|
|
Judge
Patricia Kerr Karasov |
|
|
|
|
Born: |
|
1951 |
|
|
|
|
|
Education: |
|
1983
JD William Mitchell College of Law
1974 BFA University of Minnesota |
|
|
|
|
Recent
Career: |
|
1995
Judge, Hennepin County District Court
1985 Assistant Hennepin County Attorney
1983 Law Clerk, Hennepin County Attorney’s
Office
1982 Law Clerk, Ramsey County Public Defender’s
Office
1981-83 Research Assistant, State Public Defender’s
Office |
|
|
|
|
Elevated
to Bench: |
|
Elected in 1994, 2000 and 2006. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
Assignments: |
|
|
1/1995 to 4/1998 |
Criminal |
|
5/1998 to 9/1999 |
Civil Block and
Criminal |
|
8/1999 to 12/2000 |
Juvenile |
|
1/2001 to Present |
Civil Block and
Criminal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
Assignments:
|
|
Civil Block and
Criminal |
|
|
|
|
|
More
information on this Judge is available from the District
Court
Website |
|
|
|
|
|
Data
provided by Hennepin County District Court
Civil
Court Dispositions in 2005: |
|
Cases
are reported from date of filing. During that time
cases may be transferred between judges for various
reasons. The age of the cases and the time elapsed
before trial, therefore, may not be attributable to
the judge who eventually handles the trial. |
|
Type
of Disposition |
Number |
Avg.
Age at Disposition in Months |
Avg.
Age at
Disposition for this Court |
|
Tried by Court |
7 |
9.7 |
8.5 |
|
Tried by Jury |
5 |
12 |
14.3 |
|
Settled (Includes Closed
by ADR) |
108 |
8.3 |
7.9 |
|
Closed Summary
Judgment |
8 |
4.8 |
7.3 |
|
Dismissed |
30 |
4 |
5.1 |
|
Closed by Arbitration |
16 |
6.6 |
6.6 |
|
Other Closed |
66 |
2.4 |
2.7 |
|
Closed by Admin. |
5 |
0.8 |
0.4 |
|
Total: |
245 |
5.9 |
5.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Read
Profile from

|
|
Published
in
May/June 1995 |
|
|
|

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How I Manage My Courtroom: Criminal
Court.
Civil
Court. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Judge's Civil Courtroom Procedures and Advice |
Back
to Top
|
1. What
are your preferred procedures regarding motion practice?
Motions are heard all days of the work week at 9:00 a.m. or 1:30
p.m. One courtesy copy of each party’s legal memorandum should
be delivered to the court chambers at least two business days
prior to the hearing. Generally, one half hour is set aside for
civil motions with 15 minutes allocated to each party. If it is
anticipated that more time may be needed, please inform the
clerk when scheduling the hearing. Motions are heard in the
courtroom with a court reporter. When the matter is a TRO, a
hearing will generally be scheduled the same day or the next day
with notice to the other side.
2. What
are your preferred procedures regarding hearings?
Call if you will be late.
Hearings are held formally in the courtroom with a court
reporter present. Address your remarks to the court, not
opposing counsel. The court expects civility and compliance with
the rules of decorum.
3. What do
you expect the attorneys to have ready at the pretrial
conference?
Pretrials will be
scheduled only at the request of the parties and generally only
after ADR has been unsuccessful. Most, if not all discovery,
should be completed. Attorneys should be fully knowledgeable
about their case and have full settlement authority. All parties
with authority to settle must be present or available by
telephone.
4. At what
point to you expect the parties to undertake ADR, if at all?
ADR is required on most
cases and must be completed prior to the scheduling of a
pretrial conference. A deadline for the completion of ADR is
generally set four to five months from the issuance of the
scheduling order. If the parties are unable to agree on an ADR
process and/or neutral within 30 days of the scheduling order,
the court will appoint a process and/or a neutral.
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.?)
Early settlement is
always encouraged.
6. Do you
require that a person with ultimate authority to settle be
present at settlement negotiations?
See No. 3.
7. How do
you expect the parties to handle discovery disputes (including
calling you for a ruling during a deposition)?
I believe most
discovery disputes should be resolvable by the parties, with
issues of relevance and/or admissibility to be determined by the
court immediately prior to trial. No discovery dispute may be
brought to the attention of the court unless the parties have
conferred and made a good faith effort to settle their dispute.
The party raising an unresolved discovery issue shall first
arrange a telephone conference with the court to determine if
the dispute can be resolved without a formal motion. No motion
papers or other submissions shall be filed prior to the
telephone conference. Only if the telephone conference does not
resolve the dispute may a formal motion be scheduled.
