Early voting has begun for the Division D Judicial race in the 24th JDC

And the local CFGG has sent out an email blast urging people to go vote which is good advice.  This race has 4 candidates though editorially Slabbed has eliminated John Sudderth from consideration leaving 3 qualified candidates for the voters to choose from.

That said the post I did on Sudderth’s connection to the Judge Green prosecution had a good bit of banter about candidate Hillary Landry, who was endorsed by the local Alliance for Good Government.  As a group the Slabbed Nation is not much on establishment endorsements but I will add that my lawyer Bobby Truitt has laid money down in support of Hillary Landry and that is meaningful to me.

With that set up I need to correct the record because there was a good bit of talk about Landry’s sister being married to Chris Coulon in that prior post, such information not being up to date as “marriage” is past tense in this case. To that extent Sis is a private citizen whose private life is not salient to this race. I’d also like to point out that Mrs Landry’s hubby is a very successful trial lawyer in his own right as both Mickey and Hillary have made their own way on the local bar. That is not an endorsement but I do think a fair portrayal of the situation at Team Landry.

What does interest me is it appears only two of the candidates, Sudderth and Landry have money for TeeVee.  I liked the second Landry commercial better than the first.  If I’ve missed any political advertisements for Lorraine Perkins McInnis and Scott Schlegel help me fill in the blanks in comments.

Now back to that TeeVee thing as I sense there is a Connick in the woodpile.  Remember this race once included Julie Quinn and her ghost may be playing a role in the campaign. If I divine any juicy muck I’ll pass it along.

21 thoughts on “Early voting has begun for the Division D Judicial race in the 24th JDC”

  1. I am curious what makes Mr. Truitt back Mrs. Landry. Since the three “left” are relative newbies. All of Div. D would like more info than what is being circulated on the respective fliers.

    1. Previously posted under wrong blog:

      In several voter forums many witnessed Ms.Landry time and time again unprofessionally cut Mr. Schlegel off in the middle of his speeches/verbal responses so I do believe there is a manly, ball-busting “Hillary”-like politico running for office.

      But do we really need or want another unprofessional, political Hillary type in JP Soa Soone.

    2. I have gotten to know Ms. Landry over time, and I believe that she would make a great judge in light of her criminal and civil experience. The former tends to be minimized by the candidates, but that is a large part of the judge’s responsibilities, so experience counts in that area too.

      Also, as someone who just tried a murder trial in Jefferson Parish, I can say that judicial independence from the DA, where Ms. Landry was formerly employed, is critical, and I know she will be a fair judge when it comes to criminal matters, despite her prior employment as a DA – she has assured me of that.

      I am sure that Mr. Schelgel and Ms. McGinnis would be good judges too. However, I think that Ms. Landry possesses skills and experience that make her a better candidate for this judgeship spot. Of this, I am certain, the fourth candidate cannot be elected under any circumstances given his associations with Operation Wrinkled Robe.

      1. Good for you, Bobby. I’ve made it a rule not to support judicial candidates simply because they are competent throatslashers like their unrobed political brethern. Once in while someone comes along worth a look and it would appear Mrs. Landry is worth the support.

        Too bad we can’t disconnect the revolving door in all the parishes between the DA and the judiciary. Not only laymen but lawyers tend to forget a district attorney is to do justice, not notch the belt, and judges are supposed to weigh in on individual liberties, not add to the overwhelming might of the State against its subjects.

        1. I’ve gotten fan mail from one of Hillary’s former classmates from back in the day and taken to the woodshed by Prince Charming on this one. It is a good topic to fire the blog back up with. 😉

          1. That is why I have my stance notwithstanding the occupational hazard of being perceived as an open wallet to judicial officeseekers. The cost benefit analysis is better to contribute nothing at all or have the good fortune of having deep pockets and maxing out $5000 to anyone and everyone.

  2. I can’t believe no one is talking about Lamdrys pending lawsuit against her. Every time she is questioned about it she lies her way through. That’s the big story here. A malpractice suit agAinsy a judge canadate. Really ? Look it up its there. And an active case that is being swept under the table by Rosenberg … and it ain’t 1825 Tulane!

    1. Fill us in, lad, fill us in. Of course you run yourself on a two-pronged sword consisting of the rules of professional responsibility and the rules applicable to judicial elections. Of course if you have the covert backing of a well placed politico, such as a district attorney, you can flout those laws without fear!

  3. Malpractice, schmalpractice. Many a good lawyer has been the subject of a frivolous malpractice suit. The rubber meets the road on a big settlement or a judgment. Allegations are just that, and the fact that she may have been sued is meaningless.

    Schlegel or Landry are head and shoulders above the others in this race. Either would be a good judge. Sudderth has the stink of Wrinkled Robe on him and McGinnis is a non-entity.

  4. Schlegel with 8 years of experience? And that’s total time licensed, not accounting for the years it takes to learn the ropes as a new lawyer.
    How is this guy even running? It’s pretty comical that someone with so little experience is even running for a district court seat in a parish as big as JP.

    1. It’s really not comical at all. I have asked the question here before, and I’ll ask it again. Of these candidates, do any of them have any civil jury trial experience? In other words, if a single one of them has picked a civil jury, delivered an opening statement and/or a closing argument, please cite the case for me.

      That’s the real problem here. The Louisiana Constitution only requires that a judicial candidate for the trial court have “been admitted” for seven years. So, you can get admitted, go tend bar for 7 years, then run for judge. And if you have enough money and get the right politico-hog backing, presto, you’re a judge. Practical experience means nothing; money and lawyer/politician endorsements mean everything. So sad.

      1. Prince, if you have any experience with the legislature, even in the days of alleged budget crunches, judgeships were often created by legislators as their particular “golden parachutes.”

        But then what is “practical experience”? I undertand quite well what you mean, but “practical experience” could come in many flavors, and most of them tasting like excrement. I have run across very few scholars of the law on the bench, and as I’ve remarked above, judges tend to forget they are supposed to be impartial arbitrers of law – many judges simply function in the role of diminishing the potential relief one has against government, or operate on some perverse Solomonic judgement whereby that which a plaintiff requests gets cut in ghalf, even if the plaintiff deserves the whole loaf, as long as the “cooks” all get to eat at the table.

        1. McInnis a non entity… Better get off the crack pipe. She is the only one with in court experienced having sat as a judge ad hoc.. 5 years law clerk in 24th….
          Lets break it down…

          Suddeth= Gomer/Goober …just goofy
          Scott. = Barney …wanna be..one bullet
          Hillary. = Otis… Town clown

          McInnis = Sheriff Taylor ..even handed honest

          There is your Mayberry/Metairie

  5. Well, the TP has finally learned not to be swayed by the local political machine and has endorsed Scott Schlegal who has handled more than 1,0000 criminal cases as asst.DA and has, unlike Hillary Landry’s misleading crime fighting video showing her before a jury, tried more than 50 criminal cases before a jury.


    Hillary has never tried a criminal case before a jury so why has she been “anointed” the one to fight crime by the big gang of local Sheriffs? Just because she operated some kind of drug rehabilitation program does that make her a “crime fighter”?

    TP, if you keep these good government endorsements going I may have to resubscribe very soon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *