THE ROBING ROOM

Wow. Some of these comments are illustrative of why people with agendas should not post about judges. U.S. Magistrate Judge Brown is hardly a shill for either the plaintiff's bar or the defense bar. I primarily do defense work. There have been times when she had ordered me to turn over the documents, and other times where she has denied motions to compel. I have found that she is at her best when she is dealing with attorneys who actually know what they are doing and not looking to churn files over stupid issues that require no briefing or argument. For example, just because you don't agree about the meaning of a document, doesn't mean it is not relevant and, therefore, exempt from production. Read Rule 26 again, preferably with your eyes open. She has no discernable bias, prejudice or whatever other colorful euphemism one would use to describe a judge as being 'unfair.' Of course, she is human and has faults, as do we all. For instance, I could do without her patronizing comments that she sometimes makes to practitioners (mostly toward younger lawyers) about practicing in 'federal court.' For example, 'in federal court, you must file an appearance.' 'In federal court, summary judgment is a big deal.' Really? Thanks for sharing, judge. I suspect that such comments are attributable to her elitist pride in being a 'federal' judge. Judge Brown is clearly bright and can do the job when she doesn't let her ego get in the way. Her biggest problem appears to stem from her lack of confidence in handling a courtroom, possibly due to the fact that she had little, if any, lead chair trial experience. That she used to work for the same law firm in which Judge Shadur was a partner is no substitute for trial experience. Conversely, she has far more experience in complex litigation than many of the lawyers who appear before her. No judge ever has the complete package. Don't rant about Judge Brown just because she doesn't fit your paradigm of a 'judge.' Neither do most of the others in that courthouse. There are two components to her job: (1) conduct settlement conferences; and (2) referee discovery disputes. She is a seasoned mediator and able to get cases that should settle, settled. You don't have to be Perry Mason to settle a case. I dare say, nobody is ever entirely happy with a discovery ruling, so if 90% of the litigants who appear before her say that she splits the baby on discovery, the response should be 'yawn.' Give the lady a break. Some of you need get a clue, a better hobby or both. If you insist on slamming judges, or anybody else for that matter, man up and sign your posts. Sincerely, Wouldn't you like to know . . .