2025 JudICIAL RECALLS

Thomas C. Falls is a Judge for the Los Angeles County Superior Court in California. He was elected to the Municipal Court in 1996 and was subsequently elevated to the Superior Court after the unification of the courts in 2000. He has run unopposed since.  

Presiding in the Gang Unit for most of his career he treats female litigants as though they are the second coming of Ted Bundy - taunting them with jail and contempt over astronomical fees of $44,000 for bizarre discovery referee reports from ADR. 

(No photo of Falls anywhere on the internet)

February 22, 2024:  Case reassigned to Judge Steven Cochran

Update July 21, 2023:  Judge Falls now presides in the Clara Shortridge Criminal Justice Center in the Magistrate Division. According to the clerk in this department this division is for judges to "sign search warrants."  

May 23, 2023: Court comes back to enter another Order:  The case is now assigned to Judge Michael Stern....

May 12, 2023, New Order: In comes Supervising Judge Lewis (out of Pomona) to move the case to Mosk for reassignment. 

Plaintiff reports the outrageousness of how a new judge could come in and within 10 days read 8 motions - and that it was obvious Judge Falls would, "write the Order." 

May 9, 2023, the day Wilson Elser files a "vexatious" brief alleging it was "requested by the court" when it was not (on behalf of LaSalle Investment Management, Inc. and Kyle Dupree) where they don't allege "frivolous" cases, or that Hart lost her prior case, they have the audacity to allege "discovery abuses" under Section 391.b(3).  A firm who has ignored 2 years of discovery, refused to turn Kyle Dupree over for the second part of his deposition and begged the court for a discovery referee to bankrupt Hart has the audacity to try and label HER vexatious. This same day a Notice goes up that Judge Falls is leaving Department O on May 22, 2023, 10 days before the "final" appearance on June 5, 2023, where he was going to most likely terminate the case against Hart and ignore her terminating motions against Sullivan, Legacy and LaSalle.  The Order states that the hearing is still  set for June 5, 2023 with the new judge (coming from Department R) also with a criminal background.

Sometime in May 2023, Hart sends the March 22, 2023 transcript to  various judges at LASC.

April 10, 2023: In comes Judge Michelle Court to enter an Order stating, "in the interest of justice" Hart v Sullivan will stay with Judge Falls.  No one asked for it to be moved with Hart v LaSalle. Clearly Court spoke to Falls.    

March 24, 2023, yep, Judge Falls "actually" related both cases AND took the case away from Judge Salkin in Van Nuys. One can only guess whose idea that was.   Hart had to then waste her 170.6 challenge on Falls who accepted after alleging that service on him dated March 24, 2023 was served in "Dept. R," which of course never happened, as to excuse the late scanning of the personal service.  Stanley Mosk has yet to reassign, but told Hart over the phone that the cases should not have been related without a Notice of Related in the second case, which was not done.  The madness continues....

Hoping it has not already been planned to send Hart v LaSalle Property Fund Reit, Inc. to a "friend" of Falls. We shall see....

March 22, 2023, he "relates the cases and states he is considering ending the case against Hart due to allegedly  "not turning over a 2016 settlement" for "300 days" and her "insults" on the court.  Whenever Hart asked Judge Falls for examples of her insults, his response, "go read the record."

March 16, 2023 Update: Hart v Sullivan, et al.

March 16, 2023, Hart files Opposition to Sullivan "Notice of Related Cases." If the cases are related Hart will file a 170.6 to remove Falls. It will be quite transparent if Falls relates the cases and refuses to leave the latter case. 

On March 15, 2023, Judge Cormac Carney enters dismissal of Hart v Falls, et al., despite a  March 9, 2023 email from the federal court stating that a "new order" was coming in. After Hart repeats the email to the Steven Parminter investigator at the State Bar, the case is "dismissed." (Now before the 9th Circuit).

On March 14, 2023 Sullivan filed a "Notice of Relates Cases" to try and link up Hart v LaSalle Property Fund Reit, inc. and Hart v Sullivan.  Courtney Sullivan is not a defendant in the Hart v LaSalle Property Fund Reit, Inc. matter.

