Archive for November, 2011

« Older Entries

Rhode Island overhauls judicial, other retirement systems

November 30th, 2011

The last few years have seen massive changes to public retirement systems in general, and judicial ones in particular. I dedicated an entire week to the subject earlier this year, most focused on ending defined benefit pensions/plans and replacing them with defined contribution programs. The most recent big move was in Rhode Island earlier in November. HB 6319/ SB 1111 converts the Judicial Retirement Benefits Trust and the other state and local employee retirement systems into what media reports describe as a “hybrid” system, adding elements of defined contribution to the existing defined benefit plan(s). The bill was signed into law November 18 and already there are government websites dedicated to describing how the new program will be put into effect, including a special FAQ for judges, which includes a table (below the fold).

» Read more: Rhode Island overhauls judicial, other retirement systems

No comments »

Posted in Salary & Budget

Tags:

State-by-State 2011 Legislative Year in Review: New Hampshire

November 30th, 2011

New laws or resolutions affecting the courts enacted or adopted by the New Hampshire legislature in 2011 include the following:

HB 150 Clarifies that for judicial branch employees who transfer without a break in service from the judicial branch to state service in the executive branch or the legislative branch, the rate of accrual of annual and sick leave shall be according to continuous years worked and, upon the employee’s transfer, the rate of accrual shall be the rate of accrual of the receiving branch.

HB 299 Allows the annual contribution for unfunded accrued liability of the judicial retirement plan to be calculated over a 30-year period or the maximum period allowed, whichever is less.

HB 511 Clarifies that retired judges over 70 years of age shall not serve as judges in any judicial capacity except as judicial referees.

HB 609 Consolidates probate courts, district courts, and judicial branch family division into new circuit court.

HR 7 Directs house judiciary committee to investigate whether grounds exist to impeach marital master Phillip Cross and/or any justice of the New Hampshire superior court.

HR 13 “Repudiates” state Supreme Court advisory opinion regarding constitutionality of bill requiring Attorney General join in lawsuit against health care law. Urges Senate to pass bill compelling AG to joint suit.

SB 65 Clarifies court facilities rents are to be negotiated and paid for by the department of administrative services and not the administrative office of the courts.

No comments »

Posted in Year in Review

Tags:

State-by-State 2011 Legislative Year in Review: Oregon

November 30th, 2011

Oregon’s legislature approved of one constitutional amendment related to the courts in 2011:

HJR 44 Redefines “judicial department” as “judicial branch”.

New laws or resolutions affecting the courts enacted or adopted by the Oregon legislature in 2011 include the following:

HB 2237 Recreates the Public Guardian and Conservator Task Force.

HB 2367 Allows governing body (currently county court) of counties with a population of 400,000 or less to offer law library services in lieu of acquiring, maintaining or operating law library through a contract with a law library association or other organization. Allows use of law library fees collected in circuit court to pay amounts agreed to under contract. Requires State Court Administrator to conduct biennial electronic survey of all county law libraries and law library services provided by counties.

HB 2403 Directs Judicial Department and other state branches/agencies to partner with Oregon Military Department to provide reintegration services for veterans

HB 2667 Specifies that court administrator is subject to direction of court in entering judgment for judgment by default. Updates statutory references to Oregon State Bar’s Lawyer Referral Service to include website address. Establishes, for declaratory judgment filings occurring on or after January 1, 2011, and before July 1, 2011, $117 filing fee. Requires, upon request, partial refund of any filing fee paid at higher rate on or after January 1, 2011, and before effective date of Act.

HB 2710 : Amends, creates, or redefines numerous laws related to court fees. Court Civil Revenues Account in General Fund and directs disbursement to state bar, to counties of law libraries, etc. Repeals Judicial System Surcharge Account.

HB 3102 Transfers authority over court appointed special advocates and CASA Volunteer Programs from State Commission on Children and Families to judicial branch.

HB 3525 Establishes Courthouse Capital Improvement Trust Fund. Appropriates moneys in the account to Oregon Department of Administrative Services, and limit uses of those moneys to payment of costs of capital improvements to county courthouses. Provides that 10 percent of amount awarded as punitive damages under verdict in civil action is payable to Attorney General for deposit in Courthouse Capital Improvement Trust Fund.

SB 360 Provides that prohibition on justice of the peace district including portion of city that is county seat, or portion of city in which circuit court regularly holds court, does not prevent justice of the peace from conducting arraignment for person in custody in city if accusatory instrument for offense was filed in justice court and offense was committed within boundaries of justice of the peace district.

