Evers' judges: John R. Remington

​"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: John R. Remington
 
Appointed to: Milwaukee County Circuit Court
 
Appointment date: Feb. 15, 2024, effective May 3 (term ending July 31, 2025)
 
Education:
Law School – Washington University School of Law, St. Louis, Missouri
Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Madison
High School – New Richmond High, New Richmond, Wisconsin
 
Recent legal employment:
September 2007-present – Partner, Quarles & Brady LLP, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
 
Bar and administrative memberships:
Wisconsin Supreme Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
District Court of New Jersey
District Court of Kansas
 
General character of practice:
I have spent the past sixteen years, my entire legal career, at Quarles & Brady in its commercial litigation group. Almost 100% of my practice has been in civil litigation, though I have been involved in a few criminal matters and some transactional work. My practice focuses on unfair competition (including non-compete claims), creditor-debtor law, and healthcare related litigation. I have also taken on court appointments and pro bono matters (see below) which has broadened my experience to include Sec 1983 claims, municipal ordinance violations, and termination of parental rights.
 
Describe typical clients:
My clients have ranged from indigent pro bono clients to large multi-national corporations. I have most commonly represented health care providers, financial institutions, and a broad base of clients that utilize restrictive covenants.
 
Number of cases tried to verdict: 4; does not include injunctions or restraining orders
 
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:
 
Biomin America, Inc. v. Lesaffre Yeast Corporation, et al., 20-cv-2109 (D.Kan.); 20cv2216 (Johnson Co, KS). Lead counsel for Lesaffre Yeast Corporation, the world’s largest yeast producer. We defended the company and two of its employees from allegations of trade secret misappropriation and breach of restrictive covenants, among related claims, in federal and state court in Kansas and prevailed in three successive stages: defeated a motion for temporary restraining order; prevailed on a motion to dismiss in federal court; and prevailed on motion to dismiss in state court. … I stands out in my mind because of the wide-ranging number of issues we briefed and argued in a compressed time frame.
 
USA v. O’Rourke, 17-cr-495 (N.D.Ill.). In this matter, I represented Dura-Bar, a corporate victim of trade secret theft and coordinated with the United States Attorney and FBI to support the prosecution. The Defendant, our client’s former metallurgical engineer, downloaded company property to a thumb drive and was stopped by the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol as he attempted to board a flight to China. … Dates of my involvement were 2018 to 2020. This representation stands out to me because it was a criminal case and I was able to observe and participate in a three week jury trial.
 
Staffworks Group-Wisconsin Inc. v. Service First Staffing Inc., 18-cv-392 (E.D.Wis). I was lead counsel in heavily contested non-competition claims, breach of fiduciary duty claims, and trade secret theft claims. The case settled following a favorable summary judgment ruling. Significant because of the depth of the litigation, including the opposing party’s summary judgment submission that exceeded 2200 pages. Dates of my involvement were 2018-2020.
 
Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: None
 
Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation).
I have been involved in dozens of arbitrations with FINRA (Financial Regulatory Authority) including several to final award. Likewise, I have had three substantive arbitration matters in front of the AAA (American Arbitration Association).
 
I have participated in many mediations, including with former Milwaukee County Judges Charles Kahn, Richard Sankovitz, William Jennaro, and Michael Brennan.
 
Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: None
 
All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years:
Jeff Davis, Court of Appeals, District II, 2021
Molly Gena, Milwaukee Municipal Court, 2023
 
Professional or civic and charitable organizations:
Lake Park Little League, coach, 2022-2023
University of Wisconsin “W” Club, member, 2002-present
Catholic East Elementary School, School Advisory Committee, 2022-present
St. Thomas More Lawyers’ Society, board member and past president, 2018-present
Enderis Park Neighborhood Association, member, 2009-present
Milwaukee Rowing Club, member, 2007-present
 
Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service:
I’ve kept a robust pro bono practice during my career, including most notably:
 
Representing the birth mother in a Termination of Parental Rights jury trial in front of Judge Christopher Foley; handling several other TPR cases in Milwaukee County.
 
Representing high school students charged with truancy in court appearances in Outagamie County as a core member of the Quarles & Brady truancy court project.
 
First chairing a federal jury trial in front of Judge Adelman in the E.D. Wis., representing an inmate pursuing a Sec. 1983 claim; representing other inmates in similar cases that resolved short of trial.
 
Quotes:
 
Why I want to be a judge:
I view this appointment as the best use of my talents to serve the public. My background as a civil litigator with sixteen years’ experience in a large law firm setting is helpful background to both the breadth of issues that come in front of the court and considerations that are typically outside the court’s view (such as client dynamics and discovery). I am applying to serve because I believe that I have the combination of intellectual curiosity, work ethic, and common sense to be a credit to this Court.
 
I have been interested in a circuit court role for a long time, dating back to an internship at the Polk County Circuit Court in Balsam Lake during law school. I enjoy the range of the work—from esoteric to practical.
 
Practice in a large firm setting has treated me well. It has been rewarding to solve problems for our clients and I have greatly enjoyed the collegiality of the firm. But this opportunity to serve the state and justice system, to use talents more directly to serve the public, is something I have always found attractive. People are at their best when doing work that is meaningful and challenging. For me, a circuit court position presents that opportunity.
 
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 my view, the Citizens United v. Federal Exchange Commission case has unfortunately had a significant negative impact on the people of Wisconsin. It is a case that presents difficult legal questions because it addresses a restraint on free speech; there are powerful arguments on both sides. However, the practical effects of equating the free speech rights of individuals and corporate entities are problematic (to say nothing about the competing lines of precedent implicated in the decision). The political process in this country has become more chaotic and public confidence in the democratic process continues to wane. Reasonable restrictions on election spending have, in the past, garnered wide support. Unfortunately, those efforts are likely non-starters under the current framework.
 
Two or three judges whom I admire and why:
Justice Byron White. I have always had a deep respect for people who perform at a high level in different arenas of academics, athletics, and professional accomplishment. From a farming background in Colorado, Justice White worked his way to the highest accomplishments in sports and the law: Rhodes Scholar, Heisman runner-up, NFL star, and John F. Kennedy’s first appointment to the Supreme Court. Though I do not agree with all of his opinions (there are nearly a thousand of them) he was pragmatic and his analyses were often fact-driven. The work ethic he demonstrated in his life is reflected in his writings. I highly recommend his biography, “The Man Who Was Once Whizzer White” which I read the summer of 2005 as I entered law school.
 
Judge Molly GaleWyrick. I interned with Judge GaleWyrick in Polk County Circuit Court (Balsam Lake, WI) the summer after my first year of law school through a State Bar program. I spent that summer in the courthouse, reviewing pleadings with her, and discussing her decisions. It left a lasting impression on me how she treated each litigant and attorney with the same respect and seriousness in cases ranging from complex injury cases to fishing without a license. I observed how a good judge can impress on all parties that they had been heard and considered before reaching a decision.
 
The proper role of a judge:
A judge must discern the mandates of the legislature and apply discretion as appropriate within the legislative framework. That said, it is not a mechanical job. With all the talk of artificial intelligence, judging is an inherently human endeavor and every case presents its own considerations. A judge’s impartiality is critical and every judge must thoroughly and honestly reflect on not only on decisions but the decision-making process.
 
A judge must also communicate competence and respect to all involved. A judge is a primary point of contact with the justice system for a litigant or criminal defendant. How they view the court system, and the fairness of a decision, is greatly influenced by how effectively a judge communicates and the strength of his or her reasoning.

---