News & Updates

A group known as The Do Good Dads Against Unjust Judges is challenging the retention of three local judges. The group takes issue with the judges’ rulings in cases involving child custody, adoptions, and child abuse, among others. The group is also pursuing legislative changes and better training for attorneys who handle custody cases.

Utah's legal regulatory sandbox was designed to open the door to new kinds of legal service providers and business structures, including entities with nonlawyer ownership and nonlawyer practitioners, who could offer legal services to the public. IAALS has now completed our interim evaluation, with findings published across a four-part report series covering background, process evaluation, outcomes evaluation, and social return on investment analysis.

In a recent opinion piece, Judge Daniel E. Ramczyk emphasizes the importance and benefits of New Mexico’s judicial selection and retention process, and in particular the role that the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission (JPEC) plays in providing valuable feedback to judges as well as to the citizens who vote for them.

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."

When the Supreme Court of Missouri in January 2008 adopted a rule authorizing The Missouri Bar to create and administer the state’s first true judicial performance evaluation program, the state bar was faced with a very tight timeframe for implementation and a seemingly endless set of questions. How and where do we start? How should the evaluation be conducted? What form should the survey instrument take? What information should be considered by evaluators?

Challengers to two incumbent supreme court justices questioned their campaign financing practices. One of the challengers promised to recuse himself from cases involving contributors, while the other has raised no money.

A just-released report recommending concrete improvements in the American civil justice system has been endorsed by the Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ), the country’s association of top state judicial leaders. The report—released last week at CCJ’s annual conference in Jackson, Wyoming—calls on state judicial leaders to implement 13 recommendations.

This special edition of Selection Snapshots provides an overview of the challenges to judicial retention, court-related ballot measures, supreme court elections, public financing of judicial campaigns, and judicial campaign oversight committees.

On November 3, the federal Civil Rules Advisory Committee met in Washington D.C. to discuss a range of issues—from current proposed rule amendments to future projects focused on discovery practice and active judicial case management. The Committee is…

Recently, during the Conference of Chief Justices and the Conference of State Court Administrators, many state chief justices, court administrators, and legislators attended or participated in a panel discussion in Washington, D.C., sponsored by the National Center for State Courts. At this discussion, panelists addressed how courts should best handle the severe judiciary budget cuts impacting the nation's courts, especially in light of the public's increasing demand for court services.

Judge Neil Gorsuch’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this week underscored the difference between elected officials and judges. He repeatedly declined to answer questions about his personal views, declined to express his opinion of various precedents, and repeatedly swore to uphold the law, irrespective of the parties before him.

IAALS is privileged to benefit from the expertise of a diverse board of advisors that includes judges, practitioners, and others committed to our mission: the continuous improvement of the civil justice system. At the close of 2012, we said farewell to two board members: Justice Patricio Serna and Sue Dosal. And, on January 1, 2013, we welcomed three new board members: Judge Lee Rosenthal, Alan Carlson, and Sheila Slocum Hollis.

Colorado Public Radio's Ryan Warner watches a clip from The Paper Chase with Dean Martin Katz, University of Denver Sturm College of Law, and takes a look at the changing landscape of legal education.

Questions about when judges should recuse themselves from hearing cases—usually because a party perceives their ability to be impartial to be in doubt—have drawn renewed attention recently due to high-profile cases and closely divided U.S. Supreme Court decisions. For example, the high court ruled last year in Williams v. Pennsylvania that a defendant was denied a fair hearing in a capital case when the state’s chief justice did not recuse himself, because decades earlier the justice had prosecuted the case as then district attorney.

The Minnesota Supreme Court has adopted amendments to its Rules of Civil Procedure and General Rules of Practice that are aimed at “facilitating more cost effective and efficient civil case processing.” The amendments, which take effect July 1, 2013, adopt many of the recommendations of the Civil Justice Reform Task Force.

Rebecca Love Kourlis was interviewed on Colorado Public Radio about the "failing grades" she gave civil courts in Rebuilding Justice.

Russell has been with IAALS from the first moment. He came to us at the recommendation of Judge Richard Matsch of the Federal District Court in Denver. Russell had just left his position as Deputy Director of the Federal Judicial Center and joined the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies Program. Judge Matsch told me that if we could get Russell on our Board, we would have won the lottery. And indeed, we did. Russell has been our secret weapon—our empirical conscience. 

Arizona’s house of representatives passed a bill that would increase from three to five the minimum number of candidates a nominating commission sends to the governor for each judicial vacancy. The constitution calls for the commission to submit at least three nominees to the governor.

Four years ago, Professor Andrew Schepard and his colleagues at Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University developed a family law class that would strike a balance between doctrine and skills development. This week, we added it to our growing collection of innovative law school courses. In a recent interview, Professor Schepard discussed the course, which he has taught the last three years.

IAALS, in partnership with the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), continued its leadership on implementing Civil Justice Initiative reforms at a workshop held in Phoenix, Arizona, January 18-19. The program, The Nuts and Bolts of Civil Justice Reform, was co-sponsored by the NCSC and the Maricopa County Superior Court. Approximately 20 judges and court administrators participated, from Hawaii to Tennessee.