http://www.courts.mo.gov/page.asp?id=603
Your Missouri Courts Home :: Quick Links :: Judicial Vacancies
Judicial Vacancies
Selection of judges in the Supreme Court, the Missouri Court of Appeals and five of the state's urban trial
courts is governed by the merit-based nonpartisan court plan. In the remaining 110 counties, voters
continue to choose trial judges through partisan elections. When an interim vacancy occurs in one of
these counties, the governor appoints a judge to serve until the next election. For more information about
this application process, click here: interim judicial vacancies in trial courts.
The process of filing vacancies under the Missouri Nonpartisan Court Plan requires the governor to select
judges from a panel of three qualified applicants selected by a nonpartisan commission of citizens,
lawyers and a judge. Voters then decide periodically whether to retain nonpartisan judges. For vacancies
on the Supreme Court of Missouri and Missouri Court of Appeals, the nonpartisan commission is called
the Appellate Judicial Commission. The five circuit courts subject to the nonpartisan plan have their own
circuit judicial commissions.
Current Nonpartisan Judicial Vacancies
Circuit Courts
•
There currently are no nonpartisan judicial vacancies pending in the circuit courts.
Court of Appeals
•
•
The Appellate Judicial Commission has nominated Rep. Rachel L. Bringer, Judge Gary M.
Gaertner Jr. and attorney Thomas M. Weaver for the Court of Appeals, Eastern District, vacancy
created by the retirement of Judge Booker T. Shaw.
The Appellate Judicial Commission has nominated Judge Jacqueline A. Cook, attorney Cynthia
L. Reams Martin and Judge Gary D. Witt for the Court of Appeals, Western District, vacancy
created by the retirement of Judge Joseph P. Dandurand.
Supreme Court of Missouri
•
There are currently no vacancies on the Supreme Court of Missouri.
1
http://www.courts.mo.gov/page.asp?id=297
Your Missouri Courts Home :: Know Your Courts :: Supreme Court :: Nonpartisan Court Plan
Missouri Nonpartisan Court Plan
During the 1930s, the public became increasingly dissatisfied with the increasing role of politics in judicial
selection and judicial decision-making. Judges were plagued by outside influences due to the political
aspects of the election process, and dockets were congested due to time the judges spent campaigning.
Then, in November 1940, voters amended the Missouri constitution by adopting the "Nonpartisan
Selection of Judges Court Plan," which was placed on the ballot by initiative petition. The adoption of the
plan by initiative referendum resulted from a public backlash against the widespread abuses of the judicial
system by the "Boss Tom" Pendergast political machine in Kansas City and by the political control
exhibited by ward bosses in St. Louis.
The Missouri nonpartisan court plan, commonly called the Missouri Plan, since has served as a national
model for the selection of judges and has been adopted in more than 30 other states.
Scope of the Nonpartisan Court Plan
The nonpartisan plan provides for the selection of judges based on merit rather than on political affiliation.
Initially, the nonpartisan plan applied to judges of the Supreme Court; the court of appeals; the circuit,
criminal corrections and probate courts of St. Louis city; and the circuit and probate courts of Jackson
County. In 1970, voters extended the nonpartisan plan to judges in St. Louis County, and three years
later, voters extended the nonpartisan plan to judges in Clay and Platte counties. These changes are
reflected in the Missouri Constitution, as amended in 1976.
The Kansas City Charter extends the nonpartisan selection plan to Kansas City municipal court judges as
well. Under the constitution, other judicial circuits may adopt the plan upon approval by a majority of
voters in the circuit. Most recently, in November 2008, Greene County voted to extend the nonpartisan
plan to its judges.
Nonpartisan Judicial Commissions under the Plan
Under the Missouri Nonpartisan Court Plan, a nonpartisan judicial commission reviews applications,
interviews candidates and selects a judicial panel. For the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, the
Appellate Judicial Commission makes the selection. It is composed of three lawyers elected by the
lawyers of The Missouri Bar (the organization of all lawyers licensed in this state), three citizens selected
by the governor, and the chief justice, who serves as chair. Each of the geographic districts of the Court
of Appeals must be represented by one lawyer and one citizen member on the Appellate Judicial
Commission.
Each of the circuit courts in Clay, Greene, Jackson, Platte and St. Louis counties and St. Louis city has its
own circuit judicial commission. These commissions are composed of the chief judge of the court of
appeals district in which the circuit is located, plus two lawyers elected by the bar and two citizens
selected by the governor. All of the lawyers and citizens must live within the circuit for which they serve
the judicial commission.
2
Filling Judicial Vacancies under the Nonpartisan Court Plan
Regardless of the commission handling the applications, the constitutional process of filling a judicial
vacancy is the same. With any vacancy, the appropriate commission reviews applications of lawyers who
wish to join the court and interviews the applicants. It then submits the names of three qualified
candidates – called the “panel” of candidates – to the Missouri governor.
Normally, the governor will interview the three candidates and review their backgrounds before selecting
one for the vacancy. If the governor does not appoint one of the three panelists within 60 days of
submission, the commission selects one of the three panelists to fill the vacancy.
The People Retain a Say over Nonpartisan Court Judges
The nonpartisan plan also gives the voters a chance to have a say in the retention of judges selected
under the plan. Once a judge has served in office for at least one year, that judge must stand for a
retention election at the next general election. The judge's name is placed on a separate judicial ballot,
without political party designation, and voters decide whether to retain the judge based on his or her
judicial record. A judge must receive a majority of votes to be retained for a full term of office. The
purpose of this vote is to provide another accountability mechanism of the nonpartisan plan to ensure
quality judges. If a judge retires or resigns during or at the end of his or her term, a vacancy is created,
which will be filled under the Missouri Nonpartisan Court Plan as described above.
To inform voters about the performance of nonpartisan judges, judicial performance evaluation
committees, made up of both lawyers and nonlawyers, evaluate objective criteria including decisions
written by judges on the retention ballot as well as surveys completed by lawyers and jurors who have
direct and personal knowledge of the judges. The judges are rated according to judicial performance
standards, including whether they: administer justice impartially and uniformly; make decisions based on
competent legal analysis and proper application of the law; issue rulings and decisions that can be
understood clearly; effectively and efficiently manage their courtrooms and the administrative duties of
their office, including whether they issue decisions promptly; and act ethically and with dignity, integrity
and patience. The results of these judicial performance evaluations then are distributed to the public via
the media, the League of Women Voters and the Internet.
The success of the plan in selecting qualified judges is evident from the fact that, since its adoption, the
public has not voted any appellate judge out of office, and only two circuit judges have been voted out of
office. Judge Marion D. Waltner of Jackson County was voted out in 1942. The other, Judge John R.
Hutcherson of Clay County, was voted out in 1992 after receiving failing reviews from lawyers in the
judicial evaluation survey.
3
http://www.courts.mo.gov/page.asp?id=158
Your Missouri Courts Home :: Quick Links :: Judicial Vacancies :: Appellate Judicial Commission
Appellate Judicial Commission
Under the Missouri Nonpartisan Court Plan, the Appellate Judicial Commission helps fill judicial vacancies
on the Supreme Court of Missouri and the three districts of the Missouri Court of Appeals. It accepts
applications from lawyers interested in serving on the court and interviews the applicants. It then submits
the names of three qualified candidates – called the "panel" of candidates – to the Missouri governor. If
the governor does not appoint one of the three panelists within 60 days of submission, the commission
selects one of the three panelists to fill the vacancy.
Appellate Judicial Commission
Post Office Box 150
Jefferson City, MO 65102
Phone: (573) 751-4513
Fax: (573) 751-7365
E-mail: judgevacancy@courts.mo.gov
Office hours: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday
Composition of the Commission
The seven-member commission is chaired by the chief justice of the Supreme Court. The other members
include three lawyers elected by the lawyers of The Missouri Bar (the organization of all lawyers licensed
in this state) and three citizens selected by the governor. Each of the geographic districts of the Court of
Appeals must have one lawyer and one citizen member on the Appellate Judicial Commission. The chair
serves for two years. All other members serve staggered terms of six years each.
Chair – The Honorable William Ray Price Jr.
Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Missouri
Jefferson City, Missouri
Term expires: June 30, 2009
Lawyers :
Eastern District Member
Ms. Nancy Mogab
St. Louis, Missouri
Term expires December 31, 2011
Southern District Member
Mr. John D. Wooddell
Springfield, Missouri
Term expires December 31, 2013
Western District Member
Mr. Richard E. McLeod
Kansas City, Missouri
Term expires December 31, 2009
* The election for this position will be held Nov. 7, 2009.
4
Non-lawyers:
Eastern District Member
Mr. Don L. Ross
St. Louis, Missouri
Appointed by Governor Matt Blunt
Term expires December 31, 2012
Southern District Member
Mr. John Gentry
Springfield, Missouri
Appointed by Governor Matt Blunt
Term expires December 31, 2014
Western District Member
Ms. Jill Shurin
Kansas City, Missouri
Appointed by Governor Bob Holden
Term expires December 31, 2010
5
http://www.courts.mo.gov/pressrel.nsf/fa1bcbaea6d7c117862567670079a321/21b40bfac444a8ac86257640005b135
d?OpenDocument
Content date: 09/29/2009
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District to hold election for lawyer member
of Appellate Judicial Commission
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 10.165, the Missouri Court of Appeals, Western
District will hold an electronic election for a lawyer member of the Appellate Judicial Commission to serve
a six-year term commencing January 1, 2010. The election will take place Nov. 7, 2009. Electronic
balloting will begin within 10 days after Oct. 8, 2009, and continue through Nov. 6, 2009. Residence
address determines eligibility to vote in the election. The Missouri Bar identification number and the
Missouri Bar Personal Identification Number (PIN) both are used to confirm eligibility to vote
electronically. The clerk will send an e-mail message before Oct. 8 announcing the election to all lawyers
residing in the Western District who have an e-mail address listed with The Missouri Bar. Paper ballots
will be mailed only to those lawyers without an e-mail address, those whose e-mail addresses return an
undeliverable notice to the clerk, and those who notify the clerk that they are unable to vote electronically
and request a paper ballot. Paper ballots also will be mailed to newly admitted attorneys who reside in the
Western District.
###
CONTACT: Terence G. Lord, Clerk of Court
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District
Phone (816) 889-3600
Fax (816) 889-3668
E-mail tlord@courts.mo.gov
6
http://www.courts.mo.gov/page.asp?id=34334
:: Commission announces nominees to fill Shaw vacancy on Eastern District
15 September 2009
COMMISSION ANNOUNCES NOMINEES TO FILL SHAW VACANCY
ON MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS, EASTERN DISTRICT
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – William Ray Price Jr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Missouri and chair
of the Appellate Judicial Commission, announced today that the commission has submitted to Gov. Jay
Nixon its panel of nominees to fill the vacancy on the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, created
by the Jan. 30 retirement of Judge Booker T. Shaw.
In alphabetical order, the panel consists of the Honorable Rachel L. Bringer, the Honorable Gary M.
Gaertner Jr. and Thomas B. Weaver.
Bringer is in the sole practice of law in Palmyra and, since 2003, has served as the state representative
from District 6 (Palmyra). She was born Sept. 19, 1971. She earned her bachelor of arts degree, summa
cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa, in English with a minor in political science in 1992 and her law degree in
1995, both from the University of Missouri-Columbia. Bringer lives in Palmyra.
Gaertner is a circuit judge in the 21st Judicial Circuit (St. Louis County). He was born Dec. 17, 1964. He
earned his bachelor of science degree, magna cum laude, in economics in 1987 from the Saint Louis
University School of Business Honors Program and his law degree, cum laude, in 1990, from Saint Louis
University School of Law. Gaertner lives in St. Louis.
Weaver is a partner with the law firm of Armstrong Teasdale LLP in St. Louis. He was born Oct. 26, 1951.
He earned his bachelor of arts degree, magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa, in English with a
certificate in secondary school teaching in 1974 from Duke University in Durham, N.C., and his law
degree, magna cum laude, in 1978 from Saint Louis University School of Law. Weaver lives in Glendale,
Mo.
The governor has 60 days to select one member of the panel to fill the vacancy. If he should fail to do so,
the Missouri Constitution directs the commission to make the appointment.
###
Contact: Beth S. Riggert
Communications Counsel
Supreme Court of Missouri
(573) 751-3676
7
http://www.mobar.org/data/judges08/index.htm
JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW CRITERIA
The six judicial performance evaluation committees which analyzed the qualifications and
skills of non-partisan judges seeking retention on the November 4, 2008 general election
conducted their work based on a series of Judicial Performance Standards.
In making their recommendations regarding retention, the committees analyzed the results
of a lawyer survey, the results of a survey of jurors, and written opinions issued by each
judge.
Lawyer Survey
For appellate judges, lawyers were asked to
evaluate judges on 9 specific criteria, as follows:
For information about merit selected
judges who will be on the ballot in the
following parts of the state, click below:
1. Being fair and impartial toward each side • St. Louis City
of the case. • St. Louis County
2. Writing opinions that are clear.
• Kansas City (Jackson County)
3. Writing opinions that adequately explain
• Platte County
the basis of the court’s decision. • Clay County
4. Issuing opinions in a timely manner.
• All other parts of Missouri
5. Allowing parties to present their arguments and answer. 6. Making decisions without regard to
possible criticism.
7. Refraining from reaching issues that need not be decided.
8. Treating parties equally regardless of race, sex or economic status.
9. Being courteous toward attorneys.
For trial judges, lawyers were asked to evaluate judges on 16 specific criteria, as follows:
1. Treats people equally regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, economic status, or any
other factor.
2. Displays fairness and impartiality toward each side of the case.
3. Is not affected by partisan considerations
4. Is prepared for hearings and trials
5. Allows parties latitude to present their arguments.
6. Bases decisions on evidence and arguments.
7. Gives reasons for rulings.
8. Demonstrates appropriate demeanor on bench.
9. Maintains and requires proper order and decorum in the courtroom.
10. Is competent in the law.
11. Rulings on dispositive motions state reasons and consistently apply the substantive
law.
12. Effectively uses pre-trial procedure to narrow and define the issues
13. Understands rules of procedure and evidence.
14. Weighs all evidence fairly and impartially before rendering a decision.
15. Written opinions and orders are clear.
16. Clearly explains all oral decisions.
8
For both appellate and trial judges, lawyers’ evaluations were converted into a numerical
score between 1 and 5, with 1 being the poorest and 5 being the best. The number of
responses and the average score is listed for each criteria.
Juror Surveys
Members of the public who had served on juries before trial judges during the last two
calendar years were asked to complete a survey composed of “yes/no” answers. Questions
on the juror survey are as follows:
1. Did the judge treat people equally regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, economic
status, or any other factor?
2. Did the judge appear to be free from bias or prejudice?
3. Did the judge act in a dignified manner?
4. Did the judge act with patience?
5. Did the judge appear to be well-prepared for the case?
6. Did the judge clearly explain court procedure?
7. Did the judge clearly explain the legal issues of the case?
8. Did the judge maintain control over the courtroom?
9. Did the judge promote public confidence in the courts?
10. Did the judge clearly explain the responsibilities of the jury?
It is important to note that juries do not serve in appellate courts, so no jury information
was involved in the evaluation of appellate judges seeking retention.
Written Opinions
Each appellate judge was asked to provide five (5) written opinions for use by the
evaluation committee. The committee was charged with the responsibility to review the
decisions authored by each judge for adherence to the record, clarity of expression, logical
reasoning, and application of law to the facts presented.
Each trial judge was asked to provide one (1) written opinion for use by the evaluation
committee. The committee was charged with the responsibility to review the decision
authored by each judge for thoroughness of findings, clarity of expression, logical
reasoning, and application of the law to the facts presented.
Want to know more about Missouri's judicial selection and retention system? Click here.
9
http://www.mobar.org/data/judges08/standards.htm
JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Administers justice impartially and uniformly
•
•
•
•
Treats people equally, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, economic status, or any
other factor
Displays fairness and impartiality toward each side of the case
Is not affected by partisan considerations
Weighs all evidence fairly and impartially before rendering a decision
Makes decisions based on competent legal analysis and decisions based on the
proper application of law
•
•
•
Bases decisions on evidence and arguments
Understands rules of procedure and evidence
Is competent in the law
Issues decisions and rulings that are clearly understood
•
•
•
•
Gives reasons for rulings
Written opinions and orders are clear
Clearly explains all oral decisions
Rulings on dispositive motions state reasons and clearly apply the substantive law
Effectively and efficiently manages his/her courtroom and the administrative
responsibilities of office, including issuance of decisions in a prompt manner.
•
•
•
Is prepared for hearings and trials
Allows parties latitude to present their arguments
Effectively uses pretrial procedure to narrow and define the issues
Acts ethically and with dignity, integrity and patience
•
•
Demonstrates appropriate demeanor on bench
Maintains and requires proper order and decorum in the courtroom
10