Underneath Their Robes

UTR Cribs: An Invaluable New Resource

As reported by Curbed, a blog well-loved by connoisseurs of New York real estate porn, previously private prices for co-op apartment sales are now available online -- courtesy of the New York City government. Just click here, then enter the name of your favorite New York-based federal judge, to see how much they paid for their apartment (or how big their mortgage is). Thanks, Mayor Bloomberg!

Unfortunately, the data appears to be incomplete. Many transactions show up with $0 as the sale price.  But most entries do show the address of the property in question -- which can then be used, in conjunction with tools like Google and local real estate listings, to estimate the value of a particular jurist's home.

Article III Groupie has run a few searches for noted S.D.N.Y. and Second Circuit judges, which have turned up some interesting bits of information. But she won't name names, since she does not want to be accused of violating the security or privacy of any judge. You can just go do it yourself, with information that is now all a matter of public record, placed online by NYC.gov. Happy Searching!

Food for thought: Given the security threats that they routinely face, will federal judges -- or an organization that represents their interests -- take action to keep their home address information private?

UTR Cribs: The Late Chief's Teepee Sold

Yes, Article III Groupie realizes that this "news" was reported last week, concerning a real estate transaction that took place last year. But A3G has been extremely busy, preparing for her upcoming move to Washington, D.C. (where she will be joining the appellate practice of a large law firm; she's had it up to here with "trial work," a.k.a. document review). So if she's a little behind the times, please -- cut her some slack!

Last week, Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts, the Reliable Source gals, offered this juicy tidbit (scroll down to last item; via How Appealing):

SURREAL ESTATE

Seller: The family of William Rehnquist

Price: $747,000

Details : The 16th chief justice of the United States and his wife, Natalie, bought their North Arlington home near Marymount University in 1983 for $207,500, according to public records. He continued living there after her death eight years later, and it was in this three-bedroom, three-bath brick townhouse that Rehnquist himself succumbed to thyroid cancer Sept. 3. His daughter, Janet , a Washington attorney, handled its sale shortly before Thanksgiving.

A3G can add one more detail (which she feels it raises no security issue to mention, since Chief Justice Rehnquist has passed away and his family has sold the house): the Rehnquist residence was located at 2329 N. Glebe Road, Arlington, Virginia.

Speaking of Supreme residences, Washingtonian Magazine -- perhaps inspired by UTR Cribs? -- ran an article in its December 2005 issue entitled "At Home with the Supremes." In this fascinating piece, the magazine offered photographs, descriptions, assessed values, and market values for the houses of all nine current Supreme Court justices (plus the possible next justice, Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr.).

Unfortunately, this mouthwatering article isn't available online. And you don't want to borrow A3G's copy, since the pages are stuck together (no, not with hair gel; that's dried-up drool). But if you can locate your own hard copy of the December 2005 Washingtonian, turn to page 92, for an article that gives new meaning to the term "real estate porn." Scrumptious!

Judge Farris to Vietnamese Gardener: "Chop Chop!"

In UTR Cribs, Article III Groupie dishes the dirt about the lavish homes of federal judges. Today's report involves a very lavish home -- and lots of dirt, both figuratively and literally.

Judge Jerome Farris, a senior judge on the Ninth Circuit (and that court's first African-American member), owns a truly amazing residence. It's an 8,000 square foot, $2.4 million house, located in the lovely Mount Baker neighborhood of Seattle.* The judicial mansion boasts remarkable views of Lake Washington.

These jaw-dropping views were enhanced in 2003, when Judge Farris instructed his gardener to chop down more than 120 trees that were obstructing the home's water views. And what was the problem with this landscape redesign, you ask? Well, the trees that were chopped down -- including some indigenous cherry trees, à la George Washington -- weren't on Judge Farris's property. They were in a public park...

