Update: State Supreme Court reprimands Ziegler in unprecedented ruling

Steven Elbow  —  6/02/2008 9:40 am

The Wisconsin Supreme Court reprimanded its newest sitting justice for conflicts of interest during cases she presided over while a circuit judge in Washington County, marking the first time the court issued a decision disciplining one its own.

The punishment handed to Justice Annette Ziegler was in line with a recommendation by a three-judge Judicial Conduct Panel, but the court could have imposed censure, unpaid suspension or removal from the bench.

Although the court chose the least severe punishment available, it did so with a stinging rebuke.

"Judge Ziegler's conduct was a serious failing," the court wrote.

The Judicial Commission had decided that Ziegler should have recused herself from 11 cases or disclosed her possible conflicts of interest to the parties involved.

The cases identified by the commission included her decisions to order one person to repay the bank more than $46,000, allowing the bank to repossess vehicles from customers in default and allowing the bank to foreclose on an abandoned property.

"Given her knowledge of her husband's relationships with the bank, red flags of danger were prominently flying," the panel wrote in its decision.

Ziegler recused herself from today's 5-1 Supreme Court ruling.

Only Justice Louis Butler dissented, writing that he disagreed "not with the particular choice of discipline made by the court, but with the lack of a sufficient evidentiary foundation for that determination."

Butler, who was defeated in April by Judge Michael Gableman, criticized the court's decision to hear the case after the Judicial Conduct Panel's decision not to take testimony, instead relying on legal arguments and documents. He recommended sending the case back to the panel for "further fact-finding." Butler will be on the bench until Gableman takes his seat in August.

The Supreme Court wrote that Ziegler "was required to recuse herself from the 11 cases at issue, and although we conclude that her failure to recuse herself was willful and diminishes public confidence int he legal system, the judge was cooperative with the Wisconsin Ethics Board and the Judicial Commission and after the election admitted publicly the violations at issue."

The court noted that it could have issued a private reprimand to Ziegler, but "a private reprimand cannot adequately convey to the public the gravity with which this court views judicial misconduct such as Judge Ziegler's willful violation."

The court also considered, but rejected, a suspension.

"Our decision to impose a public reprimand and not a suspension is consistent with our past precedent in both the judicial and attorney discipline lines of cases," the court wrote.

The Judicial Commission launched an investigation into Ziegler's conduct after the watchdog group Wisconsin Democracy Campaign filed a complaint.

Mike McCabe, Wisconsin Democracy Campaign's executive director, said the length of time it took for the justices to issue their opinion showed they struggled to come to a decision.

"I don't think it's the right decision," said Mike McCabe, . "I don't think it's the proper decision. I think it's what the justices could agree on."

He said his group issued a report in January that showed that the justices routinely issue more severe discipline to attorneys for relatively minor infractions, and the Ziegler decision is one more case of judges treading lightly on their own.

"I think this is going to widely be seen as nothing more than a slap on the wrist, so I don't think it's going to do much to improve public confidence in the court," he said.

The Judicial Commission ruled that Ziegler reached the correct legal decision in each of the cases. And the Judicial Conduct Panel's decision stated that it recommended the lighter punishment because Ziegler and her family didn't benefit from her handling of the cases.

Ziegler has admitted that she failed to consider conflicts of interest in the cases, which involved West Bend Savings Bank, where her husband was a paid director.

The commission dismissed several other allegations that Ziegler failed to disclose stock her family owned in businesses involved in cases she handled while a Washington County judge, but nevertheless issued a warning to Ziegler in those cases.

The court's decision, written per curium, or authored by the court rather than a particular justice, noted that Ziegler "took prompt steps to prevent a recurrence," and characterized her during her time as a Washington County judge as a "hard-working, diligent and highly regarded circuit court judge."

While calling Ziegler's conduct "troubling," the opinion said, "nevertheless, we are confident that Judge Ziegler can and will perform creditable service as a member of this court."

Allegations of Ziegler's conflicts of interest came to light last year as Ziegler campaigned for the 10-year term on the court against Madison lawyer Linda Clifford. She took her seat last August.

The state Ethics Board also launched an investigation, and Ziegler later settled that case with a $5,000 fine, plus $12,000 for the cost of the Ethics Board investigation.

Ziegler's election last spring followed a campaign that was widely seen as surpassing all previous measures of rancor and expense, until this year's election of Gableman.

Both Ziegler and Gableman benefited from negative advertising campaigns by conservative groups, most prominently Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, which spent millions in both campaigns.

With the election of Gableman, the business lobby proclaimed success in changing the makeup of the seven-member court from a 4-3 liberal majority to a 4-3 majority for the conservative faction.

Steven Elbow  —  6/02/2008 9:40 am