When can a judge be held liable?

Useful Rulings on Conduct of Judges

Recent Rulings on Conduct of Judges

JOSUE RAMOS VS FRANCISCO MEDINA ET AL

Commission on Judicial Performance (1989) 49 Cal.3d 826, 838, fn. 6.)” more effort by both parties. Under these circumstances, the court is not inclined to award sanctions to either party. Consequently, all requests for sanctions are DENIED. IV. Conclusion and Order. Defendants’ motion for an order compelling plaintiff Ramos’s attendance and testimony at deposition is GRANTED.

  • Hearing

    May 21, 2020

THE SUNSET LANDMARK INVESTMENT, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, PETITIONER VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, ET AL.

(Pitchess, supra, 11 Cal.3d at 540; see also Commission on Judicial Performance v. Superior Court (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 617, 623 (concluding the same).) In Marylander, a defendant in a pending civil action sought to compel memoranda from the Governor’s Office relevant to his defense. The appellate court rejected the agency’s refusal to provide the memoranda based on the common law deliberative process privilege. “[T]he Legislature has decreed there are no privileges except as provided by statute.

  • Hearing

    Feb 24, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

CHERYL PAYNE ET AL VS PEDRO PRADO CEJA ET AL

Co. (1916) 172 Cal. 6, 11 [erroneous rulings, even when numerous and continuous, are not grounds for bias or prejudice; nor are “judges’ expressions of opinion uttered in what he conceives to be the discharge of his judicial duty.”].) A party’s remedy for an erroneous ruling is not a motion to disqualify, but rather review by appeal or writ. (See Ryan v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 30, 2019

SYLVIA VERONICA SCOTT VS BURBANK UNITIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

So far as the Commission on Judicial Performance is concerned, their proceedings are made public when they reach a decision and publish their findings and orders, subject to review by the California Supreme Court. In terms of a fair trial, jurors are assigned to this court house from a circle which extends up to, but no more than twenty miles from the courthouse. There is no inherent preference for jurors from the City of Burbank.

  • Hearing

    Aug 02, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

DINA PADILLA VS. COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE AN AGENCY OF THE JUDICIAL BRANCH

No appearance is required under the following conditions: Case Management Conference - Case Management Program continued to 09/12/2019 at 08:30 in this department. New Case Management Statements shall be filed by all parties no later than 15 days prior to the hearing pursuant to Local Rule 2.51. To request oral argument on this matter, ...

  • Hearing

    Jun 07, 2019

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

DINA PADILLA VS. COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE AN AGENCY OF THE JUDICIAL BRAND

No appearance is required under the following conditions: Case Management Conference - Case Management Program continued to 06/13/2019 at 08:30 in this department. New Case Management Statements shall be filed by all parties no later than 15 days prior to the hearing pursuant to Local Rule 11.055 To request oral argument on this matter,...

  • Hearing

    Apr 05, 2019

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

DINA PADILLA VS. COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE AN AGENCY OF THE JUDICIAL BRANCH

No appearance is required under the following conditions: Case Management Conference - Case Management Program continued to 06/13/2019 at 08:30 in this department. New Case Management Statements shall be filed by all parties no later than 15 days prior to the hearing pursuant to Local Rule 11.055 To request oral argument on this matter,...

  • Hearing

    Apr 05, 2019

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

AUSTIN M KOOBA MD VS DIVISION OF MEDICAL QUALITY MEDICAL

In reply, Kooba provides the cite he contends supports the ALJ’s abrogation of judicial duty. AR 3880-91. Reply at 9. The Joint Appendix only includes pages 3880 to 3888. All Phillips said on those pages was that the Board’s guidelines for experts asks them to assume patient complaints are true. AR 3881. This means is that the expert is not supposed to decide who is telling the truth.

