Meet the candidates for Sauk County Circuit Court

In Sauk County, Nancy Thome and Blake J. Duren vie for an open seat after Judge Pat Barrett chose not to run for reelection.

Thome is an attorney in private practice in Baraboo. She graduated from the University of Wisconsin Law School in 1994. Her resume is here.

Duren is an attorney in private practice in Reedsburg. He graduated from the St. Louis University School of Law in 2010. 

WJI asked each of the candidates to answer a series of questions. The questions asked are patterned after some of those on the job application the governor uses when he is considering judicial appointments

The candidates' answers are printed as submitted, without editing or insertion of “(sic)” for errors.

Thome

Duren

Nancy Thome​

Why do you want to become a judge?

I want to be a judge because I am passionate about public/community service, and I am passionate about the law. I want to bring my 28 years of legal experience, and my values of integrity, wisdom, open-mindedness, and compassion to the bench.

Name one of the best or worst U.S. or Wisconsin Supreme Court opinions in the last 25 years and explain why you feel that way.
 
In Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (2011), a 5-4 majority held that a district attorney’s office cannot not be held liable for failing to turn over exculpatory evidence due to a lack of training of its employees when there had only been one instance of such conduct. This case undermined Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) which held that the due process clause requires the prosecutor’s office to give to the defense evidence favorable to the accused and material to guilt of punishment. This has since become known as the “Brady rule”. It also contradicted Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (1989) which held that a police department can be held liable for violating an arrested person’s due process rights when the violation is due to a lack of training of its employees. Furthermore, it is incorrect that there was only one instance of the prosecutor’s office failing to turn over exculpatory evidence. As Justice Ginsberg wrote in the dissent “…the Brady violations in Thompson’s prosecutions were not singular and they were not aberrational…Thompson demonstrated that no fewer than five prosecutors…disregarded his Brady rights. He established that they kept from him, year upon year, evidence vital to his defense.” However, even if there had been only one instance, it defies reason that a police department can be held liable for a single instance, but a prosecutor’s office can’t be. Thompson almost paid with his life for the intentional Brady violations in his case. He was sentenced to death row, and an execution date was set. If it had not been for the death bed confession of one of the prosecutor’s who intentionally withheld evidence from Thompson’s defense, he very well may have been executed. Fortunately, that did not happen. After his conviction was reversed by the court of appeals, he was retried by the same prosecutor, but this time, with the aid of the previously withheld exculpatory evidence, he was acquitted by a jury after only 35 minutes of deliberation. In summary, the majority decision was a bad decision because it undermined the Brady rule, it illogically deviated from Canton, and it disincentivized prosecutors from providing thorough training to their staff.
 
Describe your judicial philosophy. 

A trial judge is like a referee in a football game. They are not there to play for one side or the other. Their job is to make sure the rules of the game are followed, so that both sides feel they were treated fairly. Perhaps you have watched a football game where your team lost, but you felt the referees made correct calls. It's easier to accept the loss because you feel both teams were treated fairly. On the other hand, have you watched a game where your team lost, and you felt the referees made several wrong calls that favored the other team? In that situation, it's harder to accept the loss because you feel the referee was biased. Like a referee, a trial judge's job is to make correct calls (rulings). What type of judge will I be? I will be a nonpartisan, common sense judge, who, like a good referee, will make correct calls, so that no matter who loses, both sides will walk away feeling that they were treated fairly. How will I do that? I will decide cases based only on the law, without allowing my personal or political preferences to influence my rulings; and by deferring to the United States Constitution, prior court decisions (precedent), the legislative branch (statutes), and the executive branch (administrative codes). When the law is unclear, or when there is no law that applies to the issue before me, I will use common sense and Sauk County community standards to guide me, in addition to any available evidence of lawmaker intent. 
 
Describe two of the most significant cases in which you were involved as either an attorney or a judicial officer.
 
In Snajder v. I.N.S., 29 F.3d 1203 (7th Cir. 1994), I was part of the defense team as a law student intern with Legal Assistance to Institutionalized Persons. I wrote the brief and made the oral argument. The appellant had entered the U.S. in 1961 as a refugee, and was later granted permanent residency, retroactive to his arrival. In 1989, He pled guilty to one count of possession of a firearm, several drug-related violations, and bail jumping. The Immigration and Naturalization Service commenced deportation proceedings against him. During the deportation hearing, Snajder was not represented by counsel. At the beginning of the hearing, he was advised of his right to counsel. He waived his right to counsel. Right after Snajder testified, he was served with an additional deportability charge. After the immigration judge explained that the INS had added a second ground for deportation, the judge asked again if Snajder wanted a continuance, but did not advise him of his right to counsel based on this new charge. Snajder appealed. The 7th Circuit held that under the regulations in effect at the time, the immigration judge was required to inform his of his right to counsel after the new charge was added. The 7th Circuit reversed the decision of the BIA and remanded the case for a new hearing. This case is significant to me because it is the only time I have had a case in a U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and because I was merely a law student, but feel I did an excellent job in briefing and arguing the case.
 
In re Rob’s Automotive, LLC v. Jacob Lazarz, Adv. Proc. No 20-49, U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, 2019, I represented the defendant in a civil lawsuit that had been commenced in Wisconsin Circuit Court (a different attorney from a different law firm represented defendant in the circuit court case). Plaintiff was seeking more than $330,000 in damages. I first successfully fought off plaintiff’s attempt to keep the case in Wisconsin Circuit Court. I then fought off plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. At trial, plaintiff tried to prove the following claims: Embezzlement, Trade Secret Misappropriation, Nondischargeability under 11 U.S.C 523(a)(2), Nondischargeability under 11 U.S.C 523(a)(4), Nondischargeability under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6), Conversion, and Civil Theft. At trial, the judge ruled that plaintiff had an unsecured claim for $15,731. An unsecured claim is dischargeable. This was a huge victory, considering that plaintiff was seeking a judgment of more than $330,000, and was seeking to have the judgment determined non-dischargeable. This case is significant to me because of the complexity of the claims, and because I achieved a very favorable outcome for my client.
 
Describe your legal experience as an advocate in criminal litigation, civil litigation, and administrative proceedings.
 
Although I had experience in criminal litigation as a law student, and early in my career as an attorney, I decided that criminal defense was not an area of law I wanted to continue practicing, and approximately 5 years into my career, I stopped doing criminal defense. However, while I did criminal law, I had a 3 day jury trial for a felony sexual assault of a child case, and I handled a second felony sexual assault of a child case. I do occasionally act as substitute counsel for other attorneys at initial appearances, and I have also interviewed defendants in jail for other attorneys. I have had some experience in administrative proceedings over my 28 year career, including in the areas of labor law and Medicaid eligibility. I have had quite a bit of experience in civil litigation, and bankruptcy litigation (which is civil, but is arguably a category of its own). I have litigated family law cases, contested guardianships, contested probates, contracts, foreclosures, real estate partitions, and more.
 
Describe an instance when you were challenged and had to exhibit courage in the face of adversity or opposition and how you handled that situation.
 
When I was on the Baraboo School Board, it seemed like we were thrown one challenge after another. The first was an offensive photo that went viral around the world. Literally. We had to have FBI protection in our buildings, and the local police kept my home and the homes of the other school board members and the superintendent under their watch out of concern that we were at heightened risk of a personal attack or an attack against our property. The second was Covid. The third was a rebellion by retired teachers. Since the question asks for only one example, I will use Covid. In the fall of 2020, we had to decide whether to re-open our schools to in-person learning, or whether to keep them closed and continue virtual learning. I was the only school board member to vote to keep them closed. Covid was a very divisive issue, and whether one agrees with my vote or not, I feel that I displayed a great deal of courage and independence in being the sole board member to vote against the superintendent’s recommendation that we re-open for in-person learning.
 
Do you support requiring a justice or judge to recuse him/herself from cases involving donors and indirect supporters who contribute money or other resources to the judge's election? If not, why not? If so, why, and what contribution limits would you set?
 
Absolutely. Wisconsin Statute 757.19 sets forth seven circumstances when a judge is required to recuse herself. The first five are straightforward. It’s the last two that are problematic because they are ambiguous. 6. “When a judge has a significant financial or personal interest in the outcome of the matter…” 7. “When a judge determines that, for any reason, he or she cannot, or it appears he or she cannot, act in an impartial manner.” The judge must evaluate these factors from both a personal and public viewpoint. Take campaign contributions as an example. A judge may feel that she can be impartial in a case involving a major campaign donor. However, a poll by the Brennan Center for Justice found that 90% of voters believe judges should step aside from cases involving major campaign supporters. Thus, a judge should recuse herself in a case involving a major campaign donor because whether she can be impartial or not, the public will not perceive her as impartial, which erodes public confidence in our judicial system. I think in the case of a monetary donation or a donation in kind that exceeds $500, the judge should recuse herself, and I myself pledge to do so.

What are the greatest obstacles judges face when trying to deliver true justice? What can or should be done about them? 
 
There are many obstacles, but I will focus my answer on some of the obstacles a judge has some control over. First, justice should be consistent, so that like cases are treated alike. For example, two 2nd OWI defendants whose cases have similar fact patterns, such as being pulled over for weaving while on the way home from a bar, should get the same sentence. Secondly, justice should be proportional, so that offenders of more serious crimes are punished more severely than offenders of less serious crimes. Thirdly, justice should not discriminate based on age, disability, gender, LGBTQ+, military service, national origin, race, religion, political affiliation, or socioeconomic status. I realize that across Wisconsin, caseloads are too high. I understand that in Sauk County, our caseload is such that a 4th branch/judge is warranted. High caseloads can interfere with a judge being as deliberative as she should. That makes it all the more important to focus on consistency, proportionality, and non-discrimination.

Provide any other information you feel would be helpful to potential voters deciding for whom to vote.

I am the best candidate because I have twice as much experience as my opponent, I am a longtime resident of Sauk County, and I have a proven track record of making tough choices and exercising independent judgment. I have been a lawyer in private practice in Baraboo for 28 years. I have represented over 2,000 clients in over 30 types of cases that come before the court. I have also had more than 800 cases in federal court. I have a long history of public office and community service. I was elected to the Baraboo School Board twice. I was appointed by the Baraboo Mayor to serve on the Community Development Authority and the City Administrator selection committee. I have been on the boards of more than 8 non-profits in Sauk County. I am also a graduate of the Sauk County Institute of Leadership. Before law school, I was a Peace Corps volunteer in the Central African Republic, and I was an economic support case worker for the department of human services. My husband, Pat, and I have lived in Sauk County for the past 28 years. He has worked at Primex Plastics in Reedsburg for 25 years. Both of our children were born and raised in Baraboo and graduated from Baraboo High School.

Blake Duren

​Why do you want to become a judge?

I am running for Judge to make our courts fairer and communities safer and stronger. My extensive courtroom experience, my knowledge of the law, my commonsense approach, and my commitment to equal justice make me uniquely qualified.
 
My family has farmed in Sauk County for over 100 years. After graduating from Reedsburg High School, I earned my BA from the University of Wisconsin-Madison and my JD from St. Louis University. My law office is in Reedsburg and I live in Baraboo.
​
I am active in the broader community, helping coach the Reedsburg Area High School Mock Trial Team and in the past have volunteered at the Richland County Free Legal Clinic and served on Sauk County Task Forces. I was appointed by the Wisconsin Supreme Court to the State Board of Bar Examiners and served as Vice Chair. I serve as a Guardian ad Litem in Sauk, Richland, and Juneau Counties.
 
The best preparation for being a judge is being in court. I have the most circuit court trial and courtroom experience in this race. Last year I handled 308 cases in Circuit Court while my opponent handled 5. Everyone before me will get a fair shake. The law can change lives, make us safer, and fairly resolve disputes. There are also ways we can improve our criminal justice system such as treatment courts. I will continue to support those efforts.

Name one of the best or worst U.S. or Wisconsin Supreme Court opinions in the last 25 years and explain why you feel that way. 

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is the worst US Supreme Court decision in the past 25 years. It reversed decades of precedent. It’s been extremely injurious to women’s health. We are just starting to see the negative, far reaching consequences of this decision. The decision is detrimental to women, hurts families, and harmed the legitimacy of the Court as an institution at a very volatile time. 
 
Describe your judicial philosophy.

I will apply the laws to the facts. I will treat everyone with respect. I will strive to make sure equal justice under the law is achieved in my courtroom every day.
 
As a Judge I will bring to the courtroom my extensive legal and trial experience, my knowledge of the law, and the values that I learned growing up in Sauk County: hard work, respect for others, honesty, and an appreciation for fair play.
 
This judge will decide cases that have a profound impact on the lives and futures of kids, families, individuals, and businesses. This judge will have a very busy court calendar. And this judge will need the temperament to maintain an environment in the courtroom that helps every one know they are being heard and treated fairly. I have handled nearly every type of case this judge will hear.

In a busy circuit court courtroom where life-altering decisions are being made, there is no time for on-the-job training. I have the crucial first hand experience that will enable me to serve all the people of Sauk County with integrity, competence, and evenhandedness from day one.
 
Describe two of the most significant cases in which you were involved as either an attorney or a judicial officer. 

Last year I was Guardian ad Litem in a case where the mother wanted to relocate out of state. The parties had been exercising equal, shared placement. The mother wanted to move to improve her life, and the life of her child. The father was less than perfect. But, it was my job to recommend to the Court whether the move would be in the child’s best interest, even though it would mean greatly reducing the time spent with the father. It was a very tough decision.

I represented an individual this summer who was charged with OWI causing death. He was only 19. The case was not legally complex. He drove the wrong way down the interstate. But, he displayed no remorse, and was recorded on jail video calls joking about what had occurred. Those videos were played at sentencing. Over 50 friends and family members of the victim attended the sentencing. It was one of the most difficult sentencings I have been party too, and it left a deep impression on me.
 
Describe your legal experience as an advocate in criminal litigation, civil litigation, and administrative proceedings. 

As a criminal defense attorney, I am in the Circuit Courts everyday with defendants arguing motions, participating in hearings and sentencings, and negotiating with prosecutors. I’ve tried criminal cases to jury in six counties. I’m certified to take the highest level felonies with the Office of the State Public Defender. 
 
I have also handled a variety of civil lawsuits during my career. I also handle divorces and paternity actions. The civil matters I handled have involved real estate and business disputes.

Shortly after the pandemic ended, I handled a number of administrative hearings over unemployment compensation issues. I routinely handle probation revocation hearings in front of administrative law judges.
 
Describe an instance when you were challenged and had to exhibit courage in the face of adversity or opposition and how you handled that situation. 

A few years ago I represented an individual with severe mental health issues in a series of criminal matters. My client was unable to regulate his behavior while he was being held in the county jail, and ended up being charged with 21 felonies, mostly stemming from his conduct in the jail while he was having episodes of significant mental illness. The prosecutor was not being reasonable. At one point, my client spat on me in open court. Although I could have withdrawn at that point, I did not. I stuck with my client. Talked to a lot of doctors. And, eventually, got my client the help he needed and resolved his situation in a fair manner.
 
Do you support requiring a justice or judge to recuse him/herself from cases involving donors and indirect supporters who contribute money or other resources to the judge's election? If not, why not? If so, why, and what contribution limits would you set?

Yes.
 
Wisconsin has some of the weakest recusal laws in the Country. The US Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United means that large expenditures on judicial races by special interests are not reasons for recusal. Restoring trust and confidence in the impartiality of our Courts is critical for our democracy. I support strengthening recusal rules. 
 
What are the greatest obstacles judges face when trying to deliver true justice? What can or should be done about them?

Throughout our court system, access to justice is one of the most significant obstacles to justice. Improving access to justice leads to better outcomes for the individual litigant and strengthens our judicial system. Some people can afford attorneys. Some people in criminal cases qualify for state or county appointed lawyers. There is a sizable group in the middle. And, in civil cases like divorce and child custody, the choice is either the hire an attorney or represent yourself. I have volunteered at a number of free legal clinics that assist people who are in that very position. Sauk County has recently started a free family law legal clinic that assists people with divorce and child custody issues. The State Bar Association has a number of initiatives to encourage more attorneys to practice in smaller, more rural counties and to fill the gaps in access. I support those initiatives. 
 
Provide any other information you feel would be helpful to potential voters deciding for whom to vote. 

All across Wisconsin, Courts are being required to do more work with fewer people. Here in Sauk County, we are a growing county. However, the number of attorneys who accept appointments to represent clients who cannot afford an attorney, has shrunk. Law enforcement recruitment numbers are down, creating staffing issues in transporting inmates from prisons in Green Bay or Waupun to Baraboo for Court. Sauk County has a sizable portion of individuals in Court who require interpreters.

Remote appearance technology can help Courts use time more efficiently. The shortage of attorneys is a complex, system-wide issue. As a Judge, I will always be fair, impartial, and respectful to attorneys and their clients including being respectful of an Attorney’s schedule. There is nothing more frustrating to a busy, practicing attorney – or potentially unfair to a litigant or defendant – than a Court that is not flexible and fair in its scheduling practices, or one that is inflexible on the use of telephone or video appearances.
​
In addition, an effective method for improving court procedures and efficiency is to seek, and act on, input from stakeholders at the Courthouse including bailiffs, court clerks, judicial assistants, social workers, attorneys, the Clerk of Courts office, the District Attorneys office, and the State Public Defenders office. We have so many hardworking, compassionate, and knowledgeable professionals who understand our court system so well, that we must tap into their experience and work collaboratively to make our courts stronger and fairer. Some things can’t be changed because of the law. Other things can be done in a variety of ways. I’m the only candidate in this race with the experience to recognize the difference, and effectuate change that will benefit the entire county.