Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - That Chuck Schulz poll I wrote about this morning is now posted here (use same password, all CAPS)
Next Post: Too far?
Posted in:
If you’re gonna sue somebody, you have to expect to be deposed, and you’re supposed to answer the questions. Chief Justice Thomas sees things differently, however.
Illinois’ highest-ranking judge refused to answer 15 questions at a deposition he gave last month — including what medications he takes and whether it is fair to criticize public figures like President Bush.Chief Justice Robert Thomas faced the grilling in his defamation suit against a suburban newspaper, the Kane County Chronicle. On Thursday, under orders from a Cook County judge, Thomas answered most of them, though some of his answers were immediately placed under seal.
During the April interview — given under oath — Thomas invoked his position as chief justice as a reason not to answer. But legal experts said deposition witnesses are supposed to talk.
“It’s highly inappropriate,” said Ronald Allen, a professor at the Northwestern University School of Law. “Unless there’s some privilege, then he should answer. End of story.”
Thomas — a former kicker for the Chicago Bears — sued the Chronicle in 2004, alleging columnist Bill Page wrote false stories about his role in the case of Meg Gorecki, the former Kane County state’s attorney whose law license was suspended for four months. According to Page, Thomas agreed to a lower penalty for Gorecki if her supporters backed a judicial candidate he favored.
Thomas says he suffers “stress” and a damaged reputation because of the stories.
“I have been terrifically stressed out as a result of that,” Thomas said in the deposition. “You kind of feel like your blood pressure’s going up.”
His reputation is so “damaged” that he was elevated to Chief Justice. Must be a difficult life.
UPDATE: Chief Thomas had a different outlook when speaking to the graduating class at St. Ambrose University this month:
“God is a God of restoration, and he is calling all of us to restoration. If there are broken friendships or hurt feelings, go to that person before this day is out,†he urged.
I highly doubt that Thomas talked to Bill Page after that speech. Maybe he should heed his own advice.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, May 26, 06 @ 10:12 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - That Chuck Schulz poll I wrote about this morning is now posted here (use same password, all CAPS)
Next Post: Too far?
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Last I heard Gorecki landed a contract with Aurora.
Comment by Bill Baar Friday, May 26, 06 @ 8:08 am
Time to fire Thomas and bring in Kevin
Butler. Again.
Comment by Punky QB Friday, May 26, 06 @ 8:43 am
Judges are like members of Congress. They think the rules apply to everyone, except themselves.
Comment by Sammy Esposito Friday, May 26, 06 @ 11:20 am
I was sued by Emanuel “Chris” Welch for defaming him on Proviso Probe, a blog I maintain.
When I obtained pro-bono representation Welch dropped the lawsuit.
My attorneys filed a sanctions motion. I contend that everything I wrote about Welch and his brother was true or non-actionable opinion. The sanctions motion is based on the premise that Welch knew his lawsuits were bogus when he filed them, but did so for a non-legitimate purpose, e.g. to impose financial hardship on a political critic.
After Welch convinced the judge to postpone the depositions until after Karen Yarbrough whooped his butt in the Dem Primary, Welch sat for his deposition.
Under the advice of his attorney and boss, James Roche, Welch refused to answer a number of deposition questions. Many questions of substance were simply not answered.
According to the deposition transcript the deposition ended about the time Roche threw a briefcase at one of my attorneys. I wasn’t there, so I dont’ know what exactly happened, but the incident is recorded in the transcript.
When the deposition was discussed in court Judge Diane Joan Larsen effectively agreed with Welch’s argument that he shouldn’t have to answer questions. Welch argued that he shouldn’t be required to answer questions except about what he knew at the time of filing the suit. However, the questions Welch ducked included questions of substance that he reasonably knew of the answers at the time he filed his suit.
So, the legal experts may say that parties being deposed are required to answer questions. However, it seems that in practice when parties refuse to answer deposition questions judges aren’t militant about enforcing the point.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Friday, May 26, 06 @ 12:17 pm
Way to go Justice Thomas. I’m all for standing up against smears and lies and there should be severe ramifications for trying to ruin a person’s reputation.
Comment by Jon Zahm Friday, Aug 11, 06 @ 12:09 am