Super Lawyers - Minnesota 2015

you work through something and you have a view of it and it just doesn’t work, so you’re forced to change. Other times, somebody says something or you read something that causes you to look at the issue in a slightly different way that leads you to a different conclusion.

That’s one of the beauties of working with six other people. When you have seven people in a room trying to get it right as best they see it, and that they see it from a slightly different perspective, it enriches your view and helps you understand in a better way. And then the writing process refines that even more, and oftentimes in the process your views can change. It’s been a learning process from day one.

Q: And so leaving aside the question of significance or importance, are there any cases that are particularly memorable for you?

A: Oh, there are any number of them that come to mind. Sometimes we make very difficult decisions with results that you don’t like at all. Having to reverse a conviction when there’s been a brutal crime committed and you have a strong sense that the [convicted] person is guilty, yet it’s clear from what took place at the trial that they didn’t get a fair trial, and that they’re entitled to that and so you have to reverse your conviction. Those are always difficult.

I had a case early on that was a question of statutory construction, a statute that made no sense. There wasn’t much you could do to make sense out of it, and it’s like you want to throw up your hands and walk away, except you don’t get to do that. You have to be able to come to a conclusion on what it means in a way that is true to what— at least as best you can determine—the legislature was trying to accomplish. Thank goodness, we figured out a way to do it, but it was not pleasant getting there.

Q: What advice would you give lawyers who are arguing a case before the court?

A: First of all, in your brief, be brief. Be
clear, be concise, and as far as arguments
go, when you get asked a question, answer
the question. Don’t assume it’s a trick
question; don’t assume that the person
asking the question is out to trip you up or
disagrees with you. I ask questions because
I need to know the answer to help me
make my decision.

Think about the one question you don’t want to hear and have an answer for it, because you’re probably going to get it. You have seven people up there who have studied your briefs and the law and are pretty up-to-speed, and so they’re going to be concerned about various and sundry issues. We need answers to those questions so we can make a decision that accounts for the myriad of concerns that may be presented.

Q: It’s surprising to hear that some attorneys will ascribe negative intent to the questions they’re asked.

A: Oh, that’s the other thing. Don’t be hostile. You’re trying to get us to rule in your favor. The idea is to help us, and we’re asking questions so you can help us. If I ask a question and you disagree with the premise of the question, explain to me why I’m wrong and I’ll listen to that. I want to know why I’m wrong or if I’m wrong. Don’t try to avoid the question; don’t answer the question you want answered. Answer the question we asked.

Q: You’d think “don’t be hostile” would be common sense.

A: You would think that, wouldn’t you? But it doesn’t always work that way.

Q: Who were your mentors growing up and in your various careers?

A: My parents, my family. They are the ones that I looked up to. The reality is that most of us are influenced by those who we can talk to, who we can reach out and touch, and who is that for young children?

Parents and family. This notion that athletes and entertainers and celebrities have a big impact—maybe they do, maybe they don’t. But it’s not nearly the impact of the people immediately around us.

In my football career, the people that
taught me how to be a football player
were Jim Marshall, Carl Eller, Gary Larsen,
Paul Dickson, people like that. And in my
legal career it was Leonard Lindquist,
Gene Keating, Ed Glennon, Ed Garvey from
Lindquist & Vennum. They all taught me
what being a lawyer was all about. I came
out of law school and I didn’t have a clue,
and they were instrumental in getting me
going down the right path.

Q: Regarding your law school days, how were you able to balance your studies with your football career?

A: Lots of people work and go to law school, and for me the challenge was more going to school during the season, finding classes that I could take at times when I was available to take them. It worked out pretty well.

Q: And of course you had a bit more celebrity than the average law student. Did that affect your education?

A: You know what, from my vantage point, it didn’t affect it for me. I mean, I am just who I am. It may have had some effect on others, but I didn’t spend a lot of time worried about that. I was going to law school so I could learn and understand the law. And so the fact that I had some celebrity, it’s just a fact of life that I haven’t spent a lot of time worried about.

Q: Have you put any thought into what you would like your legal legacy to be? A: Again, I will leave that for others, quite frankly, as I have left it for others with respect to my athletic career. I have done, hopefully, the best that I can do and what others think about that, they will think about it.

Q: What’s next for you?

A: Hopefully, continued growing and learning. Clearly, it’s going to be a work in progress and, hopefully, it’ll be exciting and challenging. Beyond that, I don’t have it nailed down. Obviously, I’ll be involved on a much greater basis with the Page Education Foundation. Hopefully I will be doing some other interesting and exciting things also. And somewhere along the way, I suppose my family would like me to share time with them. I look forward to that.