By Judge Michael Gibbons
The Supreme Court of Nevada is one of the busiest appellate courts in the nation. In 2014 it received more cases per justice than any other state supreme court. An extreme caseload causes slow case resolutions, thereby invoking the famous proposition, “justice delayed is justice denied.”
Over the years, the supreme court tried to lessen the backlog and improve the time it took to resolve cases. The legislature increased the number of justices from five to seven. The court created two panels of three justices and resolved only a minority of cases en banc. It hired more staff attorneys. It established a mandatory settlement program for civil cases. And it created a fast-track program for certain criminal cases and all family law cases involving children.
These measures helped, but they could not keep pace with Nevada’s ballooning population and expanding caseload. Only a structural change would meaningfully reduce the backlog. Hence, the Nevada Court of Appeals was born.
A court of appeals for Nevada was rejected four times at the ballot box, most recently in 2010. Nevertheless, the Nevada legislature understood the urgency of the situation and approved an innovative plan for a court of appeals, which allowed the supreme court to set the new court’s jurisdiction by rule. The supreme court envisioned Nevada Rule of Appellate Procedure 17, which created an uncommon, push-down model, wherein the supreme court assigns a significant portion of its cases to the court of appeals.
Justice James Hardesty led the campaign for the court of appeals, and the voters approved the constitutional amendment in November 2014. Three dozen lawyers applied, and Governor Brian Sandoval appointed the inaugural judges: District Judges Abbi Silver, Jerry Tao, and myself.
As new appellate judges, we hit the ground running in January 2015. We hired chambers’ staff and quickly transitioned to the role of appellate judges. We also committed to informing the public and bar with frequent public appearances and reports.
Our court has been well-received by the bar over its first decade. We focused on resolving all cases through the mantra of, “speedy, accurate, and fair,” and we resolve one third of all Nevada appeals each year. Consequently, the supreme court’s backlog has reduced dramatically, and the justices have more time to invest in the most serious matters.
The composition of the court of appeals changed with Judge Bonnie Bulla joining in 2019 and Judge Deborah Westbrook in 2023. These two judges are dedicated and smart jurists. They made key contributions to the amended rules of appellate procedure, and they expanded our outreach with the bar throughout the state. They also resolve cases with the highest level of excellence.
Further, Chief Justice Elissa Cadish recently appointed Judge Bulla as the third chief judge for the court of appeals. Chief Judge Bulla began her four-year term in January. I was honored to serve almost eight years as chief judge, first as the inaugural chief presiding over the development of this court, and then again after Chief Judge Abbi Silver was elected to the Supreme Court of Nevada in 2018. I’m confident Chief Judge Bulla will continue leading the court in its successful pursuit of speedy, accurate and fair case resolutions as we start our second decade.
About the author
Judge Michael Gibbons has served on the Nevada Court of Appeals since its inception in 2015. He previously served as a general jurisdiction district court judge for 20 years and over 13 years with the Douglas County District Attorney’s Office.
About the article
© 2025 Clark County Bar Association (CCBA). All rights reserved. No reproduction of any portion of this issue is allowed without written permission from the publisher. Editorial policy available upon request.
This article was originally published in the Communiqué (Jan. 2025), the official publication of the Clark County Bar Association. See https://clarkcountybar.org/about/member-benefits/communique-2025/communique-jan-2025/.
The articles and advertisements appearing in Communiqué magazine do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the CCBA, the CCBA Publications Committee, the editorial board, or the other authors. All legal and other issues discussed are not for the purpose of answering specific legal questions. Attorneys and others are strongly advised to independently research all issues.