01:10:01

Subscribe and listen on…

Apple Podcasts | Stitcher | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Amazon Music | PocketCasts | iHeartRadio | Player.FM Podcasts

Watch Full Interview | View Show Notes | View Transcript

In 2024, women serve as presiding judges in 5 Southern California counties and as presiding justices on several California Courts of Appeal. The Portia Project was invited to highlight many of these dynamic women presiding judges – Justices Kathleen O'Leary, Lee Smalley Edmon, and Maria Stratton, LA Superior Court Presiding Judge Samantha Jessner, and Orange County Superior Court Assistant Presiding Judge Cheri Pham – in a live panel at the California Lawyers' Association's Annual Litigation and Appellate Summit in Long Beach, California. This episode features that panel discussion.

Relevant episode links:

Justice Lee Smalley Edmon, Justice Maria Stratton, Judge Samantha Jessner, Judge Kathleen O’Leary

I'm pleased to be presenting this episode at the California Lawyers Association Litigation and Appellate Summit in Long Beach, California with an amazing array of presiding justices from throughout Southern California. On this panel, we have Presiding Justice Lee Smalley Edmon of the Second Appellate District, Presiding Justice Maria Stratton from the Second Appellate District as well, Presiding Justice Kathleen O'Leary from the Fourth Appellate District, Division Three, Presiding Judge Samantha Jessner from the Los Angeles Superior Court, and Assistant Presiding Judge Cheri Pham from the Orange County Superior Court. 

Path To The Bench

This is an outstanding group of panelists and a special point in the history of the judiciary in Southern California with so many female presiding judges and justices in the trial and appellate courts of this state. We wanted to highlight that at this summit. I wanted to start with the whole panel with the first foundational question of what was your path to the bench and how did your experience prior to the bench prepare you for service as a judicial officer? I'll start first with Justice Edmon.

Let me start by saying thank you so much for having us here today. I'm so honored to be with this group of wonderful judges and justices. It’s lovely to see so many of you who I know in this audience. Thank you for having us. My path to the bench is a fun story for me. When I became a new lawyer, that was the beginning of my path. 

I had not the foggiest idea that I ever wanted to become a judge, would become a judge, could become a judge, and yet the first person that I worked with, I was in a big firm, commercial litigation, and worked with a partner who said from the very get-go, “You need to give back to the community. You need to become involved in public service and you need to become involved in bar association activities.” That was the launch. 

I did a lot of pro bono work. I ultimately became involved in the boards of those with service organizations and also became involved in my bar at that point, the LA County Bar. I got involved both as a young lawyer and as a senior lawyer. That gave me opportunities to see what it was like to be doing public service. Probably the penultimate of this is that one of my very last projects for the LA County Bar before I ultimately became a judge was a project that was called the Blue Ribbon Commission for Superior Court Improvement. 

To me at the time, it seemed perfect to have a bunch of lawyers and a bunch of judges to sit down and talk about what was wrong with the Superior Court. Now that I'm on the other side of the bench, it's surprising to me that some of these judges had the courage to agree to do that. The fact of the matter is I got to know a bunch of judges very well. I got to know the legal system and loved it. 

For me, it was a natural progression at that point to join the LA Superior Court. Ultimately, I ended up on the Court of Appeal. That was purely because I picked up the phone one day and Joan Dempsey Klein was on the other end of the line and said, “You know what? We need you over here on the Court of Appeal. You have to come over and pro tem.” The rest was history. That was my path.

There's always an evolution. We saw the evolution as your career progressed. I have to say this because I still remember this so fondly. You were also in your service gracious to the next generation and others in your bar service. I remember you being very open and saying, “I'll drive from LA to Orange County to meet with you to talk.” I don’t remember what it was about. I just remember that I was a junior attorney. It felt lovely. 

We went to the wrong Long Beach Marriott. My apologies for being late today because I was on the other side of town but I sure as heck hope I do that. To me, I stand on the shoulders of all those folks. That's my job now to reach down and bring those other folks along. Anybody who wants to have a cup of coffee and talk about their career, I'm there. I am happy that that's what we owed them.

I remember that fondly and I think that's how you walk away. Justice Stratton, what’s your path to the bench? 

Mine was a little different. I clerked for a judge on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal who immediately told me after a couple of months of working together that I needed to be a judge. I went to law school. I didn't even know any lawyers when I went to law school. I went because in those days, if you didn't know what you wanted to do, you went to law school.

You took the LSAT. You didn't do all this other stuff. It was very different in those days. Anyway, he kept telling me during my clerkship, “I want you to become a judge and what are you going to do out of your clerkship?” I said, “I'm thinking about going into a criminal because I want to be a trial lawyer.” He says, “Great. I'll see if I can get you a job at the U.S. Attorney's Office because it's much easier to go to the bench from the U.S. Attorney's Office.”

I interviewed at the U.S. Attorney's Office, but I also interviewed at the Federal Public Defender's Office. There was no choice. It was very different. I was drawn to the Federal Public Defender's Office, and I got a job there. He was so disappointed. He gave me so much stuff because of that. “You should have been a prosecutor.” 

I went into private practice for a while, and then I came back as the head of the office and he's still bugging me. He was such a wonderful mentor. He saw stuff in me that I didn't see. He kept telling me, “You need to go to the bench.” I started applying and then I applied under Gray Davis and the word I got back was he doesn't appoint public defenders. 

