WHY ELECT ELIZABETH ZAREH

It is my goal and intention to bring about significant changes to the court. First, I like to make it affordable and accessible. This can be done by increasing the cap in small claims court from $10,000 to $15,000 or even $20,000.

San Francisco E-filing System

San Francisco e-filing system is a disaster. Unless you are a big firm and have an e-filing specialist on staff you are hopeless to file anything in San Francisco. Self-represented litigants are forgotten. It is a maze. The court rejects documents on a regular basis without proper reasons or explanations. San Francisco clerks act as opposing attorneys rather than clerks.  Documents are rejected on multiple times for different reasons. With each rejection there is a fee of $13.50. This is not an affordable system. 

It is so difficult that large law firms like Morrison & Foerster are hiring e-filing specialist in San Francisco. San Francisco has one of the highest ratings in rejecting e-filings in the state.  My opponent, judge Lee, implemented the e-filing system. After being on the bench for 20 years, this is what we have. We are in Silicon Valley and we need to change this defective system. If elected, I will make it my first priority to develop a simple, easy, and affordable e-filing system.

.

Master Calendar

Our master calendar system is another major problem. It is time to move into this century. Federal courts, and other counties have single assignment system. Litigants and pro se litigants representing themselves, are homeless in San Francisco Court. We have no idea who to turn to when faced with an issue that can be resolved with a simple conference call.  Because of that everyone is forced to file a motion. This makes litigation expensive.

In federal courts or other counties, cases are assigned to a single department. That in of itself reduces motion practice. Many issues can be handled without a motion by a conference call if it is assigned to a single department. This will ultimately it will reduce the litigation cost.
.

A Judiciary that Reflects San Francisco Values

San Francisco never had an Iranian-American judge on the bench. 3% of San Francisco's population is Iranian-American. Iranian-American judges preside in San Mateo, Santa Clara, Los Angeles, and San Diego. Addition of an Iranian-American judge to San Francisco represents San Francisco values. Our judiciary must reflect the ethnicity of its population.

.

Seat #9

Elizabeth is running for Seat #9. Currently, Seat #9 is occupied by Judge Cynthia Ming-Mei Lee. In addition to Judge Lee, Kwixuan Maloof from public defender's office is running for the same seat. In this election alone, four SF public defenders are running.  How many public defenders do we want as judges.  Their experiences are limited to the cases handled by the public defender's office which is mostly criminal cases. They lack experience in civil, real estate, construction defect and other complex issues facing San Francisco court.   

As noted by California Senator Scott Wiener that could be a problem. He said: "It concerns me that one public defender’s office is trying to take out four judges in one fell swoop." https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Bay-Area-Dems-defend-4-GOP-appointed-judges-12611704.php.   None of them have any background in real estate or important civil issues facing San Francisco. 

According to California State Bar, Judge Lee was admitted to practice  law in 1974.  She was appointed in 1998 by Governor Pete Wilson.  The Robing Room, a website dedicated to rate judges, rated Judge Lee 3.3 out of 6.  Attorneys appearing before Judge Lee characterized her as "mean," "arrogant," "bias," and wanting "to humiliate and embarrass any attorney who does not suck up to her, like a queen on the throne." It is time to change. 

Elect Elizabeth to bring humility back to our court. 

   

See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.3 - 6 ratings(s)

Non-Attorney Average Rating:   4.0 - 1 rating(s0

What others have said about Hon. Cynthia Ming-Mei Lee

Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA11701
Rating:1.5
Comments:
In 15 years of litigation I have never come across a more mean, arrogant judge. She seems to want to humiliate and embarrass any attorney who does not suck up to her, like a queen on the throne.
Very sad. I'll take any judge in CA over this one.

View Detail  Send e-mail to this poster 8/15/2017 5:40:46 PM
Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA7722
Rating:1.0
Comments:
She wasted 30 minutes explaining that she does not have time! She lied, was abusive, mean and very biased. She was wrong on the law which cost over $50,000 in time for litigants and probably over $40,000 in time for the Court.

View Detail  Send e-mail to this poster 10/10/2015 2:09:41 PM
Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5052
Rating:1.0
Comments:
She is mean and crooked, does not follow the law and has no knowledge of Constitutional rights.

View Detail  Send e-mail to this poster 4/15/2014 11:08:27 PM
Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA3886
Rating:2.8
Comments:
Misquoted a rule regarding the time required for filing a document to counsel; abrupt and officious; very poor judicial attitude.

