Clifford Taylor

From Judgepedia

(Redirected from Clifford W. Taylor)
Jump to: navigation, search
Chief Justice Clifford Taylor
Chief Justice Clifford Taylor
Michigan Supreme Court


Sitting Justices
Clifford Taylor
Michael Cavanagh
Elizabeth Weaver
Marilyn Jean Kelly
Maura Corrigan
Robert Young
Stephen Markman
2008 challengers
Clifford Taylor
?
Former justices
Michigan on Judgepedia


Clifford W. Taylor is the current Chief Justice on the Michigan Supreme Court. He is up for re-election in 2008. A Flint native, Justice Taylor resides in Laingsburg with his wife, Lucille. Justice Taylor received his undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan and his law degree from George Washington University. After three years in the U.S. Navy as a line officer, he returned to Michigan and served as an assistant prosecuting attorney in Ingham County.[1]


Contents

Legal Experience

In 1972, he joined the Lansing law firm of Denfield, Timmer and Seelye, which later became Denfield, Timmer & Taylor when he became a partner in the firm. He remained in private practice for 20 years, receiving the highest ratings for competence and character by lawyer rating organizations. In 1992, Governor Engler appointed him to the Michigan Court of Appeals where he served until his appointment to the Michigan Supreme Court in August 1997, to fill the seat vacated by retiring Justice Dorothy Comstock Riley. In 1998, Justice Taylor ran and was elected to fill the balance of Justice Riley’s term. Justice Taylor was re-elected to a full eight-year term in 2000. In January 2005, he was elected by his colleagues to serve as Chief Justice of the Court.[2]

Awards and Associations

Justice Taylor’s professional activities include service on the Board of Directors of the National Conference of Chief Justices, and on the Board of the George Mason University Law and Economics Center which provides judicial education across the country. He served in the past on the Michigan Legislature’s Commission on the Courts in the 21st Century, and on the Michigan State Board of Law Examiners. He is the co-author of a three-volume work entitled Torts which covers personal injury law in Michigan. His community activities include having served on the Board of Directors of Chief Okemos Council of the Boy Scouts of America, and the Board of Directors for the Michigan Dyslexia Institute.[3]

Political Affiliation and Judicial Philosophy

Republican.
"Judges have an important but narrow role: to apply the law as written by the Legislature. In other words, a judge has no authority to impose his personal views or pursue his own agenda."[4]

News & Articles on Campaign

Opposition Unknown (June 2008)

Despite fierce Democratic Party contempt for Chief Justice Taylor, Democrats have spent the election year, through June 2008, evading inquiries concerning their Supreme Court candidate. Prognosticators suspect that attorney Marietta Robinson will again be their choice to unseat Taylor. Robinson, highly regarded in Democratic and Detroit circles, ran against Taylor in 2000; in that year, Democrats spent millions in an attempt to unseat three sitting Republican justices.[5]

Candidate enters the race

Judge Deborah Thomas has launched her campaign for the Michigan Supreme Court. She has run for the Court before in 2004, so this will be her second time, assuming she earns the nomination of the Democrat Party.[6] She is currently serving on the Wayne County Circuit Court, where she has been since 1994.

In the News: Articles

Democrats maneuver to gain majority on Supreme Court (7/10/08)

Judges who would see a pay cut and in some cases a pink slip under a sweeping amendment to the state constitution likely will decide if the measure gets on the November ballot. It's an ethical quandary because court rules say judges can be disqualified from hearing a case if they have an "economic interest" in the result.

The salaries of Supreme Court justices, Court of Appeals judges and trial judges would fall 15 percent if the proposal passes. It also would cut the number of high court justices from seven to five and appeals judges from 28 to 21 while adding 10 trial judges. Backers of the amendment, including Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer, refuse to say who wrote it or paid to collect 487,000 signatures to try to put it on the ballot. But Brewer and other supporters say judges have a clear conflict of interest if they block the measure from reaching voters. However, many legal experts agree that in the end, judges will rule on legal challenges to the proposal if for no other reason than they have to. The measure appears to have been developed behind the scenes by Democratic strategists working in conjunction with Hastings-based activists. The activists unsuccessfully tried in 2006 to move to a unicameral, or one-chamber, legislature. Democrats, while worried black voters could lose representation if legislative seats are cut, like provisions to revamp the way districts are redrawn in 2011 by shifting responsibility from the Legislature to a nine-member commission. Each major political party would choose four members and the eight would select a nonpartisan chair. Under the current system, the Michigan Supreme Court ends up hearing redistricting lawsuits. The ballot measure would take away state courts' say in the pivotal process and reshape Republicans' 5-2 dominance of the high court by cutting two justices with the least seniority. Those justices are Republicans, which the GOP says is no coincidence.

Backers of the measure are sending warning signals -- particularly to Republican Chief Justice Clifford Taylor, the only justice up for re-election this year and a big target of Democrats. "The special interests will try to block the will of the people," said Joe Lukasiewicz, executive director of Reform Michigan Government Now, which organized the proposal. "And because every judge has a conflict of interest, the courts should stand aside and let the people decide in November on reforming Michigan's broken government." Republicans and business groups expected to sue over the constitutional amendment caution that it's a stealth power grab by Democrats and a primary motive is defeating Taylor by hammering his conflict of interest if the measure doesn't make the ballot.
"They're willing to throw out Michigan's constitution to do it. What an absurd abuse of power that would be," Michigan Republican Party spokesman Bill Nowling said.[7]

Evidence of Democratic maneuvers (8/8/08)

While researching union expenditures on a UAW website, a labor intern for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy discovered a PowerPoint presentation entitled, "Changing the Rules of politics in Michigan to help Democrats," that revealed the primary aim of obtaining redistricting advantages for Democrats. Slide eight stated that securing a majority in every branch of government was "an extremely expensive and very long shot proposition." But, according to the presentation, "Redistricting reform by itself will not be approved by the voters." In order to succeed, "redistricting reform must be a small part of a larger, popular state government reform proposal." In order to secure the redistricting advantage, Reform Michigan Government Now would need to alter Michigan's courts. The most inexpensive way--according to the presentation--to alter Michigan's courts, would be to "Reduce the number of Supreme Court Justices from seven to five; two GOP Justice eliminated" and "Reduce the Court of Appeals from 28 to 20 judges, most of them [former Republican Governor John] Engler appointees."

The proposed amendment has generated a court challenge. Opponents argue that the proposal is a constitutional revision that requires a constitutional convention that requires a constitutional convention. The measure is too complex to be described within 100 words as required by the Michigan Constitution, and there are technical deficiencies in the amendments, which includes a reference to a section of the Constitution that does not exist. To have a court rejection would not be considered a loss by RMGN. In a campaign commercial aired prior to the discovery of the PowerPoint presentation, the Michigan Democratic Party contended that any negative court ruling would demonstrate that Chief Justice Clifford Taylor, the sole justice up for reelection, was biased. Were Judge Taylor to lose his re-election bid, and the proposal were to pass, the RMGN would not only succeed in cutting the Supreme Court by two, but would be able to influence the open seat.[8]

Democrats not backing Thomas (7/30/08)

Democrats are seeking to change the makeup of the court. Four of the seven justices are firmly-committed strict constructionists: Chief Justice Clifford Taylor (two-time Republican U.S. House candidate and Federalist Society member), Maura Corrigan (boomed by the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol and other conservatives for the Supreme Court seat that eventually went to Samuel Alito), Stephen Markman (onetime assistant U.S. Attorney General under Reagan and professor at Hillsdale College), and Robert Young, Jr. (former general counsel to AAA Michigan and the lone African American on the court). Rounding out the court are two decidedly liberal, Democratic-named justices--Marilyn Jean Kelly and Michael Cavanagh, brother of the late Detroit Mayor (1961-69) Jerome Cavanagh--and Elizabeth Weaver, a Republican appointee who almost always rules with Kelly and Cavanagh. The statewide election to reconfirm justices for an eight-year term has taken on major significance and may become the biggest battle in Michigan this year.

With Judge Clifford Taylor the only justice on the ballot, Democrats, organized labor, trial lawyers and left-of-center sources of money have been expected to make his defeat a top priority. Reform Michigan Government Now, which was constructed by the United Auto Workers to restructure the Michigan government, has been gathering support and signatures to put the proposal to vote. Were the chief justice to lose, the balance of the court that conservatives in Michigan refer to as "The court Ronald Reagan really wanted" would tilt toward Democratic judicial activism. Democrats are having a difficult time finding a candidate they can support. Earlier in 2008, there were significant rumors of former Democratic Governor (1982-90) James Blanchard making a comeback by running for the court against Taylor. Blanchard finally decided against the race, as did fellow Democrat Marietta Robinson, who lost to Taylor in 2000 by a margin of 54% to 38% statewide. That leaves Wayne County Circuit Judge Deborah Thomas, who raised only $28,000 in a losing bid for another Supreme Court seat in 2004. Both Democratic Party elders and union leaders are reportedly skeptical of fielding Thomas as their standard-bearer against Taylor and, sources say, in a desperate search for another court candidate to nominate at their September convention.[9]

Supreme Court rules on government liability (5/30/08)

On April 25, 2008, the Michigan Supreme Court issued its opinion in Estate of Chantell Buckner v. City of Lansing. In it, the Court applied statutory interpretation to further narrow an exception to governmental immunity. Three girls (ages 7, 13, and 14) were walking to a fast food restaurant from their house nearby. The sidewalk on which they were traveling became impassible due to an accumulation of ice and snow that had been deposited there by a plow operated by the City of Lansing. It was the policy of the City not to plow that stretch of sidewalk. The three girls ventured along the curb. Two of the girls were struck by a car. Both were very severely injured, and the youngest of the three died from her injuries.

In Michigan, governmental agencies such as cities enjoy immunity from tort liability except for six specific scenarios. One such exception is known as the "Highway Exception" and is explained by MCL 691.1402(1), which states that a governmental agency "shall maintain the highway in reasonable repair so that it is reasonably safe and convenient for public travel." The section goes on to explain that an individual who is injured "by reason of failure of a governmental agency to keep a highway ... in reasonable repair and in a condition reasonably safe and fit for travel" may recover from the governmental agency for those injuries. Importantly, MCL 691.1401 expressly includes sidewalks in the definition of "highway." The City of Lansing brought a motion to dismiss the case based on the argument that no actual structural defect existed in the sidewalk’s construction. The trial court denied the motion, and the Court of Appeals affirmed that decision. Both courts noted that while a structural defect requirement might be appropriate for natural accumulations of snow, this particular case differed because the city had placed the snow on the sidewalk deliberately.

A 4-3 majority of the Michigan Supreme Court reversed the decisions of the lower courts. The three dissenting Justices, led by Justice Elizabeth Weaver, would have affirmed the lower courts and ruled on behalf of the plaintiff. Justice Weaver concludes that this expansion of governmental immunity "in a one-page order, instead of a full opinion, appears to be an attempt by the majority to conceal its latest example of judicial activism by unrestrained statutory interpretation."[10]

By contrast, in a concurring opinion Justice Stephen Markman noted that Justice Weaver's arguments in her dissent had "the potential to mislead future litigants and which seek to replace the policy determinations of the Legislature... with those of Justice Weaver."

Federalist Society Event

On March 7, 2008, Justice Taylor participated in a panel discussion sponsored by the Federalist Society at the University of Michigan Law School entitled "The Merits of Electing Our Judges."[11]

2008 Smear Campaign

The often blatant contempt Michigan Democrats have for Justice Taylor is evident in some select links.

On the Issues

See the talk page (discussion tab) for Clifford Taylor for the "On the Issues" case analysis template, which can be copied and pasted to this section.

See Also

External Links

References

  1. ↑ Michigan Supreme Court: Clifford Taylor
  2. ↑ Michigan Supreme Court: Clifford Taylor
  3. ↑ Michigan Supreme Court Biography
  4. ↑ Cliff Taylor: Why This Race is Important to You
  5. ↑ Democratic candidate for Michigan top court? Does anybody know?
  6. ↑ Deborah Thomas for Supreme Court
  7. ↑ Michigan judges face ethical issues over pay cut
  8. ↑ "A Partisan Pill for Michigan's Foundational Problems"
  9. ↑ Court Fight in Michigan
  10. ↑ Michigan Supreme Court rules in favor of government
  11. ↑ Student Symposium Schedule
Retrieved from "http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Clifford_Taylor"