- law dawg
- 107 Comments
- 4476 Views
The results of the RJ’s 2025 Judicial Performance Evaluation have been published! 790 attorneys weighed in anonymously, and judging from the comments, some of our loyal readers were among those. Here’s your post for discussing the results, the strongly worded comments, and what you think about retaining judges in next year’s judicial election. Did those who were surveyed get it right? Feel free to tell us what you think and how you really feel, but try to do so in a professional manner.
The Review-Journal is doing an important community service with judging the judges. It needs to become reliably permanent for every election. JTJ cuts through the haze of rubber chicken dinners, roadside signs and endorsements from unions and civic organizations that have no clue about what makes a good judge.
Judge Kishner, the article refers to you as one of the most hated judges in the District Court. “’Just resign,’ wrote one lawyer. ‘Your form over substance methodology makes you a hated member of the bench. Is this how you want your legacy to be viewed? You make every attorney’s life miserable for no good reason.’” That’s not accurate or fair, at least in terms of precision. You are the MOST hated judge, it’s not even close. Your response, whether you believe it or not, is weak and pathetic.
“’I decide cases according to the law and facts, without regard to whether decisions are popular with those who may be inclined to respond negatively,’ Kishner said in a statement. ‘I put in the time and work to be well prepared to uphold and apply the law, and perform all the duties of my judicial office fairly and impartially. I in turn, ask that the lawyers do the job their clients retained them to do, by being prepared and following the laws and rules that govern the court. As a result, I may not win a popularity contest, but, I do respect all those who appear in court and ensure that the law is followed fairly and impartially.’”
This is an implicit insult to your colleagues. Do you really believe that Judges Kierney, Yeager, Bluth and Gall obtained the highest ratings because they are unwilling to make hard decisions and don’t require lawyers to be prepared and follow rules? Because that’s the implication you are making and it is a joke.
Everyone has a Judge Kishner story. A story about a time that you exalted form over substance, a time where you applied the rules in an absurdist way to embarrass or humiliate, a time where you were an impediment to resolution and justice. The last time I had a case in front of you, opposing counsel and I were working professionally and effectively towards resolution on behalf of our clients in spite of the unnecessary headwind that you created. You are the opposite of a judge like Judge Gall, who somehow manages her docket more efficiently than you (including lawyer rule compliance), yet treats everyone with respect (and even kindness) while facilitating resolution of cases. I strongly suggest that you observe Judge Gall and adjust your practices accordingly.
We have a duty as Clark County attorneys to let our friends and family know that it doesn’t matter who they vote for next year, as long as it is NOT Kishner. like OP said, we all have a Kishner story, and NONE of them are good. In her own way, Kish is like Elizabeth Halverson, nobody wants her on the bench.
Consider that duty breached! I’m voting for her because I love rules, even more when opposing counsel can’t read them 😀
I don’t make that many appearances these days, but I was involved in a trial in her court a few years ago. While the substance of her rulings on evidence, etc. was fine, she just made the entire process about 5x more stressful than it needed to be with her dogmatic (if that’s the right word) approach to the most obscure subsection of the most obscure local rule that no one (except her) has read in 30 years. She could actually be a very good judge, but her approach just makes it impossible, and obviously she doesn’t get it. Maybe she will draw a good opponent this time.
Isn’t Kishner eligible or going to retire. She could go then go on to Senior Judge status. The problem is that is so hard to get rid of bad judges even in elections. Remember Judge Jesse Walsh. Judge Halverson. There have been so many bad judges. I was an advocate for electing judges but no more. The problem now is that they have all the District Court Judges running at the same time so the average voter has absolutely no idea who they are voting form. Female voters just pick a female judge over their male counterparts. Look at the all the good male judges who got booted off the bench even when they ran a good campaign.
Kishner does not represent all women judges. The men who ran for judicial seats did not run good or effective campaigns or they would have been elected. Q.E.D.
The top rated judges are all female, so obviously gender has nothing to do with why Kishner is horrible. But to pretend that Clark County voters don’t have a gender preference is willful ignorance.
Considering the majority of attorneys are women, shouldn’t also the majority of judges be women? Again, Q.E.D.
The majority of attorneys are not women. It is lopsided male. 65 per cent male. 35 per cent women based on state bar.
56.2% of law school students are women, outnumbering men in law school attendance, and the gap is growing every year.
Many men are no longer actively trying cases, etc. They are closer to retirement. Why would they take pay cuts to become a judge?
1:03 pm. “The men who ran for judicial seats did not run good or effective campaigns.” Two male judges ran the best campaigns and were defeated by female candidates who ran no campaigns. The block voting of all judges was one of the causes.
Talking only to other lawyers is not “running the best campaign.”
They were well-funded, had signs and advertisements out and went on the Rubber Chicken circuit. They were defeated by women who literally did nothing except file for election. They did far more than merely talk with other lawyers.
I once had a case with her father, Irwin Kishner who was beyond arrogant and downright insulting.
Her father was a real estate developer.
he was also an attorney
Walsh sure did disappear in a hurry. Where did she go?
Married and moved to Florida
The story was she had a sick mother in Florida. She consistently ruled in favor of a particular plaintiff’s personal injury firm.
Well when you pay your 10k plus a few more through llcs you’re entitled to some special consideration.
Agree with all of this. Her response is her deluding herself into thinking it’s just sour grapes from litigants who appear in front of her. It’s not. She has the worst case of Black Robe Disease I have ever seen, and it’s pretty sad she thinks she does nothing wrong. That woman literally makes litigants’ lives miserable to no end that serves any actual purpose. A shame, too, given she’s not stupid and could actually be a good judge if she wasn’t so unnecessarily nasty.
25 years plus here. Kishner is the Pomranze of the Civ/Crim Bench.
Pomranze went out of her way to spread misery. I always wondered if she favored men or women but ultimately realized she hated everybody.
I won the one case I had in front of Judge Kishner and it was a miserable experience. It’s not sour grapes.
Does anyone have a story of her pre-judge? How was she as a lawyer?
I knew Joanna pre-bench. She was mildly pompous but nothing like she is on the bench today. By the way, she remains a pretty nice person off of the bench. But when she gets on the bench, a switch flips on her.
Someone made a sports comparison for me which was that she is the Ndamakong Suh of the bench. Kind, intelligent, giving until she steps on the field and then she just loses herself in what she thinks is the game.
Now there’s a name I hadn’t heard in a long time.
He’s me. . .
Nah. You’re Conrad Dobler.
If you want me to stomp on your leg periodically to remind you I can.
I’ve only had one case in front of her and she was actually reasonable. What is it she does? Please provide examples. These all seem like ad hominem attacks, to be honest. What specifically makes her a “bad judge”?
The experience I had was her literally spending a majority of the hearing (i.e. more than 50%) complaining that attorneys didn’t properly file the notices of remote appearance. Castigate the attorneys – sure. You can even say “if it happens again I’m not letting you appear.” But to make it the focus of your hearing shows a complete inability to prioritize what matters.
If there weren’t any other stories like this, I’d assume she was having a bad day, or she just really, really cares about notice of remote appearance. But every story about her is the same: she puts all her energy into policing the most banal procedural issues, to the detriment of everyone appearing in front of her.
I had a medmal case with her around a decade ago where one of the hospitals wanted a protective order on some of their policies and procedures. Not a big deal. The plaintiffs, the doctors, the ambulance company, etc. (12 total defendants) all agreed. She rejected like 5 or 6 iterations of a protective order, stipulated to by the parties because she wasn’t satisfied with the stipulation and kept giving vague reasons why she wasn’t satisfied. When I think of the thousands of dollars wasted on such a nothing burger my head wants to explode. I could have taken my family to Cancun for a month with the amount of money the carriers spent. Even as an ID attorney I was frustrated.
Retweet a thousand times. I think many of these lawyers don’t like being called out for NOT knowing the rules and coming unprepared to court. If you’re prepared, kind, and efficient, she is the most accommodating judge.
