http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/127662258.htmlHidden in today's JS article about who funded the recount of the Wisconsin Supreme Court election (Prosser/Kloppenburg) is the real story of Justice Prosser's serious conflit of interest problems, and his being unwilling to recuse himself.
..snip..
Troupis, one of the key attorneys for Prosser's recount, is representing tea party groups and other conservatives in a case they brought last year to halt state regulations on political speech. The case will be argued before the court on Sept. 6.
In April, Prosser said he had not thought much about whether he could remain on the case but that his initial impression was that he could do so. Prosser could not be reached Friday, but his campaign director, Brian Nemoir, said Prosser planned to stay on the case and could remain impartial.
Experts in legal ethics said Prosser should not sit on the case because state ethics rules say judges cannot sit on cases in which a reasonable person would question their ability to be impartial.
"A lawyer-client relationship is one of the highest fiduciary relationships," said professor Monroe Freedman, a professor at Hofstra Law School in New York. "The judge has put his trust and confidence in this lawyer in retaining him. The fact that the judge has had this kind of extremely close relationship with this lawyer - a relationship built on dependency and trust - in the recent past is something that might well cause a reasonable person to question the judge's ability to be impartial.
..end..
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
