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

RECENT EDITIONS
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

sponsored by
News


Lawyers rate female jurists as less courteous than men

"Sugar and spice, and everything nice" may fit for a nursery rhyme, but, when it comes to District Court judges in Clark County, local attorneys don't think women on the bench are nearly as courteous as the men in black robes.

In the Review-Journal's Judging the Judges survey, the court's male judges as a group scored higher than female judges as a group when attorneys rated each judge as either "less than adequate," "adequate" or "more than adequate" on courtesy.


Most Popular Stories
  • Man shot by police identified as local attorney
  • TRAFFIC STOP: Shooting accounts conflict
  • NORM: At time, drug use wasn't suspected
  • One motorcyclist killed, another critically injured in accident
  • NORM: Marie Osmond, manager battling
  • Nurseries fence out day laborers
  • Second person dies after being restrained by police
  • Boy struck, killed by car pulling out of driveway
  • Three children fall from vehicle; mothers arrested
  • REFUSING THEIR OWN MEDICINE: Vaccination policy spurs legal action




  • One probable factor is that two-thirds of the attorneys surveyed were men and, according to experts who study judges and the courts, attorneys and litigants favor a judge similar to them, whether in age, ethnic makeup or gender.

    "Courteousness, or lack of courteousness, might show a partiality or favoritism, and that is a substantive concern for the attorneys," said Tuan Samahon, associate professor of law at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

    Bill Dressel said, "If you are dismissive or abusive in your language, you are not providing justice."

    Dressel is a former judge and president of the National Judicial College, which holds classes in Reno for judges from across the country.

    The courteousness of all but two of the 13 male District Court judges was rated more than adequate by between 66 percent and 76 percent of the attorneys who responded.

    Meanwhile, the courteousness of nine of the 10 female District Court judges was rated more than adequate between a low of 22 percent, for Chief Judge Kathy Hardcastle, and a high of 63 percent for Civil Court Chief Judge Elizabeth Gonzales. That means the highest-scoring female judge scored lower than all but two of the male judges.

    The two lowest-scoring male judges, outgoing Judge Lee Gates and Judge Donald Mosley, who plans to seek re-election this year, bring the males' average down to 64 percent "more than adequate" on the question of courteousness. With them out of the equation, the average for male judges jumps to 71 percent "more than adequate."

    If Hardcastle's low score, and the abysmal grade of ousted Judge Elizabeth Halverson, are not included, the average for the female District Court judges is 47 percent "more than adequate." With Halverson's and Hardcastle's ratings included, the average for female judges drops to 41 percent.

    Aside from Gonzales' top score among female judges, the other female District Court judges who received the highest "more than adequate" marks for courteousness include Susan Johnson, Jennifer Togliatti and Valerie Adair.

    With regard to Johnson, one attorney wrote anonymously, "Always courteous and organized. Shows up on time. Does not waste attorneys' time."

    On Togliatti, one wrote: "Very professional and courteous, however, she has a problem making up her mind."

    And, on Adair, attorneys wrote, "Wonderful. She runs a great courtroom, does not waste time and dispenses economic and fair justice."

    In addition to Hardcastle, who didn't return calls seeking comment, the lowest scoring female District Court judges include Sally Loehrer, Jackie Glass and Michelle Leavitt. Approximately 30 percent of attorneys ranked them "less than adequate" on the question of courtesy.

    Of Loehrer, who did not seek re-election, an attorney wrote, "Who will she be rude to when she retires?"

    On Glass, one wrote, "Treats experienced attorneys like 5th graders."

    Few attorneys had nice things to say about Mosley. An example: "Could give Vincent Price a run for his money. Very scary." According to his assistant, Mosley, who this year has drawn opponents for his position, had "no comment" on the survey results.

    Gates, the husband of former Clark County Commissioner Yvonne Atkinson Gates, drew similar comments. One was, "I have practiced law for 38 years in three different states and Judge Lee A. Gates is the rudest, crudest judge I have ever been before."

    The highest-scoring male judges on the courtesy question were Doug Herndon, Allen Earl, Mark Denton and James Bixler.

