Quantcast
MobileRJ | RSS TwitterTwitter FacebookFacebook E-mail Alerts
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
May. 22, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

Attorneys most critical of judges' knowledge of law

By ALAN MAIMON
REVIEW-JOURNAL
More Info
Complete results including survey methology, summary of retention scores, questionnaire and more

Clark County attorneys are quick to call out jurists they believe lack superior legal knowledge.

Out of 68 judges and justices rated in the 2008 Judicial Performance Evaluation survey, 30 were considered most deficient in the area of properly applying the law and rules of procedure and evidence. Even judges with very high retention scores, a rating of whether a judge should be re-elected, tended to receive their least glowing reviews on those criteria, which are at the core of a judge's performance.

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
  • NORM: Walton: Coach deserved a punch
  • Two of three suspects in slaying of officer could face death penalty
  • DEADLY HOME INVASION: Police suspect link to family
  • Station Casinos posts $455 million third-quarter loss
  • NORM: 'Girls Gone Wild' creator feels heat
  • Las Vegas police shoot at man fleeing after traffic stop
  • Las Vegas police shoot at man fleeing after traffic stop
  • UNLV sacks football coach Sanford




    • As might be expected, judges who got poor retention scores tended to score poorly on those same core questions, especially the one about properly applying the law.

    A staggering 84 percent of respondents questioned how District Judge Elizabeth Halverson exercises the law, far and away the poorest rating of any jurist evaluated.

    Halverson's retention score of 8 percent was also at the bottom.

    Two other District Court judges were perceived by a majority as less than adequate in applying the law:

    • Jessie Walsh (59 percent less than adequate).

    • Lee Gates (54 percent ).

    Supreme Court Justice Nancy Saitta (53 percent) was also rated poorly in this area by a majority of lawyers who evaluated her. So was Family Court Judge Lisa Kent (59 percent).

    Gates isn't running for reelection. Saitta is next on the ballot in 2012. Walsh and Kent both have multiple challengers in races this year.

    In defense of her performance, Walsh said she has worked hard during 10 years on the bench to study case law, pleadings, and case files.

    "I think my numbers reflect improvement," Walsh said. Her retention ratings have increased from 31 percent in 2004 to 34 percent in 2006 to 41 percent this year.

    Supreme Court records show that Walsh's rulings have been reversed or partially reversed on appeal at least six times in the past two years, but the judge said that figure should be viewed in the context of her annual case load of nearly 2,000.

    Kent, meanwhile, said she has a firm commitment to her cases and family law.

    "It's a misconception that I don't know family law because I've practiced it my whole career," she said. "I think I do a good job for children and families in Clark County."

    Kent had a retention score of 36 percent.

    Several lawyers commented in the evaluation that Kent often was reluctant to take a position on cases.

    Halverson, who declined interview requests by the Review-Journal, has been suspended from the bench because of allegations of misconduct and faces a disciplinary hearing in June.

    Family Court Judge Stefany Miley, another judge rated low on applying the law, is one of three candidates seeking to replace Halverson.

    Forty-eight percent of respondents said Miley was less than adequate in that category, the sixth lowest score of any judge in any court surveyed.

    Miley's retention score was 55 percent, down from 60 percent two years ago.

    Some attorneys polled by the Review-Journal questioned Miley's commitment to Family Court, where she presides mostly over divorce and child custody cases: "She appears to be only mildly interested in her job and more interested in furthering her own career."

    Miley said she has confidence in her ability and aspires to be on the Nevada Supreme Court.

    Asked about those who question her legal ability, Miley pointed to a record of rulings being affirmed by the state Supreme Court. But in February, the Supreme Court reversed Miley's ruling in a child custody case on the grounds that the parties involved were deprived of due process by not getting an evidentiary hearing to settle disputed claims.

    "If somebody doesn't think I'm applying the law, I can tell you that I am," she said.

    All of the judges interviewed for this story questioned the validity of the survey results, citing primarily the anonymity of the responses and the less-than-constructive tone of some of the written comments offered, anonymously, by lawyers. They also pointed out that some lawyers, in the comments section, lavished them with great praise.

    High scores on application of the law even eluded some judges and justices who otherwise were deemed extremely competent.

    Chief Justice Mark Gibbons, whose retention score of 86 percent was highest among Supreme Court justices, had his legal acumen questioned by 17 percent of respondents.

    Gibbons, speaking in general about judicial competence, said ongoing education for judges is a key to improving performance.

    "We'd like to go further in developing courts with judges that have special knowledge in certain areas," Gibbons said, pointing to already existing business, mental health, and other specialty courts.

    At 3 percent, Family Court Judge Gloria Sanchez got the lowest "less than adequate" score in application of the law. Her retention rating of 97 percent was highest of all judges and justices rated.

    Contact reporter Alan Maimon at amaimon@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0404.

    COMPETENCE, RETENTION SCORE RELATED
    JUDGE/JUSTICE LESS THAN
    ADEQUATE (%)*    		 RETENTION
    SCORE (%)**
    Dist. Judge Elizabeth Halverson 84 8
    Family Judge Lisa Kent 59 36
    Dist. Judge Jessie Walsh 59 41
    Dist. Judge Lee Gates 54 43
    Sup. Ct. Justice Nancy Saitta 53 45
    Family Judge Gloria Sanchez 3 97
    Municipal Judge Tony Abbatangelo 8 90
    Municipal Judge Stephen George 8 91
    Municipal Judge Martin Hastings 8 92
    Justice of the Peace Deborah Lippis 8 91
    *The judge/justice properly applies the law, rules of procedure, and rules of evidence. Lawyers could rate judges “More Than Adequate,” “Adequate” or “Less Than Adequate.”
    **Question: Taking everything into account, would you recommend retaining this judge/justice on the bench?
    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 57 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.

    christinekimbulman wrote on May 05, 2009 10:58 AM: My experience with the family court on Feb 18 2009 was unacceptable and as a consequence has messed up a family's life. That experience has enabled a known domestice abuser and manipulator control again. I have a lot more to say about this and am inclined to write about this experience and publish this with a publisher here in Toronto. Also, my daughter accompanied me to court that day and is witness to what happened. This will be a topic at her university in her womans studies and pre law program I promise. Unbelievable. You can contact me anytime if this is the review journal because I do have a story that will shock the pants off any supporter for womens and childrens rights. I will not be quiet about this. Thank you


    Roger wrote on July 26, 2008 09:54 PM: To Constance:
    Yes I do. She has her favorite attorneys who can do no wrong. She makes decisions while admiting she doesn't have all the facts. And even when shown perjury in her courtroom, does not change her decisions. I cannot believe she is still a judege. I expect her high retention score is from favorite attorneys that want to keep their free ride.


    Family In Vegas wrote on June 24, 2008 09:02 AM: Every year this comes out... Every year, Judge Lisa Kent (formerly Lisa Brown) is posted as having the lowest rating in Family Court. Every year they/she argue(s) the validity of the results.

    Where there is smoke, there is fire...So, what do you do when there are low ratings? You plaster yourself on the news touting what a great adoptive mother you are. What great press!! Hopefully there are enough educated people out there to realize that it was a publicity stunt and while I am sure she is a great mother, she has absolutely no business being on the bench handling family court.

    Do NOT re-elect Judge Lisa Kent.


    roscoe wrote on May 25, 2008 09:25 AM: The IDIOT that created the questions for this POLL should be given a medal, he/she has single handedly saved the State of Nevada millions of dollars by showing us "uneducated peons",(not been to LAW school) that there is NO NEED for a "SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA"
    because the (LAWYERS KNOW BETTER THAN THE SUPREME COURT) AS TO HOW THE LAW SHOULD BE PROPERLY APPLIED!!!!....


    Constance Robinson wrote on May 25, 2008 02:22 AM: do you have any history or compliants on judge Gloria Sanchez? Please email them to me. She is a family judge.

    Thank you,

    Constance


    nvkorruption wrote on May 23, 2008 11:12 AM: Well maybe some deeper digging is in order. I am not defending Quackenbush, but understand sometimes to get a conviction at all, immunity to a key witness is given rather than everybody walk.

    A sign that the court really wants to nail Gage before he walks away Scott free. (thats more than we'd get from some of our local judge unless the USAG is breathing down their neck for the right reason)

    Like I said its the home grown ones that we need more dots connected without speculation


    Bunch of Bull wrote on May 23, 2008 10:37 AM: nvkorruption, At the beginning of the Gage trial, Quackenbush lined through the prosecutors opening statements and limited their time. The jury instruction were very hard to understand. Quackenbush has threatened to dismiss the Gage case if Kabins is not granted immunity. Not Quackenbushes place. I have learned through experience to watch the small things with these judges that don't add up. Quackenbush sat a high profile case here years ago. It is on the net if you Google Justin Quackenbush. Many current players have ties to that bunch. Is this coincidence? You might even call them Dawsons crowd.


    nvkorruption wrote on May 23, 2008 08:31 AM: not so sure about Quackenbush, but there are some home grown federal judges that are questionable and need to be looked at carefully. Dawson, Jones, to name a couple.


    Bunch of Bull wrote on May 22, 2008 08:51 PM: Nancy Saitta's dirty cases that she left behind are still working their way through the system. You almost have to laugh when you see how pathetically the new judge makes excuses for her and try to sweep her dirty deeds under the rug. Maybe, Saitta and the stable of attorneys that call on her will eventually get caught up with. That would truly be a great day for Nevada. Unfortunately, she would most likely end up in front of someone like Quackenbush that would do all he could to let her off. Maybe, the feds should take a look at the federal judges along with the rest of these roaches.


    nevada wrote on May 22, 2008 08:14 PM: Jem: I totally agree!!! The roaches in the Nevada justice system earned the title 'judicial hell hole' for a reason.
    Actually the attorneys should have nothing to say about judges as they are generally parasites themselves feeding off of the backs of the public who later become judges so they can play the game themselves.
    Corruption in this system needs to end and the people of Nevada need to be a part of the change instead of waiting for the feds to do it.


    Read All Comments