Judge Rudolph Randa Erred by Not Disclosing Potential Conflict

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
August 15, 2013

http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/judge-rudolph-randa-erred-by-not-disclosing-potential-conflict-b9975960z1-219645241.html

The Holy Cross Cemetery Mausoleum (left) at the Holy Cross Cemetery in Milwaukee is where the parents of U.S. District Judge Rudolph T. Randa are buried.

Should it matter that close family members of a federal judge hearing the Archdiocese of Milwaukee bankruptcy case are buried in archdiocesan cemeteries?

How about when this same judge ruled that the $50 million that the archdiocese holds in trust for its cemeteries was off limits in the bankruptcy case?

It might matter. And that's why U.S. District Judge Rudolph T. Randa should have disclosed his connection to the archdiocese. It's the judge's responsibility to disclose potential conflicts, and on the face of it, this looks like a potential conflict.

In motions filed earlier this week, creditors stated:

"During the week of July 29, 2013, the committee discovered that at least nine of Judge Randa's relatives (including his mother, his father and his wife's parents) are buried in cemeteries owned and operated by the debtor, the very cemeteries that are to be maintained with the funds moved from the debtor's accounts to the Cemetery Trust before filing for bankruptcy. This fact alone creates the appearance of partiality in favor of the Cemetery Trust in this action and establishes strong grounds for recusal."

By purchasing burial rights, Randa entered into a contract with the archdiocese, which they claim is additional evidence of a conflict.

The creditors are asking Randa to set aside the ruling placing the cemetery trust off limits and to recuse himself from the case. Those requests are not likely to be granted, but it's possible that the issue will arise again on appeal.

Randa ruled in July that forcing the archdiocese to tap the $50 million that it holds in trust for the perpetual care of cemeteries would burden its free expression of religion under the First Amendment and a 1993 federal law aimed at protecting religious liberty. That was a big win for the archdiocese; the cemetery trust fund is one of the last major assets available for a settlement with sex abuse victims who filed claims in the bankruptcy.

This does not appear to be a major conflict and might not be enough to either disqualify Randa or cause him to set aside his decision.

But the judge should have disclosed that his family members are essentially "customers" of the archdiocese. And if he was determined to stay on the case, he should have explained why this connection would not affect his ability to be impartial.

By choosing not to be upfront, the judge has needlessly called his decisions into question.

Should U.S. District Judge Rudolph T. Randa have disclosed his connections to the archdiocese to the archdiocese's creditors? To have your opinion considered for a letter to the editor, email jsedit@jrn.com. Please see letters guidelines.