Steve Bryant was fresh out of law school and just learning his way around the courtroom when the judge hearing his case one day threatened to throw him in jail.

The judge had announced a recess, and Bryant seized the opportunity to pass a file to a clerk. But when the clerk in turn passed the file to the judge, Bryant was blamed for interrupting the judge’s break — a sin apparently justifying jail time.

“I thought he was dead serious,” Bryant said. Distraught, he called the partners at his Bryson City law firm and gave them the bad news that his legal career was over.

But it turned out Judge Robert Leatherwood was infamous for such admonitions and old-fashioned tongue lashings during his reign in the 1970s and ‘80s. For the lawyers and clients on the receiving end, they spent their days in court navigating an invisible minefield for fear a misstep would invoke Leatherwood’s ire.

“People were afraid of him, and the lawyers were afraid of him,” said John Snow, a judge for 28 years and now a state senator. “When I became a judge, that was one of the things I made a conscious effort to do, to make people feel comfortable in the courtroom.”

Nine years after Bryant’s embarrassing day in court, he became a District Court judge himself. Leatherwood committed suicide in the parking lot of Moody Funeral Home in Bryson City in the mid-1980s, and Bryant was appointed to fill the vacant seat. Like Snow, Bryant didn’t want to the run the kind of courtroom that Leatherwood had.

“I was conscious of the fact that the courtroom under the volatile circumstances of my predecessor made for an unnecessarily uncomfortable workplace,” Bryant said.

Lawyers constantly feared a clash with Leatherwood would land their clients harsher sentences with no apparent reason other than a moody day on the bench. Bryant instead strove for a “degree of predictability.”

“If you are an even-keel person, and day in and day out you handle your interactions with lawyers on the same basic plane, it makes it easier for the lawyers to advise their clients of a likely outcome,” Bryant said. “I don’t think you can worry about if they like you or don’t like you or think you are smart or an idiot, but it is important that everybody who comes to the table has their day in court.”

Judge Danny Davis came on the bench about the same time as Bryant, and likewise had experienced the Leatherwood courtroom.

“I think we both lived through that in our early days practicing law and understood the downside of that,” Bryant said.

Over the next two decades, Snow, Davis and Bryant conveyed a courtroom demeanor that was ultimately institutionalized as standard operating procedure within the 30th Judicial District, a court circuit spanning the seven western counties from Waynesville to Murphy.

“Everybody that came to practice after that, they realized they were going to get a fair shake and be treated with respect,” Snow said.

As a result, the 30th Judicial District is the envy of lawyers elsewhere in the state.

“We’ve had such a good set of judges for so long, lawyers that practice in other counties like to come here and do cases because they know they and their people will be treated fairly and courteously,” said Steve Ellis, a Waynesville attorney running for judge. “Even if they ruled against you, you knew they had made a thoughtful decision, and it wasn’t a knee-jerk reaction.”

Bob Clark, a Waynesville attorney who has practiced in other districts, said the judges here are simply the best.

“Most of that is a consistency in temperament,” Clark said. “The judge won’t be in one mood one day and a different mood another day. Court runs well when you have judges who are clear in their rulings and dealings with others so you don’t have a tense situation of wondering what is going to happen next.”

That temperament is appreciated across the legal community.

“Judges should allow attorneys to try their cases without walking on eggshells,” said Roy Wijiwickrama, an attorney who lives in Waynesville and serves as prosecutor for the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians.

What’s known as “judge shopping” — when lawyers jockey for a slot on the schedule to have their cases heard by the better judges — happens little in District Court here. Attorneys for the most part can roll into court without stressing about which judge they get.

“It’s something that is not so certain going forward given the amount of change we are facing,” Ellis said.

After two decades of relative stability, the 30th Judicial District is in major flux. Of six District Court judges now in office, three are new to the bench in the past five years. With the retirement of Davis and Bryant, two more seats will change hands. In all, five of the six District Court judges will be new since 2004 — with their combined experience being fewer years than any of their predecessors claimed alone.

