Revised 11-24-2021
Maryland Judiciary Special Committee on Judicial Compensation
The Honorable Jonathan Biran, Court of Appeals, Chair
The Honorable Mary Ellen Barbera, Chief Judge Court of Appeals (retired)
The Honorable Matthew J. Fader, Chief Judge Court of Special Appeals
The Honorable Keith A. Baynes, Chair, Conference of Circuit Court Judges
The Honorable John P. Morrissey, Chief Judge, District Court
The Honorable Angela M. Eaves
The Honorable Stacy A. Mayer
The Honorable Scott M. Carrington
Pamela Harris, State Court Administrator
Kelley O’Connor, Government Relations, Administrative Office of the Courts
Jennifer Boswell, Human Resources, Administrative Office of the Courts
Lee Robinson, Human Resources, Administrative Office of the Courts (retired)
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
September 16, 2021
This report was prepared by the Maryland Judiciary as part of the briefing for the statutory Judicial Compensation Commission at their organizational meeting prior to the 2022 legislative session of the Maryland General Assembly.
Statutory Provisions for the Judicial Compensation Process in Maryland
The Judicial Compensation Commission was created by statute in 1980 with the legislative purpose to ensure that the Maryland Judiciary attracts highly qualified applicants to the bench in Maryland without economic hardship to the judicial nominees (Chapter 717, Acts of 1980). The statutory provisions are codified at Maryland Code, Courts & Judicial Proceedings Article, § 1-708 (see Tab 1). The statute was amended in 2009 to provide for quadrennial review of judicial salaries by the Commission. Under the statute, the Commission prepares a report that is submitted to the Governor and the Maryland General Assembly prior to the start of the next regular session (Courts & Judicial Proceedings Article, § 1- 708). A Joint Resolution, which encompasses the Commission’s proposals, is then introduced in each house of the General Assembly by the 15th day of the session. The General Assembly may amend the Joint Resolution to decrease, but not increase, any of the Commission’s salary recommendations. Failure to amend or reject the Joint Resolution within 50 calendar days after its introduction results in the adoption of the salaries recommended by the Commission. If the General Assembly rejects any of the Commission’s recommendations, the salaries of the judges remain unchanged, unless modified under other state personnel provisions of the law.
1
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
T ABLE OF C ONTENTS
Structure of the Maryland Judiciary ...........................................................................3 Report of the Special Committee................................................................................4 Statutory Authority...................................................................................................22 State Courts Judicial Salary Survey..........................................................................25 Federal Court Salaries ..............................................................................................30 Judicial Salaries versus Inflation .............................................................................32 National Center for State Courts (NCSC) Survey of Judicial Salaries ..................... 47 Comparative Salary Data..........................................................................................50
2
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
Structure of the Maryland Judiciary The District Court of Maryland Most Maryland residents who come into
The Court of Special Appeals The Court of Special Appeals is the intermediate appellate court in Maryland, located in Annapolis. The Court was created in 1966 in response to the rapidly growing caseload in the Court of Appeals. Originally, the Court of Special Appeals could hear appeals only in criminal cases. In 1974, its jurisdiction was expanded to include any reviewable judgment in the Circuit Courts. Today, the Court of Special Appeals resolves over 2,100 appeals per year. The Court consists of 15 judges — one from each of the seven geographically determined appellate judicial circui ts and eight “at large” judges who can reside anywhere in the state. In most cases, the Court hears and decides cases in panels of three. The Court of Appeals The Court of Appeals is the highest court in Maryland (what most states would call their “Supreme Court”), also located in Annapolis. Since the expansion of the Court of Special Appeals’ jurisdiction in 1974, the Court of Appeals has heard cases on an almost exclusively discretionary basis. Parties can file a “petition for writ of certiorari” in any case pending in or decided by the Court of Special Appeals. The Court of Appeals then reviews the petition and determines whether further review of the case is desirable or in the public interest. This includes cases that raise constitutional issues, unsettled questions of law, and issues related to emerging technologies. If the case meets this standard for further review, the Court grants the petition and allows the parties to argue their case. With few exceptions, decisions of the Court of Appeals are final and cannot be appealed to another court. The Court of Appeals is composed of seven judges — one from each of the seven appellate judicial circuits — all of whom sit on each case. Currently, the Court’s seven members include three female judges and two African-American judges, making it one of the most diverse panels on a state supreme court in the country. This year marks the eighth consecutive term in which all of the Court’s opinions were released in the same term (year) in which they were heard.
contact with the legal system do so through the District Court. The District Court is a statewide court headquartered in Annapolis, with 33 locations in 12 districts throughout the state. It has a staff of over 1,700 individuals, including 124 judges. As one of the two trial courts in Maryland, more than 1.7 million cases are filed in the District Court each year. These cases include domestic violence and peace orders; landlord- tenant disputes; motor vehicle violations ranging from parking tickets to driving under the influence; civil lawsuits for up to $30,000; criminal misdemeanors and certain felonies; and pretrial release and preliminary hearings for all defendants charged in Maryland. The mission of the District Court is “to provide equal and exact justice for all who are involved in litigation before the Court.” As mos t individuals appearing before the District Court represent themselves, the District Court judges are presented with a unique challenge in an adversarial system.
The Circuit Courts
The Circuit Courts are the trial courts of general jurisdiction in Maryland. They have exclusive jurisdiction over most matters of equity, civil cases exceeding $30,000, and most felony criminal cases. The Circuit Courts also preside over divorce and other family law matters. They are the only state courts in Maryland empowered to conduct jury trials (in both civil and criminal cases). In addition to their role as trial courts, the Circuit Courts also hear appeals from the District Court and administrative agencies. There are 24 Circuit Courts in Maryland: one in each of the 23 counties plus Baltimore City. The number of judges on each Circuit Court is set by statute and varies by county: Baltimore City has the most Circuit Court judges with 35, while Caroline, Dorchester, Garrett, Kent, Queen Anne’s, Somerset, and Talbot Counties have only one Circuit Court judge each. These judges are tasked with resolving the more serious and more complicated criminal and civil cases in the Maryland trial courts.
3
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
Report of the Special Committee
Introduction
This report has been prepared by the Maryland Judiciary in advance of the statutory Judicial Compensation Commission (Commission) review of judicial salaries prior to the 2022 legislative session of the Maryland General Assembly. As has been past practice, the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals appointed a Special Committee on Judicial Compensation (Committee) consisting of incumbent judges and support staff from the Judiciary. This Committee has met several times over the last six months to consider the issues associated with judicial compensation in order to prepare this report, which consists of comparative data and an analysis of judicial salaries in states similar to Maryland in their geography, economy and judicial structure for presentation to the Commission.
Findings
As a result of this study, the Committee noted several areas of concern:
➢ Judicial Salaries Versus Inflation: Over the past 20 years (2001 – 2021) Maryland judicial salaries have not kept pace with inflation. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index (CPI-U), the cost of living for all urban consumers in the Northeast United States increased by 72.52% over the most recent 20 years. Judicial salaries increased by 45% to 48% during that same time. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the cost-of- living for all urban consumers in the Baltimore/Washington Region also increased by 68.78% over the most recent 20 years. ➢ Regional Ranking: Of the nine regional states with which Maryland is most comparable geographically and economically, the salaries of Maryland judges currently rank in the bottom third: Circuit Court – ninth (last); Court of Special Appeals – sixth; Court of Appeals – eighth; Chief Judge, Court of Appeals – seventh. Moreover, Maryland’s judicial salaries have remained stagnant in the rankings over the past four years: Circuit Court – remained at ninth; Court of Special Appeals – remained at sixth; Court of Appeals – remained at eighth; Chief Judge, Court of Appeals – remained at seventh. Of the seven states (including Maryland) having limited jurisdiction courts comparable to the District Court, Rhode Island is the only state in our region. Maryland ranks behind Rhode Island. ➢ National Ranking: Of the fifty states and the District of Columbia 1 in a national ranking, the salaries of Maryland judges also generally dropped in their competitive positions especially when a cost of living factor is applied. Without the cost of living factor, the ranking is: Circuit Court – 21st; Court of Special Appeals – 18th; Court of Appeals – 17th; Chief Judge, Court of Appeals – 13th. With the cost of living factor, the ranking is: Circuit Court – 43rd; Court of Special Appeals – 37th; Court of Appeals – 37th; Chief Judge, Court of Appeals – 29th.
1 The National Center for State Courts (NCSC) Survey of Judicial Salaries includes U.S. Territories that are not included in this summary.
4
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
➢ Federal Judicial Salaries: A prior Committee recommended keeping pace with federal judicial salaries to maintain Maryland’s competitive standing, which it believed was critical, given Maryland’s proximity to the District of Columbia. However, it appears the gap between Maryland judicial salaries and federal judicial salaries continues to widen, for example, a judge on the federal intermediate appellate court earns a salary of $231,800 while a judge on the Court of Special Appeals – Maryland’s intermediate court – earns a salary of $183,633, a difference of $48,167. ➢ Legal Associate Salaries: According to Law Crossing (2018), a Baltimore Law Firm 1st year Associate makes $179,678, which is $18,345 more than our Judge, District Court and $5,245 more than our Judge, Circuit Court. A Baltimore Law Firm 2nd year Associate makes $193,045, which is $9,412 more than our Chief Judge, District Court and Judge, Court of Special Appeals and $6,412 more than our Chief Judge, Court of Special Appeals. A Baltimore Law Firm 3rd year Associate makes $212,110, which is $15,677 more than our Judge, Court of Appeals and only $3,323 less than our Chief Judge, Court of Appeals. A Baltimore Law Firm 4 th year Associate makes $245,089, which is $29,656 more than our Chief Judge, Court of Appeals. According to Law Crossing (2018), a District of Columbia Law Firm 1st year Associate makes $181,570, which is $20,237 more than our Judge, District Court and $7,137 more than our Judge, Circuit Court. A District of Columbia Law Firm 2nd year Associate makes $195,077, which is $11,444 more than our Chief Judge, District Court and Judge, Court of Special Appeals and $8,444 more than our Chief Judge, Court of Special Appeals. A District of Columbia Law Firm 3rd year Associate makes $214,343, which is $17,910 more than our Judge, Court of Appeals and only $1,090 less than our Chief Judge, Court of Appeals. A District of Columbia Law Firm 4 th year Associate makes $247,669, which is $32,236 more than our Chief Judge, Court of Appeals. ➢ Law Professor Salaries: According to University of Baltimore Compensation Analyst, a University of Baltimore Law School Professor salary average is $177,371, which is $16,038 more than our Judge, District Court and $2,938 more than our Judge, Circuit Court. According to University of Maryland Compensation Manager, a University of Maryland Law School Professor salary average is $177,371, which is $16,038 more than our Judge, District Court and $2,938 more than our Judge, Circuit Court.
