Steven Rose

Steven Rose was nominated for reappointment to the Industrial Accident Board.

The hearing is scheduled for May 30 at 12:30

Resume

Does the judge demonstrate a basic knowledge of workers' compensation law and procedure?
    Always 42.3% (11), Usually 42.3% (11), Sometimes 11.5% (3), Rarely 0% (0), Never 0

Does the judge exhibit appropriate judicial demeanor?
    Always 23.1% (6), Usually 15.4% (4), Sometimes 42.3%(11) Rarely 15.4% (4), Never 0, N/A 15.4% (4)

Is the judge punctual?
    Always 53.8% (14), Usually 34.6% (9), Sometimes 7.7% (2), Rarely 0, Never 0, N/A 3.8% (1)

Are the judge's hearing decisions supported by adequate subsidiary findings based on the evidence?
    Always 20% (5), Usually32% (8), Sometimes 36% (9), Rarely 12.1% (4), Never 0, N/A 12% (3)

Does the judge understand and correctly apply the rules of evidence at hearing?
    Always 28% (7), Usually28% (7), Sometimes 32% (8), Rarely 4% (1), Never 0, N/A 8% (2)

Does the judge avoid excessive bias in the administration of justice?
    Always 32% (8), Usually12% (3), Sometimes 36% (9), Rarely 16% (4), Never 3.1% (1), N/A 4% (1)

Are the judge's hearing decisions issued within a reasonable period of time given the complexity of the case?
    Always 54.2% (13), Usually 29.2% (7), Sometimes 4.2% (1), Rarely 0, Never 0, N/A 12.5% (3)

Do the judge's decisions adequately address the issues raised on appeal?
    Always 12.5% (3), Usually 29.2% (7), Sometimes 20.8% (5), Rarely 0, Never 0, N/A 37.5% (9)

Does the judge write opinions in a clear and well-reasoned manner?
    Always 16.7% (4), Usually 33.3% (8), Sometimes 29.2% (7), Rarely 0, Never 0, N/A 20.8% (5)

Does the Reviewing Board issue decisions within a reasonable period of time given the complexity of the case?
    Always 0% (0), Usually 13.6% (3), Sometimes 22.7% (5), Rarely 0, Never 0, N/A 63.6% (14)

Source: Massachusetts Bar Association Survey

Hearing:

Councilors Present were:

Charles Oliver Cipollini - District 1
Marilyn M. Petitto Devaney - District 3
Mary-Ellen Manning - District 5
Terrence Kennedy - District 6
Jen Caissie - District 7

Councilor Kennedy presided.

The hearing began with Councilor Kennedy administering an oath to the nominee and each of the witnesses, Councilor Cipollini objectd to this procedure.

First to speak was The Honorable Omar Hernandez, Senior Judge for the Industrial Accident Board.

The Honorable Omar Hernandez said he had known Judge Rose for 18 years.

The Honorable Omar Hernandez represented the state when he appeared before him. 

The Honorable Omar Hernandez stated that Judge Rose's performance is excellent.  Judge Rose did not make it out of the nominating committee first time round but persisted.  The Honorable Omar Hernandez stated that Judge Rose is a tremendous asset, and that he could not speak highly enough of him.

The Honorable Omar Hernandez stated that Judge Rose was one of the top five producers of  decisions, and that his turn around was one of the best.


Mark Joyce, Senior Regional Manager for the Department of Industrial Accident also spoke in favor of Judge Rose.

In Mr. Joyce's position he got involved with the Judges of the Industrial Accident Board when there are complaints.  In the case of Judge Rose he  never heard a complaint against him.  Mr. Joyce described Judge Rose as being respectful and that he makes sure that everyone is heard.

Mr. Joyce stated that his coworkers and collegues, the staff in Springfield, enjoy working with Judge Rose.  He expressed the view that  Springfield was fortunate for having Judge Rose.

 
When Judge Rose spoke he was asked about the length of his term.

He acknowledged that his term ended in May 2010.

He said he was not recommended for reappointment by the Advisory Committee, but was told that he could reapply.

He received the highest rating by the Senior Justice.

Judge Rose acknowledged that between his not being recommended by the the Advisory Committee and then being recommended, when he reapplied, the make of the the committee itself had changed.

Judge Rose was asked if he had been involved in any controversial case at the time his nomination did not pass the committees, he stated that he was not aware of one if he was.

Judge Rose acknowledged that the lack of support from a bar association president appeared to have derailed his renomination.

Judge Rose also clarified that he can report fraud if he believes a party appearing before him is acting fraudulently.  He also stated that he had done this.

Judge Rose does his own research and writes his own rulings.

There appeared to be a consensus that the council was unhappy with Judges being held over rather than being resubmitted to the council.


Unless otherwise noted these recordings are complete recordings of the Council Hearings, gavel to gavel.
Use of the materials provided on this website is encouraged, however please provide this website as the source where appropriate 

A vote was taken at the June 6, 2012 meeting.

This site is not funded by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts it is dependent upon viewers like you.  Please consider contributing.