John P. Frank,
Partner at the Phoenix
firm of Lewis and Roca
Education:
Yale Law School, J.S.D., 1947
University of Wisconsin, LL.B., 1940
University of Wisconsin, M.A., 1940
University of Wisconsin, B.A., 1938
Admitted in:
Arizona and Wisconsin
About Mr. Frank (reprinted
from Lewis and Roca, Mr Frank's law firm in Phoenix)
Mr. Frank passed away on September 7, 2002. He was a partner
in the firm's Commercial Litigation Group. His extensive
experience included appeals, civil litigation and antitrust.
Prior to joining the firm in 1954, Mr. Frank served as Law
Clerk to Mr. Justice Hugo L. Black during the October 1942
term of the United States Supreme Court. He also was Assistant
Professor of Law at Indiana University from 1946-49 and
Associate Professor of Law at Yale University from 1949-54 and
during that time was associated with the Antitrust Division of
the United States Department of Justice.
Mr. Frank was involved in more than 500 appeals
in his years with the firm. These include many cases at the
Arizona Court of Appeals, the Arizona Supreme Court, the Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals, other federal circuits, and the
United States Supreme Court. A more notable appeal concerned
the premium required to be paid by physicians at a medical
school for malpractice insurance and resulted in client
savings of over seven million dollars. He continued to be
active in state trial courts and federal district courts,
where he represented the motion picture industry in antitrust
litigation, represented a newspaper on antitrust and contract
issues, and recently represented an air tanker contractor in
federal district court litigation on an issue of whether
certain planes were properly acquired.
Mr. Frank was frequently called upon for
opinions, as for example, the water rights of an Arizona
Indian tribe. His professional work was entirely occupied with
litigation in a variety of forums, in legal matters either in
anticipation of litigation or seeking to avoid litigation.
Professional Activities
From 1960-70, Mr. Frank was a member of the Committee on Rules
of Practice and Procedure of the Judicial Conference of the
United States and continues to meet regularly with it; a
member of the Arizona Salary Commission from 1970-82; and a
member of the Arizona Appellate Court Nominating Committee
from 1972-84 and chairman of the nominating commission for the
U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit (Southern) from 1977-1980.
He was a Director of the Alliance for Justice
(headquartered in Washington, D.C.) and past Chairman of the
Senior Advisory Board for the Ninth Circuit of Appeals. A
former board member of the Phoenix Art Museum, he was very
active in pro bono litigation.
Publications
Mr. Frank wrote 11 books on legal history and constitutional
law. His publications include: Cases and Materials on
Constitutional Law, Callaghan & Co.; Cases on the
Constitution, McGraw-Hill; Mr. Justice Black,
Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.; Marble Palace, The Supreme Court in
American Life, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.; Lincoln as a
Lawyer, University of Illinois Press; Justice Daniel
Dissenting, Harvard University Press; The Warren Court,
The MacMillan Co.; American Law: The Case for Radical
Reform, The MacMillan Co.; Clement Haynsworth, The
Senate, and The Supreme Court, The University Press of
Virginia. He was a frequent publisher of articles in numerous
publications.
Special Recognitions
He was Order of the Coif and was a recipient of the Harley
Award in 1984. In 1997, he received the Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
Award from the American Inns of Court Foundation in a ceremony
in the Supreme Court chamber of the United States Supreme
Court.
In 1992, Mr. Frank was the recipient of the
University of Wisconsin Law School's Distinguished Service
Award and the Arizona Bar Foundation's Walter E. Craig
Distinguished Service Award for outstanding contributions to
the field of law. He had honorary doctorates from Lawrence
University and Arizona State University.
Mr. Frank was listed in the current edition of
"100 Most Influential Lawyers in America." For five
consecutive years, he made "National Law Journal's" list of
The Best Lawyers in America 1999-2000®, Copyright 1999 by
Woodward/White, Aiken, SC. Mr. Frank was rated by
Martindale-Hubbell as a "Preeminent Attorney."
Bar Affiliations
Mr. Frank was a member of the Maricopa County Bar Association,
the State Bar of Arizona and the American Judicature Society.
He served on the Council of the American Law Institute and was
a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation.
STANLEY
G. FELDMAN
EDUCATION:
-LLB from University of Arizona College of Law, 1956
-University of Arizona
-University of California at Los Angeles
-Tucson High School
-Tucson Public Schools
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:
-Chief Justice of Arizona Supreme Court - January 1992 to
January 1997
-Appointed as Justice of Arizona Supreme Court - January 20,
1982
-Partner in law firm of Miller, Pitt & Feldman, P.C. - 1968 to
1982
-Member of faculty, University of Arizona College of Law
(instructor, lecturer, and adjunct professor) - 1968 to 1976
-Admitted to State Bar of Arizona - 1956
Reprinted from Arizona Attorney Magazine, 14 ARIZONA ATTORNEY FEBRUARY 2004, by
Jodi Weisberg.