Davis said demeanor is perhaps the most important quality voters should size up when picking from the daunting list of District Court judge hopefuls on the ballot this election year.

“The demeanor of who is on the bench is important. I think the main thing is to be courteous to people and to be fair to them and have patience, which is tested from time to time,” Davis said. “You can read about the law and listen to the evidence, but temperament and demeanor are sometimes hard to teach and hard to learn.”

The demeanor promulgated by tenured District Court judges and coveted by the legal community isn’t lost on candidates posturing for the open seats.

“We have been extremely fortunate here to have judges with a great judicial temperament that are fair and objective. We need to take care to ensure that continues,” said David Sutton, a Waynesville attorney running for one of the seats.

“It is the best bench in the state and always has been,” said Justin Greene, a Bryson City attorney running for judge. “They are not unapproachable. They are not bullies. If you need help, they will help you. They will work with you. They are all professional in their jobs. I would take a lot of pride in being part of that.”

Despite candidates’ pledges to carry on the tradition, this election can’t help but “change the flavor of the bench,” said Greg Boyer, a Franklin attorney running for judge.

“They are big shoes to fill,” Boyer said.

Those appearing in District Court come from all walks of life. But despite their socio-economic status or the crime they’re charged with, Davis said everyone in court deserves dignity.

“I still say ‘Yes sir’ and ‘No ma’am’ to folks in court. Even if you are getting ready to sentence them, they deserve a certain amount of respect,” Davis said.

It doesn’t go unnoticed by practicing attorneys.

“They look at people no matter what their station in life as individuals,” said Donna Forga, a Waynesville attorney running for judge. “They treat people with respect.”

The attitude is infectious throughout the court system.

“The key thing I have seen is a caring about people in the court system,” said Greg Boyer, a Franklin attorney who practiced in Florida prior to moving to the mountains. “They aren’t just a number or a cog in the wheel. The judges and the lawyers still see individuals. They see people.”

Another hallmark of the 30th Judicial District is the absence of an ivory-tower philosophy.

“One thing I always wanted to avoid as a judge is being enamored with my position, thinking that just because I am a judge, I am a special person,” Snow said. “You don’t want to be thought of as acting that way.”

The behavior of those appearing in court has gotten more raucous over the years, however, and doesn’t always make the judge’s job easy. Davis often finds himself telling people: “This is not Judge Judy’s court.”

“Some of these court TV shows are not realistic, but people think that they are,” Davis said.

Davis said the nature and volume of cases has changed for the worst.

“You have a front row seat for a lot of ills of society,” Davis said. “It is hard work. It is also emotionally draining. From time to time you will see things you don’t want to see. It is not the same job it was in 1984.”

There has been one improvement. Judges have their own office in the courthouse now, unlike in Davis’ early years.

“People would drive out to my house to get orders signed,” Davis said.

For 25 years, Superior Court Judge Marlene Hyatt has often worked as much as 12 hours a day, five days a week presiding over some of the toughest legal cases in North Carolina. Her job has taken her to every corner of the state to rule over serious crimes, including murder, trafficking, armed robbery, burglary, sex offenses and more.

Hyatt has seen it all — ranging from the woman who chopped her husband up and scattered his remains along the Blue Ridge Parkway to a state trooper killed by a semi-truck on I-40 to a battle to save an old magnolia tree from a developer’s ax.

Though her line of work may have exposed her to some of mankind’s most horrible and heart wrenching acts, she still doesn’t think the world is a bad place. Rather, she maintains a more matter-of-fact view.

“You see the good and the bad, and humankind is what it is,” she said.

Governor Beverly Perdue will appoint Hyatt’s replacement. A local committee has formed to recommend names. An election for the seat will be held in 2010.

When elected resident Superior Court Judge in 1986, Hyatt was the first woman in the state to hold such a position. Now, at age 55, Hyatt is finally stepping off the bench. She wants more free time to do things her demanding schedule hasn’t allowed, like garden. As her judicial career draws to a close, Hyatt sat down with The Smoky Mountain News to reflect on what she’s learned.

“It’s been a really interesting job,” she says.

