17 attorneys seek disqualification of LA judge citing bias, abuse

Seventeen attorneys are supporting a motion to disqualify Los Angeles County Judge Mary Ann Murphy from a case claiming sexual molestation of six schoolchildren by their teacher.

Declarations by the attorneys uniformly describe Murphy as displaying a pattern of hostile, biased, and unprofessional behavior, including favoritism toward defense attorneys and racial prejudice.

"Judge Murphy has a long, well-established history of severe and pervasive abuse of lawyers, courtroom staff, jurors, parties and court reporters," Nicholas C. Rowley of Trial Lawyers for Justice in Ventura, who represents the plaintiffs, said in an email on Monday. "I hope that together we can put a stop to that abuse."

Rowley concurrently filed complaints with the Commission on Judicial Performance and to Los Angeles County Superior Court Presiding Judge Sergio C. Tapia II on Monday.

"Judge Murphy is abusive to lawyers, witnesses, and jurors, in direct contravention of Canon 3 of the California Code of Judicial Ethics. Her behavior from the bench is so extreme and so aggressive that she must urgently be removed from the bench for the protection of the public," Rowley wrote to the commission.

Murphy declined to comment through a court representative via email on Monday, citing Canon 3B(9) of the California Code of Judicial Ethics prohibiting judges from commenting publicly on pending court proceedings.

Murphy, a former federal prosecutor, was appointed to the bench in 1993 by Gov. Pete Wilson. She was reelected without opposition last year.

The plaintiffs in the underlying case are also represented by Trial Lawyers for Justice attorney John A. Kawai in Ventura, Luis A. Carrillo, Michael S. Carrillo and Laura M. Jimenez of the Carrillo Law Firm in Pasadena and Keith J. Bruno of Bruno Nalu in Irvine.

"Everybody that goes into trial expects to have a fair judge and throughout the length of this case me and my clients have never received that, and it's a travesty to the justice system to have to deal with this horrendous behavior during the length of this trial," Michael Carrillo said in a phone call on Monday.

Dana A. Fox and Edward E. Ward Jr. of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP in Los Angeles represent defendant Mountain View School District. They did not respond to phoned or emailed requests for comment by press time on Monday.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of six plaintiffs who say the district knew that the teacher who allegedly molested them was a danger to children but failed to act. A total of 12 victims have since come forward, according to the plaintiffs' court documents. Doe et al. v. Mountain View School District et al., BC712514 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed July 2, 2018).

The district argued that the plaintiffs "have no evidence to support a claim that defendant was on notice of any alleged abuse" in a June 2021 trial brief.

Monday's motion to disqualify and the accompanying declarations focused in part on Murphy's conduct during voir dire for the case, calling it "shockingly prejudicial and openly hostile" and noting perceived favoritism toward defense attorney Fox.

"In full view of prospective jurors, she repeatedly berated plaintiffs' counsel while showing preferential treatment to the defense," the motion read.

Sarah A. Havens of Havens Injury Law Inc. in Solana Beach, who is president of the Consumer Attorneys of San Diego, said she was taken aback by Murphy's conduct while observing the proceedings as a spectator.

"Immediately, Mr. Fox began objecting and the judge would respond with a lot of commentary and reprimanding of Mr. Rowley," Havens said. "Mr. Rowley did nothing wrong. By the time they got to jury selection, Mr. Rowley did not even get a sentence out before the judge interrupted and reprimanded him for mentioning respect in the courtroom. For the rest of the morning, the judge regularly and routinely, sue sponte, interrupted Mr. Rowley with an unrelated lecture as well as commentary and reprimanded him in front of the jury."

"The way that I saw Judge Murphy behave while I was in her courtroom horrified me," Havens added. "I had never been scared in a courtroom before, but my legs were shaking because Judge Murphy seemed so unhinged."

Other attorneys shared anecdotes from previous cases, including sole practitioner Ted B. Wacker of Newport Beach, who said a client of his was so intimidated by Murphy they asked to settle the case.

"The overall demeanor and tenor of Judge Murphy was so disconcerting to both myself and my co-counsel as well as our client that our client did not want to proceed any further with the trial in front of this judge for fear her statements and berating of her counsel had so tainted the jury pool that they could never be fair to our side. So, we elected to settle for much less than we would be willing to just to get out of her courtroom since she was so biased," Wacker said.

The accounts included multiple reports of perceived racial prejudice exhibited by Muphy. Trial lawyer Haytham Faraj of Woodland Hills recalled an incident where he said Murphy berated him for his line of questioning.

"Judge Murphy refused to allow me to explain the purpose of my questioning but allowed my co-counsel to speak who had an Anglo-Saxon name as compared to my ethnic name. Judge Murphy's refusal to allow me to explain my intent behind the question forced me to remain quiet," Faraj said.

Accounts from plaintiffs' attorneys Luis and Michael Carrillo also referenced an incident where they said Murphy used disparaging language toward a Latina attorney from their firm after they took a writ in a previous phase of the case.

"She said on the record that an attorney from my firm, Laura Jimenez, had 'scurried' to the reporter to the get the transcript," Michael Carrillo recounted. "Judge Murphy's use of a verb associated with cockroaches towards a female Latina attorney appearing in front of her did not appear to be accidental, and it made it impossible for anyone viewing the proceedings to believe that justice was being administered in a fair and neutral manner. Taking a writ was our job and we should be respected for doing our job, not punished or insulted."