Current Maryland Judicial Salaries
In January 2018, the Judicial Compensation Commission submitted to the Maryland Legislature a recommendation to increase the salaries of all Maryland judges by $35,000 over four years ($10,000 each in years 1 and 2; $7,500 each in years 3 and 4). The legislature reduced the Commission’s recommendation to $5,000 each year and it was awarded in phases in fiscal years 2019 to 2022. The increases were as follows for each level of judgeship: $5,000 (FY19); $5,000 (FY20), $5,000 (FY21); and $5,000 (FY22). The total cumulative, average increase amount was an approximate 12.16% increase in salary.
5
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
Title
Salary Prior to Increases
07/01/2018 Salary
07/01/2019 Salary
07/01/2020 Salary
07/01/2021 Salary
Judge, District Court
$141,333
$146,333
$151,333
$156,333
$161,333
Chief Judge, District Court
$163,633
$168,633
$173,633
$178,633
$183,633
Judge, Circuit Court
$154,433
$159,433
$164,433
$169,433
$174,433
Judge, Court of Special Appeals
$163,633
$168,633
$173,633
$178,633
$183,633
Chief Judge, Court of Special Appeals
$166,633
$171,633
$176,633
$181,633
$186,633
Judge, Court of Appeals
$176,433
$181,433
$186,433
$191,433
$196,433
Chief Judge, Court of Appeals
$195,433
$200,433
$205,433
$210,433
$215,433
Judicial Salary Survey as of July 2021
In July 2021, the Judiciary Human Resources Department obtained current judicial salary data from the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) to compare Maryland judicial salaries with judicial salaries in states within the region and nationally. The Committee compiled the judicial salary data and presents its findings here for the consideration of the Commission. Tab 2 provides the most recent judicial salary data report by each state for each judicial classification. It should be noted the NCSC no longer tracks salary data for the Intermediate Appellate Court Chief Judge and Courts of Limited Jurisdiction due to jurisdictional differences from state to state. The data is listed in order of national rank (highest to lowest). Regional rankings are also provided as are salaries adjusted for cost of living. What follows is a synopsis of the reported data for state courts.
Regional Comparison:
Although the Committee believes it is important to examine the salaries of Maryland judges compared to the nation as a whole, it considers it particularly important to examine how Maryland judges stand when compared to other states in the Mid-Atlantic geographical area. The states that traditionally have been included in this regional comparison with Maryland are:
Connecticut
New York
Delaware
Pennsylvania
District of Columbia
Rhode Island
New Jersey
Virginia
6
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
The chart below shows the current regional rankings vs. those reported in our last survey, with 1 being highest and 9, lowest.
Regional, No Cost-of-Living Factor
Chief Judge, Highest Appellate
Judge, Highest Appellate
Judge, Intermediate Appellate
General Jurisdiction Judge
Date
01/01/2017
7
8
6
9
07/01/2021
7
8
6
9
Variance
0
0
0
0
As indicated above, Maryland remained stagnant in all four (4) judicial classifications. At each level, Maryland judicial salaries are near or at the bottom of the regional rankings. The chart below shows the cost-of-living factor being applied to the regional rankings vs. those reported in our last survey, with 1 being highest and 9, lowest.
Regional, Cost-of-Living Factor
Chief Judge, Highest Appellate
Judge, Highest Appellate
Judge, Intermediate Appellate
General Jurisdiction Judge
Date
01/01/2017
4
6
5
7
07/01/2021
7
7
6
8
Variance
-3
-1
-1
-1
As indicated above, when the cost-of-living factor is applied, Maryland lost ground in all judicial classifications. At each level, Maryland judicial salaries are now near the bottom of the regional rankings. As noted previously, the NCSC no longer tracks salary data for courts of limited jurisdiction, e.g. the District Court of Maryland. Within the region, Rhode Island is the only state that has a court of limited jurisdiction comparable to Maryland’s District Court. Therefore, the Committee had to research other states to find comparable courts. As a result of the research and utilizing the NCSC list serve, the Committee obtained salary data for six (6) states that have a court of limited jurisdiction that is comparable to Maryland: Alaska, Colorado, Kentucky, Nebraska, Rhode Island, and Washington. The average of judicial salaries for courts of limited jurisdiction in those states is $164,643. This is a difference of $3,310 when compared to current judicial salaries in the District Court, as of 07/01/2021. A comparison of the average cost of living in these jurisdictions indicates Maryland has a cost of living adjustment index of 126.8 while the other states average 113.27, a difference of 13.53. Maryland District Court judges make less than the average salary of their counterparts in the above states, yet also have a higher cost of living.
7
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
National Comparison:
The chart below highlights how Maryland’s current national rankings have changed vs. those that were reported in the 2017 survey with 1 being highest and 51 lowest.
National, No Cost-of-Living Factor
Chief Judge, Highest Appellate
Judge, Highest Appellate
Judge, Intermediate Appellate
General Jurisdiction Judge
Date
01/01/2017
11
14
19
22
07/01/2021
13
17
18
21
Variance
-2
-3
+1
+1
As indicated above, Maryland lost ground in two (2) of the four (4) judicial classifications and grained ground in two (2) of the four (4) judicial classifications.
National, Cost-of-Living Factor
Chief Judge, Highest Appellate
Judge, Highest Appellate
Judge, Intermediate Appellate
General Jurisdiction Judge
Date
01/01/2017
21
32
32
37
07/01/2021
29
37
37
43
Variance
-8
-5
-5
-6
As indicated above, when the cost-of-living factor is applied, Maryland lost ground in all four (4) of the judicial classifications. The Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals is paid in the bottom half of highest appellate court chief judges nationally. The other national classifications for Maryland judges range from the bottom twenty-eight percent to the bottom eight percent. A Maryland General Jurisdiction Judge, the lowest nationally ranked judge classification in Maryland, when adjusted for cost-of-living, dropped six (6) rankings and now ranks 43rd when compared to other states and the District of Columbia:
National Rank
State
COLF
Salary w/ COLF
Illinois
1
100
$216,297
Tennessee
2
92.2
$201,759
South Carolina
3
98.6
$199,554
Arkansas
4
90.4
$193,387
New York
5
112.4
$187,674
Georgia
6
93.4
$186,047
Pennsylvania
7
102.2
$182,669
8
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
Virginia
8
102.4
$180,353
Missouri
9
90.3
$176,695
Nebraska
10
101.1
$176,232
Delaware
11
109.9
$175,463
Washington
12
115
$173,117
Michigan
13
91.6
$169,849
Utah
14
103.5
$169,687
Louisiana
15
97.1
$168,486
Indiana
16
95.2
$168,083
Ohio
17
92.4
$165,451
Minnesota
18
102.9
$164,538
Florida
19
101.1
$163,672
Colorado
20
111.1
$160,615
Texas
21
96.6
$159,487
California
22
135.2
$158,717
Iowa
23
97.8
$158,384
New Jersey
24
121.9
$157,764
Oklahoma
25
93.2
$156,195
Mississippi
26
88.6
$153,520
Wyoming
27
104.9
$152,511
North Carolina
28
95.6
$148,698
Wisconsin
29
100.3
$147,151
Arizona
30
101.8
$146,712
Idaho
31
99.1
$145,755
South Dakota
32
99.7
$145,588
Alaska
33
131.3
$144,502
Connecticut
34
126.7
$142,483
Nevada
35
112.6
$142,101
Kentucky
36
92.4
$141,733
Rhode Island
37
128.7
$141,670
North Dakota
38
108
$140,871
Massachusetts
39
132.3
$139,621
Vermont
40
121.2
$138,162
New Mexico
41
100.3
$138,011
Hawaii
42
150.4
$137,691
Maryland
43
126.8
$137,608
Kansas
44
98.2
$137,546
Montana
45
104.1
$137,065
District of Columbia
46
159.5
$137,016
New Hampshire
47
120.5
$136,853
Alabama
48
93.1
$135,313
West Virginia
49
95
$132,596
Oregon
50
119.2
$129,772
Maine
51
116.7
$121,125
A Maryland Intermediate Appellate Court Judge, when adjusted for cost-of-living, dropped five (5) rankings and now ranks 37th when compared to 39 other states:
9
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
National Rank
State
COLF
Salary w/ COLF
Illinois
1
100
$235,713
Tennessee
2
92.2
$209,011
South Carolina
3
98.6
$204,797
Pennsylvania
4
102.2
$198,530
Arkansas
5
90.4
$198,145
New York
6
112.4
$197,687
Indiana
7
95.2
$196,707
Virginia
8
102.4
$190,842
Georgia
9
93.4
$190,567
Florida
10
101.1
$190,015
Missouri
11
90.3
$187,391
Texas
12
96.6
$184,679
Michigan
13
91.6
$183,882
Washington
14
115
$182,374
California
15
135.2
$181,641
Nebraska
16
101.1
$181,024
Ohio
17
92.4
$179,834
Utah
18
103.5
$178,068
Alabama
19
93.1
$177,306
Louisiana
20
97.1
$175,426
Minnesota
21
102.9
$175,231
Iowa
22
97.8
$170,180
Colorado
23
111.1
$167,536
New Jersey
24
121.9
$166,623
Oklahoma
25
93.2
$163,768
Mississippi
26
88.6
$163,462
North Carolina
27
95.6
$157,096
Wisconsin
28
100.3
$155,920
Arizona
29
101.8
$151,802
Idaho
30
99.1
$151,766
Kansas
31
98.2
$150,700
Connecticut
32
126.7
$148,116
Kentucky
33
92.4
$147,870
Alaska
34
131.3
$147,628
Nevada
35
112.6
$146,536
New Mexico
36
100.3
$145,289
Maryland
37
126.8
$144,821
Massachusetts
38
132.3
$143,679
Hawaii
39
150.4
$141,479
Oregon
40
119.2
$137,587
A Maryland Highest Appellate Court Judge, when adjusted for cost-of-living, dropped five (5) rankings and now ranks 37th when compared to other states and the District of Columbia:
National Rank
State
COLF
Salary w/ COLF
Illinois
1
100
$250,442
Florida
2
101.1
$224,746
Tennessee
3
92.2
$216,195
10
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
Pennsylvania
4
102.2
$210,408
South Carolina
5
98.6
$210,049
New York
6
112.4
$207,651
Virginia
7
102.4
$207,388
Missouri
8
90.3
$205,013
Arkansas
9
90.4
$204,190
Indiana
10
95.2
$202,357
California
11
135.2
$193,749
Ohio
12
92.4
$192,944
Georgia
13
93.4
$191,769
Washington
14
115
$191,583
Texas
15
96.6
$191,304
Nebraska
16
101.1
$190,551
Iowa
17
97.8
$187,784
Louisiana
18
97.1
$187,600
Delaware
19
109.9
$186,656
Utah
20
103.5
$186,570
Minnesota
21
102.9
$185,966
Michigan
22
91.6
$179,705
Alabama
23
93.1
$178,380
New Jersey
24
121.9
$174,930
Colorado
25
111.1
$174,448
Oklahoma
26
93.2
$172,867
Mississippi
27
88.6
$171,840
Wyoming
28
104.9
$166,826
Wisconsin
29
100.3
$165,276
North Carolina
30
95.6
$163,874
Idaho
31
99.1
$161,857
Connecticut
32
126.7
$157,680
Arizona
33
101.8
$156,861
Alaska
34
131.3
$156,265
South Dakota
35
99.7
$155,817
Kansas
36
98.2
$155,726
Maryland
37
126.8
$154,916
Kentucky
38
92.4
$154,071
North Dakota
39
108
$153,560
New Mexico
40
100.3
$152,935
Hawaii
41
150.4
$152,705
Massachusetts
42
132.3
$151,915
Nevada
43
112.6
$150,977
Montana
44
104.1
$149,779
Rhode Island
45
128.7
$147,183
New Hampshire
46
120.5
$145,923
Vermont
47
121.2
$145,330
District of Columbia
48
159.5
$145,329
West Virginia
49
95
$143,158
Oregon
50
119.2
$140,295
Maine
51
116.7
$129,280
11
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
A Maryland Highest Appellate Court Chief Judge, when adjusted for cost-of-living, dropped eight (8) rankings and now ranks 29th when compared to other states and the District of Columbia:
National Rank
State
COLF
Salary w/ COLF
Illinois
1
100
$250,442
Florida
2
101.1
$224,746
Texas
3
96.6
$ 222,391
Tennessee
4
92.2
$221,623
South Carolina
5
98.6
$220,552
Arkansas
6
90.4
$220,513
Virginia
7
102.4
$220,231
Pennsylvania
8
102.2
$216,531
Missouri
9
90.3
$214,336
New York
10
112.4
$214,235
Ohio
11
92.4
$205,549
Minnesota
12
102.9
$204,564
California
13
135.2
$203,177
Indiana
14
95.2
$202,357
Louisiana
15
97.1
$196,981
Iowa
16
97.8
$196,586
Delaware
17
109.9
$195,081
Washington
18
115
$194,347
Georgia
19
93.4
$191,769
Nebraska
20
101.1
$190,551
Utah
21
103.5
$188,502
Oklahoma
22
93.2
$184,602
New Jersey
23
121.9
$181,037
Michigan
24
91.6
$179,705
Mississippi
25
88.6
$179,458
Alabama
26
93.1
$179,454
Colorado
27
111.1
$178,250
Connecticut
28
126.7
$170,414
Maryland
29
126.8
$169,900
North Carolina
30
95.6
$168,241
Wyoming
31
104.9
$166,826
Wisconsin
32
100.3
$165,276
Idaho
33
99.1
$164,884
Arizona
34
101.8
$161,921
Rhode Island
35
128.7
$161,902
Kansas
36
98.2
$159,628
Kentucky
37
92.4
$159,483
Hawaii
38
150.4
$158,314
North Dakota
39
108
$157,903
South Dakota
40
99.7
$157,823
Alaska
41
131.3
$156,722
Massachusetts
42
132.3
$155,887
New Mexico
43
100.3
$154,930
Vermont
44
121.2
$152,275
Montana
45
104.1
$151,570
12
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
Nevada
46
112.6
$150,977
New Hampshire
47
120.5
$150,448
Maine
48
116.7
$149,475
District of Columbia
49
159.5
$145,643
West Virginia
50
95
$143,158
Oregon
51
119.2
$142,963
Federal Judicial Salaries:
Due to Maryland’s proximity to the n ation’s capital, it is important to be mindful of the variance between Maryland judicial salaries and those of the federal court system. To maintain a competitive standing in the region, the prior Committee’s goal was to achieve full parity with federal judicial compensation. Tab 3 shows the current federal judicial salary structure. Below is a comparison of the federal and Maryland judicial salaries and increases.
