Milton I. Shadur (from the October, 1991 evaluation)
http://www.chicagocouncil.org/news/fd_evaluations/northern_district/miltoni.htm Judge Shadur, 67, was appointed by President Carter in 1980, on the recommendation of Senator Stevenson. He graduated from the University of Chicago Law School in 1949. In 1949 he joined the predecessor firm of Miller, Shakman, Hamilton & Kurtzon, and remained at that firm until he joined the Court in 1980. His practice was primarily as a corporate and real estate lawyer, although he did have limited litigation experience, including as counsel to the Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board.
Judge Shadur is a highly intelligent judge, and is considered by most lawyers to be an excellent judge. All agree that he is exceptionally hard-working, knowledgeable, and incisive, and with high integrity. In person, he is courteous to lawyers. Most lawyers report that he is a very good trial judge.
When Judge Shadur first came on the bench, there was a substantial view that he would prejudge issues or cases and use his brilliance to make sure that the case reached the result he considered appropriate. The view today is much less harsh. Most lawyers believe that Judge Shadur is now more open to differing views. Once Judge Shadur has made up his mind, however, it is very difficult to persuade him to change it.
Judge Shadur has the unusual practice of reading every complaint -- and perhaps every piece of paper -- as it comes in. He frequently will order plaintiffs to defend the adequacy of their pleading before any motion is filed. This practice is unusual and many lawyers resent it. It is efficient, however, and not unfair, as long as he remains open to argument.
Judge Shadur is a prolific writer. This is both a strength and a weakness. The variety of precedent he provides, and the quality of his work, is important to advancing the law. On the other hand, he sometimes publishes too much, and he occasionally makes matters more complex than they need be.
Many lawyers object to Judge Shadur's practice of freely criticizing attorneys in his written opinions. The Council believes that it is entirely appropriate for judges to criticize attorneys who have significantly violated ethical norms and professional obligations. Many attorneys feel, however, that Judge Shadur's criticisms often relate to minutiae, rather than legitimate criticism of serious defects in the attorney's work. In addition, some lawyers believe that it is unfair for a court to criticize lawyers in public, without giving the attorney the opportunity to defend himself or herself first.
Judge Shadur has a reputation as an activist judge. In earlier years, he would frequently attempt to stretch Seventh Circuit precedents if the result he believed appropriate was not supported by the precedent. Due to his activist approach, Judge Shadur had a high reversal rate in the early to mid-1980's. In recent years, this type of activism seems to have diminished.
Judge Shadur is clearly one of the brightest judges anywhere on the federal bench. His temperament and demeanor have improved. Although some lawyers believe he still tends to prejudge issues, unnecessarily criticize lawyers, and overintellectualize certain matters, most lawyers now believe that he is an excellent judge.
Correct...however, the 9th Circuit Court doesn't have jurisidiction because Cuba is not part of the 9th Circuit. They had absolutely no business issuing any ruling on this or even hearing the case.
The D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court would have jurisdiction to rule on this matter...and in fact are reviewing the cases, another reason why it was assinine for the 9th to be getting involved.