    Although some said Herndon is arrogant and sides too often with prosecutors in criminal cases, other attorneys wrote things like "intelligent, thoughtful, informed and fair."

    Some thought Earl, a former plaintiffs' attorney, favors plaintiffs, but others called him "an absolute gentleman. Makes me proud to be a lawyer."

    Of Denton, one wrote, "Great judicial demeanor and concern for reaching the appropriate result."

    One attorney articulated a widespread opinion of Bixler: "Most friendly and endearing judge on the bench."

    Attorneys were supposed to rate only those judges with whom they had personal experience, and the number who rated them on courtesy ranged from 144 for Elissa Cadish, relatively new to the bench, up to 378 for veteran judge Glass.

    Samahon and Dressel said courtesy is important to overall courtroom decorum, and Samahon said "judicial temperament" can be a factor that helps or hurts a judge seeking appointment to higher office.

    Attorneys dominate on judicial-selection committees, and, whether good or bad, they may consider a judge's courteousness when considering an appointment to a federal judgeship or to the state Supreme Court, Samahon said.

    "You are showing that you are impartial," Dressel said of courteous judges, "that you are listening to everyone and that you will base your rulings in a case on the evidence."

    Contact reporter Frank Geary at fgeary@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0277.

    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 33 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.

    Report abuse

    Lawless Las Vegas wrote on October 06, 2008 12:43 PM: Hey Life Time Resident you must be smoking crack with the Judge. He is a very very crooked Judge open up your eyes and ears.


    Report abuse

    insidetheRJC wrote on August 02, 2008 11:30 AM: http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2003/jun/02/editorial-an-honest-answer-is-contempt/

    http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2005/may/19/judge-cherry-to-preside-over-laughlin-motorcycle-g/

    http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2000/jan/25/prosecutors-question-whether-judge-in-walters-case/

    It is a coward who cannot accept responsibility for his own actions, instead blames the mother of his child. It is a corrupt judge who uses his judicial office to prevail in a custody case. Just my opinion.


    Report abuse

    Alice wrote on May 25, 2008 09:03 AM: 66% of the respondents to the POLL were MALE!

    CAN YOU SAY GOOD OL BOYS?

    GENDER BIAS?
    BAD POLL!BAD,BAD,BAD


    Report abuse

    Lawless Las Vegas wrote on May 22, 2008 07:28 PM: If someone wants to win a case Mosley is your Judge. All you have to do is pay him off and you won your case. I have no idea how he stays on the bench. I hope the people of Las Vegas vote in another Judge in Department 14.


    Report abuse

    tmosley wrote on May 22, 2008 01:35 PM: To NEK; I did not give "strange interviews" in fact I gave almost nothing publicly because of a custody dispute. Once again, the custody dispute which lasted 15 years is now over, which allows me to finally go public with more information than you could possibly imagine in District Court not Family Court. You do not know me and certainly I do not recognize NEK, therefore while I respect your right to comment this does not equate to your representation that you have the inside track to my motivation or psychological state of mind. Remember I am not a public official, making slander and defamation serious offenses. Would those be on the "civil" side where you preside.
    Tmosley
    P.S. I'm not your "girl" cowboy.


    Report abuse

    NEK wrote on May 22, 2008 12:18 PM: WHOA! Down Girl - As I said - I work in CIVIL law and am not an attorney - don't do criminal (which is what I believe Judge Mosley does) and don't do domestics (which is what I believe you are talking about) - do remember all the strange interviews you gave years back and would say based on your last post that you sure seem to be a "bit round the bend" - If ya have evidence of a judge obtaining illegal controlled substances (any Judge, anywhere) I would find it very difficult to believe that the DA, AG or Judicial Council would ignore that. Heck, I would find it difficult to believe that the press would ignore actual evidence of such a thing! As for all the judge's hiding on the grassy knoll to conspire against the people who elect them - - just doesn't seem that likely to me. Seems more likely that you are involved in a domestic dispute and therefore are seeing things through a slightly different lens then perhaps those of us who are dealing with less emotional issues are looking through. For the most part I see hard working judges, hard working judicial employees, hard working jurors and a system (again, on the civil side) that is something that overall we should be very proud of - that's all I'm saying - not commenting on whatever it is you've got going on - just commenting on the civil side of the house.


    Report abuse

    NEK wrote on May 22, 2008 08:22 AM: You are right, I am proud of the judicial system to the extent that I have spent a lifetime working on the civil side of it and continue to be amazed at how juries rise to the occasion to comprehend everything from complex contract issues to the simplest traffic accidents. I would only say that we seem to be stirring all of the judges and disciplines with one spoon on this blog - Family Court, District Court, Supreme Court, etc. and they all have different needs and functions. I would also say to "Just Curious" nobody believes that Del Vecchio should remain on the bench while these charges are pending (and I say that as someone who has never set foot in the Family Court building)! As taxpayers we should all be pressing for an interim suspension on this one. However, as to Halverson - I concur that we have WAY to much information about silliness, from her relationship with her husband to foot rubs BUT - please remember one thing - JURY TAMPERING is not a "petty dumb charge" nor is it a "mistake" - it is a felony and no matter where you went to law school you have to know that! Furthermore, she has admitted that she had improper communication with at least two juries (and compromised a criminal prosecution in at least one of them) - She also compromised the security of the courthouse on at least one occasion so I'm not sure why anybody would want to defend her any more than Del Vecchio.


    Report abuse

    tmosley wrote on May 21, 2008 09:47 PM: To Just Curious: Your question is not only honest and clearly without bias, but it is also astute. Judge Halverson made some mistakes, as many new judges before her. She also had a better grasp of the law than many, especially Mosley, after many years on the bench. The difference? Judge Halverson was not motivated by greed, politics, or self-gratification. She did not intentionally set out to make a deal with a felon to lie in her custody case in exchange for probation (see RJ story 1990 "Judge Sees Courtroom From Other Side". She made a mistake and they were waiting for it as Judge Halverson is not part of the "in crowd" and an easy target. Bottom line; she knew too much!! The true test will be when other complaints are filed and decisions and punishments rendered. The punishment should fit the crime regardless of who the judge is, and be consistent with prior decisions. I suspect your question is rhetorical, as you have simply stated exactly the same. Too bad more voters are not as aware. Perhaps one day the legislature will enact legislation which might offer restitution to litigants whom the guilty judge has damaged. Perhaps the Judicial Discipline will also acknowledge those judges who do behave honorably, as that is proving to be increasingly difficult in the "in crowd".
    tmosley


    Report abuse

    curiousreader wrote on May 21, 2008 08:17 PM: I have to ask this question... How is that Judges like Del Vecchio, Kathy Hardcastle, Siatta, and Cherry who are as crooked as they come are still in their seats, Yet someone like Halverson who was only in office about 6 months and basically did nothing illegal or unetical is out? SHe had two sets of staff that worked for her for equal amounts of time (3 months), One set said she abused them, the other said she was wonderful and they loved working for her.

    So.. can anyone tell me why this Judical committee jumped in and removed Halverson for really petty dumb charges, Yet Del Vecchio with serious charges has not missed one day at the good ole RJC.

    Any idea why that might be???

    Seems to me that there really are two sets of rules, and two very different ways people are treated.

    Several people writing in seem to be "in the know" like "tmosley" and "undr cvr"... do either of you have any idea why that might be?

    Seems very odd to me..

    Just curious


    Report abuse

    tmosley wrote on May 21, 2008 07:54 PM: To NEK: Yes the custody case is over but the issues of judicial corruption involved will not be until there is some level of justice. This is now much more than a custody case. Because the child is now almost an adult and has himself been damaged by the judicial system you seem so proud of, I am finally free to speak. And speak I will. I no longer have a dog in this fight as it pertains to "custody" therefore I will not hesitate to identify myself when I speak. Can you say the same, NEK. P.S. It is common knowledge in the Family Court Building that if you have no case just call her crazy or him abusive. Whatever happened to the best interests of the child. TMosley


    Read All Comments