CALIFORNIA>FORM

700

STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS

RE~:~~~p '-P ~
FEB 1 6 2012

FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION

Please type or print in ink.

PRACTICES COMMISSION

(MIDDLE)

(FIRSn

(LASn

NAME OF FILER

MA
---~At..IA...... ....... -

f A~~E;5tr~~ER PAGE

A PUBLIC DOCUMENT

12 FEB 24M.i?~ I: 05

GRILLI

ANN

1. Office, Agency, or Court

Agency Name

SANTA CLARA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

Your Position

Division, Board, Department, District, if applicable

SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE

SUPERIOR COURT
~

If filing for multiple positions, list below or on an attachment.

Agency: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Position: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

2. Jurisdiction of Office (Check at least one box)

o State
o Multi-County _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
o City of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

~ Judge or Court Commissioner (Statewide Jurisdiction)

~ County of SANTA CLARA

o Other - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

3. Type of Statement (Check at least one box)

~

Annual: The period covered is January 1, 2011, through

December 31,2011.

-or-

The period covered is ---1---1_ _ _ _ , through

December 31, 2011.

Assuming Office: Date assumed ---1---1_ _ __

Candidate: Election Year - - - - - -

The period covered is January 1, 2011, through the date of

leaving office.

The period covered is ---1-----1_ _ _ _ , through

the date of leaving office.

~ Total number of pages including this cover page: _ .......

4 __

Check applicable schedules or ''None.''

Schedule A-1 - Investments - schedule attached

o
o

~ Schedule A-2 - Investments - schedule attached

Office sought, if different than Part 1: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

4. Schedule Summary
~

Leaving Office: Date Left ---1-----1_ _ __

(Check one)

Schedule B - Real Property - schedule attached

Schedule C - Income, Loans, & Business Positions - schedule attached

Schedule D - Income - Gifts - schedule attached
Schedule E - Income - Gifts - Travel Payments - schedule attached

-or-

None - No reportable interests on any schedule

5. V
M
(

herein and in any attached schedules is true and complete. I acknowledge this is a
I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that th
Date Signed

_2_.1. J--'
. 'i'-J/L-rl--:;.-:---o--_.,---__
_
(month, day, year)

Signature
FPPC Form 700 (2011/2012)
Toll-Free Helpline: 866/275-3772 www.fppc.ca.gov

CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL BRANCH NEWS SERVICE

CJBNS.ORG

YJ

SCHEDULE A-1
Investments
Stocks, Bonds, and Other Interests
(Ownership Interest is Less Than 10%)
Do not attach brokerage or financial statements.

