DOCSLIB.ORG

JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE DECISION SUMMARIES July-August 2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE DECISION SUMMARIES July-August 2018 JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE DECISION SUMMARIES July-August 2018 In the Matter of Roberts, Order (Arizona Supreme Court August 28, 2018) (https://www.azcourts.gov/portals/137/reports/2017/17-084.pdf) Based on a stipulated resolution, the Arizona Supreme Court publicly censured a judge for knowingly permitting his bailiff to work for 2 court service providers. The Court’s order does not describe the misconduct; the resolution, including stipulated facts, are attached to the order. Wise Choice Alternatives provides “Life Skills,” a court-ordered sentencing alternative program that a defendant is required to complete in 60 days. Completion requires use of a workbook that, if sent by mail, a defendant receives in 5-10 days. If a defendant did not wish to wait for the workbook by mail, the defendant could obtain a copy from a Wise Choice Alternatives representative. In May 2015, the judge asked Jeffery Hickman, a part-time court bailiff supervised by the judge, if he would be interested in serving as Wise Choice Alternatives’ local representative to distribute workbooks to defendants ordered by the court to complete the program. When asked, the judge told Wise Choice Alternatives that Hickman might be willing to serve as its local representative. Wise Choice Alternatives hired Hickman directly and paid him $10 for each of the 48 workbooks he provided to defendants from June 2015 through March 22, 2017. The judge was aware that Wise Choice Alternatives compensated Hickman for distributing the workbooks. If a hearing were held, the judge would testify that he believed that the public benefited from having workbooks available for immediate distribution but acknowledged that he erred in failing to consider the code of conduct for court employees, which precluded such employment. SCRAM of Arizona provided alcohol monitoring services for the court. In May 2015, the judge asked Hickman if he would be interested in installing SCRAM bracelets. When asked, the judge told SCRAM representatives that Hickman might be willing to serve as its local representative. SCRAM hired Hickman to install alcohol monitoring bracelets. From June 2015 to March 22, 2017, Hickman installed 17 SCRAM bracelets. SCRAM compensated Hickman not less than $1,037, $50 to install a bracelet, $5 to remove a bracelet, and $.50 a mile for travel. The judge was aware that Hickman was being paid by SCRAM to install alcohol monitoring bracelets during the time he was a part-time bailiff for the court. If this matter were to go to a hearing, the judge would testify that he believed the public benefited from the services but would acknowledge that he erred in failing to consider the code of conduct for judicial employees, which precluded such employment. In March 2017, the chief court administrator, deputy court administrator, and presiding judge advised the judge to address the issue of Hickman’s employment by Wise Choice Alternatives and SCRAM. As soon as an opportunity presented itself, the judge notified the bailiff that he must end his employment relationships with Wise Choice Alternatives and SCRAM. Letter of Censure of McGowan (Arkansas Judicial Discipline & Disability Commission July 13, 2018) (http://jddc.publishpath.com/Websites/jddc/images/pdf/Press%20Release/McGowanCensure. pdf) Based on the judge’s agreement, the Arkansas Judicial Discipline & Disability Commission publicly censured a judge for being impatient, discourteous, and undignified toward a public defender in a hearing, toward a deputy prosecuting attorney in 2 hearings in drug court, to a drug court litigant during a hearing, to probation officers, and to members of her court staff. The Commission stated that it would monitor the judge’s compliance with the agreement for the rest of her judicial career and ordered her to attend a course at the National Judicial College, the National Center for State Courts, or any similar educational institution involving proper judicial demeanor, to coordinate with the administrative judge regarding management of her court, to allow Commission staff or their assigned agent entry into her courtroom at any time, and to provide the Commission with audio recordings of any proceeding as requested. In a hearing in a criminal case, the judge instructed the defendant to step away from the deputy public defender and proceed to the probation officers while the public defender was attempting to argue on the defendant’s behalf and excused the public defender from her court as he was attempting to make the same legal argument. In a drug court case, the judge interrupted the deputy prosecuting attorney, eventually excused or removed her from the courtroom in the middle of a hearing, and proceeded with the hearing without a deputy prosecutor. The judge conducted a hearing in a second drug court case without another deputy prosecuting attorney available. On a different date, in a third drug court case, the judge raised her voice and used a discourteous tone while talking to a litigant as his case was being heard. The Commission also found that the judge behaved impatiently, discourteously, and in an undignified manner to probation officers assigned to her court and to members of her court staff. The Commission stated: The average citizen cannot be expected to brush off impatient or undignified temperament by a judge. The power imbalance is such that a litigant has no way to respond without risking a harsh or even vindictive counter response from a judge. Undignified judicial temperament may render litigants reluctant to fully present their case. Thus, fear of being unfairly chastised or mocked may affect the fundamental right to a fair hearing. In November 2008, the Commission had reprimanded the judge for injudicious temperament toward litigants and lawyers. In 2016, the Commission informally adjusted the judge for a delayed ruling and publicly reprimanded her for delay in 7 cases. 