It`s hard to imagine, but in winning the conviction of Cook County Circuit Court Judge Reginald J. Holzer on 27 of 29 counts of mail fraud, extortion and racketeering, the government didn`t exhaust its list of sins against the fallen jurist.
Testimony at the six-week trial showed that Holzer racked up about $200,000 in loans from attorneys and court-appointed receivers that appeared before him and never disclosed these financial relationships although they posed severe conflicts of interest in cases before him.
Court records reveal more ways that the prosecution says Holzer obtained money from lawyers. They include allegations that Holzer was paid off to help secure admission for applicants to area law schools and received $10,000 to pay off another judge–but instead kept the money himself–for a favorable ruling in a case.
Government prosecutors Scott Turow, Julian Solotorovsky and Howard Pearl also disclosed another connection with Fred Lane, president of the Illinois State Bar Association, whose name surfaced earlier in connection with a $2,500 loan to Holzer.
Most of the new disclosures come in a document entitled ”other crimes and wrongs,” filed in February by the prosecutors, that was kept under seal until after Holzer`s conviction.
In 1971, when Holzer was sitting in the Law Division of the Circuit Court, according to the government, he received a $2,000 referral fee from Lane. The government says this money was given to Holzer for cases Holzer had referred to Lane before Holzer became a judge in 1966. The government said Holzer never revealed ”the existence of this financial relationship” to opposing counsel when members of Lane`s law firm subsequently appeared in Holzer`s court.
Lane, who has steadfastly denied any wrongdoing in giving Holzer the loan, which Lane has described as a campaign contribution, also denied any impropriety in the fee-referral relationship. He said none of the cases referred to his office by Holzer for a fee was ever assigned to Holzer as a judge.
Lane acknowledges, according to the documents, that he had a
”professional relationship” with Holzer based, in part, on cases with which the two were associated before Holzer became a judge. Lane said that he personally appeared before Holzer only in rare instances and when he did, the judge disclosed their relationship to opposing attorneys, even though the judge may not have specifically disclosed the referral-fee relationship.
Lane said he did not know if Holzer disclosed Lane`s relationship to opposing attorneys when other attorneys from Lane`s office appeared before him on cases.
”I presume he did,” Lane testified. ”There is a general obligation to disclose that which the court believes is of some materiality to both sides. The fact that a relationship existed years before is something I personally believe should be disclosed, although some others might disagree. I presume he made the necessary disclosures.”
In 1975, according to the government`s document, Holzer ”said he could fix the law school admission” of the son of an attorney. Holzer ”solicited and received $1,000 in cash” as partial payment on a total of $3,000 to arrange for the admission, the document said. But, when the attorney`s son gained admission in another law school, Holzer ”refused to return the $1,000.”
A similar instance occurred in 1978, when lawyer Jerrold Morris asked Holzer to help the son of a client get admission to a Chicago law school. Holzer wrote a letter to the dean and, in response, the dean said that ”very special consideration” would be given to the applicant, according to the government. At about that time, Holzer`s wife contacted Morris` client to buy insurance and the client agreed. In April, 1978, when the client`s son was admitted to the school, the client obtained a $2,000 cashier`s check and sent it to the law school where it was credited as a donation in Holzer`s name, the government said.
Morris, who testified that he had obtained more than $30,000 in personal and bank loans for Holzer in 1970s, was out of town and not available for comment.
Another interesting story pops up in the grand jury testimony of attorney Russell Topper, who testified at Holzer`s trial that he lent Holzer $10,000 in 1979 while one of his cases was pending before Holzer.
The incident revolves around a civil case pending before Cook County Circuit Judge Daniel Covelli, now deceased. In that case, according to the government, the plaintiff paid $10,000 to Holzer that Holzer ”said would be passed on to (Covelli) for a ruling in favor” of the plaintiff.
During his grand jury appearance in February, 1985, Topper recalled how Covelli, a close personal friend, had told him how Covelli had accidentally learned of the alleged payoff and angrily chastised Holzer for it.
According to Topper, Covelli ruled in favor of the plaintiff based on the merits and, sometime afterward, bumped into the attorney who had given the $10,000 to Holzer. The lawyer ”thanked him very much for the verdict and said he hoped it was enough,” Topper testified. ”When Covelli asked, `What was enough?` the lawyer then proceeded to describe to him (Covelli) the arrangement that Judge Holzer had made,” Topper said.
Covelli told Topper that he was outraged and he rushed down the 24th floor hall of the Daley Center to Holzer`s chambers, according to the transcript of the grand jury testimony. ”Covelli told me, `I still had my robes on, and I walked in . . . I don`t remember opening up his door, I may have gone right through it,` ” Topper testified.
Topper said Covelli told him that he called Holzer a ”foul name” and told Holzer, ”If you ever do anything of that kind with me, or any other judge in Chancery again, I`ll kill you.”
THIS IS WHAT YOU CALL FLAMBOYANCE
A dozen of the nation`s most widely acclaimed trial attorneys showed up one day last week at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel here for what was billed as a
”Superstar Seminar,” sponsored by the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association.
About 450 lawyers and judges paid from $75 to $175 to hear the likes of Melvin Belli; Howard L. Weitzman, who successfully defended John DeLorean in his cocaine conspiracy trial; Joseph D. Jamail, who recently won a $10.5 billion verdict on behalf of Pennzoil Co. against Texaco Inc.; Richard
”Racehorse” Haynes, who successfuly defended Texas tycoon T. Cullen Davis in a couple of murder trials; and Gerry Spence, who counts among his victories a $10.5 million verdict against Kerr-McGee in the Karen Silkwood case and a $52 million Cook County verdict against McDonald`s Corp.
Along with providing winning tips, they regaled their audience with personal anecdotes that sometimes stretched believability and personal opinions that made no pretense at legal niceties.
Belli and Weitzman both criticized Warren Burger to loud applause. Belli at one point called the chief justice ”a bum” and described a recent appointee of President Reagan to the federal bench as a ”stupid oaf.”
At one point, Belli spoke about how he was trying to live down his reputation for flamboyance in the courtroom when he immediately embarked on the story of how he sued the ownership of the San Francisco Giants shortly after their move to the Bay city. Belli said that Giants` owner Horace Stoneham had promised fans radiated heat in the ballpark, but instead Belli had frozen his (cough cough) ears off at a game and decided to sue the Giants for $1,650–the price of a season ticket.
”When it was time to argue the case, I came out wearing a fur coat, mucklucks, a fur hat and fur gloves,” said Belli. ”I couldn`t have any notes because I couldn`t turn the pages because of the fur gloves.”
The jury retired, came back with a verdict in two minutes and awarded Belli the full amount of the $1,650 he had asked for.
”That was my flamboyant best,” Belli said. ”I assure you that I haven`t done anything like that since–except to bring a woman to court with all her clothes off to show where they did plastic surgery on her breasts” in a medical malpractice suit against an errant surgeon.
Haynes also reveled in the unorthodox, extolling the advantages of distraction when the opposing counsel is on the way to making a telling point. A specially tailored pair of ”tear-away britches” that can be split up the rear at the proper moment comes in most handy to ”throw the most serious, beady-eyed prosecutor off the track,” he said.
ANOTHER LOOK AT ESTATE CASE
Ever-vigilant Cook County public guardian Patrick Murphy is taking what might even be considered a rare step for him. Tuesday he will ask Circuit Court Judge Henry Budzinski to reopen an estate case involving the late Zella Burgeson. Murphy contends the case raises questions about the conduct of attorneys John P. Coleman and Sheldon Kirschner. Murphy maintains that the attorneys took advantage of the woman, ultimately taking $60,000 in allegedly nonitemized fees that constituted nearly a third of her total estate. He also alleges that they hoodwinked the judge when obtaining an order effectively absolving Kirschner of charges of impropriety in handling Burgeson`s affairs. Murphy alleges that some fast talking during a hectic day of hearings on legal motions resulted in the judge signing an order that had the effect of getting Kirschner off the hook. Murphy considers the affair manipulation of an ill woman and rape of her estate. Coleman vigorously denies any wrongdoing by him or Kirschner.
BRIEFS: As we predicted, the Illinois Medical Center Commission reinstated as its general counsel last week Edward A. Scott Jr., who was suspended with pay in December shortly after the Illinois Supreme Court censured him for converting and commingling a client`s funds in a personal injury case.
