The state’s judicial watchdog this week admonished an Orange County Superior Court judge who showed bias and denied parties in civil cases their full right to be heard.
Judge Derek Hunt, who has been on the bench since 1997, also made discourteous remarks that showed a poor demeanor, according to the California Commission on Judicial Performance.
The public rebuke is based on four cases brought before Hunt from 2018 to 2021.
In the case of Steciw et al vs Petro Geosciences, Hunt ruled on a motion to dismiss without giving all the parties time to file their opposition.
“Whether you like it or not, I’m going to deal with them, and you can figure out what you’re going to do with it,” Hunt told the parties.
When the plaintiffs’ counsel later asked if he could file his opposition that day, Hunt responded: “The way it works is, file when you can. I’m not going to turn it down. I start reading. And when I get bored, I stop reading.”
Hunt dismissed the case. The commission concluded that Judge Hunt’s conduct in advancing the hearing on the motion to dismiss by two weeks, without notice to the parties — even though the plaintiffs had not yet filed their opposition — denied them the opportunity to be heard.
In a defective product case, Clelia Almendarez et al. v. Kia Motors America, Horn referred to a separate but related class-action suit in federal court. The plaintiff’s attorney explained that they were not part of the federal case.
Even so, Horn delayed the case in his court. Appellate justices ruled that Horn abused his discretion, and the commission agreed.
In the personal injury case of Paymeneh Jahangiri vs. Madison Yates, Hunt proceeded with a hearing in the attorneys’ absence and dismissed the case — after hearing the parties had reached a settlement.
As a result of the dismissal, the plaintiff was unable to recover the amounts that multiple defendants in the case had agreed upon and was forced to settle with only one of the defendants for a much lower amount.
In the case of Alejandro Ramirez vs CL Education, the plaintiffs sought $165,000 in attorney fees and legal costs. Hunt reduced the amount to $1,000 with no explanation.
An appellate court concluded, as did the commission, that Hunt’s arbitrary action was an abuse of his discretion. “These matters were, at a minimum, improper action,” the commission said.
In his response to the commission, Hunt acknowledged the need to reach a balance between being effective and fair and listening to the parties, and resolving matters quickly and efficiently.
It is not the first time Hunt has been disciplined by the commission.
He received an advisory letter in 2009 for commenting to a news reporter about a case that he had presided over, but was still pending before the appellate court.
Eight commission members voted for the latest public admonishment and one voted for a private admonishment. Two commission members did not participate.
from Signage https://ift.tt/BYEGMR2
via Irvine Sign Company
from Signage https://ift.tt/PuiCa4S
via Irvine Sign Company
