- Quickdraw McLaw
- 18 Comments
- 784 Views
We were going to be on hiatus until after the New Year, but too much is going on to not make a post.
- Las Vegas Justice of the Peace (and Son of the Mayor) Eric Goodman suffered a traumatic head injury in a Summerlin park restroom on December 15. No one seems to know exactly what happened, but it appears his injuries are likely the result of an assault. The good news is he is “recovering well.” [RJ, Las Vegas Sun]
- In a 4-page decision released on Christmas Eve, the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline found that special prosecutors proved 8 of the 12 charges against Judge Steven Jones. A hearing is scheduled for January 27th (well after the judicial candidate filing deadline), to determine the sanctions he will face as a result. [RJ]
- According to her Facebook page, a private celebration honoring the life of Lisa Willardson will take place in Utah on January 4, 2014. In lieu of flowers and in honor of her dedication to the rights and welfare of abused and neglected children, her family asks that donations be made in her name to Childhaven.
- The RJ published the results of its 2013 Judicial Performance Evaluation and is publishing a series of articles on “Judging the Judges.” We’ll have a post focusing specifically on the results later (only 12 out of 90 judges had a majority say do no retain). For today, let’s take a look at an RJ article on how Nevada Supreme Court incumbents usually draw no challengers. The article reads a carefully crafted warning that you’re wasting your time and money if you run against a Nevada Supreme Court incumbent. This year, the two seats up for contention are Justices Pickering and Gibbons. What do you think? Is it already a foregone conclusion or is it worthwhile for someone to challenge them?
I've noticed that 8 out of 12 of the judges who received a majority of "no retain" votes are women. Does anyone know what the ratio of male to female judges is in Nevada? I've only been here a few years, but it seems like last year a strong majority of the "no retain" votes were also for women judges. This would make sense if 50% or 60% of the judges are women though.
Fair question. And then ask yourself what percentage of the voting public are women and how that effects the election of female judges. Halvorsen openly acknowledged when she was elected as the only woman in the field for her seat that she targeted women's groups to elect her because women generally vote about 8% more frequently then men. Although Nevada is one of the few states where men outnumber women for registered voters, that trend is reverse in Clark County.
An equally good question is the percentage of LDS Judges on the non-retain list.
Why would the percentage of LDS Judges be an equally good question? Do you have reason to believe it is disproportionate to the number of LDS Judges in total? More so than Catholic or Jewish Judges?
An "equally good" question? How so?
I tire of the handful of idiots who are obsessed with the Mormonness of the bar and judiciary in Clark County. Yes, there are a lot of Mormon attorney and judges in Clark County, probably because Clark County has one of the largest Mormon populations of any county in the US (including most Utah counties).
Mormons are just like everyone else. Some Mormons are bad judges, some are good judges. Some Mormons are good attorneys, some are bad. Some Mormon opposing counsel are easy to work with, others are dbags. Just like everyone else.
According to this link http://www.slate.com/articles/life/map_of_the_week/2012/02/mormon_population_in_the_u_s_an_interactive_map.html Mormons make up 5.95% of the population in Clark County. I think their representation on the bench and at the bar is disproportionate to the overall population. That said, there is nothing wrong with that–no requirement that limits % of Mormons practicing and no reason to do so.
I am 10:34…. 9:34 seemed to question whether frmale jurists are scrutinized harder than male jurists, leading to a disproportionate number of women in the Not Retain list. My question was not meant to indicate that LDS Jurists are generally worse jurists but more to examine whether certain judges draw ire because of their affiliations and inclinations. One of the questions on the survey is freedom from religious bias. Judge Smith in particular has drawn heat for the perception of religious bias.
Actually, I think the initial comment was pointing out that female judges are generally shittier.
