Group seeks to press Justices Ziegler, Gableman to leave case
Wisconsin State Journal, January 23, 2009
By Dee Hall
A left-leaning advocacy group Thursday delivered petitions containing more than 1,200 signatures of people asking Wisconsin Supreme Court justices Annette Ziegler and Mike Gableman to step down from a case favored by Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce.
"The longer Justices Gableman and Ziegler refuse to step away from this case, the more they appear to be bought and paid for by WMC."
- Scot Ross, One Wisconsin Now executive director.
One Wisconsin Now noted that the pro-business group invested $4 million in the last two elections to help elect Ziegler and Gableman to 10-year terms on the court.
The group is asking the two to recuse themselves from a case that could set a precedent for how much money and assets owners can legally take for themselves when a company goes belly up.
Although WMC isn't a party in the case, it has weighed in with a friend of the court brief on the side of the former owners of Communications Products Corp. of Lancaster, Daniel Virnich and Jack Moores.
Virnich and Moores are appealing an order that they repay the company $6.5 million. The two owned the stereo component factory in Lancaster from 1986 to 2003, when the company went into receivership for defaulting on a $100,000 loan.
Now called Loudspeaker Components, the factory continues to operate under different owners.
In 2006, a Grant County Circuit Court jury agreed with claims by the bank that Virnich and Moores had milked so much money from CPC through shell corporations and exorbitant equipment lease contracts that they should pay millions back to the company.
"The longer Justices Gableman and Ziegler refuse to step away from this case, the more they appear to be bought and paid for by WMC," said Scot Ross, One Wisconsin Now executive director.
Court spokesman Tom Sheehan said it's up to each justice to determine whether to recuse.
Only Justice Patience Roggensack has opted to step aside in this case, he said, adding that "it would be very rare for a justice to indicate why they did or did not participate."
The court heard oral arguments in the case Jan. 7. A decision is expected this summer.
