Eich, William Oral History 04302013
Oral History Interview of William Eich, April 30, 2013
All right. This is Dan Gartzke on April 30, 2013, meeting with Judge William Eich. We're meeting in my office at 6502 Grand Teton Plaza in Madison as part of the interview process for the Dane County Bar Association oral project. We're -- so provided an outline of -- of questions, Judge Dike -- Eich, I'm sorry.
Q Do you want to start on your pre law school experience?
A Well, I was born in Park Ridge, Illinois, in 1938. At that time, my dad was a factory worker; my mother was a home person. I went to grade school in Park Ridge, and then, when I was in mid high school, my parents moved farther north of Chicago to Palatine, Illinois, where I graduated from Palatine High School in 1956, and went from there to Beloit college and majored in philosophy; was a managing editor of the newspaper; played on the baseball team; and got better grades than I had in high school, fortunately.
My father was -- neither of my parents went to college. By the time I went to college, my father had become involved in sales of the product that he used to make on the assembly line -- electronic products -- and really did -- did nicely by himself. But, what I remember is being a pretty mediocre high school student. Having been accepted at Beloit, I came home from a ball game or something in the summer after my graduation, and I saw my dad's car home. And he was there. I walked in and he said, "Get in the car." And I got in the car, and he started driving. And he said, "We're going to Beloit. Look at this." And he showed me a letter that had come from the director of admissions that he reconsidered my application and thought I might do better at another school.
So an hour and a half later we arrive at Beloit and he drives to the home of the admissions director, knocks on the door, and he said, "I'm William Eich. This is my son, Bill, Jr., and he has something he wants to tell you. And that is why -- he wants to tell you why you should reconsider and accept him." It was dead silence all the way up.
Q Oh yeah. I was going to say, if you were –
A No, no. So I remember absolutely nothing about the meeting, but I did get admitted and graduated in 1960.
Q All right.
A And I had decided -- I really enjoyed philosophy and writing and reading -- and I decided, thinking whether to go to graduate school or whether -- or something else, and, it seemed to me that at the time, law was attractive to me for that -- those very reasons. I liked the reading and the writing part of it. And so I went to law school here at the university and did fairly well and worked in the summers cooking bratwursts and steak sandwiches at the old Brathaus on State Street.
Q Mm hmm.
A And for $1.60 an hour, which is 60 cents better than an offer I had from Carroll Metzner to work in his law firm at a dollar an hour.
Q What was he going to have you do at that firm?
A I don't know. Just general, whatever a law student would do.
Q Oh, okay. All right.
A And in the summertime; so I decided to make the extra 60 cents an hour and stay at the Brathaus.
Q Mm hmm.
A And when I finished law school, I became a law clerk to Justice William Dietrich of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. As you and I were talking earlier, and as I talked with your father when he and I were colleagues on the bench, Justice Dietrich was not recognized as one of the "scholar" members of the court; but it was a wonderful court. Judge Tom Fairchild was there and Myron Gordon, Harold Hallows, George Curry, Horace Wilkie, and Bruce Beilfuss. And it was really an outstanding -- outstanding group, outstanding court. At the time, well known around the country for reasons that got completely opposite of what the Wisconsin Supreme Court is known for today, but –
Q So you turned down Carroll Metzner. Was that just after your first year of law school?
A Yeah, I think so.
Q Okay. Did you continue to work at the Brathaus on State Street all throughout law school?
A Mm hmm, yes. Mm hmm.
Q So your first job in the legal field was as a clerk for Justice Dietrich?
A Yeah. I did, during the school year, work part-time as a clerk in a local law office. In those days was called, Arthur, Dewa, Tomlinson & Thomas.
Q Okay.
A And I spent a summer, I think, working, just doing clerky stuff with the law firm.
Q Researching? A Little bit, yeah.
Q Yeah.
A Mm hmm.
Q Was that -- is it Tomlinson, Rickers now, or?
A I don't know. Ray Tomlinson is -- none of them is practicing anymore and certainly not alive. But Robert Arthur was a district attorney of Madison in the 50s I think, or something like, or in Dane County in the 50s; Bruce Thomas was a lawyer in the firm. He eventually became -- he left to become general counsel for Verex; Ray Tomlinson remained in practice; and Bob Dewa remained in solo practice. He left the firm. And when I finished my law clerkship, I went to work for him -- for Bob Dewa for a year.
Q How do you spell that last name?
A D-E-W-A.
Q Okay. How old was he at the time?
A He was probably -- let's see. He has a son Roger, who is a year or so older than I. Well, if I was 25, he was probably in his 50s.
Q So did you go right on to law school from college?
A Yes. Mm hmm.
Q So you would have graduated in '63 then?
A '63, that's right.
Q Okay.
A And I worked for the court for the '63 four term, and then I worked with Bob Dewa from June of '64 until probably a year later in '65. And while I was with Dewa, somebody, a friend of mine -- I can't think of who it was now -- said, "I know a guy you ought to meet. He's running for attorney general, and his name is La Follette." So I got to know Bronson La Follette, who was just a few years older than I was.