Who are the top and bottom? Firewall.
Wow, talk about JUDGING the Judges!
And in this day and age the sexual preference of our judges should not matter.
Adriana Rincon (family) was 98%
She’s new, it’s still the honeymoon phase. Although she was exceptionally prepared when I appeared in front of her. I hope that continues.
I’m surprised by some of the lower rankings like Judge Clark-Newberry. Several judges ranked higher than her shocked me.
I really like Clark-Newberry. Intelligent and a nice person.
You must not be a criminal defense attorney.
Clark-Newberry is a retired cop. What do you expect?
Forsberg was higher than expected and she needs to go.
If she could start her calendars on time, criminal attorneys would be able to get on with their day and talk with their clients. Instead of having lunch in her courtroom waiting!
Hoping someone can post the list/results/page in archived form for those of us who don’t pay the RJ! Can’t wait to see the results
https://www.removepaywall.com/
The results are posted at Our Nevada Judges. https://ournevadajudges.com/home
I am no fan of the Adelson family, and I think they’ve imposed their politics on the RJ in some ludicrous ways (e.g. they had a reporter doing “hard news” about Biden during the week and then writing an anti-Biden opinion piece every weekend). But the RJ is still an invaluable resource here in Vegas and I think it’s worth the very cheap price to support their efforts. I love the Indy but Vegas deserves to have a traditional paper too.
Alina Habba, fake US Attorney for NJ, accepts fate and the Third Circuit and sends out a notice that she is “stepping down.” Is Fake US Attorney Sigal Chattah next?
Irrespective of her legal acumen, Lilly-Spells’ “slowest judge in the courthouse” label is dead on. She routinely takes the bench late, takes multiple half-hour plus breaks during calendar, sits in long periods of silence after attorneys have presented argument, etc. If you have anything to argue in her court you have to assume you’ll be there well into the afternoon.
Spoken like a true campaign manager for her opponent. I disagree. She is smart and diligent in my experience. I will be voting for her. -signed actual attorney, not a campaign manager.
I have heard she is not nice to her staff.
i don’t mind slow if the result is right…
This may be a one-off, but she took nearly a year to issue an opinion in a case that was then swiftly reversed by the Supremes. If you’re going to take that long to issue a bad legal ruling, I know attorneys who can do the same in half the time.
Here is an ongoing problem with JLS’s department. She takes matters under advisement, issues Minute Orders and never serves anyone with the Minute Orders. Has happened 4 times to our firm.
That’s a staff problem.
It is a department wide problem
She has long pauses of silence because she reviews the bench memos she has prepared for all of her cases. She reads them from the bench, which is how I know she has something written prepared. Oral argument can sway her, and that seems to be when she takes matters under advisement. I find JLS prepared, nice and a good judge. She has my vote.
Oral argument often sways here because she doesn’t know what is going on in front of her and isn’t prepared.
The RJ JTJ article discussing the low-ranked judges’ responses to the survey is comedy gold. Makes we want a televised Roasting The Judges next year.
Ms Congeniality!!!
Oh honey…oh honey no.
Kierney
Yeager
Bluth
Gall
Talim
Trujillo
Williams
Wiese
Jones
E Johnson
Hardy
Piper
Eller
Schwartz
Sturman
Denton
Leavitt
Barisich
Albertson
Reynolds
Holthus
Delaney
Mendoza
Clark-Newberry
Krall
S Johnson
Craig
Lilly-Spells
Peterson
Israel
Kishner
Ballou
Using a law school bell curve…
A: Kierney, Yeager, Bluth, Gall, Talim
B: Triujillo, Williams, Weise, Jones, E Johnson, Hardy
C: Pieper, Eller, Schwartz, Sturman, Denton, Leavitt, Barisich, Albertson, Reynolds, Holthus, Delaney, Mendoza, Clark-Newberry
D: Krall, S Johnson, Craig, Lily-Spells, Peterson, Israel
F: Kishner, Ballou
Those D and F categories look pretty accurate when you put it like this.
Kierney, Talim, Trujillo, Pieper and Mendoza clearly too high. Denton, Krall and Clark-Newberry demonstrably too low.
Hardy is also too high. He seems to have stopped making decisions for fear of being overturned.
Sleepy Joe
The sad thing about Kishner is that she is a person of high intellect, who is well-prepared and generally makes good decisions. If she dialed back the aggression by a couple of notches, and changed nothing else, she would go from F to a solid A/B.
Any thoughts on who the best business court judges are?
Retired. They retired.
Thank goodness
Albertson seemed like she would be a disaster when she was elected, pleasantly surprised she’s middle of the pack.
Yeager absolutely botched a case I had in front of her (as the Nevada Supreme Court later concluded), but her decision was very thoughtful and fair. Sometimes judges get it wrong and I don’t have a huge problem with that, unless they always get it wrong in one direction.
Some of them are right in rating judges high because they do a good job (Gall and Bluth); some are not right because they rated judges high who are just nice but do not make the tough decisions (Talim and Kierney). But it goes to show how important nice/courteous can be. Talim and Mendoza took the bench at the same time from the same background and are pretty similarly not adept at handling civil cases. Talim draws higher marks merely because she is nicer. The article even notes in discussing Kierney and Yeager that people commented on their cordiality. Contrary to what Kishner said, there is no correlation between getting it right and not being cordial.
Attorneys care less if the judge is nice than they do their decisions. Anyone commenting otherwise isn’t an actual attorney. We are paid by clients who don’t care about a judges disposition. Now if that disposition affects their rulings that’s different. Those filing out surveys were attorneys. Those commenting on this blog are largely not. Which is okay but let’s not confuse our preference for sound rulings with someone scoring higher because they’re simply nice. If you bothered reading the articles, there was a very specific system and questions that targeted knowledge of the law and sound decision making. Anyone discounting the survey didn’t do one. The results are spot on.
There were real metrics used. Not who do you like versus who do you not like. So anyone discounting this survey or dismissing this as a popularity contest is mistaken. Metrics matter and were very well utilized in these surveys.
I don’t think half the lawyers on this blog would pass the knowledge of the law and sound decision making questions tho.
Talim may have shied away from difficult civil decisions in her first few months on the bench, but she has developed at an extremely fast rate. After only a year and a half on the bench, Talim can handle civil cases and civil law far better than many of her more experienced fellow EJDC judges. Mendoza may still get the hang of civil cases and law, but I agree she is still getting her footing.
Gall would have been higher had she not gotten a split docket. Her criminal decisions are not great and largely based on what other judges tell her they would do. Or she punts somethign til another judge makes a decision in another case so she can follow along in hers.
To be fair, as a not so newly minted civil lawyer, I’m sure I’d struggle at criminal matters too for a while. Apples and oranges. This is why I’m in favor of separate dockets – especially for a court as big as the 8th.
Professionalism goes a long way as well. I’ve been in several departments where the judge, clearly friends with counsel, will engage in small talk about their weekend, kids, etc etc. Or they’ll engage in banter best reserved for happy hour. It’s not cute. It’s not funny. But we all have to laugh because you’re judges. It makes things award. So please stop. .
Kishner gets poor ratings because she is a stickler for following the rules. Spoiler alert! Being a lawyer is all about following the rules. Otherwise, any lay person could do it! I applaud anyone who works to change a rule they don’t like. More to the point, go to Federal Court and flaunt the rules and see what happens. I don’t care one way or the other about Kishner; she can stay or go. But complaining about a judge who expects lawyers to follow the rules is something a bad lawyer, an incompetent lawyer, an ignorant lawyer, or a lazy lawyer does. All of you complaining need to look in the mirror and decide what you are.
If you think what separates lay people from lawyers is the ability to follow rules, I feel bad for your clients.
And what about the many, many parts of the rules that call for a judge to exercise discretion? If every single thing were spelled out in the rules then it would be easier for a lay person to do it.