SB 391 Specifies conditions under which tax court magistrate may hold outside office or position of profit or pursue outside calling or vocation.

SB 676 Directs Governor and Chief Justice to report to Legislative Assembly on plan to implement outcomes-based strategies.

No comments »

Posted in Year in Review

Tags:

Bans on court use of sharia/international law: Pennsylvania bill introduced

November 28th, 2011

Welcome New York Times readers!

Welcome Post-Gazette readers!

Since the last update of this list in October, one piece of legislation has been introduced.  Pennsylvania’s HB 2029 bans court references to any “foreign legal code or system” if doing so would impair constitutional rights.

Full roster of 2010 bills are available. 2011 and 2012 bills after the jump. » Read more: Bans on court use of sharia/international law: Pennsylvania bill introduced

5 comments »

Posted in Jurisdiction, Other, Special Edition

Tags:

Special/Interim Judiciary Committee meetings in Illinois, North Carolina, Washington

November 28th, 2011

This week promises to be busy for legislators as Special and Interim Sessions are being held in Illinois, North Carolina, and Washington.

The Illinois House’s Judiciary II – Criminal Law Committee meets December 1 to examine overcrowding in prisons.

In NC, the Senate Judiciary I committee meets today (November 28) to debate changes to the state’s No Discriminatory Purpose in Death Penalty Act that allow the introduction of certain statistical evidence to show discrimination in either pretrial or posttrial proceedings in capital cases.

Washington State’s Senate Judiciary Committee will consider draft legislation on “Protection of public policy” on November 29.  On December 1 the same committee will consider bills on

  • Bail and pretrial release practices
  • Consular Notification
  • County Coroners

On December 2, it is the House Judiciary’s turn to meet. That committee will look at

  • Child Support Schedule Work Group Report and Recommendations
  • Uniform Collaborative Law Act
  • Legislation authorizing qui tam actions as part of a state Medicaid Fraud False Claims Act

No comments »

Posted in Interim Activities, Other

Tags:

Due to holiday, there’s no issue this week

November 24th, 2011

A special double issue will come out next Thursday. Happy Thanksgiving from Gavel to Gavel!

No comments »

Posted in Weekly Edition

Minnesota: Should judicial disciplinary board be used to review merits of judicial decisions?

November 21st, 2011

Several states have seen legislative efforts to change the composition and role/function of their judicial disciplinary bodies in 2011. Among the motivating factors are disgruntled litigants who, finding their appeals rejected, wish nevertheless to “hold judges accountable.” Such language was and is at the forefront of the impeachment efforts underway in New Hampshire. Media reports indicate much of the testimony heard before a Tennessee committee regarding that state’s judicial disciplinary body focused on disagreements with the decisions rendered by judges as well.

Minnesota’s Senate considered the issue in the form of hearings conducted on November 17 before its Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety. At issue was HB 1568, the latest in a series of bills introduced in the last several years that would have allowed the Board of Judicial Standards to examine the merits of judicial decisions and used the Boards disapproval or disagreement as the basis for disciplinary actions against the jurist. Several Senators who spoke in favor of the bill did so with an eye towards using the judicial disciplinary process as a means to put pressure on the courts to rule certain ways or to provide a free or low cost alternative to an appeal.

Sen. Michael Jungbauer (R): “I’ve heard many, many issues about judges and cases and people always tell me they feel just this empty feeling when a judge rules something and they disagree with it but maybe don’t have the money or the wherewithal to bring it somewhere else.”

Sen. Dave Thompson (R): “The judiciary has taken on a much more significant role in our society that it should have through asserting itself overly aggressively in the area of judicial review and other things…So the problem we have here is judges are too significant, which is why how we select them and how we discipline them and how we review their performance has become far more important that it ought to be and until the judiciary is willing to see its role as less significant in our society and until legislatures are willing to do the politically difficult thing and ask judges about the decisions that they make, we’ll never solve the problem.”

The video below is from that November 17 and includes those portions that discussed changes to the Board and its role/function.

 

3 comments »

Posted in Qualification & Terms, Rule Making Authority, Video

Tags:

New Hampshire proceedings to impeach judges for their decisions continues Nov. 29

November 21st, 2011

The effort in New Hampshire to impeach a marital master, and potentially all the judges of the state’s Superior Court, for their decisions in family law cases is set to continue on November 29 (see here for all prior posts). According to the NH House calendar, a special subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee is set for a work session pursuant to HR 7, which directs the house judiciary committee to investigate whether grounds exist to impeach marital master Philip Cross and/or any justice of the New Hampshire superior court.

No comments »

Posted in Interim Activities, Other

Tags:

Nearly 3 dozen bills introduced reforming Michigan’s judicial structure, geography

November 18th, 2011

In the last several years, three major efforts to consolidate or restructure a state’s courts have been enacted: Vermont (2010 merger of Probate, Family, and District Court), New Hampshire (2011 merger of District, Probate, and Judicial Branch Family Division into newly created Circuit Court) and Indiana 2011 (granting all Circuit, Superior, and Probate courts original and concurrent jurisdiction in all civil and criminal cases).

Each of these, however, took the form of a single bill. Michigan’s effort at restructuring its judiciary been introduced as a series of nearly 36 bills, all of which are focused on elimination of judgeships, merging Probate courts with District by making Probate Judges serve as District Judges (or vice versa), and the consolidation of geographic districts/circuits. This is addition to the effort to the legislative push for concurrent jurisdiction and consolidation plans developed independently by courts.

Details are below

Eliminate District Judgeship(s); require probate judges in district serve as District Judges in their respective counties

HB 5071 / SB 830: 84th District. Also reduces from three to two the number of District Court judgeships in 86th District.

HB 5072 / SB 829 93rd, 97th, and 98th Districts.

HB 5075 / SB 838 79th District. Also reduces from 2 to 1 the number of Circuit Court judgeships in the 27th Judicial Circuit.

HB 5094 / SB 837 87-A, 88th and 89th Districts.

HB 5095 / SB 831 95-A District. Also reduces from 2 to 1 the number of Circuit Court judgeships in the 41st Judicial Circuit.

HB 5101 / SB 840 23rd, 81st, and 83rd District. Also reduces from 2 to 1 the number of Circuit Court judgeships in the 23rd Judicial Circuit.

 

Reduces judgeships but retains Districts/Circuits

HB 5073 / SB 843 54A District and 68th District: from 5 to 4.

HB 5074 / SB 833 66th District: from 2 to 1.

HB 5093 / SB 832 7th District: from 2 to 1. County of Kalamazoo Probate: from 3 to 2.

HB 5104 / SB 839 18th Judicial Circuit: from 3 to 2. 74th District Court: from 3 to 2.

HB 5105 / SB 844 3rd Judicial Circuit: from 61 to 60. 52nd District: from 11 to 10. 71A District: from 2 to 1.

HB 5106 / SB 841 25th Judicial Circuit: from 2 to 1. 96th District: from 2 to 1.

HB 5107 / SB 836 42nd Judicial Circuit: from 2 to 1. 75th District: from 2 to 1.

SB 416 3rd Circuit: 61 to 60. 26th District: 2 to 1. Eliminates District judgeship in 85th Judicial District. Splits 85th District into 85-A and 85-B and requires probate judges in district serve as District Judges in their respective counties.

District/Circuit Consolidation

HB 4313 Consolidates 20th and 21nd Circuits into 20th, with the consent of the cities involved.

HB 5102 / SB 834 Consolidates 24th and 52nd Circuits into the 24th. Provides new 24th to have one Circuit Judge.

HB 5103 / SB 835 Consolidates 43rd District & 44th District into the 43rd and 45A and 45B District into the 45th District. Also reduces judgeships in 25th District (2 to 1), 30th District (2 to 1), 33rd District (3 to 2), 48th District (3 to 2), and 50th District (4 to 3) . Retains provision giving 47th District two judgeships, but eliminates clause allowing an additional judgeship if and when a district court judgeship was eliminated anywhere in the state, subject to review and recommendation by SCAO and subsequent legislation.

HB 4313 Combines twentieth and twenty-first districts.

Other

HB 5108 / SB 842 In 2-B, 65-B, 91st and 94th Districts, combines District Court with Probate. Provides for two probate judges until vacancy occurs, then retains single judge of probate.

SB 319 Reduces Court of Appeals from 4 districts of 7 judges each to 4 districts of 6 judges each.

No comments »

Posted in Structure Changes

Tags:

Pennsylvania House Judiciary Committee meets November 21, will look at personal injury

November 18th, 2011

The Pennsylvania House Judiciary Committee will meet 11/21 to vote on HB 1976, related to venue in personal injury actions against corporations and similar entities.

No comments »

Posted in Interim Activities

Tags: