X
December 2022 Cover Story - Orange County’s Appellate Justices of the 4/3

The appellate justices of California’s District 4, Division 3 (or, “the 4/3”) are a special group. They uniformly and consistently compliment each other and it’s clear their comradery is one of their favorite perks of the job. As a group, they are three women and four men. Their experience on the 4/3 ranges from twenty-five years to just two months. One justice is a Vietnam veteran and another has experience working at the United Nations in the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Undoubtedly, you will agree that each justice is interesting and delightful.

Since the Orange County Lawyer has limited space, what follows is a very brief summary of each justice’s biography, followed by their answers to selected interview questions in their own words. Each justice was interviewed by a different member of the legal community. Beginning with Presiding Justice Kathleen O’Leary, the profiles are ordered by the longest to shortest serving associate justices: William W. Bedsworth (1997), Eileen C. Moore (2000), Thomas M. Goethals (2018), Maurice Sanchez (2021), Joanne Motoike (June 2022), and Thomas A. Delaney (October 2022). These profiles will be followed by a list of past justices as a way to honor their service.

Presiding Justice Kathleen O’Leary
If experience is the best teacher, then twenty-two years of experience serving as an Appellate Justice moves Justice Kathleen O’Leary to the front of the class.

After five years as a trial attorney and over eighteen years as Superior Court Judge, Justice O’Leary was attracted to the intellectual challenges presented in the appellate process. In 2000, Justice O’Leary began her appellate judicial career when she was appointed by Governor Gray Davis to the Fourth Appellate District, Division Three as an Associate Justice. In 2011, Governor Jerry Brown appointed her to serve as the Presiding Justice of that same District and Division. After a finding of “exceptionally well qualified” by the California State Bar Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation, the Commission of Judicial Appointments unanimously confirmed her as the Presiding Justice, cementing Justice O’Leary’s place in history as the first woman in Orange County to hold the position.

Born in Worcester, Massachusetts, Justice O’Leary and her family moved to Los Angeles shortly before starting high school. She enrolled in Immaculate Heart High School, a Catholic girls’ school. The core teaching of Immaculate Heart was complemented by the message of social conscience delivered by her parents. “To whom much is given, much is expected” was a concept impressed upon Justice O’Leary from an early age. Below, we get to know a bit about “KO,” as her friends call her, on a more personal level.

What is your number one pet peeve in the courtroom?
I think it is a tie between being nonresponsive to a justice’s question and demeaning the trial court or opposing counsel.

What do you enjoy most about being an appellate justice?
The colloquy with my research attorneys, my colleagues, and the lawyers during oral argument is the best part of the job. I think the collaborative effort at the court and the different perspectives everyone offers makes for a better decision.

Is there anything that stands out as a best practice in papers or courtroom practice?
If you have something to say, say it. That tells me you are confident in your position. Sometimes lawyers tend to offer too much of an explanation and try to exclude all possible arguments against their position, and the real message gets obscured. Whether in a brief or at oral argument, start with a strong concise statement of your position. And, if there is a question at oral argument, answer it to the best of your ability because, if we ask a question, it’s because we really want an answer.

If you were not in the legal profession, which job would you want to do and why?
I would like to be a CEO of a court, a hospital, or some other large organization. I am fascinated by organizational dynamics and the challenge of enhancing operations and instituting innovative ways of doing things. As an appellate court justice, in most cases I am required to defer to the trial court on factual findings, defer to the trial court on issues of discretion, and follow precedent. It is in my role in judicial administration as Presiding Justice that I have a chance to do things that are more proactive and an opportunity to think outside the box.

What is your advice for lawyers about pursuing a hobby or work-life balance?
Work hard and play hard. Work-life balance makes you a better professional and a better human being. But I think to be truly successful professionally, work-life balance has to be weighted in favor of work.

Do you have any hobbies or interests that you regularly pursue in your free time?
I like gardening and traveling, but my newest hobby—a really challenging one—is working with the little terrier rescue dog we adopted in July. I now find myself juggling work, life, and the dog. But Riley is totally worth it.

What advice would you give someone pursuing a path to the bench?
Work hard. So many people think there are short cuts or strategies that get you to the head of the line. I don’t think that is true as a rule. Sure, people game the system, but the surest path, and the most rewarding path, to the bench is excelling in your legal work. Hard work and extraordinarily good performance are what help you advance in your career or on your path to the bench.

