HCBA Logo
Hennepin County
Bar Association
Judge Scherer



 

Meet the Judges            How District Court Works           Judicial Elections 

 

Judge Richard Scherer

     
Born:   1946
     
Education:   1975  JD  University of Minnesota Law School
1968  BA  Gustavus Adolphus College
     
Recent Career:   1994  Judge, Hennepin County District Court
1975  Attorney, Castor, Klukas, Scherer & Logren
1972  Teacher, Robbinsdale Senior High
1970  U.S. Army
1968  Teacher, Robbinsdale Senior High
     
Elevated to Bench:   Appointed by Governor Arne Carlson in 1994.
Elected in 1996, 2002 and 2008.
     
Previous Assignments:  

7/1994 to 12/1998

Criminal

1/1999 to 5/2000

Civil Block and Criminal

6/2000 to 12/2002

Juvenile

1/2003 to Present Civil and Criminal
     
Current Assignments:

  Criminal
     

More information on this Judge is available from the District Court Website

 
 
     
     
     
     
     
 

 

Read Profile from

 

Published in
Jan/Feb 1995

   
 

   
 
  Civil Courtroom Procedures/Working with the Judge  
1. What are your preferred procedures regarding motion practice?
Schedule motions as far in advance as possible. Assume the judge has read all submitted papers, including attachments – if reasonable – prior to the hearing. Limit oral argument accordingly. You will always be permitted a record, if desired, but chambers discussions are invited if the parties are comfortable with written submissions. All motions will be decided as soon as my schedule and time for appropriate consideration provides

2. What are your preferred procedures regarding hearings?
Please stand when addressing the court. Professional courtesy toward opposing counsel is mandatory, and counsel should realize discourtesy will not be tolerated.


3. What do you expect the attorneys to have ready at the pretrial conference?
In my mind, the purpose of a pretrial conference is to seriously discuss settlement and/or to discuss potentially problematic trial issues. Counsel should be prepared to seriously discuss settlement and identify potentially problematic trial issues should trial be necessary. Counsel SHOULD NOT arrive at pretrial requesting a continuance or further discovery unless all parties agree and for good cause. I consider the pretrial as a last opportunity to avoid trial, but invite the parties to ask for a second pretrial if my efforts may assist in settlement of their case. I do not participate in settlement discussions on the day of trial. On trial day, we call a jury.


4. At what point to you expect the parties to undertake ADR, if at all?
Except conciliation court appeals and medical malpractice cases, all parties will be referred to ADR unless all parties agree it is inappropriate. The court must approve skipping ADR if the parties feel it is inappropriate. ADR should be completed before a court pretrial is scheduled, although the court will agree to a pre-ADR pretrial if the parties agree it might facilitate settlement.


5. At what point, if any, do you encourage the parties to settle or to exchange settlement offers/demands? Does that vary by type of case (personal injury, family, criminal, etc.?)
ANYTIME!! A settlement agreeable to the parties – the clients – is always preferable to any resolution imposed by a jury or by rulings made by a judge. As a judge, I pledge to any who appear before me that I will do my ultimate best to make the fairest ruling I can, without preconceived opinions. Nonetheless, whether you seek a ruling from me or a jury, no resolution is more favorable than one acceptable to both parties to a controversy..


6. Do you require that a person with ultimate authority to settle be present at settlement negotiations?
Yes, unless with prior approval of the court. I will be flexible on this issue, unless it will, in my opinion, impede true settlement negotiations or if I feel someone is not negotiating in good faith. Should I feel, on the other hand, that a party is not operating in good faith or without just cause for non-appearance, I am not adverse to imposing significant sanctions for non-appearance when ordered.


7. How do you expect the parties to handle discovery disputes (including calling you for a ruling during a deposition)?
I expect all to be first and foremost gentlewomen and gentlemen. Counsel should not expect the court to be available on moment’s notice to handle their bickering. Most of these issues can be handled with ordinary civility. Any unsolvable issue should be identifiable well in advance. Normal discovery disputes should be handled according to the Rules of Civil Procedure, and should only involve the court if necessary. Telephone conferences are preferable to in-court proceedings related to discovery issues.


8. Do you conduct hearings and motions by phone? If so, please describe the procedure you would like attorneys to use to do so, including how testimony is to be transcribed and who puts the teleconference together.
These are possible. The process should be initiated by requesting counsel well in advance. Hearing can be recorded by the court’s reporter through speaker phone, but accuracy of record not guaranteed.


9. Do you have any preferences for courtroom decorum (including but not limited to cell phones, pagers, passing notes, communicating with others at counsel table, water/beverages at counsel table, approaching the witness, courtroom attire)?
Just use common sense. Stand when addressing the court – not for me – for the office. Use a podium or not when addressing the jury – your choice. ALWAYS be courteous to opposing counsel – life is too short and all of our jobs are too stressful to add an unneeded and unnecessary element to what we are all about!!! You may pass notes and communicate with your client as long as it is not distracting from the proceedings. PLEASE, no cell phones or pagers!!!


10. When, if ever, would you consider issuing sanctions, formal reprimands, holding an attorney in contempt, or reporting an attorney for unethical behavior?
In ten years I have only come close once. Only if counsel deviates so far from acceptable behavior, or repeatedly violates court orders.


11. Under what circumstances do you accept ex parte communications from counsel? Do you consider an attorney’s communication with your clerk a potential ex parte communication?
Counsel or staff may freely communicate with my staff regarding scheduling issues. Parties may only communicate with the court with prior approval of adverse parties, whether by phone, fax, mail or email.


12. What is your practice with granting continuances and under what circumstances would you consider granting one?
A stipulation of the parties for a continuance does not control. ANY request for a continuance will be looked upon with disfavor, but will not be rejected out of hand.