  • Hearing

    Mar 14, 2019

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

TRAVYON C HARBOR VS MARK C KIM

In 2005, the Commission of Judicial Performance declined to take action against Judge Romero because it lacks jurisdiction over retired judges. FAP, p.5. Between 2002 and 2017, Respondent Judge Kim knew or should have known that making a false statement within any document is a crime. FAP, p.3. In 2015-16, Judge Kim took over as presiding judge over all post-conviction matters following Judge Romero’s recusal. FAP, p.5.

  • Hearing

    Feb 28, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

DEMITRIUS R. FURLOW VS SUSAN J TOWNSEND, HONORABLE

The Court notes that Plaintiff has attached a complaint about a California judge and letter that were sent to the Commission on Judicial Performance. To the extent this was intended to show compliance with section 945.4, it fails. The requisite government claim needed to be filed with the court, not with the Commission on Judicial Performance. Accordingly, the demurrer to the complaint is sustained. Judicial Immunity Defendant asserts this action is barred by judicial immunity. The Court agrees.

  • Hearing

    Jan 03, 2019

  • Judge

    Wendy Chang or Jon R. Takasugi

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

TRAVYON C HARBOR VS MARK C KIM

In 2005, the Commission of Judicial Performance declined to take action against Judge Romero because it lacks jurisdiction over retired judges. FAP ¶7. . Between 2002 and 2007, Defendant Judge Mark C. Kim (“Judge Kim”) knew or should have known that making a false statement within any document is a crime. FAP ¶1. In 2015-16, Defendant Judge Kim took over as presiding judge over all post-conviction matters following Judge Romero’s recusal. FAP ¶8.

  • Hearing

    Nov 15, 2018

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ANTHONY FERRO VS JOHN PETROV

If a judge acts without jurisdiction, the judge may be subject to discipline by the Commission on Judicial Performance. A disqualified judge may violate section 170.4 by acting on matters not specifically defined in that section. If the disqualified judge does so, he or she may be subject to discipline.” Davcon, Inc. v. Roberts & Morgan (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1355, 1363. Reconsideration of a previous ruling is not one of that matters that a disqualified judge may do pursuant to CCP § 170.4.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2018

ANTHONY FERRO VS JOHN PETROV

If a judge acts without jurisdiction, the judge may be subject to discipline by the Commission on Judicial Performance. A disqualified judge may violate section 170.4 by acting on matters not specifically defined in that section. If the disqualified judge does so, he or she may be subject to discipline.” Davcon, Inc. v. Roberts & Morgan (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1355, 1363. Reconsideration of a previous ruling is not one of that matters that a disqualified judge may do pursuant to CCP § 170.4.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2018

JANE CMB DOE VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL

Commission on Judicial Performance (1999) 20 Cal.4th 371, 390). “Comparatively, other than the addition of the dignity factor, the Ramirez balancing test for determining what procedural protections are warranted, given the governmental and private interests involved, is essentially identical to that employed under the federal analysis.” Id. The foregoing authorities establish the following analytical framework for evaluating a procedural Due Process claim under the state and federal constitutions.

  • Hearing

    Apr 20, 2018

JANE CJD DOE ET AL VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET

Commission on Judicial Performance (1999) 20 Cal.4th 371, 390). “Comparatively, other than the addition of the dignity factor, the Ramirez balancing test for determining what procedural protections are warranted, given the governmental and private interests involved, is essentially identical to that employed under the federal analysis.” Id. The foregoing authorities establish the following analytical framework for evaluating a procedural Due Process claim under the state and federal constitutions.

  • Hearing

    Apr 20, 2018

JAMES GALLEGOS VS HAVANA HOUSE, ET AL

Commission on Judicial Performance (1989) 49 Cal.3d 826, 842 (ridiculing attorneys in open court). 4) Coercing a party to settle the case. Barrientos v. City of Los Angeles (1994) 30 Cal.App.4th 63, 71-72 (imposing monetary sanctions on attorneys to coerce settlement). 5) receiving evidence out of Court. Guadalupe A. v. Superior Court (1991) 234 Cal.App.3d 100, 108-109. 6) Coercing jurors into reaching a verdict. Langdon v. Superior Court (1923) 65 Cal.App. 41, 43.

  • Hearing

    Nov 03, 2017

JULIUS M. ENGEL VS. STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA ET AL

Notice Of Respondent Commission On Judicial Performances Joinder In Demurrer To Petition For Writ Of Mandate Or, In The Alternative, Peremptory Writ Filed By Respondent State Bar Of California Set for hearing on Thursday, September 21, 2017, Line 1, RESPONDENT COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE's Joinder In Demurrer To Petition For Writ Of Mand...

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2017

JULIUS M. ENGEL VS. STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA ET AL

DEMURRER TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE/ PROHIBITION/ CERTIFICATION Set for hearing on Thursday, September 21, 2017, Line 1, RESPONDENT THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA's DEMURRER TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PEREMPTORY WRIT. Hearing required. =(302/AJR)...

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2017

JULIUS M. ENGEL VS. STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA ET AL

DEMURRER TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE/ PROHIBITION/ CERTIFICATION Set for hearing on Thursday, September 21, 2017, Line 1, RESPONDENT GEORGE GASCON's DEMURRER TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PEREMPTORY WRIT. Off calendar as untimely. The joinder does not comply with the notice requirements of CCP 1005. Any par...

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2017

COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE VS. ELAINE M. HOWLE ET AL

Other Judicial Watch, Inc.'S (Amicus Curiae) Application For Leave To File Amicus Brief In Support Of Respondents Defendants Elaine M. Howle And The California State Auditors Office Set for hearing on Thursday, August 17, 2017, Line 10, Other Judicial Watch, Inc.'S (Amicus Curiae) Application For Leave To File Amicus Brief In Support Of Res...

  • Hearing

    Aug 17, 2017

COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE VS. ELAINE M. HOWLE ET AL

Other Judicial Watch, Inc.'S (Amicus Curiae) Application For Order Shortening Time Set for hearing on Thursday, August 17, 2017, Line 10, Other Judicial Watch, Inc.'S (Amicus Curiae) Application For Order Shortening Time Off calendar. =(302/SRB)...

  • Hearing

    Aug 17, 2017

COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE VS. ELAINE M. HOWLE ET AL

Petitioner Commission On Judicial Performance'S Motion For Issuance Of Petition For Writ Of Prohibitory Mandate Set for hearing on Thursday, August 17, 2017, Line 10, Petitioner Commission On Judicial Performance'S Motion For Issuance Of Petition For Writ Of Prohibitory Mandate Hearing required. The hearing on the petition for writ of m...

  • Hearing

    Aug 17, 2017

COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE VS. ELAINE M. HOWLE ET AL

Judicial Watch, Inc.'S (Amicus Curiae) Motion To Admit Counsel Pro Hac Vice Set for hearing on Thursday, August 17, 2017, Line 10, Judicial Watch, Inc.'S (Amicus Curiae) Motion To Admit Counsel Pro Hac Vice Grant, the court will execute the moving parties' form of order. Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email t...

  • Hearing

    Aug 17, 2017

COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE VS. ELAINE M. HOWLE ET AL

Application For Leave To File Amicus Brief In Support Of Respondents Defendants Elaine M. Howle And The California State Auditors Office Set for hearing on Monday, August 14, 2017, Line 10, OTHER JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.'s (AMICUS CURIAE) Application For Leave To File Amicus Brief In Support Of Respondents Defendants Elaine M. Howle And The Califor...

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2017

COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE VS. ELAINE M. HOWLE ET AL

Notice Of Application And Application For Order Shortening Time Set for hearing on Monday, August 14, 2017, Line 11, OTHER JUDICIAL WATCH, INC. (AMICUS CURIAE) Notice Of Application And Application For Order Shortening Time. Continued to August 17, 2017 to be heard at 9:30 a.m. in Department 302. Any party who contests a tentative rulin...

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2017

1 2     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.