
judicial  vacancy  on  the  United  States  District  Court  for 
the  Central  District  of  Illinois. 

On  May  20,  1997,  I  was  advised  by  the  Office  of  Counsel  to 
the  President  of  the  United  States  that  my  nomination  had 
been  accepted  by  the  President. 

Following  my  nomination  by  United  States  Senators  Carol 
Moseley-Braun  and  Dick  Durbin,  I  completed  extensive 
questionnaires  for  the  Department  of  Justice  and  the 
American  Bar  Association. 

On  June  23,  1997,  I  was  interviewed  by  the  Department  of 
Justice  in  Washington,  DC. 


30 


1294 


On  July  15,  1997,  I  was  interviewed  by  the  American  Bar 
Association  in  Chicago,  IL. 

During  the  summer  of  1997,  five  special  agents  of  the 
Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation  conducted  a  thorough 
background  check  regarding  my  character  and  fitness  to  be 
a  U.S.  District  Court  Judge. 

On  July  28,  1997,  I  was  advised  by  the  Department  of 
Justice  that  my  nomination  had  been  forwarded  to  the 
Office  of  Counsel  to  the  President  of  the  United  States. 

On  July  31,  1997,  I  was  advised  by  the  Office  of  Counsel 
to  the  President  of  the  United  States  that  President 
Clinton  had  nominated  me  to  fill  the  vacancy  on  the  United 
States  District  Court  for  the  Central  District  of  Illinois 
and  that  my  nomination  had  been  filed  with  the  Committee 
on  the  Judiciary  of  the  United  States  Senate. 

Has  anyone  Involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a 
judicial  nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal 
issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be 
interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue, 
or  question?   If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

No. 

Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving 
"judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal 
government,  and  within  society  generally,  has  become  the 
subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.  It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that 
alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of  the 
prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have 
been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution 
rather  than  grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual 
plaintiff  as  a  vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far- 
reaching  orders  extending  to  broad  classes  of 
individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad, 
affirmative  duties  upon  governments  and  society; 


31 


1295 


A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening 
jurisdictional  requirements  such  as  standing  and 
ripeness;  and 

A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon 
other  institutions  in  the  manner  of  an  administrator 
with  continuing  oversight  responsibilities. 

Answer  to  Question  No.  5: 

I  firmly  believe  that  legal  decisions  should  be 
decided  on  a  case-by-case  basis  with  the  holding 
aimed  solely  at  resolving  the  conflict  before  the 
court.  I  do  not  believe  that  trial  judges  should 
decide  cases  with  an  eye  toward  achieving  a  broad 
resolution  of  issues. 

A  United  States  District  Court  Judge  should 
follow  the  letter  of  the  law  and  not  attempt  to 
interfere  with  the  other  branches  of  government. 
District  Court  Judges  should  resolve  the  issues 
and  disputes  before  the  court  without  attempting 
to  set  policy.  Judges  in  all  trial  courts  in  the 
United  States  should  follow  the  constitutional 
mandate  that  the  executive,  legislative  and 
judicial  branches  of  government  are  separate 
entitles.  Moreover,  the  judicial  branch  should 
not  attempt  to  usurp  the  powers  granted  to  the 
other  two  branches  of  government. 


32 


1296 


FINANCIAL    DISCLOSURE     REPORT 

FOR   CALENDAR    YEAR    1996 


l;;-lS-».      X3vta^cr   33.    1919 
15   ■--.S.C.    Xpp.    i,    131.11.JI 


NcCuskey,  Michael  P. 


iddle  i.-.i:UII 


J.  C=i;rt  cr  Crs«.-.l  =  a-.ion 

U.  S.  District  Court  — 
Central  District  of  Illinois 


08  ^1  /97 


<.   Title      lArtlcle  in  judcej  indica-.?  a::tvt  or 

.Mlor  »ta:usj  .Sagis:catc  Juagea  lr.iieo;. 
full-  or  pan-tjir.tj 

Nominee  for  U.  S.  District  Court  Jud 


^  KanLnh 


or..  ta-.;2/3]797 


fi-  R*portlng  Period 

11/1/96-  7  /I  ;97 


Cr-a-iisrs  or  OfSire  Addr. 


-r.  the  b«*i.i  of  cr.e  information  t 
Any  ircdif icat io.-va  pertainir.c  thia 
in   ccnpliance   with  applicable   la 


viewing   Oi!i;;? 


ai-ed    ii-.   chi«   Repo. 


IMPORT ANT  NOTES:  The  iostructioiu  accompanying  [his  form  miKt  be  followed.    Complete  all  parts, 
cbcclung  the  NONE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable  information.    Sign  on  last  page. 


I.     POSITIONS.     (Reportiogindividualonly,  see  pp.  9-13  of  Instructions.) 


D 


POSITION 
NONE      (No  reportable  positions) 


Director 


NAME   OF   ORGANIZATION/ENTITY 


Illinois   State   University  Alumni  Association 
Illinois   State   University  Varsity   "I"   Club 


II.     AGREEMENTS.     CR'POrting  individual  only,  see  pp.  14-17  of  Instructions.) 
DATE  PARTIES   AND   TERMS 


□ 


NONE      (No  reportable  agreements) 
Vested  Member      Illinois   Judicial  Retirement    System 


III.     NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME.     (Reporting  indi^dual  and  spouse;  see  pp.  18-25  of  Instniciions.) 


n 


SOURCE    AND   TYPE 
NONE      (No  reportable  non-investment  income) 


State  of 

Illinois  ~ 

Judicial 

Sa 

lary 

State  of 

Illinois  -- 

Judicial 

Sa 

larv 

My  wife  is  a  homemaker.   She  was 

not 

eilP 

loved 

duT 

im 

1995  and 

1996. 

1297 


UNANCIM.    DISCLOSURE    REPORT 


McCuskey,    Michael   P. 


08  /01/97 


REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS  --  traosponaUoD,  lodging,  food,  enicriainmem. 

(lacludss  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  pareniheticals  "(S)'  and  "(DC)'  to  indicate  reportable 
reimbursements  and  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  26-29  of  Instruction!.) 
SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


D 


NONE      (No  such  reportable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 


OTHER  GIFTS.      (includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheticals  "(S)'  and  "(DC)'  to 
indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  30-33  of  Insliuaioos.) 
SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


D 


NONE       (No  such  reportable  gifts) 


-1.     LIABILITIES.      (Includes  those  of  spou-^e  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  appliaiblc,  person  responsible 
for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  "(S)'  for  separate  liability  of  the  spouse,  "(J)"  for  joint  liability  of 
repotting  individual  and  spouse,  and  "(DC)"  for  liability  of  a  dependent  child.  See  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE* 


Q 


NONE      (No  reportable  liabilities) 


•Vslue  CodM:      O-SIS.OOJ  or  leis  K'SIS.OOI-SSO.OOO      L-SSC.OOI-SICO.OCO      X>S10O,Olll-52S3,C0a      K.S2S0,«9t-$SCC.3CC 

C-5»3O,0Dl-Sl.OO3.OOO                  ?1-Sl, 300. 0C1-S5. OOO.COO                                -    .P2«S5,COa.O31-S25,CO0.OCO    ■ 
pa-S35.0C0.  C01-SSe.000.0C»      P<-SS0,C00,031   or  ciorc  ■  .'.        ' '       "      ■      '  ' '  ' '■ 


1298 


INANCIAL  DISCLOSXJRE  REPORT 


Kii-.c   or   ?«r»o-   Rcjcrclr.s 

McCuskey,   Michael   P. 


08/01   /97 


I.  Page  1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS  •■  income,  value,  trinsactions  (Includes  those  of  spouji; 
and  dependent  children.  See  pp.  37-54  of  InslrucUons.) 


DovsripcLon  of  Xfssca 
tmcludir.?  trust  ar.ftecsl 

Xndlcacc  whsrt  4?D;i=ibl»,   ovr.er  cf 

B. 
I.-.:OT.s 
djrir.c 
report  i-g 
period 

c. 

Gross  value 
m  end  0! 

pirioJ 

D. 
Trsp.anoelone  during   report  irs  period 

tr.g   ir.divifiuai  a.->d   ipouss,    "(SI''   isi 
s«parat«   owaersSi?  by  spousie.    •  (DC)  ' 
£or  o>-r-«  =  5.1tp  by  dejender.i  c!-.llij. 

Place   'IX)-  alfBf  eich  asjcc 
«j<9T?t   fron  prior  clsclosj^e. 

111 

Ant.l 

121 
Typs 

(1) 
cod?'' 

(21 

Ket.^.cd! 
code 
10-a] 

If  not  cxstet   from  diacloaurc               1 

_(21 

(3) 

Cede 
IJ-fl 

HI 

Gain 
Code 

:    Id.ntl!i  0: 

NONE       (NO  rcpsriiiU 
Ir.coT.!.    isaeco.  or 
crmartio.ns) 

EXEM 

'T 

First   National   Bank  ot 
\,acon   IL 

A 

Int 

J 

T 

jPfizer,    Inc.    Coiranon 
Srork    (S) 

A 

Div 

K 

T 

Smith   Barney  Mutual   Fund 

c 

Div 

L 

T 

'Fidelity  Fund   IRA 

E 

Div 

M 

T 

American  Century  Funds   IRA 

B 

Div 

J 

T 

^Fidelity   Puritan  Fund 
Tav   Deferred 

D 

Div 

K 

T 

Illinois  Judicial 
Retirement   System 

Fut 

ire 

P4 

T 

. 

9 

10 

n 

12 

" 

» 

IS 

16 

" 

19 

^cJ?=^i!^&.?-^*:lh?§?i=f:J5!?co          S:fh§'5;!?i!??,§:!lo="-"-°"  S:fJi°?S;n5i???.o=c.ooo  •  g;2H:?§5:SIM^'^r, 

-■  "•-  -BMMm^^i...  mami'^-''"-"'  .?^--^^^Hi-^??soors^f'°:i^!:"-"=  _ 

^1cS>  a!""".   S^aSSs'il-Ge                      :  -JllSJi-"'  ""'■'  ""''"'^       ■■'■.-■■:'•-.•   5:|JJ*S?S'    ■       'vTr^f'h/Kirk?::-. 

1299 


PINANCIM.   DISCLOStmE    REPORT     (conc'd) 


KMit  of    tr.csor.   Repor-.l.-.j 

McCuskey,  Michael  P. 


08/01/97 


vni.  ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS  (Indicate  pan  of  Report.) 


/ 


IX-  CERTIFICATION. 

In  compliance  with  the  provisioni  of  28  U.S.C.  §  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Judicial 
Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry.  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory  function  in  any  litigation 
during  the  period  covered  by  this  report  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  financial  interest,  as  defined  in 
Canon  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent  children,  if  any)  is 
accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  roy  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  reported  was  withheld  because  it  met 
applicable  stamtory  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  fiirther  ceniiy  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been  reported  are 
in  compliance  widi  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C.  A.  app.  4,  §  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  §  7353  and  Judicial  Conference  regulations. 


Signamre 


Micrtael  P.  McCuskey  t*' 


Date     August    1.    1997 


NOTE:     ANY  INDP/IDUAL  WHO  KNOWlNdLyAND  WILFULLY  FALSIFIES  OR  FAILS  TO  FILE  THIS  REPORT  MAY  BE 
SUBJECT  TO  CIVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  §  1(M.) 


\[         ■      FIUNG  INSTRUCTIONS:' 

,'■  Maji  signed  onguial  isd  3  additioDal  copies  to:   '    . 

Comrmilec  on  Financial  bisclosuie 

AdmirnsaiiiveOffice  of  the  ■■ 

■     United  Slates  Courts  '.,.  ■ 

:Suiiei-301'      '  :    ;';  .■  -.■.: 

'     One  Columbus  ciircle,  N.E,,     :      , 

.:  Washington;  D.C..20J44'.'  .■..     . 

1300 

nNANOAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORT« 


Provide  I  complete,  cunent  flr.wclil  net  wonh  jutement  which  iiemiKi  In  delill 
tU  tssf  li  (Includiig  bink  jccounts,  tttl  e$ut«,  lecuritiet,  tnjju,  invejtmenu,  tni  other  fin»flcii] 
holdiflgj)  »U  Uibillticj  (Including  detu,  mongigei.  loini,  ind  other  fminciil  obligitiont)  of 
yourxl/,  your  jpouse,  ind  other  lmn\e<Ii»t4  membert  of  your  household. 


ASSETS                                             1 

UABaJTIEi                                  ] 

Cuh  on  tiud  Ui4  in  luit 

21329 

KelM  JxjrtWr  to  Unb-Mcwod 

i 

U.S.  CovuBiscnt  Moirilin-tiii 
»eh*du]« 

HoU4  f  iyikli  Is  hula-<u\sKv.'*i 

2000 

Liit/4  >ceuniu-M  Khtduli 

73932 

Notti  f  lyitU  10  rtltu'vM 

Vnljltc4  fCCurilki-tM  k1i<^)« 

Koui  piyiib  to  oOiut 

. 

AccoiuiU  tni  MUi  rtMlviUc    \ 

Amowu  >n4  Mis  in* 

D\)«  bvm  MliUrti  uid  fritAdi 

VtfiSi  (nc«m«  lu 

1 

Dm«  bom  olhui 

Olhu  wpiii  M  tni  inltrtit 

Douirful    Promissory  Note 

6000 

Kill  iiuu  reerv^itei  fkyMt-M 

Khc4ul<    First   of  America 

5200 

) 

1 
1 

Kcd  C4U1C  own»i-tdd  icht^lt 

152000 

Oiuu]  ewit{qu  art 4  olhtr  U«ni  ; iy< 

530 

i 

Rul  (ilitc  mMU'lu  teccivtlli 

Olhei  it\ti~\\un3ui 

Auloi  mi  otJitf  penootl  prepoly 

30000 

Cuh  vtlue-Uft  lAittTuioa 

OOvtr  tutlt-iuiolit: 

State    o^    Illinois    Bonds 

40000 

t 

1 

IRA's—See   Attached   Schedule 

164301 

Deferred  Compensation — See 

126448 

Totti  SAOillH 

7730 

Attached   Schedule 

KciWofft 

i3670 

Teui  AsMU 

614010 

T«t>l  libnUu  uid  net  Mxtk 

.1401 

CO.^mN0E^•T  UABnJTIES 

CENXRAl  INFORMATION 

Ai  toiotut,  totntku  or  juouilof 

■0 

Art  iny  uk'j  fte<S(»ifl  (Add  iched- 
<iJt.) 

No 

On  Itutt  u  oontncU 

0 

Art  yog  icttaiu*  Ir.  tr^  tolu  or  Ufi 
wiiout 

No 

UcO  Clilmt 

0 

KiT<  you  cc*  UXta  tuJovpleyl 

Nft 

ProviiIoB  for  Fedeni  Ineomt  Ttt 

0 

OlfKr  ip«ul  <tU 

0 

^^ 

1301 


ATTACHMENT  TO  FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 

OF 

MICHAEL  P.  McCUSKEY  AND  BRENDA  H.  McCUSKEY 


Listed  Securities 

Pfizer,  Inc.  Common  Stock  18,688 

Smith  Barney  Mutual  Fund  55,244 


Real  Estate  Owned 

Personal  Residence  135,000 

Washburn  IL 
1/3  Interest  In  Condominium  17,000 

St.  Petersburg  FL 


Individual  Retirement  Accounts 

Fidelity  Investments  154,090 

American  Centry  Investments  10,211 


Deferred  Compensation 

With  State  of  Illinois  as  22,513 

Employer--Invested  in 
Vanguard  Inst.  Index  Fund 

State  of  Illinois 

Judicial  Retirement  System  93,259 

Illinois  Municipal  Retirement  Fund       10,676 


1302 


BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

1.  Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used.)  ' 
George  Patrick  Murphy 

2.  Address:  List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address(es). 

Office:  G.  Patrick  Murphy,  Attorney  at  Law 

1 04  W.  Calvert,  P.O.  Box  907 
Marion,  IL  62959 

Home:  Marion,  IL  62959 

3.  Date  and  place  of  birth. 

12/1/48 
Carbondale,  Illinois 

4.  Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name).  List 
spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  address(es). 

Married  to  Gail  Diane  (Sanders)  Murphy 
Spouse's  occupation:  Student 

5.  Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates 
of  attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

John  A.  Logan  Junior  College,  1969  •  1970 
Southern  Illinois  University,  1970  - 1975 

Bachelor  of  Science  -  May  1 7, 1 975 
Southern  Illinois  University  School  of  Law,  1975  - 1977 

Juris  Doctorate,  Dec.  17, 1977 

6.  Employment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional  corporations, 
companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and 
organizations,  nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were 
connected  as  an  officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since 
graduation  from  college. 

(1 )       James  W.  Sanders  &  Associates  1 978  - 1 982 

Associate 


1303 


(2)  Garrison  &  Garrison  1982-19 

Associ! 

(3)  Winters,  Brewster,  Murphy,  1983-19 
Crosby  &  Patchett  Partn 

(4)  G.  Patrick  Murphy,  Attorney  at  Law  1994  -  Prese 

Self-employ( 
Sole  practition 

7.  Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give  particulars, 
including  the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of 
discharge  received. 

Yes. 

June  30, 1966  /  April  18, 1969 

Marines  -  Viet  Nam  -K  Co  3d  Bn  1st  Marines 

Rank:  E4 

Serial  Number:  2286652 

Honorably  discharged 

8.  Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees,  and 
honorary  society  membership  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the 
Committee. 

Fellow  -  American  College  of  Trial  Lawyers 
Member  -  National  Board  of  Trial  Advocacy 

9.  Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related  committees 
or  conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and 
dates  of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Fellow,  American  College  of  Trial  Lawyers 

(Illinois  Downstate  Committee) 
National  Board  of  Trial  Advocacy,  Member,  Civil  Section 
Illinois  State  Bar  Association,  Member 
American  Bar  Association,  Member 

(Forum  on  Construction  Law, 

Tort  &  Insurance  Practice  Section,  Litigation  Section) 
Illinois  Trial  Lawyers  Association,  Member 
The  Association  of  Trial  Lawyers  of  America,  Member 


-2- 


1304 


10.       Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are  active 
in  lobbj-lng  before  public  bodies.   Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which 
yon  belong  I  am  a  member  of  the  following  organizations  and  each  one  is 
active  in  lobbying  before  public  bodies: 

Veterans  of  Foreign  Wars 
American  College  of  Trial  Lawyers 
Illinois  State  Bar  Association 
American  Bar  Association 
Illinois  Trial  Lawyers  Association 
Association  of  Trial  Lawyers  of  America 
Marine  Corp  League 

1 1  Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  lu  practice, 
with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed    Plr^se 
explain  the  reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same  information  lor 
Hdmlnlstratlve  bodies  which  require  special  admission  to  practice. 

lillnols  Supreme  Court,  Illinois  Appellate  Court,  and  Illinois  trial  courts. 
May  ie,  1978 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District  of  Illinois,  1 980 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Seventh  Circuit,  May  19, 19B5 

12  rublished  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dales  of  books,  articles, 
reports,  or  other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.   Please  supply 
one  copy  of  all  published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee 
Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  Issues  involving 
constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.   If  there  were  press  reports  about  the  speech, 
and  I  hey  are  readily  available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

I  have  not  spoken  on  Issues  of  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy. 

Southern  llllnots  University  Law  Journal  Volume  20,  Summer  1 098 

Survey  of  lltlnolt  Law:  Evidence 

Southern  llllnole  University  Law  Journal  Volume  1 3.  Bprlng  1 BBB 

Civil  Procedure 

Similar  Occurrencee  April  10, 1B62 

ISBA  Law  Ed  Series 
Bloomlnglon,  IL 

Discovery  In  a  Products  Case  April  10, 1B92 

From  the  Plaintiff's  Perspective 


1305 


Comparative  Negligence  April  28, 1984 

ITLA 

Pretrial  Discovery  -  Tips  &  Tactics  April  8, 1988 

Hot  Tips  November  1 , 1 993 

Slip,  Trip  &  Fall  Mishaps 
Plaintiff  Perspective 

Anatomy  of  a  Trial  April  11, 1994 

Civil  Practice  &  Procedure 
Pretrial  Preparation 
ISBA  Law  Ed  Series 

Anatomy  of  a  Trial  November  1 7, 1994 

Part  II:  Recurring  Evidentiary  Issues 
ISBA  Law  Ed  Series 
Bloomington,  IL 

Current  Topics  in  Injury  Victim  Advocacy  April  8, 1995 

Evidence  of  Previous  Injuries 
St.  Louis,  MO 

The  Future  of  Health  Care:  October  22, 1996 

Doing  More  With  Less 

The  Legal  Aspects  of  Managed  Care 

&  Medicare-Medicaid  Fraud  and  Abuse 

Collinsville,  IL 

How  to  Make  Money,  Keep  Money,  and  Sleep  February  1 2, 1 997 

at  Night  in  Handling  Plaintiff  Litigation 
Settlement  Offers  and  Liens 
ISBA  Law  Ed  Series 

13.  Health:  What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  your  last 
physical  examination. 

Good.  Last  Exam:  June  19, 1997 

14.  Tudicial  Office:  State  chronologically  any  judicial  offices  you  have  held, 
whether  such  position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the 
jurisdiction  of  each  such  court. 

None. 

15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  ( 1 )  citations  for  the  ten 
most  significant  opinions  you  have  \vritten;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and 
citations  for  all  appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or  where 


1306 


your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significar\t  criticism  of  your  substantive  or 
procedural  rulings;  and  (3)  citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state 
constitutional  issues,  together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on 
such  opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please 
provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

Not  applicable. 

16.  Public  Office:  State  chronologically  any  public  offices  you  have  held,  other 
than  judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions 
were  elected  or  appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful 
candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

None. 

17.  Legal  Career: 

a.         Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after 
graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name  of  the 
judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

No. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and  dates; 

I  currently  practice  alone  and  have  done  so  since  January  1 , 
1994. 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices,  companies  or 
governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected,  and 
the  nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 

(1 )  James  W.  Sanders  &  Associates  1 978  - 1 982 

Associate 

(2)  Garrison  &  Garrison  1982-1983 

Associate 


1307 


(3)  Winters,  Brewster.  Murphy,  1983-1893 
Crosby  &  Patchett  Partner 

(4)  O.  Patrick  Murphy.  Attorney  at  Law  1994 -Present 

Self-employed 
Sole  practitioner 

What  has  been  the  |>cneral  character  of  your  law  practice,  dividing 
it  into  periods  with  dates  if  Its  characier  has  changed  over  tl\c  years? 

I  have  been  a  trial  lawyer  sinoe  I  started  practicing  law.  Initially, 
I  defended  nnunlclpal  bodies  and  school  boards  In  employment 
and  civil  rights  litigation.  While  I  was  employed  at  Garrison  & 
Garrison.  I  handled  personal  Injury  cases  on  behalf  of  Insurers 
and  their  Insureds.  While  I  was  a  partner  at  Winters.  Brewster. 
Murphy,  Crosby  &  Patchett.  I  divided  my  practice  between 
Insurance  coverage  litigation  for  the  Insured,  construction 
litigation,  and  plaintiff's  personal  Injury  litigation.  Since  I  have 
been  a  solo  practitioner,  I  have  primarily  handled  pialntlfTs 
personal  Ir^ury  cases  with  a  sprinkling  of  Insurance  defense 
work  as  well  as  commercial  and  construction  litigation. 

Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  ntcntion  the  areas,  if  any, 
in  whiclt  you  have  specialized. 

Generally,  I  represent  individuals  who  have  been  Injured  and  are 
seeking  damages.  I  also  represent  banks  and  businesses  In 
litigated  matters.  I  have  specialized  In  civil  litigation. 

Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at  all?  If  the 
frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such 
variance,  giving  dates. 

I  appear  In  court  on  a  regular  basis;  I  am  In  court  on  a  dally 
basis. 

What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts;  20% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record;  80% 

(c)  other  courts. 


-6- 


1308 


3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil;  95% 

(b)  criminal.  5% 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to  verdict  or 
judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

Approximately  250  tried  to  verdict  or  judgment  as  sole  counsel. 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury;  35% 

(b)  non-jury.  65% 

Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you 
personally  handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket 
number  and  date  if  unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of  each 
case.  Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail  the 
nature  of  your  participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case. 
Also  state  as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before  whom 
the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  The  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co-counsel  and 
of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 

1 .        Mid-America  Ban/<  &  Trust  v  Commercial  Union, 
587  NE2d  81,  224  III  App  3d  1083  (1992) 

Summary:  A  complicated  insurance  coverage  case.  The  insurer, 
Commercial  Union,  refused  to  accept  a  reasonable  settlement 
demand  until  the  eve  of  trial,  which  resulted  in  a  verdict  many 
times  the  amount  of  the  coverage.  The  plaintiff  in  the  underlying 
case  obtained  an  assignment  from  the  insured  and  his  lawyer 
referred  the  coverage  case  to  me.  The  insurer  refused  to  settle 
the  coverage  case  and  it  was  tried  to  a  jury.  My  client,  a  severely 
injured  minor,  received  the  entire  amount  of  his  original  verdict 
along  with  his  attorneys'  fees. 


-7- 


1309 


Represented: 

Detail  participation: 

Court: 

Judge: 

Opposing  Counsel: 


Mid-America  Bank  &  Trust  Company,  Administrator 

of  the  Estate  of  Oavid  Struempf,  a  Disabled  Adult 

Sole  counsel 

Circuit  Court,  Madison  County 

The  Honorable  Gordon  Maag 

Michael  J.  Pitzer 

Rabbitt,  Pitzer  &  Snodgrass,  P.C. 

One  Boatmen's  Plaza,  Suite  2300 

800  Market  Street 

St.  Louis,  MO    63101-2608 

Phone:314-421-5545 


2. 


People  V  Bebout 
Circuit 


(1984)  84-CF-ig0,  Williamson  County,  First  Judicial 


Summary:  A  murder  case  where  I  represented  a  young  handyman  charged 
with  killing  an  elderly  woman  with  a  garrote.  The  defendant  was 
found  not-guilty  of  all  charges. 


Represented: 

Detail  Participation: 

Date  of  Trial: 

Court: 

Judge: 

Co-Counsel: 


Donald  Bebout 

Lead  counsel 

1984 

Circuit  Court,  Williamson  County 

The  Honorable  Robert  H.  Howerton 

Brocton  Lockwood 

Attorney  at  Law 

802  N.  Court,  P.O.  Box  1208 

Marion,  IL   62959 

Phone:  618-997-3202 


Opposing  Counsel: 


Brian  D.  Lewis 

(then  Asst.  Wmsn.  Co.  States  Attorney) 

Attorney  at  Law 

503  W. Jackson 

Marion,  IL   62959 

Phone:618-997-6211 


3. 


SwinkvKLLM 

90-4094,  So.  Dist.  of  IL  (1990) 


Summary:  A  catastrophic  injury  case  that  was  tried  to  verdict  in  federal 
district  court  for  the  Southern  District  of  Illinois.  Mr.  Swink  was 
struck  by  a  truck  while  assisting  a  stranded  motorist  on  the 
shoulder  of  the  highway.  Although  he  was  severely  injured, 
there  was  no  offer  before  trial.  The  jury's  verdict  for  the  plaintiff 
resulted  in  a  $13,350,000  judgment  that  was  completely 
satisfied  by  the  defendant's  insurer. 


-8- 


1310 


Represented: 

Detail  Participation: 

Date  of  Trial: 

Court: 

Judge: 

Co-Counsel: 


Dennis  Swink 

Lead  counsel 

1990 

U.S.  District  Court,  So.  District  of  Illinois  -  Benton 

The  Honorable  James  L.  Foreman 

Ronald  E.  Osman 

Ronald  E.  Osman  &  Associates 

1602  West  Kimmel,  P.O.  Box  939 

Marion.  IL   62959 

Phone:  618-997-5151 


Opposihg  Counsel: 

Jerome  E.  McDonald 

Campbell,  Black,  Carnine  &  Hedin,  P.O. 

108  S.  9th  Street 

P.O.  Drawer  C 

Mt.  Vernon,  IL   62864 

Phone:618-242-3310 


Richard  Record 
Craig  &  Craig 
1807  Broadway  Ave. 
P.O.  Box  689 
Mattoon,  IL61938 
Phone:217-234-6481 


4.        County  of  Massac  v  United  States  Fidelity  and  Guaranty  Co. 
446  NE2d  584, 113  III  App  3d  35  (1983) 

Summary:  An  insurance  coverage  case.  The  plaintiff  in  the  underlying 
case,  Mark  Kruger,  was  injured  when  his  car  struck  a  partially 
completed  bridge  being  constructed  over  a  creek.  He  sued  the 
construction  company  and  my  client,  the  County  of  Massac,  for 
negligently  failing  to  provide  adequate  warning  signs, 
barricades,  or  lighting  to  alert  motorists  that  the  bridge  was 
under  construction.  The  county's  insurer,  USF&G,  refused  to 
defend  the  county  on  the  grounds  the  applicable  policy  did  not 
provide  coverage.  Later,  USF&G  took  the  position  that  it  did  not 
provide  a  defense  to  the  county  because  this  would  have 
created  a  conflict  of  interest.  The  Appellate  Court  held  that 
USF&G  was  estopped  from  asserting  a  coverage  defense  as  it 
wrongfully  refused  to  defend  the  county.  Moreover,  the  court 
found  that  there  was  no  conflict  of  interest. 


Represented: 
Detail  Participation: 
Date  of  Trial: 
Court: 
Judge: 


The  County  of  Massac 

Sole  Counsel 

1983 

Circuit  Court,  Massac  County 

The  Honorable  James  R.  Williamson 


-9- 


1311 


Opposing  Counsel:  J.  C.  Mitchell 

Mitchell  &  Mitchell 
404  N.  Monroe 
Marion,  IL   62959 
Phone:  618-993-2134 

5.  People  V  Comille 

484NE2d301,  136IlIApp3d  1011  (1983) 

Summary:  A  criminal  case  where  a  sheriff  was  charged  with  official 
misconduct.  He  was  collecting  fines  and  depositing  them  in  his 
personal  account.  He  could  not  account  for  all  of  the  fines  he 
collected  nor  could  he  account  for  what  he  had  expended.  1 
represented  the  sheriff  and  presented  a  defense  consistent  with 
his  assertion  that  he  was  using  the  money  to  pay  informants. 
He  was  found  guilty  on  two  of  four  counts.  The  guilty 
judgments  were  affirmed  on  appeal. 

Represented:  Sheriff  Comille 

Detail  Participation:  Sole  counsel 

Date  of  Trial:  1983 

Court:  Massac  County,  III 

Judge:  The  Honorable  William  A.  Lewis 

Opposing  Counsel:  Special  Prosecutor  now  Associate  Judge 

The  Honorable  Rodney  A.  Clutts 
Union  County  Courthouse 
309  W.  Market  Street 
Jonesboro,  IL   62952 
Phone:618-833-8114 

6.  Landmark  Structures,  Inc.  v  F.E.  Holmes  &  Son  Const.  Co. 
552  NE2d  1336, 195  III  App  3d  1036  (1990) 

Summary:  A  commercial  case  where  my  client,  a  general  contractor,  was 
sued  by  a  siding  manufacturer  because  of  his  failure  to  pay  for 
siding.  The  siding  was  used  on  several  sets  of  apartrnent 
buildings  and  ultimately  buckled  and  had  to  be  replaced.  My 
client  counter-claimed  and  was  completely  successful  in  the 
trial  court.  The  trial  court  was  affirmed  on  appeal. 

Represented:  F.E.  Holmes  &  Son  Construction  Co. 

Detail  Participation:  Sole  counsel 

-10- 


1312 


Date  of  Trial: 

Court: 

Judge: 

Opposing  Counsel: 


1990 

Circuit  Court,  Johnson  County 

The  Honorable  James  R.  Williamson 

Ronald  E.  Fuhr 

Parker,  Seimer,  Austin  &  Resch 

P.O.  Box  697 

307  North  Third  Street 

Effingham,  IL  62401 

Phone:217-342-9291 


7.        Kigin  v  Woodmen  of  the  World  Ins. 

541  NE2d  735, 185  III  App  3d  400  (1989) 

Summary:  A  young  girl  who  was  a  guest  at  a  Woodmen  of  the  World 
summer  camp  was  sexually  assaulted  by  an  intoxicated 
counselor.  The  trial  court  dismissed  the  case  on  the  pleadings 
as  there  was  no  allegation  that  the  defendant  was  aware  of  the 
counselor's  intoxication  or  propensity  to  take  advantage  of 
young  girls.  The  Appellate  Court  reversed  and  remanded  the 
case  for  a  trial  on  the  merits.  The  case  ultimately  settled. 


Represented: 

Detail  participation: 

Date  of  Trial: 

Court: 

Judge: 

Opposing  Counsel: 


Darlene  Kigin,  Next  Friend  of  Misty  Mitchell,  a  minor 

Sole  counsel 

1989 

Circuit  Court,  Williamson  County 

The  Honorable  Robert  H.  Howerton 

James  B.  Bleyer 

Bleyer  &  Bleyer 

601  W.  Jackson,  P.  O.  Box  487 

Marion,  IL  62959 

Phone:618-997-1331 


8.         Salo  V  Singhurse 

537  NE2d  339, 181  III  App  3d  641  (1989) 

Summary:  A  personal  injury  case  arising  out  of  an  intersection  collision. 
My  client,  Mike  Salo,  was  assessed  a  percentage  of  comparative 
negligence,  a  finding  from  which  I  prosecuted  an  appeal.  The 
case  was  remanded  for  a  new  trial  on  the  issue  of  liability  and 
ultimately  settled  for  the  entire  amount  of  the  damages  awarded 
in  the  first  trial  without  reduction  for  comparative  fault. 


Represented: 
Detail  participation: 
Date  of  Trial: 


Mike  Salo 
Sole  counsel 
1989 


-11- 


1313 


Court: 
Judge: 

Opposing  Counsel: 


Circuit  Court,  Franklin  County 
The  Honorable  Loren  Lewis 

Michael  J.  Pitzer 

Rabbitt,  Pitzer  &  Snodgrass,  P.C. 

One  Boatmen's  Plaza,  Suite  2300 

800  Market  Street 

St.  Louis,  MO    63101-2608 

Phone:  314-421-5545 


Carlisle  v  Harp 
558  NE2d  318,  2001 


App  3d  908  (1990) 


Summary:  A  personal  injury  case  arising  out  of  an  intersection  collision.  I 
represented  the  plaintiff,  Dorothy  Carlisle,  who  was  traveling 
west  into  an  intersection.  The  defendant  was  traveling  north  into 
the  intersection.  It  was  an  open  intersection  and  both  parties' 
visibility  was  hampered  by  vegetation.  The  defendant.  Harp, 
was  carrying  out  his  duties  as  a  mail  carrier  when  the  collision 
occurred.  He  admitted  driving  into  the  intersection  without 
knowing  what  was  coming  from  his  right.  Shortly  before  trial, 
defense  counsel  sought  to  have  the  plaintiff  examined  by  his 
retained  expert.  This  request  was  denied  on  the  grounds  it  was 
untimely.  After  trial  started,  he  attempted  to  assert  the  defense 
of  plaintiffs  contributory  negligence.  The  court  denied  his 
request  to  amend  his  answer  and  assert  this  defense.  The 
plaintiff  recovered  a  verdict  in  the  amount  of  $40,000  for  a  back 
injury  and  this  verdict  was  affirmed  on  appeal. 


Represented: 
Detail  participation: 
Date  of  Trial: 
Court: 
Judge: 

Opposing  Counsel: 


Dorothy  Carlisle 

Sole  counsel 

1990 

Circuit  Court,  Franklin  County 

The  Honorable  Terrence  Hopkins 

Paul  Giamanco 

Attorney  at  Law 

1008  Jordan,  P.O.  Box  882 

Mt.  Vernon,  IL   62864 

Phone:618-244-5737 


1 0 .       Murphy  v  Inter-City  Products 

93-CV-526,  So.  District  of  Illinois 

Summary:     Raymond  Murphy,  no  relation  to  Attorney  Murphy,  was  assaulted 
by  an  employee  of  an  outside  security  agency  at  a  factory 


-12- 


1314 


auction.  Mr.  Murphy  was  not  physically  injured.  The  security 
company  and  the  factory  owner  tool*  the  position  that  since 
there  was  no  physical  injury,  Mr.  Murphy  was  not  entitled  to 
damages.  The  jury  returned  a  verdict  for  $20,000. 

Represented:  Ray  Murphy 

Detail  participation:         Sole  counsel 

Date  of  Trial:  October  12  - 14, 1994 

Court:  U.S.  District  Court,  So.  District  of  Illinois  - 

E.  St.  Louis 
Judge:  The  Honorable  Clifford  Proud 

Opposing  Counsel:  Stephen  C.  Mudge 

Reed,  Armstrong,  etal. 
101  N.  Main,  P.O.  Box  368 
Edwardsville,  IL   62025 
Phone:  618-656-0257 

19.  Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have  pursued, 
including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that 
did  not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this 
question,  please  omit  any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege 
(unless  the  privilege  has  been  waived.) 

Davis  V  Showa  Denko,  MDL-865,  So.  Dist  of  IL,  (1994)  settled  before  trial.  My 
client,  like  thousands  of  other  middle-aged  American  women  suffered 
rheumatoid  type  symptoms  as  a  result  of  using  an  over-the-counter  food 
supplement,  L-Tryptophan.  L-Tryptophan  is  an  amino  acid  that  is  essential  for 
a  healthy  diet.  The  Japanese  defendant,  Showa  Denko,  devised  a  method  of 
synthetically  producing  L-Tryptophan  which  was  sold  to  American 
distributors  through  a  wholly  owned  subsidiary,  Showa  Denko  of  America. 
Inc.  Unfortunately  the  product  was  not  wholesome  and  thousands  of 
consumers  were  injured  as  a  result.  This  case  is  significant  because  the 
liability  aspect  of  the  case  was  consolidated  and  the  lawyers  for  the  victims, 
working  together,  put  together  a  solid  case  that  resulted  in  all  of  the  cases 
being  settled  except  for  one  in  California.  The  case  involved  multi- 
jurisdictional  discovery  (Germany,  Japan,  and  England)  as  well  as  cutting 
edge  medical  science.  The  case  settled  on  terms  very  satisfactory  to  my 
client. 

The  most  significant  non-litigated  matter  I  have  been  involved  in  is  acting  in 
the  capacity  as  Guardian  for  a  disabled  minor.  I  believe  my  ward,  in  years  to 
come,  will  enjoy  a  quality  of  life  that  she  would  not  have  otherwise 
experienced  but  for  my  efforts. 


-13- 


1315 

II.      FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 


1.  List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred  income 
arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits 
which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  professional 
services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please 
describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any 
financial  or  business  interest. 

I  intend  to  refer  all  of  my  open  files  to  other  lawyers.  I  do  not  expect  to 
receive  any  remuneration  for  legal  services  that  are  unpaid  as  of  the  date  I 
am  sworn  in  as  a  Federal  District  Judge.  I  will  either  rent  or  sell  the  building 
where  my  law  practice  is  presently  situated.  Otherwise,  I  do  not  anticipate 
receipt  of  any  deferred  income,  stock  options,  uncompleted  contracts,  and 
other  future  benefits. 

2.  Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including  the 
procedure  you  will  follow  in  determining  these  areas  of  concern.  Identify  the 
categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present 
potential  conflicts-of-interest  during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which 
you  have  been  nominated. 

I  virill  follow  the  guidelines  of  the  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct. 

3.  Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside 
employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court? 
If  so,  explain. 

No. 

4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar  year 
preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all  sales, 
fees,  dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and  other  items 
exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure 
report,  required  by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted 
here.) 

See  attached  Financial  Disclosure  Report. 


■14- 


1316 


5.         Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail  (Ad 
schedules  as  called  for). 

See  attached  net  worth  statement. 

6  .       Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign?  If  so, 
please  identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates 
of  the  campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

I  was  treasurer  for  the  judicial  campaigns  of  Robert  Howerton  for 
Appellate  Court  Judge  (1991),  Terrence  Hopkins  for  Appellate  Court 
Judge  (1994)  and  Ronald  Eckiss  for  Circuit  Court  Judge  (1994). 


■15- 


1317 


III.     GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 


An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's 
Code  of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of 
professional  prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to 
participate  in  serving  the  disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to 
fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time 
devoted  to  each. 

I  devote  approximately  20  percent  of  my  time  to  pro-bono  work.  For 
instance,  I  am  the  court  appointed  guardian  for  Amanda  MIssine,  a 
disabled  minor.  I  have  served  in  this  capacity  since  1990. 1  have  not  taken 
a  fee  for  my  services  since  1990. 1  manage  her  estate  and  approve  all 
expenditures.  Each  week,  I  make  decisions  as  to  what  services  she  needs 
and  what  she  should  pay  for  those  services.  I  regularly  provide  services  to 
members  of  the  Veterans  of  Foreign  wars  and  their  spouses  without  fee. 
Typically,  this  includes  the  preparation  of  a  will  and  a  durable  power  of 
attorney.  My  staff,  from  time  to  time,  is  required  to  make  visits  to  the  V.A. 
hospital.  To  my  knowledge,  we  have  never  charged  a  veteran  or  his 
spouse  for  these  services.  I  am  an  active  member  of  the  VFW  Post  1301 
Ritual  Team  and  as  such  I  participate  in  approximately  25  funerals  a  year 
for  veterans.  Also,  I  regularly  assist  indigent  or  disadvantaged  persons  in 
obtaining  divorces  without  charge.  I  recently  tried  a  tort  case  for  a  young 
indigent  black  man  who  was  sued  for  property  damage  arising  out  of  a  two 
car  vehicular  accident.  This  case  was  prosecuted  as  an  insurance 
subrogation  matter,  my  client,  Jason  Isaacs,  was  uninsured.  I  tried  the 
case  to  verdict  without  any  fee.  He  was  completely  exonerated.  I  have 
never  tried  to  keep  a  record  of  the  pro  bono  work  that  I  do  because  I 
provide  it  on  an  as-needed  basis. 

The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct 
states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any 
organization  that  invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion. 
Do  you  currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization  which 
discriminates  --  through  either  formal  membership  requirements  or  the 
practical  implementation  of  membership  policies?  If  so,  list,  with  dates  of 
membership.  What  you  have  done  to  try  to  change  these  policies? 

No. 


-16- 


1318 


3.  Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates 
for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it  recommend  your 
nomination?  Please  describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection 
process,  from  beginning  to  end  (including  the  circim\stances  which  led  to  your 
nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you  participated). 

I  was  recommended  by  a  selection  committee.  I  completed  a  substantial 
application  and  was  interviewed  by  the  entire  committee.  I  was 
interviewed  by  Senators  Moseley-Braun  and  Durbin  and  recommended  by 
them.  I  also  completed  lengthy  questionnaires  and  was  interviewed  by 
representatives  of  the  ABA,  Department  of  Justice  and  FBI. 

4.  Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nonunee 
discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that 
could  reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case, 
issue,  or  question?  If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

No. 

5.  Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial 
activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal  government,  and  within 
society  generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent 
years.  It  has  become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that 
alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other 
branches  and  levels  of  government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  judicial  activism  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than 
grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a  vehicle 
for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad  classes  of 
individuals; 


A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duti 
governments  and  society; 


ies  upon 


■17- 


1319 


A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional  requirements 
such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 

A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions  in  the 
manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight  responsibilities. 

The  federal  courts  are  courts  of  limited  jurisdiction.  A  federal  court 
should  not  accept  Jurisdiction  of  a  case  unless  the  requirements  of  the 
particular  statute  or  the  Constitution  are  clearly  met.  The  function  of 
a  trial  judge  is  to  adjudicate  actual  disputes  between  real  parties  in 
accordance  with  the  law  and  the  evidence.  It  is  not  the  function  of  a 
judge  to  attempt  to  solve  larger  social  problems  when  deciding  a  case. 
It  is  not  proper  for  courts  to  function  as  legislators  or  administrators. 
A  district  judge  is  bound  by  precedent.  It  is  not  the  function  of  a  district 
judge  to  attempt  to  establish  precedent  in  an  area  where  there  is 
applicable  precedent. 


-18- 


1320 


lO-IO  (w) 
lev.  a/96 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

Nominatioii  Report 


Report  Required  by  the  Ethia 
Reform  Aa  of  1989.  PubLNo. 
101194.  November  30.  I9S9 
(3  U.S.C.  Afp.  4  .  Sec.  101-112) 


PcnoD  Reportiiig        (Loit  name,  first.  tnidtBe  initiat) 

/lurphy,  George  P. 


2.  Conrt  or  Ortinlrarioil 

U.S.  Dist.  Ct.  So.  Dist.of  IL 


3.  D«U  of  Report 

08/02/1997 


6.  Reporting  Pu 

01/01/1996 
06/30/1997 


.  TUc  (Artide  III  judges  indicate  active  or 

senior  status:  magistrate  judges  indicate 
fitU-  or  part-time) 

J.S.  District  Judge  Nominee 


S.  Report  Type  (check  type) 

X    Nomimlioii.    Dite     07/31/1997 

Inidai  Annual  Fuol 


.  Chambers  or  Omce  Addrca 

104  W.Calvert 
=.0.  Box  907 
Vlarion,  IL  62959 


8.  Go  the  baiia  of  the  Infoniiatioil  contained  In  this  Report  and  any 
modifications  pertaining  thereto,  it  Is  in  my  oplnloa.  In  compliance 
with  applicable  laws  and  regulations. 


Reriewlng  Onker 


IMPORTANT  NOTES:  Vu  instructions  accompanying  this  form  must  be  followed.   Complete  ail  parts, 
checking  the  NONE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable  infomation.  Sign  on  the  last  page. 


POSITIONS      (Reporting  individual  only: 

POSITION 

X,  NONE  (No  reportable  positions.) 


epp.  9-13  of  Instructions) 


NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION  /  ENTTTY 


[.     AGREE^MEINTS   (Reporting  individual  only:  see  pp.  14-17  <^ instructions. ) 

DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


^ 


NONE   (No  reportable  agreements.) 


n.    NON-I>rVESTMENT  ESCOME 
DATE 

NONE    (No  repomble 

^  1997  Law  practice 


(Reporting  individual  and  spouse:  see  pp.  18-25  of  Instruaions.) 
PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


2  1996 


1995 


Law  Practice 


3  1994-97        G.  Patrick  Murphy,  Attorney  (S) 


Law  practice 


GROSS  INCOME 

(yours,  not  spouse's) 


$    159,697.35 


$    199,099.00 


$    284.736.00 


1321 


fANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nune  ot  renoo  KcpoiSi^ 

Murphy,  George  P. 


Due  of  Repon 

08/02/1997 


REIMBURSEMENTS   and   GIFTS    -  nnsponition.  lodging,  rood,  ciuciuimncu. 

luda  ihoae  lo  spouse  and  deperulaa  childrtm  use  Uie  pareiuhelicats  '(S)'  out  '(DQ '  lo  indicate  reportable  reimbunemaus  and  gifts  received  by  spouse 
dependent  children,  respectivety .  See  pp.  26-29  of  Instructions.) 


: 


SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 

NONE  (No  such  reponable  rciinburseinents  or  gifts) 


exempt 


.    OTHER  GXFTS 

dudes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  paremheticals  '(S)  '  and  'Q>Q  '  to  indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children, 
pectivefy.  See  pp.  30-33  of  Instructions.) 


3 


SOURCE  DESCRIPTION  VALUE 

NONE  (No  such  repomble  gifts) 


exempt 


[.    LLVBILITIES 

'ncludes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible  for  liabUay  by  using  the  parenthetical  '(Sj'for  separate 
ability  of  the  spouse,  '(/)' for  joint  liability  of  reporting  iruUvidual  and  spouse,  and  '(DQ'  for  liability  of  a  dependent  child.    See  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 


3 


CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE* 

NONE    (No  reponable  liabilities) 


Bank  of  Herrin,  Herrin,  IL Offic:e  Building  Mortgage 


•VALCODES:J=$l5.(X»orless  K  =  $15.(»1-JS0.(X)0  L=$50.001  lo  $100,000  M=$100.001J250,000  N=J250.001-$500.000 

0=$500.001-S1. 000.000    Pl=$1.000.001-$5.000,000    P2  =  $5.0OO.001-J25.0O0.0OO    P3=$25.000.001-$50.000.000    P4= $50,000,001  or  more 


1322 


INANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nime  of  t*ersoD  Reporting 
Murphy,    George   P. 


-  income,  vatiu.  transactions  (incUtdes  tiuat  of  spouse  and 
dependent  children.  See  pp.  37-54  of  Instructions.) 


DinorRepoR 
08/02/1997 


01.  Page      1  EWESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS 


A. 
DescriptioaafAsels 

•ulicaie  vhtre  applicable,  owner  <>f 
'le  asset  by  using  the  parenthetical 

B. 

Income 

during 

repotting 

period 

C. 

Gross  value 

aiendof 

reporting 

period 

D. 

Tntisaclions  during  repoitiiig  period 

Uj  'fi>r  Joint  ownership  of  reporting 
Tdividual  and  spouse.  '(Sl'prsep- 

1) 

\m. 
Code 
A- 

H) 

m 

Type 
(e.g.. 
dividend. 

interest) 

(1) 

Value 
Code 
(I-P) 

m 

Value 
Medxid 
Code 
(Q-W) 

(1) 

Type 

(e.g. 

buy.  sell. 

merger, 

redemp- 

If  not  exempt  from  disclosure                                                  1 

rale  ownership  by  spouse.  '(DQ' 
or  ownership  by  dependent  child. 

Place  '00 '  t^er  each  asset 
exempt  from  prior  disclosure. 

(2) 
Date: 
Mondt- 
Day 

3) 

Value 
Code 
J-P) 

(4) 
Gain 
Code 
(AH) 

(5) 

Identity  of 
twyer/setler 
(if  private 
transaction) 

NONE  (no  repomble  locome.asseis.  or 
transactions) 

1  Hearcland  Bancsharea   -   common 

IV 

Dividend 

J 

T 

exempt 

2  Charter  Financial   Incorporated     - 
common 

B 

Dividend 

M 

T 

exempt 

3  Heritage  Cash  Trust  Money  Market 

D 

Interest 

K 

W 

exempt 

4  Kemper  High  Yield  Fund 

H 

Dividend 

K 

W 

exempt 

SAlB  Value  Class  Mutual   Fund 

H 

Dividend 

J 

H 

exempt 

6  Van  Kampen  Agressive  Growth  Fund 

None 

J 

H 

exeiq>t 

7  Modem  Hoodmen  of  Am.   Annuity 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

exempt 

8  SIT  Mutual   Fund  Group 

None 

J 

T 

exempt 

9  Mercantile  Bank  money  market 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

exempt 

10  Bank  of  Hezxln  NOW  acct 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

exempt 

11  Chemed  Corporation   -   common 

A 

Dividend 

exempt 

12  Compaq  Computer  Corp   -    common 

None 

exempt 

13  GTE  Corp   -    common 

A 

Dividend 

exempt 

14   Southern  Company   -   common 

A 

Dividend 

exempt 

is  Monterey  Pasta  Co .    -   common 

None 

exempt 

16  Pacific  Telesis  Group   -    common 

A 

Dividend 

exempt 

n  Pepsico   Inc.    -    common 

A 

Dividend 

exempt 

Itnc/Gain  Codes:  A=$1.000  or  less                     B=$1.001-J2,500                  C=$2,50l-J5,000                       D=J5,001-SIS,000                     E-II5.0O1-S5O.00O 
(Col.Bl.D4)       F=$50,00l-I100,000               0=J  100.001 -J  1,000,000         H1-J1.000.001-$S,000,000        H2=S5,000,001  ot  more 

2ValCodcs;          J-$  15,000  or  less                     K=$15.001-$50.0OO                L-S50.001-$100.0GO               M=$100,001-$250,000             N=$250,001-$500,000 
(Col.Cl.D3)      O=$500,001-$  1.000.000         Pl=$1.000.001-J5.000.000  P2=$S.000.001-nS.OOO.OOO  P3=J25,OO0,0Ol -$50,000,000  P4-J50.000.001  or  mote 

3  Val  MUl  Codes:  Q=Appr«i5al                            R=Cost  (real  esule  only)                             S=Assessmenl                                     T-Cash/Maiket 
(Col.C2)             U-Book  Value                         VOther                                                     W-Eslimaled 

1323 


NANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of  Ferson  Keponing 
Murphy,    George   P. 


■rw     n  .  n.r..^«..~  ..,.«.«         .    „_..._„        "-  tiKomt,  volut,  ironiactions  (includts  lluut  of  spouse  and 

n.    Page       2  INVESTMENTS  and    TRUSTS       depe„Jen,cluldr«,.  Seepp.  }7-S4ortn„rucnon.7 


Dale  of  Report 
08/02/1997 


A. 
Deicripdon  of  Atiea 

dicate  where  appUcable,  owner  of 
e  asset  by  using  the  parenthetical 

dividuai  and  spouse.  '(Si' for  sep- 

B. 

Income 

during 

reporting 

period 

C. 

Gross  value 

at  end  of 

reporting 

period 

D. 

Transactions  during  reporting  period 

(1) 

Ami. 

Code 

(A- 

H) 

C) 

Type 

(e.g.. 

dividend. 

rent  or 

interest) 

(1) 

Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

(2) 

Value 

Method 

Code 

(Q-W) 

(1) 
Type 
(e.g.. 
buy.  sell, 
merger. 

tion) 

If  not  exempt  from  disclosure                                                     1 

•me  ownership  by  spouse.  '(DQ ' 
r  ownership  fry  dependera  child. 

Ptace  '00 '  (0er  each  asset 
exempt  from  prior  disclosure. 

(2) 
Date: 
Mouh- 
Day 

(3) 
Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

(4) 
Gain 
Code 
(A-H) 

(5) 

Identity  of 
buyer/seller 
(if  private 
transacbon) 

NONE  (■»  tepomble  mcome.assels.  or 
transactions) 

1  Wholesome   fc  Hearty  Foods   -   common 

None 

exempt 

»  Bank  of  Marion   -   common 

A 

Dividend 

exempt 

1  Buropaclfic  Growth  Fund 

A 

Dividend 

exempt 

1 

1  Inc/G«in  Codes:  A=JI  ,000  or  less                     B" 
(ColBl,D4)       F=$50.00l-$100.000               G=J 

$I.00I-$2.S00                    C=S2.501-$5.000                         D=$5.001-$I5,000                       E=S  15.001 -$50,000 
100,001 -$1,000,000         Hl='$l.000,001-$5.000.000        H2=$5.000.001  ormore 

2V»ICodes:          J=$  15.000  or  less                     K=S15.0OI-$50,OOO                L=$50.00l-$l00.000               M=JIOO,001-V250,000             N=$250,OOl-$S0O,OOO 
(Col  CI.D3)      O=S500,001-JI,000,000         PI=J1.00O,00!-$5.OO0.0OO  P2=J5.000.001-J2S,000,000  P3»$25.0OO.001 -$50,000,000  P4=J50.000,001  or  more 

3  Val  MUi  Codes:  Q^Appraisil                            R=Cosl  (real  estate  only)                            S=Assessment                                     T^ash/Markct 
(Col.C2)             U=Book  Value                         v=Olher                                                    W=Estimated 

1324 


[NANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nunc  or  Penon  Reporting 

Murphy,  George  P. 


Dale  of  Repon 
08/02/1997 


X.    CERXmCATlON 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
idicial  Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory 
tnction  in  any  litigation  during  the  period  covered  by  this  report  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children 
id  a  financial  iruerest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  the  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent 
lildren,  if  any)  is  accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  reported 
as  withheld  because  it  met  applicable  statutory  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been 
sported  are  in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C.  app.  4,  section  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  7353  and  Judicial  Conference 
:gulations. 


Signature 


V^ 


Any  individual  who  knowingly  and  wilfully  falsifies  or  fails  to  file  this  report  may  be  subject  to  civil 
at)d  criminal  sanctions  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  Section  104). 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS 

Mail  original  and  three  additional  copies  to: 

Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 
Administrative  Office  of  the  United  States  Courts 
One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E. 
Suite  2-301 
Washington,  D.C.  20544 


1325 


NET  WORTH 


Provldo  •  complete,  cumnt  nnancUl  net  wonb  tuutnent  whiflh  Itemlzei  in  detail 
au  asseit  (including  bank  loeounu.  teal  eiute,  leeurldei,  muts.  Inveranentt.  and  other  flnueiti 
hoidingi)  all  UtbUIdw  Onolodlnc  debu.  mongtgea,  loani,  and  other  flnaoclal  obUgadeoi)  of 
younelf,  your  speuie,  and  other  ImmedUte  membeis  of  yogr  houiehold. 


allasseui 


AKm                              1 

LXABIUT1U 

Ouk  oo  band  tnd  h  btob 

35    ( 

500 

00 

1 

^~ 

■rtrti<» 

Kewi  piyikli  w  taBl»-«auaaW 

322 

O't 

95 

Mala  p4]nUc  u  nliilTii 

U«lUiad  mqiWm  idatctidult 

Nmm  p*ytkb  H  nrttm 

Onuwilt  vd  MM  iMcUtbte: 

AMOuaB  wi4  bOb  eiM 

Dm  b«B  Rlia«u  tnd  frUadi 

UnptU  iaasM  Ux 

DiuAoaothai 

Olbit  oapild  lu  ud  laUK«t 

DBubtfiil 

Rul  tfuu  a«n«H<«  ptyibk-tdd 

•diadid* 

130 

306     )0 

370 

Tfin 

on 

Chiod  naitficai  and  aDs  Una  p«]r< 

Rul  aiMi  oangiiu  r«acl»tbU 

AiUM  tAd  eOMT  pmoBil  pnpov 

147 

nnn 

nn 

Cub  v«lrM  Ufa  laiutmnai 

7 

tnn 

nn 

OihB  UKtt-tumUc: 

4 

I'in 

nn 

. 

10 

)00 

M 

175 

?n9 

00 

ToulBibOUu 

no 

OOfi 

n 

Km  Wonb 

93fi 

?7R 

n 

Toul  AMiU 

1066 

?ni 

ilO. 

1066 

2S4 

0 

1             CO^r^NOENT  LXABUnU 

OSNSRAL  INFORMAnON 

A>  luiiiwr.  eomaka  or  futnator 

None 

An  wqr  t*Hti  plid|*dT  {Add  vhad. 

no 

jJonr 

An  jrw  dofaodwi  b  tnjr  tolu  at  tcfil 
MOBMT 

no 

LcitlClilau 

None 

no 

g  PioTulon  (or  Fsdcnl  laeomc  Tu 

Paid 

li   Ovher  ifKcU)  debi 

None 

1326 
G.  Patrick  Murphy 

REAL  ESTATE  OWNED 

Real  Estate  Address  Value 


Law  office  of  G.  Patrick  Murphy  1 04  W.  Calvert  $21 5.000.00 

Marlon,  IL  62959 

Personal  Residence  3006  W.  Woodlawn  Place  $140,000.00 

Marion,  IL  62959 

Undeveloped  real  estate  (4  1/2  acres)  6936  Markley  Lane  $15,000.00 

Marion,  IL  62959 


$370,000.00 


LISTED  SECURITIES 

Name  of  Security Shares  Owned     Price  Per  Share Value 


Heartland  Bancshares 

700 

$16.75 

$11,375.00 

Charter  Financial  Inc. 