Sure enough, litigation ensued between Judge Farris and the city of Seattle. Judge Farris settled the case in 2003, by agreeing to pay $500,000 to restore Colman Park. But now, as reported in this Seattle Times column by Danny Westneat (which a UTR reader kindly brought to A3G's attention), Judge Farris is dragging his gavel in terms of paying up.

Almost three years have passed since the settlement, but Judge Farris has paid less than half of the tab. As a result, the city has placed a lien on Judge Farris's luxurious house (which he still owns, although he no longer lives in it).

The delay in payment may be due to Judge Farris's effort to get his homeowner's insurance to foot the bill -- which has spawned even more litigation. Westneat's article offers this report on the judge's case against his insurer, Farmers Insurance:

In his lawsuit, [Judge Farris] says none of it was his fault. He had the "mistaken but reasonable belief" that he had the city's OK to trim trees. He says he told his Vietnamese gardener only to trim the trees, and a language mixup led the gardener to turn part of the park into a "disaster zone."

Uh-oh... This does not sound good. The moral of the story? Next time, Judge Farris, get your law clerks to do your landscaping!**

* How could Judge Farris -- who worked in private practice for only ten years or so, before becoming a state court judge -- afford a multimillion-dollar manse? Rumor has it that His Honor made a killing through outside investments, including extensive real estate holdings.

** This is, quite obviously, a joke; making one's law clerks perform groundskeeping and gardening would be improper. Of course, even though judges shouldn't ask law clerks to perform personal errands for them, many judges do impose upon their clerks in this manner. See, e.g., this "Justice Is Blind" post (first and fourth items).

Belated Birthday Wishes, Justice Souter!

On behalf of the UTR readership, Article III Groupie would like to wish Justice David H. Souter a belated happy birthday! A little over a week ago, on September 17, 2005, DHS turned 66 years old.

A3G has a birthday gift for Justice Souter. She will now remind the world that, contrary to popular belief, Justice Souter no longer lives with his mother. Although DHS still resides in the Souter family farmhouse -- which is looking pretty down at the heels these days, and which may soon be the subject of post-Kelo eminent domain proceedings -- his mother no longer lives there with him. According to the Supreme Court Historical Society bio of Justice Souter,* his mother now "lives near the family farmhouse, in a retirement community." (The fact that he no longer resides with his mother will surely improve the dating prospects of the #4 Superhottie of the Federal Judiciary.)

(Update: This post is the subject of a correction. Helen Souter did move to a local retirement community, but then she passed away.)

So once more, with feeling: Happy Birthday, Justice Souter!

* Speaking of Souter biographies, David Hackett Souter, the new book by Professor Tinsley E. Yarbrough, is now available.

UTR Cribs: The Roberts Residence!

As the old saying goes, "A man's home is his castle." So what can we tell about Judge John G. Roberts, soon to be crowned as a Supreme Court justice (knock on wood), based on his federal judicial castle? Sounds like a job for UTR Cribs: Inside the Homes of Federal Judges!

Unfortunately, we don't know as much about the Roberts residence as we might like. (The photograph above is of a random mansion, not Judge Roberts's house.) If you have ever been inside the Roberts' home and have the inside scoop, please share what you know with Article III Groupie.

For now, all A3G has to offer is information that has previously appeared in prior news accounts:

1.  Judge Roberts's house is located in the tony Washington suburb of Chevy Chase, Maryland, just a few blocks away from the former home of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

2. With respect to Judge Roberts's choice of neighborhood, Washington Post Metro columnist Marc Fisher offers the following, intriguing ruminations:

John Roberts would take Sandra Day O'Connor's place as holder of the Chevy Chase seat on the court. Conservative justices tend to live in Virginia, as you might expect. Liberal justices tend to live in the District. Does Roberts' decision to live in Chevy Chase tell us anything useful about his temperament and values? (He recently moved from Bethesda to Chevy Chase, selling his old place for a hefty profit and moving on up thanks to the skyrocketing real estate market.)

(Thanks to DCist for the link.)

