The Courts and the Legal Profession in Texas -
The Insider's Perspective: A Survey of Judges,
Court Personnel, and Attorneys

Executive Summary

Introduction

There exists the perception that citizens' support of and respect for the courts and the legal profession have weakened. As a result, improving public trust and confidence in these institutions has emerged as the major issue faced by the judiciary and the bar. In response to this growing national concern, the Texas Office of Court Administration (OCA) and the State Bar of Texas began a comprehensive study of trust and confidence in the Texas courts and legal profession in 1998. The first phase of the study--a survey of the public's attitudes about the Texas courts and legal profession--was completed in December 1998.⁽¹⁾

This report contains the results of the second and final phase of the project--surveys of the Texas judiciary, court personnel, and attorneys on several topics related to trust and confidence in the courts and legal profession.

Methodology

Staff from the OCA and the State Bar of Texas Department of Research and Analysis developed the written questionnaires used in the study. Supreme Court of Texas justices, State Bar of Texas leadership, faculty at the University of Texas at Austin and several district judges also played essential roles in the design of the instruments. The questionnaires were mailed to samples of 2,127 Texas judges, 2,198 court personnel, and 2,487 Texas attorneys in the fall of 1998. The response rates for the surveys were: 51 percent for Texas judges; 43 percent for Texas court personnel; and, 42 percent for Texas attorneys (see Appendix A for a complete description of the surveys' samples and methodology). The surveys' major findings are summarized below.

General Trust and Confidence in the Texas Courts

Overall Impression of the Texas Court System

• The majority of judges (85 percent), court personnel (70 percent), and attorneys (63 percent) had "somewhat" or "very" positive overall impressions of the Texas courts.

• Attorneys' overall impressions were more negative than those of judges or court personnel--close to a quarter (23 percent) of attorneys had a "somewhat" or "very" negative overall impression compared with just seven percent of judges and 13 percent of court staff.
  

Overall Impression of Texas Judges

• Large majorities of judges (84 percent) and court personnel (69 percent) also had "somewhat" or "very" positive overall impressions of Texas judges, but just over half (55 percent) of attorneys had a positive impression of judges. The groups who tended to have the most negative overall impression of judges were local trial court judges, local trial court staff, and minority attorneys.

Public Image of the Texas Courts

• Most judges (68 percent), court personnel (77 percent), and attorneys (69 percent) felt that the Texas courts suffer from a negative public image. The most frequently cited reasons for the negative public image of the courts were negative media portrayal, public misunderstanding of the justice system, and issues related to access to and bias in the justice system.

Honesty and Ethics in the Texas Courts

• Though the majority of all three groups thought that the Texas courts in general were "very" or "somewhat" honest and ethical, judges' responses were much more positive (80 percent "very" or "somewhat" honest and ethical) than court personnel's (56 percent), or attorneys' (54 percent).

• Minority and female judges and attorneys rated the Texas courts lower in terms of honesty and ethics than non-minority and male judges and attorneys. Rural and local trial court judges, local court personnel, and attorneys relatively new to the legal profession also gave the courts lower honesty and ethics ratings than the other groups surveyed.

Quality Performance of Texas Courts

• A large majority of judges (70 percent) felt that theirs is a hardworking profession, but less than half of court personnel (48 percent) and even fewer attorneys (28 percent) shared this opinion. Court staff which presumably tend to work more closely with judges on a day-to-day basis (e.g., court coordinators, administrators, and managers) were more likely than other types of court staff to feel that judges work hard.

• Attorneys' and judges' opinions were highly divergent on other factors related to judicial performance as well. Three-quarters of judges compared with only about a third (36 percent) of attorneys agreed that courts follow the law in performing their duties, and though more than half of judges (55 percent) thought that judges write opinions of good quality, just 31 percent of attorneys agreed.

• There was a great deal of variation among attorneys, though, in their assessment of the performance of judges, with almost as many expressing positive or neutral opinions as negative opinions on many of the dimensions studied. Minority attorneys were more likely than non-minority attorneys to give a negative response on almost all of the judicial competence factors on the survey.

• The greatest agreement among attorneys was seen on questions relating to the time it takes for judges to make decisions. Forty-four percent of attorneys thought that judges do not issue rulings on a timely basis, and the majority (57 percent) also thought that judges do not use attorneys' time efficiently.

Court Delays

• Significant percentages of judges (59 percent) and court personnel (65 percent) felt that the Texas courts are overworked, but fewer attorneys had this perception (43 percent).

• Only 19 percent of attorneys, 38 percent of judges, and 32 percent of court staff thought that court cases in Texas are concluded in a timely manner.

Public Accessibility of the Courts

Persons with Disabilities

• Close to half of judges (47 percent), court personnel (44 percent), and attorneys (54 percent) agreed that the Texas courts adequately accommodate persons with disabilities.

