Judge Charles Hoskin has been on the Family Court bench for 17 years and is seeking another term. He faces a challenge from Timothy Treffinger, who ran for Clark County District Attorney in 2022 and lost. 

Treffinger has little campaign presence and did not respond to requests for an interview. 

Hoskin was appointed to the Family Court Department E by Gov. Jim Gibbons in 2009. He was elected in 2010, 2014, and 2020. 

by Gov. Jim Gibbons in 2009. He was elected in 2010, 2014, and 2020. 

Hoskin, who could retire if he desired, says he’s seeking reelection at the urging of family law attorneys “wanting to make sure we have some stability and some experience on the bench, as we’ve got a lot of new judges or fairly new judges.”

Family court, he says, deals with “probably the most emotional area of the law. It’s a rough situation for individuals who find themselves in those circumstances,” he said of litigants. “They  didn’t really ask for it most of the time, and they’re not really prepared for it. Essentially, they’re asking a third party to make decisions that will affect them and will affect their children.” 

Hoskin, who has practiced family law for 35 years, says he strives to ensure a professional and informed environment, which he credits with keeping the drama at a minimum in his department.  

“I had a really good idea of how the process works and how people deal with it before I even put on the robe, so I think that probably helps me,” he said, noting some judges “don’t have that experience before they come in, and it takes them a minute to to learn how that works and the overwhelming emotions that people are going through during that process.”

Between 70% and 80% of Family Court litigants represent themselves. Hoskin helped the Supreme Court create rules for an informal, opt-in trial program that allows parties to bypass some of the confusing protocol that dominates court proceedings.

The court is designed for unrepresented litigants  “who don’t understand court processes, don’t understand the rules of evidence, or the procedures. It creates a way for them to get all the evidence they need into the court and not have to jump through those hoops. We’re able to consider the totality of what they want to present, rather than what they are able to get in using the rules of evidence.”

The use of artificial intelligence in motions is complicating matters for Hoskin and other judges who say the pleadings don’t always reflect what the party is requesting. He says he’ll ask pro se litigants for additional information, when needed, and give them an opportunity in court to clarify.

“With attorneys, I’m a little less lenient, but I still want to make sure I understand their argument,” he says, adding he has at times read cases prepared by a lawyer “and I’m still not clear on what it is they’re asking me for. I just have higher expectations for someone who’s been to law school and passed the bar than somebody who hasn’t.” 

Of the 108 attorneys who evaluated Hoskin in the Las Vegas Review-Journal’s Judging the Judges 2025 survey, 83% recommended that he be retained.

According to Our Nevada Judges, which tracks judicial records, appeals courts found Hoskin to be in error in 42 of 80 cases. 

Statistics don’t always tell the story, Hoskins says, noting appellate judges “have a different job than I do. My job is to take the evidence and apply it against the law to the specific circumstances. Their job is to look at what was presented and determine whether they believe that something didn’t go the way that it should have gone.”

Appeals courts, Hoskin says, also have the luxury of time to analyze what happened, while he is “dealing with everything in the moment that is happening.” 

Statistics don’t always tell the story, he adds.

“If I’ve made a mistake, I want to learn from it and be able to change it in the future,” he says. “The frustrating part for me is when I will get a reversal in one case and an affirmance in another case with very similar facts, and have to figure  out what they want me to do in the future.”

Hoskin is endorsed by the Professional Fire Fighters of Nevada, the Las Vegas Police Protective Association, the Culinary Union, Southern Nevada Building Trades Union, IATSE 720, Teamsters Nevada, and Nevada Veterans United. 

As of Oct. 5, Hoskin had raised $20,800 and had just under $11,500 in the bank. He says he’s not trying to raise money. 

“My opponent really isn’t doing anything,” Hoskin asserts. “I haven’t seen him at any events. He didn’t even file a second quarter contribution report.”

Treffinger filed one report for the first quarter in which he reported no contributions or expenses.