- Quickdraw McLaw
- 52 Comments
- 132 Views
The RJ released the results of the 2019 Judging the Judges judicial performance evaluation. Is any of this surprising? Anything with which you vehemently disagree?
Judging The Judges 2019
- Law
- Posted on 5 years ago
Stefany Miley and Abbi Silver get the same retention rating? Are you kidding me? #fakesurvey
Our Student Council BOG should look into this and craft new rules that cost lawyers more money, and make it infinitely more difficult to pay my loans.
Maybe if Miley is personally involved in yet another public hillbilly brawl someone will notice. How many has she had now, three? Or maybe if she once again stands by and smirks again while her newest musclebound boyfriend threatens physical harm to another person. How many of these types of incidents can someone get away with and still be a District Court judge?
You can take the bleached blonde out of Texas, but you can't take the Texas out of the bleached blonde.
Redneck not hillbilly
I take no issue with anything said by 8:57, but it is apparent that when lawyers rated judges at the RJC, that they concentrated on their opinion of that individual as a jurist in the day-to-day operations of their courtroom and calendar.
The attorneys seemed relatively unconcerned with any personal problems of the judge, or in behavior that may have ethical overtones but which is not directly attached to the performance of her judicial duties as to the cases assigned to her.
That said, even limiting the rating strictly to her performance on the bench(and ignoring all this personal drama), it is still a little surprising that she now rates 65% retention–which, I think, is considerably higher than her previous scores. Yet I have not heard too many people indicating that she has improved very much.
In the Family Court ratings, lawyers were much less forgiving of isolated ethical lapses and let it color their overall ratings of a judge. But a distinction here is that the Family Court judges, who were rated down due to certain ethical problems, attracted discipline based on their handling of specific cases assigned to them. That is not really the situation with Miley, thus the distinction.
In other words, she may have largely gotten a free pass as to the soap opera which sometimes serves as her personal/family life.
Also, some of this(not all, but some of it) we can actually sort of understand. First, her ex-husband, IMO, is quite a challenge, in many respects. Secondly, as to what happened between her and their 18-year-old boy, a lot of parents can relate to the incredible stress of a teenager fighting with a parent while the teenager is driving. The boy apparently kept screaming and fighting with her, while, in his rage, apparently ignoring red lights, etc. So, if that's the way it truly went down, we can understand her intense anger, although, yes, she needs to keep her hands to herself.
As to the soccer game incident of a decade ago, or the recent incident of, while at the health club, encouraging her boyfriend to become confrontational with the opposing side's attorney, granted that there is no real excuse for any of that.
Agree with 9:47. Even absent the zany personal life, Miley is lightweight on the bench, just as she was as an attorney. She consistently punts on complex legal issues. Frequently it's as a concession to an attorney she views as more able to help her than the opposing attorney. Other times it's because she is not intellectually up to the task. And other times she just plain does not have the ability to grasp how a particular case or legal issue works.
On top of her shortcomings on legal issues, she is typically late for court and runs a slowish calendar. Many would love to see her draw a strong opponent; but that won't happen. Whatever weaknesses she has as a juris, she more than makes up for as a political animal. She raises lots of money and knows the right people. In Las Vegas, that will keep her on the bench for as long as she wants to be on the bench.
Gotta think that there is now enough stink on her that strong well-organized candidate could beat her. Here's your chance, Terry Coffing . . .
She runs next year, right?
Did you vote? If not, you can't complain about the results.
2:01–you may be right that the perfect storm(right candidate, deep pockets, well-endorsed, many contributors, etc.) could sweep her from office.
But consider the last three sentences of 10:58's comments. Plus she is female, blonde, and they will be certain to use the most attractive photo. on her signs and literature.
So, all in all, tough to beat.
Plus, oddly, this time she actually scored okay on the survey. Not great, but not something an opponent could effectively exploit.
On the other hand, Silver is an arrogant empty suit also. Maybe it is not that Miley polled too high but that Silver is known to be incompetent also.
She is not going to run again…..
Who, Silver or Miley? I don't like either.
Who isn't going to run again?
Judge has a history of violence & black robe syndrome!
https://veteransinpolitics.org/2019/07/judge-has-a-history-of-violence-black-robe-syndrome/
Courtroom Cover-ups and betrayal; business as usual!
https://veteransinpolitics.org/2018/11/courtroom-cover-ups-and-betrayal-business-as-usual/
Bully in the Courtroom; Eight Judicial District Court
https://veteransinpolitics.org/2018/11/bully-in-the-courtroom-eight-judicial-district-court/
Voldemort!
Shh… she who name may not be mentioned.
I have only been in front of Judge Williams a few times, but I am not surprised at all that he has the highest retention score of any district court judge.
Judge Israel's comments this morning in the RJ were an interesting take on his low score.
8:30–Israel's comments were okay when he started by taking accountability, acknowledging a learning curve in Criminal Law(although he didn't explain why after years he is still not improving) and that he takes the comments and criticism to heart(he really does not, but it was thee right thing to say).
But then he kept talking and fell into the trap of saying that the lawyers rate him low because he enforces rules and expects lawyers to be prepared–which is idiotic,and makes zero sense unless we assume the highly rated judges enforce no rules and consistently tolerate total lack of preparation by the attorneys.
Israel deserved even lower. I have never been in front of a judicial officer as lazy and mercurial as him, even in California. I am pleased he got hammered, and I truly hope that folks will factor this in during the next election.
Of course, though, people won't.
This should really be content the RJ allows you to see for free. Anyone wanna save a PDF?
