For decades there was a restrictive endorsement on the paychecks of Minnesota judges.  In order to cash the check, the judge had to swear that there were no matters under advisement for more than 90 days.

There were “creative” attempts to get around the restrictive endorsement requirement.  One judge took out short term bank loans and pledged the check as collateral.  (Perhaps it might have been easier to just decide the case and issue the order).  With the advent of direct deposit, most judges in Minnesota likely don’t even know this bit of judicial pay history.  But, now there is another state attempting to address getting timely orders from judges.

Concerns over the timeliness of judicial opinions are nothing new; however, one member of the New York Assembly wants a codified deadline coupled with a definitive punishment.  Under AB 8408, judges considering motions or verdicts in non-jury trials would have 9 months from submission of the motion/case to render an opinion.  Failure to meet the 9 month deadline would result in the clerk of the court reporting the delay to the state’s State Commission on Judicial Conduct.

The Commission would be required to remove a judge from office if:

•           the judge failed to meet the 9-month deadlines 5 times or more

•           took longer than 2 years to render a decision in any one case/motion

In addition, if passed, AB 8408 would give all judges 6 months from enactment to render decisions in all pending matters over the new 9-month deadline.