Presiding Family Court judge resigns position

Bill Gang

Thursday, Aug. 21, 1997 | 10:34 a.m.

The Clark County Family Court is in turmoil again after the resignation of Judge Bob Gaston as the court's presiding judge.

Gaston said he felt he needed to step down because his attempts at reform were stifled by fellow judges who didn't agree with the direction he was taking.

"Each judge has a vision of what we need to do to improve the court and my view isn't shared by other judges," the judge said. "Project after project has been frustrated."

A meeting is set for Friday for the eight Family Court judges to determine who will replace Gaston in the administrative post and let him return to handling domestic cases full time.

Gaston's resignation came after he received a letter signed by five of the judges critical of the direction he was unilaterally taking the Family Court, Judge Gerald Hardcastle confirmed.

The final straw apparently was Gaston's decision to implement a new mandatory mediation law, although Hardcastle said it was "the tip of the iceberg."

Gaston had pursued a course that would have used private mediators -- not court staff -- to help litigants resolve their divorce cases while most judges favored court-employed mediators or a combination system.

"The court doesn't have the personnel to handle the caseload," Gaston said, adding that his attempts to get other judges to work on a model for the new system was not met with cooperation.

In the end, his "months of work" was stopped by a vote of the other judges.

Although he was the presiding judge with certain administrative responsibilities, Gaston did not have supervisory authority over other judges nor did he have the authority to dictate court procedures or policy.

Yet the judge persisted in making decisions about policy issues without consulting fellow judges either for input or for approval, several courthouse officials have said.

Gaston said that allegation is "absolutely unfounded" and countered that "misinformation was being passed around" by fellow judges about his specific actions.

He praised the other seven judges as "hard working" but said "if we want to make progress and improve, then the Family Court has problems."

"The issue was where the court is headed and what is best for the court as a whole," Hardcastle said, noting that Gaston made decisions "without regard for judges having differing views."

Insiders said it got to a point where Gaston's ability to lead the court was doomed.

Miffed judges boycotted this month's judge's meeting, further crippling the court that has been trying to restore public confidence after repeated protests and public criticism.

Even the Legislature got involved through a bill to disband the Family Court, although it failed in the final days this summer. Another bill to add three new judges to the busy court also failed.

Neither Hardcastle nor Family Court Judge Gloria Sanchez doubted Gaston's motives.

"No one questions that he is a hard-working, dedicated judge," said Sanchez, who is the vice presiding judge and the expected front-runner to replace Gaston. "It was just philosophical disagreement over programs that should be implemented."

In the end, Gaston concluded "I'm not the one to carry the torch."

In addition to the mediation issue, the court must determine how to implement recommendations in a recently completed $80,000 study of the court, finalize uniformity guidelines to ensure that different judges rule the same on similar issues, and implement a legal clinic to assist litigants who represent themselves.

Gaston said his resignation will not affect his decision to seek re-election.