|
|
Judge
Thomas W. Wexler |
|
|
|
|
Born: |
|
1941 |
|
|
|
|
|
Education: |
|
1966
LLB University of Minnesota Law School
1963 BA University of Minnesota |
|
|
|
|
Recent
Career: |
|
1990
Judge, Hennepin County District Court
1969 Peterson, Engberg & Peterson
1966 U.S. Army |
|
|
|
|
Elevated
to Bench: |
|
Elected
in 1990, 1996, and 2002. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
Assignments: |
|
|
1/1991 to 1/1992 |
Family and Criminal |
|
2/1992 to 7/2002 |
Civil Block and
Criminal |
|
8/2002 to Present |
Family |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
Assignments:
|
|
Family Court
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More
information on this Judge is available from the
District Court
Website |
|
|
|
|
|
- Family
Court Info. and Individual Judge's Statistics for 2005 -
Data provided by Hennepin County District Court.
View PDF. |
|
|
|
|
Read
Profile from
|
|
Published
in May/June 1991 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The
Judge's Family Courtroom Procedures and Advice |
|
1. Do you view your
term on family court as a positive or negative experience?
Very positive. This is a unique opportunity to be an advocate
for children and to try to help people in turmoil constructively
resolve their problems.
2. Do
you have any prior personal or professional experience in family
court?
I previously served on family court from 1991 to 1992 and am now
serving a second rotation in family court from July 2002 to the
present and continuing. I did some family law practice during my
20+ years of private practice.
3. What
procedures are you following for emergency and/or ex parte
motions (by phone or in person, representations as to efforts to
notify the other side, go to the signing judge or a blocked
judge)?
On emergency or ex parte motions I almost always require that
the other side be notified. I try to get true emergency matters
heard expeditiously, even though that may mean scheduling at
7:30 a.m. or 4:30 p.m.
4. How
are you dividing the work load between judges and referees, in
terms of types of cases and issues?
Cases are now blocked to a referee or a judge for handling from
start to finish.
5. Are
you using case management conferences, and if so, when in the
process are they scheduled, who is present, who is conducting
them (judge or referee), and are motions allowed to be
considered?
Initial Case Management Conferences are scheduled on every
divorce case and they are conducted by the judge or referee to
whom the case is assigned. Motions are usually not allowed at
the same time as the ICMC.
6. Are
you using and mandating any ADR, specifically including the
settlement/arbitration program, judicial case management, early
neutral evaluations, mediation, arbitration, or trials by
private magistrates? What are the consequences of failing to do
some type of ADR?
ADR procedures are used extensively throughout family court and
in my court. Early Neutral Evaluations are encouraged in
appropriate cases. Settlement conferences are standard,
mediation is voluntary and many parties agree to use some form
of mediation. Referrals to private magistrates are infrequent,
but some parties can afford it and opt for that procedure.
7. Are
you imposing any timelines on Family Court Services for
completion of their studies?
Family Court Services has their own standards for completion of
custody evaluations. Currently that is typically three to four
months.
8. What
criteria are you using for the appointment of guardians ad litem,
and is it any different for private guardians ad litem or
guardians ad litem from the panel?
Guardians ad Litem are mandatory where child abuse is an issue.
I frequently make permissive appointments where there is unusual
conflict or it appears the child is being physically or
emotionally endangered. Significant parental alienation may also
be a basis for appointment of a guardian.
9. Are
you continuing to schedule trials on a day certain basis, or are
you scheduling several trials at the same time for week certain
consideration?
Trials are scheduled on a day certain basis.
10. Are
you enforcing the timelines for motion paper filings, and if a
violation occurs, what is your typical sanction?
Not infrequently I will allow a late filing, and then provide
the opposing side an extension to respond. If a late filing is
prejudicial, I will disregard the filing.
11.
What are your expectations of pro se litigants?
Pro se litigants generally cannot be expected to meet the same
standards of pleading and rule compliance as attorneys.
Technically, of course, they are governed by the same rules and
sometimes those rules need to be applied even if the result
might be harsh. But more often, I provide some leeway and
attempt to accommodate shortcomings and assist the parties
through the process.
12. Do
you have any policies or practices for controlling parties who
continue to bring frivolous motions in the same case time and
time again?
Fortunately this doesn’t happen too often. Sometimes awarding
fees and costs is an available, useful remedy.
13. Do
you have any timelines that you enforce in moving a case from
case management conference to temporary relief hearing to trial?
Typically the time between the initial case management
conference and the settlement conference is 90 days. The
pretrial is usually two to three weeks after the settlement
conference, and then the trial is scheduled as soon as possible
after the settlement conference. A motion for temporary relief
can be scheduled for any time after the initial case management
conference, but we are seeing fewer of those motions and find
that they are frequently unnecessary.
14.
Will you receive correspondence sent directly to the court from
a neutral expert in the case?
No.
15. How
would you characterize your willingness to award attorneys fees
as a sanction in a case?
In appropriate cases, I award attorneys fees. Unfortunately, in
many cases where a fee award would be appropriate, the parties
cannot afford to pay.
16. Do
you ever order the parties to retain the services of a neutral
evaluator or private parenting consultant and then require them
to share in the costs?
Yes, fairly frequently.
17.
What is your level of involvement in settlement discussions, and
will you tell the parties what you would do in the case if the
issue were then before you for decision?
I try to be fairly active in settlement discussion, even as
early as the ICMC stage, recognizing that there is a lot about
the case that I don’t know, and advising the parties
accordingly. Frequently, however, parties need to understand the
dynamics of the process with which they are involved, and so I
think it is helpful for them to see how judges in general and
myself in particular approach situations similar to theirs.
18.
Will you allow parties to have motions heard at pre-trial
conferences?
Yes.
|
|
| |
|
|
Judicial Profile from The Hennepin Lawyer (60:5:25) |
|
|
|
|
Thomas
W. Wexler
Originally published in
the May/June 1991 issue.
Author: John R. Kaufhold
Thomas Wexler
brings a broad civil litigation and general practice background
to the bench. His background includes insurance defense as well
as plaintiffs’ litigation and commercial litigation. Of his
private practice experience, Wexler says, "I have enjoyed
private practice with a good firm and have had exposure to just
about every type of litigation and office practice."
After serving
two years in the U.S. Army, Wexler began his career in
plaintiffs’ personal injury litigation including workers’
compensation. Over the years he has continued to do plaintiffs’
work, including product liability and medical malpractice, and
his practice has always included some workers’ compensation
marital dissolution and misdemeanor criminal work.
In the mid-1970s
to the early 1980s, his practice also included homeowners’
defense. Wexler describes this as some of the most enjoyable
work that he has done. It provided a broad variety of cases and
took him into many of the rural areas of Minnesota. He says,
"Because our firm has always had a significant labor law
practice, I was exposed to cases and issues that many general
practitioners don’t have an opportunity to see. For a number
of years I represented teachers in unrequested leave and
discharge proceedings and was also involved in a variety of
issues in the private sector."
Over the course
of Wexler’s 21 years with his former firm, he was called upon
to be the firm’s specialist in various areas of their
practice. That practice included probate work and, when the
Uniform Probate Code was first enacted, he wrote a manual
explaining some of the Code provisions. He has done a broad
variety of real estate work and was formerly an active member of
the Hennepin County real estate section.
In the early
1980s his practice began to move more into the areas of
corporate law and commercial litigation, particularly in the
area of computer law. He was active on the Hennepin County
computer law committee, is a past chair of that committee, and
was active in the MSBA computer law section.
Over the years
Wexler has devoted hundreds of hours to pro bono work including
cases for the Federal Pro se Panel and the Minnesota Civil
Liberties Union. "Like all trial lawyers I have my favorite
cases, and generally those were cases that involved vindication
of important rights and the representation of persons who
suffered serious injuries."
Wexler was
elected to the bench in a contest with an incumbent judge. It
was the first time in fourteen years that a challenger defeated
an incumbent.
Wexler has been
married for 21 years to Ardis Wexler, who is the assistant
director of the Jewish Community Relations Council and
Anti-Defamation League. They have three children: twin daughters
Rachel and Rebecca, 19, and a son Daniel, 17. Wexler enjoys golf
and barbershop music and for many years was an active member of
the Society for Preservation and Encouragement of Barbershop
Quartet Singing in America.
|
Back
to Top
|
|
|
|
Back
to Top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
