David Minge

Born: March 19, 1942, Clarkfield, MN

Education:

• Graduated from Worthington Public Schools - 1960
• B.A. degree from St. Olaf College - 1964
• J.D. degree from the University of Chicago Law School - 1967

• Judge, Minnesota Court of Appeals, St. Paul, MN, 2002 to present
• Member of U.S. Congress, Minnesota’s 2nd District, Washington, DC, 1993 to 2001
• Attorney, Nelson, Oyen, Torvik, Minge & Gilbertson, Montevideo, MN, 1977 to 1992 (also Assistant County Attorney during this time)
• Professor, University of Wyoming Law School, Laramie, WY, 1970 to 1977
• Attorney, Faegre & Benson, Minneapolis, 1967 to 1970

• Minnesota 1967
• Minnesota Federal District Court 1967

• Governor Jesse Ventura, Sworn in May 15, 2002

• Master, Warren E. Burger Chapter American Inn of Court
• Reader in Everyone Wins program at Benjamin Mays School
• Parks and Trails Council Board
• Minnesota Land Trust

• Agricultural Law Section - Chair
• Legal Services programs as volunteer and as board member
• Montevideo School Board
• Church Council
• Clean Up the River Environment (CURE) Board
• Montevideo United Way Board
• Montevideo day care (Kindercare) board
• Minneapolis Model Cities program
• Minnesota Area Board of American Friends Service Committee

Personal: Wife Karen, sons Erik and Olaf, grandchildren Christopher, Sonja, and Annika

Hobbies: Bicycling, reading, cross-country skiing, home improvements

Publications:
Coordinating Colors: The WTO Green Box and Green Payments in Farm Programs, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, D.C., 2004;Medicare Payment Disparities, Blandin Foundation, Grand Rapids, MN, 2002; "Law as a Determinant of Resource Allocation by Local Government" 30 National Tax Journal399-410 (1977); "Special Districts and the Level of Public Expenditures," 53 Urban Law Journal (University of Detroit) 701-718 (1976); "Guarantied Municipal Bonds Their Performance and Evaluation," with Michael D. Joehnk, 21 Review of Business and Economic Research 1-18 (1976); Effect of Law on County and Municipal Expenditures As Illustrated by the Wyoming Experience, Wyoming Law Institute, Laramie, WY, 1975; "Guarantying Municipal Bonds," 1974 Wisconsin Law Review 89-141 (1974); "Federal Restrictions on the Political Activities of State and Local Employees," 57 Minnesota Law Review 493-543 (1973); "Governmental Immunity from Damage Actions in Wyoming," 7 Land and Water Law Review (University of Wyoming) 229-262, 617-662 (1972)

E-mail: davidminge@yahoo.com

Web address: www.minge.org

Candidacy Questions:

1. Why did you originally apply (or run) for a position as a judge?
Friends encouraged me to apply, saying that I had the temperament and aptitude to be a good appellate judge.
I am running for election because I believe the work of the court is important. An independent, respected judicial system is critical for a democratic society. Also, I find he work challenging and rewarding. I enjoy reading, research, and writing, and I value working with the attorneys and other judges. Finally, I see the community and litigants as the customers of the courts who should be treated as such. I want to maintain the high quality judicial system in Minnesota and strive to improve it.

2. Why should voters select you rather than your opponent(s) in the upcoming election?
I am fair, thoughtful, and independent. I am committed to service as outlined in my answer to the prior question. And I am community-connected. My experience includes work as a city lawyer, a country lawyer, a law professor, a lawmaker, and now a judge. I am also a husband of 39 years, I am a father and grandfather, and I understand the joys and struggles of family. I have served in my church, community, and the legal profession. I recognize the important role of the courts. Because of these qualities and commitments, I believe I can continue to serve Minnesotans well.

3. What are the major issues facing the court on which you wish to serve? How can these realistically be addressed?
The major internal issue is lack of time. This court is handling 30% more cases per judge than was planned when it was created. One solution is to increase the number of judges. Other possibilities include:

• Increase use of order opinions,
• Allow one judge to decide simpler cases,
• Create panels to deal with specialized subject areas,
• Travel less to out-state areas.

4. What are some of your accomplishments during your tenure as a judge of which you are most proud?
My major accomplishment is doing my job to the best of my ability. This includes carefully reading briefs, participating actively in the hearings, treating litigants with respect, researching the law, deciding cases fairly, and promptly writing opinions which carefully explain the decision. When I have disagreed with the majority, I have set forth my reasons.
I am heading up an internal effort to evaluate the work of the Court of Appeals. I also speak to students and others about the courts and our system of government. Outreach to young people is important to passing on our heritage of self-governance.

5. Do you believe it is good policy to discuss disputed legal and political issues during judicial campaigns? If so, what issues do you plan to discuss and why? If not, why shouldn't such issues be discussed?
I am concerned that politicizing judicial elections will undermine the fairness and independence of the judicial system. The focus should be on what the candidate perceives to be the role of a judge, how the candidate would perform his/her duties, and the candidate’s experience and temperament.

Judges should decide cases fairly and impartially under the law. They should diligently avoid letting personal views or political opinions affect their decisions. The judges should certainly not be guided by campaign statements in deciding cases.
Finally, cases that come before the courts are fact-specific. It is deceptive to tell voters that political issues are a consideration in the work of judges.

6. What else, if anything, would you like voters to know about your candidacy that you have not discussed so far?
Judges on the Minnesota Court of Appeals work in panels of three, and the panels are regularly changed. Diversity is important in this court. I believe that my experience as a county attorney, a lawmaker, a professor, a longtime resident of rural Minnesota, and my experience with the farm economy bring an important perspective to this court.

I share the commitment of my colleagues to maintain the court’s standards, to continue to serve this state, and to strive to improve our work.