Wolverine Bar Association Rates Judicial Candidates For August 2nd Primary and November 8th Election
DETROIT – Michigan voters are preparing to cast votes in the August 2nd primary and/or November 8th election where many candidates will be vying for election or re-election to judicial offices. In most elections, the judicial races are the least publicized. Resultantly, voters know too little about the candidates. This is not an issue only in Detroit but all over the state of Michigan. The Wolverine Bar Association (“WBA”) “seeks to help all voters and resultantly has issued ratings in judicial races across the entire state” says WBA President Allen Venable.
Diane Hutcherson, Co-Chair of the WBA Judicial Qualifications Committee (“JQC”), Non-Supervisory Practice Leader and in-house counsel with AAA of Michigan, says that “the JQC is one of the WBA’s most important programs as it has a direct impact on citizens and their informed votes.” Jenice Mitchell Ford, General Counsel of Detroit Public Schools Community District serves as Co-Chair of the JQC and served as the Chair of the 2009-2012 City of Detroit Charter Revision Commission. She agrees and states that “the need to have qualified judges is paramount because judges have a significant impact on the matters that impact our everyday lives. This is why the JQC is critical.”
Invitations to submit an application to JQC were issued to every judicial candidate seeking office in the state of Michigan in this election cycle. Thirteen (13) responses were received and on July 11th and 14th, the JQC interviewed the 13 candidates and offered ratings of: (i) Extremely Well Qualified/Outstanding; (ii) Well Qualified; (iii) Qualified; (iv) Not Qualified; or (v) No Rating. Such ratings are based on both the JQC’s interview of a candidate and a review of a candidate’s completed questionnaire. An interview was offered to each candidate who submitted a questionnaire.
| MICHIGAN 2nd District COURT OF APPEALS 6 Year Term | |
| Candidate Name | Candidate Rating |
| Sima Patel (Incumbent) | Extremely Well Qualified |
| 3rd CIRCUIT JUDGE OF CIRCUIT COURT NON-INCUMBENT – Wayne County 6 Year Term (5) Positions | |
| Candidate Name | Candidate Rating |
| Charise Anderson | Well Qualified |
| LaKena Crespo | Qualified |
| Ron Haywood | Well Qualified |
| 7th CIRCUIT JUDGE OF CIRCUIT COURT NON-INCUMBENT – Genesee County 6 Year Term (1) Position | |
| Candidate Name | Candidate Rating |
| Rebecca Jurva-Brinn | Well Qualified |
| 10th CIRCUIT JUDGE OF CIRCUIT COURT NON-INCUMBENT – Saginaw County 6 Year Term (1) Position | |
| Candidate Name | Candidate Rating |
| Andrew Concannon | Well Qualified |
| 14th CIRCUIT JUDGE OF CIRCUIT COURT NON-INCUMBENT – Muskegon County 6 Year Term (1) Position | |
| Candidate Name | Candidate Rating |
| Brandon Davis | Extremely Well Qualified |
| 20th CIRCUIT JUDGE OF CIRCUIT COURT NON-INCUMBENT – Ottawa County 8 Year Term (1) Position | |
| Candidate Name | Candidate Rating |
| Paul Kraus | Extremely Well Qualified |
| Mercedes Watts | Not Qualified |
| 22nd CIRCUIT JUDGE OF CIRCUIT COURT NON-INCUMBENT – Washtenaw County 6 Year Term (1) Position | |
| Candidate Name | Candidate Rating |
| Marla Linderman Richelew | Well Qualified |
| 2A DISTRICT JUDGE OF DISTRICT COURT NON-INCUMBENT – Adrian 6 Year Term (1) Position | |
| Candidate Name | Candidate Rating |
| David Lacasse | Qualified |
| 14A DISTRICT JUDGE OF DISTRICT COURT NON-INCUMBENT – Ann Arbor 6 Year Term (1) Position | |
| Candidate Name | Candidate Rating |
| Stuart Collis | Well Qualified |
| Torchio Feaster | Extremely Well Qualified |
Evaluation of Judicial Candidates. The JQC evaluates the fitness of each candidate for judicial office based upon the candidate’s:
- Health
- Honesty
- Integrity
- Judicial Temperament (i.e., fair, impartial, open minded, even tempered and considerate/courteous to jurors, parties, witnesses and counsel, etc.)
- Legal Ability (i.e., scholarship, analysis, judgment, clarity of expression, etc.)
- Reputation
- Trial Experience
(“Evaluation Factors”).
Ratings: There are five (5) categories of ratings for candidates for election to judicial office: (i) Extremely Well Qualified/Outstanding; (ii) Well Qualified; (iii) Qualified; (iv) Not Qualified; and (v) No Rating.
(i) Extremely Well Qualified/Outstanding (“EWQ”): An individual must stand at the top of his/her profession and rank high among the best qualified judges or lawyers available for judicial service. The candidate must have outstanding legal ability and background and wide experience, wisdom, intellect, insight and impartiality. To be accorded this highest rating, a candidate should generally also have the breadth of vision and outlook which derives from participation in the civic, charitable, religious or political activities of the community and the work of the organized bar or other professional organizations. In short, the candidate should be a person whose preeminence in the law and as a citizen is widely acknowledged and whose qualifications for the position are virtually hailed by judges and lawyers.
(ii) Well Qualified (“WQ”): A “Well Qualified” candidate exhibits essentially the same qualities as an EWQ candidate. This person may have less experience but shows promise of all the criteria attendant to an EWQ rating.
(iii) Qualified (“Q”): A candidate exhibits a fitness for the judicial office. Such candidate is considered average on an overall analysis of the Evaluation Factors.
(iv) Not Qualified (“NQ”): A candidate must be considered below average on an overall analysis of the Evaluation Factors. This rating indicates that the candidate is not qualified for the subject judicial office. However, such rating should not be construed as an adverse reaction to the candidate’s qualification as an attorney.
(v) No Rating (“NR”): If a candidate does not submit a questionnaire or attend an interview and there is insufficient information available to the JQC on a candidate’s fitness for the judicial office which the candidate seeks, the JQC shall make no rating of such candidate. However, if there is sufficient information available to the JQC, even in the absence of a questionnaire or interview, the JQC may rate such candidate.
########
About Wolverine Bar Association
www.wolverinebar.org
The WBA was established by a number of African American attorneys during the 1930s. It was organized to coordinate the energies of the increasing number of African Americans admitted to practice throughout Michigan – the “Wolverine” state. From its inception, the WBA assumed a leadership role in community and political activities. This role continues to be paramount in the WBA’s endeavors today.
The roots of the WBA are in the Harlan Law Club, which was founded in 1919 by several attorneys in the Detroit area who were excluded by local bar associations throughout the state of Michigan. The club was named in recognition of the late United States Supreme Court Justice John M. Harlan. Justice Harlan was dedicated to the goal of equality of treatment under the law for all in our society. His philosophy was exemplified in the dissenting opinion of Plessy v. Ferguson, a 1896 U.S. Supreme Court decision. The Plessy dissent espoused that the law should protect the rights of all individuals and be applied to all citizens on an equal basis.
In the 1930s, the WBA replaced the Harlan Law Club and expanded its influence from Detroit to the entire “Wolverine” state. The WBA, like its predecessor the Harlan Law Club, is a powerful mechanism through which African American attorneys in Michigan address the unique needs of their community for legal service, representation and protection.
The WBA’s goals of equality and dedication to the community have not significantly changed from those of the founders of the Harlan Law Club nearly 80 years ago. With many WBA members in judicial positions on the state and federal bench and over 800 practicing attorneys statewide, the WBA is continuing to meet today’s challenges with renewed vigor and determination.
