Former L.A. judge censured for deciding cases too slowly

A former L.A. Superior Court family law commissioner was publicly censured today and barred from taking on future judicial assignments for failing to decide a number of cases within the time frame required by law, officials said.

According to the state Commission on Judicial Performance, which investigates misconduct by judges, one litigant complained to court officials that commissioner Ann Dobbs delayed ruling on a case for five years. Two others complained that Dobbs hadn’t made a judgment in their cases for 11 months and six months.

Under California law, a judge is expected to decide on matters within 90 days after the case is submitted to them. Dobbs, who served as family law commissioner from March 2001 until she retired in October 2007, could not immediately be reached for comment.

Between 2006 and 2007, court officials transferred hundreds of Dobbs’ cases to other judges and gave her time off to complete the others, but she still failed to get them done on time, according to the disciplinary decision.

When she retired in 2007, Dobbs agreed to complete 30 undecided cases from home, half of which had already been sitting on her desk for more than 90 days. She never completed the cases, and mistrials were ultimately declared in at least 15, according to the commission.

A number of those cases had to be retried. Under the discipline, Dobbs is barred from “receiving an assignment, appointment, or reference of work from any California state court.”

Dobbs’ attorney said in a statement that her client was accepting responsibility for her actions by stipulating to the censure.

“While [Dobbs] did not intend any harm, she now realizes that her inability to handle the volume of cases had unintended consequences for the parties,” attorney Heather Rosing said. “She realizes now that she simply had more work than she could handle given her health situation, and that she should have sought assistance from her court.”

 -- Victoria Kim

Comments

[Jill Bernal]

I've been waiting on a decision for 6 months in a plagiarism case in Los Angeles. It seems that I have a legal right to do so since it's taken twice the amount of time just to get a decision on whether my case goes to a jury trial or not.

Another serious problem is that the court seems to have the power to deny me my constitutional right to a jury trial simply because the case deals with plagiarism or possibly because it deals with a movie studio.

I've heard that it will take a huge lobby effort to change the law to have a writer's constitutional right to a jury trial restored after Hollywood lobbyists changed the law so that people robbed of their intellectual property rights can be automatically denied a jury trial. Apparently it's a step by step process whereby when one gets to a certain step the case against plagiarists is automatically thrown out of the closed system.

[Timray]

hmmmmm....this judge could teach President Obama something.....