Most challenging cases

Hyatt has several, but the first that came to her mind was the 2005 civil trial centering around a landslide that killed a woman in Maggie Valley. The trial pitted the late woman’s husband against both the Department of Transportation and the Maggie Valley Sanitary District. Determining just who was at fault in the woman’s death was complex, and the trial resulted in a hung jury. The matter was later settled out of court. “It was very sad,” Hyatt remembers.

In general, Hyatt says medical malpractice cases are some of the hardest to try, and almost always depressing.

“It may or may not be the doctor’s fault, but regardless, there’s a serious injury. Things have happened that were heart wrenching,” she says.

Unsurprisingly, Hyatt says cases resulting in the death penalty are also tough. She hasn’t had any such cases recently, but there have been several in the course of her career.

“There are people that are on death row and some who have been executed whose trial I presided over,” she says. “I think there are some cases where it’s necessary.”

Hyatt prefers civil cases over criminal ones, which she says are more interesting.

“In criminal court, they’re tried with certain offenses, and if they’re found guilty, there’s a sentencing structure. In civil court, it’s usually not as well-defined,” she says. “There are more issues to work out, and it’s more interesting legally.”

Her longest trial

Hyatt’s lengthiest trial lasted six weeks, and is a great example of how broad the scope of her work is. The case, tried in Charlotte, pitted two brothers against one another in a battle over an irrigation company. Their father had started the company, brought his sons in, and then died, leaving them to fight over whose it rightfully was. In many of Hyatt’s trials, such as this one, she walks away with an expanded knowledge of a very specific and random subject.

“I learned a great deal about irrigation equipment,” she says with a chuckle.

Six weeks may not seem that long, compared to, say, the O.J. Simpson trial, which lasted nine months. But Hyatt says lengthy trials like that “wouldn’t happen in North Carolina.” Once a trial begins in this state, its conducted all day long, every day, until a verdict is reached. In contrast, the Simpson trial was recessed for several days at a time and often lasted only a few hours each day.

Keeping emotions in check

No matter how horrible a case is, Hyatt hasn’t let her emotions get in the way of a verdict. It’s the absolute hardest part of the job, she says, and the most critical.

“That’s one of the things you have to learn early on to really do, because you aren’t able to do your job if you let your emotions interfere,” she says. “Regardless of how it may be — whether you feel sorry for somebody, or some who are arrogant and not the kind of people you feel sympathy for, you learn to (keep emotions out). It makes your job very hard if you’re unable to do that.”

Maintaining a neutral stance is how Hyatt is able to move on to her next case, no matter how hard the previous one may have been.

“You give that case the attention it deserves, and that’s the one for that period of time. You do what you need to do, get it to a verdict, sentence if you need to, enter judgment, and go on to the next week,” she says.

Even today, Hyatt still chokes up when talking about the sole trial in 25 years that made her cry on the bench. It was a case in Transylvania County where a mother killed her infant son. The mother was diagnosed with postpartum depression and psychosis. The woman’s family knew she suffered from mental illness and monitored her and the infant around the clock. One day, for whatever reason, the family left the woman alone with the child for a brief period. It may have only been a few minutes, but when they came back, the child was dead.

Watching a tape where the woman methodically explained to state investigators the motive for killing her son shook Hyatt to the core and was the only time the judge cracked in court.

“I had never cried in a hearing,” she says.

Trends and changes

Overall, the biggest change Hyatt has seen in crime over her career is that there’s more of it — as the state’s population has increased, so have the number of criminal and civil cases.

In terms of the types of crimes circulating through the judicial system, Hyatt says sex offenses have accounted for the largest increase. There are a couple of reasons behind the trend — more people tend to report sex offenses than did in the past, and many more women are willing to come forward.

“At one point in time, women would not talk about it. That’s changed, though I think there’s still some reluctance,” Hyatt says.

The punishments for sex offenders have also changed — now there’s a registry to keep track of them, as well as GPS monitoring.

“We have to determine how long to monitor and which kinds of cases to register, and all of that has become much more complicated,” says Hyatt.

Drugs, namely what types, are another big change Hyatt has witnessed during her years on the bench. When she first started, it was cocaine or marijuana. Then it was crack cocaine and certain prescription drugs. More recently, methamphetamines, some ecstasy and designer drugs have become the most common substances.

“Which is the drug of choice changes. Particularly in Western North Carolina, there’s been more of a shift to meth and designer drugs,” Hyatt says. She thinks that’s because meth is easy for people to make themselves, rather than buying it from some faraway source.

The state of the courts

Hyatt is well-versed in the ins and outs of the state’s court system, and knows what’s working as well as what needs work.

On the positive side, the judicial system in North Carolina hasn’t seen an increase in the number of frivolous lawsuits filed, a problem that has plagued much of the country. The state has rules in place that make it hard for someone to file a civil suit at the drop of a hat. For example, when someone accuses a physician of medical malpractice, the accuser (or plaintiff in legal speak) must first locate a specialist in the same field that can swear under oath that the accused physician wasn’t providing the expected standard of care. That’s cut way down on the number of medical malpractice suits filed, says Hyatt.

Structured sentencing

The state of North Carolina has a system of structured sentencing in felony cases, which means the judge is required to hand down a certain sentence based on the offense, number of prior convictions and other factors.

The aim of structured sentencing was to make punishments fair and equal across the state — a person convicted of a crime in Murphy would receive the same punishment in Manteo. Hyatt agrees with the goals of this type of system, but nonetheless, says it can be limiting.

“There are cases in which I would like to have more discretion, and I don’t have that discretion under structured sentencing,” she says. For example, in some cases, Hyatt would like to give the convicted person jail time, but can only mandate probation. Conversely, some who she would like to provide with a lighter sentence are required by law to go to jail.

A lack of resources

Hyatt says funding for the judicial system has decreased in the last few years, making it hard for the system to run efficiently. Too few staff have less than they need to perform an increased number of tasks.

“We’re expected to do more and more with less and less,” Hyatt says.

The problem, she says, is a lack of both “physical and fiscal,” resources. Clerk of court offices and courtrooms are insufficiently staffed, while at the same time more requirements are being put in place that amount to more paperwork.

Counties also lack adequate physical facilities, such as courtrooms and jury assembly rooms. The lack of space limits the number of cases that can be processed at one time and bottlenecks the system.

For 25 years, Superior Court Judge Marlene Hyatt has often worked as much as 12 hours a day, five days a week presiding over some of the toughest legal cases in North Carolina. Her job has taken her to every corner of the state to rule over serious crimes, including murder, trafficking, armed robbery, burglary, sex offenses and more.

Hyatt has seen it all — ranging from the woman who chopped her husband up and scattered his remains along the Blue Ridge Parkway to a state trooper killed by a semi-truck on I-40 to a battle to save an old magnolia tree from a developer’s ax.

Though her line of work may have exposed her to some of mankind’s most horrible and heart wrenching acts, she still doesn’t think the world is a bad place. Rather, she maintains a more matter-of-fact view.

“You see the good and the bad, and humankind is what it is,” she said.

Now, at age 55, Hyatt is finally stepping off the bench. She wants more free time to do things her demanding schedule hasn’t allowed, like garden. As her judicial career draws to a close, Hyatt sat down with the Smoky Mountain News to reflect on what she’s learned.

“It’s been a really interesting job,” she says.

Her most challenging cases

Hyatt has several, but the first that came to her mind was the 2005 civil trial centering around a landslide that killed a woman in Maggie Valley. The trial pitted the woman’s husband and widower against both the Department of Transportation and the Maggie Valley Sanitary District. Determining just who was at fault in the woman’s death was complex, and the trial resulted in a hung jury. The matter was later settled out of court. “It was very sad,” Hyatt remembers.

In general, Hyatt says medical malpractice cases are some of the hardest to try, and almost always depressing.

“It may or may not be the doctor’s fault, but regardless, there’s a serious injury. Things have happened that were heart wrenching,” she says.

Unsurprisingly, Hyatt says cases resulting in the death penalty are also tough. She hasn’t had any such cases recently, but there have been several in the course of her career.

“There are people that are on death row and some who have been executed whose trial I presided over,” she says. “I think there are some cases where it’s necessary.”

Hyatt prefers civil cases over criminal ones, which she says are more interesting.

“In criminal court, they’re tried with certain offenses, and if they’re found guilty, there’s a sentencing structure. In civil court, it’s usually not as well-defined,” she says. “There are more issues to work out, and it’s more interesting legally.”

Her longest trial

Hyatt’s lengthiest trial lasted six weeks, and is a great example of how broad the scope of her work is. The case, tried in Charlotte, pitted two brothers against one another in a battle over an irrigation company. Their father had started the company, brought his sons in, and then died, leaving them to fight over whose it rightfully was. In many of Hyatt’s trials, such as this one, she walks away with an expanded knowledge of a very specific and random subject.

“I learned a great deal about irrigation equipment,” she says with a chuckle.

Six weeks may not seem that long, compared to, say, the O.J. Simpson trial, which lasted nine months. But Hyatt says lengthy trials like that “wouldn’t happen in North Carolina.” Once a trial begins in this state, its conducted all day long, every day, until a verdict is reached. In contrast, the Simpson trial was recessed for several days at a time and often lasted only a few hours each day.

Keeping emotions out of the courtroom.

No matter how horrible a case is, Hyatt hasn’t let her emotions get in the way of a verdict. It’s the absolute hardest part of the job, she says, and the most critical.

“That’s one of the things you have to learn early on to really do, because you aren’t able to do your job if you let your emotions interfere,” she says. “Regardless of how it may be — whether you feel sorry for somebody, or some who are arrogant and not the kind of people you feel sympathy for, you learn to (keep emotions out). It makes your job very hard if you’re unable to do that.”

Maintaining a neutral stance is how Hyatt is able to move on to her next case, no matter how hard the previous one may have been.

“You give that case the attention it deserves, and that’s the one for that period of time. You do what you need to do, get it to a verdict, sentence if you need to, enter judgment, and go on to the next week,” she says.

The only case that brought Hyatt to tears

Even today, Hyatt still chokes up when talking about the sole trial in 25 years that made her cry on the bench. It was a case in Transylvania County where a mother killed her infant son. The mother was diagnosed with postpartum depression and psychosis. The facts of the case are heart wrenching — the woman’s family knew she suffered from mental illness, and monitored her and the infant around the clock. One day, for whatever reason, the family left the woman alone with the child for a brief period. It may have only been a few minutes, but when they came back, the child was dead.

Watching a tape where the woman methodically explained to state investigators the motive for killing her son shook Hyatt to the core, and was the sole time the judge cracked in court.

“I had never cried in a hearing,” she says.

The woman was found mentally unfit to stand trial and sent to a state psychiatric hospital.

Trends and changes in criminal activity

Overall, the biggest change Hyatt has seen in crime over her career is that there’s more of it — as the state’s population has increased, so have the number of criminal and civil cases.

In terms of the types of crimes circulating through the judicial system, Hyatt says sex offenses have accounted for the largest increase. There are a couple of reasons behind the trend — more people tend to report sex offenses than did in the past, and many more women are willing to come forward.

“At one point in time, women would not talk about it. That’s changed, though I think there’s still some reluctance,” Hyatt says.

The punishments for sex offenders have also changed — now there’s a registry to keep track of them, as well as GPS monitoring.

“We have to determine how long to monitor and which kinds of cases to register, and all of that has become much more complicated,” says Hyatt.

Drugs, namely what types, are another big change Hyatt has witnessed during her years on the bench. When she first started, it was cocaine or marijuana. Then it was crack cocaine and certain prescription drugs. More recently, methamphetamines, some ecstasy and designer drugs have become the most common substances.

“Which is the drug of choice changes. Particularly in Western North Carolina, there’s been more of a shift to meth and designer drugs,” Hyatt says. She thinks that’s because meth is easy for people to make themselves, rather than buying it from some faraway source.

The state of the court system

Hyatt is well-versed in the ins and outs of the state’s court system, and knows what’s working as well as what needs work.

NC has kept frivolous lawsuits at bay

On the positive side, the judicial system in NC hasn’t seen an increase in the number of frivolous lawsuits filed, a problem that has plagued much of the rest of the country. The state has rules in place that make it hard for someone to file a civil suit at the drop of a hat. For example, when someone accuses a physician of medical malpractice, the accuser (or plaintiff in legal speak) must first locate a specialist in the same field that can swear under oath that the accused physician wasn’t providing the expected standard of care. That’s cut way down on the number of medical malpractice suits filed, says Hyatt.

The limits of structured sentencing

The state of North Carolina has a system of structured sentencing in felony cases, which means the judge is required to hand down a certain sentence based on the offence, the number of prior convictions and other factors.

The aim of structured sentencing was to make punishments fair and equal across the state — a person convicted of a crime in Murphy would receive the same punishment in Manteo. Hyatt agrees with the goals of this type of system, but nonetheless, says it can be limiting.

“There are cases in which I would like to have more discretion, and I don’t have that discretion under structured sentencing,” she says. For example, in some cases, Hyatt would like to give the convicted person jail time, but can only mandate probation. Conversely, some who she would like to provide with a lighter sentence are required by law to go to jail.

A lack of resources

Hyatt says funding for the judicial system has decreased in the last few years, making it hard for the system to run efficiently. Too few staff have less than they need to perform an increased number of tasks.

“We’re expected to do more and more with less and less,” Hyatt says.

The problem, she says, is a lack of both “physical and fiscal,” resources. Clerk of court offices and courtrooms are insufficiently staffed, while at the same time, more things like GPS monitoring and registration requirements are being put in place that amount to more paperwork.

Counties across the state also lack adequate physical facilities, such as courtrooms and jury assembly rooms. The lack of space limits the number of cases that can be processed at one time and bottlenecks the system.

Superior Court Judge J. Marlene Hyatt, whose district stretches across the western part of the state, will retire from her post March 1.

“I am retiring as a senior resident Superior Court judge effective March 1, 2009,” Hyatt, 54, wrote in a letter on Dec. 29. “Making this decision has been a difficult one. Being a Superior Court judge is interesting, challenging work.”

Hyatt, a Waynesville native, is the resident Superior Court judge for District 30B, comprised of Haywood and Jackson counties. She was elected to her position in 1986 and is one of only seven women Superior Court judges currently serving in North Carolina.

Incoming Gov. Beverly Perdue will appoint Hyatt’s replacement, who will hail from either Haywood or Jackson counties. A local committee has formed to suggest names to Perdue.

Elections for the non-partisan post are held every eight years, the next one occurring in 2010. Whoever is appointed will have an edge over other candidates going into that election by hanging their campaign on experience already serving in the post.

Legal circles are buzzing with speculation about who will fill the seat. The replacement will have big shoes to fill — Hyatt is widely respected for her fair stance on cases.

“I always found her to be very balanced and fair. I’ve both prosecuted and defended in front of her, and felt my client would have a fair day in court,” said Haywood County attorney Bob Clark, who once worked as an assistant district attorney.

District Attorney Mike Bonfoey also had only good words for Hyatt.

“She’s been an excellent judge. She’s served the people of Haywood and Jackson county very well during her years,” he said.

The jury is still out on who will replace Hyatt. Bonfoey said he won’t be vying for the seat.

“I’ve been elected to serve as DA and I think I’ve been effective in this job and plan to continue to serve the people of Western North Carolina and Haywood County as District Attorney,” he said.

Candidates will have to be highly qualified with a lengthy legal background, as the Superior Court judge position is demanding. The Superior Court has jurisdiction in both civil and criminal cases. Generally, the court tries civil cases involving more than $10,000 in money and all felonies.

“It takes a high level of legal knowledge, and a strong personality because you often times deal with many of the top lawyers, not just locally but across the state,” said Clark. “It really takes someone with intelligence, common sense and backbone.”