1. Judge Peter McBrien Prosecution Whistleblower Leaked Transcript - Commission on Judicial Performance Victoria B Henley - Arthur G. Scotland 3rd District Court Vance W. Raye - Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye Supreme Court - Ulf Carlsson Case Sacramento Superior Court - US District Court Eastern District of California - Racketeering - Honest Services Fraud Judge Misconduct - Vol. 1 of 3

COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE
4
5
INQUIRY CONCERNING
JUDGE PETER J. McBRIEN
CJP NO. 185
-- ---- ------ -- -
-000
-- -
-- -
ORIGINAL
-- ----
--I
8
9
10
11
12
TRANSCRIPT OF THE
13
HEARING BEFORE SPECIAL MASTERS
14
15
16
SACRAMENTO,
APRIL 1,
VOLUME 1,
CALIFORNIA
2009
PAGES 1 -
250
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
REPORTED BY:
SANDRA LEHANE
REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL REPORTE:R
CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER NO. 7372
155 Orr Road
Alameda, California 94502
(510) 864-9645
25
- - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185 -
4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - . - - - -1
PARTICIPANTS:
SPECIAL MASTERS:
Honorable Dennis A. Cornell
Associate Justice
Court of Appeal,
Fifth District
10
Honorable Gail A. Andler

Superior Court of Orange County
11
12
Honorable Denise de Bellefeuille
13
Superior Court of Santa Barbara County
14
15
16
Respondent's Counsel:
James A.
Murphy,
Esq.
17
18
Examiner:
19
Andrew Blum,
Esq.
20
Valerie Marchant,
Esq.
21
22
23
24
25
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09---------------------~
---.---
APRIL I,
9:01 A.M.
2009
-000
We're on record in
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:
4
the matter of The Inquiry Regarding Judge Peter
5
McBrien, No. 185.
This is the initial appearances.
Please state your appearances.
MR.
Commission,
BLUM:
Andrew Blum,
Examiner,
with Valerie Marchant,
for the
also for the
9
Commission.
MR. MURPHY:
10
Good morning,
11
Murphy on behalf of Judge McBrien,
12
the court.
13
14
Your Honor.
who is present in
Okay.
All parties
are present with counsel.
15
Let's take care of some of our housekeeping
16
chores that I assigned to you in the pretrial
17
conference.
18
appears to be the Examiner's witness list,
19
other one is the
20
exhibits.
21
just kind of talking here.
22
please do.
23
24
James
We have some binders up here.
see.
One
and the
There are two different
And we have a master exhibit list.
MR.
BLUM:
I'm
If you want to correct me,
Attached to the witness list
there is a paper clip on there
- there's also an
exhibit list.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _---1
MR.
BLUM:
Thank you.
We have two black binders up there
with our exhibits.

All right.
My
understanding is there are no objections to the
exhibits with one exception.
Mr. Murphy?
MR. MURPHY:
8
9
10

objections,
13
of the others?
14
We do
and we also
Other than those
you don't object to the admission of any
MR. MURPHY:
We stipulate to the admission,
Your Honor.
16
Appellate Court opinion.

MR.
19
20
Okay.
No.
BLUM:
34,
15 and 16 and the
Does that have a number?
18
21
Your Honor.
object to Exhibits 15 and 16.
12
17
Not quite,
object to the Appellate Court decision,
11
15
Is that correct,
Your Honor.
34.
Thank you.
What is your objection to Exhibit
15?
22
MR. MURPHY:
23
24
MR. MURPHY:
25
Hearsay,
foundation.
And No.
Same objection,
L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
16?
Your Honor.
And No.
34?
4/1/09----------.....l
MR. MURPHY:
Hearsay.
What is it on No.
that you're really trying to avoid?

4
34
Because it's
obviously an official record that can come in under
5451(b).
MR.
MURPHY:
Well,
I don't think it can,
Your Honor.
Watley versus Cantrell Green Packa
Second District Court of Appeal Decision,
And I can site the Court to the case of

, et al.
It's the
91 Cal. Ap.
10
4875,
where the Appellate Court decision was attempted
11
to be used to establish the facts set forth in the
12
opinion.
It's hearsay;
it's irrelevant.
13
Okay.
So what
14
you're trying to avoid are the factual conclusions
15
contained in the opinion?
16
MR. MURPHY:
17
Correct .
You're not objecting
18
to the fact that there was an appeal,
19
decision,
and the decision being what it was?
20
MR. MURPHY:
21
That's correct.
22
for that limited purpose,
23
would have no objection?
24
MR. MURPHY:
2 5I,
-
and there was a
So if we receive it
at least at this point,
you
That's correct.
_______S_P_E_C_I_A_L_MAS TER CORN ELL:

IN RE CJF NO.
185
Mr.
Blum?
4/1/09---------------'
MR.
offered for the facts.
The appellate opinio
BLUM:
So you have no
objection to the description?

No,
BLUM:
Your Honor.
MR.
Item No.
Thank you.
34 will be received along with every
other one,
except the two that were noted previously,
15 and 16, with the restriction on No.
34 that i t ' s
10
not being received for the factual content but for its
11
part in the process of the underlying case.

Now,
12
13
as to 15 and 16,
frankly,
are you going
to get to those this morning?
14
MR.
BLUM:
Possibly.
15
Okay.
This is news
16
to us as to being something that was contested.
17
what I would prefer is we defer ruling on that for at
18
least a little while,
19
exhibits and we can then find out what context you're
20
going to be seeking admission and then I
21
it then.
22
23
24
25
MR.
well,
BLUM:
So
and let us get familiar with the
can deal with
The objection is new to me,
as
Your Honor.
SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:
As to 15 and 16,
was
it your intention to present a custodian of records or

~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09---------------------~
any live testimony to support the foundation for them?
Or are you just asking the Court to receive into
evidence the documents themselves?

MR.
BLUM:
At this point,
believe I
just going to ask the Court to receive them.
usual
y not a
wanted clarification for our discussion.

10
then,
11
to review it.
12
Now,
13
MR.
There is
undational objection to exhibits.
was
Thank you.
We wil
just
Thank you.
defer that,
until later in the morning when we have a chance
anything else before we begin?

MURPHY:
Yes,
Your Honor.
There's a
14
Witness Exclusion Order that was previously issued by
151
the Court,
16
witnesses here in the courtroom.
and I be ieve that there may be some
Okay.
Anybody who
18
is here as a witness in this proceeding is excluded
19
until you are called.
20
outside,
21
will let you know who is on that list.
The bailiff,
or one of you,
believe,
has a master witness list and
22
(Witnesses exit courtroom.)
23
Anything else, Mr. Murphy?
24
MR.
25
MURPHY:
No,
Your Honor.
L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T N RE CJF NO.
185
Mr. Blum?
4/1/09--------------------~
MR.
should address
Allegations 1B and 1C.

3
4
Perhaps I
BLUM:
Yes.
Good idea.
Go
ahead and address those.

MR.
Pursuant to Commission Rule 128,
BLUM:
I've been authorized by the Commissioners,
the chair
of the Commission as well as the director,
to dismiss
Allegations 1B and 1C in the interest of justice.

10
MR. MURPHY:
11
12
No,
Any objection?
Your Honor.
The motion will be
granted.
13
Anything else,
Mr.
14
MR.
Your Honor.
15
BLUM:
No,
16
an opening statement?
17
MR.
BLUM:
Blum?
Our position is laid out in our
18
pretrial briefs.
19
will waive opening statement.
20
21
I'm sure you've read those,

any statement,
Mr.
Murphy,
so we
Do you wish to make
at this point?
22
MR. MURPHY:
23
24
Do you wish to make
If i t please the Court.

Certain y.
II
25
RE C,JF NO.
185
4/1/09~-------------------
---000--
OPENING STATEMENT BY MR. MURPHY
MR.
MURPHY:
Good morning,
Your Honors.
As
you know,
this is a matter of charges brought by the
Commission against Judge Peter McBrien arising out of
the family law case of Carlsson
charges are,
Ulf Carlsson his constitutional right to due process
and a fair trial;
one,
VS.
Carlsson.
The
that Judge McBrien's actions denied
that Judge McBrien improperly
10
threatened Mr. Carlsson's attorney,
Sharon Huddle,
11
with contempt of court;
12
embroiled in the action by forwarding a partial
13
transcript of Mr.
14
employer,
15
State of California;
16
discourteous to Ms.
17
that those charges cannot and will not be met.
that Judge McBrien became
Carlsson's cross-examination to his
the Department of General Services of the

and that Judge McBrien was
Huddle.
The evidence will show
In order to understand the context of our
18
19
defense,
we are going to introduce evidence that was
20
not presented to the Court of Appeal,
21
else,
22
system.
23
appreciated to put into context what exactly happened
24
in Carlsson
25
that prior to,
or to anyone
relating to the Sacramento County family law

This system has to be understood and
Carlsson.
VS.
Yo~
will hear testimony
believe it was 1993,
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
the California
411109----------------------~
Sacramento County family law system was in disarray.
There were three judges who had heard law and-motion
matters and settlement conferences every day.
judges may,
generally speaking,
Master Calendar Department.
back in 1993,
time,
Family law cases didn't go to trial.
10
on occasion,
Those
have heard a trial; but
every trial was assigned from a

And in Sacramento County,
and in Sacramento County at the present
i t ' s almost impossible to get a matter to trial.

So what
happened?
The family law bar and some of the judges,
11
12
including Judge McBrien,
13
how better the Sacramento County Superior Court bench,
14
in connection with family law matters,
15
up.
16
viewed the system in San Diego,
17
a proposal that is now the current plan utilized in
18
Sacramento County_
undertook a study to find out
could be set
They viewed the system in Orange County; they
19
and they came up with
The family law judges in Sacramento County
20
hear law and-motion matters Mondays,
21
Wednesdays.
22
Fridays.
23
hear,
24
on Power Inn Road and Howard Avenue,
25
hear trials two
Tuesdays and
They hear trials on Thursdays and
However,
the only trials the judges will
the family law judges at the Ridgeway center out
ys or less.
~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
they will only
If a
4/1/09--------------------~
10
scheduled for hearing that will take more
days,
from the Master Calendar Department to a Superior
Court judge.
to a Superior Court judge for an ext en
counsel for the parties will be assigned out
Not necessarily a family law judge but
Sacramento County,
d trial.
like a lot of counties,
has difficulty getting cases out to trial;
important for the family law practitioner to make sure
that they get estimates that are correct and are less
10
and so it's
than two days.

Now,
11
part of the current system that was
12
adopted,
and the Bar agreed to,
13
responsibilities relative to settlement conferences
14
would be taken away from the judges and would be given
15
to lawyers who practice in family law who would donate
16
their time to hear the settlement conferences.
Two
17
lawyers for settlement conferences.
50
18
weeks during the year,
19
pro tern judges hear all the settlement conference
20
matters.
Now,
21
was that the
Each week,
four days during the week,
in exchange for the Bar agreeing to
22
this,
the Bar wanted to make sure that time estimates
23
were adhered to.
24
result in settlements following the settlement
25
conference.
And 65 to 70 percent of the cases
The settlement conferences are conducted
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO .185
4/11 09 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- - - l
11
lone week before trial,
in the event the trial was less
than one day or one day,
the event that the case is two days or less.
and two weeks before trial in
The parties need to cooperate to make the

If the time estimate that is given for a
system work.
trial is wrong,
available to it.
parties can agree for more time and request the Court
to give more time if it goes beyond two days for the
then the Court has various options

A mistrial can be declared;
the
10
judge who hears the matter.
11
the request and the other party objects,
12
consi
13
more time or not.
14
terminate the trial,
15
we're going to decide the case on the merits at that
16
time.
the Court can
r the basis for the request and either grant
Now,
17
And if one party rna
The final alternative
lS
just to
that you've used your time and
in the context of this system,
we need
18
to look at the Carlsson case and what the evidence
19
will show.
20
Judge McBrien's departure from the bench preclu
21
Ms.
22
from calling certain other witnesses and from
23
presenting closing argument in person.
24
that last issue first.
25
The Commission charges that

d
Huddle from completing her expert's testimony,
In family law matters,

IN RE CJF NO. 185
Let me address
the parties are not

4/1/09--------------------~
12
entitled to give a closing argument.
Generally speaking,
on the part of the Court to grant that request.
other witnesses who Ms.
Mr. Carlsson,
unknown because Ms.
court,
they do; but there's no obligation
Huddle,
The
on behalf of
was precluded from testifying are

Huddle,
when she testifies here in
will not be able to identify them.

Finally, what was the context of the
That is the law.
testimony that was being adduced at the time the case

It was surrebuttal testimony from an expert
10
stopped?
11
witness that was not surrebuttal testimony at all.
was covering all the grounds;
He
he was not challenging
13
any of the facts raised by the petitioner.
The
14
Commission says that "by abandoning the trial in the
15
middle of Mr.
16
him an opportunity to complete the presentation of
17
evi
18
Mr.
19
and a fair trial."
20
to the contrary.
Carlsson's case-in chief without giving
nce or offer rebuttal evidence,
you've denied
Carlsson his constitutional right to due process

Well,
the evidence is going to be
The Carlsson action was filed in the spring
21
22
of 2004.
Between the spring of 2004 and when the
23
matter finally went to trial in March of 2006,
24
Mr. Carlsson was represented by four different
25
lawyers.
Part of the dispute between the Carlssons
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
13
related to a property on 24th Street here In
Sacramento,
Mr.
fellow by the name of Joseph Mayo.
important factor that will be testified to during the
course of this hearing.
Mr.
was not on title to the property,
title to the property.
10
a four-plex that had been rehabilitated.
Carlsson claimed that he was in partnership with a
Mr.
And this is an
Mayo was a co-worker of
Carlsson's with the State of California.
Mr. Mayo
had never been on
The property at 24th Street had actually been
11
acquired by the Carlssons and the Moores and another
12
family called the Minkoffs.
13
friend of Mr.
14
California,
15
coincidentally,
16
California as his tenant.
17
He came up with the money to allow Mr.
18
acquire this four-plex property.
19
entered into a partnership with Mr.
20
written partnership agreement of which Mrs.
21
was not a signatory,
22
didn't even know about.
23
family law case,
24
important here.
25
Carlsson,
Mr.
Minkoff,
who is a
who resides in Southern
is a real estate developer who,
Mrs.
is a landlord with the State of

And he was the money man.
which Mrs.
Mr.
Carlsson to
Mayo supposedly
Carlsson,
Carlsson
Carlsson claims she
So this was out there in this
and it becomes important;
Carlsson's lawyer,
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
and it's
on December 13,
2005,
4/1/09----------------------~
14
filed a Memorandum to Settle.
this case as being a two day trial.
31
the attorney for Mr. Carlsson,
counter-memorandum,
the trial.
and that request was granted; and it was set for
hear
NOW,
process,
Sharon Huddle,
did not file a
did not challenge the length of
She did request the trial be continued,
g on March 2,
This memorandum listed
2006.
I mentioned the settlement conference
and you'll hear testimony relating to that.
10
The case was set for a settlement conference on
11
February 15th of 2006.
12
conference,
13
punitive partner of Mr. Carlsson,
14
Superior Court,
15
the Complaint was actually pr
16
Mr. Carlsson's
17
an action against Ulf Carlsson and Mona Carlsson
18
claiming that he had this contractual right and
19
interest to this 24th Street property.
20
breached this contract,
21
duties;
22
Filed that the day before the settlement conference.
23
At the settlement conference,
24
resolve.
25
that settlement conference.
The day before the settlement
on February 14th of 2006,
pro per
Joseph Mayo,
the
filed an action in
the testimony
11 be that
ared by a friend of
where Mr. Mayo,
the partner,
filed
That they
that they breached fiduciary
that they did all these horrible things.
In fact,
the matter did not
very few issues were resolved at
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1109----------------------~
15
On February 23,
2006,
facing a trial date,

Before he even
Mr.
goes to trial,
he hired an appellate lawyer.
February 27th,
Mr. Mayo,
complaint,
files a Motion For Joinder in Carlsson vs.
Carlsson.
The Motion For Joinder was assigned a
hearing date of April 3rd,
scheduled completion of Carlsson v.
given that date by the Court when he filed the Motion
10
Carlsson hires appellate counsel.
On
who has yet to serve the
2006, well after the

Carlsson.
He was
For Joinder.
11
When that date was given,
that joinder was
12
not to be part of the record.
13
We have the trial date of March 2nd,
14
March 1st,
15
files an ex parte application to continue the trial
16
date.
17
date was denied.
18
scheduled for March 2nd,
19
20
the case with Ms.
21
confer;
22
the evidence will show that when the case came up for
23
trial,
24
Court for its consideration.
25
2006,
Ulf Carlsson,
So what happens next?

2006.
On
through Sharon Huddle,
That ex parte application to continue the trial

We're going to trial.
A trial is
the very next day_
At no
prior to trial did Ms. Huddle attempt to resolve

Keeley.
They
dn't meet and
they didn't exchange exhibits.
And,
in fact,
Sharon Huddle presented no exhibit list to the
The trial was scheduled to last two days.

L-------------------.....----IN RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09----------------------
16
11
i
: a t s what the parties agreed to,
and that was the
2'
time allotted.
Judge McBrien clearly and on the record,
4
read it,
5
along,
During the course of the trial,

and you can
admonished the parties to move the matter
otherwise they were not going to be able to
6
complete the case within the two days allotted.
record is r
lete with those references.
The
It fell on
8
deaf ears.
Ms.
11
J
you will,
Huddle,
if you read the transcript,
you can see that there were times when she
Ii just wasted the Court's time, ma

I
comments that were
12
totally unnecessary and pursued evi
13
relevancy whatsoever to the Ca
14
case.
It's informative,
16
that over the course of three days,
17
days,
18
12 hours and 27 minutes.
20
nee that had no
sson vs.
151
19
which
Carlsson
and the evidence will show,

two full trial
the testimony and the Court was in session for

They were given two full
So what happened on the final day that brings
ys.
us here?
21
The alleged termination of the case.

At 4:29,
with one minute to go in court that
22
day,
Judge McBrien received an Emergency Protective
23
Order telephone call,
24
Protective Order judge.
25
bench.
and he was the Emergency

He took the call,
He did not return.
left the
No question about it.
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
411109----------------------~
17
That's what happened.
At that point in time,
the
expert witness for Mr.
Carlsson was testifying
surrebuttal,
But the testimony that he was giving was not rebuttal
testimony,
and he hadn't completed his testimony.
and you will see that in the record.
Subsequent to that point in time,
Judge McBrien told his clerk that the parties could
submit a three-page declaration for attorney's fees
and also a three-page closing argument.
Now,
at this
10
point in time,
11
Mr.
12
court,
13
what was that recourse?
14
to Charlotte Keeley and asked Ms.
15
additional time.
16
record will reflect on several occasions Judge McBrien
17
told the parties the first step is to agree between
18
yourselves for any extension of time.
19
The evidence will show you it was not.
20
if there were complaints by
Carlsson that he was short-changed his day in

that he needed more time,
he had recourse.
Sharon Huddle could have gone

Keeley for
That's the first step.
Secondly, Ms.
And
And the
Was that done?
Huddle cpuld have made a
21
request to the Court for additional time,
showing good
22
cause why additional time was necessary.
That wasn't
23
done either.
24
Mr.
25
closing argument;
What Ms.
Huddle did and what
Carlsson did was file a declaration,
file a
and when the decision was rendered
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
18
and they didn't like it,

to do all along,
they did what they were going
and they took an appeal.
Because
they had hired appellate counsel in February of 2006.

Was due process afforded to Ulf Carlsson?
The evidence will show that he had a full and complete
hearing.
the opportunity to present relevant,
evidence.
is a complaint that should be registered,
There will be no evidence that he was denied

probative
He received his day in court.
And if there
it should
10
not be registered to Judge McBrien.
]1
control the time estimates.
12
attorneys when they try to work together.
13
encourages it,
14
happened here.
J5
opportunity to present the case was given.
16
to the parties and the attorneys to except that offer
17
and complete it within the time allotted.
18
Now,
He does not
He does not control the
but he can't control it.
He
That is what
The evidence will show that the

It was up
the second charge by the Commission is
19
the threat of contempt.
20
Because in the charges leveled by the Commission,
21
only exert a small portion.
22
context of what Judge McBrien said.
23
the evidence will show that in order to buy the 24th
24
Street property,
25
Donald Minkoff,
Mr.
But what was the context?

they
They don't give the

Now,
remember,
Carlsson obtained a loan from
the landlord with the State of
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
19
California,
who -- Mr.
Carlsson worked with the State
of California.
department that Mr.
Department of General
that this loan transaction was arms length.
was evidence that would suggest that -- well,
Mr.
his disclosures requirement under the Fair Political
Practices Act.
Mr. Minkoff contracted with the very

Carlsson worked for,
the
It was questionable
Services.
But there
Carlsson didn't properly identify this property in
And,
in fact,
his testimony was that
10
he did not disclose because he didn't think it was
11
necessary.
12
Mr.
13
it may have shown this purported interest on the part
14
of Mr. Minkoff.
The document became relevant because of
Carlsson's credibility and became relevant because
15
So at the conclusion of trial on March 3rd,
16
2006,
Judge McBrien requested that Mr. Carlsson bring
17
with him to court the next time,
18
statement that is filed with the Secretary of State,
19
this Fair Political Practices Act Statement of
20
Interest.
21
March 9th of 2006, which led to this statement by
22
Judge McBrien that,
23
there's a possibility of contempt here"?
24
transcript,
25
Page 366, Line 28:
Well,
a week later,
the
what happened when court resumed on
"I take t
which is in evidence,
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
to be a no,
so
The
is informative.
4/11 0 9 - - - - -_ _ _ _ _ _- - 1
20
r
2
"The Court:
Did he bring the documents with
him?
"Ms.
on disability.
Huddle:
He never went to work.
He doesn't have them.
"The Court:
He is
So he has violated my request to
bring those documents?

"Ms. Huddle:
The way I heard you say it,
it
was a suggestion that he bring them.

"The Court:
10
Do you want me to have the
record read?
"Ms.
11
12
Huddle:
He would have to go to work to
see if he even has a copy.

"The Court:
13
Ma'am,
I would suggest that he
14
send somebody to his workplace to get those documents
15
before we conclude this trial.
16
"Ms.
Huddle:
Your Honor,
I would like to
17
compose an objection.
18
would like,
19
those records because they are irrelevant to the
20
division of community property.
know it's what the Court
but I would like to impose an objection to
"The Court:
21
Overruled.
22
they are relevant.
23
testimony.
24
proceedings.
251
to independent counsel.
However,
They are going to clarify his

they may be relevant to other
That's why I advised him to go and talk
- - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
L_
I'm not indicating
185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - l
21
"Ms.
He doesn't have $5,000 to give him before
$5,000.
they will talk to him.

"The Court:
The independent counsel wanted
Huddle:
In any case,
he can send
somebody to look for those records.

"Ms.
Huddle:
I'm going to have to advise him

If there is some claim,
to take the Fifth Amendment.
some potential cr
to discuss it with an attorney who actually knows the
10
law,
can't have him testify.

"The Court:
11
12
inal action,
and he has been unable
And -
think you're too late for
that.
Huddle:
13
"Ms.
14
"The Court:
Too late?
He has already testified
15
regarding the sum and substance of that,
16
will have a copy of the documents.
17
18
19
"Ms.
Huddle:
and the Court
Are you indicating that he
can't take the Fifth Amendment now?

"The Court:
I'm not indicating anything.
20
I'm indicating that he needs to send somebody to his
21
employment to pick up those documents.
22
23
24
25
"Ms.
Amendment,
Huddle:
If he is taking the Fifth
then those documents would be part of it.
"The Court:
Those documents are on file with
the Secretary of State.
can go to the Secretary of
L------------------------JN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
22
State's Office and get a copy of them.
"Ms.
Huddle:
Ms.
Keeley never raised this
issue.
didn't Ms.
Keeley get those documents?
trial now,
and
"The Court:
order.
Huddle:
Huddle,
not Ms.
"The Court:
We're here at
you are out of

Keeley's request.
I think you would
Ms.
Huddle,
do you wish to ask
your client to send somebody to get the records?
12
"Ms.
Huddle:
If he provides those and he
13
gets charged with something for having provided
14
them
15
"The Court:
16
"Ms.
17
why
potentially -- although I don't know
10
11
Ms.
It was my request,
"Ms.
If she believed it was really an issue,
Huddle:
Yes or no?
Is the Court indicating that he
cannot assert his Fifth Amendment?

"The Court:
18
I'm not indicating any such
19
thing.
20
Amendment.
21
is a
22
documents at this point.
23
they are the ones that he described on file with the
24
Secretary of State's Office,
25
Court,
The documents are not a part of the Fifth

It's what he states out of his mouth that
rt of the Fifth Amendment.
Those are public
They are on file.
Assuming
as a convenience to the
I've asked him to bring us a copy.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T N RE CJF NO.
185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - -
23
"Ms.
Huddle:
suppose
this is all on the
I don't know what to do in a situation like
record.
this,
evidence with -
not even the opposing side presenting it.
when you're actually asking him to produce
"The Court:
which might incriminate him,
Ms.
Huddle,
and it's
am I to take that as
a no, placing you in the possibility of contempt?
"Ms.
the records."
Huddle:
No.
I will tell him to go get
The evidence will show that in the context of
10
11
what was being discussed between the parties,
12
Ms. Huddle was not responding to the judge's request,
13
when he said,
14
of contempt," it wasn't a threat of contempt.
15
was part of the dialogue between Judge McBrien and
16
Ms.
17
Judge McBrien to be a threat of contempt.
Huddle,
"Do I take that as a no,
when
the possibility
That
and was certainly never intended by
The next charge is the alleged charge of
18
19
embroilment.
20
sending the transcript -- a partial transcript of
21
Mr. Carlsson's testimony to the Department of General
22
Services.
23
back up for a second,
24
that Judge McBrien requested the testimony just to
25
confirm what he had heard.
And this relates to Judge McBrien
Before the testimony was sent -
and let me
because the evidence will show
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE' CJF NO.
He didn't necessarily
185 -
4/1I09~------------l
24
larder the transcript with the idea of,
nAh,
I'm going
to send it off to the Department of General Services. "
The testimony will be that if that was his thought,
would have just called them up.

Judge McBrien wanted to ensure that what he
5
6
heard was the accurate testimony.
courthouse that has LiveNote or realtime reporting
like some courthouses.
was not even an employee of the State or of the
Superior Court.
11
employed by Ms.
12
he
And this is not a
This was a court reporter who
She's a contract court reporter

Huddle.
So Judge McBrien ordered a copy of the
13
transcript,
reviewed the transcript.
14
sending it to the Department of General Services,
15
spoke with two judges of the Sacramento County
16
Superior Court to find out what he should do.
17
suggestion was -
18
did was send that transcript to the Department of
19
General Services.
20
vindication.
21
the bench to provide that information to the
22
Department of General Services.
23
know whether the disclosures made by Mr. Carlsson
24
complied with or didn't comply with his requirements
25
under the Fair Political Practices Ac
And,
before
And the
the recommendation was and what he
He wasn't seeking revenge,
nor
He felt it was his duty as a member of
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
Judge McBrien didn't
4/1/09-------------------~
25
that as part of his judicial responsibilities that
information,
State.
that testimony,
should be provided to the
The final charge is with respect to alleged
And in the context of
impatience with Sharon Huddle.
this allegation,
Judge McBrien curtailed the parties'
evidence.
evidence will show that Judge McBrien did not
the Commission again claims that

rights to present
And that is clearly not the case,
and the
10
interfere with the ability of the parties to present
11
evidence in a timely fashion.
12
the length.
13
and confer, pre-mark exhibits; and they didn't do
14
that.
The parties estimated
The parties had the opportunity to meet
They didn't streamline the case whatsoever.
15
And in the context of what the Commission
16
claims is evidence of this impatience,
this
17
discourteousness to Ms. Huddle,
18
reference,
19
context.
20
being the landlord to the State,
21
Mr.
22
property came to testify, Ms. Huddle began the
23
examination by turning to the Court and saying to
24
Judge McBrien words to the effect,
25
talked about his medical condition,
they cite one
again the evidence will show,
taken out of
When Mr. Minkoff came and testified,
Minkoff
the money man for
Carlsson's acquisition of this 24th Street
~------------------------rN
RE CJF NO. 185
"Well,
remember we
and I'm
oin
4/1/09--------------------~
26
ask a couple questions as preliminary," and Judge

2
McBrien,
admittedly,
completed on t
"Ms. Huddle,
need to explain your motives to me.
question."
being instructive.
need to explain to me your motives.
turned to her and said,
this isn't a law school class;
you don't
Just ask a
That wasn't being discourteous;
In sum,
had his mind on this trial being
"Get on with the case.
that was
You don't
Ask a question."
the evidence will show that
10
Judge McBrien performed responsibly his duties as a
11
jurist; that the system employed in Sacramento County
12
1S
13
make it work.
14
Sacramento County Superior Court family law system is
15
on trial.
16
17
settle through the cooperation of lawyers and counsel,
18
that is what needs to be done.
19
The criticism should not be leveled at Judge McBrien
20
but at the parties who actually caused this system to
21
break down.
22
a system that works when the parties and counsel

This is a case where,
in essence,
the
Because if this system is to work and if
estimates are to be made and if cases are to
That wasn't done here.
Thank you.
23
24
25
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
.185 -
4/.1 /09 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
27
witness,
3
4
Mr.
Blum.
MR.
BLUM:
Thank you,
JUDGE PETER J. McBRIEN
having been first du1y sworn, testified as f0110ws:
---000--
THE WITNESS:
Peter James McBrien,
M-c B-r-i-e-n.
13
14
You may examine.
16
MR.
17
For the record,
BLUM:
Thank you,
18
an adverse witness.
19
DIRECT EXAMINATION
20
BY MR. BLUM:
21
Q.
Good morning,
22
A.
Good morning.
23
Q.
Are you a
25
Thank you.
Please
be seated.
15
24
Please state your
full name and spell your last name.
11
12
The
---000--
10
Your Honor.
Examiner calls Judge McBrien.
Call your first
Your Honor.
I'm calling this witness as
Your Honor.
judge of the Sacramento Superior
Court?
A.
am.
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
28
Q.
How long have you been a Superior Court
judge?
A.
22 years.
Q.
Before that,
were you a Municipal Court
judge?
A.
Actually,
I was a Superior Court judge -
I've been a Superior Court judge for 20 years;
two years,
Q.
I misspoke.
Before you became a judge, what type of law
did you practice?

A.
I was a municipal court judge.
and for
I practiced criminal law.
12
tort law.
13
Attorney General's Office.
was in government.
I practiced some
lobbied for the
I
4
Q.
For how long did you practice law before
5
becoming a judge?
16
A.
17
Q.
18
19
5 or 16 years.
As a Superior Court judge, what assignments
have you had?

've had general trial assignments.
A.
20
done cri
21
other assignments on an as needed basis.
22
most part,
23
been family law.
24
dependency conflict case.
25
Q.
nal and civil matters.
I've
I've filled in on
But for the
and for the last virtually 20 years,

I've been probate.
I've
I am doing a
I've had a wide variety.
What department are you currently assigned
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09-----------------------~
29
to?
A.
Department 124.
Q.
And how long have you been assigned to that
department?
A.
Ever since it opened in November of 1999.
Q.
What building is that located in?
A.
It's the William Ridgeway Family Courthouse.
Q.
Where is that located?
A.
Power Inn and Folsom.
10
Q.
In Sacramento?
11
A.
In Sacramento,
12
Q.
What hours do you typically work each day?
13
A.
I typically get to work between 6:00 and

I
would say,
City and County.
14
7 : 00.
15
through Wednesday are ex partes until 3:30.
16
when the ex partes are gone.
17
if I
have a trial,
18
Q.
19
itself,
close?
20
A.
Well,
leave at 4:30.
22
6:00.
24
25
6:30.
And Monday
I
leave
And then on trial days,
1111 leave at 4:30.
When does the courthouse,
21
23
on the average,
the building
they start attempting to get people to

I believe that the building locks at
6:00 p.m.
Q.
In your department,
do you have an assigned
court reporter?
A.
do not.
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
30
Q.
SO if the attorneys want to have a court
2
reporter,
A.
they retain one themselves?

On law and motion matters,
there are two
4
court reporters available for our floor.
Our floor
involves family law and probate.
use the court reporter for up to an hour free of
7
char
Thereafter,
court reporter.
8
9
10
In March of 2006,
A.
they need to hire
did you preside over the
did.
Q.
Was t
14
of property?
15
A.
]8
And for trials,
dissolution trial of the Marriage of Carlsson?
12
17
they would need to hire their own
their own court reporter.

Q.
11
And they are able to
main issue in that trial the division
There were
I would say spousal support and
the division of the two real property assets.

Q.
And those two assets were a family home and a
four plex?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
And did much of the testimony In the trial
21
22
23
24
25
concern the value of those two assets?
A.
Yes.
Not the value,
but the various aspects
of those two aspects -- those two assets.

Q.
But testimony was given as to the value of
each of those assets?

L . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/ 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
31
A.
It vJas.
Q.
Now,
It was.
a Cou t
of Appeal found that you denied
Mr.
Carlsson his due process right to a
Do you agree
MR.
th that finding?
Objection,
MURPHY:
I!ll sustain the objection.
BY MR.
TtJe
10
th n,
11
right to a
1,
It's not relevant.
without context to the Court of App aI,
do you believe that you denied Mr.
A.
13
Q.
vihy not?
14
A.
First of all,
do not.
they had the opportunity to
15
present evidence during the time that
16
estimated i t would take,
17
never asked for more time.
18
system,
19
But they did not.
Q.
Carlsson's
air hearing?
12
Hearsay.
Your Honor.
BLUM:
Q.
20
fair hearing.
they had
and they presented it.

And it's
They
under our
i t ' s their obligation to ask for more time.
So Ms.
Huddle never indicated to you that she
needed more time?
22
A.
Absolute y,
23
Q.
There are two black binders in front of you,
24
Your Honor.
25
36.
she did not.
One of them contains Exhibits
through
Maybe i t ' s the other binder.
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO.
185
4/1109 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - !
:3
,n,..
Okay.
Q.
Just for the record,
th
seco
binder
contains the transcript of the Carlsson trial.
Okay.
Q.
C:I
,J
I'm going to walk you through a few of the
pretrial documents that were
71
case b ginning with Exhibit 6.
10
Q.
MR.
MURPHY:
MR.
BLut.,l:
iled in the Carlsson
Did you say Exhib t
6?
o .
Do you have Exhibit 6 in front of you,
Your H nor?
do.
A.
13
Q.
What is that document?
14
A.
It is the memorandum to set th
:")1
issue.
16
17
matt rs at
Q.
On Page 1 at No.5,
is there an estimated
time for trial?
22
tv]
r s.
A.
There is.
Q.
Wh t
A.
Two days.
Q.
That means two full court days;
A.
Correct.
Q.
And this is filed by Ms.
was the estimate?
right?
Keeley on behalf of
Car Iss on?
RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _---.J
33
Q.
If you'll turn to the second page of that
document,
the dates agreed to are March 2nd and 3rd
for this trial,
of 2006?
A.
Correct.
Q.
P ease turn to Exhibit 7.

question.
arent y,
10
then,
your systems allows for the
parties to designate dates without prior appearance in

court about their availab e dates?
11
THE WITNESS:
12
aren't availab e to the Court,
13
revise them.
14
15
Correct.
But if those dates

then they have to
In other words -
THE ';AJITNESS:
17
how they go about it,
18
sure that we
19
set on any given date.
I honestly couldn't tell you

but they do correct it to make
nIt have over a certain number of cases
LU
~n
21
Go ahead,
22
NR.
24
They have to file a
new memo or the Court sends out a notification?
16
23
Let me ask a
Q.
Mr.
BLUM:
Thank you.
Blum.
Thank you,
Your Honor.
What is Exhibit 7?
Exhibit 7 is the notice of a date of
and settlement conference.

,------------------TN
C,JF l'JC"
185
4/1/09 - _____________J
Q.
And it sets the trial to begin March 2,
A.
Correct.
Q.
Please turn to Exhibit 8.
A.
This is Mrs. Carlsson's statement of issues,
contentions and proposed disposition of the case.
Q.
What is that
document?
2006?
And would this have been a document you read
prior to the trial?
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
Please turn to Page 3 in that document,
11
stamped 305.
12
Mrs.
13
and the four-plex?
Bates
Does this page of the document layout
Carlsson's position as to the value of the house

I direct your attention to L
e 7.
14
A.
It appears to.
15
Q.
Dealing with the family residence?
16
A.
Right.
17
Q.
She has it appraised at $640,OOO?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
And then in Paragraph No.2,
ginning at
in reference to the four-plex,
does she also
20
Line 13,
21
have it appraised at $640,000?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q.
If you'll turn to Page 4 of the document,
24
under "Proposed Division," at Line 17 it says:
25
proposes the assets be divided as set forth in the

-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
"Wife
4/1/09--------------------~
35
community property spreadsheet attached t
reto."
Do you see that?
2
3
A.
I do.
Q.
If you turn one more page,
spreadsheet.
A.
Okay.
Q.
What was Mrs.
A.
At that point,
it was to give Mr. Carlsson
both the family residence as well as the four-plex.

Q.
11
12
Carlsson's proposed disposition
of the two properties at this point?
10
you'll see that
Please turn to Exhibit 8
excuse me,
9.
And what is that document?

A.
13
That is the pretrial statement of
Mr. Carlsson.
15
Q.
And if you'll turn to the second

Bates stamped 322,
ge of that
16
document,
does this spell out
17
Mr.
18
assets?
19
A.
It does.
20
Q.
And drawing your attention to Line 8,
Carlsson's position on the value of those two
21
Mr. Carlsson,
first of all,
22
awarded to him?
did
ask that the residence be
23
A.
He does.
24
Q.
And what did he value the residence at?
25
A.
500,000.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO .
.185
4/1/09 - - - - - - - - - - - - '
36
Q.
And then dropping down to Line 17,
referred to here as a duplex.
four plex.
at?
A.
600,000.
Q.
At Line 20,
did the husband ask that that
four plex be awarded to him?
A.
He does.
Q.
So at this point,
10
I think i t ' s actually a
But what did they appraise that property
it's
both parties agree both
properties should be awarded to Mr.
Carlsson?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
But there is some dispute as to their value?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
15
What is this
document?
16
A.
This is a trial brief filed by Mrs.
17
Q.
And again,
Carlsson.
each of these pretrial briefs,
18
asked you about the first one,
Exhibit 6
19
asked you about No.8.
20
you would have read prior to trial?
well,
I
I
Each of these pretrial briefs
21
A.
In the normal course of events,
22
Q.
Do you recall if you read them before trial?
23
A.
I cannot.
24
Q.
Back on Exhibit 10,
25
yes.
does this indicate what
day this document was filed?

L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
37
2
3
4
trial.
Q.
document,
Please turn to the second page of the

Bates stamped 371.
Under "Wife's Income, "
you see that?
A.
Yes.
Q.
It says at the end of that Line 5 :
works 28 hours a week. "
9
10
"Wife
Was that an issue in this case,
whether she
was working full or part time?
11
A.
It was.
12
Q.
And did you have to make a determination of
13
whether or not she was working full or part-time?
14
A.
Yes,
15
Q.
And how would that determination effect your
16
7
I did.
decision?
A.
Well,
it would presumably effect the amount
18
of income that she would earn,
19
spousal support or whether spousal support would be
20
forthcoming.
21
so it could effect the child support.
22
Q.
For example,
if you found that she was only
employed part-t
24
to her than she actually made?

A.
ght effect
Both parties argued for child support,
23
25
which
you might impute a higher salary
No.
~----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
411109--------------------~
38
Q.
How would it work?
A.
If she were working part-time,
I would be
obligated by law to require her to seek full-time
4
employment before I
imputed any income to her.
Please turn to Page 5 of the document,
Bates
Q.
stamped 374.
she is speaking about the Tunnel Hill Way property,
The first paragraph,
No.1,
at Line 2,
8
which --
lS
A.
It is.
to
Q.
And what does she appraise its value at at
11
this point?
12
A.
615,000.
13
Q.
So that's somewhat lower than they had
14
that the house?
appraised i t in the prior document?
lsi
A.
It is.
16
Q.
Where she had an appraisal at 640?
171
A.
It is.
18
Q.
Down at Line 9,
19
does wife agree that home
shall still be awarded to Husband?
20
A.
She does.
Q.
And then Paragraph No.3,
22
21,
beginning at Line
is she referring to the four-plex?
23
A.
She is.
24
Q.
And what does she value the four-plex at at
25
this point?
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
39
A.
650,000.
Q.
Again,
somewhat different than in her prior
document?
3
4
A.
Correct.
Q.
Please turn to Pa
stamped 375.
two other couples who mayor may not have had some
interest in the four-plex.
6 of the document,
Beginning at Line 4,
she's referring to
Do you see that?
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
Was that an issue in this case?
11
A.
I'm not sure what you mean by "issue."
12
Q.
Well,
she's referring to this issue of a
13
third party possible interest in the four-plex.
14
that what she's doing?
15
A.
16
17
18
Well,
Bates
she rna
Isn't
s the statement that there was
other couples that were involved.

Q.
couples,
Okay.
And at Line 4,
she's talking about the
the Moores and Minkoffs?
19
A.
Correct.
20
Q.
And down at Line 16, the name actually shows
21
up at 18,
she's referring to Mr. Mayo's possible
22
interest in the property;
correct?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q.
Do you recall if you read this document
25
before trial began?
L - - - - - - - - - - - - - T N RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09--------------------~
40
2
3
A.
Presumably,
but I couldn't tell you.
I would
have received it the day of trial.

Q.
Would you have read it before you made a
decision in the case?
A.
Presumably.
Q.
But you have no independent recollection?
A.
No.
Q.
9
10
11
12
13
And what is that
document?
A.
That is Mrs.
Carlsson's attorney's
declaration regarding attorney's fees and costs.
Q.
And in here,
does she state how much in
attorney's fees she has incurred to this point?
14
A.
She does.
15
Q.
That's at Line 18?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
It's $29,880.83?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
And -
20
A.
Through February 28th.
21
Q.
And in the next paragraph,
And it's
I'm sorry.
Go ahead.
does she
22
anticipate incurring additional attorney's fees for
23
the trial pr
24
A.
She does.
25
Q.
And she's estimated it to be another 10,OOO?
and the trial itself?
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
41
A.
Or 11,500.
Q.
Okay.
There's another $10,000 figure a
3
little further down?
4
A.
Okay.
Yes.
Q.
The rest of that document,
is that just a
6
breakdown of how the fees figure was calculated?
is.
A.
It
Q.
Please turn to Exhibit
10
12~
What is that
document?
A.
This is the Minute Order that would have been
11
prepared by the Court or filled out by the Court
12
during the course of the trial.
If I
may explain.
13
Q.
Sure.
A.
Sacramento County is the only court in the
15
state where the judge
16
fills out the Minute Order.
17
clerk -- for trial,
18
Minute Order.
19
well as each trial,
20
like this.
family law judge actually

There's additional -
there's additionally a clerk's
But in each law and motion matter,
as
the judge fills out a Minute Order
21
Q.
So is the handwriting on this document yours?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q.
About a third of the way down the document,
24
there's not a box that's chec
25
of minor children."
~-----------------------IN
d,
but it says "custody
Do you see that?

RE CJF NC. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
42
A.
Correct.
Q.
There's a handwritten note after that?
:3
A.
Correct.
Q.
What does that say?
Master. "
What does that mean?
A.
They had stipulated that the issue of custody
was not before the Court,
trial.
interest of completeness.
10
And I
Q.
11
It say "per Special
and so this was a partial
just was putting that down to
in the
But it was clearly established that wasn't an
issue at the trial?
12
A.
It wasn't an issue.
13
Q.
And please turn to Exhibit 13.
14
What is that
document?
15
A.
Points and Authorities by Mr.
Q.
Does it indicate when this was filed?
17
A.
March 9,
18
Q.
SO was that the final day of trial?
19
A.
It was.
20
Q.
Is this a document you would have read prior
21
Carlsson.
2006.
to making your decision?
22
A.
Yes,
I would have.
23
Q.
And I'm not going to walk you through this
24
entire document,
25
issue of a third party's possible interest in the
of course,
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CcrF NO.
but does it brief the
185
4/1/09 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _----.J
43
For example,
four-plex?
Page 2?
A.
Page 2.
Q.
"Community's liability to U1f's business
partner," referring to Mr. Mayo?
4
5
A.
Okay.
Q.
That's the alleged person with a third party
interest in the four plex; right?

A.
Correct.
10
Page 423?
11
MR.
12
13
BY MR.
14
BLUM:
Yes,
Your Honor.
Thank you.
BLUM:
Q.
15
So that's what this brief is largely about,
this alleged third-party interest?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
So as we see now,
18
It's Bates stamped
both sides had briefed that
issue?
19
A.
Correct.
20
Q.
Hypothetically,
if it had been dete
21
that a third party did have an interest in the
22
four-plex,
23
in the case?
24
A.
25
ned
how could that have effected your decision
First of all,
I would not have accepted that
in the absence of a stipulation.

L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE elF NO.
.185
That third party was

4/.1/09-------------------~
44
not before the Court.
asking me to make a decision effecting a third party's
rights who had no voice in it.
they were
If a third party had an interest,
Q.
And implicitly,
how could
that effect your decision in distributing the
property?
MR.
MR.
BLUM:
At least a partial ownership
No.
I mean title
interest versus an equity interest.
14
MR.
15
THE WITNESS:
16
Define your term
interest.
12
13
Objection.
"interest" so we're all talking about the same thing.
10
11
MURPHY:
BY MR.
BLUM:
Okay.
Title interest,
he did not -
BLUM:
17
Q.
Right.
18
A.
There was testimony regarding Mr.
J9
There was no title interest?

Carlsson's
blief that he had an equitable interest.
20
Q.
If he had,
in fact,
an equitable interest,
21
how could that have effected your decision in the
22
case?
23
A.
I'm not sure it could have.
24
Q.
If you would,
25
Your Honor,
in the other
binder-
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
45
A.
Sure.
Q.
-- Exhibit 37 -
We'll take this
4
opportunity to take our first 10-minute recess of the
We'll be in recess for 10 minutes.
morning.
(Recess taken.)
We're back in
8
session in the matter of Judge Peter McBrien in the
9
presence of Judge McBrien and counsel.
10
Mr.
Blum,
11
MR.
BLUM:
continue.
First of all,
Your Honor,
12
believe there's going to be a withdrawal of the
13
objections to Exhibits 15 and 16.
14
15

Mr.
Is that correct,
Murphy?
16
MR.
17
18
received.
19
dealt with,
MURPHY:
Yes,
Your Honor.
They will be
I believe all the exhibits now have been

if I'm not mistaken.
20
MR.
21
(Examiner's Exhibits 1-36 received into
22
evidence. )
23
BY MR.
24
25
Q.
BLUM:
I believe so,
yes.
BLUM:
Your Honor,
transcript binder,
just directed you to the trial
which is the separate two-inch
~-------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
46
Do you have that?
black binder.
A.
Q.
Let's start with Page 25.
do.
MR.
Yes,
Your Honor.
This is the page on which the transcript of
Q.
BLUM:
This is on March 2?
the trial actually begins;
is that correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
And it indicates the trial began March 2 at
10
9:17 a.m.?
11
A.
It does.
12
Q.
Now,
13
case;
Mrs.
Carlsson was the petitioner in this
right?
14
A.
She was.
15
Q.
So she puts on her case-in-chief first;
16
right?
17
A.
Correct.
18
Q.
And on here,
19
pages,
Page 25 and the next couple of
the attorneys are discussing matters with you?
20
A.
They are.
21
Q.
Prior to calling a witness?
22
A.
Right.
23
Q.
Please turn to Page 26.
24
12, Ms.
25
A.
Beginning at Line
Huddle appears to be speaking?
She is.
~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09----------------------~
47
Q.
And she says:

I
"Before we get started with
the testimony,
just want the Court to note that the
four-plex,
amount of testimony
four plex to be awarded to him."
which is probably going to

- Mr.
the major
Carlsson does not want the
Do you see where she says that?
do.
A.
Q.
So that was a change in their position;
correct?
10
A.
It was.
11
Q.
He had previously as
12
to him;
13
A.
It was.
14
Q.
At Line 17:
d that that be awarded
right?
"The wife has as
d that it be
15
sold,
and he agrees to have the property sold,
so we
16
won't need any testimony on the value of the
17
four-plex."
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
So then you come in at Line 21 and say:
Do you see that?
"Is
20
there a proposed stipulation that both parties are
21
comfortable?"
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q.
And Ms.
Keeley says:
"No,
Your Honor.
24
did not propose the four-plex be sold.
25
Husband's insistent position in this

~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
Wife
It has been
411109--------------------~
48
four-plex be awarded to him."
A.
I do.
Q.
Okay.
Do you see that?
And then at the top of Page 27 -- I ' l l
skip a few lines to Line 4 :
the duplex should be awarded to Husband."
"It is Wife's position

Correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
Had there been the stipulation that
Huddle was talking about,
Ms.
shortened the testimony in this case;
10
11
MR. MURPHY:
THE WITNESS:
BY MR.
16
17
Calls for
Overruled.
It mi
have.
BLUM:
Q.
Well,
no testimony as to the value of the
four-plex would have been required;
correct?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
Please turn to the next page,
20
10.
21
speaking.
22
this is Ms.
23
A.
Okay.
24
Q.
She says at Line 10:
25
Please
answer.
14
15
Objection.
right?
speculation.
12
13
that would have
And just for reference,
Page 28,
this is Ms.
Line
Keeley
If you turn back to the prior page and see,

Keeley speaking.
"Mr. Carlsson has
stated that he wanted that awarded to him as well"

L------------------------IN RE CJF NO . .1 85
4/1/09----------------------~
49
she's talking about the four-plex
not opposed to."

I misspoke there.
"which we were
She was talking about the
house at this point?
"However,
if he cannot now af
of the properties,
object and would encourage Mr.
Gold River property."
rd to
certainly Mrs. Carlsson would not
A.
Correct.
10
Q.
SO now Mrs.
Carlsson to sell the
The house;
right?
Carlsson is suggesting that "No,
11
we want the four-plex awarded to Mr. Carlsson,
12
can sell the house if he wants to";

A.
Correct.
14
Q.
Do you know if this was the first
15
pretrial documents prior to that,
Mrs.
16
suggested that the house be sold;
correct?
18
MR. MURPHY:
in the
Carlsson hadn't
Calls for
Overruled.
reflecting what's in the documents.
21
THE WITNESS:
22
the house sold?
23
BY MR.
24
25
speculation.
19
20
Objection.
but he
right?
13
17
ep one
Q.
Mr.
It's
You may answer.
Mrs. Carlsson had not wanted
BLUM:
Well,
in the prior document,
Carlsson could
ep the house;
L - . - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
she had agreed
right?
4/1/09-------------------~
50
A.
Correct.
Q.
But here on Page 28,
they are now making a
suggestion maybe he should sell the house?
3
4
A.
Correct.
Q.
The house should be sold.

At the bottom of Page 29,
Mrs.
Carlsson,
correct?
now Petitioner,
is beginning her case-in-chief;
A.
Correct.
10
Q.
And if you turn the page to Page 30,
you see
11
they started with testimony from the petitioner;
12
right?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
Okay.
Obviously we're not going to walk
15
through 460 pages of transcri
s of this hearing,
16
I'm going to skip to Page 73.
And this is still
17
Mrs.
18
asking her,
19
Carlsson on the stand.

for example,
so
And her attorney is
at Line 5:
"Did Mr. Carlsson tell you that anyone other
20
than the Moores and the Minkoffs had any interest"
21
excuse me -- "had at any time an interest in the
22
four-plex?
23
"Answer:
24
"What did he tell you?"
25
At Line 10:
Yes.
"That his friend Joe Mayo had an
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - -
51
interest in it."
Do you see that?
A.
Q.
So Ms.
do.
Keeley is asking her client about this
third party interest cIa
on the four plex;
A.
Correct.
Q.
If you turn the next few pages,
she's still asking those questions.
says
10
she's talking about Joe.
Line 26 she
say that too
I'm sorry.
fast?
Page 74,
11
Line 26,
and up on the next page,
12
Page 75,
13
possible interest in the four plexi
they are still talking about Mr.
14
A.
(Nods head up and down.)
15
Q.
If you turn to Page 77,
16
74 and 75,
74,
Did I
correct?
Mayo and his
correct?
they continue through
that point to talk about that issue?
17
A.
Okay.
18
Q.
Does that appear to be correct?
19
A.
That appears to me to be correct.
20
Q.
If you would please turn to Page 84.
Carlsson -- I
said Ms.;
Did
21
Ms.
22
Carlsson -- give testimony regarding her attorney's
23
fees?
24
A.
On Page 84?
25
Q.
Yes.
~-----------------------IN
I guess i t ' s Mrs.
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09 - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
52
A.
She does.
Q.
Is that standard,
testimony about the attorney's fees they incurred?

A.
that each party will give
It is standard if,
in fact,
are at issue.
Q.
And they were in this case?
A.
They were.
Q.
attorney's fees
is cross-examination now of Ms.
10
Ms.
Huddle.
11
page,
12
Mrs.
13
attorney's fees;
And I will -- this
Carlsson by
And again at Page 100,
Line 28,
very bottom of the
and up onto the next page,
Mona --
Carlsson is being cross-examined about the

is that correct?
14
A.
Correct.
15
Q.
If you leave the trial binder,
16
binder open,
17
exhibit binder and refer you to Exhibit 14.
I would like to refer you back to the
Do you have Exhibit 14 in front of you,
18
19
Your Honor?
20
A.
21
Q.
What are those?
22
A.
The clerk's
23
Q.
And this document,
24
25
the transcript
do.
the clerk's Minute Order.

Exhibit 14,
i t ' s actually
three pages; correct?

A.
It appears to be,
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
s.
185
4/1/09 - - - - - - - - - -
53
And is there one page for each of the
Okay.
Q.
three days of trial in the Carlsson case?

Yes.
A.
sometimes the clerk pr
sometimes the judge does?
THE WITNESS:
ares the Minute 0
At a trial,
THE WITNESS:
12

BY MR.
14
15
er and
only the clerk
All law and motions,
the judge does?
11
13
apparently,
prepares one.
10
So,
Yes.
Thank you.
BLUM:
Is this still considered a Minute Order?
Q.
We
looked at a document you called the Minute Order.
16
A.
17
Orders,
18
pr
19
clerk's.
Right.
We have two different kinds of Minute
and the document earlier is the one the judge
ares,
and I had prepared that.
And this is the
Both find their way into the file.
20
Q.
21
"Trial,
22
A.
Yes,
23
Q.
The trial began at 9:18 in the morning?
24
A.
Correct.
25
Q.
And at the bottom line,
So on Page 1 of this document,
which says
Day 1 of 3"?
it does.
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
it apparently
4/1/09----------------------
54
11
recessed at 4:00 p.m.?
A.
Correct.
Q.
I 1m just going to go over these very quickly.
We'll get back to this document,

Second page,
this is on March 3rd of 2006?
A.
Correct.
Q.
And apparently,
trust me.
trial resumed at 8 : 47 that
morning?
A.
Correct.
10
Q.
And it recessed at 12:07; correct?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
So that's half a day,
13
A.
It's approximately.
14
Q.
Page 3,
15
excuse me,
for March 9,
roughly?
trial began at 1:45
1:25 in the afternoon?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
And it doesn't quite say when it ended here,
18
but the last time noted there is 4:27.
19
that?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
So this was,
22
again,
Do you see
roughly three hours,
one-half-day?
23
A.
Approximately.
24
Q.
So was that a total of two days of court
2
HE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
55
A.
I believe it was.
Q.
So when this trial ended,
they had just
reached that estimated two days for trial?
A.
Correct.
Q.
Okay.
that binder,
I'm going to ask you to go back to the
transcript.
But we'll refer back to Exhibit 14.
if you keep that document open,
So back in the transcript binder,
Now,
Exhibit 37,
please turn to Page 136.
10
on in this trial,
11
mistrial,
from early
you raised the possibility of a
didn't you?
12
A.
I did.
13
Q.
On Page 136,
14
"Your Honor,
15
about what time of day this was?
16
A.
17
afternoon.
18
Q.
19
Now,
which is
Line 18, Ms.
Huddle speaks:
I'm going to have to eat."
It was approaching 1:00 p.m.
Do you know
in the
So you had been in session since the morning,
and now it was approaching 1:00 in the afternoon?
20
A.
Correct.
21
Q.
And when she suggested she needs to eat,
22
Line 20 you respond:
23
because tomorrow afternoon,
24
It has statutory preference.
25
we're going to complete it by noon tomorrow."
at
"The reason I'm going forward is

I have a continuing trial.
So I'm ensuring that
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
And by
4/1/09----------------------~
56
"complete it," you're talking about the Carlsson
trial;
right?
A.
I was making that effort.
Q.
Now,
and a half?
A.
trying to rna
half.
Q.
10
ng to complete it in a day
certainly made that statement,

that
A.
complete it in a day and a
Even though the time estimate had been two
Even though the time estimate had been two
days.
13
Q.
Then at Line 24,
you state:
"Otherwise,
14
may as well call a mistrial right now.
15
preference."
16
A.
17
we
Statutory
Why did you refer to a mistrial?
It's an effort to
it's a word used in an
effort to try to encourage the people to move forward.
18
19
that I was
days?
11
12
so you're tr
Q.
So do you not really mean it when you say "a
mistrial will happen tomorrow at noon"?
20
A.
I did not mean it.
21
Q.
The next page,
22
Ms.
23
morning?
Huddle e
Page 137, beginning at Line 7,
lains she has two e
24
A.
Correct.
25
Q.
At Line 9 you respond:
~------------------------IN
RE CJF NC.
185
rts coming in the
"All I'm telling you

4/1/09--------------------~
57
is if i t ' s not completed
1
2
A.
Correct.
Q.
So,
again,
y noon,
s a
you use the threat of a mistrial
to try to push them along?
A.
used the possibility of a mistrial.
Q.
There is no legal requirement that a
dissolution case be held continuously,
is there?
A.
Not that I'm aware of.
Q.
You can come back at other dates and finish
the trial?
10
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
At Line 11,
again,
still on Page 137, Ms.
13
responds
14
not finished by noon tomorrow.
15
"Well,
16
be decided.
17
14,
18
ei ther.
19
is.
20
welcome to it."
I'm
Huddle
you've mentioned mistrial if i t ' s

Ms.
Huddle says:
the value on the family residence has to

T
re has to be an expert on it."
you respond:
"I
Line
don't intend to argue with you
'm telling you exactly what my availability
And if you want a mistrial at this point,
you're
Is that what you said?
21
A.
22
Q.
Would you have granted her a mistrial if she
23
did.
asked the Court at that point?
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
Why not?
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
58
I'd been doing,
A.
16 years.
Ms.
estimate.
I'm encouraging her to move the case along.

At Line 18, Ms.
"Your Honor,
see that?
I
Q.
And as we know,
she's right about that;
They set it for two days?
11
A.
They did.
12
Q.
But at this point,
15
16
Do you
do.
A.
right?
Huddle responds:
we set the matter for two days."
14
Huddle.
Huddle never completes her case within the time
Q.
13
family law for
I've had several cases with Ms.
10
at that time,
got a day and a half;

A.
you're telling her she's
right?
I'm suggesting that that would be desirous.
But certainly -
Q.
Well,
suggesting it
desirous -- you're
17
saying "mistrial if not finished by noon tomorrow";
18
right?
19
A.
Those are the words.
20
Q.
At Line 20,
after she says i t ' s been set for
21
two days,
22
I'm not going to argue with you over it.
23
your choices.
24
25
you respond:
"Ma'am,
Ms.
Huddle,
told you
You've had
I've given them to you."
What choices had you given her?
Do you see
where I was referring to?

