By MATT CHANDLER
Buffalo Law Journal

New York State Supreme Court Justice Hon. Joseph Mintz may be retiring at the end of the year, but the veteran jurist says he is as passionate about the law as ever.

"I love what I do," says Mintz, who, at 76, has not only reached the mandatory retirement age for state judges, but has also exhausted the three two-year extensions of his term on the bench. "The law fascinates me because it is ever-changing, and I learn something every day."

From his beginnings as a public defender at the Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo - where, he says, "although I'm not sure it was totally within the bounds of propriety, I maintained my law office while I did public-defender work" - to his rise through the ranks of the Buffalo legal circles, Mintz has seen a lot, and endured some disappointments. After a trouncing at the polls in his bid for Erie County district attorney in 1977, he was elected to Supreme Court a year later.

As Mintz prepares to start the next chapter in his judicial career, he sat down with the Buffalo Law Journal to reflect on a long and storied tenure on the bench.

Buffalo Law Journal: Talk a little bit about how you ended up on the bench.

Mintz: I was contacted by Tom McKinnon, who was then the (Erie County) Republican chairman, and he asked me if I would run for district attorney (in 1977). I said I would be happy to run, and I will devote my efforts and money, and of course I had a very formidable opponent in Eddie Cosgrove, who was the DA.

So I ran for district attorney, and I'll never forget - I was in the driveway with my wife and kids in the car, on the way to Republican headquarters. At about 9 o'clock the polls closed, and at 9:02 over the radio as we were leaving came an announcement that it was projected that Mintz loses the race for district attorney by the largest margin ever recorded in the history of Erie County (laughs).

But two years later, the political landscape was such that there were five seats open for the Supreme Court, and I was nominated. I was an absolute complete underdog, but of course I had some publicity from the DA's race that I thought would carry over.

There were 10 candidates for five seats, and so I was elected in November of '78, started on this job in January of '79 and I've been here ever since.

BLJ: Was there a sense of satisfaction winning election to the Supreme Court just one year after being beaten so badly in your run for DA?

JM: Oh, sure there was. As a matter of fact, the conventional wisdom back then was that the DA's office was a stepping-stone to the bench. After I ran, the conventional wisdom became, "If you run for DA and lose like Mintz did, then maybe you can get elected!"

So yeah, it was really satisfying.

BLJ: That's a great story. But as a young law-school student, did you ever see yourself here? Was it a goal or a dream to reach state Supreme Court?

JM: No, as a matter of fact it is beyond my wildest dreams.

I never even thought I would be a judge, never thought I could be elected, never even thought I would run.

BLJ: Talk about what it was like when you first took your seat in 1979.

JM: What happens to most junior judges is, they are assigned to the criminal courts.

Early on, I was assigned a case of a woman (Gail Trait) who killed her four children by draining their blood and taking out their eyeballs. I was convinced she had serious psychiatric problems, but the DA's office wasn't interested in hearing that. It was probably about four or five weeks on trial, daily in the newspaper headlines.

I frankly thought the lawyer (for the defense) made some fundamental errors, but I was reluctant to grant a mistrial because I was afraid of running afoul of double jeopardy. The case went to verdict, and she was sentenced to 25 years to life by me, four times (one for each count). The conviction was ultimately set aside by the Appellate Division. She was retried and found to be legally insane and was institutionalized.

That was my baptism under fire.

BLJ: With cases as intense as that one, how did you manage to stay fresh and not burn out?

JM: I love the law. It's fascinating to me.

Lawyers talk about judicial temperament, and I really think some people have it and some people don't. I think I am fortunate enough to have that judicial temperament.

Let me explain it to you this way. There is a distinct difference between a lawyer and a judge. Lawyers of necessity, although they shouldn't, become invested emotionally with their client's cause. A judge, on the other hand, has no interest in the outcome of the case.

Basically, if you can keep an objective view of things, that goes a long way in being able to maintain your compass. I think I am fortunate enough that I've been able to do that.

BLJ: Being that this is a mandatory retirement, would you stay on the job if you could or are you ready to step aside?

JM: Actually, I'm gonna stay on. At least I've made application. There is a program (for) judicial hearing officers where former judges can work in the court system either mediating cases, with the consent of lawyers, trying cases, helping pick juries and all the rest. You can be hired on a per diem, and I intend to do that.

I'm too old to go back to practicing law, I tell you that.

BLJ: A lot of folks count down the days until their retirement, but you're already lining up your next job. You said you love the law, but is there more to it than that?

JM: I've been a lawyer for 53 years, and I've been working since I was probably 15 years old - I don't want to quit.

Let me tell you something, and I'm not sure many judges would agree with what I say: The brilliance of judges as reflected in the decisions they make is really the brains of lawyers at work. Lawyers give us briefs, they give us memoranda of law, they give us arguments, and we read those and we adopt them many times.

So many of those landmark decisions judges make are the products of lawyers. I have a great admiration of lawyers, and the process is fascinating and always changing. And that is what keeps me here.

BLJ: As you prepare to step away from the bench, at least in a full-time capacity, what is it that you will miss the most come Jan. 1?

JM: My involvement with lawyers. I'm a lawyer first, and I'm going to miss that aspect.

What you perceive as the tumult and the pressure of this job, I don't feel that. I'm just going to miss that interaction. The rest of this, it can be kind of dull.

 

Editor's note: The Bar Association of Erie County will hold a reception in Mintz's honor Dec. 2 from 5:30 to 7 p.m. at Shanghai Red's. For more information, call 716-852-8687.