Comment #: CA54447
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge likes to pepper his banter with references to great movies and television.

Here are two recent displays of great intelligence and an earnest desire to promote justice:

The Princess Bride - 'inconceivable' is a line he recalled from this modern comedy.

For counsel coming to court in October, he reminded them to bring a sack. Why? Treats may be handed out. The Judge then recited 'I got a rock.' - from a Charlie Brown TV special.

There is a depth here that is frightening - a depth of adolescent and pre-adolescent cartoon level cognitive functioning.

Not suitable for the Bench - or the Bar.

Comment #: CA54445
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Here are a few ways that a recent trial was fouled by a judge who doesn't care about justice.

Defense counsel was desperate to get her client off the hook as to the admissions that he had never bothered to answer. A motion was filed and moved up to the first day of trial. Judge denied the motion. But the next day, there is a motion in limine to do the same thing - and this judge grants the motion!! Ridiculous ruling.

This judge favors defendants. He also doesn't listen carefully to evidence.

Nor, for that matter, does he want evidence to be presented. He will go out of his way to block key evidence being admitted and to block expert witnesses.
He chisels testimony time to an impossible minimum.

It also didn't help that he read to the jury an opening statement of instructions that was a mess - a mess written by the defense counsel.

Defense counsel left my motions in limine out of the joint binder - so he never ruled on them. Ridiculous gamesmanship.

He likes to say that he wants a jury to be presented with a seamless presentation [what is this guy? a movie director?] and that the American democracy can only be saved by jury participation. But, sure enough, after the jury is put together, he keeps reminding everyone he is afraid of losing the jury. Then, after a couple of days of testimony, he says it isn't too late for a bench trial. Then parties rest and he invites counsel to chambers and immediately announces he is not granting any non-suit [not that any of them were articulated]. Yet, within 5 minutes, after defense counsel begged in gibberish, he changed his mind and granted all non-suits and the jury was shown the door after 7 or 8 days!?! It took him 25 days to issue a 3-page minute order.

A dangerous lightweight judge who is very lonely in his empty courtroom.

Arbitrary and whimsical to the point of being a nihilist.

His chambers are decorated with an upside down map of California; it is a printer's error or a gag.

Comment #: CA54444
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I was shocked while I waited for the judge to enter the courtroom. I sat at the table and the clerk opened the door to chambers and what did I hear? The judge loudly saying this: 'crack[ing] the whip'. I guess he was on the phone. This kind of talk didn't seem right. What do you think?

Comment #: CA54436
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge is, on the surface, affable - but do not be fooled.

He can get rulings right, but the big ones he totally blows.

Recently, he had a M4SJ before him. The defendant's counsel wrote a declaration for the defendant and the defendant signed it.

The Defendant's declaration said this: I did NOT open the car door to steal the car. [I paraphrase and I have changed the COA.]

The judge let the defendant off the hook.

The judge did not understand the principle of NEGATION in such a sentence.

The sentence meant this: He, the defendant, opened the car door [but is vague as to whether he stole the car].

Given the COA was all about whether he opened the car door, the judge blew it.

Consequently, it all ended up in appellate court.

Why? Because the judge and his research staff don't know anything about ENGLISH [or logic, by the way].

Comment #: CA39610
Rating:9.0
Comments:
Excellent judge. His clerk (the one with the shrill voice yelling at everyone) needs a lesson on manners and professionalism.

Comment #: CA36514
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
A judicial wimp who looks the other way at discovery abuse. No matter how egregious, if the offending party serves responses before the hearing, he looks the other way and doesn't sanction, despite sanctions being mandatory and the CRC stating it doesn't matter if responses are served after the motion is filed. Plain and simple, he invites bad behavior because in this guy's courtroom, there are no consequences.

Comment #: CA36088
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Classic old-school sense of humor, no-nonsense. Probably one of the last honest men left on the bench today...