418 Mass. 1603
Richard Ammi Cutter
MEMORIAL
A special sitting of the Supreme Judicial Court was held at
Boston on September 14, 1994, at which a Memorial to the late
Justice Richard Ammi Cutter was presented.
Present: Chief Justice Liacos; Justices Wilkins, Abrams, Nolan,
Lynch, O'Connor, and Greaney; retired Chief Justice Edward
F. Hennessey; retired Justices Francis J. Quirico and
Benjamin Kaplan; and Chief Justice Joseph P. Warner, of the
Appeals Court.
L. Scott Harshbarger, Attorney, General, addressed the court as
follows:
May it please the court: As the Attorney General of
Massachusetts, it is my privilege and honor to present, on behalf
of the Bar of this Commonwealth, a Memorial and tribute to the
late Richard Ammi Cutter, who served as associate justice of this
court for sixteen years.
Richard Ammi Cutter was born in Salem on May 11, 1902, the
son of Louis Fayerweather and Mary (Osgood) Cutter. He died in
Boston on November 28, 1993, in his ninety-second year. He is
survived by his sons Louis and Henry and his daughter Helen
Maclennon. His wife Ruth predeceased him.
Ammi Cutter was graduated from Noble and Greenough School,
which was then located in Boston, after which he entered Harvard
College. Upon his graduation in 1922, he went on to Harvard Law
School where he earned his law degree as a member of the class of
1925, serving in his final year as an editor of the Harvard Law
Review.
He later served as the president of the Harvard Law School
Association, as chairman of the Overseers' Committee to Visit the
Harvard Law School, and as a director of the Harvard Alumni
Association, as well as a member of the Board of Overseers of
Harvard College. In 1979, Harvard awarded him an honorary Doctor
of Laws.
After his graduation from law school in 1925, Ammi, as his
parents chose to refer to him, embarked upon his legal career as
an associate in the Boston firm of Goodwin, Procter & Hoar. In
1927, he began three years of service as a Massachusetts
Assistant Attorney General, trying tax cases and arguing appeals
before this court. For most of the years between 1930 to 1956, he
maintained a diverse general practice at the firm of Storey,
Thorndike, Palmer & Dodge. During World War II he left his
practice to join the military. This tour of duty, which saw
Justice Cutter ascend from the rank of Major in the Army to
become an aide to the Assistant Secretary of War, earned him the
Legion of Merit with one oak leaf cluster. His duties with the
Assistant Secretary's office included planning for the military
governments in Germany and Japan, researching war crimes
prosecutions, and looking at issues regarding treatment of
American prisoners of war in enemy hands.
After the war Ammi returned to his law practice. His work in
the private sector ended in 1956 when he was appointed by
Governor Christian A. Herter to this court. He sat as associate
justice of the Supreme Judicial Court for sixteen years until his
retirement, in 1972, at the age of seventy.
During his tenure on this court, of the 630 full opinions he
authored, a mere fourteen elicited dissent from his brethren,
evincing the measure of his influence. His opinions, noted for
their details, depth of analysis, and often extensive footnotes,
were always well focused and never ornate. One of his most
important and widely cited opinions is Commonwealth v. Freeman,
352 Mass. 556 (1967). In Freeman, Justice Cutter wrote for the
court that in cases in which there is a substantial risk of a
miscarriage of justice, technical procedural barriers would not
deny appellate relief to defendants. In his refusal to place form
over substance, Ammi Cutter, in this case, as in many others,
worked to ensure that our judicial system met its often
hard-to-realize goal of dispensing justice.
Justice Cutter's retirement from the court in 1972 proved to
be short-lived; he was appointed soon after by the United States
Supreme Court as master of original jurisdiction in an action
between New York and Vermont concerning alleged pollution in Lake
Champlain. In 1980, at the age of seventy-eight, he was recalled
to the Massachusetts Appeals Court, where he was to serve ten
years. During that time he handled a workload encompassing the
full legal spectrum and authored an additional 143 opinions. His
exceptional contribution to the Commonwealth was recognized in
1984 when Justice Cutter was awarded the Boston Bar Association's
Public Service Award.
