Home  About us  Contact
 

Court Judge (court + judge)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Law and Criminology93%

Kinds of Court Judge

  • family court judge
    		•
  • juvenile court judge
    		•

    Selected Abstracts

    Babies Can't Wait: A Judicial Response

    JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL, Issue 2 2004
    JUDGE SHARON S. TOWNSEND
    During my career as a Family Court Judge over the past 12 years, I was faced daily with the difficult task of deciding whether or not to remove a newborn infant from the care of her mother and place the child in foster care upon discharge from the hospital. In the huge majority of cases, removal was ordered based upon the mother's history of substance abuse and the subsequent positive toxicology of the infant at birth. I could not risk the health and safety of this often premature and vulnerable infant to a mother with such an addiction to drugs that she would expose her child in utero to these toxic substances. Such a mother was incapable of caring for the basic needs of this vulnerable infant, and therefore removal was ordered. This decision saddened me because, as a mother myself, I knew of the critical bond existing between infant and mother during those critical first days and weeks of a child's life. That bond must be nurtured and strengthened and is crucial to a child's development. [source]

    An Evaluation of a Delaware Teen Court

    JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL, Issue 3 2001
    ARTHUR H. GARRISON M.S.
    ABSTRACT The Kent County Teen Court Program (teen court) provides sanctions for juvenile delinquency from a panel of a juvenile's peers rather than from a Family Court Judge. Part of the concept behind teen peer courts is that the sanction from one's peers carries more weight than sanctions from adults. The Delaware Criminal Justice Council (CJC) awarded a grant to Delaware - Teen Courts, Inc. to support the operation of the Kent County Teen Court Program. The teen court program was designed to provide participants with hands-on education in the judicial process, to create a sanction pro- gram that will not create a permanent record for a juvenile, and to foster, a sense of community responsibility in the program participants. The teen court program is an adult model teen court in which all of the judicial actors are juveniles with the exception of the judge. This article reflects the results of an evaluation on the Kent County Teen Court program's first two years of operation (Garrison, 2001). [source]

    Proceeding to yes: A federal judge looks at ADR's future

    ALTERNATIVES TO THE HIGH COST OF LITIGATION, Issue 1 2007
    Joseph A. Greenaway Jr.
    A CPR News special: Two recent speeches discussing Alternatives' publisher's impact on ADR, and what the future may look like. First, the remarks of 2006 CPR Corporate Leadership Award dinner keynoter Joseph A. Greenaway Jr., a Newark, N.J., U.S. District Court Judge, focus on where ADR works and where its promise lies. CPR Senior Vice President F. Peter Phillips, in addressing the First African ADR Congress in Nigeria in November, provides a history of commercial conflict resolution. [source]

    How conflict resolution emerged within the commercial sector

    ALTERNATIVES TO THE HIGH COST OF LITIGATION, Issue 1 2007
    F. Peter Phillips
    A CPR News special: Two recent speeches discussing Alternatives' publisher's impact on ADR, and what the future may look like. First, the remarks of 2006 CPR Corporate Leadership Award dinner keynoter Joseph A. Greenaway Jr., a Newark, N.J., U.S. District Court Judge, focus on where ADR works and where its promise lies. CPR Senior Vice President F. Peter Phillips, in addressing the First African ADR Congress in Nigeria in November, provides a history of commercial conflict resolution. [source]

    WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST AWARD ADDRESS

    FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Issue 4 2005
    Hon. Leonard Edwards
    The William H. Rehnquist Award is one of the most celebrated judicial honors in the country.1 It is given each year to a state court judge who demonstrates the "highest level of judicial excellence, integrity, fairness, and professional ethics."2 The 2004 recipient, Judge Leonard Edwards, is the Supervising Judge of the Santa Clara County, California juvenile dependency court.3 He is the first juvenile court judge to receive this prestigious award. During the 24 years he has held his position, Judge Edwards has worked extremely hard to improve how the juvenile court system serves troubled families. He has founded two organizations to achieve this end, the Juvenile Court Judges of California and the Santa Clara County Domestic Violence Council.4 Judge Edwards serves as a lead judge in San Jose's Model Court, which is one of twenty-five jurisdictions in the country which utilizes new ideas and techniques to improve adoption rates for children in foster care.5 Moreover, he has worked as president of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.6 Below is the speech he gave after accepting the award from U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. The speech notes the importance of the award to everyone working in America's juvenile courts. [source]

