University of Denver

Blog

Christine M. Durham
October 21, 2012
Justice Christine Durham has been on the Utah Supreme Court since 1982, and served as Chief Justice from 2002 to 2012. As we launch IAALS Online, she joins three other former Chief Justices in the conversation about IAALS and its initiatives by discussing the work of our Educating Tomorrow's Lawyers Initiative. "There are widespread conversations occurring about the future of lawyers and law schools. Current phenomena include dramatic decreases in legal sector jobs and a restructuring of the legal market that appears to be extremely durable. Changes in the way legal services are delivered are occurring rapidly, with on-line forms and guidance being increasingly utilized by consumers. Educating Tomorrow's Lawyers is a project grounded in the faith that “knowledge, practice and professionalism” will remain the touchstone for the role of lawyers in a future that is likely to look much different from the past."
Alli Gerkman
October 18, 2012
This November, in addition to executive and legislative candidates, Colorado voters will be deciding whether or not to retain Colorado judges. Under Colorado’s system for selecting and retaining judges, all judges who will appear on the ballot must undergo a performance evaluation, the results of which are provided to the public as a tool for casting an informed retention vote. A website—www.knowyourjudge.com—is helping voters locate this information for the judges who will appear on their ballot.
Cindy Pham
October 17, 2012
The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register. The ITC's proposed rules apply to 337 investigations, which involve allegations that a competitor is importing patent-infringing goods. The proposed rules closely follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and seek to "make patent-infringement disputes more affordable by placing limitations on electronic discovery."
Malia Reddick
October 17, 2012
Governor Brownback’s chief counsel is among 21 applicants for a court of appeals vacancy. After screening and interviewing the applicants, the nominating commission will identify three candidates from which the governor must choose.
Malia Reddick
October 16, 2012
Recent polling indicates that the chief justice race between Judge Robert Vance Jr. and Roy Moore is a dead heat, a somewhat surprising turn of events given that Vance did not enter the race as the Democratic candidate until September. Since then, Vance has raised $500,000 and received endorsements from two prominent Alabama Republicans.
Malia Reddick
October 16, 2012
Following public interviews of 18 applicants and private deliberations, the appellate judicial commission selected three nominees for possible...
Malia Reddick
October 16, 2012
Supporters of Amendment 3, which would alter the composition of the appellate judicial commission and require the commission to identify 4 (rather...
Malia Reddick
October 16, 2012
A radio ad funded by the American Justice Partnership highlights “eyebrow-raising” real estate transactions by a sitting justice who is not running...
Malia Reddick
October 16, 2012
Governor Cuomo’s first appointments to the state’s appellate courts reflect an emphasis on diversity. Of the seven appointments, one judge is Asian,...
Malia Reddick
October 16, 2012
Critics of Justice Stephen David’s majority opinion in a 2011 Fourth Amendment case are challenging his bid for retention . The decision rejected the...
Malia Reddick
October 16, 2012
A grassroots organization known as Citizens for Judicial Integrity is campaigning against the retention of four Madison County judges. According to the CFJI website, the judges were elected with "huge contributions from judges and asbestos law firms" and are "responsible for a lawsuit explosion.”
Alli Gerkman
October 16, 2012
This fall, judges are running in contestable elections in 32 states and standing in yes/no retention elections in 17 states. Judicial elections are typically low-information contests, where voters may cast their ballots based on party affiliation, name recognition, or ballot position rather than on qualifications and experience. But in a handful of states, voters will have the benefit of broad-based and objective evaluations of incumbent judges’ performance on the bench and, in one state, of the judicial potential of their challengers.