9:34 pointed out an important issue which is: many female candidates, judicial and otherwise, seem to use that as their greatest qualification for office. Often a female will get elected without any real qualifications other than gender. (Ask any campaign consultant and they will tell you that all things being equal a female candidate starts with a 5 to 8 percentage point advantage on the gender bias issue.) Also, when a bad female judge is called out for horrible decisions or bad demeanor there is invariably an outcry among some that the attack is on the judge's gender, not qualifications. Call a male judge an evil bully and an idiot and you are "speaking truth to power." Say a female judge is a vapid idiot who makes erratic and emotional decisions and you are a misogynist. The RJ list shows we have 46 male judges and 42 female judges (those included in the survey-all jurisdictions). In the end a crappy jurist is crappy regardless of gender. I generally agree with the list published in the RJ for the judges I routinely appear before, males and females alike.
Thank you, 1:57. The fear of telling the truth on this issue starts in law school.
1:57 – "9:34 pointed out an important issue which is: many female candidates, judicial and otherwise, seem to use that as their greatest qualification for office. Often a female will get elected without any real qualifications other than gender." Seriously?
I'm thinking this says more about your bias than a judicial officer's candidacy.
Has there ever been a number 1 ranked judge who is a woman in Nevada? Has the bottom 15 – 20 % ever not been composed of a disproportionate — relative to the ratio of male/female judges on that particular bench — percentage of women?
Also, who responds to these? We have 300 – 400 ratings per judge but the total pool is 4500 or more. Is this even statistically valid? What about some who have way larger nos. of responses? Is the pool being shifted?
The fact remains that judicial evaluations are a big help — even though a truly accurate one costs way more than anyone can afford. They are rough guidelines, a finger judging which way the wind goes, but people, please think about their limitations and the extent to which you're complicit in them.
I suggest some soul-searching about gender bias — and maybe other kinds of bias — is worthwhile. We have elected judges, not appointed ones, and the role we as lawyers play is so important. Should there be some consciousness-raising?
Why yes, Elizabeth Halverson comes immediately to mind. And you might note that I included elections outside the scope of the judiciary. Perhaps the reason the bottom 20% of these lists are often comprised of females is that those particular judges were elected in an anti male pro female biased election (thinking abbotangelo v marshall here) rather than because the female candidate was actually more qualified? Oh, of course not. The Nevada bar is almost evenly split male to female, as is the judiciary, so these lists mean all the men get together to vote against the women regardless of actual qualifications and the women sit out the vote. And why don't more attorneys participate you ask? Perhaps because the majority of attorneys don't appear in court often enough to form an opinion? Maybe because they are too busy or simply don't find the survey relevant when they realize the average voter does not really care about what the survey says and will likely vote their own bias. And as for my biases, I tend to vote for the person I believe is most qualified, male or female.
I'll go even further….it appears being an unattractive woman is the key to being in the bottom tier of judges. Sad. Sad. Sad. We mistake beauty and attractiveness with ability. cuz….science!?
8:27– I could not disagree with your statement "being an unattractive woman is the key to being in the bottom tier of judges." Judges Leavitt, Walsh and Hampton are deemed less attractive than….. well you evaluate the aesthetics of their counterparts. I would not say that the female judges rated low versus the female judges rated high is based on looks. If you believe that there is a gender bias, so be it. If you believe that its an aesthetics bias, I think you are off base.
I don't understand why Judge Goodman wasn't identified as the victim sooner. Were they trying to protect his identity or something?
I've appeared in front of judge goodman and liked him, but he could be pretty hard on the defendants. It's scary that he could have been targeted for who he is. It also could have been an accident or just random crime. Either way I hope he recovers completely. Sounds like an awful thing to experience.
Happy New Year to Everyone. May your 2014 be prosperous, full of good cheer, and brimming with professional courtesies.
Judge Israel has been the subject of a peremptory challenge 42 times through September 2013. His response: "“Since I carry an all civil docket, my peremptory challenge numbers are likely to be higher than those who carry a split docket. Prior to taking the bench, I had a 30-year career as a vigorous plaintiff’s attorney; that likely accounts for a significant number of the peremptory challenges."
Well, sure, that could be it. Or it could that he's an ass with a temperament that is ill-suited for the bench.
LOL at "vigorous Plaintiff's attorney"