Jump to content

Thomas D. Waterman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Thomas Waterman
Associate Justice of the Iowa Supreme Court
Assumed office
February 23, 2011
Appointed byTerry Branstad
Preceded byMarsha Ternus
Personal details
Born
Thomas Dana Waterman

1959 (age 64–65)
Davenport, Iowa, U.S.
EducationDartmouth College (AB)
University of Iowa (JD)

Thomas D. Waterman (born 1959)[1] is a justice of the Iowa Supreme Court.

Education

[edit]

Waterman was born in Davenport, Iowa.[2] He graduated from Bettendorf High School and received a degree in history from Dartmouth College in 1981.[1] He then graduated Order of the Coif in the top five percent of his class from the University of Iowa College of Law in 1984.[1]

[edit]

Waterman practiced for 27 years at the Davenport law firm Lane & Waterman LLP.[3] He was a fourth-generation partner in the firm and specialized in civil trial and appellate litigation.[4] Waterman was ranked in Band 1 for commercial litigation by Chambers and Partners and was also recognized by The Best Lawyers in America.[1] He was also a member of the Iowa State Judicial Nominating Commission and the American College of Trial Lawyers.[2]

Iowa Supreme Court

[edit]

Waterman was one of three justices appointed by Iowa Governor Terry Branstad in 2011. In November 2010, Iowa voters had removed all three justices seeking reelection in response to the court unanimously legalizing same-sex marriage in Varnum v. Brien.[5] Waterman is an elected member of the American Law Institute.[2] He is the second member of his family to serve on the Iowa Supreme Court after Charles M. Waterman, who founded Lane & Waterman.[6]

In 2019, Waterman spoke with state Representative Steven Holt, the floor manager of a bill to modify procedures for choosing judges and the chief justice's term.[7] Michael Gartner reported that the bill was a "power grab" by Waterman and his allies, who lobbied the legislature and wanted Waterman to replace Mark Cady before his term expired.[8] Unlike Cady, Waterman refused to disclose his contacts with legislators or recuse himself in the ensuing litigation.[9][10] Waterman subsequently took part in a 4-2 decision to refer the case to the Iowa Court of Appeals, which dismissed the lawsuit 3–2 on standing grounds, following which the Iowa Supreme Court declined review.[11][12][13]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b c d "Iowa Voters Judicial Directory" (PDF). Iowa Judicial Branch. August 2012. Archived (PDF) from the original on July 18, 2019.
  2. ^ a b c "Thomas D. Waterman". Archived from the original on November 18, 2018. Retrieved April 4, 2020.
  3. ^ Tibbetts, Ed. "Q-C attorney named to Iowa Supreme Court". The Quad-City Times. Retrieved 2020-04-05.
  4. ^ Gaul, Alma. "25,000 cans of beer in the house". The Quad-City Times. Retrieved 2020-04-05.
  5. ^ A.G. Sulzberger (3 November 2010). "Ouster of Iowa Judges Sends Signal to Bench". The New York Times. p. A1. Retrieved 11 October 2016.
  6. ^ "Charles M. Waterman | Past Justices | Iowa Judicial Branch". www.iowacourts.gov. Retrieved 2020-04-05.
  7. ^ Gruber-Miller, Stephen (September 16, 2019). "Iowa's chief justice recuses himself from case challenging judicial nominating process". The Des Moines Register.
  8. ^ Gartner, Michael (June 5, 2019). "Dico, owing millions in fines, thumbs its nose at Feds. Register circulation plummets, more reporters leave". Des Moines Cityview. Archived from the original on February 20, 2020.
  9. ^ Belin, Laura (September 18, 2019). "Chief justice sheds new light on Iowa Supreme Court lobbying for judicial bill". Bleeding Heartland. Archived from the original on May 29, 2020.
  10. ^ Lynch, James (September 25, 2019). "Iowa Supreme Court justice again refuses to recuse himself from judicial nominating challenge". Cedar Rapids Gazette.
  11. ^ "Appeals court to hear lawsuit over new judge selection law". Associated Press. September 26, 2019.
  12. ^ Pitt, David (February 19, 2020). "Challenges to Iowa judge selection law fail in appeals court". Associated Press.
  13. ^ Laird, Rox (May 17, 2020). "Iowa High Court Dismisses Challenge to Changes in Judicial Nominations". Courthouse News Service.
[edit]