Lott Rolfe
Circuit Court District 6.1 Division 10 Candidate
Candidate introduction at February 9th Indivisible Judicial Forum at UALR Bowen School of Law
Age: 47
Law School and Graduation Year: UALR Bowen School of Law (May 1997)
Occupation: Attorney (Rolfe Law Firm, P.A.)
Previous Elected Office: Maumelle City Council (Ward 1)
Community Service: Arkansas Child Abuse, Rape, and Domestic Violence Commission (2013-2018), University Of Arkansas National Alumni Board Of Directors (2013-2019), Arkansas Heart Ball Executive Committee (2018), Saint Mark Baptist Church Deacon’s Ministry and Legal Ministry
1. What experience, knowledge, and attributes of yours make you believe you will be a good judge?
In my twenty-two years as a practicing attorney, I have had the opportunity to serve individuals and families all over the state of Arkansas. I am uniquely qualified to serve as 10th Division Juvenile Court Judge due to my educational background, legal experience, and community service. I have a Secondary Education Degree from the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville with an emphasis on teaching at the middle school and high school level. Prior to starting my private law practice, I worked full-time with the Little Rock City Attorney’s Office and the Pulaski County Public Defender’s Office. At the Public Defender’s Office, I represented indigent clients at the District, Juvenile, and Circuit Court level. I believe that I have the temperament, knowledge, and experience to serve in a judicial capacity.
2. What are the three most important areas where the administration of justice can be improved at the circuit court level, and how would you implement improvement?
Efficient Use of Technology: The court system should always strive to use the most up to date technology that will assist in providing prompt and reliable information to court officials and the general public. This would include the implementation of the latest case management software and modernizing methods of producing transcripts of court proceedings.
Expanded Use of Arbitration and Mediation to Reduce Docket Congestion: It is very important that we work toward reducing docket congestion and explore the expanded use of arbitration and mediation to settle disputes. Their use will decrease the wait time to resolve cases and will assist in avoiding unnecessary court expense and attorney’s fees.
Improve Public Access to Records and Electronic Filing: With the exception of legally protected confidential information, litigants and the general public should have greater access to case information online. Also, I would like to see that electronic filing is allowed in every county within the state of Arkansas by either attorneys or pro se litigants.
3. What changes if any can the court system make to reduce the numbers of juvenile and criminal offenders?
First, I would request collaboration with officials at the local, county, and state level to work on devising strategies that will improve the lives of our young people and keep them out of the criminal justice system. There needs to be coordination of efforts on all governmental levels to accomplish juvenile justice reform. Second, I would favor the expansion of pre-trial diversion programs for non-violent youthful offenders. The expanded use of diversion programs would keep low risk juveniles out of the court system so that the court can focus more on the young people who are most at risk. Third, there should be a focus on reducing unnecessary delays in the juvenile justice system so that juveniles would be able to quickly receive the services that they need.
4. Do you believe in leveling the playing field between pro se parties (parties without lawyers) and parties represented by counsel, and if so, how would your court do this?
Yes. Arkansas law recognizes that there is a constitutional right for litigants to represent themselves in civil and criminal proceedings. Since many litigants, especially in civil cases, may not be able to afford the services of an attorney, I believe that courts should work toward leveling the playing field between pro se parties and parties represented by counsel. Pro se litigants should have access to necessary legal forms and should be held to a less stringent standard when it comes to court hearings and the filing of pleadings. I would still expect all litigants to maintain courtroom decorum and a respect of civil and criminal procedure. I am also an advocate of limited scope representation which would allow a pro se litigant to engage an attorney for a specific matter (i.e., summary judgment hearing).
5. Do you believe that alternative dispute resolution (mediation and arbitration) should play a greater role in disputes that come to the circuit courts, and if so, how should that happen?
Yes. I believe that option of using alternative dispute resolution should be explored and it should play a greater role in resolving disputes in circuit court. I believe that judges should encourage all litigants to explore the option of mediation and arbitration to resolve a case. The use of mediation and/or arbitration could lead to a quicker resolution of cases and could save litigants from unnecessary out of pocket expenses (court expenses and attorney fees). Courts should encourage the settlement of disputes through an appropriate dispute resolution process and should require attorneys to discuss this option with their clients before proceeding forward with trial.