« JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY | Main | THOSE WONDERFUL SUPREMES »

JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS





A PROPOSAL FOR A STATEWIDE SYSTEM
OF JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS IN OREGON

By Lauren Paulson



Dear OSB BOG Member:

OSB President Gerry Gaydos has allowed me a few minutes to speak with you this Friday at your BOG meeting. The purpose is to update you on the subject of a statewide formal system of judicial performance evaluations for Oregon.

The blueprint for a statewide judicial performance evaluation program for Oregon is to be found in Exhibit #5 below. (Note the online addresses for some Exhibits are stated and you can download as you see fit. The other Exhibits will be available.)

THE OREGON STATE BAR (OSB)

Prologue

Our democratic system requires some degree of citizen oversight and accountability from all branches of government. If anyone is put in fear of speaking out then democracy fails.


OSB Board of Governor's (BOG) Committee on the Judiciary


2004   In 2004 The Oregon State Bar Board of Governors (BOG) voted to implement a statewide judicial performance evaluation program. The Oregon State Bar BOG had a (now moribund) Judiciary Committee in 2004 which compiled a detailed study of other state court judicial evaluation systems in a memo first dated May 7, 2004 which observed "Oregon has no established judicial evaluation procedure. Many other states do." (Exhibit 3) The pros were listed as "help judges improve; help the public evaluate judges at election time". The cons listed "...alienating judges further, complexity of the task; cost".

BOG minutes of August 13, 2004 state that Oregon Supreme Court Chief Justice Wallace Carson told the OSB President that "...this would not be received well by the judiciary." By consensus, BOG's Committee on the Judiciary and the Full Board agreed to pursue an Oregon prototype for a statewide formal judicial evaluation program at this meeting.

An October 2004 Draft Black Letter Guidelines from the ABA on statewide judicial performance evaluations was available to the Committee though never discussed.

2005   The American Bar Association formally adopted their Black Letter Guidelines for the Evaluation of Judicial Performance in February 2005. (Exhibit 4) These guidelines state: "Judicial evaluation programs improve the performance of individual judges and the judiciary as a whole."

In a March 2005 OSB's BOG Judiciary Committee meeting with Chief Justice Carson the latter expressed the view that performance evaluations for judges would "...be helpful, but had a concern about the cost." He went on to state the bar needed to keep in mind the fundamental notion of "first, do no harm".

The BOG committee decided that the goal of improving the image of the legal profession had, as a subset, the improvement of the performance of judges.

In July 2005 the committee planned to present an action plan on judicial evaluations to BOG on July 2006 with a goal of commencing the program in January 2007.

The OSB Judiciary Committee then was sidetracked to the subject of judicial independence. The Bar's General Counsel, George Riemer's first Draft report of August 2005 focuses on "Judicial Independence". The conclusion of the Draft report states: "The Committee on the Judiciary believes the (BOG) should endorse the concept of the need for Oregon judges to participate in a performance evaluation program." The OSB Draft report does not mention the existence of the ABA Black letter Guidelines for Judicial Evaluations mentioned above.

Chief Justice Carson announces in September, 2005 that he was retiring. Paul De Muniz is elected Chief Justice of Oregon's Supreme Court following that announcement in 2005.

On November 30, 2005 George Riemer's letter to Chief Justice Carson and Justice De Muniz states "(BOG) appreciates that the topic of judicial performance evaluations is potentially provocative...".

On December 14, 2005 George Riemer writes to only Justice Paul De Muniz summarizing their meeting of December 6, 2005, noting that Justice De Muniz opined that "...any judicial performance evaluation process...could do more harm than good..." They agreed that Justice De Muniz would "...nominate a number of judges to meet with the Committee on the Judiciary over the course of 2006...". Justice De Muniz confirms Mr. Riemer's letter summary of their meeting in a letter dated December 22, 2005.

2006 The Oregon State Bar BOG Committee on the Judiciary minutes of November 18, 2006 states: "The committee continues to believe that judicial evaluations are a good idea, but recognizes that this is not the time to pursue them."

The University of Denver Law School develops their Blueprint for Statewide Judicial Performance Evaluations. (Exhibit 5)

2008   Oregon's Supreme Court is rated at the virtual bottom of all fifty states in the United States in both productivity and competence according to a University of Chicago Law School 2008 study cited in # 6 below. This study is now published in final form in 58 Duke Law Journal 1313 (2009)

Exhibits

1. The Robing Room -- This is an online resource to evaluate Oregon judges now. http://www.therobingroom.com

2. Oregon's Administrative Law Judges have had a performance management policy for over ten years.  ORS 656.724  Performance Evaluation Guidelines for Oregon's Administrative Law Judges.

3. National Center for State Courts --- State by state summary of existing judicial performance evaluation programs along with evaluation procedures.

4. The American Bar Association Guidelines for the Evaluation of Judicial Performance. These judicial performance evaluation guidelines were developed and approved in February of 2005.


5. A Blueprint for Judicial Performance Evaluation, Transparent Courthouse, Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System. (2006)

6. Choi, Gulati, Posner, Which States Have the Best (and Worst) High Courts, The Law School of The University of Chicago, (May, 2008), 58 Duke Law Journal 1313 (2009

Recommendation

Judicial pay in Oregon is now controlled by the "Public Officials Compensation Commission" -- http://pocc.oregon.gov/DAS/HR/pocc/index.shtml

This is perfect. Every Judicial Performance Evaluation program in the U.S. uses a statewide commission for evaluating judges. Leadership in Oregon, whether it be the Oregon State Bar, the Legislature or a coalition of leaders should join with the Public Officials Compensation Commission to study, evaluate and adopt a judicial performance evaluation program for Oregon. Without bureaucratic delay. Oregon should not put this program in the Judicial Department.