If you were stranded on a desert island with only one other person, which other person—living or dead—would you want to be with you and why? (But please don’t pick your spouse.)
That’s a hard one. I guess our little dog Riley isn’t a person. I think I would choose Michelle Obama. She has done so much. I think there would be endless things to talk about. She is a distinguished lawyer, a wonderful mother, wife, and community member, and was an extraordinary First Lady. And yet she is very humble. Of course, her sense of humor also makes her my pick. I’m sure staying balanced when you are thrust into public life isn’t easy, but she didn’t let the spotlight change her. She has stayed true to herself. She’s so authentic.

Robert J. Goodkin is a Senior Deputy District Attorney with the Orange County District Attorney’s Office. He can be contacted at Robert.goodkin@da.ocgov.com.

 

Justice William W. Bedsworth
Justice William W. Bedsworth was appointed to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division Three, by Governor Pete Wilson in 1997. Prior to his appointment to the Court of Appeal, he served on the Orange County Superior Court where he was elected in 1986.

Justice Bedsworth graduated cum laude from Loyola University (Los Angeles) in 1968 and received his juris doctor from UC Berkeley in 1971. He then worked for the Orange County District Attorney’s Office where he handled cases in the California and United States Supreme Courts.

He has been recognized by the legal community with the OCBA’s Franklin G. West Award (2018), the Hispanic Bar Association’s Judge of the Year (1997), the Celtic Bar Association’s Judge of the Year (2012), the Lavender Bar Association’s Community Leadership Award (2011), and the OCBA’s David G. Sills Award (2015). The California Chapter of the American Board of Trial Advocates named their only judicial award after him in 2017.

Justice Bedsworth is known for his award-winning, nationally syndicated monthly humor column, “A Criminal Waste of Space.” In 2019, it won the California Newspaper Publishers Association’s contest for the best column in California. Below, he reflects on his career path and the practice of law.

If you were not in the legal profession, what career would you be doing?
If I’d had a decent high school guidance counselor, I’d be doing play by play for the Durham Bulls today. I might not have been good enough to make it to the big leagues, but it would have been fun to try. My love of baseball—and sports in general—has given me many happy hours. My mom always insisted I learned to read only because I found out there was baseball news in the L.A. Times. A neighbor lied about my age so I could play on a team at six. I chose my college after a lunch with the Stanford team convinced me I was not good enough to play baseball there (Loyola’s top catcher would graduate my sophomore year and I would replace him). I like to think my decision-making has improved since then.

Baseball isn’t my only vice; I’ll watch anything where they keep score. I’m a big fan of Australian Rules football and curling (I said “anything”). I also spent fifteen years as a goal judge for the National Hockey League. That was more fun than anybody ought to be allowed to have. I got paid to watch over 700 hockey games, worked every NHL arena west of Detroit, and ended up with a Stanley Cup ring. If I weren’t here, I’d be somewhere doing something related to sports.

Who has been a terrific mentor to you?
I’ve been blessed with too many mentors to count. The judges and lawyers of this county have been astonishingly kind to me. And we’ve had an extremely talented bench and bar during my career that I’ve been honored to learn from.

I’ve had two heroes: Tom Crosby and Dave Sills. Crosby was the Lion of the Left; Sills had been Ronald Reagan’s son-in-law. They were political polar opposites, but they never let that get in their way. They were men of nonpareil character whose integrity and dedication to this court inspire me every time I remember I’m trying to fill their shoes.

What is your favorite opinion you have written so far?
When I was appointed, I wasn’t concerned about leaving a legacy; I just wanted to get as many right as I could. But my youngest is a lawyer today because she heard me say many times, “There is no greater engine on the planet for doing good than the American legal system. If you want to do good, become a lawyer.” And there are opinions I feel have done some good.

I’m very proud of my civility cases, especially LaSalle v. Vogel, 36 Cal. App. 5th 127 (2019). That case weaponizes CCP section 583.130 in the fight against incivility and sharp practice. If you’re a civil lawyer and don’t know about section 583.130—black letter law that requires opposing counsel to cooperate—you’re going into court without some important armament.