On March 13, 2023, Judge Falls held an OSC re: sanctions (again) for allegedly not being deposed despite a Protective Order being filed after she was harassed at the first 4.5 hours (21-hours ordered to date). Falls took Hart's Protective Order off calendar without even reading the transcript and despite the case being less 9 defendants and despite he striking sections of the complaint since the original order to sit for 21 hours. Hart is required to sit for 21 hours "because she does not answer yes or no to a question." Falls also made it clear that plaintiff has engaged in "egregious" breaches of orders. The other order breached  is as to the defendants having yet to enter her home to photograph her home when her unit has nothing to do with the lawsuit and there is a pending Protective Order, and have YET to even notice entry. Naturally terminating sanctions would then be warranted. 

This case is a Netflix documentary in the making. 

Ashan Peiris (now "of counsel" we all know what that means) on behalf of Kyle Dupree &  LaSalle Investment, in an 800-page declaration alleged that Hart was not allowed to write LaSalle Property Fund Reit, Inc., despite not being a defendant in Hart v Sullivan. 

Hart is about to lose 2 years of discovery because she cannot afford pay JAMS $1000 an hour. Falls was supposed to take back discovery over a year ago and instead will now punish Hart by trying to cut off her case. 

On March 9, 2023, the Courtroom Deputy Clerk in the Hart v Falls matter writes Hart, "An order will be issued shortly giving defendant's chance to file a reply." This led plaintiff to believe that the anticipated dismissal was delayed. 

On March 8, 2023, Hart files Hart v LaSalle Property Fund Reit, Inc. at Van Nuys Courthouse. It is assigned to Judge Salkin.

On March 2, 2023, Justices Lui, Ashmann-Gerst and Chavez denied Hart's third writ and supporting Amicus  from Consumers Attorneys of California. Apparently an unprecedented order of a 21-hour deposition     

(Cahill Construction Co., Inc. v Superior Court (2021) 66 Cal.App.5th 777, 787) making Hart pay for all court transcripts, striking her Objection to an unlawful inspection of her home as a "flagrant abuse", making her pay $44,000 to reimburse Sompo International and Axis Capital for the most bizarre referee reports, and stating, "It's not like I can actually point a gun at your head and take your check book" is not evidence of bias and did not warrant a neutral judge reviewing her Third Verified Statement to Disqualify Falls before Falls improperly struck it.

On February 24, 2023, Falls suddenly corrects his September 8, 2022 Order leading Hart to believe that the $16,500 due to reimburse Sompo International for the most bizarre ADR report, was not due until March 24, 2023.

On February 23, 2023, Hart goes in ex-parte to get clarity on the OSC; Is it civil, criminal, coercive or punitive? Falls denies as not exigent and does not tell her that it is not a contempt hearing. Falls also refuses to correct his September 8, 2023 defective order. 

On February 14, 2023, a day that was set to hear Hart's Motion for Terminating Sanctions against Sullivan and Legacy, which he continued to a later date, ordered plaintiff to pay $1800 for Jim Vaughn to review Wayne Norris' declaration as to the work he did on the cell phone extraction and the protocol entered into between the parties, which was not an order of the court. This was a continuance from the prior improper contempt of October 26, 2022.  The problem is, there is no order that instructed how any extraction could take place and the court cannot hold a party in contempt over an agreement between the parties. (Martins v Superior Court (1970) 12 CA3d 870, 876-877, 90 CR 89.  Despite plaintiff bringing $23,000 to court to make partial payment to reimburse billion dollar insurance carriers for ADR's insane reports, it was "still a breach" of the prior vague court orders and he puts yet ANOTHER OSC on calendar.  This entire case before Falls has consisted of bogus and deceptive sanction hearings instead of DISCOVERY hearings.  Hart asked to please correct his September 8, 2022 order telling Hart to pay Legacy defendant's allocation fees to LaSalle Investment Management, Inc., lawyers. He would not. Apparently $8000 was not enough for Sompo International.

On January 20, 2023, Bubion runs to tell the court that Hart has yet to pay reimbursement of $26,500, and asks to move Hart's pending Motion for Terminating Sanctions. Judge Falls complies of course and then states in the Minute Order that it was done on his own motion. At this hearing he allows KTS and Jamie Sternberg out of the case on Summary Judgment allowing them to maintain her personal identifiers they obtained without her permission - ignoring various consumer protection laws.

October 26, 2022, without reading Hart her rights, holds her in contempt (Final Order entered on November 1, 2022) alleging her computer consultant and she "willfully" went outside the court's July 28, 2020 Order because he ran tests to make certain the 2017 cell phone belonged to the defendant, as it appeared wiped with little to no data, and for listening to 2 audio files in the date range permitted by the court and for opening gmails that were transferred by Jim Vaughn's office after the extraction in order to look for what information was stolen from Hart's tenant file.  None of this was a breach. Falls ordered she pay $750 to the court, to destroy all extraction reports (which have data of crimes being committed to include perjury) and to turn over all devices to the court. He did not seem to care that the defendant had wiped her phone of the gmail that was the basis of the inspection despite 2 court orders not to destroy evidence in the case. 

September 25, 2022 Update: And the madness continues...

On May 26, 2022, Falls enters an order that if Hart settles with some of the defendants she can keep those funds and would not have to pay the allocation from it (the wacky discovery referee  fees for reports that consist of "see no. 1" and "see no, 8" as it's legal conclusions). 

Hart then enters into a $120,000 settlement.  On June 6, 2022, Falls finds out that he has been added to the recall committee.  

On June 12, 2022, Falls picks JAMS as the new referee over Hart's objection. Referee Swart is $1000 an hour. As though any lawyer in the case could afford to pay $1000 an hour.  Thankfully they have their insurance  carriers to engage in years of discovery games;

 Sompo International and Axis Surplus. 

No other judge would ever hand such outrageous orders.

On June 24, 2022, Falls enters an unprecedented order that plaintiff has to pay 90% of the referee fees (billed before ADR did any work) despite decades  of precedent  - it's clearly retaliation for Hart's First Amendment right to recall a judge and file a lawsuit. 

Then, on September 8, 2022, days after the settlement is paid,  Falls now states that plaintiff has to pay allocation from the settlement.  

Purely insane.

Falls also buys into the lies that LaSalle Property Fund Reit, Inc., is not the real owner of the property despite public records and a custodian of the city authenticating the business license.  What does LaSalle and their lawyers at Wilson Elser come up with? The business tax application and application that the property has been working under for 4 years,  is "hearsay" despite Evidence Code Section 1414, and despite the fact that they have been paying taxes under the license number for 4 years.  You can't make this up.  They actually accused Davin Ross, the former property manager,  of essentially committing fraud and lying in the documents he submitted to the city on LaSalle's behalf.  They said he was "not authorized," to file the application with the city as though he came up with the name on his own.  lol.  And Ross' lawyer, Justin Bubion, remained silent.  This is all on the record. 

This is how biased Falls is - won't even look at the obvious or the facts before him.

When a judge has a financial interest in a case like stopping the plaintiff who intends to recall him - might be a good time to recuse yourself. 

As thought this was not enough, he sanctioned Hart for writing Kyle Dupree about the property.  Two court orders stated that she could and Dupree was rerouting Hart's emails to JLL back to him, taking steps to make sure that he received the emails.  

On July 28, 2020, Judge Traber ordered Sullivan's devices extracted due to she stealing copies of Hart's PII from her tenant file at 1:00AM.  The extraction takes place in October 2020.  Evidence is seen in the date range proving Courtney Sullivan made false claims against plaintiff and lied that she did not have records that she did.  Now, 2 years later, her counsel, Justin Bubion, taking advantage of the crazy orders, seeks to get Hart sanctioned alleging she and her consultant "went outside the protocol." This did not happen but the truth does not matter in Department R.  

Hart then opposes the motion on August 31, 2022, with a sworn declaration from her consultant.  Bubion replies to the Opposition.  Falls then states on September 12, 2022, "Plaintiff did not oppose the motion despite being on notice."  lol

During ex-parte communications on August 31, 2022,  Falls grants a property inspection into her unit for no reason (and allows counsel to take photos of her belongings). He then strikes her Objection when she discovered what took place.  Hart unfortunately now has to sue the court under U.S Section 1983.  

This whole thing is nuts.

This isn't a lawsuit this is a war between a judge who wants to stop Hart's advocacy.  