L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
59
I do see where the language says that.
A.
1
2
choices are to move forward.
Certainly,
well,
That's the primary one.
that she would have the opportunity -
anyway.
Isn't the choice here finish by noon tomorrow
Q.
or have a mistrial?
don't believe so.
A.
Q.
Is that the words you used to her?
The
those were the choices,
10
11
mistrial,
12
right?
That
finish tomorrow or mistrial?
know you say you really wouldn't have given her a

but that's not something you expressed;
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
What you're telling her is "Finish by noon
15
tomorrow or mistrial because I
have this other case"?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
So that's the choice you're giving her;
18
correct?
19
A.
Right.
20
Q.
You say:
21
your client.
22
witnesses.
23
availability,
24
tomorrow afternoon that has statutory preference."
25
you see that?
"You might want to discuss it with
I would presume discuss the potential

But certainly I have explained my
and I do have another continuing matter
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
Do
4/1/09----------------------~
60
A.
Q.
Could I
this,
session?
do.
ask you to turn to Page 149.
apparently,
A.
It is.
Q.
Okay.
Page 148,
p.m.
NOw,
is the beginning of the afternoon
And if you look briefly over at
the last line,
you had recessed at 12:52
that day?
A.
Correct.
10
Q.
As you had said,
11
eating,
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q.
On Page 149,
when Ms.
Huddle asked about
you were approaching 1:00?
at Line 5,
now Ms.
Huddle is
14
speaking:
15
with this matter of an additional half-
16
not the Court is going to allow us to have that at
17
some point in time?"
"Before we proceed,
Your Honor,
y,
can we deal
whether or
Do you see that?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
Since you had told her trial was ending the
20
next day at noon,
21
issue?
basically,
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q.
At Line 9,
24
25
to do so;
A.
she's addressing that
you indicate that you are willing
right?
Mm-hmm.
do,
yes.
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
61
Q.
1
2
full two days?
A.
Correct.
Q.
And,
y so they can have their
Add another half-
in fact,
that was decided to do;
add that second half-day?
A.
We did.
Q.
Ms.
further witnesses."
10
you did
"Your Honor,
Keeley is speaking:
here;
Just at Line 5,
we have no
So she's wrapping up her case
correct?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
But then there is some issues with marking
13
exhibits;
14
A.
15
Q.
16
is that right?
arently.
And then at Page 196,
point rested her case;
17
A.
She has.
18
Q.
You ask Ms.
correct?
Huddle to proceed.
19
didn't realize that Ms.
20
say,
21
right?
"Well,
but you
she did rest and then kind of reopened";
A.
Right.
23
Q.
So at this point,
25
She said she
Keeley was finished,
22
24
Petitioner has at this
Mrs.
Carlsson's case is
rested?
A.
It is.
L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
Q.
Mr.
Carlsson begins his case by calling
2
Joseph Mayo,
at the bottom of the Page
A.
Yes.
Q.
Now,
96?
if you have Exhibit 14 open still,
the
other binder?
A.
I do.
Q.
First page,
just want to clarify some of
s .
these t
A.
Okay.
10
Q.
The last
the fourth paragraph,
--
which does
11
not start with a time on it but starts "the Court took
12'
the noon recess";
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
(Reading)
do you see that?
Richard Sutcliffe
(sic)
was
15
called by Petitioner,
sworn and testified,
16
2:40.
"The following exhibits were
17
admitted."
18
with, marking those exhibits at the end of
19
Ms.
Then it says:
released at
And that's the testimony we just dealt
Keeley's case?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Then it says:
22
A.
It does.
23
Q.
And that's correct?
24
that point;
25
A.
"Petitioner rests";
right?
Petitioner rested at
right?
Petitioner did rest.
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
63
1
2
Q.
The next paragraph says
Mayo is called."
Right?
A.
Correct.
Q.
That's when this is happening on Page 196;
i t ' s 2:48?
A.
Apparently.
Q.
Then going further in that same paragraph in
Exhibit 14:
"Witness released at 3:20."
testified for approximately 32 minutes?
10
A.
arently.
11
Q.
30 minutes,
12
sworn and testified;
32 minutes.
Then Mr.
A.
Ri
14
Q.
Then the very last line,
p.m.
A.
We did.
17
Q.
So that afternoon,
18
hour and 12
19
case-in-chief?
you recessed at 4:00
A.
Correct.
21
Q.
Now,
Page 219,
Mr.
Carlsson had about an
nutes to begin to present his
20
moving along back in the transcripts,
this is where Mr.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
And as we saw,
25
Carlsson is
that day?
16
22
Mayo
correct?
13
15
So Mr.
Carlsson is called?
so this must be roughly 3:20?
You recall from Exhibit 14,
that's when Mr.
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
Mayo
4/1/09--------------------~
64
finished?
A.
Right.
Q.
So he has just now taken the stand on
Page 219.
Ms.
Do you see that?
Huddle had asked a question;
A.
Yes,
Q.
At Line 10,
9
10
objection.
Ms.
Line 7,
Keeley objects.
do.
you make your ruling on the
"Anyway,
have to move along."
won't strike it only because we

Do you see that?
11
A.
Right.
12
Q.
So she has just got into her case-in-chief,
13
and you're trying to get her to move it along?
14
A.
Correct.
15
Q.
At Page 222,
16
have that."
17
the moment.
18
along"?
19
A.
Correct.
20
Q.
So you're continuing to try to push her
21
And I
ain,
Line 21,
you say:
won't go into what "that" was at

you say:
"I just want us to move
along?
22
A.
Right.
23
Q.
Then at the bottom of that page,
24
25
"I think we
we're still at Page 222.

A.
Do you see that,
Line 28 -
Your Honor?
do.
L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185- 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
65
"I'm just reminding you,
You're speaking:
Q.
you have a
limited period of time.
important,
keep going."
along?
If it's not
Yet again,
you're pushing her
am.
A.
Q.
And you're stressing how little time is
available?
time";
ri
You said:
t?
A.
Right.
10
Q.
11
2
13
ask you to turn to Page 260,
the yellow tab.
after the tab and it's after the next index.

begins the next day,
A.
Correct.
15
Q.
By the way,
A.
18
I mean,
19
Trial
at 8:45 a.m.?
this would be a Friday?
Presumably.
I'm not
Because the 2nd was a Thursday.
the 2nd and -- 3rd,
yeah,
would be Friday.
Do you guys want to
move this along?
21
22
March 3rd,
It's
trying-
17
20
which is after
This is Day 2 of testimony.
14
16
"You have a limited period of
MR.
BLUM:
have a reputation for being
slow.
23
(Laughter. )
24
Where was I?
25
MR.
MURPHY:
I ' l l stipulate it was a
-------------------------IN RE CJF NC. 185 -
Friday.
4/1/09--------------------~
66
How's that?
3
BY MR.
BLUM:
Q.
5
morning,
6
Mr.
Accepted.
At the beginning of the Court session that
Ms.
Huddle is telling you about this witness,
Minkoff?
A.
Yes,
she was.
Q.
She's telling you that he couldn't be there
9
because he's undergoing chemotherapy;
10
A.
Correct.
Q.
And on the next page,
12
261,
correct?
Line 20,
they are
talking about when to schedule that other half-day?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
You tell her that you're only available on
J5
Thursdays and Fridays;
correct?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
What's the other part?
18
A.
The other part is I
Partially correct.
indicated that I would be
19
willing to do it over the noon hour on one of the
20
other days.
21
Q.
Nobody was interested.
Page 262,
Line 10, Ms.
Huddle speaking:
22
don't want to have my case heard without Mr.
23
testifying about the arrangement."
241
arrangement about the four-plex?
25
A.
"I
Minkoff
That's the
Correct.
1- _ _ _ _ __ IN RE CJF NO. 185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
67
Q.
And why everybody's name was on the title and
what the plan was here.
"Ms.
motion for a mistrial or what."
Keeley,
5
6
Your response at Line 13 was:
don't know whether this
1S
a slow
Why did you say that?

A.
Because we were engaged in about seven pages
of discussion over when she could schedule this
witness in an effort to try to get this witness during
the days -- the days that we normally would hear law
10
and motion,
11
of this grand discussion was.
12
13
14
Q.
didn't quite know what the purpose
So again,
mistrial;
A.
and I
you're raising the possibility of a
correct?
"Slow motion for a" -- what.
15
(Witness examines document.)
16
Slow -- oh,
yeah.
Well,
I was trying to
17
interpret it.
18
Q.
You were trying to interpret what?
19
A.
I was trying to interpret Ms.
Huddle's
20
involvement with this lengthy discussion over
21
scheduling this witness.
22
23
24
25
Q.
But you raised the possibility,
mistrial;
A.
again,
of a
correct?
No.
was doing.
questioned whether this is what she
I mean,
used the word "mistrial," yes.
L--------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
68
Q.
She hadn't suggested a mistrial,
A.
She had not at that point,
Q.
Please turn to Page 314
A.
Although to
pe
THE WITNESS:
MR.
THE WITNESS:
11
no.
There's no question
ng.
10
had she?
BY MR.
BLUM:
Okay.
'm sorry,
313?
314.
Okay.
BLUM:
Q.
Line 24, Ms.
Huddle has e
lained she wants
~2
to check on the completeness of some exhibits and make
13
sure there are signatures on them?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
You respond at Line 27:
16
waning.
Go ahead;
"Your t
you can check."
is
Correct?
17
A.
Correct.
18
Q.
What did you mean her time was waning?
19
A.
She has a limited amount of time.
20
moving on,
21
but check her exh
22
Q.
but
its.
At any time during this trial,
did
to the attorneys
24
they could have court time after March 9th?

A.
is
I was just reminding her of that,
23
25
u offer
or indicate to the attorneys that
Any specific date?
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
69
Q.
Anything.
A.
I explained the trailing procedure,
Page 149.
Still on Page 360 of the transcripts,
Q.
line,
examination.
A.
You said 360 or 316?
Q.
360.
A.
Okay.
10
Q.
I'm sorry.
it says Ms.
12
And this is redirect
referring to,
You're right.
MR.
14
15
MR.
16
18
19
BLUM:
BLUM:
Line 1.
On Page 360?
Yes.
Thank you.
BLUM:
Q.
I'm just saying this is where Ms.
Huddle
began redirect examination of her client -
20
A.
21
Q.
22
It is.
Mr.
Carlsson?
y.
Then a couple pages later,
23
for example,
24
correct?
25
Which line are you
Counsel?
13
BY MR.
top
Huddle is doing redirect
11
17
Line 1
A.
at 363,
Line 21,
she is asking her client questions;
Correct.
L - - - - - - - - - , - - - - I N RE eJF NO.
185
4/1/09------------
70
Q.
Then at Line 25,
you speak:
have to adjourn this proceeding.

3
downtown,
see that?
"I'm going to
They are awaiting me
so we will resume Thursday at 1:30."
A.
Correct.
Q.
So she was in the process of redirect
Do you
7
examination of her client when court adjourned for the
8
day;
correct?
A.
Correct.
10
Q.
Well,
12
A.
It did.
13
Q.
So it wasn't that she had -
11
Not for the day but the morning.
the trial had been adjourned for the
day?
14
asking her client -questions,
15
adjourned?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
NOw,
ri
if you'll turn,
she was still

when you
please,
to Page 366.
18
Did the final half day of trial begin on March 9 at
19
1:30 in the afternoon?
20
A.
21
Q.
And at Page 371,
22
Mr.
lieve so.
we have testimony from
Minkoff; correct?
23
A.
Yes,
24
Q.
This was that cancer patient she couldn't get
25
we do.
in the day before,
and now she's got him there?
L - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
411109-------------------~
71
A.
Correct.
Q.
At this point,
Huddle calls her real estate appraisal expert,
Mr.
Shaw?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And then at Page 390, Ms.
Keeley takes on
that expert voir dire?
A.
Correct.
Q.
I'm just walking you through to see the
10
timeline here.
11
A.
Okay.
12
Q.
At Page 394,
13
expert,
14
property.
she starts questioning her
and she's asking him about the 24th Street
Do you see that on Line 13 and 14?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
That's the four-plex?
17
A.
It is.
18
Q.
Okay.
19
A.
Okay.
20
Q.
--
21
Ms.
At Page 422,
Line 16
this is where Ms.
cross-examining Mr.
Keeley begins
Shaw?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q.
Then it continues for a number of pages.
24
if you turn to Page 442,
at Line 10, Ms.
25
finishes her cross-examination of Mr.

' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE elF NO.
185
And
Keeley
Shaw?
4/1/09------------------~
72
A.
Okay.
Q.
"I have
no further questions."
Ms.
Huddle speaks:
can get a break to use the lady's room?"
respond at Line 15:
mistrial."
And you
"You know you're approaching a
do.
A.
Q.
So again,
you're raising the specter of a
mistrial?
10
11
is there any way I
Do you see that?
"Your Honor,
At Line 1 ,
A.
raised the specter of the limited time that
they had estimated.
12
Q.
Ms.
Huddle responds at Line 17:
"I haven't
13
even been able to talk to the gentleman who went to
14
work to get the records requested.
15
16
that record request later on here,
17
response.
18
why you're asking for a break?"
Ms.
19
do need to use the lady's room.
We have been here"
20
and I
21
started this session about 1:30.
22
breaks until this point?
don't know what he has to say."
And we'll get into

but that was her
And at Line 21 you say:
"Okay.
A.
Not to my recollection.
24
Q.
Line 25 you say:
five-minute recess.
Is that
Huddle:
could ask you to walk through this,
23
25
He has returned.
"No.
but we
And were there any
"Why don't we take a
But I guarantee you,
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
if it is not
411109---------------------~
73
complete
see that?
A.
Correct.
Q.
So had you ever offered them more courtroom
time beyond March 9?
A.
It's not my obligation to do so.
Q.
Is that a "no"?
A.
No.
MR.
9
10
It is a no.
BLUM:
Excuse me,
Your Honor,
have one moment.
11
12
(Pause.)
13
14
BY MR.
Certainly.
BLUM:
Q.
In the exhibit binder,
15
have the transcript,
16
Exhibit 5.
17
18
if I could
the one that doesn't
if you could please turn to
There was a deposition of you last December;

correct?
19
A.
Correct.
20
Q.
And is this transcript from that deposition?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q.
23
24
25
Line 11 there,
Approximately at
I'm actually the one asking questions:
"Would you say you precluded Mr. Carlsson

from completing his expert's testimony?"
L - . - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185 -
4/1/09--------------'
74
"Why wouldn't you say that?
"Because earlier in the transcript,
offered them another option.
"Question:
And at Line 18:
What was that?"

"That was if they wanted to
wait,
schedule them another day.
would have that time.
10
they would not have any priority but we could

If I was available,
if I was in another trial,
Do you rem
er giving us that testimony at
the deposition?
13
A.
14
Q.
Then I asked you at Line 23:
15
16
do.
"Do you know where in the transcript that
would be reflected?
17
"Answer:
18
half days,
19
says.
20
21
they
that trial would take precedence."
11
12
I had
but I
I'm sure it's in the last two and a

can find it" is actually what it
Do you believe what you said is "I can't find

it" or
22
A.
Yeah.
23
Q.
During the deposition,
We couldn't find it at the moment.

you couldn't find the
24
location in the transcript where you told them they
25
could have another day;

~------------------------IN
right?
RE CJF NO. 185
411109----------------------~
75
A.
We did find it at Page 149.
Q.
You're talking about the transcript Page 149?
THE WITNESS:
Of the reporter's transcript.

Of the deposition or
the trial?
THE WITNESS:
THE WITNESS:
10
149 of what?
BY MR.
11
Of the trial.
Back on Day I?
I believe so.
BLUM:
Now,
Q.
Page 149 of the transcript,
that's where
12
you're talking about adding a second half day;
13
correct?
14
A.
Correct.
15
Q.
My question pertains to whether you ever
16
indicated to them they could have court t
17
March 9?
18
A.
19
Q.
And,
beyond
have no recollection of doing so.

in fact,
back on transcript Page 442,
20
where we just were,
21
five
22
not completed by 4:30,
23
Does that indicate to you that you hadn't ever given
24
them the option of having time in the Court beyond
25
March 9?
nute recess.
at Line 25:
But I
"Why don't we take a
guarantee you if this is
there will be a mistrial."
IN HE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
76
A.
That
I had not?
Q.
That you had not.
A.
It doesn't indicate anything to me.
Q.
Guaranteeing them a mistrial at
4:30 if not
finished by 4:30,
would you say indicates to you that
you're at least indicating to the attorneys you have
no intention of going beyond 4:30;
A.
Correct.
Q.
And again,
That's what I
442,
trial is over?
intended to convey.
Line 28,
Ms.
Huddle's
10
response to you:
11
the top of the next page your response:
12
estimate the length of trial."
"I
have records to get in."
And at
"I didn't
Do you see that?
13
A.
do.
14
Q.
So you're telling them here,
15
days is up
they have a two day est
16
get to the end of that,
this is over;
once their two
teo
Once they
right?
17
A.
As far as I
18
Q.
Have you ever presided over a trial that took
19
knew,
yes.
longer than the attorneys estimated it would?
20
A.
Absolutely.
21
Q.
Isn't that pretty common?
22
A.
They have to make a request.
And,
23
have a Minute Order there from a trial of
24
Ms.
25
in fact,
Huddle's
Q.
The question is:
~-----------------------IN
Isn't that relatively
RE CJF NO. 185 -
411109----------------------~
77
common,
A.
No,
Q.
Estimating the length of trial can be
to go over the estimated time period?
difficult,
it is not common,
but it does happen.
can't it?
A.
It can.
Q.
Witnesses may give lengthy answers;
new
issues could arise?
A.
Correct.
Q.
In those other cases where you're going
10
beyond the estimated time -
11
A.
12
Q.
13
A.
couldn't tell you because they occurred in
the mid '90s.
16
17
did you repeatedly threaten those
attorneys with mistrials?
14
15
Rig
Q.
In this case,
"threatened."
It's a loaded word.
18
A.
It is a
19
Q.
In this case,
20
21
22
23
24
25
Ms.
you never -- I'm using the word
loaded word.
did you ever threaten
Keeley with a mistrial?
A.
during Ms.
Q.
have no recollection of using that word
Keeley's case.
In fact,
here in this case;
A.
the issues did change a little bit

correct?
They did.
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09---------------------
78
ample,
the disposition of the four-plex
quest of how i t should be distributed?

3
A.
Correct.
Q.
And Mr.
A.
Correct.
Q.
And Mrs.
"okay,
it";
Carlsson decided he didn't want it?
Carlsson,
instead of just agreeing,
just sell it," decided "no,
we want you to have
right?
A.
Right.
10
Q.
Isn't that a little odd of a
11
request,
to
force someone be awarded a property?
12
A.
First time in my experience.
13
Q.
So given that,
14
a new issue,
15
the house?
16
MR.
17
Relevance and
18
in the case.
19
now Mr.
so to speak,
MURPHY:
Carlsson is faced with
the possibility of selling
Objection,
sstates the test
BY MR.
21
Q.
ony and the evidence
We're -
20
Your Honor.
Sustained.
BLUM:
You may already be
there.
22
am.
23
A.
24
Q.
Line 15,
you at two
25
this is you speaking:
nutes to 4:00."
"We'll see
On the prior page you
LI----------______________ IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09 - - -___________---1
79
had said you were gOlng to take a five
nute recess,
and you ordered them back at two minutes to 4:00;
correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
So this statement on the bottom of 442 where
you're saying you're guaranteeing a mistrial by 4:30,
apparently you made that statement just a few minutes
before 4:00?
A.
Presumably.
10
Q.
Then you take a recess;
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
Line 22?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
After the recess,
15
6
the recess,
correct?
after you came back from
had the attorneys made some effort to try
to short n the trial?
17
A.
They did.
18
Q.
For example,
on the top of Page 444,
Line 1,
19
Ms.
20
check stubs she has handed to me can be admitted into
21
evidence without any foundation."
22
to expedite matters?
Keeley speaks:
"I have agreed that the three
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q.
The next page,
25
445,
So they're trying
Line 19, Ms.
Huddle
announced they are waiving this claim for a car repair

L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE C3F NO.
185 -
4/1/09-------------'
80
bill of $5,900?
A.
Correct.
Q.
The price
Line 27.
So t
the amount is actually listed on
yare waiving this issue;
A.
Correct.
Q.
And Line 19 to 20 she says:
correct?
hYour Honor,
the car repair bill,
transcript must be a little garbled there,
would just consume too
on
it would just consume tooh
(sic)
but
the
hit
and may risk a mistrial. "
10
So that's what she is explaining as to why they are
11
waiving this issue?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q.
She's afraid of a mistrial?
14
A.
Correct.
15
Q.
The bottom of Page 446,
16
Ms.
Huddle of her expert,
17
page; correct?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
In fact,
20
Mr.
this is redirect by
Shaw,
beginning at this
they do this without even returning
him physically to the stand?
21
A.
Poss
22
Q.
If you look at Line 17, at least you
23
suggested that;
ly.
correct?
24
A.
Okay.
25
Q.
And that was in an effort to speed the
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09---------------------~
81
process?
A.
Correct.
Q.
The bottom of the next page,
re-calls her expert,
correct?
her appraiser,
447,
Mr.
Ms.
Keeley
Sutcliffe;
A.
Correct.
Q.
Please turn to Page 453,
at Line 5.
This is
Keeley asking her expert, Mr.
Sutcliffe:
"Do you
Ms.
have a copy of Mr.
10
property?"
Shaw's appraisal of the 24th Street
That's the four-plex.
11
A.
Okay.
12
Q.
And then on Page 455
so she's
13
cross examining -- redirecting her client's e
14
about Mr.
Carlsson's expert's report;
correct?
15
A.
Correct.
16
Q.
Starting at Line 5 on Page 455,
17
the question
is:
18
"Is the annualized income determined from
19
Page 9 incorrectly stated?
20
" An s we r :
21
Line 8:
22
ert
amount" -
23
It is."
"Is it incorrectly stated as what
"It is incorrectly stated as what amount?

"Answer:
It's stated at 30,720,
when his
24
computed figure and the actual figure should be
25
36,720.
RE CJF NO.
185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - -
82
"Question:
What effect would that have on
the conclusion of value by the direct capitalization
method?"
Answer,
Line 13:
"That's a very significant
difference.
that's going to be a little bit aggressive because
it's probably a little bit lower than that by about
$900,
quarter . .. "
If we take that 6,000 and we add it,
and we use this capitalization rate of 5 and a
10
The expert continues at Line 18:
11
have a calculator.
12
here.
13
property,
"I don't
I'm just using a rough estimate
That's going to bring the value of the
14
using his figures,
close to $700,000."
Do you see that?
15
A.
16
Q.
So at this point,
17
trial ended,
18
do.
Mr.
a few pages before this
Sutcliffe is saying their expert's
ort has got a huge mathematical error in it; right?
19
A.
Correct.
20
Q.
Instead of a $600,000 appraisal,
21
number,
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q.
So about a $100,000 discrepancy here;
24
25
and
using their
it should be $700,000?
is that
right?
A.
Right.
~----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09
83
At this point,

2
take our second morning recess.
for 10 minutes.
We'll be in recess
(Recess taken.)
We're back in
Judge McBrien is present and counsel.
session.
And you may continue, Mr.
MR.
10
Q.
we'll
BLUM:
Thank you,
Blum.
Your Honor.
We had just left off at Page 455 of the
transcript
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
- talking about how Mrs. Carlsson's expert
13
had found this big mathematical error in
14
Mr. Carlsson's expert's report;
15
A.
Correct.
16
Q.
Turn to Page 457.
17
Ms.
surrebuttal examination of Mr.
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
Now,
correct?
Huddle begins
Sutcliffe; correct?
on Page 459, Line 20,
she's asking about
20
this inaccuracy that he says is in Mr.
21
Line 20,
22
there's a math error."
his answer
1S:
"His analysis is fine,
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
"What was the math error?"
explain:
but
Do you see that?
23
25
Shaw's report.
And he goes on to
"The math error is he left off 6,000 in
~------'------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
411109----------------------~
84
annualized income."
Is that true?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Then at the top of the next page,
3,
460,
the question is:
"So your disagreement would be $6,000?
"Answer:
math error.
It's not a disagreement.
It's a
His figures"
Line 6,
Line
question:
"You don't disagree with
how he did it; you just think there is a math error?"
10
Line 8:
"I disagree with a lot of what he
11
said.
12
error here.
13
conclusion of value than he's got here because of the
14
error.
15
Correct?
But using just his assumptions,
And his math error leads to a different
It's off by maybe 90 to 100 thousand dollars."
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
That's the testimony Mr .
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
She says:
18
there is a math
Sutcliffe is giving
here?
21
"No further que s t ion Ei
"
Then there's a few statements between you and
22
Ms. Huddle at the bottom of that page.
23
Page 461,
24
Ms. Huddle.
"Anyway,
call your witness
25
while you still have any time."
Do you see that?
Line 3,
you tell
You say:
L-----~-----------------IN
Top of
you're talking to
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09
85
Q.
So she calls Mr.
3
the stand.
Shaw,
her expert,
And on the next page,
back to
462 -- perhaps I
4
ShOLld refer you back to Exhibit 14 for a moment,
that
clerk's Minute Order.
5
6
A.
Okay.
Q.
Third page,
just so we pin down the t
s of
8
wher these things are happening.
9
A.
Okay.
10
Q.
We saw where Mr.
Sutcliffe was re-called,
according to this Minute Order,
11
12
3
that was at 4:09 p.m.?
A.
Correct.
Q.
And then he gives his testimony which,
14
part,
talks about Mr.
15
Mr.
16
to Exhibit 14,
Shaw,
Shaw's report.
at Page 461,
17
A.
Correct.
18
Q.
And now Ms.
And then
was re called.
that's at 4:27 p.m.;
In
And according
correct?
Huddle begins asking Mr.
Shaw
19
about this mathematical error at Line -- Page 461,
20
Line 16,
21
her witness actually suddenly admits:
made an error.
It
Do you see that?
22
A.
Yes,
23
Q.
At Line 22:
24
25
"Yes,
sir.
"Question:
Would that make the property
worth substantially more,

L------~--~---rN
or don't you know?
RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09---~------~
86
"No,
it wouldn't.
"Why not?
"Because the most important factor in
analyzing determining the value of this property,
which I believe Mr.
comparison analysis,
Sutcliffe agrees with me,

not income approach."
A.
Correct.
Q.
Without getting too deep into this,
is sales
the error
was in his evaluation under the income approach;
10
that right?
11
A.
Correct,
12
Q.
Then at the top of Page 462,
apparently.
the expert is
13
still testifying.
He's trying to explain why one
14
system is better,
one approach is better than the
15
other.
Does that appear to be what's happening?
16
A.
It appears to be.
17
Q.
Because he made an error in one of his
18
is
calculations;
correct?
19
A.
Correct.
20
Q.
Then at Line 19:
21
"Question:
If you re-did your capitalization
22
and your sales market approach --" and then you cut in
23
at Line 21:
24
recess.
25
"Pardon me.
I have an EPO.
Court is in
Do you remember this happening?

---------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
411109--------------------~
87
Q.
First of all,
what is an EPO?
A.
It's an Emergency Protective Order request
froffi law enforcement for a restraining order that is
good for five court days and is allowed by statute to
be ffiade over the telephone by a peace officer.
Q.
Is that how you do it,
A.
It is.
Q.
Well,
10
tell us.
When you take such a call,
what happens?
11
A.
carry a phone,
and I
12
And I could feel the vibration,
13
adjourn,
14
go into chambers,
15
so I
16
get better reception there.
17
over the telephone?
explain that I
get -
Q.
leave it on vibrate.
and then I would
had to take an EPO,
and then
because that's where the windows are
it's a mobile phone or a cell phone,
If I
could just cut in.
You made a gesture
18
toward your side when you referred to the mobile
19
phone?
20
A.
Right.
21
Q.
On your belt?
22
A.
On my belt.
23
That's where I
And then take the call.
so I
carry the phone.
And when I
complete
24
the call,
I would typically return to the courtroom,
25
explain for the purposes of either self-represented

L-------------------------IN R E CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
88
people or clients of attorneys,
they are unfamiliar with the term and process,
EPO is.
Q.
When you're on the phone,
A.
Eventually,
Q.
Do you talk to somebody else first,
typically?
A.
Somet
I'm talking to a peace officer.
Sometimes the call
s .
11
through the county operator.
14
who are you talking
to?
from a police agency,
13
what an
And then we resume.
10
12
maybe the attorneys if
Q.
directly
and sometimes they are filtered
So if you get the county operator,
you talk about with her?

A.
.~
l .:::>
what would
What typically happens?
The county operator would indicate,
"I have
15
Sergeant Smith from Citrus Heights Police Department;
16
he's seeking an EPO."
17
18
Q.
So they are just informing you a call is
about to come in?
19
A.
Correct.
20
Q.
SO I
21
22
23
24
25
assume that first call would be very
brief?
A.
It should be.
Relatively -- you know,
relatively brief.
Q.
A minute or two minutes,
rather than 15 or 20
minutes?
~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
89
Oh,
A.
yes.
Proba
It's not a separate
call; they are just connecting you directly to the
officer?
THE WITNESS:
Correct.
They are filtering
the call from the officer through them to me.
BY HR.
BLUM:
Q.
Then you talk to the officer?
A.
Correct.
10
Q.
And they tell you the situation,
or what do
They indicate what is happening,
what
11
they do?
12
A.
13
physical evidence they might have to substantiate
14
that,
15
usually go through a series of questions,
16
well,
17
the requesting party to the potentially restrained
18
party.
19
they have children together,
20
various orders.
21
22
in fact,
this is a true account.
to make sure I
Q.
And then I
such as
understand the relationship of
Find out if they live together,
find out if
and then issue some
And the orders you issue,
you issue right
there on the telephone?
23
A.
24
Q.
You don't fill out paperwork?
25
A.
I do not.
do.
~---------------""-------IN
The officer is supposed to be

RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09---------------~----~
90
filling out some paperwork.
Q.
That's at the other end of the line?
A.
Right.
Q.
How long would it typica
A.
They vary.
5
6
y take to handle an
EPO?
minutes,
minutes.
would say anywhere from a few
and I've had them as long as 20 minutes,
Q.
Is 20 minutes fairly unusual?
10
A.
It is.
11
Q.
Is two minutes more typical?
12
A.
Somewhere in between is more typical.
13
think two minutes is really on the short side.
14
think probably if you went three to five,
15
be a typical time frame.
that wou d
16
Q.
Do you remember this particular EPO call?
17
A.
No.
18
Q.
So referring back to the transcript here,
19
still at Page 462,
20
"Pardon me.
21
means you felt the vibration on the cell phone?
again at Line 21,
have an EPO.
when you say:
Court is in recess," that
22
A.
23
Q.
Do you answer the ca 1 In court,
24
25
25
did.
or do you
leave the courtroom?
A.
answer it while I'm leaving.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09------------------~
91
Q.
So when you make this first
2
21 and 22,
stateme
you haven't yet answered the
ne;
3
correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
You just know you've got the phone call
6
coming in?
A.
Right.
Q.
And you're on your way out the door?
A.
Q.
How far from your bench seat is the door?
11
A.
Well,
12
am.
it's within,
i t ' s probably 5 yards,
I'd say,
10 yards.
10 yards.
But
Somewhere in there.
13
Q.
It's 15 to 30 feet?
14
A.
Probably
Q.
You said yards.
16
A.
Q.
From where you're sitting in your courtroom,
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
did say yards.
It's probably 15 feet at
most.
which direction do you go?
A.
The door is -- actually,
the door I go out
would be on my right hand side.