The case I’m most proud of is People v. Garcia, 77 Cal. App. 4th 1269 (2000), reversing a conviction because two lesbian jurors had been excused by a prosecutor who refused to justify his actions, arguing lesbians were not a protected class under CCP section 231. We held they were a protected class under the equal protection and due process clauses of the Constitution. State Senator Carole Migden referred to Garcia as “the first gay rights case in American history” and immediately introduced legislation to codify it. CCP section 231 now prohibits the exercise of peremptory challenges based on sexual orientation. The legislation stated, “It is the intent of the Legislature to codify the decision in People v. Garcia.”

Is there anything that stands out as a best practice in papers or courtroom practice?
I’ve been doing this for fifty-two years. I am the happiest man you’re ever going to meet in the practice of law, and I’m convinced it’s because I’ve tried to treat people right.

Incivility and sharp practices can win you short-term victories. But if you mistakenly treat our profession as a business and judge success only by the bottom line, you’ll have to work much harder, you’ll make no friends, and you’ll end up disappointed, trying to figure out why you’re not rich and famous.

The goal isn’t rich and famous. It’s proud and happy. Treat people right and you’ll get that.

Michelle A. Philo is an attorney at Philo Law Firm, P.C. where she practices probate, trust and estate litigation, and offers general counsel services to small businesses.

 

Justice Eileen Moore
Justice Eileen Moore was appointed to the Superior Court of California, County of Orange in 1989 by Governor George Deukmejian and to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division Three in 2000 by Governor Gray Davis.

On the trial court, Justice Moore chaired the Orange County Family Violence Council, leading the community in its response to domestic violence. For her efforts in this area, Justice Moore was twice honored by the Orange County Board of Supervisors.

Justice Moore spent her nonjudicial legal career in private practice in Newport Beach. From 1965 until 1972 she practiced as a registered nurse, including service as a combat nurse in Vietnam. She is a member of Vietnam Veterans of America.

At a live podcast program she did for high school girls through Girls Inc. of Orange County, Justice Moore emphasized the impact of the women’s movement on her career: “I served as a combat nurse in Vietnam and when I came home, . . . I read a book by a woman named Betty Friedan called The Feminine Mystique. She told me that the likes of me, a nobody, the daughter of a high school dropout, a girl, that I could study at a university, and I believed her.” Justice Moore attended UCI with many other women who, like her, were returning to college after doing something else.

Later, Justice Moore was moved to volunteer to help other veterans. “After I was appointed to the Superior Court, sometime in the 1990s, I was invited by the local chapter of Vietnam Veterans of America to speak . . . [O]ff to the side of the auditorium sat three rows of men who looked disheveled with old fatigues. They look tired and worn out. Immediately, I said to myself, ‘Homeless Vietnam vets self-medicating.’” After her talk, those men came up and wanted to touch her hands or her arm. She explains that this conveyed “a message that I should probably get active and do something. That was the beginning of my being involved with veteran’s activities.”

If you were not in the legal profession, which job would you want to do and why?
Knowing what I know now about the issues military veterans face, were I not in the legal profession, I would want to deal with veterans’ issues, primarily the policies of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

And the first policy I would likely tackle would be to change the regulation that mandates that incarcerated veterans are not given any medical or psychological treatment by the VA while in a jail or prison. It does not make sense that the nation’s foremost experts in treating post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury are not permitted to treat incarcerated veterans, many of whom ended up behind bars because they were suffering from conditions they incurred while serving their country.

Who has been a terrific mentor to you, and what specific things did they do to help you advance along your path to your goals?
When David Sills was still practicing law, he often referred cases to my law firm. Thus, he and I knew each other for many years, and he was always there for me.

Judge Sills was assigned as my mentor judge when I was appointed to the Superior Court. His first words of wisdom concerned the importance of a judge being willing and able to multi-task. He said a trial judge is like a ring-master in the circus in that the judge must preside over the main event, usually a trial, but also manage the side matters such as ex parte motions and judgment debtor examinations at the same time.

When I arrived at the court of appeal, he was my presiding justice. His guidance to me at the court of appeal had to do with collegiality. Justice Sills said that being an appellate justice was like being in an arranged marriage with seven other justices, with no possibility of divorce.

What is your favorite opinion you have written so far? Why is it your favorite?
I don’t know whether “favorite” is the right word, but the case that has stayed with me the most is People v. Em, 171 Cal. App. 4th 964 (2009). In it, I wrote in a dissent: “A fifty-year prison term should be reserved for our worst offenders. A fifty-year–to–life term for an immature fifteen-year-old with an underdeveloped sense of responsibility, who was an aider and abettor and not the shooter, and who had a relatively minor criminal record, is not within the limits of civilized standards. It is cruel and unusual punishment.”

Since then, there have been great changes in the law with regard to criminal charges against juveniles. While my dissent is certainly not solely responsible for those changes, I suspect it might be one of many reasons our laws have evolved. Nowadays at sentencing, courts consider brain development, maturity, other factors of youth, and whether the juvenile may be rehabilitated.

What is your favorite book and why?
The Soul of America, a nonfiction book by Jon Meacham, shows that Abraham Lincoln knew what he was talking about when he said the better angels of our nature repeatedly win the day.

Meacham goes into the suffragettes, the Civil Rights Movement, the Women’s Rights Movement, and many of the accomplishments of our country’s wonderful leaders such as both Presidents Roosevelt and Presidents Dwight Eisenhower and Lyndon Johnson. Meacham demonstrates how our present political climate is not new, and how this country has had many challenges but always seems to emerge through the darkness still clinging to its ideals. This book represented to me that our nation will keep moving forward despite its present difficulties.

Mary-Christine (“M.C.”) Sungaila is an appellate lawyer and shareholder at Buchalter, member of the OCBA Board of Directors, and creator and host of the award-winning Portia Project podcast.

 

Justice Thomas Goethals
Justice Thomas Goethals is the second oldest of eight children. He was raised in Glendale, California, but spent his summers in Newport Beach. He fondly recalls his first job—picking up beach trash for the City of Newport Beach—as “the greatest job ever.”

Justice Goethals attended Santa Clara University and briefly considered becoming a teacher or a writer. He believes that those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it. At the suggestion of his father, he enrolled in Loyola Law School. He married his wife Patty after his first year of law school. They moved to Orange County, renting an apartment on Balboa Island.

After graduating from law school, he applied to both the District Attorney and the Public Defender offices in Orange County. Then deputy district attorney, now Judge Julian Bailey, interviewed him for the job at the DA’s office. Shortly thereafter, then deputy district attorney, now Judge Ron Kreber (Retired), was the first to call and offer him a job with the DA’s office. He accepted.

Within a few short years, Tom Goethals was elevated to the homicide unit where he prosecuted homicides for six years, and eventually headed the unit for his last two years. He was then transferred to the law and motion section which, as a trial attorney, he had not expected. He came to enjoy appellate work and eventually led the law and motion section for two years.

Following his successes with the DA’s office, Tom joined a law firm with now Judge Gary Pohlson and Judge Gary Moorhead (Retired). Together they ran the law firm of Pohlson, Moorhead and Goethals, practicing both criminal and civil law. In what was perhaps a sign of his own future, another young lawyer by the name of Kathleen O’Leary was also affiliated with their firm until she left for the Orange County bench. She went on to become the Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeal in which Justice Goethals now sits.

In the wake of 9/11, Tom felt a calling to return to public service. He was appointed to the Orange County bench in December 2002, where he served for fifteen years before his confirmation to the Court of Appeal on January 25, 2018.

Justice Goethals has been happily married for nearly forty-seven years and has three children and seven grandchildren. He feels fortunate that his family is local. He spends his Saturday mornings enthusiastically cheering at his grandkids’ baseball and soccer games, which gives him a tremendous amount of satisfaction. Below are some of this other thoughts about life.

What do you enjoy most about being an appellate justice?
What I enjoy most is working with the people in this building. They are all centered on trying to do the right thing on every case, they have a lot of experience, they’re all smart, and they act in good faith. I haven’t really had an argument with anyone since I got here. We disagree sometimes, and sometimes somebody dissents to one of my opinions, and sometimes I dissent to somebody else’s opinions, but it’s very professional and thoughtful. I also like the pace here.

Who has been a terrific mentor to you, and what specific things did they do to help you advance along your path to your goals?
My dad was a great role model and mentor for me. He was a deputy public defender in Los Angeles for ten years. He taught me to be honest, to be a man of integrity, and to practice law as a profession, not just a job.

In the DA’s office, I was mentored by Brian Brown and now U.S. District Court Judge David Carter. They were trying murder cases when I was a young “nobody” in the office. They took me under their wing and gave me a lot of great advice, which I have tried to remember in the years since.

