Kelly J. Lawson
Kenai Superior Court | Third Judicial District
Judge Lawson was appointed to the Kenai Superior Court in March of 2023. This is her first judicial retention election.
Performance Summary
The Alaska Judicial Council finds that Judge Lawson did not meet performance standards related to judicial temperament and integrity. The Alaska Judicial Council therefore recommends against her retention in office.
Judges must be judicial both in the courtroom and in their conduct off the bench. The Alaska Judicial Council concludes that, while performing acceptably on the bench, Judge Lawson has lacked patience, dignity, and courtesy in her communications with court employees, creating friction between Judge Lawson, court staff, and other judges to a degree that has impeded the efficient administration of justice.
Administrators and staff at the Alaska Court System, an independent constitutional body, have worked with Judge Lawson to mprove the situation, but those efforts had been largely unsuccessful at the time of the Council's evaluation.
The Judicial Council's conclusion is based on information provided by court employees, records maintained by the Alaska Court System, and an interview with Judge Lawson.
Also included in Judge Lawson's evaluation were surveys and reviews from attorneys, court employees, jurors, and other user groups familiar with the judge's work, analysis of the judge's financial disclosure documents, analysis of how often the judge's decisions were affirmed on appeal, whether their pay was withheld for untimely decisions, how often the judge was disqualified from a case, whether the judge followed standards of ethical conduct and continuing education, input from the public, and the judge's demonstrated commitment to the administration of justice and the community.
The Council's evaluation process included an interview with Judge Lawson and an opportunity for Judge Lawson to comment on her own performance.
“I find my work as a judicial officer very rewarding and humbling. I am constantly reminded of how important my work is in the daily lives of many different people in our community.”
- Judge Lawson
Detailed Performance Findings
The Council evaluated Judge Lawson’s performance on legal ability, integrity, impartiality and fairness, judicial temperament, and diligence and administrative skills. Judge Lawson did not meet standards related to judicial temperament and integrity. A summary of Judge Lawson’s performance is presented here.
Complete reports are posted in the source documents below.
-
▼ Legal Ability
Did the judge demonstrate knowledge of substantive law, evidence and procedure, and clarity and precision in their work?
Attorneys familiar with Judge Lawson’s work rated her legal ability as good. See chart below for numerical ratings. Attorneys who appeared in cases before her gave positive reviews.
Jurors who served in Judge Lawson’s courtroom rated her attentiveness, intelligence and skill as excellent.
In Alaska, a party who disagrees with a trial judge’s decision can appeal to a higher court. The appeal court analyzes the judge’s decision and issues an opinion. The Council reviews all the opinions and analyzes how often and why individual judges are affirmed or reversed as one measure of the judge’s legal ability. Judge Lawson had one case appealed and decided in the evaluation period. One case is not enough to use as a statistical performance measure. She was affirmed in the case. A review of the opinion raised no concerns about her legal ability. For more details, see the Appellate Affirmance Report, linked below.
Judge Lawson met or exceeded educational requirements set by the Alaska Supreme Court.
-
▼ Impartiality & Fairness
Did the judge demonstrate a sense of fairness and justice and treat all parties equally?
Attorneys and court employees rated Judge Lawson’s impartiality and fairness as good. Peace officers rated her as excellent. See chart below for numerical ratings.
Jurors who served in Judge Lawson’s courtroom rated her impartiality as excellent. See chart below for numerical ratings.
Court rules allow a litigant at the beginning of a case to file a request for change of judge. Parties whose cases were assigned to Judge Lawson seldom asked for a different judge.
-
▼ Integrity
Was the judge's conduct free from impropriety or the appearance of impropriety, and did the judge make decisions without regard to possible public criticism?
Attorneys and peace officers rated Judge Lawson’s integrity as excellent. Court employees rated her integrity as good. See chart below for numerical ratings.
Judge Lawson filed financial disclosure statements with the Alaska Public Offices Commission and separate conflict-of-interest forms with the court system as required, and the Council found no items of concern in these disclosures.
The Council confirmed that Judge Lawson was not the subject of any public disciplinary proceedings before the Alaska Commission on Judicial Conduct, and that she followed standards of ethical conduct for judges.
Judges must disqualify themselves from cases where they have a conflict of interest or their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. The Council found no concern about Judge Lawson’s performance on this requirement.
-
▼ Judicial Temperament
Was the judge courteous and free from arrogance, and did the judge manifest human understanding and compassion?
The Council found, based on information provided by court employees, records maintained by the Alaska Court System, and an interview with Judge Lawson, that Judge Lawson has lacked patience, dignity, and courtesy in her communications with court employees, creating friction between Judge Lawson, court staff, and other judges to a degree that has impeded the efficient administration of justice. (See above Performance Summary).
Attorneys and peace officers rated Judge Lawson’s judicial temperament as good. Court employees rated her temperament as acceptable. See chart below for numerical ratings.
Jurors who served in Judge Lawson’s courtroom rated her as excellent on respectful and courteous behavior.
-
▼ Diligence & Administrative Skills
Was the judge prepared for court proceedings, did the judge work diligently, and was the judge reasonably prompt in making decisions?
Attorneys, court employees, and peace officers rated Judge Lawson’s diligence as good. See chart below for numerical ratings.
Under Alaska law, a judge cannot receive a paycheck if they have any decision undecided or uncompleted for more than six months. Each pay cycle, judges must sign an affidavit declaring that no matter referred to them has remained undecided or uncompleted for more than six months. The Council verified that Judge Lawson was paid on schedule, and she certified that she had no untimely decisions.
Judge Lawson demonstrated commitment to improving the administation of justice and to community outreach. Judge Lawson:
- Sits on the Henu Community Wellness Court, a tribal-state therapeutic court;
- Participated in a 2024 conference to support the re-entry of women being released from prison; and
- Participated in training for Indian Child Welfare Act cases and therapeutic courts.
See Judge Lawson's retention questionnaire for more information.
The Judicial Council distributed electronic surveys to attorneys, court employees, jurors, and peace officers asking them to rate Judge Lawson’s performance on key skills. Survey ratings from these groups are shown in the charts below.
