Justices forced to pull double duty

Erica D. Johnson

Wednesday, July 2, 2003 | 11:09 a.m.

The Nevada Supreme Court's need to take on the state's budget crisis comes at a bad time for the Clark County judicial system and two of the justices.

Justices Mark Gibbons and William Maupin previously had volunteered to fill in for absent Clark County judges after a funding shortfall prevented the high court from hiring visiting judges.

The justices still expect to hear Clark County criminal, civil and family cases during the next few weeks, but some of the work may have to be postponed if they are too busy with Gov. Kenny Guinn's lawsuit seeking a tax plan and school funding.

While Guinn's lawsuit is unprecedented, justices presiding over local cases is not. But this is the first time in more than a decade that it has happened.

Maupin and Gibbons volunteered to temporarily relocate from Carson City, after the court did not have enough money to hire senior judges. A yearlong civil lawsuit involving construction contracts at the Venetian helped deplete the budget, court officials said.

Nevada law allows Supreme Court justices to preside over district cases, but it is rarely necessary, Gibbons said.

"This is very rare," he said. "We have senior judges who could do the work but not enough funds to pay them."

Gibbons said the court more than likely would not have enough money to hire senior judges until at least October.

Gibbons will handle divorce and child custody cases for Family Court Judge Steven Jones for an unspecified period of time while Jones recuperates from knee surgery. Gibbons is the first Nevada Supreme Court justice to hear cases in Family Court, he said.

Maupin will take over for District Judge Stewart Bell from July 14 to 17 while Bell, who was elected to the court six months ago, attends judicial college.

District Court Administrator Chuck Short said that during brief judicial absences, local cases are typically postponed or heard by other district judges.

But during prolonged absences, he said, other arrangements must be made.

"You don't want important decisions to lag because the judge has an unexpected illness or an injury," he said.

Family Court Judge Gerald Hardcastle said he thinks it is good that a Supreme Court Justice will see first hand how Family Court works.

"It's always nice to see someone come down here and see how we do business," he said. "I think it's good for them to see the realities of what goes on when people are involved in divorce litigation."

Family Court Judge Art Ritchie said he hasn't run into Gibbons much in the courthouse halls, but that most judges are familiar with Gibbons from when he he served as chief judge.

"We know Justice Gibbons well," he said. "It is great to have a sitting justice hearing cases."

Gibbons said his and Maupin's absence would not put a strain on the Supreme Court, as he and Maupin volunteered during times when they weren't set to hear any cases.

Both justices have sacrificed their vacation time to to help Clark County officials. he said.

The Supreme Court certifies senior judges, who are normally retired district judges, to sit in if a judge has a prolonged illness or goes on vacation. The senior judges are paid on a case-by-case basis.

But the recent Venetian construction trial, which lasted nearly a year, depleted the court's two-year budget for senior judges, court officials said.

Supreme Court officials had assigned Senior Judge James Brennan to oversee that trial in order to free up the calendars of busy District Court judges, Gibbons said.

"The Venetian trial threw our budget out of whack," he said. "There's no question about that."

Supreme Court justices asked the Legislature for extra money for senior judges, but the request died in the Assembly, Gibbons said.

Senior judges are paid on the same pay scale as district judges, $130,000 per year, but senior judges are paid for half days of work, he said.

If any of the Clark County cases Gibbons or Maupin preside over are appealed, the justices disqualify themselves from the three-judge panel that would hear the case in the Supreme Court.

Gibbons said it is not unusual for justices to recuse themselves.

"It's not really a big problem," he said. "A lot of cases that are under appeal are cases I ruled on as a district judge. I can't hear those cases either."

For now, though, the top concern is the urgent business of the state's finances, and it will call Gibbons and Maupin back to their Supreme Court duties as early as next week.

While most cases in the high court are heard by panels made up of three judges, major cases, such as the one dealing with the state's budget crisis, are heard by all seven Supreme Court justices, Gibbons said.