3. The Roberts home is a large, elegant, two-story, white-brick colonial. A3G was quite impressed by the imposing exterior of the house, which she saw when the Roberts family was filmed returning to their white house, after their visit to the White House, on the night that President Bush announced the Roberts nomination.

4. The house is worth approximately $1.3 million, which is in line with neighborhood standards. The charming Scottish Tudor shown at right, located not far from the Robertsian abode, sold last year for $1.5 million.

At $1.3 million, the Roberts house is a pretty nice pile o' bricks -- certainly nothing to scoff at. But it's worth about a tenth as much as the federal judicial mega-mansion inhabited by Judge Susan J. Dlott (S.D. Ohio) and her hubby, superstar plaintiffs' lawyer Stan Chesley.

Here at UTR, prestige is everything. And compared to working at blue-chip law firms like Hogan & Hartson or Pillsbury Winthrop, plaintiffs-side work is much less prestigious (at least in the eyes of Establishment-types). But if you're good at it, as Stan Chesley sure is, it pays really, really well!

5. Judge Roberts and his well-paid wife, Biglaw partner Jane Sullivan Roberts -- a.k.a. "the Pillsbury [Winthrop] Dough Girl"* -- carry a home mortgage of $790,000, at a 30-year fixed rate of 5.625 percent. They presumably have this mortgage just for the tax deduction, since they could pay off the mortgage anytime they want (out of their bulging bank accounts, which hold between $1 million and $2 million).

6. Rumor has is that Judge Roberts mows the lawn himself. How down-to-earth of him! Senate Democrats: How can you vote against a man who mows his own lawn?

7. According to Al Kamen of the Washington Post, there is no truth to the rumor that Judge Roberts "illegally trimmed his trees," which is "a big deal in that neighborhood."

The Roberts residence sounds quite lovely. And in a few weeks, assuming all goes well, Judge Roberts may soon be acquiring a second home. No, we're not talking about a beach house in Malibu, or a mansion in the Hamptons -- nothing as pedestrian as that. This locale is far more exclusive, a gated community with only nine permanent residents: One First Street, the most fabulous address in the land!

* A3G realizes that Mrs. Jane Roberts, as a professional development partner who no longer actively practices law, probably doesn't make as much as she used to from her partnership draw -- maybe $250-$400K, as opposed to the Pillsbury Winthrop profits-per-partner of $757,500. But A3G couldn't resist the opportunity to deploy her coinage of "Pillsbury Dough Girl"!

(This moniker refers, of course, to Mrs. Roberts's lucrative legal employment. It should not be construed as commenting on the physique of Mrs. Roberts, who is commendably trim and fit.)

UTR Cribs: Justice O'Connor's Real Estate Adventures, and More About Alberto Gonzales

In this recent post about the departing Justice O'Connor, Article III Groupie reported a rumor "that SOC put her house on the market last Friday." It appears that this rumor was incorrect (as rumors sometimes are, much to A3G's disappointment). As reported in this article from the New York Times, Justice O'Connor just purchased a new home in Washington:

The O'Connors plan to move to a townhouse they recently bought in northwest Washington from their home in Chevy Chase, Md., a move that was one factor fueling speculation that Justice O'Connor was not planning retirement any time soon. Her friends had long speculated that one reason she would step down would be to move back to Arizona, where the couple still own a home.

Perhaps the rumors of a house for sale concerned Justice O'Connor's former home in Chevy Chase, Maryland? Consider these succulent tidbits -- concerning SOC's current and former cribs, among other things -- offered by William Patry, of the always interesting Patry Copyright Blog:

You asked about whether SOC's house was up for sale. If you mean the one in Chevy Chase, it has already been sold, and the O'Connors have bought a townhouse in D.C., which they will use as their Washington home away from home in Arizona (their principal residence). You speculated that their D.C. home was luxurious. I was in it a number of times, and it was quite lovely, a very comfortable size, in extremely good taste, and just north of the Chevy Chase Circle in Maryland. But luxurious is a vague word (like equal protection).

