Evaluation of the Judiciary Serving Jefferson County, KY. Comparison of Judges Summary Report

Similar documents
Nichole Davis Mentoring Program Administrator Risk Management Counsel South Carolina Bar

FIELD PLACEMENT PROGRAM: COURSE HANDBOOK

INTRODUCTION FEDERAL RACES. Note. Third Congressional District $716,742. United States Senate $58,207 WE CALL EM, LIKE WE SEE EM $10,145,566

Pro Bono Practices and Opportunities in Mexico

BEST PRACTICES FOR PRINCIPAL SELECTION

CURRICULUM VITAE LAWRENCE A. DUBIN

SUMMARY REPORT MONROE COUNTY, OH OFFICIAL RESULTS PRIMARY ELECTION MARCH 6, 2012 RUN DATE:03/20/12 11:03 AM STATISTICS REPORT-EL45 PAGE 001

Suggested Talking Points Graying of Bar for Draft

Judith Fox Notre Dame Law School 725 Howard Street South Bend, IN (574)

Discrimination Complaints/Sexual Harassment

Policy Name: Students Rights, Responsibilities, and Disciplinary Procedures

This Statement was adopted by the Executive Committee of the New York County Lawyers' Association at its regular meeting on March 29, 2004.

Youth Apprenticeship Application Packet Checklist

IUPUI Office of Student Conduct Disciplinary Procedures for Alleged Violations of Personal Misconduct

SEARCH PROSPECTUS: Dean of the College of Law

Juris Doctor (J.D.) Program

Sara Schotland, Ph.D., J.D. Fall 2014 Justice Matters: Literature and the Law Syllabus HONR 208L

Preferred method of written communication: elearning Message

Haddonfield Memorial High School

ST. MARTIN PARISH SCHOOL BOARD MAY 7, 2014 BREAUX BRIDGE, LOUISIANA MINUTES

UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE SCHOOL OF LAW FALL SEMESTER 2017

ENGLISH 298: Intensive Writing

Application Paralegal Training Program. Important Dates: Summer 2016 Westwood. ABA Approved. Established in 1972

EMPLOYEE DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT COMPLAINT PROCEDURE

Proposed Amendment to Rules 17 and 22 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai i MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION

DISCIPLINE PROCEDURES FOR STUDENTS IN CHARTER SCHOOLS Frequently Asked Questions. (June 2014)

I. STATEMENTS OF POLICY

June 2, Via . Stephen Metz Bankruptcy Bar Association-District of Maryland 4800 Montgomery Lane Suite 900 Bethesda, MD RE: NEE1609

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

HIDDEN RULES FOR OFFICE HOURS W I L L I A M & M A R Y N E U R O D I V E R S I T Y I N I T I A T I V E

PCG Special Education Brief

Instrumentation, Control & Automation Staffing. Maintenance Benchmarking Study

Members Attending: Doris Perkins Renee Moore Pamela Manners Marilyn McMillan Liz Michael Brian Pearse Dr. Angela Rutherford Kelly Fuller

Daniel B. Boatright. Focus Areas. Overview

A Guide to Supporting Safe and Inclusive Campus Climates

Co-op Placement Packet

Carolyn L. Dessin CURRICULUM VITAE

430 F.2d 368 United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

JD Concentrations CONCENTRATIONS. J.D. students at NUSL have the option of concentrating in one or more of the following eight areas:

Agree to volunteer at least six days in each calendar year ( (a)(8));

Legal Technicians: A Limited License to Practice Law Ellen Reed, King County Bar Association, Seattle, WA

VITAE G. TERRENCE CORIDEN WORKER S COMPENSATION

2018 Kentucky Teacher of the Year

PUBLIC SPEAKING, DISTRIBUTION OF LITERATURE, COMMERCIAL SOLICITATION AND DEMONSTRATIONS IN PUBLIC AREAS

AFFILIATION AGREEMENT

2013 Kentucky Teacher of the Year

The College of Law Mission Statement

Guidelines for the Iowa Tests

The Juris Doctor (JD) degree is conferred upon candidates who have successfully fulfilled the following requirements:

PROCEDURES FOR SELECTION OF INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF LODI

BISHOP BAVIN SCHOOL POLICY ON LEARNER DISCIPLINE AND DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES. (Created January 2015)

CHARTER SCHOOL APPLICATION TIMELINE

THIS KIT CONTAINS ALL THE INFORMATION YOU NEED

Promotion and Tenure Policy

ATHLETIC TRAINING SERVICES AGREEMENT

DEPARTMENT OF EARLY CHILDHOOD, SPECIAL EDUCATION, and REHABILITATION COUNSELING. DOCTORAL PROGRAM Ph.D.

MAILING ADDRESS 1 Campus Box 1120, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO WEBSITE

Test How To. Creating a New Test

School Year Enrollment Policies

Bullying Fact Sheet. [W]hen a school knows or should know of bullying conduct based on a student s

EMPLOYMENT APPLICATION Legislative Counsel Bureau and Nevada Legislature 401 S. Carson Street Carson City, NV Equal Opportunity Employer

Internship Department. Sigma + Internship. Supervisor Internship Guide

KATIE E. DIETER CURRICULUM VITAE. CONTACT INFORMATION 416 Somersbe Place Bloomington, IN

My Child with a Disability Keeps Getting Suspended or Recommended for Expulsion

4-H Ham Radio Communication Proficiency Program A Member s Guide

A guidance for assessing and communicating uncertainties

A Manual for Law Schools on Adjunct Faculty

MSW POLICY, PLANNING & ADMINISTRATION (PP&A) CONCENTRATION

Persuasive Writing For Lawyers And The Legal Profession By Louis J. Sirico

Alabama

Equal Times. President s Message. January Luncheon: Cheer in the New Year with Justice Luz Elena Chapa

MOUNT ROGERS COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD LOCAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE MINUTES

STUDENT ABSENCES AND EXCUSES/TRUANCY

Spanish Speaker Perceptions of Access and Fairness of the Superior Court of New Jersey in Vicinage XV and Improvement Recommendations

The University of Tennessee at Martin. Coffey Outstanding Teacher Award and Cunningham Outstanding Teacher / Scholar Award

MEDIA LAW AND ETHICS: COMM 3404 Learn to Think-Think to Learn Monday 6:00-8:45 p.m. Smith Lab 2150 Off: , Cell:

DST ASSIGNMENTS FALL 2012

Student Handbook. Supporting Today s Students with the Technology of Tomorrow

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ANNUAL REPORT. The South Australian Law Reform Institute. 1 January December 2012

Forum Juridicum: The Law School in a Changing Society

University of Michigan - Flint POLICY ON FACULTY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND CONFLICTS OF COMMITMENT

2014 Comprehensive Survey of Lawyer Assistance Programs

University of Michigan - Flint POLICY ON STAFF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND CONFLICTS OF COMMITMENT

Information Pack: Exams Officer. Abbey College Cambridge

Juris Doctor. RMIT will inspire you to turn your passion and talent for law into a successful career. JURIS DOCTOR INFORMATION SESSION

Virginia Law Schools Offer Clinical Placement Programs

OVERVIEW OF THE WRITTEN EXAMINATION FOR PROSPECTIVE COURT INTERPRETERS

Oklahoma State University Policy and Procedures

DU PAGE COUNTY JUDICIAL AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE FINAL SUMMARY. November 17, 2015 Regular Meeting 8:15 AM

Corrections Vocabulary

CONTRACT TENURED FACULTY

RESEARCH INTEGRITY AND SCHOLARSHIP POLICY

BSW Student Performance Review Process

New Graduate Program Proposal Review Process. Development of the Preliminary Proposal

INTRODUCTION TO CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY ANT 2410 FALL 2015

Master of Arts in Teaching with Elementary Teacher Certification Oakland and Macomb County Programs

Ministry Audit Form 2016

Department of Social Work Master of Social Work Program

FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM FELLOW APPLICATION

Transcription:

Evaluation of the Judiciary Serving Jefferson County, KY Jefferson Circuit Court, Jefferson Circuit Court Senior Status & Jefferson Family Court Comparison of Judges Summary Report The Louisville Bar Association and The Louisville Bar Foundation 600 West Main Street Louisville, KY 40202 Evaluation

Table of Contents Background and Methodology... 1 General Satisfaction with Performance... 4 Judicial Temperament Ratings... 9 Court Management Ratings... 14 Judicial Integrity Ratings... 19 Legal Ability Ratings... 24 Civil Cases Ratings... 29 Criminal Cases Ratings... 34 Prepared by: Thoroughbred Research Group 1941 Bishop Lane, Suite 1017 Louisville, KY 40218 www.torinc.net i

Background and Methodology 1

Background and Methodology Background The Louisville Bar Association (LBA) contracted the services of Thoroughbred Research Group to assist in its annual review of the performance of sitting judges. The LBA sent evaluations to all Kentucky Bar Association members with contact addresses in Jefferson County to rate the performance of various judges with whom they have had experience over the past two years. Jefferson Circuit Court and Jefferson Family Court judges were included in the evaluation for. Methodology In April, letters and postcards were sent to an estimated 4,435 LBA members informing them of the annual Judicial Evaluation. Members who were qualified to participate in the review were asked to fill out the postcard request and return it to Thoroughbred Research Group no later than April 18. A total of 815 postcard requests were received by the postmark date. Survey packets and return envelopes were mailed to the 815 members in early May. A reminder was posted on the LBA website approximately two weeks later. Respondents were asked to return the completed evaluation forms to Thoroughbred Research Group postmarked no later than May 17,. A total of 433 completed survey forms were returned in time to be included in the tabulation. Response Rate Because of the size of the litigation bar and the nature of such practice, only a limited number of attorneys have had significant experience with a particular judge in a specific court. Consequently, from the original 4,435 attorneys who received notice of the evaluation, just a fraction could reasonably be expected to respond to the survey questions. Of those attorneys who were qualified and agreed to respond to the evaluation, many may have significant experience in only one of the courts evaluated or with a limited number of the judges listed. Still, the number of lawyers responding is more than adequate to result in a statistically valid evaluation of the judiciary. 2

The judges rated during the evaluation and the total number of respondents rating each judge are shown below: Jefferson Circuit Court A. C. McKay Chauvin (n=261) Susan Shultz Gibson (n=215) Olu A. Stevens (n=262) Frederic J. Cowan (n=239) Judith E. McDonald-Burkman (n=259) Barry Willett (n=269) Charles L. Cunningham, Jr. (n=250) Mitchell L. Perry (n=252) Audra J. Eckerle (n=220) James M. Shake (n=291) Brian C. Edwards (n=234) Mary M. Shaw (n=216) Jefferson Circuit Court -- Senior Status Martin F. McDonald (n=205) Jefferson Family Court Dolly Wisman Berry (n=128) Patricia Walker FitzGerald (n=129) Joseph W. O Reilly (n=141) Jerry J. Bowles (n=137) Eleanore M. Garber (n=119) Paula F. Sherlock (n=127) Joan L. Byer (n=144) Stephen M. George (n=127) Donna Delahanty (n=110) Hugh Smith Haynie, Jr. (n=126) Note: Having been elected in November 2012, Circuit Court Judge Angela McCormick Bisig did not have the requisite six months experience on the bench to be included in the evaluation. Questionnaire The survey instrument included a series of 19 attributes for the circuit court and 18 attributes for the family court that were used to evaluate the performance of each judge. Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with each statement used to describe a particular judge using a four-point rating scale of strongly disagree, disagree, agree and strongly agree. Respondents were also given an option to write in any advice they would give to a particular judge to improve his/her performance. These comments were provided only to the applicable judge under separate cover as confidential feedback for his or her personal review. General comments on how to improve the evaluation process or the court system were submitted to the LBA under separate cover. Respondents were instructed to rate only those judges with whom they have had substantial professional contact within the past two years. Where applicable, comparative ratings are shown from the most recent prior Judicial Evaluation in. 3

General Satisfaction with Performance The rating for this category is based on the level of agreement with the following statement for each judge: Does a good job overall. This is an independent rating of the above attribute. It is NOT a mathematical average of all other ratings. 4

General Satisfaction with Performance Jefferson Circuit Court A.C. McKay Chauvin Frederic J. Cowan Charles L. Cunningham, Jr. 70% 68% 78% 90% 95% 94% Audra J. Eckerle Brian C. Edwards Susan Shultz Gibson Judith E. McDonald-Burkman 83% 81% 93% 91% 92% 91% 85% 83% 5

General Satisfaction with Performance Jefferson Circuit Court Mitchell L. Perry 84% 79% James M. Shake Mary M. Shaw 96% 97% 93% 88% Olu A. Stevens Barry Willett 69% 81% 88% 78% Jefferson Circuit Court Senior Status: Martin F. McDonald 33% 53% 6

General Satisfaction with Performance Jefferson Family Court Dolly Wisman Berry 92% 92% Jerry J. Bowles Joan L. Byer 73% 73% 77% 85% Donna Delahanty Patricia Walker FitzGerald Eleanore M. Garber Stephen M. George 64% 75% 78% 77% 89% 90% 96% 95% 7

General Satisfaction with Performance Jefferson Family Court Hugh Smith Haynie Joseph W. O'Reilly Paula F. Sherlock 57% 66% 83% 82% 79% 84% 8

Judicial Temperament Ratings An average rating was calculated for the performance attributes that make up the Judicial Temperament category. This rating was calculated by averaging the positive ratings for each attribute ( strongly disagree and disagree for negative statements, agree and strongly agree for positive statements). The performance areas under Judicial Temperament are: Gives due consideration to arguments of counsel. Conducts court proceedings courteously. Pre-determines the outcome of the case. Refrains from interfering with the role of counsel in case presentation. Conducts court proceedings with objectivity. 9

Judicial Temperament Jefferson Circuit Court A.C. McKay Chauvin Frederic J. Cowan Charles L. Cunningham, Jr. Audra J. Eckerle Brian C. Edwards Susan Shultz Gibson Judith E. McDonald-Burkman 86% 79% 74% 80% 92% 93% 84% 83% 96% 94% 92% 92% 83% 82% 10

Judicial Temperament Jefferson Circuit Court Mitchell L. Perry 70% 83% James M. Shake Mary M. Shaw Olu A. Stevens Barry Willett 96% 95% 95% 95% 74% 85% 89% 83% Jefferson Circuit Court Senior Status: Martin F. McDonald 36% 59% 11

Judicial Temperament Jefferson Family Court Dolly Wisman Berry 90% 88% Jerry J. Bowles Joan L. Byer Donna Delahanty Patricia Walker FitzGerald Eleanore M. Garber Stephen M. George 75% 71% 75% 71% 80% 86% 89% 93% 78% 77% 92% 96% 12

Judicial Temperament Jefferson Family Court Hugh Smith Haynie Joseph W. O'Reilly Paula F. Sherlock 60% 67% 84% 81% 82% 83% 13

Court Management Ratings An average rating was calculated for the performance attributes that make up the Court Management category. This rating was calculated by averaging the positive ratings for each attribute ( agree and strongly agree ). The performance areas under Court Management are: Conducts court business in a timely manner. Is usually available for business during normal working hours. Is familiar with the file so as to consider issues presented. Exercises appropriate control over court proceedings and court personnel. 14

Court Management Jefferson Circuit Court A.C. McKay Chauvin 95% 94% Frederic J. Cowan 75% 76% Charles L. Cunningham, Jr. Audra J. Eckerle Brian C. Edwards Susan Shultz Gibson Judith E. McDonald-Burkman 98% 97% 92% 92% 95% 96% 95% 94% 94% 91% 15

Court Management Jefferson Circuit Court Mitchell L. Perry James M. Shake Mary M. Shaw 93% 90% 96% 97% 92% 91% Olu A. Stevens Barry Willett 88% 89% 84% 80% Jefferson Circuit Court Senior Status: Martin F. McDonald 59% 70% 16

Court Management Jefferson Family Court Dolly Wisman Berry 96% 94% Jerry J. Bowles Joan L. Byer Donna Delahanty Patricia Walker FitzGerald Eleanore M. Garber 80% 79% 90% 86% 81% 84% 89% 93% 83% 83% Stephen M. George 97% 97% 17

Court Management Jefferson Family Court Hugh Smith Haynie 82% 83% Joseph W. O'Reilly Paula F. Sherlock 74% 75% 85% 88% 18

Judicial Integrity Ratings An average rating was calculated for the performance attributes that make up the Judicial Integrity category. This rating was calculated by averaging the positive ratings for each attribute ( strongly disagree and disagree for negative statements, agree and strongly agree for positive statements). The performance areas under Judicial Integrity are: Is influenced by the race, gender, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socio-economic status of persons appearing in court. Engages in out-of-court conduct or activity which directly interferes with judicial effectiveness. Is affected by partisan interests in the conduct of the court. Engages in ex parte communications which may prejudice proceedings. Lets personal relationships affect his/her judgment. Adheres to the highest ethical standards in and out of court. 19

Judicial Integrity Jefferson Circuit Court A.C. McKay Chauvin Frederic J. Cowan 89% 92% 91% 91% Charles L. Cunningham, Jr. Audra J. Eckerle Brian C. Edwards Susan Shultz Gibson 90% 90% 96% 97% 95% 95% 95% 95% Judith E. McDonald-Burkman 87% 91% 20

Judicial Integrity Jefferson Circuit Court Mitchell L. Perry James M. Shake Mary M. Shaw 90% 87% 96% 97% 97% 98% Olu A. Stevens Barry Willett 81% 87% 93% 90% Jefferson Circuit Court Senior Status: Martin F. McDonald 55% 72% 21

Judicial Integrity Jefferson Family Court Dolly Wisman Berry 92% 92% Jerry J. Bowles Joan L. Byer Donna Delahanty Patricia Walker FitzGerald Eleanore M. Garber Stephen M. George 81% 77% 85% 83% 85% 89% 89% 85% 94% 96% 95% 96% 22

Judicial Integrity Jefferson Family Court Hugh Smith Haynie Joseph W. O'Reilly Paula F. Sherlock 87% 86% 81% 87% 87% 86% 23

Legal Ability Ratings The following charts show the level of agreement with the following statement for each judge: Renders decisions that reflect sound legal analysis. 24

Legal Ability Jefferson Circuit Court A.C. McKay Chauvin 86% 78% Frederic J. Cowan 65% 67% Charles L. Cunningham, Jr. 89% 89% Audra J. Eckerle Brian C. Edwards Susan Shultz Gibson Judith E. McDonald-Burkman 78% 78% 92% 87% 90% 89% 77% 80% 25

Legal Ability Jefferson Circuit Court Mitchell L. Perry 78% 73% James M. Shake 92% 93% Mary M. Shaw 81% 85% Olu A. Stevens 65% 79% Barry Willett 84% 77% Jefferson Circuit Court Senior Status: Martin F. McDonald 31% 49% 26

Legal Ability Jefferson Family Court Dolly Wisman Berry 90% 87% Jerry J. Bowles Joan L. Byer 72% 66% 78% 82% Donna Delahanty Patricia Walker FitzGerald 58% 67% 88% 93% Eleanore M. Garber 78% 74% Stephen M. George 93% 95% 27

Legal Ability Jefferson Family Court Hugh Smith Haynie Joseph W. O'Reilly Paula F. Sherlock 82% 84% 64% 72% 72% 80% 28

Civil Cases Ratings The following charts show the level of agreement with the following statement for each judge: Does a good job in handling civil cases. 29

Civil Cases Jefferson Circuit Court A.C. McKay Chauvin 90% 86% Frederic J. Cowan 71% 71% Charles L. Cunningham, Jr. Audra J. Eckerle Brian C. Edwards Susan Shultz Gibson Judith E. McDonald-Burkman 93% 93% 82% 84% 92% 89% 90% 91% 86% 83% 30

Civil Cases Jefferson Circuit Court Mitchell L. Perry James M. Shake Mary M. Shaw 84% 83% 92% 97% 88% 86% Olu A. Stevens Barry Willett 78% 88% 82% 73% Jefferson Circuit Court Senior Status: Martin F. McDonald 39% 55% 31

Civil Cases Jefferson Family Court Dolly Wisman Berry Jerry J. Bowles 81% 77% 74% 93% Joan L. Byer 82% 87% Donna Delahanty 63% 79% Patricia Walker FitzGerald 89% 92% Eleanore M. Garber 79% 77% Stephen M. George 96% 95% 32

Civil Cases Jefferson Family Court Hugh Smith Haynie Joseph W. O'Reilly Paula F. Sherlock 84% 86% 61% 68% 77% 84% 33

Criminal Cases Ratings The following charts show the level of agreement with the following statement for each judge: Does a good job in handling criminal cases. Family Court Judges were not evaluated on criminal cases. 34

Criminal Cases Jefferson Circuit Court A.C. McKay Chauvin Frederic J. Cowan Charles L. Cunningham, Jr. Audra J. Eckerle Brian C. Edwards Susan Shultz Gibson Judith E. McDonald-Burkman 88% 77% 72% 67% 93% 91% 81% 77% 96% 89% 93% 90% 80% 76% 35

Criminal Cases Jefferson Circuit Court Mitchell L. Perry 84% 75% James M. Shake Mary M. Shaw Olu A. Stevens Barry Willett 63% 72% 96% 95% 91% 91% 89% 89% Jefferson Circuit Court Senior Status: Martin F. McDonald 35% 52% 36