Persons with Special Language Needs

• Just over half of judges (55 percent) and court personnel (56 percent) agreed that the courts do a good job of accommodating non-English speaking persons, though minority judges were less likely to agree (39 percent) than non-minority judges (57 percent). Forty-four percent of attorneys agreed that the courts are responsive to the needs of those speaking languages other than English.

Understandability of Court Procedures

• Very few judges (16 percent) and court staff (15 percent) thought that the average person can understand court procedures.

Customer Service

• Only about one-fourth of judges (22 percent) and court personnel (27 percent) thought the courts did a good job of informing the public about court procedures and services.

• Though most judges and court staff believe that there is a need for more public communication about court procedures and services, half of judges and 56 percent of court personnel agreed that court personnel respond in a timely manner to requests by the public for information.

• Almost two-thirds of attorneys (62 percent) agreed that judges are courteous and respectful toward the public, though women and minorities did so at lower rates than male and non-minority attorneys.

• Close to half of all attorneys (44 percent) thought that court personnel are courteous and respectful to the public, but just 30 percent of minority attorneys agreed.

Equality and Fairness in the Texas Courts

Gender, Racial/Ethnic, and Socioeconomic Bias in the Courts

• Though the majority of judges did not report gender (56 percent) or racial/ethnic (51 percent) bias in the courts, markedly fewer (42 percent) thought that the courts treated poor and wealthy persons alike. In general, state trial and appellate court judges were more likely to agree that the courts treat people equally regardless of gender, race/ethnicity, or socioeconomic status than their local trial and county trial court counterparts. Women and minority judges at all levels of the courts, though, were less likely to agree that the courts were free of gender and racial/ethnic bias.

• In contrast to the judges' responses, higher percentages of court personnel thought that gender, racial/ethnic, and, especially socioeconomic, bias is prevalent in the Texas courts. Less than one-third (31 percent) of all court personnel felt that poor and wealthy are treated equally in the courts, and just 39 percent thought the courts treat all races/ethnicities the same. Forty percent of court staff agreed that courts treat men and women alike. As was true for judges, personnel in higher level courts (county and district) were less likely to perceive bias of all types than were local trial court staff.

• A large proportion of attorneys also disagreed that the courts are free of gender, racial/ethnic, and socioeconomic bias. Of the three groups surveyed, attorneys were least likely to agree that the courts treat poor and wealthy equally--only 19 percent perceived that a person's socioeconomic status did not affect the treatment they received in court. Forty-two percent of attorneys thought the courts were race/ethnicity neutral, and about a third (37 percent) agreed that the courts treat men and women the same.

• The greatest disparity of opinion was between male and female attorneys regarding gender bias--only 14 percent of women attorneys felt that the courts treat males and females the same compared with close to half (44 percent) of men attorneys.

Influence of Campaign Contributions to Judges

• Judges were close to evenly split in their assessment of the impact of campaign contributions on judicial decisions, with about half (48 percent) believing that such contributions have a "fairly" or "very" significant influence and 52 percent asserting that contributions have "no" or a "not very significant" influence.

• In contrast, large majorities of court personnel (69 percent) and attorneys (79 percent) believed that campaign contributions to judges have a "very" or "fairly" significant influence on judges' courtroom decisions.

• Among judges, those most likely to feel that campaign contributions to judges affect their decisions were judges serving in local trial courts, minority judges, and rural judges. Minority court personnel and minority attorneys were also more likely to perceive that campaign donations affected judges. Almost all (92 percent) minority lawyers thought that campaign donations have a significant impact on judicial decision-making.

Protection of Society by Texas Courts

• Large proportions of judges (70 percent), court personnel (75 percent), and attorneys (62 percent) agreed that an important function of the courts is to protect society from criminals, but just 42 percent of court personnel and 29 percent of attorneys thought that citizens' rights are well protected by the courts. About 60 percent of judges felt that the courts do a good job of protecting citizens' rights.

• Only 20 percent of attorneys believed that judges are too lenient with criminals, and almost half of judges (47 percent) thought that current legislative mandates give them sufficient options for dealing with criminal defendants.

• Though about half of judges (56 percent) and court personnel (48 percent) agreed that the courts are responsive to community problems and issues, only about a third (30 percent) of attorneys saw the courts as responsive to community needs.

Representation on the Bench and Judicial Selection in Texas

Representation of Women and Minorities on the Bench

• Thirty percent of judges and close to half (46 percent) of court staff maintained that there are too few female judges in Texas. Just over forty percent of judges (43 percent) and about a third of court personnel (35 percent) thought that too few minorities serve as judges in Texas. Feelings that the number of women and minority judges was not adequate were strongest among female and minority judges and minority court personnel.

Judicial Selection in Texas

• Non-partisan election was the most preferred judicial selection method among judges (52 percent), court personnel (54 percent), and, to a lesser extent, attorneys (42 percent). About a fifth of judges (21 percent) and a third of attorneys (35 percent) favor initial appointment by the governor with subsequent retention elections. Only 11 percent of attorneys and 21 percent of judges prefer the present system of partisan election for the selection of judges.