I applied federally and the word I got back was, “We don't appoint public defenders.” He was very upset. He said, “I told you so.” Gray Davis got recalled. I figured, “What the heck? Let's try again.” Schwartz in there didn't have that thing going on. I sailed through with him and as a lifelong Democrat, I got appointed by a Republican, go figure. I got appointed to the Superior Court and then I was there for twelve years. I loved it. 

Lee called and asked me to pro tem in her division and I had never even considered the Court of Appeal because I thought I should be in the trial court and all that. I came over and pro tem with Lee and as she said she lifted everybody up. After that experience, I thought that I liked it. I applied to the court of appeal and if it hadn't been for Lee, I wouldn't be here. It's payback and pay it forward. 

Paying it forward is a good thing. You always apply it in different ways. 

Now, I'll tell you, if anybody's a public defender out there, it's a great time to apply to the bench. Come on over. Legal aid or public interest, just go for it. It's a great time. Not so great for prosecutors. 

Justice Kathleen O'Leary.

I hate to even tell my story because it's such ancient history. I was a public defender. I was a public defender in Orange County, and I spent five years in the public defender's office and then decided that I would go into private practice. I was there for six months doing criminal defense, a little family law, and even a little civil. It was a real learning experience for me, but I had applied for the bench right before I left the public defender's office and ended up getting appointed. 

In 1981, I was appointed to the bench. It was a municipal court way back when we had one. We didn't have cell phones, we didn't have computers on our bench, and women wore skirts to court. It was a very different time. When I first went to the municipal court, the presiding judge at the time said, “That was an open trial court, which was fine.” I would be doing civil law motions. 

I thought, “Really?” I pulled out the books and I knew there were two different like sustain or overrule. I want to make sure I got the language right. I might've been hazed a little, but I studied hard. I asked some of the lawyers who aren’t exactly big firm lawyers. Sometimes I asked them questions that they were even stumped by because I had worked so hard to show that I knew what I was doing. 

After five years on the municipal court, I was elevated to the superior court by George Deukmajian, because I let any governor appoint me. I’ve been in that sphere for 13 years. Gray Davis appointed me to the appellate court. After 12 years on the appellate court, Jerry Brown appointed me PJ of my division. I like the symmetry. I started with Jerry Brown and I ended with Jerry Brown

In terms of my taking the bench, it was a very different time. There weren't a lot of women trying cases in Superior Court. I was the first woman to try a murder trial to a jury in Orange County. There were a lot of firsts and so people paid a lot of attention to you. I think that was a real advantage for me in getting noticed and getting on the bench.

Justice Jessner.

I echo Lee's expression of gratitude for having us here this afternoon. It's certainly our pleasure and our privilege to be here. I graduated from law school and I went to a big law firm in downtown Los Angeles. I was there as an associate in the litigation department for a couple of years. I was lucky enough to try a case, believe it or not, with a senior partner who still believed in developing associates and respected the practice of law and the fact that it was a profession. 

He owed it to others to bring others up. I was lucky enough to be that person. When we finished that trial, I had a whole new view of what I wanted to do as an attorney. I wanted to be in a courtroom. I was lucky enough to learn that the US Attorney's Office was hiring after many years of a hiring freeze and Nora Mannella was the United States Attorney and was hiring lots of people, lots of women, and lots of people of color.

She hired me and I went to the US Attorney's Office. I was in the criminal division. I was there in two different stints. In between, I went in-house. I went to Boeing, which is down the street from here. Also, I was an Assistant Inspector General for the Los Angeles Police Commission before going back to the US Attorney's Office. 

I was lucky also in that many women were going to Governor Schwarzenegger who didn't subscribe to these, no public defenders, very few women or whatever. He was like come one, come all. There were many women from the US Attorney's Office as well as the Federal Public Defender's Office, I knew Maria back then, who were getting appointed to the bench. 

Like the others, I never imagined that I would or could be a judge but watching my colleagues get appointed put me in a frame of mind where I thought, “Maybe I could do that. I don't think I'll be as good as they'll be but I'm going to throw my hat in the ring,” which I did. I think we're probably talking about Arthur, right? No, it was Pregerson. 

I had two judges who supported me to a very great extent, who were very helpful in not only helping me get on the bench but also doing what Lee talked about, which is urging me to get involved in the legal community beyond the billable hour, beyond whatever case that I was assigned to at the US Attorney's Office. I think one of the reasons that I have been able to transition to the work on the Superior Court is I did a lot of different things as a lawyer. 

I was in private practice. I was in-house in a Fortune 10 company. I was a federal prosecutor. I worked in a law enforcement agency, the LAPD in an exterior role. When you become a judge on the trial court, you need to have that flexibility so that when the presiding judge contacts you and says, “You're going here and it's over in this part of the county,” you say, “Thank you, may I have another?” I think I felt like I did a bunch of different things as a lawyer. I think I can figure out how to do different things as a judge. That's how it happened. 

I had a sense that everything was figured out. You have that sense because you did it. You worked full-time in practice. Judge Pham. 

First of all, thank you very much, MC, for having me. It's an extreme honor to be part of this panel. These are the women that I aspire to be. In all seriousness, my fellow panel members are all people that I aspire to be when I grow up. I have to start and go way back to when I immigrated to this country with my family from Vietnam. In those moments, we faced many challenges, including financial hardships, language, and cultural barriers. 

My father would have been a writer for a newspaper and he's putting himself in law school in Vietnam, slipped into a very deep depression because he could not adjust to the idea of having to start a life over in the country that he had. He couldn't work and my mother, who had been a stay-at-home mom, was forced to become a breadwinner, and she had to go work first in a [Inaudible] shop that has an assembly. 

Both my older brothers, ten and nine years older, had to quit school to go work. Being a young child, I was lucky enough to continue my studies and attend school without being interrupted. I went to college and law school on financial aid and student loans. The reason I decided to pursue law was that I wanted to do something for my father. I was very grateful that he got to live to see me become a lawyer before he passed away. 

After I passed the bar, I practiced criminal law for nineteen years, first in the public defender's office in West County, and then I became a prosecutor at the DA's office. I chose public interest because I felt more accepted and welcomed. Back when I graduated from law school, diversity was not quite a priority for law firms. 

Another major reason why I went to the public interest was because coming from where I did, I felt that I couldn't have a more meaningful impact by representing people who face challenging circumstances like I did, defendants and victims alike. That was also the same reason that motivated me to learn from open judicial proceedings in 2010. I was fortunate enough to get elected and get an interim appointment from Governor Schwarzenegger that same year. That's my path to the bench. 

Advice For Aspiring Judges

Your story is so touching, Judge Pham, because of your family's experience, but also the connection with your father and being able to accomplish things that he couldn't do. That's unique. What advice would you give to someone, a woman lawyer, or any of us, who might be interested in joining the bench? Let’s start with Judge Jessner on this. 

I recently read one of those little phrases, “Don't talk yourself out of it. There are plenty of other people that will do that for you.” I think you have to believe in yourself and you have to believe that you belong on the bench. Part and parcel of having that confidence is doing well in your practice. 

As I mentioned, I had a dynamic career because of things that opportunities presented themselves. With each opportunity, I learned more not only about myself, but I learned more about what I wanted to do in the law. I think when a young or new attorney goes into the profession, you don't have the frame of reference to understand that there are many different things that you can do, many different ways that you can work, many different environments that you can work in. 

Every opportunity, whether it's going to work out long-term or short-term, is going to provide you with very great opportunities to learn. With that kind of interest, dedication, discipline, and hard work, you can fill out that application. By the way, please fill out the application. By July, we will have 30 vacancies in the Los Angeles Superior Court. We want you. All of you can be a judge. Believe that you can do it because you can do it. 

I agree. You will also be open to considering different things. I think somehow we get so focused on, “I'm going to do this.” You don't see what goes on to other things. Be open to recognizing them. That's important too. Judge Pham, what advice would you give? You also need judges on your court.

More so than Judge Jessner. 

That's not true. 

The truth is the larger the number in LA, the larger the percentage in Orange County.

The work still needs to be done. That's 30 dockets without a judge.

I would advise you to seek mentors and also network and establish relationships not just with people in your practice area, but with people in the legal community in general because these are the people who will support you when the time comes for you to apply for an apprenticeship. 

Another advice I would give is that if you are interested in an apprenticeship, start gathering and recording your trials, important cases, including case numbers, information about your public counsel, and contact information of judges who review your case because this is all the information that you will need for your judicial application. 

I would recommend that you keep them because when the time comes for you to apply, you will have the information handy. You will have to go online and look up cases that you handled years ago. That would be my good practical advice because that's an extensive inquiry on the application. Cases are here. I know because I'm mentoring judicial advocates.

I guess I would tell you this because I was in federal criminal defense for 25 years. I was in a little teen-ish practice. A lot of people will say that getting on the bench is who you know. It's who knows you. That's how you get on the bench. It's very personal. Once you get through that verbal application, it becomes a very personal process and it's about who knows you. 

If you're in a little niche like I was, you have to get out of that niche some way and the best way to do that is to do bar activities. They don't have to be bar activities necessarily in your practice area. They have to be bar activities that you like. Maybe you're not a family lawyer, but you'd like to do domestic violence work, or maybe you're not a criminal lawyer, but you want to do something else.

It has to be something that you like and then once you get into it, you have to show what you can do because one thing about becoming a judge, that's a whole application process, is you never know who's going to pop out of somewhere and say something great about you. You never know. You can probably guess who's going to say nasty things about you based on your experience, but you never know who's going to say great things about you. 

You never know who will pop out of somewhere and say something great about you.

You don't know how much juice that person has with so many committees and the governor and the secretary and all that stuff. You can never go wrong shining your light in a bar activity. You're out of your practice area or you're meeting people you ordinarily wouldn't even come across in the courthouse probably. You're expanding the people who know you. 

The other thing that I would say, based on a very weird experience I had, which I'll tell you about briefly is once you decide to apply, get the word out that you applied. I know that at least for a lot of women that I know, it’s a little self-effacing. We don't like to self-promote. You don't have to self-promote. Just get the word out to people who know you that you have your application out there because they'll promote it for you. 

You don't have to do anything, but if you keep your light under a bushel, then that odd random person who's going to end up helping you is not even going to know about it. I tell you this because when I applied to be a federal public defender, I didn't tell anybody. Somebody at my firm left the application on my chair. Somebody was trying to get rid of me maybe, but they left the application. I walked in the morning and I asked, “Who put this on my chair?” I looked at it and I said, “I didn't even know this position was open. I'd like to apply.” 