ABBOTT LABS

HEALTHCARE

$10,001-$100,000

ACTIVISION INC,

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

$10,001-$100,000

Stock

AMAZON,COM INC,

CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY

$10,001 - $100,000

Stock

APPLE

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

$10,001 - $100,000

Stock

11/1512011

APPLIED MATERIALS

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

$10,001 - $100,000

Stock

912312011

BHPBILLITON

INTERNATIONAL EQUITIES

$2,000 - $10,000

Stock

Stock

CME GROUP INC,

FINANCIALS

$10,001 - $100,000

Stock

912312011

CARDINAL HEALTH INC,

HEALTHCARE

$10,001 - $100,000

Stock

313112011

CATERPILLAR

INDUSTRIALS

$10,001 - $1 00,000

Stock

CHARLES SCHWAB NEW

FINANCIALS

$10,001 - $100,000

Stock

CHEVRON TEXACO

ENERGY

$10,001 - $100,000

Stock

COCA COLA

CONSUMER STAPLES

$10,001-$100,000

Stock

EI DUPONT

MATERIALS

$10,001 - $100,000

Stock

EMCCORP,

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

$10,001 - $100,000

Stock

EXXON MOBIL

ENERGY

$2,000 - $1 0,000

Stock

912312011

91112011

GENERAL ELECTRIC

INDUSTRIALS

$10,001 -$100,000

Stock

GENERAL MILLS

CONSUMER STAPLES

$10,001 - $100,000

Stock

313112011

GOOGLEINC,

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

$10,001- $100,000

Stock

8/1512011

HEINZHJ

CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY

$10,001 -$100,000

Stock

INTEL
IBM
JP MORGAN CHASE
JOHNSON & JOHNSON
MICROSOFT
NIKE
PEPSICO
PETROLEO BRASILEIRO
PROCTER & GAMBLE
QUALCOMM INC,
SCHLUMBERGER
SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY
STARWOOD HOTELS AND RESORTS
TARGET
TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE
VISA CORP,
WALT DISNEY
WELLS FARGO
KLA TENCOR
DOMINION RESOURCES
HEWLETT PACKARD
LINEAR TECHNOLOGY
SCHLUMBERGER
IBM
QUALCOMM INC.
DOl MINION RESOURCES
GLAXO SMITHKLlNE
CATERPILLAR
CHEVRON TEXACO
GOOGLEINC,
AMAZON,COM INC,
COCA COLA
MICROSOFT
MCDONALDS
AT&T INC,
APPLIED MATERIALS
LOWES COMPANIES
ABBOTT LABS
NIKE

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
FINANCIALS
HEALTHCARE
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY
CONSUMER STAPLES
ENERGY
CONSUMER STAPLES
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY
HEALTHCARE
INDUSTRIALS
FINANCIALS
ENTERTAINMENT
FINANCIALS
SEMICONDUCTOR EQUIPMENT
UTILITIES
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
ENERGY
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
UTILITIES
HEALTHCARE
INDUSTRIALS
ENERGY
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY
CONSUMER STAPLES
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY
COMMUNICATIONS
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY
HEALTHCARE
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY

$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001-$100,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $1 00,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $1 00,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$2,000 - $10,000
$2,000 -$10,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 -$100,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$100,001 - $1 ,000,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$2,000 - $10,000
$2,000-$10,000
$2,000 - $10,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$2,000 - $1 0,000
$2,000 -$10,000
$10,001-$100,000
$2,000 - $10,000
$2,000 - $10,000
$2,000 - $10,000
$2,000 - $10,000
$10,001 - $100,000
$10,001 - $1 00,000
$2,000 - $10,000
$2,000 - $10,000
$2,000 - $10,000

Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock

Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock

912312011

Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock

912312011
812512011
9/2312011

Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock

Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock

Stock
Stock

21412011
313112011
5/812008
312412010
9/1412009
312412010
5/812008
612512010
121312007
313112011
6125/2010
5/812008
6/812009
9/1412009

Stock
Stock

Stock
Stock
Stock

21112008
812312007
1112112008
8/312007

312812011
8/15/2011
21112011
21412011
2/412011
21412011
312812011
312812011
313112011
03131121011
6/3012011
6/3012011
613012011
8/1512011
811512011
8/1512011
811512011
8/1512011
1111612011
1111612011

FPPC Form 700 (2011/2012) 5ch. A-1x

FPPCToll-Free Helpline: 866/ASK-FPPC www.fppc.ca.gov

SCHEDULE A-2
Investments, Income, and Assets
of Business Entities/Trusts
(Ownership I nterest is 10% or Greater)

* Select from drop down list

NAME AND ADDRESS OF BUSINESS

ENTITY OR TRUST
(Business Address Acceptable)
(If Trust, go to 2)

GENERAL
DESCRIPTION OF FAIR MARKET
BUSINESS
VALUE'
ACTIVITY

ROLLOVER ROLLOVER IRA

IRA 191 N. FIRST ST., SAN JOSE
t<ULLLJV r::.:t<

AC~~RED

A
or

DISPOSED

(mm/dd/2011)

NATURE OF
INVESTMENT
(if "other,"
describe)'

YOUR
BUSINESS
POSITION

LIST SINGLE
INVESTMENTSOURCES OF
BUSINESS
SHARE OF
GROSS
INCOME OF
ENTITY/NAME, AND
INCOME TO $10,000 OR MORE BUSINESS ACTIVITY
ENTITY/TRUST*

$100,001$1,000,000

IRA

FPPC Form 700 (2011/2012) 5ch. A-2x

FPPC Toll-Free Helpline: 866/A5K-FPPC www.fppc.ca.gar

SCHEDULE C
Income, Loans, & Business
Positions
(Other than Gifts and Travel Payments)

**You are not required to report loans from commercial lend

created as part of a retail installment or credit card transacti
business on terms available to members of the public withol
loans and loans received not in a lender's regular course of

* Select from drop down list

NAME AND ADDRESS

BUSINESS
YOUR BUSINESS
OF SOURCE
ACTIVITY, IF ANY
POSITION

EMPLOYMENT

SEMICONDUCT SPOUSE'S
OR
INCOME
EQUIPMENT

GROSS
INCOME
RECEIVED"

Over
$100,000

(if "other," describe)

OF LENDER** (Business
BUSINESS
Address Acceptable)
ACTIVITY, IF ANY
AND GUARANTOR, IF
ANY

HIGHEST
BALANCE"

INTEREST
RATE
(%)

Salary

FPPC Form 700 (2011/2012) 5ch. Cx

FPPC Tol/-Free Helpline: 866/A5K-FPPC www.fppc.ca.gar

SOCIOECONOMIC BIAS IN THE JUDICIARY

MICHELE BENEDETTO NEITZ*
ABSTRACT
Judges hold a prestigious place in our judicial system, and they earn double the
income of the average American household.
How does the privileged
socioeconomic status of judges affect their decisions on the bench? This Article
examines the ethical implications of what Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski
recently called the unselfconscious cultural elitism of judges.** This elitism can
manifest as implicit socioeconomic bias.
Despite the attention paid to income inequality, implicit bias research and
judicial bias, no other scholar to date has fully examined the ramifications of implicit
socioeconomic bias on the bench. The Article explains that socioeconomic bias may
be more obscure than other forms of bias, but its impact on judicial decision-making
processes can create very real harm for disadvantaged populations. The Article
reviews social science studies confirming that implicit bias can be prevalent even in
people who profess to hold no explicit prejudices. Thus, even those judges who
believe their wealthy backgrounds play no role in their judicial deliberations may be
influenced by implicit socioeconomic bias. The Article verifies the existence of
implicit socioeconomic bias on the part of judges through examination of recent
Fourth Amendment and child custody cases. These cases reveal that judges can and
do favor wealthy litigants over those living in poverty, with significant negative
consequences for low-income people.
The Article contends that the American Bar Association (ABA) Model Code of
Judicial Conduct (the Code), the document designed to regulate the behavior of
judges, fails to effectively eliminate implicit socioeconomic bias. The Article
recommends innovative revisions designed to strengthen the Codes prohibition
against bias, and suggests improvements to judicial training materials in this context.
These changes will serve to increase judicial awareness of the potential for implicit
socioeconomic bias in their judicial decisions, and will bring this issue to the
forefront of the judicial agenda.

Professor of Law, Golden Gate University School of Law, San Francisco, California.
The author served as a law clerk for the Honorable Napoleon A. Jones, Jr., in the Southern
District of California. I am grateful to Professor Deborah L. Rhode, Professor Eric C.
Christiansen, Professor Kathleen Morris and Jennifer Pesetsky for their thoughtful comments
on earlier drafts. I appreciate the assistance of research assistants Sharon Alkire and Richard
Hullinger. This Article is dedicated to Wiley Neitz.
** United States v. Pineda-Moreno, 617 F.3d 1120, 1123 (9th Cir. 2010) (Kozinski, C.J.,
dissenting).

137

CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL BRANCH NEWS SERVICE

Published by EngagedScholarship@CSU, 2013

CJBNS.ORG
1

138

CLEVELAND STATE LAW REVIEW

[Vol. 61:137

I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 138

II. THE CHALLENGES OF IDENTIFYING IMPLICIT
SOCIOECONOMIC BIAS ......................................................... 142
A. The Economic Status of Judges ................................... 142
B. Socioeconomic Bias vs. Class Privilege ...................... 143
C. The Challenge of Identifying Socioeconomic Bias ...... 144
1. The ABA Model Code of Judicial
Conducts Prohibition of Socioeconomic Bias .... 144
2. The Unique Nature of Socioeconomic Bias ......... 146
3. The Challenge of Identifying Implicit Bias .......... 149
i. The Implicit Association Test ........................ 150
ii. How Can We Measure Implicit
Socioeconomic Bias? .................................... 152
III. IMPLICIT SOCIOECONOMIC BIAS IN FOURTH
AMENDMENT AND CHILD CUSTODY CASES ......................... 154
A. Implicit Socioeconomic Bias in Fourth
Amendment Cases ........................................................ 154
B. Implicit Socioeconomic Bias and Child
Custody Determinations .............................................. 158
IV. PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................... 161
A. Judicial Discipline: An Ineffective Solution ................ 161
B. Clarifying the ABA Model Code of Judicial
Conduct........................................................................ 162
C. Judicial Trainings ........................................................ 163
V. CONCLUSION ....................................................................... 165
I. INTRODUCTION
In the early 1970s, Robert William Kras asked the United States Supreme Court
to allow him to proceed in bankruptcy court without paying the requisite filing fees.1
Mr. Kras lived in a small apartment with multiple extended family members and his
younger child was hospitalized with cystic fibrosis.2 Mr. Kras had been unemployed
for several years, after losing his job with a life insurance company when the
premiums he had collected were stolen out of his home.3 His wife had to give up her
employment due to her pregnancy, and she was focused on caring for their ill son.
The family lived on public assistance benefits and had no real assets.4

United States v. Kras, 409 U.S. 434, 437 (1973).

Id.

Id.

Id. at 438.

http://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev/vol61/iss1/6

CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL BRANCH NEWS SERVICE

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31

CJBNS.ORG

CALIFORNIA CODE OF JUDICIAL ETHICS

Amended by the Supreme Court of California effective August, 19, 2015; adopted
effective January 15, 1996; previously amended March 4, 1999, December 13, 2000,
December 30, 2002, June 18, 2003, December 22, 2003, January 1, 2005, June 1, 2005,
July 1, 2006, January 1, 2007, January 1, 2008, April 29, 2009, January 1, 2013, and
January 21, 2015.
Preface
Preamble
Terminology
Canon 1. A judge shall uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary.
Canon 2. A judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in
all of the judges activities.
Canon 3. A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially, competently,
and diligently.
Canon 4. A judge shall so conduct the judges quasi-judicial and extrajudicial
activities as to minimize the risk of conflict with judicial obligations.
Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary.
Canon 6. Compliance with the Code of Judicial Ethics.

CANON 3
A JUDGE SHALL PERFORM THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL
OFFICE IMPARTIALLY AND DILIGENTLY
A. Judicial Duties in General
All of the judicial duties prescribed by law* shall take precedence over
all other activities of every judge. In the performance of these duties, the
following standards apply.
B. Adjudicative Responsibilities
(1) A judge shall hear and decide all matters assigned to the judge
except those in which he or she is disqualified.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTARY
Canon 3B(1) is based upon the affirmative obligation contained in the
Code of Civil Procedure.
(2) A judge shall be faithful to the law* regardless of partisan interests,
public clamor, or fear of criticism, and shall maintain professional
competence in the law.*
(3) A judge shall require* order and decorum in proceedings before
the judge.
(4) A judge shall be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants,
jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official
capacity, and shall require* similar conduct of lawyers and of all court staff
and personnel* under the judge's direction and control.
(5) A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A
judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, engage in speech,
gestures, or other conduct that would reasonably be perceived as (1) bias or
prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex,
religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic
status, or (2) sexual harassment.
(Canon 3B (5) amended effective December 22, 2003.)
(6) A judge shall require* lawyers in proceedings before the judge to
refrain from manifesting, by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon
11

CANON 3
A JUDGE SHALL PERFORM THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL
OFFICE IMPARTIALLY AND DILIGENTLY
A. Judicial Duties in General
All of the judicial duties prescribed by law* shall take precedence over
all other activities of every judge. In the performance of these duties, the
following standards apply.
B. Adjudicative Responsibilities
(1) A judge shall hear and decide all matters assigned to the judge
except those in which he or she is disqualified.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTARY
Canon 3B(1) is based upon the affirmative obligation contained in the
Code of Civil Procedure.
(2) A judge shall be faithful to the law* regardless of partisan interests,
public clamor, or fear of criticism, and shall maintain professional
competence in the law.*
(3) A judge shall require* order and decorum in proceedings before
the judge.
(4) A judge shall be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants,
jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official
capacity, and shall require* similar conduct of lawyers and of all court staff
and personnel* under the judge's direction and control.
(5) A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A
judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, engage in speech,
gestures, or other conduct that would reasonably be perceived as (1) bias or
prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex,
religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic
status, or (2) sexual harassment.
(Canon 3B (5) amended effective December 22, 2003.)
(6) A judge shall require* lawyers in proceedings before the judge to
refrain from manifesting, by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon
11

CANON 3
A JUDGE SHALL PERFORM THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL
OFFICE IMPARTIALLY AND DILIGENTLY
A. Judicial Duties in General
All of the judicial duties prescribed by law* shall take precedence over
all other activities of every judge. In the performance of these duties, the
following standards apply.
B. Adjudicative Responsibilities
(1) A judge shall hear and decide all matters assigned to the judge
except those in which he or she is disqualified.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTARY
Canon 3B(1) is based upon the affirmative obligation contained in the
Code of Civil Procedure.
(2) A judge shall be faithful to the law* regardless of partisan interests,
public clamor, or fear of criticism, and shall maintain professional
competence in the law.*
(3) A judge shall require* order and decorum in proceedings before
the judge.
(4) A judge shall be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants,
jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official
capacity, and shall require* similar conduct of lawyers and of all court staff
and personnel* under the judge's direction and control.
(5) A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A
judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, engage in speech,
gestures, or other conduct that would reasonably be perceived as (1) bias or
prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex,
religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic
status, or (2) sexual harassment.
(Canon 3B (5) amended effective December 22, 2003.)
(6) A judge shall require* lawyers in proceedings before the judge to
refrain from manifesting, by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon
11

race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, or

socioeconomic status against parties, witnesses, counsel, or others. This
Canon does not preclude legitimate advocacy when race, sex, religion,
national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status or
other similar factors are issues in the proceeding.
(7) A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a
proceeding, or that person's lawyer, full right to be heard according to law.*
A judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or
consider other communications made to the judge outside the presence of the
parties concerning a pending or impending proceeding, except as follows:
(a) A judge may obtain the advice of a disinterested expert on the law*
applicable to a proceeding before the judge if the judge gives notice to the
parties of the person consulted and the substance of the advice, and affords
the parties reasonable opportunity to respond.
(b) A judge may consult with court personnel* whose function is to aid
the judge in carrying out the judge's adjudicative responsibilities or with
other judges.
(c) A judge may, with the consent of the parties, confer separately with
the parties and their lawyers in an effort to mediate or settle matters pending
before the judge.
(d) A judge may initiate ex parte communications, where
circumstances require, for scheduling, administrative purposes, or
emergencies that do not deal with substantive matters provided:
(i) the judge reasonably believes that no party will gain a
procedural or tactical advantage as a result of the ex parte communication,
and
(ii) the judge makes provision promptly to notify all other
parties of the substance of the ex parte communication and allows an
opportunity to respond.
(e) A judge may initiate or consider any ex parte communication when
expressly authorized by law* to do so.

12

(9) A judge shall not make any public comment about a pending or
impending proceeding in any court, and shall not make any nonpublic
comment that might substantially interfere with a fair trial or hearing. The
judge shall require* similar abstention on the part of court personnel*
subject to the judge's direction and control. This Canon does not prohibit
judges from making statements in the course of their official duties or from
explaining for public information the procedures of the court, and does not
apply to proceedings in which the judge is a litigant in a personal capacity.
Other than cases in which the judge has personally participated, this Canon
does not prohibit judges from discussing in legal education programs and
materials, cases and issues pending in appellate courts. This educational
exemption does not apply to cases over which the judge has presided or to
comments or discussions that might interfere with a fair hearing of the case.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTARY
The requirement that judges abstain from public comment regarding a
pending or impending proceeding continues during any appellate process and
until final disposition. This Canon does not prohibit a judge from commenting on
proceedings in which the judge is a litigant in a personal capacity, but in cases
such as a writ of mandamus where the judge is a litigant in an official capacity,
the judge must not comment publicly.
(10) A judge shall not commend or criticize jurors for their verdict
other than in a court order or opinion in a proceeding, but may express
appreciation to jurors for their service to the judicial system and the
community.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTARY
Commending
or criticizing jurors for their verdict may imply a judicial
expectation in future cases and may impair a juror's ability to be fair and
impartial in a subsequent case.
(11) A judge shall not disclose or use, for any purpose unrelated to
judicial duties, nonpublic information* acquired in a judicial capacity.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTARY
This Canon makes it clear that judges cannot make use of information from
affidavits, jury results, or court rulings, before they become public information, in
order to gain a personal advantage.
C. Administrative Responsibilities

14

(1) A judge shall diligently discharge the judge's administrative

responsibilities impartially, on the basis of merit, without bias or prejudice,
free of conflict of interest, and in a manner that promotes public confidence
in the integrity of the judiciary. A judge shall maintain professional
competence in judicial administration, and shall cooperate with other judges
and court officials in the administration of court business.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTARY
In considering what constitutes a conflict of interest under this Canon, a
judge should be informed by Code of Civil Procedure section 170.1(a)(6).
(Canon 3C(1) amended effective April 29, 2009.)
(2) A judge shall require* staff and court personnel* under the judge's
direction and control to observe appropriate standards of conduct and to
refrain from manifesting bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion,
national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status in
the performance of their official duties.
(3) A judge with supervisory authority for the judicial performance of
other judges shall take reasonable measures to ensure the prompt disposition
of matters before them and the proper performance of their other judicial
responsibilities.
(4) A judge shall not make unnecessary court appointments. A judge
shall exercise the power of appointment impartially and on the basis of merit.
A judge shall avoid nepotism and favoritism. A judge shall not approve
compensation of appointees above the reasonable value of services rendered.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTARY
Appointees of a judge include assigned counsel, officials such as referees,
commissioners, special masters, receivers, and guardians, and personnel such as
clerks, secretaries, court reporters, court interpreters, and bailiffs. Consent by the
parties to an appointment or an award of compensation does not relieve the judge
of the obligation prescribed by Canon 3C(4).
(5) A judge shall perform administrative duties without bias or
prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of administrative duties,
engage in speech, gestures, or other conduct that would reasonably be
perceived as (1) bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or
prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual
orientation, or socioeconomic status, or (2) sexual harassment.
15

(1) A judge shall diligently discharge the judge's administrative

responsibilities impartially, on the basis of merit, without bias or prejudice,
free of conflict of interest, and in a manner that promotes public confidence
in the integrity of the judiciary. A judge shall maintain professional
competence in judicial administration, and shall cooperate with other judges
and court officials in the administration of court business.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTARY
In considering what constitutes a conflict of interest under this Canon, a
judge should be informed by Code of Civil Procedure section 170.1(a)(6).
(Canon 3C(1) amended effective April 29, 2009.)
(2) A judge shall require* staff and court personnel* under the judge's
direction and control to observe appropriate standards of conduct and to
refrain from manifesting bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion,
national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status in
the performance of their official duties.
(3) A judge with supervisory authority for the judicial performance of
other judges shall take reasonable measures to ensure the prompt disposition
of matters before them and the proper performance of their other judicial
responsibilities.
(4) A judge shall not make unnecessary court appointments. A judge
shall exercise the power of appointment impartially and on the basis of merit.
A judge shall avoid nepotism and favoritism. A judge shall not approve
compensation of appointees above the reasonable value of services rendered.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTARY
Appointees of a judge include assigned counsel, officials such as referees,
commissioners, special masters, receivers, and guardians, and personnel such as
clerks, secretaries, court reporters, court interpreters, and bailiffs. Consent by the
parties to an appointment or an award of compensation does not relieve the judge
of the obligation prescribed by Canon 3C(4).
(5) A judge shall perform administrative duties without bias or
prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of administrative duties,
engage in speech, gestures, or other conduct that would reasonably be
perceived as (1) bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or
prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual
orientation, or socioeconomic status, or (2) sexual harassment.
15

JUDGE
MARY ANN 5. GRILLI
SUPERI OR COURT O F CALI FORN IA
COUNTY OF SAN TA CLARA
f.B0 FiOiii
l Liiili E

all the help she received from court

........
..
..

staff. She hopes to adapt some proce

....

dures in probate court when she returns

to family court, such as having a court

staff person who takes "notes" on each

Elected judge of Santa

case so, in ongoing proceedings, the

Clara

judge knows the history of what has

County Superior Court, 1996; Superior

Court commissioner,

happened before.

1993-96; sole

"It's a very varied calendar," Grilli

practitioner, 1987-93; attorney in part

said

nership with John Miller and Jerry

of her

current

assignment.

It

includes not just traditional probate

Berg,1973-87

work and conservatorships but also

Age 62

adoptions and guardianships.

"There are a lot more lawyers than

By Craig Anderson

in family court," she said.

Daily Journal Staff Writer

A native of Ithaca, N.Y., Grilli

SAN JOSE - Santa Clara County

grew up in Baton Rouge, La., the

Superior Court Judge Mary Ann Grilli,

a veteran of family court both as

daughter of a Louisiana State University

an

professor of animal breeding and genet

attorney and a judge, will be heading

ics. She was taking pre-med classes at

back there in January after spending

the University of California, Berkeley,

two-and-a-half years handling probate

when she decided it was not for her and

matters.
Probate lawyers say they are going
to miss her.
"She is everything a judge should
be," said Michael Desmarais, a veteran

that the law interested her a lot more.

Grilli

success to her experience in the rough

majored

in

criminology,

and-tumble atmosphere of family court,

graduating in 1968, the same year she

where parents wage emotional battles

married John Grilli, whom she met

Los Gatos attorney. "She has empathy,

over money and their children, often

when they were working as switchboard

patience

without lawyers.

operators at their dormitory.

and

intelligence.

She

has

shown me enormous patience and has

In conservatorship cases, parents

She attended night classes at Santa

actually tried to lead me into realizing

often disagree about how to deal with

Clara University School of Law and had

that I don't know it all in my area of spe

their young adult children with disabili

two children. The night program lasted

cialty. And she has done so very tactful

ties - a situation not dissimilar from

four years, and Grilli graduated in 1973.

arguments that rage in family court

She worked part-time for three years

ly."
Desmarais said probate attorneys

between divorcing spouses. In other

until starting full-time in 1976, working

tried, without success, to persuade the

cases, it is the parent who needs care,

with John Miller and Jerry Berg at a

court to keep her on the probate calen

with children and new spouses at odds.

family and criminal law firm where she

dar, which speaks to how well she has

"The judge's experience in family

managed to overcome her own limited

law gives her substantial sensitivity in

experience in that area of the law.

the conservatorship field," Stem said.

became a partner in the early 1980s.

Her two children are adults now,
and Grilli has six grandchildren.

"When we have a judge who has

After a career in family court, as a

Grilli specialized in family law,

not done probate before, there is always

lawyer and then a commissioner and

and started her own practice in Palo

concern about how that person will

finally a judge, Grilli said she is happy

Alto in 1987. Six years later, the judges

work out," said Palo Alto attorney Peter

to have made the switch to probate

of Santa Clara County Superior Court

Stern. "I think things have worked out

court. But, she adds, "I'm happy to be

appointed her a commissioner. She han

very well."

going back."

dled family law, child support and

domestic violence.

Stern and other lawyers say Grilli,

The judge said she had to learn

62, has the legal chops to understand the

about conservatorships - not just the law

In 1996, Grilli ran for an open seat

ins and outs of wills, trusts, and conser

but also the practical reality - by visiting

on the Superior Court bench, defeating

vatorship dispt1tes that come up on her

elder facilities.

defense attorney Thomas Spielbauer.

calendar, but also the temperament and

experience to deal with the emotional
issues that arise: in contested cases.
Several attorneys attributed G1illi's

Daily Journal Corporation

"I learned a lot about politics," she

"I went to places to see what it is

like," she said.

said.

Grilli has enjoyed her time in pro

Grilli, who took office the next

bate court, saying she has appreciated

year, found herself dealing with protests

2010-1

JUDGE MARY ANN S. GRILLI, SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

and acrimony over the way Santa Clara

bate

County family court judges handled

divorce and custody cases.
She was not the primary target of
protesters' vitiiol, and attorneys who
were among the court's critics back then

Attorneys:
Ellen McKissock,
Hopkins & Carley, San Jose; John
Posthauer, Santa Clara county counsel's
office; and Sheri Sudweeks, Los Gatos

say they are happy about her return.

"She's

known

quantity

and

knows the law backwards and for

wards," said Los Gatos family law attor
ney Robin Yeamans.
While some attorneys say it is bet
ter for judges to get switched away from
family court to avoid burnout, Grilli
bristles at the suggestion. She points out
that many judges who handle criminal
calendars have spent virtually their
entire careers as prosecutors or criminal
defense attorneys before joining the
bench.
"That question doesn't get asked
[of them]," she said.
Desmarais said Grilli's courtroom
can get very crowded, with as many as
a dozen attorneys representing various
factions of an extended family in dis
putes over living trusts.
"Lawyers are getting angry and
clients are getting angry," Desmarais
said. "A lot of judges would let some of
that anger seep through. She doesn't."
Jack Coward, a Los Gatos sole
practitioner, said Grilli is always pre
. pared and efficient in moving through
her calendar.
"She's fair and will let the lawyers
present and argue their case," Coward
said. "When there's a repetition of the
argument, she will rein them in."
Grilli said she is proud of her role
in promoting a program to encourage
low- and no-cost representation for
guardians of children, known as the
Guardianship Access Program, and
hopes to create a similar program in
family court.

- In re Conservatorship. of Frank
Reed, l-07-PR-161658 - conservator
ship
Attorneys: Mark Gonzalez, Santa
Clara county counsel's office; Vincent
Kilduff, San Jose; and Sung Lee, Santa
Clara County public defender's office
- In re Conservatorship of Diana P.,
l -07-PR-162463 conservatorship
Attorneys: Rebecca Weisman,
Fleishman & Weisman, San Jose, and
Howard Frank, Frank Law Firm, San
Jose

This profile originally appeared in

the Los Angeles Daily Journal and the
San Francisco Daily Journal December
29, 2009.

Here are some of Judge Grilli's

recent cases and the lawyers involved:

- Dantzig Trust, l -05-PR-156777 living trust

Attorneys: Jack Coward, Los
Gatos; Peter Stern, Palo Alto, and
Terrance Heath, Heath Law Group, San
Francisco
- Raffanti Living Trnst, l-08-PR163480 - living trust
Attorneys: Paul Breen, Hoge,
Fenton, Jones & Appel, San Jose, and
Michael Desmarais, Los Gatos
- In re Co:nservatorship of Gary B.,
l-97-PR-141989 - conservatorship/pro2010-1

------ -

Daily Journal Corporation

.JUDGE MARY_ANN S. GRILLI, SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

BIOGRAPHY
CURRENT ASSIGNMENT

1990-present: Academy of Family

Mediators

Court: Superior Court of California

County of Santa Clara

1983-1993: Santa Clara County Bar

Association (Family Law

Title: Judge

Executive Committee)
1973-present: Admitted to California
Bar
Pafo Alto Area Bar Association
(President)

Dates: 1997 to Present

Status: Elevated
Appointed by: Election
Date: March 1, 1996
PREV IOUS JUDICIAL

PERSONAL HISTORY

APPOINTMENTS

Status: Appointed
Appointed by: Court
Date: November 1, 1992
EDUCATION

Law School: Santa Clara University

School of Law
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Date: 1973
Degree: J.D.
Honors: Magna cum laude
College: UC Berkeley
Location: Berkeley, CA
Date: 1968
Degree: B.A. Criminology
PRACTICE HIS TORY

Birthplace: Ithaca, NY
Sex: F
Spouse: John Grilli
Religion: Jewish
Political Affiliation: Democrat
Recreation: Hiking, cooking
MILITARY

OTHER

Continuing Education Taught: Child

Support LegiSlation, 1992
Continuing Education Taught:
Trying a Family Law Case, San
Jose 1980, 1982
Moderator, CEB program, "Dividing
Property on Dissolution of
Marriage," 1994

Sole Practitioner
Location: Palo Alto, CA
From: 1988 to 1992
Specialty: Family Law
In partnership with Attorney John
Miller
Location: Palo Alto, CA
From: 1978 to 1988
Specialty: Family and Criminal Law
Matters
Assoicate of Attorney Jerry Berg
Location: Palo Alto, CA
From: 1973 to 1978
Specialty: Family and Criminal Law
Matters
BARS AND RELATED
PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES

1996-present: Judicial Council

Family and Juvenile Advisory
Committee
1994-present: Domestic Violence
Council, Santa Clara County
(Chair)

Daily Journal Corporation

20101