Let this be a lesson to all voters - be careful who you vote for and look into all judges on the ballot. Exposing a corrupt system is worth the fight.

Hart has also been ordered into 21 hours of a deposition or face "terminating sanctions". The first 4  1/2 hours (on a day noticed for Defendant Deanna OBrien) were comical -  Bubion asked more questions about this recall than the actual law suit.   

You really can't make this stuff up. 

Due to CJP's relationship with Bacigalupo -  of course they are turning a blind eye to it all. 

Lifetime Movie?  Discovery Channel?  Netflix? 

Feel free to monitor the case.  

Trial set for March 2023. Should be very entertaining. 

July 20, 2022, UPDATE: Judge Thomas Falls held a hearing where only Justin Bubion appeared. He then agreed to move up a meritless motion to hold plaintiff in contempt that was to be heard in late November, to now be heard on September 12, 2022. The motion is filled with perjury and has been sent to The State Bar. On July 20, 2022, Judge Falls finally granted a Good Faith Application to settle with some of the defendants. The very next day another motion popped up filed by the LaSalle Defendants (Kyle Dupree and LaSalle Property Fund) asking for plaintiff to be sanctioned "$20,000" for communicating with her landlord and reporting feces all over the garage due to a waste pipe leaking for almost one year. An exhibit (Exhibit"H") in the motion is forged and has been turned over to The State Bar who are currently investigating Steven Parminter.  It is obvious that the court is working with defense counsel to now chip away at the settlement. 

There is no end to the madness that is LASC.

Unprecedented (and retaliatory) orders are being made in this case. On July 15, 2022, Judge Thomas Falls struck "13" declarations filed in the case by the plaintiff.  His reason (days before a writ is going to be filed on his June 24, 2022 Order), they are each "frivolous" and "meant to intimidate the court," while not citing to any line in any of the 13 declarations. Why would a judge strike a declaration 7 months after it was filed?

On July 7, 2022, we were sent the following:

"Judge Falls is a judge in Pomona. Because I do not wish to deal with people like Judge Falls, I rarely, if ever, take a case in Pomona. His reputation precedes him -- it is not good." 

We will not repeat what public defenders have told us about him, but his orders in Hart v Sullivan, say it ALL.

Why is Judge Paul Bacigalupo, Judge Salvatore Sirna and Judge Eric Taylor helping this alarming judge strip a litigant's rights away and destroy the record?

June 30, 2022, UPDATE:  Denied request to stay referee orders pending writ, denied permission to file a concise outline (pretty sure he did not know what this is) denied request for mediator in depositions due to counsel's bad conduct (said nothing about the conduct described in ex-parte application but continues to admonish plaintiff on her conduct),  denied request to consolidate 8 July motions to save plaintiff money on court reporters, refuses to comply with September 4, 2020 Order that plaintiff only pay one referee admin fee. Refuses to hear a motion on plaintiff's economic inability, and alleges that plaintiff can afford a referee because "someone" previously helped her on a writ (a pro bono firm).

June 24, 2022, UPDATE: Judge Falls has now ignored decades of precedent and ordered a pro per litigant of less than modest means to pay a total of $36,000 of discovery referee fees despite ADR abrogating court orders, allowing for document dumps and acknowledging that they did, "not know current code."  The presiding judges at LASC all knew what Judge Falls was about to do and supported this outrageous order. This order is also in direct contradiction to a prior September 4, 2020 Order, which stated allocation would only happen if, "fair and just under all circumstances." Section 1023 does not even permit one side to pay the majority of fees. This man must be removed from the bench.

He has also NOW sent the referee matter to JAMS who is $1000 an hour over plaintiff's written objections.  This man is vindictive and out of control and not FIT to sit on the bench. 

April 21, 2022, UPDATE:  Judge Falls denied a Good Faith citing a paragraph not in the FAC. He has also denied a Fee Waiver request because if granted, he would have to take back discovery in the case. 

He is not allowing a pro per litigant to prove economic inability and has ignored 4 declarations evidencing health issues (already on the record) and that she is being monitored by various doctors, and will continue to be for the next 4 years - and naturally, needs her money for expensive healthcare/monitoring.

Despite decades of precedence, Section 639 and CRC, Rule 3.922, he chose a NEW referee over objections, and is contemplating allocating $46,000 onto a pro per for a discovery referee who had NO business being a referee. 