11249 

$21.50 

$241,853.00 

Kemper  High  Yield  Fund 

3984 

$8.45 

$33,665.00 

Kemper  High  Return  Fund 

15 

$31.90 

$478.00 

VanKamp,  An  Aggressive  Growth  Fund 

989 

$11.00 

$10,879.00 

Aim  Value  Class  Mutual  Fund 

310 

$35.93 

$11,138,00 

SIT  Mutual  Fund 

971 

$13.43 

$13,046.00 

$322,434.00 

Property  Mortgage: 

Law  Office  of  G.  Patrick  Murphy 
104  W.Calvert  Street 
Marion,  IL  62959 


Bank  of  Herrin  Note  #  57032 

101  S.  Park  Avenue  Amount:      $130,006.00 

Herrin,  IL  62948 


August  1,  1997 


1327 


I.    BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 


1.  Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used). 

Frederica  A.  Massiah-Jackson 
(Frederica  A.  Massiah) 

2.  Address:   List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address(es). 

Office:  506  City  HaU 

PhUadeiphia,  PA  19107 

Home:  Philadelphia,  PA 

3.  Date  and  Place  of  birth. 

November  10,  1950 
Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania 

4.  Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name).    List  spouse's 
occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  addresses). 

Spouse:  Thomas  H.  Jackson,  HI 

Project  Assistant 
Philadelphia  Housing  Authority 
2021  Chestnut  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA 

5.  Education:   List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates  of 
attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

Chestnut  Hill  College 

Philadelphia,  PA 

1967-1971 

A.B.,  Political  Science 

University  of  Pennsylvania 
School  of  Law 
Philadelphia,  PA 
1971-1974 
J.D. 


8/97 


1328 


6.  Employment  Record:    List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional  corporations, 
companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  instimtions  and  organizations, 
nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer 
director,  partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  from  college. 

Hon.  Robert  N.C.  Nix,  Jr. 
Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania 
Philadelphia,  PA  19107 
Judicial  Law  Clerk 
1974-1976 

Blank  Rome  Comisky  &  McCauley 
Four  Penn  Center  Plaza 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103 
Associate  Attorney 
1976-1979;  1981-1984 

Senate  of  Pennsylvania 

Hon.  Freeman  Hankins  (deceased) 

Main  Capitol  Building 

Harrisburg,  PA 

Chief  Counsel 

Senate  Insurance  and  Business  Committee;  and 

Special  Senate  Committee  to  Investigate 

Significant  Business  Closings 

1979-1981 

Court  of  Common  Pleas 
First  Judicial  District 
PhUadelphia,  PA  19107 
Trial  Judge 
1984  to  present 

Wharton  School 
University  of  Pennsylvania 
Philadelphia,  PA  19104 
Lecturer 
1992-1995 

7.  Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give  particulars, 
including  the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of 
discharge  received. 

None 


1329 


8.  Honors  and  Awards:    List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees,  and 

honorary  society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

Gateway  Black  History  Recognition,  1997 

Punchey's  Community  Service  Award 
Walking  the  Extra  Mile,  1996 

Alpha  Kappa  Alpha,  Iota  Tau  Omega  Community  Service,  1995 

Sadie  T.M.  Alexander  Award,  University  of  Pennsylvania 
Law  School,  1995 

Alpha  Kappa  Alpha  Sorority,  Women  in  Leadership,  1993 

National  Catholic  Educational  Association, 
Presidential  Award,  1990 

Naval  Base  of  Philadelphia 

Martin  Luther  King  Humanitarian  Service  Award,  1989 

We  The  People,  Freedom  Medal,  1988 

498  Hardworking  Women, 

A  Directory  for  Pennsylvania,  1987 
compiled  by  Kathryn  Larson 

Woman  of  the  Year,  1987,  Zeta  Phi  Beta  Sorority,  Inc. 

School  District  of  Philadelphia,  1986-1987 
Law-Related  Educational  Program, 
"Impact  of  Law  on  Minorities  and  Females" 

School  District  of  Philadelphia 

Women  in  Education  Award,  1986 

Willing  Workers  Association  of  Southwest  Philadelphia,  1986 

Nicetovm  Boys  and  Girls  Club,  Community  Service  Award,  1985 

Julia  Reynolds  Masterman  School,  Distinguished  Alumna 
of  1985 

Rafters  Charities,  Inc.,  Appreciation  Award,  1984 

3 


1330 


Italian-American  Press  Award,  1984 

Philadelphia  Jaycees,  Outstanding  Young  Leader  of 
Philadelphia,  1983 

American  Federation  of  Govermnent  Employees, 

Local  1793,  V.A.M.C.,  Community  Service  Award,  1983 

One  of  the  81  People  to  Watch  in  1981, 
Philadelphia  Magazine 

Downingtown  Industrial  and  Agricultural  School, 
Distinguished  Service  Award,  1979 

Leadership,  Inc.,  Class  of  1979-1980 

(formerly  Community  Leadership  Seminars) 

Philadelphia  Jaycees,  Finalist, 

Outstanding  Young  Leader,  1978 

Bar  Associations:    List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related  committees  or 
conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of 
any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Conference  of  Pennsylvania  State  Trial  Judges 

Legislative  Committee,  1986;  1993-present 

Court  of  Common  Pleas,  Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania 

Elected,  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Judges,  1995-present 
Chair,  Corporate  Sureties  and  Fiduciaries  Committee, 

1995  -  present 
Judicial  Study  Committee,  1989-present 
StafFmg  Committee,  1991 

Joint  Bench/Bar  Planning  Committee,  1991-1992 
District  Attorney  Screening  Committee,  1991 

American  Bar  Association 

Special  Committee  on  Youth  Education  for  Citizenship, 
1988-1991 


1331 


Philadelphia  Bar  Association 

Chair,  Fidelity  Award,  1994 
Board  of  Governors,  1980-1983 
Executive  Committee, 

Young  Lawyers  Division,  1978-1980 

Barristers  Association  of  Philadelphia, 

affiliate  of  the  National  Bar  Association 
First  Vice-President,  1977-1978 

Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania 

Hearing  Committee,  Disciplinary  Board,  1S>79-1982 
Judicial  Council,  1982 

Minor  Court  Civil  Procedure  Rules  Committee, 
1978-1980 

American  Inns  of  Court 

Master  of  the  Bench,  1993-1996 

University  of  Pennsylvania  Law  School 
Board  of  Managers,  1982-1985 
Chair,  Nominating  Committee,  1991,  1992 

Temple  University  Law  School 

Law-Related  Education  Advisory  Board 
(LEAP)  1988-present 

American  Arbitration  Association 
Philadelphia  Personal  Injury 

Advisory  Board,  1992-present 

Lawyers  Club  of  Philadelphia,  1975-1985 

Continuing  Legal  Ekiucation  Faculty: 

How  to  Avoid  Legal  Malpractice,  December,  1996 
Trial  Advocacy,  September,  1996 
Fee  Dispute  Resolution,  December,  1995 
Advocacy  for  Women  Litigators,  April,  1995 
Court  of  Common  Pleas,  Mediation  Training,  January, 
February,  1995 


1332 


Litigation  Medical  Malpractice  Claims,  ALI-ABA,  October, 

1994 
Civil  Bench  Bar  Conference,  September,  1994 
A  View  From  The  Bench/Opening  and  Closing  Statements, 

September,  1994 
Effective  Advocacy,  July,  1994 
Alternative  Dispute  Resolution/Judicial  Settlement 

Conferences,  June,  1994 
Trial  Techniques:  Guide  to  Civil  Trial  Advocacy,  April,  1994 
Fee  Disputes,  Ethical  Considerations,  December,  1993 

10.       Other  Memberships:    List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are  active  in 
lobbying  before  public  bodies.   Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you 
belong. 

I  do  not  participate  in  organizations  which  are  active  in  lobbying  before  public 
bodies. 

Other  organizations  to  which  I  currently  belong  are: 

Friends  of  The  University  of  Natal  Durbin,  South  Africa, 
1995  -  present 

Jack  and  Jill,  Inc.  -  1981  -  present 

Links,  Inc. 

Chair,  International  Trends,  1985-1995 
Corresponding  Secretary,  1995  - 

National  Catholic  Educational  Association 

Board  of  Directors,  1987-1990,  1994-1997 
Vice  Chair,  Board,  1994  -  1997 
Convener,  1995  Presidential  Search 

Philadelphia  Heart  Institute  of  Presbyterian  Hospital 
Foundation  Board,  1991  -  present 

Scribe  Video  Center 

Board  of  Directors,  1987  -  present 


1333 


1 1 .  Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice,  with 
dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed.    Please  explain  the 
reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.   Give  the  same  information  for  administrative 
bodies  which  require  special  admission  to  practice. 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Eastern  District  of 
Pennsylvania.   Admitted  1974. 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Middle  District  of 
Pennsylvania.   Admitted  1976  to  1979,  for  one  case. 

Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania.  Admitted  1974. 

12.  Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers  and  dates  of  books,  articles,  reports  or 
other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.   Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.   Also,  please  supply  a  copy 
of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.   If  there 
were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you,  please 
supply  them. 

a.  "Education  and  Delinquency,  a  Judge's  Four-Point  Plan  for  At-Risk 
Kids."   Update  on  Law-Related  Education,  American  Bar  Association 
Spring,  1989 

b.  "In  Search  of  Full  Vision" 
Momentum 
September,  1990 

OTHER  PROFESSIONAL  REPRESENTATIONS 

"African  Americans  and  Civil  Rights:  A  Reappraisal" 
Black  History  Month  Committee  of  the  U.S.  Dept.  of  Labor 
and  U.S.  Dept.  of  Health  and  Human  Services,  February,  1997. 

"The  Economic  Impact  of  Justice" 

Jobs  With  Income  Summit,  January,  1997 

"Sisterhood  Across  America" 

Panel  Discussion,  Themes  &  Books,  October,  1996 

North  Philadelphia  Spiritual  Center 
Gesu  Church,  1996 


1334 


"Women  in  Judging:  Transforming  The  Image  of  Justice" 
University  of  Pennsylvania  Law  School,  March,  1995 

"Race,  Justice  and  Peace" 

Presenter  Pennsylvania  Legislative  Black  Caucus  Summit, 
1995,  1994 

"Legal  Concerns  of  Senior  Citizens" 

Southvfest  Community  Center,  April,  1993 

Alumna  Speaker;  Black  Law  Student  Association 
University  of  Pennsylvania,  March,  1993 

"North  Philadelphia,  Then  and  Now" 

A.M.E.  Union  Church,  February,  1993 

"Women  Celebrating  Women" 

St.  Charles  Borromeo  Church,  October,  1992 

"We  Have  Come  This  Far  By  Faith  -  Women's  Strengths" 
St.  Ignatius  Church,  June,  1992 

Alumna  Speaker;  African  American  Awareness  Society 
Chestnut  Hill  College,  March,  1992 

"Victim's  Rights"  Keynote,  VictimAVitness  Advocacy  Program 

Tri-County  Prosecutor's  office,  Gloucester  County,  New  Jersey, 
AprU,  1991 

"Black  Youth,  We  are  The  Future,  Reaching  for  Our  Dream" 

Luncheon  -  Keynote,  Church  of  the  Gesu,  February,  1991 

Dinner  Speaker,  Conclave 

Twigs,  Inc.,  Wihnlngton,  Delaware,  June,  1990 

"Women-God's  Gift  of  the  Universe" 

Union  Baptist  Church,  June,  1990 

"Women  and  the  Constitution" 

Mt.  Sinai  Tabernacle  Church,  1990 

Black  History  Celebration,  LaMott  Community 

Cheltenham  Tovmship,  February,  1990;  February,  1989 


1335 


Martin  Luther  King  Observance;  Pliiladelphia  Naval  Base; 
Keynote  Address,  January,  1989 

"Women  at  the  Crossroads-From  the  Kitchen  to  the  Pulpit" 
Holy  Cross  Lutheran  Church,  May,  1989 

"Equal  Opportunities  for  Women  and  Minorities,"  EEO  Luncheon 
Speaker,  Naval  Aviation  Engineering  Service  Unit, 
March,  1988 

"The  Role  of  Paralegals  in  the  Office" 

American  Institute  for  Paralegal  Studies,  May,  1988 

Conference  for  Women 

West  Chester  University,  October,  1988 

National  Law-Related  Education,  Leadership  Seminar/Keynote 
Address  -  American  Bar  Association,  November,  1988 

"Continuing  the  Dream,"  Message,  Martin  Luther  King  Service 
Cardinal's  Commission  on  Human  Relations  and  Urban 
Ministry,  January,  1987 

Naturalization  Proceedings,  United  States  Courthouse, 
March,  1987 

"Women  in  the  Law  -  200  Years  After  the  Constitution," 

Women's  Law  Caucus/Student-Alumnae  Diner,  Temple  Law 
School,  April,  1987 

"Women  Going  Forward,"  Olivet  Baptist  Church,  May,  1987 

"Women-Your  Rights  in  the  Workplace,"  Katherine  Gibbs 
School,  June,  1987 

"Salute  to  the  Young,  Gifted  and  Black,"  Miller  Memorial 
Baptist  Church,  June,  1987 

"How  to  Become  a  Judge,"  League  of  Women  Voters  and  NBA 
Women  Lawyers,  January,  1986 

"Sugar  and  Spice,"  Black  Business  and  Professional  Women, 
AprU,  1986 


1336 


"Women  in  Education,"  Keynote  Speaker,  School  District  of 
Philadelphia,  April,  1986 

"Challenges  to  our  Youth,"  Boys  and  Girls  Clubs  of 

Metropolitan  Philadelphia,  Nicetown  Branch,  Annual 
Meeting,  1985 

"Developing  Character  in  a  Technical  Age:   A  Challenge  to 

Education,"  American  Association  of  University  Women, 
May,  1985 

"We,  Women  of  the  80's,"  with  Hon.  Lisa  Rlchette,  National 
Women's  Political  Caucus,  Community  College  of 
Philadelphia  Forum,  October,  1985 

"The  Right  Women  for  the  Job,"  Black  Women  Education 

Alliance,  School  District  of  Philadelphia,  October,  1984 

In  addition  to  the  above,  I  have  participated  in  numerous  panel 
discussions,  conferences,  seminars,  symposia,  with  formal  and  informal 
presentations  on  behalf  of  the  Pennsylvania  Bar  Association,  the  Philadelphia  Bar 
Association  (including  but  not  limited  to  several  Bench-Bar  Conferences),  the 
Barristers  Association  and  Penn  Law  Student  programs,  over  the  past  20  years. 
Finally,  I  have  participated  as  a  "judge"  in  many  moot  court  competitions  and 
mock  trial  programs  over  the  years. 

13.  Health:   What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?   List  the  date  of  your  last  physical 
examination. 

Excellent 
March,  1997 

14.  Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have  held,  whether 
such  position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each 
such  court. 

I  was  elected  to  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  in  November,  1983,  for  a  10-year 
term.    In  November,  1993,  I  won  a  retention  election  for  my  second  10-year 
term. 

The  Court  of  Common  Pleas  is  Pennsylvania's  trial  court,  with  unlimited 
jurisdiction.  I  sat  for  8  years  in  our  Criminal  Division,  hearing  Major  Felony 
cases.    Since  1S>91,  I  have  presided  in  our  Civil  Division,  hearing  medical 
malpractice,  products  liability  and  commercial  cases. 

10 


1337 


15.       Citations:    If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:    (1)  citations  for  the  ten  most 
significant  opinions  you  have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was 
affirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and 
(3)  citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues;  together 
with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.   If  any  of  the  opinions 
listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

PART  1 


1.  Clark  V.  Philadelphia  College  of  Osteopathic 
Medicine 

June  Term,  1990,  No.  5674 

2.  Maerten  v.  Philadelphia  Marine  Services.  Inc. 

32  Phila.  174  (1995) 

3.  Meehan  v.  Volvo  White  GMC 

30  Phila.  225  (1995) 

4.  Congregation  Ner  Zedek  Ezrath-Israel  and  Church 
Mutual  Insurance  Co.  v.  Union  Roofing  and  Sheet 
Metal  Contractors 

29  Phila.  209  (1994) 

5.  Pavoni.  et  al.  v.  Magee.  M.D. 

29  Phila.  28  (1994) 

6.  Shaw,  et  al.  v.  Kirschbaum.  P.O. 

27  Phila.  595  (1993) 

7.  Williams  v.  Supermarkets  General  Corp. 

27  Phila.  518  (1994) 

8.  Frve  v.  Kanner.  D.P.M..  Balderston.  M.D.  and 
ElUs.  M.D. 

27  PhUa.  170  (1993) 


11 


1338 


9.  Commnnwealth  v.  Johnson 

18  Phlla.  418  (1988) 

AfTd,  566  A.2d  1197  (Superior  Ct.  1989) 

10.  rqm^nnwp^lth  ▼.  Mlta 

14  PbiU.  636  (1986) 

PART  2 

Since  January,  1984, 1  have  presided  over  thouaanda  of  Jury  and  non-Jury 
trials  in  criminal  and  clril  matters,  guilty  pleas,  nolo-contendere  pleas,  pre-trial 
suppression  motions,  Rule  1100  (speedy  trial)  motions,  and  cItU  motions  (Lsi, 
summary  Judgment). 

According  to  Court  Administration  Criminal  Division  records,  I  disposed 
of  551  cases  In  1984;  736  cases  In  1985;  653  cases  in  1986;  591  cases  in  1987;  241 
cases  in  1988;  354  cases  in  1989;  and  447  cases  in  1990.   In  1991,  I  spent  eight 
months  in  the  Criminal  Division  and  four  months  In  the  Civil  Division.  In  1992, 
1993,  1994  and  1995, 1  disposed  of  60  to  100  civil  cases  per  year  (averaging  more 
than  1  trial  per  week).   In  1996,  as  a  Civil  Team  Leader,  my  records  indicate  200 
Civil  dispositions.   Civil  dispositions  Include  trials  to  verdict,  settlements  before 
or  during  trial,  and/or  dispositive  rulings. 

According  to  my  records,  flrom  January,  1984,  to  March,  1997,  95  appeals 
were  filed  with  the  Superior  Court  of  Pennsylvania.  Of  these,  the  Superior 
Court  reversed,  in  whole  or  in  part,  14  times. 

To  the  best  of  my  knowledge,  4  Superior  Court  Opinions,  which  reversed 
In  whole  or  In  part,  have  been  published.  These  were  all  dvll  cases.   Two 
Superior  Court  cases  which  affirmed  the  Trial  Court  (1  dvll  and  1  criminal)  have 
been  published.  Thus,  all  other  Superior  Court  decisions,  approximately  89,  for 
affirmance  or  reversal  or  remand,  were  non-published  Memoranda.  The 
Memorandum  Opinions  are  sent  to  the  parties  and  the  Trial  Court.  By  Superior 
Court  Rule,  they  may  not  be  referred  to  or  relied  on  in  any  other  litigation  as 
precedent. 

1.         rt^mmnnwealth  V.  Ernest  Pleasant 
January  Term,  1986,  No.  0144 

Defendant  appealed  alleging  ineffective  trial  counsd.  FMJ  denied 
Motions.  Superior  Court  affirmed  trial,  remanded  for  new  sentence. 


12 


1339 


2.  Commonwealth  v.  Victor  Colon 
June  Term,  1986,  No.  2585 

Defendant  appealed  sufficiency  of  evidence.   FMJ  denied  Motions. 
Superior  Court  reversed  rape  charges,  holding  that  expert  witness  should 
not  have  testified  about  child  sexual  abuse.   New  trial  ordered. 

3.  Commonwealth  v.  Robert  Hicks 
October  Term,  1986 

FMJ  discharged  defendant  and  Commonwealth  appealed.   Superior  Court 
ordered  a  trial. 

4.  Commonwealth  v.  Mavberrv  and  Jenkins 
January  Term,  1987,  No.  1792 

FMJ  granted  Suppression  Motion;  Commonwealth  appealed.   Superior 
Court  reversed  and  ordered  a  trial. 

5.  Commonwealth  v.  Dwavne  Garman 
January  Term,  1987,  No.  0397 

FMJ  held  Rule  1100  (speedy  trial  Rule)  violated.  Superior  Court  reversed 
and  ordered  trial. 

6.  Commonwealth  v.  Larry  Crew 
February  Term,  1988,  No.  5148 

FMJ  held  that  Commonwealth  failed  to  sustain  prima  facie  burden  to  hold 
defendant  for  trial.  Superior  Court  reversed. 

7.  Commonwealth  v.  Martin  Mallov 
February  Term,  1988,  No.  1974 

FMJ  granted  Suppression  Motion  -  reversed  on  appeal. 

8.  Commonwealth  v.  Willie  Wvche 
December  Term,  1988,  No.  3709 

FMJ  held  that  this  juvenile  defendant  required  an  expanded  certification 
hearing.   Superior  Court  held  it  was  premature  for  Trial  Court  to 
consider  the  issue. 


13 


1340 


9.  Commonwealth  v.  Wesley  Smith 
October  Term,  1990,  No.  3502 

FMJ  granted  certain  pre-trial  Motions  precluding  evidence.   Reversed  on 
appeal.  Defendant  subsequently  found  not  guilty. 

10.  Commonwealth  v.  Linda  Scott 

Details  unknovm.   My  records  indicate  only  that  defendant  appealed  in 
1990.  Superior  Court  reversed  in  October  1991. 

11.  Halpin  and  Courtney  v.  LaSalle  University 
May  Term,  1990,  No.  1109 

Two  college  professors  challenged  employment  termination  due  to  age. 
FMJ  sustained  their  allegations.  Superior  Court  held  there  was  no 
contract  to  permit  the  challenge. 

12.  Shaw  v.  Kirschbaum.  D.O. 
27  PhUa.  597  (1993) 

Pa.  Superior  Ct. ,  653  A.2d  12  (1994) 

Superior  Court  vacated  the  judgment  holding  that  referral  physician  could 
not  be  liable  under  theory  of  informed  consent. 

13.  Clark  v.  Philadelphia  College  of  Osteopathic  Medicine 
June  Term,  1990,  No.  5674 

Pa.  Superior  Ct. ,  693  A.2d  202  (1997) 

The  Superior  Court  affirmed  the  Trial  Court's  evidentiary  rulings,  then 
vacated  the  judgment  after  holding  that  the  plaintiffs  joint  tortfeasor 
settlement  with  certain  defendants  "capped"  the  recovery.   Appellate 
Opinion,  dated  March  12,  1997,  will  be  published.  Both  sides  have 
petitioned  for  re-argument< 

14.  Fiorentino  v.  Rapaport.  et  al. 
March  Term,  1989,  No.  4395 

Pa.  Superior  Ct. ,  693  A.2d  208  (1997) 

FMJ  was  not  the  trial  court,  but  sat  as  post-trial  court  en  banc  for  a  trial 
judge  pro  tern.   Superior  Court  reversed  non-suit  determination, 
remanding  for  new  trial. 


14 


1341 


PART  3 

None  at  this  time. 

16.  Public  Office:    State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you  have  held,  other  tl.-an 
judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were 
elected  or  appointed.   State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies  for  e;-aive 
public  office. 

I  served  as  an  elected  committee  person  for  the  22nd  Ward  Democratic 
Executive  Committee  for  approximately  8  years  prior  to  1983. 

I  was  appointed  to  serve  as  a  Delegate  to  the  1980  Democratic  National 
Convention  in  New  York. 

In  the  Spring  of  1981,  I  was  an  unsuccessful  candidate  for  the  Court  of 
Common  Pleas. 

17.  Legal  Career: 

a.         Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after  graduation 
from  law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  a  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name  of  the 
judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk; 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and  dates; 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices,  companies  or 
governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected,  and  the 
nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 

I  have  never  practiced  alone. 

1974  to  1976  Judicial  Law  Clerk 

Hon.  Robert  N.C.  Nix,  Jr. 
Pennsylvania  Supreme  Court 
(Retired  as  Chief  Justice  in  1996) 
6640  Lincoln  Drive 
Philadelphia,  PA  19119 


15 


1342 


1976  to  1979  Associate  Attorney 

Blank  Rome  Comisky  &  McCauley 
Four  Penn  Center  Plaza 
16*^  and  J.F.K.  Boulevard 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103 

1979  to  1981  Senate  of  Pennsylvania 

Hon.  Freeman  Hankins  (deceased) 
Senate  Insurance  and  Business  Committee;  and 
Special  Senate  Committee  to  Investigate 
Signiflcant  Business  Closings 

1981  to  1984  Associate  Attorney 

Blank  Rome  Comisky  &  McCauley 
Four  Penn  Center  Plaza 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103 

1984  to  present         Judge,  Court  of  Common  Pleas 
First  Judicial  District 
506  City  Hall 
Philadelphia,  PA  19107 

1992  to  1995  Lecturer,  Wharton  School 

University  of  Pennsylvania 
Legal  Studies  101 
(Business  Law  to  undergraduate 
college  students) 

b.         1.         What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice,  dividing  it 
into  periods  with  dates  if  its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 

In  the  years  before  I  was  elected  to  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  the 
general  character  of  my  practice  was  corporate  and  commercial  litigation. 
During  1976  through  1979,  I  worked  as  an  associate  attorney  in  the  area  of 
antitrust,  securities  and  multi-district  litigation.   As  a  young  attorney,  my 
responsibilities  required  me  to  work  with  others  in  the  representation  of  clients  in 
civil  and  criminal  matters  involving  the  United  States  Attorney's  Office,  as  well 
as  private,  treble  damage  litigation.   I  handled  discovery  issues  at  all  stages  of 
pre-trial,  trial  and  settlement  proceedings  in  Federal  Court. 

I  was  engaged  in  general  civil  and  commercial  litigation  for  three  years, 
1981  through  1984.  Additionally,  during  1981  and  1982,  I  represented  a  taxi 
company  before  the  Public  Utility  Commission  Hearings  as  we  transferred 
ownership  to  individual  driver/owners  of  taxis. 

16 


1343 


From  1979  through  1980,  while  on  a  leave  of  absence  from  the  firm,  I 
used  my  legal  talents  much  differently.   While  working  with  our  State  Senate,  I 
was  the  chief  administrator  charged  with  interviewing  literally  hundreds  of 
people  to  attempt  to  learn  why  three  major  supermarket  chains  closed  within  a 
six-month  tune  period,  leaving  more  than  10,000  people  out  of  work  in 
Pennsylvania.   Our  Special  Senate  Committee  had  subpoena  power  and  I  was 
invited  to  serve  as  Counsel  because  of  my  antitrust  experience.   I  was  responsible 
for  scheduling  pubUc  hearings  in  Philadelphia,  Harrisburg  and  Pittsburgh. 
Subsequently,  I  prepared  a  report  and  recommendation  from  our  bipartisan 
committee  to  the  full  Senate. 

Later,  from  1980  through  1981,  as  Counsel  to  the  Senate  Insurance 
Committee,  I  was  responsible  to  lead  our  Senator's  staff  in  drafting  legislation 
and  reports  for  the  full  Senate  Committee. 

My  work  as  a  judicial  law  clerk,  from  1974  to  1976,  provided  me  with  the 
signiflcant  learning  experience  of  viewing  cases  from  the  appellate  perspective  of 
our  Commonwealth's  highest  court.  I  honed  my  skills  in  legal  research,  analysis 
and  vtriting.   Much  of  this  early  perspective,  I  use  today  as  a  trial  judge. 

2.         Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the  areas,  if  any,  in 
which  you  have  specialized. 

The  typical  clients  at  Blank  Rome  Comisky  &  McCauley  were  medium 
and  large  corporations.   During  my  first  "stint"  at  the  firm,  my  projects  involved 
major,  multi-district  private  antitrust  and  anti-dumping  litigation.   Class  action 
litigation  was  developing  in  the  early  1970's,  as  well  as  complex  commercial 
matters.   The  clients  were  companies  selling  products  in  the  United  States  and 
abroad.   As  plaintiffs,  we  sued  a  group  of  Japanese  electronic  product 
manufacturers.   As  defendants,  we  represented  individuals  and  the  companies 
accused  of  price  fixing.   I  coordinated  the  defense  of  a  multi-district  class  action 
which  was  consolidated  in  the  Middle  District  Court  of  Pennsylvania. 

When  I  returned  to  the  law  firm  in  1981,  the  Litigation  Department  was 
no  longer  subdivided.  I  worked  on  state  and  federal  court  matters  in  more 
general  commercial  litigation,  as  well  as  Public  UtiUty  Commission  administrative 
hearings. 

c.  1.         Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at  all?   If  the 

frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such 
variance,  giving  dates. 

I  appeared  in  court  occasionally. 


17 


1344 


2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts; 

(b)  state  courts  of  record; 

(c)  other  courts. 

Approximately  80%-85%  was  in  federal  courts;  other  appearances  were 
before  state  courts  or  private  dispute  resolution. 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil; 

(b)  criminal. 

One  hundred  percent  of  my  experience  was  in  civil  litigation. 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to  verdict  or 
judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

As  an  associate  attorney  at  a  200-person  law  firm,  I  worked  with  other, 
more  senior,  attorneys.   To  the  best  of  my  knowledge,  all  of  the  cases  I  worked 
on  eventually  settled. 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury; 

(b)  non-jury. 

Eighty-five  percent  jury;  15%  non-Jury. 

18.       Litigation:    Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you  personally 
handled.   Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and 
date  if  unreported.    Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of  each  case.    Identify 
the  party  or  parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.    Also  state  as  to 
each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  Judges  before 
whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of 
co-counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 


18 


1345 


The  following  are  litigation  matters  that  I  personally  handled: 

(a)        Ruli  Corporation  v.  The  School  District  of  Philadelphia 
October  Term,  1981,  No.  3362,  Court  of  Common  Pleas 

Ashbourne  Transportation  Co.  v.  The  School  District  of 

Philadelphia 

October  Term,  1981,  No.  3363,  Court  of  Common  Pleas 


Ronald  H.  Surkin,  Esquire 

25  W.  Second  Street 

P.O.  Box  900 

Media,  PA  19063 

(610)  565-4600 

I  was  co-counsel 

for  Plaintiff 


Martin  Horowitz,  Esquire 
923  E.  Darby  Road 
Havertown,  PA  19083 
(610)  449-2088 
Defendant 


(b)       Roy  Jackson  v.  Mirick  Pearson  Batcheler  Henrv 
American  Arbitration  Association;  private  ADR 


Sheldon  Albert,  Esquire 
3300  Two  Commerce  Squai-e 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103 
(215)  963-0600 
I  was  co-counsel 
for  Plaintiff 


Bruce  Lombardo,  Esquire 
11  Penn  Center 
1835  Market  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103 
(215)  563-4470 
Defendant 


(c)        Pizzeria  Trio.  Inc.  v.  CSMI.  Inc. 

Civil  Action  No.  81-4312,  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania 


Jeffrey  Less,  Esquire 
1515  Market  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA  19102 
(215)  568-1155 
Plaintiff 


Ronald  H.  Surkin,  Esquire 

25  W.  Second  Street 

P.O.  Box  900 

Media,  PA  19063 

(610)  565-4600 

I  was  co-counsel 

for  Defendant 


19 


1346 


(d)        Teamsters  Ix>cal  169  and  Northern  Shipping  Co. 
Ron  Easlev  Discharge 
Case  No.  1-30-0230-82H 


American  Arbitration  Association 
Charles  Mullen,  Arbitrator 

Richard  Sigmond,  Esquire 

11th  Floor 

Public  Ledger  Building 

Independence  Square 

Philadelphia,  PA  19106 

(215)  351-0609 

Plaintiff 


Sheldon  Albert,  Esquire 
3300  Two  Commerce  Square 
Philadelphia,  PA  19102 
(215)  963-0600 
I  was  co-counsel 
for  Defendants 


(e)  Bethlehem  Furniture  Co.  v.  Richard  I.  Rubin.  Inc. 
Eastern  District  Court  of  Pennsylvania 

(f)  Mayer  Pollock  Steel  Corporation  v.  Arvedi  Steel  Co. 
Eastern  District  Court  of  Pennsylvania 

As  co-counsel  to  plaintiff,  the  issue  was  a  dispute  over  the  price  of  a  large 
shipment  of  Italian  steel.   My  supervising  attorney  was  Morris  Dean, 
Esquire,  Blank  Rome  Comisky  &  McCauley,  Four  Penn  Center  Plaza, 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103,  (215)  569-5500. 

(g)  In  re:  Metro  Transportation  Company 

Honorable  Charles  Hoffman 
Administrative  Law  Judge 
Pennsylvania  Public  Utility  Commission 

Lawrence  Beaser,  Esquire 

Kathleen  Herzog  Larkin,  Esquire 

Blank  Rome  Comisky  &  McCauley 

Four  Penn  Center  Plaza 

Philadelphia,  PA  19103 

(215)  569-5500 

I  was  co-counsel  for  Sellers 


Jay  Bomze,  Esquire 
1401  Arch  Street 
PhUadelphia,  PA  19102 
(215)  569-0110 
Buyers 


20 


1347 


(h)        In  re  Anthracite  Coal  Antitrust  Litigation 
79  F.R.D.  707  (1978) 

Honorable  Malcolm  Muir  QVl.D.  Pa.) 

This  multi-district,  class  action  was  consolidated  in  the  Middle  District  of 
Pennsylvania  from  1976  through  1978.   I  served  as  one  of  the  lead  defense 
attorneys  in  coordinating  document  productions,  discovery,  notice  to  the 
class,  and  preparation  of  settlement  details  in  the  price  fixing  litigation. 

Counsel  for  plaintiffs  included  Arnold  Levin,  Esquire,  Levin,  Fishbein, 
Sedran  and  Herman,  320  Walnut  Street,  Philadelphia,  PA,  (215)  592-1500; 
H.  Laddie  Montague,  Berger  &  Montague,  P.C,  1622  Locust  Street, 
Philadelphia,  PA  (215)  875-3010. 

Counsel  for  defendants  included  co-counsel  Richard  McEh-oy,  Esquire, 
Blank  Rome  Comisky  &  McCauley,  Four  Penn  Center  Plaza, 
Philadelphia,  PA,  (215)  569-5500;  Edward  F.  Mannino,  Esquire,  Wolf 
Block  Schorr  &  Solis-Cohen,  15th  and  Chestnut  Streets,  Philadelphia,  PA, 

(215)  977-2492. 

(i)         Zenith  Radio  Corp.  v.  Matsushita  Electric 
Industrial  Co..  Ltd..  et  al. 

481  U.S.  1029  (1987);  807  F.2d  44  (3rd  Cir.  1986); 
423  F.2d  238,  723  F.2d  319  (3rd  Cir.  1983); 
513  F.Supp.  1100  (E.D.  Pa.  1981); 
494  F.Supp.  1190  (E.D.  Pa.  1980) 

The  Japanese  Electronic  Products  Antitrust  Litigation  was  a  major  lawsuit 
involving  allegations  of  international  price  fixing,  dumping,  economic 
cartels  and  trade  violations.   After  many  years  of  pre-trial  discovery, 
commencing  in  the  early  1970's,  summary  judgment  was  granted  in  favor 
of  all  defendants  in  the  1980's  and  affirmed  by  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court.  Several  judges  in  the  Eastern  District  Court  of  Pennsylvania, 
including  the  Honorables  A.  Leon  Higgenbotham  and  Edward  R.  Becker, 
presided  at  different  periods.   My  role  as  one  of  several  co-counsel  for 
plaintiffs  involved  document  reviews  (in  Japanese  and  English),  research 
and  writing  of  discovery  related  motions  and  memoranda  between  1976 
through  1978. 

Counsel  for  plaintiffs  were  Edwin  P.  Rome,  Esquire  (deceased),  Richard 
McElroy,  Esquire,  and  William  H.  Roberts,  Esquire,  of  Blank  Rome 
Comisky  &  McCauley,  Four  Penn  Center  Plaza,  Philadelphia,  PA  19103, 
(215)  569-5500. 

21 


1348 


Local  defense  counsel  included:   Patrick  T.  Ryan,  Esquire,  Drinker, 
Biddle  &  Reath,  1345  Chestnut  Street,  Philadelphia,  PA,  (215)  988-2865; 
Raymond  T.  CuUen,  Esquire,  Morgan,  Lewis  &  Bockius,  2000  One  Logan 
Square,  Philadelphia,  PA,  (215)  963-5650;  Harry  A.  Short,  Jr.,  Esquire, 
Marshall,  Dennehey,  Warner,  Coleman  &  Goggin,  1845  Walnut  Street, 
Philadelphia,  PA,  (215)  575-2690;  Walter  R.  Milbourne,  Esquire,  Saul, 
Ewing,  Remick  &  Saul,  3800  Centre  Square,  Philadelphia,  PA,  (215) 
972-1975;  Henry  T.  Reath,  Esquire,  Duane,  Morris  &  Heckscher,  One 
Liberty  Place,  Philadelphia,  PA,  (215)  979-1340. 

Because  the  cases  I  have  located  are  so  old,  I  do  not  believe  that  these 
adequately  reflect  my  qualifications,  experience,  temperament,  character  or 
integrity  as  a  trial  court  judge.   I  will  provide  the  names  of  members  of  the  legal 
community  who  have  had  recent  contact  with  me  in  my  service  as  a  judge: 

1.  Edward  F.  Chacker,  Esquire 
Gay  and  Chacker,  P.C. 
1731  Spring  Garden  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA  19130 
(215)  567-7955 

2.  Charles  A.  Cunningham,  Esquire 
First  Assistant  Defender 
Defender  Association  of  Philadelphia 
Public  Defender's  Office 

70  North  17th  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA 
(215)  568-3190 

3.  Eileen  Giordano  Katz,  Esquire 

Southeastern  Pennsylvania  Transportation  Authority 
Office  of  the  General  Counsel 
1234  Market  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA 
(215)  580-7445 

4.  John  Konchak,  Esquire 
Defender  Association  of  Philadelphia 
Public  Defender's  Office 

70  North  17th  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA 
(215)  568-3190 


22 


1349 


5.  Donald  F.  Ladd,  Esquire 
While  and  Williams 

One  Liberty  Place,  Suite  1800 
PhUadelphia,  PA  19103 
(215)  864-7118 

6.  Sayde  Joy  Ladov,  Esquire 
One  Penn  Center,  Suite  640 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103 
(215)  564-0600 

7.  Dante  Mattioni,  Esquire 
Mattioni,  Mattioni,  Mattioni,  Ltd. 
399  Market  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA  19106 

(215)  629-1600 

8.  Robert  Pasquale,  Esquire 
Doroshow,  Pasquale  and  Linarducci 
1202  Kingwood  Highway 
Wihnington,  DE  19805 

(302)  998-0100 

9.  William  H.  Roberts,  Esquire 
Blank  Rome  Comisky  &  McCauley 
Four  Penn  Center  Plaza 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103 

(215)  569-5632 

10.  Alan  Schwartz,  Esquire 

Anapol,  Schwartz,  Weiss  &  Schwartz 
1900  Delancey  Place 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103 
(215)  735-0330 

11.  Carol  Sweeney,  Esquire 
District  Attorney's  Office 
1421  Arch  Street 
Philadelphia,  PA  19102 
(215)  686-8700 


23 


1350 


12.  William  F.  Sutton,  Esquire 
Post  &  Schell,  P.C. 

1800  J.F.K.  Boulevard 
Philadelphia,  PA  19103 
(215)  587-1059 

13.  Rhonda  Hill  Wilson,  Esquire 
1500  Market  Street 

East  Tower,  12th  Floor 
Philadelphia,  PA  19102 
(215)  972-0400 

14.  Charles  G.  Young,  III,  Esquire 
Litvin,  Blumberg,  Matusow  &  Young 
1339  Chestnut  Street,  18""  Floor 
Philadelphia,  PA  19107 

(215)  557-3304 

19.       Legal  Activities:   Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have  pursued, 

including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did 
not  involve  litigation.   Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question. 
Please  omit  any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the 
privilege  has  been  waived). 

I  have  found  that  participating  as  a  "faculty"  member  making 
presentations  for  Continuing  Legal  Education  Programs,  as  well  as  attending 
professional  enrichment  programs,  has  helped  me  in  my  work  as  a  trial  judge. 
Much  of  my  day-to-day  activity  is  goal  oriented;  that  is,  dispose  of  a  motion, 
complete  a  trial,  settle  a  case.   The  course  participation,  whether  as  a  presenter 
or  as  a  student,  enables  me  to  exchange  ideas  and  learn  new  concepts  in  a 
broader  context. 

Continuing  Legal  Education  Faculty: 

How  to  Avoid  Legal  Malpractice,  December,  1996 

Trial  Advocacy,  September,  1996 

Fee  Dispute  Resolution,  December,  1995 

Advocacy  for  Women  Litigators,  April,  1995 

Court  of  Common  Pleas,  Mediation  Training,  January, 

February,  1995 
Litigation  Medical  Malpractice  Claims,  ALI-ABA,  October, 

1994 
Civil  Bench  Bar  Conference,  September,  1994 


24 


1351 


A  View  From  The  Bench/Opening  and  Closing  Statements, 

September,  1994 
Effective  Advocacy,  July,  1994 
Alternative  Dispute  Resolution/Judicial  Settlement 

Conferences,  June,  1994 
Trial  Techniques:  Guide  to  Civil  Trial  Advocacy,  April,  1994 
Fee  Disputes,  Ethical  Considerations,  December,  1993 

Continuing  Legal  Education  Courses  Attended: 

Toxic  Torts/Chemical  Sensitivity  Litigation,  February,  1997 

Pulse  of  Justice 

National  Center  for  State  Courts,  April,  1995 

Effective  Legal  Negotiations  and  Settlement,  Penn  Law 

School,  November,  1994 
Products  Liability  Law  Series 

Philadelphia  Civil  Trial  Judges,  Fall,  1994 
Managing  Trials  Effectively 

National  Judicial  College,  February,  1992 
Toxic  Torts  for  Trial  Judges 

National  Judicial  College,  November,  1990 


25 


1352 


n.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

1.  List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred  income 
arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which 
you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  professional  services,  firm 
memberships,  former  employers,  clients  or  customers.    Please  describe  the 
arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or 
business  interest. 

Pennsylvania  State  Employees  Retirement  System  Pension. 

2.  Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including  the 
procedure  you  will  follow  in  determining  these  areas  of  concern.    Identify  the 
categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present  potential 
conflicts-of-interest  during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been 
nominated. 

I  will  follow  the  guidelines  of  the  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct. 

3.  Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside  employment, 
with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court? 

No. 

4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar  year  preceding 
your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees, 
dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and  other  items 
exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure 
report,  required  by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.). 

Financial  Disclosure  Report  is  attached. 

5.  Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail  (add  schedules  as 
called  for). 

Net  worth  statement  attached. 

6.  Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign?  If  so,  please 
identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the 
campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

No. 


26 


1353 


m.    GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 

An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's  Code  of 
Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  serving  the 
disadvantaged."    Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing 
specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

My  interest  in  community  service  is  reflected  in  time  spent  as  a  classroom 
speaker  and  resource  person.   Over  the  years,  I  have  visited  many  of 
Philadelphia's  public  and  parochial  schools.   When  schedules  permit,  I  have 
invited  classes  to  visit  my  courtroom  for  discussion. 

Additionally,  as  my  interest  and  knowledge  in  Law-Related  Education  has 
expanded,  I  frequently  work  with  law  students  who  teach  in  school  classes. 
Through  Temple  Law  School's  LRE  program,  I  was  introduced  to  the  American 
Bar  Association's  Special  Committee  on  Youth,  Education  and  Citizenship,  when 
I  served  from  1988-199L 

I  fully  accept  my  responsibility  to  work  with  young  people,  to  share  my 
courtroom  experiences,  to  provide  guidance  in  citizenship,  review  the  Bill  of 
Rights,  and  as  a  role  model  and  native  Philadelphian. 

Although  my  time  varies  from  month-to-month  or  year-to-year,  a  sample 
of  the  schools  where  I  have  been  a  presenter  are  as  follows: 

1984  -  Gillespie  Middle  School;  John  L.  Kinsey  Elementary 

School;  Strawberry  Mansion  Elementary  and  Middle 
School;  Shoemaker  Jr.  High  School. 

1985  -  Kennedy-Crossen  Elementary  School;  Julia  R. 

Masterman  School;  St.  Vincent's  Elementary 
School;  Rhoads  Elementary  School;  Franklin 
Learning  Center;  Lankenau-Saul  High  School. 

1986  -  Rhoads  Elementary  School;  Kennedy-Crossen 

Elementary  School;  West  Philadelphia  High  School; 
Germantown  High  School. 

1987  -  Grover  Cleveland  Elementary  School;  Friends 

Select  School;  Hail  Stanton  Public  School;  Mary 
McCloud  Bethune  Elementary  School; 
Kennedy-Crossen  School;  James  Rhoads  School. 


27 


1354 


1988  -  Bok  High  School;  Bartram  High  School;  Steel 

Middle  School;  Y.M.C.A.  classes  in  Chester,  PA. 

1989  -  Ludlow  Elementary  School;  West  Catholic  Girls 

High  School. 

1992  -  Cheyney  University;  Friends  Select  School;  Powelton 

Elementary  School,  where  in  March,  1992,  after  much 
planning  and  coordination  with  teachers  and  parents, 
two  classes  visited  my  courtroom.   The  teachers 
prepared  their  lesson  plans  based  on  my  cases  and  the 
students  spent  two  days. 

1993  -  Wagner  Middle  School;  Abington  Friends  School; 

Temple  LEAP/Penn's  Discovery  Moot  Court  for 
Junior  High. 

1994  -  Gesu  School;  Philadelphia  Inquirer  High  School 

Workshop;  Philadelphia  High  School  for  Girls; 
Fitler  Academic  Plus  Elementary;  Mary  McLeod 
Bethune  Elementary  School;  Springside  School; 
City- Wide  Sunmier  Non- Violence  Mock  Trial. 

1995  -  Prince  Hall  Elementary  School;  Jay  Cooke  Middle 

School. 

1996  -  Philadelphia  High  School  for  Girls  visited  the 

courtroom  for  Mock  Trial  presented  by  real  lawyers, 
followed  by  extensive  discussions  and  questions  about 
an  actual  case. 

1997  -  Greene  Street  Friends  School;  Elverson  Middle  School. 

The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  states 
that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that 
invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex  or  religion.    Do  you  currently 
belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization  which  discriminates  —  through 
either  formal  membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of 
membership  policies?  If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.    What  you  have  done  to 
try  to  change  these  policies? 

No,  I  do  not  belong  to  organizations  which  discriminate  through 
membership. 


28 


1355 


Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates  for 
nomination  to  the  federal  courts?   If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?   Please 
describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from  beginning  to 
end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in 
which  you  participated). 

Yes,  there  have  been  three  selection  committees  in  the  Eastern  District  of 
Pennsylvania  which  have  recommended  my  nomination  to  the  Federal  Court  in 
1993,  1996  and  1997. 

In  1993,  former  U.S.  Senator  Harris  Wofford  named  a  15  person 
committee  chaired  by  Dr.  Mary  Patterson  McPherson,  President  of  Bryn  Mawr 
College,  to  conduct  a  search  for  nominees  for  one  vacancy  on  the  Third  Circuit 
Court  of  Appeals  and  one  vacancy  on  the  Eastern  District  Court  of  Pennsylvania. 
Over  90  candidates  submitted  completed  questionnaires  which  were  similar  to  the 
ABA'S  Personal  Data  Questionnaire. 

Panels  of  the  committee  met  with  about  25  of  the  candidates.   The  full 
committee  met  and  interviewed  a  smaller  group  of  semi-finalists.   I  was  one  of  4 
or  5  individuals  who  met  with  Senator  Wofford  for  consideration  for  both  of  the 
vacancies.   Although  I  was  not  appointed  to  the  federal  bench  at  that  time,  I 
remain  very  interested  in  the  opportunity. 

In  the  Spring  of  1996,  Senator  Arlen  Specter,  the  Senior  Senator  in 
Pennsylvania,  convened  a  new  judicial  nomination  committee.   Again,  after  going 
through  the  process  of  interviews,  I  was  strongly  recommended.    No  nominations 
were  made  that  year. 

In  July,  1996,  Congressman  Thomas  M.  Foglietta  submitted  my 
credentials  to  the  Honorable  William  J.  Clinton  for  consideration.   I  have 
support  for  my  goals  from  educational  leaders,  elected  officials,  clergy,  union 
leaders  and  leaders  of  the  bench  and  bar  in  Philadelphia.  Many  of  these 
individuals  did  submit  letters  of  support  to  Senator  Wofford,  to  Congressman 
Foglietta  and  to  former  White  House  counsel  Peter  C.  Erickson,  Esquire. 

In  June,  1997,  after  two  interviews,  I  was  recommended  by  a  judicial 
nomination  committee  convened  by  Senators  Specter  and  Santonun.   I  have  been 
investigated  and  interviewed  by  the  American  Bar  Association,  the  Federal 
Bureau  of  Investigation  and  the  Department  of  Justice. 


29 


1356 


Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee  discussed 
with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably 
be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue  or  question?  If  so, 
please  explain  fully. 

No. 

Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial  activism. " 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal  government,  and  within  society 
generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.    It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial 
branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of 
government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than 
grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a 
vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad 
classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duties  upon 
governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional 
requirements  such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions  in 
the  manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities. 

The  legislature  makes  the  laws,  the  executive  carries  out  the  laws,  and  the 
courts  apply  the  laws. 

This  is  the  first  lesson  in  my  class  on  separation  of  powers.   The  courts  are 
an  integral  part  of  our  system  of  democracy.   Our  constitutional  government  has 
remained  strong  for  200  years  because  we  have  adhered  to  the  formula  of  the 
framers. 


30 


1357 


Courts  have  a  special  role,  a  well  defined  role,  not  to  re-write  laws,  nor  tt 
initiate  processes  where  the  legislatures  have  not  ventured,  but  rather  to 
determine  whether  existing  laws  are  fair,  just  and  constitutional. 

The  Federal  judiciary  is  not  a  place  for  judicial  creativity.   It  is  an  arena 
for  scholarly  and  objective  consideration.   It  is  up  to  a  judge  to  know  the 
precedent,  to  be  learned  of  the  legislative  intent  where  necessary,  and  then  to 
decide  each  case  based  on  the  facts  presented.   The  judge  is  not  on  a  soapbox, 
nor  is  she  a  policy  maker.   Judicial  responsibility  is  a  stabilizing  force  of 
restraint. 


31 


NOMINATIONS  OF  BARRY  G.  SILVERMAN  (U.S. 
CIRCUIT  JUDGE);  CARLOS  R.  MORENO  AND 
RICHARD  W.  STORY  (U.S.  DISTRICT 
JUDGES);  AND  CHRISTINE  O.C.  MILLER, 
JUDGE  OF  THE  U.S.  COURT  OF  FEDERAL 
CLAIMS 


WEDNESDAY,  NOVEMBER  12,  1997 

U.S.  Senate, 
Committee  on  the  Judiciary, 

Washington,  DC. 
The  committee  met,  pursuant  to  notice,  at  2:13  p.m.,  in  room 
SD-226,   Dirksen  Senate   Office   Building,   Hon.   Orrin  G.   Hatch 
(chairman  of  the  committee)  presiding. 
Also  present:  Senators  Grassley  and  Feinstein. 

OPENING  STATEMENT  OF  HON.  ORRIN  G.  HATCH,  A  U.S.  SEN- 
ATOR FROM  THE  STATE  OF  UTAH,  CHAIRMAN,  COMMITTEE 
ON  THE  JUDICIARY 

The  Chairman.  I  apologize  for  being  a  little  bit  late.  I  apologize 
particularly  to  my  colleagues  as  well  as  the  nominees.  I  got  held 
up  with  the  media,  please  forgive  me. 

Today  we  have  four  excellent  nominees  for  various  courts:  Barry 
G.  Silverman,  of  Arizona,  to  be  U.S.  circuit  judge  for  the  Ninth  Cir- 
cuit Court  of  Appeals;  Carlos  R.  Moreno,  of  California,  to  be  U.S. 
district  judge  for  the  Central  District  of  California;  Richard  W. 
Story,  of  Georgia,  to  be  U.S.  district  judge  for  the  Northern  District 
of  Georgia;  and  Christine  O.C.  Miller,  of  the  District  of  Columbia, 
to  be  a  judge  of  the  U.S.  Court  of  Federal  Claims. 

We  are  happy  to  have  all  of  you  here.  We  are  happy  to  welcome 
you  here,  and  we  are  pleased  that  we  have  Senator  Cleland  here 
to  introduce  Judge  Story.  We  have  Senator  Feinstein,  but  shall  we 
start  with  our  colleague  first? 

Why  don't  we  turn  the  time  over  to  you  and  allow  you  to  intro- 
duce your  nominee  here  today.  Before  you  do,  though,  I  would  put 
a  statement  of  Senator  Kyi  in  the  record  at  this  time. 

[The  prepared  statement  of  Senator  Kyi  follows:] 

Prepared  Statement  of  Hon.  Jon  Kyl,  a  U.S.  Senator  From  the  State  of 

Arizona 

Mr.  Chairman,  fellow  members  of  the  Judiciary  Committee,  I  wish  to  express  my 
enthusiastic  support  for  the  nomination  of  Magistrate  Judge  Barry  G.  Silverman  to 
the  Ninth  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals.  I  regret  that  I  cannot  deliver  these  remarks  per- 

(1359) 


1360 

sonally,  but  I  would  like  to  take  this  opportunity  to  briefly  comment  on  Judge 
Silverman's  qualifications. 

I  have  had  the  pleasure  of  meeting  with  Judge  Silverman,  and  I  have  discussed 
his  nomination  and  background  with  other  judges,  lawyers,  and  professionals  who 
have  worked  with  Judge  Silverman  over  the  years.  By  all  accounts,  he  is  a  man  of 
honor,  intelligence,  and  integrity — and  good  humor.  For  example,  fellow  Arizona 
Judge  Ronald  Reinstein  has  commented  on  Judge  Silverman's  "professionalism  and 
total  commitment  to  the  litigants  who  appear  before  him." 

Judge  Silverman  brings  a  proven  judicial  track  record  to  today's  hearing.  For  the 
past  two-and-a-half  years,  he  has  served  as  a  Magistrate  Judge  on  the  United 
States  District  Court  for  the  District  of  Arizona,  my  home  state.  For  over  10  years 
prior  to  that,  he  was  a  Superior  Court  Judge  in  Maricopa  County,  Arizona.  While 
on  the  Superior  Court  bench,  Judge  Silverman  rendered  superior  service  in  all  as- 
pects of  his  civil,  criminal,  juvenile,  and  domestic  relations  assignments.  In  addition 
to  his  time  on  the  bench.  Judge  Silverman  spent  five  years  as  Court  Commissioner 
for  the  Superior  Court  of  Arizona,  Maricopa  County. 

Throughout  his  distinguished  judicial  career,  Judge  Silverman  has  earned  the  re- 
spect and  admiration  of  fellow  judges  and  the  advocates  appearing  in  his  courtroom. 
For  example,  in  1991  Judge  Silverman  received  the  "Henry  Stevens  Award,"  which 
is  given  annually  by  the  Maricopa  County  Bar  Association  to  the  current  or  former 
Arizona  trial  judge  "who  reflects  the  finest  qualities  of  the  judiciary."  Similarly,  in 
1994,  the  Maricopa  County  Committee  on  Judicial  Performance  indicated  that 
Judge  Silverman  received  the  highest  percentage  of  superior  ratings  from  lawyers, 
litigant,  witnesses,  and  court  staff  in  all  categories  of  performance  reviewed.  Also 
in  1994,  Judge  Silverman's  court  division  was  honored  as  the  "Judicial  Division  of 
the  Year"  by  the  Maricopa  County  Superior  Court  Recognition  Committee. 

In  addition  to  his  regular  judicial  duties.  Judge  Silverman  has  advanced  the  legal 
profession  through  service  on  the  Supreme  Covu"t  of  Arizona  Judicial  Ethics  and  Ad- 
visory Committee;  the  Committee  on  Judicial  Education  and  Training;  and  the  Com- 
mittee on  Professionalism.  He  also  chaired  the  Committee  to  Study  the  Criminal 
Justice  System  in  the  Arizona  Superior  Court  in  1993,  and  the  Governor's  Commit- 
tee on  Child  Support  Guidelines. 

Judge  Silverman  has  shown  his  commitment  to  the  United  States  Constitution 
and  the  rule  of  law  by  co-founding  the  Sandra  Day  O'Connor  Prize  for  Excellence 
in  Constitutional  Law  at  the  Arizona  State  University  College  of  Law. 

Judge  Silverman's  academic  credentials  are  equally  impressive.  He  graduated 
summa  cum  laude  from  the  Arizona  State  University  College  of  Law  in  1976,  and 
was  subsequently  honored  by  his  alma  mater  twice:  once  in  1994,  when  the  College 
of  Law  presented  him  with  its  "Outstanding  Alumnus  Award,"  and  again  in  1997, 
when  he  received  the  prestigious  "Dean's  Award." 

In  short,  I  believe  Judge  Silverman  meets  the  high  standards  reqmred  of  our  fed- 
eral judges.  Indeed,  his  legal  knowledge  and  judicial  temperament  show  him  to  be 
an  exemplary  nominee. 

I  urge  a  swift  and  resounding  vote  in  Judge  Silverman's  favor,  so  that  he  may 
be  considered  by  the  full  Senate  as  soon  as  possible. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  MAX  CLELAND,  A  U.S.  SENATOR  FROM 
THE  STATE  OF  GEORGIA 

Senator  Cleland.  Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman,  mem- 
bers of  the  committee.  I  would  just  Hke  to  say  I  am  pleased  to  ap- 
pear before  you  today  to  introduce  Richard  Wayne  Story,  the  Presi- 
dent's nominee  to  fill  the  vacancy  on  the  U.S.  District  Court  for  the 
Northern  District  of  Georgia. 

As  a  country  boy  from  a  small  town  in  Georgia,  I  feel  particularly 
pleased  to  introduce  Judge  Story  because  he  is  also  from  a  small 
town,  having  been  raised  in  Harlem,  GA.  Indeed,  as  much  as  my 
small-town  upbringing  has  been  so  much  a  part  of  my  life,  being 
a  small-town  guy  has  meant  a  lot  to  Rick  and  has  shaped  him  into 
the  determined,  principled  man  that  he  is  today. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  can  confidently  say  that,  as  you  review  his 
qualifications,  I  am  sure  that  you  will  come  to  agree,  as  I  have, 
that  he  is  a  very  qualified  trial  judge  and  attorney  who  will  make 
an  excellent  district  court  judge. 


1361 

This  nominee  comes  to  us  having  been  a  trial  judge  in  the  (Geor- 
gia superior  courts  for  almost  11  years.  It  has  been  said  that  Judge 
Story  has  a  special  way  of  handling  his  courtroom  such  that  people 
get  a  different,  unique  feeling  after  having  appeared  in  front  of 
him.  Now,  this  special  feeling  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  sub- 
stantive outcome  of  the  case;  rather,  it  has  everything  to  do  with 
how  Judge  Story  handles  people.  Whether  or  not  the  person  has 
been  successful,  time  and  again  they  report  feeling  that  they  have 
been  treated  with  courtesy,  respect,  with  fairness,  and  a  good  dose 
of  common  sense. 

Judge  Story  believes  that  litigants  feel  good  about  being  in  his 
courtroom  because  of  his  ways  that  he  learned  growing  up  in  Har- 
lem, GA.  Harlem  is  indeed  a  small  country  town.  For  those  of  you 
unfamiliar  with  these  types  of  town,  you  can  kind  of  think  of 
Mayberry,  R.F.D.,  the  classic  setting  of  "The  Andy  Griffith  Show." 
Rick  likes  to  say  that  he  grew  up  in  Mayberry.  From  this  small- 
town community  and  from  his  parents,  Rick  learned  the  value  of 
hard  work.  His  father.  Buck  Story,  a  native  of  Columbia  County, 
was  living  in  Augusta,  GA,  when  he  met  and  married  Earline 
Helmey,  a  native  of  Richmond  County.  They  settled  in  Harlem  to 
raise  a  family.  Buck  ran  his  own  service  station  while  Earline  was 
a  florist,  and  together  they  raised  their  three  children,  Bob,  Rick, 
and  Angela.  Rick  worked  in  his  father's  gas  station  while  growing 
up,  and  working  in  a  gas  station,  he  constantly  interacted  with  the 
people  of  Harlem  and  the  surrounding  small  towns. 

He  attended  LaGrange  College  in  LaGrange,  GA,  from  1971  to 
1975,  gaining  a  bachelor  of  arts  degree  in  1975.  At  LaGrange,  he 
was  named  the  outstanding  male  freshman  and  was  an  officer  in 
the  Student  Grovernment  Association.  Additionally,  Rick  was  the 
president  of  both  his  fraternity,  Delta  Tau  Delta,  and  the  college's 
Inter-Fraternity  Council.  Though  he  was  active.  Rick  still  main- 
tained a  stellar  academic  record,  making  the  dean's  list  and  Who's 
Who  for  College  Students. 

Our  nominee  moved  directly  to  the  University  of  Georgia  Law 
School,  earning  his  J.D.  in  1978.  While  in  law  school,  he  remained 
active  as  a  member  of  the  Student  Bar  Association  and  the  Inter- 
national Moot  Court  Team,  while  also  working  throughout  his  sec- 
ond and  third  years. 

Our  nominee  has  had  an  exceptional  professional  career,  most  of 
ail,  that  could  be  considered  good  training  to  be  a  trial  judge.  Two 
years  into  his  private  practice,  private  litigation  practice  in  1980, 
Rick  was  appointed  a  special  assistant  attorney  general  represent- 
ing the  State  of  Georgia  in  child  support  and  custody  cases.  He 
moved  on  to  become  a  Hall  County  juvenile  court  judge  in  1985  and 
was  appointed  a  judge  of  the  Superior  Court  for  the  Northeastern 
Judicial  Circuit  of  Georgia  in  1986.  He  has  been  the  chief  judge  for 
the  northeastern  circuit  since  May  1993  and  has  been  a  ninth  dis- 
trict administrative  judge  since  1996.  In  addition.  Judge  Story  com- 
pleted the  general  jurisdiction  school  of  the  National  Judicial  Col- 
lege in  1987. 

Judge  Story  is  extremely  active  in  the  legal  community  and  his 
community  as  a  whole.  His  affiliations  and  activities  are  too  nu- 
merous to  list,  but  as  a  small-town  boy,  I  would  just  like  to  note 


1362 

that  he  has  chaired  and  co-chaired  more  councils  and  commissions 
than  you  could  shake  a  stick  at,  as  we  say  in  my  State. 

Indeed,  he  has  given  of  his  time  to  many  activities  within  the 
legal  community  at  all  levels,  the  Methodist  Church,  and  the 
Gainesville-Hall  County  area.  More  importantly,  our  nominee  is  a 
Sunday  school  teacher  who  always  manages  to  find  time  for  his 
lovely  wife,  Nancy,  and  their  three  children:  Laura,  who  is  17;  Eliz- 
abeth, 13,  and  Will,  7. 

Mr.  Chairman  and  colleagues,  I  would  like  to  wrap  up  and  say 
that  I  am  confident  that  you  could  search  the  end  of  the  earth  and 
the  end  of  this  country,  and  you  would  not  find  a  man  more  de- 
voted to  the  ideals  of  family  and  community  or  more  dedicated  to 
the  professional  pursuit  of  human  decency  and  justice  than  Judge 
Rick  Story. 

I  am  very  proud  to  know  him  and  call  him  a  friend.  I  am  genu- 
inely elated  at  the  opportunity  as  part  of  my  job  to  recommend  this 
good  old  country  boy  for  this  judgeship.  I  know  of  no  finer  can- 
didate for  this  bench  than  the  President's  nominee,  Richard  Wayne 
Story. 

Thank  you  very  much,  Mr.  Chairman. 

The  Chairman.  Well,  thank  you,  Senator.  I  tell  you.  Judge,  I 
have  heard  a  lot  of  these  introductions  of  judges.  I  do  not  know 
that  I  have  ever  heard  a  better  one  than  that.  He  is  a  great  col- 
league of  ours,  and  we  appreciate  you,  and  that  is  high  praise,  in- 
deed. So  we  are  honored  that  you  would  come.  Senator  Cleland. 

I  think  I  will  turn  to  Senator  Feinstein  to  introduce  her  judge  at 
this  time.  Are  there  any  other  Senators  here  or  Members  of  Con- 
gress who  want  to  testify?  OK.  We  will  go  to  Senator  Feinstein. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  DIANNE  FEINSTEIN,  A  U.S.  SENATOR 
FROM  THE  STATE  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Senator  Feinstein.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman.  I  am  happy  to  in- 
troduce to  you  Judge  Moreno  and  his  family.  He  is  accompanied  by 
his  wife  Chris,  his  daughter  Keiko,  and  his  son  Nicholas.  They  are 
sitting  right  in  the  first  row  on  your  left. 

Judge  Moreno  obtained  his  B.A.  from  Yale  in  1970  and  his  J.D. 
from  Stanford  in  1975.  He  served  on  the  Yale  Alumni  Board  of 
Governors  for  3  years,  from  1991  to  1994,  the  Stanford  Law  School 
Board  of  Visitors,  and  he  was  honored  as  outstanding  alumnus  of 
the  Chicano  Alumni  of  Yale  in  1991.  He  began  his  legal  career  in 
the  city  attorney's  office  in  Los  Angeles.  He  worked  there  from 
1975  to  1979,  prosecuting  jury  trials,  misdemeanor  prosecutions, 
and  criminal  and  civil  consumer  protection  cases. 

From  1979  to  1986,  he  worked  as  a  litigation  attorney  for  the  law 
firm  of  Kelley,  Dryer  &  Warren.  He  handled  commercial  litigation 
in  State  and  Federal  courts.  His  caseload  included  bankruptcy, 
wrongful  termination,  banking,  real  estate,  and  antitrust  litigation. 

In  1986,  he  was  appointed  by  then-California  Governor  George 
Deukmejian  to  be  a  municipal  court  judge,  where  he  served  for  7 
years.  As  a  municipal  court  judge,  Carlos  Moreno  handled  40  civil 
jury  trials  in  addition  to  a  regular  criminal  trial  workload. 

In  1993,  Governor  Wilson  elevated  Carlos  Moreno  to  the  Califor- 
nia Superior  Court,  where  he  has  served  for  the  past  4  years.  He 
has  averaged  approximately  two  dozen  jury  trials  a  year,  at  least 


1363 

a  third  of  which  have  been  homicides.  The  remainder  have  con- 
sisted of  a  broad  range  of  felonies.  At  the  same  time,  Judge  Moreno 
has  presided  over  a  dozen  bench  trials  per  year. 

This  year,  he  was  elected  the  Superior  Court  Judge  of  the  Year 
by  the  criminal  law  section  of  the  Los  Angeles  County  Bar  Associa- 
tion. Upon  receiving  this  award.  Judge  Moreno  was  described  as 
someone  who  "earns  praise  from  both  prosecutors  and  defense  at- 
torneys for  his  fair,  even-tempered  handling  of  a  high  volume  cal- 
endar of  criminal  cases.  The  large  number  of  court  trials  he  han- 
dles in  which  both  sides  waive  jury  and  try  the  case  before  him  is 
an  indicator  of  the  trust  that  counsel  places  in  him." 

Governor  Deukmejian  wrote  in  a  letter  sent  to  you  last  month, 
Mr.  Chairman,  that  I  ask  be  made  part  of  the  record 

The  Chairman.  Without  objection. 

[The  letter  follows:] 

George  Deukmejian, 
Los  Angeles,  CA,  October  6,  1997. 
Hon.  Orrin  Hatch, 

Chairman,  Senate  Committee  on  Judiciary,  U.S.  Senate,  Washington,  DC 
Re:  Judge  Carlos  R.  Moreno 

Dear  Senator  Hatch:  It  has  come  to  my  attention  that  Judge  Carlos  Moreno  has 
been  nominated  for  an  appointment  to  the  U.S.  District  Court,  Central  District  of 
California. 

In  1986,  it  was  my  pleasure  to  appoint  him  to  the  Compton  Municipal  Court  and 
in  1993  he  was  appointed  by  Governor  Pete  Wilson  to  the  Los  Angeles  Superior 
Court. 

It  is  my  understanding  that  he  has  performed  in  an  exemplary  manner  as  a  Mu- 
nicipal and  Superior  Court  Judge  and  has  a  clear  perception  of  the  importance  of 
maintaining  a  judicial  system  that  insures  fairness  and  social  order. 

Judge  Moreno  is  well  suited  for  this  position.  I  am  confident  that  he  has  the  ap- 
propriate judicial  skills  and  in  light  of  his  qualifications,  I  hope  you  will  give  him 
every  consideration  for  appointment  to  the  U.S.  District  Court. 
Most  cordially, 

George  Deukmejian, 
35th  Governor  of  California. 

Senator  Feinstein.  Governor  Deukmejian  wrote: 

It  is  my  understanding  that  Judge  Moreno  has  performed  in  an  exemplary  man- 
ner as  a  Municipal  and  Superior  Court  Judge  and  has  a  clear  perception  of  the  im- 
portance of  maintaining  a  judicial  system  that  ensures  fairness  and  social  order. 
Judge  Moreno  is  well  suited  for  this  position.  I  am  confident  that  he  has  the  appro- 
priate judicial  skills,  and  in  light  of  his  qualifications,  I  hope  you  will  give  him  every 
consideration  for  appointment  to  the  U.S.  District  Court. 

It  is  a  great  pleasure  for  me,  Mr.  Chairman,  to  have  rec- 
ommended him  to  the  President,  and  I  might  say  that  he  was  the 
No.  1  person  proposed  by  the  screening  panel  of  attorneys  and  oth- 
ers who  work  on  these  nominations  for  me,  and  he  was  the  No.  1 
choice  of  the  California  Narcotics  Officers  Association. 

The  Chairman.  Well,  thank  you,  Senator.  I  think  we  had  two 
very  good  statements  by  Senators  for  their  respective  nominees, 
and  I  think.  Judge  Moreno,  that  is  very  high  praise  indeed.  I  hap- 
pen to  have  a  high  regard  for  both  of  these  Senators,  and  Senator 
Feinstein  in  particular  serves  very  well  on  this  committee.  So  I 
think  it  is  wonderful  that  she  could  be  here  today  with  you  when 
so  many  Senators  are  out  of  town.  We  are  happy  to  have  you  here. 

Are  there  any  other  Members  of  Congress  to  testify?  If  not,  then 
if  the  four  of  you  will  come  to  the  dais,  I  think  I  will  have  all  four 


1364 

of  you  come  up  at  once.  If  you  will  just  stand  and  take  the  oath, 
I  think  we  can  get  you  all  sworn  at  once. 

Do  you  swear  the  testimony  you  shall  give  in  this  hearing  shall 
be  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  so  help 
you  God? 

Judge  Silverman.  I  do. 

Judge  Moreno.  I  do. 

Judge  Story.  I  do. 

Judge  Miller.  I  do. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Let's  start  with  you  first,  Mr.  Silverman.  What  I  would  like  you 
to  do  is  introduce  your  family,  friends,  anybody  else  you  would  care 
to  introduce.  We  are  honored  to  have  members  of  the  family  here, 
and  then  if  you  would  care  to  make  any  statement,  we  would  love 
to  have  that  at  this  time  as  well. 

TESTIMONY  OF  BARRY  G.  SILVERMAN,  OF  ARIZONA,  TO  BE  U.S. 
CIRCUIT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  NINTH  CIRCUIT 

Judge  Silverman.  Good  afternoon,  Mr.  Chairman,  Senator  Fein- 
stein.  My  name  is  Barry  Silverman.  I  am  presently  a  magistrate 
judge  in  the  U.S.  District  Court  in  Arizona.  I  regret  that  my  family 
isn't  able  to  be  with  me  today  here  in  person,  but  my  wife  Georgia 
and  my  parents,  Rita  and  Sol  Silverman,  from  Phoenix,  are  with 
me  here  in  spirit.  I  am  very  grateful  to  be  here  today. 

The  Chairman.  Glad  to  have  you  here. 

We  will  go  to  you.  Judge  Moreno. 

TESTIMONY  OF  CARLOS  R.  MORENO,  OF  CALIFORNIA,  TO  BE 
U.S.  DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  CENTRAL  DISTRICT  OF  CALI- 
FORNIA 

Judge  Moreno.  Mr.  Chairman,  my  wife  Christine,  my  daughter 
Keiko,  and  my  son  Nicholas.  It  is  a  pleasure  for  all  of  us  to  be  here. 

The  Chairman.  We  are  glad  to  have  you  all  here.  What  a  nice 
family.  We  are  pleased  to  have  you  here. 

Judge  Story. 

TESTIMONY  OF  RICHARD  W.  STORY,  OF  GEORGIA,  TO  BE  U.S. 
DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE  NORTHERN  DISTRICT  OF  GEORGLV 

Judge  Story.  Thank  you.  Senator.  It  is  a  pleasure  for  me  to  be 
here  and  thank  you  for  the  opportunity  for  this  hearing.  I  guess  fol- 
lowing the  theme  of  Senator  Cleland,  we  brought  a  lot  of  folks  from 
the  country,  I  guess,  a  chance  to  come  to  Washington.  We  have  a 
number  of  folks  here,  and  I  have  my  wife  Nancy,  my  daughters 
Laura  and  Elizabeth,  and  my  son  Will. 

The  Chairman.  Great. 

Judge  Story.  Also,  my  father,  Buck  Story,  and  my  sister,  Angela 
Brown,  and  brother.  Bob  Story,  her  children,  Justin  and  Victoria. 
It  just  keeps  going.  My  secretary,  Joyce  Carruth;  my  law  clerk, 
Wylencia  Hood  Monroe;  and  some  friends  from  Richmond,  who  had 
moved  to  Richmond  and  were  able  to  drive  up  today:  Judy  Powell, 
as  well  as  her  daughters,  Susannah  and  Lydia. 

Thank  you. 

The  Chairman.  We  better  treat  you  pretty  well  with  all  these 
people.  [Laughter.] 


1365 

What  a  nice  family.  It  is  wonderful  to  have  all  of  you  here.  We 
welcome  you. 
Judge  Miller. 

TESTIMONY  OF  CHRISTINE  O.C.  MILLER,  OF  THE  DISTRICT  OF 
COLUMBIA,  TO  BE  A  JUDGE  OF  THE  U.S.  COURT  OF  FEDERAL 
CLAIMS 

Judge  Miller.  It  is  a  pleasure  to  be  here  and  an  honor,  indeed, 
Mr.  Chairman.  Regrettably,  my  husband  Dennis  is  in  Bangkok, 
and  I  really  miss  him  today. 

The  Chairman.  We  understand. 

Judge  Miller.  But  I  am  here  with  my  loyal  staff  and  friends,  my 
former  law  partner  and  some  clerks. 

Thank  you. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you. 

QUESTIONING  BY  CHAIRMAN  HATCH 

The  Chairman.  Does  anyone  care  to  make  any  additional  state- 
ment? All  right.  Then  I  think  what  we  will  do  is  ask  some  ques- 
tions, and  we  will  go  from  there.  We  will  just  come  across,  and  each 
of  you  can  answer  these  questions. 

Are  you  committed  to  following  Supreme  Court  precedent  and 
the  rulings  of  the  Federal  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  for  your  district 
faithfully  and  giving  them  full  force  and  effect  even  if  you  person- 
ally disagree  with  such  precedents  or  rulings? 

Judge  Moreno.  Yes,  and  I  don't  think  the  personal  predilections 
of  a  judge  should  have  any  bearing  on  how  they  apply  and  inter- 
pret the  law,  and  I  would  faithfully  do  so. 

The  Chairman.  OK. 

Judge  Silverman.  Yes. 

Judge  Miller.  Yes. 

Judge  Story.  Yes,  I  would. 

The  Chairman.  All  right.  What  would  you  do  if  you  believed  the 
Supreme  Court  or  the  court  of  appeals  had  seriously  erred  in  ren- 
dering a  decision?  Would  you  nevertheless  apply  that  decision  or 
your  own  best  judgment  of  the  merits?  You  could  take,  for  example, 
the  Supreme  Court's  recent  decision  in  the  Adarand  case  involving 
affirmative  action  since  that  seems  to  be  on  everybody's  mind. 

Judge  Moreno.  I  think  I  would  be  obligated  to  follow  the  control- 
ling law  in  my  circuit,  unless  there  was  some  intervening  U.S.  Su- 
preme Court  case  that  shed  some  further  light  on  that  issue.  But, 
otherwise,  I  believe  I  would  be  bound  by  stare  decisis  in  the  Ninth 
Circuit  in  my  case. 

The  Chairman.  OK. 

Judge  Silverman.  I  am  clearly  bound  by  the  Supreme  Court  de- 
cisions and  would  follow  them,  of  course. 

The  Chairman.  All  right. 

Judge  Miller.  We  don't  have  actions  like  Adarand  in  our  court, 
but  I  would  always  follow  Supreme  Court  precedent. 

The  Chairman.  Whatever  does  apply  to  your  court. 

Judge  Miller.  Yes. 

Judge  Story.  And  I  also  would  follow  those  precedents  and  not 
attempt  to  substitute  my  view  for  that  of  the  appellate  courts. 


1366 

The  Chairman.  Under  what  circumstances  do  you  believe  it 
would  be  appropriate  to  declare  an  act  of  Congress  unconstitu- 
tional? Maybe  I  will  shift  this  around.  Let's  start  with  you,  Judge 
Story. 

Judge  Story.  It  was  going  well  there.  [Laughter.] 

The  Chairman.  You  like  being  last?  All  you  have  to  say  is  me, 
too. 

Judge  Story.  I  believe,  obviously,  it  would  require  reviewing  the 
legislation  and  reviewing  it  in  light  of  the  Constitution.  You  would 
have  to  look  at  the  document,  look  at  the  specific  language  of  the 
Constitution,  and  consider  that  along  with  any  Supreme  Court  pro- 
nouncements interpreting  the  Constitution  that  may  be  applicable 
to  make  that  decision.  It  would  be  something  that  you  would  have 
to  weigh  very  heavily  because  there  would  be  a  presumption  of  va- 
lidity for  any  legislation  that  may  have  been  passed  by  the  Con- 
gress, and  so  you  would  have  to  look  at  it  from  that  perspective. 

The  Chairman.  OK.  Judge  Miller. 

Judge  Miller.  In  the  cases  that  have  come  before  me  involving 
challenges  to  statutes  on  constitutional  grounds,  the  first  thing  I'd 
do  is  try  to  determine  if  I  can  decide  the  case  on  another  basis.  If 
that  cannot  be  the  case,  then  I  proceed  to  examine  the  statute,  giv- 
ing due  regard  to  its  presumption  of  validity  and  consulting  Su- 
preme Court  precedents. 

The  Chairman.  OK.  Judge  Silverman. 

Judge  Silverman.  I  likewise  would  indulge  the  presumption  of 
constitutionality  whenever  possible.  Then  I  would  look  to  whatever 
Supreme  Court  precedent  there  may  be.  If  there's  no  binding  Su- 
preme Court  precedent,  I  would  try  to  find  analogous  precedent.  I 
would  look  to  the  legislative  history,  even  though  that  is  not  defini- 
tive or  the  be-all  and  end-all,  but  it  may  be  of  some  help  in  resolv- 
ing it. 

The  Chairman.  OK.  Judge  Moreno. 

Judge  Moreno.  I  would  simply  incorporate  the  remarks  of  the 
other  nominees.  I  would  add,  however,  that  I  would  grant  appro- 
priate deference  to  the  legislative  branch,  and  any  ruling  that  I  did 
ultimately  make  I  think  would  have  to  be  very  narrowly  tailored 
and  decide  the  issue  as  narrowly  as  I  possibly  could.  I  think  this 
type  of  situation  calls  for  very  incremental  movement. 

The  Chairman.  OK.  Now,  you  have  stated  that  as  a  circuit  or 
district  court  judge,  respectively,  or  as  a  judge  on  the  Court  of  Fed- 
eral Claims,  that  you  would  be  bound  by  Supreme  Court  precedent 
and  the  rulings  of  the  Federal  circuit  court  of  appeals  for  your  dis- 
trict. There  may  be  times,  of  course,  when  you  are  faced  with  cases 
of  first  impression. 

Now,  what  principles  will  guide  you  and  what  methods  will  you 
employ  in  deciding  cases  of  first  impression?  Let's  start  with  you. 
Judge  Silverman. 

Judge  Silverman.  Well,  again,  first,  the  presumption  of  constitu- 
tionality. Then  when  it  comes  time  to  try  to  interpret,  to  try  to  go 
from  there,  we  would  look  first  to  the  intent  of  the  Framers  of  the 
Constitution.  If  there  are  not  binding  cases  on  point,  I  would  look 
to  see  if  there  are  analogous  cases  that  may  be  of  some  help.  And 
then  when  all  is  said  and  done,  as  I  would  look  back  on  a  proposed 
decision  that  I  would  make,  I  would  ask  myself  if  it  makes  common 


1367 

sense  and  is  it  fair.  But  the  starting  point  is  the  presumption  of 
constitutionality  and  the  intent  of  the  Framers  as  the  point  of  de- 
parture in  an  analysis  of  constitutionality. 

The  Chairman.  Judge  Moreno. 

Judge  Moreno.  I  think  I  would  do  the  same  thing.  I'd  also  look 
for  analogous  statutes  that  might  shed  some  light  on  a  particular 
statute  in  question. 

The  Chairman.  Judge  Miller. 

Judge  Miller.  Well,  almost  every  base  has  been  covered,  but 
there  is  one  more.  Even  though  they're  just  persuasi\e,  they're 
often  helpful.  If  there  were  no  other  source,  I  would  also  look  at 
the  work  of  my  colleagues  to  see  if  the  same  factual  situation  had 
arisen  and  the  same  law  had  been  applied  and  see  if  the  approach 
offered  was  a  reasonable  one. 

The  Chairman.  Judge  Story. 

Judge  Story.  I  would  adopt  the  same  approach  as  stated  by  the 
other  nominees. 

The  Chairman.  Let  me  direct  some  questions  to  you,  Judge  Sil- 
verman. Please  state  in  detail  your  best  independent  legal  judg- 
ment, irrespective  of  existing  judicial  precedent,  on  the  lawfulness 
under  the  equal  protection  clause  of  the  14th  amendment  and  Fed- 
eral civil  rights  laws  of  the  use  of  race-,  gender-,  or  national  origin- 
based  preferences  in  such  areas  as  employment  decisions  as  hiring, 
promotion,  or  layoffs,  college  admissions  and  scholarship  awards, 
and  the  awarding  of  government  contracts. 

Judge  Silverman.  In  my  opinion,  race-based  classifications  are 
inherently  suspect.  They  are  subject  to  the  strictest  scrutiny,  and 
I  agree  with  Adarand  that  even  when  they  are — when  they  pass 
constitutional  muster,  they  must  be  carefully,  narrowly  tailored  to 
redress  the  compelling  interest  at  issue. 

The  Chairman.  What  would  it  take  to  pass  constitutional  mus- 
ter? 

Judge  Silverman.  Careful  tailoring  is  the  first  thing  that  comes 
to  mind;  compelling  interest  is  another.  Off  the  top,  I  cannot — I 
can't  think  of  a  circumstance  right  now  that  I  could  cite  to  you  as 
one  that  would  pass  muster. 

The  Chairman.  So  it's  extremely  rare  for  things  to  pass  muster? 

Judge  Silverman.  Yes;  it's  not  impossible,  but  it's  very  rare. 

The  Chairman.  Judge  Miller,  under  the  takings  clause  of  the 
fifth  amendment,  private  property  may  not  be  taken  by  the  govern- 
ment for  public  use  without  the  payment  of  just  compensation  to 
the  owner.  Could  you  give  us  in  detail  your  best  independent  legal 
judgment,  irrespective  of  existing  judicial  precedent,  on  whether  a 
property  owner  is  entitled  to  just  compensation  under  the  takings 
clause  when  the  government — I  can't  help  but  ask  this — through  a 
national  monument  or  wetlands  designation  or  through  other  land- 
use  or  environmental  regulations  prohibits  or  substantially  limits 
an  owner's  otherwise  lawful  use  or  development  of  his  or  her  pri- 
vate property,  or  the  otherwise  lawful  development  or  use  of  public 
land  by  the  individual  or  company  pursuant  to  government  con- 
tract or  permit? 

Judge  Miller.  My  own  view,  apart  from  Supreme  Court  prece- 
dents, is  that  a  land  owner's  use  of  his  property  is  paramount  and 
one  of  the  sacred  rights  that  is  guaranteed  under  the  Constitution. 


1368 

A  keystone  of  this  court's  jurisdiction  is  our  being  able  to  award 
compensation  for  uncompensated  takings  of  property. 

At  present,  there  is  a  permitting  process,  and  if  the  permit  is  de- 
nied or  its  issuance  is  unreasonably  delayed,  that  is  a  basis  for  re- 
dress by  monetary  compensation  in  our  court,  and  it's  a  jurisdiction 
that  we  treat  most  gravely. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you.  My  time  is  up. 

Senator  Feinstein. 

QUESTIONING  BY  SENATOR  FEINSTEIN 

Senator  FEINSTEIN.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

In  the  last  Congress,  the  number  of  Federal  death  penalty  acts 
were  increased  from  about  a  half  a  dozen  to  more  than  50.  I  would 
like  to  ask  each  one  of  you  how  you  would  handle  death  penalty 
cases  and  what  your  view  on  the  death  penalty  is.  Mr.  Story,  do 
you  want  to  begin? 

Judge  Story.  I  would  handle  them  very  seriously.  As  a  trial 
judge  in  a  State  which  has  a  death  penalty,  I  have  had  six  cases 
that  involved  the  death  penalty  in  my  court.  Two  of  those  actually 
went  to  trial,  and  in  one  case  the  death  penalty  was  imposed.  So 
it  is  a  very  serious  matter.  I  would  handle  it  with  utmost  care  and 
would  follow  the  law,  as  I  have  done  in  the  cases  before  me  as  a 
superior  court  judge  and  would  continue  to  follow  and  would  have 
no  difficulty  in  following  the  law. 

Senator  FEINSTEIN.  And  do  you  believe  the  Constitution  permits 
the  imposition  of  a  death  penalty  sentence? 

Judge  Story.  Yes;  I  do. 

Senator  FEINSTEIN.  Ms.  Miller. 

Judge  Miller.  Our  court  does  not  have  criminal  jurisdiction. 
However,  as  an  officer  of  the  United  States,  I  would  apply  the  laws 
of  the  Congress,  and  the  death  penalty  has  been  declared  constitu- 
tional, and  that  comports  with  my  own  belief. 

Judge  Silverman.  I  agree.  The  Supreme  Court  has  ruled  that  it's 
constitutional.  I  agree  that  it  is  constitutional,  and  I  would  affirm 
death  penalty  cases  in  the  appropriate  case. 

Judge  Moreno.  I  have  no  reservation  about  being  able  to  apply 
the  death  penalty  in  an  appropriate  case.  I  believe  it  is  constitu- 
tional. 

Senator  Feinstein.  I  notice  that  many  of  you  are  judges,  and  one 
of  the  things  that  I  have  found  in  talking  with  some  of  the  people 
that  have  gone  from  either  a  superior  bench  or  another  bench  to 
the  Federal  district  court  is  that  very  often  the  docket  they  encoun- 
ter is  very  heavy.  I  would  like  to  ask  this  question:  How  would  you 
handle  your  docket? 

Judge  Moreno. 

Judge  Moreno.  Well,  I  think  it  is  very  important,  first  of  all,  to 
know  your  docket,  to  be  able  to  sort  out  the  cases  that  you  think 
can  be  expedited,  to  give  those  cases  special  attention,  to  seek  early 
disposition,  that  is,  early  settlements.  It's  also  important  that 
courts  set  firm  trial  dates.  In  my  experience  doing  both  criminal 
and  jury  trials  and  civil  jury  trials  for  the  last  11  years,  there  is 
nothing — no  greater  incentive  for  a  settlement  than  an  open  trial 
court.  So  I  think  offering  the  parties,  if  a  matter  does  not  settle, 
a  firm  trial  date  is  one  way  to  expedite  cases. 


1369 

Senator  Feinstein.  Judge  Silverman. 

Judge  Silverman.  Well,  I'm  from  Maricopa  County,  AZ,  the 
home  of  civil  delay  reduction,  and  I  can  tell  you  what  we've  done, 
and  I  think  it's  been  successful.  The  key  is,  first,  early  case  man- 
agement by  the  judge,  which  includes,  as  Judge  Moreno  says,  set- 
ting deadlines,  setting  next  events  in  the  case,  and  sticking  to  it; 
firm  trial  dates  and  holding  counsel  to  the  trial  dates  and  not 
granting  continuances  unless  there's  really  genuine,  genuine  good 
cause. 

Second,  implementation  as  soon  as  possible  of  alternative  dispute 
resolution  mechanisms;  either  settlement  conferences  or  diverting 
cases  out  for  arbitration  or  mediation  has  also  been  helpful. 

And,  finally,  when  push  comes  to  shove  and  the  case  gets  tried, 
the  judge  has  a  duty  to  decide  the  case  promptly  and  move  on  to 
the  next  one. 

Senator  FEINSTEIN.  Judge  Miller. 

Judge  Miller.  For  15  years,  I  managed  a  civil  trial  docket,  and 
we  don't  have  juries,  so  we  do  all  the  managing.  And  I  think  case 
management  was  certainly  the  seam  of  the  1980's  and  has  been 
part  of  the  1990's,  but  it's  a  two-pronged  approach,  both  the  will- 
ingness of  the  judge  to  work  with  the  litigants  to  fashion  the  best 
way  to  handle  their  case  speedily  and  economically,  and  that  in- 
cludes alternative  dispute  resolution,  if  appropriate,  but  also  the 
corresponding  obligation  of  the  judge  to  make  sure  that  the  judge 
renders  decisions  promptly  and  in  a  manner  that's  clear  and  fully 
informs  the  parties  of  their  rights  so  they  can  determine  what  the 
next  step  should  be. 

Senator  Feinstein.  Thank  you. 

Judge  Story. 

Judge  Story.  I'm  on  a  very  active  trial  court  that  handles  all 
types  of  cases,  both  civil  and  criminal.  It  is  the  general  jurisdiction 
court  in  our  State,  and  I  would  agree  with  all  of  the  things  that 
have  been  stated. 

I  might  add  that  in  terms  of  making  decisions,  I  think  it's  impor- 
tant for  judges  to  make  decisions  early  in  the  process  as  well,  when 
discovery  disputes  arise  to  help  the  litigants  get  those  matters  re- 
solved so  that  they  can  move  on  with  their  litigation. 

ADR  has  been  particularly  helpful  in  our  circuit.  We  established 
one  of  the  first  ADR  programs  in  the  State,  beginning  in  domestic 
relations  cases,  and  it  has  expanded.  We  even  do  mediation  in 
criminal  cases,  and  it's  been  very  successful  in  resolving  some  of 
those  cases. 

So  there  are  a  number  of  things  that  we  do  in  the  State  court 
that  I  think  translate  over  very  well. 

Senator  Feinstein.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Thanks,  Mr.  Chairman. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you.  Senator  Feinstein. 

Senator  Grassley. 

questioning  by  senator  grassley 

Senator  Grassley.  Congratulations  to  all  of  you.  I  wasn't  here 
when  you  were  sworn  in  and  when  you  gave  your  opening  state- 
ment, but  congratulations,  anyway.  I  just  have  a  few  questions. 


1370 

Judge  Moreno,  what  is  your  experience  or  what  has  it  been  with 
CaHfornia's  "three  strike"  law?  Have  you  ever  dealt  with  it  in  any 
of  your  cases?  What  are  your  fellow  judges  saying  about  it?  Are 
there  any  problems  with  it? 

Judge  Moreno.  Yes;  I  have  been  dealing  with  it.  Four  months 
after  being  appointed  to  the  superior  court  in  March  1994  is  when 
"three  strikes"  was  enacted,  first  by  the  legislature,  by  the  way, 
and  then  that  November  by  the  people  by  way  of  initiative. 

There  were  dire  predictions  that  we  were  going  to  be  inundated 
in  cases.  I  was  part  of  a  superior  court  committee  that  devised  fast- 
track  rules  for  the  handling  of  these  cases.  I'm  happy  to  report  that 
the  backlog  that  we  initially  experienced  is  there  no  longer.  We 
treat  "three  strike"  cases — they  do  go  to  trial  a  little  bit  more  often. 
But  they  haven't  posed  the  problem  that  most  people  thought  they 
would  initially. 

I  have  handled — I'd  say  30  percent  of  my  cases  are  "third-strike" 
cases.  Some  of  them  are  serious  felonies,  and  some  of  them  are — 
the  instant  case  is  not  a  serious  felony,  but  they're  all  deserving 
of  great  consideration. 

Senator  Grassley.  So  you  have  really  had  a  lot  of  experience 
with  it.  What  about  some  other  people  that  are  on  the  bench  with 
you  and  deal  with  it?  Do  they  seem  to  express  problems  with  it, 
if  you  can  speak  for  other  people? 

Judge  Moreno.  I  don't  know  if  I  can  speak  for  others,  but  as  I 
said,  I  think  most  of  us  on  the  California  Superior  Court  are  han- 
dling the  problem  quite  well.  We  were  given  discretion  last  year, 
1996,  judges  were  given  further  discretion  to  have  some  input  into 
the  ultimate  sentence,  but  I  don't  think  that  it's  the  problem  that 
it  was  initially  thought  it  was  going  to  be. 

Senator  Grassley.  I  am  going  to  ask  all  of  you — well,  let  me 
ask — I  think  except  for  Judge  Miller.  I  don't  know  whether  you 
would  be  involved  with  this  issue  or  not,  but  for  the  others  of  you 
that  will  be  on  the  district  court  or  courts  of  appeal — ^by  the  way, 
first  of  all,  let  me  tell  you  I  have  got  very  much  an  interest  in  the 
judicial  process  and  prosecuting  process  that  is  called  qui  tarn.  It 
is  when  an  individual  can  go  into  court  when  the  U.S.  attorneys 
don't  or  where  the  U.S.  attorneys  use  some  of  their  information, 
qui  tam.  And  I  was  involved  with  that  legislation,  so  I  kind  of — 
and  I  probably  wouldn't  ask  this  except  just  last  week,  after  about 
three  courts  of  appeals  and  I  think  several  district  courts  had  al- 
ways upheld  the  constitutionality  of  it,  there  was  a  district  court 
judge  in  Texas  that  ruled  that  these  statutes  were  unconstitu- 
tional. 

Do  any  of  you  have  views  as  to  the  constitutionality  or  unconsti- 
tutionality of  the  statute? 

Judge  Moreno.  I  have  no  particular  views,  one  way  or  the  other. 
I  am  just  vaguely  familiar  with  the  notion  of  the 

Senator  Grassley.  Is  there  an5rthing  about  the  process  that  you 
find  obnoxious? 

Judge  Moreno.  No;  not  at  all. 

Senator  Grassley.  Judge  Silverman, 

Judge  Silverman.  No. 

Senator  Grassley.  Judge  Story. 

Judge  Story.  No,  sir. 


1371 

Senator  Grassley.  OK.  And  I  think  I  am  right.  You  will  not  be 
dealing 

Judge  Miller.  We  do  have  the  suits  insofar  as  sometimes  the  in- 
dividual involved 

Senator  Grassley.  Oh,  you  will — well,  give  me  your  opinion, 
then. 

Judge  Miller.  My  opinion  is  the  law  does  not  pose  constitutional 
difficulty. 

Senator  GRASSLEY.  OK.  Well,  thank  you. 

We  will  move  onto  another  question.  I  would  like  to  have  Judge 
Silverman  and  Judge  Moreno  think  about  this.  I  think  you  have 
both  agreed  in  your  discussion  with  Senator  Hatch  that  laws 
passed  by  Congress  must  be  given  deference  in  the  presumption 
that  they  are  valid  and  constitutional.  What  about  citizen  initia- 
tives? 

We  have  this  situation.  I  suppose  you  could  cite  several  from 
California  and  the  ninth  circuit,  but  the  one  that  in  Jones  v.  Bates 
where  the  three-judge  panel  has  set  up  a  dual  standard  as  a  result 
of  that  case,  should  citizen  initiatives  be  given  a  presumption  that 
they  are  constitutional? 

Judge  Moreno.  Go  ahead. 

Judge  Silverman.  Yes.  Yes;  of  course. 

We  in  Arizona  have  an  initiative,  a  referendum  procedure.  They 
are  presumptively  constitutional.  They  are  the  grassroots  will  of 
the  electorate,  and  the  electorate  ought  to  be  presumed  to  have 
known  what  it  has  done,  and  are  entitled  to  great  deference  just 
as  any  other  law  would  be. 

Senator  Grassley.  Judge  Moreno. 

Judge  Moreno.  I  am  in  favor  of  initiatives.  I  have — I  believe 
they  are  also  entitled  to  the  same  presumption  of  constitutional  va- 
lidity and  in  deference  by  any  reviewing  court. 

I  am  proud  of  the  fact  that  California  has  the  initiative  process. 
Sometimes  the  people  simply  have  to  speak  when  the  legislature  is 
not  able  to. 

Senator  GRASSLEY.  Could  I  ask  each  of  you,  then,  if  you  disagree 
with  the  decision  in  the  Jones  case? 

Judge  Moreno.  I  have  read  a  synopsis  of  it.  The  only  part  that 
concerns  me  is  a  reference  to  the  electorate  being  the  electorate, 
being  ignorant,  and  the  court  somehow  substituting  its  will  of  what 
an  overwhelming  amount  of  voters  decided  should  be  the  law. 

Senator  GRASSLEY.  Judge  Silverman? 

Judge  Silverman.  I  disagree  with  the  decision  and  agree  with 
the  dissent. 

Senator  GRASSLEY.  Judge  Silverman,  many  people  believe  that 
the  ninth  circuit  is  just  too  big  and  unwieldy  to  function  effectively. 
Do  you  believe  that  courts  can  get  too  big,  and,  specifically,  do  you 
believe  that  the  ninth  circuit  is  too  big  or  at  least  should  not  get 
any  bigger? 

Judge  Silverman.  Well,  there  are  pros  and  cons  to  dividing  the 
circuit  up.  I  do  not  think  it  would  be  advantageous  to  have  the  cir- 
cuit get  any  bigger.  There  are  economies  of  scale.  In  some  respects, 
having  large  circuits,  there  is  less  administration  and  that  sort  of 
thing.  We  have  less  divisions  amongst  circuits,  the  fewer  circuits 
there  are,  but,  by  the  same  token,  sometimes  the  circuit  can  get  so 


1372 

big  that  it  gets  out  of  touch  with  the  districts  that  comprise  it.  So 
there  is  something  to  be  said  for  both  sides  of  that.  I  am  not  really 
sure  how  I  would  resolve  it. 

Senator  Grassley.  OK.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Chairman. 

The  Chairman.  Thank  you. 

I  have  a  lot  of  other  questions,  but  I  am  satisfied,  listening  to  the 
four  of  you,  that  you  are  excellent  nominees. 

As  you  know,  I  am  death  on  judicial  activism.  Five  years  ago 

Senator  Grassley.  Oh. 

The  Chairman.  You  did  not  know  that? 

Senator  Feinstein.  No  kidding. 

The  Chairman.  Do  not  tell  me  none  of  you  knew  that. 

But,  you  know,  5  years  ago,  people  did  not  really  understand 
what  that  was.  I  think  everybody  understands  today.  It  is  impor- 
tant. 

Let  me  just  make  this  case.  As  people  can  easily  see  around  here, 
if  they  really  know  what  is  going  on,  I  have  worked  very  hard  to 
fill  these  judgeships.  The  Ninth  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals,  in  par- 
ticular, has  been  very,  very  difficult  to  fill,  and  one  of  the  reasons 
is — and  you  are  going  on  that.  Judge  Moreno — one  of  the  reasons 
it  is  so  difficult  is  because  of  the  activism  of  that  court,  and  these 
judges  think  that  they  are  standing  up  for  liberal  principles  when, 
in  fact,  they  are  undermining  the  judiciary  across  the  board,  and 
even  members  of  the  judiciary  from  the  left  to  the  right  are  very 
critical  of  what  they  are  doing. 

If  you  go  on  that  court  and  you  become  one  of  those,  you  are 
doing  the  judiciary  a  great  deal  of  harm.  It  is  very  difficult  knowing 
that  that  court  is  the  most  reversed  circuit  court  in  the  country.  It 
is  very  difficult  to  get  the  nominees  through  the  committee,  and  it 
is  a  tribute  to  you  that  you  are  going  to  go  through  the  committee 
and  hopefully  onto  the  court  as  quickly  as  possible. 

Now,  just  so  everybody  knows,  I  intend  to  have  Margaret 
McKeown — I  want  my  colleagues  to  know  this — who  will  also  come 
up  for  the  Ninth  Circuit  Court  of  Appeals  and  Susan  Mollway  from 
Hawaii  on  the  next  hearing.  She  is  for  the  district  court,  but  Mar- 
garet McKeown  will  be  for  the  ninth  circuit,  but  I  am  counting  on 
you  when  you  get  there  to  just  be  a  great  judge. 

I  do  not  really  care  if  you  are  liberal  or  conservative.  Naturally, 
I  think  I  would  prefer  you  to  be  conservative,  but  the  fact  is,  it  is 
not  that  important  if  you  observe  the  rule  of  judging.  Judges  are 
not — they  are  the  closest  thing  to  God  in  this  world,  but  the  fact 
of  the  matter  is,  they  are — ^you  are  nominated  and  confirmed  for 
life  for  these  positions,  to  interpret  the  laws,  not  make  them. 

Now,  sure,  you  have  cases  of  first  impression  where  you  have  got 
to  decide  what  the  law  really  is.  Sure,  you  have  to  split  the  baby 
sometimes,  so  to  speak,  to  decide  any  particular — some  of  these 
particular  cases,  but  I  think  you  know  what  I  am  talking  about 
when  I  talk  about  judicial  activism,  and  I  do  not  mean  to  lecture 
you,  but  I  am  telling  you  that  it  is  a  big  problem  to  us  on  the  Judi- 
ciary Committee  and  it  should  be  because  some  of  the  judges  in 
this  country  really  are  activists  who  just  substitute  their  own  pol- 
icy preferences  for  what  the  clear  law  is,  and  that  is  not  right. 

You  said  today  that  if  the  death  penalty  came  before  you,  you 
would  have  no  problems  at  all  with  sustaining  it  because  that  is 


1373 

the  law  of  the  land.  There  are  three  judges  in  the  Ninth  Circuit 
Court  of  Appeals  who  have  never  voted  in  their  whole  tenure  on 
that  bench  to  sustain  a  death  penalty. 

Now,  I  have  to  admit,  I  do  not  like  the  death  penalty  personally, 
but  it  is  the  law,  and  I  believe  it  is  something  that  needs  to  be  the 
law  because  I  do  believe  that  it  is  a  deterrent,  if  only  for  those  who 
have  committed  murder  so  they  do  not  do  it  again  in  prison  or  else- 
where. And  we  have  plenty  of  illustrations  to  show  that  they  do. 

So  it  is  very  important  for  you  to  set  examples  as  members  of 
the  Federal  judiciary.  I  love  the  Federal  judiciary.  I  fight  for  you. 
I  fought  for  the  pay  increase.  I  wanted  it  separated  for  more  pay. 
I  got  that  through  the  Senate,  could  not  hold  it  in  conference.  I 
think  the  judiciary  is  the  reason  this  country  is  great.  I  think  it 
is  the  reason  the  Constitution  is  observed  in  this  country,  but  if 
judges  start  doing  whatever  they  want  to  rather  than  observing 
what  the  law  is  and  following  it  the  way  it  is,  then  it  will  not  take 
long  until  the  judicial  system  will  undermine  this  very  country  that 
you  now  are  sustaining. 

So  this  is  very  important.  I  think  all  four  of  you  are  excellent 
nominees.  I  commend  the  President  for  sending  you  here,  and  we 
are  going  to  do  everji^hing  we  can  to  get  you  through. 

I  believe  they  will  be  on  tomorrow's  markup.  We  are  going  to  put 
you  on  the  markup  tomorrow.  Now,  whether  we  can  get  you 
through  in  this  timeframe  or  not,  we  only  have  tomorrow,  I  think. 
It  will  be  probably  the  last  day.  I  am  not  sure,  but  do  not  worry. 
It  will  carry  over,  and  we  will  do  the  best  we  can. 

I  also  do  not  think  it  is  fair  to  have  you  standing  in  limbo  when 
you  have  to — and  each  of  your  cases,  it  is  not  so  bad  because  you 
are  already  either  a  magistrate  or  judges,  but  where  a  person  is 
practicing  law  and  has  to  wind  down  that  practice,  it  is  a  big  prob- 
lem, and  I  would  like  to  have  more  cooperation  in  resolving  some 
of  these  very  serious  problems. 

I,  for  one,  do  believe  that  the  President,  whoever  the  President 
may  be,  is  the  President,  and  that  President  has  a  constitutional 
right  to  make  these  nominations.  We  have  a  constitutional  obliga- 
tion that  unless  there  are  really  significant  reasons  for  rejecting  a 
judicial  nominee,  to  confirm,  not  with  a  blank  check,  but  to  confirm 
those  that  the  President  has  nominated. 

So  understand  that  you  can  help  others  by  your  actions  when 
you  get  there.  It  is  really  important.  In  fact,  I  get  it  mixed  up.  It 
is  you,  Mr.  Silverman,  that  is  going  on  the  ninth  circuit,  but  that 
you  are  going  to  be  within  the  ninth  circuit. 

Judge  Silverman.  I  thought  you  knew  something  I  did  not  know. 

The  Chairman.  You  would  not  want  to  be  on  there  with  the  type 
of  judges  they  have  there  right  now.  We  are  counting  on 

Senator  Feinstein.  Oh,  oh. 

The  Chairman.  I  am  just  kidding.  I  thought  I  would  just  throw 
a  little  here — we  are  kind  of  counting  on  you,  Judge  Silverman,  to 
make  a  difference. 

Judge  Silverman.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  commit  to  you  that  I  will  do 
that. 

The  Chairman.  Well,  I  commit  to  you  that  I  will  be  watching. 


1374 

Senator  Feinstein.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  think  Judge  Silverman 
probably  wins  an  award  for  the  quickest  processed  nominee,  at 
least  since  I  have  been  on  this  committee. 

The  Chairman.  You  know,  when  you  put  up  the  nominees, 
we 

Senator  Feinstein.  I  have  been  trying  to  figure  out  what  your 
magic  is. 

Judge  Silverman.  Well,  I  am  a  magician. 

The  Chairman.  Do  not  tell  us  that. 

Let  me  just  say  this,  that  when  we  get  good  nominees,  we  try 
to  put  them  through.  Now,  I  have  to  admit,  I  wish  we  could  do  bet- 
ter. The  committee  is  not  totally  without  some  fault,  too,  but  we 
have  worked  hard,  and  we  have  tried  to  move  nominations  as 
quickly  as  we  can. 

We  have  35  confirmed  judges  this  year,  8  are  pending,  4  today. 
That  would  be  12  more.  If  we  can,  that  would  be  47  total  possible 
judges.  That  is  far  better  than  our  colleagues  on  the  other  side  did 
during  a  number  of  years  during  the  Bush  and  Reagan  administra- 
tions, when  there  were  actually  more  vacancies. 

By  the  way,  we  have  about  40  vacancies  that  have  not  gotten  any 
nominees,  and  as  hard  as  I  try,  I  have  never  quite  been  able  to  get 
nominees  confirmed  who  are  not  nominated.  So,  you  know,  I  get  a 
little  tired  of  all  the  screaming  and  shouting,  but  the  point  I  am 
making  is  each  of  you  can  make  a  difference  for  people  who  follow 
you  here  before  the  committee  by  being  good  judges  and  observing 
the  Constitution  and  doing  what  really  is  expected  of  you,  and  if 
you  will  do  that,  you  will  help  the  Federal  judiciary  immensely,  re- 
gardless of  who  the  chairman  is  or  who  is  in  charge  of  this  commit- 
tee. I  think  you  will  find  that  all  of  us  will  work  harder  to  make 
sure  that  these  positions  are  filled,  and  we  will  do  our  very  best 
for  you. 

I  will  do  my  very  best  to  get  you  through  before  the  end  of  this 
session,  which  means  probably  tomorrow,  but  that  means  that  we 
will  put  you  on  the  markup  for  tomorrow,  and,  hopefully,  all  four 
of  you  will  pass  that,  but,  if  something  happens  that  you  do  not  get 
through  this  session,  we  will  do  our  very  best  to  get  you  through 
as  soon  as  we  come  back  after  the  20th  of  January. 

Judge  Silverman.  Thank  you  very  much. 

The  Chairman.  I  want  to  thank  each  of  you.  I  want  to  thank 
your  families  for  being  with  you,  and  your  friends.  I  think  it  is  a 
real  tribute  to  all  of  you  to  have  all  of  these  folks  with  you,  and 
we  wish  you  the  very  best,  and  I  hope  you  will  not  forget  us  on  the 
Judiciary  Committee. 

We  believe  once  you  get  there,  you  can  observe  things  that  this 
committee  needs  to  do,  and  we  would  love  to  receive  correspond- 
ence. I  know  there  is  a  fine  line,  but  we  would  love  to  receive  cor- 
respondence from  you.  We  would  love  to  have  your  suggestions.  We 
would  love  to  be  able  to  do  a  better  job  here. 

And  believe  it  or  not,  with  all  of  the  wide  diversity  of  beliefs  on 
this  committee,  we  do  get  a  lot  done,  and  I  think  you  find  that 
there  are  many  times  when  we  get  together  as  Democrats  and  Re- 
publicans and  do  what  is  right  for  this  country,  as  well  as  some  of 
the  fiascos  that  occasionally  occur  as  well. 


1375 

We  want  to  thank  each  of  you  for  being  here,  and  with  that   we 
will  recess  until  further  notice.  ' 

[Whereupon,  at  2:56  p.m.,  the  committee  was  adjourned.] 
[Submissions  for  the  record  follows:] 


1376 


SUBMISSIONS  FOR  THE  RECORD 


SEMATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUSSTIONNAIRE  FOR  JXIDICIAL  NOMINEES 
I.    BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 

1.  Full  na'"''*  (include  any  former  names  used.) 

Bajrry  G.    Silverman 

2.  Address ;   List  current  place  of  residence  and  office 
address (es) . 

Place  of  residence 
Phoenix,    AZ 

Office  address 

U. S .    Courthouse 

230   N.    1st  Ave.,    Rm.    5011 

Phoenix,   AZ     85025 

602-514-7022 

3 .  Date  and  place  of  birth; 

October  11,    1951,    New  York,    NY 

4.  Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's 
name).   List  spouse's  occupation,  employer's  name  and 
business  address (es). 

Married  to  George-Arm  Silverman  (maiden  name:  Middleton) 
self-employed  court  reporter,    works  from  home 


Education;   List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have 
attended,  including  dates  of  attendance,  degrees  received, 
and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

Phoenix  College,  summer,  1969  (immediately  after  high 
school  graduation  in  June,  1969,  I  attended  Phoenix 
College  in  the  summer  to  earn  credits  for  transfer  to 
Arizona  State  University  in  fall,    1969) 

Arizona      State      University,       August,       1969- 
January,    1973.    Degree:   B.A.    summa   cum  laude 

Arizona      State      University     College     of     Law, 
August,    1973-May,    1976,    Degree:   J.D. 


S.    Employment  Record;   List  (by  year)  all  business  or 

professional  corporations,  companies,  firms,  or  other 


1377 


enterprises,  partnerships.  Institutions  and  organizations, 
nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were 
connected  as  em  officer,  director,  partner,  proprietor,  or 
employee  since  graduation  from  college. 

After  college  graduation  and  durincr  law  school  (Jan.  .  1973- 
Mav.    1976) 

1973:  KXTV  Radio  (no  longer  in  existence) ,  Phoenix,  AZ. 
Part-time  job  selling  advertising  and  as  board  operator 

1974:  Jones,  Hunter  &  Lerch  (firm  no  longer  in  existence) , 
Phoenix,    AZ.      Law  cler}i 

1975-76:  Streich,  Lang,  Weeks  Cardon  &  French,  (now  Streich 
Lang)  2  N.  Central,  Phoenix,  AZ  85004,  602-229-5200) .  Law 
clerk/ summer  associate 

1975-76:  Treon,  Warn! eke,  Dann  &  Roush  (now  Treon  S trick 
Lucia  &  Aguire  PA)  2700  N.  Central  Ave.,  Phoenix,  AZ  85004, 
602-285-4400.      Law  clerk 


After  law  school 

10/25/76   -    11/30/77:    Phoenix   City  Prosecutor' s   Office, 

455    N.     5^    St,     Suite    400,     Phoenix,     AZ    85004,     602-262-6461: 

Assistant   City  Prosecutor. 

12/1/77  -  12/7/79:  Maricopa  County  Attorney' s  Office,  301  W. 
Jefferson,  Phoenix,  AZ  85003,  602-506-3411 :  Deputy  County 
Attorney 

12/7/79  -  9/4/84:  Superior  Court  of  Arizona  for  Maricopa 
County,  201  W.  Jefferson,  Phoenix,  AZ  85003.  602-506-3204: 
Superior  Court  Commissioner 

9/4/84  -  1/25/95:  Superior  Court  of  Arizona,  201  W.  Jefferson, 
Phoenix,    AZ      85003,    602-506-3204 :    Judge   of  Superior  Court 

1/25/95  -  present:  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  District  of 
Arizona,  230  N.  1"  Ave.,  Phoenix,  AZ  85025,  602-514 -7022 : 
U.S.    Magistrate  Judge 


Military  Service:   Have  you  had  any  military  service?   If  so, 
give  particulars,  including  the  dates,  branch  of  service, 
rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 


1378 


No 

Honors  a"d  Awards;   List  any  scholarships,  fellowships, 
honorary  degrees,  and  honorary  society  memberships  that  you 
believe  would  be  o£  interest  to  the  Committee. 

^Outstanding  Aluraaus  Award,"  Arizona  State  University- 
College  of  Law  Alumni  Association,    1995 

■^Judicial  Division  of  the  Year,  "  Superior  Court  Employee 
Recognition  Committee,    May,    1994 

Family  Law  Committee  of  the  Maricopa  County  Bar 
Association  Award  for   "^Excellence  as  a  Jurist,  "  1994 

"^1991  Henry  Stevens  Award"  by  the  Maricopa  County  Bar 
Association  to  a  sitting  or  former  trial  judge  "^who 
reflects    the  finest  qualities  of   the  judiciary" 

Highest  scorer  among  all  Maricopa  County  Superior  Court 
judges  in  the  1994  Arizona  Judicial  Performance  Review 
survey;  highest  scorer  among  all  Maricopa  County  Superior 
Court  judges  in  the  1992  Arizona  Judicial  Evaluation 
Poll;  highest  or  second- to- the -highest  scorer  in  the 
1990,     1988,   and  1986  Arizona  Judicial  Evaluation  Polls. 

"^1992  First  Place  Excel  Award  for  an  Editorial  or  Column 
(Category:  Magazine-Ad  Revenues  of  $100,000  or  Less)" 
from  the  Society  of  National  Association  Publications  for 
my  article,  M  Judge's  Mailbox,  "  that  appeared  in 
Litigation.  Fall,  1991,  published  by  che  American  Bar 
Association 

Nominated  for  a  1992  ^Maggie  Award"  given  by  a  magazine 
industry  group  for  "Best  Regularly  Featured  Department, 
Section  or  Column  in  a  Trade  Publication"  for  a  series  of 
columns  I  wrote  for  Arizona  Attorney  in  1991,  published 
by   the  State  Bar  of  Arizona 

Member,    Arizona  State  Law  Journal.    1974-75 


9.         Bar  Associations;   List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or 

judicial -related  coBnaittees  or  conferences  of  which  you  are 
or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of  any 
offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

State  Bar  of  Arizona    (1976 -present) 
American  Bar  Association    (197 6 -present) 
Maricopa   County  Bar  Association    (197 6 -present) 
Federal   Bar  Association    (1995 -present) 


1379 


American  AssociAtion  of  Law  Lihraries    (1989-1994) 
Ninth   Circuit  Historical   Society   (199€-1997) 
Federal  Magistrate  Judges  Association    (1995-preBent) 
Arizona  Judges  Association    (1979-   1995;    secretary  1993 


94) 


3t  I 

Law  Society  of  Arizona  State   University    (1995-present) 


10.  Other  Memberships;   List  all  organizations  to  which  you 
belong  that  are  active  in  lobbying  before  p\iblic  bodies. 
Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

A.  No  organizations   that  are  active  in  lobbying 

B.  Other  organizations: 

International  Brotherhood  of  Magicians    (1986-present) 

Society  of  American  Magicians    (1992 -present) 

Psychic  Entertainers  Association  (1989 -present)  —  The  PEA 
is  an  organization  of  magicians  with  an  interest  in  wagic 
tricJis    that   create  an  illusion  of  mind-reading. 

B'nai   Brith    (1976-present) 

Temple  Solel    (1996 -present) 

Temple  Beth  Israel    (1978-1996) 

11.  Court  Admission;   List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been 
admitted  to  practice,  with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if 
any  such  memberships  lapsed.   Please  explain  the  reason  for 
any  lapse  of  membership.   Give  the  same  information  for 
administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission  to 
practice. 

