Sides submit arguments

Embattled District Judge Elizabeth Halverson might have made errors while serving as a judge, but she never created a hostile work environment or treated a former bailiff like a slave, according to written closing arguments filed with the Nevada Judicial Discipline Commission.

"Judge Halverson made mistakes. She is not perfect. She is not a saint. She is not infallible," wrote her attorney Michael Schwartz. "However, neither has she engaged in judicial misconduct."

Halverson is accused of improperly communicating with jurors, falling asleep on the bench and mistreating staff, among other charges. The Judicial Discipline Commission in August held a quasi-judicial disciplinary proceeding, conducted like a trial, to determine whether she will be removed from the bench.

This week, Schwartz and special prosecutor Dorothy Nash Holmes submitted written closing arguments to the commission. The commissioners typically make decisions in disciplinary cases within 20 days of hearing or receiving closing arguments.

Halverson, who was up for re-election this year for Department 23, failed to qualify for the general election. The commission's decision could permanently bar her from serving as a judge.

Halverson was recently hospitalized after she was beaten with an iron skillet by her husband, authorities said.

In his closing arguments, Schwartz states that Halverson might have erred when she spoke to deliberating jurors during a trial without the attorneys for both sides present. But he said it was an error made by an inexperienced judge and wasn't misconduct.

"If every judge who committed plain error were to be removed from the bench by the disciplinary authorities, the judiciary would be in a constant state of turmoil, with judges being disciplined and removed from their positions simply for making honest mistakes," he wrote.

He also denied that Halverson ever treated her former bailiff Johnnie Jordan as a personal slave. During the hearing, Jordan testified that Halverson ordered him to rub her feet and back and forced him to chauffeur her around. He said she was a paranoid judge who ordered him to spy on court staff.

During the hearing, Jordan shouted: "I can't stand what she did to me! What's it say about America? What's it say about the president of the United States? If you guys allow her to be in office after this, what does it say about all you?" He then burst out crying.

According to Schwartz, Jordan isn't a reliable witness.

"His demeanor, to put it bluntly, was of an individual who, instead of coming to tell the truth, was determined to make self-serving statements, accompanied by theatrics and outbursts," he wrote.

But Holmes said it was Halverson who acted out during the disciplinary hearings. She wrote in her closing arguments that Halverson's behavior during the hearing was shocking. During the hearing, Halverson often rambled and became combative. She also testified that she tried to stop Jordan from rubbing her feet but he was too attentive.

"The behavior of Judge Halverson was nothing short of astounding, and demonstrated a temperament ill-suited for the bench," Holmes wrote, adding that Halverson was at times sarcastic and condescending.

She also wrote that Halverson's errors weren't harmless mistakes by a rookie judge. Rather, they showed a pattern of incompetence.

The errors "illustrate a pattern of ignorance of the law and shocking professional incompetence," she wrote, adding that Halverson has a "tendency to ridicule others and flaunt what she sees as her superiority; and a penchant for blaming others and lying to try to get herself out of trouble."

Contact reporter David Kihara at dkihara@reviewjournal.com or 702-380-1039.