CONTACT:


Lauren Paulson                                                               971 219 5859
3980 SW 170th Ave.                                                        laurenjpaulson@yahoo.org
Aloha, OR 97007                                                              bulletinsfromaloha.org June 11, 2009

Posted on Saturday, June 13, 2009 at 09:10AM by Registered CommenterLAUREN PAULSON | Comments9 Comments | References8 References

References (8)

References allow you to track sources for this article, as well as articles that were written in response to this article.
  • Response
    Thanks for the blog topic. I just got online for the first time 2 monthsago. I am an addict, but enjoying the new found discovery. Thanks again.
  • Response
    BULLETINS FROM ALOHA - WEEKLY BULLETINSl - JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS
  • Response
    BULLETINS FROM ALOHA - WEEKLY BULLETINSl - JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS
  • Response
    Response: uggs courts
    BULLETINS FROM ALOHA - WEEKLY BULLETINSl - JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS
  • Response
    Response: Zappos Uggs
    BULLETINS FROM ALOHA - WEEKLY BULLETINSl - JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS
  • Response
    Response: indexer
    Terrific Website, Stick to the fantastic job. Thanks for your time.
  • Response
    Terrific Site, Continue the great job. Thank you so much.
  • Response
    855 You may need 9 darkish strips and eight white strips to the weave. The one consistent that remains within our kid's lives, calendar year in, yr out, louis vuitton multiple wallet would seem to get their basically phobic distaste for walking.

Reader Comments (9)

Thanks for taking the time to talk about this, I feel fervently about this and I take pleasure in learning lanvin shoes about this topic. Please, as you gain information, please update this blog with more information. I have found it very useful

December 16, 2010 | Unregistered Commenterdfend

The Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission replaced the Judicial Evaluation Commission this year after legislative leaders expressed dissatisfaction with the previous incarnations set up.
Weight loss pills | Quick weight loss | Caralluma Fimbriata

June 14, 2011 | Unregistered Commentercarababe

hey...nice and very informative article..you advice is excellent..
thanks for sharing with us such a great and lovely information..

SEO Orlando | SEO Tampa | SEO Miami

June 23, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterSeo-orlando

I really differ with a lot of people in this article, given that I noticed this blog article I couldn't stop before I finished, even though it was not merely what I'm hunting for, was nevertheless a great look over however. I will quickly consider your blog feed to keep in touch of future updates.
Roofing Jacksonville | Roofer Jacksonville | Metal Roofing Jacksonville

June 27, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterRoofing Jacksonville

Good post once again...I am following your blog regularly and got great information. I really like the tips you have given. Thanks a lot for sharing. Will be referring a lot of friends about this. Keep blogging
Regards:
Bible Audio

June 29, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterBible Audio

El 17 de septiembre, 2010 la Comisión de Evaluación de Rendimiento Judicial de Nuevo México (JPEC) publicará sus evaluaciones para la retención de dos Jueces de la Corte Suprema, dos Jueces de la Corte de Apelación y 16 Jueces de la Corte Metropolitana del Condado de Bernalillo. Para retener sus puestos, estos jueces deben recibir al menos el 57% de votos de aprobación. Por favor lea nuestras evaluaciones en inglés o español (a la derecha) y vote en todas las elecciones y referendos – incluyendo las elecciones para la retención de los jueces.

Ocala | Bathroom Remodeling Ocala |Window Replacement OcalaKitchen Remodeling

The office of judge is unique in our society. A judge is a public servant holding an office of high public trust and so should answer to the public. However, the obligation of a judge is to resolve disputes impartially and to base decisions solely upon the facts of the case and the law. A judge, therefore, should be insulated from public pressure.

Merit selection of judges was developed as an alternative to requiring judges to run in contested elections. The Judicial Article of the Utah Constitution, revised effective July 1, 1985, establishes merit selection as the exclusive method of choosing a state court judge. As stated in the Utah Constitution: "Selection of judges shall be based solely upon consideration of fitness for office without regard to any partisan political consideration."

There are four steps in the Utah merit selection plan: nomination, appointment, confirmation and retention election.

The Judicial Selection Act (Utah Code Section 78A-10-101 et seq.) governs the process for selecting judges in Utah.

The Governor appoints a committee of lawyers and non-lawyers for each judicial district, including the appellate courts. These committees are called Judicial Nominating Commissions. Commission members review the applications for vacant judicial positions and select candidates to interview. After interviews have been conducted, the Commission refers five names (for district and juvenile court judges) or seven names (for appellate court judges) to the Governor. The Governor appoints one of the nominees who must then be confirmed by a majority of the Utah State Senate.

mood ring

July 13, 2011 | Unregistered Commentermood ring

I would like to thnkx for the efforts you have put in writing this blog. I am hoping the same high-grade blog post from you in the upcoming as well. In fact your creative writing abilities has inspired me to get my own blog now. Really the blogging is spreading its wings quickly. Your write up is a good example of it

Regards:
roofing Jacksonville

October 1, 2011 | Unregistered Commenterroofing Jacksonville

I thank thee that I am none of the wheels of power but I am one with the living creatures that are crushed by it. aqmigb aqmigb - supra muska.

October 25, 2011 | Unregistered Commenterdewmrk dewmrk

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>