2 In the Matter Concerning Gianquinto, Decision and order (California Commission on Judicial Performance August 22, 2018) (https://cjp.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/sites/40/2018/08/Gianquinto_DO_Censure_8-22-18.pdf) Based on a stipulation, the California Commission on Judicial Performance publicly censured a former commissioner and barred him from receiving an assignment, appointment, or reference of work from any California state court for (1) Facebook posts and reposts that reflected, among other things, anti-immigration sentiment, anti-Muslim sentiment, anti-Native American sentiment, anti-gay marriage and transgender sentiment, anti-liberal and anti- Democrat sentiment, anti-California sentiment, opposition to then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, accusations against President Barack Obama, support for Donald Trump, a lack of respect for the federal justice system, and contempt for the poor and (2) representing to his presiding judge and the Commission that he had taken the posts down when that was not true, although he believed the posts were no longer publicly viewable. The Commission noted that, because the commissioner had retired, a censure and bar was the strongest discipline he could receive. In 2016 and 2017, the commissioner maintained a public Facebook page that identified him as “Jj Gianquinto,” stated that he “works at Kern County,” and contained photos of him recognizable by the public, but did not identify him as a commissioner. On May 8, 2017, Presiding Judge Charles Brehmer notified the commissioner in writing that there was “significant concern” about the “content” of a number of his posts and the “impression” a member of the public might have on reviewing them. Copies of the posts were included with the letter. The posts were: • “When [Obama] said he was going to ‘fundamentally transform’ this nation, he was gaining success. He was going to transform it from a primarily Judeo-Christian nation into Islam. Got it now? Thank God for Trump.” • “What a pity it is to watch the RINOs [Republican in name only] run from the immigration order like roaches when the light comes on. They are more interested in saving their positions, than in protecting the rest of us.” • “For the Indian Rez that will not permit the wall built on 75 miles of border on their land — how about building the wall around that rez, fencing them into Mexico? That should please them.” • “What would cause anyone to be depressed or disappointed over the Clinton thing? If you paid any attention, you had to know from the outset that nothing was going to happen to her. So, I have lost respect for the federal justice system, but I am not surprised.” • “I am asking myself ‘Why am I reading all the crap about the FBI and Hillary? It only causes me grief when I know nothing will EVER happen?’ /so, [sic] I guess I will sign off for a little while during the complete destruction of a magnificent republic. We are no longer a nation of laws.” • “As I drove to the gym this morning, my route goes past several low income housing units recently built, and some apartment buildings that are also low income. I did not see a single light on at 6:00. That is when people going to work arise.” 3 Judge Brehmer’s letter also included copies of additional photos or videos and statements that the commissioner posted on his public Facebook page during the same period. For example: • The commissioner stated, “Democrats are consistent, and they proved that at President Trump’s address in Congress!” with reposted photos with the text, “Democrats haven’t changed in 250 years. They just left their hoods in their office.” • The commissioner posted, “LIBERALS ARE AMERICA’S CANCER. Any doubt in your mind?” • With a video of protesters chanting “no border, no nation, f*** deportation,” the commissioner posted, “SHOULD TRUMP ARREST THESE PROTESTORS? LIKE + SHARE = YES!” • The commissioner stated, “Leftist values on full display. #WomensMarch” with reposted photos.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Help Yourself
    Help Yourself Trials In Landlord and Tenant Court This information sheet describes what happens at trials. A tenant or landlord who would like more help can visit the Landlord Tenant Resource Center or talk to another lawyer. There is information at the end of this sheet on where to find legal help. n What happens at a trial? If the tenant has defenses to the A jury trial may not be scheduled for three or four months landlord’s claims, the tenant can ask for a trial. At the trial, both or more after your first court date. Before your trial date, you the landlord and tenant can present evidence. This evidence will have to come back for several court dates. You will have may include documents, photographs, or testimony from wit- a scheduling conference, mediation, and pretrial conference. nesses. Either a judge or jury will hear the evidence and make You also may have to file documents with the court or with the a decision about whether the landlord or the tenant wins the other party. If you miss a court date or fail to file a document, case. At a trial, the landlord has the burden of proving his or her you may lose your case. If you do not have an attorney, it may claim against the tenant. If the tenant has filed a counterclaim, be hard for you to do everything you have to do for a jury trial. recoupment, or setoff, the tenant has the burden of proving Some people without attorneys choose a bench trial instead of a those claims.