His tenure on the bench embodies all the best aspects of
public service; it demonstrates the reasons that I encourage
young lawyers to enter public service; he dealt with all of the
important issues of his day from defendants' rights to First
Amendment rights and literary expression; he took his
opportunities to right the wrongs that he saw; and he used the
law -- always with a great respect for precedent, but employing
his creativity to fashion innovative remedies -- to bring a
little more justice to the world. In a time, such as the present,
when the law has, for too many people, come to represent not
simply the minimum ethics: What "Thou shall NOT do," but the
maximum ethics: "it doesn't matter if it's wrong as long as it's
not illegal." Justice Cutter's life and his work serve to remind
us that public service and the law have a nobler purpose.
While Justice Cutter's contributions on both the Supreme
Judicial Court and the Massachusetts Appeals Court merit high
praise, his legacy reaches beyond simply his judicial opinions.
Justice Cutter's election on February 24, 1938, to the American
Law Institute was the beginning of a tenure at the Institute that
was to last five and one-half decades. His responsibilities
included second vice president, first vice president, and, in
1976, president of the Institute. In 1980, he became chairman of
the Council, a post which he held until 1987, when at the age of
eighty-five, he assumed emeritus status. Throughout his active
and lengthy membership, Ammi served as an advisor on many
projects of the Institute, including the Restatement (Second) of
Property; the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws; and the
Model Land Development Code. These many years of devoted service
prompted the Institute to name its First Reporter's Chair for
Ammi Cutter.
Perhaps the achievement for which Justice Cutter would be
most proud, however, rests in his countless efforts to advance
the lives and careers of those individuals fortunate enough to
know and work with him. Although examples of his efforts on
behalf of others are numerous, this trait is exemplified by
Benjamin Kaplan's experience with Ammi Cutter at the Pentagon, to
which I understand Judge Kaplan will refer in his remarks.
Similar efforts laid the foundation for the careers of numerous
lawyers and judges and one Governor -- William F. Weld.
Justice Cutter's typically understated reflection on his own
career that "occasionally there is a basis for feeling that one's
work contributes a little to progress" is based on much more than
the many judicial opinions and statutory codifications on which
he has left his indelible mark. The progress advanced by the work
of Justice Cutter has taken form in the careers and achievements
of the innumerable individuals who, perhaps unbeknownst to them,
have had their careers advanced, their lives enriched, and
obstacles in their paths removed by this kind, intelligent, and
decent man.
It is an honor for me to participate in this fitting
ceremonial to an outstanding Justice of our Supreme Judicial
Court and a man worthy of great respect.
On behalf of the Bar of the Commonwealth, I respectfully
move that this Memorial be spread on the records of this court.
John A. Perkins, Esquire, of the Boston bar addressed the
court as follows:
May it please the court: R. Ammi Cutter, whose active legal
career extended to a remarkable sixty-five years (LL. B. 1925 -
final retirement in 1990), spent by my calculation at the most
twenty-three years in the private practice of law as most of us
would probably understand the term. But this statistic gives no
indication of the depths of his commitment and contribution in
his capacity as a membec of the honorable calling of the
independent bar. Throughout his career in the law Ammi Cutter
played an active and leading role in the institutions of the
legal profession and, even apart from his judicial service, in
the development of law.
Cutter's years in private practice fall into three periods.
A short eighteen months as a new member of the Bar in the firm
then known as Goodwin, Procter, Field and Hoar. That was followed
by three years as assistant attorney general of Massachusetts. In
1930, he joined the firm then known as Storey, Thorndike, Palmer
& Dodge, becoming a partner in 1931. This second period in
private practice continued for twelve years, interrupted by a
tour of duty as special adviser to the Governor of Puerto Rico in
matters of taxation, which resulted in publication of his Report,
and interrupted later for, in his own words, "some-five months of
nearly complete absence from my office" in organizing the
Metropolitan Division of the Greater Boston Community Fund
Campaign of 1940. His third period of private practice, following
an extraordinary legal service in army uniform in World War II,
commenced in 1946 with his return to his firm then known as
Palmer, Dodge, Chase & Davis, and continued until his appointment
as an Associate Justice of this court in 1956. This ten and
one-half years in private practice was, not surprisingly,
interrupted for three intervals of service to the United States
government: in 1951 to help negotiate an air base agreement with
Portugal, in 1954 to investigate some problems of United States
military purchasing in Europe, and in 1956 to take major
responsibility for presenting the Foreign Aid Program to Congress
for the State and Defense Departments and the International
Cooperation Administration.
It was during this third period in private practice that I
had the privilege of working closely with Ammi, first as an
associate and then for six years as a partner in the firm. It was
a time when the legal profession was beginning to learn that
specialization, if not entirely a virtue, was at least a
practical necessity. Ammi, like almost every lawyer, was
officially in general practice and in fact was experienced and
capable in many areas. But Ammi was ahead of his time. His
experience in trying and arguing tax cases as assistant attorney
general and his stint as tax adviser to the Governor of Puerto
Rico ripened in private practice into his being, even in general
practice, an expert in matters of taxation. This continued in his
practice after his return to the firm in 1946. I vividly recall
an occasion when he was asked by a friend at lunch one day a tax
question which I recognized as presenting a difficult issue. I
listened with admiration as Ammi gave his friend in simple terms
a letter perfect answer to his question, which he concluded by
saying: "Now, remember that answer is worth exactly what you paid
for it." His friend knew better.
In private practice lawyers recognized in Ammi some of the
qualities later to mark his service as a judge. On the Harvard
Law Review in law school, in practice he was sharp and incisive
in analysis of legal questions and given to careful and thorough
scholarship. He was a consummate draftsman. Some probably thought
too consummate, but his keen analysis revealed all the
possibilities and the drafting task inevitably required that
adverse possibilities had to be blocked off not just by inference
but in Cutter style by precise and careful drafting.
Ammi practiced law with a compelling sense of personal and
professional ethics. I am sure there are many others who have
their own windows into this part of the Cutter tradition, I will
mention only one of my experiences with it. My role in the firm
at the time of at least one of Ammi's separations from the firm
for service to the United States government made me the person
with whom Ammi initially had to work out the details of the
separation. I do not recall what, if any, Federal policies may
then have applied, but this was before conflict of interest
became a complex body of rules and regulations (and of course,
before it became for opponents a part of the arsenal of adversary
litigation). Nothing less than a formal written separation and
meticulous insulation from financial interest in the firm was
thinkable for him.
Ammi's years in private practice foretold another
characteristic of his later service as judge -- long hours of
work. Eventually, I remember that Mrs. Cutter succeeded in having
his secretary, before leaving work, set an alarm clock in the
bookcase at a good distance from Ammi's desk to give him the word
to get home for dinner. That was still a time when lawyers
normally got home for a family dinner hour -- even a late one.
But Ammi's contribution and influence as a member of the
independent Bar had a much larger dimension than anything
directly involved in his tours of duty in private practice. High
among these contributions was his role in the American Law
Institute. Elected a member in 1938 at the age of thirty-six, he
became a member of the Council of the Institute in 1949. He
served in active leadership roles for more than twenty years,
including, as already related, President and later Chairman of
the Council until assuming emeritus status at the age of
eighty-five. He served as Adviser on projects drawing on rather
diverse areas of expertise. My impression is that his title of
Adviser ex officio on all projects while serving as President and
Chairman of the Council does little to convey the background,
commitment, and judgment he brought to that role. Ammi was also
an ex officio member of the American Law Institute-American Bar
Association Committee on Continuing Professional Education from
1976 to 1985 and served as Chairman of the Committee in
1980-1981. The American Law Institute's First Reporter's Chair
was named for Ammi Cutter. The work of the American Law Institute
was a demanding interest of Ammi Cutter while he was in private
practice and continued while he served as a judge. I came on
various occasions to know his interest and constructive and
effective influence in shaping the work and the products of the
Institute.
Ammi brought an unusual background to his service as Adviser
ex officio to the American Law Institute Restatement (Third)
Foreign Relations Law of the United States, for he in fact had a
significant role in an event of seminal impact for the
development of international law (including human rights law)
that has since occurred in our time. In the Fiftieth Anniversary
Report of his Harvard Class of 1922 he notes briefly that his
service as staff assistant to the Assistant Secretary of War
"involved me in London negotiations (about the then proposed war
crimes' trials)." These were the negotiations that resulted in
the August, 1945, London Agreement for the Prosecution of the
Major War Criminals of the European Axis Powers and the Charter
of the International Military Tribunal. Telford Taylor in a 1992
memoir, THE ANATOMY OF THE NUREMBERG TRIALs at 75 (Alfred A.
Knopf 1992), recounts the history and names Colonel Ammi Cutter
among those who "made a major contribution to the project by
developing the basic concepts and furnishing the drafts that were
the basis of discussion." (Further as to Cutter's role, see 36,
41). A part of Ammi Cutter's war time service this surely was. It
was an extraordinary contribution in a career in and out of
uniform dedicated to the realization of the rule of law.
Cutter's ventures into affairs of State included more than
his war-time experience and more than his three further
interruptions of private practice for service to the United
States government in 1951, 1954, and 1956, already noted. Another
venture is recounted in William Marbury's 1988 memoir, IN THE
CATBIRD SEAT. A friendly get-together at Ammi's summer home in
Randolph, New Hampshire, provided the setting at which a major
foreign policy effort of the 1950's, the Committee on the Present
Danger, was born. North Korea's invasion of South Korea on June
24, 1950, precipitated a new world crisis and fresh alarms over
Soviet intentions. See account in DAVID MCCULLOCH, TRUMAN, at
775-779 (Simon & Schuster 1992). The occasion was a dinner during
that summer with Marbury and Tracy Vorhees and their wives.
Marbury was Ammi's former chief in the Legal Branch of the
Contract Division of the Office of the Under Secretary of War.
Some wit, as Ammi liked to recall, referred to Marbury and Cutter
as "Arsenic and Old Lace." This story is confirmed in MARBURY, IN
THE CATBIRD SEAT, at 158. Vorhees was Under Secretary of the Army
at the time of the dinner. The discussion focused on the dangers
of a Soviet invasion of an unprotected Europe. In this discussion
the Committee on the Present Danger was born. The Committee,
which included such prominent persons as former Secretary of War
Robert Patterson and former Harvard President James B. Conant,
pressed the need for the presence of a substantial body of United
States troops in Europe backed by a program of universal service.
The first was, of course, achieved and in NATO continues to this
day. See MARBURY, IN THE CATBIRD SEAT, at 297-301.
Ammi's involvement in the Bar took a new turn after his
retirement from this court in 1972, when the court appointed him
special master in the petition by the Massachusetts Bar
Association to organize the Bar of Massachusetts as a unified
self-governing Bar with official responsibilities by rule of the
Court. Cutter was appointed to frame proposed court rules on two
possible bases: (a) Part I, so-called, to accomplish certain
public functions without an official unified Bar and (b) Part II,
to accomplish these public functions with a unified Bar. Cutter
found himself sorting through conflicting positions from the Bar
on both of the alternative bases and having to guide the
development even while maintaining neutrality between the two
basic alternatives. Cutter's draft of the Part I rules reflected
his recommendation that the Board of Bar Overseers and the
Clients' Security Board, each to be involved in carrying out
important public functions of the Court, be appointed by the
Court and accountable directly to it. See Report, par. 19, sub
par. 1, Comment (B), and sub par. 6, Comment (A). In deciding to
go forward on the first basis and substantially adopting Cutter's
so-called Part I rules, the Court produced fundamental change in
the legal profession, change that by now most of the Bar probably
accepts as the way it has always been. The rules under which this
change was accomplished are in a significant way the principled
handiwork of Ammi Cutter.
Ammi was secretary of what he liked to call the great class
of 1925 at the Harvard Law School. His devotion to the class and
to Harvard Law School reflected a commitment to legal education,
and to advancing the careers of promising young lawyers with whom
he had occasion to work or to know. Ammi's fine hand is evident
in a number of academic and judicial appointments. More public
ways in which his commitment to legal education was reflected
include service as President of the Harvard Law School
Association in 1971 and service, on two occasions, on the Law
School Visiting Committee of the Harvard Board of Overseers,
serving as chairman of the Committee in 1971-1972.
Ammi's distinguished service and contributions have been
recognized: He received the Legion of Merit (with cluster) in
1945 for his war time service; an honorary Doctor of Juridical
Science from Suffolk University in 1960; and an honorary Doctor
of Laws from Harvard College in 1979.
Especially I wish to note the esteem in which he has been
held by his peers in the legal profession. In 1929, at the
youthful age of twenty-seven, Ammi was elected a member of the
venerable Curtis Club, honored among lawyers. Long its youngest
member at the beginning, he was long its senior member at end. In
1980, following Ammi's retirement as President of the American
Law Institute, a number of his former law clerks, partners, and
friends commissioned a portrait of him to be painted by Gardner
Cox for the Harvard Law School. Characteristically, Ammi's
consent was somewhat reluctant, protesting that the money would
be better spent by adding to a book fund already existing in his
name.
In 1984, Cutter was honored by the Boston Bar Association
with its Public Service Award. The citation, in which I confess
to have had a hand, concluded in words with which I now close:
"Ammi Cutter has brought the finest traditions of the law to
a distinguished career as private lawyer, government lawyer
and advisor, judge, supporter of legal education and leader
in the development of law -- an advocate and exemplar of the
highest standards of our profession."
Retired Justice Benjamin Kaplan addressed the court as
follows:
Rising to support the motion of the Attorney General, I
offer some notes of long association and friendship.
I tell of a day in early April, 1942, when a Major R.A.
Cutter, young, buoyant, and obviously of Boston, signed me up for
service in the Army. I ventured to remark that a young woman and
I were planning to get married later in the month and go off on
honeymoon. The Major said that, given the general cussedness of
life and the unfeelingness of the Army bureaucrats, I was sure to
be called up in the midst of the honeymoon. Thus my introduction
to a worldly-wise New Englander. My call-up came just two days
after the marriage.
Ammi was the main organizer, deputy chief, then chief of a
remarkable office in the Pentagon that came to be widely known
simply as the Legal Branch. The first function of the office,
according to Ammi, was to try to recognize problems in the field
of military procurement before they became crises. Next came the
steadier job of coordinating and guiding the legal procurement
policies of the several Army services, from Ordnance to Chemical
Warfare, not excepting the procurement offices of that separate
fiefdom, the Army Air Force; the subjects -- contract standards,
pricing, patents, labor relations, property controls,
renegotiation, reconversion, and whatever else might turn up.
Some of the work became codified in Procurement Regulations, some
in sponsored legislation.
To all this wartime jurisprudence Ammi made important
substantive contributions, enhanced by his intuitive
understanding of how the Army machinery worked or could be made
to work. He was notably inventive. I recall an early exploit. The
Comptroller General was showing a regrettable lack of plasticity,
a morbid attachment to peacetime methods. What to do? Ammi
conceived the idea of wheeling up the First War Powers Act and
trying to elicit an opinlon from the Justice Department
interpreting the statute -- this on the basis of an array of
carefully calculated questions, Ammi's questions. The scheme
succeeded. The man in the Justice Department responsible for a
favorable outcome was George Washington, in fact a collateral
relative of the President, and Ammi quite naturally inscribed on
the formal opinion, "First in war, first in peace, first in the
hearts of the Legal Branch." The Comptroller General became
reasonably tractable.
Ammi served as manager of the day-to-day activities of the
Legal Branch for nearly three years before he went on to more
exotic duties with the Assistant Secretary of War. The first
chief of Branch, William L. Marbury of Baltimore, was a
brilliant, temperamental, sometimes choleric man. The
Marbury-Cutter partnership was hailed by a local wit as "Arsenic
and Old Lace." Ammi had his own methods of recruiting people, and
the results were exceptional. The staff, uniformed and civilian,
came from all parts of the country, from all lines of practice,
and were individualistic almost to a fault. Ammi understood his
associates and welded them into a team. Under daily stress and
strain, Ammi remained the user of the unraised voice; only when
exasperation became extreme would he invoke the antique swear
words, "Hell's bells." In sum, Ammi was a first-class manager, a
fact important to an understanding of his lifetime work.
Ammi was loyal without limit to his staff, and they
responded in kind. His concern was long term; he looked ahead to
the end of the war and set about thinking what would be the best
subsequent career for the individual and what could be done to
bring it about. In these matters he had a sure confidence in his
own judgments. I cite my own case. One day, while improving my
draft of a document by his characteristic method of studied
understatement, Ammi turned to me and said, without preliminary,
"You ought to teach law." This was a surprise, but a couple of
years later, there I was, teaching law. Ammi had trained his
sinuous powers of persuasion on Dean Griswold and President
Conant. I had not been consulted. My story is typical of many
others. The host of people whose careers Ammi shaped or assisted
were of diverse backgrounds and makeup. And this is the place to
observe that Ammi sponsored women in the profession well before
it became fashionable to do so.
In 1972, twenty-five years after I was plunged into
teaching, I had the honor and great pleasure of succeeding to
Ammi's seat on the Supreme Judicial Court, and I pledged then to
follow in his footnotes. In 1980, Ammi accepted an invitation to
serve on recall in that busy court of intermediate appeal, our
Appeals Court, and I joined him there in 1983.
One could see that Ammi took nourishment from his debates
and worries and work with younger colleagues; in this way he was
sustained in good spirits for a decade until his final retirement
in 1990 at the age of eighty-eight.
The manager in Ammi came out in his shrewd advice about the
efficient but scrupulous movement of cases on the heavy calendars
of the court. Again the manager appeared in a poignant way when
-- say in reviewing action by some branch of government -- he was
heard to complain, between the lines of the opinion, sometimes
with a touch of despondency -- "Don't you see? This or that was
the right, the efficient thing to do. Why didn't you see?"
Ammi's grasp of the details of an appeal record was
unsparing. He took seriously the maxim ex facto jus oritur, the
law springs or ought to spring from the facts. As you read Ammi's
opinions, you come upon those famous footnotes that cite all the
decisions, relevant, nearly relevant, and sometimes only by the
way. Occasionally the footnote seems an expression of a whimsical
or wayward interest in the subject. More often it is intended to
seal off all the exits -- "to stop up every earth," as Lord Bowen
said of the older compendious style of equity pleading (From an
essay, Progress in the Administration of Justice During the
Victorian Period [1887], reprinted in 1 Select Essays in
Anglo-American History 516, 524-525 [1907]). Yet decision is
made to rest on a narrow base, so that future developments should
not be unduly embarrassed.
There will be more cogent discussion today and in time to
come of Ammi's style and merits as a judge, but I like to respond
to the question, was he conservative or liberal? A fellow judge
has suggested playfully that Ammi might be thought of as
nominally a conservative but in truth a closet liberal or
progressive. The point is that for a judge of Ammi's caliber the
question makes an empty sound -- so various and subtle are the
impulses toward decision.
To conclude: Ammi was a fine man of large sympathies and
achievements. He was the conscious bearer of an ancestral
tradition, but he chose not to be too much trammeled by it; he
spread his wings. His unique personality -- old manners tempered
to new times -- will abide in the grateful memories of the many
whose lives he touched.
Governor William F. Weld addressed the court as follows:
If the Court please, my name is William Weld and I was clerk
to Mr. Justice Cutter during the 1970-1971 term. I believe I may
safely represent on behalf of Judge Cutter's dozens of clerks
that none of us felt worthy to be his clerk -- each of us knew
that, in his decades of interviewing, the Judge made one mistake.
During my own terrifying job interview with him, I knew I was
going to be all right only after I carelessly mentioned that my
undergraduate Latin thesis consisted of eighteen pages of text
and forty-six pages of footnotes.
I do not know whether Judge Cutter taught each of us more
about law or about life.
On the law front, he instructed by example; there was seldom
any direct pedagogy. But if you had ears to listen, you could
pick up a certain amount from a muttered marginal comment, such
as, in a criminal case, "This fellow is going to get cold comfort
from the facts as stated by me!"
Judge Cutter never breached the secrecy of the Justices's
conference on cases. Nonetheless, I gathered that not every hot
new idea that was proposed made it past final cut into the
opinion. If the Judge seemed in a particularly good mood -- a
mood of one who had successfully excluded error -- I would
occasionally ask him, "How'd things go at the conference?" And he
would look out the window (he and I never addressed each other
directly, only when the speaker was looking out the window), and
he would intone: "The King of France, with twice ten thousand men
marched up the hill, and back marched down again." That meant
that he had gotten the fourth vote.
He was also a man of few words on politics. I asked him a
question in 1973: "Should I join the impeachment staff against
President Nixon?" Answer: "Only if you're prepared, as a
Republican, to go all the way."
Another question, 1978: "Should I run against Frank Bellotti
for Attorney General?" Answer: "No, he's done a pretty good job,
you'd be a fool."
He was right, of course, in both cases.
Colonel Cutter was a man of no words when teaching about
life. It was in the eyes; it was in the eyebrows; it was in the
angle of his chin; it was in the hesitation or pause between
words, it was in the grace with which he squired Mrs. Cutter --
his bride -- on evening walks around our Cambridge neighborhood
in her declining years.