Q.
So from the audience's perspective,
you're
heading out to the left?

A.
Correct.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
The phone you have

4/1/09--------------------~
92
is used only for requests for Emergency Protective
Orders?
THE WITNESS:
emergencies too,
It is.
And actually other
but ...
THE WITNESS:
BY MR.
Yes.
BLUM:
Q.
Official business.
Line 22,
Then after you said,
"Court is in recess" on
between Lines 22 and Line 26 there's an
10
exchange between Ms.
11
that?
12
A.
13
Q.
Now
Huddle and the clerk.
Do you see
do.
-
well,
I ' l l read it.
Ms.
Huddle said:
14
"I think he's just taking an Emergency Protective
15
Order request.
16
It's his week,
17
always assigned EPOs."
Is that it?
right?"
Like a domestic violence?
The clerk responds:
"He's
Do you see that?
do.
18
A.
19
Q.
Was it your belief you were not in the
20
21
22
23
24
25
courtroom when these words were spoken?
A.
couldn't tell you,
but I don't recall
hearing them.
Q.
They sound like they are talking about you in
the third person,

A.
like you're not present?
Right.
~------------~---------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
93
1
2
That would make sense because
Q.
that phone call,
you're leaving;
right?
A.
Q.
So even though the transcript doesn't say
am.
here "judge exits room,
A.
Q.
y.
Then at Line 27,
returned here.
have taken the call?
11
Would you,
MR. MURPHY:
Argumentative,
Objection,
Your Honor.
calls for speculation.

Overruled.
Answer
if you can.
14
THE WITNESS:
15
completed the call.
16
the county operator.
17
BY MR.
18
apparently you've
in the intervening time,
12
13
you believe you did?
do believe I did.
10
"
I don't believe I would have

I
was probably still talking with
BLUM:
Q.
In fact,
at Line 27 and 28,
19
"We're going to have to adjourn this.
20
operator is on the phone."
21
remember?
you state:
The county
Does that help you
22
A.
(Gesturing.)
23
Q.
And you don't remember the call at all,
24
25
realize,
A.
but
I do not.
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
94
Q.
is that consistent with you -- you've
answered the phone and you've got the county operator
still on the phone?
A.
Yes,
Q.
Your next statement at the end of Line 28:
until they connect me to the officer.
"This trial has ended."
A.
Correct.
Q.
Do you see that?
A.
10
Q.
You're ending the trial right there?
11
A.
12
Q.
Do you remember coming back into the
do.
am.
13
courtroom and saying the statement that's recorded
14
here on Line 28,
"This trial has ended"?
15
A.
16
Q.
You don't remember that conversation?
17
A.
18
Q.
So you don't remember returning and making
19
do not.
do not.
can only assume i t ' s accurate.
this statement?
20
A.
I do not remember that.
21
Q.
Anyway,
the next occurrence here under
22
Page 463,
23
"Your Honor,
24
fees/costs put on."
25
A.
Line 2,
Ms.
Huddle says to you:
I don't even have my client's attorney's
When I
Do you remember that?
read it here,
~-----------------------IN
yes.
RE CJF NO. 185 -
It's on here so
4/1/09--------------------~
95
presumably I was
Q.
Because you respond?
A.
Q.
So do you actually not really remember the
do.
conversation,
probably happened?
A.
or just you see i t ' s stated here so it
don't independently r
er it.
it not here before me on this transcript,
""__ ,,,...,e r
10
Q.
And were
I would not
it.
11
over that issue" -- talking
12
fees
"Then I ' l l reserve
out the attorney's
13
A.
Okay.
14
Q.
-- "or you can get a mistrial,
15
other."
16
A.
Okay.
17
Q.
So again,
18
A.
I do.
19
Q.
Reserve over attorney's fees or have a
20
mistrial;
you give her a choice?
right?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q.
Ms.
Keeley responds:
23
mistrial.
24
hear that comment by Ms.
25
A.
one or the
"We don't want a
We'll reserve over that issue."
Did you
Keeley?
could not tell you.
L-------------------------TN RE CJF NO. 185
Apparently,
could
4/1/09--------------------~
96
have in that i t ' s a couple lines later that I exit the
room.
Q.
Ms.
Huddle responds:
"But,
Your Honor,
the
house that we're evaluating ... " and then she trails
off there.
A.
Yeah.
Q.
Then it says "Judge exits room."
8
9
Do you know if you stayed after you made the
statement on Lines 4 and 5?
10
A.
11
Q.
Let me rephrase it.
12
don't know.
Might you have made that
statement and then left the courtroom?
13
A.
I might have.
14
Q.
So you mayor may not have stayed for their
15
16
answer to your statement?

A.
17
18
I mayor may not have stayed.

"stayed," you mean in the courtroom?
19
MR.
20
THE WITNESS:
21
22
3
When you say
BY MR.
Q.
point,
BLUM:
In the courtroom.
Yes.
BLUM:
So according to the transcripts here,
by the time you've exited there,
at this
this
24
evidentiary portion of this trial is over; correct?
25
With the exception that you let them reserve on

" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO .
.185 -
4/.I/09------------~
97
attorney's fees?
A.
The evidentiary portion that day is over.
Q.
There's not going to be any more testimony in
this case;
A.
correct?
There's not going to be any more testimony
6
that day in this case.
Q.
Or any day?
A.
Q.
Okay.
did not state that.
Well,
"This trial has ended" is your
statement?
10
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
Sounds pretty final,
13
A.
It sounds that way.
14
Q.
And you didn't,
15
in fact,
testimony after this point,

A.
16
Q.
19
20
21
22
23
Mr.
t?
allow any additional
did you?
There was no request for an opportunity to
7
provide additional testimony,
18
doesn't
In your opinion,
at least made to me.
did you preclude
Carlsson from completing his expert's testimony?

A.
interrupted his expert's surrebuttal
testimony by taking the EPO call.

Q.
over";
And then returned and announced "The trial is

right?
24
A.
Right.
25
Q.
And at the time you said tha
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJ.F NC . .185 -
4/1/09---------------'
98
Excuse me.
The
question was "And then returned and announced the
trial was over?"
actually leaving and then returning to announce that
as opposed to acknowledging the operator's call and
saying,
leaving?
another?
Do you have an independent memory of
"excuse me," making that statement and then

As you sit there,
THE WITNESS:
9
10
returned.
11
the clerk's office.
do you know one way or
I believe I exited and
But I didn't get to chambers;
12
13
14
17
18
Thank you.
Which I assume is
right on the inside of the door?
15
16
I only got to
THE WITNESS:
BY MR.
Q.
ght.
BLUM:
So you just stepped through the door to take
the initial phone call?
19
A.
Correct.
20
Q.
When you came back in and said,
"This trial
21
has ended, " there was still a witness testifying in
22
the witness stand;
correct?
23
A.
There was.
24
Q.
Just please turn to Exhibit 14 again.
25
A.
Okay.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09-------------------~
99
Q.
On Page 1 of this document
to this location earlier,
rests."
referred y
where it says "Petitioner
A.
Yes.
Q.
Is there any indication in these documents
that Respondent ever rested?
A.
There was not.
Q.
How long have you been handling EPOs?
A.
The earliest record we have is 1992.
10
believe the statute went into effect around those
11
years.
12
Q.
How many would you handle in a typical month?
13
A.
Probably,
14
Probably now,
15
four a day.
16
Q.
two a week.
18

Do you get those EPa
calls in the middle of the night?
19
THE WITNESS:
20
get those.
21
It's a rotation.
23
fewer than now.
But I've had as many as
17
22
in the early years,
The magistrate on call would
And I'm on call about three times a year.
Go ahead.
What
exhibit are you referring to?
24
MR.
25
BLUM:
15.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
Thank you.
4/1/09-------------------~
100
MR.
BLUM:
I would say here,
Your Honor,
these next two documents contain what may be personal
phone numbers.
the judge's private phone numbers so

SPECIAL MASTER DE BELLEFEUILLE:
Are you
asking for a redaction?

MR.
And i t ' s not our intention to publish
BLUM:
I'm not asking for it,
but perhaps
Mr. Murphy will.

In that i t ' s already
10
been admitted into evidence,
11
stipulation.
12
redact what you don't want us to see and then give us
13
yours,
But my suggestion to you is take a copy,
and it will be substituted.

MR. MURPHY:
14
Perhaps I
15
want you guys to see it,
16
public record,
17
and cell numbers.
18
19
so I assume there is a
should clarify.
but this is going to become a
and i t ' s got the judge's personal home
We guys get
it.
20
MR.
BLUM:
21
22
that,
Mr. Murphy,
23
concerns of both.
I'm sorry.
So if you would do
we can substitute it and satisfy
24
MR.
MURPHY:
25
Yes,
Your Honor.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO .
Unless you have a
.185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - '
101
better idea.
MR. MURPHY:
Well,
the better idea is ask the
judge whether he's ever seen this document before.
But
5
6
7
we'll do that,
Your Honor.

BY MR.
Q.
Thank you.
BLUM:
In Exhibit 15,
if you turn the document to be
right side up towards you,
number listed there;
top left,
it has a phone
correct?
10
A.
Correct.
11
Q.
Do you recognize that phone number?
12
A.
That is the EPa phone number.
13
Q.
Your EPa phone number?
14
A.
It is.
15
Q.
How long has that been your EPa phone number?
16
A.
That,
couldn't tell you.
Because while
17
I've had that responsibility since 1992, we didn't
18
Sacramento County didn't introduce a phone to go along
19
with it until either the late
20
So -- but as far as I
21
used that whole time.
22
23
Q.
know,
'90s or early 2000s.
the same number has been
On the top right of the document,
indicates the billing period.
it
Do you see that?
24
A.
Yeah.
25
Q.
It states 2/11/2006 through 3/10/06?
L-----------------~------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
411109--------------------~
102
A.
Yes.
Q.
And on the left side,
down this column,
there's a list of phone calls; correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
And the phone calls are numbered.
A.
Yes.
Q.
8
9
10
realize the type is very small.
And if you look down,

call No.
32,
33 and 34,
were on March 9,
starting with phone
they all indicate that those
2006?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
And they indicate the first one occurred at
13
4:28,
an incoming call.
Do you see that?
14
A.
I do.
15
Q.
Then across from that line,
16
916 number?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
Do you recognize that number?
19
A.
20
21
22
the number has a
believe it's the county operator.
Or a
number the county operator has.
Q.
Okay.
the same line,
And then across to the next column,
on
it shows one minute?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q.
Would that be consistent with getting a very
25
brief call from the county operator?

' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CL]F NO .
.285 -
4/1/09---------------'
103
A.
I believe so.
Q.
Line 33,
p.m.,
this one indicates i t ' s at 4:29
one minute later.
Do you see that?
A.
Correct.
Q.
It also says i t ' s incoming?
A.
Correct.
Q.
Then across,
the number is not listed.
says "unavailable."
A.
Correct.
10
Q.
It indicates the next call,
11
It
seconds.
1 minute
53
Do you see that?

do.
12
A.
13
Q.
Would that be consistent with getting a brief
14
phone call from a police agency?
15
A.
Sounds like it could be.
16
Q.
Then the third call,
17
4:35 p.m.,
18
incoming;
Line 34,
a few minutes later.
shows it's at
This one doesn't say
i t says "Sacramento."
Do you see that?
19
A.
20
Q.
And then across the next column is another
do.
21
916 number.
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q.
Do you recognize that number?
24
A.
25
Q.
Whose number is that?
Correct?
do.
IN RE C3F NO.
185
4/1/09
104
A.
At that time,
Q.
That's your personal home phone number;
it was our home number.
correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
It shows that call lasted for one minute?
A.
Correct.
Q.
Do you remember calling home that afternoon?
A.
I do not.
Q.
So the third call has nothing to do with the
10
EPO,
does it?
11
A.
Apparently not.
12
Q.
The first two,
13
handling an EPO,
14
unlisted call?
however,
are consistent with
the county operator call and then an
15
A.
Presumably.
16
Q.
And they would have taken a total of just
17
under 3 minutes?
MR. MURPHY:
18
19
Overruled.
The
document speaks for itself.

THE WITNESS:
22
There are less than 3 minutes
23
total in those two lines.
24
BY MR.
25
Calls for
speculation.
20
21
Objection.
BLUM:
Q.
And you told us an average EPO was 3 to 5

RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.....J
105
minutes.
So
length of time it took for an EPO?
lS
that consistent,
again,
with the
A.
It could be.
Q.
So assuming these are accurate,
3 minutes to handle that EPO that afternoon?
A.
Presumably.
Q.
After those 3 minutes,
it took you
did you return to the
courtroom?
A.
10
Q.
Why not?
11
A.
Because the trial had ended.
12
Q.
Did you go back to look and see if maybe the
13
did not.
attorneys or parties were still there?
14
A.
15
Q.
It had ended rather abruptly;
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
So instead of returning to the courtroom,
18
could not tell you.

correct?
what did you do?
19
A.
I have no independent recollection.
20
Q.
Apparently you made a call home?
21
A.
Apparently.
22
Q.
Do you recall if you even looked into the
23
courtroom to see if the parties were still there?
24
A.
25
Q.
Just briefly,
have no independent recollection.
'----~----------IN
if you would,
RE CJI: NO.
185
we'll turn to
4/1/09----------------~
106
Exhibit 16.
on the left- column.
This document has a list of phone numbers

Do you see those?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Do you recognize those numbers?
A.
Q.
What number is that -- don't recite the
number,
A.
It's my work number.
Q.
Is that the phone in your chambers?
10
A.
It is.
11
Q.
And you've already told us you wouldn't have
12
do.
but whose number is that?
used your chamber's phone to handle an EPO;
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
But just to show this,
15
three,
four,
16
at that line,
17
March 9,
five
correct?
there are one,
on the fifth line down,
two,
beginning
there are four phone calls dated
2006?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
And the first one is in the morning at 8:09?
20
A.
Correct.
21
Q.
The second one is at 10:46,
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q.
The third one is a little later,
24
A.
Correct.
25
Q.
And tbe fourth one is 8:00 in the morning?
~------------------------IN
also morning?
12:26 p.m.?
RE CJF NO. 185 - 4/1/09-----------------------
107
It says 0800.
A.
That's what it says.
Q.
So none of those would have been the EPa you
handled that afternoon while you were presiding over
the Carlsson case;
correct?
A.
Q.
And they are all listed as toll-free numbers?
A.
They are.
Q.
Please turn back to Exhibit 14,
don't
lieve they would be.
10
The last entry on that page,
11
"The Court instructed the clerk to notify counsel that
12
they may submit a three-page brief for attorney's fees
13
and a three-page closing brief,
14
March 17,
15
'06.
in brackets,
third page.
states:
if they choose,
by
Clerk verbally gave notice."
Do you see that entry?
16
A.
17
Q.
Is that the instructions you gave your clerk?
18
A.
19
Q.
20
do.
arently
s .
You didn't give this instruction to your
clerk on March 9,
did you?
21
A.
22
Q.
No memory of this?
23
A.
I have no memory of this.
24
couldn't tell you.
y of giving this instruction to your
25
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
108
A.
I do.
Q.
But no memory of when you gave it to her?
A.
No.
Q.
You filed an answer to the Commission's
5
6
Notice of Formal Proceedings; correct?
A.
Yes.
MR.
an exhibit.
extra copies,
10
BLUM:
1'm going to refer to
It's one of the pleadings.
i t ' s not
I have a few
if you don't have it available.
Are you talking
11
about the Notice of Formal Proceedings filed on
12
Respondent's answer filed on October 10,
13
MR.
BLUM:
Yes.
2008?
It's actually titled "Notice
14
of Formal Proceedings," but I believe it to be the
15
answer.
On the top left it has "James Murphy" on it.
16
17
MR.
18
Your Honor.
19
20
BLUM:
Yes,
I have that.
If I may approach the witness,
Certainly.
don't need to ask permission.
21
MR.
22
(Document handed to the witness.)
23
24
25
You
Q.
the way,
A.
BLUM:
Thank you.
Please turn to Page 4 in this document.

what is this document,
By
for the record?
Apparently this is our answer to the notice.
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
109
Did you review this document before it wa
Q.
filed?
A.
I believe I
Q.
Did you ascertain whet
did.
r
the statements in
it were true or not?
A.
To the best of my recollection,
Q.
On Page 4,
six lines down,
must have.
you're talking
about why you ended the case the way it was ended.
"Third,
10
all testimony and argument had to be concluded
by 4:30."
Do you see that?
11
A.
12
Q.
Why did it have -- but why did all testimony
13
and argument have to be completed by 4:30?
14
15
A.
18
19
20
21
Because that was the extent of the estimate
they had given.
16
17
do.
Q.
The Court is open until about 5:00 p.m.,
A.
The courthouse would be open until 6:00.
you
said?
Different employees are there until different hours.

Q.
Did you inquire,
on March 9,
whether staff
and/or counsel could stay a bit beyond 4:30 -
22
A.
23
Q.
-- in an attempt to complete the testimony?
24
A.
25
Q.
don't recall doing so.
don't recall.
L . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185 -
What is that
4/1/09----------~
110
document?
A.
That was the closing argument of Mr.
Carlsson
through Ms. Huddle.
Q.
And it shows it was filed on March 17,
A.
Yes.
Q.
Did you read this document before reaching
your
'06?
cis ion in the Carlsson case?
A.
I'm sure I did.
Q.
At Line 18,
it states:
"Respondent's counse
10
was verbally noticed and instructed by Court's clerk
11
on March 10,
12
deemed concluded and no further testimony will be
13
taken."
14
A.
15
Q.
Is that an instruction you recall giving to
16
19
Do you see that?

do.
your clerk to relay to the attorneys?
17
18
2006 that the trial in this matter was
A.
I have no independent recollection of doing
Q.
Now,
so.
you told us earlier that had the
20
attorneys gotten together and asked for more time,
21
might have been given;
correct?
22
A.
Right.
23
Q.
When you saw this statement,
24
25
it
assuming
you
said you read the argument?

A.
Right.
L - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE C,JF NO.
185 - 4 / I / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - J
111
Did that cause you concern,
Q.
been instructed by your clerk that no further
testimony will be taken?
Until they initiate a request,
A.
certainly a fair reading.
me concern,
But as to whether it caused
couldn't tell you.
At Line 22,
Q.
that was
"Respondent objects to this
procedure as Respondent's redirect testimony was not
concluded and rebuttal testimony not allowed."
10
Do you
see that?
11
A.
12
Q.
So this is Ms.
do.
Huddle representing that she
13
hadn't finished her testimony of her client,
14
thing;
right?
for one
The Respondent.
15
A.
That is what it says.
16
Q.
Did it concern you that an attorney was
17
representing to you that she hadn't been allowed to
18
finish her case,
her testimony?
19
A.
It did.
20
Q.
So what did you do in response to that
21
22
concern you had?

A.
Well,
one,
she's doesn't ask
23
offer a remedy.
24
wasn't a lot I could do.
25
Q.
Namely, more time.
or doesn't
So there really
What did you do?

IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
112
What did you do?
THE WITNESS:
read it and then
decided the case.
BY MR.
Q.
5
6
BLUM:
SO you did nothing in response to her comment
about finishing her case;

A.
I'm sure I
correct?
did not initiate any contact with the
attorneys regarding what they wanted to do.

Q.
Line 24,
"Respondent submitted several
10
exhibits for which testimony was to be elicited.
11
While Petitioner's counsel graciously agreed to admit
12
the documents without testimony,
13
regarding the documents as stated below would support
14
Respondent's contentions in this case."
15
that?
Do you see
do.
16
A.
17
Q.
So again,
18
the testimony
she's saying there is other
testimony she would have introduced -
19
A.
She does.
20
Q.
-- to explain the significance of some
21
exhibits that were received?
22
A.
Okay.
23
Q.
Do you still have your answer in front of
A.
I do.
24
25
you?
IN RE CJF NO. 185 - 4/1/09
113
Q.
MR.
Q.
BLUM:
5 of the answer?
Yes.
You're talking about this contested issue
about the valuation of the properties?
5
6
A.
Yes.
Q.
And you state,
six lines down in the first
paragraph:
the basis of expert testimony became irrelevant
"The issue of fair market determination on
10
because the properties were to be sold which,
11
definition,
12
Do you see that?
by
would determine the fair market value."
do.
13
A.
14
Q.
Now,
this was part of your explanation for
15
why you felt the case was over?
16
mischaracte ize that.
Don't let me
17
A.
No,
18
Q.
What are you responding to here?
19
A.
Apparently the interrupted testimony of
20
21
22
Mr.
don't think that is exactly right.
Shaw.
Q.
And,
of course,
that testimony had largely to
do with the value of the properties?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q.
And you're stating that that became
25
irrelevant
ecause you decided to ord
L . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09-------------------~
right?
A.
Right.
Q.
When did you make the decision to or
those
properties sold?
A.
I made the final decision once I'd heard all
the evidence.
Q.
Which would include their closing arguments?
A.
Correct.
Q.
So on March 9,
10
the value of those two
properties was still a relevant issue?
11
A.
It was.
12
Q.
So in the transcripts,
13
Page 463,
at Line 8,
when Ms.
14
Your Honor,
15
exit,
16
issue at that point; correct?
the very last page,
Huddle says:
the house we're evaluating," and then you
the valuation of that house was still a
17
A.
Correct ..
18
Q.
Now,
19
Page 2,
20
Respondent -
21
Respondent,
22
testimony she wanted to introduce.
back on Exhibit 18,
Bates Stamp 437,

Ms.
Huddle,
relevant
closing argument.
Lines 21 through 28,
the
on behalf of her client,
lists another piece of evidence or
23
A.
That's what she states.
24
Q.
(Reading) :
25
"But,
Is that correct?
"Respondent would have presented
Mayo's testimony as to his check stubs for payment he

L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
115
made related to the four-plex.
return and bank statements with the original partners
name on them would have been submitted to the Court
furthering Respondent's claims on the partnership
existence.
testified to by Respondent."
Parties'
A partnership tax
last tax return would have been
7 S o she's listing things that she wanted to

8
get in?
A.
10
Mayo had been
excused as a witness.
11
12
I was confused because Mr.
Q.
But she is saying there is some more
testimony she would have introduced from Mr.
Mayo?
13
A.
She does say that.
14
Q.
On Page 3 of the document,
15
under No.5,
16
"Respondent would have testified that the selling of
17
the Tunnel Hill residence would traumatize the
18
parties' minor child,
19
that?
Tunnel Hill residence,
McKenzie,
Bates Stamp 438,

at Line 6:
age 13."
Do you see
20
A.
I do.
21
Q.
Would that have been a relevant issue
22
A.
It would have been.
23
Q.
24
25
if you're making a determination to sell
the house,
A.
the family house?
It would have been.
~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09----------------------~
116
Q.
You would consider the effect on the child?
A.
Abso utely.
Q.
Exhibit 19,
this one out.
just very briefly I'm pointing
That's Ms.
A.
Okay.
Q.
And Exhibit 20,
Keeley's closing brief.
which is a series of,
believe,
four documents titled "Specia
Decisions."
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
What are Special Master's dec sions?
11
A.
Specia
Master's
Masters are individuals who have
12
agreed to intervene,
13
regarding
14
custody of the child or parenting arrangements.
15
the benefit is that you don't need the expense of
16
having an attorney appearing for you reporting to the
17
Specia
18
Q.
in effect,
and make decisions
either make decisions regarding the

And
Master.
And these have to do with recommendations
19
about custody of the child and conditions for the
20
child?
21
A.
Visitation,
anything along that line.
22
Q.
Would you have read these documents?
23
A.
I was asked to take judicial notice of them
24
during the course of the trial,
25
have read i t -- read them.

' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO .
and I presume I would
.1.85 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - l
117
Q.
Do you know if there was a
the Special Master about the impact selling the family
home would have on the daughter,
the child?
A.
Q.
do not recall.
What is that
document?
A.
That is my tentative decision.
Q.
Is that your handwriting on the document?
A.
It is.
10
Q.
And this was issued on March 22,
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
In your tentative decision,
you write:
2006?
third paragraph
13
down,
14
one-half of the community property interest and the
15
husband's PERS retirement and does not order a
16
segregated account."
"The Court awards each party
Do you see t,hat?
17
A.
18
Q.
What does it mean to order a segregated
19
20
21
do.
account?
A.
Then the retirement plan would hold them in
separate accounts.
22
Q.
And you ordered it not segregated?
23
A.
That was the only evidence I had during the
24
25
course of the trial.

Q.
Do you recall if Mr.
Carls so
L-----------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/ 0 9 ___________________-----.J
118
that he wanted them segregated?
A.
He offered no evidence during the trial on
that issue.
argument that he wanted to segregate the accounts.
But it was his argument during closing
Q.
So you ruled against that position of his?
A.
10
There was no
evidence that supported his position.
ruled against that position.
Q.
I'm not challenging the wisdom of your
decisions.
I'm just asking:
made contrary to Mr.
That's a decision you
Carlsson's position?
11
A.
It is.
12
Q.
Would you say that you entered judgment in
13
favor of Ms.
14
issues?
Carlsson on most,
15
A.
I would not.
16
Q.
Why wouldn't you?
17
A.
The biggest issue,

-
namely the value of the
18
two properties,
19
test
20
what somebody is willing to pay for a property.
21
it was apparent to me during the course of this trial
22
that Mrs.
23
these properties; and from the first appraisal in the
24
summer of 2005 to the second appraisal in the winter
25
of 2006,
ny,
is one
if not nearly all,
in Mr.
Sutcliffe's
is best determined by the market value,

And
Carlsson had two separate appraisals of
the family residence had dropped about
~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
119
The four plex,
$25,000.
fairly similar,
And I
whi
if it didn't even increase,
in value.
ordered both sold because were I
to
pick a figure of value for the family residence and
award it to Mr.
been worth that by the time
effect a purchase, by the time he was able to Line it
up.
10
Carlsson,
it probably would not have

-
if he were able to
request an alternate valuation date?
11
THE WITNESS:
12
13
14
recess at this time.
No.
We'll take our noon
We'll be in recess until 1:30.
(Lunch recess taken from 12:00 to 1:30 p.m.)
15
16
Had you decided to
AFTERNOON SESSION.
We are back on the
17
record in the matter of Judge McBrien,
18
of Judge McBrien and counsel.
19
Before we get started,
in the presence
I wanted to bring up a
20
scheduling issue.
21
conference,
22
afternoon,
23
being available Friday afternoon.
24
go beyond hours today and tomorrow in order to
25
complete this thing within the time allotted,
As I
told you in the pretrial
we do have this room available Friday

although we originally anticipated it not
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
We are available to
and I
4/1/09----------~---------~
120
understand the irony.
you want us to do so we can schedule accordingly.
don't know if you've discussed it.
one who expressed concerns.
5
6
Mr. Murphy is the
If you have any way to enlighten us,
I would
appreciate it.
MR.
Mr.
recess.
Blum,
10
11
So we just want to know what
MURPHY:
Why don't I
discuss it with
and we can advise the Court after the next
Excellent.
Thank
you.
12
Mr.
Blum,
13
MR.
BLUM:
14
EXAMINATION RESUMED
15
BY MR.
you may continue.
Thank you.
BLUM:
16
Q.
Good afternoon,
17
A.
Good afternoon.
18
Q.
We were going through your tentative rulings
19
in the exhibit binder,
Your Honor.
No.
21?
20
A.
Correct.
21
Q.
We had just spoken _.- on Page 1 of the
22
document,
23
order or no segregation order on the PERS benefits?
we had just talked about the segregation
24
A.
Correct.
25
Q.
Going down to the bottom of that first page,
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------
121
on child support,
very last sentence -
A.
Q.
needed.
"
A.
Q.
SO in your tentative ruling,
Yes.
"Child support was not argued but is
Do you see that?
do.
child support to the wife,
Mrs.
did you grant
Carlsson?
did.
A.
Q.
Please turn to the second page.
10
paragraph,
starts out "H/R."
The second
Do you see that?
11
A.
12
Q.
And does that stand for Husband/Respondent?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
"Husband/Respondent contends that
15
do.
Wife/Petitioner" -
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
-- "is underemployed."
18
Mr. Carlsson's contentions;
19
underemployed?
That was one of
right?
That his wife was
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
What was your finding on that issue?
22
A.
My finding was that she works full-time as an
23
office manager for a dental office and earns a set
24
salary of $3,000 per month.
25
Q.
Two paragraphs down further,
~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
it says:
"While ,
4/1/09----------------------~
122
Husband/Respondent would have the Court"
that?
do you see
A.
Yes.
Q.
"-- would have the Court not order spousal
support," you went ahead and ordered spousal support;
correct?
A.
Q.
Contrary to Mr.
A.
Correct.
10
Q.
Turn to Page 3,
11
paragraph.
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
It says:
14
did.
Carlsson's position;
if you would.
ordered to be listed and sold";

A.
Yes.
16
Q.
That was your order,
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
And Mr.
house;
Second
"Each of these properties is
15
19
right?
to sell both of them?
Carlsson had wanted to be awarded the
correct?
20
A.
Correct.
21
Q.
Now,
at the very end of that same paragraph,
22
the last sentence,
23
read,
24
properties are owned only by the parties."
25
right?
i t ' s a little bit difficult to
but I believe it says:
A.
"Each of these
Correct.
L-------------------------IN RE C,]F NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
123
Q.
Is that what it says?
A.
It does.
Q.
So you did make a ruling about whether there
was a third-party interest in that property?

A.
I made a ruling there were two people on
No.
title to the properties.
Q.
And that it's owned only by those two?
A.
Correct.
Q.
Then in the final paragraph on that page,
10
you award $35,000 in attorney's fees to be paid by
11
Mr. Carlsson to Mrs.
did
Carlsson?
12
A.
13
Q.
When you made these ru ings
14
turn to Exh
15
Ms.
did.
it 22 briefly,
- well,
Your Honor.
please
Is that
Huddle's objections to your tentative decision?
16
A.
They are.
17
Q.
And she had a number of objections; correct?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
And then Exhibit 23,
20
is that your final
decision?
21
A.
It is.
22
Q.
Okay.
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
And you basically stayed with your tentative
25
And that was issued on March 30,
ruling except for this one issue as I

' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CcJF NO.
185
2006?
read it on child
4/1/09--------------------
124
support?
A.
Correct.
Q.
So on all other aspects,
your tentative
became your final decision?
A.
Correct.
Q.
When you made those decisions,
you knew that
Respondent had wanted to introduce additional relevant
evidence:
MR.
10
correct?
evidence.
MURPHY:
Objection.
Calls for speculation.
11
12
13
Relevant evidence.
Overruled.
assume you're referring to the post-trial
brief.
14
MR.
15
THE WITNESS:
16
the termination of the trial.
17
BY MR.
18
Assumes facts not in
BLUM:
Correct.
I
knew that they objected to
BLUM:
Q.
Well,
think you've testified also that some
19
of the testimony they say they wanted to introduce
20
would have been relevant?
21
A.
It would have been.
22
Q.
So at the time you made your decision,
23
decision,
24
relevant evidence they had wished to offer?
25
A.
final
you knew that there had been additional
know they stated that,
L-------------------------"~l
RE CJF NO. 185
yes.
4/1/09 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.-J
125
Do you see a problem with making a ruling
Q.
under those circumstances?
they want more time.
under those circumstances?

