News
Judges and Judiciary
Feb. 21, 2002
Keeping Calendar Under Control
LOS ANGELES - For years when Chuck Essegian met someone, they would hear his name and say, "Essegian? Essegian? Are you related to that baseball player?"
PROFILE
Ruth Essegian
Superior Court Judge
Van Nuys
Career highlights: Appointed by Gov. George Deukmejian to Los Angeles Municipal Court, 1989, elevated by court unification to Los Angeles Superior Court, 2000; sole practitioner, Burbank, 1987-89; deputy director of legal affairs, California State Department of Consumer Affairs, Sacramento, 1983-87; deputy attorney general, California State Department of Justice, 1981-83; deputy city prosecutor, Pasadena city attorney, Pasadena, 1980-81; pre-law career as controller and accountant for six different electronics distribution companies, including Hollywood Radio & Electronics, Terminal Hudson Electronics and Opti-Cal.
Law school: Whittier School of Law, 1980
Age: 75
By Ed Kimble
Daily Journal Staff Writer
LOS ANGELES - For years when Chuck Essegian met someone, they would hear his name and say, "Essegian? Essegian? Are you related to that baseball player?"
Essegian, who knocked in two homers to clinch the Dodgers' 1959 World Series win over the Chicago White Sox, said these days he's more likely to hear, "Essegian? Essegian? Hey, are you related to that judge?"
His sister is Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ruth Essegian. A corporate controller who decided to go to law school in her 40s, she's just as serious about her numbers as her brother ever was, and she has star power all her own, admirers say.
"Have you ever seen a brighter smile?" exclaimed Paul Gutman, supervising judge of Los Angeles Superior Court's North District.
"She's a workhorse, a charming person, she's a pleasure to work with, and those are the bad points," Gutman said.
Essegian is smiling a lot these days at the big drop in the number of limited jurisdiction cases she inherited with her Van Nuys courtroom four years ago. In March 1999, that number was 1,598 open cases, with 676 over 2 years old. Today, the number of open cases is 984, with just 83 over 2 years old.
While she is chopping away at those numbers, nearly 300 new cases are assigned to the judge each month (though the new cases don't actually come to her court until the complaint is served and the defendant answers it). The total number of cases assigned to her court, including those awaiting a defendant's answer to a complaint, is 2,698, down from 3,898 in April 1999.
Essegian works closely with her clerk, Tracy Kincheloe, a 13-year veteran of limited jurisdiction courts, to keep her heavy calendar under control.
"We both really love our job, and whatever extra work I do, she motivates me to make sure we have really good numbers," Kincheloe said. "I'm very lucky I have a great judge. She considers everything. She absolutely listens to each individual case put before her."
Kincheloe confirmed Essegian's reputation as a stickler for adherence to fast-track rules, but she said her court is "user friendly" as a result.
"It serves everyone to be firm because then everyone gets better service to get everything expeditiously taken care of," Kincheloe said. "And even if we hold them to guidelines that we didn't set, they still have a good experience in here."
Essegian said she insists on a businesslike adherence to procedure as a matter of fairness.
"Keeping one eye on the numbers and working the oldest as soon as possible and then ... making sure everyone gets their time in court if that's what they want to do, I think you can see that the name of the game is settle," Essegian said.
Essegian's pre-law career as an accountant, credit manager and controller for electronics distribution companies not only accounts for her businesslike demeanor but also gave her a taste of judicial life to come.
Outside salesmen, she said, provided her first proving ground. She would have to approve their expenses, which sometimes seemed out of proportion to the potential sales to the companies they were wooing. Since they came from a wide variety of backgrounds and cultures, she learned how to rein them in smartly, watching the company purse strings while retaining and encouraging its talent.
And knowing salesmen's reputation of promising the moon to make a sale, when she was a credit manager, she would accompany the salesman to a prospective customer's offices for a closing presentation. It was her way of finding out just what the salesman had promised, whether the company really could live up to the promises and to the size of the true value of the deal. Or improve on it.
Working in tandem with the sales representatives, Essegian helped develop some of the first in-plant stock rooms for large defense and aerospace contractors. She convinced the aerospace firms that her electronics distributor could do a better job of parts purchasing than their own supply staff. It gave them first shot at every electronics part, and despite the overhead costs of stocking and manning these satellite distribution centers, they were hugely profitable - so long as the monthly invoices got paid on time.
"I know what it's like to sit at the door of some of these big corporations to make sure we got those huge invoices paid on time," Essegian said. "Sometimes that's what you have to do. So I know how important these cases are to the people who come into my court."