He was running for attorney general, and he won. And so he asked me to come into the office with him; so I did in 1965. I became an assistant attorney general; and then in '68, deputy attorney general. And when I was an assistant in the Civil Service staff, I was working on what came to be known as "environmental matters", representing the old conservation department, pre-DNR, and did some criminal appeals, which was nice. And I had the distinction of -- I must have been 28 years old or something like that, and Bronson and I went to Washington to argue a case in the U.S. Supreme Court.
Q What year was that?
A I wish I could remember. It was Menomonee Tribe. It had to do with the Menomonee Indians' tribal rights to hunt and fish their lands, which were State lands. It had become State lands, free from regulation.
Q Oh.
A And the -- what was so interesting was Bronson did the arguing then. If you have been to the Supreme Court, the lawyers sit very close to the justices. So I was sitting there, and Chief Justice -- now, on one side was Hugo Black, and on the other side was William Douglas. And just as Bronson starts to argue, I can hear Black lean over in front of Warren, asked Douglas, and I can hear him say, "Is that Phil's son or Bob's son?" And they looked at me, and I went, "Bob." And they nodded their heads and went on to listen to the argument. I couldn't even tell you if we prevailed in that case or not. But the other thing I remember about it is that we met once -- I'm sorry my memory was off. That was another.
Q No, that's okay. So then that would have worked it's way up through the federal courts, I take it; right?
A Yeah.
Q So did you have a trial in federal district court before?
A Yeah, but we were not involved in it. That had taken place before –
Q Okay.
A -- we were there.
Q And all that certainly predated the Chippewa cases that came up later.
A Right. That's right.
Q Huh.
A And another case that I inherited as a young, young lawyer, while I was still an assistant AG, was the reincarnation of the Chicago water diversion case, which was litigation under provisional acts under the Wisconsin Supreme Court, started in 1922, and the City of Chicago was, in the early days of the century, was really seriously polluting Lake Michigan. And Chicago River ran into the lake, carrying a lot of the sewage from the city. So they reversed the flow of the river so that now went down and joined the Missouri River base and -- but the effect of it was to lower the levels of the Great Lakes; so shipping was being affected; some of the canals -- the Welland Canal -- were being affected. So all of the states bordering the Great Lakes commenced this original action in the U.S. Supreme Court. And the first Opinion was written by Oliver Wendell Holmes, in fact.
Q Hmm.
A But the case was reopened again in the 50s, late 50s; and somehow I inherited the case when I went in the attorney general's office. And it was being heard by a special master in Philadelphia, who was a retired Court of Appeals judge named Albert Maris, and he -- attorney generals and others from around the country, around the great lake states were there -- and the chief, the main counsel was a Randall LeBeouf from a big New York law firm, which then was known as LeBeouf, Lamb & Leiby. And we would meet in his office, and then we would go see the judge. The judge was sitting in New York; so we were there a lot. But one of the interesting things about that case is that representing the United States was Thurgood Marshall, the Solicitor General; so I had the opportunity to be in his office once or twice, and –
Q Let me do a sound check and make sure I'm doing this okay. All right. Okay continuing on. My sound check was okay. We were just talking about the case –
A Well, I just mentioned being a young lawyer and having these contacts, however brief, with luminaries like Marshall and Black and Douglas.
Q I'm going to jump back and forth a bit. Do you remember who the other clerks were at the Supreme Court at the time you were there?
A Yes. There was David Wexler, David Leffler, Pat McMahon worked for Hallows. Goodness. I'm trying to think. I even have a picture in my office at home of the seven of us sitting in the bench of the court, and I can't -- I can't come up with -- I haven't thought about them in years.
Q Was it a good collegial group? A Yeah, very. And the -- and the -- some of the judges were so nice. Bruce Beilfuss was just wonderful, and he was very new. He came on the court. And Dave Wexler was his law clerk, and Dave was a good friend of mine. And he was the first trial judge to allow cameras in his courtroom, and he became really well known. He was famous and –
Q Was it a Dane County judge?
A No. He was from Neillsville, Clark County.
Q Okay.
A And he -- he was just all over the place, and publicity and stuff, and he ran for the supreme court on one -- so some of the other judges had the feeling that, well, he's not really one of us, you know. He's got in here. So he wound up enjoying having lunch with Dave and me more than anybody else, who we would -- two or three times a week the three of us would have lunch at the Plaza Tavern.
Q Oh.
A Which he -- Judge Fairchild really, or Judge Beilfuss really loved, and
Q Do you remember what you were paid as a clerk?
A Yes, it was $6,000 a year.
Q Okay.
A And, actually, that was good. That was considered a good -- a good salary. I remember my dad pointing out that my -- an uncle wasn't making that much in Chicago, who was a salesman for some outfit, you know.
Q Yeah.
A So yep. And then I told you that I was in practice with this older lawyer for a year, and I think I made $5,000 then. And I don't know what made me think of this, but I went to work in the attorney general's office in summer of '65 as an assistant attorney general, and I think the salary was $7,200 which was very good then, I thought.
Q Mm hmm.
A And then in 1968 I became deputy attorney general, which is fun because I got to move into the big office next to his in a beautiful, beautiful office setup. And so I remained there until Bronson then ran for governor against Warren Knowles and lost. And so I didn't have any plans. And so, briefly, I went back to my self-service job in the AG's office. And I was working on a case; and oddly enough, I was in Los Angeles. It was, we had started on air pollution -- joined an air pollution litigation against the automobile manufacturers, and it was in federal court in Los Angeles. So I remember I was in the hotel room in Los Angeles -- and Pat Lucey was governor -- and I got a call and it says, "Is this Bill Eich?" And I said "Yes." Said, "This is the governor's office calling." So I figure it's a friend of mine playing a joke; so I made some smart comment. But it was Pat Lucey's chief of staff, and he called to say that he wanted to appoint me Chairman of the Public Service Commission, which I barely knew what it was it did. I remember when I was in the AG's office working on some cases -- I knew that in those days, they were in charge of the navigable waters law, but I don't think they were by that time. At any rate, so I came back and I went into Lucey's office -- and I met him once or twice, but I really didn't know him. It turns out that he had been looking for a young lawyer to -- other members of the commission were -- had been there for 30 years and were all young lawyers. And he happened to talk to people like Nat Heffernan, who had replaced Justice Dietrich, who I worked for. In fact, he died. Justice Dietrich died about the time I finished my year with him.
Q Oh.
A And he was replaced by Nat Heffernan –
Q Okay.
A -- who I knew because he was U.S. attorney when Bronson La Follette was his assistant, which is where he was when he ran for AG; so that's how I initially met Nat. So, anyway, he talked to Nat; he talked to Horace Wilkie, who had been a former democratic senator; and I think he talked to Bronson and some others and said my name kept coming up; so he just called up and said, "I want to do this."
Q Mm hmm.
A So I went in to see him, and it was quite a thrill. I remember he told me I needed to shave off my mustache.
Q Hmm.
A And he told me not to take any crap from the Utilities, and that was all he wanted to tell me –
Q And then you went in?
A -- and wish me well. So I went out there and one of -- one of the other two commissioners was more than twice my age, and the other one had been on the Commission since I had been in high school.
Q Mm hmm.
A And, although we got along pretty well -- but that was kind of exciting because it was -- it was part of -- it was the days of the Arab oil embargo way back when, and this was –
Q So the 70s?
A It was '71 that I went there.
Q Okay.
A And I stayed until -- well, essentially, it was at the end of '75 -- '74 when I had gotten divorced; and I was kind of tired of the PSC. And I went to see Lucey and said I would definitely stay on as long he wanted me to, but if, you know, might be interested in moving on; and I mentioned that there was a vacant judgeship in Dane County. And he -- initially, he was interested in replacing his then secretary of transportation. And there was some suggestion that I would take that job, but I didn't want to do that. So, anyway, he wound up appointing me to the Dane County Court.
Q And that would have been the circuit court not the county court; right?
A This was the county court.
Q Oh, it was the county court.
A It was county court.
Q So the judge could appoint on the county court.
A Yeah. And this was -- this was in December of 1974. I took office in January of '75. And then I think it was two years later -- or the next year I ran and was opposed by two lawyers in one election; and then two years after that -- so then three years after I had been there -- one of the circuit judges retired, and I ran unopposed for his seat -- Bill Sachtjen.
Q Oh, okay.
A And so the years are kind of escaping me here, but it was probably around '77, '-8. And then I was elected there once or twice more. And then in '85 Governor Earl appointed me to the court of appeals.
Q And what branch was Sachtjen? Do you remember the branch number?
A It was 4. It was Branch 4 of the circuit court. Probably continued on as Branch 4 even after the –
Q Yeah.
A consolidation.
Q Yeah, yeah. Okay.
A But, you know, the early days -- I mean, that was -- that was the plum job of the State because all -- there were four circuit judges and six county judges; and the four circuit judges -- all we heard were large amounts, civil cases on jury trial, felony trials, and we heard all administrative appeals all over the state. We didn't do divorces or misdemeanors or traffic or –
Q Okay.
A small claims or anything, and that was all county court; so this was a really nice job.
Q Yeah. Yeah. And probate was all handled through the county courts.
A Probate was a court all by itself.
Q Oh. A separate court?
A Yeah.
Q Okay. All right. And that was all changed in the 1978 consolidation?
A In the consolidation everything was lumped together.
Q Yeah. Yeah.
A So, you know, in those days there were -- in small claims and some of these others -- there was an appeal from the county court to the circuit court –
Q Okay.
A -- In some of those. But it was a long time ago.
Q Oh. I'm jumping around a little bit.
A Sure.
Q Back to the attorney general, how many people were in the office at that point when you were there?
A Well, our office -- our offices are all in the Capitol. There were 21 assistants –
Q Okay.
A -- and two investigators, and I was –
Q They were all in the Capitol?
A Yep. We each had an office in the Capitol.
Q Okay.
A And when I was deputy -- I can't remember what year that would have been -- the staff moved to the Lorraine Hotel, and just the attorney general and his deputy and executive assistant remained in the Capitol in that suite across from the governor's office.
Q Okay. That was on West Washington, as I remember the Lorraine. It's still there, actually. Yeah.
A Yep. It's condos now.
Q It is condos. Yeah, okay. Good. All right. Now, when you went to the Dane County -- oh, let's go back. In the PSC, where were you located then?
A In the Hill Farm State Office Building.
Q And that must have been quite new at that point.
A Yeah, it was. I don't know how old, but its wasn't more than 6 or 8 years old, I don't think.
