Judges Gone Wild

by Mark Swain

Judges in Washington, D.C. and right here in Illinois have recently demonstrated a conspicuous lack of fairness, proportionality, and judgment that are the traditional hallmarks of judicial office.

Welcome to what could be the next reality TV series “Judges Run Amok.”

In Washington, an administrative law judge who is paid $100,512 per year (presumably because he has the requisite judicial temperament) sued his neighborhood dry cleaning establishment, owned by Korean immigrants, for $67.3 million for losing a pair of his suit pants. Ridiculous? Outrageous? Gross abuse of judicial process? Yes! Yes! Yes!

Nonetheless, he has relentlessly pressed his suit all the way to trial. I can only imagine his early conversations with the immigrant defendants when he must have said something like, “I am a powerful judge in this city. I will squash you and your little dry cleaning shop like a bug.”

Certainly his shameful actions suggest that arrogant attitude. This judge should be summarily stripped of his robes for conduct unbecoming a judicial officer.

Meanwhile, here in Illinois, the saga of Chief Justice Thomas’ suit against the Kane County Chronicle and a reporter for that small newspaper continues. In November, a Kane County jury ordered the newspaper (circulation 14,000) to pay Justice Thomas $7 million. The presiding judge later decided the award was unreasonably high and reduced it to $4 million.

The newspaper has now filed a federal civil rights lawsuit seeking to overturn the verdict on the grounds that it can’t fairly appeal the multimillion defamation verdict awarded to the judge because all but two of the justices on the Supreme Court testified on his behalf, and because he is the Chief Judge of the entire judicial system in the state of Illinois. Talk about “command influence”!

The newspaper’s federal case is right on the mark. Justice Thomas’ pursuit of his defamation case is a shameful abuse of power that runs rough shod over freedom of the press and has high-jacked appellate rights guaranteed by the Illinois constitution.

Despite the jury’s verdict in favor of the Chief Judge, there have been no winners in this lawsuit.

To be sure, the Chief Justice was successfully portrayed as a hapless victim seeking vindication of his integrity. But, in filing suit against the small newspaper, he revealed an unbecoming pettiness and perpetrated a shameful abuse of the power of his office as the Chief Judicial officer in Illinois.

Public officials, and judges in particular, need thick skin. Judges’ decisions are regularly criticized by the parties, their lawyers, the press, as well as angry citizens. Criticism comes with the territory in public life. Deep down, it’s part of the job.

In every hotly contested lawsuit, it’s a virtual certainty that one of the parties will be angry and critical of the judge. They might even question his or her judicial integrity. Does that mean the judge should cash in with a lot of size-, multi-, million dollar verdicts against the disappointed litigant or angry citizen who is disgusted by the judges ruling? Of course not.

The enormous jury verdict in favor of the Chief Justice will prove to be Pyrrhic victory in all respects. In his relentless quest to vindicate his integrity regardless of the broader implications, he has demonstrated a total lack of the judgment and sense of fair play expected of a Chief Justice.

I know the Chief Justice may view my comments in this piece as critical of him. I suspect he may even be angry that I don’t support the huge verdict he has won. I just hope he doesn’t decide to sue me.

As for the pant-less Washington judge, most likely he'll be chasing ambulances and filing more frivolous lawsuits in private practice in the near future.

(Mark Swain is the pen name for an Illinois attorney who is a student and keen observer of the Illinois judiciary and judicial system.)

Cross-posted at Illinois Justice Blog.