    [Show full text]
  • Is Innocent a Possible Verdict in a Criminal Trial
    Is Innocent A Possible Verdict In A Criminal Trial diddleCarotenoidCreepiest imprecisely Hank Chase kowtow whileIslamises indefiniteher eiderdownperceptually Richy so worths or theoretically outspan that thirsts. tempestuously that Dorian equiponderates when Ibrahim isvery blistered. downstream. Aldo still Costs of doing charity with not proven currently outweigh possible benefits. The shade then enters a judgment based on the verdict and avoid jury is released from playing If seen not guilty the defendant in certain criminal lawsuit is released. Clear My evidence What and on his Criminal Record LegalMatch. Did not openly available from retrieving information is innocent a verdict criminal trial in court practice, if the new jersey are not an electronic register. Means that if there ever two reasons given has the ultimate and iron are possible explanations. A The verdict in every person action ever be general. Both a verdict criminal trial is in some cases? That I thought some have resulted in cotton not guilty verdict had the Defendant gone to trial. Does not not guilty go on item record? Or her liable in american criminal than the results from the act trial but likely be applied. In practice criminal trial its burden if proof required of the prosecutor is to prove criminal guilt. If the defendant is found guilty the judge in may case will decide on sentence. Criminal Justice System The Trial in County WA. Anyone accused of fiction crime is presumed under the law but be innocent however they plead. Once a better trial has begun but turn it goes quickly the clean it's penalty for a defendant to obtain may not-guilty verdict from his judge.
    [Show full text]
  • Instructions for Parties Including Guidelines Regarding Protected, Confidential, Or Sensitive Information
    Instructions for Parties including guidelines regarding protected, confidential, or sensitive information Office of Administrative Law Judges U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street NE, Mail Stop 2585 Washington, DC 20549 Phone: (202) 551-6030 Fax: (202) 777-1031 Email: [email protected] This information is primarily for parties1 appearing in Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC or the Commission) administrative proceedings before an administrative law judge. If you have questions regarding the record of a case, documents posted on the SEC’s website, or electronic filing through the SEC’s Electronic Filings in Administrative Proceedings (eFAP) system, please contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400. For eFAP system access or technical issues, contact (202) 551-EFAP (3327). Part I: General Instructions Administrative proceedings are governed by the SEC’s rules of practice found at 17 C.F.R. § 201.100 et seq. The rules are available online here. All parties, including pro se respondents,2 are expected to be familiar with and abide by these rules. Parties must also familiarize themselves with the Office of the Secretary’s eFAP instructions and user manual governing electronic filing. Legal Representation Respondents may retain their own legal counsel to represent them3 and are encouraged to do so. The SEC cannot, however, appoint or pay for a 1 As used in this document, the term party or parties usually means Respondents and the Division of Enforcement. Non-party case participants should follow these instructions to the extent applicable. 2 A respondent is the person or entity charged in an administrative proceeding instituted by the Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bench Trial: It Really Is Different by HON
    Back to Table of Contents ADVOCATE SUMMER 2009 92 THE ✯ FROM MY SIDE OF T HE BENCH The Bench Trial: It Really Is Different BY HON. RANDY WILSON E’RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A BENCH TRIAL and I’m ask a witness to read a paragraph out loud. The document Wreminded of the many ways that a trial to the judge is already in evidence; there’s absolutely no reason to have differs from a jury trial. Trial lawyers often approach the witness demonstrate his reading prowess. Simply turn them the same, but there are fundamental differences. Now to the judge and say, “Your Honor, I’m now going to focus my that I’ve presided over scores of bench trials, I offer these questions on paragraph 4 of Ex. 1. Would you like a minute observations. to look at it before I begin my questions?” And, whatever you do, avoid the hackneyed trick of reading a paragraph from First, keep in mind that the judge is deciding both the a document and merely asking the witness, “did I read that facts and the law. As a result, you should approach the correctly?” That ruse might be a way to drive home a point in trial differently from the onset. The opening statement to a a document to a jury, but it has little place with the judge. jury will focus on the facts. In a bench trial, however, the opening statement should weave the facts and law together. Sixth, think of closing arguments the same as a jury trial.
