Carolyn Henry, September 1, 2010
Unit 7 Assignment

In the Matter of Judicial Disciplinary Proceedings Against the Honorable Annette K. Ziegler,
Wisconsin
Judicial Commission, Complainant, v. The Honorable Annette K. Ziegler, Respondent
Case Summary
Link to State Court Website: http://wscca.wicourts.gov/caseDetails.do;jsessionid=0B6DCF2C076A7996166BEC1C2F0B6A1C?caseNo=2007AP002066&cacheId=E701C83EB550F7ED813211D163C2CD61&recordCount=2&offset=0&linkOnlyToForm=false
This case is to determine whether a judge’s conduct in presiding in 11 cases in which the judge’s husband was a director of one of the parties constitutes misconduct under Supreme Court Rule 60.04(4)(e)1 of the Code of Judicial Conduct and Wisconsin Statute § 757.81(4)(a). Wisconsin Statute §757.81(4)(a). defines misconduct as willful violation of a rule of the code of judicial ethics.
Washington County Circuit Judge Annette K. Ziegler presided in 11 cases in which the West Bend Savings Bank was a party when the Judge’s spouse was a director of the Bank. The applicable code rule, SCR 60.04(4)(e)1. requires a judge to recuse herself from presiding in a case in which the judge’s spouse is a director of a party to the proceeding. Judge Ziegler’s conduct in presiding in the 11 cases falls within the mandatory rule of the Code and constitutes misconduct as defined by the legislature. Accordingly, the court concluded as a matter of law that the Judge violated the code as charged.
Article VII, Section 11 of the Wisconsin Constitution provides that judges shall be subject to reprimand, censure, suspension, or removal for cause in disciplinary proceedings. An important purpose of judicial discipline is to foster public trust and confidence in the judicial system. The purpose of SCR 60.04(4)(e)1. Is to promote the public’s confidence that judicial decisions are free from favoritism. SCR 60.04(4)(e)1. prohibits a judge from sitting on a case in which the judge’s spouse is a director of a party is to avoid the perception that the judge is unfair and partial. If a judge complies with SCR 60.04(4)(e)1., no question will ever be asked about a judge’s favoritism toward a party to the litigation when the judge’s spouse is a director. The court determined that Judge Ziegler’s failure to recuse herself from these 11 cases or obtain a waiver diminished public confidence in the legal system. The discipline that was imposed on Judge Ziegler by the Supreme Court was a public reprimand.
Labels for the post: legal ethics, judicial conduct, conflict of interest, judge’s spouse, reprimand, recuse, confidence, public perception