Utah's U.S. judges show wide-ranging portfolios

And potential conflicts of interest are numerous

U.S. District Judge Dale A. Kimball does not preside over cases involving his former law firm, Parr-Waddoups. A story in Wednesday's Deseret Morning News did not make clear that Kimball recuses himself as a matter of course from any cases involving the firm. Also, Parr-Waddoups has not paid into Kimball's 401k plan, which is managed by an independent company based in Austin, Texas, since he left the firm in November 1997.

By Jerry D. Spangler and Angie Welling
Deseret Morning News

WASHINGTON — July 6, 2005 — They all wear the same robes, interpret the same federal law and earn roughly the same amount of money for their service. But Utah's nine federal judges are a mixed bag when it comes to their financial portfolios.

Some are rich, some are less affluent. Some are stock-market junkies with a wide range of investments, while others stake their retirement on safe IRAs and government pensions.

And according to federal financial disclosure reports required of all federal judges, Utah's judges have a wide range of potential conflicts of interests, ranging from part ownership of a gold mine to a busted investment in the defunct energy giant Enron — a business boondoggle that is now before the federal courts.

At least one judge is a millionaire, and two or three others could be close to joining the well-heeled club, according to their 2003 reports, the most recent year for which reports are available online by the watchdog group Judicial Watch.

Two have investments worth well into six figures, and the other three have little or nothing outside of their judicial salaries, according to the reports, which require judges to annually reveal, within certain ranges, their outside income and the value of their assets.

Prosperous judge

Far and away, U.S. District Judge David K. Winder is the most well-to-do of the federal judges in Utah.

According to his 2003 disclosure form, Winder has investment and trust assets worth at least $1.54 million, but they could be worth as much as $3.32 million. (The disclosures list only a range of the assets' value, not the exact amount.)

Speaking candidly about his rosy financial picture, the senior jurist said his actual worth in 2003 was close to the middle of the range.

"I'm proud of my financial situation. I've saved and worked pretty hard," said Winder, a federal judge in Utah for 27 years.

Winder's disclosure form lists 28 different investments and trust income, everything from dividend payments of less than $1,000 from General Electric and Johnson & Johnson, to three different investment funds that each paid him between $15,000 and $45,000 in 2003 alone.

For the entire year, Winder showed income outside of his judicial salary of at least $71,500, though it could have been as much as $275,000, reports show.

While he has no qualms releasing information about those businesses with which he has financial dealings, Winder does question the necessity of including the amount of money attached to a particular asset. It should be enough to ensure judicial independence, he said, simply to make public the identities of companies themselves.

"There can be a conflict, and it all comes down to that," Winder said. "I'm all for the idea of disclosure of the names and addresses and identities of the people that the judges might be litigating with."

If Winder has a potential conflict, it could be his investments in public projects such as health care, electrical and water development, and city bonds.

And he shows an interest in the Sacramento de la Plata gold mine, which he discloses was worth less than $15,000 and produced no income. Mention of that particular investment makes Winder smile and note that he has held onto the investment, for which he paid $6,500, since 1968.

Down on the list

At the other end of the spectrum is U.S. District Judge Dee Benson, who, as far as the government is concerned, had nothing to disclose. There are no outside positions or outside income of any kind, and he has no debts or liabilities.

Behind Winder in being able to afford country club dues is U.S. District Judge J. Thomas Greene, who listed 73 investments, mostly blue chip stocks that paid small dividends, along with several investment and bond accounts.

All told, the investments produced less than $60,000 in income but had a minimum value of $245,000 and a maximum of $1.5 million.

If Greene has a potential conflict, it is his financial affection for high-tech stocks such as MCI Worldcom, Lucent Technologies, Motorola, Intel, Hewlett Packard and Dell Computer. But he also has a diversified portfolio showing lots of bonds, money markets and nice, safe tax-free investments such as T-bills and government bonds.

Greene, however, questioned his placement as second-highest on the scale. In describing his situation, the senior jurist said, "My financial life is such that if somebody really followed my decisions on financial matters they would be a pauper by now."

Also a senior judge after 20 years on the bench, Greene said he is cautious in his holdings and has tried not to invest in local companies that are likely to come before him in court. He recalled recusing himself from a case involving the credit-reporting firm Equifax, in which he still held an interest in 2003.

"It's something that I have done as a matter of course," he said. "If you have a financial interest in a company, you shouldn't sit on a case."

According to his 2003 disclosure, Greene did not receive any gifts but did receive reimbursements for travel to Seattle and Jackson, Wyo., for meetings of the American Bar Association and the Administrative Office of the Courts, respectively.

Savings and investments

U.S. District Judge Tena Campbell has a fair amount tucked away in investments, but she must be a cautious investor. Her disclosure forms list just 10 investments, mostly money markets and individual retirement accounts, that produced somewhere between $1,000 and $12,000 in outside income in 2003.

The value of those investments is $415,000 at a minimum, and it could be as much as $915,000.

Campbell listed no other potential conflicts. She holds no positions in any organizations, received no gifts or reimbursements, has no debts and she has no other outside source of income other than her salary and investments.

Another apparently cautious investor is U.S. District Judge Bruce Jenkins, who has most of his assets tied up in a credit union savings account. He lists 12 investments, savings and tax-exempt accounts worth a minimum of $115,000 and a maximum of $465,000.

If Jenkins has potential conflicts, it could be the small investments in Questar, Skywest, Sprint, Disney and Hilton. All combined, his portfolio produced a minimum of $5,000 in outside income and a maximum of $115,000.

Dividends from his stocks produced only a small amount of revenue.

U.S. District Judge Ted Stewart is also largely devoid of conflicts. He has no positions with nonfederal entities, has entered into no agreements, has earned no outside income, received no gifts or reimbursements and has no investment income other than interest from a credit union account. His only liabilities listed are two small credit card loans.

U.S. District Judge Dale Kimball's disclosure forms list a total of seven real estate investments, pensions and other investments worth a minimum of $400,000 and a maximum of $685,000.

And thanks primarily to a generous pension from the law firm of Parr-Waddoups, Kimball earned a minimum of $112,500 in income outside of his judicial salary. The maximum, based on the sliding scale allowed in the disclosure report, would be about $1 million.

Kimball's potential conflicts are several. Not only is there the Parr-Waddoups pension — a law firm that presumably practices in the federal courts — Kimball has an interest in two rental properties that produce annual revenue of up to $5,000.

Kimball is active with various nonfederal legal groups, including being a director of the Utah Chapter of the Federal Bar Association and the Salt Lake Chapter of the J. Reuben Clark Law Society. He's also a member of the American Bar Foundation.

Informative tool

U.S. District Judge Paul Cassell may not have the investment income of some of his colleagues on the bench. But his 2003 disclosure form reports he earned just less than $19,000 in salary from the University of Utah law school and another $10,000 in book royalties.

Cassell's financial portfolio is all invested in IRAs, money market accounts and the Utah Retirement System.

He also noted his wife worked for the Sandy City Attorney's Office at the time (she's now with the Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office), and that he received reimbursement from the Federalist Society for travel to an annual convention in Washington, D.C.

But Cassell's income from his 12 investments was less than $4,000. The total value of those investments was worth a minimum of $100,000 and a maximum of $295,000.

U.S. District Judge David Sam reported six investments that produced less than $1,000 in outside income. Altogether, the investments are worth $90,000 or less, the report states.

Sam's potential conflicts could include oil and gas development. He gets a royalty from Chevron for a gas lease, and he says he has one-half interest in unspecified oil and gas leases — a hot commodity with today's energy crises and a potential topic to end up in the federal courts.

And his most embarrassing investment was probably Enron.

Federal judges are required by federal law to disclose their financial information to the Judicial Conference every year. A study by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, found the public can obtain these reports only after lengthy delays and processing fees.

Judicial Watch, an independent group based in Washington, D.C., now makes the reports available free of charge to the public.

"We believe posting these reports will help educate the public about, and increase understanding of, federal judicial operations," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "The information also can serve as a tool to ensure that the federal judicial process is above reproach."