Q How large an office was that? How many staffed and all?
A Oh, I can't remember, 30 or 40 perhaps. I -- I just can't remember.
Q Okay. All right. I'll go through some of these things. Did you have any particular local lawyers that you admired early in your career that you saw?
A Well, I always admired Eugene Gehl, who was a wonderful trial lawyer. Actually, I think he taught a torts class when I was in law school. People like Wade Boardman, just excellent, really good lawyers. And, you know, you wind up, even as a judge -- particularly a young judge -- learning a lot from lawyers because, in the circuit court, I would try jury trials, oh, goodness, every -- one or two a week sometimes -- sometimes long, long trials. But it was very much -- and I found that fascinating, just fascinating. I would always hold the jury after the trial and go talk to them afterwards. I would ask if they had any questions, and it was always interesting to me how attuned jurors are -- were and I'm sure are -- to the lawyers. Always talk about something the lawyers did, and so -- and how they -- they really like this guy, or they, you know. And I was really interested in that, and it taught me that good lawyering, at least to a jury, involves a lot. You know?
Q Well, did you find them more attuned to the lawyers than the parties themselves even?
A Yes, as a matter of fact. Yeah.
Q Okay.
A I think it's because the parties, unless it's a -- a case with really unusually hard or fact situations, the lawyers are in movement all the time. They're always present there asking questions, they're objecting, they're standing up and moving around; and the parties only play a relatively brief role in the trial. But I just found that interesting that they seem to be so attuned to the lawyers' performances.
Q And how did you feel about the level of lawyering that you saw? Were there people who were misleading? And I'm not asking for names or things like that, but people who are particularly admirable in how they could communicate to a jury?
A Yeah. There were several and there were, fortunately, there were not very many bad eggs in the group.
Q Yeah.
A But, in those days, a lot more cases were tried than are tried now. And some of the lawyers were just so good, and no matter -- they just seemed to establish a rapport with the jury. A young lawyer, again, is not all that young any more; but a young lawyer who really impressed me in those days along those lines was Ward Richter.
Q Okay.
A Really excellent. But, you know, others were more showy; but they could also, oh, really have an effect on the jury. Jack McManus was a very flamboyant trial lawyer in Madison for many, many years; and I heard lawyers say -- a juror say once, a woman, she said, "I feel so privileged to have sat on a trial of Mr. McManus." And he was this flamboyant -- he would throw pencils, you know. He just –
Q Throw tantrums and things?
A Pencils. Well he was just loud and brash, and –
Q Yeah.
A But they seemed to love him, and –
Q But was he still within the confines of civility and collegiality? Did you ever have any issues?
A Oh, pretty much so. Yeah.
Q Okay.
A I think in these days the -- the Dane County Bar was so much smaller, and certainly the trial bar was fairly cohesive and, as you know.
Q Yeah.
A It's -- it's easiest to get along when you get along.
Q Yeah. Did you ever have Dick Cates in front of you?
A Oh, yeah. He was wonderful.
Q Yeah.
A Really good. I forgot about Dick. Yeah.
Q Oh, hang on.
A He was one of the very best, I thought. You know?
Q Yeah. Who else at that firm? Jim Olson –
A Yeah.
Q Or John Carlson, or –
A Yeah, yeah. They didn't -- I didn't have many. I knew them both personally quite well, but I didn't really have a lot of legal experience with either of them.
Q Okay. All right.
A We played softball together –
Q Oh.
A -- for the Dane County fastpitch softball team. Dick was on that team.
Q Okay.
A Gerry Nichol was kind of the coach –
Q Oh.
A -- and player. And it was a good group.
Q Yeah.
A Good group of people.
Q I'm trying to think of who else I would -- now that you mention the word "Richter," Steve Callum -- did he –
A Yeah. He was very good, real good. Yeah. He was with the Metzner firm, yeah.
Q Yeah.
A And Carroll was good. He really tried a lot of cases, and he represented American Family, and he always did well. He told the -- every closing argument Carroll would tell the same horrible, corny joke.
Q Oh. Where was the joke?
A I wish I could remember, Dan. I just can't.
Q Oh.
A But I just -- I stopped listening, you know, after the 15th trial. But they all seemed to love it.
Q Any particular interesting jury experiences that you had, or –
A No. Once had a deaf juror, which was interesting as we had a sign language interpreter sit in front of the jury box –
Q Mm hmm.
A -- directly across from -- and there wasn't really much to go on. And I devised an oath for her -- for the interpreter. It seemed to work very well. Very well.
Q Who were the other circuit court judges at the time?
A When I first -- when I first became a county judge, the circuit court judges were Bill Sachtjen, Norris Maloney, Bill Jackman and Mike Torphy. Just replaced Mike Torphy in the county court. He was elected the circuit court that year.
Q Okay. All right.
A And the county judges were Erv Bruner, Archy Simonson, Bill Bryne -- oh, god. I can't think of his name.
Q Was Bardwell a judge at that time?
A Yeah. I'm sorry. He was a circuit judge. It's my mistake. It was Bardwell, Sachtjen, Maloney and Torphy.
Q Okay.
A And Buenzli.
Q Buenzli?
A Bill Buenzli was the county judge.
Q And Maloney was colorful, I always heard.