As a judge, Essegian promotes settlement at every turn and inquires about the possibility of settlement at almost every appearance of parties in her court. Her morning calendar begins with standard appearances and motions. Her late afternoon calendar is reserved for final status conferences.
"Because of the volume of my cases, I don't set a final status conference and a mandatory settlement conference. I do both at the [final status conference]," Essegian said. "They have to have all their documents in then. They have to have their clients here. If there is an insurance company involved, the adjuster has got to be here. When it's just business litigation, the actual business partners or owners, whoever has the authority to make the decision has to be here."
Essegian said she schedules up to three final status conferences each day, and she prepares thoroughly for each.
"There isn't one document that I ask them to submit that I haven't read every page and analyzed it. So when they come in for their [status conference], I have completely outlined the facts and have the issues that are going to be outstanding from there, and that's where I work," Essegian said.
She said she sets 10 cases for trial each week but expects half of them to settle before trial. Last year, she settled 139 cases at final status conferences and mandatory settlement conferences, she said.
"What it does, at the final settlement conference, where they have to get in all those documents, it makes each attorney focus on his case. And if I don't settle the case, it also helps because at that stage, we go right into the preparation for trial," she said.
She structures her calendar so that trials are in the afternoons only, from 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
"All my jury trials start at 1:30, but they can all count on never waiting a minute outside my courtroom," she said.
At trial, Essegian is very clear on her rules: Stand to make objections and state the grounds only, no speaking objections, no standing at the lectern, don't present arguments or instruct jurors during opening statements.
"They know I don't want a lot of interruptions with sidebars. I will not deny them one if it's important," she said.
Essegian said she expects attorneys in her courtroom to be prompt and prepared so that everyone on her calendar can be well-represented and have an equal opportunity at justice.
"It isn't brain surgery," Essegian said.
Thomas Kerrigan, an attorney for the state Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, has tried many appeals of Labor Commission hearings in Essegian's court.
Kerrigan describes her as "a very gracious, very charming
"She doesn't suffer fools gladly, especially if they come into court and they're not prepared or they're not procedurally where they should be. She does not tolerate that. But if everybody is doing what they're supposed to do and behaving themselves and fair, she is very pleasant."
Greg Stone of the Encino firm of Stone Rosenblatt & Cha was impressed with Essegian's handling of an 11-day jury trial televised on Court TV in 1994. Stone defended a Hispanic security guard for the Ralph's grocery chain accused of a racially motivated detention of an African-American shopper. The guard accused the shopper of taking a bottle of Visine.
"I was not pleased to get transferred to [Central Civil West]. You know it's called 'the Bank' and is known for large plaintiff awards. But she was fair, she was patient and she was tough when she had to be," Stone said, who took the defense to a complete win.
"I've had other cases in front of her since, and I'm always happy to be in her court," Stone added.
So is James F. Jordan, who lost that case to Stone.
"Ruth Essegian is a marvelous judge," Jordan said. "I think she had a good grasp of most of the legal issues, and she had an extremely good grasp of how to run a courtroom. ... She maintained her courtroom with a great deal of dignity; you felt good going in there."
Jordan has tried many other cases in Essegian's court since and rates her highly as a judge.
"She basically lets you try your case and doesn't get in the way unless absolutely necessary," he said.
Beverly Hills sole practitioner Scott J. Nord, who recently defended a homeowners association in a claim for attorney fees was surprised by her ease in settling what had been an emotional case for the parties.
"At first, I was worried, but she handled the settlement really well. My clients really liked her," Nord said. "I'd try a case in her court anytime."
Here are some of Essegian's recent cases and the lawyers involved:
Harris v. Costco, 01E04431
Plaintiff: Mark A. Schenkman, Law Office of Mark A. Schenkman, Encino
Defense: Richard Michael Koep and Darcy F. Storin, Even Crandall Wade & Lowe, Woodland Hills
Spitzer v. Fulton Court Homeowners Association, 01E04430
Plaintiff: Daniel B. Spitzer, Law Offices of Daniel B. Spitzer, Encino
Defense and cross-complainant: Scott J. Nord, Law Offices of Scott J. Nord, Beverly Hills
Cross-defendant: Mariana Marquez, in pro per
Young v. Ralph's, BC082435
Plaintiff: James F. Jordan, Law Offices of James F. Jordan, Tarzana
Defense: Gregory E. Stone, Stone Rosenblatt & Cha, Encino
Vasquez v. Correa, 9E10713
Plaintiff: Norman W. Coe, Southwest Law Center, Van Nuys
Defense: Bradley M. Bush, Even Crandall Wade & Lowe, Woodland Hills
Petrilyak v. Dovlatyan, 00E05230
Plaintiff: Nora Hovsepian, Law Offices of Nora Hovsepian, Sherman Oaks
Defense: Wendy Coffelt, Kazanjian & Martinetti, Glendale
Ruth Essegian
Superior Court Judge
Van Nuys
Career highlights: Appointed by Gov. George Deukmejian to Los Angeles Municipal Court, 1989, elevated by court unification to Los Angeles Superior Court, 2000; sole practitioner, Burbank, 1987-89; deputy director of legal affairs, California State Department of Consumer Affairs, Sacramento, 1983-87; deputy attorney general, California State Department of Justice, 1981-83; deputy city prosecutor, Pasadena city attorney, Pasadena, 1980-81; pre-law career as controller and accountant for six different electronics distribution companies, including Hollywood Radio & Electronics, Terminal Hudson Electronics and Opti-Cal.