Federal Court Salaries
2017
2021
Chief Justice, Supreme Court
$263,300
$280,500
Associate Justice, Supreme Court
$251,800
$268,300
Judge, Court of Appeals
$217,600
$231,800
Trial Courts - District Court Judges
$205,100
$218,600
Bankruptcy & Magistrate Judges
$189,000
$202,000
Maryland State Court Salaries
07/01/2017
07/01/2021
Chief Judge, Court of Appeals
$195,433
$215,433
Judge, Court of Appeals
$176,433
$196,433
Chief Judge, Court of Special Appeals
$166,633
$186,633
Judge, Court of Special Appeals
$163,633
$183,633
Judge, Circuit Court
$154,433
$174,433
Chief Judge, District Court
$163,633
$183,633
Judge, District Court
$141,333
$161,333
13
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
Recommendations
In view of the above findings, the Committee respectfully urges the Judicial Compensation Commission to consider the recommendation of a significant salary increase for each classification of judge to be effective July 1, 2022. In order to maintain the current gaps in salaries between classifications, the Committee recommends that any salary increase be the same dollar amount for each judicial classification. An across-the-board percentage increase would serve only to widen the gap between each classification, which the Committee does not recommend. The Committee also asks that any proposed salary increase be implemented in total on July 1, 2022, rather than incrementally over several years. Incremental increases would further delay the necessary immediate correction to judicial salaries, causing salaries to continue to lag behind the market. It also would diminish the positive effects of the total increase because a likely rise in the cost-of-living or employee-paid benefits each year would noticeably reduce the value of smaller yearly increases.
14
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
Accomplishments of the Maryland Judiciary Since the Judicial Compensation Report of 2017 The Maryland Judiciary’s mission is to provide fair, efficient, and effective justice for all. As such, the Maryland Judiciary advances justice for all who come to Maryland’s courts. All judges serve to support the Judiciary’s vision of an efficient, innovative, and accessible court system that works collaboratively with justice partners to serve the people with integrity and transparency. Our judges collectively handle more than 2 million cases per year; every case represents a crucial juncture in peoples’ lives. These include approximately 3,000 cases per year at the appellate level, close to 300,000 cases annually at the circuit court level, and the remaining 1.7 million cases per year are handled by the District Court. Every day, Maryland judges are called upon to make decisions that have a profound impact on people’s lives. Our judges hear cases that run the gamut from traffic violatio ns to first degree murder, from landlord-tenant disputes to civil cases involving medical malpractice and complex commercial and technology matters. They hear difficult cases involving divorce, child custody, domestic violence, and human trafficking. They decide juvenile matters and are given the authority to terminate parental rights and remove children from their homes to protect them from imminent harm. And, they have the authority to sentence a criminal defendant in the appropriate case to spend the rest of his or her life in prison. In recent years, the Maryland Judiciary has expanded the role of its trial court judges, increasing their interactions with litigants through innovative programs such as drug courts, veterans’ courts, and mental health courts. Our judges are also supporting expanded services for children and families, juveniles, human trafficking victims, the elderly, the unrepresented, and the limited English-speaking population. At the same time, judges are adapting to significant changes as the Judiciary phases in the Maryland Electronic Courts (MDEC) initiative, works to modernize its overall operations, and strives for increased transparency by making more information publicly accessible.
Some of the recent accomplishments by the Maryland Judiciary and its judges include:
Modernization and System Improvements
➢ MDEC is fully operational in 21 of 24 jurisdictions in the state representing 87.5 percent of courts. Montgomery county will “go live” with the MDEC system in October 2021. The rem aining two jurisdictions, Prince George’s County and Baltimore City, are on pace for full statewide implementation by 2023. ➢ Trial courts are developing and implementing new case management plans statewide to improve overall efficiency, enhance service delivery, and make case management information more accessible.
➢ Courts throughout the state are held accountable with established case-time standards. For example, the Court of Appeals has met its standard of issuing rulings on all cases during
15
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
the same term in which the cases were heard for the past eight consecutive terms since it established the standard.
