W

• Author: Mark Thompson/Elizabeth Smith
• Pages: 842-885

S–Z

-W-

-W-

WALMARK, Richard

Temperament/Demeanor

Attorneys interviewed about Judge Walmark praised his

demeanor. “Overall, it’s a very cheerful and pleasant court. I

always look forward to going there. I think every attorney will

agree, when they walk in his court, that he’s an extremely

pleasant guy. He’s never demeaning toward any of the attor-

neys. I like the fact also that he’s very respectful and courte-

ous to the client, the criminal defendants that come to the

courthouse,” said one. Others said, “He had the type of tem-

perament that was perfect for a judge. No ego.” “He’s a very

nice man. He’s very pleasant.” “He seemed very pleasant.” As

a prosecutor, he was “always a very jovial guy.”

Intelligence/Knowledge

One interviewee called Judge Walmark’s knowledge of

law “impeccable.” The attorney explained, “He’s extremely

knowledgeable of the law. He keeps a very thorough file on

what the law is on a variety of issues that arise in court. He

updates it routinely. He can rattle off cases and cite numbers

without ever referring to his file of cases. At the same time,

he is certainly willing to research a novel issue or something

that may not have come before him in the past. His skills in

that regard, in terms of researching and understanding the

case law and how it applies to the case before him, are very

good. He has a very strong legal mind.” Another attorney

concurred with that assessment, calling Judge Walmark

“very knowledgeable about the law.” A number of the crimi-

nal defense attorneys interviewed about Judge Walmark had

very favorable recollections of his years as a prosecutor and

praised both his fairness and knowledge of law. As one put

it, “He was a very intelligent and hardworking D.A.”

On Motions

One interviewee said Judge Walmark’s pleasant demeanor

is readily apparent in hearings on motions. “Even if he dis-

agrees with their position, he’s always extremely respect-

ful and courteous,” the attorney said. “That doesn’t always

translate into getting the rulings that you want, of course.

But it’s nice to practice law in that kind of environment.”

Another attorney said his basic sense of fairness colors his

motions practice. “He understands discovery and evidentiary

issues and knows that investigations have to be conducted to

give everybody a fair trial,” the attorney said. A third attorney,

who had not yet taken a case to trial in Judge Walmark’s

court, had nonetheless seen enough about the way he oper-

ates in preliminary proceedings to conclude that he would be

good on motions. “I certainly think that I would give him an

opportunity to make a decision,” the attorney said.

On Trial

A criminal defense attorney who had gone up against

Judge Walmark before he became a judge said, “I knew him

as a prosecutor and he was an extremely effective trial attor-

ney. Very ethical. I can’t image that as a judge, he would do

anything but handle things in an ethical way and an effective

way in court. Given his knowledge of the law, and given how

pleasant and fair he is to all the attorneys, I wouldn’t hesi-

tate to try a case in his court.” Three other criminal defense

attorneys said much the same thing. “Because he was such

a fair, even-handed prosecutor, I would try any case in front

of him.” “He was very straightforward, a straight shooter.” “I

tried some criminal cases on the other side [when he was a

prosecutor] and he was always very fair. I can’t imagine him

being a bad judge.”

Continuances

Attorneys interviewed about Judge Walmark had no com-

plaints about his policy on continuances. “I think he goes by

the law,” said one. “If there is good cause, he will give you

a continuance. He’s not trying to jam anybody, but he does

like to move his calendar along. If proper notice is given, and

if the cause is stated, he will grant you a continuance. But I

think he might lose patience with attorneys who are engag-

ing in dilatory practices.” Another attorney said, “I think he’s

incredibly fair. He understands the nature of private practice.

He’s not loosey goosey and is not going to give you a lifetime

to drag a case out. He’s smart enough to see whether you’re

actually working the case or you’re manipulating the system.”

Settlement

Asked whether Judge Walmark is proactive about try-

ing to reach pretrial dispositions in cases, one interviewee

replied, “His entire courtroom is proactive about disposi-

tions. But he does not force dispositions on people. He

doesn’t threaten people. He doesn’t tell them he’s going to

put them in jail [if they don’t take a plea]. His staff, every-

thing about his courtroom, is a friendly, safe haven, where

you’ll understand what’s going and he’ll answer your ques-

tions and he’ll do what’s in your best interest and what’s in

the best interests of society.” Another attorney added, “My

experience is that he leaves [plea negotiations] to the parties.

The cases that I have settled in his court were those that

were done between the prosecutor and myself. But he does

recognize that in the end he has to approve the disposition,

so he doesn’t automatically let the disposition go forward

without understanding a little about why the disposition is

being reached. But he does let the parties negotiate in their

own manner without interceding.”

Proclivities

Criminal defense attorneys interviewed about Judge

Walmark generally had no complaints about biases on his

part. “He’s very interested in the resolution of cases as well

as caring for individual defendants. He takes great pride

in doing the fair thing. He’s not biased and he’s very even-

handed,” said one attorney. Another said, “He was a fair

D.A.; I found him to be very firm, but he was okay.” Another

interviewee noted that most former prosecutors on the bench

are “a bit harsh because they’ve seen it all. But I can’t really

say anything negative about Judge Walmark. He’s an okay

judge, from my limited experience.” A defense attorney who

represented a defendant in a misdemeanor criminal case

said the experience offered an insight into how some city

attorneys view Judge Walmark. “There are some matters

that the city attorneys don’t want him to hear,” the attorney

asserted. “Their complaint is that on insignificant or non-

serious matters, he tends not to give them sufficient serious-

ness. On serious matters they’re okay with him.”

