Superior Court Associate Judge Reappointment Evaluation Survey
Hon. Alfred S. Irving, Jr. Due By June 19, 2023
The District of Columbia Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure ("Commission") has the responsibility to determine whether or not a sitting judge of the D.C. Courts whose term is expiring and who seeks a new term is to be reappointed. The statute requires that the Commission file with the President of the United States a written evaluation of the judicial candidate's performance during the term of office, as well as his or her fitness for reappointment to another term. In its evaluation, the Commission is required to place a judge in one of three categories. If the Commission evaluates a sitting judge as "well qualified," the judge is automatically reappointed to a new term of 15 years. If the Commission evaluates the judge as "qualified," the President may, if he or she chooses, renominate the judge subject to Senate confirmation. If the Commission evaluates the judge as "unqualified," the judge is ineligible for reappointment.
The Commission invites comments from members of the Bar, representatives of the Court system, and the general public on each of the candidates. Your input and candid feedback are important to the Commission's evaluation of the judicial candidate. Your identity and personal information will be kept confidential. Therefore, the Commission encourages you to provide narrative comments, as appropriate to explain your answers, such as examples of experiences you have had before a candidate. Specific references directing the Commission’s attention to a particular case or proceeding also are very helpful.
At the end of the survey, please indicate below whether you are open to further confidential discussions with the Commissioner assigned to evaluate the candidate.
1. Please identify the candidate you are evaluating for this survey. Note: You must complete a separate survey for each candidate you are evaluating.
2. Please describe the context of your evaluation of this candidate.
3. How many times have you appeared before the candidate?
4. When did you appear before the candidate?
5. Does the candidate demonstrate an ability to handle complex legal and factual issues?
6. Does the candidate demonstrate knowledge of pertinent judicial authorities and current developments in the law?
7. Does the candidate treat counsel, litigants, witnesses, and others including Court personnel, with respect?
8. Does the candidate treat counsel, litigants, witnesses, and others without bias based on race, gender, ethnicity, religion, or any other grounds?
9. Does the candidate exhibit professional conduct and appropriate judicial temperament on the bench?
10. Does the candidate convene court on time and as scheduled?
11. Does the candidate control and manage a calendar to ensure matters before the Court are handled promptly and without unnecessary delay?
12. Does the candidate rule on motions and make decisions on time or with reasonable promptness?
13. Does the candidate preside over trials and evidentiary proceedings fairly and competently?
14. Does the candidate let the attorney or party present his or her case?
15. Does the candidate demonstrate a command of the issues and facts during proceedings?
16. Does the candidate state reasons for decisions and rulings?
17. Does the candidate decide cases on the basis of factors other than the issues in the case?
18. Does the candidate explain the legal process and make self-represented litigants aware of available legal assistance and/or resources?
19. Does the candidate treat self-represented litigants with respect?
Full Name