You also speculated [see items #4 and #5] about her culinary habits. SOC once cooked dinner for me and Craig Joyce, a close relative of hers by marriage, in the kitchen in that house. She wore an old apron and rustled up a salad and an enormous salmon. I have been a vegetarian for over 30 years, but when SOC is the chef, you eat up, and I did. SOC was particularly proud of her wine cork opener, a floor stand model, which she used with gusto.

How delicious, both figuratively and literally! [Update: Don't miss this post by Bill Patry, which includes his fabulous, more detailed of that dinner (plus lots of other goodies, including a description of her new chambers at the Court). Here's a teaser: "Hello, Bill, this is Sandra..."]

Article 3 Groupie is extremely envious of Mr. Patry -- she can only dream of dining with a Supreme Court justice.* And A3G would have loved to have visited Justice O'Connor's gorgeous home, to say nothing of eating a dinner prepared by the most powerful woman in America (and one of the most powerful women in the world -- #6 on Forbes magazine's list of the most powerful women on the planet).

A3G is continuing to monitor the SOC situation closely. For the time being, she is sticking with her prediction of Alberto R. Gonzales as the nominee, despite some vocal conservative opposition to Judge Gonzales's candidacy. Although some conservatives, A3G included, might ideally want a more reliably conservative nominee, we have to be realistic. A3G's message to her fellow travelers: "Come on, people, let's get real. Who are we kidding? We are replacing Sandra Day O'Connor, not William H. Rehnquist. Got it?"

A3G agrees with Tom Goldstein -- one of the most astute, insightful, and plugged-in observers of the Court -- that President Bush might want to name Alberto Gonzales as Chief Justice. But this doesn't mean the President will refrain from nominating Al Gonzales as an Associate Justice now, in order to "save" him for the Chief Justice slot later. After all, nothing precludes President Bush from nominating Judge Gonzales to replace Justice O'Connor, then "pulling a Rehnquist" by subsequently promoting Associate Justice Gonzales to the position of Chief (just as President Reagan promoted then-Associate Justice William Rehnquist from within the Court).

If Chief Justice Rehnquist returns for and completes October Term 2005, which is looking reasonably likely,** then Associate Justice Gonzales will have one full Term under his belt by the time the Chief Justiceship is vacated. This would be just enough time for him to develop a strong understanding of the internal workings of One First Street, the personalities of his colleagues, etc., but not so long a time that an internal promotion would generate awkwardness or friction within the Conference (a frequently voiced concern when it comes to internal promotion of an associate justice).

O.k., must run. It's a Saturday night on a long holiday weekend, and yours truly is only mildly buzzed, as opposed to flat-out drunk. If you have any good gossip, either about Justice O'Connor or her possible successor, please email A3G, ASAP!

* The insecure, self-promoting A3G cannot resist pointing out that although she has never had dinner with a Supreme Court justice, she has been invited to lunch by Judge Richard Posner...

** Check out some of the statements issued by SOC's soon-to-be-former colleagues at the Court. They make for very interesting reading. As Lyle Denniston observes here, Chief Justice Rehnquist's statement suggests that he will be sticking around One First Street for OT 2005: "[Justice O'Connor] is a longtime friend and valued colleague. I shall miss her greatly." If the Chief were planning to be joining her imminently in retirement, he would have said something along these lines: "She is a longtime friend and valued colleague. I look forward to seeing her in the produce section of a Phoenix-area Krogers in the near future."

The statement of Justice Scalia -- with whom Justice O'Connor has had some personal issues over the years, due to the bench-slaps he has administered to her in some of his stinging dissents -- is particularly intriguing. First, he notes that "she has become a star" -- how very UTR of him to say! He then goes on to state that Justice O'Connor "has established -- to the point where it now goes almost without notice -- the role of her sex in the administration of justice."