Responding to Needs in the Community
➢ The Judiciary operates 60 active problem-solving courts statewide, including some exclusively designed to meet the needs of our veteran population, families in recovery, drug addiction, juveniles, and those with acute mental health needs. A first of its kind Re- Entry Program has been launched in Baltimore City. Judges spend many hours in the community and with participants engaged with these problem-solving initiatives. These courts often convene during evening hours following a full day of dockets. ➢ The Maryland Judiciary has been acknowledged by the Justice Index as a national leader in access to justice, ranking fourth, nationally, for overall performance. The Maryland Judiciary Help Centers have walk-in centers and statewide call-in locations that are staffed by trained attorneys and have helped over 100,000 people over the past year seeking assistance in civil legal matters, particularly those related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Full- time walk-in centers are available in courthouse locations in Baltimore, Rockville, Catonsville, Upper Marlboro, Glen Burnie, Salisbury, and Frederick. Part-time walk-in services are available in Cambridge and Hagerstown. Individuals can also receive help from 8:30 am to 8:00 pm Monday through Friday by calling 410-260-1392 to talk with an attorney for free.
➢ Judges are collaborating actively with Executive Branch departments to implement the Maryland Justice Reinvestment Act and to deal with pandemic-related issues.
➢ Judges increasingly are using e-warrants to support law enforcement more efficiently when emergency search warrants are needed after hours, on weekends, and on holidays. This requires judges, as scheduled, to be on-call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year in every county and in Baltimore City. ➢ Judges are implementing a Judiciary resolution against the presumptive shackling of juveniles in the courtroom. Research indicates that children are hindered in their access to justice when restraints cause emotional restrictions, preventing communication with counsel, or when shackling results in an undue perception of guilt. ➢ The Judiciary has expanded access to court resources for people with limited English proficiency through new website portals that offer the most requested resources in Spanish, French, Russian, Chinese, and Korean, including court forms and requests for interpreter services. Remote virtual language assistance is being piloted throughout the state in the upcoming months.
Judicial Achievements During the Pandemic Emergency
➢ On March 13, 2020, Chief Judge Mary Ellen Barbera issued a set of Administrative Orders to adjust Judiciary operations in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. The orders clearly delineated that, regardless of conditions, the Judiciary needed to maintain operations to provide service to the most vulnerable populations that it serves. Those
16
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
services included bail reviews, protective orders, peace orders, extreme risk protective orders, juvenile detention hearings, family law emergencies, and quarantine and isolation cases. ➢ Throughout these challenging times, Maryland state courts have remained open to address matters to the extent allowed by the pandemic, providing due process and protecting constitutional rights. Chief Judge Barbera issued the first two administrative orders responding to changing conditions and capacities, authorizing Administrative Judges in trial courts to take appropriate measures to protect the safety of the public, justice partners, and court personnel. For Administrative Judges, these responsibilities were in addition to hearing cases, managing trial calendars and overseeing the administration of the court. ➢ In addition, since the onset of the pandemic, Administrative Judges have been responsible for enacting and adapting to over 80 Administrative Orders to ensure that the courts remained operational during this unprecedented pandemic. Collectively, they managed their courts through the pivot to remote proceedings, retrofitted their courtrooms with Plexiglas shields, distributed PPE and adjusted to each and every phase of the phased reopening thereby maintaining public safety while still remaining operational. No additional compensation is provided for these pandemic-related duties. ➢ During this initial period, the Judiciary procured truckloads of plexiglass, sanitizers, contactless thermometers, decals for social distancing, masks and other PPE. The first courthouse screening protocols were developed, the judiciary started to pivot to Skype video dockets and administrative procedures were developed to deal with the positive test results in courthouses. ➢ In the initial response to the pandemic, the Judiciary faced issues ranging from ensuring continuity of the drug and mental health courts to pausing electronic feeds to the MVA and CCU. By June 2020, the Judiciary fully embraced remote proceedings moving from Skype to Teams and Zoom for Government. In managing this remarkable pivot from all in-person proceedings to remote hearings, the Judiciary resolved security issues inherent in remote proceedings, effectively incorporated interpreters into these remote proceedings, and developed integrations with our recording systems. During the same time, the Administrative Office of the Courts and District Court Headquarters provisioned hundreds of laptops, webcams and microphones, and resolved issues with noticing of hearings and the text messaging notice of trial date program. ➢ Since June of 2020 through July of 2021, the Judiciary conducted more than 147,145 Zoom sessions, that involved 1,079,741 participants, and used over 49,001,723 Zoom minutes. In addition, the Judiciary’s Help Centers remained operational remotely throughout the pandemic, developing a knowledge base of resources, which include local rental assistance programs. Maryland Court Help Centers provided more than 150,000 instances of service to individuals without counsel between March of 2020 and August of 2021. More than 32,000 instances of service were for landlord-tenant matters. Town Hall meetings with the local bar associations were initiated to update changes to operations.
17
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
The Judiciary hosted regular meetings with the Department of Public Safety, the Department of Health, and the Department of Housing at the state level, and with all of the justice partners at the local level, to ensure that operations continued collaboratively as safely as possible. ➢ Notwithstanding what appeared to be never-ending obstacles and challenges, the courts continued to function effectively and efficiently due to the diligence and initiative of Maryland judges. If not for these judges, with the assistance of equally diligent and motivated Judiciary staff, the courts would have ceased to function during a time when, perhaps, their presence was of the greatest importance to our society.
