District Court revamping expected soon

Bill Gang

Monday, March 8, 1999 | 11:11 a.m.

The Nevada Supreme Court's Judicial Assessment Commission, which five years ago had recommended a strong chief judge system for the District Courts, has voted again in support of the supervisory format.

Chief Justice Bob Rose said at the revived commission's first meeting Friday that the strong chief judge system likely will be enacted within the next few weeks after details are worked out.

Judges in Clark County have been meeting to formulate recommendations for what is now considered an inevitable change in the court system.

The anticipated Supreme Court rules come in conjunction with a bill expected to pass this session of the Nevada Legislature that would require a supervisory plan over the courts.

Although the District Court currently has a chief judge -- District Judge Lee Gates -- the position is administrative and there is little authority over fellow judges.

Rose said the original commission -- nicknamed the Rose Commission -- sought to determine "who was in charge ... and the conclusion in Clark and Washoe counties was that no one was."

The 1994 recommendation for a strong chief judge followed, but Rose indicated that the high court, which has authority over the entire court system in the state, had no appetite to make the change out of "deference to the District Court."

But the growth of the courts plus public criticism and the Legislature's interest has brought the issue to the forefront again.

At his State of the Judiciary speech to the Legislature, Rose conceded that a couple of judges in Clark County aren't carrying their weight, leaving the courthouse early, taking excessive vacations and "not cooperating" with other judges to improve efficiency.

He said that isn't fair to "the vast majority of our judges (who) are hard-working and overworked."

Rose has long been an advocate of the supervisory system "so taxpayers get the most bang for their buck."

Before voting, the commission heard from Michael Planet, court administrator in Seattle, about the system in place there to control the 49 judges and 10 commissioners.

He told the commission "the key to an effective court is strong leadership."

"Someone needs to be in charge," Planet said.

One of the duties of the presiding judge in Seattle is to collect monthly statements from judges that certify they have no cases pending longer than 30 days. The consequence if they do, he noted, is that paychecks are withheld.

While there has been a suggestion in Nevada that mandatory hours be set for district judges, Planet said judges' work hours aren't tracked in Seattle because "judges aren't hourly employees.

He indicated, however, that it becomes known if judges are coming in late or leaving early and it can result in a visit from the presiding judge.

Most disputes and problems, he added, are resolved through a "collegial process" rather than a dictatorial approach.

Planet said that judges have sometimes tried to circumvent supervision by emphasizing they are independently elected officials, "but I don't think that argument flies."

Such a position, he said, "dilutes the independence of the judiciary as a branch of government."

Planet said the process to select a strong chief judge varies throughout the United States and can involve such methods as election by fellow judges, appointment by a higher court or rotation by seniority.

In Las Vegas, the chief judge is elected by fellow judges for two-year terms. That system is expected to continue when a strong chief judge system is implemented.