Rule 28-401. Criteria for evaluation of judicial performance.

A. Integrity and impartiality. The integrity and impartiality of each judge should be evaluated with the goal of determining if (1) the judge's conduct is free from impropriety or the appearance of impropriety; (2) the judge makes finding of facts and interpretation of law without regard for the possibility of public criticism; (3) the judge treats all parties equally and fairly; (4) the judge's behavior is consistent and free from the appearance of favoritism; (5) the outcome of cases is not prejudged; and (6) the judge's actions and decisions display basic fairness and justice. B. Knowledge and understanding of the law. A judge should be evaluated on the judge's knowledge, understanding and appropriate application of the law and rules of procedure, including (1) the applicable rules of procedure; (2) the Rules of Evidence; (3) substantive law; and (4) the ability to understand the facts presented and apply the law to those facts. C. Communication skills. A judge should be evaluated on the judge's communication skills, including (1) the sensitivity of the judge to the impact of the judge's nonverbal communications; (2) the courtesy and fairness displayed to all parties and participants in proceedings; (3) whether the judge's verbal communications are clear, complete and logical; and (4) whether a judge's written communications are clear, complete and logical. D. Case management. A judge should be evaluated on the judge's management of the docket and cases assigned to the judge, including: (1) discharging responsibilities diligently; (2) meeting time commitments and acting as promptly and efficiently as possible in scheduling and disposition of cases; (3) considering the availability of settlement and alternative resolution processes and the cost of litigation; (4) punctuality and efficient use of time; and (5) maintenance or proper control over the courtroom.