Metropolitan News-Enterprise

 

Tuesday, July 15, 2025

 

Page 1

 

Former LASC Judge Publicly Admonished for Calling Female Lawyers, Parties ‘Ladies’

Commission on Judicial Performance Also Says Jurist Engaged in Pattern of Impatient Behavior

 

By a MetNews Staff Writer

 

Former Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James A. Kaddo yesterday drew a public admonishment from the judicial disciplinary body for addressing female litigants, attorneys, and others as “ladies” or “ma’am,” and not using similar terminology for their male counterparts, as well as engaging in a pattern of discourteous, undignified and impatient behavior toward potential jurors, lawyers, and parties.

Kaddo, who retired in November at the age of 90, also on multiple occasions told women appearing before him to “control” themselves and accused them of talking too much, statements that the Commission on Judicial Performance (“CJP”) said created an implication that women are too emotional.

In one example cited by the commission, he repeatedly referred to Glendale-based attorney Maro Burunsuzyan, who was admitted to the State Bar in 1994, as “young lady” during a medical malpractice trial in 2021. He also told her to “control herself” after she questioned his ruling on an objection, and told her, “You don’t like me, take it up on appeal.”

Outside of the presence of the jury, the judge at one point paraphrased former President Bill Clinton’s infamous statement, during a grand jury investigation into his relationship with White House assistant Monica Lewinsky, that “it depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is,”  and said that the quoted remark was made before Burunsuzyan “was born.”

She later objected to the judge calling her “young lady,” pointing out that her male opposing counsel was 20 years her junior and that Kaddo had never made a reference to his age, commenting: “There are times when I’ve left the court and I’ve wondered we all come from the same association. We hold a license from the same bar. And why am I being called a young lady?”

Kaddo apologized and added that he was not biased.

After one juror refused to return for deliberations, after finding out that another had possibly been exposed to COVID-19, Burunsuzyan asked the judge to inform the concerned panelist that the other party had not tested positive. He declined to do so, declared a mistrial, and told his clerk in chambers that Burunsuzyan is a “bitch.”

He repeated the sentiment in front of Los Angeles Superior Court Supervising Judge Virginia Keeny and two staff members.

The commission said:

“Judge Kaddo made several comments to Ms. Burunsuzyan reflecting bias on the basis of sex or gender. He told Ms. Burunsuzyan…to ‘control’ herself; repeatedly called her ‘young lady’ (once in the presence of the jury); and said, ‘[Y]ou’re upset’ and ‘You’re welcome to your feelings.’ ”

Continuing, the disciplinary panel remarked:

“Judge Kaddo also made several comments to Ms. Burunsuzyan that reflected bias and embroilment, unconnected to gender bias. Judge Kaddo told Ms. Burunsuzyan to ‘take it up on appeal,’ while in the presence of the jury; called her ‘unprofessional’;…admonished her for complaining about being called ‘young lady’;…and said she was too young to remember President Clinton’s quote….The commission found that Judge Kaddo’s conduct was rude, demeaning, conveyed the appearance of embroilment and bias against the plaintiff (or plaintiff’s counsel), and could reasonably interfere with the attorney-client relationship, in violation of canons 3B(4), 3B(5), 2, and 2A.”

Other Instances

In another instance cited by the commission, Kaddo interrupted the plaintiff’s attorney, Laura Sedrish of Los Angeles office of Jacoby & Meyers, during her cross-examination of a defense witness during a 2018 personal injury trial. He accused her of being aggressive and said:

“Just calm down. Do you know what ‘calm down’ is?”

When Sedrish said that she was insulted by his comment and questioned whether he would make such a comment to a male attorney, he repeated:

“Just calm down.”

The commission concluded that Kaddo’s repeated demand that Sedrish “calm down” could reasonably be perceived as gender bias and could make Ms. Sedrish appear less credible than her male counterpart, who received no similar admonishment.

During a 2021 unlawful detainer trial in which the parties were self-represented, he accused a female litigant, who was appearing telephonically, of talking too much, telling his clerk to mute her, saying that “[s]he wouldn’t shut up.” When she asked for the case to be permanently assigned to a courtroom, Kaddo responded:

“You don’t tell me what to do. You don’t run the courthouse. We run the courthouse.”

Finding the comments to be rude and demeaning, the CJP concluded that they also conveyed the appearance of embroilment and bias.

Other examples of interrupting attorneys were cited by the panel, as well as multiple instances in which he referred to female attorneys, paralegals, or litigants as “Ma’am” or “lady” and accused them of talking too much.

Treatment of Jurors

He was also admonished for his treatment of potential jurors, at times disparaging their excuses for being allegedly unable to serve. In one case, he called the reasons “lame,” commenting:

“I had a lady who decided to get pregnant. I had a lady who decided to have a cousin die so she could go to a funeral.

“I had a professor who doesn’t believe in the jury system, but he loves America. He wants us to eliminate…the jury system. He loves democracy, but he doesn’t love juries. That’s insane. That’s insane…..

“I’m not going to take it anymore. I’m not going to take it. They’re here to serve.”

He added:

“I’m due to retire….But yesterday was agony, walking barefooted on broken glass. My ulcers are acting. My heartburn is a flaming volcano. If I had a dog, I would have kicked it. Thankfully my children were not home, and so I couldn’t take it out on anybody.”

The CJP concluded:

“From 2018 through 2024, Judge Kaddo engaged in a pattern of discourteous, undignified, and impatient behavior, directed at potential jurors, attorneys, and parties. In some instances, the judge also conveyed the appearance of embroilment and bias on the basis of gender, sex, race, national origin, or ethnicity.”

Kaddo’s Response

Rejecting Kaddo’s attempt to characterize his behavior as “rare flareups” or necessary for courtroom control, the commission cited the Judicial Conduct Handbook, which provides:

“Anger is an understandable human emotion, but abusiveness is never necessary.”

As to his treatment of women, Kaddo insisted that his use of “lady” was respectful, pointing out that the term is often used when addressing the jury. The commission disagreed, saying:

“Use of the term ‘ladies and gentlemen’ to address the jury panel is not the same as calling an individual member of the bar ‘lady,’ when a male attorney is not similarly addressed as ‘gentleman.’ The jury panel consists of a group of men and women, and using their names would not be practical. The commission concluded that, no matter his intention, many of Judge Kaddo’s comments were, at a minimum, demeaning, and also reflected offensive and outdated stereotypes.”

Ten members of the commission, including Justice Julia C. Kelety of the Fourth District Court of Appeal’s Div. One and Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Lisa B. Lench, voted in favor of the public admonishment. Los Angeles attorney Rickey Ivie was recused from the matter.

 

 

 

Copyright 2025, Metropolitan News Company