Comment #: CA46713
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
If you believe judges should rule based on their social agendas,and what they feel that day, with disregards to the laws that have been signed, and written into law by the lawmakers, then you should congratulate “Saba". Saba is very two faced, and more than partial, when it comes to other women in the courtroom, she has a strong visceral resentment toward men, that is evident the moment you walk into her courtroom. This hatred toward men might be rooted in her “Iranian” back ground,and that’s understandable given that men are in charge in that country, and it is woman who are at a disadvantage, but this is America not Iran. Along with her education from Berkeley law school, it is no wonder that she is a social justice warrior and not a judge of the laws and facts, but rather a social justice warrior for “woman's rights”. Be ready for anything.

When, appointed, and elected officials, believe they’re above the law, they stop being social justice warriors and become just another crooked cop, leaving society to shoulder the burden. With the way of thinking, reasoning she’s not fit to be running a Starbucks cash register.

Comment #: CA46613
Rating:10.0
Comments:
The best judge in North County Vista. everyone loves her. Super friendly, and fair. She knows how to settle a case. We are lucky to have her on the bench

Comment #: CA34119
Rating:3.0
Comments:
A judge who is very experienced, competent, and scholarly when it comes to the law. Also punctual and highly flexible in scheduling. In general, she treats litigants, attorneys, and witnesses with respect. In terms of temprament, she is generally "even-keeled," but is prone to outbursts in court which can be either verbal or phsyical through her body language. She will make it quite clear verabally and/or physically when she is frustrated (e.g. crossing arms, slumping in chair, looking to the sky, putting her head on her desk). You should also expect her to constantly be doing "other things" than focusing intently on your proceedings while you're in her courtroom (e.g. dissomaster calculations, preparing orders, or reading filed briefs during the actual court event). These "other things" she is constantly doing will often detract from her attention to oral statements and from time to time will result in her becoming frustrated because oral statements have become too long or complex to allow her to simultaneously accomplish these "other things" and pay attention.

Most importantly, over the 12 filings, 2 hearings, and 1 trial in my case - as well as during several other cases I observed while I was present in her courtroom - she routinely demonstrates a clear, observable, and highly favorable bias towards women (attorneys, litigants, and witnesses), but most particularly for women of color. This bias is evident in not just her courtroom behavior, but also in her verbal and/or written orders (or lack thereof). It is abundantly clear to an educated and experienced observer that her previous social justice pursuits as a criminal public defender - probably inspired by her education and experiences at UCLA, Berkeley - to "right the wrongs" against certain protected classes have bled over into her civil courtroom.
Simply put, I would tell any man (attorney, litigant, or witness) to NOT expect a fair, impartial, or unbiased court event in this judge's court if their opposing party is a woman, or represented by a woman, but most particularly if either of them are women of color.