Law school: Whittier School of Law, 1980
Age: 75
Essegian, who knocked in two homers to clinch the Dodgers' 1959 World Series win over the Chicago White Sox, said these days he's more likely to hear, "Essegian? Essegian? Hey, are you related to that judge?"
His sister is Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ruth Essegian. A corporate controller who decided to go to law school in her 40s, she's just as serious about her numbers as her brother ever was, and she has star power all her own, admirers say.
"Have you ever seen a brighter smile?" exclaimed Paul Gutman, supervising judge of Los Angeles Superior Court's North District.
"She's a workhorse, a charming person, she's a pleasure to work with, and those are the bad points," Gutman said.
Essegian is smiling a lot these days at the big drop in the number of limited jurisdiction cases she inherited with her Van Nuys courtroom four years ago. In March 1999, that number was 1,598 open cases, with 676 over 2 years old. Today, the number of open cases is 984, with just 83 over 2 years old.
While she is chopping away at those numbers, nearly 300 new cases are assigned to the judge each month (though the new cases don't actually come to her court until the complaint is served and the defendant answers it). The total number of cases assigned to her court, including those awaiting a defendant's answer to a complaint, is 2,698, down from 3,898 in April 1999.
Essegian works closely with her clerk, Tracy Kincheloe, a 13-year veteran of limited jurisdiction courts, to keep her heavy calendar under control.
"We both really love our job, and whatever extra work I do, she motivates me to make sure we have really good numbers," Kincheloe said. "I'm very lucky I have a great judge. She considers everything. She absolutely listens to each individual case put before her."
Kincheloe confirmed Essegian's reputation as a stickler for adherence to fast-track rules, but she said her court is "user friendly" as a result.
"It serves everyone to be firm because then everyone gets better service to get everything expeditiously taken care of," Kincheloe said. "And even if we hold them to guidelines that we didn't set, they still have a good experience in here."
Essegian said she insists on a businesslike adherence to procedure as a matter of fairness.
"Keeping one eye on the numbers and working the oldest as soon as possible and then ... making sure everyone gets their time in court if that's what they want to do, I think you can see that the name of the game is settle," Essegian said.
Essegian's pre-law career as an accountant, credit manager and controller for electronics distribution companies not only accounts for her businesslike demeanor but also gave her a taste of judicial life to come.
Outside salesmen, she said, provided her first proving ground. She would have to approve their expenses, which sometimes seemed out of proportion to the potential sales to the companies they were wooing. Since they came from a wide variety of backgrounds and cultures, she learned how to rein them in smartly, watching the company purse strings while retaining and encouraging its talent.
And knowing salesmen's reputation of promising the moon to make a sale, when she was a credit manager, she would accompany the salesman to a prospective customer's offices for a closing presentation. It was her way of finding out just what the salesman had promised, whether the company really could live up to the promises and to the size of the true value of the deal. Or improve on it.
Working in tandem with the sales representatives, Essegian helped develop some of the first in-plant stock rooms for large defense and aerospace contractors. She convinced the aerospace firms that her electronics distributor could do a better job of parts purchasing than their own supply staff. It gave them first shot at every electronics part, and despite the overhead costs of stocking and manning these satellite distribution centers, they were hugely profitable - so long as the monthly invoices got paid on time.
"I know what it's like to sit at the door of some of these big corporations to make sure we got those huge invoices paid on time," Essegian said. "Sometimes that's what you have to do. So I know how important these cases are to the people who come into my court."
As a judge, Essegian promotes settlement at every turn and inquires about the possibility of settlement at almost every appearance of parties in her court. Her morning calendar begins with standard appearances and motions. Her late afternoon calendar is reserved for final status conferences.
"Because of the volume of my cases, I don't set a final status conference and a mandatory settlement conference. I do both at the [final status conference]," Essegian said. "They have to have all their documents in then. They have to have their clients here. If there is an insurance company involved, the adjuster has got to be here. When it's just business litigation, the actual business partners or owners, whoever has the authority to make the decision has to be here."
Essegian said she schedules up to three final status conferences each day, and she prepares thoroughly for each.
"There isn't one document that I ask them to submit that I haven't read every page and analyzed it. So when they come in for their [status conference], I have completely outlined the facts and have the issues that are going to be outstanding from there, and that's where I work," Essegian said.
She said she sets 10 cases for trial each week but expects half of them to settle before trial. Last year, she settled 139 cases at final status conferences and mandatory settlement conferences, she said.
"What it does, at the final settlement conference, where they have to get in all those documents, it makes each attorney focus on his case. And if I don't settle the case, it also helps because at that stage, we go right into the preparation for trial," she said.
She structures her calendar so that trials are in the afternoons only, from 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
"All my jury trials start at 1:30, but they can all count on never waiting a minute outside my courtroom," she said.
At trial, Essegian is very clear on her rules: Stand to make objections and state the grounds only, no speaking objections, no standing at the lectern, don't present arguments or instruct jurors during opening statements.
"They know I don't want a lot of interruptions with sidebars. I will not deny them one if it's important," she said.
Essegian said she expects attorneys in her courtroom to be prompt and prepared so that everyone on her calendar can be well-represented and have an equal opportunity at justice.
"It isn't brain surgery," Essegian said.
Thomas Kerrigan, an attorney for the state Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, has tried many appeals of Labor Commission hearings in Essegian's court.
Kerrigan describes her as "a very gracious, very charming
"She doesn't suffer fools gladly, especially if they come into court and they're not prepared or they're not procedurally where they should be. She does not tolerate that. But if everybody is doing what they're supposed to do and behaving themselves and fair, she is very pleasant."
Greg Stone of the Encino firm of Stone Rosenblatt & Cha was impressed with Essegian's handling of an 11-day jury trial televised on Court TV in 1994. Stone defended a Hispanic security guard for the Ralph's grocery chain accused of a racially motivated detention of an African-American shopper. The guard accused the shopper of taking a bottle of Visine.
"I was not pleased to get transferred to [Central Civil West]. You know it's called 'the Bank' and is known for large plaintiff awards. But she was fair, she was patient and she was tough when she had to be," Stone said, who took the defense to a complete win.
"I've had other cases in front of her since, and I'm always happy to be in her court," Stone added.
So is James F. Jordan, who lost that case to Stone.
"Ruth Essegian is a marvelous judge," Jordan said. "I think she had a good grasp of most of the legal issues, and she had an extremely good grasp of how to run a courtroom. ... She maintained her courtroom with a great deal of dignity; you felt good going in there."
Jordan has tried many other cases in Essegian's court since and rates her highly as a judge.
"She basically lets you try your case and doesn't get in the way unless absolutely necessary," he said.
Beverly Hills sole practitioner Scott J. Nord, who recently defended a homeowners association in a claim for attorney fees was surprised by her ease in settling what had been an emotional case for the parties.
"At first, I was worried, but she handled the settlement really well. My clients really liked her," Nord said. "I'd try a case in her court anytime."
Here are some of Essegian's recent cases and the lawyers involved:
Harris v. Costco, 01E04431
Plaintiff: Mark A. Schenkman, Law Office of Mark A. Schenkman, Encino
Defense: Richard Michael Koep and Darcy F. Storin, Even Crandall Wade & Lowe, Woodland Hills
Spitzer v. Fulton Court Homeowners Association, 01E04430
Plaintiff: Daniel B. Spitzer, Law Offices of Daniel B. Spitzer, Encino
Defense and cross-complainant: Scott J. Nord, Law Offices of Scott J. Nord, Beverly Hills
Cross-defendant: Mariana Marquez, in pro per
Young v. Ralph's, BC082435
Plaintiff: James F. Jordan, Law Offices of James F. Jordan, Tarzana
Defense: Gregory E. Stone, Stone Rosenblatt & Cha, Encino
Vasquez v. Correa, 9E10713
Plaintiff: Norman W. Coe, Southwest Law Center, Van Nuys
Defense: Bradley M. Bush, Even Crandall Wade & Lowe, Woodland Hills
Petrilyak v. Dovlatyan, 00E05230
Plaintiff: Nora Hovsepian, Law Offices of Nora Hovsepian, Sherman Oaks
Defense: Wendy Coffelt, Kazanjian & Martinetti, Glendale
#337672
Ed Kimble
Daily Journal Staff Writer
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424
Send a letter to the editor:
Email: letters@dailyjournal.com