Nevada Appellate Lawyer & Attorney : Tami D. Cowden : Nevada Supreme Court, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Meanwhile, has anyone ever done a study to determine if there is a correlation between campaign contributions and judicial decisions? 

Why yes, as a matter of fact, someone has.

In fact, as the New York Times Reported last week in  Looking Anew at Campaign Cash and Elected Judges, a couple of studies have shown a relationship.  

For example, Vernon Palmer, a law professor at Tulane University in New Orleans, reviewed cases decided by the judges, and compare outcomes where no parties or lawyers had made contributions, with those cases where contributions had been made. Prof. Palmer found that some  judge seemed to vote against his or her typical inclination to favor plaintiffs or defendants when a contribution was involved. For one judge, for example, the likelihood of a favorable outcome increased by 30%  with each $1000 contributed.  

Prof. Palmer’s conclusions mirrored those made following a review by the Times of the Ohio Supreme Court’s practices, after it was discovered that a $212 million verdict had been thrown out, with one of the appellate court judges having received sizable donations by the defendant’s CEO.

Prof. Palmer recommends that any judge who has received a contribution from a litigant or the litigant’s lawyer recuse him or her self.  

If we could be sure that would happen, we wouldn’t need to pull out the checkbooks.  

But then again, this isn't Louisiana or Ohio.  Things are different here.

Hat tip to Harmful Error.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Jonell at Harmful Error has listed the current status of the judicial election races across the state here.

Calls for campaign donations for contested races have started. Get your check books ready, folks.  

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Jane Ann Morrison’s column in today’s R-J discusses Judges playing musical chairs could leave taxpayers, voters standing.

Morrison takes issue with sitting judges filing for other open judicial seats. Of course, it is not uncommon for a sitting judge to file for a seat on a higher or different court. For example, the most recent additions to the Nevada Supreme Court, Justices Cherry and Saitta, held positions in the 8th Judicial District Court, at the time of their election.  

Less typical is the situation of a sitting judge filing for another seat on the same court, as did Family Court Judge Sandra Pomrenze. 

Pomrenze’s current seat, along with five others in family court, run on a different election cycle. However, the legislature is changing that, so those six seats are scheduled for an election in 2010, an off-year, for a four year term. If successful in her bid for on of the By running for one of the newly created family court seats, Pomrenze will avoid the need to run during the off year, which she, apparently, sees as a disadvantage. 

Morrison dislikes sitting judges running for new offices, as, when successful, they leave the office open for gubernatorial selection. She doesn’t point out that a new, otherwise unnecessary, election will also be required.

Judge Pomrenze's opponent for the new seat, Jack Howard, questions the ethics of her  decision. 

I doubt any rules have been broken here, although I’ll let those more savvy about the election rules and judicial ethics make that decision. 

But I do see this kind of maneuvering for the sake of  political advantage  as one of the inherent evils of selecting judges through election. If we force judges to be politicians, then we shouldn’t be surprised when they think and act like politicians. 

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As readers here may know, I am not a fan of selecting judges through election.  Judges have enough to do interpreting law; worrying about whether interpretations are popular or nor should not be a part of that. 

Besides, unlike other  political candidates, judicial candidates aren't safe targets for my ridicule.   At least, not as long as I still represent clients.

But despite my misgivings about electing judges,  I also believe in making the systems we have work as best as they can for as long as we have them.  To that end, I believe information about judicial candidates is a good idea. 

Harmful Error has begun compiling links to candidate websites.  I won't duplicate Jonell's list, but I will try to keep readers informed about events where you can meet candidates--an effort that would be aided, obviously, if people let me know about such events. . .

I am thinking of having a contest for best candidate site.  What do you think?

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks