Minnesota Lawyer Blog

Two locally based firms -- James H. Gilbert Law Group and Robert Hill & Associates (both of Eden Prairie) -- scored a big victory for Walgreens today at the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

The dispute involved how the tax value of two properties leased by Walgreens for use as stores should be calculated. Under the arrangement it has used to develop thousands of sites nationwide, Walgreens leases sites from developers that buy the property and develop it to fit the retailer's highly specialized needs. The long-term leases Walgreens enters into provide for rents at substantially above market rates in order to allow the developer to recoup its capital outlay and other development costs over time. As part of the lease, Walgreens agrees to pay all property taxes.

In determining what those property taxes should be on the two properties, the city of Madison used the rent generated by the property as a means of figuring out the property's market value. However, rather than using the rent amount that the property would generate on the open market to determine the properties' worth, the city used the much higher monthly rent that Walgreen paid to the developer. The city's way of calculating property value led to a result that was much higher than Walgreens' -- approximately doubling the valuations from about $2 million each to about $4 million each.

Both the trial court and lower appellate court ruled in favor of the city's assessment.

But, in Walgreen Co. v. City of Madison, the Wisconsin Supreme Court today reversed.

"If we were to expand the law in the direction the City requests, property assessments would in essence become business value assessments, with assessors improperly equating financial arrangements with property value," wrote Judge Louis Butler for the court.

Jim Gilbert of the Gilbert Law Group called the decision "huge," given that Walgreens has thousands of stores and uses a similar lease arrangement with developers throughout the country. He noted that this decision was "closely watched" as cash-strapped municipalities look to find creative ways to fill their coffers as residential real estate values decline.

Gilbert's co-counsel on the case was Bob Hill.

Joanne Colan over at Rocketboom tells us that on this day in history, the Greeks entered Troy with their Trojan Horse. We all know how that turned out, hence the saying, "beware of Greeks bearing gifts."

But if you replace "Greeks" with "attorney general offices" — then delete the rest — this phrase might be as apropos now as it was in 1184 B.C.

Where's my point? E-mails recently obtained by the Wisconsin State Journal show that a top detective's final year in the Wisconsin Attorney General's Office was like warfare.

"The last year has been really ugly for me and this retirement was pretty much shoved down my throat," wrote Jim Warren, who led Wisconsin's Division of Criminal Investigation for 10 years, to another agent. "I would have loved to stay on but the constant war with the current administration just got to be too much," another message reads.

Sound familiar?

It’s good enough for Wisconsin, Iowa, and South Dakota. But not for Minnesota.

Our neighbors to the west are actually not the latest state to allow cameras and other recording devices into its Supreme Court -- it did so in 2001. But now, thanks to a high court ruling, South Dakota has expanded the use of recording devices, allowing cameras and tape recorders in its circuit courts. Next up in SoDak: A study of whether cameras should be allowed in lower courts.

Meanwhile, as has been reported in Minnesota Lawyer, the issue of cameras in our courtrooms is a dead discussion for the time being, despite endorsements of the practice from judges in both Iowa and Wisconsin.

Do we know something that all the states around us don’t know? Or is it the other way around?

For anyone wondering why the Minnesota State Bar Association spends so much time debating the future of judicial races, let me present Exhibit A: Wisconsin.

We mentioned earlier this year how the race between Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Louis B. Butler Jr. and his challenger, Circuit Court Judge Michael J. Gableman, could become a big money, mudslinging slugfest.

Unfortunately, we were right.

This week, a citizens' group filed a complaint against Gableman with the state's Judicial Commission over a recent campaign ad accusing Butler of being soft on crime.

The complaint alleges that the ad "knowingly and with reckless disregard misrepresents the facts." Butler has since struck back with his own TV spot.

At stake is a 10-year term on the state's high court. The good news is that with an April 1 election, Wisconsinites only have to endure 12 more days of this judicial pissing match.

Let's hope we never have to.

The Associated Press has reported that a Wisconsin legislator has persuaded the state's Assembly to eliminate all state funding for the University of Wisconsin law school. The reason: There's too many lawyers in Wisconsin.

Rep. Frank Lasee, R-Green Bay, was quoted as saying: "We don't need more ambulance chasers. We don't need frivolous lawsuits. And we don't need attorneys making people's lives miserable when they go to family court for divorces. And I think that having too many attorneys leads to all those bad results."

Wow. Tell us how you really feel Rep. Lasee. I respect the representative's right to make these comments, but I also respect the legal profession too much to let them go unchallenged. We know that lawyers are not rated too high on the public's list of honorable professions, and negative, stereotypical comments like these are a big part of the reason. They seriously undercut and undermine the good and important work that personal injury and family law attorneys do for their clients. While every profession has a few "bad apples," by far the great majority of attorneys I know -- and as a legal journalist and attorney myself, I know a lot of them -- are honorable folks who got into the profession to help people.

Fortunately, according to the AP report, Lasee's plan appears to have little chance at surviving negotiations between the Assembly and Democratic-controlled Senate and being included in the Legislature's final budget. And even if it did, Gov. Jim Doyle would likely veto it. (Apparently, Doyle's late mother was a beloved administrator at the law school.)

Let's hope Rep. Lasee's sentiments -- and his proposal to eliminate funding to the state's law school -- are not contagious and don't spread to Wisconsin's neighbors. Let's also hope that Rep. Lasee doesn't need legal representation any time soon.