Although he is one of
only a few justices who have served 20 plus years on the
Arizona Supreme Court, Stanley Feldman doesn’t see it as that
great an accomplishment. "I was on the ballot every six
years and unopposed. So what’s the big deal about being on the
Court for 20 years?" he asks. But his long tenure on the Court
has been a "big deal" to lawyers, academics— and the people of
Arizona.
During his years on the
Court, Feldman grappled with issues ranging from the death
penalty to water law to consumer protection. In all of his
decisions, he says he strove to protect the rights of
"consumers and citizens from the government and from powerful
interests." Among many topics, Feldman has firm views
about the death penalty. At times, almost half of the Supreme
Court caseload consists of death penalty cases. "I’ve signed
off on 80 to 100 death cases, but I personally see no value to
it," he says. "As a pragmatic matter, I think the death
penalty is a waste of resources. I don’t think it deterred
anybody in the cases we see. I also think it is a terrible
burden for victims because these cases go on for years, and
there is no closure."
In other areas, Feldman
cites two cases from the 1980s—one addressing wrongful
discharge and the other addressing contracts
of adhesion -
that illustrates his commitment to protecting consumers and
citizens.
Wagenseller {v.
Scottsdale Memorial Hospital, 710 P.2d 1025 (Ariz. 1985)]
brought a sense of reality to the employment area," Feldman
says. "People can't be fired for bad cause. It was arule
that just had to be." In that case,a nurse claimed that
she was fired because she had refused to joint in "mooning"
during a staff camping trip. The Court found her
termination contrary to public policy.
"And
Darner [Motor
Sales, Inc., v. Universal Underwriters Insurance Co.,
682 P.2d 388
(Ariz. 1984)] reflects the reality of modern life," says
Feldman. "We do not truly negotiate our insurance or banking
contracts. You just take what you are given. Now the
reasonable expectations of the consumer must be considered."
In Darner,
the Court refused
to enforce the boilerplate terms of an insurance contract,
which were more limited than the coverage expressly agreed
upon by the parties.
Martin Solomon, of Solomon, Relihan & Blake PC, has practiced
personal injury law since 1974. He cites Feldman decisions
that afforded protection to nursing home residents and abused
elders, as well as their families. "Justice Feldman has done
more than any other individual to protect the rights of
consumers and preserve the letter and the spirit of the
Arizona Constitution," Solomon says. "He also has an
incredible sense of wit and is able to take complex issues and
make them clear and understandable."
Professor Dan Dobbs, of the University of Arizona law school
and author of the hornbook Law of Torts,
believes Feldman has had an enormous impact on tort law and
the court system. "He set a model for the court to make well
thought-out decisions, and I think he is a hero for creating a
really good Court," says Dobbs. "He also has good common
sense, which is disguised because he writes scholarly
opinions. But I appreciate that aspect." Dobbs says he
differs with Feldman on a number of his decisions because the
justice leaned more to the plaintiff’s side. But he respects
the decision-making process Feldman went through in reaching
his conclusions.
Differences of opinion and personality conflicts, both on the
Court and off, were also a part of Feldman’s tenure. At times
he clashed with Fred Martone, now a judge with the U.S.
District Court, as well as former governor, Fife Symington.
"Stanley was not fond of the supremacy clause of the U.S.
Constitution," says Martone. "As a result of that he always
tried to rely on the Arizona Constitution in order to avoid
federal judicial review. Serving with Stanley was a
challenging experience. He was a passionate advocate for his
own views."
According to David Byers, Administrative Director of the
Arizona Supreme Court, Feldman found himself at odds with
Symington over legislation requiring the automatic transfer of
some juveniles to adult court. It was also during that time
that merit selection of judges was challenged. Although
Feldman lost out to voters on the juvenile justice issue, he
did prevail in preserving the merit selection of judges in the
state’s two largest counties. "Justice Feldman felt each
case should be reviewed and not just be automatic," says
Byers. "There are a lot of problems now for those kids who end
up on adult probation because there are fewer services
available."
Byers also says Feldman had a tremendous impact on the
administration of the courts. "Justice Feldman was the first
chief judge to place the presiding judge of each county in
charge of all the courts in that county. Until 1993, they were
only in charge of the superior court, but Administrative Order
9330 changed all that," says Byers. "This was strategically
critical because now there is someone overlooking limited
jurisdiction courts."
