Lisa Neubauer versus William Gleisner
Lisa S. Neubauer and William Gleisner ran against each other in the April 1, 2008 election for the position of judge of the Wisconsin Court of Appeals District II. Neubauer was appointed to the court in December of 2007 by Governor James Doyle. She won a full term after defeating Gleisner, an attorney from Hartland, WI.[1]
Results
Neubauer defeated Gleisner on April 1, 2008 with 62.6% of the vote.[2]
Responses to the League of Women Voters
The League of Women Voters asked the following questions of each candidate, and their responses follow.[3]
1. What educational, occupational, civic and community experiences have you had that you believe qualify you for this elective office?
2. Explain, in terms a layperson could understand, what the Court of Appeals does and how it does it. What does it do well? What could it do better?
3. Assuming that additional staff is not an option in these times of state budget deficits, what legislative or procedural changes might improve the operations of the court?
4. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the current methods for electing Court of Appeals judges and financing campaigns? What are your thoughts on campaign finance reform for judicial races?
Responses from William C. Gleisner III
1. I have a law degree from Marquette Law School and a Masters of Law degree from Georgetown Law Center. I have extensive experience in appellate work, which is the business of the Court of Appeals. As General Counsel for the National Federation of the Blind, I handled numerous appeals in the United States, including before the U.S. Supreme Court. During the past 25 years I have been involved in well over 100 appeals before the Wisconsin Court of Appeals and Supreme Court. I have coauthored a 1400 page legal treatise on electronic evidence law, as well as numerous legal articles.
2. The Court of Appeals is designed to work closely with the trial courts. It is primarily an error correcting court. However, the Court of Appeals is a very important court. There were over 3000 appeals to the Court of Appeals last year, and only a couple hundred of those cases will ever be heard by the Supreme Court. For most citizens and businesses in District II, the Court of Appeals is the court of last resort in most lawsuits. The Court is very good at error correction. It needs to improve the quality of its delivery system via the Internet.
3. Since its inception in 1978, the Court of Appeals has employed a system whereby it is able to designate a portion of the decisions it renders as "unpublished." When a decision is unpublished it cannot be cited as precedent. In my judgment, this system needs to be eliminated. In our system, the decisions of appellate courts are supposed to set precedent, so as to guide other courts and lawyers in what can and cannot be done in court. In this era of open government, all decisions of appellate courts should be published and available as precedents.
4. The election of judges is basically a good thing. However, insofar as possible elections of nonpartisan members of the judiciary should be conducted on merit and without regard to political considerations or rancor. Money deters many qualified candidates from seeking judicial positions. Of greater importance, the Founding Fathers viewed the Judiciary as the only "honest broker" in society. Courts are only effective if they command the respect of the citizens. When money plays too important a role the perception that results is that justice is for sale and this threatens to debase the social compact upon which our Democracy depends.
Responses from Judge Lisa S. Neubauer
1. As the incumbent judge on the Court of Appeals, I know what the position requires, and believe that I perform the job with excellence. I attended the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the University of Chicago Law School, and graduated with honors. I clerked for federal district Judge Barbara Crabb. I was a civil litigator at Foley & Lardner for nineteen years, where I acquired a depth of knowledge and skills in litigation and appeals. I have developed excellent research and writing skills – both central to the Court's work. I served on the boards of United Way, Legal Action and Equal Justice Fund (legal services for the poor). [WORD LIMIT]
2. The Court of Appeals, District II, is an error correcting court that reviews appeals in civil, criminal, administrative and juvenile cases from the state trial courts in 12 counties. This court applies the law – following the legal precedent – to each matter before it, to determine, in most cases, whether the determinations made by the judge or the jury should be affirmed or reversed. District II is an excellent court. The current other members are Chief Judge Richard S. Brown, Presiding Judge Daniel P. Anderson, and Judge Harry G. Snyder. At this point, I'd be hard-pressed to identify any suggested improvements.
3. The operations of the court are very good.
4. To ensure meaningful elections, the voting public must be informed about the candidates' qualifications. Thus, campaign committees must raise money, which raises questions about impartiality. These concerns can be addressed by members of the Court of Appeals, because there are four judges on our court (District II) and each case is heard by a three- or one-judge panel. Disclosure of significant campaign contributions from a lawyer/party involved in a matter, with an opportunity to seek recusal, is an effective way to address concerns. If there is an objection, the matter will be heard by the other three members of the court.
See also
External links
- Appeals court seat open for first time in 26 years (dead link)
- Lisa Bauer's campaign website
- William Gleisner's campaign website
Footnotes
Federal courts:
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals • U.S. District Court: Eastern District of Wisconsin, Western District of Wisconsin • U.S. Bankruptcy Court: Eastern District of Wisconsin, Western District of Wisconsin
State courts:
Wisconsin Supreme Court • Wisconsin Court of Appeals • Wisconsin Circuit Courts • Wisconsin Municipal Courts
State resources:
Courts in Wisconsin • Wisconsin judicial elections • Judicial selection in Wisconsin