Should I not -- I don't have an answer to
A.
So do you see a prob em with making a ruling
Q.
5
6
It's their obligation to ask for more time if
A.
I'm not sure exactly what you're asking.
that.
Q.
We 11 we just descri
10
A.
Ri
11
Q.
The trial ended I
d the situation.
t.
I think you would agree,
rather abruptly?
12
13
A.
It was.
14
Q.
In their closing arguments,
15
they say "There
is these pieces of evidence we wish to put in"?
16
A.
Right.
17
Q.
But you make a decision despite that;
correct?
18
19
A.
I'm not sure I did.
I'm not sure I didn't
20
take into account those items that they wished to put
21
in.
22
23
Q.
Well,
you hadn't heard testimony on those
items; correct?
24
A.
That's correct.
25
Q.
But you consi
red them anyway?
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T N RE CJP NO.
185 -
4/1/09------------'
126
A.
I'm not saying that.
No.
honestly don't
know what
could not tell you today what I did and did not
consider,
Q.
had that information before me.
other than that
I had read it all.
assume you didn't consider evidence that
had not been introduced;
correct?
A.
Q.
In the exhibit binder,
5.
tried not to.
Page 62,
10
A.
11
Q.
at Line 12,
please turn to Exhibit
I'm asking you a question
Okay.
-
similar to the one I
just asked you:
12
you feel there was something wrong in the way"
13
specifically I
MR. MURPHY:
15
MR.
16
17
MR. MURPHY:
18
BLUM:
MR. MURPHY:
21
MR.
what page?
52?
62.
Of the deposition.
Thank you.
The line reference is
BLUM:
Thank you.
And at Line 14 you answer my
question:
"Did
23
24
I'm sorry,
Line 12.
20
22
"Do
say "the way you ended the trial?"
14
19
answerthe trial;
no.
I don't know.
I had two responsibilities.
Basically I
One was to hear
the other is to respond to EPOs.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO . .185
They were
4/]/09 - - - - - - - - - - - - '
127
not compatible responsibilities."
1
2
Q.
Do you see that?
A.
Q.
Do you still believe that?
A.
Q.
Why were these not compatible
do.
responsibilities?
A.
do.
They were not compatible because the EPO
interfered with our conclusion of the trial in one
10
minute.
11
attorneys are going to comply with the rules and the
12
procedure or ask for more time; and partly,
13
the insight or lack of insight of the public,
14
think that's what was of some concern to me,
15
not know the rules.
16
17
Q.
Partly,
there is the e
ctation that the
we have
and I
who may
We've seen that the EPO in the afternoon
actually took you 3 minutes to complete;
correct?
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
Would you at least concede that these two
I'm assuming,
20
responsibilities,
21
the EPO on this occasion,
22
A.
yes.
hearing the trial and responding to
They were,
were not incompatible?
because I had already terminated
23
the trial by the time the EPO had concluded.
24
expectation was that the parties were not waiting for
25
me,
but rather were gathering their books,
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO . .185
My
were very
4/1/09 - - - - - - - - - -
128
likely going to meet and confer,
forward.
regarding his request for
for a
for them to figure out how they wanted to go forward.
how to go
Huddle was going to talk to her client
strial.
Q.
Ms.
ci
or his whispering to her
And it was going to take some time
But you decided when you first got that phone
call to end the tr
right then;
correct?
A.
For that day I
Q.
You didn't return to the courtroom that day;
10
yes.
right?
11
A.
Not that I'm aware of.
12
Q.
You saw these two phone calls that took three
13
minutes?
14
A.
Correct.
15
Q.
Did you shortly thereafter leave the
16
building?
17
A.
At some point,
18
Q.
There was a third call to your home.
19
you on your way out by then,

I
A.
20
21
consi
23
time?
25
Were
out of the building?
have no recollection.
22
24
I'm sure I did.
At any time did you
asking the attorneys if they wanted more
THE WITNESS:
I actually considered asking
the attorneys what they were doing and concluded that

~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
129
they were running the evidence to 4:30,
every bit of t
would then -- they would then decide how they wanted
to move forward,
try to schedule it for another day,
The attorneys generally do not like to do that simply
because they have no guaranteed hearing.
did consider a 1 those,
them go the way they wanted to go.
10
11
just to us
that was readily available,
and they
whether it was worth their while to
but I
trail possibly.
So all
just thought I'd let
Did it appear to you
they were stringing the evidence out?
12
13
THE WITNESS:
They were.
15
THE WITNESS:
16
17
BY MR.
Q.
18
That's what it
appeared to me.
14
Both sides?
A bit.
BLUM:
You testified that typically an EPO takes 3
to 5 minutes?
19
A.
Correct.
20
Q.
Why cou dn't you have made a recess,
hand ed
21
the EPO and returned to the courtroom and tried to
22
reso ve the matter?
23
A.
Well,
could.
But it could have been one of
24
those 15 or 20-minute EPOs.
25
we were not going to be hearing more evidence that

' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
And I was concerned that
185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
130
day;
court with their attorneys,
purpose for them to wait,
to gather again.
confer.
to her client regarding his request for a mistrial,
'7
mumbling.
this is costing people money to stand around in
Q.
They still nee

Ms.
And you never suggested to them that there
MR.
MURPHY:
Objection,
MR. MURPHY:
14
MR.
Your Honor.
BLUM:
Sustained.
I'm going to move on to the second
allegation.
Q.
In the reporter's transcript binder,
turn to Page 363.
18
second day of the hearing.

A.
Oh,
363.
I'm sorry.
21
Okay.
Q.
The bottom of the page,
Line 28,
23
a sua sponte request for Mr.
24
Statement of Economic Interest documents?

A.
please
It's near the end of the
20
25
This
Thank you.
17
22
right?
line of questioning has been asked and answered.
13
19
or
think they needed some time.
16
d to meet and
Huddle needed to talk
12
15
in court for us all
could be more courtroom time available;
10
11
for me,
They needed to
And I
and there was no real
did you make
Carlsson to produce his
I did.
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/]/09--------------------~
131
Q.
Opposing counsel had not aske
documents;
correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
Beginning at the bottom of the page at Line
"I would ask you to bring a copy of your 2004 -
28:
whatever the document is that you filed with the Fair
Political Practices Commission,
State."
A.
Presumably.
10
Q.
Was this an order or just a request?
11
A.
It's a request.
12
Q.
And in your opinion,
with the Secretary of
Is that how you worded it?
13
reasonable for Ms.
14
request rather than an order?
would it have
en
Huddle to interpret that as a
15
A.
think so.
16
Q.
A few lines down,
at Line 6,
Ms.
Keeley
(sic)
17
asked:
18
2002 and 2003?"
19
probably bring them for those years,
20
you also might want to talk to an attorney who
21
specializes in that area because there are potential
22
penalties far
23
you see that?
"Would we need copies of that document for

And you respond:
"You should
but you might -
yond what we're talking about."
Do
24
A.
25
Q.
What potential penalties were you talking
do.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE elF NO.
185
4/1/09-------------------~
132
about?
A.
From the testimony,
it appeared that his
evidence,
violation of the Fair Political Practices Act.
he included it in his Statement of Economic Interest,
it becomes a nonissue.
it becomes an issue for our hearing.
8
9
10
Q.
his testimony,
could have involved a

And if
If he doesn't include it,
then
And the information that you were talking
about he'd included or not included was what?
A.
Was his relationship with Mr. Minkoff, who
11
was an individual who owned buildings that he leased
12
to the state through Mr.
13
through Mr.
14
15
Q.
Carlsson,
Carlsson's employer, and
understand.
And would it also be to disclose the
ownership of a certain piece of property?
16
A.
On the Statement of Economic Interest?
1.7
Q.
Yes.
18
A.
It could.
19
Q.
So what you were looking for in the document
It could have.
20
was whether or not Mr.
21
relationship with Mr. Minkoff?
22
A.
Carlsson had described his
was looking to see whether there would be a
23
problem for this case as it related to the rules of
24
the Fair Political Practices Act.
25

L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
Does that form also,

4/1/09--------------------~
133
reflect
or would it in this in
if you know,
reflect the income from the rental property?
THE WITNESS:
THE WITNESS:
BY MR.
Q.
It would.
Annual income?
It would.
BLUM:
Why did you suggest that perhaps Mr.
Carlsson
should talk to an attorney who specializes in the
area?
10
A.
Because he had testified that he did not
11
include that information.
12
he,
13
and might want to talk to an attorney to get some
14
legal advice.
15
16
17
18
19
frankly,
Q.
was potentially in violation of the law
And someone who specializes In the area
rather than Ms.

A.
And I was concerned that
Ms.
Huddle?
Huddle did not appear to have an idea of
what we were talking about.

Q.
which is the next
20
day of trial.
21
client consulted some legal advice regarding the
22
issue;
At Line 25,
you ask Ms.
Huddle if her
correct?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q.
We're talking about the issue here of the
25
documents?
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
134
A.
Yes.
Q.
Ms.
Huddle responds:
"I found him a lawyer."
Then you ask:
Top of the next page, Ms.
to work.
And your response at Line 3 was:
my request to bring those documents?"
"Did he bring the documents with h

Huddle says:
He's on disability.
"He never went
He doesn't have them."

"So he has violated
That was your response?
A.
According to the transcript,
10
Q.
How could he violate a request?
11
A.
Maybe i t ' s a poor choice of words.
12
not comply with the request.
yes.
Q.
It's still a request,
14
A.
It was.
15
Q.
And at Line 5,
not an order?
Ms. Huddle responds:
16
I heard you say it,
17
them."
18
to have the record read?"
He did
How's that?
13
"The way
it was a suggestion that he bring
And your response at Line 7:
"Do you want me
What did you mean by that?
19
20
?"
A.
thought that clearly one of us was wrong or
21
both of us were wrong,
22
available.
and that was an option that was
23
Q.
What did you think the record would show?
24
A.
What had actually been requested more so than
25
our memories,
a week later,
seem to suggest it
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
135
1
2
suggest.
Q.
There was no question about what had been
requested;
talking about?
We knew what documents you're
correct?
A.
What the form of the request was.
Q.
Whether it was a request or order?
A.
Correct.
Q.
Mandatory or not?
A.
Correct.
10
Q.
You already told us you think it was a
11
request?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q.
And she's telling you,
14
suggestion,
the way I
heard it";
"I think it was a
correct?
15
A.
That's what she said.
16
Q.
So did you want to look at the record because
17
18
it might show it was an order?

A.
I wanted to give the option of looking at the
19
record so we could clarify this discussion that we
20
were having.
21
Q.
22
though,
23
A.
They did.
24
Q.
At Line 11 you state:
25
So to this point at least,
they had a choice,
whether or not to bring the documents in?
"Ma'am,
would
suggest that he send somebody to his workplace to get

~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
136
those documents before we conclude this trial."
you're using the word "suggest" here.
request?
A.
It is.
it is still a
Is it still a
It's becoming a little stronger,
Well,
we're having a
semantic battle if suggestion is stronger than
request.
(Laughter.)
9
10
BY MR.
11
12
but
request.
And
BLUM:
Q.
At Line 14,
objection;
Ms.
Huddle imposes an irrelevance
right?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
And you respond at Line 19:
"Overruled.
15
am not indicating that they are relevant."
16
you mean by that?
A.
17
Since I
didn't have the document,
What did
I didn't
18
know what the document said.
19
disclosed this relationship and this property on the
20
document,
21
basically seeing what impact the FPPC potential action
22
might have on this piece of property_
23
in
24
attorneys give me their respective opinions as to what
25
impact,
uded,
If Mr.
Carlsson had
i t becomes irrelevant for my needs,
then,
if any,
frankly,
which is
If it isn't
intended to have the
this lack of information might have.
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-.-J
137
But we never got to that point.
Q.
SO your testimony is the reason you wanted to
see t
document is because you thought his failure to
disclose the property
A.
Q.
Correct.
-- might impact an interest in the property
somehow?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Can you explain how you thought that
A.
Well,
10
11
ght
work?
in my experience,
the FPPC rules are a
12
little bit difficult.
1.3
paper about them issuing fines against various
14
politicians and such,
15
also had powers of confiscation or liens or anything
16
else that might
17
Q.
And while we can read in the
I was unclear as to whether they
act the four-plex.
So you thought that if someone didn't
18
disclose a property in their Statement of Economic
19
Interest,
20
against the property?
21
22
23
24
25
A.
the FPPC might have the right to take action
thought that was a possibility,
but I
was
expecting the attorneys to tell me.

Q.
SO you thought maybe the FPPC could put a
lien on the property?

A.
Possibly.
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 - 4/1/09---------------------
138
Q.
Acquire an ownership interest?
A.
Possibly.
Q.
Do you have any idea if the FPPC has that
kind of authority?
A.
Since that time,
them,
to call them because I
in
and they do not.
called them and asked
At that time,
I did not want
didn't want to be investigating
pendent of the evidence that was presented to me.
Q.
At this time,
when you were asking for these
10
documents,
11
lien on someone's property for failure to disclose?
12
A.
had you ever heard of the FPPC putting a
I,
frankly,
don't really follow that much
13
about the FPPC.
14
of a particular instance.
So I would have to say I
15
Q.
You've been a
16
A.
Now,
17
Q.
And in any other case,
18
19
20
hadn't heard
judge 22 years?
yes.
have you ever asked
anyone else to produce these documents?
A.
I've never had a case where anybody has
raised the issue
court.
21
Q.
Is that no?
22
A.
It is a no.
23
Q.
Back on the transcript,
24
Line 24, Ms.
25
wanted $5,000.
Huddle says:
still at Page 367,
"The independent counsel
He doesn't have $5,000 to give him
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
139
before they will talk to him."
Do you see that?
A.
Uh huh.
Q.
And you respond at Line 27:
"In any case,
can send somebody to go get those records."
what you said?
he
Is that
A.
It is.
Q.
So now you're telling him to go get the
records even though you know that he hasn't been able
to consult with counsel about it?
10
11
A.
He's -
he's consulted with his attorney in
this case.
12
Q.
But not with a
13
A.
Not,
as far as I
Now,
at the top of Page 368,
14
15
16
spe~ia1ist
know,
in the area?
with a specialist in
the area.
Q.
makes a Fifth Amendment objection;
Ms.
correct?
17
A.
Correct.
18
Q.
And you felt that that privilege,
19
20
Amendment privilege,
A.
did not apply;
felt that it had been waived by his
testimony during his examination and
22
cross examination,
Q.
the Fifth
is that right?
21
23
Huddle now
if there was a privilege.
By the way,
did you ever say on the record
24
that the reason you wanted those documents was because
25
of this possibility of an FPPC lien?

L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
140
A.
1 didn't.
Q.
And after Ms.
Huddle makes the Fifth
3
Amendment objection at Line 6 4
you say:
"1 think you're
"Too late?"
this is Page 368
too late for that."
She
responds:
has already testified regarding the sum and substance
of that,
documents."
can't take the Fifth Amendment now?"
And you say at Line 8:
"He
and his employer will have a copy of the
And she asks:
"Are you indicating he
And your
]0
response at Line 13:
11
I'm indicating that you need to send somebody to his
12
employment to pick up those documents."
13
"I'm not indicating anything.
Do you see that?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
So is this an order now?
16
A.
It's becoming one.
17
Q.
She again says:
"He's taking the fifth" at
18
Line 16.
19
documents are on file with the Secretary of State.
20
could go to the Secretary of State's office and get a
21
copy of them."
22
23
24
25
And at Line 18 you respond:
You could get them,

A.
I've never tried.
"Those
couldn't you?
But presumably they are
open to the public.
Q.
Ms.
Huddle,
at Line 21,
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
responds:
4/1/09--------------------~
141
"Ms. Keeley never raised this issue.
it was really an issue, why didn't Ms.
those documents?"
Ms.
If she believed
Keeley get
Huddle's got a point there,
If they are available to the public, Ms.
have gotten them;
A.
She does have a point,
Q.
At Line 25,
"Ms.
Huddle,
Keeley could
correct?
hasn't she?
yes.
your response to her is:
you are out of" -
and I'm guessing
10
that's a typo; you didn't say it this way exactly,
11
but:
"Ms. Huddle,
12
you are out of order"?
MR. MURPHY:
Your Honor,
13
the official transcript.
14
mischaracterization.
16
rise and fallon its own.
17
BY MR. BLUM:
18
Q.
19
I ' l l object to any
15
"Ms.
Huddle,
the transcript is
Sustained.
It will
you are out of the order"; is
that what you said?
20
A.
Presumably.
21
Q.
"It was not my request; it was Ms.
22
request."
And this conversation continues,
23
next page,
369,
24
"Those are public documents at this point.
25
on file
Line 12.
Keeley's
top of the
This is you speaking:

They are
assuming they are the ones
~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
142
on file with the Secretary of State's Office.
convenience to the Court,
a copy."
I have asked him to bring us
Do you see that?
A.
I do.
Q.
At the risk of being semantic still,
as a convenience to the Court;
this is
i t ' s not an order?
A.
That doesn't sound like an order.
Q.
At Line 18, Ms.
As a
Huddle says:
what to do in a situation like this,
"I don't know

when you're
10
actually asking him to produce evidence which might
11
incriminate him,
and it's not even the opposing side
12
presenting it."
And your response at that point at
13
Line 22 is:
14
placing you in the possibility of contempt?"
]5
16
"Ms.
Huddle,
am I to take that as a no,
What were you going to find her in contempt

for?
17
A.
18
Q.
So why did you raise the possibility of
19
couldn't.
There hadn't been a clear order.
contempt?
20
A.
I'm explaining the landscape.
21
Q.
What does that mean?
22
A.
That means that she's resisting.
23
getting,
for the most part,
24
my wording.
I'm
stronger and stronger in
And eventually i t ' s going to become an
2 5l_e_v_e_r_-_s_o_-_c_l_e_a_r_ _o_r_d_e r,
if nee d be,
IN RE CJF NO.
185
at which point if she

4/1/09-------------------~
143
continues he
contempt becomes an option.
Do you think most people would interpret this
Q.
as a threat?
MR. MURPHY:
Objection.
Calls for
speculation.
BY MR.
BLUM:
Q.
10
Ms.
Sustained.
Would you say you were being impatient with
Huddle at this point?

don't believe so.
11
A.
12
Q.
Discourteous?
13
A.
I don't believe so.
14
Q.
Please turn to Exhibit No.2.
15
What is that
document?
A.
16
That appears to be the initial letter in
response to the preliminary investigation.
17
18
Q.
19
And just for the record,
investigation letter is E
the preliminary
ibit No.1.
20
A.
Oh.
21
Q.
And Exhibit 2 is your response to it?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q.
Did you read this response,
24
25
Yes.
Exhibit 2,
before
i t was sent to the Commission?

A.
Presumably.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185 - 4 / U 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
144
Q.
you sent it?
A.
Presumably.
Q.
Please turn to Page 3 of the document,
Did you determine that it was accurate before
is Bates stamped 37.
starts "Ultimately.
which
In the second full paragraph,
"
Do you see that?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And I ' l l just go down to the last sentence
it
that starts "nevertheless . . . "
You wrote:
10
"Nevertheless,
Judge McBrien regrets mentioning even
11
the possibility of contempt to Ms.
12
circumstances and believes that he was momentarily and
13
in
14
misapplication of the Fifth Amendment."
propriately frustrated with Ms.
Huddle under the
Huddle's
Do you see that?
15
16
A.
17
Q.
So you were frustrated with her?
18
A.
At least with her mis
19
20
21
22
do.
lication of the Fifth
Amendment.
Q.
You were frustrated with her that she was
resisting your request to get the documents?
A.
Not necessarily that,
but with her
23
construction of the Fifth Amendment and how it applied
24
or didn't apply.
25
Q.
And is that why you threatened her with
~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
145
A.
No.
Q.
You state here that you were inappropriately
frustrated.
I
Why was it inappropriate?

don't believe a judge should ever be
A.
frustrated.
Q.
Were you being impatient with her?
A.
Or be impatient.
Q.
Were you being impatient with her?
10
A.
11
Q.
You told us a little while ago the reason you
don't believe so.
12
wanted these documents was you thought the FPPC might
13
be able to put a lien on the property;
14
A.
15
correct?
Might be able to take some action against the
property based upon their rules and regulations.
16
Q.
Still on Exhibit 2,
still on Page 3,
the
17
first full paragraph,
you're explaining why the
18
Statement of Economic Interest documents would be
19
relevant to your hearing.
20
characterization?
Is that a fair
21
22
Let me direct you more specifically.
23
lines from the bottom,
24
parenthetical.
25
you see that?
ve
the sentence starts after the
Its a y s ,
" Am 0 n got her t h i n g s . . . "
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
Do
4/1/09--------------------~
146
A.
I do.
Q.
"Among other things,
it was likely that the
form set forth an opinion from Mr.
the value of the rental property and the amount of
income from the rental property.
an opinion from Mr.
rental property would be relevant to the dissolution
and admissible."
As a property owner,
Carlsson as to the value of the
This is what you told the Commission was the
10
Carlsson regarding
reason you wanted the documents?

MR.
11
MURPHY:
Objection.
Mischaracterizes the
12
document.
It's not "the" reason.
13
reasons."
He's mischaracterizing the evidence.
14
MR.
15
16
Go ahead.
17
BY MR.
18
19
BLur"!:
It said "among the
Is this among the reasons -

It's a statement.
BLUM:
Q.
Is this among the reasons you wanted the
document?
A.
20
Should the document have reflected that,
it
21
would have had that kind of information and would have
22
been pertinent and relevant to the valuation issue.
23
So,
24
25
yes.
The FPPC form is
filed independently?
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09 --------.....1
147
BY MR.
BLUM:
Did you state -
Q.
in Exhibit 2,
responded to the Commission's request,
this concern about the FPPC liens?

MR.

BY MR.
10
Your Honor.
The
Sustained.
BLUM:
Q.
Why didn't you?

MR.
11
12
did you mention
document speaks for itself.
Objection,
MURPHY:
when you
MURPHY:
Objection.
Assumes a fact not
in evidence that there was a reason he needed to.
13
14
THE WITNESS:
Partly,
Overruled.
in responding at that
15
point,
I did not have the benefit of the transcript.
16
The transcript brings a lot of information to the
17
recollection of the Court.
18
school of judging.
19
back in the late
20
approach for people that are going to be involved in
21
He was a
I'm of the Don Smallwood

judge in Orange County
'80s and early
'90s that laid out an
ly law for a sustained period of time.
22
Would you like to hear what his approach was?
23
24
25
up to this point,
Well,
you've led us
so what are the conclusions?
THE WITNESS:
He said approach each case with
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
148
an open
nd,
direction.
information in that case.
flush it all away.
ever.
Learn all that you can about the
Stewart said:
back.
MR.
13
You don't second guess yourself
as Potter
Do the best you can and don't look
BLUM:
Your Honor,
THE WITNESS:
please turn in the
BY MR.
Q.
Okay.
BLUM:
Beginning at Line 7
14
this earlier, but this is Mr.
15
Line 7 he's asked:
16
17
Or,
transcripts to Page 351.
11
12
Once you've decided it,
SPECIAL MASTER CORNE
10
with no prejudice or bias in any
now,
you touched on
Carlsson's expert.
At
"Did you list the 24th Street property on

that form?
18
"Answer:
19
"Why not?
20
"Because I didn't think it was applicable to
21
No,
I don't believe I did.
what I had to list."
22
You referred to this a moment ago.
He
23
testified that he did not disclose his ownership
24
interest in the four-plex;
25
A.
correct?
Correct.
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
149
as he says here,
that he didn't
sclose anything,
then the documents aren't going to be useful in
dete
the rental it receives; correct?
ning the fair market value of the property or
A.
For that purpose,
Q.
You're familiar with these FPPC Statement of
Economic Interest forms,
no.
aren't you?
am.
A.
10
Q.
You've had to fill them out many times?
11
A.
Ever since the law went into effect in 1974,
12
13
14
15
I believe.
Q.
pages of Form 700,
A.
16
17
Statement of Economic Interest.
Yes.
MR.
BLUM:
the entire document.
18
This is three
For the record,
I didn't enclose
It's 30-something pages long.
19
familiar with it.
20
BY MR.
We're
BLUM:
21
Q.
22
2005 2006?
The first page shows this is from the year
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
The second page is an explanation of how to
25
fill out Schedule B?

~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
150
A.
Yes.
Q.
And the final page is Schedule B?
A.
Correct.
Q.
This is the schedule you use to disclose
interest in real property?
A.
Well,
it's one of the forms.
Q.
Was there any indication that the apartment
building in question was in trust?
10
A.
I'm just trying to be complete.
11
Q.
I understand.
12
You can
also have another form if it's in a trust.
Yes.
"no,
The answer to my question is
there was no indication" -
13
A.
There was no indication there was a trust.
14
Q.
Now,
15
this has two columns for two different
pieces of property,
right,
on the document?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
So looking at the first column,
18
you include
the address and city of the property?
19
A.
Correct.
20
Q.
And then there's fair market value?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q.
Now,
23
A.
You do.
24
Q.
One of the boxes says $100,001 to $1,000,000;
25
you just check a box; right?
correct?
~------------------------TN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
151
A.
Correct.
Q.
So how was this document -- had it been
filled out for the four-plex,
going to help you determine fair market value of that
property?
A.
Well,
how was this document
if you keep gOlng down,
if the rental
property gross income received is included,
of the various valuation methodologies,
figure what the approximate value might be.
10
Q.
the four-plex were that was in dispute?
12
it this morning.
A.
one could
Do you recall what the numbers of value of
11
13
using one
believe one side said 650,
14
might have said 620,
15
used the income cap approach.
We went over
and one side
and then there was a
610 if you
16
Q.
So they were all in the $600,000 range?
17
A.
They were.
18
Q.
So starting with fair market value,
not gross
19
rental - we'll get to that in a moment - would
20
checking that box $100,001 to $1,000,000 have helped
21
you determine -- to settle this dispute about whether
22
the property is worth 600,000 or 650,000?
23
A.
24
Q.
And you mentioned gross rental income a
25
moment ago.
don't believe so.
As we saw in your response to the
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 - 4/1/09-----------------------
152
Commission,
that was also among the relevance reasons
you wanted those documents;
correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
If you look down at the next section on this
form,
"If rental property gross income received," do
you see that?
A.
Yes.
Q.
You're just checking boxes?
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
And one of the boxes says $10,001 to
11
$100,000.
Do you see that?
12
A.
I do.
13
Q.
Was there any dispute that the gross rental
14
receipts were less than 10,000?
15
A.
I don't now recall what they were,
frankly.
16
I don't recall there was a lot of dispute regarding
17
rent though.
18
Q.
19
income,
20
A.
I don't believe so.
21
Q.
And we briefly looked at it where Mr.
22
There wasn't any dispute about the rental
was there?
Shaw
had that mathematical error?
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q.
And used 36,000 rather than 30,OOO?
25
A.
Correct.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE elF NC.
185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - l
153
So if that was the range of gross rental
Q.
income,
Mr.
wasn't going to help you determine the gross rental
.5
income,
A.
No.
Q.
Please turn to Exhibit No.3.
8
9
10
somewhere between 30,000 and 36,000,
Carlsson checking that box "10,000 to 100,000"
was it?
Well,
it
ght but not all that closely.

What is that
document?
A.
That was a letter that I wrote to the
Commission in August of 2008.
Q.
You wrote it yourself?
12
A.
I did.
13
Q.
This wasn't composed by your attorney?
14
A.
It was not.
.5
Q.
On Page 2 of the letter,
Bates stamped 72,
16
you're talking about why you wanted these documents,
17
the Statement of Economic Interest documents.
18
Correct?
19
A.
Apparently,
20
Q.
Well,
yes.
the first
11 paragraph,
"I've been
21
employed with the State of California"
22
explaining you're familiar with these documents?
23
A.
Right.
24
Q.
Next paragraph:
2.5
you're
"Then when it became ever so
apparent that no disclosure or any concern regarding

~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
1.54
this matter rested with Mr.
I was faced in my mind with possible cr
or at least a conflict of interest."
A.
Correct.
Q.
SO
MR.
BY MR.
Objection,
Your Honor.
Vague as
Please clarify.
BLUM;
Q.
At the t
during the trial,
A.
13
14
MURPHY:
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL;
11
12
that the reason you wanted the
to time.
10
inal activity
document?
lS
Carlsson or his attorney,
you requested the document,

is this the reason you wanted it?
I believe that this was what my thinking was
in August of 2008.
15
Q.
Okay.
16
A.
don't know that I
really was in a position
17
to have much reflection on
18
have the benefit of the reporter's transcript to
2006 when I
didn't
refresh my memory.
20
21
(sic)
Q.
Now that you've had that benefit,
why did you
want the documents?
22
A.
wanted the documents to determine whether
23
or not there was going to be an issue in terms of the
24
disposition of the four plex based upon the FPPC rules
25
that,
were it not included,
L - , - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
I was going to have the

185 -
4/1/09----------
155
attorney
rules required,
if any impact.
As it happened,
Q.
documents?
A.
Q.
So you made your
did you ever get those
did not.
cis ions without seeing the
documents?
did.
A.
Q.
I'm going to move on to the third allegation.

Did you have your court clerk ask the court
10
11
reporter to prepare a transcript of part of
12
Mr.
Carlsson's testimony?
13
A.
14
Q.
What part of his testimony did you want?
15
A.
The cross-examination of Mr.
16
Ms.
did.
Carlsson by
Keeley.
17
Q.
Why did you want that?
18
A.
I wanted to ensure that what I thought I had
19
heard,
I had actually heard.
20
Q.
What was it that you thought you heard?
21
A.
22
thought I heard the admission of the
violation of the FPPC rules.
Q.
23
So you wanted the document to determine -
24
help determine whether Mr.
25
law?
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF
or
Carlsson had violated the
NO. 185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - -
156
A.
No.
I wanted to double-check what I
thought
2
I had heard to ensure that I heard -- accurately heard
3
that.
Q.
And you needed that to
Ip you make a
decision in the case?

A.
Well,
think that was -- would be helpful to
know.
this whole pursuit of the Statement of Economic
Interest may have been irrelevant.
10
If,
in fact,
Q.
12
transcript?
13
A.
had misheard that information,
As it turns out,
never received the Statement of Economic Interest.
11
14
When was it you first requested that
don't know.
I don't have any recollection.
It was sometime after he testified and was
cross examined.
16
Q.
Was it a
17
A.
18
Q.
please turn to Exhibit 17.
19
transcript?
20
A.
Apparently,
21
Q.
Just to help you pin down the time on this,
er the trial concluded on March 9?
couldn't tell you.

This
if you turn to Page 19 of the document,
23
Bates Stamp 123

A.
25
Q.
a partial
yes.
22
24
lS
which has a
Yes.
at Line 12,
it indicates that "In witness
L . - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
J85
4/J/09----------~
157
whereof,
March 2006."
A.
Q.
So did you request this transcript sometime
have here unto set my hand this 10th day of

Do you see that?
do.
prior to March 10,
2006?
A.
Q.
When you asked for the transcript,
would presume so.
you say to your clerk?
A.
I'd like to get a transcript -- well,
10
11
nature of what I
12
purpose.
13
cross-examination to check my -- what I
14
heard,
15
think I
16
Q.
17
transcripts,
18
should not be informed about the request?
don't recall exactly what I
19
20
21
22
what did
But i t ' s in the
was attempting to get for what
Namely,
the transcript of the

actually
to ensure that I actually heard what I
A.
that,
said.
did
heard.
When you asked your clerk to get the
but I
Q.
i t ' s -
did you tell her that the attorneys
have no -- I'm fairly certain I wouldn't do

Is this request something you would have
wanted the attorneys to know about?
23
A.
Wouldn" t?
24
Q.
Is this request of the transcript something
25
you would want the attorneys to know about?

L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
158
2
3
I would assume they would
A.
whatever it is I
Q.
requested.
had made this request possibly lead to a 170.1?
MR.
MURPHY:
Objection.
Calls for
speculation.
a copy of
Could disclosure to the attorneys that you
5
6
BY MR.
Sustained.
BLUM:
Q.
This time that you asked for the transcripts,
10
apparently
11
March 3rd,
Mr.
Carlsson's cross-examination was on
the second day of trial?
12
A.
I will take your word for that.
13
Q.
It's in evidence in the transcript.
14
A.
Okay.
15
Q.
So sometime between the 3rd and at least the
16
10th; right?
17
A.
Correct.
18
Q.
Did you get the transcript at that t
19
A.
20
Q.
So then you went ahead and made your decision
21
did not.
without the transcri
22
A.
I did.
23
Q.
Did you ask for the transcript again in May
24
25
of 2006?
A.
I believe that there was some procedure that
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
159
had to be followed that hadn't been followed,
needed to make a
system for a copy of the transcript.

Q.
formal request through the Court
A.
Yes.
Q.
What is it?
A.
Well,
i t ' s a Minute Order and -- with my
signature and name stamp.
And I believe i t ' s just a
10
formal request for that transcript.
11
and time says 3/2 or -3/06,
12
May 12,
13
Q.
14
Do you recognize
this document or type of document it is?
and we
It's -- the date
and underneath it,
it's
2006.
So would this be when you made the second
request to get the transcript?
15
A.
I don't know that it was.
It could have
16
been.
17
just a procedure that was brought to our attention
18
that needed to be pursued.
19
20
I don't know.
Q.
Well,
I don't know that this isn't
But I don't know.
had you made a second request of your
clerk to get the transcript?
21
A.
I believe so,
23
Q.
Was it likely to be around May 12th?
24
A.
That sounds reasonable.
22
25
but I
can't tell you when that
was.

RE CJF NO. 185
Had you requested

4/1/09--------------------~
160
transcripts over the course of your career on
occasion?
THE WITNESS:
first t
Never.
So this was your
?
THE WITNESS:
First time ever.
Even when I
was in the Attorney General's Office doing criminal
appeals,
recollection.
10
BY MR.
Q.
11
12
I didn't request transcripts,
to my
BLUM:
At this time,
in May,
your decision in the case;
right?
13
A.
14
Q.
So why did you want the transcripts at this
A.
It was really more follow-up out of
15
16
had -- I
you've already made
time?
17
curiosity.
18
transcript.
19
Q.
20
21
22
23
24
25
did.
I was curious what had happened to the
So are you saying you didn't particularly
want the transcript anymore?
A.
didn't
if it had never come,
I wouldn't
have been particularly upset.

Q.
What is that
document?
A.
It appears that it is an Order to Show Cause
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
161
form used In fami
Mrs.
Carlsson.
Q.
And filed on May 8,
2006?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And what is she asking for in this document?
A.
She's asking to sell -- for a listing agent
for the family residence,
residence and an order requiring Mr.
execute the documents.
10
entry of the judgment.
11
Q.
a sales price for the family
And an order compelling the
So In other words,
12
this case,
13
sold;
a decision,
Carlsson to
you had made an order In
ordering that the property be
right?
14
A.
Correct.
15
Q.
And at least part of
he a legations in this
16
document is that Mr.
17
your order;
18
A.
That's what I
19
Q.
Could that be why you made the second request
20
Carlsson wasn't complying with
is that correct?
understood.
to get the transcript?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
So at this point,
23
A.
24
brought
25
formal request for the transcript was a procedure that
Totally unrelated.
it was just curiosity?
believe that the Minute Order was

was given -- the Minute Order with the
L--------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
the Court possibly told my clerk needed to be done in
order to get the transcript.
apparently had been some oral request at an earlier
point,
be followed that eventually resulted in that Minute
Order that
was signing it.
In other words,
but accounting and other procedures needed to
- my only involvement in that Minute Order
Q.
But you signed it for a reason;
A.
10
11
there
signed it because I rna
sometime earlier,
right?
the request
yeah.
Excuse me.
What was
12
the process by which you would have your signature
13
affixed to these OSC forms?
14
THE WITNESS:
They are stamp applied.
15
if there's a
16
would be personally applied.
17
request for a temporary order,
Except
then they
So when the OSC forms
18
were filed with the clerk's office -- were they filed
19
with the clerk's office or your department?
20
THE WITNESS:
21
22
With the clerk's office.

signature
stamp affixed in the clerk's office?
23
THE WITNESS:
24
25
Was t
was May 8th of 2006,

~-----------------------IN
Yes.
So if the filing date
with the hearing set for

RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
163
June 20th of 2006,
when would you have likely seen this form personally?

THE WITNESS:
3
4
Probably within a week of
June 20th.
under your customary procedure,
BY MR.
Q.
Thank you.
BLUM:
This was in May.
Did you get the transcript
at that time?
A.
10
Q.
Did you later ask for the transcript again?
11
A.
12
13
don't believe I did.
don't know.
asked again or -- I
I mean,
I don't know if I
don't know.
14
afternoon recess at this point.
15
for 10 minutes.
We'll take our first

We'll be in recess
16
(Recess taken.)
17
At our last recess,
18
you were going to consult and tell us what your
19
tentative plans were for the rest of the day.
20
MR.
MURPHY:
Yes,
Your Honor.
21
we could extend today until 5:00,
22
to be done by noon on Friday.
23
into the afternoon,
We agreed if
and then
hope
But if we have to go
that would be okay?
24
25
able to extend tomorrow as well,

L------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
Yes.
We would be
if you need.
So you
4/1/09 - - - - - - - - - - -
164
ight want to
ep that in mind in your schedule.
that way,
We don't want to put everybody through stress.
we might put a little less stress on Friday.
MR. MURPHY:
in mind, and we'll go to 5:00 today then.
Sure.
MR. MURPHY:
Mr.
Blum,
10
MR.
BLUM:
11
Q.
And
Great.
So we'll keep that
Thank you,
Your Honor.
Thank you.
you may continue.

Thank you,
Your Honor.
We were just talking about when you made a
12
third request for that transcript sometime after May.
13
I believe you said you weren't sure you actually made
14
a request?
15
A.
I only recall making the first request.
16
Minute Order we signed -
17
processing,
18
through accounting or through administration or
19
whatever.
20
request,
21
22
Q.
as I
or I
signed is the
understood it,
of that request
And as to whether there was a third

I
So you don't actually have a
recollection of
the second request in May?
23
A.
No.
24
Q.
Do you know when -
25
The
did you eventually
receive the transcript?
L - . - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO . .185 -
4/I/09--------------'
165
A.
I di
Q.
Do you know about when?
A.
In September of 2006.
Q.
In fact,
Page 3,
if you have Exhibit 2 in front of
a Bates stamp of 37,
at the bottom,
you,
paragraph numbered 3, do you state in there that the
transcript was faxed by you to Linda Cabatic on
ember 11,
2006?
A.
It was.
10
Q.
So presumably you received the transcript on
11
or shortly before that date?
12
A.
Before that date,
13
Q.
After you received the transcript,
14
A.
I did.
16
Q.
After reading it,
18
did you
read it?
15
17
I'm sure.
did you feel it had any
relevance to anything?
A.
There was still the overlying concern as to
19
whether or not Mr. Carlsson had violated the FPPC
20
rules.
21
22
23
24
25
Q.
By not disclosing the ownership in the
four-plex?
A.
This relationship with his contractee,
contractor, with whom they did business.

Q.
So what did you do with the transcript after
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
411109--------------------~
166
A.
Well,
discussed with some other judges,
had been discussing with some other judges throughout
4
this time,
this circumstance.
And I think that I
concluded -- or we concluded that,

send it to the FPPC 7
and
Services,
rather,
at this point,
just
to the General
since nobody knew anybody at the FPPC,
and
8
let them deal with it.
Q.
So correct me if I'm wrong.
Did you say you
10
had been talking about it or thinking about the issue
11
prior to receiving it?
12
13
Q.
For what period of time or months were you
- prior to receiving the transcript,
considering this?
16
17
I had
yes.
14
15
A.
A.
couldn't even begin to tell you.
couldn't tell you.
18
Q.
It was some period of time prior to receiving
20
A.
Yes,
21
Q.
Why were you still concerned with that issue?
22
A.
I believe that a
19
23
24
25
it?
and when I
received it too.
judge has an obligation to
report any potential violation of the law.

Q.
But you said you don't know whether or not
you actually ordered the document?

L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
167
A.
did order the document sometime,
I presume,
in March.
Q.
Well,
let me restate it.
You told us you
don't know if you actually requested the document the
third time in September?
A.
don't believe that I
a third time in September.
got to me,
Q.
10
but I
A.
12
believe it eventually
don't have any recollection.
But leading up to receiving it,
considering this issue,
11
requested the document
you're
wondering what to do?
I was.
Had you ever
13
reported counselor a party or a participant in
14
litigation to any authority because of suspected
15
criminal activity?
16
17
THE WITNESS:
I can't recall ever having done
so.
18
19
the State Bar,
20
reporting obligations?
21
previously,
THE WITNESS:
I think,
Yes.
annually.
Had you received from
letters to judges about
Yes,
I have received
22
those,
23
the State Bar regarding an individual back some 18
24
15, 20 years ago,
25
failed to appear with his client,
who
And I have been called by
in a criminal case,
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
who
and the State Bar

4/1/09--------------------~
168
called me about two hours later.
guess I
the fact that he didn't show up in court with his
client.
did r
THE WITNESS:
BY MR.
At least I
confirmed
But you didn't
I didn't initiate the call.
BLUM:
Q.
10
in effect,
initiate the call?
ort that person.
So,
In this case,
after you read the transcript,
you sent it to the Department of General Services?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
Why them?
13
A.
Why them?
Because one of the judges with
14
whom I was consulting,
15
consulting with the two judges in the next two
16
departments,
17
recently come from state government,
18
knew that Linda Cabatic was the general counsel for
19
General Services.
Q.
20
21
Mr.
and I was,
I believe,
Judges Hight and Sumner, both of whom had

and Judge Sumner
Did General Services have some relation to
Carlsson?
22
A.
He was -
23
Q.
So you sent the transcript to Mr. Carlsson's
24
25
they were his employer.
employer?
A.
Correct.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185- 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1
169
Did you send the transcript to someone in
Q.
particular?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Who was that?
A.
Linda Cabatic.
Q.
Who was she?
A.
She was their general counsel.
Q.
Do you know her?
A.
had a passing recognition relationship with
10
her from the Attorney General's Office when we were
11
both there in the
'70s and early '80s.
12
Q.
13
you send it?
14
A.
received her telephone number from Judge
15
Sumner.
gave her a call.
16
number.
And she wanted to know what this was about,
17
and I
18
When you sent the transcript to her,
asked her for her fax
said it might be something about reporting.
Q.
So you initiated the call?
20
A.
21
Q.
And did you e
23
24
25
And
faxed it.
19
22
how did
did.
lain to her what you were
sending to her?
A.
No.
just said it might have something to
do with some reporting.

Q.
You didn't send it to the FP
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------
170
A.
did not.
Q.
So after reading the partial transcript,
thought it might contain some evidence of improper
activity by Mr.
you
Carlsson?
A.
Q.
And you took action to disclose that to his
did.
employer?
A.
Q.
Don't you think you should have either gotten
o
11
12
did.
off the case at that point or at least disclosed what

you had done to the parties?
A.
At that point,
didn't know whether that was
13
disclosing any particular information to the employer
14
that the employer didn't already have through an FPPC
15
report that included information regarding this
16
relationship.
17
there was a problem.
18
19
Q.
So at that point,
I didn't believe
Let me ask you this in terms of the objective
observer.
20
A.
Okay.
21
Q.
You have a situation where someone has
22
testified that they didn't disclose an ownership right
23
of interest in this property in their Statement of
erest.
The judge takes action to get the
and review them,
as you just told us,
RE CJF NO. 185 -
felt
4/1/09--------------------~
171
that they might have some evidence of criminal
activity or improper action,
document to the individual's employer.
and then forwards that
Do you feel an objective observer might feel
4
5
that the judge might not be able to be fair and
impartial at that point?
MR.
speculation,
MURPHY:
Objection.
incomplete hypothetical.
10
Calls for
Overruled.
Answer
if you can.
11
THE WITNESS:
Only if the judge believes the
12
testimony from Mr.
Carlsson that,
in fact,
13
have to -
14
frankly,
15
Mr.
16
believe that he was truly aware of what he was
17
including and not including.
18
that he had his secretary fill it out and all he did
19
was affix a signature.
20
BY MR.
he didn't have to include this.

I
he didn't
And quite
had the opportunity to observe
Carlsson's demeanor at that time and did not
21
Q.
In fact,
he testified
BLUM:
So you had no idea when you sent the
22
transcript to his employer whether or not he had done
23
anything improper?
24
25
A.
didn't.
There was suspicion,
but I
didn't
know.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09-------------------~
172
Q.
On 9/11/2006,
his employer,
anybody;
after sending the transcript to
you didn't disclose that fact to
correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
And you didn't recuse yourself at that point;
correct?
A.
Right.
Q.
I think,
instead,
motion in the case;
you went on to hear another
right?
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
Let's turn to Exhibit 29.
12
A.
Notice of Appeal.
13
Q.
And that's apparently filed August 24,
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
It's a notice that Mr.
16
What is that?
2006?
Carlsson was going to
appeal your decision in the case?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
Do you have any idea when you might have seen
19
this document or if you would have seen this notice?
20
21
A.
First I
saw it is when we received this
discovery from the Commission.
22
Q.
Turning to Exhibit 30, what is that document?
23
A.
That is an Order to Show Cause filed by
24
Ms.
Keeley on behalf of Mrs.
25
order of sale of the 24th Street property.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
Carlsson requesting an
185
4/1/09--------------------~
173
Q.
This was apparently filed September 6,
A.
Apparently.
Q.
And it set the hearing date for September 20,
2006;
correct?
A.
Yes.
Q.
7
8
2006?
What
lS
that
document?
A.
That
lS
a Minute Order for September 20th at
which that prior Order to Show Cause was heard -- or
10
some motion was heard,
and the motion on the sale of
11
the 24th Street property.
12
Q.
13
Exhibi t
14
A.
15
Q.
SO you did hear that OSC?
16
A.
17
Q.
And you heard it on September 20,
18
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
This is some nine days after you sent the
20
Is that the OSC we just looked at in
30?
believe so.
did.
transcript to Mr.
2006?
Carlsson's employer?
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q.
And how did you rule at that hearing?
23
A.
24
25
ordered that the judgment be enforced,
that
the 24th Street property be sold.

Q.
Did you also order Mr.
~----------------'-------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
Carlsson to pay
4/1/09--------------------~
174
additional attorney's fees?
No.
A.
Well,
"additional."
that is the reason I

Q.
depending upon what you mean by
had deferred it on the first OSC,

ordered it at this point.
So did you rule here against Mr.
Carlsson's
position?
A.
I believe that his position was he did not
want to sell an
want to sell the four plex.
hing at this point.
So he did not
And there is some
10
language here about the Gold River property,
11
don't quite know what it all means at this point,
12
looking at this copy.
13
14
and
Q.
Mr.
but I
So was that "yes," you ruled against
Carlsson's position?
15
A.
It does
ear that way,
if his position was
16
he was opposed to it,
which,
17
know for sure he was,
since at the trial he wanted it
18
sold.
19
that was filed by Ms.
20
time.
21
22
23
frankly,
don't quite
I'd have to look at the opposition,
Q.
his attorney at the
He didn't want the house sold;
four plex sold.
A.
Shannon,
He did.
if any,
he wanted the
Right?
And that's what we're talking about.
24
The 24th Street property is the four-plex.
25
have a shorthand where I put two X's if,

--------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
Although I
in fact,
it's
411109--------------------~
175
a stipulation.
stipulation.
Q.
And this was obviously not a
Do you feel that after you sent that
transcript to Mr. Carlsson's employer that you should
have presided and ruled on this motion?
A.
Depends on
Objection,
MR. MURPHY:
10
MR. BLUM:
Sustained.
I'm going to move on to the fourth
allegation.
12
Before doing so,
13
you take a look at Exhibit 32,
14
been discussing,
15
on the bottom, where it says,
16
you read that sentence for us,
17
THE WITNESS:
18
(Witness examines document. )
19
Clerk
20
25
the Minute Order we've
and decipher for us the handwriting

"Clerk can sign ...
Can
please?
Oh.
"Clerk can sign for the 24th Street
What does it say In
parens?
23
24
can
property."
21
22
His
feelings are irrelevant.
11
Your Honor.
THE WITNESS:
reading.
Oh,
Clerk
Oh,
that's what I believe I was
"clerk can sign ... "

-
see that.
looks like "designation."
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
I don't
4/1/09----------~
176
know what that means,
it might be clearer,
Did you learn how to
write in medical school?
(Laughter.)
THE WITNESS:
you have a
Court
sign -
10
11
Maybe on the original
but . . .
3
4
frankly.
It's not atypical for
reluctant party,
not my clerk,
but the Clerk of the Court
13

property worked out,
15
Okay.
October,
17
means.
18
third party."
It looks like "first weekend of

But I don't know what that
THE WITNESS:
21

BY MR.
23
25
But that is
your handwriting?
20
24
"Gold River
third party" is the last line?
THE WITNESS:
16
22
We know
that.
THE WITNESS:
19
where
to have the Clerk of the
12
14
Q.
Mr.
It is.
Okay.
BLUM:
Did you find out at some point that
Carlsson was appealing your decision?

A.
No.
Until -- well,
I did eventually,
L-----------------------IN RE CJF NC. 185
but it
411/09--------------------~
177
wasn't that
Q.
When did you find out?
A.
I want to say probably in 2007 or
Q.
How did you find out?
A.
Q.
Moving on to Allegation 4,
received the decision,
you repeatedly told Ms.
'8.
guess it was 2008.

as we've seen in
the trial,
be a mistrial if she didn't finish at a certain time.
Correct?
10
A.
Correct.
}1
Q.
Initially,
12
mistrial if she
13
right?
14
A.
you were telling her it would be a
dn't finish in a day and a halfi
I was leading her to believe that,
15
Well,
16
saying it,
17
Huddle there would
I don't know if I was successful,
Q.
yes.
but I was
guess.
Do you feel
in your opinion,
did you
18
display impatience with Ms.
19
this trial?
20
A.
Huddle at any t
during
Depends on what you mean by "impatience."
21
Ms.
Huddle has the ability to not necessarily get to
22
the point,
23
point.
24
it was.
25
Q.
and I
try to move her along toward t
So if that's impatience -- but I don't believe
In your opinion,
were you ev
L--------------------------IN RE CJF NC. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
178
to her?
A.
No.
Q.
Turn in the transcript binder to Page 371.
We looked at that briefly before.
Mr. Minkoff,
testify?
in the final half-day of trial,
A.
Correct.
Q.
This was the patient -
This is where
began to
the witness who had
earlier been unavailable because of cancer treatment?
10
A.
Correct.
11
Q.
Towards the bottom of the page,
Line 24,
12
Mr.
Minkoff is explaining his physical condition.
13
his treatment:
14
kind of knocks me out.
15
drive me up.
16
explaining why he couldn't be there for the previous
17
day of trial?
"I have chemo on Wednesday,

And I
A.
Correct.
19
Q.
Then Ms. Huddle says:
20
an airplane?
"Answer:
21
22
A.
Correct.
24
Q.
And you sustain it.
27,
Ms.
Huddle explains:
get sick."
Keeley objects to relevance.
23
25
He's
"Why can't you get on
Because of the air,
The top of Page 372, Ms.
and it
couldn't get anybody to
I can't get on a plane."
18
And
Then on Page 373,
"Your Honor,
L . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - T N RE CJF NO.
185
Line
got cut short
4/1/09,-~----------------~
179
on some pre
because you do judge
and I want the Court could
Mr. Minkoff's condition so far,
Do you see that?
meanor,
and I
(sic)
want the Court
to be aware of
that can be factored."
do.
A.
Q.
She was apparently trying to explain why
Mr.
Minkoff's demeanor in court might have been
affected by treatment or his medication?
10
A.
11
Q.
Your response at Line 3:
presume so.
with the questioning.
"Ma'am, move on
This is not a law school class.
13
Move on with the questioning.
14
explain everyone of your motives."
You don't have to
15
A.
Correct.
16
Q.
What did you mean when you said,
17
"This is not
a law school class"?
18
A.
was trying to give a concrete example of
19
what,
In fact,
was nee
20
ask the question.
All she needed to do was
d.
21
Q.
Why did you bring up law school?
22
A.
Because possibly,
in law school,
professors
23
and/or students would explain why they're going
24
through a procedure,
25
Q.
as a learning tool.
Are you referring to law school -- isn't that
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09--------------------~
180
demeaning to her,
as though she didn't know anything
more than a law student?
A.
Or a professor.
Q.
So the answer to the question was?
A.
Not in my perception,
it wasn't.
I was
trying to give a concrete example of where it might be
applicable.
Q.
9
10
would it have been
reasonable for someone to perceive that as demeaning

to them?
A.
11
12
In your opinion,
I understand someone could perceive that,
you'd have to ask that person.
13
Q.
Remember we saw on Page 369,
earlier today,
14
where you threatened her with contempt?
15
Page 369, Line 22.
MR. MURPHY:
16
17
Objection.
Bottom of
Mischaracterization.
Mischaracterizes the witness's testimony.
18
MR.
19
20
but
BY MR.
21
BLUM:
Let me rephrase it.
Thank you.
BLUM:
Q.
You state:
"Ms.
Huddle,
22
a no,
23
You remember that; correct?
am
to take that as
placing you in the possibility of contempt?"
do.
24
A.
25
Q.
We're here a few pages later at the top of
L-------------------~----IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
181
Page 374,
you're
A.
Correct.
Q.
Now,
A.
I'm not sure I
Q.
We 1,
were you still frustrated with her?

was frustrated with her.
lieve you testified when you were
commenting about the possibility of contempt,
frustrated with her
documents?
MR. MURPHY:
10
witness's testimony.
you were
out maybe not providing the
Objection.
Mischaracterizes the
11
12
(Sotto voce discussion between Special
13
Overruled.
Masters.)
14
15
1111 sustain the objection.
16
BY MR.
17
Q.
18
school,
19
A.
change my ruling.
BLUM:
So when you made the comment about law
were you frustrated with her?
No.
was trying to provi
a concrete
20
ex
21
or this kind of statement would be appropriate.
22
Ie of a context in which this type of questioning
Q.
This is the letter
23
that we looked at earlier that you wrote to the
24
Commission?
25
A.
Yes.
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
182
On Page 2,
Q.
Bates Stamp 72,
in the
second to-last paragraph where it starts "I admit.
Do you see that?

do.
A.
Q.
"I admit
deserve to be r
acted badly,
uked."
and for which actions
How did you act badly?
As important as the substance of a ruling or
A.
"
procedure,
is sometimes the perception.
in this case,
And I
believe
I was remiss in not protecting the
10
record,
11
information to where they could understand what I was
12
doing,
13
present also wouldn't have an idea of what was going
14
on.
15
clients,
16
would know exactly what was happening.
17
18
19
given the Court of Appeal's sufficient
that any members of the public that were
I believe,
Q.
though,
that the attorneys and their
should they have discussed it with them,
So when you say that you acted badly,
are you
talking about not protecting the record?

A.
I'm talking about the lack of protecting the
20
public's view of the judiciary through making a
21
complete record.
22
Q.
You say you deserve to be rebuked.
23
A.
Correct.
24
Q.
What did you mean by that?
25
A.
I meant that an informal letter of

IN RE CJF NO. 185
would
4/1/09
183
be an appropriate resolution.
Q.
For what misconduct?
A.
For not keeping in mind the need to appear to
the public that I completed everything according to,
possibly,
happen as opposed to the way in which Sacramento's
family law system is structured.
8
9
10
Q.
the public's perception of how things should
So are you saying the only thing you feel you
did wrong in this whole case is to leave a record that

is misleading?
11
A.
Incomplete.
12
Q.
Incomplete.
13
A.
You did nothing else wrong?
don't believe that I did.
14
MR.
15
16
BLUM:
MR.
MURPHY:
18
CROSS-EXAMINATION
19
BY MR. MURPHY:
21
22
Do you wish to
question your client at this point, Mr.
17
20
No further questions.
Q.
Yes,
Judge McBrien,
Your Honor.
Murphy?
Thank you.
tell us a little bit about
your background.
A.
was born in Pennsylvania,
23
Went to school
24
Stanford,
25
California at U.S.C.
raised in Fresno.
college in Northern California,
at
and went to law school in Southern
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
411109--------------------~
184
Q.
And when did you
A.
1970.
Q.
When did you sit for the Bar?
A.
Q.
Between 1971 and up until your appointment to
the bench,
think
graduat(:~
law school?
'71 .
were you an active member of the State Bar?
A.
Q.
During that period of time,
was.
tell us a little
bit about your professional career.
10
A.
I was in private practice in Los Angeles for
11
a short period of time,
12
General's Office in Sacramento where I worked for over
13
10 years.
14
where I
15
Q.
A.
And now I've been
What did you do while you were working in the
Well,
the first six months,
education advisor,
20
the
21
speak.
22
23
worked for over four years.
Governor's Office?
18
9
And then went to the Governor's Office,
judge for about 22 years.
17
then went to the Attorney
I was the
the criminal legal affairs adviser,
part of the public affairs administrator,
Q.
But I
so to
basically had a variety of hats.
And when you were appointed to the bench,
it
was initially to what was then the Municipal Court?
24
A.
Correct.
25
Q.
Prior to unification?
'-----
~----------IN
RE CJF NO.
.185 -
4/1/09 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _---l
185
A.
Co
Q.
And what types of cases did you handle as a
judge in the Municipal Court?
4
5
A.
In fact,
All kinds.
believe I
possible assignment on the Municipal Court.
Q.
When were you elevated?
A.
In 1989.
Q.
And when you were elevated,
9
10
11
sat in every
to a civil trial department,
were you assigned
criminal department?
What?
A.
did a general trial assignment.
And then
12
at that point,
13
have the new judge
14
assigned to family law.
15
assigned,
16
opposed to immediately as your first assignment.
17
started in family law in December of 1989.
18
19
Q.
the Sacramento Superior Court would

new Superior Court judge
-
by the time I was
they wanted to do this on an annual basis as

So I
And prior to your assignment in family law,
had you ever practiced as a family law attorney?
20
A.
No.
21
Q.
Ever
22
A.
Actually,
I had one case in private practice.
23
It was a default divorce.
24
family law.
25
And so
Q.
Only involvement I had in
Tell us about the family law court system in
~------------------------TN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
186
Sacramento when you were first assigned to a
law department.
A.
In Sacramento,
law judges.
would sit in settlement conferences.
never heard a
day a week I was in settlement -- I
judge.
family
the -- there are three family
We heard law and motion,
family law trial.
and we were -
And we virtually
So in my department,
heard law and motion for four days a week,
and one
was the settlement
And in the other two departments,
they each
10
had three days of law and motion and two days as the
11
settlement judge.
12
Q.
Describe for us how a family law matter would
13
get to trial at or about the time that you were first
14
appointed to a family law department.
15
A.
Since we were all generally new to family
16
law,
17
efforts.
18
would go to master calendar where it would compete
19
with the criminal proceedings,
20
proceedings, and might,
21
assigned through the master calendar system.
22
23
we were relatively unsuccessful in our settlement
Q.
So once i t left the settlement,
then it
the other civil
hopefully,
get to a trial court
And at that point in time,
where were the
family law departments located physically?
24
A.
Downtown in the courthouse.
25
Q.
Is that 901 H Street?
L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185 -
4'/1/09--------------1
187
720 9th Street.
A.
It's actually 920 -
Q.
That's the main Sacramento County courthouse?
A.
It is.
Q.
And how long were the family law departments
6
7
8
in that particular courthouse?

A.
Until 1999,
when we moved out to the Ridgeway
building.
Q.
Going back to when you were first appointed
to the family law department or assigned to the family
10
law department,
11
master calendar system?
12
no.
A.
what were the problems with this
The trials never got to trial.
So the Bar
13
the family law bar,
and it was a fairly strong bar
14
here in Sacramento,
initiated the concept of a trip to
15
Orange County and San Diego County to pick up some
16
ideas about how their courts were structured.
17
myself and Judge Ridgeway and two family law attorneys
18
made that trip and came back with various i
19
to restructure the system.
20
21
Q.
Now,
And
as of how
is there a family law section of the
Sacramento County Bar Association?
22
A.
There is.
23
Q.
And was there a family law section of the
24
25
Sacramento County Bar Association back in 1991?
A.
There was.
b-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
188
Q.
Is there an organization called the Family
Law Executive Committee?
A.
There is.
Q.
What is the Family Law Executive Committee?
A.
It is a group of leaders that the family law
bar e ects to take care of the administrative needs
for the section.
9
10
Q.
And did you work with the Family Law
Executive Committee in developing the current system

in the fami y law practice in Sacramento County?
11
A.
We did.
12
Q.
Could you describe what that wor
13
14
ng
relationship was?
A.
Okay.
We
we I,
first of all,
i t ' s a very
15
good relationship.
16
We keep making adjustments to the system when there
17
are problems.
18
where we have law and motion in the family
19
departments on Monday,
20
the trials on Thursday and Friday if,
21
trials are two days or less.
22
than two days,
23
calendar.
24
25
Q.
We meet -- we still meet monthly.
But basically,
we moved to a system
Tuesday,
Wednesday,
aw
and we hear
in fact,
those
And if they are more
they go down through the master
Backing up,
the Family Law Executive
Committee is appointed in what fashion?

~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
/09----------------------~
189
2
3
A.
They are elected by the membership of the
family law bar.
Q.
The family law bar section of the Sacramento
County Bar Association?
A.
Correct.
Q.
And you and other judges worked together with
this Family Law Executive Committee in developing the
current system?
A.
Correct.
10
Q.
Who are the other judges?
11
A.
Well,
12
13
14
15
at the time,
there was Justice Raye
now Justice Raye.
Q.
Justice Vance Raye of the Third District
Court of Appeal?
A.
16
Yes.
And another individual whose name always
17
escapes me,
18
years.
but he left the bench after about two
19
Q.
Dave Sterling?
20
A.
Dave Sterling.
21
Q.
Now,
after you went to Orange County,
you met
22
with the Family Law Executive Committee and
23
developed
24
presented to the Superior Court for its approval?
25
A.
or started to develop a plan.
It was.
Was that
And what happened is the Bar culled
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09 - -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--1
190
through the various ideas and options,
plan,
what adjustments we felt were appropriate and then
presented the whole of it to the full bench.
presented it to the family law bench.
Q.
And was that plan approved?
A.
It was.
Q.
When?
A.
In 19
Q.
And since 1991,
10
came up with a
want to say late
We made
91 .
is that the current plan that
is employed in the family law departments?
11
A.
It is.
12
Q.
You testified that on Mondays,
13
Wednesdays f
14
matters and trials of two days or less on Thursday and
15
Friday;
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
Who hears the settlement conferences?
18
A.
The family law bar indicated that they would
Tuesdays and
ly law courts hear law and motion
right?
19
be willing to volunteer,
20
settlement pro terns.
21
the week except for Monday.
22
week where they have two volunteers.
23
make it gender neutral,
24
and they hear the settlement conferences.
25
Q.
and they serve as the
There are two for each day of

So they have four days a
And they try to
have one male and one female,
And are settlement conferences assigned
~----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----~------------------
191
dependent upon the length of the trial?
A.
They are.
Q.
How does that work?
A.
If,
less trial,
week before the trial date.
two days or less,
9
10
Q.
in fact,
i t ' s going to be a one-day or
the settlement conference would be one

And if i t ' s going to be
it would be two weeks before.
And in connection with the estimation of the
length of the trial,
is that something that you as a
judge would do?
1.1
A.
No.
12
Q.
Who makes the estimation?
13
A.
The attorneys.
14
Q.
Are the attorneys encouraged to work together
15
in developing the estimated time?
16
A.
They are.
17
Q.
And is there any significance to the
18
estimated length of the case,
at least from the
19
judicial perspective of the Sacramento County Superior
20
Court judge?
21
A.
I believe that -- you know,
22
many of them,
23
aren't always accurate,
24
be accurate,
25
Because quite frankly,
having seen many,
that they generally are accurate.

but I
They
think they are trying to
stay within the guidance that we have.

if,
in fact,
L-------------------------IN RE Cc7F NO. 185 -
they don't
411109----------------------~
192
complete it,
Q.
they can be mistried.
And when you say "mistried," meaning that the
parties will then be given a new trial date?
A.
They would.
Q.
You were involved,
Carlsson vs.
A.
Correct.
Q.
obviously,
Carlsson case?
would like you to take a look at Exhibit C
in the respondent's
10
A.
think mine is over there.
11
MR. MURPHY:
12
13
May I
THE WITNESS:
15
MR.
16
THE WITNESS:
17
BY MR.
Q.
18
19
MURPHY:
You don't need
you said C?
Exhibit C,
Okay.
yes.
have it before me.
MURPHY:
For the record,
A.
could you describe what
This is an Order to Show Cause filed by
21
Ms.
22
continue the trial,
25
Yes.
Exhibit Cis?
20
24
approach the witness?
to seek permission.
14
23
with the
Huddle on behalf of Mr.
Q.
Carlsson asking to
fi ed on March 1st of 2006.
What was the basis of the request for a
continuance?
A.
That she was just served with a
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJ.F NO.
185
joinder
411109------------~
193
Q.
What is a
A.
Well,
joinder petition?
a third party was attempting to be
joined to the case and needed to file a
petition in order to do that.

Q.
A.
And was this ex parte application for an
I'm thinking it was,
but that certain y
doesn't look like my handwriting,
10
11
And that was Mr. Mayo.
order to continue the trial presented to you?
8
9
joinder
Q.
2006;
Okay.
that "denied."
The trial did proceed on March 2nd of
is that correct?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
And prior to trial,
is it incumbent upon the
14
lawyers to attempt to streamline the issues for the
15
trial?
16
A.
It is.
17
Q.
Is that something that you,
18
County Superior Court judge,
19
who appear before you?
as a Sacramento
emphasize to attorneys
20
A.
21
Q.
And to your knowledge,
do.
Carlsson,
in this particular
22
case of Carlsson vs.
23
Ms.
24
settlement conference in an effort to resolve the
25
issues?
did Ms.
Huddle and
Keeley meet at any time other than through the
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09----------------------~
194
A.
Not to my knowled
In fact,
I believe the
2
transcript reflects that they were largely
3
4
unsuccessful at the settlement conference.
Q.
Judge McBrien,
you were asked a number of
questions by Mr.
Blum with respect to streamlining the
case and this issue with respect to 24th Street.
the two-day estimate was made,
December of 2005?
Exhibit 6.
When
was that made in
I would address your attention to
10
A.
I believe that's correct.
11
Q.
And when that Memorandum to Set was made,
12
was a two-day estimate;
it
correct?
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
Was it your understanding that up until the
15
time of trial,
all of the issues with respect to the
16
real property requested by Mr. Carlsson,
17
that he be awarded the properties,
18
issue?
specifically
were still at
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
So was it your understanding that when this
21
two-day estimate was made in December 2005,
that
22
Mr. Carlsson was requesting that he be awarded both
23
the 24th Street property and the Gold River property?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
When the case started trial on March 2,
L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO .
.185
2006,
4/1/09 - - - - - - - - - - - '
195
you testified under Mr.
Mr.
Blum's questioning that
Carlsson's position then changed;
correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
And were you aware that Mr. Mayo had filed an
action against Mrs.
Sacramento County Superior Court for breach of
contract?
MR.
BLUM:
MR.
MURPHY:
10
Carlsson and Mr.
Carlsson in
Vague as to time,
THE WITNESS:
11
believe so.
12
transcript about Mrs.
13
mornings.
14
BY MR.
15
Your Honor.
At the start of trial.
At the start of trial,
I don't
But there was a reference to i t in the
Carlsson being served one of the
MURPHY:
Q.
Did Ms.
Keeley represent to you that Mr.
16
had filed a lis pendens against the 24th Street
17
property?
18
A.
19
Q.
Did Ms.
Mayo
don't recall that.

Keeley argue to you that her client
20
did not want the property sold because of a claim by
21
Mr.
22
23
24
25
Mayo in the form of a lis pendens?

A.
suspect that was her motivation.
don't
recall whether she said that or not.

Q.
But she did argue that they wanted -- "they"
being Mona Carlsson and Ms.
Keeley
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
wanted the
411109--------------------~
196
property given to Mr. Carlsson with an equalizing
payment?
A.
Yes.
We'll take our
second afternoon recess at this point.
minutes.
(Recess taken.)
We are back on
record in the presence of Judge McBrien and counsel.
10
You may continue,
11
MR.
12
Recess for 10
Q.
MURPHY:
Counsel.
Thank you,
Judge McBrien,
Your Honor.
when the Carlsson case was
13
presented to you on March 2,
2006,
did you understand
14
that it had been estimated for a two-day trial?
15
A.
did.
16
Q.
And if a party presents a case ln front of
17
you and requests additional time from you to provide
18
testimony,
19
your response generally?
20
A.
documents,
things of that nature,
First of all,
what is
I want to make sure that the
21
other party is present,
find out what their position
22
is regarding the need for additional time.
23
there appears to be a need or there's a stipulation
24
for additional time,
25
that they can -- and I would recommend that -- let's
And if
then we'll schedule it for a time
- - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09--------------------~
197
say a Friday afternoon,
tend not to go so long.
trial in progress,
row.
that other case to complete before they actually would
get any time.
I mean,
Q.
8
9
simply because Friday cases
they would be taking the second
they would need to basically wait for
What do you do in situations where one side
requests additional time and the other side says no?

A.
Well,
if it appears that there's -
10
a legitimate issue there,
11
resolved,
12
objection.
13
And -- but if there's another
Q.
there is
where it ought to be
I would grant the request even over the
Are there occasions where you,
on your own,
14
without input from counsel,
will extend time to
15
complete a trial that has gone over the estimated
16
length?
17
A.
I've never done that.
18
Q.
Is there a reason why you've never done that?
19
A.
believe that attorneys are in control of
20
their cases and responsible for their cases.
21
were to put myself in the position of initiating the
22
request,
23
and I don't think i t ' s appropriate that I do that.
24
25
Q.
And if I
I'm in affect grabbing some of that control;
In the Carlsson matter,
stopped on March 9,
2006,
when the trial was
the record reflects that
L . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - I N HE CJF NO.
185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - . J
198
Mr.
Shaw was testifying in a surrebuttal case;
correct?
A.
Correct.
Q.
And his testimony in surrebuttal was an
attempt,
it appears,
admitted to?
to correct his error that he
A.
Correct.
Q.
And that error was brought to the Court's
9
10
attention in rebuttal testimony by Mr.
Sutcliffe;
right?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
Now,
you were asked to read a number of
13
statements contained in the record up until the time
14
you exited the room.
15
look -
16
transcript,
is this Exhibit 5?
17
MR.
18
Exhibit 37.
19
transcript.
21
Q.
BLUM:
No.
The trial
The trial transcript is
Exhibit 37,
the trial
And go to the very last page,
Reporter's Transcript 463,
23
A.
Did you say 37?
24
Q.
463
25
The transcript?
is it Exhibit 5?
MR. MURPHY:
20
22
I would like you to take a
which is
Lines 11 through 12.
Exhibit 37.

~------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
It will be a separate
4/1 /09 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
199
binder that has the trial transcript it in.
THE WITNESS:
MR. MURPHY:
The last page,
Reporter's Transcript Page 463,
5
6
Oh.
THE WITNESS:
which is
Line 11 through 12.
Yes.
BY MR. MURPHY:
Q.
Ms.
"We'll arrange another date.
Keeley:
Don't panic" in response to Ms.
Huddle.
At any time after March 9,
2006,
10
knowledge,
11
they had agreed to more trial testimony?
12
13
14
A.
to your
did counsel approach you and tell you that
They did not.
And i t surprised me that no
Okay.
Huddle file any type of a
one did.
Q.
Did Ms.
15
written request to you for additional trial
16
availability to provide additional testimony?
17
18
19
20
21
A.
requesting more t
Q.
And-
said to Ms.
23
to reserve.
25
Judge McBrien,
that same page there's an indication that Ms.
24
never received anything from either party
on
Keeley
Huddle that she was going to ask for you

Did you ever have such a request?
THE WITNESS:
I never had the
that request
to reserve.
RE CJF NO . .185
411109--------------------~
200
THE WITNESS:
see.
Over the issue of attorney's
fees or anything.
It appears that she
seems to be indicating she was about to go into
chambers to talk to you.

THE WITNESS:
8
9
Did she do that?
She did not.
BY MR. MURPHY:
Q.
Judge McBrien, do you recall when it was that
10
you advised your clerk to notify counsel that they
11
could submit a three-page declaration for attorney's
12
fees and a three-page closing brief?
13
14
15
A.
I don't,
but I have a suspicion it was the
next day_
Q.
And before you ruled in the Carlsson vs.
16
Carlsson case, we've already established that
17
post trial briefs were submitted.
18
review those briefs?
Did you read and
19
A.
I did.
20
Q.
And you also were asked questions by Mr.
21
relative to Exhibit 13, which is a Memorandum of
22
Points and Authorities?
Blum
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
I would like you to address yourself to the
25
trial transcript at Page 447,

L - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE Ct]F NO.
right before
185
4/1/D9-------------------~
201
Mr.
Sutcliffe came back on as a rebuttal witness.
Line 17:
"Ms.
Your Honor,
Huddle:
I didn't have the
Points and Authorities marked as an exhibit, but I
have served Ms.
they get filed and are before the Court.
Keeley.
I would like to make sure if
"The Court:
Does that refresh your recollection of when
Exhibit 13 was first brought to your attention?
10
11
That's fine."
A.
I would say it would have been on the last
day of trial.
12
Q.
Shortly before the conclusion?
13
A.
Shortly before the conclusion.
14
Q.
And that memorandum relates to this Mayo
15
claim;
right?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
And you considered that Points and
18
Authorities in connection with your decision In the
19
Carlsson vs.
20
A.
I did.
21
Q.
Was there any documentary evidence presented
Carlsson case?
22
during the Carlsson vs.
23
Mrs.
24
between Mr.
25
Carlsson case that
Carlsson had agreed to this purported partnership
A.
Carlsson and Mr. Mayo?
There was not.
In fact,
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
to the contrary,
411109--------------------~
202
Mrs.
Carlsson indicated that that had not been
presented to her,
conference or mediation
mediation.
Q.
I believe,
until a settlement
it might have been a
They attempted mediation to resolve it.
Were any documents introduced by Mr.
Carlsson
that showed any type of an ownership interest by
Mr. Mayo in the 24th Street property?
A.
No.
Q.
Or any type of an interest of any nature in
10
the property?
11
A.
I believe there was a partnership agreement
12
signed by Mr.
Carlsson and Mr.
Mayo.
13
recollection that one of the exhibits might have
14
inclu
I have some
d that.
Anything else?
15
Q.
Okay.
16
A.
It did not include Mrs. Carlsson's signature.
17
Q.
And based on the evidence that was presented
18
to you during the course of the trial,
the
19
declarations submitted post trial,
20
including Exhibit 13/
21
Authorities,
22
A.
I did.
23
Q.
Was your decision based on that evi
24
A.
It was.
25
Q.
Did you give the parties a full and complete
the briefs,
the Memorandum of Points and
did you rule based on that evidence?
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
nce?
4/1/09--------------------~
203
hearing on their claims in connection with this case?
A.
I believe I did.
Q.
Now,
let1s talk a little bit about

During the course of the trial,
Mr.
Minkoff.
there evidence that Mr.
Street property was in the form of a loan?

A.
He did,
was
Minkoff1s interest in the 24th
at the time of the trial,
believe,
have a loan -- or the Carlssons had a loan to him.
But it was a partnership agreement with Moore and
10
Carlssons and Minkoff.
11
Q.
Okay.
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q.
--
14
A.
Right.
15
Q.
Was he completely paid off,
16
knowledge?
17
A.
But in 2004,
Minkoff was paid off
relative to the 24th Street refinance?
believe he was
to your
id off everything other
18
than a $16,000 note that was maybe put on the house.
19
20
21
can't recall exactly.

Q.
Was that $16,000 note put on the Gold River
property?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q.
SO at the time of trial,
Mr.
Minkoff had a
24
lender's interest in the Tunnel Road/Gold River
25
property;
correct?
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/21 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
204
A.
He did.
Q.
And during 2002,
2003 and 2004,
he had a
lender's interest in the 24th Street property as well?
A.
He did.
Q.
Is that what caused you concern with respect
to the Fair Political Practices Act disclosures?

A.
That,
plus the fact that Mr.
for the State and Mr.
State.
10
Q.
Now,
Carlsson worked
Minkoff leased property to the
you testified under questioning by
11
Mr.
Blum that you did not consider the statement
12
relative to a
13
pejorative or insulting to someone who would know all
14
of the facts;
law school explanation of motives to be
right?
15
A.
Correct.
16
Q.
Why do you believe that?
17
A.
Why do I believe that it would not be?
18
Q.
Right.
19
A.
It,
to me,
is not a pejorative comment.
It's
20
simply another way of saying,
"move on; we don't need
21
this at this point."
22
negative,
23
the law students possibly that are in law school.
24
just as readily,
25
refers to someone who's a professor at a law school.
It just -- law school is not a
quite frankly.
Other than the
parts of
But
one could conclude that the comment
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
205
Q.
Now,
you did try to move the Carlsson vs.
Carlsson case along,
did you not?
did.
A.
Q.
And you made all of those statements with
respect to this trial to Mr.
Blum -
A.
Q.
--
A.
Q.
And why were you trying to move that case
10
did.
referred to in the record?
did.
along?
A.
11
In my experience with Ms.
Huddle,
she would
12
never complete her cases within the estimate.
13
i t ' s a child custody case,
14
complexity and variations that might arise that would
15
create some uncertainty.
16
least two occasions extended the time for the trial.
17
In the case of Barrett,
18
a third day.
19
two and a half.
20
issues.
21
Q.
can understand the
And,
And if
in fact,
believe,
In the case of Myles,
have on at
we went a third -
I
believe we went
Both of which had involved custody
But in order to maintain the orderly flow of
22
justice through the family law courts,
23
other judges there insist that the trial estimates be
24
met?
25
A.
do you and
We do.
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
206
Q.
Is there a reason for that?
A.
Yes.
Q.
What is it?
A.
Well,
the Bar,
family law bar,
volunteers
their time to the Court in expectation that they're
going to be able to get to trial when they set their
trials.
goes,
something that they certainly expect of us.
And I don't want to say i t ' s a,
t i t for tat,
but it may well be,
as the saying
in their minds,
And quite
10
frankly,
11
in Sacramento County that you're going to adhere to
12
your estimate or you're going to make a
13
explaining the reasons you need more time.
Q.
i t ' s part of the general family law culture
Two last questions.
request
The first one,
want
15
you to first take a look at the reporter's transcript
16
of the trial,
17
let me read Lines 5 through 13:
Page 138,
"The Court:
18
Lines 5 through 7.
No,
Actually,
you don't have to ask me.
19
You have to always ask the other party first before I
20
will consi
21
anything that either party wants."
Is that your practice and procedure?
22
A.
Absolutely.
23
Q.
And is that done by attorneys who appear
24
before you?
25
A.
It is.
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
207
Q.
"Ms.
(Reading) :
Huddle:
didn't
if the Court was willing to give us another day,
I will discuss it with -

"The Court:
I'm not saying I am.
then
I'm just
saying you have to discuss it with the other party
first before you bring it up with me."

Did you make that statement to her?
7
8
A.
Q.
To Ms.
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
Did you understand
12
have made that statement more than once.

Huddle?
strike that.
Did you believe that she understood what you

were saying at that time?
13
14
A.
15
I hope so.
MR. MURPHY:
Those are all the questions I
16
have at this time,
17
Judge McBrien in our case in chief.
18
Your Honor.
19
looking at Exhibit 6,
20
is the at issue memo.
21
it that,
22
dealing with these.
Judge McBrien,
just for my edification,
I'm
which
I don't know if you still call
but that's what it was called when I was
23
THE WITNESS:
24
25
We reserve to call
Yes.
There's an
interesting notation on the bottom that family law

L - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185 -
4/1/09--------------',
208
matters will be set for trial on Thursdays and Fridays
only at 8:30 a.m.
in Department 124.
THE WITNESS:
Yes.
Were you the
master -- counselor of the master calendar?

I was the substitute -- over
THE WITNESS:
the course of my career in family law,
I've probably
been the supervising judge for 10 or 12 years.
2006,
In
I was expecting to retire in 2007; and so I
10
indicated that somebody else ought to do it.
11
that somebody who was designated to do it was almost
12
never there because she taught some courses in a
13
variety of subjects throughout the state.
14
was gone more than
15
a bit of the time.
So she asked me if I would still
16
serve in that position,
17
supervising judge.
not more,
And so she
but she was gone quite
but she could be the titular
So that's why it's 124.
18
However,
Okay.
So on
19
Thursday mornings,
20
department would come into your court and be assigned
21
out?
22
23
24
25
all cases set for trial in any
THE WITNESS:
Yes.
It's a master calendar
system for the family law court of family assignments.

presumably start at 9:00 a.m.
And the trials
or thereabouts?
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
209
THE WITNESS:
Right.
Any more questions, Mr.
MR.

down,
BLUM:
No questions,
Blum?
Your Honor.
Okay.
Call your next witness,
MR.
10
BLUM:
Mr.

step over here to this chair,
12
Raise your right hand.
Ms.
---000--
14
SHARON HUDDLE
having been first duly sworn,
16
please
please.
testified as follows:
---000--
17
Please have a seat.
State your full name and spell your last name.
19
THE WITNESS:
Sharon Marie Huddle,
H-u d-d I-e.
21
22
Huddle,
if you would,
13
20
Blum.
Examiner calls Sharon Huddle.
11
18
You may step
Judge McBrien.
15
I have
no more questions.
Thank you.
Thank you.
You may
examine.
23
MR.
24
I I
25
II
BLUM:
L-~~------------------IN
Thank you,
Your Honor.
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
210
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR.
BLUM:
Q.
Good afternoon,
A.
Good afternoon.
Q.
What is your occupation?
A.
I'm an attorney.
Q.
How long have you been an a torney?
A.
Since 1982.
Q.
Are you currently a sole practitioner?
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
And how long have you been a sole
12
Huddle.
practitioner?
13
A.
Since
I believe it was 1992.
14
15
Ms.
up.
I'm having trouble hearing.
16
THE WITNESS:
17
18
THE WITNESS:
19
You have to speak
BY MR.
Okay.
Thank you.
1992.
BLUM:
20
Q.
What kind of law do you practice?
21
A.
The vast majority is family law.
22
Q.
And how long have you practiced fa
23
A.
On a full time basis,
24
Q.
Where do you practice?
25
A.
My office is in Roseville.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
ly law?
since '92.
185 - 4 / I / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - l
211
Q.
Do you practice mostly In a few counties?
A.
Mostly Sacramento and Placer.
few in Eldorado County,
other counties,
San Joaquin,
Q.
do have a
and occasionally I
like Solano,
do one in
San Jose -- not San Jose,
Yolo.
In March 2006,
did you represent a party in
the family law case of Carlsson VS.
Carlsson?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Which party did you represent?
10
A.
Ulf Carlsson.
11
Q.
Were the Carlssons getting divorced?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
Did the case go to trial In early March 2006?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
And who represented Mrs.
16
A.
Charlotte Keeley.
17
Q.
Have you tried other divorce cases in
18
Carlsson?
Sacramento County?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
How many?
21
A.
I'd say one to three a year.
22
Q.
Since the early 1990s?
23
A.
Yeah.
24
Q.
In your experience,
25
when do judges typically
stop for the day in family law trials?

' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1r;
RE CJF NO.
185 - 4/1/09 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
212
A.
Typically they try to be out of there by
2
4:30.
Q.
Have you ever had an occasion where a trial
4
went beyond 4:30?
A.
That was not uncommon.
Q.
How long have you gone?
A.
The longest one was until 6:00.
Q.
And does this going past 4:30 happen on many
occasions?
A.
I'd say half to three-fourths of the time.
11
Q.
Now,
12
in the Carlsson trial,
who was the court
reporter for that trial?
14
15
A.
Robbi Joy.
Q.
Had you ever met Ms.
Joy before the Carlsson
trial?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
When did you meet her?
18
A.
Well,
the first time I met her or spoke to
19
her directly was in a matter of Hargett.
20
Hargett.
21
Q.
And what year was that?
22
A.
It was the early 2000s.
23
Q.
And where was that case?
24
A.
Placer County.
25l'____Q_.__N_O_w_,_h_a_d_you requested Ms.

.
IN RE CJF NO. 185
Mary Jo
Joy to be the
4/1/09--------------
213
reporter in that case?
A.
No.
Q.
When you need a reporter,
getting one?
A.
I tell my secretary to call Diamond Court
Reporting.
a court reporter.
one,
Sacramento County,
And this is for counties which do not have

Like Eldorado County always has
so we don't have to call.
reporter they will send.
11
have a court reporter.
12
tell them what we need.
14
Q.
A.
they have a court
But on trials,
you have to
So my secretary calls them to
So that trial in Placer County was the first
time you ever met Ms.
15
Or if i t ' s a trial in
the motions,
10
13
how do you go about
Joy?
called the court reporting service last
16
week just to make sure.
17
18
prior to the Hargett trial.
19
a case called Crumbach,
20
apparently they had sent her,
21
to the court reporter.
22
always talk to the court reporteri
23
and do their job and leave.
24
met her or talked to her at those two motions.
25
rting service in
Q.
And she -- the court
cates that she did two motions
C r
There was two motions on

u-m-b-a-c-h.
but I
So to say I
So I
So
don't always speak

"met" her,
I don't
they just show up

don't know that I
Who arranged to have a court
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
214
Carlsson trial?
A.
My secretary.
Q.
Did you specifically request Ms.
Joy for that
trial?
A.
No.
Q.
Is she a personal friend of yours?
A.
No.
Q.
Have you ever socialized with her?
A.
No.
10
Q.
Have you ever been to her home?
11
A.
No.
12
Q.
Has she ever been to your home?
13
A.
No.
14
Q.
What was the main issue in the Carlsson
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
trial?
A.
I would say it was the -- single-most main
issue was the four-plex.
Q.
So what properties were involved in this
case?
A.
There was real property.
There was a family
residence and this four-plex.

Q.
Before the trial,
were the parties In
23
agreement regarding distribution of those two items of
24
real property?
25
A.
You mean like -
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
215
Q.
As to who should be awarded those two
2
properties.
3
A.
Prior to trial?
Q.
Right.
A.
No,
there wasn't any agreement.
6
don't know if you'd call it an agreement.
7
Well,
I think one
was agreeing that they could keep the residence,
but
8
they wanted a particular price on it.
10
Q.
Your client, Mr.
Carlsson,
did he want both
properties to be awarded to him?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
And we're just talking about before the trial
13
began?
14
A.
Correct.
15
Q.
Before the trial began,
did Mrs.
Carlsson
16
agree that both properties could be awarded to your
17
client?
18
A.
19
record.
20
the four-plex.
2]
the family residence.
22
Q.
You know,
I
I'd have to look back at the
can't recall if there was an argument about
Okay.
know she didn't
ect to him having
There's a binder in front of you with
23
a number of tabs in it.
24
Page 3 of that exhibit,
25
Please turn to Exhibit 8,

Bates Stamp 305.
Does that page spell out Mrs.

~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
Carlsson's
4/1/09--------------------~
216
position on who should be awar
properties?
d those two
Actually,
that page describes their value;
correct?
A.
Mm-hmm.
Q.
Their appraised value.
last page of the document
If you turn to the
strike that.
Turn to Bates Stamp 307.
10
A.
Mm hmm.
11
Q.
Does that document state how Mrs.
12
wanted the two properties awarded?
13
A.
Yes, it does.
14
Q.
How did she want them awar
15
18
d?
To whom did
she want them awarded?
16
17
Carlsson
A.
awar
She wanted the four plex and the residence
d to Mr.
Q.
Carlsson.
So before trial,
they were all
they were
19
both in agreement that both properties should go to
20
Mr. Carlsson?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
When trial started,
23
did those positions
change somewhat?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
How did they change?
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
411109--------------------~
217
Ms.
A.
sold,
have to look at the transcript.
"this is what happened" if it didn't happen that way.
can remember.
No,
no.
She wanted -
I'd
I don't want to say
know there was a change in position.

Did your client change his position about
Q.
6
7
as I
Carlsson wanted
either of those properties?
A.
Yes,
Q.
How did he change his position?
10
A.
I think he wanted the four-plex sold.
11
Q.
Is that unusual,
I believe he did.
for one of your clients to
12
change their position about how property should be
13
award
14
?
A.
Well,
in family law,
that's not unusual for
15
parties to go back and forth about who's going to get
16
what property.
17
Q.
18
transcripts.
19
12,
20
The other binder in front of you is the trial

Would you please turn to Page 26.
Line
you're speaking.
A.
Mm-hmm.
21
22
THE WITNESS:
23
MR.
BLUM:
24
with the testimony,
25
four-plex,
Yes.
I'm sorry.
(Reading) :
I
Is that a yes?
Yes.
"Before we get started
just want the Court to know the
which is probably going to be a major
L------------------------IN RE CJF NC. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
218
amount of testimony,
four-plex awarded to h
BY MR.
Carlsson does not want the
"
THE WITNESS:
Mr.
Mm hmm.
BLUM:
Q.
Is that a yes?
A.
Yes.
Q.
So you're explaining to the Court your client
I'm sorry.
Yes.
has changed his position on that;
10
A.
Yes.
Q.
At Line 17:
Yes.
correct?
"The wife has asked that it be
11
sold,
12
there won't be any need -- we won't need any testimony
13
on the value of the four-plex."
14
and he agrees to have the property sold.
A.
16
THE WITNESS:
18
19
BY MR.
Q.
Do you see that?
Mm-hmm.
15
17
So
Is that a yes?
Yes.
BLUM:
So at this point,
are you trying to shorten
the trial to some extent?