    STRATEGIES AND NEED FOR SYSTEMS CHANGE

    FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Issue 2 2000
    Improving Court Practice for the Millennium
    Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye of New York delivered the following address to the Millennium Conference of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges in Washington, D.C., on November 15, 1999. In it, she describes the development of the philosophy of the family court in the past century. Judge Kaye describes the family court's transition from reliance on social science to the incorporation of procedural due process guarantees in the Gault decision. She suggests that a further transformation is required to meet the needs of children and families in the 21st century. Judge Kaye proposes that in the next millennium the family court abandon the "remote adjudicator" judge who evolved after Gault to a "problem-solving model of judging, a judge who looks at the issues that are driving the caseload, who looks at the results that are being achieved, and who uses a hands-on style to figure out how we might do better both in individual cases and on a systemic level." The New York Times described Chief Justice Kaye as, "A dedicated and effective reformer of the state's sprawling court system. Each of her hard won changes has had a positive impact." Chief Judge Kaye recently received the National Center for State Courts' William H. Rhenquist Award for Judicial Excellence in November 1999. On the occasion of the award, Roger K. Warren, president of the National Center, observed about her,"There are many who are working hard to better process the many cases that come before the state courts, but there are few working an harder or more successfully to better serve the people who use the state courts." [source]

    WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST AWARD FOR JUDICIAL EXCELLENCE ADDRESS

    FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Issue 2 2009
    Hon. Jonathan Lippman
    The William H. Rehnquist Award is one of the most celebrated judicial honors in the country. It is given each year to a state court judge who demonstrates the "highest level of judicial excellence, integrity, fairness, and professional ethics." The 2008 recipient, Jonathan Lippman, was recently appointed and confirmed as Chief Judge of the State of New York. Chief Judge Lippman was previously the Presiding Justice of the Appellate Division of the First Judicial Department of the New York State Supreme Court. He was appointed New York's Chief Administrative Judge by Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye and served from January 1996 to May 2007 and was responsible for the operation of a court system with a $2.4 billion budget, 1300 state-paid judges, 2300 town and village judges, and 16,000 nonjudicial personnel. Among his numerous professional activities, Chief Judge Lippman served as president of the Conference of State Court Administrators from 2005 to 2006 and was the vice-chair of the National Center for State Courts from 2005 to 2006, where he was a member of the Board of Directors from 2003 to 2007. During his tenure, Chief Judge Lippman has been the recipient of numerous awards and recognitions, including the 2006 Fund For Modern Courts Cyrus R. Vance Tribute for Vision, Integrity and Dedication to the Fair Administration of Justice Personified by Cyrus R. Vance (November 27, 2006); the New York County Lawyers' Association Conspicuous Service Award in Recognition of Many Years of Outstanding Public Service (September 28, 2006); and the Award for Excellence in Public Service of the New York State Bar Association's Committee on Attorneys in Public Service (January 24, 2006). Chief Judge Lippman received a Bachelor of Arts in Government and International Relations from New York University, Washington Square College, where he graduated cum laude in 1965. He also received his J.D. from New York University in 1968. Below is the speech he delivered after accepting the William H. Rehnquist Award from U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts. [source]

    WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST AWARD ADDRESS

    FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Issue 4 2005
    Hon. Leonard Edwards
    The William H. Rehnquist Award is one of the most celebrated judicial honors in the country.1 It is given each year to a state court judge who demonstrates the "highest level of judicial excellence, integrity, fairness, and professional ethics."2 The 2004 recipient, Judge Leonard Edwards, is the Supervising Judge of the Santa Clara County, California juvenile dependency court.3 He is the first juvenile court judge to receive this prestigious award. During the 24 years he has held his position, Judge Edwards has worked extremely hard to improve how the juvenile court system serves troubled families. He has founded two organizations to achieve this end, the Juvenile Court Judges of California and the Santa Clara County Domestic Violence Council.4 Judge Edwards serves as a lead judge in San Jose's Model Court, which is one of twenty-five jurisdictions in the country which utilizes new ideas and techniques to improve adoption rates for children in foster care.5 Moreover, he has worked as president of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.6 Below is the speech he gave after accepting the award from U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. The speech notes the importance of the award to everyone working in America's juvenile courts. [source]

    Children Who Have Been Traumatized: One Court's Response

    JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL, Issue 4 2008
    Judge Michael L. Howard
    ABSTRACT A court that is trauma-informed can assist with the process of identifying children in need of trauma-focused services and can provide education and direction to families frustrated by prior treatment failures. The unique role of the juvenile court judge as a community convener offers an opportunity to increase community awareness about the impact of trauma, and to promote the adoption of evidence-based treatment for trauma victims. This article outlines the way that increased trauma awareness and trauma screening within a family court system mobilized the development of effective resources for children and families affected by trauma. [source]

    Claims firm overpays tens of millions,and then gets most of it back

    ALTERNATIVES TO THE HIGH COST OF LITIGATION, Issue 2 2008
    Russ Bleemer
    A Brooklyn, N.Y. federal court judge presides over a claims resolution facility that he had ordered to retrieve nearly $60 million in misdirected payments. A negotiation-style conference in the middle of the courtroom retraced the steps of the missing money, and how most of it had been returned in less than a month. Also: Italian law officially changes to allow class actions, providing for an "ADR Chamber of Reconciliation" to hash out payments. [source]

    Otto Kahn-Freund and Collective Laissez-Faire: An Edifice without a Keystone?

    THE MODERN LAW REVIEW, Issue 2 2009
    Article first published online: 20 FEB 200, Ruth Dukes
    This paper describes Otto Kahn-Freund's advocacy of the British ,collective laissez-faire' system of regulation of industrial relations, in which regulation proceeded autonomously of the state. It suggests that a weakness of collective laissez-faire as a normative principle was its failure to make adequate provision for the furtherance of the public interest. It links this failure to a more general reluctance, on the part of Kahn-Freund, to conceive of the state as representative of the public interest. And it seeks to explain this reluctance with reference to Kahn-Freund's experiences of living and working as a labour court judge in the Weimar Republic, and of moving to the UK as a refugee from Nazism. [source]

    POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL CHECKS ON CORRUPTION: EVIDENCE FROM AMERICAN STATE GOVERNMENTS

    ECONOMICS & POLITICS, Issue 1 2008
    JAMES E. ALT
    This paper investigates the effects of checks and balances on corruption. Within a presidential system, effective separation of powers is achieved under a divided government, with the executive and legislative branches being controlled by different political parties. When government is unified, no effective separation exists even within a presidential system, but, we argue, can be partially restored by having an accountable judiciary. Our empirical findings show that a divided government and elected, rather than appointed, state supreme court judges are associated with lower corruption and, furthermore, that the effect of an accountable judiciary is stronger under a unified government, where the government cannot control itself. [source]

    Asking the Right Questions: Utilizing a Judicial Checklist to Track the Educational Success of Youth in Foster Care

    JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL, Issue 2 2006
    SUSAN A. WEISS
    ABSTRACT Asking about the educational objectives for children in foster care has not been a priority in most juvenile and family courts. Research has shown that compared to the general school population, children in foster care have lower grade point averages, change schools more frequently, earn fewer credits toward graduation, and are more likely to be placed in special education programs. In response, Casey Family Programs, in collaboration with the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges' Permanency Planning for Children Department, developed a Judicial Checklist with key educational questions to be asked from the bench. The Checklist has become a useful tool for juvenile and family court judges when assessing the effectiveness of current educational placements of the children who come before their courts, tracking their performance, and in making a positive future impact on their educational outcomes. [source]

    Gender and the Likelihood of Being Securely Detained for Contempt

    JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL, Issue 1 2003
    M. DYAN MCGUIRE PH.D. J.D.
    ABSTRACT Several theorists have hypothesized that juvenile court judges are circumventing the proscription contained in the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act ("JJDPA"), which prohibits the secure confinement of status offenders by securely detaining status offenders for contempt. It has also been suggested that girls may be especially likely to be securely detained as a result of violating a valid court order. This study uses descriptive and multivariate techniques to examine the demographic, legal, and jurisdictional variables associated with receiving secure detention for violating a valid court order and to evaluate the degree to which the spirit, if not the letter, of the JJDPA's core requirement of deinstitutionalizing status offenders is being violated because of the exemption permitting juvenile court judges to securely detain children found in contempt. The findings from this study indicate that being female does not contribute to detention for contempt but being accused of a status offense does. Implications of these findings are discussed. [source]

    Youth Transfer Decisions: Exploring County Variations

    JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL, Issue 1 2003
    NANCY RODRIGUEZ PH.D.
    ABSTRACT In an effort to control violent and chronic juvenile offenders, many state legislatures have created statutes that give exclusive jurisdiction to adult criminal courts for certain violent offenses. Much research has been conducted on juvenile transfers, but relatively few studies rely on official and self-report data to evaluate this process. By using data from four counties within Washington State, this study examines how legal, extra-legal, and organizational variables impact waiver decisions. In cases where youths were selected for transfer proceedings, data from official records are used to compare transfers within and between counties. In addition, interview data with juvenile court personnel (e.g., juvenile court judges, probation officers, legal advisors) are used to assess the factors associated with transfer decisions. Policy implications are presented along with recommendations for future research. [source]

    Juvenile Court Judges' Perceptions of What Factors Affect Juvenile Offenders' Likelihood of Rehabilitation

    JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL, Issue 3 2002
    JILL MARIE D'ANGELO PH.D
    ABSTRACT An instrument was developed to measure whether judges perceive the likelihood of rehabilitation to be influenced by extra-legal factors. A self-administered questionnaire was sent to 1,040 juvenile court judges across the United States. Two indices-extra-legal and legal-were created to measure the relationship between judges' perceptions and the factors they consider in their transfer decisions. Primary analysis used frequencies, cross-tabulations, and measures of association. The factors that judges may consider in their transfer decisions are specified and vary according to state statutes. Extra-legal factors are never included in the statutes as factors that may be considered. Nonetheless, the findings suggest that judges consider extra-legal factors in determining an offender's likelihood of rehabilitation. The results suggest that both male and non-minority judges' perceive that extra-legal characteristics affect an offender's likelihood of rehabilitation. All judges seem to believe that family structure and prior record are almost equally important factors in determining offenders' likelihood of rehabilitation. Thus, although judges consider legal factors in determining an offender's likelihood of rehabilitation, they also include criteria not explicitly permitted by law. [source]