oops.
Portrait
of
embarrassed
young
blonde
woman
holding
hand
on
head
and
grimacing
with
awkward
expression,
being
guilty
and
hoping
that
nobody
will
know
about
her
fault.
Emotions
concept
After
the
hideous
events
of
September
11,
2001,
we
spoke
of
a
“new
normal”
for
Americans.
Are
we
now
in
a
new
“new
normal”?
Have
we
normalized
authoritarianism,
given
all
that
has
gone
on
over
the
past
week
or
so?
Ever
since
January
20?
What
does
that
mean?
While
we’re
thankfully
not
totally
in
authoritarian
grips,
at
least
not
yet,
there
have
been
disturbing
signs
of
that
normalization,
especially
here
in
the
past
week
in
Los
Angeles.
And
no,
Los
Angeles
has
not
been
on
fire,
except
for
those
two
destructive
fires
that
swept
through
part
of
Los
Angeles
city
and
county
in
January.
And
no,
except
for
the
approximately
one
square
mile
curfew
in
downtown
LA
(since
lifted),
life
in
La-La
Land
goes
on
without
any
hiccups.
Jimmy
Kimmel
quipped
last
week
that
Los
Angeles
has
more
destruction
and
trouble
after
any
of
our
sports
teams
wins
a
championship.
And
yes,
the
National
Guard
is
still
here
and,
yes,
ditto
700
or
so
Marines.
Sorry
47,
but
L.A.’s
death
has
been
greatly
exaggerated
once
again.
So
let’s
focus
on
the
mundane,
the
ridiculous,
and
of
course,
the
“what
were
they
thinking,”
that
grips
our
profession
nonstop.
Doing
that
shows
that
the
world
still
turns
in
some
fashion.
Let’s
start
with
former
San
Bernardino
County
District
Attorney
Michael
Ramos,
who
lost
his
re-election
bid
in
2018.
He
has
stipulated
to
a
six-month
suspension
of
his
law
license.
For
what?
For
deleting
text
messages
and
emails
in
the
context
of
criminal
charges
that
his
office
brought
and
could
not
prove
beyond
a
reasonable
doubt.
If
you
are
like
me,
you
hate
doing
litigation
holds
and
collecting
emails
and
texts
and
producing
them
when
demanded,
especially
when
there
could
be
one
or
more
“smoking
guns”
that
do
not
help
your
case
and
may
tank
it
altogether.
However,
the
duty
of
preservation
is
paramount.
Every
lawyer
is
required
to
know
the
rules.
Am
I
right
or
am
I
right?
Ramos
claimed
he
was
ignorant
of
record
keeping
laws.
Wait!
What?
He
was
the
DA
for
16
years
and
didn’t
know
about
record
keeping
laws?
Really?
He’s
been
in
practice
for
more
than
30
years.
What
about
the
requirement
that
the
government
turn
over
all
evidence
it
has
to
the
defense?
What
about
the
requirement
that
the
turnover
must
include
all
kinds
of
evidence?
Ramos’s
stipulation
has
yet
to
be
approved
by
the
California
Supreme
Court.
I
wonder
if
the
court
will
approve
it,
given
that
he
was
the
district
attorney
for
16
years
with
an
office
of
more
than
200
deputy
DAs.
He
was
also
a
public
official,
as
well
as
an
attorney.
The
California
State
Bar
determined
that
Ramos’
excuse
lacked
credibility.
No
surprise
there.
Switching
now
to
the
appellate
court,
just
because
you’ve
retired
as
an
appellate
justice
doesn’t
necessarily
mean
that
you
get
a
hall
pass.
California’s
Commission
on
Judicial
Performance
now
has
its
sights
on
retired
appellate
justice
William
J.
Murray,
Jr.
He
retired
from
the
Third
Appellate
District
bench
in
Sacramento.
In
its
20-page
complaint
and
with
another
20
pages
of
exhibits,
CJP
alleges
that
the
now
retired
justice
Murray
engaged
in
willful
misconduct
in
office,
“persistent
failure
or
inability
to
perform
his
duties,
conduct
prejudicial
to
the
administration
of
justice
that
brings
the
judicial
office
into
disrepute,
improper
action,
and
dereliction
of
duty
within
the
meaning
of
article
VI,
section
18
of
the
California
Constitution,
providing
for
removal,
censure,
or
public
or
private
admonishment
of
a
judge
or
former
judge.”
Clearly,
former
judges
are
not
exempt.
Among
the
charges
alleged
is
that
Murray
delayed
issuing
a
significant number
of
decisions
from
2012
to
2022.
California
law
requires
that
an
appellate
decision
be
issued
within
90
days
of
submission
to
the
court.
In
failing
to
comply
with
that
requirement
the
former
justice
allegedly
violated
various
canons
of
judicial
ethics.
And
last,
but
not
least,
the
Wall
Street
Journal
reported
last
week
that
the
State
Bar
of
California
has
opened
an
investigation
into
Gloria
Allred’s
firm
amid
claims
from
dissatisfied
clients
who
alleged
that
they
were
pressured
into
settling.
Sounds
like
these
claims
may
be
what
every
litigator
who
has
ever
settled
a
case
calls
“settlor’s
remorse.”
Over
the
years,
I
had
a
number
of
cases
with
Allred’s
partners.
We
resolved
every
case
at
mediation.
Both
sides
were
unsatisfied
but
litigation
was
over.
My
client
paid
more
than
it
wanted
(kicking
and
screaming
all
the
way
with
an
occasional
tantrum)
and
I
imagine
that
the
firm’s
clients
received
less
than
they
thought
they
deserved.
So
what
else
is
new?
While
I
know
nothing
about
any
other
issue
mentioned
in
the
Journal’s
reporting,
I
do
know
that
a
good
resolution
means
both
parties
are
pissed
and
unhappy.
That’s
as
it
should
be.
Jill
Switzer
has
been
an
active
member
of
the
State
Bar
of
California
for
over
40
years.
She
remembers
practicing
law
in
a
kinder,
gentler
time.
She’s
had
a
diverse
legal
career,
including
stints
as
a
deputy
district
attorney,
a
solo
practice,
and
several
senior
in-house
gigs.
She
now
mediates
full-time,
which
gives
her
the
opportunity
to
see
dinosaurs,
millennials,
and
those
in-between
interact
—
it’s
not
always
civil.
You
can
reach
her
by
email
at
[email protected].