Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.

John Markson

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
BP-Initials-UPDATED.png
This page was current at the end of the official's last term in office covered by Ballotpedia. Please contact us with any updates.
John Markson
Image of John Markson
Prior offices
Dane County Circuit Court

Education

Bachelor's

University of Wisconsin, Madison

Law

University of Wisconsin, Madison


John W. Markson was a judge of the Dane County Circuit Court in Wisconsin.[1] He was appointed by Gov. Jim Doyle (D) on June 27, 2007, to replace retiring Judge Robert A. DeChambeau.[2] Markson retired from the bench in June 2017.[3]

Biography

Email editor@ballotpedia.org to notify us of updates to this biography.

Markson earned a B.A. and a J.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Prior to his appointment to the circuit court, he was a shareholder in Bell, Gierhart & Moore, which he joined as an associate in 1984. Before that, he was a partner in Stafford, Rosenbaum, Rieser & Hansen. Markson began his legal career as a law clerk to Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice William G. Callow.[2][4][5]

Elections

2014

See also: Wisconsin judicial elections, 2014
Markson ran for re-election to the Dane County Circuit Court.
General: He won without opposition in the general election on April 1, 2014. [6]

Noteworthy cases

Judge issues ruling criticizing the state's actions against protesters

Protests against Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) took place at the state's capitol in Madison after a collective bargaining law was introduced in 2011. Many protesters were arrested or ticketed. Judge Markson opposed some of the police's actions in these protests.

On February 5, 2014, Markson threw out 29 tickets against protesters, stating that the rule requiring them to obtain a permit was unconstitutional.[7][8] The court also found that the Capitol Police had altered certain citations before filing them with the court. Markson wrote in a court order:

I write here, even though the matter is moot, because I cannot let this pass. I cannot ignore any party’s – much less the state’s – altering a document filed with the court so that it is different from the one actually served upon the other party. That this is wrong requires no explanation. It cannot be remedied simply by sending a letter, particularly where the letter misleadingly advises that the change made is merely a 'technical' one. How this could happen is perplexing at best.[9]
—Judge John Markson[10]

See also

External links

Footnotes