View Detail  Send e-mail to this poster 5/30/2013 3:47:15 PM
Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA3644
Rating:8.0
Comments:
AS PJ, she requires all trailing attorneys to come to Court each day, which in this day of Court cutbacks and limited department is a waste of time and money for all litigants. Hopefully she will see this policy is not helping anyone

View Detail  Send e-mail to this poster 4/4/2013 9:16:15 PM
Other

Comment #: CA439
Rating:4.0
Comments:
Involved in a homicide trial before this judge. Defendant was found Not Guilty of Second Degree Murder, Voluntary Manslaughter and another serious felony, a 246 PC/F. Was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm. The jury, including three alternates, felt the evidence proved it was self-defense. The judge disagreed and was extremely angry about the verdict. At the sentencing hearing she excoriated the defendant for what she thought was his arrogance and his belief that he was above the law. Then the judge, in her own arrogance and mean-spiritedness placed herself above the law, finding spurious aggravated circumstances, and sentenced the defendant to the maximum term. She then fined him $10,000 to be paid into a victim's fund, yet the charge on which he was convicted had no victim. It pains me to see the word "honorable" before this judge's name.

View Detail  Send e-mail to this poster 1/20/2009 11:20:03 PM
Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA435
Rating:5.3
Comments:
Smart and mean...a bad combination.

View Detail  Send e-mail to this poster 1/12/2009 11:17:30 PM

 

  

Elect Elizabeth to eliminate bias. 

Elect Elizabeth to bring back honor to our court rooms.

Elect Elizabeth to bring back civility to our court rooms.

Elect Elizabeth to restore the court's reputation. 

Hon. Cynthia Ming-Mei Lee,   Judge Superior Court
San Francisco County

Attorney Average Rating: 3.3 - 6 rating(s)

Non-Attorney Average Rating: 4.0 - 1 rating(s)

What others have said about Hon. Cynthia Ming-Mei Lee

.

Comments:
Civil Litigation - Private             Comment #: CA1170 1                     Rating:1.5
Comments:
In 15 years of litigation I have never come across a more mean, arrogant judge. She seems to want to humiliate and embarrass any attorney who does not suck up to her, like a queen on the throne. Very sad. I'll take any judge in CA over this one.    Posted: 8/15/2017 5:40:46 PM

.

Criminal Defense Lawyer          Comment #: CA7722                        Rating:1.0
Comments:
She wasted 30 minutes explaining that she does not have time! She lied, was abusive, mean and very biased. She was wrong on the law which cost over $50,000 in time for litigants and probably over $40,000 in time for the Court.   Posted: 10/10/2015 2:09:41 PM

.

Civil Litigation - Private             Comment #: CA5052                         Rating:1.0
Comments:
She is mean and crooked, does not not follow the law and has no knowledge of Constitutional rights. Posted: 4/15/2014 11:08:27 PM

.

Civil Litigation - Private             Comment #: CA3886                       Rating:2.8
Comments:
Misquoted a rule regarding the time required for filing a document to counsel; abrupt and officious; very poor judicial attitude.    Posted: 5/30/2013 3:47:15 PM

.

Civil Litigation - Private              Comment #: CA3644                       Rating:8.0
Comments:
AS PJ, she requires all trailing attorneys to come to Court each day, which in this day of Court cutbacks and limited departments is a waste of time and money for all litigants. Hopefully she will see this policy is not helping anyone.     Posted 4/4/2013 9:16:15 PM

.

Other                                                   Comment #: CA439                            Rating:4.0
Comments:
Involved in a homicide trial before this judge. Defendant was found Not Guilty of Second Degree Murder, Voluntary Manslaughter and another serious felony, a 246 PC/F. Was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm. The jury, including three alternates, felt the evidence proved it was self-defense. The judge disagreed and was extremely angry about the verdict. At the sentencing hearing she excoriated the defendant for what she thought was his arrogance and his belief that he was above the law. Then the judge, in her own arrogance and mean-spiritedness placed herself above the law, finding spurious aggravated circumstances, and sentenced the defendant to the maximum term. She then fined him $10,000 to be paid into a victim's fund, yet the charge on which he was convicted had no victim. It pains me to see the word "honorable" before this judge's name.    Posterd: 1/20/2009 11:20:03 PM

.

Criminal Defense Lawyer          Comment #: CA435                            Rating:5.3
Comments:
Smart and mean...a bad combination.    Posted:   1/12/2009 11:17:30 PM