Some one could work full time responding to the inanity of the stuff they put out at One Wisconsin Now. The latest is an attack on Annette Ziegler for representing W.R. Grace in asbestos cases. Did you know she did it in 92.37% of the cases in which she appeared on the pleadings in state and federal courts? And, although we know nothing about the merits of those particular cases, the company has been accused of doing bad things in other contexts.
First, the percentage is a bit misleading. Asbestos cases generally involve a large number of plaintiffs who think that they may have been exposed to asbestos and that it may be causing current health problems suing an even larger number of defendants who may or may not have made asbestos to which the plaintiff was exposed. It is high volume work. If you looked at my current caseload, "most" of the cases are asbestos suits, even though my client never made anything with asbestos in it and I spend virtually no time on those matters. We got on some list that circulates among plaintiffs' lawyers and we keep getting sued and dismissed. The point is that, if you do any asbestos work, it is going to involve an awful lot of cases.
But I suppose that W.R. Grace was a more active defendant. A lot of companies used asbestos. Let's assume that Annette Ziegler spent almost all of her time on those cases. (This could explain why she became a judge; they are boring.) Apparently One Wisconsin thinks that this means these companies are not entitled to a lawyer. That would be a dangerous thing to assume because there has been substantial litigation abuse by lawyers representing plaintiffs in asbestos cases. It took defense lawyers to find that.
Even worse, One Wisconsin would presumably argue that no criminal defense lawyer should ever be appointed to the bench. They represent a lot of really bad people. It's kind of hard to avoid; criminal defendants being what they are.
Or maybe One Wisconsin thinks that no one is worse than a corporation. In that case, it may want to a close look at the client base of Godfrey & Kahn, Linda Clifford's law firm. It consists largely of corporations and rich people. (They tend to be the only ones who can afford firms like that.) The firm describes it's practice as "predominantly business-oriented." I happen to think that's just fine, but perhaps One Wisconsin should alert the people.
The irony, of course, is that Annette Ziegler, as a young associate, had little to do or say about who her firm's clients were and which of them she worked for. Representing asbestos defendants is a good and necessary thing as is representing people who are accused of crime. Dumping on lawyers for the clients they keep is neither.
(NB: And, yeah, I think that the Ziegler commercial taking a shot at Linda Clifford for being an "immigration lawyer" is just as unenlightening.)