Generally, these telephone conferences are not transcribed. I
am open to being available for phone conferences, without a
reporter, during depositions. On rare occasions, I have arranged
for a conference room at the courthouse for the taking of
depositions where the deponent is reluctant or hostile and
frequent requests for court intervention are anticipated.
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.
Generally, other than
discovery disputes, I do not conduct hearings or motions by
telephone, unless circumstances of emergency or unavailability
create the necessity. These rare telephonic hearings would be
transcribed by a court reporter.
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)?
All electronic
devices must be off in the courtroom. Communications and passing
of notes at counsel table is acceptable as long as they are not
disruptive. Water pitchers and cups are provided at counsel
table. Generally, no children under the age of 17 are permitted
in the courtroom while it is in session. Be on time.
Counsel should stand when addressing the court and confine their
remarks to the court, rather than to opposing counsel. Counsel
should be mindful of the court reporter by speaking clearly and
slowly and in the direction of the court reporter. Objections
should be stated in one or two words and never argued in front
of the jury.
Proper court attire is expected, unless the hearing is an
emergency.
10. When,
if ever, would you consider issuing sanctions, formal
reprimands, holding an attorney in contempt, or reporting an
attorney for unethical behavior?
I have and will impose
monetary sanctions to compensate an aggrieved party. So far, no
situations have arisen during my judicial career that would
justify finding an attorney in contempt and/or reporting an
attorney for unethical conduct.
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?
Ex parte
communications with either of my clerks is permissible for
procedural and scheduling issues and other housekeeping matters.
In the case of a default, waiver of appearance or no show
without excuse, I may engage in ex parte communication on
substantive issues with the party present usually on the record.
E-mail communications with my clerks are also acceptable as long
as all parties are included.
12. What
is your practice with granting continuances and under what
circumstances would you consider granting one?
Trial continuances are
rarely granted except in emergency situations, even if the
parties are in agreement. I try to accommodate counsels’
schedules by granting requests made in advance for a trial week
or day certain. Continuances on motion hearings are generally
granted if both parties are in agreement. Also, requests to
extend deadlines contained in the scheduling order, including
the discovery deadline, are generally approved, especially if
the parties are in agreement and the dispositive motion date is
still at least 60 days in advance of the trial block.
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?
Usually I have read all
the motion papers and supporting memorandum prior to a hearing
and will indicate that in court. I will let you know what issues
are of particular interest or concern to me. Generally, one half
hour is set aside for the entire hearing. When scheduling a
hearing, please let my clerk know if you anticipate needing more
time for the hearing so we can accommodate your request.
14. What
do you consider to be the basic requirements of good oral
argument (including the amount of time appropriate for oral
argument)?
I prefer that oral
argument be organized, succinct and to the point on the legal
issues. I do tend to ask questions – acknowledging that I may
not be as knowledgeable about the facts or the legal specialty
of the case as the attorneys are.
15.
What preferences do you have for jury trials? How do you prefer
voir dire to be conducted?
Prior to trial, counsel
should pre-mark all exhibits with consecutive numbers, provide
witness lists, proposed jury instructions and special verdict
forms, and a statement of the case to be read to the jury. I
prefer to rule on all pretrial issues prior to beginning voir
dire. I prefer an informal discussion on how we want voir
dire to go and what, if any, questions the attorneys would
like me to ask.
Generally, trial, whether a jury or court trial, is held between
9:00 a.m. and noon and 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. with one 20 minute
break in the morning and afternoon. If, during the trial,
counsel wishes to put certain matters on the record outside the
presence of the jury, please alert the court so a time can be
arranged so the jury is not left waiting.
The court reporter does not usually report bench conferences. If
counsel wishes their arguments to be on the record, I prefer to
continue with the trial and put those arguments on the record
during a break in the proceeding rather than ask the jury to
step out.
|
Back
to Top |
| The Judge's
Criminal Courtroom Procedures and Advice |
Back
to Top |
1.
What are your expectations of attorneys (both defense and state)
at arraignment?
Being on time and knowledgeable
about their case.
2. What
do you see as the bench’s role in settlement at the pretrial
stage?
I encourage settlement
and suggest possible negotiations based on the facts and
circumstances of the case.
3. If so, what
limitations do you place on ex parte contacts with your staff?
Ex parte contacts
with my staff are limited to procedural or scheduling issues.
E-mail communications must be to all parties.
4. When a
matter is assigned to you for trial, do you attempt to
facilitate settlement before beginning trial?
Absolutely. I always
encourage the parties to reach a fair negotiation if possible.
5. When
in trial, what hours do you normally use for the trial itself
(including breaks and lunch recesses)?
Generally, 9:00 a.m. to noon, and
1:30 to 4:30 p.m. with a 20-minute break in the morning and
afternoon. Children under 17 are generally not allowed in the
courtroom during the proceedings. Anyone else engaging in
disruptive behavior will be asked to leave the courtroom.
6.
What policies do you have concerning weapons, firearms and
ammunition exhibits in the courtroom?
All
weapons must be contained in locked boxes generally provided by
the Sheriff’s Office. During deliberations, firearms and
ammunition are never allowed to go into the deliberation room
together.
7. What
policies do you have concerning drugs and other sensitive
exhibits in the courtroom?
Real drugs
are illustrative exhibits only and are not entered as exhibits
to go to the deliberation room. Exhibits containing bodily
fluids are to be encased in clear plastic with a bio-hazard
sticker. If, given the nature of the case, an exhibit containing
bodily fluids must be handled by the jurors during
deliberations, plastic gloves are provided and an instruction is
given by the court.
8. Do
you have any other specific policies concerning exhibits?
No
exhibits are to be displayed or shown to a witness in front of
the jury unless the court has given approval by prior ruling.
9.
When do you discuss proposed jury instructions with attorneys?
Usually
after all of the evidence has been presented.
10.
What are your policies concerning jury sequestration?
Generally,
I do not sequester criminal juries unless there are concerns
regarding media attention.
11. Do
you have any specific policies or practices concerning
pre-sentence investigations or sentencing?
I prefer
pre-sentence investigations before I commit to a particular
sentence. At sentencing, victims and/or appropriate family
members may orally or in writing present victim impact
statements. These comments are to be addressed to the court, not
the defendant.
|
Back
to Top |
| |
|
|
Judicial Profile from The Hennepin Lawyer (64:5:17) |
|
|
|
|
Patricia
Kerr Karasov
Originally published in
the May/June 1995 issue.
Author: Joseph W. Anthony
To be
considered first-rate, a judge should be fair and respectful and
demonstrate a willingness to work hard to understand and apply
the law to the facts of each case. Using that standard, Patricia
Kerr Karasov, recently elected Hennepin County District Court
judge, will be a first-rate judge. She is even-tempered, a quick
study, and patient and dedicated enough to educate herself in
unfamiliar areas. Judge Karasov will be a judge before whom
lawyers in this county will appreciate appearing.
Born
and raised in Lansing, Ill., a suburb of Chicago, she moved to
Minneapolis with her parents at the age of 17. She attended the
University of Minnesota and earned a B.A. as an art major in
1974. Given the shortage of jobs for art majors with a specialty
in metal casting, she worked in a photography business and as a
waitress, a dog groomer, and an AFDC intake worker. One of life’s
lessons that Judge Karasov quickly learned was that women with
college degrees in the 1970s were earning incomes that placed
them at or near the poverty level. By comparison, her male
counterparts with high school degrees were earning over twice as
much for performing the same work. While her jobs brought her
into contact with regular people on a daily basis, they did not
enable her to earn enough to support herself and her daughter.
Determined
to improve the quality of her life, Judge Karasov enrolled in
William Mitchell College of Law in 1981. While attending William
Mitchell, she worked as a research assistant with the State
Public Defender’s Office and as a law clerk with the Ramsey
County Public Defender’s Office. In those positions, she
provided services related to the representation of criminal
defendants in municipal and district court. She graduated from
William Mitchell in 1983 with honors.
After
graduation, Judge Karasov joined the Hennepin County Attorney’s
Office. From 1984 through 1994, she worked as an assistant
Hennepin County attorney, a position in which she prosecuted
hundreds of cases in the areas of criminal, juvenile, and family
law.
From
1987 to 1993, she was assigned to the Hennepin County Attorney’s
Adult Prosecution Division. In that position, she had extensive
felony jury trial experience. She earned a reputation as an
aggressive prosecutor and skilled trial attorney. Peter Connor,
one of her supervisors at the Hennepin County Attorney’s
Office, described her commitment to the practice as follows:
"She was hardworking, tenacious, and aggressive about doing
the best job she possibly could on behalf of her clients. She
was a caring and a strong advocate for victims’ rights."
Judge
Karasov combined her skills as a trial attorney with a
commitment to public service, which resulted in her making
substantial contributions to the development of programs that
improved the quality of the criminal justice system. During her
11 years with the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, she
demonstrated a strong commitment to victims’ rights and worked
cooperatively with the juvenile court bench to develop
restitution policies and protocol.
While
assigned to the Juvenile Prosecution Division from 1985 to 1987,
she served as liaison to, and testified before, the Minnesota
Legislature in matters relating to juvenile gangs and major
offenders. When assigned to the Child Support Division of the
Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, she was instrumental in
developing and instituting new office policies and procedures to
more aggressively and effectively pursue the collection of child
support payments. Mike Freeman, the Hennepin County Attorney,
described Judge Karasov as "a very strong advocate who made
a big difference in a lot of people’s lives. She did a
tremendous job in the adult prosecution and child support
areas."
Apart
from the contributions she made as a prosecutor, Judge Karasov
also has been involved in community activities. She is an
advisory board member of the Hmong Mutual Assistance
Association, a volunteer for Habitat for Humanity, a youth
teacher in her synagogue, and a former vice president and
current executive board member of AFSCME, Local 2938. She is
also a member of Minnesota Women Lawyers, the National
Organization of Women, and the American Civil Liberties Union.
In
1994, Judge Karasov’s career took a different turn. At that
time, she challenged then-sitting Hennepin County District Court
Judge Sean Rice in the November elections. Challenging a sitting
Hennepin County District Court judge is not something undertaken
lightly. Undaunted, Judge Karasov launched a spirited campaign
that earned her 58 percent of the vote and a resounding victory.
Judge
Karasov was sworn in on Jan. 4, 1995. Having been on the bench
only four months, she is still forming a judicial philosophy.
There are a number of judges whom she admired as a prosecutor
and who demonstrated qualities that she hopes to develop in
herself as a judge. Judges Edward Toussaint, Patrick Fitzgerald,
Daniel Mabley, and Allen Oleisky are some that she mentioned who
demonstrated the grace under pressure, respect for the
profession, and a commitment to hard work that she hopes to
emulate. Since being on the bench, she has developed a
tremendous amount of respect for her colleagues and the services
they provide. All of her colleagues have been very supportive
and cooperative. The clerks of court and the support staff also
have been extremely helpful.
Her
goal as a judge is to create the appearance and the reality of
fairness. She says, "Persons appearing in my courtroom are
entitled to be heard out in an orderly fashion and to be treated
respectfully." Judge Karasov is sensitive to the concern
that she may be viewed as pro-prosecution, given her years with
the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office. She sees herself as
understanding the difference between being an advocate and being
a judge. Judge Karasov has one quality that is particularly
noteworthy and will serve her well. She described it in her own
words as "not knowing everything, but willing to learn as
much as I possibly can." Presently, Judge Karasov is
assigned to criminal matters, an area where her talents will be
well utilized. As she rotates through the system, she will, at
some point, be assigned a civil block. When assigned a civil
block, Judge Karasov is certain to apply herself with the same
dedication and zeal that has typified her work to date.
As a
product of the 1960s, Judge Karasov also asks herself broader
questions—the kinds of questions that make us all wonder
whether what we do for a living has any purpose. "What
social value does a lawyer have? What can a judge do about what
goes on in this county or this state? Can we do anything to
improve the quality of the lives of the people we serve?"
She has a social conscience and an awareness of the issues that
need to be addressed. Judge Karasov’s commitment to community
service makes it clear that she is concerned about and committed
enough to these types of questions to make her a credit to the
bench.
Judge
Karasov has aspirations for herself as a judge. She wants to
earn the respect of her colleagues and the trial bar and she
intends to continue to serve the community as both a judge and a
participant in community affairs. She also has a desire to
actively participate in the International Association of Women
Judges and aspires to participate in a United Nations tribunal
directed towards addressing crimes committed in the course of
war in international conflicts.
When
not on the bench or participating in community activities, Judge
Karasov enjoys spending time with her two daughters, Emily and
Danielle, playing golf, coaching and playing softball, and
reading historical novels.
Perhaps
most of all, Judge Karasov hopes that her accomplishments will
be an inspiration to her daughters and to other women. The risks
she has taken and her efforts to excel are qualities and
characteristics that she hopes to pass on to her daughters. She
has told them that "they can do anything in life if they
work hard and do not get distracted by the negative things that
happen." She has tried to teach them not to shirk their
responsibilities or to be afraid to take chances—"you
have to be willing to go after what you want in order to be
happy."
Judge
Karasov has a history of risk taking and excellence. She has
overcome obstacles through her courage and perseverance. If her
history in the practice of law is any indication, she will be a
major contributor to the Hennepin County District Court bench.
|
Back
to Top
|
|
|
|
Back
to Top |
|
|
|
|
|
|