Wyoming committee advances bill waiving judicial retirement mandate

2013-01-15T16:00:00Z 2013-01-15T22:18:15Z Wyoming committee advances bill waiving judicial retirement mandateBy KYLE ROERINK Star-Tribune staff writer Casper Star-Tribune Online

High-ranking legislators and judges were perturbed after an age requirement forced Wyoming Supreme Court Justice Michael Golden to retire.

“Seeing him go off the court in his prime was a travesty,” state House Majority Floor Leader Kermit Brown, R-Laramie, said.

He was a lion, Supreme Court Justice James Burke said.

“It just didn’t seem like we ought to be losing good people for relatively arbitrary means,” Burke added.

Lawmakers on the House Judicial Committee want to eliminate the mandatory retirement age of 70 for state Supreme Court and district court judges.

The committee advanced a bill Tuesday to strike the requirement from law. Wyoming is one of 33 states with a mandatory requirement age for judges.

There is no age limit for circuit court judges.

If the Legislature does get rid of the age requirement, the Judicial Conduct and Ethics Commission has powers to remove judges who are unable to perform their duties.

“It could be a judge in their 50s,” said Ronda Munger, deputy court administrator with the Wyoming Supreme Court. “It isn’t necessarily precluded by senility requirements.”

The state has removed six judges in its history.

Rep. Dan Zwonitzer, R-Laramie, introduced a similar bill two years ago that passed the House 69-1 but failed in the Senate. Zwonitzer is the principal sponsor on the new bill and expects opposition once again.

“It’s getting a little frustrating on the Senate side,” Brown said.

Another option for changing the law may be a different piece of legislation sponsored by Senate Majority Floor Leader Phil Nicholas, R-Laramie. His bill proposes changing the mandatory retirement age to 75.

If Zwonitzer’s bill passes the Legislature, it would require a constitutional amendment and would be on the ballot for voters to decide.

House Bill 101

The committee also passed a bill that would eliminate the state Supreme Court’s automatic review of worker’s compensation cases shot down by the district court.

The goal of the bill is to decrease the number of cases that would move on to the Supreme Court, said Joan Evans, director of the Wyoming Department of Workforce Services.

Each worker’s compensation case heard by the Supreme Court costs the state $8,000, Evans said. The Supreme Court heard 20 cases in 2012. Workforce Services says the new legislation would decrease by half the amount of worker’s compensation cases heard by the court each year. Three justices need to approve the case before the court hears the case.

Lawmakers need to decide how important it is that workers have a right to have their cases reviewed by the state Supreme Court, said Tom Jubin, spokesman for the Wyoming Trial Lawyers Association.

“The policy ought to be that you make sure to take care of injured workers,” Jubin said.

Worker’s compensation appeals cases in the Supreme Court aren’t just costly. They take up more time than anything else and they get more reviews than others, Zwonitzer said.

Documents given to committee members showed that the Supreme Court overturned 20 to 25 percent of the decisions made by the appeals court to deny worker’s compensation.

“That’s a significant number,” Rep. Cathy Connolly, D-Laramie, said. “The numbers show that the system is working.”

If the bill becomes law, there would be less of a chance that the Supreme Court would hear worker’s compensation cases where the plaintiff was denied damages by the district court, said Mark Aronowitz, director of Lawyers and Advocates for Wyoming.

“It is taking away the right of injured workers,” Aronowitz said. “I am concerned that people who are at the highest level of the judiciary can decline to hear issues that are important to everyone.”

Aronowitz offered an amendment that in the event of cases in which circuit and district courts reach the same decision, there wouldn’t be an automatic review. If the two courts disagree, the case would be up for review by the Supreme Court.

“Without the amendment, this bill does not help injured workers,” Aronowitz said.

Currently, after an on-the-job injury, Workforce Services decides if an employee is eligible for compensation. If the department decides the employee is not eligible, the department will pay for the employee to hire an attorney for a department-level hearing. If the employee loses in the hearing, the case can go to circuit court. If the employee loses, the case can go to district court and can continue all the way to the Supreme Court, with the state paying legal fees for both sides.

“If there’s egregious circumstances, I trust the Supreme Court will hear the cases,” Zwonitzer said.

Copyright 2015 Casper Star-Tribune Online. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(2) Comments

  1. jaded_1
    Report Abuse
    jaded_1 - January 16, 2013 10:19 pm
    while i disagree with carlover's comment about "elites" the rest of his comment is spot on. mike golden had his day and was replaced by a highly regarded district judge who was deserving of a chance to serve on our high court. we dont need a bunch of geezers serving as judges in our state courts. all one need do is look at the federal courts, which allow a judge to serve for life, to see what kind of problems can be caused by judges too old to serve.
  2. carlover
    Report Abuse
    carlover - January 15, 2013 7:26 pm
    so what happens when they cant remember their names anymore? or are senile? we just keep them in no matter what? comon guys. retirement is retirement mandates are there for a reason. your time is over, thanks for serving now go fishing....everyone deserves a turn...not just the elite..
Untitled Document

Civil Dialogue

We provide this community forum for readers to exchange ideas and opinions on the news of the day. Passionate views, pointed criticism and critical thinking are welcome. Name-calling, crude language and personal abuse are not welcome. Moderators will monitor comments with an eye toward maintaining a high level of civility in this forum. Our comment policy explains the rules of the road for registered commenters.

If your comment was not approved, perhaps...

  1. You called someone an idiot, a racist, a dope, a moron, etc. Please, no name-calling or profanity (or veiled profanity -- #$%^&*).

  2. You rambled, failed to stay on topic or exhibited troll-like behavior intended to hijack the discussion at hand.

  3. YOU SHOUTED YOUR COMMENT IN ALL CAPS. This is hard to read and annoys readers.

  4. You have issues with a business. Have a bad meal? Feel you were overcharged at the store? New car is a lemon? Contact the business directly with your customer service concerns.

  5. You believe the newspaper's coverage is unfair. It would be better to write the editor at editors@trib.com, or call Editor Jason Adrians at 266-0545 or Content Director David Mayberry at 266-0633. This is a forum for community discussion, not for media criticism. We'd rather address your concerns directly.

  6. You included an e-mail address or phone number, pretended to be someone you aren't or offered a comment that makes no sense.

  7. You accused someone of a crime or assigned guilt or punishment to someone suspected of a crime.

  8. Your comment is in really poor taste.

Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick

Featured Businesses