Kenneth C. Cory
Office - (702) 671-4324
Fax - (702) 671-4323
Law Clerk - (702) 671-4328
Email - email@example.com
Location - RJC Courtroom 16A
Regional Justice Center
200 Lewis Ave., Las Vegas, NV 89155
Term of Office 2004 - present
Judge Kenneth C. Cory graduated from Las Vegas High School in 1961 and earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science from Brigham Young University in 1967. In 1971, he earned his JurisDoctorate from American University, Washington College of Law.
Following college Judge Cory worked for Senator Alan Bible. After serving as an Assistant United States Attorney and a Deputy City Attorney in Las Vegas, Judge Cory was appointed as the first Federal Public Defender in Nevada, where he achieved the highest rate of acquittal of any federal public defender office in the country.
In 2004, Governor Kenny Guinn appointed Judge Cory to the bench to fill the judgeship vacated by Gene Porter. Previously, Judge Cory sought appointment to the bench in 1995 and in 1996 challenged Judge Michael Douglas for the judgeship in Department 11.
Judge Cory is the son of Calvin and Beth Cory of Las Vegas. Calvin Cory served as the first president of the Clark County Bar Association and as a Las Vegas attorney.
Judge Cory is married and has six children.
No weapons are allowed. There is no eating, drinking, smoking or chewing gum in any courtroom.
Proper courtroom attire is required. No shorts or tank tops are allowed in the courtroom, shoes are required. T-shirts, which show offensive slogans or pictures, are not allowed. Hats should be removed before entering the courtroom.
While in the courtroom, sit quietly when court is in session. Do not talk or whisper. The court proceedings are being recorded by a court recorder and noise can interfere with the preparation of this important record.
All beepers, cellular telephones, and electronic devices must be turned off before entering the courtroom. Avoid reading newspapers, or books in the courtrooms, particularly if your use of such material may be a distraction to others.
Attorneys are expected to maintain the highest ethical standards at all times, and to strictly adhere to the opportunities, requirements, limitations, and deadlines set by the judge. All counsel are to be punctual for all conferences, hearings and trials. They are to be civil to one another as well as to all parties, witnesses, and court personnel - whether in front of a jury or the court.
- Department 1 is currently assigned a Civil Court docket.
Motion calendar schedule
- Department 1 hears all Civil Court matters on Tuesday and Thursday at 9:00 a.m.
Other regularly scheduled court sessions
Regular chambers calendar
- Department 1 does have a chambers calendar. Matters placed on the chambers calendar are set on Mondays with no appearances required. Matters regularly placed on chambers calendar include: Motions to Withdraw; Motions to Amend; Motions to Associate Counsel; Motions to Reconsider; Motions to Consolidate; Minor´s Compromise Claims; Motion to Quash Bench Warrant; and Motions for Attorney´s Fees and Costs.
Discovery Commissioner assigned
- Commissioner Bonnie Bulla
Court Reporter or a Court Recorder for its official record
- Department 1 uses a Court Recorder.
Telephonic appearance request
- Department 1 requires telephonic appearances be made via Court Call. Counsel must arrange via Court Call prior to their scheduled appearance.
- Department 1 does not grant unopposed motions in advance of the hearing date. However, counsel is not required to appear for unopposed motions, unless directed otherwise by chambers.
Default judgment prove-ups
- All Default Judgments for a total award of less than $50,000 may be submitted to chambers. All Default Judgments for a total award of $50,000 or more, must be set on the Department´s regular motion calendar. Testimony is required, but can be telephonic if arranged via Court Call prior to the scheduled hearing.
Submission of Orders
- Department 1 requires proposed orders to be submitted to chambers within ten (10) days of notification of the ruling, pursuant to EDCR 7.21. Counsel designated to prepare the order is requested to provide a draft to opposing counsel(s) prior to submission. Non-drafting counsel is required to sign the order prior to submission. Disputes may be resolved by submission to chambers of an explanatory letter, copied on all parties, with or without a draft of a competing order. If the dispute cannot be resolved through written communication, a telephonic hearing with counsel may follow.
- Department 1 uses the “Modified Arizona Method” of jury selection. In civil cases, counsels are required to submit any proposed voir dire to the Court at the same time as their Joint Pre-trial Memo. Further explanation of this and other aspects of the conduct of the case is found in the seldom-read Trial Order entered by the Court in civil cases. Provided adequate time has been allowed for the Jury Commissioner to process it, motions for written voir dire questions will be entertained by the Court. At trial, following qualification questions by the Court, counsel are allowed to direct voir dire toward the minimum number of jurors and alternates necessary to be qualified, seated in and directly in front of the jury box, rather than the entire venire. The seating chart will differentiate between jurors and alternate jurors. Questions must be directed first at large to the panel, with follow-up questions to individual jurors. Counsel will not be allowed to ask the same litany of questions to each juror in turn. Challenges for cause must be made at side bar immediately after a side’s voir dire of the panel or are deemed waived. An excused juror will be replaced from the assembled venire. Peremptory challenges are exercised in writing, alternating between sides. The jury consists of the first 8 or 12 unchallenged jurors (civil vs criminal), and the first unchallenged alternates of the requisite number, which will vary according to the length of trial. The panel will not be advised of the identity of the alternate(s) until time to deliberate upon a verdict.
- A similar method is used in criminal cases, modified as required by rules, statute, and case law.