Former Chief Justice Tom Zlaket recalls the political problems
all chief justices face. "Stanley has always been outspoken
about things he believes in, and he was quite vocal in talking
about the justice system and ways to improve it," says Zlaket.
"That offended some people who did not want to give the
judiciary its due. Whenever he asked for more resources, the
politicians always resisted. The same was true for me and it’s
true for Bud [current Chief Justice Charles Jones]. But
Stanley never let criticism deter him from doing and saying
what was right."
Speaking at a December event honoring Feldman, Zlaket added,
"Stanley is as tough as a $2 steak, but he was always straight
up." During his time on the bench, Feldman saw several changes
on the Court, including the swearing-in of women justices for
the first time in recent history. It was something he
welcomed. "I have always thought women were regular people,"
jokes Feldman. "I enjoy having women here and I think they
have made a difference for the better. For one thing, our
language is better. I think men just behave better around
women. They have a civilizing influence."
Justice Ruth McGregor, who was appointed to the Court in 1998,
enjoyed working and jesting with Feldman. "Two characteristics
that best define him are energy and integrity," she says. "He
was always prepared, always thoughtful, always reasonable and
always delightful."
Perhaps his secretary, Sherry Van Camp, knows him better than
anyone. She has worked for him since 1974 and continues to do
so now that he has returned to private practice. "He is
difficult to work for because he expects you to give 110 per
cent like he does," she says. "He gives his best and wants
your best. He doesn’t like lazy people who take shortcuts, and
he doesn’t like people who aren’t prepared."
Maritza Munich, Feldman’s first law clerk, vividly recalls his
work ethic. He was adamant from the beginning that each clerk
would stay at the office until the job was done. "It was
clear that he expected his workday, and that of the lawyers on
his team, to be no less demanding in public service than it
had been as a litigator in private practice," she says. "In
fact, the law firm atmosphere that prevailed in the office led
me to joke privately that instead of the customary ‘Justice
Feldman’s chambers,’ we should answer phone calls with the
greeting ‘Feldman & Associates.’"
Stephen Golden, his last law clerk, says little changed in the
two decades since Munich clerked for Feldman. "Justice
Feldman is very demanding of himself and wants to get things
right, accurate, correct, appropriate and judicial," he says.
"He instills that in the clerks who work for him. He pushes
always for the facts and the law that support a statement. He
can also help people realize the difference between the theory
and the practice of law."
Feldman has been a practicing attorney and a judge for almost
an equal number of years. Prior to his appointment to the
Supreme Court in 1982, he was a well known plaintiff’s
attorney with attorney, with Miller, Pitt & Feldman in
Tucson, for 25 years..
"I practiced
law intensely, had an interesting practice and handled all
sorts of cases," says Feldman. "It was a lot of work, but it
was an opportunity to see how the world works. Being a judge
was even more of an opportunity. You just can’t be bored in
that job." Feldman has private thoughts about whom he would
like to succeed him on the bench. Although he doesn’t name
names,
he does make it clear he is not in favor of a quota system to
balance the composition of the Court. "I have always believed
in equality of opportunity. It is a hallmark of my personal
philosophy," he says. "I believe in getting the best people no
matter what their ethnic origins. The overriding concern
should be who the best person is."
Feldman makes it clear that he is not retiring; he’s just
changing jobs. He is currently of counsel to his old firm, now
known as Haralson Miller Pitt Feldman & McAnally PLC. He will
also teach a class at the James E. Rogers College of Law at
the UA. "I’m going to practice some law, but I don’t want to
work 12- to 13-hour days," he says. "I have an obligation to
contribute to society, and law is what I know best."
Feldman says he hopes he will be remembered for contributing
to the growth and change of the law, because the law needs to
evolve as society changes. "I gave the law a sensible
construction that reflects not only what we would like to do
but what the realities are," he says. "I hope attorneys
perceived me as prepared, understanding of the issues,
interested in reality and not just the abstract rules, and
that my mind was open on the issues." Although he will be
practicing law and teaching, Feldman says he has no intention
of strictly scheduling his days. "I plan to do more of the
things I enjoy, such as playing tennis, fast walking, playing
bridge, traveling and going to the theater," he says. "And, of
course, if Lute [Olson, coach of the UA basketball team] would
hire me as a graduate assistant, I’d be very happy!"
Jodi Weisberg is a lawyer, freelance
writer and standup comic currently living in Phoenix.
17 FEBRUARY 2004 ARIZONA ATTORNEY
