Tenth Judicial District - District Court Judge
Honorable Larry Charles Schwartz
Retention Year: 2016
Recommendation: Meets Performance Standard
Reports:
2016 Retention Survey Report (PDF)
2013 Interim Survey Report (PDF)
2011 Interim Survey Report (PDF)
Need an accessible PDF Document Version?
Please click on the link below and email our staff
The Tenth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance unanimously (10-0) recommends that Judge Larry Charles Schwartz BE RETAINED.
Judge Schwartz was appointed to the District Court bench on July 1, 2008. He has served the community with the upmost integrity and has been a positive addition to the bench. He is extremely conscientious about every facet of his duties. He took an active role in supervising the construction of the new judicial building and continues to be the point person to address any issues with the building.
The Commission conducted a personal interview with Judge Schwartz, interviewed agencies that interact with him in court, reviewed orders and opinions he authored, observed him in court and reviewed surveys sent to attorneys and non-attorneys. Among the survey questions was “how strongly do you recommend that Judge Schwartz be retained in office or not be retained in office?” Of 34 attorneys completing the survey, 78% recommended to retain, 12% not to retain and 9% made no recommendation regarding retention. Of 28 non-attorneys completing the survey, 89% recommended to retain, 0% recommended not to retain and 11% made no recommendation regarding retention. Judge Schwartz takes seriously the criticisms of his performance reflected in those surveys and acknowledges that he has room for improvement.
Judge Schwartz currently presides over primarily criminal matters and water court. He handles 25% of the criminal docket and 100% of the water docket. Prior to the current docket, Judge Schwartz handled 50% of the civil docket and 50% of the domestic relations docket. In his interview with the Commission, Judge Schwartz pointed out that when he took over the Water Court docket, there were 200 pending cases, some dating back many decades; he has now reduced that to 100 cases in a relatively short period of time. The primary concern presented was that Judge Schwartz has a tendency to be overly rigid in expectations of the attorneys and timelines. In contrast, Judge Schwartz was very efficient with his time and extremely organized. He knows the law and applies it appropriately. The Commission found that Judge Schwartz is knowledgeable about the law. He applies the appropriate legal standard to the facts and is very detail-oriented and organized. He has been credited with being available to assist others with technology concerns.