Kelsey Bill to Eliminate Two Shelby Judges Draws Fire in Nashville

Judges, lawyers dispute weighted caseload data, urge county delegation to "speak with one voice" against changes.

Posted by Jackson Baker on Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 5:19 AM

Judge Childers addressing Shelby County legislators on Wednesday
  • JB
  • Judge Childers addressing Shelby County legislators on Wednesday

NASHVILLE — A trial of sorts is about to pit a Shelby County legislator against a goodly portion of the county’s judicial establishment. Only this showdown will take place not in the courtroom but in the hearing rooms and chambers of the Tennessee General Assembly.

What’s at stake, if legislation introduced this week by state Senator Brian Kelsey (R-Germantown) makes it through in the current legislative session, is the possible loss of two Shelby County judgeships, and a number of the county’s judges and lawyers turned up in the state capital this week to voice their displeasure at the prospect.

Kelsey’s measure Senate Bill 1484, which so far lacks a House co-sponsor, would, in the language of the bill, “abolish... Parts I and V of the circuit court of the 30th judicial district effective September 1, 2014 and provides that no person will be elected at August 2014 (Shelby County) general election to serve as judge of the abolished parts.”

Divisions I and V of Circuit Court have been filled, respectively, by Judge John McCarroll, who is retiring, and Judge Kay Robilio, whose retirement is already effective. Kelsey cited this fact as the reason for those divisions being singled out for elimination. As for what he perceives as the need for eliminating positions at all, he cited a study prepared last fall by state Comptroller Justin Wilson, which was dispatched to members of the General Assembly, including Kelsey, who serves as chairman of the state Senate Judiciary Committee.

Entitled “Tennessee Trial Courts Judicial Weighted Caseload Study,” the document , prepared for the state by the National Center for State Courts as the result of a legislative mandate, is thick with statistics and evaluations of trial frequencies, judges’ workloads, and extrapolated caseload data of other kinds. The bottom line: The state’s 30th Judicial District (Shelby County), which has 9 Circuit Court judges, and three Chancery Court Judges, has an excess of presiding civil jurists — 2.76 too many, in fact.

Led by Shelby County’s senior Circuit Court judge, W.A. “Butch” Childers, a sizeable contingent from the county’s legal community, including other judges and lawyers, were in the environs of Capitol Hill and Legislative Plaza Wednesday,

“We are concerned,” Childers said, to a luncheon meeting of the Shelby County legislative delegation, held in an office building across the street from Legislative Plaza. He noted that the last time Shelby County was granted the right to add a new civil judge was 1984 and said, “It’s very difficult to get a new judge even when you need a new judge. Once you lose a judge it is extremely difficult to get a new judge.”

He presented a series of slides, one of which noted the ratio of active civil judges to population in various Tennessee counties. Shelby County had a ratio of one civil judge for every 77,000 citizens — that latter number being conspicuously higher than in the state’s other major urban areas.

As Childers noted, the legislature ceased taking pure population numbers into effect some years ago — a fact that one of the delegation attendees, state Senator Jim Kyle, remembered as being due to the fact that in counties like Shelby, pure population figures did not take into account the additional number of commuting citizens from adjoining areas, whose presence accounted for a greater likelihood of medical, damage-related, and other cases to be tried in county courts.

Childers noted such factors as the higher incidence of poverty-line residents in Shelby County, a fact resulting in disproportionate number of “pro se” (self-filed) litigation; a huge backlog of untried cases of all kinds, and a larger rate of medical malpractice cases to be tried, even as the number of malpractice filings may have dropped following legislation imposing caps on damages.

The impact of malpractice legislation had been mainly on the type of case that in the past had been subject to summary dismissal, Childers said. “Meritorious” suits were, if anything, requiring more trial time. The weighted caseload study also failed to take into account factors like retrials, repeated appeals, hung juries, and the like, he said.

Childers was supported in his assertions by Memphis lawyers Les Jones, David Cook, and Tim Smith. In what he called “a statement against interest,” Smith attested to the fact of a large and growing case backlog which would worsen if the county lost two judges and said, “If you take away two judges in Shelby County., you might as well call it the lawyer-enrichment act.with small businesses having to pay the tab. This will cause your businesses in your district more money, and this will result in more money for lawyers.”

Circuit Court judges Donna Fields and Karen Williams also made an effort the debunk the idea that Shelby County caseloads required fewer judges than at present. “Why isn’t my docket getting shorter?: asked Williams. She said that, since 2008, the number of cases to be tried in Shelby County had risen in all but one year. A former legislator herself, she called for the Shelby delegation “to speak with one voice” against the proposed legislation.

Kelsey responding to questionsls
  • JB
  • Kelsey responding to questionsls
Addressing his question to “the Senate Judiciary chair” (Kelsey), state Rep. G.A. Hardaway asked, “will this bill come to your committee, sir? Are you the reason they (the visiting lawyers and judges) are up here?”

Kelsey had said during the discussion that he he acted on the assumption that, as the weighted caseload study seemed to suggest, case filings in Shelby County had dropped. In an interview after the meeting, he elaborated as follows:

“As the Republican Party, we are the party of small government. If we’re not willing to start by following up on the studies that we’ve funded, where are we going to start? This is my responsibility as chairman of the committee, to make difficult decisions, and sometimes the best decisions for the entire state of Tennessee may be the most difficult to make as a committee chairman, but that’s what we’re sent here to do — to look out for what makes Tennessee a better state and what takes care of our taxpayers and insurors.”

Comments (5)

Showing 1-5 of 5

What Butch Childers and the "other judges" who appeared to contest the elimination of these two divisions of circuit court are really afraid of is having to work a full day if more cases are transferred into their courtrooms due to reassignment of cases that normally would be in divisions 1 and 5.

In my opinion, the only thing wrong with Kelsey's bill is that it doesn't eliminate enough divisions of court. They should eliminate fully one half of all the divisions in circuit, general sessions, criminal, chancery and probate court.

A person can walk into any courthouse in Shelby County most any day of the week and find nearly ALL of the judges off the bench by mid-day to early afternoon.

In fact, by 2 pm most of the judges are off the bench in all divisions and General Sessions Civil courts are not even open for business on Friday afternoons.

We have nearly 30 courts in Shelby County with judges making just under $150,000/year. In addition, we pay for them to have judicial clerks and paralegals, who do all of the judges work off the bench, except for maybe executing their signatures.

For that kind of money, most people would be happy to work a full 8 hour day, 5 days a week but most of these judges, personally, put in about 5 hours a day of real work.

I believe judges should be paid about 50,000 per year and serve 1 term of public service then move on back into private practice and make the real money. Of course, most of our judges are good enough attorneys to draw a good salary doing good work for good law offices.

It's sad for public servants to make more money than the majority of the people they are elected to serve.

Being a judge should not be a lifelong slot at the public feed trough.

I'd be embarrassed to be one of the judges that appeared at this meeting complaining about the elimination of only 2 divisions of court. They should be telling the legislature, "Hey, we have really great benefits and salaries and hours and working conditions, let us take over the cases in those 2 courtrooms and let us help the taxpayers save money by working a full day."

It's shocking how many cars I see with judicial plates headed downtown every day AFTER court SHOULD have opened and then all headed back East about 2 or 3 every afternoon. They get to work late, leave early and then complain they may have to work a little bit more if the legislature eliminates 2 divisions. Shameful.

report 6 likes, 3 dislikes   
Posted by Cordelia on 01/16/2014 at 11:30 PM

You can't strictly go by time on bench. Getting 100% yield on court time is not realistic. They schedule trials months in advance. Trials get moved and there are large numbers of parties involved. Multiweek trials will be going 9-5 and during that time there is other work to be done. The actual length is also unpredictable.

Also, the shorter stuff when they finish up early is usually the most critical to get scheduled to move litigation along. Judges will fill in those holes with time sensitive family law matters as well.

I agree with the term limits and the salary is a bit high.

report 3 likes, 1 dislike   
Posted by attorneydavid on 01/17/2014 at 12:43 AM

Let's see if this Guy gets targeted for defeat.

report 0 likes, 1 dislike   
Posted by jrgolden on 01/17/2014 at 5:01 AM

Why? "The answer to 99 questions out of 100 is money."

The less chancery court judges, the more restricted the access to the civil courts. The more restricted the access to the civil courts, the easier it is for those with money to screw those without it.

report 2 likes, 2 dislikes   
Posted by MTBlake on 01/17/2014 at 9:11 AM

Kelsey's bill was just voted out of the Judiciary Committee 7-0, and because of the fiscal impact was sent to the Finance Committee. During the brief discussion the Circuit Court clerk from Shelby County was quoted as saying new case filings had decreased from approx 11,000 to approx 5,000 over the last few years. This decrease was attributed by the chairman to the passage of tort reform, and removing the workers' comp cases from the circuit courts.

report 2 likes, 0 dislikes   
Posted by Drift Boat on 01/21/2014 at 3:31 PM
Showing 1-5 of 5

Add a comment