JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE standards recently adopted by the NH Supreme Court will be the basis for annual evaluation of the court’s justices – by attorneys, other justices and themselves.

Starting in September, more than 200 judicial performance questionnaires will be distributed to attorneys and individuals who appear before the Supreme Court. The questionnaire asks respondents to rate the overall appellate process, rather than the performance of individual justices "because the members of the Supreme Court act together as a court," according to a press release from the court.

Respondents to the questionnaire will be asked to evaluate the justices’ performance based on such criteria as the clearness, thoroughness and completeness of decisions; fairness; courtesy and open-mindedness on the issues in court; and the equal treatment of all participants. Responses will be anonymous.

In addition to judicial performance standards, the court has also established time standards that will be reviewed each year to determine the court’s proficiency in moving cases through the appellate process. The time standards state, for example, that a case should be scheduled for oral argument within 180 days after both sides have filed briefs and an opinion or final order in the case should be issued within 180 days after oral argument.

Both the time standards and judicial performance standards were presented in a report to Gov. Jeanne Shaheen and Senate and House leaders.

The justices will meet each fall to review the judicial performance questionnaires and the court’s adherence to time standards, as well as self-evaluations that each justice will be asked to complete and peer reviews by fellow justices. The court will send an annual report on the judicial evaluations to the governor and legislative leaders.

According to Supreme Court spokeswoman Laura Kiernan, the court instituted the new evaluation process as a way to help improve the job the court does. "The justices recognized that feedback from their constituents – lawyers, the people who appear before them – would be welcome and constructive for them in helping to figure out how to best do their jobs," she said.

According to Kiernan, Supreme Court Chief Justice David Brock believes the court’s new review system will be "an opportunity for introspection in a formal setting." The work of an appellate court is much different from that of a trial court, Kiernan said; more time is spent reading and writing than at the trial level. There are, therefore, few opportunities for the Supreme Court justices to "sit down with each other to discuss the job they’ve done," she said. The evaluation process will provide a framework for such an examination, according to Kiernan.

"It’s to the court’s credit that they’re starting this process. There are only positive things to be gained by the court evaluating what it’s done through the year," said Kiernan.

A judicial evaluation process has been in place in the lower courts since 1987 and was revised and formalized by the Supreme Court in March 2001. Through that process, judges are to be reviewed once every three years by each court’s administrative judge. The evaluation includes review of any complaints received by the Judicial Conduct Committee that have been made public and of questionnaires distributed to a sample of attorneys, jurors, witnesses, parties and court staff. Questionnaires are also available to the public at the clerk’s office of each courthouse.

Superior Court Chief Justice Walter L. Murphy is currently evaluating nine of 25 Superior Court judges. Responses to the evaluative questionnaires are due by July 31 and Murphy expects the review of the nine judges to be complete by October.

Edwin W. Kelly, chief justice of the district courts, is currently evaluating 26 of the 70 sitting district court judges. According to the administrative office of the district courts, 1,017 questionnaires were distributed for evaluation of the first 21 judges and 62 percent were returned. The overall rating of those judges was "very good," according to the administrative office. The remaining district court evaluations are expected to be complete by September.

The district court reviews have suggested several ways to improve that court system, including minimizing waiting time for litigants, monitoring court punctuality, implementing time and case flow management procedures and providing administrative counseling for judges whose courtroom demeanor isn’t up to snuff, according to the Supreme Court.

In the probate courts, Administrative Justice John R. Maher recently completed a three-year review of all 10 sitting probate court judges. The one probate court judge reviewed this year, as part of the new three-year system, received an average rating of "excellent" from respondents to the judicial evaluation questionnaires.

Home | About the Bar | For Members | For the Public | Legal Links | Publications | Online Store
Lawyer Referral Service | Law-Related Education | NHBA•CLE | NHBA Insurance Agency | NHMCLE
Search | Calendar

New Hampshire Bar Association
2 Pillsbury Street, Suite 300, Concord NH 03301
phone: (603) 224-6942 fax: (603) 224-2910
email: NHBAinfo@nhbar.org
© NH Bar Association Disclaimer