    [Show full text]
  • The Decision Between a Jury Trial and a Bench Trial in Federal Civil Litigation Can Have Significant Implications for the Procedure, Timing, and Outcome of a Case
    CIVIL JURY TRIALS IN FEDERAL COURT The decision between a jury trial and a bench trial in federal civil litigation can have significant implications for the procedure, timing, and outcome of a case. Although bench trials have certain perceived advantages over jury trials, such as greater efficiency, there are various reasons why parties might want a jury trial if it is available. Counsel expecting to resolve a dispute at trial should carefully examine the unique procedural and practical features of jury trials and how jury trials may be preferable to bench trials. 26 June/July 2019 | Practical Law © 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights reserved. HAROLD P. NORMAN C. SIMON SAMANTHA V. ETTARI WEINBERGER PARTNER SPECIAL COUNSEL AND PARTNER KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & E-DISCOVERY COUNSEL KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP FRANKEL LLP Norm maintains a diverse Harold represents plaintiffs litigation practice with a Samantha maintains a and defendants in false focus on advertising law diverse litigation practice advertising disputes under the federal Lanham and is co-chair of the firm’s Advertising Litigation with an emphasis on advertising litigation, Act and is co-chair of the firm’s Advertising group. He represents global brands in false contract and licensing disputes, business tort Litigation group. He also represents clients advertising disputes under the federal Lanham litigation, securities and regulatory defense, in other complex intellectual property and Act and class actions brought pursuant to and bankruptcy litigation. She also serves as commercial litigations and arbitrations, class consumer fraud statutes, as well as in challenges the firm’s e-discovery counsel, guiding clients actions brought pursuant to consumer fraud before the NAD and the NARB.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 7 TRIAL PROCEEDINGS 1. the Non-Jury Trial (Bench Trial)
    TMCEC Bench Book CHAPTER 7 TRIAL PROCEEDINGS Defendants in municipal courts have a right to appear by counsel as in other cases. Art. 45.020, C.C.P. When the defendant appears, the court can require the defendant to enter a plea in writing. Art. 45.021, C.C.P. A defendant who wants the judge to hear the evidence and decide his or her case must waive the right to a jury trial in writing. Art. 45.025, C.C.P. Unless good cause is shown by the defendant, a municipal court may order a defendant who does not waive a jury trial and who fails to appear for the trial to pay the costs incurred for impaneling the jury. This order is enforced by contempt as prescribed by Section 21.002(c), G.C. See Article 45.026, C.C.P. If the prosecutor is not present at trial—both bench and jury—the court may: (1) postpone the trial to another date; (2) appoint an attorney pro tem (see Article 2.07, C.C.P.); or (3) proceed to trial. Art. 45.031, C.C.P. If the judge opts to proceed to trial, the State’s failure to present a prima facie case of the offense alleged in the complaint entitles the defendant to a directed verdict of “not guilty.” Art. 45.032, C.C.P. In this instance, State’s witnesses, such as the peace officer, may be present at the trial but unable to testify for the State unless called by the prosecutor. Because procedures for conducting a bench trial differ from a jury trial, there are separate checklists for these procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • Wasserman + Walker 34 Final
    The New World of Agency Adjudication Christopher J. Walker Melissa F. Wasserman CSAS Working Paper 17-004 Perspectives on the PTAB : The New Role of the Administrative State in the Innovation Economy, November 9, 2017 The New World of Agency Adjudication Christopher J. Walker* & Melissa F. Wasserman** In 1946, the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) set forth the criteria for “formal” adjudication, requiring an administrative law judge to make the initial determination and the agency head to have the final word. That is the lost world. Today, the vast majority of agency adjudications Congress has created are not paradigmatic “formal” adjudications as set forth in the APA. It turns out that there is great diversity in the procedures by which federal agencies adjudicate. This new world involves a variety of less-independent administrative judges, hearing officers, and other agency personnel adjudicating disputes. But, like in the lost world, the agency head retains final decision-making authority. In 2011, Congress created yet another novel agency tribunal— the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)—to adjudicate patent validity disputes between private parties. Questions abound concerning the PTAB’s proper place in the modern administrative state, as its features depart from the textbook accounts of APA- governed “formal” adjudication. Many of these questions are working DOI: https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38Q23R09S Copyright © 2019 California Law ReView, Inc. California Law ReView, Inc. (CLR) is a California nonprofit corporation. CLR and the authors are solely responsible for the content of their publications. * Associate Professor of Law, The Ohio State UniVersity Moritz College of Law. ** Charles Tilford McCormick Professor of Law, The UniVersity of Texas at Austin School of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Motions for Directed Verdict” in Non-Jury Trials