Arizona  Supreme  Court,    October  22,    1976 
U.S.    District   Court    (D.Ariz .) ,    November   1,    1976 
U.S.    Court  of  Appeals    rs"  Cir . ) ,    November  4,    1976 
U.S.    Supreme  Court,    July  14,    1980 


12.   Published  Writings:   List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates 
of  books,  articles,  reports,  or  other  pviblished  material  you 
have  written  or  edited.   Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
piiblished  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee. 
Also,  please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues 
involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.   If  there  were 


1380 


press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily 
available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

Copies  of  the  following  writings  are  supplied  at  Tab  A  of  the 
accompanying  supporting  documents: 

Author,  "A  Judge's  Mailbox, "  18  Litigacion  43  (Fall, 
1991) .  It  was  reprinted  in  Iowa  Lawyer,  January,  1993, 
and  in  The  Federal  Lawyer,  March/April,  1997  anid  first 
appeared  in  Arizona  Attorney   "Out  of  Order"    series. 

Author,     "Out   of  Order, "    a    series   of   eight  monthly 
humor    columns     in    Arizona     Attorney,      the    monthly 
magazine     of     the    State    Bar    of    Arizona,     April 
December,       1991.  Three      of      the      columns      were 

reprinted  in   The  Phoenix  Gazette    (Augusc  31,    1991, 
January  14,    1992  and  March  3,    1992.) 

Author,  Book  Review,  Death  of  a  "Jewish  American 
Princess, "  Arizona  Attorney,    October,    1988. 

Principal  author,  "A  System  in  Crisis:  The  Report  of  the 
Committee  to  Study  the  Criminal  Justice  System  in  the 
Arizona  Superior  Court,  "  Supreme  Court  of  Arizona,  July 
20,     1993. 

Copies    of    the    following    speeches    and   notes    of    speeches    are 
supplied  at  Tab  B: 

1.  Convocation  Address,  Arizona  State  University  College 
of  Law,    May  15,    1997. 

2.  "Annual  Dinner  Pays  Witty  Tribute  to  Departing  Dean,  " 
reprint  of  remarJcs  published  in  the  Arizona  State 
University  Law  Forum,    Spring,    1990. 

3.  Notes  of  speech  given  to  Society  of  Boutiques  (May  7, 
1996),  Arizona  State  University  Law  School  Alumni 
Association  (January  10,  1996),  and  Scottsdale  Bar 
Association    (April    9,    1996) . 

4.  Notes  of  speech  to  entering  law  scudents  at 
Orientation,  College  of  Law,  Arizona  State  University, 
August    18,    1994. 

5.  Notes  of  speech  to  new  members  of  the  District  Court 
bar,    1996,    exact   date   unknown. 

6.  Notes  of  speech  ac  Maricopa  County  Bar  Association 
seminar  on  "Juvenile  Dependency  Cases  in  a  Nutshell," 
December  3,    1990. 


1381 


7.  Notes  of  remarks  at  the  dinner  in  honor  of  the 
retirement  of  Chrie  C.  Tountas  from  Superior  Court,  May 
11,    1990. 

8.  Notes   of  speech    to  Focus   Phoenix,    June   9,    1987. 

9.  Notes  of  speech  to  Young  Lawyers  Section  of  Maricopa 
County  Bar  Association,      May  21,    1987. 

10.  Notes  of  speech  at  the  Arizona  Judicial  Conference, 
December  9,    1986. 

11.  Notes  of  speech  to  the  Scottsdale  Bar  Association, 
January  8,    1985. 

12.  Notes  of  speech  on  a  juvenile  law  topic,  audience 
and  date  unknown. 

13.  Notes  of  speech  at  State  Bar  of  Arizona  seminar 
called  "Collecting  Child  Support  Judgments  Without 
Contempt,  "  March  27,  April  3,  April  10,  and  April  24, 
1987. 

14.  Notes  of  speech  on  a  domestic  relations  topic, 
audience  and  date  unknown. 

15.  Notes  of  speech  on  a  domestic  relations  topic, 
audience   and  date   unknown. 

16.  Notes  of  speech  on  "observations  from  the  bench"  to 
a   group  of  summer  law  clerks,    date  unknown. 

17.  Notes  of  speech  at  Maricopa  County  Bar  Association 
seminar  called  "D.R.  Bench  on  Trial,  "  estimated  date: 
1987. 


13.  Health;   What  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?   List  the 
date  of  your  last  physical  examination. 

Excellent.      May   7,    1997 

14.  Judicial  Office:   State  (chronologically)  any  judicial 
offices  you  have  held,  whether  such  position  was  elected  or 
appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each  such 
court . 

Current  judicial   office    (since  January  21.    1995) 

U.S.     Magistrate     Judge,      U.S.     District     Court     for     the 

District   of  Arizona.       I   was   appointed  by    the  judges   of 


1382 


the  District  Court  in  accordance  with  the  statutory 
merit -selection  process.  The  District  Court  is  an  Article 
III  court  of  limited  jurisdiction. 

January  21.    1995 -September  4.    1984 

Judge,  Superior  Court  of  Arizona  for  Maricopa  County. 
I  was  appointed  by  Gov.  Bruce  Babbitt  in  accordance  with 
the  Arizona  judicial  merit  selection  process  and  retained 
in  office  by  vote  of  the  people  in  the  1986,  1990  and 
1994  retention  elections.  The  Superior  Court  is  the 
court   of  general   jurisdiction  in  Arizona. 

September  4.    1984    -  December  10.    1979 

Superior  Court  Commissioner/Judge  Pro  Tern,  Superior  Court 
of  Arizona  for  Maricopa  County.  I  was  appointed  by  then- 
Presiding  Superior  Court  Judge  Robert  C.  Broomfield  in 
accordance  with  a  merit-selection  process  analogous  to 
the  Arizona  judicial  merit  selection  procedure.  A 
Superior  Court  Commissioner  is  a  judicial  officer  similar 
to  a   U.S.    Magistrate  Judge. 

15.   Citations;   If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide: 

(1)  citations  for  the  ten  most  significant  opinions  you 
have  written;  (2)  a  short  sunanary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed 
or  where  your  judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant 
criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3) 
citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state 
constitutional  issues,  together  with  the  citation  to 
appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.   If  any  of  the 
opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide 
copies  of  the  opinions. 

(1)    OPINIONS  I  HAVE  WRITTEN    (Copies  of   the   following  opinions 
are   supplied  at   Tab  C.  ) 

1.  Avala  V.  Qlaiz.  161  Ariz.  129,  776  P. 2d  807  (App.) 
review  denied    (1989) . 

2 .  In  the  Matter  of  Ashley  [confidential  surname] . 
Maricopa   County  Superior   Court  No.    JD-6113    (1991) 

3.  Marriage  of  McGivem,  Maricopa  County  Superior  Court 
No.    DR    92-13343     (1994) 

4 .  In  the  Matter  of  Babv  Girl  (names  confidential] . 
Maricopa   County  Superior   Court  No.    JS-8287    (1990) 

5.  Suvapol  V.  Loonev.  United  States  District  Court  for 
Che     District      of     Arizona     No.      CIV     97-1489      PHX     RCB 


1383 


(BGS)  (1997) 

6.  Wolfe  V.  McDouaall.  et  al . ,  United  States  District 
Court  for  the  District  of  Arizona  No.  CIV  95-2246  PHX  PGR 
(BGS)  (1996) 

7.  Zions  First  National  Bank  v.  Johnson.  United  States 
District  Court  for  the  District  of  Arizona  No. CIV  94-2032 
PHX  ROS    (BGS)     (1997) 

8.  Casey  v.  Lewis.  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
District  of  Arizona  No.    CIV  90-0054  PHX  RGS    (BGS)     (1997) 

9.  United  States  v.  Horner.  United  States  District  Court 
for  the  District  of  Arizona  No.  CR  90-464  PHX  RCB 
(BGS)  (1996) 

10.  Price  V.  Arvaia,  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
District  of  Arizona  No.    CIV  94-1596  PHX  BGS    (1996) 


(B)    SUMMARY  OF  REVERSALS    &   AFFIRMANCES -WITH -CRITICISM 
Puhlished   opinions 

1 .  In  the  Matter  of  Maricova  County  Juvenile  Action  No. 
JD-05401.  173  Ariz.  634,  845  P. 2d  1129  (App.1993)  .  Court 
of  Appeals  held  that  juvenile  court  cannot  award  long- 
term  custody  of  a  minor  to  grandparents  without  a  finding 
that    the   child  is    "dependent." 

2.  State  V.  Buacrs .  167  Ariz.  333,  806  P. 2d  1381 
(App.1990).  Affirmed,  Court  of  Appeals  holding  that 
erroneous  self-defense  jury  instruction  was  harmless 
error . 

3.  Romley  v.  Superior  Court.  163  Ariz.  278,  787  P. 2d 
1074  (App.  1989)  .  Court  of  Appeals  held  that  the  juvenile 
court  psychologist's  report  is  not  hearsay  and  is 
admissible  in  evidence  without  foundation  -even  if  the 
psychologist  does  not    testify. 

4.  State  v.  Bouchier.  159  Ariz.  346,  767  P. 2d  233 
(App. 1989) .     The  Court  of  Appeals  affirmed  the  conviction 

but  modified  the  term  of  probation  to  comport  with 
statutory  maximum  probation   term. 

5.  Mardian  Construction  Co.  v.  Superior  Court.  157  Ariz. 
103,  754  P. 2d  1378  (App. 1988)  .  Court  of  Appeals  held  that 
Worker's  Compensation  statutes  barred  not  only  worker's 
personal  injury  claims  but  his  spouse's  loss  of 
consortium  claim  as  well. 

8 


1384 


6 .  Ziaav's  Opportunities.  Inc.  v.  I-IO  Industrial  Park 
Developers .  152  Ariz.  104,  730  P. 2d  281  (App.l9S6j  . 
Court  of  Appeals  held  that  in  post-eminent  domain 
proceedings,  evidence  did  not  establish  all  the  requisite 
elements  of  adverse  possession. 

7.  Walter  O.  Boswell  Memorial  Hos-pital  v.  Yavaoai  County. 
148  Ariz.  38S,  714  P. 2d  878  (App.l9a6)  .  Court  of  Appeals 
affirmed  in  part  and  reversed  in  part .  Court  affirmed 
method  of  calculating  reimbursement  of  indigent  medical 
care,  but  remanded  for  a  determination  of  the  proper 
reimbursement  amount  based  on  medicaid  rates  in  effect  at 
relevant    time. 

8.  Bryan t  v.  Sil verman .  146  Ariz.  41,  703  P. 2d  1190 
(1985).  Supreme  Court  held  that  in  airline  crash  case, 
law  of  the  forum  state,  Arizona,  rather  than  law  of  the 
situs  of  the  crash,  Colorado,  should  be  applied  because 
Arizona  had  the  greatest  interest  in  the  determination  of 
the  wrongful   death  action. 

9.  Merwn's  v.  Superior  Court.  144  Ariz.  297,  697  P. 2d 
690  (1985) .  Arizona  Supreme  Court  held  that  in 
garnishment  proceedings  that  are  in  rem  or  quasi  in  rem, 
service  by  publication  is  not  an  unconstitutional 
deprivation  of  due  process.  [Note:  Less  than  a  month 
after  this  decision  was  rendered,  in  an  unrelated  case, 
the  Arizona  garnishment  statutes  were  declared 
unconstitutional  by  the  federal  court  in  Neely  v.  Century 
Finance   Co.    of  Ariz.,    606  F.Supp.    1453    (D.Ariz.    1985)] 

10.  State  V.  Goodwin.  160  Ariz.  366,  773  P. 2d  471  (App.) 
review  denied  (1989) .  Court  of  Appeals  held  that 
previous  case  requiring  a  written  waiver  of  the 
preservation  of  a  second  breath  sample  does  not  apply  if 
defendant  is  actually  furnished  the  sample.  Written 
receipt  for  sample  is  not  required. 


Unpublished   decisions       (Copies    of    the   following   unpublished 
decisions   are   supplied  at   TaLb  D.) 

1.  Czerwinski  v.  Sonenberg,  1  CA-CR  92-0354  (1994). 
Affirmed  on  appeal,  reversed  and  remanded  on  cross - 
appeal.  Court  of  Appeals  reversed  portion  of  case 
dealing  with  child  support  award  due  to  lack  of 
sufficient  findings  to  deviate  from  child  support 
guidelines .  Case  remanded  for  additional  findings  and 
legal    description   of  property. 

2.  Frost  V.   Frost,    l  CA-CV  93-0040A    (1993).     Reversed  in 


1385 


part;  affirmed  in  part.  Court  of  Appeals  reversed  order 
retroactively  granting  to  wife  a  portion  of  husband's 
military  retirement.  Held,  change  in  law  after  original 
divorce  was  not  prospective  and  did  not  apply  to  this 
case. 

3.  State  V.  Gonzales.  1  CA-CR  11800  (1988).  Court  of 
Appeals  remanded  for  resentencing  because  aggravated 
sentence  called  for  in  plea  agreement  was  imposed  without 
the  court   stating  aggravating  factors  on   the  record. 

4.  Marriage  of  Khamre,  1  CA-CIV  9073  (1987).  Court  of 
Appeals  found  that  appellee' s  failure  to  file  an 
answering  brief  was  a  confession  of  error  when  appellant 
raises  a   debatable  issue. 

5.  Sutherland  v.  Arizona  Indoor  Soccer.  Inc. .  1  CA-CIV 
8523  (1986) .  Cross-motions  for  swnmazy  judgment.  Court 
of  Appeals  held  that  grant  of  summajry  judgment  against 
corporation  and  sole  shareholder  in  breach  of  employment 
contract  case  was  error.  Held,  facts  did  not  warrant 
piercing  corporate  veil  and  disputed  facts  existed 
requiring  parol   evidence    to  resolve. 

6.  Ricrex  Development.  Inc.  v.  Tash.  1  CA-CIV  8686 
(1986)  .        Court    of    Appeals    held    suinmary    judgment    was 

erroneous  in  an  action  for  breach  of  an  option  in  a 
contract.  Appellant' s  withdrawal  of  money  from  an  escrow 
account  did  not  constitute  rescission  as  a  matter  of  law. 

7.  Whitton  V.  Vanderwev,  1  CA-CIV  8198,  (1986).  Court 
of  Appeals  reversed  summary  judgment  in  favor  of  the 
seller  in  case  arising  out  of  a  sale  of  a  residence. 
Acceptance  of  late  payments  constitutes  waiver  of  right 
to  invoice  acceleration  provision  of  note. 

8.  State  V.  Wolkoff.  1  CA-CR  88-237  (1988).  Affirmed  in 
part,  reversed  in  part.  Imposition  of  $100  statutory 
assessment  when  probation  was  revoked  in  1988  was 
erroneous  because  assessment  was  not  in  effect  in  1983 
when   crime   was   committed. 


(C)  OPINIONS  ON  CONSTITUTIONAL  ISSUES  (The  first  three  of  the 
following  citations  are  to  appellate  opinions  on 
constitutional  rulings  I  made  as  a  trial  judge.  The  fourth 
citation  is  to  an  appellate  opinion  in  which  I  joined,  as  an 
appellate  judge  pro   tem,    concerning  a  constitutional   issue.) 

1.      Dept.    of  Revenue  v.    Arthur.    153  Ariz.    1,    734   P. 2d  98 
(App.    1986). 

10 


1386 


2.  Nalbandian  v.  Sunerior  Court.  163  Ariz.  126.  786  P. 2d 
977  (App.  1989),  reconsideration  denied  (1990),  cere. 
denied,    489   U.S.    997    (1990) . 

3.  Merwn's  v.  Superior  Court,  144  Ariz.  297,  697  P. 2d 
690     (1985) . 

4.  Olson  V.  WaDcer.  162  Ariz.  174,  781  P. 2d  1015  (App.), 
review  denied    (1989),    12   A.L.J?.  5ch  1020. 


Public  Office;   State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices 
you  have  held,  other  than  judicial  offices,  including  the 
terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected  or 
appointed.   State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful 
candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

None 


17 .   Legal  Career: 

a.    Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and 
experience  after  graduation  from  law  school 
including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge, 
and  if  so,  the  name  o£  the  judge,  the 
court,  amd  the  dates  of  the  period  you 
were  a  clerk; 

Not  applicaJDle 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so, 
the  addresses  and  dates; 

Not  applicable 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law 
firms  or  offices,  com|>euiies  or 
governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have 
been  connected,  and  the  nature  of  your 
connection  with  each; 

After  law  school 

10/25/76    -    11/30/77:    Phoenix  City  Prosecutor' s   Office, 
^      455    N.   5"^  St,     Suite     400,     Phoenix,     AZ    85004,      602-262-6461: 
Assistant   City  Prosecutor. 

12/1/77    -    12/7/79:   Maricopa   County  Attorney's  Office,    301    W. 
Jefferson,     Phoenix,    AZ    85003,     602-506-3411:       Deputy    County 

11 


1387 


Attorney 

12/7/79  -  9/4/84:  Superior  Court  of  Arizona,  for  Maricopa 
County,  201  W.  Jefferson,  Phoenix,  AZ  85003,  602-506-3204: 
Superior  Court   Connnissioner 

9/4/84  -  1/25/95:  Superior  Court  of  Arizona,  201  W.  Jefferson, 
Phoenix,    AZ      85003,    602-506-3204:    Judge  of  Superior  Court 

1989  -  present:  BAR/BRI  Bar  Review,  20  E.  University,  Tempe, 
AZ  85281,      602-929-0190 :  Lecturer,      Arizona      Community 

Property,    and  since  1997  Idaho  and  Nevada   Community  Property 

1/25/95  -  present:  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  District  of 
Arizona,  230  N.  I*=  Ave.,  Phoenix,  AZ  85025,  602-514-7022: 
U.S.    Magis era t e  Judge 


1.  What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your 
law  practice,  dividing  it  into  periods  with 
dates  if  its  character  has  changed  over  the 
years? 

1976-1979 :   Criminal  prosecution  —  I  year  of  misdemeanors , 
2   vears  of  felonies 


2  years  of  felonies 


1979-present:  Judicial  —  As  a  Superior  Court  judge,  I 
served  rotations  in  the  Civil,  Domestic  Relations, 
Criminal,  Juvenile,  and  Special  Assignment  departments  of 
the  court.  As  a  Superior  Court  Commissioner,  I  served  in 
those  departments  and  also  in  the  Probate/Mental  Health 
department . 

As  a  U.S.  Magistrate  Judge  since  1995,  my  workload  is 
half  civil,  half  criminal.  It  includes  civil  trials  by 
consent,  settlement  conferences,  pretrial  motions, 
petitions  for  writs  of  habeas  corpus,  issuance  of  search 
and  arrest  warrants,  and  various  hearings  and  other 
proceedings  in  criminal  cases  including  -misdemeanor 
trials  by  consent. 


Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and 
mention  the  areas,  if  any,  in  which  you  have 
specialized. 

I  have  a  special     interest    in    domestic 
relations ,    juvenile  and  criminal    law. 

Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently, 
occasionally,  or  not  at  all?   If  the  frequency 

12 


1388 


of  your  appearances  In  coiirt  varied,  describe 
each  such  variance,  giving  dates. 

Frequently 

2.    What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts; 

Oi 

(b)  state  courts  of  record; 

67f 

(c)  other  courts. 

33i    (Phoenix  City  Court) 


3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil; 

If 

(b)  criminal . 

99% 

4 .  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record 
you  tried  to  verdict  or  judgment  (rather  than 
settled) ,  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

In  courts  of  record,  I  tried  5  cases  as  sole  counsel  and 
2  as  chief  counsel.  In  the  Phoenix  City  Court,  which  is 
classified  as  a  "court  on  the  record"  but  not  a  *court  gf 
record,  "  I  tried  over  25  jury  trials  and  several  hundred 
bench   trials. 


5.    What  percentage  of  these  trials  was; 
(a)  jury; 

lOOi 


(b)  non-jury. 

Oi- 
ls.  Litigation:   Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated 

13 


1389 


matters  which  you  personally  handled.  Give  the  citations,  if 
the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  mjmber  and  date  if 
unreported.  Give  a  capsule  Bummary  of  the  substance  of  each 
case.  Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you  represented; 
describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  the 
litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.  Also  state 
as  to  each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or 
judges  before  whom  the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  The  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone 
ntimbers  of  co-counsel  and  of  principal  counsel  for 
each  of  the  other  parties. 


PLEASE  NOTE:  Three,  rather  than  10,  cases  are  recounted  here 
because  although  I  have  been  a  lawyer  for  21  years,  the  last 
18  of  those  years  I  have  held  judicial  office.  I  have 
presided  over  thousands  of  jury  trials,  bench  trials,  hearings 
and  other  proceedings ,  but  my  experience  as  a  trial  lawyer  is 
limited  to  my  first  three  years  of  practice  (1976-79) .  A  list 
of  recent  contacts  I  have  had  with  members  of  the  legal 
community  follows    the  case  descriptions. 

State   V.    Paul    o.    Valenzuela 

Maricopa   County  Superior  Court,    No.    CR   99701 

Judge:    Hon.    Sandra   Day  O'Connor,    202-479-3000 

Opposing  counsel :   Trial:  Lionel   C.  Estrada,    602-254-6661; 

Appeal:  Paul  Prato,   602-506-8219  &  John  Rood  602-506-7965 

Trial:   May,    1978 

Appeal:     Aff'd     in    part,     rev'd    in    part    by    Memorandum 

Decision   of    the   Court   of  Appeals,    l    CA-CR   3570,    1    CA-CR 

3731    (consolidated)    September  18,    1979 

Prosecution  for  first -degree  rape  and  sodomy  with  prior 
convictions .  The  victim's  name  and  phone  number  had  been 
furnished  to  the  defendant  by  a  dating  service  of  which 
both  the  victim  and  the  defendant  were  members.  On  their 
date,  the  defendant  drove  the  victim  to  a  remote  location 
in  the  desert  and  sexually  assaulted  her.  Consent  was 
the  defense ■  The  jury  found  the  defendant  guilty  of  all 
counts;  he  was  sentenced  by  then-Judge  (now  Justice) 
O'Connor    to    30-50    years    imprisonment.  In   post- trial 

proceedings,  Judge  O'Connor  vacated  the  conviction  and 
granted  a  new  trial  because  of  some  irregularities  that 
occurred  at  the  trial  including  attempted  jury  tampering 
by  the  defendant' s  mother.  The  prosecution  appealed  the 
grant  of  the  new  trial;  the  defendant  cross -appealed  the 
underlying  conviction.  The  Arizona  Court  of  Appeals 
affirmed  the  conviction  and  reversed  the  granting  of  a 
new   trial. 

14 


1390 


Significance :  (1)  Conviction  obtained  despize  a  consent 
defense  in  the  dating  context;  (2)  the  order  for  a  new 
trial  was  reversed  on  appeal  even  though  new  trial 
motions  are  usually  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  trial 
judge.    I   tried   the  case  and  handled   the  appeal. 

State  V.    John  A.    Trebil 

Maricopa   County  Superior  Court,    No.    CR   102919 

Judge:     Hon.     William     P.     French,      602-212-8516      (now    in 

private  practice) 

Opposing  counsel:    Ron  Kent  Hooper,    602-953-5267 

Trial:    May,     1979 

Appeal:  Rev'd  by  Memorandum  Decision  of  the  Arizona  Court 

of  Appeals,    January  29,    1981,    No.    1   CA-CR   4234 

Prosecution  for  vehicular  homicide.  The  defendant  was 
parked  at  the  pick-up  window  of  a  drive -thru  restaurant 
chatting     with     the     waitress .  Upon     overhearing     co- 

defendant  Martin  speak  obscenities  over  the  order- taking 
intercom,  Defendant  gave  chase  of  Martin.  Both  were 
driving  in  excess  of  80  MPH.  Martin  crashed  his  car  into 
a  home  killing  an  elderly  couple  asleep  in  bed.  Martin 
pled  guilty.  I  prosecuted  defendant  Trebil  for  vehicular 
homicide  even  though  his  vehicle  did  not  collide  with 
anything.  The  jury  found  the  defendant  guilty.  The  case 
was  reversed  on  appeal  due  to  an  error  in  the  judge's 
answer   to  a  juror's  note  during   the  deliberations . 

Significance:  This  was  the  first  vehicular  homicide 
prosecution  in  Arizona  of  a  person  who  caused  a  fatal 
collision  but  was  not  in  the  collision  himself.  I  tried 
the   case . 


State   V.    James  McNett   and  Jesus  Rodriguez 

Phoenix    City    Court,      case    number    unavailable     (records 

destroyed  after   7  years) 

Judge:    Hon.    John    T.    Zastrow,     602-514-7356     (now   a    U.S. 

Immigration  Judge) 

Opposing  counsel:  Charles  I.  Robson   (whereabouts  unknown, 

believed  deceased) 

Trial:   May.    1977 

Appeal:   Aff'd  on   appeal    to   Superior   Court  Judge  Marilyn 

Riddel    (retired)  ,   case  number  unavailable  (Superior  Court 

"Lower    Court  Appeal"    cases    are   not    indexed   by  name    of 

defendant  prior   to  1986.) 

Prosecution  for  soliciting  prostitution.  Two  undercover 
police  narcotics  agents  from  a  neighboring  town,  while  on 
duty,     solicited   acts    of   prostitution    from   a    woman    who, 

15 


1391 


unbeknownst  to  them,  was  an  undercover  Phoenix  police 
detective.  Their  defense  was  that  they  were  attempting  to 
develop  narcotics  information  and  practicing  their  street 
rap.  The    prosecution     had     evidence     to     rebut     those 

contentions.  After     a     week     long     jury     trial,      both 

defendants  were  found  guilty  and  fined  $120.00.  The 
convictions  were  affirmed  on  appeal  to  the  Superior 
Court . 

Significance:  The  case  was  front-page  news  in  Phoenix  for 
a  week  and  attracted  national  media  attention.  The 
Phoenix  Police  Department  viewed  the  case  as  a  make-it- 
or-break-it  test  of  its  undercover  vice  enforcement 
program.  I  tried  the  case  and  received  a  formal 
commendation  from  the  Chief  of  the  Phoenix  Police 
Department. 


The  following  is  a  list  of  members  of  the  legal  community 
wich  whom  I  have  had  recent  contact: 

Mark   I.    Harrison 

Bryan    Cave 

2800  N.    Central  Ave, 

Phoenix,    AZ   85004 

602-280-8405 

Janet  Napolitano 

U.S.    Attorney  for  Arizona 

230   N.    I"  Ave. 

Phoenix,    AZ   85025 

602-514-7583 

Jon  M.    Sands 

Federal    Public  Defender 

222  N.    Central   Ave.,    Suite   810 

Phoenix.    AZ  85004 

602-379-3290 

Irwin  Harris 

111    W.    Monroe,    Suite  1107 

Phoenix,    AZ        85003 

602-258-6904 

Richard  J.    Morgan,    Dean 

Boyd  School   of  Law 

University  of  Nevada  at  Las   Vegas 

4505  Maryland  Parkway 

Las   Vegas,    NV  89154 

702-895-3671 


16 


1392 


Hon.    Frederick  J.    Mar  tone 
Arizona   Supreme   Court 
1501    W.    Washington 
Phoenix,    AZ  85007 
602-542-4535 

Ann   E.    Harwood 
Assistant   U.S.    Attorney 
23  0   N.    I"  Ave 
Phoenix,    AZ  85025 
602-514-7737 

Jane  E.    Reddin 

Lewis   &  Roca 

40  N.    Central   Ave. 

Phoenix,    AZ   85004 

602-262-5311 

Michael   L.    Gallagher 
Gallagher  &  Kennedy 
2600  N.    Central  Ave. 
Phoenix,    AZ   85004 
602-530-8000 

William  M.    Demlcng 
Bess   &  Dysart   PC 
7210   N.     16'"   St. 
Phoenix,    AZ   85020-5201 
602-331-4600 

Robert  K.    Jones 
Streich  Lang   PA 
Two  N.    Central   Ave. 
Phoenix,    AZ   85004-2391 
602-229-5496 


19.  Legal  Activitieg;  Describe  the  most  significant  legal 
activities  you  have  purBued,  including  significant  litigation 
which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did  not 
involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  this  question,  please  omit  any  information 
protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the 
privilege  has  been  waived.) 


1.  As  a  U.S.  Magistrate  Judge  in  1995,  I  issued  about  a 
dozen  search  warrants  concerning  the  Oklahoma  City 
bombing  case.  In  addition,  I  was  called  upon  to  consider 
motions    to  unseal    the  warrants  brought  on  behalf  of   the 

17 


1393 


news  media. 

2.  In     July,      1996,      I    presided     over     the     week-long 

de tendon  hearing  of  the  "Arizona  Vipers,  "  twelve 
defendants  who  were  alleged  to  be  members  of  an  anti- 
government  militia  group  suspected  of  planning  to  blow  up 
federal  buildings  in  Phoenix.  The  arrest  of  the  Vipers 
and  their  detention  hearings  were  the  biggest  local  news 
stories     of     the     year.  The     news     media     covered     Che 

detention  hearings  intensely.  At  the  conclusion  of  the 
hearings ,  I  ruled  that  six  of  the  twelve  defendants  would 
be  released  pending  trial,  but  that  the  other  six  would 
be  held  without  bond  as  dangers  to  the  community.  The 
assigned  District  Judge  and  the  Ninth  circuit  Court  of 
Appeals  affirmed  all  of  the  detention  orders.  The  U.S. 
Attorney     did     not     appeal      the     release     orders.  The 

defendants  who  were  released  appeared  for  all  their  court 
appearances  and  fully  complied  with  all  other  pretrial 
release   conditions . 


18 


1394 

Supplement  to 

Senate  Judiciary  Committee  Questionnaire  of 

Barry  G.  Silverman 

Part  I,  Question  12: 

Add   the  following  to  original   answer: 

On  March  21,  1996,  I  testified  at  the  Arizona  House  of 
Representatives  Government  Operations  Conmiittee  in  favor  of  a 
pay  raise  for  state  judges.     No  record  of  testimony  available. 


DATE 


BARRY  G.    SILVERMAN 


1395 


II.   FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 

List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  o£  all  Euiticipated  receipts 
from  deferred  income  arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncoinpleted 
contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which  you  expect  to  derive 
from  previous  business  relationships,  professional  services, 
firm  memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers. 
Please  describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be 
compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or  business 
interest. 

I  receive  a  $25.00  per  year  payout  from  the  City  of 
Phoenix  Deferred  Compensation  'Plan.  The  payout  is 
received  in   February  of  each  year  and  started   in   1960. 

In  2001,  I  will  begin  receiving  benefits  from  the  Arizona 
Elected  Officials  Retirement  Plan  in  the  approximate 
amount  of  $2,000  per  month. 

In  2002,  I  will  begin  receiving  a  payout  from  the  State 
of  Arizona  Deferred  Compensation  Plan  in  the  approximate 
amount   of   $357  per  month. 

In  2009,  I  will  begin  receiving  a  payout  from  the 
Maricopa  County  Deferred  Compensation  Plan  in  the 
approximate  amount   of   $1,575  per  month. 


Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of 
interest,  including  the  procedure  you  will  follow  in 
determining  these  areas  of  concern.  Identify  the  categories 
of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to 
present  potential  conflicts-of -interest  during  your  initial 
service  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated, 

I  will  resolve  all  potential  conflicts  in  accordance  with 
the  Code  of  Conduct  for  United  States  Judges  and  all 
applicable  statutes.  Specifically,  I  will  recuse  myself 
in  any  matter  in  which  my  wife  and  I  have  a  financial 
interest.  I  will  maintain  a  list  of  companies  in  which 
I  own  stock  (presently,  we  own  only  one  stock)  and  I  will 
recuse  myself  in   cases   involving  those   companies. 

I  will  recuse  myself  in  any  matter  in  which  I  may  have 
been  the  prosecutor  or  judge  in  state  court.  I  will 
instruct  my  staff  Co  screen  for  my  possible  involvement 
all  criminal  cases  that  originated  in  Arizona  state  court 
between   1976  and   1995. 


13 


1396 


My  wife  is  a  court  reporter.  Her  clients  are  lawyers. 
I  will  maintain  a  current  list  of  her  clients  and  recuse 
myself  in  any  case  in  which  one  her  clients  is  appearing. 

3.  Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitjaents,  or  agreements  to  piirsue 
outside  employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your 
service  with  the  court?   If  so,  explain. 

To  the  extent  permitted  by,  and  in  full  compliance  with, 
the  Ethics  Reform  Act,  I  plan  to  continue  giving,  for 
compensation,  my  community  property  bar  review  lectures 
for  BAR/BRI  Bar  Review,  20  E.  University  Dr.,  Tempe,  AZ 
85281,  602-929-0190.  The  lecture  is  about  three  hours 
long.  I  give  it  three  times  a  year  in  Arizona,  and  once 
a  year  in  Idaho  and  Nevada.  BAR/BRI  is  owned  by  Harcourt 
Brace  Legal  and  Professional  Publications,  Inc.,  Chicago, 
IL. 

4 .  List  so\irces  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the 
calendar  year  preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current 
calendar  year.  Including  all  salaries,  fees,  dividends, 
interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and 
other  items  exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so, 
copies  of  the  fineincial  disclosure  report,  required  by  the 
Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

1557.-     U.S.    Government   salary:      $122,912 
BAR/BRI   Bar   Review.  $5,250 

1996:  U.S.    Government  salary:      $122,912 

BAR/BRI  Bar  Review:  $2,250 

My  Financial   Disclosure  Report  is   supplied  at   Tab  E. 


5.  Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in 
detail  (Add  schedules  as  called  for) . 

My  Net   Worth  Statement  is   supplied  at   Tab  F. 

6 .  Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political 
campaign?  If  so,  please  identify  the  particulars  of  the 
campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the  campaign,  your 
title  and  responsibilities. 

As  a  high  school  student  in  1968,  I  volunteered  for  the 
Hubert  Humphrey  for  President  campaign  in  Arizona  and  was 
a  page  for  the  Arizona  Delegation  to  the  1968  Democratic 
National    Convention   in   Chicago. 

20 


1397 


AO-IO  f)) 
ltev.S/f6 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

Nmninatioii  Report 


Kepan  Retparai  Irf  the  Eliutt 
Jt^brm  Aa  afl9S9,  Pub  I.  No. 
101-104,  Ntncmber  }0.  19)9 
(S  U.S.C.  Afp.  4  .  S€C.  101-112) 


I.  PctMoIUpvnJot        (Laa  naae.  first,  mUHt  mUaO 

Silverman,    Barry  G. 

4.  TItk  (Anidt  nijudga  indicau  aaive  or 

svuor  ffaau;  magiitrate Judges  in^rvre 
fiiU- or  part-timtl 

Nominee  for  Judge 


7.  CtiMiiWn  or  Of&x  AiUrts: 

U.S.  Courthouse 
230  M.  1st  Ave. 
Phoenix,  A2   65025 


2-  Court  or  Orgmtntioii 

us  Court  of  Appeals,  9ch  Cir 

X_  Nomimnon.    D^    11/08/1997 
iDiml  Amnal  Hm] 


3.  Due  of  Ripon 

11/09/1997 


<■  RcpottiBg  PctM 

01/01/1996 

12/31/1996 


S.  On  Ibc  fassia  of  the  mfomalieo  eaalamed  in  Ibis  Sfport  n^  any 
moitilicrtopa  pcrtsinmg  tfacreto,  it  k  tn  my  opaugn,  iD  complaBCE 
with  apfiiicaMe  tows  and  ngaUOna- 


Beriewiag  Officer 


lUPORTAtfT  NOTSi:  The  uuiryaions  accompanying  thJa  form  must  be  foliowed.  Confute  ail  parts, 
chedang  the  SOf^S  tax  for  eacM  section  where  you  have  no  rtportabie  ir^ormaaon.  Sign  on  the  last  page. 


NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION  /  ENTITY 


I.    POSITIONS      (Reporting  Indivutual  only:  see  pp.  »-l)  of  Inslnictlans) 

POSITION 

NONE  (No  repotaMe  ponoons.) 

1  0.S.  Magistrate  Judge  U.S.  District  Court,  District  of  Ariz. 

2  Lecturer 


BAR/BRI  Bar  Review 


n.     AGREEMENTS   (Reporting  individual  only;  tee iv.I4-17of/nstnictioKS.) 

DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


D 


NONE  (No  reporobk  aen«meou.) 
I  1976 


2  1984 


3  1984 


City  of  Phoenix  Deferred  Compensation  Plan 
Ariz.  Elected  Officials  Retirement  Plan 


Maricopa  County  Deferred  Compensation  Plan 


m.     NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME        (Reporting  individual  and  ipouse:  see  pp.  IS-2S  oflnstniaians.l 

DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


□ 


NONE    CNo  rcponable  non-invcKondQl  iocome.) 

1  1996      Self-employed  court  reporter  (S) 


BAR/BRI  Bar  Review  (lecture  fees) 


City  of  Phoenix  Deferred  Compensation  Plan 


U.S.  Government  (magistrate  judge  salary) 


U.S.  Government  (magistrate  judge  salary) 


GROSS  INCOME 

(yours,  not  spmise'&} 


$ 

2 

250 

00 

$ 

25 

00 

$ 

122 

912 

00 

$ 

119 

544 

00 

4.5-964    98-45 


1398 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


EoTRnon  Repomjtt  _ 

DueafScpon 


Silverman,  Barry  G. 


11/09/199 


rV.  REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS   -  nasponuua.  lodsiiig.  fbod.  uBnainaeoL 

Old  dtptndau  diitdm,  respeaivdy.  See  pp.  26-29  of  Dumcaeiu,}  ^^ 


□ 


w^^  SOURCE  DESCRIPncm 

NONE  (No  such  reportable  icimtunemems  or  gifn) 


V.    OTHER  GIFTS 

(bictiides  those  to  spaue  and  deperuitnt  chiUren:  use  the  parenthairah  '(S) '  and  '(DQ'  to  imScon  other  g^  received  by  spouse  and  dependen  chiidren, 
respeaively.   See  pp- 50-33  trfbutrvaions.i 


Fl 


SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 

NONE  (No  such  Tcponiblc  gifts) 


VI.    LIABILmES 

QndndeM  chose  cftpouxe  aid  dxpendent  children;  indicau  where  appUcabte.  person  responsible  for  UabUay  by  using  the  pareiahetical  '(S)  'for  separaie 
UabUof  <^  the  spouse.  '(J)' for  joua  Uability  t^rtponutgindMdiut  and  spouse,  ayi '(DQ'  for  babUUy  of  a  depended  ehUd.  See  pp.  34-36  tflnstruaiotu.) 


Q 


CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE* 

NONE    (No  reparable  liabilides) 


•  VAL  C»DES  J-tlS.OOO  or  leu  K-Sli.OOl-UO.OIX)  L-S5a.(»l  id  SIQO.On  M-Sioo.oai-S25o.oao  N-sz50.ooi-ssoa.ooa 

o-sjoo.ooi-si  .000.000  pi-si.ooa.oai.ss.ooo.ooo  rz-ss.ooo.ooi-su.ooa.ooa  i>3-sz5.ooa.ooi.sso.oao,ooo  iH-sso.ooo.aoi  or  more 


1399 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Namt  or  1*0100  Kcporang 
Silverman,    Barry  G. 


DiieorKepoit 
11/09/1997 


»»T»     •«.  .  ,  - bicant.  valut,  mnaaaiaa  Hiidiida rtoM cfipouse and' 

Vn.  Page     1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS     6.f„^cmr^.  u.fr.i7-i4,ib,sm„Z^ 


A. 

DcscrijKion  of  A«ea 

AdloBt  wtitrt  oppUcabU.  awntr  ^ 
At  asstt  by  using  t/ir  parvtAeiad 
'U)'forJKru  awnenMip  ifrtpor^ng 
inOiviaual md ipoiat.  '{$)' for tep- 
erau  mnenklp  by  spauxt^  'iDQ  " 

Flact  '00 '  ^er  each  asses 
exempt  from  prior  £sclasve. 

B. 
period 

c. 

GnjH  value 
■lend  of 
reponliig 
period 

D. 

Transiaionj  during  rcponiag  period 

(1) 

Amt 

Code 

(A- 

H) 

(2) 

1>pe 
(cj.. 
dividend, 
rem  or 

(1) 
Vilae 

Code 

O-f) 

at 

Vihie 
Method 
Code 
(Q-W) 

(1) 
Type 
(e.S.. 
buy,  Kll. 

nKlfCT, 

Rdeoip- 
Hon) 

IfootcMmpcfromdisclotun                                             1 

(2) 
Mosdi- 

n«y 

(3) 

Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

(«) 

Ciain 
Code 
(A-H) 

(5) 

Idasiiyaf 

tnycr/seUer 

Ofpiivaie 

saiisicdoa) 

NONE  (do  reponable  locome.uwa.  or 
t/angaciioiis) 

10/11 

I  Hells   Fargo  BanJc  checking    (JI 

A 

Interest 
Interest 

J 
J 

I 

Opened 

J 

2  Hells  Fargo  money  sarket    (J) 

A 

T 

Opened 

10/11 

J 

3  First  Interstate  Bank  checking 
(J) 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

Closed 

10/11 

J 

«  first  Interstate  Bank  money 
market    (JI 

A 
A 

interest 

J 

I 

Closed 

10/11 

J 

5  Bank  of  America  cert  of  deposit 
(J) 

Interest 

J 

T 

6  Bank  of  wierica  checking   (J) 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

7  OS  savings  Bonds    (J> 

A 

None 

K 

T 
T 

8  Fidelity  Asset  Mgx  mutual    fund 
ISl 

A 
A 

Dividend 

K 

9  Fidelity  Equity  Inc  ii  mutual 
fund  IRA 

Dividend 

J 

I 

10  Fidelity  Equity  Inc  II  mutual 
fund  spouse   IRA    (SI 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 

11  Fidelity  Equity  Inc   II  mutual 
fund  spouse  Keogh      (S] 

C 

Dividend 

L 

T 

12  Fidelity  cash  Reserves  mutual 

funds    (S) 

A 

Dividend 

Sold 

03/06 

J 

A 

13  Huveen  Municipal  Bond   Fund  mutual 
fund   IJ) 

A 

dividend 

J 

T 

14  Nuveen  Tax  Exempt  Unit   Investment 
Trust  AZ-191    IJl 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

15  Tax  Free  Trust   of  AZ  mutual   fund 
(JI 

B 

Dividend 

K 

T 

1£  Tucson  Electric   Power  common 
stock    (JI 

A 

None 

Sold 

03/01 

J 

A 

n  Israel   Bond 'due   10/1/2003    (JI 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

llnc««ui  Codes.  A"J|.000  or  less                     B-Jl.OOl 
(CoI.Bl.D4)       F=J50.001-J100.000               G-SIOO.OO 

-42,300                   C=S2.l01.«.000 
l-SI,000,000        I(l-Sl.000.001-S5,0a0,00 

0 
0       H2- 

=45.0oL$IS.0O()                       E'=SiS,OOI-$SO.000 
=S5,000.001OflBorc 

:V.lCod«s.-         WlS.OtoorleM                   k-JIS.M  -JJlt.OOO              Uj«.()41^100.(KlO 
(Col.Cl.D3)     t>=HOO,0OI-$1.000.000         P1=S1.000.00I-$5.000.0(IO  PJ-SS.OOO.OOI-tU.OOO.OOC 

M=4 

r>3=ES 

oo.oAi -1250,000         N-c;o.ooi-tsao,aoo 

.000.001-S50.000.000  P4=S50.00a,00  lor  more 

3  Vol  Mdl  Codes:  (^Appnisal                              R'<ost  (real  esnte  only)                              S-Anessmeal                                       Ti<»*i/MaA<» 
(Cot.C2)              U=BookVdBe                           V-Olher                                                        W-Ettiaaled 

1400 


I   HUBM  oc  I'wioa  K«poniiig 
FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT      Silverman,    Barry  G. 


DivofRcpon 

11/09/1997 


tncame,  value,  trwuaatans  finebidts  those  ^spctaeand 


Vn.    Page       2  INVESTMENTS  and   TRUSTS       depeiulen  tuedren.  Seepp.  17-S4cflnanialaa. 


A. 
Ddcriptioo  of  AileB 

In^icae  mActc  ^pUcable.  mmer  ^ 

B. 

bicome 

during 

rtportng 

pctjod 

C. 

Gioa  vtkie 
•lend  of 
RpoltiOg 

peiiod 

D. 

xrntHCoanE  during  Rpoftfang  period 

in&Mual out tpaat.  '(Sj'forlep- 

(1) 

/VmL 

Code 

(A- 

H) 

(2) 
Type 

(e.«.. 
dividenL 
lent  or 
li»e<e«i) 

0) 

VlllK 

CO* 

a-p) 

(2) 

Vahic 

Method 

Code 

(Q-W) 

(1) 

Type 
(e.g.. 
buy. KlL 

6oa) 

If  not  exenipc  from  disclosure                                                        1 

Hact  •(X)' <^er mdi  atsti 
tjxmpifmn  prior  Sldoaun. 

(2) 
Date: 
Moalli- 
Dsy 

(3) 
Value 
Code 
(I-P) 

(*) 
Gaiti 
Cade 
(A-H) 

(S) 

Ueadiy  of 
buyer/seller 
(lfpri«B! 

NONE  (i»  npoiuble  locome.auca.  or 
mnsacoons) 

la  I»r«l  Bond  due  10/1/2005    (Jl 

A 

Inceiesc 

J 

T 

19  Israel   Bond  due   10/1/2008    IJJ 

A 

Interest 

T 

20  Israel  Bond  due  10/l/l»99    (J) 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

21  Israel   Bond  due   11/1/2004    (Jl 

A 
A 

Interest 

J 

T 

1 

22  Israel   Bond  due   3/1/2004    (Jl 

Interest 

J 

T 

23  Israel  Bond  due  S/1/1996   (Jl 

A 

Interest 

Redeem 

05/24 

J 

A 

24  Israel  Bond  due  S/1/20I1    (Jl 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

Bought 

05/01 

J 

25  Israel   Bond  due   9/1/2000    (Jl 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

26   Israel   Bond  due    9/1/2001    (Jl 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

21  Israel  Bond  due   9/1/2002    IJI 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

29  Israel   Bond  due   9/1/1998    (Jl 

Interest 

J 

T 

29  Israel   Bond  rero  coupon      due 
10/31/2003    (Jl 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

30  Israel  Bond  zero  coupon  due 
3/31/2000   11    (Jl 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

- 

31  Israel   Bond  lero  coupon  due 
3/31/2000   12    (Jl 

A 

Interest 

J 
J 

T 

32  Israel   Bond  zero  coupon  due 

10/31/2003    (Jl 

A 

Interest 

T 

33  Israel   Bond  lero   coupon   duo 
12/31/2001   »1    (Jl 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

34  Israel   Bond^zero  coupon  due 
12/31/2001    #2    (Jl 

ft 

Interest 

•' 

T 

1 

1  XTxldJa.  Co<te:  A=SI,000  Of  less                     B-$1.00 
(ColBI.D*)      F-S$0,001-SIOO.OOO               0=J100.0( 

-^TSDO     '■"'■   C-$i.i01-tS.()()0                        OS5.00UlS.0U0                       E-J15.001-ViO.(XW 
»1-S1,000,000        Hl=Sl,OOO.O01-S5,000.0OO        H2^S.000.001  or  more 

TVacodi: MlS-OdOorlcn                K-slJ.tJOi-J50.6o4            L-S50.0oi-si0O.000           M-41oo.ooi-jaso.oug          n-j.jju.ooi-muu.uuu 

(Col.CI.D3)      »4SO0.001-SI,O0O,0O0         Pl-Sl.00O.OOI-S5.0OO.000  P2-$5,00O,0OI-$2S,00O,00O  P}-S25,0O0.OOl-SSO.0O0.00O  P4-SSO.000.00 1  or  more 

3VdM*Co<lcs;O.Appr9isal                              R-Co«  (real  at«r  only)                              S-Asiannenl                                       T=CuWMaiket 
(Col.  a)            U-Dook  Value                       V-Odw                                                W-Esiiinaied 

1401 


;T  I   Silve 


PencNiKqionJiK 


verman,  Barry  G. 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSIJRE  REPORT 

vn.  P»ge     3  INVESTMENTS  «.dVu'^i7^^rirr^'^;^^^f^ 


Dai*  of  Repon 
11/09/199 


D 


A. 
Oescnpdos  of  Aues 

tixSam  wntn  appUoMt.  tnmtt  of 
th€  asto  by  usmg  the  parmAmcal 
'(J)'forjcOv  anneafup  tfrepomng 
indivtdt»alandspoui€.  'fSi'forup- 
tnte  (mntnJup  by  jpouu,  '0Q ' 

amftpum  prier  Hsdosure. 

B. 

iDcmu 
dori^ 
reponins 

C. 

Gnus  vahtc 

•tend  of 

reponlag 

period 

D. 

Ttusactuni  during  nfartSaf  period 

(1) 

Aot. 

Code 

(A- 

H) 

(2) 

Trpc 

(e.I.. 

dtvldud. 

lemor 

(1) 

Vlluc 

Coda 

a-P) 

m 

VUue 
Medud 
Co<k 
(Q-W) 

(1) 

Type 

(c.».. 

boy.  icU, 

owtef. 

ledeaip- 

um) 

1/  Due  ezempi  from  disclosure 

0) 
Due: 

Month- 
Dsy 

(3) 

Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

(4) 
GiJn 
Code 
(A-H) 

(5) 

Meuiiyaf 

buyer/Idler 

WptiYBi: 

naasaction) 

NONE  (DO  reponable  incoaje.asseB.  or 
tnasacboni) 

. 

3S  Israel   Bond   zero  coupon  due 
l.'31/2006    (J) 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

Bought 

02/26 

J 

36  Xr 
Ke 

izona  elected  officials 
titement  plan 

A 

Nona 

L 

T 

37  Ci 
Col 

ty  of   Phoenix   Deferred 
npensation  Plan 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

38  Maricopa  County  Deferred 
Compensation   Plan 

D 

Interest 

M 
X 

I 

39  SCaee   of   Arizona   Deferred 
Coapeasation  Plan 

B 

Interest 

T 

40  Vanguard   SOO   Porrfolio   Index 
Bucual   tund 

A 
A 

Dividend 

X 

T 

41  Vanguard   SOO   Portfolio   Index 
imtual   fund    (SI 

Dividend 

K 

T 

42  First  Federal  credit  onion  share 
acet    (Ji 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

43  First  Federal  Credit  tmion  money 
•larket    (Ji 

B 

Interest 

n 

T 

44  First  Federal  Credit  Dnion 
checking   (J) 

A 

Intarest 

J 

T 

45  Federal  Reserve  Bank  of  Los 

Angeles  Treasury  Direct  Acct    (J) 

D 

Interest 

H 

T 

46Vailey  Bank  of  AZ     U) 

A 

Interest 

J 

T 

Opened 

03/11 

J 

1 

llocA3auiCo<iei:A<=S1.600arles>                     8^1.001-12.500                  C-SZSOI-XS.AOO                      0= 
(Col  B1.D4)       F-*50.001-$100.000              C=J100.001-S1.000.000         H1=SI.000.001-SS,OOC.OOO        H2= 

=S5.00 
«5.00C 

oo.bbi 

000,00 

-SIS.OOO                     E=$l$.0Ol-SSO.000 
.001  or  more 

2VdCo<Ja          MlS.OOOorlw                   K=SI5.00I-S5<I,000              L-SSO.OAl-SlOaOOO             M=SI 
(Col  CI.  03)      O=J$00.00l-$1.000.000         PI»il,000,001-$5.000.000  P2-JS.O0O.0Ol-S25.0O0.O0O  P3=«2S 

-$250,000           N=S25O,0Ol-J500,0OO 
1-150,000,000  P4-SS0.000,001  or  marc 

3  Vil  Mih  Codes:  OApprabal                          R-Con  (rcsl  cjmt  only)                          S=Ass«s«m 
(Col  C2)              U=Book  Value                           V=0«ier                                                        W-EfOnm 

em 

led 

T=Cs5h/Mir1t£t 

1402 


INmie  of  Penoo  Rtpocdos 
Silverman,    Bacry  G. 


H/09/1997 


Vm.     ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS.         ODdkaie  pn  cr  levoR.) 

NONE  (No  tdiJMooil  iBbmailoa  or  upluiiioaL) 

SECTION  I  —  POSITIONS 

BAB/BRI  Bar  RevleK  is  owned  by  HB  Legal  i   Professional  Publications,  Inc.,  Chicago,  IL. 

SECTION  II  —  AGREEMENTS 

The  listed  agreements  are  employee  benefic  plans  offered  by  my  previous  employers.   The 
years  indicated  are  the  years  that  I  started  in  the  plans.   My  contributions  to  these  plans 
remain  on  deposit  in  the  plans.   As  required  by  law,  I  have  made  arrangements  to  begin 
receiving  payments  from  the  plans  at  various  times  in  the  future.   I  have  the  right  to  choose 
from  among  several  investment  options  offered  to  all  participants  in  the  State  of  Arizona  and 
Maricopa  County  plans,  but  otherwise  have  no  control  over  any  of  the  plans. 


1403 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT        Sllveman,    Barry  G. 


SECTION  HEADING.      (laacie  pur  of  repon.) 
SECTION   2.    ASREBMSHTS    (cont'd.) 
I,i.    Date  Paxtles   and  Texms 


Dueoritipon         1 
11/09/1997 


d 


State  of  Ariz.  Deferred  Compensation  Plan 


SBCTION  3.  KON-INVBSTMBNT  INOWIE  (cont'd.) 
LI.  Date     Parties  and  Terns 


Groes  Income 


6  1995  Self-etrployed  court  reporter  (S)  $  0.00 

7  X995  Maricopa  County/Staco  of  Arizona  (judicial  salary)  $  •4,122.00 

8  199S  BAR/BRI  Bar  Review  (lecture  fees)  $  2,250.00 

9  1995  City  of  Phoenix  Deferred  Compensation  Plan  $  25.00 

10  1994  Self-employed  court  reporter  (S)  $  0.00 

11  1994  Maricopa  County/State  of  Arizona  (judicial  salary)  $  87,360.00 

12  1994  BAR/BRI  Bar  Review  (lecture  fees)  $  2,2SO.00 

13  1994  City  of  Phoenix  Deferred  Compensation  Plan  $  2S.00 


1404 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSUSE  REPORT 


Name  of  Penoo  Rcpoctiag 

Silverroan,    Barry  Q. 


DucofBepon 
11/09/1997 


tX.    CERTIFICATION 

In  compliance  widi  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  455  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on 
Judicial  Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  at  the  time  after  reasonable  inquiry.  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory 
fiinction  in  any  litigation  during  the  period  covered  by  this  report  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children 
had  a  financial  interest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3Xc).  in  the  omcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify  that  all  the  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  d^endent 
children,  if  any)  is  accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  repotted 
was  withheld  because  it  met  applicable  stamtoty  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  further  certify  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  wliich  have  been 
reported  are  in  compliance  with  tfie  provisions  of  5  U.S.C.  app.  4,  section  501  et.  scq..  5  U.S.C.  7353  and  Judicial  Conference 
regulations. 


Signamre 


sldO/^ — 


bh 


Any  individual  who  knowingly  and  wilfiilly  falsifies  or  fails  to  file  this  report  may  be  subject  to  civil 
and  criminal  sanctions  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  Section  104). 


FU-mC  INSTRUCTIONS 

Mail  original  and  three  additional  copies  (o: 

Committee  oa  Financial  Disdosarc 
Administrative  OOice  of  the  United  States  Coum 
One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E. 
Suite  2-301 
WaibiDgtoa,  D.C  Z0544 


1406 

NET  WORTH 


Provide  i  compktt,  cuncnt  financial  nci  wonh  mtemeai  which  itemiTi-^  yj  ^^^j^ 
ill  asMB  Cinclnding  bank  accounts,  real  esnte,  securines.  trusts,  invesnneois.  and  other  financial 
holdings)  all  liahfliries  Oncloding  debts,  mortgages,  loans,  and  other  fin^nnal  obligations)  of 
yourself,  your  spouse,  and  other  tminw<i;|f»  members  of  yonr  hoosehoid. 


Assrrs 

■ 

LUBHITIES                                       1 

Ctsh  OB  had  ud  ia  bub 

5"1  \lL% 

Vota  pxyibk  ts  ' — *" rrl 

1 

Kbcdale 

iSl| 

oin 

Wirlilil 

KscB  ps)nble(a  idiara 

1 

Itelised  iecases-«dd  schedule 

1     ! 

Halts  p«y*blB  to  cAcs 

1 

Acasna  tad  setcs  icceiTibls: 

Arnrmn  udbSlsdue 

4 

oco\ 

Cm  tea  nUdTct  ud  fr---^' 

Uapiid  isesiEs  az 

1 

Doe  torn  ohei     SpSfSe  S   bj4.ne<5  ^ 

ul 

7a« 

0(J)ef  **wyi»^   OQC  1^  ?*T,*   ■  |> 

! 

Dccb<Sd            r.c.w.^i.,         _; 

Sxii  enaie  meRSifei  payihle-add 

KiV«iuU 

Real  esaic  awnrrt    I'rtrl  u&cdnlc 

HO 

Ofc3 

rhiffri  aaRjHa  lod  odx;  lies  pxy- 

Xul  ooic  mort^ixes  rrseivihU 

1 

[M 

ISH 

1 

Cua  nlue-Ii£:  innnscc 

10 

376, 

,1 

Ottic  tatn-jiftniar 

1 

P«rM>*.i\    pf(»|i<fU; 

?n 

l-il 

. 

^■»*plffv«t  b*ne(-\|  p(*ni 

1■^\ 

Qlo 

Total  g,*^*"*-'** 

H 

Ot)0 

1 

NctWcsA 

[  Jit 

'Kiu 

Tsui  AoeU 

I 

Jltsllffc 

Yool  ^i  ■KiTif^j-t  ud  aex  vcn& 

I   llo 

R^fc 

CONTINGEJrr  uabiuties 

1 

GOiSSLM.  IMFOBMATIOM 

At  niianrr.  cDiuicr  er  pononr 

Are  uy  »cs  ;iad(oC   (Add  lacd- 
olc) 

Oa  kues  or  ecaffscs 

■cacntf? 

Lc(>l  Cliiau 

1 

H»ve  yea  ere  utaa  teJcapwy? 

:    1   1 

Prarwoo  &>r  FadmJ  loomc  Til 

1       _ 

1         1         1  _ 

**  Olba  ipEciiJ  ddx                                                  |                 i 

j__ 

J_ 

1 

1406 


IT"  '^YMATE  Barry  G  &  George-Ann  Silverman 

'    9/97 

NET   WORTH    REPORT 
SUMMARY 
ASSETS 


Cash  in  bank  accounts  47,97S 

Certificates  of  deposit  11,792 

Securities  and  commodities  709,805 

Real  estate  140,263 

Receivables  11,728 

Vehicles  39,754 

Personal  property  27,982 

Life  insurance  10,376 

other  assets  271,270 


TOTAL   ASSETS:  1,270,946 

LIABILITIES 


Installment   debts  4,000 

TOTAL    LIABILITIES:  4,000 

NET         WORTH 


Total  assets  1,270,946 

Total  liabilities  4,000 


NET  WORTH:  1,266,946 


NET    WORTH    REPORT 
DETAIL 


ASSETS 


Cash  in  bank  accounts 

Wells  Fargo  Bank 
Bank  of  America 
Wells  Fargo  Bank 
First  Fed  Crdt  Un 
First  Fed  Crdt  Un 
First  Fed  Crdt  Un 

-Otal  cash  in  bank  accounts 


6,824 

4,453 

10,563 

-4 

27 

-4  A 

26,100 

-4  9 

9 

S: 

47,976 

1407 


^'"■^ificates  of  deposit 

Bank  of  America  n    752 

90  days  ' 

Total  certificates  of  deposit:        11,792 

Securities  and  commodities 

$10,000  US  Savings  Bond  6,456 

Issued  9/92 

1   units  ®  6,456.000  ea 

$10,000  US  Savings  Bond  g  456 

9/92  ' 

1   units  ®  5,456.000  ea 

1987  US  Savings  Bonds  1  579 
$100  face  value 

18   units  @  87.740  ea 

1988  US  Savings  Bonds  1,985 
$100  face  value 

24   units  @  82 . 700  ea 

198  9  US  Savings  Bonds  1  8  71 

$100  face  value 

24   units  @  77 . 940  ea 

1990  US  Savings  Bonds  1,7G4 
$100  face  value 

24   units  ®  73.460  ea 

1991  US  Savings  Bonds  l,GG2 
$100  face  value 

24   units  ®  69.260  ea 

1992  US  Savings  Bonds  x  55'' 
$100  face  value 

24   units  ®  64 .660  ea 

1993  US  Savings  Bonds  1,433 
$100  face  value 

24   units  ®  59.700  ea 

1994  US  Savings  Bonds  997 
$100  face  value 

16   units  @  56.060  ea 

1994  US  Savings  Bonds  1,121 

$200  face  value 

10   units  ®  112.120  ea 


1408 


1995  US  Savings  Bonds  1,590 

$500  face  value 

6   units  @  2GS.000  ea 

1995  US  Savings  Bonds  328 
$200  face  value 

3  units  @  109.170  ea 

1996  US  Savings  Bonds  3,070 
$500  face  value 

12   units  @  255.300  ea 

1997  US  Savings  Bonds  2,250 
$500  face  value 

9   units  ®  250.000  ea 

Fid  Asset  Manager  GAS  SEP  IRA      23,416 
1,235   units  @  18.960  ea 

Fid  Equity  Income  II  BGS  IRA        15,374 
540   units  @  2S.470  ea 

Fid  Equity  Income  II  GAS  IRA       15,374 
540   units  ®  28.470  ea 

Fid  Equity  Income  II  Keogh  MP      141,581 
4,973   units  @  28.470  ea 

Israel  Bond  due  10/1/05  1,000 

7th  Development  Iss 

1   units  @  1,000.000  ea 

Israel  Bond  due  10/1/2003  1,000 

7th  Development  Iss 

1   units  @  1,000.000  ea 

Israel  Bond  due  10/1/2008  1,000 

7th  Development  Iss 

1   units  @  1,000.000  ea 

Israel  Bond  due  10/1/99  1,000 

6th  Development  Iss 

1   units  ®  1,000.000  ea 

Israel  Bond  due  11/1/04  1,000 

7th  Development  Iss 

1   units  @  1,000.000  aa 

Israel  Bond  due  3/1/04  500 

7i:h  Development  Iss 
1   units  (S  500.000  ea 


1409 


Israel  Bond  due  5/1/2011  500 

7th  Development  Iss 
1   units  @  500.000  ea 

Israel  Bond  due  9/1/00  1,000 

7th  Development  Iss 

1  units  @  1,000.000  ea 

Israel  Bond  due  9/1/01  1,000 

7th  Development  las 

1  units  @  1,000.000  ea 

Israel  Bond  due  9/1/02  1,000 

7th  Development  Iss 

1   units  ®  1,000.000  ea 

Israel  Bond  due  9/1/98  500 

6th  Development  Issu 
1   units  @  500.000  ea 

Israel  ZCB  due  10/31/2003  6,000 

1   units  @  6,000.000  ea 

Israel  ZCE  due  10/31/2003  6,000 

1   units  ®  6,000.000  ea 

Israel  ZCB  P-4  due  03/31/2000        6,000 
1   units  ®  6,000.000  ea 

Israel  ZCB  P-7  due  03/31/2000       6,000 
1   units  @  6,000.000  ea 

Israel  ZCB  P-D  due  12/31/2001        6,000 
1   units  @  6,000.000  ea 

Israel  ZCB  P-E  due  12/31/2001       6,000 
1   units  @  6,000.000  ea 

Israel  Zero  Cpn  Bnd  01/31/2006      6,000 
1   units  ®  6,000.000  ea 

Nuveen  Flgshp  A2  Mun  A  shares         779 
69  units  ®  11.290  ea 

Nuveen  Flgshp  AZ  Muni  Bond  Fnji      9,676 

Class  R  shares 

857   units  @  11.290  ea 

Panavision  (PVI)  4,250 

200   units  @  21 . 250  ea 

Tax-Free  Trust  of  AZ  (AZTFX)        60,665 


1410 


5,G38   uniCS  ®  10.760  ea 

US  Treasury  Bill  due  03/05/98      65,000 
1   unics  a  65,000.000  ea 

US  Treasury  Bill  due  01/02/98      10,000 
1  unics  ®  10,000.000  ea 

US  Treasury  Bill  due  01/08/98       20,000 
1  units  ®  20,000.000  ea 

US  Treasury  Bill  due  02/05/98       10,000 
1  units  @  10,000.000  ea 

US  Treasury  Bill  due  03/12/98      20,000 
1  units  ®  20,000.000  ea 

US  Treasury  Bill  due  04/09/98      25,000 
1  units  (3  25,000.000  ea 

US  Treasury  Bill  due  04/30/98      15,000 
1   units  O  15,000.000  ea 

US  Treasury  Bill  due  11/20/97      20,000 
1   units  (3  20,000.000  ea 

US  Treasury  Bill  due  12/04/97      55,000 
1   units  ®  55,000.000  ea 

US  Treasury  Bill  due  12/11/97       10,000 
1  units  ®  10,000.000  ea 

Vangrd  500  Portfolio  Indx  Trst     50,203 

GAS  IRA  (VFINX) 

562   units  @  89 .330  ea 

Vangrd  500  Portfolio  Indx  Trst     52,973 

BGS  IRA  (VFINX) 

593   units  ®  89.330  ea 

Total  securities  i  commodities:       709,805 

Real  estate 

Residence,  Phoenix  AZ  140,000 

Lease  on  storage  locker  263 

Phoenix,  AZ 

Total  real  estate:  140,263 

R.ecgivables 


1411 


George-Ann  Silverman  Ct  Rptr       11,728 
Receivables 

Total  receivables:  11,728 

Vehicles 

96  Oldsmobile  Cutlass  Supreme  19,3  90 

97  Toyota  Caunry  4-DR  LE  Sedan  20,364 
Total  vehicles;  39,754 

Personal  property 

Business  equipment  27,982 

Total  personal  property:  27,982 

Life  insurance  (cash  value) 

Horace  Mann  5,573 

BGS 

Minn  Mutual  1, 3  37 

BGS 

Prudential  3,466 

GAS 

Total  life  insurance:  10,376 

Other  assets 

City  of  Phoenix  Deferred  6,066 

Comp  Plan 

Elected  Officials  Retirement       54,173 
Plan 

Fed  Employes  Retirement  System      2,73i 

Maricopa  County  Deferred  123,421 

Comp  Plan  (Nationwide  Fixed) 

State  of  AZ  Deferred  Comp  50,550 

Plan  (PGA  &  SPI) 

US  Govt  Thrift  Savings  Plan         34,324 


Total  other  assets: 


271, 270 


1412 

JTAL  ASSETS:  1,270,546 

LIABILITIES 

Installment   debts 

Bank  of  America  visa  4,000 

Total    installment   debts:  4,000 

TOTAL    LIABILITIES:  4,000 

NETWORTH 


Total   assets  1,270,946 

Total   liabilities  4,000 

NETWORTH:  1,266,946 


1413 


III.   GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 


An  ethical  consideration  iinder  Canon  2  o£  the  American  Bar 
Association's  Code  o£  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for 
"every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional  prominence  or 
professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  Co  participate  in 
serving  the  disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to 
fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing  specific  instances  and 
the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

Canon  4  (G)  of  the  Arizona  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct 
prch^bics  judges  frcjj-n  praccicing  law  on  a.  pro  bono  basis 
or      otherwise.  I      have      attempted      to      fulfil      my 

responsibilities    to   the  disadvantaged  in  other  ways: 

First,  I  actively  recruited  minority  lawyers  to  apply  for 
judicial  positions  and  brought  together  a  group  of 
lawyers  sind  judges  for  this  purpose.  I  have  assisted  and 
mentored  minority  lawyers  through  the  state  judicial 
merit  selection  process  and  after   they  became  judges. 

Second,  as  a  judge,  I  have  had  a  special  interest  in  the 
enforcement      of      child      support       obligations .  The 

disadvantaged  are  particularly  harmed  by  the  inability  to 
collect  child  support.  I  chaired  a  committee  to  revise 
the  Arizona  Child  Support  Guidelines .  In  addition, 
several  years  ago,  I  donated  my  time  to  organize  and  put 
on  a  seminar  on  how  to  collect  past  due  child  support. 
The  seminsur  was  offered  in  four  locations  around  the 
state. 

Third,  my  wife  and  I  contribute  financially  to 
scholarship  funds  for  minority  law  students  and  donate 
food   to  a  local   food  bank. 


2.  The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of 
(Judicial  Conduct  states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge 
to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that  invidiously 
discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you 
currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization 
which  discriminates  --  through  either  formal  membership 
requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  mexabership 

^  policies?   If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.   What  you 
have  done  to  try  to  change  these  policies? 

T  do  not  belong  to  any  such  organization  and  never  have. 

3 .  Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to 

21 


1414 


recomnend  candidates  for  nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If 
so,  did  it  recomnend  your  nomination?  Please  describe  your 
experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from 
beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led  to 
your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which  you  participated) . 

On  June  28,  1997,  I  met  Senator  Kyi  ac  his  office  in 
Phoenix  where  he  informed  me  that  J  had  been  suggested 
for  the  Ninth  Circuit  by  several  members  of  the  local 
legal  community^  In  September,  1997,  I  received  a  call 
from  Jon  Yarowsky,  of  the  Office  of  Counsel  to  the 
President,  advising  me  that  I  was  under  consideration . 
On  Occober  3,  1997,  I  was  mzerviewed  in  Washingzon  r>y 
Mr.  Yarowsky  and  three  other  representatives  of  the 
Administration.  At  their  request,  I  completed  an  ABA 
Personal  Data  Questionnaire  and  an  FBI  Background 
Investigation     form.  About      10     days     later,      I     was 

interviewed  by  the  FBI,  and  on  October  23,  1997,  I  was 
interviewed  by  Charles  B.  Renfrew,  a  member  of  the  ABA 
Committee  on    the  Federal   Judiciary. 

Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a 
judicial  nominee  discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal 
issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be 
interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue, 
or  question?   If  so,  please  explain  fully. 

Wo 

Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving 
"judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal 
government,  and  within  society  generally,  has  become  the 
subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.  It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that 
alleges  that  the  judicial  branch  has  usurped  mcuiy  of  the 
prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of  government . 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have 
been  said  to  include : 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem- solution 
rather  than  grievance -resolution ; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual 
plaintiff  as  a  vehicle  for  the  Imposition  of  far- 
reaching  orders  extending  to  broad  classes  of 
individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  is^ose  broad, 
affirmative  duties  upon  governments  and  society; 

22 


1415 


d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening 
jurisdictional  requirements  such  as  standing  and 
ripeness ;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  iz^ose  itself  upon 
other  institutions  in  the  manner  of  an 
administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities . 


I  believe  that  some  of  the  criticism  involving  judicial 
activism     is     justified.  The    power     of     the     federal 

judiciary  is  not  unlimited.  The  constitutionail  doctrines 
of  the  separation  of  powers,  respect  for  state 
sovereignty,  standing,  ripeness  and  the  requirement  of  a 
case  or  controversary  all  are  designed  to  act  as 
constraints  on  the  judicial  branch  of  government.  There 
are  at  least  three  aspects  of  judicial  activism  that  are 
of  special   concern   to  me. 

First,  I  have  noticed  the  tendency  of  some  appellate 
courts  to  engage  in  "appellate  fact  finding.  "  In  my 
experience,  this  phenomenon  usually  occurs  when  a 
reviewing  court  disagrees  with  a  particular  result  in  a 
given  case.  In  my  view,  appellate  courts  should  defer 
to  the  factual  findings  of  the  trial  judge  --  the  "judge 
on  the  scene"  --  unless  those  findings  are  clearly 
erroneous  or  unsupported.  Although  it  is  obviously 
appropriate  for  appellate  courts  to  review  questions  of 
law  on  a  de  novo  basis,  a  healthy  respect  for  the 
doctrine  of  judicial  restraint  requires  appellate 
deference  to  lower  courts'  factual  and  discretionary 
calls   whenever  possible. 

In  my  view,  some  trial  judges  have  been  guilty  of  the 
same  thing  --  substituting  their  opinions  and 
discretionary  judgments  for  those  of,  for  example,  prison 
officials  and  school  administrators.  Although  the 
federal  courts  have  an  indisputeibly  vital  role  to  play  in 
assuring  compliance  with  the  constitution.  I  think  that 
some  judges  have  unwisely,  sometimes  unwittingly, 
appointed  themselves  the  de  facto  Director  of  the 
Department  of  Corrections  or  Superintendent  of  Schools. 
Judges  do  not  have  the  time  or  expertise,  much  less  the 
authority,  to  micro-manage  schools  and  prisons.  When 
they  do,  it  damages  the  public's  confidence  in  the 
judiciary,  an  unfortunate  result  of  which  is  that  such 
judges  are  not  taken  seriously  when  genuine 
constitutional  issues  come  along  that  truly  require 
judicial   intervention. 

Third,    until   the  recent  passage  of  the  Prison  Litigation 

23 


1416 


Reform  Ace,  several  appellate  decisione  made  it 
unnecessarily  difficult  to  quickly  get  rid  of  frivolous 
litigation,  difficulties  well  beyond  what  the  Rules  of 
Civil  Procedure  require.  For  example,  case  law  in  some 
circuits  prohibited  federal  trial  judges  from  dismissing, 
sua  sponte,  civil  complaints  that  fail  to  state  a  claim. 
In  addition,  although  frivolous  litigation  could  be 
dismissed  on  the  court's  own  motion,  some  appellate 
courts  have  construed  "frivolous"  so  narrowly  as  to  be  of 
little  help. 

I  try  never  to  forget  that  being  a  judge  is  not  the 
equivalent  of  being  the  king,  and  that  in  a 
constitutional  democracy  it  is  the  judge's  job  to  fairly, 
impartially,  and  intelligently  follow  the  law  whether  he 
or  she  agrees  with  it  or  not. 


24 


1417 


CARLOS  ROBERTO  MORENO 

RESPONSES  TO  SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE 
QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 

I.  BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 


1 .  Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used.) 
Carlos  Roberto  Moreno 

2.  Address:  List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address. 

Residence:  Office: 

210  West  Temple  Street 

Los  Angeles,  California  90041  Department  1 3 1 

Los  Angeles,  California  90012 

3.  Date  and  place  of  birth. 

November  4,  1948;  Los  Angeles,  California 


4.    Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name.)  List  spouse's 
occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  address(es). 

Christine  (Donahue)  Moreno,  Artist/  Teacher  . 

East  Los  Angeles  City  College  California  State  University 

1301  Avenida  Cesar  Chavez  5151  State  University  Drive 

Monterey  Park,  California  9 1 754-6099  Los  Angeles,  California  90032 


5.    Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates  of 
attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

Colleges  &  Law  School  Dates  Attended  Degree  &  Date 
California  State  University 

at  Los  Angeles  02/66-06/66  None 

Yale  College  09/66-06/70  Bachelor  of  Arts,  6/70 

Harvard  Business  School  09/70-10/70  None 

Stanford  Law  School  09/72-06/75  Juris  Doctorate,  06/75 


1418 


Employment  Record:  List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional  corporations, 
companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations, 
nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer, 
director,  partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  from  college. 


Year  Employer 

10/93-present        Los  Angeles  Superior  Court 
1 1  /86- 1 0/93  Compton  Municipal  Court, 

02/92-05/92  California  State  University 

at  Dominguez  Hills 
02/90-05/90  California  State  University 

at  Dominguez  Hills 
05/79- 1 1  /86  Kelley  Drye  &  Warren.  Los  Angeles 

(formerly  Mori  &  Ota) 
09/75-05/79  Los  Angeles  City  Attorney 

11/70-06/72  Los  Angeles  County 

Department  of  Public  Social  Service 


Judge 
Judge 
Adjunct  Instructor 

Adjunct  Instructor 

Associate 

Deputy  City  Attorney 

Personnel 

Representative 


In  addition,  since  March  1 997  to  the  present.  1  have  served  as  an  unpaid  board 
member  of  the  Arroyo  Vista  Family  Health  Center,  a  non-profit  community  health 
center  established  pursuant  to  Section  330  of  the  Public  Health  Service  Act. 

From  1976  through  1978, 1  also  served  on  the  boards  of  two  additional  non-profit 
organizations,  the  Narcotics  Prevention  Project  (  a  drug  rehabilitation  program  in  the 
Boyle  Heights  section  of  Los  Angeles)  and  the  Public  Inebriate  Program  (an  alcohol 
rehabilitation  program  in  the  skid  row  section  of  Los  Angeles). 


7.    Military  Service:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give  particulars,  including 
the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 

None. 


Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees,  and 
honorary  society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

1997  CriminalJustice  Award,  Superior  Court  Judge  of  the  Year,    Criminal  Law 
Section,  Los  Angeles  County  Bar  Association 


1419 


9.  Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related  committees  or 
conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of 
any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

California  Judges  Association  (Criminal  Law  and  Procedure  Committee) 

Los  Angeles  Superior  Court  (bail,  investigators,  trial  delay  reduction,  new  judge 
orientation,  and  jury  committees)  (1993-1997) 

Municipal  Court  Judges  Association  (Legislative  and  Bail  Committees)  (1987-1992) 

Presiding  Judges  Association  (Municipal  Court)  (1989-1990) 

Mexican- American  Bar  Association  (President)  (1981) 

Los  Angeles  County  Bar  Association  (1979-1986)  Immigration  and  Business  Law 
Sections 

10.  Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are  active  in 
lobbying  before  public  bodies.  Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

a.  Lobbying: 

Califonua  Judges  Association 
Los  Angeles  Superior  Court 
Arroyo  Vista  Family  Health  Center 

b.  Non-lobbying: 

Yale  Club  of  Southern  California 

Yale  Chicano  Alumni  Association 

Stanford  Alumni  Association 

Stanford  Chicano/Latino  Association  of  Los  Angeles  County 


1420 


1 1 .  Court  Admissions:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice,  with 
dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed.  Please  explain  the 
reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same  infonnation  for  administrative 
bodies  which  require  special  admission  to  practice. 

United  States  District  Court  for  the  Central  and  Northern  Districts  of  California, 
admitted  1979.  (Membership  inactive  due  to  appointment  to  the  bench  in  1986). 

California  Supreme  Court  and  all  state  courts  of  California,  admitted  in  December 
1975.  (Membership  inactive  due  to  appointment  to  the  bench  in  1986). 


12.  Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books,  articles,  reports,  or 
other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.  Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.  Also,  please  supply  a  copy 
of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.  If  there 
were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you.  please 
supply  them. 

Over  the  years  I  have  spoken  to  \arious  school  classes,  service  organizations,  and 
senior  citizen  groups  concerning  my  job  as  a  judge.  None  of  these  talks  involved 
constitutional  issues  or  legal  policy  and  none  were  reported  by  the  press.  1  have  not 
retained  any  notes  used  in  connection  with  these  speeches,  nor  have  I  written  any 
published  articles  or  speeches. 


13.  Health:  What  is  the  present  state  of  >  our  health?  List  the  date  of  your  last  physical 
examination. 

Excellent,  May  22,  1997 


14.  Judicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have  held,  whether  such 
position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each  such 
court. 

Judge  of  the  Superior  Court,  Los  Angeles  Superior  Court,  October  1993  to  present, 
with  general  civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction  throughout  the  County  of  Los  Angeles; 
presently  assigned  to  a  direct  calendar  criminal  department,  handling  arraignments, 
pretrial  conferences,  trials,  sentencings,  and  probation  violations;  appointed  October 
1993  by  Governor  Pete  Wilson,  elected  without  opposition  June  1994. 


1421 


Judge  of  the  Municipal  Court,  Compton  Municipal  Court,  November  1986  to 
October  1993,  with  jurisdiction  over  criminal  misdemeanor  cases,  felony 
preliminary  hearings,  and  civil  disputes  not  exceeding  $25,000  in  controversy; 
appointed  October  1986  by  Go\emor  George  Deukmejian,  elected  without  opposition 
June  1988. 


15.  Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  (1)  citations  for  the  ten  most 
significant  opinions  you  have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was 
aflfirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your  substantive  or  procedural  rulings;  and  (3) 
constitutional  issues,  together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such 
opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide 
copies  of  the  opinions. 

(1)  Municipal  and  Superior  Court  trial  judges  generally  to  do  not  issue  written 
opinions,  and,  if  written,  none  are  published.  I  have  not  written  any  published  or 
unpublished  opinions  in  my  career  as  a  trial  court  judge 

(2)  The  Appellate  Department  of  the  Los  Angeles  Superior  Court  has  jurisdiction  over 
appeals  fi-om  the  Municipal  Courts  of  the  County  of  Los  Angeles.  Their  opinions 
are  generally  unpublished.  I  have  attached  the  only  opinions  of  the  Appellate 
Department,  of  which  I  have  personal  knowledge,  which  reversed  convictions  in 
trials  I  handled  as  a  Municipal  Court  judge. 

In  the  first  case.  People  v.  Crespin,  (Superior  Court  No.  CRA27965,  Compton 
Municipal  Court  No.  88M03642),  a  school  teacher  convicted  of  multiple  counts 
of  annoying  female  students,  had  his  judgment  reversed  for  prosecutorial  error  due 
to  improper  closing  argument. 

In  the  second  case.  People  v.  Crescentini,  (Superior  Court  No.  BR28452, 
Compton  Municipal  Court  No.  89M00J12),  the  defendemt's  conviction  for  resisting 
arrest  was  reversed  for  prosecutorial  misconduct  in  improperly  cross-examining  a 
character  witness  for  the  defendant. 

As  a  Superior  Court  judge  I  have  not  had  any  of  my  decisions  reversed  on  appeal 
or  criticized  significantly. 

(3)  No  claim  of  constitutional  error  was  made  in  the  two  Municipal  Court  cases  in 
which  the  judgment  was  reversed. 


1422 


16.  Public  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you  have  held,  other  than 
judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected 
or  appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies  for  elective  public 
office. 

None. 


17.  Legal  Career: 


Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after  graduation 
from  law  school  including: 

1 .  whether  you  served  as  a  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so.  the  name  of  the 
judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk: 

1  have  never  served  as  a  law  clerk  to  a  judge. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so.  the  addresses  and  dates; 
I  have  never  practiced  law  as  a  solo  practitioner. 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  llrms  or  offices,  companies 
or  governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have  been  connected,  and 
the  nature  of  your  connection  with  each: 

(September  1975  -  April  1979) 

Los  Angeles  City  Attorney's  Office 

200  North  Main  Street 

Los  Angeles,  California  90012 

Deputy  City  Attorney  -  Criminal  Division 

(May  1979 -October  1986) 
Kelley  Drye  &  Warren 
(formerly  Mori  &  Ota) 
5 1 5  South  Flower  Street,  #1 1 00 
Los  Angeles,  California  9007 1 
Litigation  Associate 


1423 


(November  1986  -  October  1993) 
Compton  Municipal  Court 
200  West  Compton  Boulevard 
Compton,  California  90220 
Judge  of  the  Municipal  Court 

(November  1993  -  present) 
Los  Angeles  Superior  Court 
210  West  Temple  Street 
Los  Angeles,  California  900 1 2 
Judge  of  the  Superior  Court 


What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice,  dividing 
it  into  periods  with  dates  if  its  character  has  chanucd  o\cr  the 
years? 

September  1 975  to  April   1 979  -  Deputy  City  Attorney  handling 
misdemeanor  prosecutions  for  Los  Angeles  City  Attorney's  Office, 
downtown  criminal  trial  courts:  handled  all  phases  ofcriminal 
prosecution,  special  assignments  to  public  disorder  prosecution 
team  and  Special  Counsel  to  City  Attorney;  civil  consumer 
protection  prosecutions  for  unlaNslul  business  trials  practice. 

May  1 979  to  October  1 986  -  Litigation  attorney  with  the  Los 
Angeles  office  of  Kelley  Dr>e  &  Warren,  a  national.  New  York- 
based  law  firm,  handling  commercial  litigation  in  state  and  federal 
courts,  including  bankruptcy,  emplojTnent  (wrongful  termination, 
EEO,  and  labor  negotiations  for  management),  banking,  real  estate 
and  antitrust  litigation  for  predominantly  corporate  clients. 

November  1 986  to  October  1 993  -  Judge  of  the  Municipal  Court, 
Compton  Municipal  Court,  handling  felony  preliminary  hearings, 
misdemeanor  trials  and  ci\il  trials. 

November  1993  to  Present  -  Judge  of  the  Superior  Court,  Los 
Angeles  Superior  Court,  presiding  over  a  direct  calendar  court, 
handling  felony  trials,  including  special  circumstance  homicides  and 
a  broad  array  of  violent  felonies  in  addition  to  daily  pretrial 
conferences,  sentencings,  case  settlements  and  probation  violations. 


1424 


2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the  areas,  if  any, 

in  which  you  ha\e  specialized. 

As  a  prosecutor  with  the  Los  Angeles  City  Attorney's  Office.  I 
represented  the  People  of  the  State  of  California  in  both  criminal 
and  civil  prosecutions.  T>pical  witnesses  consisted  ofpolice 
officers  employed  by  the  Los  Angeles  Police  Depanment  or  other 
local  law  enforcement  agencies,  as  well  as  members  of  the  public 
who  were  victims  of  crime. 

T>pical  clients  with  the  law  firm  of  Kelley  Drye  &  Warren  (Los 
Angeles  office),  and  its  predecessor,  Mori  &  Ota.  consisted  of 
multinational  corporations  with  a  heavy  concentration  of 
corporations  which  were  subsidiaries  of  Japanese  corporations. 
Many  of  these  firms  were  the  local  distribution  arm  of  the  parent 
corporation  (e.g.  Yamaha  Motor  Corporation.) 


Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at  all?  If  the 
fi-equency  of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such 
of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such  \ariance. 
gi\ing  dates. 

As  a  Deputy  City  Attorney  I  appeared  in  trial  courts  e\ery  day.  As 
a  civil  litigator  I  appeared  weekly  with  an  emphasis  on  law  and 
motion  practice. 

Wliat  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts:  1 0% 

(b)  state  courts:  70%  (All  prosecutions  were  in  State 

Court) 

(c)  bankruptcy  courts:       20% 

What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil  100%(KeIley  Drye  &  Warren) 

20%  (L.A.  City  Attorney's  Office) 

(b)  criminal:  0%  (Kelley  Drye  &  Warren) 

80%  (L.A.  City  Attorney's  Office) 


1425 


State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to  verdict  or 
judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether  you  were  sole 
counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

Approximately  75  trials  (70  criminal,  5  civil);  I  was  sole  counsel  on 
all  criminal  trials  and  sole  or  chief  counsel  on  all  civil  trials. 


5.         What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury:  95% 

(b)  non-jury  5% 


18.  Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you  personally 
handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and 
date  if  unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of  each  case.  Identify 
the  party  or  parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.  Also  state  as  to  each 
case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before  whom  the 
case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  The  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co-counsel  and 
of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 

(1)  Hines  v.  Sumitomo  Bank,  Orange  County  Superior  Court,  Case  No.  405225 
(1985) 

In  this  action,  I  defended  a  bank  client  alleged  to  have  committed  fraud  in 
obtaining  third-party  owned  collateral  to  secure  several  loans  to  the  principal 
borrower,  who  was  also  a  family  relative  of  the  guarantors.  The  case  involved 
numerous  parties,  including  the  loan  officers  who  arranged  the  loans.  The 
principal  issues  involved  the  validity  of  the  loan  guarantees  and  the  alleged  false 
representations  of  the  loan  officers  in  obtaining  the  collateral  securing  the 
guarantees.  I  prepared  all  the  motions  and  took  most  of  the  depositions  and  would 
have  been  second  chair  to  Paul  Bressan  of  Kelley  Drye  &  Warren  had  the  case 
proceeded  to  trial.  The  case  was  settled  on  the  eve  of  trial.  Judge:  Orange  County 
Superior  Court;  no  judge  assigned;  Co-Counsel,  Paul  Bressan,  5 1 5  South  Flower 
Street,  #1 100,  Los  Angeles,  California  90071,  (213)  689-1300;  Opposing  Counsel: 
Steven  Weston,  444  South  Flower  Street,  43  rd  Floor,  Los  Angeles,  California 
90071;(213)  623-2322. 


1426 


(2)  JSP,  Inc  V.  Sumitomo  Bank,  Siskiyou  County  Superior  Coun,  Case  No. 35883 
(1985) 

In  this  action.  I  defended  a  bank  client  alleged  to  have  committed  fraud  in 
extending  construction  loan  financing  to  a  developer  who  alleged  that  the  bank 
failed  to  release  collateral  as  promised.  The  principal  issues  in\olved  the 
application  of  the  parol  evidence  rule  and  the  statute  of  frauds  and  whether  any 
alleged  verbal  representations  by  the  loan  officer  were  admissible.  I  was  chief 
counsel  for  the  bank  and  took  all  depositions  and  wrote  all  motions,  including  a 
successftil  partial  summary  judgment  motion.  Ultimately,  the  case  was  resolved 
through  a  settlement  agreement.  Judge:  Siskiyou  County  Superior  Court,  handled 
by  various  judges  through  granting  of  defendant's  summary  judgment  motion. 
Opposing  Counsel:  Peter  Racobs,  6670  Alessandro  Boulevard,  UB,  Riverside, 
CaUfomia  92506;  (909)  789-8100 

(3)  Yasutake  v.  Real  Estate  Securities  Service,  Orange  County  Superior  Court,  Case 
No.  380266(1985) 

In  this  case.  I  represented  a  husband  and  w ife  who  owned  an  apartment  four-plex 
and  who  sought  to  set  aside  a  wrongful  foreclosure  sale  by  a  creditor.  The 
foreclosure  sale  was  set  aside  alter  a  contested  two-day  court  trial.  The  principal 
issue  involved  the  nature  of  the  alleged  breach  and  the  adequacy  of  the  notice  of 
default.  ludge:  Leonard  H.  McBride,  Orange  County  Superior  Court.  Opposing 
Qjunsd:  Robert  Lewin.  105  Crescent  Bay.  f^F,  Laguna  Beach.  CA.  92651:(714) 
497-8897 

(4)  Pehota  v.  Sanyo  E  &  E  Corporation,  U.S.  District  Court  for  the  Southern  District 
of  California.  Case  No.  85-0907-JLI(IEG);  San  Diego  Superior  Coun, 

Case  No.  N25608(  1984) 

In  this  litigation,  I  defended  a  major  manufacturer  of  electronic  components  being 
sued  by  a  former  employee  and  union  member  who  alleged  wrongful  termination 
and  employer  harassment.  After  successfiilly  demurring  to  the  complaint  in  the 
Superior  Court  on  federal  preemption  grounds,  the  case  was  removed  to  federal 
court  where  the  case  was  dismissed  for  failure  to  exhaust  administrati\e  remedies. 
I  was  chief  counsel  and  prepared  all  motions  and  handled  all  court  appearances. 
Judge:  J.  Lawrence  Irving,  United  States  District  Court  for  Southern  District  of 
California.  Opposing  Counsel:  Diane  Tufts,  969  Vale  Terrace,  #10,  Vista, 
California  92084;  no  telephone  listing. 


1427 


(5)  San  Jose  Cash  Register  v.  Tec  America  Inc.,  Santa  Clara  County  Superior  Court, 
Case  No.  453646(1984) 

In  this  case,  I  defended  a  major  franchisor  charged  with  unfair  trade  practices  and 
interference  with  prospective  business  advantage  by  a  former  franchisee.  The 
nature  of  the  dispute  involved  the  validity  of  territorial  restrictions  and 
infringement  by  adjoining  franchisees  and  the  duty  of  the  franchisor  to  ensure  that 
only  one  franchisee  operated  in  a  particular  territory.  In  an  eight-day  jury  trial.  I 
was  chief  trial  counsel  and  handled  all  pretrial  motions  and  depositions.  A 
substantial  money  judgment  entered  against  our  client  was  reversed  on  appeal  on 
account  of  erroneous  jury  instructions  on  damages.  Judge:  David  W.  Leahy, 
deceased,  Santa  Clara  County  Superior  Court;  Co-Counsel  David  Maurer;  91 30 
West  25th  Street,  Los  Angeles,  California  90034-1904;  (310)  839-1524  Opposing 
Counsel:  Anthony  Trepel,  50  West  San  Fernando  Street,  San  Jose.  California 
951 13;  (408)  275-0501. 

(6)  Thomell  v.  Coleman.  Los  Angeles  Superior  Court.  Case  No.  C280523  (1983 

In  this  case,  I  successftilly  defended  a  company  executive  charged  with  civil 
negligence  during  a  weekend  excursion  for  allegedly  providing  excessive  amounts 
of  alcoholic  beverages  to  the  plaintiff,  who  subsequently  injured  herself  by  falling 
off  a  resort  balcony.  This  four-day  jury  trial  involved  disputed  issues  of  fact  and 
the  liability  of  individual  hosts  who  ftimish  alcoholic  beverages  to  an  injured  party. 
I  was  sole  trial  counsel  for  all  aspects  of  this  case.  Judge:  Arthur  Baldonado. 
retired,  Los  Angeles  Superior  Court.  Opposing  Counsel:  Ed  Barker  (per  State 
Bar,  deceased  July  30,  1991);  Eugene  Bennett,  17592  17th  Street.  3rd  Floor, 
Tustin,  California  92680,  (714)  544-7200.  ) 

(7)  Sumitomo  Bank  v.  Escobar,  U.S.  Bankruptcy  Court  for  the  Central  District  of 
California.  Case  No.  BK-SB8203164  (WH);  Adv.  No.  SB-821541  (1982) 

In  this  case,  I  obtained  automatic  stay  relief  for  a  bank  client  to  foreclose  on  a 
mini-mall  shopping  center.  The  half-day  trial  centered  on  conflicting  expert 
testimony  on  the  value  of  the  property  and  the  nature  of  the  default  in  state 
foreclosure  proceedings.  Judge:  William  Hyer,  United  States  Bankruptcy  Court 
for  the  Central  District  of  California.  Opposing  Counsel:  William  Baker,  550 
North  Golden  Circle  Drive,  Santa  Ana,  CaUfomia  92705;  (714)  558-9432. 


1428 


(8)  Nagao  v.  Community  Redevelopment  Agency,  Los  Angeles  Superior  Court.  Case 
No.  C323138(1981) 

In  this  case,  I  represented  on  a  pro  bono  basis  low-income,  long-term  commercial 
tenants  in  the  Little  Tokyo  section  of  Los  Angeles.  The  clients  were  defending 
against  eviction  actions  initiated  by  the  city  redevelopment  agency,  which  wanted 
to  construct  a  new  parking  garage  on  the  site  of  our  clients'  auto  mechanic  and 
body  shop  repair  businesses.  The  principal  issues  involved  the  adequacy  of  notice 
and  the  duty  of  the  agency  to  provide  relocation  assistance  to  displaced  businesses. 
I  was  chief  counsel  for  all  court  appearances  and  coordinated  the  work  of  junior 
associates.  Ultimately,  after  a  year  of  delaying  the  eviction  action,  we  obtained  a 
favorable  settlement  on  behalf  of  our  clients.  Iudg£:  No  judge  assigned. 
Co-Counsel.  David  Maurer.  9130  West  25th  Street.  Los  Angeles,  California 
90034-1904;  (310)  839-1524  Opposing  Counsel:  James  O.  Foster.  4929  Wilshire 
Boulevard,  #915.  Los  Angeles.  California  90010:  (213)  936-2!  10. 

(9)  People  v.  John  Doe.  Los  Angeles  Municipal  Court.  Case  No.  unknown.  ( 1978) 

As  a  Deputy  City  Attorney.  I  prosecuted  a  union  member  charged  with  assault 
with  a  deadly  weapon  for  throwing  a  brick  through  the  window  of  a  delivery  truck 
crossing  a  Teamsters  strike  picket  line.  After  an  eight-day  jury  trial  with  numerous 
witnesses.  evidentiar>'  issues,  and  substantial  injuries,  the  defendant  was  acquitted, 
ludge:  Marion  Obera.  retired.  Los  Angeles  Municipal  Court.  Opposing  Counsel: 
Jewell  Jones,  retired.  Superior  Court  Commissioner.  7281  East  Quill  Avenue, 
Downey,  California  90242;  (310)  940-8846. 

(10)  People  V.  Cristobal  Beltran,  Los  Angeles  Municipal  Court,  Case  No.  31 107463 
(1978) 

As  a  Deputy  City  Attorney,  I  prosecuted  a  Hispanic  defendant  charged  with 
assault  with  a  deadly  weapon  (knife)  against  several  black  victims  where  defense 
counsel  attempted  to  exclude  all  blacks  ft-om  the  jury  panel  during  jury  selection. 
The  principal  issue  involved  restrictions  on  the  defense  exercise  of  peremptory 
challenges  in  a  discriminatory  manner,  a  prohibition  thought  to  apply  to  the 
prosecution  only  at  that  time.  A  writ  of  mandate  was  obtained  staying  the  trial  and 
discharging  the  panel.  The  defendant  was  later  convicted  by  a  new  jury.  Judge; 
James  Nelson,  retired,  Los  Angeles  Municipal  Court;  Opposing  Counsel:  Ray 
Tabet,  5900  Indian  School,  N.E.,  Albuquerque,  New  Mexico,  871 10; 
(505)265-3451. 


1429 


ADDITIONAI.  REFERHNCFS: 

( 1 )  Honorable  Richard  Paez 
United  States  District  Court 
255  East  Temple  Street 

Los  Angeles,  California  90012 
(213)894-0764 

(2)  Honorable  Edward  Ferns 
Los  Angeles  Superior  Court 
210  West  Temple  Street 

Los  Angeles,  California  90012 
(213)974-5781 

(3)  Michael  VUlalobos 

Office  of  the  District  Attorney 
210  West  Temple  Street 
Los  Angeles,  California  90012 
(213)974-3611 

(4)  James  Dabney 

Office  of  the  District  Attorney 
210  West  Temple  Street 
Los  Angeles,  California  900 1 2 
(213)974-3611 

(5)  George  Castello 

•   Office  of  the  District  Attorney 
210  West  Temple  Street 
Los  Angeles,  California  90012 
(213)974-3611 

(6)  Pat  Dixon 

Office  of  the  District  Attorney 
210  West  Temple  Street 
Los  Angeles,  California  900 1 2 
(213)974-3611 


1430 


(7)  Michael  Miller 
Alternate  Public  Defender 
320  West  Temple  Street 

Los  Angeles.  California  90012 
(213)974-8163 

(8)  Steve  Urias 

Alternate  Public  Defender 
320  West  Temple  Street 
Los  Angeles.  California  90012 
(213)974-8163 

(9)  Leonard  Levine 

1901  Avenue  of  the  Stars  ff  1708 
Los  Angeles.  California  90067 
(310)553-6510 

(10)  Joel  Isaacson 

8484  Wilshire  Boulevard.  t--S5Q 
Beverly  Hills.  California  902!  1 
(213)782-7722 


19.        Legal  Acti\ities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have  pursued, 
including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that 
did  not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this 
question,  please  omit  any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  pri\  ilege 
(unless  the  privilege  has  been  \vai\ed.) 

Member,  Los  Angeles  Superior  Court  Trial  Delay  Reduction  Committee  (1996); 
established  and  enforced  court  policies  which  successfiilly  reduced  trial  backlogs 
due  to  Third  Strike  cases;  policies  were  implemented  county-wide  and  drastically 
reduced  the  number  of  aged  cases;  fewer  criminal  cases  are  now  tried  by  civil 
courts,  and,  in  fact,  the  criminal  courts  have  accepted  civil  cases  for  trial  for  the 
first  time  in  several  years. 

I  have  also  taught  Business  Law  (Spring  1 990)  and  Administrative  Law  (Spring 
1992)  to  undergraduates  at  California  State  University  at  Dominguez  Hills. 


1431 


CARLOS  ROBERTO  MORENO 

RESPONSES  TO  SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE 

PART  II      FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 


List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred  income 
arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits 
which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  professional 
services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please 
describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any 
financial  or  business  interest. 

a.)        California  Judges  Retirement  Systems 

Current  Amount:  approximately  $79,000 
(monthly  contributions) 

Upon  leaving  office  this  fund  will  be  withdrawn  and  placed  in  an  annuity  or 
other  retirement  instrument. 


b.)        County  of  Los  Angeles  401(K)  Savings  Plan 
Current  Amount:  approximately  $85,000 
(monthly  contributions) 

I  plan  to  leave  this  sum  in  its  mutual  fund  market  account  or  place  it  in 
another  retirement  instrument. 

c.)     ■    Kelley  Drye  &  Warren  Restated  Retirement  Plan 

CuiTent  Amount:  $412  monthly,  commencing  in  the  year  201 3  (Annuity) 

I  have  no  control  over  this  plan  and  cannot  withdraw  my  vested  interest 
prior  to  attaining  the  age  of  60  in  the  year  2008.  I  intend  to  disqualify' 
myself  from  any  case  involving  my  former  firm. 


Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including  the 
procedure  you  will  follow  in  determining  these  areas  or  concern.  Identify  the 
categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present 
potential  conflicts-of-interest  during  your  initial  service  in  the  position  to  which 
you  have  been  nominated. 

I  foresee  no  categories  of  cases  or  issues  that  are  likely  to  present  a  conflict  of 
interest  for  me.  In  the  event  of  a  potential  conflict  of  interest,  I  would  abide  by  the 
Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  for  federal  judges. 


1432 


Do  you  ha\e  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside 
employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court?  If 
so.  explain. 

No. 


4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar  year  preceding 
your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees, 
dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and  other  items 
exceeding  $500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so.  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure 
report,  required  by  the  Ethics  in  Go\emment  Act  of  1978.  may  be  substituted 
here.) 

See  attached  Financial  Disclosure  Report  (AO-10). 

5.  Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  uorth  statement  in  detail  (Add 
schedules  as  called  for). 

See  attached  Financial  Statement. 

6.  Ha\e  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign?  If  so. 
please  identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the 
campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

No. 


1433 


AO-IO ] 


FINANCIAL    DISCLOSURE    REPORT 

FOR  CALENDAR  YEAR  1996 


nmi> 


tAV 


I.   ?*rian  aeporils?    tLaat   n»-^,    t*c«t.   '■Idtl'.*   ir\i.ti«:i 

MORENO,    CARLOS   R. 

2     Courc  or  Crganlmion 

District    Court 

Central    District    of    California 

1     S*zt  et  Scaor:    , 
07/31   /97           1 

«.  Titl*-     ifctiVcle   li:    jadsr*   ir^vc«cc  «ctiv«  or 

U.S.    District    Court    Judce 

5.    Report   Tfp*    lch«ck  appropriate  cypei              6.   aepotting   Period 
Jj-      Nomnatlon.    Dace    7/3^     0  7 

ini5i*l    *rtnu*i    riMi                 1/1/96-7  01^97 

■»     ChaiMjcr*  or  Ot'icc  Mdres* 

LOS  Angeles   Superior   Court 

210  UesC   Temple   Street,    Dpt.    //131 

Los  Angeles      California      90012 

1.    Cf.  tft«  b«»i»  of  tne   mforrfiation  concamtd  in  this  Report   and                1 
*ay  l^od»tlcation^  pertaining   thereto,    it    i>,    la  t-y  opinion.                   1 
in  coffip^iance  with  spplicAble   !««•  and  r*9ui»clo.-if 

IMPORTANT  NOTES:  The  iaslructioni  accompanying  this  form  musl  be  followed.    Corapleie  ail  pailj, 
checking  the  NONE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  rcporlable  information.    Sign  on  iasi  page. 

L     POSITIONS.     (Rtportingindividualoiily,  see  pp.  9-13  of  Instructions) 

POSITION'  NAME    OF   ORGAN  1 2AT 1 0?T/ ENTITY 

MOITE      (No  reportable  positions) 


Board   Member 


Arroyo   Vista    Familv   Health   Center 


II.     AGREEMENTS.     (Reporting  individual  only,  see  pp.  I"!-!?  of  Instiuctions) 

DATE  PARTIES    AND    TERMS 


D 


NONE      (No  Yeportabic  a^ccmenis) 

Kelley  Drye   i.  Warren  Retirement   Plan    (N'o   Control) 


County  Of    Los   Angeles   401 (K)    Retirement    Plan.     (Mutual    Fund) 


California    .Tudj^ps    Rptirenent    c;v;rpm 


in.     NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME.     (Reponing  individiul  and  spouse;  see  pp.  15-25  of  Insinicuons ) 


eaiE 

n 


SOURCE    A^D    TYPE 
NONE      (No  tepoiiable  nonioveslmeot  income) 

Los  Angeles   Superior   Court 


1997(7   months')    T.os    Angeles    Sunerior    Coiirr 
1996  Title   House    rSnouse) 


19?7 


East   Los    Angele.s    City   College    fSnousp) 


G.yss    i;]CpME 

S    133.659. 
S      -J?    -in 

$ 

$ 

S 


1434 


rzNANcua.  piscLosnns  ospout 


««••  of  f«r«en  AapaiCinv 

CARLOS   R.    MORENO 


D«C«  otf  Krpon 

07''  3/97 


IV.    REIMBURSEMENTS  aod  GI?TS  -  inDuponation.  lodgzog.  food,  eotcitauiment. 

(Indwlet  those  Co  spoiue  and  d«pcndcu  childreo;  use  tbe  parcfltheticals  '(S)'  and  '(DC)'  to  indicate  teoortaMs 
reimlmneacDts  and  gifti  received  by  ipcus*  asd  dcpeodcDt  cinldtca,  respectivctr.  See  pp.  26-29  of  laUiuctiou.) 
SOURCE   .  DgSCaiPTION 


Q 


VOm      (No  well  report^le  rcimbunements  or  gifts) 


V.    OTHER  GIFTS.      (lodudci  clio$e  10  spouse  aad  dcpendeiu  ciuldicn:  luc  tbe  pareotiieticais '(S)' and '(DC)' 10 
indioie  other  pfti  moved  by  spouse  and  dcpeodeal  children,  respectively.  Sec  pp  30-33  o(  lulruciiona.) 


Q 


SOURCS 
ttom      (No  such  reportable  giita) 


PEgqaiPiioa 


vALys 


VL     LIABILITIES.      (Includsi  tboie  of  ipowc  and  dependent  children:  indicate  where  applicable,  pcnoo  rcsponuble 
for  Uabdity  by  using  the  parenthetical  '(S)'  for  separate  liability  ot  the  ipoiue.  '(J)'  for  joint  liability  of 
reporting  individual  and  tpouie,  and  '(DC)'  for  Uabiiity  of  a  dependent  child.  Sec  pp.  34-3$  o{  Instroctioas) 

□CRgQITQB  PggCSIPIIga  VALUE  COD^* 

Hon      (No  ttpoitabic  liabilities) 


(J)      ;fBNA  America 


■^evffl- 


r-n'^'r 


(S)   Snidpnr  Loan  Cornoran'rin  (Ti  ri  h^■.l<^    qmH.^nr  Tnn,, 
(J)   Uells  Farpo  Cank  Credit  Line 


(J)   Leonard  &  Dolores  Fenton 
% 
(J)   Citibank 


Family  Loan 


Credit  Card 


^•u«  OMni    J>>>1  ooj  er  !<••  (•(!(. ooi.st>.«c«    k-iso,ooi-(i».goo    nMiot.Mi-taio.oto    ••>ii9.09i-is««.e«« 

^•tOO.iAl.il.fria.OOO                 n .si, 009. 401 -M. 090.060                                    fX-SS.  090, 001 -lis, coo. 609 
W-a3».000.001.0Sfl.999,000      N»<*0.000.  901   or  ■or* 


1435 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSUKB  REPORT 


Nain«  of   P^rBOft  Report  vnq 

CARLOS    R.    MORENO 


^te  of  BcpocL 
07    /3I  /  97 


Vll.  Page  1  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS -income,  value,  transactioos  (Includej  ihose  of  spouse 
and  dependent  children.  Sec  pp.  37-54  of  Inslcucuou.) 


k. 

Dvccripilon  of  Jua«tv 
lincludlns   Cru»C    isttir.l 

Indic«t*  wher*  applicable,   o'-npf  of 
the  ASiet   by  uain9  cho  parrncbcclcjl 
•(Jl"   lor  1610=   own«r»hip  ef   rtport- 
livg   indlviJujl  .i/id  jpouio.    "'Si'   tor 
•cp*r*t«  o«'n«r»h»p  by  •po««».    "IDCC 
Zor  ownvrtnip  by  o*prnd«nc  child. 

Pljcc   "IX)-   afcer  each  otitt 
v»wipK  rr^  prior  d».4Cio«urc. 

during 
r*porcaA9 
fwriod 

Cros«  v«:u« 
«c  tnd  oc 

Trar-aecciona  durlnq  reporting  period 

Sic' 

ril: 

value; 
Code 

(J-JI 

1=1 

v.lue 
Kctbodl 

Code 
(0-«l 

,tJp. 

bu^l.h. 

If  not   exeevc  fro*  disclosure                1 

fteath- 
my 

Cod!* 

Cainl 

Code 

191 
Identity  o« 
bwyer/»ellcr 
m   private 
ttaiuaction} 

NONE         IKo  rrportabla 

'      (J)    L.A.    Countv   401    (K) 

c 

Div 

L 

T 

Plan 

(J)    California   Judges 

None 

T, 

T 

Retirement   Plan 

'      (J)   Kellev  Drve   &  Uarrer 

None 

J 

T 

J                   Retirement   Plan 

ic 

» 

w 

» 

» 

IS 

» 

17 

11 

yr'it^S.?-^  ?:U6!2§:'JiJr3co            ?:ll6Ho?'s!'?oS:?lo"-"-'"  ?tUi'SU'5li'Sl.cco.oo3    S3fi?:S55:;s;--,„ 

'^^^ "•-    ?i!iislh^!5;'E'sSo.ooo  y^BM^^-—  i^ii^'^i^^i^'^-— 

\zXi'.^'!'^-  SiJssfMti.               ;:g;:5i"'' -"" '^'"              ii^iia'A         ^•^••'<'--= 

1436 


FINAMCIAL  V1SCL03XTRZ  REPORT    (cont'd) 


NSA*  Of  ?«i?on  RcportlM 

CARLOS  R.  MORENO 


ctir  cf  Reps 

07/31/97 


VUI.  ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS  (IndtaBe  put  of  R.port.) 

Part  VII 

L.A.  County  ^Ol(K)  Savings  Plan  is  invested  In  Pacific  Mutual  Investment  fund  pursuant 
to  a  guaranteed  investment  contract  with  the  County  of  Los  Angeles. 

Upon  leaving  the  State  Court  System,  I  have  a  right  to  withdraw  only  my  contributions 
to  the  California  Judges  retirement  fund  and  roll  them  over  into  an  alternate 
retirement  instrument.   I  have  no  right  to  withdraw  or  control  any  vested  interest  in 
the  Kellev  Drve  ;.  U'arren  retirement  plan  until  the  year  2003,  ■-.-hen  I  attain  the  age 


IX.  CERTIFICATION. 

to  complusce  with  the  provisioni  of  28  U.S  C.  {  4SS  uxl  of  Advisory  Opioioa  No  57  of  the  Advuory  Committtc  od  Judicial 
Actrvitiet.  and  to  the  belt  of  my  knowledge  il  ibe  time  after  reaioiublc  Inquiry.  I  did  oot  perform  ary  adjudicatory  function  m  any  litipQoa 
dunog  the  period  covered  by  this  repoit  in  which  I.  my  spouse,  or  isy  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  nnancicii  interui.  as  defsed  ia 
CanoQ  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  luch  litigation. 

I  certify  (hat  all  inforinaiioQ  given  above  (lacludin^  laformatioa  pertauung  to  my  spotise  and  minor  or  depeodeot  children,  if  any>  is 
accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  kaowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  not  reponed  was  withheld  because  it  met 
applicable  iiatutory  provisions  permining  ixio-disclosure. 

I  Autbci  ceni^  thai  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  hooorana  and  (he  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been  reporud  are 
ia  compliance  with  the  provitions  of}  U.S.C.A.  app  4,  f  SOI  et.  srq  ,  }  (J.S.C.  §  7353  and  Judicial  Conference  regulauons. 


Sigsaiure , 


&^^I^  'jZ  Vtru, 


1U^^ 


Date    Jul"    31.    l??' 


NOTE:     AhfY  INDIVIDUAL  WHO  KNOWINGLY  AND  WILFULLY  FALSIFIES  OR  FAILS  TO  FILE  THIS  REPORT  .MAY  BE 
SUBJECT  TO  Crvn.  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U.S.C  App.  4.  ;  104  ) 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS; 

Mail  sifoed  origioal  (ad  3  «rfHif;»n.i  copies  to: 

Comimttec  on  Financial  Disclocuie 

Admioatiatrve  OOlcc  of  the 

Uailed  States  Courrs 

Sunt  2-301 

Om  Colambus  Circle.  N  £., 

Waihunlon.  D.C.  20344 

1437 

FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
NET  WORTH 


Provide  a  complete,  cuzrent  finandal  net  woith  ttatement  which  itemizes  in  detail 
all  assets  Cncluding  bank  accounts,  real  estate,  tecudties.  trusts,  invesimeats,  and  other  financial 
holdings)  all  liabilides  Qncluding  debts,  mortgages,  loans,  and  oAer  financial  obligations)  of 
yourself,  your  spouse,  and  other  immediate  members  of  your  household. 

CARLOS  R.  AND  CHRISTINE  MORENO  (MAY  23,1997) 


ASSETS                                             1 

LIABIUnES 

n 

Cub  oa  hnd  ud  ia  bub 

2 

000 

Nottf  pqfibic  ts  bub-Mcmd 

1 

UJ.  OeTtaacal  MCBrilui-«dt 

Notu  pcyiUc  ts  bBb-unncacd 

Neta  piyiU*  la  reUtiTa 

15 

000 

NoM  pqnbk  10  oibei 

I 

Aeeooati  lad  neat  raccrribla; 

1 

Dim  bomitUiiTU  ud  biiadt 

Unpaid  iaeoB*  ux 

1 

DoiteaMfacR 

OihcT  ttipiid  ox  ud  intaRM 

1 

OoeMfid 

Jlul  «ftu>  matfifc*  p«)nbk-«dd 

KhedoUdst    6,    2nd   Trust   Dee( 

s) 

■320, 

000 

Rill  citil*  owBcd-cdd  MiMilaU 

Personal   Residence 

450, 

300 

Quail  aeattl'"  a^d  eifas  lica  pay- 
aUa 

Rul  itttu  raontiici  raocivibl* 

Oifacx  ddo-itaoin: 

Aum  ud  othct  peieul  prepetty 

25, 

)00 

Credit  Lines 

21. 

)00 

Cuh  trifat-Cft  inianaet 

Revolving   Credit 

45, 

)00 

Olto  ttww-hfmJTf 

Auto  Loans 

20, 

)00    , 

Personal  Property 

30. 

opn 

School   Loans 

- 

45, 

)00    '■ 

401    (K)    Savings   Plan 

85, 

000 

Judges   Retirement   Fund 

79, 

000 

466, 

)00 

\ 

NrtWcift 

205, 

)00 

Tetil  AOitt 

671, 

300 

Telal  firiditiaa  aad  aat  »Bflh 

671. 

)00 

COffnNOENT  UABOmES 

GENERAL  INFOBMAHON 

None 

A»B7«a»pWc«&  (Addacbad. 

No 

Oa  kuct  er  conncti 

None 

An  yoa  ^iBdut  ia  any  aaio  or  Ufal 

No 

Vnacumt 

None 

Hava  you  am  ukB  bialonpieyT 

No 

ftorisiaB  tat  fwiani  laeonu  Tb 

None 

Oihe  tpKUl  dcbc 

None 



1 

1st  Trust  Deed Sumitomo  Bank  $i72,000 

2nd  Trust  Deed Small  Business 

Administration  148,000 


1438 


CARLOS  ROBERTO  MORENO 

RESPONSES  TO  SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE 

PART  III    GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 


An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's  Code  of 
Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "e\er)'  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  sen  ing 
the  disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to  flilfill  these  responsibilities, 
listing  specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

Since  March  of  1997  to  the  present.  I  have  served  as  a  Board  Member  for  the 
Arroyo  Vista  Family  Health  Center,  a  non-profit  community  health  center  that 
contracts  with  the  County  of  Los  Angeles  to  provide  a  wide  array  of  fi-ee  and  low- 
cost  health  care  to  the  medically  under-served  population  of  Northeast  Los 
Angeles.  Although  1  was  just  recently  asked  to  ser\e  on  the  Board  by  its  executi\e 
director  (a  high  school  ft"iend).  1  have  come  to  learn  about  its  extensive  community 
outreach  program  in  our  area.  The  Board's  mandate  is  to  insure  that  the  Center 
provides  high-quality  health  care  at  atlbrdable  prices  to  its  patients. 
(Approximately  4  hours  a  month.) 

Previously,  between  1 976  and  1 978,  1  ser\  ed  as  a  Board  Member  for  the  Narcotics 
Prevention  Project  (  a  drug  rehabilitation  program  in  Boyle  Heights)  and  the  Public 
Inebriate  Program  (an  alcohol  rehabilitation  program)  for  alcoholics  living  on  skid 
row  in  downtown  Los  Angeles.  (Approximately  4  hours  a  month.) 

In  1981,  as  a  litigator  with  Mori  &  Ota  (the  predecessor  firm  of  Kelley  Drye  & 
Warren),  I  pro\ided  pro  bono  legal  services  to  two  elderly  businessmen  (an  auto 
body  repairman  and  auto  mechanic)  in  Little  Tokyo  who  were  being  evicted  by  the 
City  of  Los  Angeles  after  more  than  twenty  years  in  business  on  the  same  site.  I 
managed  the  entire  litigation  in  various  courts  and  ultitnately  reached  a  \er>' 
satisfactory  settlement  for  our  clients,  who  were  able  to  continue  in  business. 
(Approximately  200  hours.) 

Sometime  later,  I  was  responsible  for  coordinating  the  eviction  of  numerous 
tenants  fi"om  two  adjoining  residential  hotels  in  the  same  area.  I  believe  1  was 
especially  sensitive  to  the  needs  of  these  mostly  elderly  and  long-term  tenants  and 
persuaded  the  firm's  client  to  provide  relocation  assistance  despite  having  no 
obligation  to  do  so  under  California  law. 


1439 


Finally,  my  work  with  the  Yale  Club's  Alumni  Schools  Committee  (Central  Los 
Angeles)  for  over  twenty  years,  exposes  me  to  talented,  but  often  under-privileged, 
youth  who  have  applied  for  admission  to  Yale  College.  I  meet  with  these  students 
and  their  parents  and  give  them  guidance  and  encouragement  in  pursuing  college 
opportunities.  I  have  later  mentored  a  number  of  students  who  I  have  met  in  the 
course  of  these  alumni  inter\iews.  (Approximately  four  hours  a  month.) 


The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct 
states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization 
that  invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you 
currently  belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization  which  discriminates  — 
through  either  formal  membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of 
membership  policies?  If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.  What  you  have  done 
to  try  to  change  these  policies? 

No;  I  have  supported  efforts  by  the  California  Judges  Association  and  the  Los 
Angeles  County  Bar  Association  to  discourage  memberships  in  such  organizations. 


Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates  for 
nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so.  did  it  recommend  your  nomination? 
Please  describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from 
beginning  to  end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and 
interviews  in  which  you  participated). 

On  January  31,  1997  I  submitted  my  Personal  Data  Questionnaire  (Judicial 
Appointments)  to  the  Office  of  Senator  Dianne  Feinstein.  A  few  weeks  later,  I 
was  one  often  candidates  interviewed  by  a  Selection  Committee  appnainted  by 
Senator  Feinstein.  I  do  not  know  the  number  of  candidates  who  were  pre- 
screened  and  not  interviewed.  The  Selection  Committee  consisted  often 
distinguished  attorneys  and  judges  from  Southern  California  who  represented  a 
wide  diversity  of  views  and  experiences.  Three  finalists  were  selected  by  the 
Committee,  all  of  whom  were  interviewed  personally  by  Senator  Feinstein  on  May 
10,  1997.  A  day  after  my  interview,  I  was  advised  by  Senator  Feinstein  that  she 
was  recommending  my  appointment  to  the  federal  district  court  by  President 
Clinton. 


1440 


Subsequently,  I  completed  several  questionnaires  and  forms  which  were  sent  to  me 
by  the  White  House.  After  completing  these  documents,  on  June  2,  1997, 1  met 
with  representatives  of  the  Office  of  Policy  Development  at  the  Department  of 
Justice.  Following  this  meeting,  I  was  investigated  by  the  Federal  Bureau  of 
Investigation  and  evaluated  by  the  American  Bar  Association.  I  met  personally 
with  a  special  agent  of  the  FBI  and  later  with  a  representative  of  the  ABA's 
Standing  Committee  on  the  Federal  Judiciary.  On  July  31,  1997, 1  was  advised  by 
a  White  House  representative  that  I  had  been  nominated  that  day  by  President 
Clinton  for  an  appointment  to  the  federal  district  court. 


4.         Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee 

discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could 
reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue,  or 
question?  If  so,  please  explain  fiiUy. 

No. 


Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal  government,  and  within  society 
generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.  It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that  alleges  that  the 
judicial  branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels 
of  govenunent. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than  grievance- 
resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a  vehicle 
for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad  classes  of 
individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duties  upon 
governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional  requirements 
such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 


1441 


A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions  in  the 
manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight  responsibilities. 

One  of  the  principal  strengths  of  our  form  of  government  is  found  in  the 
doctrine  of  separation  of  powers.  Each  branch  has  been  structured  by  the 
Constitution  so  that  it  may  function  relatively  independently  of  the  other 
branches,  yet  appropriate  restraints  are  imposed  on  the  work  of  each 
branch  by  the  Constitution. 

At  the  risk  of  over-simplification,  it  goes  without  saying  that  the  legislative 
branch  is  best  equipped  and  structured  to  enact  and  create  law  on  behalf  of 
the  people,  while  the  executive  branch  has  a  separate  independent  mandate 
to  implement  and  enforce  the  law. 

The  judicial  branch,  in  the  first  instance,  must  exercise  restraint  with 
respect  to  intruding  into  the  work  of  the  other  branches.  The  acts  of  these 
branches  carry  a  presumption  of  Constitutional  validity  and  therefore  are 
entitled  to  a  degree  of  deference.  The  judicial  branch  is  ill-equipped  to 
perform  anything  more  than  its  Constitutional  mandate  to  apply  the  law. 

The  courts,  and  individual  judges,  must  also  exercise  restraint  to  insure  that 
they  decide  only  the  issues  in  controversy  which  have  been  tendered  in  a 
specific  case  and  that  decisions  are  based  solely  upon  the  record  created  by 
the  parties.  A  court  should  not  go  beyond  the  established  record  or  issue 
in  controversy  to  resolve  what  is  perceived  by  the  court  to  be  a  broader 
social  issue  in  need  of  resolution  by  society. 

At  all  times,  whether  deciding  an  issue  of  fact  or  an  issue  of  law,  a  judge 
should  be  guided  solely  by  sound  principles  of  law  and  not  individual 
predilection.  Findings  of  fact  should  be  based  on  common  sense  and  the 
trial  record,  while  findings  of  law  should  be  based  upon  established  case 
precedent  and  sound  statutory  interpretation. 

Of  course,  there  wdU  be  a  few  instances  where  novel  issues  will  be 
presented  which  may  implicate  significant  Constitutional  principles  with 
ramifications  across  broad  sections  of  society,  or  which  question  the  acts  of 
a  particular  branch  of  government.  In  all  matters,  but  especially  in  these, 
the  judicial  branch  must  proceed  cautiously  and  incrementally,  search  for 
precedent  in  analogous  situations,  and  be  guided  by  principles  of  judicial 
restraint.  Ultimately,  however,  the  decision  of  the  court  must  be  based 
upon  objective  and  established  principles  of  law,  unswayed  by  sympathy, 
prejudice,  or  public  opinion,  and  impelled  by  the  courage  to  do  what  is  just 
and  fair  in  light  of  all  the  circumstances. 


1442 


SENATE  JUDICIARY  COMMITTEE  QUESTIONNAIRE 

RICHARD  W.  STORY 

FOR  JUDGE  OF  UNITED  STATES  DISTRICT  COURT 

NORTHERN  DISTRICT  OF  GEORGIA 


I.  BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 


1.  Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used.) 

Richard  Wayne  Story 

In  1977, 1  legally  changed  my  first  name  from  Ricky  to  Richard. 

2.  Address:  List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address(es). 


Residence  address:    Gainesville,  Georgia  30506 

Office  addresses:       Mailing: 

P.  O.  Box  1778 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30503 

Street: 

116  Spring  Street 

Gainesville,  Georgia  30501 


3.  Date  and  place  of  birth. 

Dateofbirth:May3,  1953 
Place  of  birth:  Augusta,  Georgia 

4.  Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name).  List  spouse's 
occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  address(es). 

Married  to  Nancy  Gail  Duffey  Story.    She  is  emplo)  ed  b)  the  Hall  County  Board  of 
Education  as  a  teacher  at  North  Hall  High  School,  4885  Mount  Vernon  Road, 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30505. 


1443 


5.  Education:  List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates  of 
attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

LaGrange  College,  LaGrange,  Georgia 

Attended:  1971  -  1975 

Degree:  Bachelor  of  Arts  with  a  majoi  in  English  in  March,  1975 

University  of  Georgia,  School  of  Law,  Athens,  Georgia 

Attended:  1975  -  1978 

Degree:  Juris  Doctor  in  June,  1978 

6.  Employment  Record:  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional  corporations,  companies, 
firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and  organizations,  nonprofit  or 
otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were  connected  as  an  officer,  director, 
partner,  proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation  from  college. 


a)  Georgia  Department  of  Labor 
Contingency  Clerk 

LaGrange,  Georgia  -  March,  1975  -  June,  1975 
Athens,  Georgia  -  September,  1975  -  January,  1977 

b)  Diversified  Wood  Products,  Inc. 
Harlem,  Georgia 

Sawmill  Laborer 

June,  1976  -  August,  1976 

c)  University  of  Georgia  Law  Library 
Athens,  Georgia 

Student  Assistant 

September,  1976  -  December,  1976 

d)  Stanley  R.  Durden,  Attorney 
Athens,  Georgia 

Law  Clerk 

January,  1977  -  June,  1978 


1444 


e)         Kenyon,  Hulsey  &  Oliver 

(Now:  Hulsey,  Oliver  &  Mahar) 

Gainesville,  Georgia 

Partner 

July,  1978  -  July,  1986 

0         Gainesville  Jaycees  (nonprofit) 
Gainesville,  Georgia 
Director/  Officer,  1978  -  1984;  President,  1982-83 

g)         State  of  Georgia 

Gainesville,  Georgia 

Special  Assistant  Attorney  General,  1980  -  1985 

h)         Gainesville-Hall  County  Girls  Club  (nonprofit) 
Gainesville,  Georgia 
Director,  1981-88;  President,  1985 

i)  Gainesville-Hall  County  Chamber  of  Commerce  (nonprofit) 

Gainesville,  Georgia 
Associate  Director,  1984 

j)  Hal!  County  United  \\  ay  (nonprofit) 

Gainesville,  Georgia 
Director,  1985-88,  1994-96 

k)         Northeast  Georgia  Alcohol  and  Drug  Abuse  Council  (nonprofit) 
Gainesville,  Georgia 
Director,  1985-88 

1)         Hall  County  Juvenile  Court 
Hall  County  Courthouse 
Gainesville,  Georgia 
Judge  of  Juvenile  Court 
January,  1985  -  July,  1986 

m)        State  of  Georgia 

Hall  County  Courthouse 
Gainesville,  Georgia 
Judge  of  Superior  Court 
July,  1986  -  Present 


1445 


n)        North  Georgia  College 
Dahlonega,  Georgia 

Taught  Business  Law  course  at  Gainesville  College  Campus 
March,  1995  -  June.  1995 


Militar\'  Serv'ice:  Have  you  had  any  military  service?  If  so,  give  particulars,  including 
the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of  discharge  received. 

No. 

Honors  and  Awards:  List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorar)'  degrees,  and  honorary 
society  m.emberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee. 

Named  one  of  Five  Outstanding  Young  Georgians  by  the  Georgia  Jaycees  in  1987; 
Gainesville-Hall  County  Young  Man  of  the  Year  in  1985;  Silver  Shovel  Award  in 
1984  for  service  to  Gainesville-Hall  County  Chamber  of  Commerce;  Honorary 
Lifetime  Member  of  Gainesville  Jaycees;  T.  Malone  Sharpe  Award  for  1982-83 
(given  to  top  12  local  Jaycee  presidents  in  the  state);  Outstanding  State  Jaycee 
Chairman  of  the  Year  1983-84;  ARCH  Award  from  University  of  Georgia  Alumni 
Society  for  ser\ice  to  the  community  in  1986;  Leadership  Hall  County,  Class  of 
1983;  Leadership  Georgia,  Class  of  1992. 

Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related  committees  or 
conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and  dates  of 
any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

Judicial  Council  of  Georgia:  1996-  Present; 

Georgia  Courts  Automation  Commission:  1995  -  Present; 

Council  of  Superior  Court  Judges:  Ninth  District  Administrative  Judge  and  member 
of  Executive  Committee,  1996-  Present;  Benchbook  Committee,  Chair,  1991-96; 
Automation  Committee,  1995  -  Present;  Legislative  Committee,  Chair,  1996  - 
Present; 

Council  of  Juvenile  Court  Judges:  1985  -  1994;  Served  on  Permanency  Planning 
Committee,  Legislative  Committee,  Purchase  of  Services  Committee,  DFACS 
Liaison  Committee,  and  committee  which  drafted  permanency  planning  legislation 
in  1989. 


1446 

National  Council  of  Juvenile  and  Family  Court  Judges:  1985  - 1994; 

American  Bar  Association:  1991  -  Present; 

State  Bar  of  Georgia:  Member  of  Intrastate  Moot  Court  Competition  Committee  of 
Younger  Lawyers  Section,  1980-81; 

Gainesville-Northeastern  Bar  Association:  Law  Day  Chairman,  1980; 
Pro  Bono  Committee,  1983-84; 

Court  Liaison  Committee,  1990  -  Present,  Chair,  1990-91; 
Alternative  Dispute  Resolution  Committee,  Co-Chair,  1991-92. 

10.  Other  Memberships:  List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  are  active  in 
lobbying  before  public  bodies.  Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you  belong. 

Lobbying: 

I  am  a  member  of  the  Georgia  Council  of  Superior  Court  Judges  which  lobbies  the 
Georgia  Legislature  on  issues  of  importance  to  the  Superior  Courts. 

Other: 

I  am  a  member  of  the  Gainesville  Rotary  Club,  Gridiron  (a  University  of  Georgia 
fraternal  organization)  and  Delta  Tau  Delta  (a  national  fraternity).  A  copy  of  the 
Gainesville  Rotary  Club  bylaws  is  attached  as  Attachment  "V." 

1 1 .  Court  Admission:  List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice,  with 
dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed.  Please  explain  the 
reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.  Give  the  same  information  for  administrative 
bodies  which  require  special  admission  to  practice. 

Superior  Courts  of  Georgia,  admitted  July  10,  1978; 

Court  of  Appeals  of  Georgia,  admitted  September  12,  1978; 

Supreme  Court  of  Georgia,  admitted  October  2,  1978; 

United  States  District  Court,  Northern  District  of  Georgia,  admitted  October  2, 
1978; 


1447 


United  States  District  Court,  Middle  District  of  Georgia,  admitted  February  20, 
1985; 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals,  11  th  Circuit,  admitted  October  7,  1982. 

12.        Published  Writings:  List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates  of  books,  articles,  reports,  or 
other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.  Please  supply  one  copy  of  all 
published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.  Also,  please  supply  a  copy 
of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy.  If  there 
were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are  readily  available  to  you,  please  supply 
them. 

I  served  as  the  editor  of  the  Georgia  Superior  Court  Benchbook  published  in  1995.  I 
also  wrote  the  sections  on  Alternative  Dispute  Resolution  and  Trial  Procedures.    A 
copy  of  these  sections  is  attached  as  Attachments  "A"  and  "B",  respectively. 

"Ethics  and  the  Moral  High  Road  in  the  World  of  Litigation",  Verdict.  Winter, 
1996.  This  article  is  a  speech  which  1  delivered  at  a  seminar  and  a  copy  is  attached  as 
Attachment  "C". 

I  do  not  have  copies  of  any  speeches  on  constitutional  law  or  legal  policy. 

15.        Health:  WTiat  is  the  present  state  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  you  last  physical 
examination. 

My  health  is  excellent.  My  last  physical  examination  was  May,  1996. 

14.        ludicial  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have  held,  whether  such 
position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  description  of  the  jurisdiction  of  each  such 
court. 

I  am  presently  Judge  of  Superior  Courts  for  the  Northeastern  Circuit,  consisting  of 
Dawson  and  Hall  Counties.  I  was  initially  appointed  by  Governor  Joe  Frank  Harris 
and  began  my  first  term  on  July  8,  1986.  I  was  elected  to  four  year  terms  in  1988, 
1992,  and  1996.  The  Superior  Court  is  the  trial  court  of  general  jurisdiction  in  the 
State  of  Georgia. 

In  1985, 1  was  appointed  Judge  of  the  Juvenile  Court  of  Hall  County  by  Chief 
Superior  Court  Judge  A.  Richard  Kenyon.  I  served  from  January  1,  1985,  until  July  7, 
1986,  when  I  resigned  to  become  Superior  Court  judge.  The  juvenile  court's 
jurisdiction  is  limited  to  delinquency,  abuse,  neglect,  and  unruly  cases. 


1448 


Citations:  If  you  are  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide;  (1)  citations  for  the  ten  most 
significant  opinions  you  have  written;  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations  for  all 
appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or  where  your  judgment  was 
affirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your  substantive  and  procedural  rulings;  and  (3) 
citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state  constitutional  issues,  together  with 
the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such  opinions.  If  any  of  the  opinions  listed 
were  not  officially  reported,  please  provide  copes  of  the  opinions. 

(1)       Willie  V.  Harwell.  Ir.  vs.  The  Continental  Insurance  Company.  Civil  Action 
Number  86-CV-1079-B,  Superior  Court  of  Hall  County. 
Copy  of  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "D". 

State  of  Georgia  vs.  Rudi  Lee  Bromlev,  Case  Number  87-CR-n93-B,  Superior 
Court  of  Hall  County. 

Copy  of  opinion  dated  May  24,  1988,  regarding  motions  to  suppress  evidence 
seized  pursuant  to  nine  search  warrants  is  attached  as  Attachment  "E". 

State  of  Georgia  vs.  Rudi  Lee  Bromlev,  Case  Number  87-CR-1393-B,  Superior 
Court  of  Hall  County. 

Copy  of  opinion  dated  May  25,  1988,  regarding  a  motion  to  suppress  evidence 
seized  in  a  warrantless  search  of  the  defendant's  trash  is  attached  as 
Attachment  "F'. 

State  of  Georgia  vs.  Crawford  L.  Gober,  Case  Number  90-CR-587-A,  Superior 

Court  of  Hall  County. 

Copy  of  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "G". 

Hardy  G.  Baglev.  et  al..  vs.  Sidney  William  Shortt.  et  al..  Case  Number 
88-CV-5648-B,  Superior  Court  of  White  County. 
Copy  of  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "H". 

State  of  Georgia  vs.  Stephen  A.  Mobley,  Case  Number  91 -CR-243-A,  Superior 
Court  of  Hall  County. 

Copy  of  opinion  dated  January  11,  1994,  denying  the  defendant's  motion  for 
a  continuance  and  for  funds  to  conduct  genetic  testing  of  the  defendant  is 
attached  as  Attachment  "I". 

State  of  Georgia  vs.  Stephen  A.  Mobley,  Case  Number  91-CR-243-A,  Superior 
Court  of  Hall  County. 

Copy  of  opinion  dated  January  14,  1994,  denying  a  challenge  to  the 
composition  of  the  grand  jury  is  attached  as  Attachment  "J". 


1449 


State  of  Georgia  vs.  Frank  Allen  Kessler,  Case  Number  95-CR-448-B,  Superior 

Court  of  Hall  County. 

Copy  of  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "K". 

Mrs.  limmy  H.  Smith  vs.  The  Winder  News  and  Robert  W.  Adamson.  Case 
Number  93-CV-823-M,  Superior  Court  of  Barrow  County. 
Copy  of  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "L". 

George  Wangemann.  et  al.  vs.  loyce  W.  Shubert,  Case  Number 
96-CV-2925-B,  Superior  Court  of  Hall  County. 
Copy  of  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "M". 


(2)       Thompson  vs.  State.  218  Ga.  App.  444  (1995). 

The  defendant  entered  a  plea  of  guilty  and  sentencing  was  deferred.  He 
waived  his  right  to  withdraw  his  plea.  Prior  to  sentencing,  the  defendant  filed 
a  motion  to  w  ithdraw  the  plea,  and  the  motion  was  denied.  The  Court  of 
Appeals  reversed,  holding  that  a  defendant  has  an  unqualified  right  to 
withdraw  a  plea  at  any  time  before  judgment  is  pronounced. 

American  Transport,  Inc.  vs.  Thompson.  218  Ga.  App.  54  (1995). 
Plaintiff  filed  suit  against  American  Transport,  Inc.,  a  Michigan  corporation. 
After  the  statute  of  limitations  had  run.  Plaintiff  learned  that  she  had  made  a 
mistake  and  should  have  sued  American  Transport,  Inc.,  a  Pennsylvania 
corporation.  Plaintiff  amended  her  complaint  to  add  the  Pennsylvania 
corporation  as  a  party.  The  corporation  moved  to  dismiss  and  the  motion  was 
denied.  The  Court  of  Appeals  held  that  all  the  requirements  for  relation  back 
of  the  amendment  had  not  been  met  and  reversed  based  on  the  statute  of 
limitations.  The  trial  court  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "N". 

Baglev  vs.  Shortt.  261  Ga.  762  (1991). 

In  this  wrongful  death  action,  Plaintiff  was  awarded  $14,000,000.00  in 
punitive  damages.  Pursuant  to  a  motion  filed  by  defendants,  the  trial  court 
upheld  the  punitive  damage  cap  in  the  Tort  Reform  Act  and  reduced  punitive 
damages  to  $1,000,000.00,  $250,000.00  for  each  plaintiff  against  each 
defendant.  The  Supreme  Court  affirmed  the  constitutional  ruling  but  held 
that  the  cap  was  $250,000.00  per  plaintiff  regardless  of  the  number  of 
defendants  and  reduced  the  punitive  damages  to  $500,000.00.  The  trial  court 
opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "H". 


1450 


Hackel  vs.  Bartell.  207  Ga.  App.  563  (1993). 

Defendant's  motion  for  summan  judgment  in  this  personal  injury  case  was 
denied.  The  Court  of  Appeals  reversed,  holding  that  the  intervening 
negligence  of  the  plaintiff  was  the  sole  proximate  cause  of  her  injury.     The 
trial  court  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "O". 

Kinsev  vs.  Elrod.  206  Ga.  App.  375  (1992). 

Summary  Judgment  was  granted  to  the  defendant  in  this  personal  injury  case 
based  on  a  release  plaintiff  had  signed  releasing  another  driver  involved  in  the 
collision.  The  Court  of  Appeals  held  that  the  defendant  had  not  proven  the 
release  was  intended  to  cover  her  and  re\ersed  the  decision.     The  trial  court 
opinion  is  attached  as  attachment  "P". 

Addlev  vs.  Beizer.  205  Ga.  App.  714  (1992). 

In  a  case  of  first  impression,  the  Court  of  Appeals  held  that  the  attorney  for  a 
corporation  does  not,  by  virtue  of  that  fact,  serve  as  attorney  for  the  officers  of 
the  corporation  in  their  indi\idual  capacities.  The  jur)  verdict  for  the 
plaintiff  was  reversed. 

State  vs.  Watson.  205  Ga.  App.  313  (1992). 

The  Court  of  Appeals  reversed  a  decision  granting  the  defendant's  motion  to 
suppress.  The  Court  held  that  under  the  "totality  of  the  circumstances,"  there 
was  a  sufficient  basis  for  a  stop  of  the  defendant.     The  trial  court's  opinion  is 
attached  as  Attachment  "Q". 

Papp  vs.  Hall  County.  262  Ga.  72  (1992). 

Summary  judgment  was  granted  to  the  defendant  based  on  sovereign 
immunity  under  a  1991  Amendment  to  the  Georgia  Constitution.  The 
Supreme  Court  held  that  the  1991  Amendment  was  not  to  be  retroactively 
applied  and  reversed.  The  trial  court's  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "R". 

BabbvsCook.  203  Ga.  App.  437  (1992). 

Plaintiffs  filed  an  action  for  loss  of  consortium  and  personal  injuries.    The 
trial  court  granted  a  summar\  judgment  based  on  the  statute  of  limitations. 
The  Court  of  Appeals  affirmed  as  to  the  personal  injur)  claim  (2  year  statute 
of  limitations)  but  reversed  as  to  the  loss  of  consortium  (4  year  statute  of 
limitations).     The  trial  court's  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "S". 

Williams  vs.  State.  261  Ga.  640  (1991). 

The  defendant's  conviction  for  possession  of  cocaine  with  intent  to  distribute 

was  reversed  based  on  the  improper  admission  of  evidence  of  a  similar 


1451 


tiansaction.  Evidence  was  admitted  at  trial  by  introduction  of  a  certified 
copy  of  a  previous  conviction  of  defendant.  The  Court  established  three 
affirmative  showings  required  of  the  State  before  such  evidence  should  be 
admitted. 

Titan  Indemnity  Company  vs.  Hall  County.  202  Ga.  App.  38  (1991). 
The  Court  of  Appeals  affirmed  the  denial  of  the  plaintiffs  motion  for 
summary  judgment.  However,  the  Court  held  that  the  trial  court  erred  in  its 
interpretation  of  the  insurance  contract  and  reversed  the  summary  judgment 
of  defendant.    The  trial  court  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "T". 

Womack  Industries.  Inc.  vs.  B  &  A  Equipment  Company.  199  Ga.  App  660 

(1991). 

The  Court  of  Appeals  reversed  a  jury  verdict  finding  the  plaintiffs  lien  valid. 

The  Court  held  that  the  facts  demanded  a  contrary  conclusion  and  that  a 

verdict  should  have  been  directed  in  favor  of  defendant. 

Buffington  vs.  Sieler.  259  Ga.  478  (1989). 

The  Supreme  Court  reversed  a  jury  verdict  which  had  required  specific 

performance  of  a  sale  of  property.  The  Court  held  that  the  plaintiff  failed  to 

comply  with  the  terms  of  the  sale  and  was  not  entitled  to  specific 

performance. 

Georgia  Real  Estate  Commission  vs.  Svfan.  192  Ga.  App.  3  (1989). 
This  case  went  to  the  Superior  Court  on  appeal  from  the  Georgia  Real  Estate 
Commission  which  had  revoked  Syfan's  license  for  including  false 
information  on  his  license  application.  However,  Syfan  had  provided  the 
correct  information  to  the  Staff  of  the  Commission  but  pursuant  to  their 
direction  did  not  include  it  on  his  application.  The  Superior  Court  reversed 
the  Commission's  decision  to  revoke  the  license.  The  Court  of  Appeals 
reversed  the  Superior  Court  holding  that  the  Commission  had  the  discretion 
to  revoke  the  license  even  in  light  of  the  mitigating  circumstances.    The  trial 
court's  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "U". 

Van  Huvnh  vs.  State.  258  Ga.  663  (1988). 

A  motion  for  new  trial  w  as  granted  to  defendant  after  he  was  convicted  of 
malice  murder  and  other  offenses.  At  the  new  trial,  the  defendant  was  again 
convicted  of  malice  murder  and  other  offenses.  However,  he  was  also 
convicted  of  felony  murder.  Because  the  defendant  had  not  been  convicted  of 
felony  murder  in  his  first  trial,  the  Supreme  Court  reversed  the  conviction  on 
that  charge.  The  malice  murder  and  other  convictions  were  affirmed. 


10 


1452 


(3)        State  vs.  Bromlev.  Case  Number  87-CR-B93-B,  Superior  Court  of  Hall 
County.  A  copy  of  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "F*. 
Appellate  decision:  Bromley  vs.  State.  259  Ga.  377  (1989). 

Baglev  vs.  Shortt.  Case  Number  88-CV-5648-B,  Superior  Court  of  White 
County.  A  copy  of  opinion  is  attached  as  Attachment  "H". 
Appellate  decision:  Baglev  vs.  Shortt.  261  Ga.  762  (1991). 

16.        Public  Office:  State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you  have  held,  other  than- 

judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether  such  positions  were  elected 
or  appointed.  State  (chronologically)  any  unsuccessful  candidacies  for  elective  public 
office. 

In  1980,  Attorney  General  Arthur  K.  Bolton  appointed  me  as  a  Special  Assistant 
Attorney  General  for  the  State  of  Georgia.  I  also  served  under  Mr.  Bolton's 
successor,  Michael  J.  Bowers,  until  December  31,  1984.  I  have  never  been  an 
unsuccessful  candidate  for  elective  public  office. 


17.        Legal  Career: 


Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and  experience  after 
graduation  from  law  school  including: 

1.  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the  name  of  the 
judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you  were  a  clerk, 

No. 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and  dates; 
No. 

3.  the  dates,  names,  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices, 
companies  or  governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have  been 
connected,  and  the  nature  of  your  connection  with  each; 

After  graduation  from  law  school,  I  became  a  partner  in  the  law 
firm  of  Kenyon,  Hulsey  and  Oliver  in  July,  1978. 


11 


1453 


The  present  name  of  the  firm  is  Hulsey,  Oliver  &  Mahar  and 
the  address  is  200  E.E.  Butler  Parkway,  Gainesville,  Georgia 
30501. 

I  remained  with  the  firm  until  I  went  on  the  Superior  Court 
bench  in  July,  1986.  In  1980, 1  was  appointed  a  special 
assistant  attorney  general  for  the  State  of  Georgia,  but 
remained  a  member  of  the  law  firm.  I  handled  child  support 
enforcement  cases  and  abuse  and  neglect  cases.  Effective 
January  1,  1985, 1  was  appointed  Juvenile  Court  Judge  of  Hall 
County,  Hall  County  Courthouse,  Gainesville,  Georgia.  This 
was  a  part-time  position.  Effective  July  8,  1986, 1 
was  appointed  Judge  of  Superior  Court  for  the  Northeastern 
Circuit.  I  have  served  in  this  position  full-time  since  then. 

b.  1 .         What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice, 

dividing  it  into  periods  with  dates  if  its  character  has  changed 
over  the  years? 

Our  firm  had  a  general  civil  practice  which  included  insurance 
defense,  business  law,  governmental  law,  and  a  limited 
plaintiffs  practice.  1  worked  primarily  in  litigation, 
concentrating  on  insurance  defense,  zoning,  and  civil  rights.  In 
1980, 1  was  appointed  a  Special  Assistant  Attorney  General  for 
the  State  of  Georgia  representing  offices  of  the  Department  of 
Family  and  Children  Services  in  Northeast  Georgia.  I  also 
handled  child  support  enforcement  cases  for  the  state.  I 
resigned  my  position  as  a  Special  Assistant  Attorney  General  at 
the  end  of  1984  before  becoming  a  part-time  juvenile  court 
judge,  January  1,  1985.    I  remained  a  member  of  the  law  firm 
until  I  went  on  the  Superior  Court  bench  in  July,  1986. 

2.  Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the  areas,  if 

any,  in  which  you  have  specialized. 

M)  tjpical  former  clients  included  insurance  companies,  small 
businesses.  Hall  County  government,  and  the  State  of  Georgia. 


12 


1454 


c.  1 .  Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at  all?  If 

the  frequency  of  your  appearance  in  court  varied,  describe  each 
such  variance,  giving  dates. 

Occasionally. 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in; 

(a)  federal  courts  -  20% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record  -  70% 

(c)  other  courts  -  10% 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil  -  95% 

(b)  criminal  -  5% 

4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  court  of  record  you  tried  to  verdict 
or  judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether  you  were 
sole  counsel,  chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

95  -  80  as  sole  counsel,  15  as  associate. 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jur>  -  10% 

(b)  non-jury  -  90% 

Litigation:  Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigated  matters  which  you  personally 
handled.  Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket  number  and 
date  if  unreported.  Give  a  capsule  summar}'  of  the  substance  of  each  case.  Identify 
the  party  or  parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.  Also  state  as  to 
each  case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before  whom 
the  case  was  litigated;  and 

(c)  the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co-counsel 
and  of  principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 


13 


1455 


-1- 


Rex  Armour,  et  al.  vs.  E.L.  England,  et  al..  Civil  Action  CV-79-32-C, 
(1979)  U.S.D.C,  N.D.  Ga.,  fudge  William  C.  O'Kelley  presiding. 
Voluntary  dismissal  by  plaintiffs  was  filed  January  5,  1981. 

Plaintiffs  counsel:  Michael  A.  Mogill,  150  South  College  Street, 
Carlisle,  Pennsylvania.  17013,  (717)  240-5283  and  Eric  G.  Kocher,  161 
Spring  Street,  S.W.,  Atlanta,  Georgia  30303,  (404)  681-0680 

Defendants'  counsel:  I  represented  the  defendants  along  with  Julius 
M.  Hulsey,  200  E.E.  Butler  Parkway,  Gainesville,  GA  30501,  (770) 
532-6312 

Inmates  at  the  Hall  County  Jail  brought  a  class  action  suit  against  the 
sheriff  and  jailer.    We  represented  all  of  the  defendants.  The  suit 
complained  about  conditions  which  existed  in  the  Hall  County  Jail. 
Specifically,  the  plaintiffs  alleged  that  the  jail  was  unsafe  and 
unsanitary,  that  inmates  were  denied  recreation,  access  to  legal 
materials,  and  access  to  medical  care,  and  that  inmates  were  subjected 
to  arbitrary  discipline.  I  engaged  in  lengthy  negotiations  to  settle  all 
of  the  issues  in  the  case.  The  settlement  included  the  development  of 
operating  rules  for  the  jail,  construction  of  an  exercise  yard  and 
creation  of  a  law  library  for  inmates.  The  case  was  voluntarily 
dismissed  by  the  plaintiffs. 


John  Alfred  Davis  vs.  INA.  Edward  L.  England,  et  al..  Civil  Action 
Number  C80-1796A  and  C81-01G,  (1980),  U.S.D.C.  N.D.  Ga.,  Judge 
William  C.  O'Kelley,  presiding.  The  trial  began  November  2,  1981. 

Plaintiffs  counsel:  Richard  A.  Gordon,  Suite  520,  400  Interstate  North 
Parkway,  Atlanta,  Georgia  30339,  (770)  952-2900 

Defendants'  counsel:  I  represented  the  individual  defendants  along 
with  Julius  M.  Hulsey,  200  E.E.  Butler  Parkway,  Gainesville,  Georgia 
30501,  (770)  532-6312  and  the  insurance  company  was  represented  by 
Sewell  K.  Loggins,  5605  Glenridge  Drive  N.E.,  Suite  900,  Atlanta, 
Georgia  30342,  (404)  256-0700. 


14 


1456 


Plaintiff  sought  damages  for  injuries  which  he  alleged  he  received 
during  an  arrest  by  defendants.  After  he  was  stopped  by  two  sheriffs 
deputies,  the  plaintiff  fled.  He  alleged  that  when  the  deputies  caught 
him,  they  committed  an  assault  and  battery  upon  him  and  inflicted 
injuries,  including  a  ruptured  bladder.  In  a  jury  trial,  a  verdict  was 
rendered  in  favor  of  the  defendants. 


-3- 

American  Booksellers  Association,  Inc.,  et  al.  vs.  Hinson  McAuliffe,  et 
aL  Civil  Action  Number  C81-1 193A,  (1981),  U.S.D.C,  N.D.  Ga., 
Judge  Horace  T.  Ward,  presiding.    The  motion  for  summar)  judgment 
was  granted  October  23,  1981 . 

Plaintiffs'  counsel:  J.  Kirk  Quillian  and  William  N.  Withrow,  Jr. 
Nationsbank  Plaza,  Suite  5200,  600  Peachtree  Street,  N.E.,  Atlanta, 
Georgia  30308,  (404)  885-3204;  Michael  A.  Bamberger,  425  Park 
Avenue,  New  York,  New  York  10022,  (212)  371-5900. 

Defendants'  counsel:  I  represented  the  Sheriff  and  Solicitor  of  Hall 
County  along  with  Julius  M.  Hulsey,  200  E.E.  Butler  Parkway, 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30501,  (770)  532-6312;  other  defendants  were 
represented  by  Roy  Mays,  170  Mitchell  Street,  S.W.,  Atlanta,  Georgia 
30303,  (404)  614-4570,  Gail  C.  Flake,  556  North  McDonough  Street, 
Room  504,  Decatur,  Georgia  30030,  (404)  371-2909;  Thomas  ().  Davis, 
Suite  201,  545  North  McDonough  Street,  Decatur,  Georgia  30030, 
(404)  378-3633;  Roy  E.  Barnes,  166  Anderson  Street,  Suite  225, 
Marietta,  Georgia  30060,  (770)  424-1500;  John  H.  Smith,  301  Green 
Street,  Suite  200,  Gainesville,  Georgia  30501,  (770)  536-3381;  Paul  C. 
McCommon,  III,  P.  O.  Box  U,  Macon,  Georgia  31202,  (912)  752- 
3511;  Tony  L.  Axam,  1280  West  Peachtree  Street,  Suite  310,  Atlanta, 
Georgia  30309,  (404)  524-2233;  Jerry  Gentry,  100  Cherokee  Street, 
Suite  595,  Marietta,  Georgia  30090,  (770)  528-4000;  James  A. 
Henderson,  P.  O.  Box  223,  Lawrenceville,  Georgia  30246,  (770)  822- 
8609. 

A  suit  to  declare  Act  785,  Ga.  Code  Ch.  26-35  unconstitutional  and  to 
enjoin  its  enforcement  was  brought  by  a  number  of  publishers  and 
booksellers.  The  act  sought  to  restrict  distribution  or  display  to  minors 
of  materials  containing  descriptions  or  depictions  of  "illicit  sex  or 


15 


1457 


sexual  immorality."  Along  with  Julius  Hulsey,  I  represented  the 
Sheriff  and  Solicitor  of  Hall  County.  The  Court  enjoined  the 
enforcement  of  the  act  and  ultimately  declared  it  unconstitutional. 


Clyde  Adams  vs.  Danny  Bishop,  et  al..  Ciyil  Action  Number  C81- 
1440,  (1981),  U.S.D.C,  N.D.  Ga.,  Judge  William  C.  O'Kelley, 
presiding.    Summary  judgment  was  granted  to  two  defendants  on 
December  6,  1982.  A  judgment  was  entered  on  a  jury  verdict  in  favor 
of  the  remaining  defendant  on  April  4,  1983. 

Plaintiffs  counsel;  Jane  Kent-Plaginos,  111  Dahlonega  Street, 
Cumming,  Georgia  30130,  (770)  887-2321. 

Defendants'  counsel:  I  represented  the  two  sheriffs  deputies  along 
with  Julius  M.  Hulsey,  200  E.E.  Butler  Parkway,  Gainesville,  Georgia 
30501,  (770)  532-6312  and  Edward  L.  Hartness,  620  Spring  Street, 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30501,  (770)  535-7000;  the  District  Attorney  was 
represented  by  Daryl  A.  Robinson,  132  State  Judicial  Building, 
Atlanta,  Georgia  30334,  (404)  651-6194. 

The  Plaintiff  filed  this  action  alleging  that  his  motorcycle  had  been 
unlawfully  seized  by  the  defendants.  The  motorcycle  was  seized  by 
Hall  County  Sheriffs  deputies  during  a  routine  traffic  stop  of  a  truck 
which  had  the  motorcycle  in  the  cargo  area.  The  identification 
numbers  on  the  motorcycle  had  been  altered.  The  motorcycle  was 
seized  and  subsequently  released  to  a  third  party  who  submitted  proof 
of  ownership  to  the  district  attorney.  Summary  judgment  was  granted 
to  the  defendants  on  all  claims  except  one  against  Deputy  Bishop  who 
was  the  officer  who  released  the  motorcyle  to  the  third  party.  That 
claim  went  to  trial  before  a  jury  which  found  in  favor  of  Deputy 
Bishop. 

-5- 

Hall  Count^■  vs.  Agri-Bio  Corporation.  249  Ga.  112  (1982).  Judge 
James  E.  Palmour,  III,  presiding  trial  judge.    The  case  was  decided  by 
the  trial  court  on  July  17,  1981  and  by  the  Supreme  Court  on  March  2, 
1982. 


16 


1458 


Plaintiffs  counsel:  I  represented  Hall  County  along  with  Julius  M. 
Hulsey,  200  E.  E.  Butler  Parkway,  Gainesville,  Georgia  50501,  (770) 
532-6312. 

Defendant's  counsel:  Frank  VV.  Armstrong,  III,  200  Main  Street,  S.W., 
6th  Floor,  Hunt  Tower,  Gainesville,  Georgia  30501,  (770)  536-0101. 

Agri-Bio  sought  to  rezone  a  tract  of  land  to  planned  industrial 
development.  The  tract  was  located  in  the  center  of  a  residential 
subdivision.  The  Board  of  Commissioners  denied  the  rezoning 
application.  However,  the  trial  court  held  that  the  zoning  of  the 
property  was  unconstitutional  and  directed  the  county  commissioners 
to  rezone  the  property.  On  appeal,  the  County  contended  that  the 
applicant  had  failed  to  properly  raise  the  issue  of  constitutionality 
before  the  county  commissioners  and  that  the  evidence  did  not 
support  the  findings  of  the  trial  court.  The  Supreme  Court  reversed 
the  trial  court  holding  that  the  applicant  had  failed  to  make  a  proper 
constitutional  challenge  before  the  commissioners. 


Eddie  Howington  vs.  Hall  County  Planning  Commission,  Civil  Action 
Number  K-81-23,885,  (1981),  Superior  Court  of  Hall  County,  Judge  A. 
R.  Kenyon,  presiding.    The  case  was  heard  on  April  12,  1982,  and 
decided  on  August  26,  1982. 

Plaintiffs  counsel:  James  M.  Walters,  311  Green  Street,  N.W., 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30501,  (770)  536-3264. 

Defendant's  counsel:  I  represented  the  defendant. 

The  plaintiff  appealed  a  ruling  by  the  Planning  Commission  which 
had  denied  his  request  to  locate  a  go-cart  track  on  a  parcel  of  land. 
The  Court  affirmed  the  Planning  Commission  decision  holding  that 
the  plaintiff  had  not  properly  raised  constitutional  questions  before 
the  Commission  and  that  the  Commission  did  not  abuse  its 
discretion. 


17 


1459 


-7- 

William  G.  Harden  vs.  E.  L.  England,  et  al..  Civil  Action  Number 
C82-25G,  (1982),  U.S.D.C,  N.D.  Ga.,  Judge  William  C.  O'Kelley, 
presiding.    A  partial  summary  judgment  was  granted  to  the  defendants 
on  Februar)  7,  1983.  The  bench  trial  was  held  May  26,  1983.  The 
plaintiffs  application  to  the  Eleventh  Circuit  for  leave  to  appeal  in 
forma  pauperis  was  denied  by  the  Eleventh  Circuit  on  December  7, 
1983. 

Plaintiffs  counsel:  F.  Robert  Raley,  743  Walnut  Street,  Macon, 
Georgia  31208,  (912)745-1174 

Defendants'  counsel:  I  represented  the  sheriff,  the  jailer  and  the 
county  commissioners. 

Plaintiff  brought  suit  against  the  Hall  Countv  Sheriff  and  others 
complaining  about  conditions  at  the  Hall  County  Jail.  Plaintiff 
contended  that  he  had  been  placed  in  solitary  confinement  by  jailers 
without  the  benefit  of  a  disciplinary  proceeding.  He  contended  that 
the  cell  in  which  he  was  placed  was  unheated,  had  no  natural  light,  and 
was  infested  with  roaches.  The  plaintiff  further  contended  that  when 
he  was  moved  from  solitary  to  the  general  jail  population,  that  he  was 
subjected  to  violence  from  other  inmates  and  that  jail  personnel  were 
not  complying  with  the  jail's  operating  rules.  Motions  to  dismiss  and 
for  summary  judgment  were  granted  to  some  defendants.  The  case  was 
tried  before  the  Court  without  a  jury  and  a  judgment  was  rendered  in 
favor  of  the  remaining  defendants. 


lerry  Smallwood  vs.  Billy  Moonev.  et  al..  Civil  Action  Number  C82- 
59G,  (1982)  U.S.D.C,  N.D.  Ga.,  Judge  William  C.  O'Kelley, 
presiding.    Judgment  was  entered  for  the  defendants  on  a  directed 
verdict  on  April  5,  1983. 

Plaintiffs  counsel:  Charles  W.  Smith,  Jr.,  210  Washington  Street, 
N.W.,  Gainesville,  Georgia  30501,  (770)  532-7888. 


18 


1460 


Defendants'  counsel:  I  represented  the  individual  defendants  along 
with  Julius  M.  Hulsey,  200  E.E.  Butler  Parkway,  Gainesville,  Georgia 
50501,  (770)  532-6312;  the  insurance  carrier  was  represented  by  James 
A.  Dunlap,  405  Washington  Street,  N.E.,  Gainesville,  Georgia  30501, 
(770)  532-7211. 

Plaintiff  filed  suit  seeking  damages  for  injuries  which  he  alleged  he 
sustained  when  a  Hall  County  jailer  intentionally  closed  a  cell  door  on 
his  hand.  The  plaintiff  asserted  causes  of  action  under  42  USC  S 1983 
and  under  a  state  law  claim  of  battery.  Plaintiff  sought  to  recover 
against  the  jailer  who  injured  him  as  well  as  against  supervisory 
personnel,  including  the  sheriff.  The  federal  claims  against  the 
super\'isor}  personnel  were  dismissed  on  pretrial  motions.  The 
plaintiff  then  sought  to  voluntarily  dismiss  his  state  court  claims 
against  those  defendants  so  that  he  could  refile  his  case  in  state  court. 
We  opposed  the  motion  and  the  motion  was  denied.  The  case  went  to 
trial  and  the  defendants  were  granted  a  directed  verdict  in  their  favor. 


lasper  Johnson  vs.  Richard  Mecum.  et  al..  Civil  Action  Number  C84- 
030G,  (1984)  U.S.D.C,  N.D.  Ga.,  Judge  V\  illiam  C.  O'Kelley, 
presiding.    The  case  was  tried  before  a  jury  beginning  March  14,  1985. 

Plaintiffs  counsel:  Robert  Remar,  2600  The  Grand,  75  Fourteenth 
Street,  Atlanta,  Georgia  30309,  (404)  873-8000. 

Defendants'  counsel:  I  represented  all  of  the  defendants  along  with 
Julius  M.  Hulsey,  200  E.E.  Butler  Park-way,  Gainesville,  Georgia 

30501,(770)532-6312. 

Plaintiff  brought  this  action  alleging  that  he  had  been  subjected  to 
cruel  treatment  by  the  staff  of  the  Hall  County  Jail  when  he  was 
stripped  and  placed  in  restraints  in  a  padded  cell.  The  case  was  tried 
before  a  jury  and  verdicts  were  rendered  against  each  of  the  defendants 
in  the  amount  of  $1.00  each. 


19 


1461 


-10- 


Randall  Long  vs.  Richard  V.  Mecum.  et  al..  Civil  Action  Number 
MD84-n885,  (1984),  Hall  County'  Superior  Court,  Judge  Robert  L. 
Scoggin,  presiding.    The  case  was  heard  on  September  8,  1984  and 
decided  November  16,  1984.  An  application  for  discretionary  appeal 
was  denied  by  the  Georgia  Court  of  Appeals  on  January  9,  1985. 

Plaintiffs  counsel:  Edward  L.  Hartness,  620  Spring  Street,  Gainesville 
Georgia  30501,  (770)  535-7000. 

Defendants'  counsel:  I  represented  the  defendants  who  were  the  sheriff 
and  members  of  the  civil  service  board  and  count)  commissioners. 

The  case  came  to  Superior  Court  on  a  writ  of  certiorari  issued  to  the 
Hall  County  Civil  Service  Board.  The  plaintiff  was  discharged  from 
the  sheriffs  department  for  engaging  in  sexual  relations  with  a  young 
woman  who  was  a  member  of  the  department's  Explorer  Post.  He 
challenged  his  discharge  on  constitutional  and  procedural  grounds. 
The  decision  of  the  civil  service  board  was  affirmed.  The  plaintiffs 
application  to  the  Court  of  Appeals  for  a  discretionary  appeal  was 
denied. 


Because  all  of  the  foregoing  cases  are  more  than  ten  years  old,  I  am 
providing  the  following  list  of  attorneys  who  have  had  more  recent 
contact  with  me  in  my  capacity  as  a  judge: 


William  M.  Brownell,  Jr. 
410  Bradford  Street,  N.W. 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30501 
(770)  534-7700 

J.  David  Burroughs 
P.  O.  Box  324 

Gainesville,  Georgia  30503 
(770)  531-0446 


R.  Thomas  Jarrard 
410  Bradford  Street,  N.  W. 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30501 
(770)  534-7700 

James  E.  Mahar,  Jr. 
200  E.  E.  Butler  Parkway 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30501 
(770)  532-6312 


20 


1462 


John  A.  Dickerson 
P.  O.  Drawer  1408 
Toccoa,  Georgia  30577 
(706)886-3178 

Mr.  David  A.  Fox 
210  Washington  Street,  N.  W. 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30501 
(770)  534-7386 

Steven  P.  Gilliam 
301  Green  Street,  N.  W. 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30501 
(770)  536-3381 

Henry  D.  Green,  Jr. 

1  Midtown  Plaza,  Suite  800 
1360  Peachtree  Street,  N.E. 
Atlanta,  Georgia  30309 
(404)  870-8000 


Kelly  Miles 

301  Green  Street,  N.VV. 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30501 
(770)  536-3381 

Bonnie  Oliver 
220  E.  E.  Butler  Parkway 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30501 
(770)  532-6300 

Charles  W.  Stephens 
210  Washington  Street,  N.W. 
Gainesville,  Georgia  30501 
(770)  536-7619 

J.  Douglas  Stewart 
Hunt  Tower 

Gainesville,  Georgia  30501 
(770)  536-0101 


19.        Legal  Actu  ities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  )ou  have  pursued, 

including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did 
not  involve  litigation.  Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question, 
please  omit  any  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the 
privilege  has  been  waived). 

My  experience  on  the  Superior  Court  bench  has  given  me  the  opportunitv  to  play  a 
role  in  several  innovations  in  the  administration  of  justice  in  our  circuit.  I  am 
particularly  proud  of  the  following  programs  for  which  I  had  primary  responsibility. 

In  1991,  in  conjunction  with  the  local  bar,  we  designed  a  mediation  program  for 
domestic  relations  cases  in  the  superior  courts  of  our  circuit.  Because  of  the  success 
of  the  program,  we  obtained  a  grant  which  allowed  us  to  expand  the  program  to  other 
cases  in  other  courts  in  our  circuit.  This  program  has  now  expanded  to  the  entire 
Ninth  Judicial  District. 

Prior  to  July,  1992,  our  circuit  consisted  of  four  counties,  three  of  which  were  rural 
and  had  small  caseloads.  Because  of  the  limited  caseloads  in  the  smaller  counties, 
the  judges  of  the  circuit  did  not  hold  court  in  those  counties  very  often.  We  learned 


21 


1463 


that  this  situation  was  causing  delays  in  appointing  counsel  for  indigent  defendants. 
I  developed  a  plan  which  required  that  persons  booked  into  custody  be  interviewed 
for  counsel  at  booking  and  that  these  applications  be  immediately  forwarded  to  a 
judge.  This  system  assured  early  appointment  of  counsel  to  eligible  persons. 

The  increase  in  criminal  cases  over  the  past  few  years  caused  our  criminal  docket  to 
fall  behind.  In  an  effort  to  expedite  the  entry  of  pleas  as  well  as  to  operate  more 
efficiently  for  lawyers,  litigants,  and  the  courts,  I  developed  a  new  calendaring  system 
that  assured  a  timely  opportunity  for  entry  of  pleas  and  ended  the  necessity  of  the 
lawyer  and  defendant  in  every  criminal  case  having  to  come  to  every  week  of  court. 


22 


1464 

II.  FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 


1 .  List  sources,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred  income 
arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other  future  benefits  which 
you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business  relationships,  professional  services,  firm 
memberships,  former  employers,  clients,  or  customers.  Please  describe  the 
arrangements  you  have  made  to  be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or 
business  interest. 

I  am  a  member  of  the  Superior  Court  Judges  Retirement  System  and  will  be  eligible 
to  begin  receiving  benefits  when  I  reach  the  age  of  sixty  years. 

2.  Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including  the  procedure 
you  will  follow  in  determining  these  areas  of  concern.  Identify  the  categories  of 
litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are  likely  to  present  potential  conflicts-of- 
interest  during  your  initial  ser\ice  in  the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

I  am  unaware  of  any  financial  or  business  relationships  which  will  cause  a  conflict  of 
interest.  Should  any  future  conflicts  develop,  I  would  recuse  myself  in  any  case 
involving  a  conflict  of  interest  in  accordance  with  the  Code  of  Conduct  for  United 
States  Judges. 

3.  Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside  employment, 
with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the  court?  If  so,  explain. 

No. 

4.  List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar  year  preceding 
your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all  salaries,  fees, 
dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria,  and  other  items  exceeding 
$500  or  more  (If  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of  the  financial  disclosure  report,  required 
by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of  1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

See  attached  financial  disclosure  report.  Attachment  "W". 

5.  Please  complete  the  attached  financial  net  worth  statement  in  detail  (Add  schedules  as 
called  for). 

See  attached  financial  worth  statement,  Attachment  "X". 


23 


1465 


Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign?  If  so,  please 
identih'  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate,  dates  of  the 
campaign,  your  title  and  responsibilities. 

WTiile  I  was  in  high  school  and  college,  I  worked  on  several  campaigns  for  my  father, 
LawTcnce  Farr  Story,  for  county  commissioner  in  Columbia  County,  Georgia.  I 
canvassed  neighborhoods,  attended  political  functions,  and  passed  out  literature  in 
shopping  centers  and  at  approaches  to  polling  places.  His  campaigns  were  in  1968, 
1972,  and  1976. 

In  1976, 1  worked  as  a  volunteer  in  the  presidential  campaign  of  Jimmy  Carter  by 
distributing  campaign  literature  in  Athens,  Georgia. 

In  1982, 1  served  as  Hall  County  coordinator  for  the  campaign  of  Max  Cleland  for 
Secretary  of  State  for  the  State  of  Georgia.  I  hosted  a  fund  raiser,  helped  distribute 
campaign  information  in  the  community,  and  directly  solicited  votes. 


24 


1466 


FINANCIAL    DISCLOSURE    REPORT 

FOR   CALENDAR   YEAR   1996 


Report   Required  t' 


J.    Pub-    L.    No. 


1.    Person  Reporting    (Usi  naxe.    firs;,   middle  iniciai) 

Scory,   Richard  W. 

2      Court  cr  Organization 

U.S.    District   Court 
Northern  District   of   Georeia 

)     Cate  cf  F.epor; 
9/18/97 

,.    Title      {Article   Ii:   y.zzts   indicate  active  cr 

senior  stat^J;   Sa=;strate  judges   indicate 
full-    or  psri-ti-el 

U.S.    Districc  Judce   -  Active   Stacus 

S.    Report  Type    (check  aporocriate  ty^el 
JL  No..n...o..    Dace    9,1  ^    97 
Initial     Annual     Fir.al 

1/1/96-   8/20  97 

T,   Chambers  or  Office  ;.idress 
Hall   County   Courthouse 
116  Spring  Street 
Gainesville,   Georgia  30501 

B.    On  the  basis  of   the    inf  orT.a:  icr.  contained   tr.  chis  Kerori  at.z 
any  rocificacior.s  pertainir.c  thereto,    it   is,    jr.  r.v  ccir.ier., 
in  ccT.jliar.ce  with  applicable   laws  *r.ii  rejulaticr-s 

Reviewinc  Officer                                                                              ~ate 

IMPORT.-\.NT  NOTES:  The  instructions  accorapan)ing  this  form  must  be  followed.    Complete  all  parts, 
checking  the  NO>fE  box  for  each  section  where  you  have  no  reportable  information.    Sign  on  last  page. 

I.     POSITIONS.     (Reporting  indi\idual  only;  see  pp.  9-13  of  Instructions.) 

POSITION  N.^J^E   OF   ORC-.-.NIZATION/£yTITY 

NONE      (No  reportable  positions) 


Executor 


Erline  H.    Storv   Estate 


Green   Street   Club 


United   Way  of   Hall   County 


II.     AGREEMENTS.     (Reporting  indi\idual  only,  see  pp.  14-17  of  Instructions.) 
DATE  P.aRTIES   AND   TERMS 


n 


NONE      (No  reportable  agreements) 
12 Superior  Court  Judges  Retirenent  Plan   (no  control) 


III.     NON-I>fVEST.MENT  INCOVIE.     (Reporting  individual  and  spouse;  see  pp.  18-25  of  Instructions.) 
DATE  SOURCE   AND  TYPE 


n 


1996- 

-97 

1996- 

-97 

1996 

-97 

1996 

-97 

NONE      (No  reportable  non-investment  income) 


State  of  Geor2ia 


Hall  County 


Dauson  County 


Hall   County  Board  of   Education    (S) 


GROSS    INCOME 


20,473 

2,212 

s 

s 

1467 


FINANCIAL    DISCLOSURE    REPORT 


Richard  W.    Story 


9/18  /97 


Q 


REIMBURSEMENTS  and  GIFTS  --  Iransponation,  lodging,  food,  entertainment 

(Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parcnthcticals  '(S)"  and  '(DC)"  to  indicate  reportable 
reimbursements  and  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  26-29  of  Instructions.) 
SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 


NONE      (No  such  reportable  reimbursements  or  gifts) 


V.     OTHER  GIFTS.      (Includes  those  to  spouse  and  dependent  children;  use  the  parentheticals  "(S)"  and  '(DC)'  to 
indicate  other  gifts  received  by  spouse  and  dependent  children,  respectively.  See  pp.  30-33  of  Instructions.) 
SOURCE  '  DESCRIPTION 


Q 


NONE      (No  such  reportable  gifts) 


VI.     LIABILITIES.      (Includes  those  of  spouse  and  dependent  children;  indicate  where  applicable,  person  responsible 

for  liability  by  using  the  parenthetical  "(S)"  for  separate  liability  of  the  spouse, '{})'  for  joint  hability  of 
reporting  individual  and  spouse,  and  "(DC)"  for  liability  of  a  dependent  child.  See  pp.  34-36  of  Instructions.) 

CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION  VALUE  CODE' 


n 


NONE      (No  reportable  liabilities) 


Gainesville  Bank  &  Trust   (J) 


Personal  Loan 


C-350O,COi-Sl.CCO, 
P3-;2S, ceo. 001-550 


pi-si.ooo,oci-:5,ooc. 


L-CSO.CCI-SIOO.OCO   M.S100.001-32SC,0OC   N-S2£0 . 001  - SS CO , OCO 


01-:25.C00,CCC 


1468 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Name  of    Person  Reporting 

Richard   W.    Story 


ite  o(    Report 

9/18/^7 


MI.  Page   1  IWESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS -- Income,  value,  Iransactions  (Includes  Ihosc  of  spouse 
and  dependent  children.  See  pp.  57-54  of  Inslruclions.) 


J.. 

Descnrticn  cf  ^sstzs 

the  asset  bv\sir.c':^e"carer.thetical 
-(Jl-    for    i=;n;  cl-jrship  of   "oorc- 
ir:=    ir.div:n..l   a-d   sir-se,    -ISl'    for 
separate  o.r.ers.-.ir  tv  stluse.    ■  IDCl  • 
for  ownersr.ir  by  cerer^ient   clild. 

Place  "iio;  *;-::  ':=^'^^!'^ 

B 

duri.ig 
report  i.-ig 
period 

C 

Cross  value 

at  er.d  of 

reportir.o 

perioo 

T.-a.-^sactior.s  durir.o  repcrti.-.o  period 

ID 

(2) 
ri. 

(11 

Value: 

Code 

(21 

Value 
Kethcd3 
Code 

buy.    sell. 

If   not   exe-rt    fro-  dlsrlosure                 1 

(21 
Date; 
Kc-th- 

131 

Value2 

Code 

Gair.: 

(5) 
Identity  of 

^'"  .l\:'^'-\.\ 

NONE         ISO  reportable 
tr«?.saitiOr.sr 

.Residence  -  Harlem,    Columbia 
Co.  .GA-Frl  inp    "Jmrv  .  F«;rs  rp 

L 

W 

None 

-Common   -  Gainesville 
''Rank    anr!   Tri'cr 

A 

Div. 

J 

W 

None 

"Common  -  Wal-Mart   Store           None 

None 

None 

J 

W 

""Common-Resions   Financial   Co 

A 

Div 

J 

W 

None 

'Rental   ProD.-Dean   Street 

D 

Rent 

K 

W 

None 

Rent 

K 

W 

None 

'Note   -   Barnes                                     D 

Int 

L 

T 

None 

Account-Edward   D.    Jones 

C 

Int 

K 

T 

None 

' 

10 

M 

12 

n 

- 

-.5 

1 

16 

1^ 

IB 

ic^f'it:E,r"^  ?:no=5?i=fiir?o=          l:lJ=?=5=l:.;?§oi:!5o^='--'^  i;:li^65onii?a.c,=.cco    l£:cl:ii5;IH-ir.ore 

'-'  -■  miMm.^ti...  mmmM^^~  ^^^-m^^.^:^—- 

\^   ?iV   -        -^JJ-iJtle                                       5:i?t^r"-    "-"   "'"                                       -Jtn-5                         —--- 

H$ 


1469 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT  (cont'd) 


Hare  of    Person   Reporting 

Richard   W.    Story 


9  /I  8/97 


VIII.  ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION  OR  EXPLANATIONS  andicate  pan  of  Report.) 

Part   VII,    2-8   are   all   held   in   the   nane   of   the  Green   Street   Cliih.    an   invp■;rge^^   rl.,^>   r.f  .-p^-r.- 
I  was   a   member   during   the   reporting   norind.    hni-    from  whirh    t    ;,m  withdrawinr. 


IX.  CERTIFICATION. 

I.T  complii-.ce  with  the  provision;  of  28  U.S.C.  §  ^55  a.-.d  of  Advisor.-  Opinion  No.  57  of  the  Advisor.-  Comminee  on  Judicid 
Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  r:y  knowlecie  at  the  time  after  reisor.abie  inquL-v,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatoI^'  function  in  anv  litisa-.-cn 
during  the  period  covered  by  this  repon  m  which  I,  my  spouse,  c:  my  minor  or  dependent  children  had  a  financial  interest,  asdefined  in 
Canon  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

I  certify-  that  all  information  given  acove  (including  information  pertaimng  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent  children,  if  anv)  is 
accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  information  cot  reponed  was  withheld  because  ii't::»- 
applicable  statutory  provisions  permir.ing  non-disclosure. 

I  further  cenify  that  eaned  income  from  outside  employment  and  honoraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  vihich  have  been  reponed  are 
in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  5  U.S.C. A.  app.  4,  §  501  e:.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  §  7353  and  Judicial  Conference  regulations. 


Signature 


ZS^ 


f//07 


NOTE:     ANY  INDIVIDUAL  WHO  KMOWINSW  AND  i^ILFULLY  FALSIFIES  OR  FAILS  TO  FILE  THIS  REPORT  MAY  BE 
SUBJECT  TO  CIVIL  AND  CRIMINAL  SANCTIONS  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  §  104.) 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS: 

Mail  signed  original  and  3  additional  copies  to: 

Committee  on  Financial  Disclosure 

Adnunistraiive  Office  of  the 

United  States  Courts 

Suite  2-301 

One  Columbus  Circle,  N.E.. 

Washuigion,  D.C.  20544 

1470 


FINANCIAL  STATEMENT 
RICHARD  W.    STORY 

NET  WORTH 

June   1,    1997 


Provide  a  complets,  cuircnt  financial  net  worth  statement  which  itemizes  in  detail 
aU  assets  (including  bank  accounts,  real  estate,  securides,  trusts,  invesonents,  and  oLher  financial 
holdings)  all  UabiHries  (including  debts,  mongages,  loans,  and  other  financial  obligations)  of 
yourself,  your  spouse,  and  other  immediate  members  of  your  household. 


ASSETS 

^^^^^^^ 

UABIUnES 

= 

00 

Ciih  en  hiTrd  t-.i  iz  bids 

4 

000 

00 

Ndei  F4>-»ble  to  b»nl3-Mcured               | 

1 

0 

Notej  F*yiik  to  b*nkj-«aiesred 

8 

300 

TJsstd  (cc=n&n-tdd  icbedule 

0 

Notes  piyiile  io  rditJYei                        | 

UlUisiii  Kcriiec-iid  ichr-'  ;le 

0 

Nolej  MN-iik  to  otten                             ] 

1 

1 

Ac»uau  ind  nctei  rscsivible: 

0 

Accoucti  L-^  billi  due                            { 

1 

Dim  £ron  rtUiv«  trtd  friends                         | 

0 

Unpud  iasnt  tix                                  { 

1 
1 

Dus  from  ts.-.ffi                                                1 

0 

Other  uaitid  lu  lad  ir/jrcjt                    | 

! 

DC.C.. 

0 

RuJ  eitiu  ccnjtjei  ptyUrle-kid 
tdteditje 

265 

20 

00 

ReiJ  eiiiLc  o*Tj^-Ldi  leheiale 

300 

000 

00 

C-oce:  scr^jijes  ud  other  liers  fiy- 
ihle 

12 

(DO 

CD 

1  Reii  a-M£  rr.cr^«iu  reiclvible 

Other  detu-i'"''"'-                                 |             |            | 

Alxj  t-.d  olSc  pcrv:ci]  prepcTv 

75 

DOO  i)0 

Credit  cards  -  consumer 

18   I75O 

00 

Cue  viJue-liis  i.-xi.-i.-.a 

!     .1     1 

1  CHher  usea-iisrrJzr: 

1      1      1 

Green  St.   Club-investment  club 

6 

!33    00 

1  '  1     1 

(Balance  sheet  attached) 

1 

ToCll  VaV^lif'"* 

304 

970 

00 

NetWonh 

81 

263 

i00 

ToUl  AsieU 

386 

233 

DO 

Toul  liibuinei  led  nci  worth 

386 

233 

00 

j              CO^TI^■GH:M■  UABIUTIES 

NONE 

Ce?<ZRAL  IWORMATION 

1 

Ai  esdoner.  csmiicr  or  {uarutoc 

Are  toy  tuca  ^edgetf?  (Add  iched- 
ole.) 

Yes 

On  kmn  or  ccanc'j 

~ 

Are  yoQ  iclcsdant.  in  any  loiu  or  lejal 
tcccns? 

No 

P  Lcgil  CUinu 

— 

1  Hive  you  ever  tilea  b3=kn.7<cy? 

No 

1 

Pra»uioo  tor  Fodt-iJ  Income  Tti 

1- 

1 

1  Other  jpecUJ  <iebt 

~ 

L. 

1                                                                1 

1          '    — 

Attachment  "X" 


1471 


GREEN  STREET  CLUB 

BALANCE  SHEET 

AT  FAIR  MARKET  VALUE 

MARCH  31.  1997 

Balance  at 

Write  Up 

March  31, 1997 

(Down) 

ASSETS 


Current  Assets: 


Fair  Market  Value 
at  March  31   1997 


Edward  D.  Jones 

$ 

36,031  63 

- 

36.031  63 

Gainesville  Bank  &  Trust 

2.26327 

- 

2.263.27 

Stock  -  Gainesville  Bank  &  Trust 

2,000.00 

2,500  00 

4,500.00 

Stock  -  Wal-Mart  Stores 

3,195.70 

(295.70) 

2.900.00 

Stock  -  Regions  Financial  Co 

2,168.95 

2,277.05 

4.446.00 

Total  Current  Assets 

45,659.55 

4.481.35 

50,140.90 

Property  &  Equipment: 

Dean  Street  Land 
Dean  Street  House 
Dean  Street  Equipment 
Richardson  Street  Land 
Richardson  Street  House 
Accumulated  Depreciation 
Total  Rental  Property 

Other  Assets: 

N/R  -  Chicopee  House 
Total  Other  Assets 

TOTAL  ASSETS 


5,000.00 

- 

S.000.00 

24,836.50 

- 

24.836.50 

560.00 

- 

560.00 

2,000.00 

- 

2.000.00 

36.366.00 

- 

36.366,00 

(19.079.15) 

19,079.15 

- 

49,683.35 

19,079.15 

68.762.50 

59.857.43 

59.857.43 

59,857.43 

- 

59.857.43 

155,200.33 

23,560.50 

178.760.83 

LIABILITIES: 

Deferred  Gain  on  Sale  of  Home 
N/P  -  Gainesville  Bank  &  Trust 
Total  Liabilities 

PARTNERS'  EQUITY: 

Partners'  Capital 

TOTAL  LIABILITIES  &  PARTNERS'  EQUITY 

EACH  PARTNER'S  1/8  SHARE  OF  CAPITAL 


21.719.39 
85.553.50 


47.927.44 


4.564  00 


4,564.00 


21,719.39 
85.553.50 


6,561.43 


95%  OF  EACH  PARTNER'S  1/8  SHARE  OF  CAPITAL 


6.233.36 


1472 


REAL  ESTATE  SCHEDULE 


Residence  in  Hall  County,  Georgia 


REAL  ESTATE  MORTGAGE  SCHEDULE 

SunTrust  Bank  $178,329.00  Balance 

SunTrust  Bank  $67,991.00  Balance 

Gainesville  Bank  &  Trust         $19,000.00  Balance 


PLEDGED  ASSETS  SCHEDULE 


Residence  -  Hall  County,  GA 
1995  Ford  Windstar 


1473 

111.  GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 


An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's  code  of 
Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  serving  the 
disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing 
specific  mstances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

\Miile  practicing  law,  I  was  a  volunteer  attorney  for  the  Hall  County  Pro  Bono 
Program  and  served  on  the  Pro  Bono  Committee  for  the  local  bar.  I  also  did 
volunteer  legal  work  for  various  local  civic  organizations  including  the  Girls  Club, 
Pro  Musica  and  Jaycees.  I  have  participated  in  numerous  community  service  projects 
through  the  Jaycees  and  United  Way.  I  helped  lead  the  efforts  which  resulted  in  the 
acquisition  of  a  new  facility  for  the  Gainesville-Hall  County  Girls  Club.  This  work 
included  a  substantial  capital  fund  drive  and  design  and  renovation  of  the  New 
Holland  Recreation  Center  for  the  club.  I  have  been  an  active  member  of 
Gainesville  First  United  Methodist  church  since  1978  and  have  worked  in  the  various 
programs  and  ministries  of  the  church.  Since  1990, 1  have  coached  youth  girls' 
basketball.  The  last  two  years  I  have  also  coached  boys'  clinic  basketball  and  T-ball. 

The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct  states 
that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  an)  organization  that 
invidiously  discrimmates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.  Do  you  currently  belong, 
or  ha\e  you  belonged,  to  an\  organization  which  discriminates  —  through  either  formal 
membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of  membership  policies?  If 
so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.  WTiat  have  you  done  to  try  to  change  these 
policies? 

I  am  a  member  of  Delta  Tau  Delta  and  Gridiron  which  are  social  fraternal 
organizations  at  LaGrange  College  and  the  University  of  Georgia,  respectively.  I  was 
a  member  of  the  Jaycees  from  1978  until  1988.  In  1985,  when  serving  as  state  legal 
counsel  for  the  Georgia  Jaycees,  I  drafted  and  proposed  amendments  to  the  bylaws  of 
that  organization  which  opened  membership  to  women.  Those  bylaw  amendments 
were  adopted  and  women  were  admitted  to  the  organization.  I  am  a  member  of  the 
Gainesville  Rotary  Club.  I  was  first  invited  to  join  the  club  in  the  Iatel980's.  At  that 
time,  the  club  admitted  only  men  into  its  membership,  and  I  declined  the  invitation 
because  of  this  policy.  Less  than  a  year  later,  the  club  amended  its  bylaws  and 
admitted  women.  Shortly  thereafter,  I  was  invited  to  join  Rotary  and  accepted  the 
invitation. 


25 


1474 


Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates  for 
nomination  to  the  federal  courts?  If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?     Please 
describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from  beginning  to  end 
(including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in  which 
you  participated). 

Yes.  Yes.  Senator  Max  Cleland  named  a  fourteen  member  committee  to  review 
applicants  for  this  position  and  to  recommend  up  to  five  qualified  applicants  to  him. 
I  submitted  an  application  and  writing  sample  to  that  committee.  I  appeared  before 
the  committee  for  a  personal  inter\'iew  and  was  one  of  five  persons  recommended  by 
the  committee  to  Senator  Cleland.  I  had  a  personal  interview  with  Senator  Cleland 
and  was  selected  by  him  for  recommendation  to  the  President.    Since  the 
recommendation,  I  have  been  interviewed  by  attorneys  with  the  Justice  Department, 
Agent  Wayne  Martin  of  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation  and  Sylvia  Walbolt  of 
the  American  Bar  Association's  Standing  Committee  on  Federal  Judiciary. 

Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee  discussed 
with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could  reasonably  be 
interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue,  or  question?  If  so,  please 
explain  fully. 

No. 

Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  "judicial  activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciar)  within  the  Federal  government,  and  within  societv 
generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.  It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial 
branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of 
government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  "judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than 
grievance-resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a 
vehicle  for  the  imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad 
classes  of  individuals; 


26 


1475 


c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciar)'  to  impose  broad  affirmative  duties  upon 
government  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciar)  toward  loosening  jurisdictional 
requirements  such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciar)'  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions  in 
the  manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight 
responsibilities. 

The  role  of  the  judiciary  is  to  resolve  the  disputes  of  litigants  properly 
before  the  Court.   A  judge  must  make  decisions  based  on  the  facts  as 
they  are  proved  and  the  applicable  law.  Judges  are  bound  by  judicial 
precedent  and  legislative  enactments  controlling  the  issues  before 
them.  The  separation  of  powers  doctrine  contemplates  separate  and 
distinct  roles  for  each  branch  of  government. 


27 


1476 


UNITED  STATES  SENATE 
QUESTIONNAIRE  FOR  JUDICIAL  NOMINEES 

I.  BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION  (PUBLIC) 


1 .  Full  name  (include  any  former  names  used): 

Christine  Odell  Cook  Miller;  Christine  Cook  Nettesheim;  Christine  Odell  Cook. 

2.  Address:   List  current  place  of  residence  and  office  address. 

Washington,  DC  20(X)7;   U.S.  Court  of  Federal 
Claims,  717  Madison  Place,  N.W.,  Washington,  DC  20(X)5. 

3.  Date  and  place  of  birlh:    August  26,  1944;  Oakland,  CA. 

4.  Marital  Status  (include  maiden  name  of  wife,  or  husband's  name).    List  spouse's 
occupation,  employer's  name  and  business  addresses). 

Married.  Dennis  F.  Miller,  self-employed,  President,  Science  and  Technology 
International,  Inc..  1535  28th  Street.  N.W.,  Washington,  DC  20007;  Lt.  Col., 
U.S.  Army  Reserves. 

5.  Educapon:   List  each  college  and  law  school  you  have  attended,  including  dates 
of  attendance,  degrees  received,  and  dates  degrees  were  granted. 

Undergraduate:    Stanford  University,  Stanford,  California 
1962-1966;  B.A.  PoUUcal  Science,  June  12,  1966; 

Law  School:   University  of  Utah  College  of  Law.  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah,  1966- 
1969;  J.D,  June  6.  1969. 

6.  Employment  Record:   List  (by  year)  all  business  or  professional  corporations, 
companies,  firms,  or  other  enterprises,  partnerships,  institutions  and 
organizations,  nonprofit  or  otherwise,  including  firms,  with  which  you  were 
connected  as  an  officer,  director,  or,  proprietor,  or  employee  since  graduation 
from  college. 


1477 


1)  Summer  1967  —  Law  Clerk  to  Leo  M.  Cook.  Esq.  (father) 
P.O.  Box  418 

Ukiah,  CA  95482 

2)  June  1969-June  1970  -  Clerk  to  Honorable  David  T.  Lewis 

Gater  Chief  Judge) 
United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Tenth  Circuit 
4201  Federal  Building 
Salt  Lake  City,  UT  841 11 

3)  August  1970-May  1971  -  Trial  Attorney 
U.S.  Department  of  Justice 

Foreign  Litigation  Unit 
Civil  Division 

10th  &  Constitution  Ave.,  N.W. 
Washington,  DC  20530 

4)  May  1971-April  1972  -  Trial  Attorney 
U.S.  Department  of  Justice 

Court  of  Claims  Section 
Civil  Division 

10th  &  Constitution  Ave..  N.W. 
Washington,  DC  20530 

5)  April  1972-February  1974  --  Trial  Attorney 
Federal  Trade  Commission 

Bureau  of  Consumer  Protection 
Division  of  National  Advertising 
6th  &  Pennsylvania  Ave.,  N.W. 
Washington,  DC  20580 

6)  February  1974-March  1976  —  Associate,  Litigation 
Hogan  &  Hartson 

555  13th  St..  N.W. 
Washington,  DC  20005 

7)  March  1976-November  1978  --  Special  Counsel 
Pension  Benetit  Guaranty  Corp. 

1200  K  St.,  N.W. 
Washington,  DC  20005 


1478 


8)  November  1978-March  1980  -  Assistant  General  Counsel 
U.S.  Railway  Association 

955  L'Enfant  Plaza  North.  S.W. 
Washington,  DC  20595 

9)  March  1980-January  1983  -  Associate  (Partner  Jan.  1983) 
Shack  &KiinbaU,  PC. 

1129  20th  St..  N.W. 

Washington,  DC  20036  (firm  dissolved;  current  address) 

Thomas  G.  Shack,  Jr.,  P.C. 

1150  Connecticut  Ave.,  N.W.,  Suite  900 

Washington,  DC  20036 

10)  January  1983-present  -  Judge 
United  States  Court  of  Federal  Claims 
7 1 7  Madison  Place,  N.W. 
Washington,  DC  20005 

1 1)  March  1996-Prcsent  ~  Board  of  Governors 
March  1997-Present  -  Assistant  Secretary 
University  Club  of  Washington,  DC 

1135  16th  Street,  N.W. 
Washington,  DC  20036 

Military  Service:   Have  you  had  any  military  service?  if  so,  give  particulars, 
including  the  dates,  branch  of  service,  rank  or  rate,  serial  number  and  type  of 
discharge  received. 

I  have  never  had  any  military  service. 

Honors  and  Awards:   List  any  scholarships,  fellowships,  honorary  degrees,  and 
honorary  society  memberships  that  you  believe  would  be  of  interest  to  the 
Committee. 

Comment  Editor  and  member  of  the  Board  of  Editors  of  the  Utah  Law  Review: 
Order  of  the  Coif;  Reginald  Heber  Smith  Fellowship  (fiall  scholarship  1968  and 
1969);  Co-founder  and  Vice-President,  George  Washington  American  Inn  of 
Court. 


1479 


9.  Bar  Associations:  List  all  bar  associations,  legal  or  judicial-related  committees 
or  conferences  of  which  you  are  or  have  been  a  member  and  give  the  titles  and 
dates  of  any  offices  which  you  have  held  in  such  groups. 

I  am  currently  a  member  of  the  California  State  Bar  Association  and  the  Bar 
Association  of  the  District  of  Columbia.   I  was  a  member  of  the  Utah  State  Bar 
Association  and  the  American  Bar  Association.   I  have  been  a  member  of  the 
ABA's  International  and  Litigation  Sections  and  participated  in  symposia  for  the 
International  Section  in  connection  with  the  Iranian  representation. 

10.  Other  Memberships:   List  all  organizations  to  which  you  belong  that  arc  active 
in  lobbying  before  public  bodies.   Please  list  all  other  organizations  to  which  you 
belong. 

I  do  not  belong  to  any  organizations  that  lobby.   I  belong  to  the  University  Club 
of  Washington,  DC. 

1 1 .  Court  Admission-   List  all  courts  in  which  you  have  been  admitted  to  practice, 
with  dates  of  admission  and  lapses  if  any  such  memberships  lapsed.   Please 
explain  the  reason  for  any  lapse  of  membership.    Give  the  same  information  for 
administrative  bodies  which  require  special  admission  to  practice. 

Supreme  Court  of  the  State  of  California,  June  10,  1982; 

District  of  Columbia  Court  of  Appeals,  Apr.  17,  1972; 

Utah  Supreme  Court,  Sept.  30,  1969: 

United  States  Supreme  Court,  Aug.  8,  1980; 

United  States  Court  of  Claims,  May  6,  1971; 

United  Stotes  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Third  Circuit,  Feb.  16.  1982; 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Fifth  Circuit,  Oct.  1,  1981; 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Tenth  Circuit,  Dec.  8,  1969; 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Eleventh  Circuit,  Oct.  1,  1981; 

United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  District  of  Columbia  Circuit,  Dec.  12, 

1980. 

I  have  also  been  admitted  to  other  federal  courts  of  appeal  and  various  federal 
district  courts  throughout  the  United  States,  the  records  of  which  I  do  not  have 
readily  available. 


1480 


12.  Published  Writings:   List  the  titles,  publishers,  and  dates,  of  books,  articles, 
reports,  or  other  published  material  you  have  written  or  edited.   Please  supply 
one  copy  of  all  published  material  not  readily  available  to  the  Committee.   Also, 
please  supply  a  copy  of  all  speeches  by  you  on  issues  involving  constitutional 
law  or  legal  policy.   If  there  were  press  reports  about  the  speech,  and  they  are 
readily  available  to  you,  please  supply  them. 

Note,  Warrant  Procedure  Applicable  to  Municipal  Code-Enforcement 
Inspections  of  Private  Dwellings  and  Commercial  Structures,  1967  UTaH  L. 
Rev,  589,   I  have  no  copies  of  speeches.   Please  see  attached  list  of  cases. 

13.  Health:   What  is  the  present  State  of  your  health?  List  the  date  of  your  last 
physical  examination. 

My  health  is  excellent.    I  had  a  physical  examination  on  October  13.  1997. 

14.  JiiHicial  Office-   State  (chronologically)  any  judicial  offices  you  have  held, 
whether  such  position  was  elected  or  appointed,  and  a  £ie£cription  of  the 
jurisdiction  of  each  such  court. 

I  am  currently  a  judge  on  the  United  States  Court  of  Federal  Claims .   The 
court's  jurisdiction  encompasses  Fifth  Amendment  takings,  patent  and  copyright 
claims,  government  contracts,  suits  for  tax  refunds.  National  Cluldliood  Vaccine 
Injuiy  Act  appeals.  Native  American  claims,  and  military  and  civilian  pay  cases. 

15.  Citations:    If  you  arc  or  have  been  a  judge,  provide:  (1)  citations  for  the  ten 
most  significant  opinions  you  have  written,  (2)  a  short  summary  of  and  citations 
for  all  appellate  opinions  where  your  decisions  were  reversed  or  where  your 
judgment  was  affirmed  with  significant  criticism  of  your  substantive  or 
procedural  rulings;  and  (3)  citations  for  significant  opinions  on  federal  or  state 
constitutional  issues,  together  with  the  citation  to  appellate  court  rulings  on  such 
opinions.   If  any  of  the  opinions  listed  were  not  officially  reported,  please 
provide  copies  of  the  opinions. 

(I)   Citations  for  ten  most  ?;ipnificant  opinions: 

International  Business  Machines  Corp.  v   United  States.  1997  WL  456656  (Fed. 

CI.,  Aug.  8,  1997); 

InOaw    Inc    v.  United  .States.  1997    WL  433804  (Fed.  CI..  July  31,   1997); 

GraphicData    T-LC  v   TlniteH  ■<;tatffs   37  Fed.  CI.  771  (1997); 


1481 


Tyger  Const.  Co.,  Inc.  v.  UniteH  States,  31  Fed.  CI.  177  (1994); 

TTT  Corp   V    United  States,  17  CI.  Ct.  199  (1989); 

Universal  Life  Church.  Inc.  v    United  55tate.<i    13  CI.  Ct.  567  (1987); 

Neptune  Mut    Ass'n    Ltd    v    United  States    13  CI.  Ct.  309  (1987); 

Johns-Manvilie  Corp   v.  United  States.  13  CI.  Ct.  72  (1987); 

White  Mountain  Apache  Tribe  v.  United  States.  II  CI.  Ct.  614  (1987); 

Missouri  Pacific  Tn.ck  Lines,  Inc   v.  United  States.  3  CI.  Ct.  14  (1983); 

(2)   Rever.sals  and  criticisms 

Bakery    United  States   No.  96-5134,  1997  WL  632044  (Fed.  Cir.  Oct.  15, 
1997).   Air  Force  lieutenant  colonels  claimed  that  their  selection  for  retirement  by 
Selective  Early  Retirement  Board  violated  their  constitutional  right  to  equal  protection 
because  the  charge  to  the  board  amounted  to  a  racial  classification  favoring  women  and 
minorities.  The  United  States  Court  of  Federal  Claims  ruled  that  the  charge  used  was 
not  a  racial  classification.  The  Federal  Circuit  vacated  the  judgment  because  the  Air 
Force  affiant,  who  had  averred  that  an  offensive  charge  was  not  used,  recanted  his 
affidavit  while  the  matter  was  on  appeal. 

Preseault  v  United  States.  100F.3d  1525  (Fed.  Cir   1996).  Owners  of  property, 
subject  to  the  Rails-to-Trails  Act,  souglit  compensation  fiom  the  United  States  under  the 
Fifiai  Amendment  for  alleged  taking  of  their  land,  based  on  conversion  of  railroad  right- 
of-way  into  public  recreational  trail.  The  Court  of  Federal  Claims  found  in  favor  of  the 
Government  and  held  that  plaintiffs'  reversionary  interest  in  former  railroad  right-of-way 
did  not  constitute  a  compensable  property  interest,  precluding  relief  on  their  claim  that 
the  Govenunent  took  their  property  without  just  compensation.  On  rehearing  en  banc, 
the  Federal  Circuit  reversed  and  remanded,  holding,  inier  alia,  that  the  Government 
engaged  in  a  taking  of  owners'  property  by  approving  the  state's  lease  of  former  railroad 
easement  to  a  city  for  conversion  to  trail. 

Lake  Pleasant  Group  v.  United  States,  79  F.3d  1 166  (Fed.  Cir.  1996)  (Table). 
Lake  Pleasant  Group  (LPG)  sought  compensation  for  an  alleged  taking  of  its  property  in 
violation  of  the  Takings  Clause  of  the  Fifth  Amendment.  The  Bureau  of  Reclamation 
deiucd  LPG's  application  for  a  right-of-way  to  connect  its  land-locked  parcel  to  the  public 
road.  LPG  then  brought  suit  in  the  Court  of  Federal  Claims,  claiming  that  the  Bureau's 
action  deprived  it  of  its  property  without  just  compensation.  The  Court  of  Federal  Claims 
granted  suimnary  judgment  for  the  United  States,  after  concluding  on  three  separate 
grounds  that  LPG's  claim  to  an  easement  failed  to  assert  a  compensable  property  interest. 
Each  groimd  was  based  on  the  factual  issue  of  whetlier  adequate  compensation  under  the 
New  Mexico- Arizona  Enabling  Act  was  paid  for  LPG's  easement  property  interest.  The 


1482 


Federal  Circuit  held  that  LPG  must  be  given  the  opportunity  to  prove  at  trial  that  it 
possessed  a  comTnon  law  casement  by  necessity  and  that  it  was  not  adequately  paid  for 
the  easement  property  interest. 

Branch  v  United  States  69  F.3d  1571  (Fed.  Cir.  1995).   Chapter  7  trustee  of 
debtor-bank  holding  company,  on  behalf  of  one  of  the  holding  company's  banks,  brought 
suit  against  the  Government  asserting  that  the  cross-guaranty  assessment  provisions  of  the 
Financial  Institutions  Reform,  Recovery  and  Enforcement  Act  (FIRREA)  had  resulted  in 
a  taking  without  just  compensation  in  violation  of  Fifth  Amendment.  The  Court  of 
Federal  Claims  denied  cross-motions  for  summary  judgment,  but  ruled  for  plaintiff  on 
liability  to  the  effect  that  the  cross-guaranty  provision  of  FIRREA  could  constitute  a 
taking.  The  Federal  Circuit  held  that  the  application  of  the  cross-guaranty  provision  of 
FIRREA  did  not  result  in  a  prohibited  taking  of  property  under  Fifth  Amendment,  even 
though  the  assessment  resulted  in  the  bank's  insolvency  and  seizure  by  the  Government. 

Creppel  v.  United  States.  41  F. 3d  627  (Fed.  Cir.  1994).  The  Federal  Circuit 
reversed  that  portion  of  the  Court  of  Federal  Claim's  grant  of  sununaiy  judgment  in  a 
Fifth  Amendment  takings  claim,  which  barred  plaintiffs'  pcmianent  takings  claim.  The 
gravamen  of  the  appellate  decision  was  that  the  trial  court  had  erred  in  its  interpretation 
of  certain  factual  events  fixing  the  date  on  which  the  permanent  takings  claim  accrued 

Applegate  v.  United  States.  25  F.3d  1579  (Fed.  Cir.  1994).  The  Federal  Circuit 
held  that  a  decision  dismissing  plaintiffs'  Fifth  Amendment  takings  claim  because  the 
statute  of  limitations  had  expired  was  erroneous    In  cases  of  alleged  taking  by  continuous 
process,  the  statute  of  limitations  is  tolled  until  the  owner  can  ascertain  the  extent  of 
damage.  In  the  instant  litigation,  the  Govemment's  promise  of  a  sand  transfer  to  prevent 
beach  erosion  caused  sufficient  uncertainty  to  toll  the  statute  of  limitations. 

Wilner  v.  United  States.  24  F. 3d  1397  (Fed.  Cir.  1994)  {en  banc).  The  Federal 
Circuit  vacated  the  Court  of  Federal  Claim's  opinion  awarding  damages  on  a  government 
contractor's  claim  for  government-induced  delay  compensation  brought  pursuant  to  the 
Contract  Disputes  Act.  It  was  reversible  ciTor  for  the  trial  court  to  have  accepted  the 
contracting  officer's  adoption  at  trial  of  his  reasons  in  his  decision  letter,  rather  than 
reviewing  the  contracting  officer's  factual  findings  de  novo,  as  mandated  by  the  Contract 
Disputes  Act. 

Transamerica  [ns  Cnrp  v  United  States.  973  F.2d  1572  (Fed.  Cir.  1992).   The 
Federal  Circuit  reversed  a  decision  dismissing  a  government  contractor's  complaint  for 
lack  of  subject  matter  jurisdiction.   The  trial  court  had  stated  in  a  bench  ruling  that  the 
contractor's  alleged  claim  was  insufiicient  because  no  request  had  been  made  for  a  final 
decision  by  the  contracting  officer,  "as  required  by  the  Contract  Disputes  Act.  In  the 


1483 


alternative,  the  trial  court  ruled  that  the  alleged  claim  was  improperly  certified.  In  its  de 
novo  review,  the  appellate  court  found  that  while  the  contractor  had  not  requested 
explicitly  a  final  decision,  it  had  submitted  sufficient  material  to  indicate  that  it  was 
seeking  implicitly  a  final  decision.  Additionally,  the  appellate  court  ruled  that,  even 
thojigh  the  certification  may  not  have  complied  precisely  with  the  Contract  Dispute  Act's 
requirements,  it  complied  substantially. 

Sawverv  United  States.  930  F.2d  1577  (Fed.  Cir.  1991).  The  Federal  Circuit 
reversed  a  grant  of  summary  judgment  awarding  plaintiff  disability  benefits  and 
correcting  his  military  records  to  indicate  a  medical  discharge.  This  decision  was  based 
on  a  determination  that  the  United  States  Claims  Court  had  restricted  the  authority  of  the 
civilian  correction  board  to  reweigh  the  evidence  before  a  disability  panel. 

Craft  Machine  Works   Inc  v  United  States.  926  F.2d  11 10  (Fed  Cir.  1991).  In  a 
de  novo  review  of  the  Claims  Court's  interpretation  of  a  contiact  preference  clause,  the 
Federal  Circuit  determined  that  the  Dial  court  had  misinterpreted  the  meaning  of  the  word 
"supplies." 

Johns-Manville  Corp  v.  United  States.  893  F.2d  324  (Fed.  Cir   1989).  The  Claims 
Court  ruled  that  it  had  the  authority  to  award  costs  in  a  case  that  had  been  dismissed  for 
lack  of  subject  mattei  jurisdiction.  The  Federal  Circuit  reversed  on  the  ground  tliat  the 
Claims  Court  was  not  included  in  a  statute  authorizing  certain  other  courts  to  award  costs 
in  cases  dismissed  for  lack  of  subject  matter  jurisdiction.  Consequently,  the  conunon  law 
rule  —  prohibiting  an  award  of  costs  in  cases  dismissed  for  lack  of  subject  matter 
jurisdiction  ~  applied. 

Neptune  Mut  Ass'n  T.td  v  United  States.  862  F.2d  1546  (Fed.  Cir.  1988).  The 
Federal  Circuit  afOrmed  the  majority  of  the  Claims  Court's  opinion  gianting  summary 
judgment  where  the  court  construed  overlapping  portions  of  the  Internal  Revenue  Code 
and  held  that  a  foreign  insurer  was  liable  for  federal  excise  tax.   The  appellate  coujt 
vacated  that  portion  of  the  opinion  holding  that  certain  government  claims  were  barred  by 
the  statute  of  limitations. 

Voge  v.  United  States.  844  F.2d  776  (Fed.  Cir.  1988).   In  an  opinion  affinning  that 
portion  of  an  order  awarding  a  military  doctor  additional  pay  based  on  a  confession  of 
judgment  and  vacating  that  portion  denying  plaintiffs  claim  to  amend  her  military 
records,  the  Federal  Circuit  ruled  that  the  trial  court  had  exceeded  its  jurisdiction  to 
consider  the  latter.  The  appellate  court  held  that  the  Claims  Court  may  only  review  the 
military's  administrative  decisions  for  potential  procedural  violations,  which  had 
occurred. 


1484 


Watstein  v.  T  Jnited  States  837  F.2d  1096  (Fed.  Cir.  1987)  (unpub.).  Plaintiff 
applied  for  relief  to  a  civilian  correction  board,  claimiiig  that  he  was  commissioned  as  a 
second  lieutenant  after  attending  officer's  training  school,  but  was  thereafter  unlawfiilly 
decommissioned.  After  the  board  denied  relief,  plaintiff  sought  review  of  that 
administrative  decision  in  the  Claims  Court,  five  and  one-half  years  after  he  was 
discharged  and  approximately  six  and  one-half  years  after  he  became  aware  of  the  facts 
which  were  the  basis  for  his  claim.  On  cross-motions  for  summary  judgment,  the  Claims 
Coim  rejected  the  Govenmient's  defense  of  laches  because  tiie  affidavits  supporting  it 
were  submitted  with  defendant's  reply  brief,  but  held  that  the  board  had  not  erred.  The 
Federal  Circuit  determined  that,  regardless  of  the  merits  of  the  case,  the  Claims  Court 
misapplied  the  initial  defense  of  laches,  because  a  delay  of  six  or  more  years  is 
presumptively  injurious  and  therefore  prejudicial.  The  Federal  Circuit  remanded  the  case 
to  reconsider  the  defense  of  laches. 

Haber  v.  United  States.  831  F.2d  1051  (Fed.  Cir.  1987).  The  Claims  Court 
dismissed  a  foreign  taxpayer's  suit  seeking  a  refiind  based  on  having  paid  already  certain 
foreign  taxes.  The  Federal  Circuit  held  that  the  taxpayer  could  have  reasonably  believed 
in  a  statement  by  an  IRS  agent  orally  withdrawing  a  notice  of  disallowance. 
Consequently,  the  subsequent  issuance  of  a  notice  of  disallowance  five  years  later  served 
to  set  the  date  upon  which  the  two-year  statute  of  limitations  began  to  run.  The  case  was 
remanded. 

Hilo  Coast  Processing  Co.  v.  United  States.  816  F.2d  629  (Fed.  Cir.  1987). 
Hawaiian  sugar  processors  and  their  cooperative  refining  and  marketing  association 
challenged  the  Department  of  Agriciilture  (DOA)  denial  of  coverage  to  part  of  their  1977 
sugar  crop  under  a  price  support  payment  program.  On  cross-motions  for  summary 
judgment,  the  Claims  Court  held  that  DOA's  refusal  to  amend  regulations  providing  for 
price  support  payments  to  growers  of  cane  and  beet  sugar  was  rational.  The  Federal 
Circuit  reversed  and  remanded  for  appropriate  instructions  to  the  Secretary  of  DOA. 
holding:  (1)  internal  transfer  of  raw  sugar  to  refinery  operations  constituted  "marketing," 
so  diat  plaintiflFs  were  eligible  for  the  payment  program,  and  (2)  plaintiffs  had  been 
singled  out  for  special  and  seemingly  unfair  treatment. 

Kirchdorfer  v  United  States.  795  F.2d  1010  (Fed.  Cir.  1986)  (Table).  Contractor 
brought  action  on  contract  to  maintain  Air  Force  family  housing  units.  The  Claims  Court 
held  for  defendant  on  cross-motions  for  partial  summary  judgment.  The  Federal  Circuit 
summarily  reversed,  finding  that  defendant  had  not  disputed  plaintiffs  factual  issues,  and 
remanded  for  determination  of  amount  of  damages. 

White  Mountain  Apache  Tribe  v.  United  States.  776  F.2d  1063  (Fed.  Cir.  1985) 
(Table).  Indian  tribe  brought  action  against  the  Government  alleging  claims  for 


1485 


nusmanagement  of  water  resources,  grazing  land,  and  tiinber.  The  Claims  Court  held  that 
(1)  tribe's  action  was  subject  to  dismissal  with  prejudice  due  to  its  disobedience  of  court's 
orders,  and  (2)  nevertheless,  judgment  would  be  entered  in  tribe's  favor  for  S 1 0  million, 
which  was  approximately  three  fourths  of  the  amount  originally  offered  by  the 
Govermnent  in  setdement.  After  the  tribe  agreed  to  comply  with  the  trial  court's  order, 
the  Federal  Circuit  summarily  vacated  and  remanded. 

Citv  of  Alexandria  v  United  States  737  F.2d  J  022  (Fed  Cir.  1984).   In  a  breach 
of  contract  action,  the  appellate  court  reversed  the  Claims  Court's  decision  holding  that  a 
statute  authorizing  the  Government  to  enter  into  land  sale  deals  for  the  disposal  of  surplus 
land  with  a  state  or  subdivision  of  a  state  was  either  facially  unconstitutional  or 
unconstitutional  as  applied  because  Congress'  prior  approval  before  the  agency  made  its 
decision  violated  the  separation  of  powers  doctrine.  Having  fouind  the  statute  at  issue 
constitutional,  the  appellate  court  held  that  no  implied-in-fact  contract  existed  and  that 
the  Government  was  not  estopped  from  raising  the  defense  of  nonexistence  of  contract 

(3)  Cases  on  .significant  constitutional  issues: 

Tnslaw  Tnr.   v   United  States    1997  WL  433804  (Fed.  CI  ,  Jul  31,  1997), 

Pleasant  Country.  Ltd.  v.  United  States.  37  Fed.  CI.  321  (1997); 

J  &  E  Salvage  Co  v  United  States  36  Fed.  CI.  192  (1996); 

Seldovia  Native  As.s'n.  Inc  v.  United  States  35  Fed.  CI.  761  (1996); 

Baker  v.  United  States.  35  Fed.  CI.  749  (1996), 

Applegate  v.  United  States.  35  Fed.  CI.  406  (1996); 

Davis  v  United  States.  35  Fed.  CI.  392  (1996), 

Avenal  v.  United  States.  33  Fed.  CI.  778  (1995),  affd.  100  F.3d  933  (Fed.  Cir. 

1996). 

Creppelv  United  States.  33  Fed.  CI.  590  (1995); 

Scopin  V.  United  States.  33  Fed.  CI.  568  (1995); 

Scogin  v  United  States.  33  Fed.  CI.  285  (1995); 

City  Nat  Bank  of  Miami  v.  United  States  33  Fed.  CI.  224  (1995); 

Lake  Pleasant  Group  v.  United  States.  32  Fed.  CI.  429  (1994); 

Branch  on  Behalf  of  Maine  Nat.  Bank  v.  United  States.  31  Fed.  CI.  626  (1994), 

rev'd.  69F.3d  1571  (Fed.  Cir.  1996); 

Creppel  v.  United  States.  30  Fed.  CI.  323,  affd  in  part  and  rev'd  in  part.  41  F.3d 

627  (Fed.  Cir.  1994), 

Uintah  Ute  Indians  of  Utah  v.  United  States.  28  Fed.  CI.  768  (1993); 

Applegate  v.  United  States.  28  Fed.  CI.  554  (1993),  rev'd.  25  F.3d  1579  (Fed.  Cir. 

1994); 

Perry  v.  United  Slates  28  Fed.  CI.  82  (1993); 

Aide.  S.A  v  United  States.  28  Fed.  CI.  26  (1993); 

10 


1486 


Richmond  Fredericksburg  and  Potomac  R  R.  Co  v  United  States.  27  Fed  CI.  275 
(1992).  afPd  75  F.3d  648  (Fed.  Cir.  1996); 

Preseault  v  United  States.  27  Fed.  CI.  69  (1992),  rev'd.  100  F.3d  1525  (Fed.  Cir. 
1996); 

ConrnionweaJth  of  Kentucky.  Natural  Resources  and  Envirorunental  Protection 
Cabinet  v  United  States.  27  Fed.  CI.  173  (1992); 

Tabb  Lakes.  Tnc  v  United  States.  26  CI.  Ct.  1334  (1992).  afU,  10  F.3d  796  (Fed. 
Cir.  1993); 

Marrero  Land  &  Imp   Ass'n.  Ltd  v  United  States  26  CI.  Ct.  193  (1992); 
Preseault  y.  United  States.  24  CI.  Ct  818  (1992); 
Scope  Kntcrprises  Ltd  v  United  States.  18  CI.  Ct.  875  (1989); 
ITT  Corp.  V.  United  States.  17  CI.  Ct.  199  (1989); 

Keene  Corp  v.  United  States.  17  CI.  Ct.  146  (1989),  affd  sub  nom.  UNR  Indus. 
Inc.  V  United  States.  962  F.2d  1013  (Fed.  Cii".  1992),  cert,  granted  sub  nop;i. 
Keene  Corp  v.  United  States.  506  U.S.  939  (1992).  aflji,  508  U.S.  200  (1993); 
Murray  v  United  States.  15  CI.  Ct.  17,  afTd   864  F.2d  148  (Fed.  Cir.  1988); 
O'Connell  v  United  States.  14  CI.  Ct.  309  (1988); 

Keene  Corp.  V-  United  States.  12  Ci.  Ct.  197  (1987).  afTd  sub  nom.  Johns- 
Man  ville  Corp  V.  United  States.  855  F.2d  1556  (Fed.  Cir.  1988); 
Johns-ManviHe  Corp.  v.  United  States.  12  CI.  Ct.  1  (1987), 
Dwverv  United  States.  7  CI.  Ct.  565  (1985); 
Anderson  v.  United  States.  7  CI.  Ct.  341  (1985); 
Jarboe-Lackey  Feedlots.  Inc.  v.  United  States.  7  CI.  Ct.  329  (1985); 
Augusta  Towing  Co    Tnc  v  United  States.  5  CI.  Ct.  160  (1984); 
Bettini  v.  United  States.  4  CI.  Ct.  755  (1984); 
Morton  Thiokol.  Inc.  v.  United  States.  4  CI.  Ct.  625  (1984);  and 
City  of  Alexandria  v.  United  Stotes.  3  CI.  Ct.  667  (1983),  rev'd.  737  F.2d  1022 
(Fed.  Cir.  1984). 

16.  Public  Office:    State  (chronologically)  any  public  offices  you  have  held, 
other  than  Judicial  offices,  including  the  terms  of  service  and  whether 
such  positions  were  elected  or  appointed.    State  (chronologically)  any 
unsuccessful  candidacies  for  elective  public  office. 

I  have  not  held  any  public  office,  nor  run  for  elective  public  office. 

17.  Legal  Career: 

a.   Describe  chronologically  your  law  practice  and 
experience  after  graduation  from  law  school  including: 


11 


1487 


1 .  whether  you  served  as  clerk  to  a  judge,  and  if  so,  the 
name  of  the  judge,  the  court,  and  the  dates  of  the  period  you 
were  a  clerk; 

June  1969-Junc  1970  -  Clerk  to  Honorable  David  T.  Lewis  (later  Chief 
Judge),  United  States  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Tenth  Circuit,  4201 
Federal  Building,  Salt  Lake  City,  UT  84111 . 

2.  whether  you  practiced  alone,  and  if  so,  the  addresses  and  dates; 
I  have  not  practiced  alone. 

3.  the  dates,  names  and  addresses  of  law  firms  or  offices, 
companies  or  governmental  agencies  with  which  you  have 
been  connected,  and  the  nature  of  your  connection  with 
each; 

August  1970-May  1971  -  Trial  Attorney 

U.S.  Department  of  Justice 

Foreign  Litigation  Unit 

Civil  Division 

10th  &.  Constitution  Ave.,  N.W. 

Washington.  DC  20530 

Worked  under  Unit  Chief  processing  requests  for  international  judicial 
assistance. 

May  1971-April  1972  -  Trial  Attorney 

U.S.  Department  of  Justice 

Court  of  Claims  Section 

Civil  Division 

10th  &  ConsdtutJon  Ave.,  N.W. 

Washington,  DC  20530 

Worked  alone. 

Primary  responsibility  for  defending  at  trial  and  on  appeal  17  cases  in  the  Court 
of  Claims  Section  of  the  Civil  Division.   These  cases  were  military  and  civilian 
procurement  building  and  service  contracts  disputes;  federal  back-pay  claims; 
and  Congressional  reference  cases. 
Argued  successfully  all  appeals  before  that  fiill  Court  of  Claims. 


12 


1488 


Won  Congressional  reference  trial  that  produced  the  most  significant 
federal  laches  law  in  decades. 

Won  summary  judgment  on  $25  M  back-pay  case  involving  Immigration  and 
Naturalization  Service.  Representation  extended  to  preparation  for  trial, 
including  depositions  and  discovery  of  records  relating  to  160  plaintiffs  over  six 
years,  who  were  located  in  various  jurisdictions. 

April  1972-February  J  974  --  Trial  Attorney 
Federal  Trade  Commission 
Bureau  of  Consumer  Protection 
Division  of  National  Advertising 
6th  &  Pennsylvania  Ave.,  N.W. 
Washington.  DC  20580 

Worked  as  second  in  command  or  supervised  up  to  two  other  attorneys. 

Primary  responsibility  for  investigating,  briefing  and  trying  only  case  brought 
during  my  tenure  that  the  Commission  prevailed  on  at  the  appellate  level     This 
was  also  the  first  case  brought  under  the  "ad  substantiation  program,"  whereby 
advertisers  were  required  to  maintain  documented  substantiation  for  their  claims. 
Primary  responsibility  for  the  Commission's  investigation  into  cosmetics 
advertising,  which  involved  close  liaison  with  dermatologists,  other  physicians, 
medical  schools,  and  the  Federal  Drug  Administration. 
Primary  responsibility  for  settling  the  Hawaiian  Punch  case.   The  settlement 
resulted  in  the  first  so-called  "corrective  advertising"  agreed  to  by  a  respondent. 
Secondary  responsibility  for  investigating,  briefing  and  trying  the  Commission's 
analgesics  case  against  Sterling  Laboratories  (Bayer,  Cope,  Midol  &  Vanquish). 
I  also  prepared  for  trial  and  assisted  in  settling  the  case  against  Sterling  involving 
claims  for  Lysol.   Both  cases  required  development  of  expert  witness  testimony 
in  medicine,  biochemistry,  microbiology,  hospital  science,  psychology  and 
psychiatry. 

Primary  responsibility  for  bringing  case  to  halt  children's  vitamin  advertising, 
which  resulted,  before  discovery,  in  advertisers'  voluntary  withdrawal  of  all 
advertising. 

February  1974-March  1976  —  Associate,  Litigation 
Hogan  &  Hartson 
555  13th  St.,  N.W. 
Washington,  DC  20005 

Worked  under  partners  or  alone. 


13 


1489 


Primary  responsibility  for  prosecuting  stockholders'  derivative  suit  that  involved 

many  M.D.  investors  in  Washington  Medical  Center,  Inc.,  which  held  parcels  of 

valuable  commercial  real  estate  in  downtown,  D.C.   I  drafted  complaint; 

arranged  for  service  of  all  process;  drafted  all  pleadings  relating  to  discovery, 

including  interrogatories  and  answers;  conducted  depositions  of  Price 

Waterhouse  partner  and  other  accountants;  chaired  all  plaintiffs'  documentary 

examination;  drafted  a  successful  opposition  to  motion  to  dismiss;  argued 

motions  in  federal  district  court;  and  worked  on  setdement  favorable  to 

plaintiffs. 

Primary  and  secondary  responsibility  for  defense  work  of  New  York  Insurance 

Co.,  Home  Insurance  Co.,  and  Prudential  Insurance  Co.,  including  all  phases  of 

trial  work  and  post-trial  relief.   I  assisted  in  defending  a  jury  trial  brought  by  a 

plaintiff  claiming  injury  due  to  birth  control  pills;  I  drafted  a  motion  for  new 

trial  after  the  firm  was  retained  to  upset  an  $8  M  verdict  (at  the  time,  the  largest 

persona]  injury  verdict);  I  drafted  and  argued  summary  judgment  motions  in 

coverage  cases. 

Secondary  responsibility  for  bringing  partnership  dissolutions. 

Primary  responsibility  for  sujjcrvising  private  auditors  conducting  audits  of 

AMTRAK. 

Secondary  responsibility  for  motions  practice  generated  by  Chrysler 

Corporation. 

March  1976-November  1978  —  Special  Counsel 
Pension  Benefit  Guaranty  Corp. 
1200  K  Street,  N.W. 
Washington,  DC  20005 

Supervised  up  to  seven  other  attorneys  at  any  one  time. 

Initial  responsibility  for  establishing  litigation  capability  at  the  then  new  PBGC. 
Directed  defense  of  all  cases  (after  I  joined)  brought  against  the  agency  in 
federal  district  courts  throughout  the  United  States.   Initially,  tliese  cases 
involved  the  constitutionality  of  PBGC's  enabling  legislation,  the  Employee 
Retirement  Income  Security  Act  of  1974.   I  drafted  and  argued  motions  and 
briefs  at  the  federal  trial  and  appellate  levels. 

Responsibility  for  bringing  and  defending  cases  in  district  and  bankruptcy  courts 
involving  the  PBGC's  plan  termination  insurance  coverage.    I  drafted  or 
reviewed  all  papers  filed  in  the  12-15  cases  I  handled  at  any  given  time.    I 
appeared  in  federal  district  courts  in  support  or  defense  of  complaints  and 
discovery  requests,  as  well  as  pretrials  and  trials.   I  argued  a  case  in  lower  court 
and  briefed  a  case  before  the  Seventh  Circuit  that  resulted  in  the  first  trial  and 
appellate  decisions  favorable  to  the  PBGC. 

14 


1490 


Represented  the  PBGC  in  all  EEO  claims  brought  against  the  agency. 

November  1978-March  1980  -  Assistant  General  Counsel 

U.S.  Railway  Association 

955  L'Enfant  Plaza  North,  S.W. 

Washington,  DC  20595 

Supervised  up  to  five  other  attorneys  and  up  to  ten  paralegals  at  any  one  time. 

Primary  responsibility  for  defending  $450  M  claims  brought  by  four  bankrupt 
railroads  (the  Reading,  Lehigh  Valley,  North  Pennsylvania,  and  Peoria  & 
Eastern)  under  the  Regional  Rail  Reorganization  Act  of  1973.  The  cases  were 
tried  before  the  Special  Court  (Friendly,  Wisdom,  Thomsen,  J.J.),  created  by 
the  Act.  The  cases  were  companions  to  seven  others,  including  Penn  Central, 
aggregating  over  $8  B  in  claims. 

The  Special  Court  has  adopted  rules  patterned  on  the  Rules  for  Multi-district 
Litigation,  because  the  cases  together  constituted  the  largest  civil  suit  in  the 
United  States,  designation  of  nine  depositories  was  required  to  implement 
documentary  discovery,  and  the  litigation  spans  the  Northeast.   The  U.S.R.A. 
alone  had  500,000  documents  computerized  on  LEXIS  and  maintained  in  its 
depository  a  much  greater  number  of  documents. 

The  rules  provided  for  trial  by  written  testimony  of  the  value  of  claimants' 
properties  for  continued  rail  use.    My  team  completed  discovery  and  cross- 
examination  of  over  20  expert  and  other  witnesses  proffered  on  behalf  of  those 
claimants  against  which  we  defended.    We  also  prepared  and  submitted  expert 
rebuttal  testimony. 

March  1980-January  1983  --  Associate  (Partner  Jan.  1983) 

Shack  &  Kimball,  P.C. 

1 129  20th  Street,  N.W. 

Washington,  D.C.  20036  (firm  dissolved;  current  address) 

Thomas  G.  Shack,  Jr.,  P.C. 

1150  Connecticut  Ave.,  N.W.,  Suite  900 

Washington,  DC  20036 

Supervised  up  to  three  attorneys  and  paralegals  in  office  and  20  local  counsel 
throughout  the  United  States. 

Primary  responsibility  for  two  plaintiffs'  cases  in  federal  court  in  the  District  of 
Columbia  seeking  recovery  of  Iranian  financial  assets  and  real  property. 
Primary  responsibility  under  Thomas  G.  Shack,  Jr.,  for  defending  the 
Government  of  Iran  in  litigation  involving  Iranian  assets  in  all  jurisdictions  other 

15 


1491 


than  New  York  and  Massachusetts.   Over  40  cases  were  pending  in  the  District 

of  Columbia  alone,  which  required  oral  argument  at  least  once  a  week  for  over  a 

year. 
°  Responsibility  for  coordinating  defenses  in  my  jurisdictions.   I  drafted  pleadings 

for  litigation  throughout  the  U.S.  in  district  courts  involving  sovereign  immunity 

and  other  defenses  under  the  Foreign  Sovereign  Immunities  Act.   I  argued  these 

matters— predominantly  in  the  District  of  Columbia. 
3         Responsibility  for  monitoring  over  200  cases.   I  acted  as  liaison  with  U.S. 

Government  representatives. 

b.  1.    What  has  been  the  general  character  of  your  law  practice,  dividing  it 
into  periods  with  dates  if  its  character  has  changed  over  the  years? 

The  general  character  of  my  law  practice  was  civil  litigation  since  May 
1971,  when  I  began  working  as  a  trial  attorney  in  the  Court  of  Claims 
section  of  the  Civil  Division  of  the  Department  of  Justice. 

2.   Describe  your  typical  former  clients,  and  mention  the  areas,  if  any,  in 
which  you  have  specialized. 

While  I  worked  for  the  U.S.  Government  and  its  agencies,  my  clients 
were  the  U.S.  Government  and  its  agencies.   In  private  practice  with 
Hogan  &  Hartson,  I  worked  for  major  corporations,  as  well  as  private 
individuals.   While  practicing  with  Shack  &  Kimball,  my  principal  client 
was  the  Islamic  Republic  of  Iran  and  its  governmental  entities.    I  did  not 
specialize  within  the  general  area  of  civil  litigation. 

c.  1.    Did  you  appear  in  court  frequently,  occasionally,  or  not  at  all?   If  tlic 
frequency  of  your  appearances  in  court  varied,  describe  each  such 
variance,  giving  dates. 

I  appeared  in  court  regularly  before  becoming  a  judge. 

2.  What  percentage  of  these  appearances  was  in: 

(a)  federal  courts  -  85% 

(b)  state  courts  of  record    -  5  % 

(c)  other  courts  -  10% 

3.  What  percentage  of  your  litigation  was: 

(a)  civil  -  99% 

(b)  criminal  -  1  % 


16 


1492 


4.  State  the  number  of  cases  in  courts  of  record  you  tried  to  verdict  or 
judgment  (rather  than  settled),  indicating  whether  you  were  sole  counsel, 
chief  counsel,  or  associate  counsel. 

Before  becoming  a  judge,  I  did  not  try  any  case  to  judgment.  However, 
this  is  not  indicative  of  my  trial  experience,  as  I  have  tried  many  cases  up 
to  the  point  of  judgment  and  accomplished  highly  favorable  settlements  in 
the  trial  process.  Moreover,  I  handled  a  number  of  appellate  matters  (not 
having  been  involved  in  the  trial  phase)  and  participated  through  judgment 
in  many  cases  not  tried,  but,  rather,  determined  on  dispositive  motions. 

5.  What  percentage  of  these  trials  was: 

(a)  jury  -  0% 

(b)  non-jury  -  1(X)% 

18-   I-itigatinn-   Describe  the  ten  most  significant  litigation  matters  which  you 
personally  handled.    Give  the  citations,  if  the  cases  were  reported,  and  the  docket 
number  and  date  if  unreported.    Give  a  capsule  summary  of  the  substance  of  each  case. 
Identify  the  party  or  parties  whom  you  represented;  describe  in  detail  the  nature  of  your 
participation  in  the  litigation  and  the  final  disposition  of  the  case.    Also  state  as  to  each 
case: 

(a)  the  date  of  representation; 

(b)  the  name  of  the  court  and  the  name  of  the  judge  or  judges  before  whom  the  case 
was  litigated;  and 

(c)  the  individual  name,  addresses,  and  telephone  numbers  of  co-counsel  and  of 

principal  counsel  for  each  of  the  other  parties. 

In  listing  the  ten  cases.  I  did  not  have  some  of  the  particulars  called  for,  because  they 
are  not  available  to  me  at  this  time.    1  held  litigation  positions  with  five  other  offices 
and  have  not  been  able  to  remove  case  files  I  worked  on  in  these  successive  positions. 
The  following  are  listed  in  reverse  chronological  order: 

1)   Tom  Aeima    et  a1    v    TTnifed  States    Nos.  259-70;  292-70;  349-70;  458-70  (Ct. 
CI.),  202  Cl.  CI.  206,  479  F.2d  1356  (1973),  ssiL  dfiaisd.  416  U.S.  905  (1974). 

This  was  the  major  case  I  handled  alone  in  the  Court  of  Claims  Section  of  the  Civil 
Division  of  the  Department  of  Justice,  which  was  a  S25  M  suit  for  back-pay  under 
various  federal  statutes  involving  the  Immigration  and  Naturalization  Service  and  the 
United  States  Customs  Service,  principally,  19  U.S.C.  §  9267.   The  significance  of 
this  case  is  that  it  was  a  unique  back-pay  case,  not  decided  under  the  usual  statutes  and 
regulations  for  federal  employees,  and  required  a  legal  and  factual  analysis  of  first 
impression  as  to  whether  the  work  of  INS  inspectors  began  on  Sundays  and  whether 

17 


1493 


they  were,  therefore,  entitled  to  double  pay  for  that  work.   I  developed  the  theory  of 
the  case,  conducted  pre-trial,  and  left  the  Department  after  drafting  the  dispositive 
motion,  which  was  eventually  decided  in  the  United  States'  favor. 

a)  1971-1972; 

b)  United  States  Court  of  Claims; 

c)  Robert  C.  Baxlcy,  Esq.,  1059-lOth  Ave.,  San  Diego.  CA  92101,  714/236-1144. 


2)  McQuown  V.  United  States,  Cong.  Rcf.  Case  No.  2-70  (1972). 

This  was  a  Congressional  reference  back-pay  case  which  was  significant  insofar  as  it 
established  a  new  standard  of  laches  claimed  by  the  U.S.  Govemmenl.    I  tried  the 
case  alone  and  won  a  defense  verdict. 

a)  1971  -  2  days; 

b)  Trial  Judge  David  Schwartz; 

c)  Thurman  Bishop,  Esq.,  Mays  &  Richey.  212  Oak  Ave.,  Greenwood,  SC  29646, 

803/223-8511. 

3)  Tn  the  Matter  of  Fedders  Corp    v.  FT  C.  FTC  Docket  No.  9932,  529  F.2d  1398 
(2d  Cir.),  cen.  denied,  429  U.S.  818  (1976). 

This  was  a  case  noteworthy  in  that  it  was  the  first  case  brought  against  a  U.S. 
corporation  to  test  the  'ad  substantiation  program"  of  the  FTC.    As  chief  counsel,  I 
handled  the  case  development  from  investigation  through  trial.   Although  the 
Commission's  decision  on  remedy  was  modified  on  review,  liability  was  upheld. 

a)  1972- 2  days; 

b)  No  record  of  name  of  judge; 

c)  Sydney  B.  Wertheim,  Esq.,  Weisman,  Cellcr,  Spett,  Modlin  &  Wertheim,  150 

East  58th  St.,  New  York,  NY  10155,  212/371-1492. 

4)  Tn  re  Sterling  Analgesics.  FTC  Docket  No.  8919. 

This  was  the  major  analgesics  investigation  concerning  Bayer,  Cope,  Midol,  and 
Vanquish,  commenced  against  Sterling  Drug  Company.    The  matter  was  litigated,  but 
I  did  not  participate  in  the  trial,  which  postdated  my  employment  with  the 
Commission.   1  list  the  case  because  the  matter  represents  a  massive  amount  of 
investigative  work  in  which  I  participated  as  associate  counsel.   I  was  involved  in  this 
investigation  from  approximately  late  1972  through  February  1974,  when  1  left  the 

18 


1494 


Commission.   With  respect  to  other  litigation  involving  Sterling  Drug  Company,  and 
its  product  Lysol,  I  developed  expert  testimony  with  many  medical  wdtnesses  in 
preparation  for  trial.  This  case  was  ultimately  settled  very  favorably  to  the 
Commission,  and  advertising  of  Lysol  was  radically  altered  as  a  result  of  settlement. 

a)  1972-1974; 

b)  Not  before  judge  in  investigative  phase;  name  of  judge  in  trial  phase  in  1973-1974 

unknown; 

c)  General  counsel  for  Sterling  Drug  Company;  no  record  of  name. 

Another  matter  which  did  not  go  beyond  the  development  of  expert  testimony  was  the 
children's  Vitamin  T.V.  Advertising  case,  which  I  was  hired  to  try  in  1972.   This 
involvement  was  significant,  because  the  Commission  put  great  emphasis  on  this  case. 
After  my  team  presented  its  initial  evidence,  the  manufacturers  of  children's  vitamins 
voluntarily  withdrew  their  advertising  from  television  because  of  the  FTC's  novel 
theory  of  unfairness,  i.e..  T.V.  advertising  unfair  to  an  audience  because  of  its 
particulcU'  susceptibility. 

a)  early  1972; 

b)  no  judge  assigned; 

c)  opposing  counsel:  no  record  of  name. 

5)  In  re  Hawaiian  Punch.  FTC  Docket  No.  unknown. 

As  of  the  date  of  this  settlement  and  for  sometime  thereafter,  this  was  the  only 
successful  corrective  advertising  case  brought  on  behalf  of  the  Federal  Trade 
Commission.   The  case  had  been  prepared  for  trial  by  other  attorneys,  and  it  was 
assigned  to  me  for  sole  trial  responsibility.   After  negotiation,  a  settlement  highly 
favorable  to  the  Commission  was  obtained  and  approved. 

a)  1973; 

b)  no  record  of  name  of  judge; 

c)  Eugene  I.  Lambert,  Esq.,  Covington  &.  Burling,  1201  Pennsylvania  Ave.,  N.W., 

Washington,  DC  20004,  202/622-5518. 

6)  James  W.  Bernhard.  et  a1.  v.  Wa.shiqgton  Medical  Center.  Inc..  et  al  .  Civ.    Act. 

No.  74-440  (D.D.C.). 

I  had  primary  trial  responsibility  under  a  Hogan  &  Hartson  partner  for  a  complex 
stockholders'  derivative  lawsuit  brought  by  doctors/investors  of  Washington  Medical 
Center  (which  owned  Doctor's  Hospital  and  1801  K  Street,  among  other  properties) 
against  WMC.    Although  the  case  was  ultimately  settled  favorably  to  plaintiffs,  this 

19 


1495 


represented  one  of  the  most  intense  discovery  and  trial  development  cases  in  my 
practice. 

a)  1974; 

b)  Hon.  June  L.  Greene; 

c)  George  H.  Clark,  Esq.,  Clark  &  Constable,  1300  19th  St.,  N.W..  Washington, 

DC  20036,202/466-7171. 

7)  lyJachman  Corp.  v.  Pension  Benefit  Guaranty  Corp  .  436  F.  Supp.  1334  (N.D.  111.) 

(1977).  rev'd   592  F.2d  947  (7th  Cir.  1979),  afCd,  446  U.S.  359  (1980). 

This  is  the  first  case  upholding  the  validity  of  the  Employment  Retirement  Income 
Security  Act  of  1974.  insofar  as  it  created  the  PBGC  and  authorized  the  PBGC  to 
assess  employer  liability  for  deficiencies  in  certain  terminating  plans.    I  left  the  PBGC 
when  the  matter  was  pending  before  the  Seventh  Circuit,  having  participated  in 
writing  the  brief.   I  had  sole  trial  responsibility  for  defending  the  PBGC.   This  is  one 
of  the  few  cases  that  I  have  lost  at  the  trial  level,  and  I  mention  it  because  I  was 
informed  through  a  law  clerk  to  the  Supreme  Court  Justice  who  authored  the  opinion 
that  most  persuasive  to  the  Supreme  Court  were  the  arguments  in  the  motion  to 
dismiss  the  complaint  which  I  had  authored  several  years  previously. 

a)  1976-1  day: 

b)  Hon.  Abraham  Marovitz; 

c)  Robert  W.  Gettleman,  Esq..  D'Ancona,  Pflavm,  Wyatt  &  Riskind,  30  N.  LaSalle 

St.,  Chicago.  IL  60602,  312/580-2000. 

8)  Tn  the  Matter  of  the  Valuation  Proceeding-s  Under  SS  303rc^  and  Regional  Rail 

Reorganization  Act  of  1973.  Misc.    No.  79-  (special  Court). 

I  had  full  trial  and  supervisory  responsibility  for  three  major  rail  estates— the  Reading 
Railroad,  the  Lehigh  Valley  Railroad,  and  the  Peoria  &  Eastern  Railroad.   The 
aggregate  value  of  the  claims  against  these  railroads  was  over  $450  M.   I  was  hired  to 
try  these  cases  begiruiing  in  November  1978,  after  previous  attorneys  worked  for  over 
two  years  on  trial  preparation.   Therefore,  this  litigation  represents  my  "quickest 
study.'  The  case  was  tried  entirely  on  deposition  and  involved  almost  all  expert 
witnesses,  with  only  several  lay  witnesses.    Complex  accounting,  financial,  economic, 
and  valuation  analysis  was  required,  not  only  for  defending  against  the  claims  of  rail 
estates,  but  also  with  respect  to  development  of  expert  and  lay  testimony  in  rebuttal  to 
the  estates'  cases. 

a)  Dec.  1979  -  Mar.  1980  -  fuU  trial; 

b)  Special  Court  (Wisdom,  Friendly,  Thomscn,  J. J.): 

20 


1496 


c)  Howard  H.  Lewis,  Esq.,  Obermayer,  Rebmann,  Maxwell  &  Hippcl,  14th  Floor, 
Packard  Building,  Philadelphia,  PA  19102,  215/665-3000  (Reading);  David  C. 
Toomey,  Esq.,  Duane,  Morris  &  Heckscher,  One  Franklin  Plaza,  Philadelphia 
PA  19102,  215/854-6300  (Lehigh  Valley);  no  record  of  counsel  for  Peoria  & 
Eastern. 

9)  Dames  &  Mnnre  V.  Regan    453  U.S.  654  (1981). 

This  was  the  case  brought  to  test  the  authority  of  the  President  of  the  United  States  to 
settle  claims  of  U.S.  nationals  against  the  Government  of  Iran  under  the  Algiers 
Declarations.  The  case  was  not  tried.   However,  according  to  U.S.  Supreme  Court 
personnel,  it  was  one  of  the  fastest  cases  briefed,  argued,  and  decided  by  the  U.S. 
Supreme  Court  in  history.    I  was  responsible  for  the  brief  before  the  Supreme  Court 
filed  on  behalf  of  the  Government  of  Iran.    My  senior  partner  argued  the  case,  and  I 
was  responsible  for  assisting  him.   The  Supreme  Court's  decision  is  the  leading  case 
on  issues  of  international  and  domestic  law  concerning  the  enforceability  of  treaties 
and  executive  agreements  as  of  the  date  of  decision. 

a)  June-July  1981; 

b)  Supreme  Court; 

c)  C.  Stephen  Howard,  Esq.,  Tuttle  &  Taylor,  609  S.  Grand  Ave.,  Los  Angeles,  CA 

90017,  213/683-0600. 

10)  Islamir  Rp.ptihlic  of  Iran    et.  a!    v    Cyrus  Ansary    Civ     Act.    No.  81-1817 

(D.D.C.). 

I  list  this  case  because  I  had  trial  responsibility  for  problems  unique  in  bringing  a 
claim  by  a  foreign  government  against  a  U.S.  citizen  in  courts  of  the  United  States. 
These  problems  related  to  difficulties  of  proof,  client  communication,  and  proof  of 
foreign  law  and  records.    Iran  sued  for  return  of  S5  M  entrusted  to  its  former 
international  investment  advisor  in  1975.  who,  in  turn,  counterclaimed  for 
approximately  $21  M,  representing  various  contract  and  other  claims.    The  case 
underwent  aggressive  discovery  and  dispositive  motions,  and  I  settled  it  favorably. 

a)  Aug.  1981  to  Jan.  1983; 

b)  Hon.   Harold  H.  Greene; 

c)  Paul  Martin  Wolff,  Esq.,  F.  Whitten  Peters,  Esq.,  Williams  &  Connolly,  939  17th 

St..  N.W.,  Washington,  DC  20006.  202/331-5000. 

19.  Legal  Activities:  Describe  the  most  significant  legal  activities  you  have  pursued, 
including  significant  litigation  which  did  not  progress  to  trial  or  legal  matters  that  did 
not  involve  litigation.   Describe  the  nature  of  your  participation  in  this  question.   Please 

21 


1497 


omit  all  information  protected  by  the  attorney-client  privilege  (unless  the  privilege  has 
been  waived.) 

The  most  significant  legal  activities  that  1  pursued  prior  to  serving  as  a  judge  are  listed 
in  response  to  question  18.   Also,  in  response  to  question  17,  1  listed  significant  cases 
or  matters  in  connection  with  my  employment  prior  to  being  appointed  to  the  United 
Sutcs  Claims  Court  (now  the  Court  of  Federal  Claims).   As  a  sitting  trial  judge,  I 
consider  managing  and  deciding  my  cases  as  significant  legal  activities. 


22 


1498 

n.  FINANCIAL  DATA  AND  CONFLICT  OF  INTEREST  (PUBLIC) 


1.        List  source,  amounts  and  dates  of  all  anticipated  receipts  from  deferred 
income  arrangements,  stock,  options,  uncompleted  contracts  and  other 
future  benefits  which  you  expect  to  derive  from  previous  business 
relationships,  professional  services,  firm  memberships,  former  employers, 
clients,  or  customers.  Please  describe  the  arrangements  you  have  made  to 
be  compensated  in  the  future  for  any  financial  or  business  interest. 

This  question  is  not  applicable,  as  I  have  been  a  sitting  judge  for  IS  years. 

Z.        Explain  how  you  will  resolve  any  potential  conflict  of  interest,  including 
the  procedure  you  will  follow  in  determining  these  areas  of  concern. 
Identify  the  categories  of  litigation  and  financial  arrangements  that  are 
likely  to  present  potential  conflicts-of-i merest  during  your  initial  service  in 
the  position  to  which  you  have  been  nominated. 

I  have  never  faced  a  conflict  of  interest  in  15  years.   In  the  past  I  have  tried  to 
anticipate  such  matters  and  present  counsel  with  the  option  of  my  transferring  a  case. 
Transfer  has  never  been  requested. 

J.        Do  you  have  any  plans,  commitments,  or  agreements  to  pursue  outside 
employment,  with  or  without  compensation,  during  your  service  with  the 
court?  If  so,  explain. 

No. 

I.        List  sources  and  amounts  of  all  income  received  during  the  calendar  year 
preceding  your  nomination  and  for  the  current  calendar  year,  including  all 
salaries,  fees,  dividends,  interest,  gifts,  rents,  royalties,  patents,  honoraria, 
and  other  items  exceeding  S500  or  more.   (Tf  you  prefer  to  do  so,  copies  of 
the  financial  disclosure  report,  required  by  the  Ethics  in  Government  Act  of 
1978,  may  be  substituted  here.) 

Please  see  attached  copy  of  Financial  Disclosure  Report  for  calendar  year  1996.  The 
sources  and  amounts  of  income  and  other  information  arc  the  same  for  1997  to  date. 

).        Please  complete  the  attached  fmancial  net  worth  statement  in  detail.     (Add 
schedules  as  called  for.) 


23 


1499 


Please  see  attached  copy  with  statement  from  Smith  Barney  dated  September  26, 
1997,  and  list  of  assets  for  Dennis  F.  Miller. 

5.  Have  you  ever  held  a  position  or  played  a  role  in  a  political  campaign?  If 
so,  please  identify  the  particulars  of  the  campaign,  including  the  candidate, 
dates  of  the  campaign,  yoiu*  title  and  responsibilities. 

No. 


24 


1500 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 

Nomination  Report 


MMpoi  ttt^rtd  by  rfw  Ethiet 
K^mi  Aa  oll9M,  f»t  L  fte 
IBI-JH,  Nevtmhtr  SO,  IM9 

p  U.S.C.  Apf  4  .  ice.  m-iiii 


Millar,    Chrietlne  o.C.    . 


2.  Csort  vr  Orriuaucioo 

U.S.  COURT  OF  FEDERAL  CLAIMS 


3.  Date  af  Rapon 

11/07/1997 


(ArtcU  injudgn  trdicatt  actfw  or 
atnior  sleiMf;  magiiuwt  Jitdgcs  btOicau 


i.  Rapan  Tn>  tcksk  lypr) 

X     No«u.»ti«..    O.U     11/06/1997  _ 


STRaponuig  fan 
01/01/1996 
10/31/1997 


T.  r>MilKiii  or  Offica  Addna 

717  MADISOH  PLACE,  N.W.  ,  #709 

HASHTMCTON,  DC   ZOOOS 


B.  Od  ^  bMi»  of  Ibc  iB/onuadaa  coalainad  fal  Ihis  lUpon  aad  any 
nudifkalinw  panaiaiuc  thafacv.  it  is  fai  my  apbiiaa,  m  compliaacc 
wiib  applicable  U<n  aad  n«ala<ioM. 


DtFOKTANTfOTES:  IKt  inmiolau  cec<mipmflrt  Ihh Jam  imot  bt  JoUomei.   CampUu  allpmm. 
cktcUng  At  HONL  hatfiir  tech  scafan  whtrt  yn,  hmt  no  npmOiU  ItffimnMoA.   iign  et%  iht  latt  pat' 


NAME  OF  ORGANIZATION  /  ENTITY 


I.    POSITIONS      (liif^'*'\t  OnUvidutl  uitly:  set  pp.  9-13  e/lnnniaiarul 

POSITION 

NONK  (No  taponchlc  poahioiu.) 

1  Member,    Board   of  Governors  (Jnivarsity  Club  of   Hachlngcon,    DC 


11.      AGREEMENTS    (IUp<,ninf,-<JtvUu„lt,nly.seepp.l4-irc/l-inructinu.J 

DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 


I  X        I  NONT    (No  raforubic  Itf  rccmcnu.J 


in.      NON-INVESTMENT  INCOME         (K,pnnifig  unlivifltuil  ami  tpmur:  ...  /•/>   IS-2!  «/ Inilnuilons.) 

DATE  PARTIES  AND  TERMS 

I  j  NONE   Qiti  reporubU  noivuivesiin.ni  incom..) 

i   annual    Dennis  F.  Miller  (spouse)  eel f -employed  -  Science 
2  and  Technology,  Inc. 


GROSS  INCOMI 

(youn.  not  ipouJK'l) 


1501 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSCSE  SEPORT 


l^urm  of  P»non  ltLc|toftiQC 

Miller,  Chri«tino  0,C.  , 


11/07/1997 


IV.    REFMBURSEMENTS    and    GIFTS    -  truuponatioo.  todpn^.  fix>d.  .nttrtAinmAni 

dneUid^  Ih^te  to  tpoun  and  dcpcr\deru  ehilHftn;  tue  Ou  pantVluoceU  '(S)' and  '0C)'  ipimMcou  rrponabte  rtUntunements  mnd  gifts  reettved  try  spouse 
0^  dtpendtnt  chUdrtn.  nof^tedvmfy.    S€t  pp.  20-29  oftm 


D 


SOURCE  DESCMFTION 

NONE  (No  •ueh  TfortibU  r«imbtira«in«fiu  or  fifU) 


V.     OTHER  GIFTS 

ilmeiuda  ihosx  w  spouse  v^  depcnd^m  childrcj*.-  use  the  parentMxiIeaU  '(S)'  and  '(OC)'  to  indicate  eiker  g^fu  merivtJ  by  ipoiue  and  dependent  childrrm. 
ntpeanety.   Set  pp.  3Q-S3  ofliuffveiiotu.J 


SOURCE  DESCRIPTION 

NONE   (No  fuch  tvpnrublc  ptl^ 


VI.    LIABILITIES 

(Inei^cj  ^oge  e/Mpctae  and  dependent  chttdrrn.    Indicate  wAe»r  appUcabte,  person  responsible  Jnr  ItabtUiy  by  using  the  porvnthetical  'fSJ  '/or  tepargie 
UabiUty  e/Oie  tpoiue.  '(/)'fi>r  joint  tlahility  f/ reporting  Imdividiuil  and  tpt*use.  and  '(OC)'Jor  Uability  vfa  dependent  ehUd-    See  pp.  3S-36  of  InxtntedonS-} 


a 


CREDITOR  DESCRIPTION 

NONE    (No  Rfofuhk  tUbiltli«») 


•VALCODES'J-SlS,(XlOorUu  K=SIS.001'$50.(XX)  L-SSa.<X1l  lo  SIOO.OOO  M-SIDO,OOI-S130.(X]0  N-S25U,00l-SS0a,C 

o-=ssoo.aoi-si.ooa,aaa   Pi<:si.ix)o.ooi-S5.ixxi,(xio   p2-55.00a.a01-s2s.0c1o.000   n-sz).oao.oai.S5o.ooo.ooo   i>4>sso.ooo.ooi  ornc 


1502 


FINANCIAL  DISCXOSURE  REPORT 


I    Nim*  of  Pbiviq  Rc^inrtJns 
r      Miller,    Christir 


D«tco^R«poR 

11/07/1997 


-  income,  vaiue.  traniacOnnx  finclitdti  Ihnst  ofspmit*  t 

VD.  Paje     1  D«fVESrMENTS  and  TRUSTS     ^.p-uUM  cuum.  snpp.S7.s*ofinjtnicdoni,i 


A. 
PucillilioiiorAucU 

iKllcait  whtn  appUcabU.  amtt'  b/ 

'Q)' for  joit>I  oMwrsAip  e/rrpnniMg 

tnit  atmijlnp  iy  Mpouie,  '(DC)- 

Hcet  '(X)'  fttr  tach  aaa 

B. 

bwoniE 

dufinc 

t«|ionine 

period 

c. 

Onis  value 
at  end  of 
reponiDg 
period 

D. 

Tranaaelicni  during  icponins  period 

(1) 

Ami. 

Cob 

(A- 

HJ 

Typ. 
<o.f.. 
dividend, 
muor 

0) 

Value 

Code 

C) 

Valu. 
MMhod 
Coda 

(1) 

Type 

t>uy.  aaU. 

tadan^ 

don) 

If  not  cxenipt  Cnni  diteloeure 

C) 
Dale: 

Momh- 
Bay 

0) 

Value 
Code 
C-F) 

(♦) 

Cain 
Code 
(A-H) 

(J) 

Idamity  of 
buyoWaallar 
rrfprt-au 
uauaetion) 

1    NONE  Cw  RfofUblc  •usamoueu.  or 
1                 nnuclJoDi) 

1  AlrTouch  Corrm.    Inc. Common 

A 

Civldand 

J 

T 

2  Allstace  Corp. 

A 

A 

Tnt*ir«t 

■^ 

JAlumix.    Inc. 

DividflnU 

.J 

T 

4  AjnBdle    Coff^. 

* 

Dlvidon.^ 

0 

T 

SArierltech  Coip.    Conunon 

A 

Dlvidond 

J 

T 

6  A,-«=r.Ttl';.    4   Tsliq.    comnot. 

* 

DivldomJ 

.7 

T 



f  Bell  AtlBpric  Corp.      coiwnot' 

I\ 

Dividend 

J 

T 



9  Ecli   South  Cocp.    Cofitrton 

A 

uividand 
Int»r«i;t 

•' 

T 

9    feerkloy,    CA  Tar    Ttee    Bond 

K 

T 

A 

10  Lll    C«lv«rt  Mut.    Fund 

A 

intar^ar 

J 

T 

liqulda 

1/.' 

■■' 

11  Chovro:^    Corp.    Coirjncn 

B 

Dividend 

K 

T 

12  Cintrqy  Coip.    Conwntiii 

" 

Di-/Vd.nd 

J 

T 

13  Crevrar   Bank 

" 

In' »;c«t 

L 

•f 

pt.inh. 

11/13 

K 

H    ISl    Domlnior.   li-«ourci;K    Coiwnon 

A 

Oivid'ind 

■' 

H 

IS  ISl    t^LS   5«Vin<lr.    Pl»n 

* 

lnt.r»«t 

J 

T 

le  ISl   £S'a  stock  r.oinmon 

B 

Intf  ri».ct 

'■ 

T 

n  Fidelity  lnv,»tin»:r.t«  Mutual    Fi."J 

B 

lnr,r..,:t 

1. 

T 

E-J13.O01.S50.0O0 

N-SlSO.OOl-tSOO.OOO 
0,000  P4-$3O.O0O.00l  oinioca 

1  Itic/Gun  Coder.  A-SLOOO  or  Its                     R-S 
(Col.B1,D4)      F-t50,001.J|no,000              G-J 

J  V.I  Coder.         J-tl  S.OOO  or  la>                   K»$  1 
(Col.CI.D3)     O»SS00.001.$  1,000.000         Pl-$ 

.001- 

00.00 

.000. 

Q_WO 

1-Jl.OOO.OOO 
SJU.OOO 
Ol-SS.OOO.OOO 

C»J2 
III-] 

P2-S5 

J0I-I5.C 

i.ouo.00 
Toi-Jic 
noc.ooi 

100 

l-*5.00O.0O0 
0.000 
125.000.000 

D-S 

H2- 
~M-$10C 
P3-S25 

,001-$ 
t5.000. 

Tooi-s 

000.00 

S.OOO 
JOIorir 
"io.oou 

-$50.0(1 

I  3  Val  Mth  Cods.  Q>AfpraisaI 


R-C<vt  (raal  «cute  only) 
V-Oiher 


1503 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSUKE  REPORT 


Ninu  of  PcnoD  Rep oniof 

Miller,  Christine  O.C. 


DatcofRepen 
11/07/1997 


-  Incmte,  value,  rmsaetions  futclu^s  Owje  oftpome  uhi 

VD.  Page     2  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS     ^fmimi  MUm.  S€c  pp  37S4  o/imnaim,,.) 


1               *' 

Dcacliplion  of  AxMU 

B. 

iDaona 

duriac 

nponinc 

pniod 

c. 

Citmvalua 
alaivlor 

pariod 

o. 

•Vl'jDrjciitlfmitrMpiifnpontKt 
mOniditatwtdiptmte,  'fSJ'for up. 
trmunmtrMpk)ipoim,  '(DCJ- 

fUnr  'CO'  ^firr  *aeh  usn 
txtmpifivm  ffiar  Jitctamrr. 

(1) 
Ann. 

Code 

(A- 

H) 

(2) 
Typ* 

(•■£.. 

dividend. 

rsnior 

(1) 

Value 
Cod. 
P-P) 

(2) 

Value 
Mcdiod 
Code 

(1) 

Type 

(•.».. 

bvy,  ttJ. 
imnter. 
fttdcmp- 
lion) 

If  D04  cxempl  fnHD  dlicloaure 

0) 
Dae: 
Monlb- 
Day 

(3) 

Value 
Code 
OK 

(4) 
Cain 
CuJe 
(A-K) 

IS) 
Maintyor 

buyirfKller 

Orprivate 

Innaactioa) 

NOKE  (no  rcpooable  UicanK,uaea.  or 
BuaacUom) 

1$  rort  Br«gg.cA,   j  loc».      1/4 
Inter.    (••«  sxpXina. I 

E 

0 

19  fr»ntain,   CA  To;t-f£««   Inconv  Fond 

C 

IntvrMXt 

J 

T 

20  rrecporc  McHotJn  Inc.      ccmnion 

A 

DivlrJtnd 

J 

'' 



21  Frtoport   Mcnorin   Cop|..c    I,   Gold 
Inc.    Common 

Di-id.nd 

' 

T 

22  Hnbftr    J.    3canr   Common 

a 

Dj  vid^nij 

.J 

" 

23   ISl    Kouj.  CrMl^   Union 

lnt"C.»t 

■' 

T 

2«    IS)    INE-.  RitireMnt    Pl.»n 

B 

Uivioand 

" 

T 

2S  l.ouiji«"J    r»cif  tc    Corp.    ronjoon 

0 

DiuldTnd 

J 

T 

26  I,uccnt  Tccnr.oiogics   common 
l.pinori    tcom  ATtTl 

A 

Divld^ny 

' 

T 

7.1  M»diSon  Gas   k   tl«c.    Common 

'■ 

Div..o«nd 

•' 

'■ 



-  — 

_    ._ 

26  Moss.    Inv.    Trust   Common 

* 

DividinO 

.3 

T 

2»McMorin  Oil   L  s*a  Co. 

A 

Di-]d«nd 

J 

T 

30  (SI    Kunicjpal   In^ttsz.    TruRt    tund 

A 

IntartiiT 

J 

" 

31   No  I  CO   Chemical    Co-    Common 

° 

Pi vldend 

■J 

T 

32  nation •«  Bant 

* 

"■•"'■•"' 

K 

T 

33  Ka 

visc.tr   Int'l.    Common 

A 

Diviilitnd 

J 

T 

3a  Na 

uruqan  Corp.    Ccmfnon 

A 

Dlviojnd 

■' 

^ 

1  he/Cam  Cudts  A-SI.OOO  or  I«e<                     B>S 
(Col  BI.D4)      F>55O,O01-SIOO.OOO              C-SI 

.0OI.«.3OO 
OO.OOl-SI.OOO.OOO 

C»$2  501.J3.000                         I>-$3.O01.J15.O00                       E-$H.00I.J50.000 
H1-SI.000.OOI-S5.000.000        H2-S5.UOn,001  ottiwrc 

2Val< 

•joia:          J-Jl  5,000  wtaa                       K»J1 

l.OOl. 

J50.000 

1*5.11 

OOl.JU 

0.000 

M=S10C 

,ooi-i- 

;n.ooo 

N--S350.O01.$50O,OOO 

(CelCI.D3)      l>-S50O,001-SI.OOO.00O  PI-II.OOO.OU).$5.000.UOO   P2«i5.0flO.0Ol.$25.OO0.000  P3'J25,O00.O0l.S50.0OO.OOO  P4-$50.00U.OOI  orroor. 

1 -Ca«liA<att*I 


3  VaJ  Mlb  Coda:  U-Anni'*l 
(Col  C2)  ItaBcnk  Value 


R»Coe(l  (real  csUU  Mly) 
V-Uvher 


S-A0CMmEni 
W-E«tiiTialcd 


1504 


nNANCUL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nunc  of  PvTton  Rspoftin^ 

Miller,  Christine  O.C. 


11/07/1997 


-  tmeorru!,  value,  uwuaellnfu  fittclujei  thost  <>frptiuse  and 

Vn.  Page     3  INVESTMENTS  and  TRUSTS     ^pa^„- tiuUnm.  u,fp.n-i4ojinjiruc<i<mi.) 


Docnpuoo  of  AiMU 

Ac  aait  by  using  d%£  parenlhtdetti 
'Vi  'fefjoiru  mmtnhip  ofrtpomng 
mJi,Kdual  atd spouse,  '(S)'fortep- 
enu  mmcnhip  ty  ipourr,  '(DC)  ' 

Plmx  '00 '  ^€r  satk  onet 
txxmptfiom  prior  dlxdatyrz. 

B. 

Iflcomt 
duriof 
teponUw 
pchod 

c. 

Cto«f  value 
eluxlor 
l<:l>onitif 
period 

D. 

TntwectioDi  dufir^  teportloc  period 

(1) 

Aim. 

Cnde 

(*■ 

H) 

Typ. 

dividud. 

rem  or 
imicfi) 

(11 

Value 
Code 
(J-P) 

0) 

Value 

Method 

Code 

(Q-W) 

(1) 
T>pc 

('■i-. 
buy.  aell, 
merger. 

(iOlO 

ir  nui  eeempt  6t>ni  dUcloaure 

a) 

Dau: 
Moalh- 

P.y 

(3) 

Value 

Code 

(4) 
Cain 
Code 
CA-M) 

t5) 

biiycrfaeUet 
fif  private 
mnaaelloo) 

1    NONE  loo  npoiuble  uiunu,>ucu,  or 
1                 iniuuctiooi) 

J5  Nyncx   Corp.    Common 

A 

Dividend 

J 

■'■ 

36  P.%cific  T«lai«   C£oup  Common 

* 

Dividrnd 

J 

T 

" 

3T   Pijeor.    Kldijc    Subdlv.     lot., 

Covelo,    CA   1/6    inter.     (•««   niipl  1 

B 

ln..r..t 

•' 

C 

36  Droctor    4    Gamble    Comjtion 

A 

Dividend 

K 

[ 

39  Reynold.   M«t..l.-:   Co. 

A 

Dividend 

J 

T 



«0    IJI    Ri9qr    MKA 

A 

'""''" 

•' 

■^ 

-^ 

—    - 

^i  SBC  Coniin.    Inc.    Common    (formei 
Southw.;.'.tfern  Bcil  1 

A 

DividAnd 

■' 

■■■ 

'.2  Saf«w«y  Inc.    Common 

A 

Dividend 

■• 

T 

43   Scart    li    Rorbuck    Common 

* 

Dividend 

" 

T 

tt   ISl    Unite   Credit    Ui.lon 

* 

Inteiejt 

J 

T 

<S  Sml-.h-ei.tney   Inc.    App.    r.ind 

b 

'"""" 

■* 

T 

«(.Strcth-Eirney   fremlum  Tonl    R«f..in 
Fund    {IRAJ 

B 

lntei«t 

L 

■^ 

- 

-    - 

iT   (J)    Sntth-Earnriy  Meniioed 
M;jnicip.il    Fund 

''■ 

Intrre.t 

L 

T 

46    1.11    Smith-Ritney   p*»w  Lquity   Fund 

A 

IrtCeceel 

J 

T 

49  (Jl    smith-Derney  llST   Equity   FuroJ 

* 

' 

■■' 

T 

t>uy 

9/11 

J 

50   IS)    Teocher'»    Inec.    4   Annulcy 
Assoc-    Common 

B 

B 

Intvc«F.t 

L 

■' 

51   ISI    Teechcfl    In»i.    4   Annuity 
A«.oc.    Money  M.ck^t 

lnt,rt.-.t 

" 

■■■ 

lliieftHinCorfstA-Sl.uOaorlts                     B^SI 
(CoLBl.IM)      F-S!O.OOI -SI  00.000              C-Sl 

OOl-JtSOO 
00.00  l-JI  .000.000 

C^=R.^U1.S5.000                            D'tS.OOl.JlJ.OUO                          E-IIS.OOl-SSO.OOO 
Hl-Jl.OOO.OOl.SS.OOO.OOO         H3-J5.000.001  oroMnt 

2ValCod«.:          >J1 5.000  or  1m                     K-JI 
(Col.Cl,D3)     O-S500.00I.$l,00a.000        n-%\ 

.001- 
,000.0 

E50.000 
OI-SS.000.000 

L-f50 
P5-S5 

OOMIO 

000.001- 

0.000 
$25,000,000 

M-SloO 
P3'$25. 

00I-S2 
00,001 

50,000 
■S50,00< 

N-nso.noi-S50o,ooo 

3.O00  P4-S50,n00.001urn<oce 

I  3  Val  MlhCods:  g^Appraiial 


R*Co*t  (real  estate  only) 
VeOlher 


S-AMeuncst 
W-Fstimat-al 


T-Cwh/Morkei 


1505 


ilNANCUL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


Nadk  of  Fcnon  RcponUv 

Miller,  Christine  O.C. 


—  iite<m}t.  vatuf.  mnucHons  flncUidts  Ihott  ^tpoust  ^nd 


I  DaU  ot  Kspon 

11/07/1997 


d 


A. 

Ducrifioao  of  Anns 

fMOcMr  «*m  appUaliU.  oMcr  cf 
du  aarf  by  utnx  l/u  ^mnniti^tteal 
•ffj-JbrjclK  txmttliip  „/rrponint 
tJividttalaidspcuie.  'fSyjoricp- 
mig  (WfKTx/BJp  by  tpovx*,  '(DC)' 

fimet  'tlCi'  ^trtach  oxnT 

B. 

locontc 
during 
rcponing 

C. 

Ofo«  vtluc 

•lend  of 

p-nod 

D 

TrBfuootkifM  duiiiig  nponins  puiod 

1) 

Ann 
Coda 

A- 
H) 

0) 
divldtiid. 

(1) 

V.luo 
Code 
0-rt 

0) 

V.IU* 
Moliod 
Code 

(1) 

H  nol  «Mnipl  liofi)  dUcloMK 

(••t-. 
buy.  MS. 

«oo) 

0) 

Modb- 
Dt, 

0) 

Value 

Codo 

(41 
Coin 
Cod« 
(A-W) 

(5) 

■dobtyoT 

Imyor/Mllor 

tnBHClio«4 

NONE  (BO  npotubU  InconcwHU.  or 

S2  T.    Kon    Pile*   Borid    Fund 

C 

Intnrftit 

J 

T 

53       UST   Inc.    Comnon 

n 

DivldoniJ 

J 

T 

M    ISI    USAA  Aflgi««<iv.    fiiolrth    Fund 

A 

int.r.;. 

.J 

T 

55   IS)    U5AA  MO.>»y   Murn.r     r>"i«J    CLl 

e 

'"""" 

" 

^ 

S«  ISI    USAA  T«>:-»».mpT    lona-t.rB. 
Fund    IRA 

A 

Int«t«ST 

J 

T 

51  U.S.    «-jt,    inc.    Ccmnon 

A 

Oividtsnd 

■" 

■•■ 

36  U.S.    Writ   H«dia   Group  Common 

A 

Di^ldond 

J 

T 

i>  >i«lij    F«r9o   t    ro.. 

B 

Dividend 

L 

T 

60  HvstlnghouB*   £l«ctcic   Cotp. 

A 

Divia-nd 

J 

T 



1  IncAiuD  Colix:  A-SI.OOO  o>  k»                     li~S 
CCelBl.CM)      F-S50.00) -J  100.000              0-Jl 

.0O1-S3.50O 

oo.ooi-si.ooo.ooo 

C-'Ji.5UU3.000                            U-S5,001.$15.000                          F.-S13,OOI-$30,000 
111 -SI. 000.00  l-SS.OOO.OOO       HZc-SS.OOO.OOl  ormon 

]  V>]  Cods:         i-Sl  5,000  or  l<ii                    K-S 1 
(Col.  CI.  D3)     O^JJOO.OOl-Sl.OOO.OOO        ri-j 

S.001.S50.000                  L'SSO.OOI-IIOO.OOO                 M-$100.001«50.000              N-'J250.00I -$300,000 
.000.001.J5.000.000  P2-S5.Oa0.0OI-S25.000.O0O  P3-$2J.000.O01-S5O,000.000  P4-$30,000.001ornioft 

3  V.I  MUi  Coder  Q'Apptmbsil                            R-Coa  (real  emm  only)                            S-Amohikm                                     T-CjsVMartul 
(ColO)            y-BookV.luc                        V-OOw                                                 W.Ertim«l«l 

1506 


FINANCIAL  DISCLOSURE  REPORT 


tfttne  of  ^non  Raponinf 

Miller,  Christine  O.C. 


11/07/1997 


vm.    ADDrnoNAL  information  or  explanations. 

I  X       I  NDNK   (No  addhioiHl  ififocniation  or  cxpUnMioiw.) 


(IndlMti:  pin  of  npOfl.) 


Cont'd  from  Sactlon  VII.  Investments  t  Trusts 

Ifl.   Two  lots  In  Tort  Bragg,  Cf,,    1/4  interest;  unlJnproved  property,  epptaised  4/21/90. 

36.   Pigeon  Ridge  subdivision,  Covalo,  CA:  1/8  Interest,  unimproved  lots  in  subdivision, 
appraised  4/2/94,  interest  from  promissory  notas. 


1507 


HNANCIAL  DI5CLOSDRE  REPORT 


NaOK  of  PcfioD  Rfl^niny 
nlllac,    Christina  O.C. 


I  UUM  OT«kCp«n\ 

11/07/1997 


DC.    CERTmCATION 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  28  U.S.C.  4S5  and  of  Advisory  Opinion  No.  57  of  die  Advisory  Committee  on 
Judicial  Activities,  and  to  the  best  of  my  icnowledge  at  tfae  time  afrer  reasonable  inquiry,  I  did  not  perform  any  adjudicatory 
function  in  any  litigation  during  the  period  covered  by  this  report  in  which  I,  my  spouse,  or  my  minor  or  dependent  children 
bad  a  financial  interest,  as  defined  in  Canon  3C(3)(c),  in  the  outcome  of  such  litigation. 

]  certify  that  all  the  information  given  above  (including  information  pertaining  to  my  spouse  and  minor  or  dependent 
cbildreo,  if  any)  is  accurate,  true,  and  complete  to  ibe  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief,  and  that  any  inftirmation  not  rq>oned 
was  withheld  becanse  it  met  applicable  statutory  provisions  permitting  non-disclosure. 

I  fiinher  cernfy  that  earned  income  from  outside  employment  and  hoooraria  and  the  acceptance  of  gifts  which  have  been 
repotted  are  in  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  S  U.S.C.  app.  4,  section  501  et.  seq.,  5  U.S.C.  7353  and  Judicial 
Confereace  regulatiotks. 


Signature 


(MnCdUiOJ^.'^Ut^     Date    >U-^^7^,   1119- 


Ptii'^  individual  who  knowingly  and  wilfully  falsifies  or  fails  to  file  this  report  may  be  subject  to  civil 
and  criminal  sanctions  (5  U.S.C.  App.  4,  Section  104). 


FILING  INSTRUCTIONS 

Mail  oripnal  and  three  additional  copies  to: 

Committee  oo  Financial  Discloxurc 
Ailminittrativc  OfTicc  of  the  United  Stales  Co 
One  Culumbu.i  Ci^cl•^  N.E. 
Suite  2-301 
Washin^un,  D.C  2U514 


1508 

FXKANOAL  STATEMENT 
KET  WORTH 


Pto»idc  I  cempTeie,  euireni  nnuelal  nel  worOi  lutemeni  which  liemJiei  In  deull 
all  uteu  (IncludLng  buih  aecounu.  rul  time,  lecuridei.  mitu,  invutmenu,  and  ether  finvicii] 
holdingt)  all  UabUioet  (Includbif  debu,  monxtgei,  loviJ.  afid  other  M/iartctal  pblifadoni)  of 
younclf,  your  spouic.  and  other  lmme<liai£  meinberf  of  your  household. 


ASSETS 


UABIUTXEI 


Cuk  aa  hMitt  lilt  in  atnki 


138 


4S5     OQ 


Ks*u  t*t^'^  >•  Wib-MOffrf 


K*IU  f  •7'^''  I*  kMla-4IMKUIl4 


er— g 


Lifli^  MalHrfe>-*di  Khftfidi 


891 


H»fct  >>T«k<» «»  w!ill»ii 


VnSilc<  wcwU(i-»i4  tAtttt* 


Nibi 


£2*11 


toefttii 


Asesiutu  «Ad  »e<ci  lucinblc    « 


AoBUAli  in4  Will  dva 


Ticl-prf   nnf^Pt 


Du«  frvm  nlidrii  uitf  bi«ftdi 


Uuild  Ifjnnii  lu        debts  beln; 


Sw  bom  •duri 


Ollw  wptld  (u  tn4  inund 


Ceubtfid 


]Lf  il  iiuk  n«ut|u  ■4ytble-id4 

kKUuI*  NorS^st  Martgage 


Oitsd  aiDPmci  M\t  mimt  liaiu  piy- 


Pigeon 


1/8  infceroofc;   popnnn 


15 


K^ihimgimtfltgniABriptli 


reside  ice 


(Mwdcki-iiunlu; 


Aulor  wij  Btfiw  pcfianJ  )>repBty 


-UQ 


;2Qa 


no. 


VISft   (W) 


Ciih  *i]uB-tif(  inioruMi 


vTSft.  mi, 


nnp 


iifl. 


OiJbcr  lUili-lunlu: 


Fidelity  Pund(W) 


ST 


Ihrift  Plan  (W)   ** 


Tetdlibaitffi 


ro77 


TST 


!jr 


KdWatft 


TeuiAiciti 


i.  165 


ifii 


(22. 


Teal  {OOUcl  Ud  Ilet«v4 


CO.VTTVOENr  UABDJTIES 


/V»^ 


OCNTJUL  XSFOKMATTOM 


A(  cedaricr,  cenulcr  sr  fuculat 


flffnsLf 


Are  «qr  ux'j  |jedtt>n  (Adl  tclcd. 


Oa  buei  tr  eDsfrieu 


A»w6 


Aft  yog  ictnlM  It,  wyr  <nlu  or  kgil 


HO. 


Letd  Cltliru 


AOU, 


HiTt  you  ettt  bfaa  tinhvf^eyt 


PwviileH  fof  Ftitnl  Ificamt  Tn         ^lr»VUL  ' 


statement  for  H.- 


0 


Include  deferred  incote  not  yet  taxed. 


1509 


1^ 


•Si  ^ 


"2" 

SSi 
(U  a. 

&  CO 


-:=r- 


w 

E 
E 

3 

tn 
& 
"5 


SS3 


sst 


S  3 


£    ^ 


5 


o 

T3" 

C  . 

(A 


"a- 


i?? 


«  I 


1? 


;|3.s.^ 


!SS 


IS  "I 
si  rl 
II     If 

II  ll 
I  h 


III 


•  •      So 

tl    ^    .        "O    ^      ^ 

•  ; 5  5  §* 

z  S  S  u  a.  u 


s  « 


J    d3S 

hi 


"4 


■■  a. 


£1^ 


M- 

^.:'..:, 

::•!:; 


til 
111 


U 


33 


Us  [i 


gtsi 


-8 


!    t 


11  -s 


20 

51 


o  *  a 
U  a  a 


1510 


CO 


E  1- 

it 

0)  a 

1-  «" 


3| 

if 
in 


SI 


a  o  - 
^5 


Q.  a-  O 

u  <  0 

LU  a  u3 

5  o  t  u 

2  3  i^  2  s 


5 


5a- 


S  i  a 
S  a>  2 


o^  «  a 

"SI 

«  g  a 


8    I 

i  si 


Sii 


2    s    a 


o  »  o  5 


I  i^ 


iJ 


^?i 


a.  ^  »• 

y  > 


1^ 

IE   Z 

85 


81 


ill 

m 


1511 


ViS 

♦-  °- 
c  « 

at  a. 

U    (D 

a.  CO 


Hi 


If 


"IS 


8  51 
J? 


it; 


gs 


:l  §: 


y  t  ? 


^6 


-  3   £ 

« j^  ^ 


E  U  =  ; 

52  a 


"•£ 


II 

S2 


•i 

II 


It 


is 


8 

i! 

£1 


.  3 

S  s 


SO   £   « 


1512 


CO 


§-; 

fc  - 

(1)  <» 

*S  -Q 

-1 

0)^ 

..    CI 

c  .5 

5  w 

o- 

"2^ 

3 

i 

V  ^ 

^    (U 

6 

01    Q. 

Q.  CO 


?3 
3i 


1- 
11 


8^ 

3  u 


ii 


II 


■3      S 


rt        n        * 


I 
II 

a  S 


If 

Ii 


t-  e 
§  S 


9  e  1 

sa  8 


1513 


C  ^ 

0)   <U 

4SE 

■o 

0) 

0)  a. 

a.  CO 


o 


CQ 


cyD 


i  °  i 

2  z   'S 

1:3  7 

4  <     3 

o  ^  a 
ly  > 

-?  ■a 


f^!,: 


i^4:'i 


5  o- 


^1 

&  a 

S3- 


■a   J, 

:':;yij       a-S 


P 


II 

-■a 

11 

6S 

5  < 

>■  o  — 

'^  o  ■« 

yss 

HI 

211 

■B 

2 

M 

Iff 

3   °   ra 

111 

3C30 

c 

II 

e 

i 

c 

"s 

u  & 

e 

n 

■^  JZ 

S  » 

«  9 

«  • 

Si 

»  —  TI 

£52 

tc 

3 

^  a 

Jl 

1 

i^ 

Si 

^ 

(« 

(J 

c 

■5 

w 

o 

■v 

^ 

s 

^ 

•a 

J 

^ 

S 

1 

e 
o 

^ 
I 

s 

O 

oi 

H 

a 

a. 

"i 

,c 

o 

§ 

■3 

3 

"Z 

a 

s 

S 

3  S  ^ .-« 1 1 
6;  5  S  8  5  « 

3  <  a  S  s  E 


-«t3. 


["IS 


tS 


8.5 


'tS; 


r.-t 


1514 


r^ 

05 

CT) 

^~ 

od 

CsJ 

E 

^ 

0) 

(U 

•♦^ 

^ 

ra 

e 

V) 

« 

"S 

.2 

en 

a 

-- 

■o 

(U 

£ 

^ 

E 

.2 

a; 

"« 

Q 

k. 

OJ 

a  col 

OQ 


■« 


if  fcir. 


IS 

8x 
X  > 

U  03 


S  5 


a  o. 
a  ~o 
-|| 

-II 


■J6:i 


i'-'ii 


rig 

o 

8 


S  S 


Si 
I  o 


S25. 

«  u  O 

S  «  3  3 


S8 


1515 


c 

0) 

oo" 
CM 

E 

0) 

OJ 

^ 

"53 

£ 

Zfi 

-2 

^ 

"5. 

c 

0) 

.£ 

C/3 

u 

T- 

■a 

0) 

E 

3i 

<u 

0) 

Q. 

L. 

Oi 

CLCO 

s 


a5 


2  < 
P  Q  * 


z  a  Q 

S2a 


/'■' 

=  1  2- 

O    V    f« 

>-  3>- 

.   B-  u 

8 

-  i  ^" 

Ml. 

fli 

ff 

^ss 

S  -5i  S- 

i-^i 

S: 

°  1  ^ 

S  "  §• 

**; 

g|s 

SiS 

-  JS  2 

HI 

c  a.  o 

o  S-U 

i  "  -^ 

c  «>.2 

^  -c  w 

u  -  c 

-3  «i  •« 

•«  c 

sit 

O  Ol   =^ 

§  c  « 

^1' 

A    O)  -£ 

■;:; 

^  U  3 

qj    Q>    «l 

^?S 

er  1  -2  * 

^•5-  » 

Qi          -^  O 

^  S-oS 

■is 

153 

nil 

V:-, 

15  &§ 

*■?• 

SS.5^ 

'^y 

£is:: 

i 

fill 

f^- 

el|~ 

-£3 

..ill 

^ 

«5  c- 

_ne 

cnS:~'5 

■f- 

wo  e.^ 

1 

1516 


c 

0) 

E 


< 

PvJ 

£ 

1- 
3) 

c 

OJ 

0) 

CL 

u 

(U 

__ 

CO 

■D 
J"    ' 

0)  c 


^5 


T  «.  3  S 
"3  If 

.SI: 

00  £  1 

u.  g- 

■  Ei  S 

:  •£ -E  -S 

fhSs 


SI  8 


5d       S 
21        ° 


3i 
II 


1517 


c 

£ 

a  oi 
-^«  ^— 
(/>    - 

00 
<  CM 

£^ 

c  £ 

Os 

^  CO 


CO 


»  1 


--  ox 

•  c 

o 


3< 


It 


it 


r  O 


X  o 


r  = 


I -i 


3G 


S-i: 


it 


i     SS 


1518 


0)  f^ 
z  en 

0)  "^ 

^  CM 

<  ^ 

IJL  5 

^    Q. 


.2 

CO 

U 

,- 

■o 

0) 

E 

•£ 

03 

a> 

a. 

L. 

0} 

(L  CO 

OQ 


CO 


:•!■§ 


t!!      » 


re 

E 
•E 

■3 
V» 


■  o : 


IB 


■=  ^  2 


8^ 


■O  3 

22 

fi  " 

-b£ 

e  « 

oH 

S  2 

S  5 

e 

If 

—  « 

•o  _, 

o  u 

s| 

•1 

■"  £ 

5  e 

12 

2! 

|1 

«l 

?3 

s» 

£2 

"  a 

a  o 

ll 

1^* 

1  1 

—  a 

ES 

ll 

is 

«     • 

1  ^ 

ijei 

a  e 

'2  a  £ 

III" 

*^  2 

•«  -  g. 

"'^3l« 

iiSlilfi 

£1 

i23.8 

,S.-""S 


-^"1- 


3f:-S, 


SJ^ 


4lS 

PI 
is- 


mi 


0 


m 


m: 


ii 


ill 


ii 


8 


1519 


<  ja 

^    Q. 
5^0 


^    03 

"oJ  O. 

W    0) 

a.  CO 


^ 


(=5 
5!a 


1! 


112    I 


S3 

ii 


S  £ 

a  2" 


§52; 
z  a «) 

u  i^  a  , 

lU  ^  (B  ! 
S>1j  z< 


Vol 

i?3 


~  =  d 

O  I-  ^ 


OT  < 
§^ 

Mii 

I" 

go 


E>. 


1520 


c 

0) 

E 

« 

'— 

^ 

00 

CNJ 

(A 

&_ 

0} 

< 

J3 

5E 

UL 

Q) 

^« 

Q. 

c 

(U 

0) 

CO 

U 

1- 

■D 

Q) 

21 

E 

J* 

o 

0> 

Q. 

Q.cr) 


g 
^ 


1 

to 

g 
So 

% 

■5 

22 

IS 
<  ° 

a. 
§. 

i5 

» 

1 

■s. 

^S 

s 

1 

1 

rm 

^ 

u 

«1 

3 

= 

,g 

^ 

^ 

< 

c; 

A 

5 

1 

2  tg 


I 


:  5        e 


ill 

IS?- 


si 


il 


^h 


.  i 


•i 
I 

1 

.-■■is 


1 


e 
s 


5  0.S 

2  «  Q 


o  e  ■- 

sj3 


?--!™%^ 

■s 

r\V^'*:i-; 

9    <. 

3|j^ 

-as 

^    § 

PI 

^ 

1 

^5  5 

^ 

^p!    1 

3s?n,T*      % 

1 

^];;Jj  g. 

3 

»!?i;!,;  5. 

^  v^/^   *- 

R 

;ii«jV!-l^      ^ 

.a 

^•>rj:;  :-*!...      ^ 

&. 

'iiS^  ■« 

1 

''■■■'        « 

.  ■' ;.   "^ 

-v'i-i'      o 

,..';'■•''  5 

:':'.;;.'.  1 

5 

•••■•rt;;'  -S 

&. 

,"',.■  ;  t> 

i» 

,„■;;    ;■      C 

o 

::'■•'    >. 

a. 

... :.",  •'    c 

,■,;.:■"-■•   5 

J 

■  •■'■•-'. -^^     •> 

■2 

■sS^i    o 

^jjikS'-^^  5" 

1 

Iww^-      5 

r*.'"!'^  "3 

wit^*"^;.^    c 

>vl?^:jii'*   5 

>j0Si$.    n 

a 

*J55  g- 

II 

%^  s. 

il^i  ? 

;^tw«  '5 

fsSi 

^^■-cn  £  ^ 

•^•1*!     a     Z 

mil 

1 

% 

mh 

& 

IS 


saug 

U.  UJ  * 


M  e 


1521 


3  S  *■ 


•^       o.-; 


o  i!  a. 


2  65 

;;  a  c 
"1 5- a 


lit 

S  o  2 


g.5- 


■C-J  » 


15  i3 


6 
9)% 

a  • 

to  5; 

0)  cJ 


3  ^ 

Is 

«  at 
c  ^ 
-of 


1522 


m.  GENERAL  (PUBLIC) 


1 .  An  ethical  consideration  under  Canon  2  of  the  American  Bar  Association's  Code 
of  Professional  Responsibility  calls  for  "every  lawyer,  regardless  of  professional 
prominence  or  professional  workload,  to  find  some  time  to  participate  in  serving  the 
disadvantaged."  Describe  what  you  have  done  to  fulfill  these  responsibilities,  listing 
specific  instances  and  the  amount  of  time  devoted  to  each. 

Since  becoming  a  judge  in  1983, 1  worked  as  a  volunteer  gemologist  for  4  hours  per 
week  at  the  Christ  Child  Society  Opportunity  Shop  firom  Sept.  1986-Aug.  1994.   I 
also  worked  as  a  volunteer  for  3  hours  per  week  at  the  Information  Desk  at  the 
Columbia  Hospital  for  Women  during  calendar  year  1990-1991.    Before  becoming  a 
judge,  I  worked  on  a  variety  of  pro  bono  assignments,  but  have  no  records  of  these 
matters  as  of  this  date. 

2.  The  American  Bar  Association's  Commentary  to  its  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct 
states  that  it  is  inappropriate  for  a  judge  to  hold  membership  in  any  organization  that 
invidiously  discriminates  on  the  basis  of  race,  sex,  or  religion.   Do  you  currendy 
belong,  or  have  you  belonged,  to  any  organization  which  discriminates  —  through 
either  formal  membership  requirements  or  the  practical  implementation  of 
membership  policies?  If  so,  list,  with  dates  of  membership.    What  you  have  done  to 
try  to  change  these  policies? 

1  have  never  belonged  to  such  an  organization. 

3.  Is  there  a  selection  commission  in  your  jurisdiction  to  recommend  candidates  for 
nomination  to  the  federal  courts?   If  so,  did  it  recommend  your  nomination?  Please 
describe  your  experience  in  the  entire  judicial  selection  process,  from  beginning  to 
end  (including  the  circumstances  which  led  to  your  nomination  and  interviews  in 
which  you  participated). 

There  is  no  judicial  selection  commission  in  my  jurisdiction.    I  sought  reappointment 
to  the  United  States  Court  of  Federal  Claims  by  writing  the  President.   Thereafter,  the 
White  House  and  the  Department  of  Justice  processed  my  request  for  reappointment. 

4.  Has  anyone  involved  in  the  process  of  selecting  you  as  a  judicial  nominee 
discussed  with  you  any  specific  case,  legal  issue  or  question  in  a  manner  that  could 
reasonably  be  interpreted  as  asking  how  you  would  rule  on  such  case,  issue,  or 
question?  If  so,  please  explain  fiilly. 

No  one  has  discussed  these  matters  with  me. 

25 


1523 


5.        Please  discuss  your  views  on  the  following  criticism  involving  'judicial 
activism." 

The  role  of  the  Federal  judiciary  within  the  Federal  government,  and  within  society 
generally,  has  become  the  subject  of  increasing  controversy  in  recent  years.   It  has 
become  the  target  of  both  popular  and  academic  criticism  that  alleges  that  the  judicial 
branch  has  usurped  many  of  the  prerogatives  of  other  branches  and  levels  of 
government. 

Some  of  the  characteristics  of  this  'judicial  activism"  have  been  said  to  include: 

a.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  problem-solution  rather  than  grievance- 
resolution; 

b.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  employ  the  individual  plaintiff  as  a  vehicle  for 
imposition  of  far-reaching  orders  extending  to  broad  classes  of  individuals; 

c.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  broad,  affirmative  duties  upon 
governments  and  society; 

d.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  toward  loosening  jurisdictional 
requirements  such  as  standing  and  ripeness;  and 

e.  A  tendency  by  the  judiciary  to  impose  itself  upon  other  institutions  in  the 
manner  of  an  administrator  with  continuing  oversight  responsibilities. 

As  a  trial  judge,  I  am  mindful  that  my  responsibility  is  to  find  the  facts  in  dispute 
between  the  parties  and  apply  the  law  to  those  facts     If  I  encounter  difficulty  in 
applying  a  federal  law,  I  explain  the  problem  in  an  opinion  so  that  Congress  can 
consider  remedying  it.   1  uphold  the  principles  of  stare  decisis  and  separation  of 
powers  and  regard  their  importance  as  paramount. 


26 

o 


BOSTON  PUBLIC  LIBRARY 


3  9999  06177  548  0 


ISBN  0-16-056254-6 


90000 


780 


60"562549