Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon

sponsored by
News


Judging the Judges

Nearly 800 lawyers turn in Judicial Performance Evaluation grades




Almost 800 Southern Nevada lawyers graded judges before whom they appear in the 2008 Judicial Performance Evaluation conducted for the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Findings of the survey will be reported in the Review-Journal over six days, and complete results will be published on the newspaper's Web site.

Thomas Mitchell, editor of the Review-Journal, said he originated the survey to help voters.


Most Popular Stories
  • Three suspects arrested in shooting death of police officer
  • Three suspects arrested in shooting death of police officer
  • FATAL SHOOTING: Police again mourn comrade
  • NORM: Biden finds rank has its privileges
  • Corrections officer dies in collision on U.S. 95
  • Two suspects in officer's slaying could face death penalty
  • Two of three suspects in slaying of officer could face death penalty
  • DEADLY HOME INVASION: Police suspect link to family
  • NORM: Walton: Coach deserved a punch
  • Station Casinos posts $455 million third-quarter loss
  • ANOTHER SOMBER DAY: Fourth officer in short span dies




  • "Some of the most important votes citizens can cast are for our judges and justices, but most of us have little contact with the courts or lawyers and have little personal knowledge of what makes a good judge. The Review-Journal decided 16 years ago that we needed to help our readers with better information about sitting judges and created the judicial survey, asking lawyers who have personal knowledge about our judges to evaluate each one every election year. It has proven to be a reliable tool, as judges and justices who fared poorly in the survey tend to fare poorly in the election."

    From the survey's origins in 1992 through 2006, results were published a couple of weeks before the filing deadline for political candidates. Some judges who were rated poorly on the survey declined to file for re-election, and poor performers who filed anyway seemed more likely to face opposition than those the lawyers gave better marks. But as of this year, the filing date for judicial offices was moved to January, before the survey was conducted, perhaps reducing its effect on such decisions.

    Even so, if they were facing elections this year, most judges who did poorly had drawn opponents already.

    "The judges who did poorly were those already known to have issues," said Nancy Downey of Downey Research Associates, who conducted the survey and did the required statistical analysis.

    The 799 lawyers who participated represent nearly 19 percent of the 4,237 lawyers who gave Clark County business addresses when registering with the Nevada State Bar. But the real rate of return from lawyers who could have rated judges is a larger, unknown number because lawyers are trusted to excuse themselves from rating any judge unless they have sufficient recent legal experience with that judge. Some lawyers decline to participate in the survey because they practice in fields that require no contact with judges. And at the time of the survey in February and March, there were new lawyers who had not yet appeared in a courtroom.

    The sample size of 799 means the margin of error is less than 4 percentage points for questions that nearly everyone answered, such as whether judges should continue to be elected as they currently are or appointed subject to retention elections, Downey said. The margin of error is larger for questions answered by fewer people.

    The survey was conducted online at a password-protected Web site. A unique personal identification number was mailed to each lawyer, permitting each lawyer access to the site. To prevent anyone from intentionally skewing survey results, each PIN could be used to complete one survey questionnaire only.

    In connection with the survey, lawyers were encouraged to write anonymous explanations of their opinions for or against judges, and many added comments about the court system or the survey.

    A few of the comments about judges are used in stories about the survey, but most are provided confidentially to the judges as an anonymous job evaluation by peers.

    The survey asked for opinions on 68 judges. There are 69 seats on the courts covered by the survey, but Judge Toy Gregory, a veteran jurist on Las Vegas Municipal Court, died shortly before the survey was to be conducted and was not evaluated.

    Contact A.D. Hopkins at ahopkins@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0270.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 45 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    sweeter wrote on July 12, 2009 01:29 PM: the most dangerous, out-of-control, group of thugs in the nation


    ernie.moore wrote on March 28, 2009 02:21 PM: would.like to know more.about us,captial.and jugdes.thanks


    Bibliocat wrote on March 06, 2009 07:51 PM: That D. Mosely is still employed in any capacity in the field of law is a crime itself. He is by far the most corrupt, arrogant and not so bright (a bad combination)judge there is. Why does he continue to get away with his actions? And, why isn't the press following and reporting more closely? He needs to go ~~~ far, far away.


    Digging Deeper wrote on October 25, 2008 11:39 AM:
    2005 DEPOSITION: Lawyer links judge to scheme
    He says Mosley suggested records could be falsified

    Donald Mosley
    District Court judge tried to help girlfriend avoid foreclosure, lawyer says

    In a deposition taken for a trial under way in Las Vegas, an attorney says District Judge Donald Mosley hatched a scheme to help his girlfriend avoid foreclosure on her home.

    In a sworn deposition taken in May 2005, Las Vegas attorney James E. Guesman says Mosley in 2001 suggested payroll records could be falsified to make it appear Mosley's girlfriend, Tawanna Crabb, was employed, although she actually had been out of work for months.

