CHIEF JUDGE SUZAN BAUCUM Justice Cont, Las Vegas Teunshie December 2, 2020 Scott F. Gilles, Senior Advisor Office of the Governor, State of Nevada P: (775) 684-5667 scottgilles@gov.nv.gov Dear Mr. Gilles, Thave reviewed your recent correspondence in which you expressed concerns about overcrowding in the Las Vegas Justice Court during the pandemic. ' In response to Governor Sisolak’s Declaration of Emergency for Directive 035 on November 23, 2020, I quickly issued Administrative Order #20-19 one day later on November 24, 2020. Administrative Order #20-19 imposed a variety of remedial measures intended to protect the public. For example, the Order provided for the following: * All criminal out-of-custody hearings scheduled between November 30, 2020, and December 31, 2020, were suspended and continued for not less than 30 days. ‘Your leter also urged that “the constable temporarily pause serving documents that require visits to the courthouse.” However, the constable’s office is separate and apart from the Las Vegas Justice Court and is not subject to direct control by the Chief Justice of the Peace. Administrative Order #20-19 is scheduled to continue until January 4, 2021, or until modified or rescinded by a subsequent Order, 1* All court filings were ordered to be accepted electronically through Odyssey eFileNV. * In order to reduce social contact, the Court encouraged the use of electronic communications for the resolution of cases, including, but not limited to, arraignments, status checks, filings of motions, and plea agreements * All currently scheduled Civil hearings were ordered to be conducted by video or telephonic means whenever possible; decided on the papers; or rescheduled unless otherwise directed by a Las Vegas Justice Court Judge. * Small Claims trials, Small Claims motion hearings, and Small Claims examinations of judgment debtor currently set were continued to a future date, * The Traffic customer-service lobby was ordered to remain closed to the public until further notice. Despite these restrictions, Administrative Order #20-19 implicitly recognizes certain case types and hearings as “essential."> The Order provides for these to be heard through in-person appearances, although appearance by alternative means is “encouraged when possible.” The Order enumerates the following list of “essential” case types and hearings: (1) All in-custody proceedings for criminal matters; (2) Bail motion hearings, motions to quash bench warrants, and motions for own recognizance walk-throughs on arrest warrants; ) Civil temporary or extended protection orders; (4) Unlawful towing cases; (5) Objections to claims of exemption; and (© Evictions. In your correspondence, you suggested that eviction hearings are “non-essential” and should be postponed. However, I would point out that Emergency Directive 035 contains no provisions relating to evictions, and the Governor’s previous moratoria relating to evictions all expired on October 15, 2020. Therefore, Governor Sisolak has imposed no current requirement for eviction cases to be postponed. 3 {would note that Nevada law envisions that a Justice Court ean never be completely closed because of the important services underlying essential case types. Sec. .g., NRS 4.360 (declaring that Justice Courts have xo terms “and must always be open”; JCRCP 77 (“The justice courts shall be deemed always open for the purpose of filing any pleading or other proper paper, of issuing and returning mesne and final process, and of making and directing all interlocutory motions, orders and rules.” aSeparately, the federal government has imposed its own moratorium on evictions, but that ‘moratorium does not prohibit eviction cases from being filed and heard; instead, the federal ‘moratorium only prohibits eviction orders from being isswed until January 2021. The recent FAQ from the CDC confirms this conclusion. See https://www.cde,gov/coronavirus/2019- neov/downloads/eviction-moratoria-order-fags.pdf (stating that the CDC Order “is not intended to terminate or suspend the operations of any state or local court{,] [nor is it intended to prevent landlords from starting eviction proceedings, provided that the actual eviction ofa covered person for non-payment of rent does NOT take plave during the period of the Order.”) Moreover, under the CDC Order, tenants can still be evicte they carry out criminal activity in the rental property or violate other terms of the lease aside from non-payment of rent or fees. Thus, the CDC Order does not contemplate a blanket prohibition on evictions in the ‘manner that you are suggesting at the state level. Additionally, I would emphasize that I have spoken with various colleagues across the state whose respective Justice Courts are still hearing eviction cases. Any type of categorical restriction on evictions should be imposed by Governor Sisolak on a statewide basis, as opposed to being imposed piecemeal in some Justice Courts and not others. Finally, I would emphasize that the Las Vegas Justice Court has been found to be in compliance with CDC guidelines relating to social distancing. Clark County Real Property Management conducted an analysis of each courtroom and determined the maximum number of| people that can be accommodated therein. Therefore, I am confident that the Las Vegas Justice Court ean conduct in-person proceedings safely for the narrow case types that are defined as “essential.” In summary, unless Governor Sisolak imposes another moratorium relating to evictions or the other case types and hearings deemed “essential,” I am not inclined to impose additional restrictions beyond those already imposed in Administrative Order #20-19. However, I will 3Continue to work with Court Administration to ensure that all social-distancing protocols are followed in the interest of public safety. Respectfully, CHIEF JUDGE SUZAN BAUCUM