Motions filed by the likes of Justin Bubion and Steven Parminter were not an affirmative showing, and they unilaterally decided that  a DENIED discovery request was worth $91.00 and $178.00 each. This case has become a freak show.  

ADR should never have taken the matter because of a 2016 conflict issue with the plaintiff and because Referee Thomas had not sat on the bench in 35 years, and acknowledged he did, "not know current code." 

He also did not know of the new 2020 Code of Civil Procedure that did not permit for a litigant to point to a document dump and DENIED supplemental responses. Now a pro per is faced with having to pay for this madness.

Parminter, on behalf of LaSalle,  actually submitted invoices that were voided by ADR. 

LaSalle responds to admissions with "argumentative" instead of a straightforward admission or denial. Now a pro per is faced with $1000 an hour to a new referee.  Parminter asks the court to teach this pro per litigant a lesson that she needs to "meet and confer," after he ignored  a year's worth of Meet and Confer letters, and was given three opportunities to supplement.

After Ret. Judge Polis withdrew (the second discovery referee) due to the improper referee order, Falls now orders the plaintiff to pay an $850 Admin Fee, for a new referee (Ret. Judge Swart of JAMS) over objection, and despite a prior 2020 Order stating the plaintiff only had to pay ONE admin fee, with the defendants having to pay any future admin fees. Swart also demands 13% of each hour to JAMS. 

The presiding Judge and Supervising Judges at LASC continue to turn a blind eye.  While their duty is to the public they are too busy protecting each other.

Falls continued the Good Faith, which was to be heard on January 6, 2022 (since denied), on calendar for months, due to Ashan Peiris (Wilson Elser) the Associate representing LaSalle Investment, submitting a Notice of Continuance on January 3, 2022, alleging "unavailability" between December 21, 2021- January 9, 2022 (a Sunday).  Naturally one would file such a document 13 days after the fact, and in the wrong Courthouse.  

Peiris continued to email about the case on January 5, 2022, while alleging unavailability - not the brightest bulb.  After the plaintiff pointed out his stupidity, suddenly, on January 7, 2022 (the day after the hearing was to be heard), all parties started to receive an "out of office" email from him. 

Who can explain such incompetence and gamesmanship? And what kind of Judge would buy into the lies, and perjury? Judge Falls. 

If you are female, and a pro per, you have no chance at Los Angeles Superior Court.  

Falls is attempting to stop the plaintiff in her tracks so she is too fearful to file a Motion to Compel because she might get stuck paying $46,000 for a hearing. The law says that a litigant is entitled to the court without a fee and that a declaration of economic inability is sufficient (Hood v. Superior Court). Hart reported Falls to the CJP (there is a supposedly an investigation), and served him with a Verified Statement to Disqualify him, which of course, he struck.

Judges at LA Superior Court continue to exhibit bias and chauvinistic tendencies, and do not care what the law is, nor do they comply with California Rules of Court. 

This must stop. 

The public must work together to get rid of these horrendous Judges once and for all.  

Next time this could be you.

#1Million5

July 2023 Update:  

Judge LaForteza returns to criminal court, but the damage has been done. 

UPDATE:  Judge LaForteza recused himself from this case on October 4, 2021, after much damage to Hart v Sullivan, et al.  As retaliation by LASC, and the Supervising Judge, the case has been moved to Pomona.

LaForteza was appointed to the bench by Arnold on November 5, 2008. He has run unopposed since. He must seek re-election in the June 7, 2022 Statewide Direct Primary Election to be installed for another term in 2023.  

In August 2010, LaForteza was referenced in an article on sfgate.com about donations, and gifts, given to then District Attorney, Steve Cooley. LaForteza made it to the list for giving Cooley $100 worth of cigars. 

His dismissal of a defendant in  People v. Gonzalez (2015), was revered. 

 In 2018, People v. Vasquez was retried due to his improper jury instructions, and now in 2021, he has made his way into civil court in Van Nuys. 

He replaced a great judge, Judge Traber, who suddenly left the department in February 2021.

During his short period of time in Department U he has ruled as follows:

Suggested in an order that a pro per litigant hire a service to go through a 14,800 video dump despite the videos not being responsive to a prior court order, Struck 3000 documents from the docket as to help opposing counsel who filed 642 documents they alleged were "personnel files."

Has ignored CCP, section 2023.080(a).

Struck a Verified Statement to Disqualify served on him for clear bias four hours after being served.

Refused to order a third party, RealPage, to remove plaintiff's personal identifiers from their website despite never being given authority.

Refused to direct the Legacy defendants to repair defects that put tenant lives in danger.  

Permits counsel to lie to him on an ongoing basis - even turns counsel's deceptive declaration statement into Orders.

Permitted Justin A. Bubion ("Bubion") who left Traub to go to Quintairos, representing Courtney Sullivan and Legacy Partners, Inc., to file his own client's SSN w/o sanctions, despite Rule 1.20.

Despite evidence before him that the plaintiff engaged in a year's worth of meet and confer efforts as to a defendant deposition, and despite oral arguments proving that the court misstated facts in the tentative accusing the plaintiff of "prematurely filing a motion" on July 2, 2021, when the docket clearly shows she waited till July 9, 2021, he ruled against her MTC. He is very dismissive and will not change his tentatives regardless of the evidence before him.  

It has been noticed by many that he is consistently ruling against a pro per litigant despite the facts before him and appears to have some form of animosity towards her - yet refuses to remove himself from the case.  A judge should not rule from a place of hate. 

LaForteza says on the record, "discovery responses are never part of the record," and therefore he was going to strike all filings in the [referee] matter, and did. While they are still available on the "document" section of the docket (wiped though from the case access), the only document that has actually vanished, is a mere Declaration filed by the plaintiff on June 3, 2021.  He did this to help Bubion and because the plaintiff opposed the sealing. The docket clearly shows that there are discovery responses in the parties IDC briefs filed in August 2020, plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions which was GRANTED in October 2020, and her CMC statement filed in April 2021. Yet suddenly, he is going to strike Bubion's filings on June 4, 2021, because discovery responses were attached. 

This is absurd! 

On August 31, 2021, after finally ruling on the discovery referee matter he affirmed Judge Thomas from ADR Services, Inc., outrageous 175-page of recommendations only tweaking 3 of them. He alleged in his tentative made into an Order that plaintiff's objection's were "meritless." After permitting all parties to file w/ the court all documents they wanted considered for the August 31, 2021, hearing,  he turned around and ignored all of plaintiff's July 30, 2021, objections and declaration. Discovery called "basic" by judge Traber and the reason why she ordered a referee with defendants paying all costs, was now not permitted. Documents proving harassment, retaliation, unlawful late fees, perjury and habitability issues were all now not going to be turned over. Over 200 "I don't recalls" and refusal to admit or deny was all acceptable to Judge LaForteza who when asked for clarity, as his ruling was confusing - he said he does not "give advise." He granted a MTQ based on two words in one of the RFP and when asked to address the rest of the requests, and why he was denying the entire subpoena...he refused to explain. Judge LaForteza is vindictive and incompetent and must be removed from the bench. His rulings are ripe for appeal and now the entire case will have to be retried because of him. 

Similar conduct is detailed on  The Robing Room by a poster on June 1, 2021. 

He even allowed Bubion to get away without filing substitutions with the court despite CRC, Rule 8.36(b). 

LaForteza is not ruling on the merits - he takes a line in a motion and conforms it to the ruling and outcome he wants, which is for the pro per plaintiff to lose. This is not the job of ANY judge. If the public were to look at the Minute Orders from Judge Traber, and compare them to Judge LaForteza, one will see a fair judge's perception of the case in contrast with a bias judge on a clear mission.

If judges handled their calendars and ruled according to precedent, Judicial Canon of Ethics, California Rules of Court and the Discovery Act, this madness could be avoided.  Pro per litigants should evade this judge from the outset.

LARecalls will be actively working to expose the conduct of Bubion, Ashan Peiris and Eli Gordon who we believe should be suspended, and or disbarred from practicing law. The State Bar must stop this misconduct, which is unfortunately accepted every day when there is a pro per litigant in a case.

What is transpiring in Department U is pure madness and is the epitome of what is wrong with LASC, and why our judicial elections are so vital.

