Verdict In on Lawyers’ View of Federal Judge

After an unprecedented experiment by a Los Angeles federal judge who hopes to improve communication between bench and bar, the jurist’s verdict is that all judges can benefit by knowing exactly what attorneys think of them.

U.S. District Judge Laughlin E. Waters invited all of the almost 2,000 lawyers who have appeared before him in his 10 years on the federal bench to privately grade him on his strengths and weaknesses as a judge.

The answers are in now, and Waters said he is pleased.

“I think it’s been helpful to me and will improve my performance as a judge,” Waters said. “I think it would be a worthwhile exercise for all judges, those who are doing a good job and those the Bar perceives as being off base in one area or another.”

After sending out 1,981 questionnaires to be answered anonymously, Waters heard back from almost 650 attorneys who had tried cases in his court since his appointment as a judge in 1976.

Waters, a 71-year-old Republican appointee known for his courtly manner and tough sentences, invited the lawyers to evaluate his performance as a judge in 22 different judicial categories ranging from impartiality and temperament to knowledge of the law.

While he was criticized by some lawyers, Waters said he was pleased that most of the lawyers grading him gave him generally high marks.

“One guy referred to me as a crusty old judge and that’s probably not too inaccurate,” Waters said. “The responses overall were extremely encouraging. I got passing grades in every area by a substantial margin.

The questionnaire sent out by Waters, a former U.S. attorney in Los Angeles during the Eisenhower Administration, was part of an experimental project by federal trial judges in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals aimed at finding the best way to let judges know what kind of a job they are doing.

While judges in San Diego, San Francisco, Phoenix and Portland have used similar surveys, Waters was the first federal judge in Los Angeles to expose himself to the judgment of lawyers who had practiced in front of him.

Earlier this year, before launching the project, Waters said he felt that he was obliged to be the first local judge to invite lawyer criticisms because of his current role as chairman of the 9th Circuit’s lawyer and judge evaluation program.

“It’s kind of like fund-raising,” he explained. “You have to get hit yourself before you can hit somebody else. Once I get the results, I can work on the brothers to do it.”

Identities Secret

The questionnaires were mailed in July, and the responses were compiled over the next two months by Leonard Brosnan, clerk of the U.S. District Court, with instructions from Waters not to let him know the identity of even the most critical lawyer.

Waters declined to disclose specifics about the remarks of the lawyers who answered the survey, saying that it was never intended to be a public scoring system. After analyzing the results, however, he said in an interview last week that he found the comments to be helpful.

“What precipitated the whole thing was there are polls done from time to time that give a slanted view of judges,” Waters said. “It’s natural to want to know how you are viewed and what kind of a job you are perceived to be doing. But being a judge is kind of an isolated position.

“The theory behind the survey is that the people best equipped to judge how a judge is doing are the lawyers appearing in front of him.”

Encourage Feedback

Federal judges up and down the Pacific Coast and throughout the Far West are being encouraged to open themselves to lawyers’ feedback from 9th Circuit Chief Judge James Browning.

“You have to accept the premise that nobody is perfect, that all of us can use constructive criticism,” said Browning, who was in San Diego last week with the first three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit ever to hear appeals there.

“We should facilitate channels of communication between the bench and bar,” he said. “Otherwise, you can go through life not knowing the things you are doing are not helpful.”

Browning said he recently spoke to a judge who learned through questionnaires that lawyers thought that he was interjecting himself too frequently into trials, questioning witnesses and interrupting lawyers.

“It had never occurred to him,” Browning said. “He thought he’d always been helpful.”

In Water’s survey, the lawyers were asked to give ratings that ranged from “excellent” to “poor” in each of the 22 judicial performance areas included in the survey. In addition, they were invited to comment at length on his strengths and weaknesses as a judge.

Reflecting on the survey’s results in general terms, Waters said he felt reassured that he was generally viewed as a good judge, but that he had found some criticisms that have caused him to question whether he has become too impatient with lawyers.

“Taking a step back, the longer you’re on the bench, the more your learn about the traits of lawyers and groups of lawyers,” Waters said. “I think I have tended to be less patient where I see the pattern repeated. Whether I’m entitled to be is a valid question.

“I become concerned sometimes that the time jurors donate to the judicial system is being wasted. I probably have developed a sense of impatience, which I should take a look at,” Waters continued. “On the other hand, a sense of impatience is not inappropriate.”

Among the categories in the questionnaire sent by Waters to the lawyers were punctuality, promptness in deciding cases, courtesy, settlement skills, restraint from prejudging cases, avoidance of sexual or racial bias and the amount of discretion used in deciding sentences.

Not unexpectedly, Waters was criticized by some criminal defense lawyers for being too tough as a sentencing judge. But even those who criticized him in that area praised him for soliciting the views of the lawyers.

“He deserves a lot of praise for this,” one attorney said. “It’s an important step in creating a real dialogue between the judges and lawyers. I just hope some of the other judges will follow his lead.”

Whether the idea will catch on among other federal judges, however, remains a question. Waters said he doubts that many of his fellow judges even knew about his survey, and that was quickly confirmed by interviews with other judges.

“I don’t see any harm in it,” another judge said. “We can all benefit from constructive criticism. Sure, why not?”

Waters said he will report the results of his survey and his conclusions to other judges at a conference early next year.

Times staff writer Jim Schachter in San Diego contributed to this story.