The hard copy costs only a buck or two. [I'm not sure, I am a digital subscriber for $10/mo].
Noted that the two JP's who the Judicial Discipline Commission wants to suspend both received very good scores. So they're fine with lawyers and parties in the courtroom but then do a Jekyll and Hyde back in chambers? That doesn't really add up to me.
https://www.scribd.com/document/435192179/2019-Judicial-Performance-Evaluation-Survey
Private link unfortunately
Which judges did lawyers want voted out? I'm not paying the subscription fee just to view one article.
So go buy a copy of today's paper. I am going to buy one to keep in hard copy.
For Family Court the low retention scores were:
Pomrenze (28% retention – and a bit overdue as she is retiring)
Moss
Hughes
Brown
Harter
You are right! Pomrenze should have been history years ago. She is absolutely disgraceful–rude, disrespectful and she makes up the rules as she goes along.
http://www.filedropper.com/2019judicialperformanceevaluationsurvey
This legit? Looks awful malwarish.
Not OP, it's legit. Just make sure you click on the correct "download," as the top one is an advert.
I am laughing at the Eliss a Cadish rating. She is horrible.
I'm in disbelief at Cadish's high rating. I've had trials with her, appeared in front of her since she was elected and she is AWFUL. Unreal.
She was OK in a couple of trials that I had; her staff was not.
1:07. Was she truly awful or were the merits of your case awful?
I' not taking up for her. She may have been what you say. But calling her awful is a gratuitous conclusion, but it is not helpful. Please explain how she was awful. That kind of info. could be useful when someone considers whether or not to file a peremptory challenge.
But too often on this blog people condemn a judge just by saying they suck, without telling us how–such as poor demeanor, not prepared, not sufficiently knowledgeable in certain areas, biased for or against certain types of attorneys or case, etc.
Suspicious high ratings–12:47 PM and 1:07PM–Suspect that members of certain pressure groups and parties may have urged their constituents to complete the survey and give high rankings. This is how it is done. Certainly, the Best of Las Vegas results are rigged.
Cadish is one of the worst
I wonder about the number who responded to the survey, the gender and the party affiliation.
We had an email about her in our firm today. We were surprised on how well she polled, more than twice the amount of percentage she received in election. I don't trust the Cadish results.
The other NSC justices are way better than Cadish. She gets the highest ratings and quoted in the RJ. Makes you wonder the people who voted.
Makes you wonder if the few people on this Blog with an axe to grind against Cadish are really just a few people on this Blog with an axe to grind as against Cadish.
Cute. First post about Cadish today. I don't care for her, because she is demeaning.
I only had maybe one or two hearings in front of her when she was in the 8th, but I've seen her numerous times through organizations that we're both in. I've never found her to be anything but respectful, polite, and kind. All these negative comments about her make me wonder if it's as 3:21 says. It's unlikely I'll ever know, unless she becomes a Senior Judge someday.
I like her personally, but not as judge. You can like the other justices better than Cadish without an axe to grind.
I agree with 3:33. I am a spouse of attorney who met her a few times. Her husband was nice, but I found her offputting and arrogant.
Cadish in person (off of the bench) is not arrogant but painfully shy to the point of socially awkward. The first time I met her I was put off by how quiet and non-contributory she was when she was the Managing Partner at Hale Lane. I understand that it can appear aloof and arrogant when someone does not excel at social engagement.
She is nasty on the bench. See het at Inns, and she is not shy at all. She has her buddies who she is not shy with. How can she be shy with her ties to Harry Reid? No, I don't see it.
Her and Howard's license plate should read, "just us." Used to be close with her, but she has changed for the not so good. She is not shy, and she is all ego.
Tim Kelley did not earn her an 89 percent approval rating. Funny how Jerry Tao is so low but Eliss. Cadish is so high.
Our District Court has a remarkable capacity of placing judges in areas that they never practiced in prior to taking the bench. I understand that it is good to have well-rounded and versatile judges, and that they do rotate, but perhaps we should question that wisdom. If a judge is well within their comfort zone, leave them where they are, rather than transferring them to a court whose subject matter is totally alien to them, and then replacing them with someone who likewise never practiced in the area of their new assignment.
Yet what we have is career prosecutors, or career criminal defense attorneys, being thrown into civil court, while career Plaintiff's P.I. attorneys, and insurance defense attorneys, are thrown into criminal calendar.
This is a dreadful approach, but it has always been employed. So considering all that, why do we act indignant and shocked when we have a judge who spent the bulk of his career overseeing a heavy advertising personal injury mill, perform poorly when he is suddenly thrown into criminal court to sink or swim?
And when they sink, and are overwhelmed and overmatched, we act upset and shocked at how bad they are. But how could we have expected anything else?
Also, some people will point out that some of these judges actually become pretty decent at learning the new area they are assigned to. Fair enough, but think of all the incalculable damage that can result to numerous cases while this person is "learning."
Most large jurisdictions match judges to their area of expertise or specialization(based on what areas they practiced in prior to taking the bench).
Again, I'm no fan of this judge who is low-rated and criticized for not knowing Criminal Law. But the bigger culprit is the misguided system that assigned him to such court because they want "well-rounded" judges. Well rounded is all well and good, but during this so-called learning curve are people being sentenced to terms of incarceration far in excess of what is warranted? Sounds like, from what I'm hearing, that many attorneys believe that is precisely what is occurring.
This is a really excellent point. I'm not sure the solution but it is a very significant flaw in the current Eighth JD system.