So none of the highly rated judges follow the rules?
They don’t know the rules, they’re DAs!!
Here is a rule for you that Sally Loehrer used to hit people with: NRCP 1. “These rules govern the procedure in all civil actions and proceedings in the district courts, except as stated in Rule 81. They should be construed, administered, and employed by the court and the parties to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.”
I clerked for a federal judge. One time we got a brief that violated all the formatting rules in the Local Rules – the font was weird, the text was too small, the margins were tiny, etc. etc. I really wanted to strike the brief because it was so painful to read. My judge said “we’re not going to ignore someone’s arguments because they broke some procedural rule. Read the brief and tell me what their arguments are.” He was probably right to care about substance over form, but I was disappointed I couldn’t skip it…
Sounds like Phil Pro or Andy Gordon
Exactly!! Every attorney hounding her for following the rules wouldn’t last FIFTEEN minutes in front of Dorsey— who has a timer for oral argument! “Form over substance” more likely than not, your substance sucks too!
Oh, honey, those grown-up complaints about Judge Kishner? They sound like when someone gets upset because they didn’t finish their homework and now they have to face the teacher!
Judge Kishner is like the principal of the courtroom. She makes sure everyone follows the rules—like keeping your toys tidy, making your bed, or putting your shoes away. She runs a very good, tidy courtroom, and she expects everyone to be ready and prepared.
If someone says she’s “mean,” it’s probably because they forgot to file their papers on time or didn’t learn what they were supposed to before coming in. They’re wasting her time, and everyone else’s time. That’s rude.
We want judges who call the game fairly, just like a line referee tennis. They just point out if the ball was out of bounds. It’s bad form to cry about the judge if the ball was out of bounds.
It’s simple: put on your big-kid pants, know the rules, and be ready to do your job. Judge Kishner isn’t the problem; it’s just that some people need to remember to do their part!
Thank you Judge Kish for weighing in on our humble blog.
The ranking are accurate and while marginally competent, your demeanor and hyper fixation is reminiscent of a barely verbal ADHD 13 year old with his Lego set.
May you be relieved of your seat in short order.
You won’t be missed.
Agree with @11:43. Thanks, Kish. You are delusional. All of the complaints about you aren’t just because you “follow the rules.” The point is you are UNPLEASANT to EVERYONE, and WITHOUT GOOD REASON. Your judicial demeanor is severely lacking to the point of nonexistence. Everyone talking about “form over substance” is talking about you making a big deal about things that don’t matter at all, e.g., not filing a stupid ATEAR 48 hours before the hearing when that was still a thing. Bitching someone out for that is not being the “principal of the courtroom.” It’s being a sperg. That doesn’t make you a good judge. In fact, it makes you a terrible judge. No one is asking you to let them disclose experts a year late or grant a baseless motion. Get over yourself and do your job. As 11:43 said, you won’t be missed.
OP here.
Darlings, this little emotional meltdown in the comments is truly precious. It’s like watching two toddlers pitch a fit because the babysitter made them clean up their kinetic sand before naptime. Honestly, the level of whining here is so deafening, I almost spilled my tea and ruined my silk Theory blouse.
To the “barely verbal” gem and the “UNPLEASANT” chorus: The judge’s competency is not determined by whether she hands out gold stars or serves lattes. Your claim that she is “marginally competent” because she expects filings like the ATEAR to be submitted on time is, quite frankly, hilariously amateur. You’re complaining about being held to a deadline—a deadline meant to manage a massive calendar and ensure public resources aren’t wasted.
When you stand before the court and complain about a technical rule, you’re not making a legal argument. You’re making an embarrassing spectacle, and the only person who looks like a barely verbal child is the one typing insults from their apartment.
It reminds me of when you spend twenty minutes perfecting a winged eyeliner look, but complain your date is on-time and you forgot to account for the extra thirty minutes needed for your favorite contour powder to be shipped from Sephora.
The ATEAR is the procedural primer of a remote hearing. You skip the step, you get busted, and then you blame the mirror (or in this case, the highly efficient Judge Kishner) for reflecting your glaring incompetence. Did you truly expect a flawless outcome with such a sloppy prep step?
For those confused about the difference between a judicial mandate and a popularity contest at the Bar Association luncheon, courts have made this abundantly clear, so get your highlighter pens ready:
“There is no constitutional right to be liked.” (Sanders v. Vargas, No. 11-C-405 (E.D. Wis. Apr. 17, 2012)).
“There is no constitutional right to be liked or loved.” (Henshaw v. Henshaw, 83 Mich. App. 68, 72, 268 N.W.2d 289, 291 (1978)).
So, do your legal homework, stop confusing a court appearance with a popularity contest, and trade that dusty law school participation trophy for a copy of the Local Rules that you actually plan on reading.
Honestly, if a little rule enforcement on an administrative form makes you this fragile, perhaps the fast-paced, high-stakes world of litigation isn’t for you. Go find a practice area where deadlines are suggestions and people care about your hurt feelings. You certainly won’t be missed.
But we all can agree that judges are in fact subject to the will of the electorate, including the authorities which may lead to the end of a judge’s judicial career.
I don’t want this judge voted off as she is in the top 20% of judges on legal acumen; however the tone deaf nature of her responses are evocative of the issues that lawyers have in Department 31. How often do attorneys get the law right but the application wrong. This is not about rule enforcement; this is about not serving the interests of justice through conduct undermines the interests of “the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.”
Standing ovation for this one.
OP, no, you’re stupid. The ATEAR is the “primer” of nothing. It is a pointless procedural step that never should have been implemented in the first place, as it makes zero difference to the outcome of any hearing whether one is filed or not. Then wasting 20 minutes bitching about why it was not filed at such and such a time is compounding the pointlessness. Form over substance. That is dumb, and not being a good judge. I sat in her courtroom once and listened to her bitching out litigants for similar nonsense for the better part of an hour. The courtroom was full of lawyers. But yeah, she’s a super boss judge and everyone just doesn’t know how to handle those rules! GTFO.
This is an excellent post. Contrast Kishner with Bluth, who also has a pretty strict but clear remote appearance policy and in fact does not publish her ZOOM. Bluth does not humiliate people for non-compliance; she simply requires compliance. Bluth got excellent marks in this area. It would be such a simple change for Judge Kishner to make.
One of the best retorts on this blog ever!
Well Judge Kish is known for her bloviating, so of course, here we are, the Judge using a VPN to comment on her own blog. . . . . Do you think that she had her law clerk do the case law research?
LETS GOOOOO
The amount of grammar mistakes in this comment just reaffirms that it’s a blessing you passed the bar. “The ranking are accurate,” run on sentences… everywhere? Also your learning disability-rooted insult is deeply distasteful and this is probably why you’re divorced, single, or an incel. Download Grammarly and be on your way!
There are two issues with Judge Kishner as I see it and from my experience with her.
First, I don’t mind her enforcing rules. That is her job. However, she does it in the most demeaning way possible and for generally no value added, except to show she is superior and the attorney is a dolt. She could enforce the rules she chooses to enforce with more pleasantness and still accomplish the same outcome. I think this would serve to educate the bar instead of inspire the clear disdain she has earned.
Second, she does not always enforce the rules. She picks and chooses. For example, I had an MSJ in front of her a few years back. The opposing party had not responded to RFA’s in over 8 months. I filed a very straight-forward MSJ based on those admissions. The opposition did not seek to withdraw the RFA’s or enlarge the time to serve responses. It just argued that the RFA’s were not important (very weak argument), even though they clearly resolved the issues in the case. Judge Kishner found some way to avoid granting SJ without actually enforcing Rule 36’s plain language. I cannot recall exactly what she did, but she jumped through some very irrelevant hoops to get to her desired outcome, as opposed to what the rules actually required.
But she’s the principal of the courtroom! Make your bed! Motion denied!
When do we get to evaluate probate and discovery commissioners?
Yeah, boy that would be fun…