    Guesman's deposition goes on to say he withdrew as Crabb's bankruptcy lawyer after Mosley suggested that another local attorney could alter employment records to make it appear Crabb worked for the unnamed attorney. (DAVID WINTERTON)
    Crabb subsequently named Guesman a defendant in her foreclosure-related lawsuit.When asked why Crabb didn't get a job, Guesman in his deposition states, "My opinion is that she had visions of grandeur. She had earned, I think, in the area of $50,000 at a job she'd had prior to getting in this financial difficulty, and she wasn't willing to look at any job other than one that would pay in that bracket. And I don't think she had the qualifications to -- at least didn't seem to have qualification to get a job in that bracket. ... I was encouraging her just go out and get a minimum wage job and we could do the reorganization (for the bankruptcy), and she just didn't do that."

    Crabb eventually filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, which doesn't offer the same level of protection from debtors as the Chapter 13 bankruptcy protection that Crabb had wanted.

    JUDGE JESSE WALSH HEARS CASE AFTER MANY RECUSE. ???


    attorneyreview wrote on October 22, 2008 08:10 PM: slm; file the complaint. It must be specific. Give to press first, then the JDC. That is the only way it works. Your attorney does not want his name on it.


    slm wrote on October 21, 2008 05:47 PM: Last year my case was on appeal to a District Court in Nev. After a short time in the court room you could see who was in bed with who. 3 days later the Judge rules against me. 3 days later I SCREAM there was a "conflict of interest"! Judge recuses himself and seals my decision! My lawyer also advised me not to file a complaint. Says, "they never work". Tell me who is straight????


    insidetherjc wrote on September 26, 2008 01:29 PM: insidetherjc wrote on September 26, 2008 01:12 PM: No, it was not tmosley, her name was Melinda, one of the Judge's girls. See Case.

    Site as Schlafer v State NV Supreme Ct Case No. 31028

    Tom Schlafer (paramedic) shot Judge Mosley's girlfriend in road rage incident. Felon Wallach snitched and Schlafer was convicted in second trial.

    See Wallach Felony Dist. Ct. Case No. 94-C-119409-C
    Felony Charges Dismissed by Judge Mosley

    attorney review wrote on September 26, 2008 11:03 AM: Obviously if you look at the tall one on the bench you can see he can't "control it".

    Didn't this surface years ago when one of his girlfriends got shot after leaving his dinnerparty? Paramedic Schafer? Was the then girl, tmosley?


    rzuck wrote on September 15, 2008 06:12 PM: Continued from Judicial Discipline Complaint:

    Count XI- Continued to communicate with McLaughlin and his wife after
    recusing himself in McLaughlinƒ s criminal case, the continued
    communication creating an appearance that Judge Mosley was rewarding
    the McLaughlins for assisting him in his custody dispute.

    After a three-day evidentiary hearing, the Commission concluded that Judge Mosley
    committed the violations admitted in Counts I, II, III, IV, VI, VII, and VIII, and dismissed
    Counts V, IX, X, and XI. Judge Mosley was ordered to attend the first general ethics course at


    rzuck wrote on September 15, 2008 06:10 PM: In re Mosley, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 94 (2004) JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE- EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, MISUSE OF JUDICIAL LETTERHEAD, AND FAILURE TO RECUSE IN A TIMELY MANNER This case is an appeal of the evidentiary findings of the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline (Commission) on eleven different counts of an official complaint filed by a special prosecutor against the Honorable Donald M. Mosley (Judge Mosley). The complaint listed eleven inappropriate actions Judge Mosley allegedly committed from August of 1997 through August 1999. The counts alleged that Judge Mosley: Count I- Wrote a personal letter on official judicial letterhead to the principal of his sonƒ s school in August 1999; Count II- Wrote a personal letter on official judicial letterhead to the principal of his sonƒ s school in February 1998; Count III- Engaged in an exparte conversation with friend Barbara Orcutt,regarding the arrest and release of Robert DiAmore in August 1999; Count IV- Ordered the release of Robert DiAmore on his own recognizance, without notifying the district attorneyƒ s office, after the police arrested DiAmore on a bench warrant issued by a different district court judge in August 1999; Count V- Engaged in an exparte telephone conversation with Catherine Woolf, an attorney representing Joseph McLaughlin in a criminal case that was assigned to Judge Mosleyƒ s chambers; Count VI- Engaged in an exparte conversation in his chambers with attorney Woolf in August 1997; Count VII- Engaged in an exparte conversation with Woolf, McLaughlin and McLaughlinƒ s wife in August 1997; Count VIII- Failed to recuse himself from McLaughlinƒ s criminal case until after Mrs. McLaughlin had testified in Judge Mosleyƒ s custody case; Count IX- Communicated with McLaughlinƒ s wife regarding McLaughlinƒ s incarceration; Count X- Assisted McLaughlinƒ s wife in obtaining the return of her vehicle; Count XI- Continued


    Lawyer Review wrote on September 11, 2008 03:24 PM: Results:
    Nevada Supreme Court
    Highest retention vote: Mark Gibbons 86%
    Lowest retention vote: Nancy Saitta 45%
    8th Judicial District - Civil and Criminal
    Highest retention votes:
    David Barker 92%
    Stewart Bell 91%
    Allan Earl 90%
    Mark Denton 88%
    Douglas Herndon 88%
    David Wall 88%
    Lowest retention votes:
    Donald Mosley 56%
    Michelle Leavitt 56%
    Kathy Hardcastle 54%
    Lee Gates 43%
    Jessie Walsh 41%
    Elizabeth Halverson 8%


    Read All Comments