A Yeah, yeah. He was kind of an irascible guy.
Q Yeah.
A But –
Q Okay.
A -- he had an interesting history. He was an attorney for the -- the big cooperatives in the 30s and 40s.
Q The electrical cooperatives?
A Yeah.
Q All right. So then, eventually, you went onto Court of Appeals; right?
A Right.
Q And when was that?
A That was in May of '85.
Q And you were appointed by –
A Tony Earl.
Q Okay.
A And -- well, your dad was on the court and –
Q Just for the record, that was Paul Gartzke.
A Yes, Paul Gartzke. And what was really fun for me, a thrill for me, was Martha Bablitch had resigned.
Q Did you fill her spot?
A No.
Q Oh. No.
A Who said I filled it? Oh, maybe I did.
Q Well, the election was in '78. And did she go -- last that long? I'm not sure. You might have –
A Dan, I can't remember that. I'm pretty sure I must have replaced Martha, but -- but -- for –
Q Must have been.
A On a few cases, Judge Beilfuss -- Bruce Beilfuss, who retired, was named to fill in for her. And I don't know how it happened, but after I joined the court, I wound up being in a couple of cases with him, which is really a thrill for me, having been a law clerk.
Q Mm hmm.
A And his office was right next door, and we would have lunch together, and I really respected him. It was really fun to be able to have that -- that connection.
Q Yeah.
A But yeah. And then -- see, '85 and then in '88 -- I think it was '88 -- I became chief judge. '88 or '89.
Q Okay, of the full Court of Appeals then.
A Yeah, mm hmm.
Q Okay.
A And I did that for nine years. Three three-year stints.
Q And I think -- was the court at that time in the Verex building, or was it already over on the Martin Luther King, Jr.?
A It was at Martin Luther King.
Q Okay. All right.
A And yeah.
Q And then when did you retire from the Court of Appeals?
A In October, 2000. Yeah.
Q Did you do reserve judging after that?
A I did some, yeah. And -- but for budgetary and a lot of other reasons, there really wasn't much of that.
Q Yeah.
A And now I've just -- I've just taken myself off that list. I've done so little of it over the years, and -- and the other thing I can tell you is that the pay for a reserve judge per diem is only slightly more than my hourly rate as an arbitrator.
Q Yeah. You mentioned before that you've been doing arbitration through American Arbitration Association?
A Yeah. And -- and on my own as well. You know.
Q Oh, okay. So you can do it either way?
A Sure.
Q As that. And god, I think you said you've been in Chicago lately, or what was that?
A Yeah. I have a week-long hearing and a case involving a -- a healthcare insurer.
Q Yeah?
A Where we have five days of hearings set in Chicago. And I just had five days in Milwaukee, which only lasted four, the last week in another case.
Q And I -- how wide of an area are you covering? I mean geographically?
A Essentially, I get a lot of cases that arise in Wisconsin and sometimes in Illinois. And other times, you know, I really don't know. It's funny. I just got a case within the last few days that comes from farther east. I did have one in Philadelphia once a couple years ago and –
Q Hmm.
A I think my name is probably on their complex litigation panel that they circulate to a wide range, but -- but it's -- what's nice about that is you do have some staff assistance. You know, there's staff. For some reason I work with a staff in Dallas. I notice that this new case I get they're in New Jersey. But, anyway, they do a lot of the arranging phone calls, and coordinating briefs and schedules, and things; so –
Q Do you see some of the same lawyers through the arbitrations?
A No. Rarely. Rarely.
Q Okay. All right.
A But what was really fun is the cases usually involved some of, really, the best lawyers around.
Q Yeah.
A And it's really fun. And the one I'm going to Chicago in June, I'm the chair of a three-arbitrator panel. And these are very topnotch Chicago lawyers.
Q The other arbitrators you're saying?
A Yeah. And the one I did out East had to do with transportation and two -- and railroads. And it had two really prominent transportation lawyers, were the other members of the panel.
Q Quite a different range of things you're covering there.
A Yeah. Yeah.
Q Wow. Wow. All right.
A And the other thing that I never knew there was a market for is appellate consulting. I've done a firm out of that where it started out someone contacted me to evaluate the -- well, what their chances for success on, if they were to appeal this; and I worked with the briefs on them, listened to arguments, and things like that. And that's really, really kind of fun. And in some cases I've worked with Bill Bablitch and Gordon Myse and others, but what -- what was really fun was, on several cases, they would hire Gordon Myse, who's a former Court of Appeals circuit judge from Appleton; Janine Geske, who -- supreme court justice, Milwaukee circuit court judge; and me. And the great part about that is we're all Beloit College graduates.
Q Oh.
A So –
Q That's a good job. (Unclear) looked at that one too. Okay. Going through some of the lists here, what did you most enjoy about being a judge? And, I guess, I mean, you've had such a wide range from county to circuit court, Court of Appeals.
A Yeah.
Q In any of those areas, I mean.
A You know -- and it's some very different things involved. When you're a trial judge, you frequently get to see the -- the reaction to your decision almost in person many times. If you are deciding something from the bench, let's say -- or at least you've seen the people certainly after a trial -- you're deciding motions, you're seeing the parties and heard their testimony. And it's always good to see someone you're doing right by, if you know what I mean.
Q Yeah.
A On the Court of Appeals, you're kind of in that vacuum; and it's -- it's a -- in one sense, more personal. It's kind of internalized, and in another sense, you're doing good -- let's hope -- for the people in general, for the most part.
Q Mm.
A When you're talking about interpretation laws and things, statutes, and things like that. But the face-to-faceness is out of it. But there are other rewards as well. And plus, the fact is, I think I said earlier, I always enjoy the reading or writing. In fact, when I finished -- I didn't tell you this, but when I finished my law clerkship, I had a call from my former major professor at Beloit, asking me if I wanted to join the faculty in the philosophy department.
Q Oh.
A And I thought, "Oh, that's really attractive; but I've just invested three years in law school and a year as a law clerk –
Q Yeah.
A -- and I don't know if I want to start going back to graduate school or what"; so I turned that down. But I was flattered to have been offered the position.
Q Yeah. Yeah. You also seem like you really enjoyed the jury work.
A Oh, yeah. I did.
Q Oh.
A That was -- to me, that was the most fascinating part of being a trial judge.
Q Mm hmm.
A And one of the things that's so enjoyable about that is you actually bring people, sometimes literally, off the street into the justice game.
Q Mm hmm.
A You know? And it's -- it's really good. It was a little distressing on how hard some people tried to get out of it.
Q Oh, really?
A And yet I would say, in talking to almost every jury I ever tried to case with, I couldn't remember anyone who didn't find it interesting on some, utterly fascinating –
Q And meaningful did they find it?
A And meaningful, yeah.
Q Did you think -- this is more a personal question for me. When I'm doing voir dire or working with juries, and I -- you know, I have a jury trial every other year maybe –
A Yeah.
Q -- I make a point of telling them how meaningful it is. Does that stay with them?
A Yes, very much so. I think -- I think if they've never done it before, and they're all herded in this big room for a jury selection, and they think, "Oh, my god. This is going to be dreadful." And then they realize that not only are they sitting there hearing these stories, but then they're together and listening to other people’s views and trying to arrive at what's right. And I think -- I think all in all, they regard it as quite meaningful.
Q Did you ever take a verdict away from a jury? Say they just got it wrong?
A You know, I don't remember that I did. I've participated in the reversal of jury verdicts on the Court of Appeals.
Q Oh, you have.
A But I don't remember. I may have done it once, but it must not have been a huge case because I really don't remember doing it.
Q Okay. Okay. And so generally you think they -- they got it right?
A Oh, yeah.
Q Yeah. Yeah.
A And very perceptive. And, of course, you -- you do start with a pretty intelligent pool in a city like Madison.
Q Yeah.
A You know, many of them are faculty members and –
Q Now, on the Court of Appeals you were probably the only trial judge when you were there. Dad wasn't on –
A In this district I was, yeah.
Q Yeah, yeah. Did that give you a different insight for –
A I thought so. I thought so. I think I used to have discussions about that with your dad. But when I first got there I thought -- I thought the Court of Appeals -- I thought they were being awfully hard on the judges, trial judges. In other words –
Q How so?
A Well, I'm just trying to think. I just -- I just thought they were being harder than they needed to on –
Q You probably got reversed on occasion as a trial judge.
A Oh, sure. Oh, yeah. Sure.
Q It stings, or does it –
A Oh, sometimes. Although sometimes you think, well, they really don't know.
Q And sometimes you think, yeah.
A See, I was in really good company because Chuck Jones and I were the most reversed.
Q The most reversed?
A Yeah, circuit judges. And he was marvelous; so I never regard that as bad company.
Q No, not at all.
A So. But it was fun. And I really -- I must say that, after court reorganization and when a circuit court is hearing everything -- divorces and small claims and traffic and stuff -- and jury trial started dropping off. And it wasn't as fun –
Q Really?
A -- as it used to be when I started; and so I was really glad to go on the Court of Appeals, and I enjoyed that a lot.
Q Hmm. What -- let's see. What were the most significant changes to substantive law that you saw? It says "which affected your particular practice" -- or the, I mean, "affected your judicial career." What was going on in the courts? How about that.
A Well that's -- I suppose that's a good question because I can't think of an answer to it.
Q Yeah. There would be so many areas. I don't think that's a good question overall, I mean, in so many ways. How about -- well, you went through some significant changes in procedural law, certainly with the court's consolidation. And did you practice before we had the major civil code rewrite, or was that before you? Let's see.
A I think that was before.
Q Okay. That was in the early 60s; right?
A Yeah.
Q Yeah. Yeah. So were there any substantial changes afterwards? Well, obviously, the Court of Appeals was a substantial procedural change.
A Yeah. Well, it certainly was change in the institution –
Q Yeah.
A -- of the judiciary, and I never -- I -- I was going to say -- and I guess it was all for the better, and I assume it was -- to me, the bad aspect, or maybe not bad, but to me, more undesirable aspect of it is that it -- it gives a huge amount of the appellate workload to the Court of Appeals. And a lot of that is a good idea; but it also reduced the Supreme Court to, you know, maybe a writing each -- each -- each one writing ten opinions a year. And what I noticed was they tended to double and triple and quadruple in length in these opinions. And I don't know if all of that time and all of that writing stuff influenced the contentiousness that so dominates the court today. I don't know. My hunch is its 99 percent personality and –
Q Yeah.
A The rest -- but it's interesting. We had dinner with some people the other night, and they were somewhere with a German couple and a -- another European couple, and when they heard they were from Wisconsin, both of them said, "What about that Supreme Court we read about? And is it -- are they really choking each other?"
Q Oh, my goodness.
A And these are Europeans.
Q Yeah. Yeah.
A But, at any rate, it's for another time. But –
Q Yeah.
A But -- oh, it's -- it's very different. When I was a law clerk in the Supreme Court, each justice was essentially assigned five opinions a month.
Q Huh.
A And they did it. You know, they were shorter; and -- and they certainly weren't any worse. They are probably better than the ones you see today.
Q What was your workload on the Court of Appeals when you were doing that?
A Well, it was a lot more.
Q Yeah.
A But the -- well, I remember when I retired after 15 years, I had written about 375 published opinions.
Q Mm hmm.
A So that's like 20 a year, or something like that, or more.
Q Yeah.
A And to say nothing of all the unpublished –
Q Yeah.
A -- opinions and decisions and things. So we would -- we would each take eight or ten cases a month, as I recall, from the conferences.
Q Mm hmm. Hmm.
A But -- but it was -- and we, you know, we weren't -- we weren't writing legal textbooks. We were just getting the case decided, and –
Q Yeah.
A And I guess –
Q And as chief judge you participated in then conferences as to which of those would be published and not.
A Sure. Yeah.
Q Yeah. Here's another question from the list: What -- what do you think are the most significant technological changes, which affected the judicial practice?
A Oh, I think -- I think it's all in the area of, probably, electronics.
Q Yeah.
A And machinery. When I was a circuit judge, I remember my secretary typing out the jury instructions with carbon paper –
Q Hmm.
A -- so we could give them to the lawyers and –
Q Mm hmm.
A -- and I could -- I always remember sitting there, and she'd be making an -- she'd peal back one after the other like that. But that certainly -- and I think that it's just fascinated me is I don't know what took me to the state law library a year -- couple years ago -- and I -- they're -- they're in a new location than I have known them.
Q Sure.
A But I -- I just happened to be in the shelf. One of the reports where there was Wisconsin or Northwest or what, and I noticed that, just for the fun of it, I would open a book and each one would crack. I would go back six months, crack -- never been opened before. You know, and I thought that's really true. And then I'd look and there's this eight or ten PCs, and so, I mean, that must be hugely different. And I thought -- I've been at it for so long -- I thought that another thing that I thought about when I thought about when I wanted to go to law school was, I like the tactile aspects of opening a book and turning pages and writing things down, which, really, probably doesn't exist much anymore. You know, you're –
Q Well, it's still available.
A -- you're typing. But at -- one of the great advantages I've had in coping, as little as I cope with all this is, when I was a freshman in high school in 1952, my mother made me take typing.
Q Hmm.
A And I was the only boy in the class, but I learned how to type. Sure enough. Then when I went to college, she gave me a portable typewriter. So I could really jump into the computer.
Q Did you type your law school exams?
A There was no provision to do that in those days.
Q Oh, there wasn't. Okay. When I graduated in '86 we could do it.
A Yeah.
Q I think now everybody types.
A Yeah.
Q Yeah. Yeah. Well, all right. Have you seen any change in the -- the relationships between lawyers over the years in Dane County, I guess, in terms of collegiality or otherwise?
A Well, you know I -- I really haven't. In the last 25 years, I really haven't seen much of the interaction of –
Q Mm hmm.
A -- of lawyers. My hunch is that they interact less. I go from time to time to a Dane County Bar Association meeting, and we don't -- you know, everyone seems to enjoy everyone else there; but I really had a sense, when I was a young judge and lawyer, of -- of a pretty general camaraderie in the profession of Madison.
Q Have you been a member of the Dane County Bar Association the whole time?
A All the time, yeah.
Q So have you gone to the lunches regularly?
A Yeah. I don't go to every one, but I go to several a year.
Q Did you ever go to the Committee on Confusion like they talked about?
A Oh, No. No. There seems to be one of those in every generation, though.
Q Yeah. Yeah. Are they what the summer outings used to be?
A Yeah. I haven't been to one of those in a while.
Q Yeah. Yeah.
A But I realize that -- many years ago I went to a Dane County Bar luncheon, and Judge Fairchild was there. He was this guy. Yeah, Circuit Court of Appeals, attorney general, Supreme Court justice, and famous family. And he -- he was at the lunch; and we sat together. And, you know, he had been retired for some time; so some lawyers were at the table, and so I -- I don't know if he introduced himself, but, anyway, they call him Tom immediately. "Oh, hi, Tom," you know. And I'm sitting there. I would never call him Tom, you know. I've known him for 35 years then, the man on the moon. But -- so, anyway, I think that's the way I would be too.
Q Yeah. What would you add to -- you know, there are the well-known lawyers –
A Mm hmm.
Q --like Fairchild, or I mentioned Dick Cates.
A Mm hmm.
Q Who would be some of the more interesting, lesser-known lawyers, do you think, that you've seen. You've seen an awful lot of lawyers -- lawyers.
A I always -- I always thought one of the really good, more interesting lawyers -- hmm. You know, I've got a -- I've got a block on his name. I know him and his wife too.
Q How old?
A You know, it was probably in his 50s, early 60s, does a lot of public defender sort of work, and -- oh, Dan. This is really strange.
Q Dennis Burke, or –
A Dennis Burke is one of the -- to me, he's one of the finest lawyers around.
Q Yeah.
A He -- he's a man of such rare dedication. He's just phenomenal. Since she retired, my wife, Lynn, has gotten together a couple of small groups of women of particular bent, you know. Some of -- one of the them is women who were involved in Dane County government and stuff, and she said, you know, "This is really fun." So I was trying to think of some people I was having lunch with -- like having lunch with once in a while. I thought Denny Burke and Steve Bablitch and Steve Hurley –
Q Mm hmm.
A And John Norsetter and Neil Heinen from channel 3. And, anyway, about eight or ten of these guys. So we get together for lunch once a month, and it's really –
Q Oh, John Norsetter is retired; right? A Yeah.
Q I know a job share with Jody Rohrer a long time.
A Yeah.
Q Yeah. I'm trying to think of who else. So, I mean, no other names overlooked or underrated or -- you know what I mean?
A Well, I think -- you know, your suggestion of Denny Burke is good. I also think the world of Steve Hurley.
Q Yeah.
A And he –
Q He tried cases in front of you?
A Yeah.
Q That must have been early in his career.
A Yeah.
Q Yeah.
A Oh, yeah. When he first was in Stoughton working with Carl Pieper.
Q Oh.
A Yeah. Oh, I wish I could think of some more. It's been so long since –
Q Tragic. Did you have Darryl McIntyre in front of you?
A Yeah, but it was -- I remember very little about it.
Q Okay.
A He was a lot older.
Q Yeah.
A Yeah. One of the best lawyers I ever had was -- from Milwaukee -- was Bill Coffey. Have you ever known him or heard of him?
Q Know the name, yeah. Yeah.
A He was fantastic.
Q Yeah.
A He was a lawyer. And there are other lawyers like this -- I think Steve Hurley is to a degree too -- is he really knew when -- not to cave, but he -- he knew -- he knew enough not to -- not to argue on a conceivable point he could think of, but concentrate on the main things. And I remember thinking about that. I wrote an article years ago on brief writing, and I just -- I remember saying something like, "If you can't convince us with your three best arguments, four, five, six, and seven aren't going to help you either."
Q Yeah.
A And why clutter up? But people who know -- you know, I suppose if you're a criminal lawyer, you're going to know when to plead your guy –
Q Yeah.
A -- rather than take it to -- or you're going to know enough not to pursue this particular claim in a civil case.
Q Yeah.
A And I think lawyers who kind of exercise that sort of control over a case are really doing a good job.
Q Focusing.
A Yeah. Exactly.
Q Well, slightly different point. It seems to me that, when you were practicing earlier on, there was a tendency and a willingness to do something that I think you wouldn't do at all now, which is, when you file a trial brief, you would give it only to the judge and not necessarily to the other side.
A Hmm.
Q Now I don't think that's ever done. Do I have that wrong?
A No. I never -- I can't imagine not.
Q Not-- not exchanging it.
A Yeah.
Q Okay. I just seem to remember that as something my dad said. Maybe that was only his practice.
A Yeah.
Q Now that would be considered ex parte -- inappropriate.
A Yeah, I would think so.
Q Yeah. Okay. All right. As a mediator, do you sometimes do that? Take just from one side and not the other?
A Oh, as a mediator, yeah.
Q Yeah. That's different, though.
A Yeah. I don't do very much of that.
Q Yeah, okay, the arbitration, yeah. All right. Well, I don't know. What else? Let's just -- summary of some of your experiences over there. Anything interesting, overarching that you would want to say? Would you recommend to a young person now going into law, or would you say, "No, better not do it."
A You know, I'm getting to be of a mixed mind. Steve Hurley, who teaches at the law school, he said he would never today recommend that anyone go to law school. He said there are so few jobs when they finish -- and they're going to finish with $150,000 in debt, most of them. He said the average -- the average UW law school graduate has a debt of -- it's just incredible at the end, of $100, $200,000. But I don't know. I really liked it, and I got a lot out of it; and I still think it's a profession that you can do good individually and generally. And I think it can be very rewarding too.
Q Mm hmm.
A I'm sure there are just as many, if not many more, opportunities for the opposite effect. But I -- it's still -- it's still a system that exists to help people, and I think it can still do that. I think sometimes it kind of forgets that –
Q Okay.
A -- that end, but I've really -- my wife and I frequently remark on how fortunate we were to have had careers that we really enjoyed.
Q Yeah. She did the Cultural Affairs Commission; right?
A Yeah. Mm hmm.
Q For many years. Yeah, I remember.
A Yeah. She developed that and ran it for 30-some years.
Q Yeah. I think her posters are famous.
A Yeah, the "poster lady."
Q Good.
A But -- but anyway. So it's been very nice for me. I'm really glad it worked out the way it did.
Q Good. All right. We'll end this on a positive note, then.
A Okay. Good.
Q Thank you.
A Well, thank you. (End of interview.)