|
"Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Mary L. Roth Burns
Appointed to: Oneida County Circuit Court Appointment date: August 12, 2022 (to term ending July 31, 2023) Education: Law School – University of Wisconsin-Madison Master’s – New York University, New York, New York Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Madison High School – Newman High, Wausau, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: December 2021-present – Attorney manager, Burns Northwoods Law, Rhinelander, Wisconsin January 2008-August 2021 – Assistant state public defender, Office of the State Public Defender, Rhinelander, Wisconsin Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin State Bar of Illinois U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin General character of practice: As an attorney with the Office of the State Public Defender … my practice was about 95% criminal law, with about 5% of my cases being mental commitments. I defended clients, both adults and juveniles, who were charged with felonies and misdemeanors. I met with clients and discussed their charges, their rights, their options, the likelihood of dismissal, and answered their questions. I appeared in court on a daily basis and worked hard to get signature bonds for our clients. I litigated motions where needed … and I negotiated with district attorneys. I tried to enlighten judges (respectfully) as to mistakes made by law enforcement. Describe typical clients: With the SPD, I represented indigent clients who qualified for representation. Many were parents, many had addictions, most were citizens, most of them just needed my help. In Oneida and Vilas Counties, many of my clients are Native American. I did specialize in juvenile cases - I was known in my office as the attorney who liked working with kids (this might be a function of my having been a teacher by training). Number of cases tried to verdict: 13 List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: l. I am including a case that is older than seven years because it's the most significant case I was ever involved with, and it actually resulted in a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision. Ultimately published as In re Tyler T., 341 Wis2d 1(2012), 814 N.W.2d 192, 2012 WI 52, the case started out as a Walworth County juvenile waiver to adult court for a 15-year-old boy who had committed an armed robbery at the behest of his mother's ex-boyfriend. I argued for retaining the boy in juvenile court but realized at the hearing that ADA Wiedenfeld had attended the meeting of the Department of Health and Human Services where he had influenced the DHHS not to recommend retaining the boy in juvenile court. When Judge Carlson ruled in favor of the State, I filed an Interlocutory appeal to the Court of Appeals (COA), arguing undue influence and prejudice. When the COA upheld the circuit court's decision, the case was appealed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Although an SPD appellate attorney wrote the brief and argued before the Supreme Court, I attended the oral arguments with my client. Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld the circuit court, although their holding seemed to be that what the State did wasn't right but they weren't going to do anything about it. I did feel vindicated that Justice Ann Walsh Bradley wrote a dissenting opinion in which Justice Shirley Abrahamson joined. On the upside, while the case wound its way through the courts, my client matured considerably and was able to avoid a prison sentence in Walworth County case #10CF97. 2. State v. Michael Johnson (not his real name) in Oneida County, in 2015. Judge O'Melia. Michael was a 17-year-old autistic boy who was living with his mother and his abusive step-father (called him a Retard, often damaged Michael's possessions, broke his computer). During a fight about the step-father breaking Michael's prized computer, Michael snapped, grabbed a knife and stabbed his step-father; when the mother tried to intervene, she was slashed across the neck. He was charged as an adult with two attempted homicides, but I worked with experts to show that my client was not actually a danger to the community. Eventually the DA (Mike Schiek) agreed to Michael pleading to two lower felonies, probation with a few months in jail, and with Huber so he could stay in high school, plus expungement. Luckily, Michael did well, and his cases were expunged. 3. State v. N. Johnson (not his last name). 2018. Very emotional juvenile case because he was to be charged with Making Terroristic Threats because he and his girlfriend made some stupid statements, with emails, while on a school trip to a Mock Trial competition, indicating a plan to commit a school shooting. The school district quickly had a meeting where, without an attorney present, the school board expelled him after 3-4 hours of testimony. First, I convinced ADA Mary Sowinski to charge him only with Disorderly Conduct to start with. Then I filed an appeal of the expulsion with the State Department of Public Instruction - the DPI overturned the expulsion due to an inadequate record of the hearing (just 4-5 sentences to summarize 3-4 hours!). As a result, Nathan was NOT expelled. Moreover, after a couple months of discussions, the ADA agreed to a Consent Decree. Thus, Nathan walked away without an expulsion or a criminal record. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: As a public defender attorney, I regularly represented clients who were incarcerated in jail because they were on probation, extended supervision or parole, but who were placed on a hold due to some allegations of violations of their rules of supervision. If the clients wished to fight the revocation, I represented them at revocation hearings before an Administrative Law Judge (AW). In my first 4-5 years as a public defender, all of the parties at these hearings were in person, but eventually video hearings became the norm. Over the years, I have probably represented clients in 70-80 of these hearings. I continue to represent clients in revocation hearings, although I am now solo practice. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). In my limited spare time, I have helped local people with completing Power of Attorney for Finance and Power of Attorney for Health Care forms, as well as simple wills. I also was a founding member of the hybrid Vilas County Circuit Court/Lac du Flambeau Tribal Court (Zaagibagaa Healing to Wellness Court) from 2011-2019. I left that court only because I was determined to start a drug court in Oneida County and didn't have the time to do both. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: I have been a volunteer in Oneida County for the Democratic Party for every election since 2011. This includes for President Obama, Hillary Clinton, Russ Feingold, Tony Evers, Tricia Zunker and all the local candidates. I continue to do so, in the form of canvassing in person or over the phone. I ran for office this year. I lost, but my Township was very red. I worked very hard, knocked on lots of doors and made tons of calls. Previous runs for public office: Oneida County Board supervisor (defeated April 2022) All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: No Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Kiwanis Club, member, 1993-1997 Northern Arts Council, board member, 1994-1998 Barron County Bar Association, secretary, 2008-2009 Walworth County Bar Association, secretary, 2009-2011 ArtStart, board member, 2013-2019 Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: As an attorney with the State Public Defender, I was not permitted to perform pro bono legal work. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge -- I’m a Badger. I grew up in and attended schools in Wausau from kindergarten through my freshman year in college. My undergraduate degree and law degree are from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Both of my parents graduated from UW-Madison, as did both of my siblings and both of my daughters. I’m also a Hodag. I have owned my home in Rhinelander since 1990 and both daughters attended Rhinelander schools. I supported the schools with bake sales, as a band mom and by working to get funding referenda passed. I also supported the community by joining local arts agencies, including the Northern Arts Council and ArtStart. However, once I became a lawyer, my public service increased exponentially. Specifically, since law school, I have been serving in various counties for the Office of the State Public Defender (SPD), and I have vigorously represented indigent members of various demographics for fourteen years: eleven years have been in the Oneida County SPD office. In those eleven years, I worked beside the Department of Social Services (DSS) to resolve the needs of mentally ill adults and children in guardianships, child protection cases, and commitment cases. I perform a valuable public service by working with court staff, including the District Attorney’s office and the Corporation Council’s office, to resolve cases fairly and efficiently. In addition, I have worked hand-in-hand with jail staff to meet the needs of and address issues with many inmates during my SPD tenure. Also, when I was the SPD representative on the courthouse safety committee, I was involved in evaluating security for the staff and visitors to the courthouse. This judicial position would offer an opportunity to use my expertise to expand my public service even further – from individual clients to the entire local court system. I care about the people who work in the courthouse AND the people who come before the court at difficult times, whether as defendants, parties to civil suits, victims or family members. Back in 2019, I decided to initiate a drug court in Oneida County, similar to the drug court I was involved with in Vilas County. I gathered other supporters from DSS, the probation office, the Rhinelander Police Department, the District Attorney’s office, a County Board Supervisor, and various treatment providers. Together, as a team, we put together a grant to the National Drug Court Institute (NDCI). Although neither of the judges had agreed to take part, they also hadn’t said no, and told us that they would consider it, if we were successful with our grant application. Happily, in January of 2020, we learned that our grant was approved and that NDCI trainers would be coming from all over the nation for a week in May of 2020 to set up the court and train the team. Unhappily, at that point, neither judge would agree to take part, and the grant was put on hold. Of course, the pandemic shot the whole process down. However, that group has now renewed our effort to initiate a drug court. I ask that you appoint me as judge, because I am determined that Oneida County will get its drug court. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. In March of 2005, United States Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the decision in Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), a 5-4 decision upholding the Missouri Supreme Court’s ruling that the Eighth Amendment forbade imposing the death penalty on defendants who were under the age of eighteen when the crimes were committed. Justice Kennedy wrote that sentencing such a defendant to death is unconstitutional per se under the Eighth Amendment’s rule against cruel and unusual punishments. The decision held that, because national consensus against the death penalty had changed (“evolving standards of decency”), and because the defendant’s “youth and immaturity diminishes…culpability and blameworthiness…by a substantial degree,” the State cannot extinguish a young defendant’s “life and his potential to attain a mature understanding of his own humanity.” The Court was influenced by various amicus curiae briefs presenting strong scientific evidence about brain development (or lack thereof) in late adolescence impairing decision making to a high degree and reducing culpability. Although Wisconsin is not a death penalty state, this case has had a tremendous positive impact on juvenile justice in Wisconsin, and will hopefully continue to have positive in the future. Because of Roper, defense attorneys like myself have reminded judges that, no matter whether a teenager is charged as an adult – meaning the justice system is calling him “an adult” – he is still an adolescent because Roper and other subsequent cases tell us that the Constitution covers these teens under 18: they are NOT ADULTS because their brains are different. I can use expert evidence and peer-reviewed studies to explain the effects of disabilities, trauma and immaturity on a juvenile’s intent, as well as on the ability to assist counsel. This has led to courts taking more time on cases involving my clients under 18 who have committed offenses, and has prevented more of my older teen clients from being sentenced more harshly. In the bigger, statewide picture, activists are pushing to change Wisconsin law so that 17-year-olds are not automatically charged as adults (except for the most serious charges). Wisconsin is one of only three states that mandates that 17-year-olds be charged as adults! With Roper telling us that the brain of a 17-year-old is not fully formed, more recent research has led to many other states retaining such teens in the juvenile system. Using updated research, some state legislators have worked for years to bring Wisconsin into the mainstream with this issue. Other similar juvenile issues, such as ending the practice of sentencing juveniles in Wisconsin to life without parole, have been attempted (SB862 in 2021), but have been blocked by the Republican majority. However, using Roper and its progeny, hopefully these laws will ultimately pass. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: The obvious choices here, for me, would be judicial rock stars Sandra Day O’Connor, Ruth Bader Ginsberg and/or Shirley Abrahamson because they were strong smart women who persevered and broke glass ceilings for women attorneys that followed their lead. All three then worked so hard that virtually no one today doubts the value that they brought to their respective Supreme Courts. Nonetheless, I am choosing lesser-known jurists who are closer to home. First, Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley. I can relate in many ways to Justice Bradley because she was born in Richland Center and I also have family ties to Richland Center. We both had what I call “previous lifetimes” – meaning we both had prior careers before attending the University of Wisconsin Law School. I was raised in Wausau, and that is where she raised her family and started her judicial career as a Marathon County circuit court judge. She was elected to the Supreme Court in 1995 and was reelected twice, having proven herself to be an excellent jurist. I have the life experience and work ethic indicating a potential to be an excellent jurist. I appreciate that Justice Bradley also works collaboratively with other justices and entities on the national level to advance the causes of freedom and justice. In addition, we have another connection - she wrote the wonderful dissent in my In Re Tyler T. case …. When Justice Bradley, joined by Chief Justice Abrahamson, wrote her support of my appeal of Tyler (a juvenile waiver case) based on my objecting to the prosecuting attorney’s improper involvement in what should have been an independent process, she stated the “answer to this question should be a resounding ‘yes.’” Thus, even though the majority ruled otherwise, I knew that I was right. Justice Bradley has continued to work tirelessly, first with Justice Abrahamson and now, with two other moderate justices, to hold the line against the partisan elements which currently drive the Court’s decisions. I can imagine how frustrating it must be to see where the Wisconsin Supreme Court is leaning these days. On occasion, I have seen her out to dinner in Wausau, and usually I respect her privacy and say nothing. But once, I just had to step to her table and thank her for all the thankless work she does for the people of Wisconsin. I was surprised that she was SO modest, grateful and gracious, thanking me for speaking up. She deserves a medal. Second, Judge Neal A. Nielsen, III, former Vilas County Circuit Court Judge. Having appeared before many judges in my career, I found Judge Nielsen to be the epitome of justice. He is smart, determined and firm, and his legal decisions are respected. He always took his time with my clients, explaining his decisions carefully. With strong ties to his community, he is also caring and kind. What really impressed me was Judge Nielsen’s determination to engage local tribal judges and other state entities to start a hybrid tribal/circuit court drug court. Even though it took a huge effort on his part to persuade all the parties that a tribal drug court was possible, Judge Nielsen pulled everyone to the finish line through the sheer force of his will. Thanks to his determination, this court has helped tribal members work to overcome their addictions and break the cycles of dysfunction that has damaged their families for generations. He is truly inspiring. The proper role of a judge: The proper role of a judge is to apply the law fairly and equally to all parties, to protect the rights of all parties, and to proceed with honesty and transparency. This requires knowledge of the law, of course. However, the relationship between the language of the law and its interpretation is often not simple or straightforward. Ideally, a judge should be detached and objective, but one’s moral presuppositions or unconscious biases are the underpinnings of each supposedly objective decision. Luckily, if a judge has ethics, an awareness of underlying biases, and a common-sense core of fairness to buttress knowledge of the law, her interpretations of the law will be valid. Because the perception of fairness is also as important as the actual fairness, a judge needs to convey an image of fairness by being equally respectful to all parties, working to move cases along efficiently, and communicating effectively and patiently. In order to communicate effectively in this era. a judge must be technologically proficient so that Zoom hearings run as smoothly as in-person hearings. And, especially at criminal hearings, a judge should limit the use of legalese and strive to speak plainly and simply so that the defendants understand when the judge explains their rights and how the cases will proceed. Ideally, in the courtroom, the judge should be able to maintain order without sacrificing compassion. The importance of maintaining professional appearances and professional communication cannot be overstated. In addition, organization is important to manage the calendar and the staff. A judge is also part of the larger courthouse team and must work with other judges, attorneys, and courthouse staff to maintain a positive, collegial relationship so as to engender a positive image with the public at large. Citizens need to feel confident that the judicial system is operating in a fair and timely fashion. As such, a judge should be willing to communicate outside of the courthouse, embracing opportunities to discuss legal issues with community leaders, community organizations and area schools.
