Evaluating Appellate Judges: Preserving Integrity, Maintaining Accountability

August 11-12, 2011

August 11, 2011

1:00 p.m. Welcome and Opening Remarks Hon. Rebecca Love Kourlis (ret.), Executive Director of the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System The Appellate Judge: What makes a good appellate judge? Can we capture these qualities in the evaluation process?

1:15 p.m.

The roles and responsibilities of appellate judges and justices differ from those of trial judges, presenting unique issues and challenges in the evaluation of their performance. This panel will explore the qualities that make a good appellate judge and how best to capture these qualities in an evaluation process. Moderator: Pam Gagel, Assistant Director of the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System Panelists: Hon. John T. Broderick, Jr. (ret.), Dean & President, University of New Hampshire School of Law Hon. Russell Carparelli, Colorado Court of Appeals Penelope Pether, Professor, Villanova Law School 2:15 p.m. Evaluating Appellate Judges: Are we doing it right? How can we do it better?

Official judicial performance evaluation programs have been established for appellate judges and justices in a number of states; in other states, unofficial programs are

administered through state or local bar associations. At the same time, there are scholars and activists who propose additional, or alternative, approaches to evaluating appellate judicial performance. This panel will explore these various methods of evaluation, with a view toward maximizing judicial performance evaluation to preserve integrity and maintain accountability. Moderator: Hon. Rebecca Love Kourlis (ret.), Executive Director of the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System Panelists: Matt Arnold, Director, Clear the Bench Colorado Mitu Gulati, Professor, Duke University School of Law Rafael Gomez, Legal Counsel, RobeProbe.com 3:30 p.m. 3:45 p.m. Break Retention Elections, Special Interests and Voters: Perspectives from a Justice , a Journalist and a Scholar

In recent years, elections for the appellate bench have become increasingly expensive and contentious. Even retention electionstraditionally low-key affairshave become opportunities for political and special interest attacks on judges and justices. This panel will explore this growing trend, from three unique perspectives: that of a supreme court justice who has been subject to special interest attacks during a retention election; a journalist who has covered these increasingly contentious elections; and a scholar who has explored voter decision making in appellate elections. Moderator: Dan Drayer, Director of Marketing and Communications at the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System Panelists: Hon. Dana Fabe, Alaska Supreme Court Grant Schulte, Associated Press Jordan Singer, Professor, New England Law | Boston 5:00 p.m. 5:45 p.m. 6:30 p.m. Conference Adjourned Cocktails Dinner and Keynote Address: Hon. Mark Cady, Iowa Supreme Court

August 12, 2011

8:00 a.m. Additional Bases for, and Methods of, Evaluating Judicial Performance

There is significant variety in state judicial performance evaluation programs and the mechanisms these programs use to evaluate appellate judges and justices. For example, some states employ a review of appellate opinions as part of the evaluation process; some use courtroom observation; some consider objective data, such as case processing time standards. This panel will discuss the various methods used, and others that might be considered, with a view toward maximizing the criteria and data used in appellate judicial performance evaluation. Moderator: Malia Reddick, Director of Judicial Programs at the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System Panelists: Hon. Richard Gabriel, Colorado Court of Appeals Dan Hall, Vice President, National Center for State Courts Hon. Steve Leben, Kansas Court of Appeals Hon. Anthony Schofield (ret.), Vice Chair, Utah Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission 9:15 a.m. Confronting Challenges and Overcoming Obstacles in Appellate Judicial Performance Evaluation Programs

In both those jurisdictions wanting to implement a judicial performance evaluation program and those with established programs, obstacles and challenges can appear on various fronts. Judicial resistance is commonfor a variety of reasonsand in the last few years as budget problems have gripped states, the cost of administering judicial performance evaluation programs has become a more pressing issue. New and established programs also struggle with how to engage the bar and public in the program. This panel will explore these issues in more detail. Moderator: Jordan Singer, Professor at New England Law | Boston Panelists: Hon. Jacqueline Griffin, Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal Nancy Norelli, Vice President, North Carolina Bar Association JPE Committee Sarah Walker, President, Minnesota Coalition for Impartial Justice 10:15 a.m. Break

10:30 a.m.

Using Judicial Performance Evaluation Results to Counteract Special Interest Attacks

On the first day of the conference we explored the growing contentiousness of appellate bench elections, which have increasingly been subject to political and special interest attacks. In this follow-up discussion, panelists will explore how to best use judicial performance evaluation results to respond to such attacks, as well as the use of social media in responding. Moderator: Karen Salaz, District Administrator, 19th Judicial District of Colorado Panelists: Hon. Dana Fabe, Alaska Supreme Court Jane Howell, Executive Director, Colorado Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation Luke Wyckoff, Chief Visionary Officer, Social Media Energy 12:00 p.m. Executive Session of the IAALS JPE Working Group (closed)