Judge Chan is actually known to be one of the fairest Judges in my court the San Francisco Superior Court, while no Judge is perfect, it makes you wonder sometimes that Judges are almost all bias, and prejudicial but to what degree?
Three things. First, this is the only case I know with him. He may be fair. One case does not define a resume. Second, I don't think he made the original decision. So, he was handed a mess, but so what, that's the job. Third, I question his wisdom not as much his objectivity. I don't think he wanted to make the difficult decision. He kicked the can
I also do not speak from personal experience but Thygesen my opponent Google Grandpa/DocuSign CEO's son, they disqualified him under CCP 170.6, clearly they believed Judge Chan would rule more favorable in favor of me vs. the other Judges in the San Francisco Superior Court
I would think the judge probably wants them both to cut the blame throwing and just get over it. The thing is, judges don't care that sometimes their actions only make things worse. They can not be wrong. Even getting a judge to admit prejudice and relieve themselves is often impossible. So why do we let this tiny group of people dictate all our actions? Purely threat of false or unjust imprisonment.
I disagree. I think the judge doesn't want to make a determination entirely about who is telling the truth and who is driving the problems, so he leaves the status quo and a problem for someone else.
Maybe, but money is also part of this equation. Maybe I oversimplified my explanation, but it is similar to your argument. Basically, they don't care. If they cared, they would resolve the issues quickly by simply doing due dilligence and applying the law / common sense principles. Just like a judge can't admit they are wrong, they don't bother to ensure they aren't/weren't wrong. It's all about rotating the calendar and making sure everyone gets paid. It's a business.
Judge Chan is actually known to be one of the fairest Judges in my court the San Francisco Superior Court, while no Judge is perfect, it makes you wonder sometimes that Judges are almost all bias, and prejudicial but to what degree?
Three things. First, this is the only case I know with him. He may be fair. One case does not define a resume. Second, I don't think he made the original decision. So, he was handed a mess, but so what, that's the job. Third, I question his wisdom not as much his objectivity. I don't think he wanted to make the difficult decision. He kicked the can
I also do not speak from personal experience but Thygesen my opponent Google Grandpa/DocuSign CEO's son, they disqualified him under CCP 170.6, clearly they believed Judge Chan would rule more favorable in favor of me vs. the other Judges in the San Francisco Superior Court
I would think the judge probably wants them both to cut the blame throwing and just get over it. The thing is, judges don't care that sometimes their actions only make things worse. They can not be wrong. Even getting a judge to admit prejudice and relieve themselves is often impossible. So why do we let this tiny group of people dictate all our actions? Purely threat of false or unjust imprisonment.
I disagree. I think the judge doesn't want to make a determination entirely about who is telling the truth and who is driving the problems, so he leaves the status quo and a problem for someone else.
Maybe, but money is also part of this equation. Maybe I oversimplified my explanation, but it is similar to your argument. Basically, they don't care. If they cared, they would resolve the issues quickly by simply doing due dilligence and applying the law / common sense principles. Just like a judge can't admit they are wrong, they don't bother to ensure they aren't/weren't wrong. It's all about rotating the calendar and making sure everyone gets paid. It's a business.
I agree with that.