Education and Professional Development
➢ Judges regularly volunteer their subject matter expertise to educate their colleagues and to plan important future educational initiatives. ➢ Judges are engaged in a newly created New Trial Judges Mentor Program, a year-long formal, structured, and guided process that supports the preparation and ongoing education of new trial judges. Experienced judges who have exhibited the highest ethical standards and have demonstrated a commitment to judicial education serve as mentors for new trial judges during their first year. ➢ Judges routinely work, on many occasions after hours, in concert with local bar associations, schools, and community-based organizations to lead civics education events, make presentations, preside over mock trials, and host court visits, all to help educate the public, including our next generation of leaders, about the legal system, how government works, and the roles that individuals play in a civil society.
Policy and Governance
➢ Judges are involved in judicial governance though participation on the Maryland Judicial Council and its eleven working committees, devoting significant “after hours” time and expertise developing policy recommendations with regard to (1) Alternative Dispute Resolution, (2) Court Access and Community Relations, (3) Court Operations, (4) Court Technology, (5) District Court, (6) Domestic Law, (7) Education, (8) Juvenile Law, (9) Legislation, (10) Senior Judges, (11) Specialty Courts and Dockets and (12) Equal Justice.
18
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
Appendix 1
The Judicial Compensation Commission
The Judicial Compensation Commission was created by statute in 1980 with the legislative purpose to ensure that the Maryland Judiciary attracts highly qualified applicants to the bench in Maryland without economic hardship to the judicial nominees (Chapter 717, Acts of 1980). The statutory provisions are codified at Maryland Code, Courts & Judicial Proceedings Article, sec 1- 708. The statute was amended in 2009 to provide for quadrennial review of judicial salaries by the Commission. Under the statute, the Commission prepares a report that is submitted to the Governor and the Maryland General Assembly prior to the start of the next regular session (Courts & Judicial Proceedings Article, sec 1-708). A Joint Resolution, which encompasses the Commission’s proposals, is then introduced in each house of the General Assembly by the 15th day of the session. The General Assembly may amend the Joint Resolution to decrease, but not increase, any of the Commission’ s salary recommendations. Failure to amend or reject the Joint Resolution within 50 calendar days after its introduction results in the adoption of the salaries recommended by the Commission.
If the General Assembly rejects any of the Commission’s recommendations, the salaries of the judges remain unchanged, unless modified under other state personnel provisions of the law.
19
MARYLAND JUDICIARY | SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL COMPENSATION
Appendix 2
Structure of the Maryland Judiciary
The District Court of Maryland
Most Maryland residents who come into contact with the legal system do so through the District Court. The District Court is a statewide court headquartered in Annapolis, with 33 locations in 12 districts throughout the state. It has a staff of over 1,700 individuals, including 124 judges. As one of the two trial courts in Maryland, more than 1.7 million cases are filed in the District Court each year. These cases include domestic violence and peace orders; landlord-tenant disputes; motor vehicle violations ranging from parking tickets to driving under the influence; civil lawsuits for up to $30,000; criminal misdemeanors and certain felonies; and pretrial release and preliminary hearings for all defendants charged in Maryland. The mission of the District Court is “to provide equal and exact justice for all who are involved in litigation before the Court.” As most individuals appearing before the District Court represent themselves, the District Court judges are presented with a unique challenge in an adversarial system. Administrative Judges of the District Court have significant responsibilities for which they are not compensated. These duties include providing supervision over the associate judges on their courts, management of the bailiffs and other courthouse safety concerns, docket management, and facilities oversight. They regularly meet with justice partners on issues and programs vital to court operations and case adjudication. Some Administrative Judges supervise multiple courthouse locations and multiple counties. Essentially, the Administrative Judges are on-call 24/7.
The Circuit Courts
The Circuit Courts are the trial courts of general jurisdiction in Maryland. They have exclusive jurisdiction over most matters of equity, civil cases exceeding $30,000, and most felony criminal cases. The Circuit Courts also preside over divorce and other family law matters. They are the only state courts in Maryland empowered to conduct jury trials (in both civil and criminal cases). In addition to their role as trial courts, the Circuit Courts also hear appeals from the District Court and administrative agencies. There are 24 Circuit Courts in Maryland: one in each of the 23 counties plus Baltimore City. The number of judges on each Circuit Court is set by statute and varies by county: Baltimore City has the most Circuit Court judges with 35, while Caroline, Dorchester, Garrett, Kent, Queen Anne’s, Somerset, and Talbot Counties have only one Circuit Court judge each. These judges are tasked with resolving the more serious and more complicated criminal and civil cases in the Maryland trial courts. Like the District Court Administrative Judges, the Administrative Judges of the circuit courts not only hear cases, but they also have significant responsibilities for which they are not compensated. Although not exhaustive, these duties include providing supervision over the associate judges on their courts, management of sheriff and bailiff concerns, human resources issue resolution, docket management, facilities oversight and security issues, and working with local executive and legislative officials on budgets for maintaining and improving the physical structure of the local courthouses, and regularly meeting with many justice partners on issues and programs vital to court operations and case adjudication. Some Administrative Judges are not only charged with the day to day operations of their respective courts, but also have limited
20
Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs