If you wish to help support the ongoing costs of running this blog and you haven't purchased anything through Amazon on this site, please consider a small donation to defray basic costs. It isn't free to me to keep this site current. I have to pay for bandwidth, costs of duplicating documents when they exist only in paper form, and keep printer ink around to read lengthy documents, and the time to do the research. Thank you. Marc Feldesman, site owner and publisher.
Oregon PERS Information is Copyright Marc R. Feldesman (c) 2003 - 2017 All Rights Reserved. Posts may not be reprinted without prior consent.


Please don't post your comments more than once. I moderate all comments and a delay between posting and appearing is part of the drill here. I get to all comments in due time. Please don't continually repost the same comment. Only one will be posted. Thank you.

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Wanna Be Startin' Something 2008

My last post triggered a fair amount of email. It would be nicer if people would just post comments to the blog, but I know some people don't want all these exchanges to be public. One recurrent question is: to whom do we write to complain about Judge Kantor's extreme slowness in finalizing his Arken/Robinson opinions. In the old days, if a Judge delayed a case too long, he/she could have pay withheld - a modest cattle prod to get someone moving. Today, that no longer seems to be the case what with caseloads being what they are. Nevertheless, Judge Kantor does have two supervisors - the Honorable Dale R. Koch, Presiding Judge Multnomah County Circuit Court, and the Honorable Paul J. De Muniz, Chief Justice of the Oregon Supreme Court. *I* am not planning to engage either Judge Koch or Justice De Muniz, at least not quite yet. I can't stop anyone else from writing to complain, but I'm not going to enable the practice by providing the email addresses of either Judge. Neither Judge is hard to find, but if you want to complain, you're going to have to do the heavy lifting yourself. If you wanna be starting something, you better be prepared to run with the big dogs.

4 comments:

gary said...

Since we've already developed a theory that the good judge may be more motivated by being re-elected than by meting out justice in a timely fashion, I would also propose that he would react negatively to our complaining about him to his bosses. Is this to suggest that his ruling could be less favorable than it would otherwise be toward us if we did complain about him? At this point, anything seems possible. I don't think complaining to the bosses is a good move quite yet. Maybe after the filing deadline passes and assuming he's running un-opposed.

What a great system we have!

Fitwon2002 said...

I would recommend that no one complains to anyone in the justice department. However, a well worded request to have judicial assistance for Judge Kantor's hugh work load might be effective without giving us bad karma.

Fitwon2002

mrfearless47 said...

I doubt that his supervisors are unaware of either (a) his high work load or (b) the fact that Arken and Robinson remain undecided. Hartman is a golfing partner with one of the SC justices. Somehow I doubt this topic hasn't been broached. Perhaps if we can get through the filing season, Judge Kantor will be secure enough to issue a ruling that doesn't jeopardize his job or draw an opponent.

George said...

What are we saying, people?

We are saying that the prime motivator for Judge Kantor's refusal to issue his ruling (yes, REFUSAL) is that he's worried about retaining his job?

If that's the case, we have just written off the ruling as being any sort of real justice (justice not being the prime motivator), and if we have written it off, what do we have to lose by putting some outside pressure on the Judge?