Download - Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
1/20
1 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
By Billy Corriher and Brent DeBeaumont August 2013
A siting Illinois Supreme Cour jusice could soon ace quesions under oah abou
allegaions ha he voed o overurn a $1 billion verdic agains a powerul corporaion
ha secrely spen millions o dollars o help him ge eleced.
A lawsui now being ried in an Illinois courroom alleges ha insurance gian SaeFarm essenially unded and operaed a mulimillion-dollar campaign in 2004 o elec
Jusice Lloyd A. Karmeier o he sae supreme cour. On Augus 5, 2013, he plainis
in Hale v. Sae Farm old he judge hearing he case ha heir saed inenion is o ask
Jusice Karmeier o address he allegaions in a deposiion.1 Te plainis conend ha
Sae Farm violaed he Rackeeer Inuenced and Corrup Organizaions Ac, or RICO,
by using he U.S. Chamber o Commerce, he Illinois Republican Pary, and oher
eniies as conduis o conceal is role in unding and operaing he jusices campaign.2
RICO allows plainis o sue persons or eniies involved in a conspiracy o engage in
improper aciviies such as bribery, raud, or violen crimes.3 In May o his year, a ed-
eral judge denied Sae Farms moion o dismiss he lawsui and ruled ha he plainiscan coninue wih discovery.4 Te rial could unearh more deails abou he exen o
Sae Farms involvemen in Jusice Karmeiers 2004 campaign.
Te lessons already learned rom he sill-unolding scandal are apparen. Campaign-
nance reorm advocaes have called on sae legislaors o address he shorcomings o
sae campaign-nance laws and judicial-ehics rules in order o preven a caaclysmic
breach o jusice rom recurring. Such reorms are crucial o quashing he widespread
belie5 ha our judicial sysem is up or sale o he highes bidder.
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
2/20
2 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
The bi ll ion- dollar verdict
Te evens ha orm he basis oHale v. Sae Farm arose in 1997, when more han 4
million aggrieved policyholders led a class-acion lawsui in an Illinois sae cour
agains Sae Farm.6 Te 1997 lawsuiAvery v. Sae Farmconcerned a clause in Sae
Farms auomobile insurance conrac ha sipulaed ha he company would pay or
replacemen pars o like kind and qualiy o resore a vehicle o is pre-loss condiionaer an acciden.7 Sae Farm was accused o breaching his promise by insalling ine-
rior replacemen pars.8 A jury in Williamson Couny, Illinois, agreed wih he plainis
inAvery v. Sae Farm and awarded hem $1.18 billion.9 Alhough he medias coverage o
he rial played up he size o he verdic,10 i acually amouned o only around $300 or
each o he 4 million plainis.
Te Fih Disric Appellae Cour o Illinois
afrmed mos o he judgmen in 2001. Te appel-
lae cours decision, auhored by Judge Gordon
E. Maag, lowered he oal award o slighly morehan $1 billion.11 Sae Farm appealed he judg-
men o he Illinois Supreme Cour.
Te Illinois Supreme Cour heard oral argumens
in he case in 2003, bu i le he verdic pending
or more han wo years.12 In he meanime, a sea
on he high cour opened up in he cours souh-
ern disric.13 (Unlike he vas majoriy o saes,
Illinois elecs is supreme cour jusices by dis-
rics.14
) Te wo candidaes or he souhern dis-ric sea were hen-Judge Karmeier, a Republican
circui judge or Washingon Couny, and Judge
Maag.15 By he ime he nal voes were allied, he
2004 Illinois Supreme Cour race would become
he mos expensive campaign or a single judicial
ofce in he hisory o he Unied Saes.16 More
han $9 million would evenually be spen by he
wo candidaes, wih Judge Karmeiers campaign
accumulaing more han $4.8 million in campaign
conribuions and Judge Maag amassing close o
$4.6 million.17 A 2008 Chicago ribune aricle look-
ing back on he race noed ha Jusice Karmeier
won wih he heavy nancial assisance o business
and insurance ineress hoping o obain a reversal
o he $1 billion-plus verdic agains Sae Farm.18
For more reasons why he 2004 Illinois Supreme
Cour race may have atraced so much nancial
atenion, see he souhern disric sidebar.
The American Tort Reorm Association, or ATRA, is a corporate-unded
organization that champions caps on damages in tort cases, restrictions
on class-action lawsuits, and other limits on corporate legal liability.19 The
group publishes an annual list o what it terms judicial hellholesloca
that it claims have the worst courts in the United States.20 The only appa
ent criterion or making this list is a perception by ATRA that a court avo
injured plaintis over corporate deendants. Madison County, Illinois,
ranked as the number-one judicial hellhole rom 2002 to 2004.21 Accord
ing to ATRA, Madison County was the class action capital o the United
States in 2004, with 106 class-action lings.22
When a party loses a case in Madison County, the Fith District Appellat
Court hears the appeal.23 The Fith District is part o the Southern Distri
o the Illinois Supreme Court, and the justice who represents this distric
has some power over appointing its lower court judges.24
Corporate critics o the Madison County courts may have seen an op-
portunity to inuence those courts through the 2004 Illinois Supreme
Court election. The U.S. Chamber o Commerces Institute or Legal Reorm
started a newspaper covering legal aairs in Madison County,25 and when
Justice Karmeier won the 2004 Illinois Supreme Court election, the paper
proclaimed that the justices victory bellow[ed] a resounding message.
The article quotes one observer commenting that the dominance o
Madison County in the judiciary was a subplot o the election.27 Ater
Justice Karmeier took his seat on the bench, Madison County ell to the
ourth spot and then to the sixth spot on the judicial hellholes list in 2005
and 2006, respectively,28 and then it dropped rom the list altogether unt
once again making the list in 2012.29
Illinois Southern Districtas the class action capital?
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
3/20
3 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
To recuse or not to recuse?
On Elecion Day 2004, Jusice Karmeier deeaed Judge Maag by a wide margin and
ascended o he Illinois Supreme Cour.30 On he heels o Jusice Karmeiers vicory, he
plainis in heAvery casepeiioned he cour o bar his paricipaion in he cases nal
decision,31 ciing Sae Farms nancial conribuions o Jusice Karmeiers campaign.
Te plainis were aware ha Sae Farm and is employees had made direc conribu-ions amouning o $350,00032 o Jusice Karmeiers campaign and ha more han $1
million had come rom groups ha included Sae Farm as a member or o which he
insurance gian was a nancial conribuor.33 Te Illinois Supreme Cour issued an order
saing ha Jusice Karmeiers recusal decision was one or him alone o make.34 Te
saes code o judicial conduc insrucs Illinois judges o recuse hemselves rom any
proceeding in which he judges imparialiy migh reasonably be quesioned, bu he
rule does no menion campaign conribuions as a source o quesions abou a judges
imparialiy.35 Jusice Karmeier reused o recuse himsel rom he decision inAvery v.
Sae Farm, and jus shy o nine monhs aer aking ofce, he subsequenly voed o
reverse he judgmen agains he insurer.36
Under he Illinois Consiuion, i akes our voes or he high cour o overurn a
lower cours ruling.37 Te ally in heAvery v. Sae Farm nal decision was our jusices
avoring reversal and wo jusices parially dissening.38 Absen Jusice Karmeiers
paricipaion, only he porions o he cours opinion joined by he parially dissening
jusices would have had he necessary voes o overurn he lower cours judgmen.39
Te nal voe would have been 3-2 in avor o reversing he approximaely $456 mil-
lion in conrac damages and 5-0 in avor o reversing he $600 million in puniive
damages.40 Wihou Jusice Karmeiers voe, Sae Farm would have sill been on he
hook or around $456 million.41
Te plainis inAvery peiioned he U.S. SupremeCour o weigh in on Jusice Karmeiers ailure o recuse in 2006, bu he Cour
declined o hear he case.42
A constitutional right to recusal
Jus hree years laer, in 2009, he U.S. Supreme Cour reviewed a legal challenge con-
cerning a similar recusal issue. Jusice Bren D. Benjamin o he Wes Virginia Supreme
Cour had ailed o recuse himsel rom a decision overurning damages agains A..
Massey Coal Co., Inc., a major nancial backer o his successul 2004 campaign.43 While
Massey Coals appeal was pending, he companys CEO gave approximaely $3 million
o a nonpro corporaion, which ran ads supporing Jusice Benjamin and atacking his
elecoral opponen during he 2004 elecion.44
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
4/20
4 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
In Caperon v. A.. Massey Coal Co., Inc., a 5-4 majoriy o he U.S. Supreme Cour held
ha he due-process clause requires a judge o recuse himsel or hersel rom any cases
in which here is a high probabiliy o acual bias.45 Wriing or he majoriy, Jusice
Anhony Kennedy reasoned ha he Massey execuives exraordinary conribu-
ions were made a a ime when he had a vesed sake in he oucome. Jus as no man
is allowed o be a judge in his own cause, similar ears o bias can arise when a man
chooses he judge in his own cause.46 In he wake o his decision, he plainis counselinAvery v. Sae Farm launched an invesigaion o deermine wheher Sae Farms nan-
cial involvemen in Jusice Karmeiers 2004 campaign had been ully disclosed.47
Te plainis claim o have uncovered addiional evidence ha proves ha Jusice
Karmeiers conic o ineres was jus as signican as he conic o ineres in
Caperon. As wih he donaions rom Massey Coal, Sae Farm had a sake in a paricu-
lar case ha was pending or imminen a he ime ha i rais[ed] unds or direc[ed]
he judges elecion campaign.48 Te U.S. Supreme Cour in Caperon noed ha he
Massey Coal execuives spending amouned o hree imes he spending by he judges
own campaign.49
When he secre conribuions alleged by heAvery plainis are addedo he $4.8 million in repored campaign donaions, he Karmeier campaigns oal
conribuions reach $5.5 million. O his, $4.2 millionmore han 75 percen o he
oal conribuionscan be atribued o Sae Farm, is employees, groups o which
he insurer had conribued, or groups ha Sae
Farm execuives conrolled.50 Sae Farms suppor
or Jusice Karmeiers 2004 campaign is similar o
he disproporionae nancial inuence o Massey
Coal in elecing Jusice Benjamin o he Wes
Virginia Supreme Cour.
Following the money trail:
Recent findings
Trough he invesigaive work o reired FBI
Special Agen Daniel Reece, he plainis con-
end ha as much as $4 million given o Jusice
Karmeiers campaign came rom Sae Farm or
eniies srongly inuenced by Sae Farm execu-
ives.51 Tis newly unearhed evidence suggess
ha Sae Farm deliberaely concealed he exen
o is nancial suppor or Jusice Karmeiers 2004
campaign by unneling money hrough a rade
associaion, a poliical acion commitee, and a
poliical paryall wih he goal o reversing he $1
billion verdic agains he company.52
FIGURE 1
Spending to support Justice Benjamin in Caperton versus
alleged contributions to Karmeiers campaign
70%State Farm-influenced contributions
$3,852,132
6%State Farm direct contribution
$350,000
24%All other contributions
$1,318,947
Alleged contributions to Karmeiers2004 campaign $5,521,079 total
Spending to support West Virginia JusticeBenjamin in 2004: $4,986,711 total
60%Massey CEOs direct independent expenditures
$2,978,207
23%Massey CEO-influenced independent expenditures
$1,163,000
17%Justice Benjamins campaign
$845,504
Sources: Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co., Inc., 556 U.S. 868, 873-884 (2009); Class-action complaint,
Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 12-0660-DRH (S.D. Ill., May 29, 2012).
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
5/20
5 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
In 2004 Sae Farm gave he conservaive-leaning, pro-business lobbying organizaion,
he U.S. Chamber o Commerce, $1 million.53 Te chamber hen conribued $2.05
million o he Illinois Republican Pary.54 Jusice Karmeiers campaign and he Illinois
Republican Pary received he majoriy o he chambers judicial-campaign conribu-
ions in 2004a ull 73 percen o all conribuions given o judicial campaigns on
behal o he U.S. Chamber o Commerce ha year.55 Te Illinois Republican Pary gave
a series o conribuions oaling $1.9 million o Jusice Karmeiers campaign. O paric-ular noe, on he same day ha he chamber gave he sae Republican Pary $950,000,
he pary donaed $911,282 o Jusice Karmeiers campaign.56
While Sae Farms $1 million donaion o he U.S. Chamber o Commerce was known
in 2004, he role o Sae Farms CEO, Edward B. Rus Jr., in seering chamber unds
o Jusice Karmeiers campaign has only recenly come o ligh. Te plainis have
uncovered evidence ha Rus was par o he chambers ask orce ha seleced judicial
races o arge in 2004.57 As a resul, he plainis now conend ha he $2.05 million
given by he U.S. Chamber o Commerce o he Illinois Republican Pary was speci-
cally agged by Rus or use in he 2004 Illinois Supreme Cour race.58
Te plainis sayha under Russ guidance, nearly 95 percen o he unds given by he U.S. Chamber
o Commerce o he Illinois Republican Pary were ulimaely dedicaed o Jusice
Karmeiers elecion eors.59
Invesigaor Reece also claims o have uncovered
evidence ha prior o he 2004 elecionand
whileAveryv. Sae Farm was pending in he
Illinois Supreme Courhe Illinois Civil Jusice
League spen $718,965 o help Jusice Karmeiers
campaign.60
Te plainis say ha he Illinois CivilJusice League veted and recruied candidaes o
run or he open sea on he cour.61 A coaliion o
Illinois ciizens, businesses, and associaions, he
Illinois Civil Jusice League lobbies or limis on
jury verdics in personal-injury and class-acion
lawsuis.62 Te head o he organizaion in 2004 was
Ed Murnane.63 Reeces invesigaion concluded ha
Murnane was chosen by Sae Farm lawyer and lob-
byis William Shepherd o head he Illinois Civil
Jusice League in 1993.64
FIGURE 2
Alleged contributions to Justice Karmeiers campaign
Source: Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 12-0660-DRH (S.D. Ill., May 29, 2012).
$5,520,079Total contributions
6%State Farmdirect contribution$350,000
22%JUSTPAC$1,190,453
35%Illinois Republican Partywith U.S. Chamber ofCommerce funds
$1,941,714
13%In-kind contributions
from the IllinoisCivil Justice League
$718,965
24%Other sources
$1,318,947
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
6/20
6 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
Te $718,965 in unrepored, in-kind conribu-
ions rom he Illinois Civil Jusice League includes
he cos o resources allegedly devoed o Jusice
Karmeiers campaign. In-kind conribuions are
dened as conribuions oher han cash ha ben-
e a campaign.65 O hese in-kind conribuions,
$177,749 included Murnanes salary, benes,and expenses.66 Te plainis claim ha, E-mails
generaed wihin Karmeiers campaign organiza-
ion unmisakably show ha Murnane direced
Karmeiers und-raising, his media relaions and his
speeches.67 wice in heir complain, he plain-
is quoe Murnane as saying o he 2004 Illinois
Supreme Cour race, Im running his campaign.68
While Sae Farm and he Illinois Civil Jusice League deny his associaion, Reece
claims o have ound numerous discarded emails reporedly linking Murnane o JusiceKarmeiers campaign.69 One o he emails suggess ha he campaigns reasurer equaed
a conribuion o he leagues poliical acion commitee wih a conribuion o he
judges campaign. Anoher purporedly shows Murnane insrucing he campaign rea-
surer no o issue press releases abou undraisers.70 Te plainis claim ha he remain-
ing unrepored unds were dedicaed o media, adverising, undraising, and oher
managerial expenses ha almos exclusively beneed Jusice Karmeier.71
Alhough his alleged spending was no repored as in-kind conribuions o Jusice
Karmeiers campaign, he Illinois Civil Jusice League is required o repor inormaion
abou is expendiures.72
Documens led wih he Inernal Revenue Service show hain 2004 he Illinois Civil Jusice League spen subsanially more on media buys han in
subsequen years. Te organizaion repored spending $223,658 on media expenses
in 2004.73 Bu i repored no such spending in 2005 and only $900 in media spending
in 2006. In 2007 he organizaion repored $49,440 in media spending.74 From 2008 o
2011 he Illinois Civil Jusice Leagues ax documens do no include much spending
or adverising and promoion, hough hey include more han $100,000 in oher
expenses or each o hose years.75 Te expendiure o nearly a quarer o a million dol-
lars on media in 2004 seems o be an oulier. Alhough here could clearly be anoher
explanaion or he seep drop in he organizaions media spending, he plainis allega-
ions raise he quesion o wheher ha money was spen o help elec Jusice Karmeier.
FIGURE 3
Campaign cash and money saved
(through a favorable ruling)
Sources: Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co., Inc., 556 U.S. 868, 873-884 (2009); Class-action complaint, Hale v. State
Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 12-0660-DRH (S.D. Ill., May 29, 2012).
0 100 200 300 400 500
$3 million / from Massey Coal to WV justice
$50 million / saved by WV justices vote
$4.2 million / alleged from State Farm to IL justice
saved by IL justices vote $456 million
Caperton v. Massey Coal
Avery v. State Farm
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
7/20
7 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
I he Illinois Civil Jusice League did secrely spend
nearly hree-quarers o a million dollars o help
elec Jusice Karmeier, should hose resources have
been considered in-kind conribuions? Te Illinois
Sae Board o Elecions saes ha, Goods or
services provided o he campaign or purchased on
behal o he campaign mus be repored as in-kindconribuions.76 Oher large conribuors o he
campaign, such as he Illinois Republican Pary and
he Illinois Sae Medical Sociey Poliical Acion
Commitee, spen heir money direcly on ads or
Jusice Karmeier, bu heir spending was repored as
in-kind conribuions.77 Why would he Illinois Civil
Jusice League ail o repor is in-kind conribu-
ions when oher big spenders repored hem? Even
JUSPAC, a poliical acion commitee creaed by
he Illinois Civil Jusice League, repored in-kindconribuions o Jusice Karmeiers campaign.78 Why
would he league no spend his money hrough is
poliical acion commitee and repor i?
I he allegaions are rue, hen he leagues secre
spending or Jusice Karmeier could no have been
considered he ype o independen spending ha is so prevalen79 in judicial elecions
oday, paricularly since i appears he Illinois Civil Jusice League acually recruied he
candidae and hen ran his campaign. Te plainis allegaions sugges ha he league
coordinaed is spending wih he candidae, which independen spenders are prohibiedrom doing,80 and as such, he spending should be considered an in-kind conribuion.
JUSPAC repored spending a saggering amoun o moneymore han $1 mil-
liono aid Jusice Karmeiers elecion eors.81 Tese unds represen more han 90
percen o he money raised by JUSPAC in 2004. 82 JUSPAC received large dona-
ions rom he American or Reorm Associaion, he U.S. Chamber o Commerce,
and several large corporaions.83
Wih heir addiional evidence o Sae Farms nancial inuence on Jusice Karmeiers
campaignadding up o more han $4 million, subsanially more han he $350,000
ha Sae Farms atorneys acknowledged84he plainis brough he curren lawsui
in ederal cour. Tis lawsui alleges ha Sae Farm, Murnane, and Shepherd violaed
RICO hrough heir secre involvemen wih Jusice Karmeiers judicial campaign.85
(For more inormaion abou RICO lawsuis, see he sidebar.) Te plainis asser ha
rom 2003 o he presen, he deendans creaed and conduced a rackeeering ener-
prise designed o enable Sae Farm o evade paymen o a $1.05 billion judgmen
afrmed in avor o approximaely 4.7 million Sae Farm policyholders by he Illinois
Fih Disric Appellae Cour.86
FIGURE 4
Following the money
Othercontributions
$599,982
Karmeiercampaign
$1,000,000
U.S. Chamberof Commerce
$2,050,000
IllinoisRepublican Party
$1,941,417
Bill Shepherd,State Farm lawyer
and lobbyist,chooses Ed Murnane
to chair ICJL
JUSTPAC
$1,190,453
Illinois CivilJustice Leaguealleged in-kindcontributions
$718,965
State Farm CEOEd Rust becomesmember of theU.S. Chambers
judicial taskforce
Direct contributions
$350,000
Source: Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. , No. 12-0660-DRH (S.D. Ill., May 29, 2012).
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
8/20
8 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
OctOber 29, 1998
Harman Mining Company president
Hugh Caperton les a lawsuit
against Massey Coal
August 1, 2002
A jury rules or Caperton and
awards $50 million in damages.
NOvember 12, 2003
Republican Brent Benjamin announces
his candidacy or the West Virginia
Supreme Court.
JuNe 2004
The court denies Masseys post-trial
motions challenging the verdict
and the damages award.
August 20, 2004
Massey CEO launches a Political Action
Committee (PAC) and gives it $2.4 mil-
lion to run ads or Benjamin.
NOvember 2, 2004
Brent Benjamin wins a seat on the
West Virginia Supreme Court with
53 percent o the vote.
mArch 17, 2005
The Circuit Court o Boone County
denies Masseys motion or
judgment as a matter o law.
OctOber 2005
Beore Massey Coal led its appeal,
Caperton moved to disqualiy Justice
Benjamin rom hearing the appeal.
July 1997
Four million policyholders lea class-action lawsuit againstState Farm, claiming that the
auto insurer breached its contracts.
OctOber 1999
A jury in an Illinois state court rulesagainst State Farm and awards theclass-action plaintis $1.18 billiondollars in damages.
April 2001
An appellate court afrms most o thejudgment against State Farm, whichappeals to the Illinois Supreme Court.
mAy 2003
The Illinois Supreme Court hearsoral arguments in Avery v. State FarmMut. Auto. Ins. Co.
september 2003
Republican Judge Lloyd Karmeierannounces his candidacy or the IllinoisSupreme Courts Southern District seat.
september 26, 2003
The Illinois Civil Justice Leagues (ICJL)PAC makes its rst o $1.19 million indonations to Karmeiers campaign.
september 24, 2004
The U.S. Chamber o Commercedonates $350,000 to the Illinois GOP.
OctOber 20, 2004
The U.S. Chamber o Commercedonates $900,000 to the Illinois GOP.The Illinois GOP injects $700,000into Karmeiers campaign.
OctOber 22, 2004
The U.S. Chamber o Commercedonates $350,000 to the Illinois GOP.The Illinois GOP spends $350,000to help Karmeiers campaign.
NOvember 2, 2004
Karmeier wins the election.
JANuAry 26, 2005
The high court rules that Karmeiercan make the decision on whetherhe should be recused, and he reusesto recuse himsel.
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
FIGURE 5
Timeline of campaign cash and rulings: Caperton and Avery
Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. Avery v. State Farm1997
2005
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
9/20
9 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
April 7, 2006
Justice Benjamin denied the request
to recuse himsel, concluding that he
had no bias or or against any litigant.
OctOber 24, 2006
Massey Coal petitions the West Virginia
Supreme Court to hear its appeal.
OctOber 10, 2007
The West Virginia Supreme Court hears
oral arguments in Caperton v. A.T.
Massey Coal Co.
NOvember 21, 2007
A 3-2 majority o the West Virginia
Supreme Court votes to overturn
the lower courts $50 million verdict
against Massey Coal.
JANuAry 2008
A photo is released showing Masseys
CEO and then-Chie Justice Maynardvacationing on the French Riviera.
FebruAry 2008
In light o the Riviera photo, the
West Virginia Supreme Court grants
Capertons petition or a rehearing.
mArch 2008
The justice in the Riviera photo recuses
himsel, as does another who criticized
the Massey CEOs spending in 2004.
April 3, 2008
With two justices sitting out,Justice Benjamin acts as Chie
Justice, and again, the Court rules
3-2 in Masseys avor.
NOvember 14, 2008
The U.S. Supreme Court grants
certiorari in Caperton v.
A.T. Massey Coal Co., Inc.
JuNe 8, 2009
The U.S. Supreme Court rules 5-4 that
Justice Benjamins ailure to recuse
himsel violated Due Process by
creating a high probability o bias.
Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Caperton v. Massey Coal,556 U.S. 868 (2009), available at http://www.scotusblog.
com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/08-22_pet.pdf; Caperton v. Massey Coal, 556 U.S. 868 (2009),
available at http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/08pdf/08-22.pdf.
August 18, 2005
The high court overturns the verdictagainst State Farm, with Karmeier
casting the decisive vote on $456million in damages.
mArch 6, 2006
The U.S. Supreme Court declinesto review the Illinois SupremeCourts decision.
December 2010
The plaintis hire an investigator tolook into State Farms involvementin Karmeiers campaign.
september 9, 2011
Spurred by the investigations ndings,the Avery plaintis petition the IllinoisSupreme Court to vacate its 2005decision.
NOvember 17, 2011
The Illinois Supreme Court deniesthe plaintis petition.
mAy 29, 2012
Plaintis le a ederal RICO lawsuit inthe U.S. District Court or the SouthernDistrict o Illinois.
mArch 28, 2013The U.S. District Court deniesState Farms request to dismissthe RICO lawsuit.
August 7, 2013
Media reports indicate that theplaintis intend to depose Karmeier.
Source: Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut.
Auto. Ins. Co.,No. 12-0660-DRH (S.D. Ill., May 29, 2012).
2006
2007
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2008
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
10/20
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
11/20
11 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
Lawyers or Sae Farm have asked he ederal judge o deny class cericaion or he
RICO lawsui, bu he plainis wan o move ahead wih discovery, in which Sae
Farm will have o provide inormaion and documenaion relaed o he alleged
RICO conspiracy.103
Recusal reforms to keep litigants from influencing judges
I he allegaions in he Hale case are rue, hen Sae Farm evaded several ani-corrupion
laws or judicial races. Tis is a perec example o he conics o ineres ha cause he
public o doub he inegriy o eleced judges. Sae legislaors should consider reorming
heir judicial-recusal rules or implemening a public nancing program or judicial races.
Illinois currenly gives judges who are no he subjec o a recusal peiion he
auhoriy o decide wheher a judge should be barred rom paricipaing in a case.104
Unorunaely, Jusice Karmeiers colleagues decided no o excuse him rom he nal
decision inAvery, insead deermining ha his recusal was an issue ha only he shoulddecide.105 Te Illinois rule on recusal insrucs judges o avoid he appearance o impro-
priey or imparialiy, bu i does no require jusices o consider campaign conribu-
ions when deciding wheher o recuse hemselves.106
I may seem obvious o mos observers ha he conribuion o hundreds o housands
o dollarsor even millions o dollarsin campaign cash rom a single liigan cre-
aes an appearance o impropriey and raises concerns abou a judges imparialiy, bu
Jusice Karmeier ailed o recuse himsel rom he Sae Farm case.107 I he plainis
allegaions are rue, hen Jusice Karmeier knew ha Sae Farm was paying he salary o
he person running his campaign, and he RICO rial could reveal he exen o which heknew ha Sae Farm ailed o inorm he res o he cour o his ac.
Te adopion o mandaory recusal rules or beter recusal procedures could help
resore he publics aih in he Illinois judiciary. wo commitees a he American
Bar Associaion, or ABA, have proposed changing he ABA Model Code o Judicial
Conduc o include mandaory recusal rules. Leaving i o saes o ll in he blanks, he
proposed rule species ha recusal is required when a pary, a parys lawyer, or he
law rm o a parys lawyer has wihin he previous __ year[s] made aggregae conri-
buions o he judges campaign in an amoun greaer han ___.108 Te rule denes
conribuions as donaions rom organizaions ha suppored or opposed he judges
elecion, and all independen expendiures made direcly by he pary, he parys law-
yer, or he lawyers law rm.109
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
12/20
12 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
Te proposed ABA-model rule applies o he ypes o independen expendiures ha
oen dominae judicial elecions oday. Bu would he proposed rule require recusal
or liigans, such as Sae Farm, ha unnel conribuions hrough hird paries raher
han giving money o groups or independen spending? Te rule denes conribuions,
in par, as money given o organizaions ha suppored or opposed he judges elec-
ion.110 Does supporing or opposing a judge include giving he judge a direc conribu-
ion? I so, should all o a liigans or a lawyers donaions o a direc campaign donorcoun oward recusal, or should only any porion conribued or he purpose o unding
a campaign conribuion coun? Tese are quesions or judges or legislaors o answer
when craing ehics rules. I seems, however, ha whenever a judge is aware ha a lii-
gan ran and subsanially unded his or her campaign, a mandaory recusal rule should
be inerpreed o preven such a conic o ineres.
Te proposed ABA rule provides legislaors and jusices a guideline o address ani-
quaed ehics rules ha were draed beore he age o mulimillion-dollar judicial cam-
paigns and unlimied independen spending. Provisions ha mandae judicial recusal or
large campaign donaions no only promoe he air adminisraion o jusice, bu heycan also help resore he publics avorable percepion o heir sae cours.111 Tus ar,
however, ew saes have adoped his ambiious sandard.
Some skepics claim ha mandaory recusal rules could allow liigans o game he
sysem by giving money o judges whom hey do no wan o hear heir cases.112 Bu
he proposed ABA-model rule addresses his concern by allowing liigans o waive he
mandaory recusal requiremen.113
Criics o mandaory recusal rules also argue ha such rules can ge in he way o judges
doing heir jobs. Te rule o necessiy says ha a judge should hear a case i no oherjudge is available, even i he judge has a perceived conic o ineres.114 Tis argumen
could have more orce in sae supreme cours, he cours o las resor or sae judicia-
ries, han in lower cours. Some saes, however, have deailed procedures ha allow he
chie jusice o appoin a lower cour judge o hear a case when a jusice recuses himsel
or hersel.115 Illinois could change he provision o is consiuion ha requires a our-
jusice quorum o overrule a lower cour. Bu such an amendmen would require a super-
majoriy voe in boh houses o he Illinois legislaure, as well as approval by voers.
Te Brennan Cener or Jusice, which advocaed or Jusice Karmeiers recusal inAvery
v. Sae Farm, oers he ollowing suggesions or reorming recusal rules:
Firs, saes should no rely on a challenged judge o make he nal decision on wheher
his or her imparialiy can reasonably be quesioned. I a judge denies a recusal reques,
here mus be promp, meaningul review o he denial. Second, saes should require
ransparen decision-making, including writen rulings, on recusal requess. Tird,
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
13/20
13 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
saes should adop rules recognizing ha judges imparialiy may reasonably be ques-
ioned, and disqualicaion made necessary, because o campaign spending by liigans
or heir atorneys. And nally, saes should require liigans (and counsel) o disclose
campaign spending relaed o any judge or judges hearing heir case.116
Sae legislaors should consider amending disqualicaion rules o ensure ha a judge
does no have he nal say in wheher he or she should be recused. In Illinois rial cours,liigans have one opporuniy o reques a dieren judge or any reason beore any
subsanial rulings in he case.117 Aer ha, he liigan can only reques anoher judge
or cause, bu he judge ha is he subjec o he reques is no permited o decide he
issue.118 Te rules or Illinois Supreme Cour jusices are less sric.
Jusice Karmeiers disqualicaion moion was pu beore he res o he high cour, bu
his colleagues graned him he nal decision on wheher or no recusal was appropriae. 119
Some saes require he enire sae supreme cour o rule on a recusal moion, insead o
allowing he cour o pun he quesion o he jusice wih he alleged conic o ineres.120
Alernaively, Illinois legislaors could consider adoping judicial rules ha subjec
recusal reviews or decisions o a special panel o reired judges or jusices.121 Te main
goal o such panels would be o preven he challenged jusice rom inuencing he nal
decision regarding he adequacy o he recusal moion. Te ABA noes ha such pro-
posals are oen rejeced because hey impose signican coss,122 bu hese coss could
be subsanially ouweighed by he bene o increased public condence in he judi-
ciary. Ineresingly, Jusice Karmeier saed in a 2011 case involving a colleagues recusal
moion ha no only should judges no be he sole and exclusive arbiers o wheher
hey should coninue o paricipae in a case, some have quesioned wheher hey
should ever be permited o si in judgmen o requess or heir own disqualicaion.123
Legislaors or jusices could consider procedural rules ha mandae he issuance o ormal
decisions responding o recusal moions and creae avenues o appeal or denied moions.
Te plainis inAvery lacked boh opions when hey requesed Jusice Karmeiers
recusal, bu had such saeguards been in place, hey may have prevened he egregious
oucome ha resuled. Having judges ariculae heir reasoning on recusal moions allows
aeced paries an opporuniy o have each allegaion addressed in a writen record. 124
Tis also allows a reviewing body o weigh he relevan acs and legal argumens concern-
ing he recusal issue.125 Adopion o sricer recusal rules could help repair he image o
our sae judiciaries and help diuse he widespread belie126 ha jusice can be bough.
Illinoiss curren recusal rules may have prevened he conic o ineres inAvery i Sae
Farms connecions o Jusice Karmeiers campaign had been disclosed. Te proposed
ABA-model rule on recusal includes a commen insrucing a judge o disclose on he
record inormaion ha he judge believes he paries or heir lawyers migh reasonably
consider relevan o a possible moion or disqualicaion, even i he judge believes
here is no basis or disqualicaion.127
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
14/20
14 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
Illinois ehics rules currenly require judges o le a deailed accoun o personal nan-
cial ineress ha could creae a conic o ineres, bu he rules do no require a simi-
larly deailed accoun o campaign cash or independen spending ha a judge knows
is conneced o a liigan.128 I a rule had required Jusice Karmeier o disclose wha he
knew abou Sae Farms eors o ge him eleced, he res o he high cour may have
ruled dierenly on he recusal moion.
Public financing can minimize the
influence of large campaign contributions
In addiion o shoring up recusal rules, sronger campaign-nance laws could also help
keep liigans rom using campaign cash o inuence cours. Some saes concerned
abou he inegriy o judicial elecions have implemened public nancing programs,
which keep candidaes beholden o he public, no campaign conribuors. Aer Massey
Coals brazen atemp in 2004 o deermine which jusice would hear is appeal, Wes
Virginia creaed a pilo public nancing program, and in 2013 he Wes Virginia legisla-ure made he program permanen.129
Illinois legislaors considered a bill o creae a public nancing sysem or judicial can-
didaes in 2007, bu i ailed o pass he sae House o Represenaives.130 Te legisla-
ion would have given a public subsidy in exchange or agreeing o spending caps and
heighened disclosure requiremens.131 Candidaes would have had o qualiy by raising
$30,000 in seed money hrough donaions o $25 or less.132
A ask orce recenly explored he various opions or public nancing programs or
saewide candidaes, including judges.133
Te ask orce ound ha public nancing orjudicial candidaes could generae greaer public condence in he cours and could be
easible, aordable, and poenially popular among voers.134
Some public nancing programs were recenly called ino quesion by a U.S. Supreme
Cour decision. In 2011 he U.S. Supreme Cour ruled unconsiuional an Arizona
public nancing sysem ha included maching unds, which were awarded o publicly
nanced candidaes whenever heir opponens spen more money han he amoun avail-
able hrough he public subsidy.135 Te Cour ruled ha his radiional orm o maching
unds was an unconsiuional penaly on he privaely nanced candidaes speech. 136
Te sae o New York, however, is currenly looking o pioneer a dieren ype o
maching-unds sysem ha does no raise he same consiuional concerns. Te sae
legislaure is considering a small-donor maching sysem in which each dollar o dona-
ions under $175 would be mached wih $6 in public unds.137 New York Ciy has had
such a sysem in place or municipal elecions, and Te Campaign Finance Insiue
ound ha i has resuled in more diverse represenaives whose campaigns are unded
by middle- and working-class consiuens.138
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
15/20
15 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
Such a sysem could have he same impac on Illinoiss high cour elecions. Te average
campaign conribuion or he winning candidae in 2012, Democraic Jusice Mary Jane
Teis, was more han $1,000,139 bu wih small-donor maching, smaller donaions would
play a more imporan role. Te ask orce noed ha public nancing could encourage
more candidaes or judicial ofce and greaer diversiy among he candidaes.140
Conclusion
Illinois has already aken one sep oward curbing he inuence o campaign cash. When
Jusice Karmeier was eleced in 2004, Illinois had no limis on campaign conribu-
ions, which allowed Sae Farm o give money o organizaions ha hen donaed huge
sums o money o Jusice Karmeiers campaign. Parly in response o he 2004 Illinois
Supreme Cour race, Illinois insiued campaign-conribuion limis in 2009141 aimed a
prevening eniies such as Sae Farm rom unneling millions o dollars o hird paries
who could hen conribue ha money o judicial candidaes.
In is 20132014 erm, he U.S. Supreme Cour will hear a lawsui challenging he
consiuionaliy o limis on he overall amoun o money ha a person or corporaion
can give o candidaes in ederal elecions.142 For each elecion cycle, ederal law limis
overall donaions o ederal candidaes and poliical acion commitees.143 Alhough his
lawsui only challenges overall limis and no he limis on conribuions o individual
candidaes, Proessor Richard L. Hasen o he Universiy o Caliornia, Irvine old Te
New York imes ha, Tis could be he sar o chipping away a conribuion limis.144
Alhough i migh seem obvious ha Congress and sae legislaures should have he
power o limi campaign conribuions o preven corrupion, his is he same U.S.
Supreme Cour ha ruled in Ciizens Unied ha unlimied independen spending inpoliical campaigns does no give rise o corrupion or he appearance o corrupion.145
Te acs surrounding heAvery v. Sae Farm case prove ha unlimied direc conribu-
ions o candidaes have he poenial o creae conics o ineres ha cause he public
o doub he inegriy o judges. Sae Farm is accused o giving millions o dollars o
hird paries who hen gave ha money o a judge hearing a case involving a $1 billion
verdic agains he insurance company.
More imporanly, Sae Farm is accused o concealing hese aciviies rom he public
and he res o he Illinois Supreme Cour, even hough Jusice Karmeier was allegedly
aware o he liigans unding and operaion o his campaign. Te curren RICO lawsui
can unearh he ruh abou Sae Farms acions.
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
16/20
16 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
Te RICO lawsui comes a an inconvenien ime or Jusice Karmeier, whose curren
erm ends nex year. Once Illinois jusices are eleced in a parisan, conesed elecion,
hey serve 10-year erms beore sanding in reenion elecions, in which voers decide
wheher o keep hem on he bench or no.146 While voers are considering ha decision
in regard o Jusice Karmeier in 2014, hey could learn ha Sae Farm secrely spen
millions o dollars o elec Jusice Karmeier in 2004 in an eor o avoid a $1 billion ver-
dic agains isel. Wihou a billion-dollar verdic pending beore he Illinois SupremeCour, can Jusice Karmeier coun on Sae Farm o oer similarly generous suppor or
his 2014 reenion campaign?
Illinois should ac now, beore here is anoher judicial-campaign scandal, o imple-
men sronger rules governing judicial ehics and campaign nance. Such acion could
help ensure ha he inegriy o he cour is no quesioned. A poll o Illinois voers
aken jus aer he 2004 elecion ound ha 89 percen believed ha campaign conri-
buions inuence he decisions o Illinois judges o some degree.147 Lawmakers and he
high cour jusices should enac new rules o minimize he inuence o campaign cash
on he judiciary and assure liigans ha he opposing paries are no secrely inuenc-ing he judges hearing he case.
About the authors
Billy Corriher is he Associae Direcor o Research or Legal Progress a he Cener or
American Progress, where his work ocuses on sae cours and he inuence o polii-
cal conribuions on judges. Corriher joined CAP aer serving as a weekly blogger or
Noice and Commen, he Harvard Law & Policy Review blog, where he ocused on
ederal appellae cour cases and oher legal and policy maters. He has also writenop-eds and blog poss or he American Consiuion Sociey and he Bill o Righs
Deense Commitee. Corriher received his bachelors degree in poliical science rom
he Universiy o Norh Carolina a Chapel Hill. He received a law degree and a masers
degree in business rom Georgia Sae Universiy, graduaing wih honors in 2009. He is
a member o he Sae Bar o Georgia.
Brent DeBeaumont is a summer inern or Legal Progress a he Cener or American
Progress. Prior o inerning wih CAP, DeBeaumon served as a policy advocae inern
wih he American Civil Liberies Union o Washingon sae and as a legal clerk wih
a Seatle law rm. He grew up on a arm in easern Washingon and received his bach-
elors degree in hisory and poliical science rom Washingon Sae Universiy in 2010.
DeBeaumon is currenly a hird-year law suden a Seatle Universiy School o Law
and plans o ake he Washingon Sae Bar Exam nex summer. He has dedicaed his
career o providing access o jusice or all individuals and advancing he legal proec-
ions or our naions mos vulnerable ciizens.
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
17/20
17 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
Endnotes
1 Steve Korris, State Farm Lawyers Seeking to Void Avery
Want Karmeier Deposition,Madison-St. Clair Record,August 7, 2013, available at http://madisonrecord.com/issues/332-class-action/257988-state-arm-lawyers-seeking-to-void-avery-want-karmeier-deposition.
2 Order denying motion to dismiss, Hale v. State Farm Mut.
Auto. Ins. Co., No. 12-0660-DRH (S.D. Ill. Mar. 28, 2013).
3 18 U.S.C. 1961-1968.
4 Order denying motion to dismiss, Hale v. State Farm Mut.Auto. Ins. Co.
5 A 2010 poll rom Justice at Stake ound that 71 percent orespondents said they believe campaign expenditureshave a signicant impact on co urtroom decisions. Justice atStake, Solid Bipartisan Majorities Believe Judges Inuencedby Campaign Contributions, Press release, September 8,2010, available at http://www.justiceatstake.org/newsroom/press_releases.cm/9810_solid_bipartisan_majorities_be-lieve_judges_inuenced_by_campaign_contributions?show=news&newsID=8722.
6 Deborah Lohse, Policyholders at State Farm Win LawsuitOver Auto Parts, The Wall Street Journal, October 5, 1999,available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/r/press/state-
arm2.htm.
7 Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 746 N.E.2d 1242, 1246(Ill. Ct. App. 2001).
8 Ibid.
9 Ibid. at 1242.
10 A Virginia newspaper ran an Associated Press account othe trial. Associated Press, Verdict against State Farm up to$1 billio n, The Free Lance-Star, October 9, 1999, available athttp://news.google.com/newspapers?id=pi4zAAAAIBAJ&sjid=gggGAAAAIBAJ&pg=2312,2115995&dq=state-arm+billion&hl=en.
11 Avery, 746 N.E.2d at 1242.
12 Brennan Center or Justice, Avery v. State Farm AutomobileIns. Co., February 3, 2006, available at http://www.bren-nancenter.org/legal-work/avery-v-state-arm-automobile-
ins-co.
13 Ibid.
14 Ill. Const. art. IV, 2.
15 Adam Skaggs, Judging or Dollars (New York: BrennanCenter or Justice, 2010), available at http://www.brennan-center.org/blog/judging-dollars.
16 Ibid.
17 National Institute on Money in State Politics, CandidateSummary: Karmeier, Lloyd A, available at http://www.ollowthemoney.org/database/StateGlance/candidate.phtml?c=63204 (last accessed July 2013); National Instituteon Money in State Politics, Candidate Summary: Maag,Gordon E, available at http://www.ollowthemoney.org/database/StateGlance/candidate.phtml?c=63221 (last ac-cessed July 2013).
18 Tim Jones, Special-interest lobbies pour cast into judicialraces, Chicago Tribune, July 28, 2008, available at http://arti-cles.chicagotribune.com/2008-07-28/news/0807280154_1_campaign-cash-wisconsin-supreme-court-judges.
19 American Tort Reorm Association, About ATRA, availableat http://www.atra.org/about (last accessed July 2013).
20 American Tort Reorm Association, New Report Cites SixJudicial Hellholes, Press release, December 13, 2005, avail-able at http://www.atra.org/newsroom/new-report-cites-six-judicial-hellholes%C2%AE.
21 Peter Lattman, Madison County, Illinois: A Judicial HellholeNo More, The Wall Street Journal, December 21, 2007,available at http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/12/21/madison-county-illinois-a-judicial-hellhole-no-more/.
22 American Tort Reorm Foundation, Madison and St. ClairCounties, Illinois, available at http://w ww.judicialhellholes.
org/2011-12/madison-and-st-clair-counties/ (last accessedJuly 2013).
23 Bethany Krajelis, Fith District arms Madison Countyruling in breach o contract c ase, The Madison-St. ClairRecord, February 4, 2013, available at http://madisonrecord.com/issues/892-breach-o-contract/252301-th-district-arms-madison-county-ruling-in-breach-o-contract-case.
24 Illinois Const., art. VI, 5.
25 David Lyle, Chamber-Owned News Service Reports On Su-preme Court Case Without Disclosing Parents Role, MediaMatters or America blog, June 19, 2012, available at http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/06/19/chamber-owned-news-service-reports-on-supreme-c/184135.
26 Ann Kne, Karmeier win bellows resoundi ng message,The Madison-St. Clair Record, November 5, 2004, availableat http://madisonrecord.com/issues/306-campaigns-
elections/130374-karmeier-win-bellows-resounding-message.
27 Ibid.
28 Lattman, Madison County, Illinois: A Judicial Hellhole NoMore.
29 American Tort Reorm Foundation, 2012/13 Judicial Hell-holes Report (2012), available at http://www.judicialhell-holes.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/ATRA_JH12_04.pd.
30 Matt Adrian, In the wake o a nasty campaign, Karmeiertakes his spot on the Illinois Supreme Court, Herald Review,December 7, 2004, available at http://herald-review.com/news/state-and-regional/in-the-wake-o-a-nasty-campaign-karmeier-takes-his/article_6d72ae43-421d-5975-b6e-7cbd34892a10.html.
31 Plaintifs Motion or Non-Participation,Avery v. State FarmMut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 91494 (Ill. Jan. 26, 2005).
32 Brennan Center or Justice, Avery v. State Farm AutomobileIns. Co.
33 Ibid.
34 Petition to Recall Mandate and Vacate August 18, 2005Judgment,Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 91494(Ill. Sept. 8, 2011), available at http://barrettlawgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Petition.pd.
35 Ill. Code o Judicial Conduct, Canon 3(C).
36 Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 835 N.E.2d 801 (Ill.2005).
37 Ill. Const. art. VI, 3.
38 Avery, 835 N.E.2d 801.
39 Brennan Center or Justice, Avery v. State Farm AutomobileIns. Co.
40 Common Cause, Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board Request orInvestigation o Justice Lloyd A. Karmeier, p. 13, available athttp://www.commoncause.org/at/c/%7BFB3C17E2-CDD1-4DF6-92BE-BD4429893665%7D/JIB_COMPLAINT_AND_HAZARD_AFFIDAVIT.PDF.
41 Ibid.
42 Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 547 U.S. 1003 (2006)(denying petition or certiorari).
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
18/20
18 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
43 Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868 (2009).
44 Ibid., p. 873.
45 Ibid., pp. 886887.
46 Ibid., p. 886.
47 McClatchy-Tribune Inormation Services, Suit: State Farmcovered up donations to justice who voted in its avor,Chicago Tribune, September 15, 2011, available at http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-09-15/news/chi-suit-state-arm-covered-up-donations-to-justice-who-voted-in-
its-avor-20110915_1_state-arm-dick-luedke-recuse.
48 Caperton, 556 U.S. at 884.
49 Ibid., p. 873.
50 Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
51 McClatchy-Tribune Inormation Services, Suit: State Farmcovered up donations to justice who voted in its avor.
52 Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
53 Ibid.
54 National Institute on Money in State Politics, NoteworthyContributor Summary: U.S. Chamber o Commerce, 2004,available at http://www.ollowthemoney.org/database/topcontributor.phtml?u=2714&y=2004&incy=0&ince=0&incs=0&inc=0 (last accessed August 2013).
55 Ibid.
56 Ibid.; National Institute on Money in State Politics, Candi-date Summary: K armeier, Lloyd A.
57 Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.,p. 10.
58 Ibid.
59 Ibid., p. 23. The $1,941,453 spent to elect Justice Karmeieramounts to 94.7 percent o the $2.05 million donation.
60 Petition to Recall Mandate and Vacate August 18, 2005Judgment,Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., p. 24.
61 Order denying motion to dismiss, Hale v. State Farm Mut.Auto. Ins. Co., p. 2.
62 The Center or Media and Democracy, Illinois Civil Justice
League, available at http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Illinois_Civil_Justice_League (last accessed August2013); Illinois Civi l Justice League, About, available athttp://www.icjl.org/about/ (last accessed July 2013).
63 Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.,p. 7.
64 Ibid., p. 19.
65 An Illinois campaign-nance disclosure orm describes inkind contributions as Contributions other than cash valuedin excess o $150. Illinois State Board o Elec tions, Instruc-tions or Completion o This D-2 Form (2011), available athttp://www.elections.il.gov/Downloads/CampaignDisclo-sure/PDF/2011_D-2.pd (last accessed July 2013).
66 Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.,p. 24.
67 Ibid., p. 19.
68 Ibid., pp. 24, 28.
69 Ibid., p. 20.
70 Ibid.
71 Ibid.
72 As an entity organized under Section 501(c)(6) o theInternal Revenue Code, the Illinois Civil Justice League mustle reports detailing its expenditures. Department o theTreasury, Internal Revenue Service, Tax-Exempt Status orYour Organization (2011), available at http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pd/p557.pd.
73 Internal Revenue Service, Form 990: Return o OrganizationExempt rom Income Tax, Illinois Civil Justice League, 2004(2005), available at http://990s.oundationcenter.org/990_pd_archive/363/363857949/363857949_200412_990O.pd.
74 Foundation Center, 990 Finder: Illinois Civil Justice
League, available at http://990nder.oundationcenter.org/990results.aspx?990_type=&n=Illinois+Civil+Justice+League&st=&zp=&ei=&y=&action=Find (last accessed July2013).
75 Ibid.
76 Illinois State Board o Elections, A Guide To CampaignDisclosure, available at http://www.elections.il.gov/down-loads/campaigndisclosure/pd/campdiscguide.pd.
77 Illinois State Board o Elections, Citizens or Karmeier: D-2Semiannual Report, 7/1/2004 to 12/31/2004, February 2,2005, available at http://www.elections.il.gov/CampaignDis-closure/D2Semi.aspx?id=292046.
78 Ibid.
79 Billy Corriher, Meet Four Conservative State SupremeCourt Justices Thankul For Citizens United, ThinkProgress,
November 30, 2012, available at http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/11/30/1240641/meet-our-conservative-state-supreme-court-justices-thankul-or-citizens-united.
80 When an individual or political committee pays or acommunication that is coordinated with a candidate orparty committee, the communication is considered anin-kind contribution to that candidate or party commit-tee and is subject to the limits, prohibitions and reportingrequirements o the ederal campaign nance law. FederalElection Commission, Coordinated Communications andIndependent Expenditures (2007), available at http://www.ec.gov/pages/brochures/indexp.shtml. Illlinois law denesindependent expenditures as spending that is not made inconnection, consultation, or concert with or at the requestor suggestion o the publ ic ocial or c andidate. 10 Il.C.S.5/9-1.15.
81 Illinois State Board o Elections, Citizens or Karmeier.
82 Illinois State Board o Elections, JUSTPAC, the Political
Action Committee o the IL Civil: D-2 Semiannual Report,7/1/2004 to 12/31/2004, January 28, 2005, available athttp://www.elections.il.gov/CampaignDisclosure/D2Semi.aspx?id=289924.
83 Ibid.
84 Petition to Recall Mandate and Vacate August 18, 2005Judgment,Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., p. 22.
85 McClatchy-Tribune Inormation Services, Suit: State Farmcovered up donations to justice who voted in its avor.
86 Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.,p. 1.
87 Rebecca Cohen, Blagojevich guilty on 17 o 20 corruptioncharges, The Daily Northwestern, June 26, 2011, available athttp://dailynorthwestern.com/2011/06/26/city/blagojevich-guilty-on-17-o-20-corruption-charges/.
88 18 USC 1962 (a).
89 18 USC 1964 (c).
90 Grantham & Mann, Inc., v. American Safety Prods., Inc., 831F.2d 596, 606 (6th Cir. 1987).
91 Town of Kearny v. Hudson Meadows Urban Renewal Corp., 829F.2d 1263, 1269 (3d Cir. 1987).
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
19/20
-
7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict
20/20
131 Ibid.
132 Ibid.
133 Illinois Campaign Finance Reorm Task Force, PublicCampaign Financing and Illinois Elections (2011), availableat http://www.elections.il.gov/Downloads/CampaignDisclo-sure/PDF/Campaign%20Finance%20Reorm%20Task%20Force%20Public%20Finance%20Report.pd.
134 Ibid., pp. 6566.
135 Arizona Free Enterprise Clubs Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett,
131 S.Ct. 2806 (2011).
136 Ibid., pp. 28142815.
137 Andy Kroll, New Yorks Gov. Cuomo Unveils His Own Billto Battle Big-Money PoliticsBut Does It Matter?, Mother
Jones, June 12, 2013, available at http://w ww.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/06/andrew-cuomo-bill-public-nancing-corruption-new-york.
138 Michael Malbin, Peter Brusoe, and Brendan Glavin, SmallDonors, Big Democracy: New York Citys Matching Funds asa Model or the Nation and States,Election Law Journal11(1) (2012): 320.
139 National I nstitute on Money in State Politics, CandidateSummary: Theis, Mary Jane, available at http://www.ollowthemoney.org/database/StateGlance/candidate.phtml?c=136591 (last accessed July 2013).
140 I llinois Campaign Finance Reorm Task Force, Public Cam-paign Financing and Il linois Elections, p. 66.
141 2009 Ill. Laws 832.
142 U.S. Sup reme Court, No. 12-536 McCutcheon v. FederalElection Commission, Questions Presented, available athttp://www.supremecourt.gov/qp/12-00536qp.pd.
143 2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1).
144 Adam Liptak, Justices Take Case on Overall Limit toPolitical Donations, The New York Times, February 19, 2013,
available at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/us/politics/supreme-court-to-hear-campaign-nance-case.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.
145 Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310, 357 (2010).
146 American Judi cature Society, Methods o Judicial Selection,available at http://www.judicialselection.us/judicial_selec-tion/methods/selection_o_judges.cm?state (last accessedJuly 2013).
147 University o Illinois at Springeld, Illinois Statewide SurveyOn Judicial Selection Issues.