Ammi Cutter was a gentleman, and a gentle man, and I need
hardly tell anyone here -- a great man.
Justice Herbert P. Wilkins, speaking for the court,
responded as follows:
My colleagues, Governor Weld, Attorney General Harshbarger,
Justice Kaplan, Mr. Perkins, members of the bar, members of the
Cutter family, and guests.
Ammi Cutter served the Commonwealth and the Supreme Judicial
Court with distinction and great ability for sixteen years as an
Associate Justice and thereafter in a variety of ways. In 1956,
he succeeded my father as an Associate Justice. In 1972, Justice
Kaplan succeeded Ammi.
Ammi worked prodigiously, handling some of the most
complicated cases that came before the court. During his tenure,
cases were not assigned substantially in rotation, as is the case
today, but rather in the freely exercised discretion of the Chief
Justice. The result was that Ammi was assigned to write for the
court in a disproportionate number of difficult cases in fields
such as property, taxation, and constitutional law. At a time
when there was no Appeals Court and the docket of this court was
becoming increasingly crowded, the court and the people of the
Commonwealth were fortunate to have Ammi Cutter serving as an
Associate Justice. In his final year on the court, Ammi authored
seventy-four opinions, forty-four of them full opinions and
thirty of them rescript opinions.
Although he was almost thirty years my elder, I knew Ammi
Cutter fairly well. He and my father were law partners, and I
first encountered Ammi because of that association. I can recall
my father, who was not profligate in the distribution of praise,
speaking warmly of Ammi's skills as a lawyer. I dealt closely
with Ammi for two years as an associate in what is now Palmer &
Dodge before Governor Herter appointed him to this court. I
recall his poise and tact, as counsel for the insurance
companies, at politically charged and volatile public hearings
held by the Commissioner of Insurance on the subject of
compulsory motor vehicle insurance rates. I also recall the long
hours that he worked, his intense focus on detail, and his
commitment to high professional standards. These qualities, which
I suspect he manifested at an early age, dominated everything he
did of which I was aware.
Ammi's judicial opinions are famous for their careful
craftsmanship and, as you have heard, often for their
considerable footnotes. Other Justices derived some amusement
from one oral argument here that focused exclusively on what the
court may have meant by language in a particular numbered
footnote in a Cutter opinion. It is true, however, that, if one
found a Cutter opinion on a point of law, he or she could rely on
that opinion, with its exquisite attention to detail, as a full
compilation of the law and reasoning bearing on that issue, and
probably on a few related ones as well. Yet a Cutter opinion
focused on what had to be decided and eschewed pontificating on
the likely answers to questions that might some day come before
this court but were not yet here.
There is a perception, rightly held, that Ammi demanded more
of his law clerks than did most, if not all, other Justices of
this court with whom he served. It was not simply a matter of
delegation because, while the law clerk was busily engaged, Ammi
was working just as hard, or perhaps harder, in his meticulous
way. Ammi told the story on himself of the occasion, when near
the end of the year of service of one of his early law clerks, he
asked the law clerk how the year had gone. "Well," came the
reply, a bit hesitantly, "if you had known more, Judge, I would
have learned less."
In the same month in 1972 that Ammi resigned from the court,
correctly anticipating the people's upcoming vote in favor of
mandatory retirement of judges at age seventy, the Supreme Court
of the United States appointed him a Special Master to conduct
proceedings in an original action that the State of Vermont had
brought against the State of New York and the International Paper
Company concerning pollution in Lake Champlain. See Vermont v.
New York, 408 U.S. 917 (1972). Shortly thereafter a newspaper in
the Lake Champlain area published an article announcing the Coast
Guard's decision to reactivate one of its vessels. Ammi took
particular pleasure in the headline which read: Cutter Recalled
from Mothballs. Ammi heard seventy-five days of testimony in that
case in 1973. The Supreme Court noted in an opinion that "[t]he
Special Master has done a very difficult task well and with
distinction; we are grateful for the professional services he has
rendered." Vermont v. New York, 417 U.S. 270, 274 (1974). Ammi
had interesting tales of his experiences as Special Master. I
shall mention one. One day he took a view of a paper mill in New
York. Eminent counsel for the paper company, a partner in a large
New York law firm, dramatically strode to the outfall pipe of the
plant, filled a glass with a brownish liquid flowing from the
pipe, and drank with apparent conviction, only to be silently
impeached by the obvious trepidation with which the senior
partner's young associate attempted to duplicate his boss's
performance.
Ammi was strongly loyal and dedicated to institutions and to
persons about whom he cared. Justice Kaplan has described Ammi's
successful attempt to locate him on the faculty of the Harvard
Law School. It is no coincidence that many lawyers who served
with Ammi in the Legal Branch in the Pentagon became actively
involved in the workings of the American Law Institute. I
certainly was a beneficiary in many ways of Ammi's interest in
helping the careers of people who worked for him or with him. One
of his former law clerks has written that "[t]ime and again for
me and, I am sure, for the nearly thirty others who served him
similarly, his hand has reached out, unasked and unseen, to
advance our careers, open doors to us, and enrich our lives."
Ammi was also dedicated to Harvard College; the Harvard Law
School; his law school class of 1925; the various clubs to which
he belonged; Randolph, New Hampshire, where he spent such summer
vacation time as he allowed himself; the American Law Institute;
and, of course, his family.
Ammi's endeavors on behalf of the American Law Institute
were substantial and productive, but, because the Institute is a
national organization, his inner workings for the Institute are
not widely known in the Commonwealth. As is true of so many of
Ammi's activities, the length as well as the breadth of his
involvement with the Institute is impressive. A member of the
Institute for more than fifty-five years, he served on its
Council for almost forty years, became its president in 1976 at
the age of seventy-four, and, in 1980, became chairman of the
Council. Ammi worked hard at advancing the interests of the
Institute, its finances, its membership, and its projects. He was
widely respected for his judgment, integrity, and courteous
treatment of others. He brought credit to this court and to the
Commonwealth. It was no coincidence that the Institute's First
Reporter's Chair was named the R. Ammi Cutter Reporter's Chair.
Ammi's worthwhile use of the many years of life with which he was
favored is impressive. In his college class's Fiftieth
anniversary report, published in 1972, the year that he retired
from this court, Ammi expressed the hope that he would have
"further opportunities to engage in useful and interesting
projects." There were indeed such opportunities, and Ammi seized
them. I have already mentioned his postretirement service to the
American Law Institute and his work as Special Master in the Lake
Champlain pollution case. He performed various tasks for this
court, among which was his monumental report as special master
and commissioner on the rules to be adopted in connection with
the creation in 1974 of the Board of Bar Overseers, the Clients'
Security Board, and the process for the annual registration of
attorneys. In 1980 he was called back to sit on the Massachusetts
Appeals Court where he sat from time to time for ten years,
resuming his thorough opinion writing and, by example, teaching
his younger colleagues the importance of hard work and attention
to detail. While a member of this court, Ammi had had a major
role in the drafting of the Appeals Court's enabling statute.
Despite his considerable skills and achievements, Ammi maintained
a respectful, even reserved, manner in dealing with others.
Bravado and self-praise were not among his personal traits. He
was soft-spoken, unassuming, and courteous to others with a
cautious style that showed perhaps a measure of shyness. His
deferential manner toward women had a quality not often found
even among his contemporaries. Yet he was supportive of women's
rights, sometimes more so than many younger judges. See, e.g.,
Bell v. Bell, 16 Mass. App. Ct. 188 (1983) (two-to-one decision),
S.C., 393 Mass. 20 (1984) (four-to-three decision). One of his
granddaughters commented to me once that her grandfather had been
most helpful and supportive in her career.
As his wife Ruth became increasingly afflicted with
Alzheimer's disease, the task fell to Ammi to deal with the
operation of their home on Sparks Street in Cambridge. In time,
Ammi became responsible for what was in effect a one-person
nursing home. Although it had always seemed to me that Ammi had
had little experience in matters domestic, he carried out his
task with his usual attention to detail and with sympathy. He
told me one day that, although Ruth did not understand what he
was reading, and probably did not even know who he was, he read
to her because it appeared to make her more restful.
Ammi earned the respect of those who knew him because of his
intelligence, scholarship, hard work, courtesy, decency, modesty,
integrity, and loyalty to people and to institutions. Typical of
Ammi was his restrained comment, written late in life, but well
before all his good works were completed, that "occasionally
there is a basis for feeling that one's work contributes a little
to progress."
The court allows the motion that the Memorial be spread upon
the records of the court.