This is an interview of Attorney John Moore by Tom Ragatz. We will go through his background and the background of his firm, and talk about things that might be of interest in historical review.

Q - Tom Ragatz

A - John Moore

Q: First of all, John, state your name and address for me.

A: John Moore. My home address is Madison, Wisconsin. My business address is Madison, Wisconsin.

Q: And you are and have been for a long time a Dane County attorney.

A: Yes, I was admitted to the State Bar and started practicing in Dane County in 1966.

Q: And, where did you go to law school?

A: University of Wisconsin.

Q: And, tell us about your choice of forum.

A: The University of Wisconsin Law School was an easy choice for me. The UW Law School has always been highly regarded, and when I decided to go to law school, I really did not consider going anywhere else.

Q: Was there anything in your history that played a big part in why you chose law?

A: I think the biggest influence in my decision to attend law school was the opportunity that I had to observe my brother-in-law, who graduated from the University of Wisconsin Law School in the early 50's. He practiced in the Village of Union Grove, Wisconsin, and had a typical small-town practice. In addition to his law practice, he was the Village attorney. Whenever I would visit my sister and brother-in-law, I was always impressed with the genuine interest that he had in resolving his clients' legal issues. He was a great influence in my decision to attend law school.

Q: You picked a law firm with a memorable history, tell us a little bit about that.

A: I joined our law firm on February l , 1968. I had obtained my undergraduate degree in January, 1963. At that time, you were not able to enter the law school at mid-term. I had recently been married, and obviously obtaining employment was a priority. My family had a connection with Farmers Mutual Insurance Company, which is now known as American Family Insurance Company. I applied for and obtained a job in the claims department of Farmers Mutual Insurance Company. When I attained the job, I did not tell them that I was going to go to law school, and my assumption was that the job would probably end in September. However, when I advised the company that I was going to go to law school, they were very supportive. They offered me an opportunity to work whatever hours I wanted to during the school year and to work full-time during the summers. As you will recall, at that time, there were a number of people involved in claims departments of insurance companies that had law degrees. I assume that they thought I might have an interest in remaining with the company once I completed my law education. Farmers Mutual at that time was a relatively small company writing insurance only in Wisconsin, Illinois and Indiana. All of the claims operations and litigation supervision was done out of the Madison office. At the beginning of my third year in law school, I was asked by one of the lawyers who handled the assignments and supervision of outside litigation to assist him. I was given the title Legal Assistant and actually started assigning and supervising some of the outside litigation in Dane County. At that time, the primary law firm used by Farmers Mutual for the defense of their litigation was known as Aberg, Bell, Blake & Metzner. Carroll Metzner was the attorney in the firm who handled the litigation and I became personally acquainted with him. When I finished law school in June of 1966, I had decided that my interests were in the trial practice. I was fortunate enough to obtain a position with the Dane County District Attorney's office and, as a result of that employment, within a couple of weeks I was appearing in court on a regular basis, and within the first year, I had an opportunity to be involved in a number of trials, some of which gained some notoriety. My intention in joining the District Attorney's office when I did was to get some courtroom experience and then move on to private practice. Late in the year of 1967, I received a telephone call from Carroll Metzner who asked whether I was interested in a position at Aberg, Bell, Blake & Metzner. Obviously, I was thrilled at the opportunity and I remember coming over to the firm, which was then located at 16 N. Carroll Street, on a Saturday morning and being introduced by Carroll to Glen Bell, George Blake, and Chuck Seybold. They were the senior members of the firm, along with Carroll Metzner at the time. The following Monday I was offered a job and have been with the firm continuously ever since.

Q: What kind of practice did the firm have?

A: At the time I joined the firm, the primary areas of practice were general business, insurance defense, and public utility work. The insurance defense work and public utility work were the major emphasis of the practice, but the firm has always had an active business law practice.

Q: And so you continue, in fact, to this date as a member of that firm?

A: I do. I am no longer a shareholder, but I am still active with the firm and actually serve as president. My personal practice is now focused on ADR, although I am still involved in some of the litigation.

Q: Tell us how the firm evolved.

A: We are very proud of the history of our law firm. Our law firm is the longest continuing law firm in Dane County. The history of the law firm goes back to 1851. The firm was known as Vilas and Remmington. Levy Baker Vilas had moved to Wisconsin in 1851 as a practicing lawyer. Obviously, there have been a number of name changes since 1851 and a number of members of the firm who played a large part in the history of the legal profession, not only in Dane County, but also the State of Wisconsin. There have been members of the firm who have served as Mayor of the City of Madison, Regents at the University of Wisconsin, United States Senators, and one, William F. Vilas, the son of Levy Vilas, who was the Secretary of Interior in President Grover Cleveland's cabinet from 1885 to 1888. From a historical standpoint, one of the other names that for years was well known in the practice of law in the State of Wisconsin was Silas U. Pinney, who joined the firm in 1854. In 1892, Mr. Pinney was appointed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court where he served until 1898. He prepared the Pinney Reports, which cover the cases decided by the Supreme Court of the Territory of Wisconsin from 1836 to the time the Supreme Court of the State of Wisconsin appointed an official court reporter in 1853. One of Mr. Pinney's biographies states that he argued cases appearing in 80 consecutive volumes of the Supreme Court Reports. By 1920, the name of the firm started to include names of individuals who you and I are familiar with. From 1920 through 1944, the firm was known as Sanborn, Blake & Aberg. William J.P. Aberg obtained his law degree from the University of Wisconsin in 1912. In 1925, he reorganized the Farmers Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (now American Family Insurance) for a local group. He was the first outside lawyer for Farmers Mutual Automobile Insurance Company and handled all of the legal work, including their defense practice for a number of years. Glen Bell joined the firm in 1927, upon his graduation from the law school. When I joined the firm in 1968, Glen was the senior partner. The firm was known as Aberg, Bell, Blake & Conrad from 1944 to 1958, and in 1958, the firm name was changed to Aberg, Bell, Blake & Metzner. Carroll Metzner had joined the firm in 1944 and became a partner in 1957. It was at that time that Edwin Conrad left the firm to become the City Attorney for Madison. Since 1975, the firm has had several name changes and is now known as Bell, Moore & Richter, S.C.

Q: Any other significant lawyers?

A: I could continue to trace the history of the firm and point out past members of the firm who have made substantial contributions to the practice of law, not only in Dane County and the State of Wisconsin, but also nationally. Glen Bell, who was the senior practicing lawyer when I joined the firm, he was responsible for starting a number of public utility companies around the State of Wisconsin, including telephone, electric and gas utilities. The utility practice in our firm dates back to Chauncey Blake, who was one of the first state-wide public utility lawyers. The firm continues to have a utility practice.

Q: During the course of your law practice, I take it you evolved doing trials of many cases.

A: I did. When I joined the firm, the philosophy seemed to be that you wouldn't hire anybody until it was too late. By that I mean, when someone was hired, it was because there was work that wasn't being done. Because of the experience that I had in the District Attorney's office and my prior experience at Farmers Mutual/American Family, it was assumed I was ready to try insurance defense cases. The first day that I came to work, I had a number of insurance defense files sitting on my desk, one of which was set to start in two weeks. There has never been a lack of opportunity to engage in litigation.

Q: Nothing like getting your feet wet early.

A: No, and it continued to be busy as long as I've been there.

Q: How has the Bar evolved in your experience?

A: Probably the most significant thing, and Tom, I'm sure you will agree with this, is that when we first started practicing law, there were very few women lawyers, not only in Dane County, but also the State of Wisconsin. My recollection is that there was one female student in our law class. Now, of course, most law classes are split pretty evenly between men and women.

Q: How about specialization? How has that impacted?

A: Specialization has made an impact on how law is practiced in most law firms. Although lawyers in more rural communities still handle a variety of cases, most of the mid to larger sized firms in the state are now made up of lawyers who handle specific practice areas.

Q: How about the Dane County Bar? How is that different?

A: Again, the biggest differences that I see in the Dane County Bar from the time that I started to now are the influence of the female lawyers and the specialization of the lawyers. As a side note, it also seems that there is less opportunity to socialize and become personally acquainted with lawyers. From a litigation standpoint, every court appearance — whether it be a motion hearing, a scheduling conference, or a pretrial conference — was held in person with the judge. As a result, you were over in the courthouse, sometimes on a daily basis, and had the opportunity to socialize with other lawyers who were frequenting the courthouse for a variety of reasons. Now, most pretrial court proceedings are done by phone. Also, there seemed to be more socializing among the lawyers after work than there is now.

Q: What about activities? Were you involved with the Dane County Bar?

A: I have been. At one point in time, I was secretary of the Dane County Bar Association and have been active in a number of committees over the years. I served on the Judicial Recommendation Committee for a number of years, as well as the Courthouse Committee. As you'll recall, one of the biggest social events of the year for decades was the Dane County summer outing. I was on the Summer Picnic Committee and enjoyed many years of Lyall (Tim) Beggs and Milo Flaten serving as Master of Ceremonies.

Q: How about activities with the State Bar?

A: Other than being members of various sections of the State Bar, primarily the Litigation Section, and having served as a presenter, I have not held any State Bar offices.

Q: How about pro bono and legal service activities?