I put my application in and I didn't tell anybody. A very close friend of mine ended up calling me about three weeks later and said, “I didn't know you applied.” I asked, “How did you know that I applied?” He says, “I got a call from the selection committee for the person that you're running against. My response to them was, “He'd be okay, but who you should get it is Maria.” The caller said, “She's applied too.” He said, “I didn't know that.” 

I felt so stupid. I was such a ninny not for even reaching out to people that I knew would be in support of me to at least let them know that I was out there. He, of course, then went on to give me a recommendation instead of the person that, the other person that they were calling about. I still hadn't even told my firm. 

When I related this to my senior partner, he said, “Are you insane? Start calling everybody you know to tell them.” You don't have to call them to say, “Call somebody for me, or will you say something nice?” Call to tell them, even if it's to warn them that they might get a call about you because they probably will. As I said, you never know who that random person is that is going to end up helping your application.

It's so true. I think it is in your career in general, as you go on, you recognize that somebody must have said something nice about me or recommended me for something. That's how I got into this particular role. You may never know who that person was. The only thing you can do is pay it forward to the next person and do the same thing but so much of it, that's part of it for sure. 

Also, I was thinking about the bar service. Both the UN Justice and significant experience in that. I remember my services and on the lawyers, the board was exactly what you said, Judge Jessner, I met so many people who did so many different things, different kinds of practice that I never would have met. We're speaking to the firm here at the Lawyers Association, those who enjoy our work and our service, that getting outside of your particular niche is good. 

That's one of the themes of the larger Bar Association, to people who are in different practice areas. Maybe I understand from them what it is they do that, it's the next thing I want to do. I didn't know what was involved in that. Now I have somebody who's practicing that. 

The flip side of what Justice Stratton was talking about, I know how important it is to always be civil and professional in everything that you do because you never know the person who's on the other side of the case, the person who's sitting at the table next to you, you don't know what position they’re on and what they're going to have to say when that evaluation form goes out. You always want to make sure that you have always been the best that you can be in dealing with those folks. I know you all are in here. I see so many people out here now, I know that's what you do.

The other thing that I would say is a more formal matter. The LA Superior Court has created a program called the California Judicial Mentor Program, where if you are interested in becoming a judge and want to have a mentor in the process, that is somebody who's going to talk to you about maybe what it's like to be a judge and give you some tips on how you ought to go forward in your reaching out to try to become a judge. It's been wildly successful. They have group mentor educational programs and then one-on-one individual programs. I would encourage you, if you are interested in becoming a judge, it's a very worthwhile program and there's one on the appellate level as well if you're interested in doing that.

May I add? Orange County has one too. 

Great, I'm sorry. 

It's great to get information and to be able to talk to people about what's involved and now get the process. Justice O'Leary, your advice? 

I was going to say that when I speak to new admittees to the bar and speak at law school graduations, I always emphasize that your reputation starts the first day you practice and in some insensibility, how you treat people. I do have another little side gig. I'm the chair of Governor Newsom's Judicial Selection Committee in Orange County. 

The advice I remember was that something you did 17 years ago came out. When we get the applications with the Governor's Office and we start making calls, sometimes you stumble across someone who says something wonderful, “The greatest lawyer I've ever seen,” but you'd be surprised at the lawyers that will go, “I remember 17 years ago when I asked for a continuance because it was my kid's graduation day and opposing counsel said, ‘That's not good cause. I opposed it.’ She's a B-I -T-C-H and they tell you that. 

The other thing I would say is, that you want to do good work because you want people to remember the good work you did and I echo, you need to be involved in the Bar Association or your legal community in some way, because should you be fortunate enough to have your name sent to Jenny, it's never a good idea when you have 20% of people responding because no one knows you. If you are going to fill out an application, when you pick those five references, make sure they are people who know you.

You want to do good work because you want people to remember the good work you did.

I know that sounds silly to say, but there are instances when someone will say, “I know him. I've met him in a few bar things. I think I was on a committee with him.” The person that we're calling is a pillar of the legal community, very important in our legal community, but they can't tell us much about the applicant. All they can say is that he seems like a nice guy. He's in my inner court or she's been on a committee with me. When you pick your references, make sure that there are people who can tell whoever is calling that they know your legal work and that they know you have the qualities to make a good judge.

Being A Presiding Justice

I think in general, for references, somebody who knows you well and who can speak about you and your ability for a position. I'm going to flip now to the question of being a presiding justice, how that happened, and what that means. What is it that you do in your court in addition to the civil case? 

In my court, it's a little different because Division 3 of the 4th District is a standalone court in Orange County. We are an independent building. I do everything from how we stretch the budget and put more mulch and fewer plants. I get calls on the weekend that our HVAC isn't working and whether should we repair it or replace it from my court administrator. I also handle all those facility things, but then also assign cases. 

We assign cases randomly to our panels, but I do the same caseload as everybody else. I handle the personnel matters with all of our employees which is not something that is ever pleasant. Rarely does anybody get you involved because someone is an extraordinary achiever. It's usually because there's some problem. 

It's a tricky job for presiding judges because we don't have immunity for anything we do in the administrative arena. I'm always with my court administrator. I do that but I do the same thing I did in the Superior Court, the PGA acceptance, fewer people, and I have a much smaller staff. I have one person.

I came out the same way as Justice O'Leary when she described the difference between the jobs. I became the presiding judge of the LA Superior Court. That path was one where one had never gone before. There had never been a woman as a presiding judge of the LA Superior Court. Fortunately, I had former presiding judges who were all men who came to me and said, “It's time, we've got to do this. Now, here's a plan.”

Of course, you've got to show your chops. You've got to be civil and go over to criminal and show that you can do felony trials. I left my job as supervising civil to go over to do felony trials. The month after I accepted the job as assistant presiding judge, the budget fell through and so the next four years were nothing budget woes. 

The fact of the matter is it was a very rewarding job. It was one of those things that I think we're all going to say in this panel, mentors mean so much and it's men and women. It's people who are willing to be there to support you. That's how that happened for me in the Los Angeles Superior Court. I was able to do that without opposition because of the support that I had from the former presiding judges. 

On the Court of Appeal, it's way different. I've got a total of a panel of four and my job is to assign cases randomly. My job is to make sure that justice gets done and we keep those cases moving and we keep them moving timely. That's the most important thing. Fortunately, I have a lovely panel so it's not that difficult a job. 

You have good training from the LA Superior Court. You got a position that went well.

If I could say one more thing, when I was the PJ in Superior Court, I was the first woman. Sometimes you have to fake it till you make it. I was in a meeting and we were talking about a several-million-dollar project in the Orange County Superior Court on the HVAC system. I had no idea what HVAC was. 

I thought, if they talk about this long enough, I will figure it out from the context. You can't figure out HVAC from the context, so I don't know. I very carefully wrote a little note to my court administrator, “Alan, HVAC?” He wrote back, about Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning. Sometimes you have to fake it a little or a lot. 

The difference between the trial court PJ rule and the court of appeal rule in California at least is one, you're chosen by your peers at the trial court, and in the court of appeal, you're appointed by the governor. It's a whole different process. 

It's a life sentence on the court of appeal. It's a two or four-year term in Superior Court. 

I'm in the same position as Lee. The second district is divided into eight divisions. I'm PJ of the division eight and I got into it because I joined the court in 2018. Last year, our PJ decided to retire. She's gone, and so the other two judges and my justices in my division came to me and said, “We want you to apply.” 

I wasn't even thinking about it because my husband had passed and I was thinking, “I'm not going to make any big changes in my life until I get situated.” They both said, “No, you need to apply. We don't want an outsider coming in. We want somebody that we know.” That's how I ended up applying and I was lucky enough to get the position. 

You're not the boss of them. You're the peer who takes the complaints, watches over the case, and makes sure we're moving our inventory correctly and fast enough. At least with me, I'm trying to make sure that my justices aren't burning out and make sure everybody has the resources they need. If somebody's getting behind, you volunteer to take a case from them so that they can feel a little less stressed. 

With me, I've been in an administrative position to look after the invisible people and that would be the staff. I try to make sure that the staff is happy and nobody is getting abused or feeling like they're getting abused and develop an atmosphere. If they have a problem or they want to talk about something, they can come in and talk to us. The fact is we're not bosses, so we have no authority.

Because every judge will tell you they are an independent Constitution officer. 

There are additional challenges in that being the case. Judge Jessner?

To sit next to all these women, but especially these two, and we've talked a lot about mentors. Both Justice Edmon and Justice Stratton have helped me immensely in my career. For example, I followed Justice Stratton as the supervising judge of the mental health court. She probably didn't even remember this when I called her one day in a panic.

The LA Superior Court used to not be so great about providing a lot of training for people. I called her and I was in the middle of hearing this trial. I said, “Maria, I think I'm going to let this woman out of the state hospital. How do I do this?” You get to know the parties in mental health a lot. I explained the facts to her and she said, “Is that Ms. so-and-so?” She knew who I was talking about. 

She says, “This is what you say, these are the findings you make, do it and be done with it.” It was the bolt of confidence that I needed when I was feeling like, “I think this is a big decision.” Lee calmly says, “I was the first woman.” She was the first woman presiding judge of the largest trial court in the country in 2011 and 2012. 

She made sure that we had education after that. 

Exactly. A little training, but in 2011, it took in the 180-year history of the Los Angeles Superior Court. I don't even know if I could say that I started thinking about running for the assistant presiding judge position. It was people sort of unsolicitedly saying to me, “You should think about doing this.” I think one of the reasons that people may have thought that was a good idea, I still don't know that it was a good idea. 

It was a good idea when you're done. 

She asked me in January, I sat in a lot of different parts of the county. I think I’ve sat in 7 or 8 different courthouses around the county. I have heard lots of different kinds of cases. I had some idea of what a day in the life of a Superior Court Judge in Los Angeles was like in a misdemeanor court, in a mental health court, in small claims, and in an unlawful detainer, which I think is very important for the leader of any court to be able to understand that a probate judge's daily existence isn't the same as a felony judge's daily existence. 

There's a whole other aspect of being the presiding judge that I got a view into because I have been very deeply and actively involved over the last seven years or so with technology innovation and implementation in our court. When I say actively involved, my role started as I blame many of Dan Buckley for this. 

He said, “You know, Sam, I think you should be the person that communicates with the bench about what we're doing and why we're taking everyone's paper away.” It morphed over time as what we have done on the Superior Court scaled up, but I ended up training almost all of our bench. You suffered through one of those sessions, right? 

No. We'd get emails and they would be tech emails but written in English. It was so great.

I always say I know what a judge does and I understand enough from the tech people to be able to explain it to a judge. My children think this is hilarious because I can't turn on the TV. What it did for me was open my eyes to what happens behind the courtroom. What happens in the clerk's office? How did a document get from the filing window before we had e-filing up to the bench? How many stops does it make and why and how and how quickly? 

I believe for me, understanding the operational organization of the court in addition to the people who work in operations has made the role of presiding judge that much more understandable. I didn't have to start from square one. On my first day as PJ, I'd been working with these people for a long time. I understood how important their roles are. I understood how important communication is and will continue to be. I think it's an exercise in not only having a depth of subject matter expertise, but breadth.

Understanding the operational organization of the court, in addition to the people who work in operations, has made the role of presiding judge that much more understandable.

I think also that it's such a court so large as Los Angeles and so many different locations. I think that PJ roles in that setting become so clear also whether you say COO or CEO of a court in terms of broader operations. 

36 courthouses. That floods all the time.

Judge Pham, what about your path?

My path to my position right now in Indiana was on March 21, 2020. When our order had to close partially in response to the governor's stay-at-home order, I was drafted to be the Criminal Supervising Judge by my head because my predecessor took off on vacation in Florida. I was tasked with carrying out six of the eight emergency relief directives from the then Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, which included maintaining our court or keeping our court open to the extent of carrying out the critical, time-sensitive, in-house criminal matters and working with our justice system to reduce the jail population to protect the health and safety of all court ministers. 

For the next three years, I work very closely with my current presiding judge, Judge Maria Hernandez, to make sure that we resume operations and jury trials at the earliest possible opportunity so that we get rid of the COVID backlogs. I decided to run for APJ because I wanted to finish what Judge Hernandez and I had started and bring our court back to some semblance of post-COVID normalcy. 

Nobody challenged me to do this. It’s likely nobody wants my job. Having been in this position for a year and a half now, I know why. Now we have initial vacancies, staff vacancies, court-report shortages, return shortages, and we have flooding, incident flooding, where it rained in one of our courtrooms. We have water about 5 inches high. It flooded our record room where it stored all of the death penalty cases as well. Then, of course, the upcoming economic gloomy economic forecasts that we're going to have to do. Recently, as of this morning, I said, “It's not like I can't ask for a transfer to another assignment.” 

I think she's too modest about COVID because during COVID, she and Judge Hernandez and a couple of other judges had a war room and they worked about 12 hours a day. Not one criminal case was dismissed in Orange County. They were on the phone with the sheriff and said, “We had an outbreak.” “Well, then substitute this defendant for that defendant.” They were transporting 8 or 10 people on a 40-person bus because they had to be separated and they had a spreadsheet of who was coming up on the deadline. It was amazing. They were a little tired. It went on for about 2 or 3 months and then things went back to normal. 

I remember I was sitting with the others at the luncheon bar at the time and we were trying to see what we do to make things keep moving forward. The level of communication and working together on that was tremendous. Especially on the criminal side, the lawyers were very concerned about that on both sides of the view. I agree, you did a great job in communicating so well with everyone and worked together well. I think there was a very open dialogue between the bench in Barbara. Making that happen. I think I'm proud of my life from the far side. 

It's all the things you didn't learn in law school, but it happens every day.

Just like when you become bar president, you never know when you become PJ. What could happen during your term, COVID, or corporate news? You have to roll with it. Empower knowledge, by the way. I hope they're making this job some appeal over here. I'm kidding. Let's say they do this part.

On Mentorship

I know they've talked a little bit along the way about mentors and sponsors and how they've impacted your career. I want to make sure before we're done, if there's anything else that somebody wanted to share along those lines, in terms of how they've been mentored and how they've paid it forward, some good stories on that. I don't know if anyone else wants to share anything. Are we good? 

I had a role model. I don't know if we even called them mentors in those days, but Judge Alicemarie Stotler was a federal judge in Orange County. She was first a DA, then she would end up in private practice with her husband. As a young lawyer, I was amazed at how she was a lawyer who could try a case like the best. She was a lawyer who could do writs and appeals and esoteric legal arguments like a pro. She went on to the municipal court, then the Superior Court went back into practice for a while, then went on to the federal court and sadly died pretty young from ovarian cancer. 

She was to me the gold standard and I looked at her and I thought if I could get this much closer to what Alice Maureen's doing, I'll be very happy with myself. I think seeing successful women, even if you don't have a real close personal connection, and she had a great sense of humor too. She didn't take herself too seriously. I think if you have women like that or any role model that does a good job, you want to be like them. I want to grow up to be like them. 

I'll share my story with you. She was one of my role models too. I tried a case in front of her with my senior partner and she used to call me a sidekick in front of the jury. It was great for the jury. 

I think we can't overstate the importance that mentors and role models have played in our lives. I suspect every one of us agrees that we wouldn't be where we are without the mentors and role models that we rely on and that we're standing on their shoulders. Joan Dempsey Klein is another person that I have to mention. Had I not picked up the phone that day and she said, “You get over here,” my life would be very different. I'm very grateful for those sorts of folks and hope that we provide that support.

Lessons And Tips

Now I'm going to switch to what is one thing that you learned from serving on the bench that you wish you'd known as an advocate? I wish I knew now I wouldn't change how I did something or I would have adjusted something or I wish I knew that at all and I would have been a different kind of judge. Let's start with Justice Edmon. 

You had raised this before and mentioned that you were going to ask us this. The only thing I could think of was I wish I had known how fun it is to be a judge because I might have done this earlier. I have so enjoyed my time on the bench. I loved the support that I've gotten from other folks on the bench. I loved working with the bench when I was on trial court. I loved working with appellate court counsel as now I'm on court appeal. I guess you're going to have to come up with it. I wish I had known earlier. 

I think when I was in the trial court until you're a judge, I didn't spend that much time looking at the jury because I was thinking about my witnesses and my notes and trying to keep the whole ball in play. When I became a judge, we had a little more time to look at the jury. Looking back, if I were a lawyer, I think I would have taken more looks at the jury because you can tell so much when you've lost them. I used to sometimes want to slip the lawyer's note and say, “They've kind of lost you.” I would say keep an eye on that jury.

I think for me, it's the importance of clarity and brotherly. As a judge, I've come to appreciate the work that you do on the site and get to the point without giving me unnecessary details or I think that's one thing that I wish I had known as an advocate. I might have walked away from the case. 

There you go. Judge Jessner? 

It's funny, this was a hard question for me to think of an answer to. I don't think it ever occurred to me as a lawyer how much work that judge or the judges had. You're so focused on your case, your trial, and your summary judgment motion. I had no idea of all the moving parts, all the balls in the air behind that bench, and what it takes for a judge to be able to take the bench and hear arguments and rule. 

I think somewhat related to that although I don't know if this is a straight line. It's okay. I always thought that as a lawyer, you had to appear that you knew everything. I then think about the flip side. The flip of that is true which is I thought when I first became a judge that I had to look like I knew everything when in fact, I didn't at all. I guess my takeaway from both sides of that coin is that it's okay to say, “I don't know, but you know what, your honor? I can research that and get you a pocket brief before the jury comes back tomorrow.” 

I am a judge, I would have said in that meeting, “What is HVAC?” I am not nineteen. I know, and they were like, “What if that little girl doesn't know anything?” I am a person who doesn't get too caught up in how stupid I look. Some of you have appeared before me, so you're probably saying that's true but we all want to get to the right answer and the right result. Sometimes you have to say, “I didn't think of that. I’ll look into that.” 

I don't think lawyers are ever upset when a judge says, “I'm not sure,” or if you get a case in an area you're not familiar with and say, “I don't do family law routinely, but can you help me?” Lawyers do get upset about it when you know nothing about the area, but you act like you know it all. That's for lawyers. Lawyers don't like that. 

I guess I would say what I didn't realize as an advocate is how little help the Superior Court judges have. At least when I was there. As I said, I practiced in federal court my whole career and I had clerked there so I knew they had research attorneys dedicated to them. They had a pool of research attorneys for overflow and they had all this help that they could call on. 

When I got to this, what I didn't realize was that it's not so much like that at the Superior Court level. I did do some state work when I was state court work when I was in private practice. Looking back now, I probably would have written more to help the judges out. I assumed that they knew everything. They're not going to volunteer. They don't know it unless you put them on the spot. Now I would think I would probably have written a few more memos, a few more legal research things for them to help them out and to make sure that we were all on the same page. 

That's a good point in terms of recognizing how much of a staff or a backup team that we have in different courts is vastly different. Now we’re going to wrap up the show but there are a few more questions. This time it is for advocacy tips so everybody can walk away with an advocacy tip whether you're a trial or a health care. The first question will be about trial tips from Judge Phan and Judge Jessner. 

Make sure you prepare and know your case inside out. Read all the case laws that you intend to rely on. As I mentioned before, focus on your most critical issues. That's how you can be more effective and more persuasive. 

I think I am going to riff off on something Justice O'Leary said, which has to do with the jury. Remember that fourteen people are sitting there watching every single thing that you do and how you look that day and why is she wearing black stockings today when yesterday she was wearing pants or whatever it is. 

You need to remember that you're trying your case to that group of people. I think, again, we become so myopic because you're doing this during the trial, “Is my witness here? Did I get what I wanted out of that witness?” You're playing to a very specific audience. Related to that you are playing to a very specific audience who doesn't know anything about your case, but you've been living with this case for who knows how many years. 

At some point in time in that trial preparation, and I was trying to tell some USC law students this last week, you have to be able to explain that case in a couple of sound bites to your grandmother or your twelve-year-old kid. If you can't do that if you can't take yourself out of the muck of, “Joan Crawford on this date went to this address and this, that and the other,” you will lose them and it will be very hard to get them back. 

Themes will help you with that 20,000 feet from the above perspective and have a very skeletal outline for each witness. What do I need to get out of this witness so that I can knock this out of the ballpark in closing and ask them for the relief that I am seeking? Remember to ask them for the relief that you are seeking because if you're not asking, they're not going to know what to do and what you want. 

Surgical strike, get in, get out, line yourself up for your closing because everybody looks forward to that for a lot of reasons because you're going to put all of those pieces together in a way that they understand it and that is persuasive. I love trials. I always say judges have the best seat in the house and it is so fun to watch a story and what is always a drama unfold. You learn something about a community or a certain type of industry or a certain type of product or how business deals are done in this ethnic community in Los Angeles, whatever it is. It's like watching a ballet if it's done well.

Let's switch to the appellate folks. Appellate brief writing, top tip for appellate brief writing. I'll start with Justice O'Leary. 

Tell a story. Don't just give us a sequential witness one said this, witness two said this, witness three said this. At the beginning, a good introduction tells us this is a situation where a business deal went awry, and then gives us that narrative. I think it's like the flap on a book I read a book because I read that quick little thing and I think, “This looks like a good book.” As we’re reading your briefs, you want to catch our attention and then we pay even more attention as we read the briefs. A good strong introduction. 

We do, in my division, about 30 appeals a month. That's 90 briefs. I'm going to tell you when to never, never, never file an oversized brief. Totally. If you can't distill it down to the word limit then you need to get somebody to help you edit it. As a PJ, so we do the motions that are filed before the case is assigned to a panel as a PJ. I do maybe 10 or 12 little motions every morning. Usually, they're motions for extensions of time or motions to augment the record, whatever. When I get one motion to file in an oversized brief, it's not happening. 

Same in the trial court.

They didn't file an oversized brief. They filed a comprehensive brief. Why does yours have to be oversized? I'm telling you when I get those, I hope that case isn't assigned to me as the author, because this is going to be bad. Generally, I can tell you that 95% of the time I deny those, “Get somebody to help you edit.” There's no reason why it should be over that as complicated as you think your case is. You're making the judge mad. 

Justice Edmon? 

Look, I agree with everything that these folks have said. The only thing I would add is, that I think you all know how important the briefs are in the Court of Appeal. The fact of the matter is, for most of our cases, we have come up with a draft opinion before we even go into oral argument, simply because we've got a deadline of 90 days once the case is submitted on oral argument, we need to get the case out.

Hopefully, we've had an opportunity to consider the opinions of the other justices in making decisions. Just emphasizes that. It doesn't mean oral argument is not important. I would urge everybody to orally argue and not waive oral argument. Having said that, the brief is incredibly important. I agree with all these points about you needing a strong beginning. You need to let us know exactly what's going on here and what you want right up front so that we don't have to dig for it. All of that's important, but it's the fact that the importance of briefs can't be overstated on the court of appeal. 

I remember in the district court, sometimes motions could be saved by great arguments. Our briefs weren't as good, but that was generally not the case for other people. The last question would be the top tip for an effective oral argument. I was saying like motions, so this is everyone. Motions in the trial court and then appellate argument. We'll start with Judge Jessner and Judge Pham for motions in your trial court. What's the best tip? 

It's not an opportunity to repeat everything that you already said in the papers. Most judges are going to have a tentative for you and you're either going to be on the good side of it or the wrong side of it. If you're on the good side of it, then you're not saying very much unless you hear it start to go south. If you're on the losing end of it, read it and pick the 3 or 4 or whatever it is factors that you interpret that tentative to have been the death nail to you prevailing on that motion and stick to those. 

Again, going back to how much work trial judges have, it is not an opportunity to stand up there or appear virtually and regurgitate. That is maddening and you feel your anxiety going up because you've got your jury coming back at 09:45 and there's nothing new happening during that motion hearing.

Those comments and again I'll come back to preparation because preparation will give you that thorough understanding of your case, your points, and cases that you want to cite as quote-unquote. I would also suggest that you practice your arguments at home. The more you practice, I think the more you can be articulate in articulating your key points and your key arguments. That'll be my tip. 

The more you practice, the more you can be articulate in articulating your key points and your key arguments.

I think the most effective of court arguments I've heard of when someone comes up and starts strong and says, “I'm going to make three points and here they are. One, two, three.” We may completely take over the argument. Maybe you never get to two or three but we know the points that they intended to make and maybe they'll get a little bit of flexibility having announced upfront exactly what those three points are. 

I also think it's important that you listen to what the justices are asking because you should welcome questions. It tells you what the justices are thinking about or worried about or what's on their mind. You should welcome that and get a bit distracted from what you have on your script, it's important to make sure that you answer those questions because that's what the justices care about. 

Justice O'Leary. 

I was going to say the same thing that Justice Edmon said. We have to be prepared when we get on the bench. When we're asking a question, we need an answer because we couldn't find something in the record or it isn't in the briefs. Sometimes I ask a question because one of my colleagues doesn't see the wisdom of my handy notes.

I'm hoping you will answer that question so he or she will get it. It's very frustrating when you ask the question and you get what time is it and you say it was a blue car. I tried it again, but I only tried twice because I thought the first time might be my fault. I might not have asked the question clearly, but the second time it's very frustrating. That's the first thing the judges say when we get back in the room and say, “She didn't want to answer your question,” or “He didn't want to answer your question.” It needlessly irritates the justice. 

Justice Stratten? 

I would say we've read your briefs, so don't give us a summary of your brief. My most fun oral arguments are, as Lee said, first when the litigant comes in or the counsel comes in and says, “I have three points to make.” Apart from those, though, I like the ones where the lawyer comes in because we're not subject matter experts anymore. Maybe we were at some time, but we're not anymore but you are. Also, you're the expert in your case. 

My favorite argument is when the lawyer comes in and tells me something I don't know about that practice. Maybe it's an asbestos case and I don't know anything about those cases. They come in and they tell me what the practical effect on the practice is going to be if you go this way or if you go that way because that might influence us. We don't want to make a decision that's going to drive the bar crazy because it's not geared to the practice of that area. I love it when the lawyers come in and give us the benefit of their years of experience in that particular area. 

That's a good point, giving an overview either of the practical impacts to an industry or to the legal practice in that area because you don't want to be doing something inadvertently. I want to thank the California Lawyers Association for hosting our CLA Annual Litigation and Appellate Summit and all of our panelists for participating.