13. With respect to oral argument, do you prefer an attorney to assume you have read the supporting memorandum and exhibits and not reiterate written material?
ALWAYS assume I have read supporting papers prior to oral argument.


14. What do you consider to be the basic requirements of good oral argument (including the amount of time appropriate for oral argument)?
A. Assume your brief, and opponents, has been read
B. Articulate the FIVE (5) KEY FACTS most important
C. Case-specific reasons to rule in client’s favor
D. Public Policy reasons to rule in client’s favor



15. What preferences do you have for jury trials? How do you prefer voir dire to be conducted?
I conduct a short (45 minute) general voir dire, and then allow the attorneys to question. The attorneys can then strike their peremptories “at the end.”
 
   
  Judicial Profile from The Hennepin Lawyer  (64:3:14)  
   

Richard Scherer
Originally published in the January/February 1995 issue.

Author: Stephen C. Fiebiger

Richard S. Scherer was sworn in as a district court judge on July 5, 1994, following appointment by Gov. Arne Carlson. Judge Scherer, a longtime resident of Hennepin County, comes to the Hennepin County bench following 19 years in private practice with the law firm of Castor, Klukas, Scherer & Logren, of Minneapolis.

Judge Scherer grew up in the western Hennepin County suburb of Hopkins and  graduated from Hopkins High School.  He taught English and history at Robbinsdale Senior High after graduating from Gustavus Adolphus College in 1968. Judge Scherer’s teaching career was interrupted with a two-year stint in the U.S. Army, including service in Vietnam. While in Vietnam he learned to speak the Vietnamese language. After the army, he returned to teaching at Robbinsdale.

Judge Scherer left teaching to enter law school at the University of Minnesota, where he graduated cum laude before entering private practice in Minneapolis. Scherer’s private practice concentrated almost exclusively in the area of civil litigation, with emphasis on insurance defense, products liability, automobile and general liability, personal injury and property damage, toxic tort, declaratory judgment, no-fault and commercial litigation, among others. He also worked in the area of alternative dispute resolution, both as an advocate and as a dispute resolver. In comparing his new position to private practice, Judge Scherer noted that "my role changes; I am no longer an advocate. I am trying to do what is fair. I need to filter through the arguments of attorneys and decide."

Judge Scherer enjoys his new job, particularly the variety he sees. He commented, "Every day is different; I never know what the day is going to hold." He enjoys dealing with people constantly and observes that "a lot of what it takes [to be a judge] is the ability to read people" because he is required "to make judgments in a very brief period of time." To most people, according to Scherer, a judge is an "unknown quality." The judge noted that most people have limited contact with the court system.

After first taking the bench, Judge Scherer spent some time floating through different court assignments, such as in custody, out of custody, court trials, suburban courts, and meeting with staff from the probation department and county and city attorney offices. Judge Scherer adds that "the support people in the court system are absolutely fabulous in their professionalism, help, and suggestions." He says that people in the system are all "very helpful and open." According to Scherer, "They get too little credit in how the system operates." The judge emphasized his strong belief that court staff "really do have good hearts."

Since his appointment, Judge Scherer has conducted some court trials. He estimates that approximately three thousand to four thousand people have come through his court in about three months. He will be on criminal assignments for about a year and then begin receiving civil assignments.

Judge Scherer also observed the following about his role on the court: No matter how small the matter that brings the person into the courthouse, it’s a critical matter to that person and warrants the attention of the district court.

The judge practices what he preaches. While assigned to the suburban court at Southdale, Judge Scherer was approached by a maintenance man who inquired about getting married at the court building. Judge Scherer not only answered the man’s question but also conducted his wedding.

At Judge Scherer’s August 19 public swearing-in ceremony, he noted, among other things, some of his hopes:

My hope is that all of us can approach the task with HEART, with FAITH, and with TRUST:

HEART tempered with compassion and empathy yet strong enough to realize that neither compassion nor empathy alone is enough to make a difference;

FAITH that improvement is possible always regardless of how hopeless the situation may appear at the onset; and

TRUST that hard work, cooperation, and creativity will accomplish more any day than resignation or complacency ever can.

The judge also remarked at his swearing-in ceremony that:

New to the bench, the process of judging others is at times disquieting, despite years of practicing law.

To judge, it seems, is to attempt to call into perspective the lives of others within the context of the larger community.

Even in my brief experience, judging others requires insight not only into community, but also into the life of another who may well (and usually will) come before the bench from a background totally different from that which any of us bring to the bench.

The process of doing justice, then, is fluid, demanding, and difficult. But, it is the task faced daily, and moment by moment, by each of us who presume to sit in judgment of others. The task should be accomplished, as well as possible, with patience, with compassion, with dignity, and with humility.

Judge Scherer’s wife, Nancy, works in human resources at Norwest Bank. They have two children —Matt, age 10, and Cary, age 7—and live in Edina. Judge Scherer spends a lot of his free time with his children and describes himself as a "chauffeur" for all of their activities. He has been active with Cub Scouts, done volunteer work with the Children’s Home Society, served on the board of directors of Edina Montessori, and volunteered time to his church. He enjoys camping, fishing up north, and skiing with his kids in the metro area. Judge Scherer also enjoys reading, but says there is too little time for pleasure reading. He recently read A Soldier of the Great War by Mark Halpern, a book about World War I.

The judge observed that "there’s no way to put into words some of the things that go through your head when somebody’s in front of you at the bench with their small problem or large problem." According to Scherer, "A judge’s real judge is the people he serves." We look forward to Judge Scherer’s service on the bench in Hennepin County.

Back to Top

 

   

Back to Top

 
   
   

   

Legal Notice

Hennepin County Bar Association.   600 Nicollet Mall #390,Minneapolis, MN 55402.   Phone: 612-752-6600.