Thomas R. Johnson and Stephen F. English
Johnson and English are partners at the Perkins Coie law firm.
After reading the Oregonian/OregonLive’s editorial regarding Misha Isaak, we felt compelled to write based on our professional experiences with Mr. Isaak as a lawyer (“Editorial: Taking a principled stand on transparency,” Sept. 11). We both worked with Mr. Isaak for several years while he was our colleague at Perkins Coie, and can both say, without any reservation, that Mr. Isaak is one of the most ethical lawyers with whom we have ever worked. He is one of those unique lawyers able to prosecute or defend his clients’ cases at an exceptionally high level, while also ensuring that his representation absolutely lives up to the ethical obligations that form a bedrock of this profession.
The suggestion that Mr. Isaak is not fit for the state court appellate bench is a disservice to our state’s judiciary. Quite simply, he will be an excellent appellate judge in Oregon. He is exceedingly smart, thoughtful, honest, hard-working, and, perhaps most of all, he loves the rule of law and what it represents in our society. During Mr. Isaak’s time here, his legal work on even the most complex of cases was of the highest quality, and there is no question that he is eminently qualified to serve on any appellate court. Further, we never witnessed any instance where Mr. Isaak did not take the most ethical path during his law practice, and quite simply could not imagine him doing so.
Finally, it is a bit unfair to criticize Mr. Isaak for work he performed on behalf of a client, when, because of his ethical obligation of confidentiality to his client, he has no ability to defend himself for work he did on behalf of his client. Lawyers serve clients and must preserve those clients’ secrets and confidences. What direction Mr. Isaak was given by his client, as the general coounsel to the governor, is something that he certainly could not, and would not, disclose, but we cannot imagine a situation where he would act inconsistently with the guidance or wishes of his client. Given that direction, he would, in our experience, do what he could for his client within the boundaries of the oath he made to the State Bar of Oregon.