CA Supreme Court Nominee Joshua Groban "Exceptionally Well Qualified," Evaluators Say
The judicial appointments commission is set to hold confirmation hearings on Groban's nomination Dec. 21.
December 19, 2018 at 06:52 PM
3 minute read
Joshua Groban, Gov. Brown's final nominee to the California Supreme Court, has received state judicial evaluators' top rating, exceptionally well qualified.
Groban, Brown's senior adviser for the last seven years, “has an outstanding scholastic background and significant legal experience in civil practice with major law firms on both coasts,” David Fermino, chairman of the state bar's commission on judicial nominees evaluation, wrote to the commission on judicial appointments in a letter released Wednesday.
“His broad range of legal experience, his love of learning and of the law, and his affirmative desire to hear diverse viewpoints, suit him ideally for consideration of the wide array of cases that come before our Supreme Court,” Fermino concluded.
The judicial appointments commission, comprised of Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, Attorney General Xavier Becerra and First District Court of Appeal Justice Anthony Kline, is set to hold confirmation hearings on Groban's nomination Friday.
In addition to the glowing review, documents released Wednesday include more than 40 letters of support for Groban from legal and social organizations, judges and lawyers. Many of the letter-writers praised Groban, who was Brown's chief adviser on judicial appointments for his efforts to diversify California's judiciary.
“I am impressed with his thorough and thoughtful approach in evaluating candidates and appointees, and especially with his review of candidates' decisions whether as a superior court judge or as a pro tempore appellate justice to make informed recommendations to the governor,” Elwood Lui, administrative presiding justice of the Second District Court of Appeal, wrote to the judicial appointments commission.
Before joining Brown's administration, Groban was a civil litigator at Munger, Tolles & Olson in Los Angeles from 2005 to 2010. Between 1999 and 2005, he was an attorney with Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. He served as a law clerk for Judge William Conner of the U.S. District Court for the New York's Southern District from 1998 to 1999.
Like Brown's most recent appointments to the Supreme Court, Groban has no experience as a judge. He does have ties to academia, having lectured at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law since 2015.
Four witnesses are scheduled to testify in support of Groban's nomination Friday: Retired California Supreme Court Associate Justice Carlos Moreno; Presiding Justice Arthur Gilbert of the Second District Court of Appeal's Division Six; First District Court of Appeal Associate Justice Therese Stewart; and Munger partner Ronald Olson.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'No Holds Barred': Why Alston & Bird Is Leaning Into Los Angeles
'Effective Remedy'?: DOJ Unveils Corrective Action Plan in Google Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250