    “MOTIONS FOR DIRECTED VERDICT” IN NON-JURY TRIALS Gerald P. Greiman Most litigators instinctively know what to do in defending a jury case when the plaintiff rests without having adequately proven its claims. You move for a directed verdict. But what do you do under similar circumstances in a non-jury trial? You certainly want to try to bring the trial to a close at that point. Yet, it seems anomalous to move for a directed verdict. Absent a jury, there is nobody for the court to direct and no one who will be rendering a verdict. (“In legal proceedings, a ‘verdict’ is the decision of a jury upon an issue or issues of fact submitted for their deliberation and determination.” Cochran v. DeShazo, 538, S.W.2d 598, 600 (Mo. App. 1976). Well, defense counsel, don’t despair. There is a procedure in non-jury cases for making the equivalent of a motion for directed verdict. However, the terminology and standards governing the grant or denial of such motions are different from motions for directed verdicts. It is important to understand the differences. In Missouri state court, motions for directed verdict in jury cases are governed by Missouri Supreme Court Rule 72.01(a). The applicable standards are familiar. A motion for directed verdict may be granted only when the court believes that, considering all of the evidence, reasonable minds could reach only one conclusion. In considering a motion for directed verdict, the court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. In federal court, motions for directed verdict in jury cases are governed by Fed.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Charleston Municipal Court
    City of Charleston Municipal Court Scheduled Court Events - Monday, September 27, 2021 to Friday, October 29, 2021 127 Cannon Street Llc C/O Lucas Morrison, Company Short Term Rental Court Hearing 10:00 am Monday, September 27, 2021 U48460 127 Cannon Street Llc C/O Lucas Morrison, Company Short Term Rental Court Hearing 10:00 am Monday, September 27, 2021 U48461 127 Cannon Street Llc C/O Lucas Morrison, Company Short Term Rental Court Hearing 10:00 am Monday, September 27, 2021 U48462 127 Coming Street Llc, Company Livability Bench Trial 8:30 am Monday, October 11, 2021 U47606 33 Spring Street Llc C/O Ray Hamilton Morrison, Comp Livability Bench Trial 10:00 am Monday, October 25, 2021 U48489 33 Spring Street Llc C/O Ray Hamilton Morrison, Comp Livability Bench Trial 10:00 am Monday, October 25, 2021 U48490 33 Spring Street Llc C/O Ray Hamilton Morrison, Comp Livability Bench Trial 10:00 am Monday, October 25, 2021 U48491 Abdo, David Livability Bench Trial 8:30 am Monday, September 27, 2021 U34792 Abrams, Sarah Jury Trial 9:00 am Monday, October 4, 2021 20200415807296 Abusai, Annria Livability Bench Trial 8:30 am Monday, October 11, 2021 U47069 Adams, Avory Traffic Bench Trial 8:30 am Thursday, October 7, 2021 20210415990389 Adams, Caleb Criminal Bench Trial 3:00 pm Thursday, September 30, 2021 20210415951890 Adams, Caleb Criminal Bench Trial 3:00 pm Thursday, September 30, 2021 20210415951891 Adams, Dayvonte Criminal Bench Trial 8:30 am Friday, October 1, 2021 20210416007797 9/24/2021 Page 1 Scheduled Court Events - Monday, September
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Division Bench Trial Protocol
    CRIMINAL BENCH TRIALS PROTOCOL 1. CASE INVENTORIES: Court Administration has identified 342 cases in “Awaiting Trial” status as of September 2020. These include Trial List cases for the 6 Judges assigned to the Criminal Division as of March 2020 – with intervening dispositions (Guilty Pleas) removed. It is not known how many of these cases are not entitled to a jury trial, i.e. punishable by a sentence of 6 months or less. 2. TRIAL POOL: Regardless of the currently assigned Judge, all cases where the defendant is represented by counsel will be assigned to a potential Bench Trial pool. Pro-se cases will not be eligible for this program. 3. TRIAGE JUDGE CONFERENCE: The President Judge will designate one (1) Judge to act as a TRIAGE JUDGE. The Triage Judge will not be the trial judge, so he/she can actively participate in negotiations without recusal concerns. (a) Triage cases will be scheduled in trial list order – meaning all trial list cases for “Judge A” will be scheduled first, then “Judge B’s” cases, etc. (b) Triage cases will be scheduled at twenty (20) minute intervals – 12 per day to start. Conferences will be held in a courtroom with attorneys present. Defendants (incarcerated or on bail) shall be available by video. (c) The purpose of the conference is to determine: (i) if a plea agreement can be reached; or (ii) if the parties will agree to have the matter determined via a bench trial; and (iii) if the defendant is incarcerated, whether he will appear via advanced communication technology (d) Any case in which a plea agreement is reached will be scheduled by the Triage Judge’s Court Clerk before an upcoming Plea Day Judge.
    [Show full text]
  • VERDICT: a Call for Future Research on Alternative Acquittals Hannah Phalen*
    OVERCOMING THE OPPOSITION TO A THIRD VERDICT: A Call for Future Research on Alternative Acquittals Hannah Phalen* INTRODUCTION In 1807, former Vice President Aaron Burr faced charges of treason. After a month-long trial, the jury deliberated for less than an hour. When they returned, however, they were not content with delivering one of the two traditional verdicts. Instead, the jury foreman declared, “[w]e of the jury say that Aaron Burr is not proved to be guilty under the indictment . submitted to us.”1 Defense attorneys protested the wording of the verdict but Chief Justice Marshall let it stand, recording the verdict as “not guilty.”2 Nearly 200 years later, President Bill Clinton faced impeachment in the United States Senate. Rather than voting guilty or not guilty, Republican Senator Arlen Specter announced that the charges against the President were “not proven.”3 Specter was upset that the Senate refused to allow live testimony and explained his vote by stating, “I do not believe the president is ‘not guilty’. I believe that there has been . a sham trial, and it’s a trial on which you can’t really come to a verdict.”4 In the American criminal justice system, juries are typically limited to one of two verdicts: guilty or not guilty.5 A guilty verdict demonstrates the jury’s * J.D. Candidate, May 2019, Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University; M.S. Candidate, May 2019, College of Interdisciplinary Studies at Arizona State University; B.A. Psychology, 2015, University of Colorado Colorado Springs. The Author would like to thank Professor Linda Demaine for her advisory assistance, and extends special gratitude to the student editors who assisted during the writing of this Article.
    [Show full text]
  • Conducting Virtual Bench Trials
    Conducting Virtual Bench Trials Friday, January 15, 2021 Program - 12:00 - 1:15 p.m. Zoom Webinar 1.25 Hrs. General CLE Credit Provider #36 The Los Angeles County Bar Association is a State Bar of California approved MCLE provider. The Los Angles County Bar Association certifies that this activity has been approved for MCLE credit by the State Bar of California. The Litigation Section presents: Co-sponsored by: Association of Business Trial Lawyers Association of Southern California Defense Counsel Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles Conducting Virtual Bench Trials Friday, January 15, 2021 Time: 12:00 — 1:15 p.m. 1.25 hour of CLE credit Zoom Webinar Practicing law virtually has become the new normal. In the current environment, the best way to get to trial may be a virtual bench trial. Hear directly from Los Angeles Superior Court Supervising Judge of Civil Hon. David J. Cowan, and plaintiff and defense attorneys, who have all conducted virtual bench trials. Practice pointers, technical requirements, and strategy considerations for virtual trials will all be discussed. This program is a must attend for successfully practicing during the pandemic. Speakers: Hon. David Cowan, Supervising Judge of Civil Los Angeles County Superior Court John Blumberg, Blumberg Law Corporation Lucia Coyoca, Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP Timothy Reynolds, Paul Hastings LLP Elise Sanguinetti, Arias Sanguinetti Wang & Torrijos LLP Douglas Silverstein, Kesluk Silverstein Jacob & Morrison PC (moderator) Thank you to our Sponsor: To register, click on this flyer to be directed to the LACBA website. 1 THE MANY BENEFITS OF STENO CONNECT Our SIGNATURE VIDEOCONFERENCING PLATFORM is built specifically for remote litigation, with seamless exhibit handling, a witness preparation greenroom, participant prioritization, and numerous details designed to make remote bench trials run smoothly.
    [Show full text]