A: Over the years, our firm has always made an effort to engage in some pro bono work. I have done my share. One of the things that I am very proud of is that I was one of several people who set up what is now known as the Dane County Mediation Program. It has turned out to be a very valuable asset to the court system and lawyers in general. The initial intention of the program was to focus on civil litigation and see if by providing an inexpensive method, cases could be resolved early on rather than waiting until a final pretrial conference or shortly before the trial itself. The model of the program remains basically the same. For a very minimal payment which goes to the administration of the program, cases can be mediated by experienced lawyers. The lawyer/mediator volunteers his/her services. That program has now evolved so that it includes, I believe, all types of litigation, with the exception of the criminal practice. For many years, I served as a volunteer mediator.

Q: That's been a good one too.

A: It has been.

Q: Community involvement?

A: I was a member of the City of Madison Library Board for several years.

Q: What about highlights of your legal career? What did you most enjoy about being a lawyer in your practice?

A: As a trial lawyer, I enjoyed the opportunity of getting around the State of Wisconsin and meeting lawyers who practiced outside of Dane County as well as judges from all over the State of Wisconsin. Obviously, prevailing in the litigation is very enjoyable, but also, the competitive nature of the litigation practice has always been enjoyable to me.

Q: What kind of recognition did you receive in the profession during your practice?

A: I have been fortunate enough to have gained recognition in a number of publications. I have been listed in the publication known as The Best Lawyers in America from its inception, which I believe was about 30 years ago. I also was fortunate enough to be inducted into the American College of Trial Lawyers in 1987. In my estimation, that is one of the premier national organizations which is by invitation only. I also served as Chairman of the Wisconsin State Committee for the American College of Trial Lawyers from 1996 to 1998. I have also been named a number of times in a state-wide publication known as Wisconsin Super Lawyers and locally in The Best Lawyers in Madison.

Q: Any particular merit or case you can tell us about?

A: I've had the opportunity to be involved in three cases that were decided by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, in which oral argument was presented. One of which involved a case a number of years ago where the primary issue was whether or not a person who has sustained personal injury as a result of a driver who was under the influence of an intoxicant was entitled to bring a cause of action against the bar and/or bartender who served the alcohol to the tortfeasor. I represented the insurance carrier for the bar and its owner, and the Supreme Court sided with our position that there was not a cause of action that could be maintained against the bar and/or bartender. That case was argued a number of years ago and was used as a precedent for many years. That law has changed since then, but for a long time, it was cited quite frequently. As you might expect, over the years, there have been a number of cases that had very interesting facts and challenges.

Q: How about significant judges that you appeared before?

A: When I first started practicing, the Wisconsin court system had what I'll refer to as two levels of jurisdiction. Each county in the State of Wisconsin had what were known as county judges who handled probate, family law, juvenile law, small claims and misdemeanors. County judges also handled preliminary examinations in felony criminal cases. Each county also had what was known as a circuit judge who handled civil litigation over the small claims threshold and all felony criminal cases. Many of the rural counties had one circuit judge who would handle the circuit court calendar for several neighboring counties. Because of the nature of the cases that I was involved in, I had the privilege of appearing before the circuit court judges all around the state on a regular basis. A number of these circuit court judges had been on the bench for many years and it was always interesting as a young lawyer to appear before them. Some had more patience than others. Dane County had four circuit judges, Bardwell, Wilke, Sachtjen, and Maloney. It was always a pleasure appearing before them. I can also recall judges such as Dick Orton out of southwest Wisconsin, Judge Gergen in the Dodge County area, and Judge Gollmar in Sauk/Columbia Counties who were all excellent judges. One of the things that regularly happened with certain of the judges — and I will not name them now — when the jury was out, it was not unusual for the lawyers and the judge to have a couple of drinks together.

Q: Any memorable experience with the Dane County Circuit Judges in those days?

A: Yes, and it involves Judge Maloney. He was pretty insistent in trying to get cases resolved at a pretrial conference. In recent years, judges have been reluctant and I understand why — to be involved in attempting to settle cases. Not only was Judge Maloney always actively involved, he took it personally if lawyers and/or insurance companies did not take his advice. I recall that in his chambers, he had the first speaker phone I had ever seen. It consisted of a box which he would set the telephone receiver in and the conversation would be amplified. The quality was not very good. In this particular case, we got to a point where there was $500 separating the parties. Judge Maloney had two lawyers in his chambers and our insurance company representative on the phone. He was very unhappy that the insurance representative was not going to come up with another $500 to settle the case. I knew the representative quite well, and I knew that he was not going to be intimidated by Judge Maloney. I believe it was the plaintiff's lawyer who came up with the idea of flipping a coin to settle the difference. Judge Maloney liked that idea and my insurance client felt it was novel enough that he went along with it. The idea was that Judge Maloney would flip a quarter and if it ended up heads, we would pay the extra $500, and if it was tails, plaintiff and his lawyer would take the previously offered amount. In his excitement when he flipped the coin, it ended up under his desk. The judge went down on his hands and knees, retrieved the coin, and advised that we had lost. Obviously, neither myself or the other lawyer ever saw how the coin landed and I'm not certain still today whether it was heads or tails.

Q: Were there any low lights in your practice?

A: One never likes to lose, and anyone who has tried lawsuits will tell you that you don't win them all. One instance that I recall being very disappointed in was a result in a case that I tried in Iowa County Circuit Court which resulted then in what was the largest verdict ever rendered in an Iowa County Circuit Court case.

Q: How do you see the evolution of the practice of law having occurred during your career?

A: Having my practice focused primarily in insurance defense litigation, I think the biggest change that I have seen is the use of discovery in litigation. In recent years, the use of written discovery has become a major part of the litigation practice. In addition to that, it seems that every possible witness is now deposed.

Q: How about the cost of litigation?

A: In my opinion, the use of discovery has increased the cost of litigation substantially. Also, the use of expert witnesses has become very common in all types of litigation and, for the most part, the cost of retaining experts is significant. I think the cost of litigation is the primary reason why the use of mediation and arbitration has become a regular tool in the resolution of litigation. There are many judges now who will not provide the parties with a trial date until mediation has been accomplished or, at a minimum, put a date for completion of mediation well in advance of the proposed trial date. Having mediated hundreds of cases, I can attest to the fact that many cases are resolved much earlier on in the process because of the costs of litigation.

Q: How about anything peculiar to the federal system?

A: Being involved in litigation in the federal court system has always been different than litigating in the state court system. As you are aware, the federal court has its own set of rules of civil procedure. As a result, if you are practicing in the federal court, you need to be very aware of those procedural rules that are different than what you may be used to in the state court system, or you will find yourself in trouble. Most federal judges are not very tolerant of lawyers who are not familiar with the federal rules.

Q: Any particular experience you had with the federal judges that would add something there?

A: Most of my federal practice has been in the Western District of Wisconsin. Some years ago, John Shabaz was appointed to the bench in the Western District. Prior to the appointment of Judge Shabaz, cases did not move particularly fast in federal court in the Western District. Judge Shabaz came on board with the idea that he was going to change that. He was soon known around the country as having the "rocket docket." Those of us who practiced in front of him on a regular basis were well aware that he would set a schedule in a case that seemed to be nearly impossible to meet. However, we learned to adjust to that and as a result, I think he not only moved cases along that went to trial, but also his method of scheduling moved cases toward settlement at a much earlier stage in the proceeding. It was always interesting when you were involved in a case that involved lawyers from outside of the State of Wisconsin, sometimes from some of the larger firms in the country. They would come to one of Judge Shabaz's scheduling conferences with the idea that this litigation might last for years. When I was involved in a case that involved attorneys from outside of the state, I would advise them in advance that Judge Shabaz was not going to be tolerant to long periods open for discovery and pretrial preparation. They did not always take my advice. Judge Shabaz would always ask the lawyers, starting with the plaintiff, how much time they would need to name witnesses, including experts, and complete discovery, as well as any date they would want for filing a motion. Many times, lawyers would come in with the idea that they would need nine months to a year to complete the discovery. Judge Shabaz would look over his glasses and then dictate a schedule which, if you were lucky, would give you 90 days to complete discovery. It was fun to watch the reaction of the lawyer who had not heeded your advice.

Q: Let's talk about what you think about the current state of the practice of law, particularly in Dane County.

A: In my experience, the practice of law in Dane County has always been of a high quality. In addition, lawyers, for the most part, get along quite well. As you are aware, civility between lawyers is a topic that is discussed nation-wide. I think we in Dane County practice law with a high level of civility and, as a result, Dane County lawyers have a reputation of not only being quality lawyers, but also a great place to practice law.

Q: There are a lot more lawyers today.

A: There certainly are. I'm not aware of the total number of lawyers in private practice and governmental practice in the State of Wisconsin, but I know it's substantial.

Q: How many years have you been practicing now?

A: I graduated from law school in June of 1966, so it will be 48 years.

Q: Been a good career?

A: I've thoroughly enjoyed the practice of law and am proud to have had the opportunity to practice with a number of outstanding lawyers and people in our firm.

Q: Well, that's good, and the future of your firm?

A: One is always prejudiced with the lawyers that he/she practices with. However, we have a wonderful group of men and women who practice law in our firm, who still provide outstanding legal services to our clients. Our practice is still made up of the four elements that were present when I joined the firm.

Q: So that even as a firm that goes back into the 1800's, maybe you've got another hundred years to go?

A: I would like to think so.

Q: Well, thanks very much, John. I appreciate that unless there is anything else you would like to add, I think this will be valuable. I will give you a transcript when I get it. You can edit this.

A: Thank you, Tom.