Page 1
San Mateo Judge Draws Public Reprimand
By a MetNews Staff Writer
|
|
|
GREENBERG superior court judge |
The Commission on Judicial Performance yesterday publicly admonished San Mateo Superior Court Judge Susan L. Greenberg for abusing her authority and disregarding the fundamental rights of a litigant by refusing to allow the party to testify at a restraining order hearing.
On June 14, 2022, Greenberg presided over the civil harassment restraining order (“CHRO”) hearing in the case of Lopez v. Chicas, 22-02096. San Mateo Superior Court Judge Leland S. Davis III called the case at 9 a.m. but the defendant, Henry Chicas, and his attorney, Diana Passadori, were not present in the courtroom.
Davis transferred the case to Greenberg. After calling the matter, she declared:
“I was informed that…when this case was called in front of…Judge Davis, the only party that was present was the petitioner, [Andrea Vanessa] Villalta Lopez, and that you did not arrive until 9:32 this morning.
“So your client will not be permitted to be part of the proceedings this morning as not having timely appeared.”
Passadori explained that her client was waiting outside of Davis’ courtroom when the case was called, unsure of whether he was allowed inside due to COVID-19 restrictions, and she was late due to having to appear at 8:30 a.m. on another matter.
‘Absolutely Unacceptable’
Undeterred, Greenberg said:
“I’m sorry, Ms. Passadori. Judge Davis was very clear. I completely understand what you went through this morning. You did not call that department. You did not notify them that you were not going to be on time. That’s absolutely unacceptable.”
The judge denied Passadori’s request for a continuance and issued a permanent CHRO preventing Chicas from having any contact with Lopez.
In an unpublished opinion written by Justice Ioana Petrou, Div. Three of the First District Court of Appeal reversed on May 11, 2023, finding that Code of Civil Procedure §527.6 requires a judge to hear any relevant testimony on an application for a CHRO and that Greenberg’s failure to hear from Chicas was an abuse of discretion.
Commission Decision
The commission commented in its “decision and order”:
“[D]enying Mr. Chicas an opportunity to defend himself disregarded his right to due process and rendered the CHRO hearing fundamentally unfair. Judge Greenberg, particularly given the clear language of section 527.6, should have known that denying a litigant who is present and ready to present testimony the opportunity to be heard implicates due process concerns….Judge Greenberg’s conduct also gave the appearance of bias and retaliation against Mr. Chicas for his attorney’s actions in being late to court, which was a purpose other than the faithful discharge of her judicial duty.”
In deciding to impose the public admonishment, the commission found prior discipline against the judge to be an aggravating factor, noting:
“In 2017, the commission privately admonished Judge Greenberg for failing to disclose campaign contributions from two attorneys appearing before her, and in a family law matter, appointing a guardian ad litem (GAL)—one of the attorneys who contributed to the judge’s campaign—without providing the litigant notice and an opportunity to review and object to a proposed order. In that matter, Judge Greenberg presided over a hearing in which a request had been made to change physical custody of the parties’ child. The mother opposed the request and Judge Greenberg appointed a GAL for the mother despite the fact that there was no application pending for appointment of a GAL; Judge Greenberg had not given the mother notice that she was contemplating appointing a GAL; and Judge Greenberg did not provide the mother with an opportunity to be heard….The commission found that Judge Greenberg’s conduct reflected embroilment and constituted an abuse of authority, a violation of the litigant’s due process rights and fundamental liberty interest, and denied the litigant a full right to be heard.”
Greenberg was elected to the bench after winning the June 3, 2014 primary and was set to take office the following January. Then-Gov. Jerry Brown appointed her to the court in September 2014, allowing her to take office early.
Before her appointment, she served as a San Mateo deputy district attorney and spent time in private practice. She was a San Mateo Superior Court commissioner from 2000 until her appointment as a judge.
Greenberg received her law degree from Hastings in 1984.
Copyright 2024, Metropolitan News Company