Sunday, May 7, 2000  (SF Examiner)

Judging family-law jurists

By Scott Winokur  /OF THE EXAMINER STAFF

Recall effort targets trio on Marin bench for alleged favoritism

The normally contentious atmosphere of the state's family law courts

has

risen to a new level of rancor in Marin County, where three judges who

hear child-custody cases have been targeted for recall.

The move by a group of angry parents came late last month in the

wake of a

private investigator's report accusing some family-law judges of gross

misconduct and confirmation by residents and authorities that the FBI

and

district attorney have been questioning people critical of the local

bench.

Behind the legal fracas are emotional disputes that have left

parents

without their offspring, life savings or current means of support --

but

with longstanding grievances against the bench.

The parents uniformly accuse the judges of favoring a small circle

of

highly compensated lawyers and court-appointed experts, and

consistently

ruling for financially powerful litigants, to the detriment of children

and poorer parents.

"I have had all the doors closed to me," said Sharon Shea, who lives

in a

San Rafael trailer park on $750 a month after losing her two children.

Shea said she complained to the FBI and wrote to Sens. Barbara Boxer

and

Dianne Feinstein about the alleged unfairness of her case, which was

heard

by Judge Michael Dufficy. She got nowhere.

Yevrah Ornstein of Woodacre, who lost his child in a custody dispute

after

spending nearly half a million dollars, said he received two typed

death

threats that he turned over to the FBI. Since 1997, Ornstein has been

among the courts' most vocal critics.

"What I said to the FBI is that I have no enemies in this world

other than

people who know I have been active in trying to reform the family-law

court system," he said.

Ornstein was one of several parents who paid $12,000 for the private

investigator last year. Shea joined with other parents to start a

petition

drive that could force a recall vote next April on Dufficy and two

other

judges, Lynn Duryee and Terrence Boren.

A fourth jurist -- family law Commissioner Sylvia Shapiro-Pritchard

--

also figures in the controversy, but can't be recalled because she was

hired by other members of the bench.

"Parents who are unhappy"

The recall follows a Marin County Bar Association survey that

elicited

harsh criticism of Dufficy and Shapiro-Pritchard, and at least five

complaints about Dufficy to the state judicial watchdog agency, the

Commission on Judicial Performance.

A commission spokeswoman said it wouldn't confirm or deny complaints

or

investigations. But a letter to one of the complainants, Sylvia Graves

of

Novato, confirmed at least one investigation. There is no indication

any

complaint has been upheld.

Dufficy declined comment. In a written response to the recall filed

with

the Marin registrar, he said: "This ..... was engendered primarily by

parents who are unhappy with my decisions ..... When these decisions

have

been appealed, all have been affirmed ..... "

A spokeswoman for Shapiro-Pritchard said she would comment if

encouraged

to do so by John Montgomery, executive officer of the Marin courts. But

Montgomery said there was "reluctance" to have members of the county

bench

comment on "pending matters."

Shapiro-Pritchard had ruled in a hotly contested case involving the

teenage daughter of a local lawyer with extensive connections in the

county legal profession.

In 1995, the commissioner awarded custody of the child to her father

despite allegations by a Los Angeles Juvenile Court social worker that

supported her claims of mistreatment at his hands.

Three years later, the father pleaded no-contest in Los Angeles

Superior

Court to a Welfare and Institutions Code charge of using inappropriate

parental discipline and a judge there ultimately awarded custody of the

girl to her mother.

Duryee and Boren also were accused of misconduct in child-custody

cases by

people behind the recall drive. Both said the charges were false.

"Judges must be free to render fair decisions, without fear of

untrue and

biased attacks," Duryee said in a written response.

In his reply, Boren said that he had conducted all the proceedings

in his

courtroom "fairly, impartially and with proper and due regard for the

rights of all the participants."

FBI probe alleged

Critics asserted that Dufficy and other local jurists have attracted

the

attention of the FBI. The FBI declined comment.

"I can verify there's an investigation. I was in touch with the FBI

yesterday," Martin Silverman, former acting chair of the county's civil

grand jury, said April 21.

However, Shea said that while the FBI was once interested in the

case, it

may have dropped it.

"I talked to the FBI about gross negligence in the courtroom," said

Shea.

"The last time I talked to them was in October or November. They said

don't bother sending in more information. That could have meant they

weren't going to investigate or they had enough. They prompted us to do

what we could without their direct assistance."

In an unusual twist, Silverman said he has been informed that he is

under

investigation by the Marin County district attorney's office.

Silverman said the nature of the probe was not disclosed to him, but

he

believed he was suspected of having leaked confidential information

about

Dufficy and Shapiro-Pritchard to Marin residents.

He said he assumed this stemmed from a civil grand jury

investigation of

the courts in which he was involved three years ago. The probe was

halted

after several weeks when the county counsel's office told the panel it

lacked authority to investigate judges.

Marin District Attorney Paula Kamena confirmed that Silverman is the

target of an investigation she is leading. She declined further

comment.

Lawyer poll was critical

Dufficy, 61, was a former Marin County deputy district attorney and

a

longtime defense attorney who represented prominent clients, including

"San Quentin Six" murder defendant Fleeta Drumgo and former San

Francisco

Sheriff and Assessor Richard Hongisto. He was appointed to the bench in

1990 by then-Gov. George Deukmejian, a Republican, whose campaigns he

had

led in Marin.

In a 1999 judicial performance survey by the Marin County Bar

Association,

Dufficy, then presiding judge in the family law courts, was rated as

needing improvement by about 25 percent of the respondents in two

areas,

preparation and consistency in rulings. He was also said by more than

20

percent to need improvement with regard to the fair and equal treatment

of

all parties. Nearly 10 percent accused him of actual bias.

Fifty of 60 written comments were negative, with several respondents

claiming Dufficy favored men and certain lawyers.

"Judge Dufficy appears to defer to rich white male politically

active

people," one lawyer said.

Shapiro-Pritchard, 55, had been in private practice specializing in

divorce until appointed commissioner by Marin judges in 1988.

She was rated as needing improvement by 22.8 percent to 36 percent

in

seven areas: treatment of parties in court, courtesy, demeanor,

patience,

promptness in issuing written decisions, punctuality and efficient

management of courtroom time.

Twenty-nine of 41 comments about her were negative. Five accused her

of

favoring men in her courtroom.

Private report ripped judges

On Feb. 28, an independent journalist, consultant and former New

York City

consumer affairs policy analyst, Karen Winner, issued the results of a

three-month investigation of the Marin courts. The probe had been

financed

by Ornstein, Silverman and other critics of the family-law courts.

Winner said she had conducted 40 interviews and examined more than

3,000

pages of records. Her findings made no pretense of impartiality. Among

them:

-Dufficy had "hidden" financial ties to local law firms through his

wife,

Penelope, a legal secretary and paralegal who had worked, for varying

periods of time, at dozens of county law offices.

Dufficy told the Marin Independent Journal after the report was

issued

that he did not routinely disclose his indirect links to the firms

through

his wife unless it was relevant to the case before him.

-Both Dufficy and Shapiro-Pritchard made rulings that channeled

alimony

and child support funds to attorneys who were their "cronies" and

otherwise showed "gross favoritism" to "certain litigants and lawyers."

-Both approved "fee-gouging by experts and court appointees."

Dufficy denied the charges, attributing them to the ill will of

litigants

and lawyers. Shapiro-Pritchard made no comment.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright 2000 SF Examiner