What does Nino mean by this exactly? Is he saying that Justice O'Connor has demonstrated the important role that women play in the administration of justice -- or is he suggesting that SOC allowed her gender to color her judicial decisionmaking? (Could this ambiguity be intentional? Could Justice Scalia be trying to issue a parting shot at Justice O'Connor, but cleverly using language that could easily be passed off as complimentary?)

UTR Cribs: Judge Dlott's Federal Judicial Mega-Mansion!

Welcome to the first of what will hopefully be many installments of UTR Cribs: Inside the Homes of Federal Judges. UTR Cribs was described back in this post as follows: "Inspired by MTV Cribs, UTR goes inside the halls of justice, with this exclusive report about the luxurious residences of the most well-heeled federal jurists." In a nutshell, think of UTR Cribs as "Lifestyles of the Rich and Federal." To paraphrase the description of MTV Cribs on the show's website, UTR Cribs is "the most exciting way to peep into your favorite [federal judicial] celebrities' homes, without getting slapped with a restraining order!"

As one can gather from the recurring hubbub over the need for federal judicial pay increases--which Chief Justice Rehnquist describes, perhaps hyperbolically, as "the most pressing issue facing the federal judiciary today"--the wealth enjoyed by many federal judges does not come from their salaries. With circuit judges earning only $167,600 a year, and district judges earning only $158,100 a year (see this table), federal judges make less than many first-year law firm associates. Federal judges certainly earn less than members of the Elect, who can rake in over $300,000 in their first year after leaving One First Street.

Although their salaries may be relatively modest, many federal judges are extremely wealthy. The sources of judicial affluence are varied, but common ones are lucrative pre-robescent employment, marrying into money, and inheritance or family wealth. As shown in this report by the Alliance for Justice, the average net worth for an appellate court judicial nominee from President Bush's first year in office was a healthy $1.63 million. The average net worth of one of President Clinton's 2000 nominees was even higher: $2 million. As Diddy, P., might say, "Being a federal judge? It's all about the BENCH-amins, baby!" Puff Daddy, It's All About the Benjamins, on All About the Benjamins (New Line Records 2002); see also Jennifer Lopez, Jenny from the Block, on This Is Me... Then (Sony Records 2002) ("Don't be fooled by the rocks that I got.") (Lo, J., protesting too much methinks).

(For example, consider the nine members of the Supreme Court. Despite salaries that are perfectly pleasant, but far from princely--Chief Justice Rehnquist earns $203,000, and each associate justice earns $194,300--the Supremes are pretty much rolling in it. As noted in UTR's irreverent review of their financial disclosure forms, Who wants to be a millionaire--AND a Supreme Court justice?, a majority of the justices are millionaires, some of them several times over.)

So yes, many federal judges have lots of cash stashed under their robes--cash they frequently drop on large and lavish lairs. In the weeks ahead, UTR Cribs will spirit you away to some of our nation's most exclusive residential enclaves, popping into federal judicial mansions around the country. Future destinations of UTR Cribs include Manhattan's super-patrician Upper East Side; sun-drenched Palm Beach, Florida; and some of Los Angeles's toniest suburbs, including Ranchos Palos Verdes and the Oak Grove neighborhood of San Marino.

Today, however, with the election moving into high gear, UTR Cribs follows the candidates to the battleground state of Ohio. The Buckeye State is home to Judge Susan J. Dlott, of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. Judge Dlott is married to Stanley M. Chesley, the prominent, hugely successful plaintiffs' lawyer.

Stan Chesley and Judge Dlott recently bought a new house. And this, dear readers, is no ordinary house. Holy mansion, Batman!

This article in the Cincinnati Enquirer offers the following juicy details:

Real estate agents had said it would take someone with extravagant taste to buy this house. Enter prominent class-action lawyer Stan Chesley.

Chesley has purchased what is believed to be the most expensive single-family home listed in Greater Cincinnati, possibly ever.