As for judicial mentors, someone who stands out is Judge Jim Perez, my first felony trial judge. I worked in his court for eighteen months and it turned out to be one of the best things that ever happened to me. He was incredibly fair. He got along with criminal defendants charged with the most serious crimes because he showed them respect in his own consistent way. I could not have been luckier than to have worked with Judge Perez.

Is there anything that stands out as a best practice in papers or courtroom practice?
Be prepared. Say what you mean and mean what you say.

What advice would you give someone pursuing a path to the bench?
First, remember that when you’re going up, there might be a time when you’re going down. So treat people right, no matter the circumstances, professionally and personally. You can be a vigorous advocate without being obnoxious. And second, network. Get involved in things and meet other lawyers.

What is your favorite book?
My favorite novels are The Killer Angels by Michael Shaara, The Old Man and the Sea by Ernest Hemingway, To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, and Winds of War and War and Remembrance both by Herman Wouk.

If you were stranded on a desert island with only one other person, which other person—living or dead—would you want to be with you and why? (But please don’t pick your spouse.)
Patty and I would like to be on a desert island with Abraham Lincoln. I find him truly and endlessly fascinating. I have so many questions I would like to ask Honest Abe. And I’d like to hear what his voice sounds like. Ernest Hemingway, Herman Wouk, and Winston Churchill would be in a lifeboat nearby.

Robert F. Kohler is a commissioner at the Orange County Superior Court.

 

Justice Maurice Sanchez
On November 10, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom nominated Maurice Sanchez to serve as an Associate Justice of the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division Three. Justice Sanchez was rated “exceptionally well qualified” for the position by the Commission of the California State Bar on Judicial Nominees Evaluation. He was confirmed by unanimous vote of the Commission on Judicial Appointments on January 6, 2022. Prior to his appointment, Justice Sanchez served on the Family Law Panel of the Superior Court of Orange County since 2018.

Justice Sanchez was born in Orange, California, the fourth child of Mexican immigrants. Spanish was his first language. Justice Sanchez graduated from Mater Dei High School in 1974. He earned a Bachelor of Arts Degree from the University of California, Irvine in 1978 and a juris doctor from what is now called Berkeley Law in 1981. While in law school, he was an extern for Justice Mathew O. Tobriner of the California Supreme Court and co-director of the McBaine Honors Moot Court Board.

Justice Sanchez began his legal career with Rutan & Tucker in 1981. He later worked as in-house counsel for Hyundai Motor America and Mazda Motor of America, Inc. He returned to private practice with a firm that later became known as Alvarado, Smith & Sanchez. He subsequently became an equity partner with two AmLaw100 law firms: Baker & Hostetler (where he was named National Leader of the Distribution and Franchise Team) and Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough (where he helped start their Los Angeles Office).

Throughout his legal career, Justice Sanchez has served on numerous charitable and professional boards, including president of the Orange County Hispanic Bar Association, chairman of Olive Crest (which provides services for abused children in Orange County and the western United States), the UCI School of Social Ecology Dean’s Advisory Board, and the Hispanic Education Endowment Fund. He has served as an assistant coach for the Mater Dei High School Mock Trial team and has served as a mentor in the Orange County Superior Court’s judicial extern program. He has also been active with various other community organizations promoting education.

Justice Sanchez has been married to his high school sweetheart since 1980. He and his wife, Teri, have three adult children and one grandchild. Below, he responds to some questions about professional and personal views.

What do you enjoy most about being an appellate justice?
We have much more time to be thoughtful and deliberate about our decisions, a luxury that Superior Court judges don’t have, and yet they get it right most of the time by far. I really like that we get to research and write about interesting issues and to collaborate with our colleagues on the court. Our attorneys and staff are really great and make my job a joy.

What is your number one pet peeve in the courtroom?
Lack of preparation. You must know your case and the other side’s forwards and backwards before you come to court. And always be civil to your opponent—that is key.

If you were not in the legal profession, which job would you want to do and why?
I can’t imagine not being a lawyer/judge, but if I had to do something else, it would probably be to teach—possibly English or U.S. History.

Who has been a terrific mentor to you, and what specific things did they do to help you advance along your path to your goals?
I have been blessed to have many mentors and role models along the way. If I had to pick one, it would be John Hurlbut, who was a great mentor while I was at Rutan & Tucker. He was always willing to listen and help with the problems faced by a young lawyer. He also set a wonderful example of how to advocate strongly for your client, while still acting in a civil and respectful manner to your opponent and the court.

What is your favorite book—fiction or non-fiction—and why?
I only read non-fiction as a rule and particularly enjoy biographies of our presidents and Founding Fathers and Mothers. I read Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow before it was made into a play and enjoyed it very much, especially about the role women played in the American Revolution. Team of Rivals by Doris Kearns Goodwin is a terrific book about Abraham Lincoln and his cabinet, and how he chose strong people who would disagree with him so that he could choose from the best ideas to govern the divided nation.

What advice would you give someone pursuing a path to the bench?
Show a strong commitment to public service before you ever apply for a judicial position. You should have a strong interest in public service if you are to succeed in being appointed and while serving on the bench.

Geelan Fahimy is a Senior Appellate Court Attorney at the California Court of Appeal.

 

Justice Joanne Motoike
A native Californian, Justice Motoike was raised on her family walnut and cherry farm. Throughout grade school and high school, she was an avid student who enjoyed learning. Justice Motoike’s interest in law began early, leading her to pursue a degree in Social Ecology-Criminology at University of California, Irvine (UCI). In addition to her studies, she worked as the Director of the College Legal Clinic providing pro bono legal services to UCI students. She enjoyed the study of criminology and found helping others particularly rewarding. Her family background and undergraduate years at UCI planted one of many seeds that would blossom later in her legal career.

Justice Motoike attended Loyola Law School. With a fondness and aptitude for trial advocacy, she competed in Moot Court. She worked two legal jobs while attending law school and, by graduation, had set her sights on a career in public service.

Cultivating her interest in criminal law and a desire to serve, her first job as an attorney was in the Orange County Public Defender’s Office. Beginning her career in the Public Defender’s Office was highly advantageous as the collective experience of an office of trial lawyers was instrumental in her development. She found the work rewarding and in keeping with many of the experiences she envisioned upon graduating law school, she found the synergy of trial work and indigent defense invaluable.

Recalling one of her most unique legal experiences, Justice Motoike cited her time working in the Hague. The possibility of serving the public on an international scale through the United Nations was aspirational and, fortunately at the time, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was in dire need of experienced trial lawyers. After several interviews and months of waiting, Justice Motoike received a call with the exhilarating news that she was selected to become a trial attorney in the office of the prosecutor for the United Nations. Within six weeks from that call, she commenced her service in the Netherlands. Having never been to Holland prior to her move, she settled in a modest flat in The Hague. The work of prosecuting war crimes in the international tribunal demanded quick study. Recalling the steep learning curve, Justice Motoike navigated proceedings in five languages: French, English, Bosnian, Macedonian, and Albanian. Public proceedings were open to all and were internationally broadcasted. Some witnesses were protected by voice distortion and, in certain circumstances, physical barriers were erected on all sides of the witness stand to further conceal the identity of those who testified about the atrocities of war. Practicing in a foreign court was not only an incredible legal experience, but immensely challenging. When asked how she felt to be a part of history she said, in a word: “Humbled.” Below are some responses from Justice Motoike, in her own words.

What do you enjoy most about being an appellate justice?
I really enjoy the innumerable issues that may come before the court and having the time to immerse myself in the issues and law. Prior to taking the bench, a great deal of my career was as a criminal law practitioner. Since law school, I have enjoyed the evolution of law and analysis no matter the subject of the case. The intersections between different areas of law are always present for a Superior Court Judge, but the ability to delve into the endless variety of legal issues at the appellate level is one of the greatest aspects of the role.

Do you have any hobbies or interests that you regularly pursue in your free time?
I like to stay active. I spend the summers hiking, playing tennis, and stand-up paddleboarding. Mountain skiing is my winter sport of choice. When my life and work schedule allows, I enjoy traveling although travel opportunities have been sparse of late. Southern California is an extraordinary place to live. Where else can you wake up at the beach, ski over the noon hour, and watch the sunset over the desert—all in one day? It’s been a while since I crammed sea, snow, and sand into one day but each time I take a day for balance, I think of a friend who always says: “une bonne chose de faite,” which is French for “a good thing done.”

What is your advice for lawyers about pursuing hobbies or work-life balance?
I think lawyers know pursuing hobbies and finding work-life balance are necessary but often the demands of the practice interfere. These challenges may continue for many on the bench as well. I know it’s often said, but finding the balance is a challenge that persists throughout our legal careers. I have always endeavored to achieve that balance; working two jobs while attending law school was my first memorable challenge in trying to achieve such. Later, as a trial lawyer, especially when I was in trial, it was very difficult to maintain my hobbies and life outside of work. I think most trial lawyers relate to this. Unfortunately, I don’t have a solution other than to be mindful about finding the balance and taking a walk, even a short one, will do wonders.

Denise Crawford is Deputy Public Defender at the Orange County Public Defender’s Office.

 

Justice Thomas Delaney
Few jurists have experienced California’s justice system from as many perspectives as Justice Thomas Delaney. During summers in high school and college, he worked in the Pasadena Municipal Court Clerk’s office answering questions from the public and running documents between departments. While attending Loyola Law School, he externed for United States District Judge Dickran Tevrizian, the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and the L.A. District Attorney’s office, where he tried a remarkable six cases to jury verdict as a certified law student.

As a partner at Sedgwick LLP, Justice Delaney litigated catastrophic injury, mass tort, employment, and commercial cases, and tried numerous cases to jury verdict. He was then appointed to the Superior Court of Orange County, where he served on the Criminal and Unlimited Civil panels before becoming the Supervising Judge of the Collaborative Courts.

More recently, Justice Delaney was elected President of the California Latino Judges Association and awarded the George Francis Judicial Civility Award by ABOTA. All this is to say—not having covered even half of his résumé—Justice Delaney is exceptionally well-qualified for his next role on the 4/3.

What advice or experiences guided your career as a judge?
There are three main perspectives that I took from my experience as a litigator and trial attorney that determined how I would run my courtroom. First, I promised myself that I would remember what it was like to practice law, including the many time constraints lawyers face. For example, there were courts, one I recall in particular, that scheduled CMCs for 8:30 a.m. but never began until 9:30 a.m. I promised I would never do that. The courts are a public service, and there seemed to be no justification for delaying hearings, especially when the result was to unnecessarily run up legal bills and waste the time and money of all involved.

Second, everyone—lawyers and litigants—deserves an explanation for the court’s ruling. To protect the legitimacy of the justice system, litigants and lawyers must know that their arguments have been thoughtfully considered. For many litigants, their appearance in my court may be their only exposure to the justice system. And even if the outcome is not in their favor, I want them to leave knowing that there exists a forum where they can have their disputes addressed, heard, and decided fairly. For this reason, I treat oral argument, really all proceedings, as a collaborative conversation designed to get at the most appropriate, just result under the applicable law and the facts supported by the evidence.

Third, everyone deserves to be treated with respect at all times in every courtroom. A judge’s demeanor and temperament are just as important as their intellect on the bench—arguably more so. I seek to create a courtroom environment that empowers people to be at their best. While we must enforce the law, including all rules of the courtroom, we also must remain cognizant of the significant stressors on people during all court proceedings and especially during trial. The courtroom is no place for yellers or screamers, and nobody should feel disrespected.

Why did you want to become an appellate justice?
Throughout my career, I have always gravitated toward working with very smart people on complex issues. Many new, groundbreaking laws will go into effect this year, and the courts will encounter difficult challenges to these laws and to the rule of law. There is no better place I can work on these difficult issues than with the brilliant jurists on the 4/3. I am very fortunate to have the opportunity to work alongside Justices O’Leary, Bedsworth, Moore, Goethals, Sanchez, and Motoike.

Also, I have to say that I love to write. As much as I love trial work, the volume is so great on the civil panel that there is precious little time to write, at least as much as I would prefer, and as a result, much of the research and writing, at least initially, is necessarily shared with our research attorneys. Some of the more interesting opinions I have written actually came from the limited criminal panel, including one on whether the anti-SLAPP statute applied to unlawful detainer actions and one involving a substantial claim of victim restitution, including lost future income, in a vehicular manslaughter case. Serving as an appellate justice will empower me to combine my innate desire to work with smart people on complex disputes with my love of the law and writing.

If you were not in the legal profession, what would you do?
I would be a history professor. In school, I focused my studies on modern world history and politics and had terrific professors. More recently, I have become enamored with how California was shaped, starting with the end of the Mexican-American War and the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. I recently presented for CJER (California Center for Judicial Education and Research) on Mexican and Latine Americans and the Courts. I enjoyed learning more about California history and presenting on what I called “Vigilance in the Fight for Equal Justice and the American Dream.”

Alexander Avery is a commercial litigator at Steptoe & Johnson LLP.