• Among judges, the strongest support for non-partisan election of judges came from local trial court judges, county trial court judges, and rural judges. Support for appointment by the governor with retention elections was strongest among state trial court and appellate court judges.

• The attorneys most likely to support non-partisan elections were minority lawyers, rural lawyers, and attorneys working in small private law firms. Large law firm attorneys--more than any other group of lawyers--favored gubernatorial appointment with retention elections.

• In addition to being asked their opinion on generic judicial selection plans, judges, court staff, and attorneys were asked whether they favored or opposed the following specific plan for the selection of district and appellate judges:

District and appellate judges in Texas should be appointed by the Governor, subject to the approval of two-thirds of the Senate; then be subject to an open, contested but non-partisan initial election approximately one year after assuming office; and thereafter be subject to periodic retention elections where people vote to determine whether the judge should remain in office.

Forty-three percent of judges, half of court personnel and 53 percent of attorneys favor this plan for the selection of district and appellate judges.

Resource Needs of Texas Courts

• Judges, court personnel, and attorneys rated several different types of technology in terms of their potential helpfulness to the Texas courts. A judicial information web site and standard computer forms for filing cases were rated as "extremely" helpful by more than half of judges, court staff, and attorneys. The most highly rated innovation among attorneys, though, was on-line access to court records--73 percent of attorneys thought this technology would be "extremely" helpful.

• Only about a fifth of both court personnel and judges (22 percent) felt that funding for the courts is adequate. When asked what specific resources were needed to improve the functioning of their courts, judges and court personnel were in agreement--the most frequently cited needs were more staff and better technology. Only about a third of attorneys thought that Texas courts have adequate staff.

• Close to half of judges (44 percent) and 50 percent of court personnel felt that Texas courthouses need better security. The greatest concern with courthouse security was expressed by state trial and appellate court judges. Court personnel opinions on courthouse security did not differ by the level of court in which the respondent worked. In contrast, the majority of attorneys (59 percent) felt that Texas courthouses are properly secured and safe.

Major Strengths and Weaknesses of the Texas Court System

Major Strengths of the Texas Court System

• There was agreement among judges, court personnel, and attorneys that the greatest strength of the Texas court system was the quality and dedication of those who work in the system--the judges, staff, and attorneys (though attorneys were mentioned less often by judges and court personnel than they were by themselves). The next most frequently cited strength by all three groups was the basic system of laws and dispute resolution utilized in the courts.

Major Weaknesses of the Texas Court System

• Judges and court personnel cited the backlog of cases and factors contributing to the backlog (e.g., lack of resources) as the major weakness of the current system. Attorneys, though, maintained that partisan election of judges was the system's most significant weakness. Judicial selection was the second most frequently cited weakness by judges. Court personnel were much more likely than judges and attorneys to mention issues related to criminal sentencing and juvenile crime.

Most Important Issue Facing the Texas Court System

• According to judges, the most important issues facing the Texas court system today are the backlog of cases followed by judicial selection. These were also the top two issues cited by attorneys, though in reverse order. Court personnel overwhelmingly cited the backlog of cases as the most critical court system issue.

• When asked what one thing they would change about the Texas court system, judges most often mentioned judicial selection. The most frequently cited change by court personnel was reduction in the backlog of cases.

Attitudes about Attorneys

Professionalism and Competence of Attorneys

• Only about one-third of judges (36 percent) felt that attorneys are prepared when appearing in their courts, and 82 percent of judges thought that at least some attorneys unnecessarily extend cases.

• When asked to rate the courtroom skills of attorneys, just 17 percent of judges indicated that more than half of attorneys they deal with are "high skilled."

Reasons for Negative Public Image of Attorneys

• Attorneys, judges, and court personnel all agreed that the main reason for attorneys' negative public image is the lack of professionalism and training exhibited by some members of the legal profession.

• The second most frequently cited reason for the negative image of the legal profession was the cost of attorneys and the perception that many are motivated only by money. This was the second most frequently mentioned issue for judges, court staff, and attorneys alike.

Most Important Issue Facing the Legal Profession

• Judges and court personnel agreed that the most important issue facing the legal profession was professionalism of attorneys. The next most important issue according to both groups was the need to educate the public and the media about the legal system and to restore public confidence in the profession.

To obtain copies of either of the following reports, please contact OCA, at (512) 463-1625:

The Courts and the Legal Profession in Texas - The Insider's Perspective: A Survey of Judges, Court Personnel, and Attorneys (full report)

The Courts and the Legal Profession in Texas - The Insider's Perspective: Data Appendix (242 pages, all tables)

1. ¹ Public Trust and Confidence in the Courts and the Legal Profession in Texas, Texas Office of Court Administration and State Bar of Texas, 1998.