news-record.com

Office you seek
Associate Justice, North Carolina Supreme court

Date of birth
July 5, 1949

Occupation
Professor of Law, Wake Forest University School of Law

Address
Campus Box 7206, 1834 Wake Forest Rd., Winston-Salem, NC 27109

Web site/e-mail address
www.suzannereynolds.org
suzanne.reynolds@suzannereynolds.org  

Education
BA, Meredith College; MA, UNC Chapel Hill (English and journalism); JD, Wake Forest University School of Law

Elective experience
None

Professional credentials (specialized training or experience): 
Professor of Law, Wake Forest University School of Law, since July, 1989
Associate Professor of Law, Wake Forest University School of Law, April, 1986 - July, 1989
Assistant Professor of Law, Wake Forest University School of Law, May, 1981 -  April, 1986
Attorney, Smith Moore Smith Schell & Hunter, Greensboro, N.C., August, 1977 - May, 1981.  Admitted to practice in N.C. and U.S. District Court for the Middle District of N.C.
Author, Lee's North Carolina Family Law
Regular presenter of Continuing Legal Education programs; teacher in the BarBri course for lawyers sitting for the NC bar examination

Family
Father, the late Chuck Reynolds, WWII Navy fighter pilot and retired manager of Coble Dairy, Lexington and Goldsboro, NC; mother, Genie Reynolds, bookkeeper in a furniture company in Lexington and then full-time homemaker in Goldsboro, NC, currently retired and residing in Winston-Salem, NC; married to Hoppy Elliot, a lawyer in private practice in Winston-Salem, NC; three children: Michael Elliot, 28, first year law student at UNC; Caroline Elliot, 26, public defender, Wake County Public Defender's Office; Lillie Elliot, 21, senior majoring in photojournalism, at UNC Chapel Hill

Why have you chosen to run for this office?
I have spent 27 years analyzing and explaining the law, and am uniquely qualified to serve on our Supreme Court.  An increasing percentage of the docket of the North Carolina Supreme Court is family law, and it is critical that we have clear, usable opinions from the Court to guide district court judges in making decisions in these matters.  My 3-volume treatise, Lee's North Carolina Family Law, is the authoritative source for law students, lawyers, and judges. 

The state's highest appellate court would benefit from someone with my expertise.  I feel the responsibility to offer my services where I think they could be put to best use.  As a teacher of professional responsibility to thousands of lawyers, I have taught lawyers to commit their services to those causes that seek them out.  Likewise, I feel obliged to respond to the call to service of this state that I love. 

In the past, especially when colleagues have asked me to run, I have declined, largely because of the partisan nature of the races and the absence of public financing.  With the advent of public financing and non-partisan races, the process became, for me, more compatible with the principles of fairness and impartiality that should characterize the selection of judges.  

What about your training and experience most qualifies you for this position?
The work of the state's highest appellate court is to clarify and explain the law in a way that makes it accessible to every lawyer in the state -- and, in turn -- to every citizen of the state.  In essence, the opinions of a state's Supreme Court should teach the law.  For 27 years, I have been teaching and writing about the law.  State and federal courts around the country have drawn on law professors for at least some of their appellate judges.  The expertise of law professors, particularly those who have maintained strong ties to the profession, makes them particularly well-qualified for the work of appellate judges.  I have that expertise to offer.

From my experience as a law professor, I bring a tradition of academic integrity and an expertise in writing about the law in a way that also teaches the law. 

What do you see as a particular strength of our court system?
North Carolina has a reputation for dedicated professionals in its court system.  The clerks and their staffs work hard to make our trial courts operate in a way that will engender respect from the public that interacts with them.  Also as a consequence, these professionals help keep errors to a minimum. 

Where does it fall short?
In making my decision to run, I struggled most with running against an incumbent.  After consulting with lawyers across the state, however, I agreed that I should think of this race as one recognizing that this is not the time to preserve the status quo on the North Carolina Supreme Court.  In the last fiscal year, the Supreme Court issued 32 signed opinions.  With 7 justices on the Court, those numbers produce an average of about 4 ½ opinions per justice.  By contrast, the Court of Appeals issued 1,722 written opinions in the last fiscal year, an average of almost 115 opinions per judge. Moreover, the number of petitions for discretionary review that the Supreme Court grants has declined, and, in fiscal year 2005-06, reached an all-time low.  In fiscal year 1998-99, for example, the Supreme Court granted 14% of its petitions.  In fiscal year 2005-06, in contrast, the Court granted 25 petitions, slightly less than 4%.  This decline in the granting of petitions has occurred when the numbers of conflicting opinions issued by the Court of Appeals has caused concern among lawyers.   When the Court of Appeals issues conflicting opinions, the Supreme Court should resolve the conflicts. 

What can be done to help the public better understand the role of our appellate courts?
We should make more use of the internet, podcasts, and video technology to educate the public about our courts.  We should follow the example of the Center for Voter Education and UNC-TV and continue the civics lessons that occur during the election process.  

How can you make a distinct impact on the quality of decisions rendered by the court?
Currently no one on the Court has expertise in family law.  I bring much-needed expertise on a critical area of the law.  Also, I come from a tradition of academic independence and integrity, which I would bring to the discussion of how many opinions to write and what petitions to accept for discretionary review. 

To what extent should judges or judicial candidates express their views about political and social issues of the day?
Judges and judicial candidates should not express their views about issues that should reasonably become the subject of litigation.  If judicial candidates express their views about these issues, then parties who present those issues in a litigated proceeding might suspect that they are not getting a fair review.  Although the current judicial code permits such discussion, it violates my personal code to speak to an issue in a way that would cause a future litigant to doubt my judicial independence. 

Who would be the one current state or federal judge you most admire, and why?
This summer I had the unique experience of teaching with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and I have a high regard for her.  Justice Ginsburg appreciates the genius of our separate branches of government and the checks and balances made possible by the distinct roles of each branch.  She also respects the limited role of the judge, not to create but to apply the law.  Because she respects that limited role, she reaches decisions based not on her personal views, but on the oath she swore to fulfill when she became a judge.  I admire her courage as well.  When her oath requires her to take an unpopular position, her oath of office and her integrity guide her way. 

Although not currently on the Court, I admire also Sandra Day O'Connor, whom I interviewed for a program at Wait Chapel on the WFU campus.  Like Justice Ginsburg, Justice O'Connor graduated at the top of her law school class.  Like Justice Ginsburg, no private law firm would hire her.  Both women, standard bearers for women everywhere, overcame their temporary setbacks with grace and determination, and, as they say, the rest is history.