The Wall Street Journal-20080114-On Today-s Docket- -Judge Alex- Does The Supreme Court- TV Justice-s Case Is Heard In Camera-Shy Chamber- -Rather Watch Paint Dry-
Return to: The_Wall_Street_Journal-20080114
On Today's Docket: 'Judge Alex' Does The Supreme Court; TV Justice's Case Is Heard In Camera-Shy Chamber; 'Rather Watch Paint Dry'
WASHINGTON -- If you want to watch "Judge Alex," a television show where a former judge settles small-time squabbles for the amusement of daytime viewers, check your local listings. If you want to see Judge Alex himself -- today, anyway -- come to the U.S. Supreme Court.
That's because the high court, where one justice famously warned that cameras would "roll over my dead body," will be picking through a show-business deal gone sour. Along the way, the case could make Alex Ferrer the first TV judge to create binding precedent.
The case pits the Havana-born Mr. Ferrer, 46 years old and promoted on TV as "Tall, Dark and Judgmental," against his former manager, an ex-criminal defense lawyer who now produces a gospel talent show on cable.
Their dispute is over how much -- if anything -- the former manager should have received in commissions. But the precise legal issue before the Supreme Court, unlike those that animate "Judge Alex" each day, won't make much blood boil. The question isn't who's right, but who gets to decide who's right -- a private arbitrator or the state labor commissioner.
Joseph Wapner, the first judge to chair the most-venerable TV bench, "The People's Court," shies away from handicapping the case out of concern for prejudicing the high court. "I don't think it's proper for me to comment on a pending case and how I would rule," says the 88- year-old Judge Wapner.
Another retired TV jurist, former New York Mayor Ed Koch, is equally circumspect. "I would apply the law as those [California] courts have interpreted it," says Mr. Koch, who presided over "The People's Court" from 1997 to 1999. "Unless and until the U.S. Supreme Court overrules" them, he adds.
While some jurists badger lawmakers to raise judicial pay and others throw in the robe to enter private practice, Mr. Ferrer, a former cop elected to the Miami circuit court in 1995, put together an audition tape. A colleague, Judge Marilyn Milian, had been tapped to preside over "The People's Court," and Mr. Ferrer was intrigued.
"The idea that she was still being a judge, and she was having fun with it, and she was making a lot more money, I thought: Are you kidding? You gotta do that!" he says.
In 2002, a mutual friend put Mr. Ferrer in touch with another former Miami lawyer, Arnold Preston, 40, who was then working at the William Morris Agency in Beverly Hills, Calif. Mr. Preston, who used to handle drunk-driving and other criminal-defense cases, circulated Mr. Ferrer's picture and videotape at William Morris, where he says he was an "agent in training."
"He was instantly hot, and everybody knew it," says Mr. Preston, in a written answer to questions from The Wall Street Journal.
In March 2002, Mr. Preston told Mr. Ferrer that two producers wanted to meet him. Mr. Ferrer took the meeting but says they couldn't reach an agreement. Two years later, Mr. Ferrer had several more meetings and a deal was struck: "Judge Alex" would be produced by Twentieth Television, a unit of News Corp., which also owns the Journal.
The U.S. Supreme Court historically has been camera-shy about its own proceedings, though several lower courts are televised. In 1996, Justice David Souter declared to a House committee: "The day you see a camera come into our courtroom, it's going to roll over my dead body." The court, he said, was not "part of the entertainment industry."
Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas have likewise rejected the idea of allowing cameras into their marble- columned courtroom. "If you introduce cameras, it is human nature for me to suspect that one of my colleagues is saying something for a sound bite," Justice Kennedy told a House committee last year.
The court has recorded audio of its sessions since 1955. Scholars were permitted to listen, but only if they promised not to make duplicates. In 1993, a college professor broke the rules by selling recordings of several landmark cases. "The court is considering what legal remedies may be appropriate," a spokeswoman sniffed at the time. It ultimately backed down. The court now releases audiotapes at the end of each term and makes same-day recordings available in some high- profile cases.
Outside of work, though, the Supreme Court justices are increasingly happy to appear on television. Justice Scalia permits broadcast of some of his speeches. Chief Justice John Roberts and retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor appeared last year in the PBS series "The Supreme Court." Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is featured in another PBS series airing this month, "The Jewish Americans."
Last year Justice Thomas allowed C-Span to broadcast a party held in a private home to mark publication of his memoir, "My Grandfather's Son." There, viewers could see Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Stephen Breyer checking out the hors d'oeuvres, and some guests apparently failing to recognize Justice Souter, standing by himself in the kitchen.
Television court shows got their start in 1981 with the landmark "People's Court." Parties to actual small-claims court cases agreed to have disputes settled on TV by a retired judge serving as an arbitrator. Judge Wapner presided for 12 years. Today, there's a veritable circuit of judge shows, each showcasing a different kind of judicial personality, such as the scolding "Judge Judy" and the street-smart "Judge Joe Brown."
Last week, millions watched "Judge Alex" adjudicate whether Gloria broke a promise to repay the $2,500 John spent to bail her out of jail, and what Christy might owe her neighbor Jim after her tree fell onto his property.
In the "Judge Alex" case, Mr. Preston says he's owed an estimated commission of somewhere between $75,000 and $150,000. Mr. Ferrer denies he owes Mr. Preston anything. "Judge Alex," he says, wasn't the product of the 2002 meeting. In any event, he contends that Mr. Preston has no right to a commission because he wasn't actually a licensed talent agent.
Mr. Preston, citing a clause in their contract, demanded a hearing in front of a private arbitrator. Mr. Ferrer refused, invoking the California Talent Agencies Act, which assigns disputes to the state labor commissioner. California state courts, following a 1967 precedent involving a spat between the rock group Jefferson Airplane and its manager, agreed with Mr. Ferrer.
"The labor commissioner is very pro-talent on this question and will hammer Preston," says Schuyler Moore, who teaches entertainment law at the University of California, Los Angeles.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which fears a ruling that could interfere with arbitration clauses across the country, filed a brief supporting Mr. Preston.
Mr. Ferrer won't discuss his compensation but notes the career sacrifice his move to television entailed. At the time he was offered the show, he was on the short-list for the state appellate court. Mr. Ferrer, who counts the late Justice Benjamin Cardozo as his judicial hero, now says that door is closed.
But if a TV judge won't soon be on the Supreme Court, how about putting the Supreme Court on TV?
"I think they should," as a matter of public policy, but "I don't think anybody would watch it," says Mr. Ferrer. "The arguments can be fascinating for lawyers or people who are students of the law, but for average people, they'd rather watch paint dry."
