Rule 60.Peer Review Board

Failure to meet the time standards may lead the Administrative Director of Courts to refer a judge to the peer review board, which reports with recommendations for remedial action within forty-five days. On receiving that report, the Administrative Director — with the Chief Justice's approval — takes what action is necessary to bring the court into compliance, which may include recalling senior status judges, reassigning judges from other circuits, or implementing case management procedures. Repeated non-compliance may, at the Director's discretion, be reported to the Judicial Investigation Commission.

The board is three family court judges chosen by the Administrative Director. The first three served one-, two- and three-year terms to stagger the membership; each judge selected afterwards serves two years.

The board investigates promptly and reports its findings and recommendations within forty-five days of the referral. It may review the judge's docket and cases, interview the judge and the judge's staff, and obtain records and documents from the circuit clerk or the judge. Failing to cooperate may itself bring a complaint to the Judicial Investigation Commission.

Two protections close the rule. The referral, the investigation, the documents obtained and the recommendations are confidential. And all information provided, documents filed or testimony given in any investigation or proceeding under Rules 59 and 60 is privileged in any defamation action, while board members and their employees are absolutely immune from civil suit in the same manner as members of the judiciary for conduct in the course of their official duties.