0 Comments
"Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Patricia A. Baker
Appointed to: Portage County Circuit Court Appointment date: Dec. 7, 2020 (elected to a six-year term in April 2022) Education: Law School – University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin Undergraduate – University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, Minneapolis, Minnesota High School – La Crosse Central High, La Crosse, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: March 2017-present – Private practice attorney, Kessler & Greer Law Office/ALR LLC, Stevens Point, Wisconsin November 2011-March 2017 – Clerk of Circuit Court, Portage County, Wisconsin December 2009-November 2011 – Assistant city attorney (part-time), Wausau, Wisconsin October 2007-November 2011 – Assistant district attorney (part-time), Waushara County, Wisconsin November 2005-December 2009 – Solo practioner, Stevens Point, Wisconsin March 2000-November 2005 – Assistant district attorney, Marathon County, Wisconsin Bar and Administrative Memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin General character of practice: Approximately 30 percent is CPS (child protective services) and APS (adult protective services) Chips and guardianship matters - both as adverse counsel (parents and ward) and guardian ad litem work including Protective Placement reviews and initial petition matters. Another 30 percent is representation of parties in divorces and post-judgment work. I also work as a guardian ad litem in family cases. Approximately 30 percent is representation in criminal matters: felony, misdemeanor and probation revocation. I work in four counties: Portage; Wood; Marathon and Waupaca. I have several civil matters and administrative review matters with WI. Dept of Families. I am also a Portage County Family Court mediator and conduct one to two mediations each month, as well as mediations for other types of matters. Describe typical clients: I am court-appointed in many cases however have many private clients in all of the above categories, as well. With regards to my criminal cases, I have slightly more female clients than male which is my choice. I believe that women frequently have different needs and goals in criminal court which are frequently not met by male attorneys. I also have multiple Legal Aid Society appointments where I represent indigent women in family cases. Number of cases tried to verdict: Approximately 40-50 criminal and CPS jury trials List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: 1) K. S. was a Marathon County criminal case involving a young woman who was a child sexual assault survivor and a sexual exploitation victim. Many survivors have a tumultuous experience with law enforcement, and she was no different. When I met K.S. she was in jail having been arrested for residing with a drug dealer and having distribution quantity drugs and weapons located in her home. She was held in custody on a $10,000 cash bond. Our initial meeting was 2½ hours. It was clear she had made many poor choices based on an elementary need for companionship. She and I identified a strong support network for her - however they were all located in Milwaukee. I needed to get her out of the jail and to a place where she could receive the support and accountability that would set her up for success. My client had a significant criminal record. The District Attorney was seeking a lengthy prison sentence. He was opposed to her release on bond citing potential for escape, for non-appearance, potential for new crimes etc. I also needed to convince the judge, the former District Attorney, to reverse her decision to impose a $10,000 cash bond - something wholly unobtainable for my client. We held a contested evidentiary motion hearing to modify her bond in 2019. I had multiple witnesses including the Executive Director from Lotus Legal Clinic in Milwaukee and a former Milwaukee County Family Court Commissioner testify as to the "plan" we created to support K.S, house her, and hold her accountable to the court. At the conclusion of the hearing the Judge stated that she had never reversed an order for such a large cash bond, but felt that we had put together a plan for K.S. that could be successful. The judge released K.S. on a $10,000 signature bond and she never missed another court appearance. The longer that K.S. was in the community on bond, her chances to avoid prison improved. We went back to court for her sentencing approximately ten months later. By then, she established a solid track record that supported probation with possible early termination. This was a successful outcome for me; for K.S.; but also for the criminal justice system. K.S. is actively working with other exploitation survivors now. She is not taking a bed in Taycheedah and she is contributing to her community as a citizen now. I could not be prouder of K.S. and her accomplishments since my first meeting with her in the Marathon County Jail. 2) K.F. is a woman with a four-year-old daughter who was a product of an unprovable sexual assault. K.F. is indigent and did not have an attorney to defend against the challenge the biological father mounted against K.F.'s "good cause finding" to not reveal the identity of the father in the child support agency. Once he found out through various small-town contacts that K.F. had given birth to his child he began using the legal system to harass her. He filed motion after motion badgering her into agreeing to a minimal placement order with the child. He continued with threats to take the child away from K.F. completely and permanently. The Guardian ad litem in the matter contacted me and asked if l would consider representing K.F. through the Portage County Legal Aid Society. I agreed to do so. In the first hearing (November 2017) we were able to minimize the father's contact with the child until a variety of requirements were met, e.g. psychological evaluations and counseling. Since that time, we have held thirteen evidentiary hearings that have involved every family court challenge imaginable. We have involved Child Protective Services, restraining orders, multiple levels of law enforcement, multiple psychological professionals, and multiple medical professionals throughout these contested hearings. The father was ultimately diagnosed with significant psychological disorders that explain the ferocity of his legal demands in these proceedings. We also learned through a lengthy background investigation that the man left a trail of criminal convictions and unseemly activity in the state in which he had previously resided. We do not yet have a final order in the matter but we have achieved sole legal custody for K.F. as well as primary physical placement and a variety of rules that protect the child and mother. The case is set for the fourteenth evidentiary hearing in the near future. This case has been significant for me as this woman could have lost all rights to her only child but for my actions stepping in to give her a voice against a violent and abusive perpetrator. This case continues today, and I look forward to continuing to ensure that K.F. retains custody and primary placement of this child. 3) I recently represented a severely autistic 37 year old man who is the object of a guardianship and protective placement. During my annual review of his case his guardian told me that he would like to have his right to vote reinstated. The man has been institutionalized his entire life. I met with him and conducted my own evaluation of his ability to comprehend the election process. After seeing his ability to communicate using a physical aid it was clear he was well-informed and capable of making an informed decision in the ballot box, with the use of an aid. I filed a petition on his behalf; we participated in a contested hearing as to his abilities and the court agreed that he was certainly intelligent, informed, and was worthy of regaining this constitutional right that had been removed 20 years earlier. The man and his family were elated that I was able to see past his disability and use the law to regain a cherished constitutional right. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: I represented E. B. in multiple felony forgery and fraud charges. She was an accomplished Nursing Assistant and had begun taking classes to become an R.N. With the felony charges, she had her name added to the "Caregiver Misconduct" registry. We appealed the decision and I negotiated a settlement with the WI Dept. of Families whereby her name would be removed after one year. I also contested a second "caregiver misconduct" registry case for a daycare owner. We went to a contested hearing and won. Her day care is now open and providing care to children today. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). I have participated in ADR [Alternative Dispute Resolution] training through Marquette University (1997 through 1999) and have also recently taken the University of Wisconsin Divorce and Family Mediation Training. I mediate approximately 1 to 2 family law matters every month for the Portage County Family Court Commissioner. The statutes limit us to mediating only custody and placement issues for the county. I have also been retained privately to mediate guardianships and other family matters. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: Treasurer, Veronica Isherwood for Portage County District Attorney (when she ran as a Democrat, unsuccessful) Previous appointments and runs for public office: Portage County Circuit Court, 2016 (lost in general election) Village of Park Ridge trustee and president, 2012-2018 (appointed and then elected) Stevens Point Area Public School District, 2014-2020 (won elections) Portage County clerk of circuit court, 2011-2017 (appointed and then elected) All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Susan Happ, Wisconsin attorney general, 2014 Joanne Kloppenburg, Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2011 Rebecca Dallet, Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2018 Jill Karofsky, Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2020 Katrina Shankland, Wisconsin Assembly, various Julie Lassa, Wisconsin State Senate, various Paul Piotrowski, Wisconsin State Senate, currently Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Portage County Bar Association, 1998-present; officer 2013-2016, including as president Rotary of Greater Portage County, 2012-present, including as president Community Foundation of Central Wisconsin, 2014-2020, including as president Mid-State Independent Living Choices Inc., 2012-present, including as director and president Wisconsin State Bar, Bar Relations committee, 2017-present Wisconsin Judicare, Inc., director, 2017-present Friends of Emerson Park, member, 2019-2020 Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: As listed … above, I have represented K.F. as a Portage County Legal Aid case since November 2017. I have logged nearly 200 hours of pro bono representation in her matter. (I have also paid for countless documents; certifications and subpoenas in her case, as I know she is unable to pay for these things). Recently, a social worker called me and asked me to represent another young woman with an autistic child in a domestic abuse restraining order hearing to protect her and the child. I asked that the woman see if she qualified for Portage County Legal Aid Society representation and if yes, would handle the restraining order matter. She qualified. There was also an on-going CPS matter and the family court order needed to be modified. We held multiple evidentiary hearings to ensure that she and the child were protected from her abusive former boyfriend. I represented her in a day-long trial in her post-judgment family court matter, as well as the restraining order. We successfully changed custody and placement in the family matter and obtained an injunction which provided the protection my client and her vulnerable child needed. I volunteered at a State Bar of Wisconsin "Wills for Heros" clinic for the Wausau Police Department in 2018. I saw what a terrific program it is and decided to organize a clinic in Portage County with the Bar Association. We held it in 2019 serving 40 police officers. I have attempted to organize a second clinic, however have been unable due to the pandemic. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge -- My greatest passion as a lawyer has been to represent those who might not have a voice in our justice system: the vulnerable child, an intimidated victim, or a senior who can no longer speak. It has been fulfilling to me to represent the State in criminal cases where justice was achieved for a victim; rehabilitation obtained for an addict, or expungement for a deserving teen. In every case, I advocate for the best result possible using the many tools that the justice system offers. I have had a unique and varied legal path. Law was a second career for me, attending Madison while pregnant with my first and second children. In addition to being a lawyer, I have been a stay-at-home mom, a co-parent in a divorce, served as Clerk of Circuit Court and been a long-time school board member. I have been so much more than just a lawyer. Every position: prosecutor, defense attorney, guardian ad litem, Asst. City Attorney, and Clerk of Court has given me a unique perspective and a broader understanding of our complex justice system. It has also given me an opportunity to learn how the systems work and the tools that each area offers. Attending law school was a privilege for me. I was the first person in our family to attend college. I can see the rungs on the ladder that were extended for me. My goal has always been to improve the lives of all I touch and to repay the opportunities that were given to me. In every position I have held, I have worked to uphold our legal institutions by treating all people with respect and dignity. It is vital to understand that the litigants that enter the system might be dealing with one of their worst moments of their life; a divorce, an eviction, or addressing a crime. The integrity of our legal system depends squarely on the integrity and empathy of the judges running those courts. It also relies on the judge appreciating that this case might be the most important moment in this litigant's life. This requires listening, humility, and empathy; qualities that I have always strived to demonstrate. We must also acknowledge that our courts are at a crossroads: we have never had so many pro se litigants; our systems are being scrutinized for its treatment of people of color, and how it interfaces with law enforcement; we are using electronic technology in court hearings that lowers the decorum and perception of the courts. These issues must be addressed. My varied background gives me unique tools to understand and work towards resolution. I embrace the challenges these issues present. My career path has been unique and varied; I have always tried to see the glass half-full, and I have embraced opportunities for improvement. Should I be appointed, I would bring all these life experiences to the bench. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. As a three-term member of the Stevens Point Board of Education, for me the case that has demonstrated a significant impact to residents of Wisconsin is Davis v Grover 166 Wis. 2nd 501, 480 N.W. 2d 460 (1992). In the late 1980's then Governor Tommy Thompson advocated for a parental choice program to allow the State of Wisconsin to send taxpayer money to private schools to educate children. The first program was the Milwaukee Public Choice Program (MPCP) and was authorized as part of the budget bill in 1989. Actions by Superintendent of Public Instruction, Herbert J. Grover, caused a school parent Lanzetta Davis, and her daughter to challenge. The issues presented to the court were regarding the constitutionality of how the bill was enacted; the uniform district school clause and whether the classification of the bill, applying only to residents of a "first class city" was a violation of the Wisconsin Constitution, Sect. IV, Art. 18. The Supreme Court, by a five to four majority ruled that the process by which the bill was created was constitutional and that the "first class city" classification was likewise constitutional. This despite only being available to "Milwaukee" residents. The Supreme Court found that how the legislation was enacted - as part of the budget bill, to be constitutional. While they discussed the substantive issues of poverty in the City of Milwaukee that brought about the need for reform, the reality is those comments were nothing more than windowdressing for their analysis of whether the bill was a violation of the constitution. Additionally, while they stated a controversial bill should be vigorously debated in both houses of the legislature, only the dissent points out the lack of such a debate in the full senate. The Supreme Court provided a defense of the goals of the program stating reform was necessary due to the "monumentally oppressive poverty problems as found in first class cities...". However, this was nothing more than dicta, as the real issue before them was the process by which the bill was passed - as part of the budget. Once this method of passing school legislation (via the budget) was deemed constitutional, it created a gateway for subsequent legislation which allowed religious schools to receive funding via the choice program in 1994. It also set the stage for the dramatic statewide expansion of school choice throughout Wisconsin in 2011. Today the State spends over $145 million on private school vouchers annually and every dollar is taken from the local public school district. The majority created a precedent which justified this process of enacting controversial legislation. The precedent has affected local school districts across the state since its decision. The result of this decision by the Supreme Court has impacted the delivery of education to generations of Wisconsin schoolchildren. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: While I have worked with many wonderful judges these three stand out in my personal experience: Hon. Jill Falstad, Circuit Court Branch 1, Marathon County I worked with Judge Jill Falstad when she was District Attorney for Marathon County. I can state unequivocally that she was my mentor and the person that instilled in me my work ethic. When people state that I am thorough and well-prepared, the credit all goes to Judge Falstad. We co-counseled multiple jury trials in which I learned the benefit of preparation. Additionally, she has always pursued justice with a passion and done "the right thing" even when that meant doing the most difficult thing. We once disagreed on a disposition in a domestic abuse homicide. While we disagreed, she displayed a remarkable sense of compassion and never swayed from seeking justice in the case. When District Attorney Falstad ascended to the bench in Marathon County, I knew she would take that work ethic, her dogged pursuit of justice, and deep compassion with her. While she turned out to be a tough sentencing judge, my clients who appeared in her court were always treated with respect, dignity, and listened to thoughtfully. If I am appointed to the bench I will aspire to be as thorough, as thoughtful, and as compassionate as her. Hon. Gregory Grau: Circuit Court Branch 4, Marathon County I had the good fortune of trying multiple jury trials in front of Judge Grau when I worked as an Assistant District Attorney in Marathon County. I have chosen Judge Grau because he pushed me to "find the authority" for every decision. I recall my law professors telling us to always look to the statutes. I received the same admonition from Judge Grau asking "what is your authority for that?" countless times. A good judge listens but also demands preparation and a solid footing upon which decisions are to be made. Judge Grau was that judge - demanding the best from those appearing in front of him. He pushed me to reach farther, work harder, and always know the authority for which I made my requests. He was an outstanding role model. Hon. Frederic Fleishauer: Circuit Court Branch 1, Portage County I appeared before Judge Fleishauer more times than I can count. He was always thoroughly versed in the statutes and case law and an excellent jurist. However, I am listing him here because of my admiration for his leadership in our community. Judge Fleishauer advocated tirelessly for thoughtful problem-solving in the justice system. He was the catalyst for the creation of the Portage County Justice Coalition more than twenty years ago; our pre-trial supervision program for OWI offenders; and a private organization (Justiceworks Ltd.) to provide mentors and other alternative programs in the criminal justice system. He was deeply involved in our community, a true advocate for justice, and embodied the role of leader of the Portage County Justice system. The proper role of a judge: A Circuit Court Judge is a leader in the county justice system, a role model and moral compass for a community. In the courtroom the judge needs to exhibit decorum but also listen carefully to all parties. Respect for all people in the courtroom is essential. Most people will enter a courtroom only once or twice in their lifetimes. It may be one of the most difficult moments in that person's life. A judge must remember that while day-to-day hearings might become rote and routine, for the person seated in front of them, this might be the most critical moment of their life. A judge must give that interaction the great weight such an encounter deserves. The court must base its rulings on the proper authority, be it statutes or case law. A judge must be prepared and well-versed in the applicable statutes and case law. A Circuit Court judge does not make law, but rather applies existing law to the situation before it, even when the judge may not agree with the applicable law. When a judge rules, they should clearly explain the basis upon which they are relying. A recitation of the relevant facts is essential to understand why the judge ruled the way they did. A Circuit Court judge respects the role of the jury as the finder-of-fact and equally respects the constitutional role of jurors in the justice process. It is important for the judge to be perceived by all as fair and impartial in all matters. When there is a perception that it might not be possible to appear to be fair and impartial, the judge must be prepared to recuse him or herself and allow another court to handle the matter. A judge realizes the power of their words - they can encourage a defendant to improve themselves, speak to divorcing parents about the value of co-parenting and mutual respect, or motivate a litigant toward rehabilitation. The role of the judge in treatment or alternative rehabilitation programs is monumental. The judge can empathize with a defendant, inspire, motivate, or buoy up a relapsed defendant. As a team member for treatment courts, the judge bears the ultimate responsibility when a defendant fails and needs consequences or to be expelled from the program. Outside of the courtroom the judge is a community leader and the face of the county justice system. The judge must be able to turn a blind eye to criticisms for unpopular rulings. The judge's personal life is on display, as well. Actions by the judge and his or her family in the community must be beyond reproach. A judge should consider themselves a role model for good citizenship. Lastly, the role of the judge is to be an ambassador for the justice system. A judge listens, and cares deeply for the integrity of the justice system. A good judge imbues respect in all ways for our constitutional form of government. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: LaKeisha D. Haase
Appointed to: Winnebago County Circuit Court Appointment date: Dec. 7, 2020 (defeated in April 2022 election) Education: Law School – Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, Oshkosh High School – Franklin High, Franklin, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: February 2019-present – Associate attorney, paralegal supervisor, Hogan Eickhoff, S.C., Appleton, Wisconsin September 2011-January 2019 – Assistant state public defender, Office of State Public Defender, Appleton, Wisconsin Bar and Administrative Memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court General character of practice: The general character of my current practice consists of Family Law - pre and post-disposition; criminal defense to include minor traffic offenses through Class A felonies, revocation proceedings before Administrative Law Judges; CHIPs proceedings where I represent both parents and children; Termination of Parental Rights proceedings representing both children and parents; Civil Litigation limited to Injunction Proceedings; Chapter 51 Commitments; and Chapter 54 and 55 proceedings. Number of cases tried to verdict: 4 List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: Injunction proceeding in Manitowoc County before Court Commissioner Charles Wingrove - the petitioner - wife alleged that my client, the respondent - spouse, sexually assaulted her throughout the court of the relationship and petitioned the court for an injunction. My client had a prior sexual assault conviction and was a registered sex offender. I obtained text messages between the parties. I was able to illicit testimony at the proceeding proving that the petitioner created the allegations due to infidelity and my client choosing to leave the marriage. My client was afraid that the injunction would jeopardize his placement with his children in the subsequent divorce proceedings. My client was fearful of testifying due to his past convictions. I spent a significant amount of time preparing my client for testimony. The petition for injunction was denied. Following the hearing, the clerk ran after me to not only congratulate me but inform me that throughout the proceeding she was messaging other clerks about the hearing because she was impressed with my preparation and professionalism. She also informed me that the court commissioner is rarely impressed by any counsel and responded positively to my representation of counsel, my professionalism, and preparedness. She then urged me to take more cases in Manitowoc County. 2nd degree and 3rd degree sexual assault in Brown County before the Honorable Donald Zuidmuilder …. The state alleged that my client sexually assaulted his family friend after a night out of drinking at a concert. The state moved to admit other acts. Specifically, the state wanted to admit evidence of the client grabbing another individual's breast years earlier in Michigan. As co-counsel for the client, a police officer, I drafted the objection for other acts. My primary role as co-counsel was to cross-examine the alleged victim at trial. My objection to the state's motion for other acts was successful and the court denied the state's motion. In preparation for trial, I reviewed the text message exchanges between the alleged victim and her husband which led to defense preparing to present additional motions to include the exchanges at trial. The state eventually dismissed the case, I believe, in part on the strong defense presented during pretrial hearings and telephone conferences with the state. Unfortunately, the state did refile the case later. I am co-counsel to a client on a 1st Degree Intentional Homicide charge in Outagamie County before the Honorable Gregory B. Gill, Jr. … I am the eighth attorney that has been appointed and the only attorney that has not been fired by the client. This case has been scheduled for trial on three separate occasions and the adjournments have not been due to defense counsel. My involvement in this case is significant because of my commitment to representing people of color, specifically, black men that are incarcerated in smaller counties in Wisconsin on higher level offenses. I am aware of the lack of legal representation from attorney's of color in the State of Wisconsin and I am all to familiar with the desire of clients to trust the judicial system even if it is a small fraction by way of their counsel. This client has expressed his appreciation of having an attorney of color represent him, an attorney that understands the cultural differences and dynamics that are important for him. My representation of this client has been nothing short of zealous advocacy but I also developed a relationship with him that is built on likeness and understanding that prior counsel could never provide. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: While employed with the Office of the State Public Defender I represented defendant's in revocation proceedings. As an Assistant State Public Defender, I represented countless clients in revocation proceedings. In private practice, I continue to represent clients at revocation proceedings, I have represented four clients in revocation proceedings while in private practice; three of which I was successful in avoiding revocation and one was a waiver of right to a revocation hearing. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). Outagamie County Drug and Alcohol Abuse Treatment Court (DATC) - As defense counsel team member, I was an integral part of the Drug Court team, I participated in pre-court staffings, hearings, team communication and decision making, information sharing, and team training. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: N/A Previous runs for public office: N/A All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: N/A Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Women in Management, 2020 to present Wisconsin Association of African American Lawyers, 2011 to present Wisconsin Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, 2019 to present National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, 2020 to present Winnebago County Bar Association, 2019 to present Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: As an Assistant State Public Defender I was restricted from practicing or volunteering in any legal capacity outside of the agency. As an Assistant State Public Defender, I was a member of the Affirmative Action Equal Employment Opportunity Advisory Committee, the Outagamie County Coordinating Counsel Committee, the Outagamie County Racial Disparity Committee, and the Outagamie County Evidence Based Decision Making Committee. As a student at Marquette University Law School, I volunteered at the Family Law Clinic, Small Claims Clinic, and the Pro Bono Legal Clinic. Prior to law school and while an employee at the Winnebago County Courthouse, I volunteered at the Legal Self Help Clinic and the Drunk Driving Victim Impact Panel. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: I want to serve the people of Wisconsin as a Judge because I believe in the need to have a fair and impartial judiciary. I believe that a fair and impartial judiciary must be made up of individuals who are educated, compassionate, and diverse. I have practiced in the State of Wisconsin for over 9 years. I have approached every case and client with professionalism and respect. I have used my voice and position as an attorney as both learning and teachable moments. I have spent countless hours in the courtroom. I have practiced before Judges in over 12 different counties. I know that every person, is deserving of respect. I want to serve the people of Wisconsin, as Circuit Court Judge, for the same reasons that I chose to become an attorney, and that is to have a lasting impact on people, regardless of the case, the litigant, or the party. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. Although, there are many cases that have had an impact, whether negative, on positive, on Wisconsin citizens, Citizens United v. Federal Election Committee greatly impacted the citizens of Wisconsin. The 5-4 decision by the United States Supreme Court, has allowed for a minute fraction of residents to have an overwhelming, bull-horn, influence in elections while essentially muting the microphone of Wisconsin citizens as it relates to local politics and issues specific to Wisconsin residents. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: One Judge that I admire is Retired Judge Thomas Gritton, Winnebago County. I had the pleasure to work for Judge Gritton as his court assistant. As a former prosecutor, Judge Gritton was committed to educating himself on all areas of the law to make an informed and impartial decision in every case before him. I was able to witness firsthand the respect he gave every person, regardless of the case, that entered his courtroom. I had a front row seat to the decisions he had to make and the thought that he put into each case whether it was a civil matter, criminal, family, or a minor traffic offense. The cases and tough decisions were at times difficult for him, yet he never treated, even the simplest of cases, as though the parties were not impacted by the justice system and ultimately impacted by him. Judge Gritton’s time on the bench was never about just getting cases through the system. I vividly recall walking through the doors of the Winnebago County Courthouse with Judge Gritton one afternoon when a woman walked up to him, calling out his name. She reminded him of her criminal case and sentence; it was a prison sentence and the first and only time she was sentenced to prison. To my surprise, she thanked him. She thanked him for the words at her hearing and thanked him for sending her to prison. She expressed that admittedly when he sentenced her, she was angry and upset. She went on to tell him that over time she thought about what he told her and was determined to turn her life. In addition to Judge Gritton, there are many other Judges and Justices that I admire, but a true standout is Justice Sonia Sotomayor. As a Justice, even when she is not a part of the majority, she speaks up. Her dissents as it relates to race, gender, criminal justice reform and discrimination are powerful, moving, and educational. Her reputation of extending kindness and respect to parties is well known. The proper role of a judge: The proper role of a Judge is to be a courtroom administrator. A judge is to interpret the law while apply the laws to the facts of a case while remaining impartial. A judge must be fully prepared to rule on matters, listen intently, and do the necessary work to lead to an informed, educated, and impartial decision. A judge has a duty to every person that enters the courtroom to treat them with respect, show dignity, and rule according to the law. A Judge must bring respect and dignity to the bench. A judge must learn and teach. I previously spoke of teachable moments, but it is clear that a judge has a duty to the community to teach and inform of those areas of the law that impacts the community. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Tricia L. Walker
Appointed to: Fond du Lac County Circuit Court Appointment date: Nov. 24, 2020 (elected to a six-year term in April 2022) Education: Law School – Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Platteville High School – Northern Ozaukee High, Fredonia, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: July 2010-present – Attorney/owner, Law Office of Tricia L. Walker, LLC, Campbellsport, Wisconsin January 2010-June 2014 – Adjunct professor, Bryant and Stratton College, Madison, Wisconsin August 2010-January 2011 – Adjunct professor, Northeastern Wisconsin Technical College, Platteville, Wisconsin August 2010-January 2011 – Adjunct professor, Fox Valley Technical College, Appleton, Wisconsin February 2010-June 2010 – Associate attorney, Mum and Martin, SC, Waukesha, Wisconsin September 2009-December 2009 – Attorney, Friends of Abused Families, West Bend, Wisconsin June 2006-August 2009 – Associate attorney, Dahlberg Przybyla Law, Jackson, Wisconsin Bar and Administrative Memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin General character of practice: I am a solo practitioner. I handle the practice areas of criminal defense, family law, basic estate planning, CHIPS, restraining orders, guardianship, small claims, evictions and Guardian ad Litem. I have previously worked on matters including personal injury, contract, intentional torts, life insurance, business and LLC organization, general business law and pharmacuetical legal work. Describe typical clients: I work with a variety of people due to the diverse nature of my practice. My focus areas are criminal defense, CHIPS, family law and guardian ad. litem work. I work with everyone from children to prisoners. I am particularly well known as a guardian ad litem for Fond du Lac County due to my thorough work in this area. Number of cases tried to verdict: 13 (approximate) List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: The trial case that stands out to me is In RE the marriage of [redacted] (it is sealed on CCAP by order of the court) …. I became attorney of record on 10/10/2014 and my most recent appearance occurred in 2019. I remain attorney of record in this matter. The original trial was bifurcated; the issues surrounding the children were heard on April 9, 2015 and the issues surrounding finances were heard on June 24, 2015. I became involved in this matter as a pro bono appointment through Legal Action of Wisconsin. I took this case on due to the husband's severe level of abuse towards both the wife and the minor children. My client was … a lovely person who is one of many people who have managed to escape an abusive marriage. Her bravery in facing a man who had beaten her and her children is both heartbreaking and inspiring. This case is significant because her case is the worst level of child abuse I have ever had to work on. I also handled it while pregnant and I had to fight to remain on the case due to a disagreement with the judge on how my pregnancy would affect the scheduling of the case. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: My primary experience with administrative work is as a defense counsel for revocation of probation matters and OWI administrative suspension. I have handled dozens of revocations, whether we go to a full hearing or if we manage to resolve prior to a hearing. I have handled a few OWI administrative suspension hearings. The limited amount of OWI administrative hearings is due to the short time limits on the same. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation): I have participated in mediations as a family law attorney and a GAL for the minor children on multiple occassions. I represented parties in a number of mediations when I practiced personal injury law. I handled one case as an attorney mediator for a divorce. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: None Previous runs for public office: None All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Michael Kenitz, Circuit Court judge, 2020 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Mahala’s Hope (substance abuse facility), board member, August 2020-present Campbellsport Theater, board member, 2009-present Campbellsport Library, board member and treasurer, 2011-2018 Peace United Church of Christ, member and service on committees, 2014-present at various points Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: I volunteer at the family law legal clinic in Fond du Lac, which is a monthly clinic. I volunteer approximately three times per year. During this volunteer work, I give general advice and help direct pro se litigants to the correct paperwork for their matter. I have also worked with Legal Action through their referral service. As a private attorney, I have viewed it as my duty to take lower financial value cases, such as State Public Defender appointments and participation in the modest means program through the Wisconsin State Bar. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: I wish to serve as a Fond du Lac County Circuit Court Judge because I bring a wide knowledge base due to my practice of law that will positively serve both the community and litigants. I also believe that my diversity in both life and legal experience brings a different viewpoint to the bench. Our courts are currently filled with judges who have had very similar life experiences. This is even truer in rural Wisconsin. As an attorney, I know what it’s like to be the only person in the room that looks like me. I have been mistaken for a court reporter, client or interpreter over the years, despite carrying my briefcase filled with legal files and being appropriately attired at courthouse. I have spoken English to an attorney only to receive the short retort that he “does not speak Spanish” (which is probably weirder since I am Asian). I have experienced discrimination in its most blatant and insidious forms. One might ask why does diversity matter on the bench? It matters in all the ways representation matters. When we help amplify voices for people from differing backgrounds, we help achieve justice through understanding and compassion. People from differing backgrounds bring a varied insight to the bench that can lead to a positive public enrichment. It means that I also recognize discrimination from my seat and that I would do my very best to make sure that our judicial system will not tolerate injustice. It means that I would want to make sure that every voice has an opportunity to be heard in the courtroom. I wish to elevate to being a judge so I may run a fair bench with an academic approach to deciding matters. I am a former adjunct lecturer and the daughter of two educators who taught me to carefully explain and defend my positions. I will be the teacher’s child even on the bench. This means I will speak carefully and plainly to litigants without condescension or careless words. We have all had amazing educators in our lives and the best teachers rarely had to yell to get their point across. I would bring that type of academic approach to the bench. I would require litigants and attorneys to engage in respectful discourse. I would be properly prepared for court. I would remain open to learning new areas and expanding my knowledge base. I want to be a judge who makes careful decisions based on the legal record. I want to continue the local drug court program, which is in jeopardy of being eliminated if the new judge will not continue it. I simply believe we cannot incarcerate addiction out of people and that if a person can endure the rigors of drug court then they have a better chance of success in sobriety. I want to be a judge because I believe that I can do the job well. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin: The case I feel that had the most positive affect on the people of Wisconsin is Obergefell vs. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015). As the panel and Governor Evers will know, this is the case that determined that same sex marriage is legal in all fifty states. Marriage equality has long reaching legal ramifications. Obergefell had the impact of legitimizing thousands of same sex unions. The majority decision noted that “[n]o union is more profound than marriage” and the litigants simply asked for “equal dignity in the eyes of the law.” The impact of this decision resonated in an immediate change of legal issues within family law, estate planning, adoption, foster care, and health care law. As an attorney who has addressed family law issues and estate planning, this had an obvious effect on my clients and their lives. It also had an effect on criminal matters where domestic violence victims in a same sex relationship were now mandated to be treated with equality instead of derision by some courts. Prior to Obergefell, we were treating LGTBQ Americans as second-class citizens. It was the “separate but equal” for a new millennium with an appalling Plessy v. Ferguson sensation to it. With the patchwork quilt of states determining that a marriage will not be recognized in State A but recognized in State B and other states recognizing civil unions but not marriage, we created a shocking and dehumanizing standard in our country. Wisconsin was part of that legacy as we did not recognize same sex marriage. More than that, Obergefell is a case that amplified the holding in Loving v. Virginia. Without the holding in Loving, my own life would be very different. I would not be married to my husband and I would not be the mother of three biracial children. I see how Obergefell will affect my children’s generation through my own experience. Obergefell is not safe from attack. As recently shown in the dissents by Justice Thomas and Alito in the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the Kim Davis appeal, there are justices that wish to scale back equality. As Americans and as people who should care for each other, we should be judged on how we treat people who hold different principles and life experiences. We should not view that our experiences are the only ones with value. It is only when we can recognize that all people deserve equality under the law that we are truly a country that lives up to the premise that all people are created equal. Obergefell is a case that touches us all because equality in the law touches us all. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: The obvious answer is that we all stand on the shoulders of the notorious RBG. She helped women open the door to equality. I adore her ability to reach across the political aisle to befriend Antonin Scalia, which caused RBG to sharpen her own dissents. There are so many accolades that could be heaped upon her that I could not possibly stay within the word limit and therefore I shall simply state it is an honor to walk the path she helped forge for all people. I also admire Judge Jean DiMotto, judge emeritus from Milwaukee County. When I was a young attorney, fresh out of law school, I had the privilege of being in her court. The hearing would now be a cake walk, but at the time I’m sure I was slightly terrified. When we were done with our hearing, she took me into chambers. She welcomed me to the profession and kindly engaged me in a lively discussion. She discussed her own experiences as both a woman and an attorney and how it affected her career. In short, she took the time to explain to a baby attorney that we have all been there. In her time on the bench, I saw the same person who brought a sense of warmth and understanding. Her character shone through both on and off the bench. I followed her blog when she was undergoing chemotherapy and her eloquence continued with a self-deprecating fighting spirit. I found her to be a wonderfully effective judge and a person who deserves my utmost respect. I am simply sad that I did not appear in front of her more often. I have an enduring admiration for Justice Sonia Sotomayer. She’s a person who will never tone back her true self for policy or appearance. As the first Latina on the Supreme Court, she has adopted retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s pet project of civics education. She goes beyond the standard law school visits and takes the time to even visit elementary schools. This is a beautiful way to engage the average person in a discourse on important issues. Her background as an educator provides her with insight on direct engagement with the public and introduces these foundational ideas to possible future litigators and future decisionmakers. I prefer her “of the people touch” to an ivory tower mentality. I believe that judges best serve our public when they do not forget what the average person comprehends and would interpret the law. While I don’t always agree with the “hot bench” mentality she brings forth, I appreciate that the best judges ask insightful questions and forces the litigants and attorneys to be properly prepared. I think she has more than earned my respect through her rigorous defense of the Fourth Amendment. She and Justice Gorsuch often join forces to address Fourth Amendment issues. This is important because it shows that our Constitution is not for playing politics but for enforcing protections provided to all people within our borders. The proper role of a judge: A judge is to be physical manifestation of justice in a courtroom. It is his/her/their job to establish order, maintain procedure, determine evidentiary propriety and weigh the standards of each case. A judge should take the time to be properly prepared. This can mean requiring information prior to hearings or at minimum reviewing the court record/filings prior to a hearing. No one should have to endure the judge who is first reading the filings while seated at the bench. A judge should not unreasonably delay decisions. People need finality and the legal process is expensive for most people. A judge should be wary of even the appearance of impropriety. It is incumbent upon judges to enter the courtroom with an open mind and a listening ear. A judge should treat all with respect. A circuit court judge sets the tone for all following hearings and should be aware that the decisions of the court affect individuals directly and can bend the course of an individual’s life. A judge should be compassionate. This is not to say lenient but rather to be conscious of the distress that a decision can render towards litigants. I have been in front of judges who can send a person to prison with compassion. I have been in front of judges who feel that screaming about a minor infraction is a worthwhile venture. I think a judge should reserve harsh words for the litigant who will not respond to any other method. I think a judge should remember that the strict rules and procedures still have a human element to it. I do not think that a judge should treat litigants or attorneys with disdain over human conditions. A judge is bound by the laws and the precedents and should view cases through that lens. It is particularly important that a judge adheres to those requirements to make a proper record to avoid appellate congestion. A judge who disregards the law does no one any justice or civil service. I believe that attorneys who have spent time doing litigation will best understand that a judge should take the time to explain the reasoning for each decision. It creates the best record but more importantly, it helps the litigants understand the decision and feel heard. Many litigants will never return to court and this is the only impression they will have of our justice system. A litigant should walk away from the court feeling that a judge understood the facts even if he/she/they disagreed on the application of those facts to the law. I believe that where a judge engages in this behavior, the litigants and attorneys walk away with a more thorough understanding of the experience. In short, a judge will be the line of defense to prevent an unjust result. A judge should be mindful of this great honor and utilize his/her/their words carefully to provide for a proper functioning courtroom. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Suzanne O’Neill
Appointed to: Marathon County Circuit Court Appointment date: June 22, 2020 (elected to a six-year term in April 2021) Education: Law School – DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois Undergraduate – St. Bonaventure University, St. Bonaventure, New York High School – Trinity High, River Forest, Illinois Recent legal employment: January 2020-present – Deputy Trial Division director, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Wisconsin 2017-2019 – Regional attorney manager, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Wausau, Wisconsin 2004-2017 – Local attorney manager, public defender, same 1991-2004 – Assistant state public defender, same Bar and Administrative Memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin General character of practice: My practice centers around criminal defense of indigent clients, and includes representing clients charged with all levels of felonies, misdemeanors and traffic offenses. Additionally, my practice includes representing vulnerable individuals such as juveniles alleged to have committed delinquent acts, children alleged to be in need of protection and services, parents facing termination of parental rights and children and adults responding to petitions for civil commitments and protective placements. Describe typical clients: My typical clients are indigent, marginalized individuals. I have specialized in criminal defense cases, including felony, misdemeanor and traffic cases. Throughout my career, I have at various times specialized in particular areas of defense, including: sexual predator commitment cases, sexually violent offender cases, abusive head trauma cases, not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect cases, juvenile cases, termination of parental right cases. Number of cases tried to verdict: More than 30 to a jury List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: I was counsel for the mother in a Termination of Parental Rights case, in Marathon County … from April, 2019 to January, 2020. My role as lead counsel was to prepare the case for trial. After deposing the relevant social workers, it became clear that social services had failed to provide adequate services to the mother who had cognitive limitations. The discovery through depositions forced the county to dismiss the petition. It was significant because by deposing the social workers, my client retained the rights to her child, keeping her family intact. Additionally, it brought to light the poor practices of social services which will presumably cause change in their operations and produce success with future families. I was co-counsel in a complex felony domestic violence case, in Marathon County … from September, 2017 to April, 2018. I joined the case as co-counsel to assist a junior staff attorney when the case appeared to becoming increasingly complex. My role was to research motions, prepare for trial, and develop a trusting relationship with the client. The case was complicated by its similarities with allegations from a local mass shooting that had traumatized the community months earlier that had been reported extensively in the media. I successfully argued a change of venire motion that caused the prosecutor to re-evaluate the case and offer a deferred entry of judgement agreement. Our client avoided a felony conviction that would likely have resulted in a significant prison term. I represented a client charged with a Class C felony drug offense, in Marathon County … from August, 2018-December, 2019. After thorough investigation, I was able to negotiate a reduction of the charge to a Class E felony. At the contested sentencing hearing, the court adopted my argument that probation was the appropriate disposition rather than the multiple year prison term advocated by the state. It was significant because my client was the mother of three young children; she struggled with chemical dependency but had never been afforded the opportunity for treatment. The sentence imposed provided her an opportunity for community based treatment while continuing to care for her children. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: Experience limited to representing clients at revocation of community supervision cases before the Division of Hearings and Appeals Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). Experience includes consulting with State Public Defender agency leaders concerning agency compliance. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: None listed Previous runs for public office: None listed All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Jill Karofsky, Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2020 Lisa Neubauer, Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2019 Michael Moran, Marathon County Circuit Court, 2011 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Marathon County Bar Association, 2004 to present; president, 2013 Marathon County Criminal Defense Bar, 2011 to present National Association for Public Defense, 2019 to present Marathon County Library Foundation, 2013-2019, including as president and vice president Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: None listed Quotes: Why I want to be a judge — Public service is my vocation. I went to law school with the purpose to become a public servant. I hoped to find a career in which I could help people who were struggling to find fairness and equity in a society that marginalized their existence. I wanted to advocate for just solutions in our often unfair and chaotic world. Upon graduating from law school, I came to the State of Wisconsin to serve its citizens as a public defender, where I have remained through my career. As a public defender, I have worked to ensure that indigent defendants receive a zealous defense and are treated fairly and with dignity. I have found fulfillment in helping marginalized individuals in the search of fairness and in advocating for justice for them. I have enjoyed being a voice for those who might otherwise be silent. I have attained satisfaction knowing that through my efforts individual clients have received justice and that they have perceived that they are valued in the judicial system, that their voice matters, that they have been heard and that the system has been fair to them. I want to serve the people of Wisconsin as a judge because I want to continue to help people who are struggling to find fairness and equity. I want to find and apply just solutions to conflicts regardless of a litigant's stature in society. I want litigants to be heard, to be respected and to know that they are valued by the judicial system. I want to help people and entities navigate conflict and resolve conflict for them in an atmosphere of honesty, integrity, and dignity. The people of Wisconsin deserve a judiciary that will honor and respect the rights and liberties guaranteed by our constitution. Ensuring a fair, just and impartial forum for our citizens to argue and resolve conflict would provide me with personal and professional meaning and satisfaction. The constitutional republic established by our country's founders remains the fairest and best form of government. The system of checks and balances adopted in our republic demand that each branch of government remain strong to ensure its continued success. It is important that judges act with courage in questioning the failures or abuses of the other branches of government. It is important that judges be audacious in the protection of recognized rights and liberties. It is important that the judiciary be comprised of hard working, well-reasoned, selfless judges seeking to better society rather than their own personal gain. I want to serve the people of Wisconsin as a judge to ensure that the people of this great state have a judge who will work hard, listen attentively, reason thoughtfully, provide dignified resolutions to every conflict and communicate every decision in a manner honoring the importance of every issue to each litigant. I want be a judge who demonstrates the courage and audacity to protect the rights and liberties of the citizens of our state. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. The citizens of Wisconsin were once divided over the right of all couples to marry. A marginally enacted state constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman was held unconstitutional in Wolf v. Walker, 9 F.Supp.3d 889 (W.D.Wis.2014). Despite the Wolf Court's ruling, a divide remained within the state and the nation, as other states maintained marriage restrictions. Wisconsin's right of all couples to marry lacked complete legitimacy. The United States Supreme Court resolved any remaining doubt that same sex couples have a right to marry in Obergefell v. Hodges … (2015). In Obergefell, the Court affirmed that the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in a person's liberty, and thus, same sex couples must be afforded the right to marry pursuant to the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Obergefell delivered a nationwide message that all couples are free to marry, bridging a divide between states and within states, and positively impacting Wisconsin citizens. In recognizing marriage as a fundamental right and protecting same sex couples who want to enter the commitment of marriage, the Supreme Court provided equality and dignity to gay and lesbian citizens. When a right is denied to a class of people, the individuals within the discriminated class inherently perceive that they are not valued, are insignificant and have no meaningful place in society. The Obergefell decision provided gay and lesbian individuals with renewed self-worth and dignity, while reminding others that all individuals are entitled to respect, regardless of sexual orientation. Additionally, Obergefell provided children of same sex couples with a sense of security and belonging. All individuals need to sense that they are loved and that they belong to an acceptable community. Children are especially vulnerable and need reassurances of their value. When the family in which a child belongs is not respected, that child will struggle to find self-worth. Obergefell’s recognition that same sex couples have the fundamental right to marry and create a family, legitimizes those families. Mainstream acceptance of a child's loving family builds that child's sense of belonging and self-worth, empowering that child to prosper. In recognizing that same sex couples have a right to marry equal to that of opposite sex couples, Obergefell placed the government's imprimatur on same sex relationships and advanced society's acceptance of the LGBTQ community. American society has frequently struggled to accept as equal people who are considered "different". The country has a long history of discriminating against those perceived to be of less value and importance because of their race, gender, or sexual orientation. Discrimination is born from fear of the unfamiliar and often develops into hate. Until society views all individuals as equal and until all individual differences are valued, discrimination will continue and hate will prevail. In Obergefell, the Court proclaimed that same sex couples are equal and that they have value in every society, regardless of state lines, positively impacting Wisconsinites. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: While I admire many judges for their intellect, work ethic, skill and courage, Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall and Circuit Court Judge Greg Grau are admired for their judicial respect of humanity and promotion of individual dignity. Despite being born into an era beholden to Jim Crow laws, Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall tenaciously achieved success advancing civil rights and promoting racial equality. Denied admission to the University of Maryland Law School because of his race, Justice Marshall succeeded to earn a law degree from Howard University. Having personally experienced blatant racial discrimination, Marshall proceeded to dedicate his legal career to eradicating archaic segregation laws and to promoting equality and civil rights. As an attorney, Marshall zealously and successfully argued unpopular positions in cases that ultimately advanced the civil rights movement and paved a judicial path to positive change. As a U.S. Court of Appeals Judge and Supreme Court Justice, Marshall continued to advance the fair treatment of all individuals and the protection of the inherent rights of all citizens, regardless of race. From the bench, Marshall displayed sensitivity to the injustices of discrimination and voiced opinions to correct inequities. He persistently valued the civil liberties owed to all individuals. Although a conservative majority silenced Justice Marshall's voice on the Supreme Court later in his career, Marshall never stopped speaking the truth. He never stopped advocating for justice. He never lost sight of the marginalized individual and of the struggle of many to achieve respect, dignity and equality. I admire Justice Marshall for his determination in fighting for equality in the face of hatred, for his relentless advocacy for individual rights of all people, and his judicial protection and advancement of personal liberty. Although Circuit Court Judge Greg Grau did not comparatively impact the nation's civil rights movement, Judge Grau did display respect for the individual rights of litigants, equal to that of Justice Marshall. Throughout his judicial career, Judge Grau presided over thousands of cases. He approached each case thoroughly prepared, having read all filing and completed relevant research. He attentively received the evidence and listened to the arguments. He rationally considered and balanced competing interests. He applied the law and articulated reasoned, legally supported and practical decisions. While I admire Judge Grau's preparation and methodical case processing, what I admire most about Judge Grau is his consistent treatment of all litigants with respect and dignity. He was patient, empathetic and considerate toward every individual, regardless of the circumstance that brought the person to court. Despite the numerous cases in which he presided, he treated every individual with the recognition that each court appearance was a crucial moment in a litigant's life. Judge Grau never minimized the importance of a decision; he never entered an order without thought and careful consideration; he never forgot that the individuals who appeared before him to resolve their conflict deserved his full attention, the right to be heard and to be treated with respect and dignity. The proper role of a judge: The proper role of a judge is to actively guide litigants through the court process and to resolve controversies pursuant to valid laws, while fervently protecting the rights and liberties of individuals and entities. Controversies are appropriately resolved and rights and liberties are properly protected when a judge interprets and applies the law conscious of beliefs and values of current society. A judge must resolve current controversies cognizant of the present world. As society changes, so too must our recognition of rights and liberties and our resolutions of conflicts. At its core, the role of a judge is to be an impartial adjudicator. A judge must objectively listen to the litigants and witnesses, must consider the evidence and arguments, must research the issues, and must resolve the controversy while respecting the litigants and controlling the courtroom. In resolving the conflict, the judge must consider existing laws and past precedent, and apply those precepts to the case presented. The role of the court is to apply the laws the legislature has enacted and to consider how earlier courts have applied the law. The doctrine of stare decisis is a cornerstone of our judicial system. A court's deference and adoption of relevant precedent promotes predictability and fairness. It provides notice of how laws will be applied and aids in the orderly operation of the judicial system. Nevertheless, the role of the judge is not to simply rely blindly on precedent. The role of the judge is to consider how the existing laws and precedent apply to the current situation. Time and time again, courts have confronted and properly invalidated antiquated beliefs and presumptions, overruling precedent. Courts have redefined fundamental rights and liberties and recognized their need for protection, rights that likely would have never entered judicial discourse decades earlier. Without judicial evolution, judicial legitimacy would be lost. The proper role of a judge is to guide litigants through the court process and to resolve controversies pursuant to valid laws and in consideration of sound precedent. A judge's role goes behind the uncritical application of the past. A judge's role is to exercise reasoned judgement and act to protect fundamental rights and liberties regardless of antiquated verbiage. As Justice Kennedy succinctly stated, judges must "respect our history and learn from it without allowing the past alone to rule the present." "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Katherine Sloma
Appointed to: Shawano-Menominee Counties Circuit Court Appointment date: July 6, 2020 (elected to a six-year term in April 2021) Education: Law School – Ohio Northern University, Ada, Ohio Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Green Bay High School – Denmark High, Denmark, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: April 2018-present – City attorney, Shawano, Wisconsin November 2004-present – Attorney, Aschenbrener Woods Lamia Schmid, S.C., Shawano, Wisconsin Bar and Administrative Memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin Menominee Tribal Court Stockbridge-Munsee Tribal Court (lapsed) General character of practice: I am in a small, general practice firm. I typically handle municipal matters, family law matters (pre and post-judgment), residential and commercial real estate transactions, small claims cases (eviction and collection), corporate formation, estate planning and probate. I also have a heavy guardian ad litem practice which includes appointments in guardianships, protective placement cases, CHIPS cases and pre and post-judgment family court cases. I was an assistant city attorney in the City of Shawano for approximatley 10 years. In 2018 I was elected city the attorney in the City of Shawano. I find myself in court almost every day. Describe typical clients: Many of my clients are local people seeking help from an attorney for the first time ever. It is typical for a potential client to walk in the office and ask to see an attorney immediately. Other typical clients are court-appointed guardian ad litem clients and municipal clients. I do not specialize in any particular area but I tend to have the greatest concentration of cases in "family law" and guardian ad litem matters. Number of cases tried to verdict: 2 jury trials List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: Shawano County Case No. 18 CV 55: Shawano Redevelopment Authority vs. Dr. R.C. Samanta Roy Institute of Science In this case I represented the Shawano Redevelopment Authority. … The basic summary is as follows: The R.C. Samanta Roy Institute of Science is a group in Shawano that has a very volatile relationship with the city, staff, elected officials, and residents. Over the past 30 years, the group has purchased various parcels of real estate within the city and the allowed the parcels to sit vacant and crumble. The buildings have deteriorated and are unusable. Residents frequently complained about the state of the buildings. As city attorney, I was able to negotiate a settlement which allowed the city to take possession of the property located at 214 and 216 S. Main Street in Shawano. The settlement also required the group to repair another of its deteriorating buildings. This was a major win for the city and as a result, the city is optimistic that it may be able to work with the group in the future to acquire more of the deteriorating properties. Shawano County Cases 12 JC 47 and 13 TP 01 … and Milwaukee County Case No. 13 CV 6089 In the cases set forth above, I represented a young lady … I was her guardian ad litem throughout. … The basic summary is as follows: As a toddler, [she] was placed in foster care. She was shuffled through foster placements and relative placements (and between a couple of states) for several years. She eventually was placed with a foster family in western Shawano County. They adopted her. As [she] entered her teen years, she got into some minor legal trouble, but had significant problems with her adoptive family. Shawano County began a CHIPS case. [She] was once again placed in foster care. Her adoptive parents sought to terminate their parental rights, and did so, with the understanding that [she] would be re-adopted by her new foster family … Shortly after the termination of parental rights, but before the adoption, the family [including the girl and other foster children] were in a terrible car accident. … Six of the eight people in the vehicle died. [The girl] lived, but had significant burns. A civil suit followed. This case was significant to me for many different reasons. First, it was significant to me because it was one of my earlier CHIPS guardian ad litem cases. The case lasted several years, and eventually ended when [she] aged out of the system. I really felt connected to this case, due in part to the length but also to all the "ups and downs" that were associated with it. Notably, this was the first case I was involved in where parents were able to "un-adopt" a child. It was heartbreaking and frustrating, but in the end, it was in the best interests of the child After the vehicle accident, a personal injury case was commenced on [her] behalf and I was involved in the personal injury case as her guardian ad litem. This was also significant to me because it was a completely new area of the law for me. Ultimately the personal injury case settled and [she] received a significant financial settlement. As [her] guardian ad litem, I was able to participate in a large mediation with the multiple claimants. A significant and beneficial settlement was attained on [her] behalf. Upon the completion of the mediation, I was able to assist with the creation of a plan to distribute the funds to [her] via a trust. When the trust was in place, I was able to participate in minor settlement hearing in Milwaukee. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: Early in my practice I appeared before administrative law judges as a public defender representing clients at probation revocation hearings. I would estimate that I took appointments in those cases for the first 3 or 4 years of my practice. Approximatley 10 years ago I appeared at a few hearings on Social Security Disability appeals before administrative law judges. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). In my family court cases where custody and placement are in dispute, the parents are referred to local mediation held at the Shawano County Department of Human Services. As a party attorney, I am not allowed to participate in the mediation session. Nevertheless, I have a good understanding of our mediator's process and I must prepare my client for the mediation session(s). I explain what the client should expect during the mediation process and then and assist my client with the preparation of the mediation parenting plan. I have participated in many divorce mediation sessions that finalize as case settlement conferences. These sessions typically do not involve matters relating to children but involve contested financial matters. My firm has used other local attorneys to mediate cases. Prior to the mediation session I prepare a mediation summary/letter brief for the mediator setting forth my client's position. At the mediation session I advocate for my client. Finally, I have had the opportunity to participate in a few personal injury mediations. Most notably was a case in which I was guardian ad litem for a minor severely injured in a vehicle accident. I was not the attorney in charge of the personal injury case, but I had the opportunity to make recommendations and negotiate on behalf of the best interest of the minor child. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: N/A Previous runs for public office: City attorney, Shawano, Wisconsin, elected April 2018 and April 2020 (2-year terms) All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: N/A Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Shawano Redevelopment Authority, board of directors, 2016-2018 Red River Riders, board of directors, 2013-2018 Shawano Area Community Foundation, board of directors, 2005-2012; scholarship selection committee, approximately 2010-2014 Waupaca County Bar Association, approximately 2006-present Leadership Shawano County, participant and graduate, 2007 Shawano Youth League, concession volunteer, approximately 2008-2014 Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: I have made it an important part of my practice to undertake pro bono legal work. Each year I take one divorce or family case as a pro bono case. These cases are typically very difficult cases. Two of the more recent cases I handled as pro bono were extremely complex. In both of those cases, my clients were very abused women; one physically and the other emotionally. The first client had been beaten to unconsciousness by her husband and essentially left for dead. I assisted her through the divorce process … and I also attended several of her husband's criminal hearings just to provide some extra support. The second client was a woman who was divorcing her husband due to his extreme drug use … Her husband faked a terminal cancer diagnosis. The community held a "benefit" to support family. Husband then took the benefit money to support this drug habits. Soon after it was discovered that husband did not have any terminal, or even significant on-going medical issue. My client was humiliated because she too had been "duped" by her husband. I was able to assist her through the divorce process for free to help her ease her significant financial strain. A significant portion of my volunteer experience has focused on my stepson and his athletic activities. For many years, my stepson was involved with the Shawano Youth Baseball League, the Shawano Hoops Basketball Program and the Shawano Community High School Football/Basketball/Track program. During all his sporting seasons my husband and I volunteered countless hours working at the concession stands/field maintenance/running the "book" etc. …. In addition, I have also spent time serving on various volunteer boards and committees. I have been on the board of directors of the Shawano Redevelopment Authority, the Shawano Area Community Foundation and its scholarship decision committee. Finally, I was on the board of directors for the Red River Riders Therapeutic Horseback Riding for the Disabled. For that program I assisted in the set-up of a yearly fundraiser (called the Day at the Races) and their large, one-time fundraiser sponsored by the Green Bay Packers - the 2016 Tailgate Tour. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge -- I truly desire to serve the people of Wisconsin and particularly Shawano and Menominee Counties as its first female judge. I believe that I can bring a perspective to this circuit court bench that has never been here before: that of wife, mother, sister, and daughter. I also think that the people of Shawano and Menominee Counties would welcome the perspective of a woman in circuit court. When I came to Shawano, I was the only "female" private practice attorney in the county. At times, I had interesting encounters with people who want to see "that lady attorney." I recall once telling a colleague that I felt like people were picking me the same way they would pick out a puppy. They were basing their decision on gender, rather than the skill. Over time, clients saw that I could stand out just fine against the local (male) attorneys. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Lisa A. McDougal
