Home Judicial Performance Evaluations 2018 Full List Judge Fay

Second Judicial District - Denver County Judge

2018 Retention Survey Report
2017 Interim Survey Report

Honorable Olympia Z. Fay

Retention year: 2018
Recommendation: Meets Performance Standard

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

The Second Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance unanimously (10-0) agrees that Judge Olympia Z. Fay MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

Judge Fay was appointed to the Denver County Court on January 13, 2015. Judge Fay received her Bachelor of Arts in History from Lenoir-Rhyne University in 1999 and earned her law degree from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law in 2007. Prior to her appointment, Judge Fay served as a Denver assistant city attorney in the civil litigation section. Before joining the City Attorney’s office, she served as a deputy district attorney in the 20th Judicial District and worked as a private attorney at Holme, Roberts, & Owen and Davis, Graham, & Stubbs. Judge Fay is a faculty member and advisor with the National Institute for Trial Advocacy and is active is the Sam Cary Bar Association, the Colorado Women’s Bar Association, the Colorado Bar Association, the Denver Bar Association, the American Bar Association, and the Colorado LGBT Association. Judge Fay is also the Chair of the Denver County Court Resource Committee, where she was tasked with reorganization of the court to better serve Denver. She also volunteers for various high school and college legal study competitions.

For this evaluation period, the Commission on Judicial Performance interviewed Judge Fay, reviewed three written opinions she authored, and observed her in court. Additionally, commissioners reviewed surveys submitted by attorneys, jurors, and parties who appeared before Judge Fay. Among other questions, the survey asked, “based on your responses to the previous questions related to the performance evaluation criteria, do you think Judge Fay meets judicial performance standards?” Of attorneys responding to the survey, 90% answered that Judge Fay meets the performance standards, 4% answered that she does not meet the performance standards, and 6% had no opinion of whether she meets or does not meet the performance standards. Of non-attorneys responding to the survey, 98% answered that Judge Fay meets the performance standards, 0% answered that she does not meet the performance standards, and 2% had no opinion of whether she meets or does not meet the performance standards. A total of 50 attorneys and 51 non-attorneys responded to the judicial performance surveys expressing their opinion of Judge Fay’s performance.

Since her appointment, Judge Fay has presided in traffic court, the general sessions division and the state criminal division. Judge Fay’s survey scores among both attorneys and non-attorneys are well above the average for county court judges in the categories of case management, application and knowledge of law, communications, demeanor, and diligence. Judge Fay received nearly universal praise in comments submitted by attorneys and non-attorneys who interacted with her. The Commission believes that Judge Fay is off to a very impressive start in her service as a judge. Based on these findings the Commission unanimously agreed the Judge Fay meets judicial performance standards.