I don't know that I would say I'm trying to
20
A.
21
shorten it.
22
doesn't want it -- normally when neither party wants
23
something,
24
the fair market value -
25
fair market value.
I'm just telling the Court that since he
it's sold.
~-----------------------IN
So if you're going to sell
l ' +
L.
whatever it sells for is the
You don't need to evaluate the

RE CJF NC. 185
4/1/09 - - - - - - - - - - - - - "
219
value.
Q.
And t
would negate the need to call
experts to testify on what the property was worth?
A.
Correct.
Q.
Now,
did Mrs.
beginning of trial,
A.
No.
Q.
So then,
Carlsson agree to that at the
say,
"Okay,
sell the four plex"?
think she objected.

consequently,
you had to introduce
evidence about its value?
10
A.
Correct.
11
Q.
Please turn in the transcript to Page 28.
12
Line 10, Ms.
13
MR.
MURPHY:
14
MR.
BLUM:
15
Q.
Keeley is speaking.
(Reading):
I'm sorry.
You said page what?
28.
"Mr. Carlsson has stated that he
16
wanted that awarded to him as well," and that's
17
talking about the house,
18
However,
19
properties,
20
Mr.
21
see that?
"which we are not opposed to.
if he cannot afford to keep one of the

certainly Ms.
Carlsson would encourage
Carlsson to sell the Gold River property."
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q.
The Gold River property was the house;
24
2.5
At
Do you
correct?
A.
Correct.
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CcJF NO.
185
4/1/09 - - - - - - - - - - - - - '
220
Q.
sold?
3
4
A.
They were proposing that be sold instead of
the four plex.
Q.
5
6
So they were now urging that the house be
Whereas,
previously,
the house could go to Mr.
both parties agreed that
Carlsson?
A.
Correct.
Q.
Did the fact that there was now a dispute
about what to do with the house
10
A.
You mean the Gold Hill residence?
11
Q.
When I
12
say "house," I mean the family home as
opposed to the four-plex.
13
A.
Okay.
14
Q.
The fact that there was now some dispute
15
about what to do with the house,
16
ot
17
trial that may not have been otherwise?
did that make some
issue -- did that make some issues relevant at
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
Such as?
20
A.
Well,
Mr.
Carlsson is living in the house.
21
He obviously has to get other
22
i t ' s sold out' from under h
23
minor child in this case.
24
try to keep the house
25
keep it,
keep the house,
a different house if
And there was also a
So,
typically,
the courts
there are -- if one party can

so the children have the
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
221
least amount of disruption.

Q.
What was the pretrial length of the estimate
of the trial?
A.
I did not have a copy of that to look at,
I have no independent recollection of what was put
down.
Q.
In the exhibit binder in front of you,
turn to Exhibit 6.
the question of what the time est
10
please
Does that document help you answer

te was?
(Witness examines document. )
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
What was the time estimate?
13
A.
It looks Ii
14
Q.
This estimate was actually made by
15
so
Ms.
it was two days.
Keeley?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
Did you file a separate document with a time
18
She prepared it.
estimate?
19
A.
No.
20
Q.
I'm going to walk you through this trial
21
transcript very quickly.
22
front of you,
You have the trial binder in
the trial transcript binder.
23
24
Did this trial begin on March 2,
25
A.
2006?
Yes.
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09 - - - - - - - - - - - "
222
Q.
Did the trial go all day that day?
A.
I'm not sure.
know we
one full day and two half days,
was which.
Q.
Okay.
with Mrs.
think we had
so I'm not sure which
Turn to Page 30.
This trial began
Carlsson testifying?
7
8
A.
That's what it looks like,
Q.
10
you're cross-examining Mrs.
11
say:
12
remember saying that?
"Your Honor,
yes.
On this page,
Carlsson.
At Line 18,
I'm going to have to eat."
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
Do you remember what time it was?
15
A.
16
Q.
And in response,
you
Do you
believe it was noon or after 12:00 noon.

Judge McBrien,
at Line 20:
17
"The reason I'm going forward is because tomorrow
18
afternoon,
19
statutory preference.
20
complete i t by noon tomorrow."
have a continuing trial that has

So I'm ensuring we're going to
Do you see that?
21
A.
Mm-hmm,
yes.
22
Q.
"Otherwise,
23
right now."
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
Did you want a mistrial in this case?
~------------------------IN
we may as well call a mistrial
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
223
A.
No.
Q.
Why not?
A.
It was very expensive for the parties to redo
the thing allover again.
that's not good for your practice,
trials.
Q.
The next page,
And you just don't want
137,
to have to redo
Line 9,
you had just told
the judge about two experts coming the next day?
A.
Mm-hmm.
10
Q.
That's yes?
11
12
THE WITNESS:
13
MR.
14
"All I
15
noon,
BLUM:
Yes?
Yes.
At Line 9,
the Court responds:
am telling you is if i t ' s not completed by
i t ' s a mistrial."
16
Q.
Do you see that?
17
A.
Mm-hmm.
18
Q.
So that would have been after a day and a
19
20
21
22
Yes.
half of trial?
A.
If this first day of trial was a full
y;
correct.
Q.
Then again at Line 14,
"The Court:
I don't
23
intend to argue with you either.
I'm telling you
24
exactly what my availability is.
If you want a
25
mistrial at this point,
you're welcome to it."
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09 ----------__________----..l
224
Do you see that?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Throughout this trial,
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
was Judge McBrien
threatening you with a mistrial?
A.
don't know if I
would use the word
"threat."
What words would you use?
Q.
Did he keep
raising the possibility of a mistrial?
A.
Yes,
Q.
On this page here,
he did do that.
136 and 137,
do you recall
11
what the judge's tone was when he was raising the
12
possibility of a mistrial?
13
14
15
16
It was 1 ike ma t t e r
A.
what I'm saying.

Q.
fa c t ,
"T his is jus t
This is what I'm doing."
That's what's going to happen,
to be a mistrial if you don't finish on time?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
Did the judge seem irritated?
19
A.
Irritated at what?
20
Q.
An
21
22
there's going
hing.
MR. MURPHY:
Objection,
withdraw the objection.

THE WITNESS:
23
24
impatient.
25
BY MR.
relevance.
I'll
I want to hear the answer.
I would say he was very
BLUM:
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185 - 4/1/09 - - ..... - - - - - - - - - - - . 1
225
Q.
Why would you say that?
A.
Because normally,
judge doesn't make this

It's not
statement about a mistrial this many times.
uncommon for a
end of the trial and you're trying to wrap it up and
you don't want to go another day.
for the judge to say,
mistrial in this case,
judge to mention maybe once towards the
"Well,
It's not uncommon
you know,
do we?"
we don't want a
You say "the judge."
10
Are you talking about Judge McBrien or judges in
11
general you've tried cases before?
12
THE WITNESS:
Judges in general I've tried
13
cases before.
14
end of the case where they are trying to wrap it up,
15
and the judge might make the comment to -- and it
16
doesn't happen in every case; but on occasion,
17
bench has said it to make sure you realize there's a
18
finite amount of time here,
19
things done.
20
BY MR.
21
Q.
Usually it doesn't come up until the
the
to please move on and get
BLUM:
Moving us through the trial transcripts,
22
Page 150, Ms.
23
Mr.
Keeley calls her real estate expert,
Sutcliffe -- Sutliffe?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
And that testimony -- turn to Page 196.
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
On
4/1/09----------------------~
226
that page they rest their case,
their case-in-chief?
A.
Yes,
Q.
And you began your case-in chief?
A.
Yes.
Q.
It indicates Joseph Mayo was your first
it appears so.
witness?
A.
Yes.
Q.
What was the relevance of his testimony?
A.
Well,
the four-plex was a major dispute,
10
about who had an interest,
11
community or if there was a third-party interest in
12
the four-plex.
13
in the four plex.
14
Q.
And Mr.
if it was just the
Mayo was claiming an interest
Please turn in the transcripts to Page 260.
15
It's after the yellow tab.
16
of trial;
This is the second morning
correct?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
And you're explaining to the judge about a
19
witness named Minkoff?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
His availability?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q.
What was the problem with Mr. Minkoff's
24
25
availability?
A.
Mr.
Minkoff was undergoing chemotherapy,
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
.185
and
4/.1/09------------------~
227
was on one day a week -- or maybe it was more than
one,
again and again and again.
would have chemotherapy,
weather,
really had to schedule his testimony right before he
went to the chemotherapies so that
and,
but on a particular day,
so to say,
you know,
then he would do i t
And every time that
he would be sort of under the

So we
for a number of days.
be able to testify.
could be alert
So there was a
10
problem with getting h
11
with the day that it would be because of his special
12
needs.
13
Page 262,
Q.
here physically and a problem
Line 13,
Minkoff's situation.
you have been explaining
14
Mr.
15
"Ms.
16
motion
17
was raising the possibility of a mistrial;
18
correct?
Keeley,
The Court responds:
don't know whether this is a slow
or a mistrial or what."
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
Starting on Page 267,
21
of witnesses to testi
22
A.
23
witnesses.
24
Q.
25
direct ex
Yeah.
So again,
the judge
is that
did you call a series
very briefly?
I think there were several small
Going to Page 302,
at Page 302,
did you begin
nation of your client?
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO.185 -
411109--------------------~
228
A.
Well,
looking at the transcript,
that I actually recalled him.
it says,
on
302,
So maybe I had him testify earlier or maybe that's a
mistake in the transcript, but I don't really have an
independent recollection because it was so long ago.

So -- on Line 19.
Were both parties
sworn in at the start of trial before being called to
testify?
MR. MURPHY:
Your Honor,
10
reflect he was recalled.
11
and was under direct examination.
12
and briefly recalled.
13
He's back on redirect.
14
BY MR.
15
16
the transcript will
He had been previously sworn

He was interrupted
So the transcript is accurate.
BLUM:
So this is a continuing direct of your
Q.
client?
17
A.
That's what it looks like,
18
Q.
I apologize.
20
219 is where
Mr. Carlsson's testimony begins.
21
22
I misspoke.
19
yes.
MR.
Q.
BLUM:
Thank you,
Your Honor.
Line 24.
You state:
23
"Your Honor, we just want to check on the completeness
24
of the exhibits to make sure there is signatures on
25
them."
At Line 27,
the Court responds:
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
"Your time is
4/1/09--------------------
229
waning,
2
3
So again,
was the judge telling you you had
very limited time left?

A.
but go ahead;
Well,
yeah.
And I took it as him telling me
was wasting my time.

Q.
At Page 342,
it indicates Ms.
Keeley began
nation of your client?
cross-ex
A.
Yes.
Q.
And then at 359,
10
A.
Mm-hmm,
11
Q.
At Line 11,
12
let me just
13
said you filed this statement or document with the
14
Fair Political Practices Board,
15
commonly called a Statement of Economic Interest?"
16
Line 11
yes.
the Court is speaking:
for a point of clarification,
"First
when you
is that a document
Do you see that?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
So the judge was asking about the Statement
19
of Economic Interest?
20
A.
Correct.
21
Q.
To clarify which documents they were?
22
A.
Mm-hmm.
23
Q.
Is that yes?
24
25
THE WITNESS:
Yes.
Yes?
I'm sorry.
L------------------------IN R E CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
230
1
2
3
BY MR.
BLUM:
Q.
Page 362, Line 15, you refer to a declaration
of disclosure?
A.
Yes.
Q.
What is that?
A.
It's a
judicial council form that you must
exchange with the other side before you are allowed to
have your divorce.
declaration of disclosure,
And it has attached to it the

income and expense
10
declaration,
11
declaration regarding material facts of property or
12
debts and of material facts regarding any business
13
opportunities that may have been presented to either
14
of the parties before or after separation.
15
Q.
a schedule of assets and debts,
Okay.
If you'll turn the page to Page 363,
16
at Line 21,
17
to the question you asked at Line 6.
you're getting an answer from your client
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
Okay.
20
and a
Correct?
So you're in the midst of redirect of
your client here?
21
A.
That's what the transcript indicates,
22
Q.
And then at Line 25,
the Court speaks:
23
going to have to adjourn this proceeding.
24
awaiting me downtown.
25
at 1:30."
yes.
"I
am
They are
So we will resume on Thursday
Correct?
~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
231
A.
Yes.
Q.
So that was the end of the session for that
day;
right?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Had you completed redirect of your client at
that point?
A.
No.
Q.
There were additional questions you wanted to
ask him?
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
Same page,
at the bottom line,
Line 28,
the
12
Court still speaking:
13
copy of your 2004 -- whatever this document is that
14
you filed with the Fair Political Practices Commission
15
with the Secretary of State."
"I would ask you to bring a
Do you see that?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
So the Court was asking you to bring those
18
documents -- or asking your client to?
19
A.
20
Q.
At Line 6,
think it was the client he was asking.

Ms.
Keeley says:
"Your Honor,
21
would need copies of that document for 2002,
22
Do you see that ?
23
24
25

would ..
we
2003."
You read "we
"
MR.
BLUM:
"Would we ..
"
L-------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 - 4/1/09-----------------------
232
1
2
3
THE WITNESS:
BY MR.
Yes,
that's correct.
BLUM:
The Court responds:
Q.
"You should probably
bring them for those years,
but you also might want to
talk to an attorney who specializes in that area
because there are potential penalties far beyond what
we're talking about here today."

Do you remember the judge saying that?
8
9
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
What did you think when you heard the judge
11
say that?
12
13
MR.
Objection,

relevance,
Mr.
MR.
17
19
BY MR.
Q.
What is the
Blum?
16
18
Your Honor.
Relevance.
14
15
MURPHY:
BLUM:
I ' l l withdraw it,
Your Honor.
Thank you.
BLUM:
The judge refers to an attorney who
20
specializes in this area.
21
in this area;
You were not a specialist
correct?
22
A.
In family law?
23
Q.
Well,
he's talking about somebody who might
24
be able to give him advice about potential penalties
25
as a result of what's on those documents.

' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE C,JF NO.
185
You weren't
4/1/09----------
233
an expert in that area?
A.
Correct.
Q.
So after the judge had made this request,
don't even practice that law.
did
you do anything to comply with this request?
A.
The request was made of the client.
So
6
you're asking me if I did anything about it?
Well,
did you att
Q.
client?
A.
Yes,
Q.
to get counsel for your
did.
It's after the next
11
yellow tab.
At the bottom of the page,
12
judge says:
"Did he bring the documents with him?"
13
And your response is:
14
on disability.
15
says:
16
documents?"
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
What did you think when the judge used the
19
"He never went to work.
He doesn't have them."
He is
The Court then
remember that.
word "violated"?
MR.
MURPHY:
Objection to relevance of her
thought process.
22
23
MR.
24
25
the
"So he has violated my request to bring those
20
21
Line 28,
BY MR.
BLUM:
Well,
Mr.
Blum?
let me reword the question.

Thank you.
BLUM:
~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NC. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
234
Q.
Did this concern you,
phrased this,
A.
the way the judge
the "violated"?
Well,
yeah.
1 thought perhaps maybe he
had misheard or something,
and that there was a violation of his order.
what 1 thought.
Q.
ma
10
and he had made an order
And would that have concerned you,
That's
had he
an order?
A.
Well,
yes,
because it would have been a
direct contempt of my client for not bringing them.
11
Q.
12
say it,
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
So had you inte
15
suggestion?
16
A.
"The way 1 heard you
it was a suggestion that he bring them."
reted this as an order or a
1 never heard it as an order.
1 heard him
17
saying that he would like them and he should bring
18
them.
19
wasn't stated,
But 1 didn't perceive it as an or
r.
Q.
21
about this.
22
continue to insist on receiving these records?
24
25
A.
It
tfyou are ordered to bring them."
20
23
On Pages 367 to 369 is further discussion

Does the judge continue -- did the judge
Yeah.
There was quite a bit of discussion
about the records.
Q.
At Page 369, Line 17,
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
you state:
"1
185 -- 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1
235
this is all on the record.
don't know
suppose
what to do in a situation like this,
actually asking him to produce evidence which might
incriminate him,
and i t ' s not even the opposing side
presenting it."
And the Court's response was:
"Ms.
the possibility of contempt?"
Huddle,
am I
when you're
to take that as a no,
placing you in
Do you see that?
8
9
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
Were you concerned when the Court mentioned
11
the possibility of contempt?
12
A.
I was extremely concerned.
13
Q.
What was your reaction?
14
A.
Well,
15
thought about my children seeing me
in jail.
16
MR. MURPHY:
17
18
THE WITNESS:
Objection.
This is irrelevant.
Overruled.
And what effect that would have
19
on them,
if I would potentially lose my license to
20
practice law because I had directly violated a
21
and was thrown in jail.
22
disturbing to hear it.
23
BY MR.
It was very,
very
judge
very
BLUM:
24
Q.
Did you perceive this as a threat?
25
A.
Yes,
I perceived it as a thr
L------------------------TN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09--------------------~
236
potentially be put in jail if I didn't comply with
what he wanted.
Q.
Please turn a few pages to Page 374.
guess, actually,
Page 373,
short on some preliminary questions."
Mr. Minkoff on the stand right now,
did want to ask,
the Court -- I want the Court to be aware of
10
the dialogue begins at the bottom of
Line 27.
You state:
"Your Honor,
I got cut
You had
by the way.
because you do judge demeanor,
"I
I want
Mr. Minkoff's condition so that that can be factored."
11
Do you see that statement?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q.
What -
14
A.
I'm sorry.
15
Q.
What were you talking about at that point?
16
A.
Well, Mr. Minkoff was very ill.
see it.
He was
17
wearing a mask.
18
if I asked questions about certain things,
19
would be an immediate objection as irrelevant or
20
whatever it might be.
21
have somebody on the stand in his condition and the
22
way he looked,
23
where my line of questioning was going so that we
24
wouldn't end up with a bunch of objections as
25
irrelevant and have to argue about it.
And
just didn't want
knew that
that there
And because it was unusual to
felt like I
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
should tell the Court
I was trying
185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
237
to basically tell it in advance of an objection.
Q.
At Line 3,
the Court responds:
"Ma'am, move
This is not a law school
on with the questioning.
class. "
A.
Yes.
Q.
Do you remember him saying that?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Did you find that comment demeaning?
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
Can you describe the judge's tone of voice
11
Do you see that?
when he made that statement?
12
A.
It was like a parent scolding a child.
13
Q.
So you felt he was scolding you,
15
A.
16
Q.
Why did you find that belittling?
17
A.
You know,
14
berating
you?
felt belittled is what I
felt.
my client was there.
There was a
18
whole courtroom full of witnesses.
19
making me look like,
you know,
20
school or something;
I don't know what I'm talking
21
about.
22
Q.
Please turn to Pa
23
you the sequence here.
24
your real estate appraiser,
25
A.
387.
felt like he was
should go back to
Again,
On that page,
I'm showing
did you call
Pakhtun Shah?
Yes.
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09---------------------
238
Q.
On Page 442,
Line 10, Ms.
Keeley finishes her
questions of your expert?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Then at Line 13,
there any way I
room?"
you state:
"Your Honor,
is
can get a break to use the lady's
Do you see that?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Do you remember this?
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
Line 15,
the Court responds:
"You know
11
you're approaching a mistrial."
12
haven't even been able to talk to the gentleman who
13
went to work to get the records you requested.
14
returned.
15
Court responds:
16
a break?"
17
the lady's room.
18
after that point in the transcript.
Your response is:
don't know what he has to say."

"Okay.
He has
The
Is that why you're asking for
Your response is:
"No.
did need to use
We have been here" -- it's cut off
19
A.
Mm hmm.
20
Q.
That's yes?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
Had you had a recess yet that day?
23
A.
You know,
"I
recall that.
I would have to read the transcript
24
to see if there had been one ahead of time,
25
was -- this trial was not proceeding as usual.

L-------------------------IN RE CJFNO. 185
but this
We
4/1/09----------------------~
239
weren't getting u
truncated.
record to see if there was a prior break.
need a break.
even more reasons why 1 needed a break,
be more satisfied with me asking for a break.
So I
MR.
the witness?
away,
MR.
BLUM:
also indicated there was
BLUM:
We'll refer you to an exhibit in
THE WITNESS:
BY MR.
Turn to Exhibit
Okay.
BLUM:
Do you recognize the document?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
Did you write up this document?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
SO before trial began,
22
c.
see it.
Q.
21
that he would
think the judge had taken it
15
20
But I did
Is there one of your binders for
the Respondent's binder.
13
14
I would have to read the
but here.
11
12
thought if I
MR. MURPHY:
10
would
did you ask for a
continuance?
A.
Let's see.
the day before,
Shortly before.
It looks like
yes.
23
Q.
Why did you ask for a continuance?
24
A.
25
would say the reasons are as stated in the
declaration of my client.
1 remember there was some
L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185
4/1/09--------------------~
240
last-minute -- this third party on the four-plex
was -- I think had sued the parties or had been
served,
that point with the third party trying to intervene.
Q.
and I thought it had become a major issue at
Was your request for a continuance
granted?
A.
It was denied.
Q.
So as we've seen,
trial starting March 2nd;
10
A.
Correct.
11
Q.
Once it
12
gan,
A.
Okay.
14
Q.
-- line 15
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
were you still -- strike that.
- the Court says:
minutes to 4:00."
18
this point.
19
room-
20
A.
21
Q.
22
25
correct?
Page 443.
17
24
you went ahead with the
Back in the trial transcripts binder
13
23
nied or
"We'll see you at two
So he's taking a recess here at
You've asked if you can go to the lady's
Yes.
and he's taking a recess here.
Do you recall what you did during this
recess?
A.
know I went to the lady's room.
like I did speak with Mr. Mayo.

~-----------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185 -
It looks
And I probably spoke

4/1/09--------------------~
241
to my client.
sure.
Q.
Okay.
would say those three things for
On Line 26 of the same page,
this is
after you ended the recess?
A.
Yes.
Q.
"Your Honor,
think we're going to get some
agreements on the record to shorten things."
you state:
Ms.
Keeley in this regard?"
10
Ms.
Keeley says:
11
check stubs she has handed me can be admitted into
12
evidence without any foundation."
"Can I
have one minute to speak with

The next page,
Line 1,
"I have agreed to let -- the three
Do you remember this?
13
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
So at that point,
16
did you and Ms.
Keeley try
to resolve some issues so you can shorten the trial?
17
A.
We did that during the whole trial.
18
Q.
Throughout?
19
A.
That was always an issue,
20
21
22
And then
not have a mistrial,

Q.
of how to basically
make sure we didn't come back.
The next page,
445,
Line 19,
was there some
issue of a car repair bill for $5,900?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
Did you walve that issue at this point?
25
A.
My client waived it.
L--------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185 -
4/1/09----------------------~
242
Q.
"Your Honor,
consume too
you
concerns about a mistrial?
And you state on Line 19 and 20:
on the car repair bill,

(sic)
it will just
and may risk a mistrial."
your client waive that issue because of the
A.
Yes.
Q.
On the following page,
briefly ask your expert,
redirect.
Mr.
446 through 447,
Shah,
A.
Yeah.
11
Q.
Then on the bottom of the page,
Ms.
you
some questions on
10
12
So did
That's what i t appears to say.

447,
Keeley recalls her expert in rebuttal?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
By the way,
see that.
during a
recess in this trial,
15
did you have a conversation with Ms.
16
transcripts?
Joy about the
17
A.
The court reporter,
18
Q.
Do you know when you had that conversation
19
with Ms.
20
A.
yes.
Joy?
Well,
can remember it was in the hallway
21
between the courtroom and the bathrooms.
22
Judge McBrien's courtroom is the farthest one at the
23
end the hall,
24
sort of like two thirds of the length of the building
25
down.
and the bathroom is past the elevators,
So at some point during the trial,
~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
we both went
4/1/09--------------------~
243
to the bathroom.
And on the way there -- she came out
of the courtroom;
ln the hallway.
came out of the courtroom.
She told me
Objection.
MR.
MURPHY:
answered the question.
please.
THE WITNESS:
8
9
10
BY MR.
Hearsay.
Sustained.
Okay.
BLUM:
Joy tell you?
11
MR. MURPHY:
Objection.
12
13
Just checking to see if we're awake?
14
MR.
Q.
BLUM:
Hearsay.
Sustained.
just thought I'd ask.
It's
getting late.
16
THE WITNESS:
We did have a conversation.
17
think that was your question.
18
BY MR.
Yes,
we did.
BLUM:
19
Q.
On Page,
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
-- you begin questioning Mr.
22
You've
Wait for another question,
What did Ms.
15
It was
of the transcript,
457
Sutliffe again
at this point.
23
A.
Ye s.
24
Q.
Mrs.
25
A.
Yes.
Carlsson's expert?
L . - . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - T N RE CtJF NO.
185 -
4/1/09-------------1
244
Q.
And on Line 7,
you ask him:
about his inaccuracies?"
capital approach right here.

Had Mr.
Answer:
"You're talking
"Yes.
What page are you on?"
Sutliffe at that point testified that
there was some mathematical error in Mr.
appraisal of the four-plex?
A.
This income
can't remember exactly.
Shah's
That rings a bell,
now that you mention it; but there was some
calculation
- mathematical calculation,
10
them up or dividing them or whatever.
11
mathematical error.
12
or at some other point,
13
about that.
14
Q.
like adding
It was just a
I don't know if it was right then
On Page 459,
but I do remember something
are you questioning Mr.
Sutliffe
15
about the error he alleges to be in your expert's
16
report,
17
A.
18
of the inaccuracy?
It looks
transcript,
yes.
That's what appears in the
yes.
And at Line 21,
19
Q.
20
math error?"
21
A.
Correct.
22
Q.
Line 22,
23
you asked:
"What was the
he explains the mathematical
error-
24
A.
25
Q.
Yes.
correct?
~------------------------IN
RE CJF NO. 185
411109--------------------~
245
And on Page 460,
don't disagree with how he did it;
there is a math error?"
A.
Yes.
Q.
He responds:
Line 6,
you ask him:
"You
you just think
You asked him that?
"There's too much in there.
disagree with a lot of what he did,
assumption,
error leads to a different conclusion of value than
he's got here,
because of the error.
maybe 90 to $100,000."
11
testimony?
12
A.
Not independently,
was testimony about it;
14
i t ' s there.
but I
Q.
Okay.
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
Why?
18
A.
Well,
19
amount,
20
value one person owes the other.
22
do remember there
Did that testimony concern you?
because if your expert is off by that
it could dramatically affect,
like,
the dollar
Did you know going into the trial that your
expert had a math error in his report?
23
A.
24
Q.
On Page 460,
25
It's off by
and the transcript indicates
15
Q.
And his math
Do you remember that
13
21
but using just his
there is a math error here.
10
Mr.
don't believe so.
Sutliffe,
Line 18,
and you state:
you
n
RE CJF NO. 185
just excused
will call Mr.
Shah
to I
4/1/09--------------------~
246
explain the situation."
Do you see that?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And then he is called at Page 461?
A.
Yes.
Q.
And you're asking here,
Line 14:
"Can you
explain to the Court your income capitalization
approach and how that reached a value?"
expert responds:
correct. II
IIYeah.
I made a math error.
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
13
A.
don't know that I
making the statement,
15
issue with the math error.
16
indicates that's what was said,

Q.
Yeah.
20
Q.
Page 462
23
And the transcript
so I believe it.
committed an error?
A.
22
remember there was an
Do you remember your expert admitted that he
19
21
but I
remember the person
14
18
He's
Do you see that?
10
17
And your
Sounds right.
recess for the day_
perhaps this is a good moment to

It's 4:58.
It wasn't your
intention to finish this witness today?
24
MR.
25
until late tonight.
MURPHY:
Not unless you want to stay
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09----------------~
247
No.
That's okay.
didn't know where you were anticipating stopping.

Okay.
We can recess for the day,
be back on the stand first thing in the morning.
THE WITNESS:
THE WITNESS:
MR.
THE WITNESS:
10
11
12
and she'll
BLUM:
Yes.
What t
9: 00.
Okay.
Is that okay?
That's good.
Better than 8:00.
Yes,
better than
8 : 00.
(T
noted:
4:58 p.m.)
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - '
248
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ss .
2
3
I hereby certify that the foregoing
proceedings in the within-entitled cause occurred at
the time and place herein named;
transcription is a true record of the proceedings as
reported by me,
and a disinterested person,
10
that the
a duly certified shorthand reporter

and was thereafter
transcribed into typewriting by computer.
11
further certify that I am not interested in
12
the outcome of the said action,
13
nor related to any of the parties in said action,
14
to their respective counsel.
15
16
17
18
N WITNESS WHEREOF,
hand
~~~_j_7~ _____ ,
nor connected with,

nor
I have hereunto set my
2009.
~~~~~~~~
19
SANDRA LEHANE,
20
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
C.S.R.
7372
21
22
23
24
25
L - - - - - - - - - - - - - I N RE CJF NO.
185
4/1/09--------------------~
249
INDEX
PAGE
2
3
OPENING STATEMENT
(BY MR.
MURPHY)
5
6
WITNESSES:
7
8
10
JUDGE PETER McBRIEN
DIRECT EXAMINATION
CROSS EXAMINATION
(BY MR.
(BY MR.
BLUM)
28
MURPHY)
184
BLUM)
211
11
12
13
SHARON HUDDLE
DIRECT EXAMINATION
(BY MR.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
' - - - - - - - - - - - - T N RE CJF NO.
185 - 4 / 1 / 0 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - . l
250

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE

JUDGE PETER J. McBRIEN

CJP NO. 185

HEARING BEFORE SPECIAL MASTERS

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL REPORTE:R

CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER NO. 7372

155 Orr Road

Alameda, California 94502

Honorable Dennis A. Cornell

Honorable Gail A. Andler

Honorable Denise de Bellefeuille

Superior Court of Santa Barbara County

RE CJF NO. 185 -

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

This is the initial appearances.

Please state your appearances.

with Valerie Marchant,

also for the

Murphy on behalf of Judge McBrien,

are present with counsel.

Let's take care of some of our housekeeping

chores that I assigned to you in the pretrial

appears to be the Examiner's witness list,

other one is the

just kind of talking here.

We have some binders up here.

There are two different

And we have a master exhibit list.

If you want to correct me,

Attached to the witness list

there is a paper clip on there

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

We have two black binders up there

with our exhibits.

understanding is there are no objections to the

exhibits with one exception.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

Other than those

you don't object to the admission of any

We stipulate to the admission,

Appellate Court opinion.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

15 and 16 and the

Does that have a number?

object to Exhibits 15 and 16.

object to the Appellate Court decision,

What is your objection to Exhibit

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

that you're really trying to avoid?

obviously an official record that can come in under

I don't think it can,

Watley versus Cantrell Green Packa

Second District Court of Appeal Decision,

And I can site the Court to the case of

where the Appellate Court decision was attempted

to be used to establish the facts set forth in the

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

you're trying to avoid are the factual conclusions

contained in the opinion?

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

to the fact that there was an appeal,

and the decision being what it was?

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

for that limited purpose,