Appointed to: Richland County Circuit Court Appointment date: June 2, 2022 Education: Law School – University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin High School – West High School, Madison, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: June 2011-present – Assistant state public defender, Wisconsin June 2005-June 2011 – General practice, McDougal Law Office, Avoca, Wisconsin Bar and Administrative Memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin General character of practice: Currently I serve as a public defender. I represent hundreds of clients each year primarily as defense counsel in criminal matters, both misdemeanors and all levels of felonies. I also represent clients in administrative revocation of probation and extended supervision matters, involuntary civil commitments, protective placement and guardianship matters, child protective services cases, termination of parental rights cases, paternity/child support matters, juvenile delinquency cases, and criminal extradition matters. Describe typical clients: Prior to working as a public defender, I worked extensively as a guardian ad litem in all types of cases (divorce, paternity, guardianship, protective placement, adoption, termination of parental rights). Now, as a trial attorney for the public defender, my typical client is an indigent criminal defendant. However, I also regularly represent juveniles and individuals (not necessarily indigent) subject to Chapter 51 proceedings. Number of cases tried to verdict: 10+ List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: The first case of significance I have chosen is a criminal jury trial in which I acted as defense counsel. It happened to be a trial that my client won, but that isn't why I see it as significant. It struck me at the time, and it continues to impress me today, that this is a great example of why our criminal justice system is as good as it is. Any time a criminal defendant indicates that they want a trial by their peers, the system should, and in my experience, does make room for it. It doesn't matter whether the case is a garden-variety misdemeanor or a case with issues of high societal importance. In this instance, my client demanded a jury trial. Without hesitation, the court scheduled the trial in a timely manner, the parties prepared their cases, the clerk assembled a jury, and the prosecution was put to its burden. This right is enshrined in our Constitution whenever jail or prison is a potential outcome. In Wisconsin, we take that right extremely seriously. Every court and every judge I have ever appeared in front of has agreed that preserving and facilitating the exercise of that right is paramount. The second matter of significance I recount is actually a series of matters. These are cases where I have brought pre-trial motions asking the Court to determine whether there has been a violation of my clients' fourth amendment rights. This is very familiar work to a public defender like me. … By and large, every circuit court made a careful review of the facts related to each motion and made thoughtful determinations as to the legality of (what is usually) police behavior. In a day and age where police action is under the microscope, the everyday work of attorneys and judges who carefully review, litigate, and ultimately act as a check on state-sanctioned power and authority is important. I am persuaded that when the lines of authority are clearly and correctly drawn by our courts, all Wisconsinites are safer. This type of careful and thoughtful scrutiny benefits everyone and the significance of such motion practice should never be underestimated. (Due to client confidentiality, I will not be submitting identifying information for these cases. I can address this with the committee if requested) Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: Most of my experience before an administrative agency is as defense counsel in revocation of probation and extended supervision cases. In this context, I have participated in many contested hearings in front of an administrative law judge. I also have limited experience representing clients in administrative health and human services substantiation of child abuse matters. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation).I have limited experience participating in mediation as guardian ad litem, typically in child custody situations. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: Not applicable Previous runs for public office: None listed All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: None listed Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Iowa County Bar Association, president, 2008-2016 Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: None listed Quotes: Why I want to be a judge -- I want to serve as a judge because I want to help people from all walks of life achieve correct and just results in their legal disputes. I want to do so while affording those same people the opportunity to be heard and for their positions to be respected. I believe my natural strengths coupled with my experience as a trial lawyer make me well-suited to fulfill the obligations and duties of that role. I have spent the last sixteen years litigating cases in many courtrooms and in front of many different judges. I have observed firsthand what is required to be a good trial court judge. I believe that I possess the temperament, skills, and experience to preside over a court in a way that will advance justice, create and maintain a forum where litigants can be fairly heard, and maintain a respectful and efficient environment. I am very comfortable in a courtroom setting and enjoy interacting with others. I am articulate and able to express myself well both orally and in writing. I have been described as collegial and friendly. I am able to adapt to different scenarios, and to handle criticism and difficult situations. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. I believe the 2009 U.S. Supreme Court decision of Arizona v. Gant had a significant positive impact on the people of Wisconsin. Gant is a Fourth Amendment case involving the search of a vehicle incident to lawful arrest. The Supreme Court held that exceptions to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement in the context of a traffic stop culminating in an arrest and subsequent search of a vehicle must be justified by concerns for officer safety or the preservation of evidence. The decision distinguished and effectively overruled a previous Supreme Court decision (New York v. Belton). Belton led to an expansion of the so-called “automobile exception” in practice, whereby officers were searching vehicles upon arrest of individuals without reason. Gant stated there must be a reasonable belief that the vehicle must contain evidence of the crime or that there is a threat to officer safety in order for a search to occur. While the vast majority of Wisconsin citizens will never be subject to an arrest or to a law enforcement search of their car, this case nevertheless has a positive impact on our citizens. Gant is just one example of a case that reinforces the right we all possess to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, redrawing the line of what is legally permissible in this situation in favor of individual privacy interests. Vigilance by the courts surrounding individual privacy interests is of positive significance for Wisconsinites. The obvious overarching purpose for the Constitution’s warrant requirement is meant to provide an extra layer of protection for the average citizen. While carving out exceptions to the requirement is an expected and necessary occurrence over time as particular fact situations necessitate, nevertheless creating blanket exceptions that swallow the rule imperil the safeguards intended under the fourth amendment. The average Wisconsin resident may not ever have the opportunity to directly apply Gant to their situation. Regardless, the Court’s willingness to address and halt the slippery slide toward all-encompassing exceptions to the warrant rule is good for every citizen. The privacy interests implicated by warrantless searches in general ultimately affect us all and the permissible exceptions should be narrowly drawn. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: I particularly admire Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Shirley Abrahamson. Both were not only brilliant jurists in my opinion, both of course made history in their own right and forged a path for women lawyers and women in general. In a profession dominated by men, it is all but impossible to learn about each of them and be anything but moved by their courage and tenacity. Their determination to practice law in the face of so much opposition and criticism speaks to the exceptional qualities each possessed, including the singular focus required to excel in their fields. Their perseverance, work ethic, longevity, and impassioned dedication to the law were hallmarks of both women’s careers and lives. They served as champions of equality for all, advocates for the marginalized, and a direct inspiration to me to do more to better the lives of others through my work. The proper role of a judge: First and foremost, the role of a judge is to decide matters fairly and impartially. Additionally, judges have an obligation to know the law, competently analyze fact situations and apply the law to those facts. This requires intelligence, integrity, and independence. When issues are unfamiliar, a judge must research the law to find answers and/or effectively employ the parties to do so. When cases involve issues that require discretion and equitable results, a good judge must utilize common sense and good judgment guided by sound reasoning, understanding that every decision affects human beings and is therefore important. Judges must be mindful that their position is one of public trust, and must comport themselves publicly and privately in a way that promotes confidence in the independence of their decisions specifically and the judiciary generally. Extending courtesy and patience toward others is no less important to the role of a trial court judge. I have witnessed judges that are patient and courteous, and others that are less so at times. All of these experiences have left an impression on me about the importance of extending civility and thoughtful regard to all as a matter of habit. A judge is also a manager, having to administer a court schedule that balances the ability of litigants to be heard while promoting the prompt resolution of matters. I have spent the last decade managing my heavy public defender caseload. Though not a comprehensive court calendar, I have nevertheless had to learn how to keep up with the demands of many, many cases at once. The ability to work well with the clerk of court is equally critical in achieving the most efficient and fair schedule possible. Finally, a good judge is also an engaged member of the community, helping to address, in a larger sense, some of the ills that intersect with the court system. In Richland County, like so many rural Wisconsin counties, there are issues of poverty, mental illness, and alcohol/drug abuse that are prevalent themes in the court system. Additionally, economic, racial, and social disparities consistently play a role in undermining fair and equitable outcomes in a courtroom. Raising and maintaining awareness about the existence of and solutions to these problems is the way to achieve consistently fair and just outcomes. Utilizing evidence-based decision-making whenever possible helps to address historical and systemic bias. Likewise, developing a rapport with local law enforcement agencies so as to promote public safety in a way that addresses dangerous and unwanted behavior while protecting the vulnerable and disadvantaged is critical. Enthusiastically supporting programs like treatment courts is one concrete way to help to bring some meaningful change to the community. I have a firm belief in the efficacy of the treatment court model. Additionally, understanding what resources are available in the community and how to utilize those resources helps judges find solutions to problems and disputes. Regular dialogue with stakeholders in these areas helps connect those needing resources with those providing them. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Yadira Rein
Appointed to: Outagamie County Circuit Court Appointment date: June 24, 2021 (elected to a six-year term in April 2022) Education: Law School – University of Wisconsin-Madison Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee High School – Neenah High, Neenah, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: February 2018-present – Attorney, McCarty Law, LLP, Appleton, Wisconsin August 2011-February 2018 – Attorney, Sigman Janssen, Appleton, Wisconsin May 2009-August 2011 – Attorney, Glenn, Hoff & Daniels, Appleton, Wisconsin Bar and Administrative Memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin General character of practice: My practice currently involves family law matters, guardianship cases and guardian ad item appointments. The primary focus of my practice consists of handling family law cases such as divorce, custody and placement disputes, and paternity matters. However, throughout the course of my career, I also have had the opportunity to handle other areas of law on a limited basis, such as personal injury, restraining orders and minor criminal cases. Describe typical clients: My practice connects me with people from all walks of life from business clients to dairy farmers. My typical client is a person who is going through a divorce or any other family law issue. Additionally, as one of the only Spanish speaking attorneys in the area, fellow Latino members of the community will often call me at work requesting my assistance in both legal and nonlegal issues. Number of cases tried to verdict: Approximately 5-10 per year List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: A Brown County marriage case: This case was complex as it consisted of a long-term marriage with a family-owned business and a non-working spouse with debilitating health issues. This case was significant to me as it not only required an understanding of how to evaluate their business but we had to be sensitive and know how to address the underlying health issues of one of the parties. A guardianship case in Outagamie County: I represented an adult child in obtaining guardianship and protective placement of her mother whose health was deteriorating. It was significant to me because it was eye opening to the struggles that families have with their aging parents. A Waushara County marriage case: I represented [the wife] in a post-judgment divorce matter. … The parties were divorced in 2016 after [she] filed for divorce due to [the husband] physically assaulting her. He was ultimately charged and deported as a result that assault. While the Respondent was in custody, he was awarded alternating weekends of placement of their small child but the placement to be exercised by paternal uncle and his wife. When the Respondent was deported, the order continued with paternal uncle having alternate periods of physical placement against the mother's wishes and without a Guardian Ad Litem being appointed. This case was significant to me because it was clear that due to the language barrier between [the woman] and her divorce attorney and the Court [she] was not properly represented in Court. I became involved post-divorce and requested that a Guardian Ad Litem be appointment as required by statute which ultimately led to the her recommendation that the it was no in the child's best interest for the frequent visits between the child and her uncle. The paternal uncle ultimately agreed and stipulated to suspend visitation. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: My practice areas do not bring me in front of administrative agencies or commissions. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). I use non-litigation strategies, such as mediation and settlement conferences, often in my practice. When handling a family law matter, I consider it a success if I can help my client come to a resolution without putting his or her family through contested litigation. I also utilize the collaborative divorce model. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: N/A Previous runs for public office: None listed All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Emily Lonergan, Outagamie County Circuit Court, 2020 Carey Reed, Calumet County Circuit Court, 2021 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Wisconsin Family Law Section, member, 2009-present Appleton Bilingual School, board member, 2012-present Wisconsin Hispanic Lawyers Association, member, 2008-present Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: Throughout my career, I have handled many cases on a pro bono basis. My personal goal is to handle two or three family law matters on a pro bono basis per year. I also consistently provide more limited legal and non-legal services to individuals who cannot afford representation. When I hear the fear and desperation in a caller's voice and I am not in a position to take the case pro bono, I do whatever I can to walk the caller through the applicable legal or non-legal process. For legal services, this includes providing copy of the pro se family packets, scheduling calls to discuss the process of a pro se divorce, and reviewing paperwork. For non-legal services, I have assisted and continue to assist Spanish speaking individuals with many issues including some as simple as talking to the local phone provider to set-up phone service. I feel a strong calling to use my bilingual abilities to help my community. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge -- I want to give back to the community that has given me so much. If not for everything that members of the community have given to me, I would not be where I am today. I was born in El Paso, Texas, right across the border between the United States and Mexico. My stay in the United States only lasted a few days though as I went to live with my grandparents in Guerrero, Mexico. Guerrero was my home for approximately the first nine years of my life, when I joined my mom, who had moved to Larsen, Wisconsin, I did not speak a word of English when I moved to Wisconsin. I had to learn to adjust to a life without the family that raised me, in a new country where I could not speak the language. Looking back, I realize that it was an adjustment for my family members, as well, to adjust to having me there. There were times when I could not live at home with the various circumstances that existed; that is where my life began to be shaped by the people in the community. These people came from all walks of life, from school counselors, teachers, my manager at Burger King, my supervisor at our local grocery store, parents of friends, to the gas station clerk. I had people open their doors to their homes even though, oblivious to me at the time, their homes were already full. When my career advisor at high school told me that I was not college material, I had an adult drive me to the technical college that day to register me for a course. With a college course under my belt and a few people from the community cheering me on, I enrolled at the UW-Community College. It was there, too, that I learned a lesson in community giving after I received scholarships from local community members. I would not be where I am today if I had not come across people that believed in me, guided me, and opened their homes to me. This life experience has created in me a strong desire to want to be a public servant. I feel that my unique life experience will give me the ability to relate to many of those who would come in front of me in Outagamie County. I once heard that people need to hear directions from someone who has already been to where they are going. If appointed judge, I hope to provide that sense of direction. I am ready to learn and work hard for the people in Outagamie County by drawing from my experience while upholding the core values of equal justice, fairness and impartiality in the administration of justice, accessibility to the court process, and treatment of all with dignity and respect. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. One case that had a significant impact on the people of Wisconsin is Michels v. Lyons, 2019 WI 57, 387 Wis. 2d I, 927 N.W.2d 486. This case involved a challenge to the constitutionality of Wis. Stat. § 767.43, better known as the Grandparent Visitation Statute. In Michels, two unmarried parents wanted to decline periods of visitation with their minor child to a grandparent. For several years, the parents had allowed their child to spend significant time with her paternal grandmother. However, as the child grew, both parents decided to limit the amount of time their child spent with her grandmother. This decision was based in part on some questionable behavior by the grandmother, such as allowing the child to sip alcohol and letting her ride a horse without a helmet, and in part based upon changes to the child's schedule. The grandmother petitioned for periods of visitation under the Grandparent Visitation Statute. The circuit court ruled in favor of the grandmother. The question before the Wisconsin Supreme Court was whether the Grandparent Visitation Statute was constitutional. The statute permitted a court to grant reasonable visitation rights to a grandparent of a child if the child's parents have notice of the hearing and the court determines (a) the child is a nonmarital child whose parents have not subsequently married each other, (b) the paternity of the child has been determined under the laws of this state or another jurisdiction if the grandparent filing the petition is a parent of the child's father.(c) the child has not been adopted, and (d) the grandparent has maintained a relationship with the child or has attempted to maintain a relationship. The parents in this case asserted that they have a fundamental liberty interest in the care and upbringing of their child and that the trial court infringed upon this interest when it overruled their decision regarding the visitation. The Wisconsin Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision written by Justice Dallet, determined that the Grandparent Visitation Statute is facially constitutional because there are circumstances under which the law can be constitutionally enforced, but it was unconstitutional as applied to the parents in that case. The Supreme Court in Michels determined that, in order to be constitutionally applied, a grandparent must overcome a presumption by clear and convincing evidence that a fit parent's decision is in the child’s best interest. In the case at hand, the Court found that the grandmother did not overcome the presumption with clear and convincing evidence. By narrowing the scope of the Grandparent Visitation Statute, the Court is protecting a parent's fundamental rights while leaving the door open for grandparents who meet the burden by clear and convincing evidence that the parents are not acting in the child's best interest to seek visitation. This case has a positive impact on residents of Wisconsin because it appropriately balances the rights of the parents with the interests of the grandparents and the children. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: I admire Justice Sotomayor for being the first woman of color and the first Latina to serve on the United States Supreme Court. As a young Latina, it was rare for me to see a woman of color, particularly a woman of Hispanic origin, in any type of leadership role. I can relate to Justice Sotomayor as we are both daughters of immigrants, English was our second language, and both of our families lacked financial resources and experience with higher education. Justice Sotomayor has said that it was important for her to tell the truth about her life, warts and all to inspire other "ordinary people". She went on to say that, role models on television are fantasized but that it is important to move people beyond just dreaming into doing by allowing them to see that you are just like them and you made it. Justice Sotomayor has said that she will continue with her commitment to speaking to young people of color and from low-income backgrounds about educational opportunities and sharing with them her own experience and tools for success. I also share in that commitment and hope to be able to inspire young Latina girls to pursue their education opportunities and to serve as a reminder that they should believe in themselves. On a local level, I admire Winnebago County Circuit Court Judge Teresa Basiliere. I had the privilege of practicing family law with Judge Basiliere when she was in private practice. If I ever had a question on a case, I would often call her to ask for guidance and never walked away from any conversations we had disappointed. Judge Basiliere was confident, intelligent, kind, and reasonable as a practicing attorney and she took those qualities to the bench with her. I admire Judge Basiliere's dedication and the hard work she has put into her new role as judge in learning new areas of law. The proper role of a judge: The role of a judge involves several important responsibilities. These responsibilities include being a good listener, a hard worker, having a good temperament, and fairly and impartially applying the law to the facts of each case. A key part of a judge's role is to listen. In my experience, clients are more willing to accept the outcome of a case when they feel that have been heard. While clients may not understand everything that is happening in court or everything being said by counsel, people from all walks of life and of all intelligence levels seem to universally understand and know if their judge is present and listening. A judge should also listen to counsel and respect the expertise that an attorney brings to a case. Each judge brings to the bench different areas of experience and inexperience. A judge that does not have experience in any given area of law needs to have the work ethic necessary to learn that area of the law and listen and respect the attorneys who do have experience in that area. A judge also needs to be cognizant that her demeanor, body language and choice of words matters. As in private practice, a judge must give each party that comes into the courtroom the attention and time that they deserve. Due to the emotional nature of my family law practice, it is not uncommon for me to put out multiple fires a day. Some issues are miniscule compared to other more serious concerns, but both deserve my full attention. In their role, a judge needs to have a patient, kind, and respectful temperament, so that each person who comes in front of her feels respected. A judge should lead by example and show respect to not only the legal process but to all the people in the room. A judge should create an environment such that the parties will feel compelled to show the same respect in return. A judge's role is also to consider the impact of a case or decision. A judge should consider what the goal or end-result is in a case and within the confines of the law craft a decision that will be attainable and practical to achieve. I believe that if we truly want to make an impact, we need to consider the practicality of the order or decision. If a judge keeps all of the above in mind, people will feel that justice was achieved even if they did not get the results for which they were hoping. In the end, we are all in pursuit of justice. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Judge Michael Zell
Appointed to: Portage County Circuit Court Appointment date: June 24, 2022 Education: Law School – University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin Graduate School – University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee High School – Slinger High School, Slinger, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: April 2021-present – Assistant state public defender, Wisconsin December 2018-April 2021 and April 2017-April 2018 – Assistant district attorney, Portage County April 2018-December 2018 – Assistant district attorney, Marathon County January 2015-April 2017 – Assistant district attorney, Wood County 2002-2015 – Owner, Zell Law Office LLC Bar and Administrative Memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin General character of practice: I began my career as an assistant public defender in Racine WI. I left that position after three years and worked for an OWI firm in Milwaukee for a little more than one year. I then ran Zell Law Office LLC for 13 years. I represented individuals in a variety of matters. Due to the rising costs of health insurance, in 2015 my spouse and I decided that I would seek employment with the State of Wisconsin. I worked as an assistant district attorney for approximately six years. I worked in several different offices due to family reasons and greater opportunities. After six years of that work I decided that I wanted to work with clients, and joined the public defender's office. Describe typical clients: As a public defender, my current clients are indigent criminal defendants. When I was running Zell Law Office, much of my practice was family law and guardian ad litem work, as well as child welfare (CHIPS and TPR), and criminal appeals. When I perceived a need in bankruptcy in the Stevens Point area I began accepting clients for this purpose and filed quite a few bankruptcy petitions, mostly chapter 7. My solo practice also included some small estate planning and other civil litigation. Number of cases tried to verdict: Dozens. I have not kept count. List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years:
Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: I have worked on a significant number of probation revocation hearings, including by filing administrative appeals of revocation decisions. I also have filed a significant number of bankruptcy cases, which are not technically administrative, but proceed in a similar fashion. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). I have some experience with mediation. While operating Zell Law Office, a significant portion of my practice was divorce and family law. Many of those cases used mediators to resolve issues about child custody and placement. I also worked on cases as guardian ad litem for children. Though not characterized as mediation, the guardian ad litem in a divorce often attempts to broker a resolution between the parents and their attorneys. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: None Previous runs for public office: None All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Steven Sawyer, Portage County judge, 2022 Rick Cveykus, Marathon County judge, 2022 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: Portage County Bar Association, 2009 to present Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service:
Quotes: Why I want to be a judge -- I have always loved the practice of law. As a young attorney the thrill of litigation was enough to propel me through the days in court, and the nights and weekends at the Marquette Law Library. I spent a lot of time in my first few years with Wayne LaFave’s Search and Seizure Treatise and Blinka’s Wisconsin Practice Series evidence manual. I was fascinated by all of it and spent a lot of time learning how it all worked. I was driven to be the smartest attorney in the courthouse, and tried cases and filed creative motions with this as my goal. I struck out on my own in 2003 because I was motivated to be the kind of lawyer that everyone wanted to hire, the smartest and best. But after twenty-four years of successes and failures, I realize that the most important part of my career has been the relationships with other people. At the core of practicing law, and everything else, is the beauty of humanity. We are a great mass of fragile and flawed beings who have an intense need to connect with each other in meaningful ways. I thrive on these connections. I am glad that other lawyers perceive me as smart and capable. But I am much prouder to be approachable and likable, and to have clients tell me I have helped them. In the past year I’ve had several public defender clients tell me that I’m the best lawyer they’ve ever had. This is not because of my intellect or sharp wit. I recognize the spark of life in everyone, and I use my bedside manner along with competence and diligence to make the best arguments I can for them. When a Portage County judge suggested I run for election in 2011, I laughed it off. But since that time, this seed has grown. I have carefully observed the local judges in Portage, Wood and Marathon Counties. Ultimately I came to realize that they are all very different people who have the job for different reasons. Their motivations for doing the work are all different. But the most noticeable difference is between those judges who respect the humanity of the people in their courtroom, and those who do not. I want to serve as a circuit court judge because I am the best candidate to meet the needs of the people of Portage County. I have the broadest and deepest experience, and the intelligence to process any legal issue. But more importantly, I will treat the people in my courtroom with the dignity and respect they deserve, even if they have done something wrong. I will study not just the problem, but the people, in order to reach a fair and just result. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. It is tempting to identify Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) as the most important US Supreme Court case in the past 25 years due to my own personal and family implications. This decision recognized the right of same-sex couples to marry. This is an important landmark in our society. Despite the decision there are still significant challenges to people who are LBGTQ. This is a good start at recognizing an important freedom. That being said, the most tangible problem in the United States in 2022 is our division into partisan tribes. Hyper-partisanship has brought government to a standstill, as positioning has become more important than solutions. When I was a teenager and young adult, politicians from both sides would negotiate and compromise to solve the big problems. That social cohesion has deteriorated, and we now seem more like two countries than one. I read widely about this phenomenon and study history to try to understand how we got to this point. There are no easy answers. But certain things stand out as factors in the development of this problem. One is the change in the media system from one that was at least ostensibly neutral to one which openly stokes partisanship. Another is the development of social media, which allows for the easy spread of misinformation. Third is the unlimited spending by corporations and special interest groups on elections. Some call this the dark-money problem. The problem was created by the Citizens United decision in 2010, and I’d select this as the most significant supreme court case in recent history. The Supreme Court agreed with a conservative non-profit and determined that corporations and other outside groups can spend unlimited money on elections. The Court reasoned that limiting independent political spending by these groups violates first amendment rights to free speech. This overturned election spending restrictions which dated back more than 100 years, and which were intended to prevent corruption in our electoral system. This ruling has changed our electoral system dramatically by allowing those with money to control the messaging. Super PACs and dark money now empower the wealthiest members of our society to spend unlimited amounts of money on elections, meaning more and more partisan messaging. Though we made it through the last presidential election without democracy failing completely, there continues to be an effort to limit the rights of citizens to vote. In combination with unimagined or unintended consequences of Citizens United, our expectations about the good life are in peril. Democracy itself appears to be in danger, and hyper-partisan bickering has prevented us from addressing the most important problems of our lifetime, such as climate change. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: The judge who has inspired me most has been Thomas Flugaur. I’ve appeared before many judges, and have developed friendly relationships with some. What I’ve learned is that judges are people, not deities or superhuman. All people are unique. I’ve seen judges screaming at lawyers or parties in the case. This lack of decorum really bothered me when I was a new lawyer. I’ve learned that the most important quality of a judge is temperament. This seems to be grounded in an appreciation for the humanity of every person. Judge Flugaur is one of the smartest judges I’ve met. I’ve gone to his courtroom many times thinking I had the right answer, only to be surprised Judge Flugaur found something I did not. But Judge Flugaur is not known for his intelligence or his legal skills, though they are great. He is known for the way he engages with the lawyers and the parties in his courtroom. For example, I loved to watch Judge Flugaur conduct indigency hearings in his courtroom. These are short hearings for a potentially indigent defendant to obtain a county-appointed lawyer when the public defender finds the person ineligible. Judge Flugaur called each defendant to the stand and talked about their life and financial circumstances. It was clear he thoroughly enjoyed these conversations, and generally the feeling was mutual. This is just one example of the kindness and empathy he showed people in his courtroom. I also have learned a great deal from former Justice Shirley Abrahamson. Justice Abrahamson was a truly remarkable person. Reading her biographical page on the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s former justices page is humbling. She achieved so much in her lifetime. She was appointed in 1976 as the first female justice, and served until 2019, which is over forty years on the Court. Her achievements and awards during that time are too many to list. Justice Abrahamson had a significant impact on me as a lawyer. As a young criminal-defense lawyer living in Milwaukee, I spent a lot of time in the Marquette Law Library reading appellate decisions. I learned more about many issues by reading her prolific dissents than by reading the majority opinions. It is reported that Justice Abrahamson and Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg were close friends. During a ceremony honoring Justice Abrahamson in Madison in 2020, a video tribute from Justice Ginsburg was broadcast. Justice Ginsburg described Justice Abrahamson as the most “courageous and sage, the least self-regarding” of justices. She also pointed out that Justice Abrahamson inspired many young women to enter the profession. Most importantly, Justice Abrahamson never forgot Dr. Seuss’ “gentle maxim: ‘a person’s a person no matter how small.’” The proper role of a judge: The most basic role of a circuit court judge is to make decisions about disputed matters. The “proper” way to do this is in accordance with established principles of judicial conduct. The preamble in SCR 60 explains the importance of the role of a judge: "Our legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent judiciary will interpret and apply the laws that govern us. The role of the judiciary is central to American concepts of justice and the rule of law. Intrinsic to all provisions of this Code are the precepts that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in our legal system. The judge is an arbiter of facts and law for the resolution of disputes and a highly visible symbol of government under the rule of law." The principles necessary to meet this goal are extensively outlined in SCR 60, the Code of Judicial Conduct. That being said, there are a few simple concepts which form the bedrock of these rules. Judges must be diligent and competent, studying the cases and the law to reach the right result. Judges must have integrity in their personal and professional lives, showing the community that they strive to live a good life, honoring the law and others. Judges must show impartiality in their reasoning and decisions, and should not allow their words or conduct to imply that their decisions are based in favor or bias. Judges cannot allow partisanship, nor the appearance of partisanship, to guide their decisions. Particularly in the United States in 2022, Judges must show that the judicial branch is independent of the other branches of government. The law is an objective tool to govern a society, and judges must show that they are able to apply the law free from the bias of partisanship. Judges must ensure that the courtroom is orderly and decorum is maintained. The courtroom is a place where all participants must have an opportunity to address the court in an orderly and controlled manner. Judges must ensure that the participants have the opportunity to address the court. Though not stated in SCR 60, Judges must strive to be patient, dignified and courteous in performing their duties and managing the participants in the courtroom. When making decisions, judges must be firm but respectful. Participants are more likely to accept a judge’s decisions when they are delivered in a respectful manner. "Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. Italics indicate direct quotes from the application. Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.  Name: Elizabeth Rohl
Appointed to: Pierce County Circuit Court Appointment date: Dec. 22, 2020 Education: Law School – Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Madison High School – River Falls High, River Falls, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: January 2013-present – Assistant corporation counsel, St. Croix County Office of Corporation Counsel January 2011-December 2012 – Assistant district attorney, St. Croix County District Attorney’s Office March 2010-December 2010 – Attorney, Hammarback & Jacobson, S.C., River Falls, Wisconsin Bar and Administrative Memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin State Bar of Minnesota (lapsed) General character of practice: I am currently Assistant Corporation Counsel for St. Croix County. I represent the County and the public interest in a variety of civil actions. My practice is split between courtroom work and transactional work. Based on the current staffing of our office, I am the primary attorney for matters involving involuntary mental commitments, termination of parental rights, and HIPAA compliance. I share responsibility for child support enforcement, contract review, open records compliance, and providing legal advice to county departments. Describe typical clients: Our client is St. Croix County. Depending on the circumstances of the case we may be representing the interests of the County, a particular county department, or the interests of the public. My specializations are detailed above. Number of cases tried to verdict: Approximately 10-15 jury trials; numerous court trials List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years: Without a doubt the most significant cases in my legal career have been the termination of parental rights (TPR) cases. These cases may not be significant to the public--given the confidential nature of the cases, the public will likely never know anything about them. But they are significant to me and, I like to think, significant to the families involved. Our office took over responsibility for these cases on behalf of St. Croix County in 2016 and the gravity of what is at stake is always at the front of my mind. Some of these cases end quickly, others are contested and take much longer. Regardless of which path the case takes, there is no greater feeling as an attorney than being able to attend the adoption hearing and to see the joy, relief, and excitement in the faces of the children and their "new" families. The first TPR case I filed involved three children who had been bounced around between their parents, family members, and foster families for almost a decade before we (I represented the Department of Children Services as petitioner) filed for termination. The discovery materials required several bankers boxes and I spent months pouring over the details of the neglect these children suffered. The case was filed in April 2016 and resulted in a three-day jury trial in January 2017. The jury found grounds to terminate the parental rights of the children's mother (the only parent who participated in the proceedings). Following the dispositional hearing in February the court determined that it was in the children's best interests to terminate the parents' rights. All three children were adopted by their foster families. With many of my other cases we see history repeat itself--we keep coming back to court with the same issues. The ability to make a lasting, meaningful change for children is the most rewarding thing I have been able to do as an attorney and therefore these cases carry great significance for me. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: When the Department of Children Services substantiates a finding of child abuse or neglect the subject of the substantiation has the option to appeal that decision. Those appeals are heard by the Division of Hearing and Appeals for the State of Wisconsin. I represent Children Services in those appeals. Depending on the nature of the subject's challenge, some of these cases are resolved. Others result in an adversary hearing before the Administrative Law Judge. I have been involved in 10 such appeals. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). Our office represents the Child Support Agency in child support enforcement. This involves establishing or modifying child support, establishing paternity, and potentially contempt for non-payment. In St. Croix County we will schedule pre-court conferences with the parties to attempt to have the parties stipulate. This involves explaining the process and the statutory arguments the parties could make as well as trying to mediate between the two parents. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: Volunteer for Joe Boles, Pierce County Circuit Court Volunteer for Amber Hahn, St. Croix District Attorney Previous runs for public office: None All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: Joe Boles, Pierce County Circuit Court, 2010 Professional or civic and charitable organizations: St. Croix Valley Bar Association, 2010 to present; officer, 2010-2014 Wisconsin Child Support Association, 2013 to present; Legal Track Committee, 2020 Wisconsin Association of County Corporation Counsel, 2013 to present Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: When I was an officer of our local bar association we became interested in the hosting a Wills for Heroes event. Wills for Heroes was a program that already existed wherein attorneys would volunteer their time to draft basic wills and power of attorney documents for first responders. All clinics that were being advertised where in the southern or eastern parts of the state. Upon reaching out, it appeared that there would be hurdles in getting the program to come to our area. Instead, we worked with the State Bar and local attorneys to get donations for our own equipment to run our own clinics. … I am no longer involvement in the administration of that program, but still volunteer at clinics. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge – The court system provides a valuable service to the communities in Wisconsin—resolving disputes, safeguarding the public, and ensuring proper protections for the most vulnerable citizens. However, the court system is only as good as the judges who serve. The people of Wisconsin and of Pierce County deserve a judge who can discharge those important duties fairly, quickly, and appropriately and I believe that I have that ability. I have a background in criminal law, both as defense and prosecution. In addition to transactional work like contracts and open records requests, my work in the Office of Corporation Counsel has given me experience in unique areas of law including involuntary mental commitments, guardianships, and termination of parental rights. My diverse experience in the practice of law means that I will be able to handle all the duties of a judge in all the variety of cases before the court. Not only do I believe I have the experience to execute the duties, but I am passionate about my community and continuing to serve the public interest. I have a strong connection to Pierce County—I grew up here, graduated from high school here, and now am raising my own family here. My father grew up here as well and then we went on to spend his career as a middle school science teacher, also here in Pierce County. The community is made of my friends, my family, my neighbors. Serving as a judge allows me to give back to a community that has given me so much in a way that not everyone is able. Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. “No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family. In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were. . . Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization's oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.” This closing paragraph of Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 highlights the importance of the Supreme Court’s decision in the lives of many of Wisconsin citizens. Before this decision, there was a string of legislation and case law that gave tokens toward equality but each of them always kept those relationships as something “other.” However, this decision clearly holds that the Constitution dictates that States must allow same-sex couples to marry and to have those marriages recognized in other states and providing, finally, equal dignity. The Court accurately expressed the ways in which the right to marry is fundamental, one of which is safeguarding children and families. The Court noted that without recognition of marriages between homosexual couples as the same as heterosexual couples, those children would suffer the stigma “knowing their families are somehow lesser” causing harm and humiliation. A decision such as this will no doubt have an impact on homosexual couples in Wisconsin and their families. Moreover, a decision that precludes arbitrary differences between segments of the population also serves to solidify that all citizens, of Wisconsin and the United States, are equal in the eyes of the law. That serves to benefit everyone, not just those directly affected by the Court’s decision. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: It would be impossible for me to answer this question without including Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. As a woman in the practice of law, I have occasionally felt lingering sexism—being referred to a “sweetie” or clients asking when the attorney is going to show up despite being told I am the attorney. My experiences pale in comparison to what Justice Ginsburg would have faced upon entering law school and throughout her ascent to the highest court. Her tenacity alone is admirable. After being rejected for a Supreme Court clerkship because she was a woman she persisted, ultimately earning her seat on the Court. Not only is the achievement admirable, but the manner in which she earned it is as well. Often quoted, Justice Ginsburg once said, “[f]ight for the things you care about, but do it in a way that will lead others to join you.” Justice Ginsburg was a tireless advocate for women’s rights but never asked for special treatment, only equal treatment. Her life and career can serve as an inspiration for generations of women, following her lead. Since her recent passing, there have been many articles written about her many accomplishments. Some I knew, some I’d forgotten, and some I never realized. She was a brilliant legal mind whose decisions will be cited for years to come but her legacy will continue as much more than that. I also admire and respect St. Croix County Circuit Court Judge Scott Needham. When I started my career, there was much I didn’t know about the practice of law and I welcomed the guidance of Judge Needham. In his 26 years on the bench, Judge Needham has gained considerable expertise in the law and that is apparent in the decisions he makes. Judge Needham’s expertise led to his being named Trial Judge of the Year in 2010, recognizing his skill and accomplishment. What is readily apparent about Judge Needham is his dedication to the integrity of the court system and his service to the people of Wisconsin. Ever willing to step into leadership roles, Judge Needham is currently the presiding judge in St. Croix County and served as the Chief Judge of the Tenth Judicial District. Recently, when considering a campaign for the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Judge Needham opted to stay in St. Croix County, stating that he thinks he found his calling in the trial court. I certainly believe that to be true. The proper role of a judge: I found myself struggling to answer this question and I think the reason is simple—there is no one proper role for a judge. The wide range of cases that come before a court require that the judge adapt to a number of different roles. If presiding over a jury trial, the judge must act as a referee of sorts, applying and enforcing the rules of evidence. In a court trial, the judge must as a trier-of-fact, weighing the evidence and testimony to decide the “truth.” In cases involving vulnerable citizens (guardianships and mental commitments, for example) the judge adopts almost a parental role, trying to craft solutions that are best for the individual even if they don’t like it. And, in the increasing arena of treatment courts, the judge must step down from an authoritative role to act as a collaborative team member and motivator. No matter the role needed at the time, I believe it is of the utmost importance for the judge to maintain the integrity of the court system. In order to do so, the judge must remain impartial and apply the existing laws to the case before the court. Regardless of personal beliefs about an issue, a judge should not rule based on how the law should be, but rather what the law is. The judicial system serves as a check to ensure fair process for all litigants, not to legislate from the bench. |
Donate
Help WJI advocate for justice in Wisconsin
|
RSS Feed