How long should LaForteza sit on the bench stripping others of their right of access to the court?

#1Million5

Convey joined LA Superior Court as a commissioner in 2002 and was appointed by Arnold in 2010. Convey ran for re-election in 2012 as an unopposed incumbent never appearing on the general election ballot again. His term ends in 2025.  We must recall him now. 

Convey has a very interesting way he runs his courtroom. With his background in insurance defense he appears to empathize with defendants and the carriers. To say he despises self-represented litigants would be quite the understatement. Even when presented with new facts - and evidence, he denied a plaintiff's right to amend her complaint. He then forced her to respond to a demurrer filed by an employee of a suspended corporation after mediation and settlement. Convey could have simply taken the motion off calendar as required per CA Rules of Court, Rule 3.1385(c)(3) or the lawyer in question [Bart Ring] could have withdrawn the motion. Instead the self-represented litigant was forced to file a response/opposition to the demurrer. His courtroom staff then allowed this same lawyer (via a mere phone request) to move up a protective order hearing seeking sanctions of $6400 against the self-represented litigant (after settlement) by two months without a motion to shorten time, his approval or the parties in the case stipulating. He never even sanctioned the lawyer for doing so. This new date did not even permit for proper service under CCP Section 1005. He then denied (and struck) the plaintiff's motion to disqualify him for bias. This seems to be a pattern of his. He is currently permitting a cross-complaint (in the same matter) to be litigated after no responsive pleading was filed by the cross-defendants (or default entered) for 15 months. Convey never even put an Order to Show Cause hearing on calendar as transcripts lodged in 2019, confirm.  While the case settled for $300,000...this judge has no business being on the bench.

Public records show a case filed by a self-represented litigant against him (a lawyer himself); Art Bufford v. Michael J Convey, et al. (2007). The stories about Convey are endless.  It is believed that he is one of the judges who egged on Falls terror of Hart in Hart v Sullivan as retribution for being posted here. 

He tragically even issued a restraining order against singer Elizabeth Le Fey (appearing in pro per) when in fact she was physically assaulted by the petitioner. You can read more about her case below.  

How much more damage will we allow Convey to cause? 

Judge Timothy Dillon was appointed by Governor Brown in 2015. His term is set to end in 2022. We must remove him from the bench now, not let him sit for another three years.

Judge Dillon is a member of the Executive Board of the California Judge’s Association (CJA). 

There have been a number of potentially corrupt and indecent judges associated with the CJA.

In a recent case of retaliatory eviction as reported by KNOCK-LA, Judge Dillon overturned a jury’s decision in favor of the tenant causing the tenant to be evicted despite evidence that the tenant was being targeted.   

Judge Dillon has been accused of ex-parte communications, which is defined as “any communication between a judge or juror and a party to a legal proceeding or any other person about the case, outside of the presence of the opposing party or the opposing party's attorney.”  

In one specific instance, a parent informed us that Dillon admitted on the record to doing so. 

Dillon is also accused of not reading motions or declarations and making judgments without being fully informed.

In another case, Judge Dillon stated on the record at least three times that he was aware of, and or in awe of, the petitioner’s boss, “a great doctor” and did not recuse himself.  This unfounded admiration of a gastro doctor who moonlights as a movie producer, lead to the judge bullying the actual victim, the respondent, over having the audacity to copy this “great doctor“ on ONE email, and blindly believing the petitioner’s testimony, which would later be proven to have been perjured testimony.  This clear bias lead to the respondent reluctantly, and out of great fear, signing a stipulation.  When later presented with proof of perjury obtained in a separate civil suit against the petitioner, Judge Dillon said nothing and did nothing and refused to vacate. 

In fact, Judge Dillon has been accused multiple times of turning a blind eye to perjured testimony allowing litigants with criminal records to walk away unscathed.  Why take the oath if there are no repercussions for lying? 

There have been several reports against Judge Dillon to the CJP who are supposed to be an independent state agency responsible for investigating complaints of judicial misconduct and judicial incapacity and for disciplining judges. Unfortunately they did nothing. 

You can read a few of his reviews on The Robing Room.  

Judge Timothy Dillon believes he will face no consequences for his years of alarming conduct. 

We are here to prove him wrong.