KnowYourCOURTS.com

 

Tidball, Jane, a/k/a Jane Tidball-Sciullo, a/k/a Jane Allison Tidball

(judge, 1st Judicial Distr., atty. reg. no. 14328)

 

---

KnowYourCOurts.com has taken the liberty to amend the specious August 2008 recommendation of the judicial performance commission (as found here). Amendments are italicized:

---

First Judicial District
District Judge

Honorable Jane A. Tidball

KnowYourCOurts.com unanimously and strongly recommends that Judge Jane A. Tidball NOT BE RETAINED.

Background: Judge Tidball was appointed to the First Judicial District Court in August 1998.  Prior to her appointment to the Court, Judge Tidball was a District Court magistrate in the 20th Judicial District.  Her community interests include helping numerous charities, being a guest professor at a local law school, speaking at high schools and denying pro se litigants access to the court. Professionally, Judge Tidball has been involved in an impressive array of legal commissions and committees (sucking up). She is currently serving on the Colorado Supreme Court Civil Rules Committee.

Although Judge Tidball believes claims that it is critical for a judge to foster a positive reputation in the community, so the public will have confidence both in the judge and the system, she has found it difficult to strike the balance between maintaining that illusion and dispensing "justice" by the whim-of-the-gavel. She has published a wide range of legal articles in four different legal communications, none of which seem to be readily accessible to the public.  She also chaired a district-wide committee on conducting mediation in criminal cases last year.

Strengths: Judge Tidball possesses many strengths that are an asset to both her and to her position.  Descriptions of her strengths from those surveyed about her include good communication, knowledgeable of the rules of evidence, neutral and unbiased, great asset to the bench, tight control over proceedings by preventing litigants from adequately developing the record (speaking), understandable language, dignity, no ex parte communications, she makes tough decisions, and she writes excellent opinions.

Weaknesses: Descriptions of her weaknesses from those surveyed about her include rushing trials and pushing an unrealistic trial schedule; fining pro se litigants for appearing in court without a lawyer or asserting any claim or defense; depriving pro se parties of the right to established adjudicatory procedures; maintaining ex parte relationships with and entertaining ex parte contact from court-appointed neutrals; and failing to apply basic constitutional principles (such as those derived from the Petitioning, Confrontation, Due Process and Equal Protection clauses). Judge Tidball has been reversed four times in one case alone for abusing her discretion, exceeding her authority, failing to properly apply the law or declining to provide findings for her seemingly capricious and arbitrary decisions, from which a reviewing court could discern and underlying rationale. In at least two cases, she has been reversed for improperly fining pro se litigants attorney fees in contravention of state law. Judge Tidball reported that she has already taken action to address these matters.

Recommendation: KnowYourCourts.com and its contributors, none of whom were invited to participate in the survey, strongly disagrees with the commission and strongly recommends that Judge Jane A. Tidball NOT BE RETAINED.

---

 The following is a partial list of Judge Tidball's cases, which have been reversed or vacated:

• People v. Hall, Colo. App. No. 07CA2028 June 26, 2008 (Order Affirmed and Case Remanded with Directions)

• Marriage of Harrington, Colo. App. No. 07CA0379 May 29, 2008 (Order Vacated in Part, Reversed in Part, and Case Remanded with Directions)

• Ingebrigsten v. Godard, Colo.App. No. 06CA2412, February 14, 2008 (Order Reversed and Case Remanded with Directions)

• Marriage of Spofford, Colo.App. No. 06CA0299 & 07CA0077, February 7, 2008 (Orders Vacated in Part, Affirmed in Part, and Case Remanded with Directions)

• People v. Sisson,  Colo. App. No. 06CA0489, June 14, 2007 (Order Reversed and Case Remanded with Directions)

• Marriage of Harrington, Colo. App. No. 04CA1986 Aug. 3, 2006 (Order Vacated and Case Remanded with Directions)

• Wallace v. Colorado Dep't of Revenue, D.M.V., Colo. App. No. 05CA1276, Aug. 3rd 2006 (Judgment Reversed and and case Remanded with Directions)

• Marriage of Harrington, Colo. App. No. 04CA1161 Mar. 11, 2006 (Order Reversed and Case Remanded with Directions)

• Marriage of Harrington, Colo. App. No. 03CA1825 Dec. 30, 2005 (Order Affirmed in Part, Vacated in Part, Appeal Dismissed in Part and Case Remanded with Directions)

• Parker v. City of Golden, 119 P.3d 557 (Colo. App. 2005) (Judgment Reversed and Case Remanded with Directions)

• In re K.N.H., Colo.App. No. 03CA1456 Dec. 20, 2004 (Order Affirmed in Part, Vacated in Part and Case Remanded with Directions)

• People v. Remington, Colo.App. No. 03CA1886 Dec. 23, 2004 (Order Reversed Case Remanded with Directions)

• People v. Rivera-Bottzeck, 119 P.3d 546, 551 (Colo.App. 2004) (Judgment and Sentence Affirmed, Order Vacated and Case Remanded with Directions)

• People v. Garcia, Colo.App. No. 02CA0907 (Order Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part and Case Remanded with Directions)

• C Bar H, Inc. v. Jefferson County Board of Health, Colo. App. No. 01CA0909, April 25, 2002 (Judgment Reversed and and case Remanded with Directions)

• People v. Benallo, Colo.App. No. 99CA1120 (Order Affirmed in Part, Vacated in Part and Cause Remanded with Directions)

• Gold Rush Invs., Inc. v. GE Johnson Constr. Co., 807 P.2d 1169 (Colo. App. 1991) (Affirmed in part; Reversed in part)

• People v. Hoeschen, Colo. App. No. 00CA0440, Dec. 20, 2001 (Order Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part and Case Remanded with Directions)

---

 

Learn more about Colorado's Divorce Industry

back to Documents Main page

 

last updated: 05/30/2008

tipline@KnowYourCOURTS.com