Home Judicial Performance Evaluations 2018 Full List Judge Green

Eleventh Judicial District - Park County Judge


Reports:
2018 Retention Survey Report
2017 Interim Survey Report

Honorable Brian L. Green

Retention year: 2018
Recommendation: Meets Performance Standard

Areas of Evaluation 0 1 2 3 4
Case Management
Application & Knowledge of Law
Communications
Diligence
Demeanor
Fairness
Attorneys
Non Attorneys

The Eleventh Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance agrees (8 -0) that Judge Brian L. Green MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

Judge Green was appointed to the Park County Court in 2007. Prior to the appointment, Judge Green served as a Deputy District Attorney for the 11th Judicial District from 2004 until 2006. Earlier in his legal career he did legal research and wrote case summaries for Lexis - Nexis, a computer assisted legal research company. Judge Green received an undergraduate degree in Sociology from the University of Iowa in 1993 and law degree from the University’s College of Law in 1997. Judge Green considers himself an ambassador for the court system and he is involved in his community in a variety of ways.  Judge Green attends two judicial conferences per year, follows discussions involving current cases and strategies for resolving difficult issues, and follows higher court opinions. He conducts his own legal research and writes his own legal decisions.

The Commission conducted a personal interview with Judge Green, reviewed opinions he authored, observed him in court, reviewed comments received from interested parties during the evaluation, and reviewed survey responses. Among the survey questions was “do you think Judge Green meets judicial performance standards?” Of the attorneys responding to the survey, 70% answered, yes, meets performance standards, 20% answered no, does not meet performance standards and 10% had no opinion. Of non-attorneys responding to the survey, 89% answered yes, meets performance standards, 5% answered no, and 5% had no opinion. Both attorneys and non-attorneys responded to the judicial performance surveys. In the combined opinion of both attorneys and non-attorneys, 85% of the persons responding to the survey felt that Judge Green meets judicial performance standards, 9% answered “does not meet performance standards,” and 6% had no opinion.

Judge Green presided over traffic, misdemeanor, traffic infractions, civil, and small claim cases this term. Based on the Commission’s overall evaluation, Judge Green demonstrated he meets or exceeds performance standards in all categories. For Judge Green, 49 qualified survey respondents agreed they had worked with Judge Green enough to evaluate his performance. The categories in the survey are:  Case Management; Application and Knowledge of Law; Communications; Diligence, Demeanor; and Fairness. Using a scale of 0 - 4, Judge Green’s combined overall score for all categories was 3.62. Jurors scored him the highest, with a total of 3.93. Judge Green scored very high in his communication skills, with a combined score of 3.82. The survey allows for respondents to comment about “weaknesses” and “strengths.” There are many more comments about his strengths than his weaknesses. During his interview, he was given an opportunity to specifically address the “weakness” comments and did so with candor and sincerity. The commission was satisfied that he understood the criticisms. Judge Green is described as fair, calm, and patient. The Commission, after reviewing the surveys, making courtroom observations and interviewing Judge Green agreed by a vote of 8-0 with one Commissioner abstaining, that Judge Green meets judicial performance standards.