You are on page 1of 250

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.
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

MR.

BLUM:

Thank you.

We have two black binders up there

with our exhibits.


SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

All right.

My

understanding is there are no objections to the

exhibits with one exception.

Mr. Murphy?
MR. MURPHY:

8
9

10

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:


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.
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

16

Appellate Court opinion.


MR.

19

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

24

MR. MURPHY:

25

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

13

Okay.

So what

14

you're trying to avoid are the factual conclusions

15

contained in the opinion?

16

MR. MURPHY:

17

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

The appellate opinio

BLUM:

So you have no

objection to the description?


No,

BLUM:

Your Honor.

MR.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

wanted clarification for our discussion.


SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

MURPHY:

No,

Your Honor.

L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T N RE CJF NO.

185

Mr. Blum?
4/1/09--------------------~

MR.

should address

Allegations 1B and 1C.


SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.


SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

10

MR. MURPHY:

11

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

12

No,

Any objection?

Your Honor.
The motion will be

granted.

13

Anything else,

Mr.

14

MR.

Your Honor.

15

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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,

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:


any statement,

Mr.

Murphy,

so we

Do you wish to make

at this point?

22

MR. MURPHY:

23

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

witness,

3
4

Mr.

Blum.

MR.

BLUM:

Thank you,

JUDGE PETER J. McBRIEN

having been first du1y sworn, testified as f0110ws:

---000--

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

THE WITNESS:

Peter James McBrien,

M-c B-r-i-e-n.
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.


SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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 -

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Exhibit 10.

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.

Please turn to Exhibit 11.

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.
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

10

Page 423?

11

MR.

12

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

MR.

BLUM:

At least a partial ownership

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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 -
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.)

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:


Mr.

Is that correct,

Murphy?

16

MR.

17

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Page 100.

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,

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

THE WITNESS:

12

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:


BY MR.

14
15

er and

only the clerk

All law and motions,

the judge does?

11

13

apparently,

prepares one.

10

So,

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Page 192.

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.

Please turn to Page 220.

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,

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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?

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

15

MR.

16

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Page 387.

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Page 17.

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?

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

THE WITNESS:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

Of the reporter's transcript.


Of the deposition or

the trial?

THE WITNESS:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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 -

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

20

Your Honor.

Sustained.

BLUM:
Please turn to Page 443.

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,

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:


2

take our second morning recess.

for 10 minutes.

We'll be in recess

(Recess taken.)

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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 ...

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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,

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.
At Line 4 you respond:

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.


SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

"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

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

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

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

13

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

Do you remember that?

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

Please turn to Exhibit 15.


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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

17

22

in the early years,

The magistrate on call would

And I'm on call about three times a year.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

Go ahead.

What

exhibit are you referring to?

24

MR.

25

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.


SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER DE BELLEFEUILLE:

We guys get

it.

20

MR.

BLUM:

21

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:


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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

17

MR.

18

Your Honor.

19
20

BLUM:

Yes,

I have that.

If I may approach the witness,

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Exhibit 18.

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Page 5.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Exhibit 21.

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

request an alternate valuation date?

11

THE WITNESS:

12

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

17

MR. MURPHY:

18

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

Did it appear to you

they were stringing the evidence out?

12
13

THE WITNESS:

They were.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

(Witness examines document.)

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:


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:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Page 366,

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

(Witness examines document.)

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:


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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.
Please turn to Exhibit 35.

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.

SPECIAL MASTER DE BELLEFEUILLE:

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


have no recollection.

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

Please turn to Exhibit 25.

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:


RE CJF NO. 185

Had you requested


4/1/09--------------------~

160

transcripts over the course of your career on

occasion?

THE WITNESS:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Exhibit 24.

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.

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

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,

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

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

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

22

With the clerk's office.


signature

stamp affixed in the clerk's office?

23

THE WITNESS:

24

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

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.
SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

14

afternoon recess at this point.

15

for 10 minutes.

We'll take our first


We'll be in recess

16

(Recess taken.)

17

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

in mind, and we'll go to 5:00 today then.

Sure.

MR. MURPHY:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

have no recollection.

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.
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Exhibit 32.

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:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

10

MR. BLUM:

Sustained.

I'm going to move on to the fourth

allegation.
SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

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

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

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 . . .

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

3
4

frankly.

It's not atypical for

reluctant party,

not my clerk,

but the Clerk of the Court

SPECIAL MASTER DE BELLEFEUILLE:

13

SPECIAL MASTER DE BELLEFEUILLE:


property worked out,

15

Okay.

October,

17

means.

18

third party."

It looks like "first weekend of


But I don't know what that

SPECIAL MASTER DE BELLEFEUILLE:

THE WITNESS:

21

SPECIAL MASTER DE BELLEFEUILLE:


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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

12

(Sotto voce discussion between Special

13

Overruled.

Masters.)

14

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Exhibit 3.

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

We'll take our

second afternoon recess at this point.

minutes.

(Recess taken.)

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:


~------------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-
SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

THE WITNESS:

see.

Over the issue of attorney's

fees or anything.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.


SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:
presumably start at 9:00 a.m.

And the trials

or thereabouts?

L------------------------IN RE CJF NO. 185

4/1/09--------------------~

209

THE WITNESS:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

Right.

Any more questions, Mr.

MR.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:


down,

BLUM:

No questions,

Blum?
Your Honor.
Okay.

Call your next witness,

MR.

10

BLUM:

Mr.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:


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--

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

14

15

Ms.

up.

I'm having trouble hearing.

16

THE WITNESS:

17

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

(Witness examines document.)

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

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

(Witness examines document.)

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?
(Witness examines document.)

7
8

A.

That's what it looks like,

Q.

Please turn to Page 136.

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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?"

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.


SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:

19

yes.

MR.
Q.

BLUM:

Thank you,

Your Honor.

Please turn to Page 314,

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER ANDLER:


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,

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:


relevance,

Mr.

MR.

17

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Please turn to Page 366.

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

23

MR.

24

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

At Line 5 you respond:

"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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

MURPHY:

answered the question.

please.
THE WITNESS:

8
9

10

BY MR.

Hearsay.
Sustained.

Okay.

BLUM:

Joy tell you?

11

MR. MURPHY:

Objection.

12

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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.

Do you remember that?

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.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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:

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

THE WITNESS:

MR.

THE WITNESS:

10
11
12

and she'll

BLUM:

Yes.

What t

9: 00.

Okay.

Is that okay?
That's good.

SPECIAL MASTER CORNELL:

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