The elegant French chateau... in Indian Hill, which has six bedrooms, seven full bathrooms, custom chandeliers and a wine cellar, carried an asking price of $11.9 million when it first went on the market last October.

That's the biggest price ever listed on the Multiple Listing Service of Greater Cincinnati, which has been around for about 60 years. . . . .

The home includes two four-car garages with apartments on top and 27,000 square feet of living space. It sits on 5.3 acres nestled into 300 acres of private green space.

There's also a game room, exercise room, a theater/media room, separate two-bedroom carriage house for live-in parents or hired help and an outdoor kitchen for entertaining friends and family. The indoor kitchen has hidden appliances.

Chesley is married to Susan Dlott, who was appointed a U.S. District Court judge by President Clinton in 1995.

The home even has its own Web site. [A3G's note: It appears that the site has been taken offline. But you can get more details about the house in this realtor's listing. Additional realty listings for the property, featuring the dimensions of specific rooms, have also been taken offline--but you can access cached versions of them here and here.]

WOW! With almost 30,000 square feet, Judge Dlott's federal judicial mega-mansion is larger than certain small federal courthouses in less populous judicial districts.

The reader who submitted this delicious tip to A3G offered additional information about Judge Dlott and her high-flying hubby:

[U]ber-plaintiff's lawyer Stan Chesley's wife is left-wing judicial diva Susan Dlott, of the Southern District of Ohio. Not as glamorous as a circuit judge, but at least not an icky state court jurist! Judge Dlott was appointed the bench by President Clinton following a number of major donations to Clinton and the Democrats by her husband. Of course, those two things are surely unrelated....

In a subsequent message, UTR's loyal correspondent added:

More on Judge Dlott.... And, it's not that I have a vendetta against her or anything (reportedly, they are lovely people, and I have yet to have the opportunity to appear in her courtroom). But I do think this additional information may qualify her as a Judicial Diva, even aside from the 27,000 square foot home! Therefore, I feel compelled to apprise you of this situation, even though she is but a meager district court judge here in S.D. Ohio. However, I'm sure you'll agree with me that it takes grit and determination to be a Judicial Diva as a district court judge! (What with that appeal-as-of-right business and all.) So, here goes...

This op-ed about Judge Dlott in the Cincinnati Enquirer of April 30, 2003, entitled "Judge Has Stepped in It Now," begins as follows: "A federal judge who lets her dogs dump on the floor of our U.S. Courthouse and once had them sworn in as federal marshals might have a problem getting much respect from real law enforcement officers."

And here's another article, from the Cincinnati Enquirer of February 7, 2004, in which Judge Dlott's potential recusal in a white collar bank fraud case is discussed by the criminal defendant... and caught on tape by the FBI! The defendant in question liked his chances with Judge Dlott, what with her being "sympathetic to white collar criminals," as well as being "one of the best friends" of said defendant's own attorney.

With press like this, I too would want to repair every evening to a massive French chateau--perhaps to spend a long evening in the well-stocked wine cellar!

Oh, I forgot to also mention that Judge Dlott's husband represented the victims of the bank fraud case in a civil suit in state court, and garnered a $16.8 million settlement for them. Not that this would be a conflict or anything, because he wasn't appearing in HER court, you see.

Article III Groupie agrees with her correspondent: the mini-scandals discussed in the articles cited above leave the unmistakable odor of canine fecal matter in the air. But she also believes that, the bad press coverage notwithstanding, Judge Dlott and her hubby have a pretty good gig going. They enjoy the best of both worlds: the money of a successful plaintiffs' lawyer, and the power of a federal judge!

Thus, despite her deeply troubling left-wing politics, the Honorable Susan J. Dlott is an inspiration to Article III Groupie. A3G describes herself as "an aspiring federal judicial diva with a real estate fetish." Judge Dlott demonstrates to A3G that, if she plays her cards right, she too can score herself a lifetime appointment exercising the judicial power of the United States--and a phat crib!

May your champagne wishes and caviar dreams come true,

Article III Groupie