Summary

Judge Walmark was held in high regard by his adversar-

ies when he was a prosecutor and defense attorneys inter-

viewed about him said he certainly hasn’t lost his sense of

fairness and pleasant demeanor since he was appointed to

the bench. “He’s a very good judge. I think he’s great,” said

one interviewee. Another also called him a “great bench

officer,” adding, “He’s a man of the people and it’s a true

pleasure to appear in front of him.” (04H)

WALSH, Brian C.

Temperament/Demeanor

Judge Walsh “has very good judicial demeanor,” said one

of the attorneys who was interviewed about him. “I think

that when you go in his courtroom, lawyers and litigants

have a comfort level and they feel welcomed. They feel that

this is somebody who is going to listen to them.” Another

interviewee said, “He is very courteous to attorneys. He has a

great sense of humor, which he appropriately uses in court.”

A third interviewee said, “He is a perfect gentleman. I have

no complaints about him.”

Intelligence/Knowledge

Judge Walsh “is very bright and hard-working,” one inter-

viewee said. Another said, “He is very smart. He is very good

on the law.” A third interviewee said, “I think he is bright. He

feels very comfortable in the family arena. He seemed com-

fortable from the day he started. He had no problem with it.”

Another interviewee, in contrast, questioned his grasp of the

area of law. “I think when it comes to family law, he really

is barely treading water. He doesn’t really understand family

832Walmark California Judge Reviews

CJ_Volume_2.indb 832CJ_Volume_2.indb 832 9/5/2014 12:48:08 PM9/5/2014 12:48:08 PM

S–Z

law at all. He is having a real problem with it,” the attorney

said. “One of his weakest points right now is that he really

doesn’t comprehend the position of minor’s counsel and

what minor’s counsel can and can’t do. That has been my

biggest experience with him.”

On Motions

Most of the attorneys who were interviewed about Judge

Walsh had no complaints about his rulings or the way he

arrives at them. “On the motion calendar, sometimes in fam-

ily court we’re lucky if they’re right as often as they’re wrong,”

said one interviewee. “He clearly reads the papers and I think

he is making the right decisions a great majority of the

time. He also will give you an intended decision.” Another

interviewee said he is “a good listener” and is “persuadable.”

That attorney added, “If you’re before him, whether you’re

represented or not, you are able to make your argument and

he will pay attention and listen.” A third interviewee said, “I

think he has very good judgment,” while another attorney

said he is “fantastic on the law.” One interviewee disagreed.

“I find that he rules from emotion rather than based on the

law,” the attorney said. “I have known him for years and

I expected to really like him, but I have been very disap-

pointed. I find him to be very emotional and arbitrary in his

rulings.” Another interviewee dismissed that criticism. “I’m a

little bit surprised to hear that comment about Brian Walsh

because, yes, I think he uses his gut and his intuition, but

that is necessary,” the attorney said. “I can’t imagine any

judge not occasionally ruling from their gut on family law

matters, because of the nature of the law. I think he is a good

judge and he tries to follow the law and also use his gut, so

I would take that criticism with a grain of salt.”

On Trial

Judge Walsh is always very well prepared for trial pro-

ceedings in his court, attorneys said. “He has obviously

reviewed the file long before the attorneys have showed up.

He is familiar with all the legal issues,” one interviewee said.

Another said, “He does keep a very well-managed calendar,

because he will not set a trial until someone is absolutely

ready and they have explored every possible avenue of settle-

ment.” Other interviewees seconded that latter observation.

“There is supposedly a policy in family law that you don’t

even get a settlement conference or trial date set unless

they determine that all discovery really is done and that you

truly are ready to go. In practice, I don’t think all the judges

adhere to that to quite the same degree, but I would say that

Judge Walsh definitely adheres to that policy. I don’t think

I’ve had a problem if we thought a case was ready to be set

and he wasn’t willing to set it. I just think he’s careful to

ask those questions: Is discovery complete and is this case

really ready?” Once a trial is underway, Judge Walsh “takes

a lot of time with his cases,” another attorney said. “He pays

a lot of attention. He is very well prepared when he comes

to the bench. He knows his cases.” Though he has a strong

preference for settlements, he doesn’t shy away from trials,

said another interviewee, who noted that he was “a good civil

litigator” before he became a judge. “But it is correct that he

will not let you set a trial unless it is absolutely necessary.

He doesn’t want to waste court resources, unless it is abso-

lutely necessary.”

Continuances

One interviewee asserted that Judge Walsh “might contin-

ue issues too much, but I think his purpose is to get people

to settle.” Another interviewee, in contrast, said, “I think he

is less patient on continuance requests” than some other

judges. “He wants to know why. He wants adequate good

cause for a continuance.” A third interviewee has “never had

any problem continuing a case” in Judge Walsh’s court, or

for that matter, in any other court in Santa Clara County, “if

there’s a good reason.”

Settlement

All of the attorneys who were interviewed about Judge

Walsh emphasized that he is, as one put it, “very big on

encouraging settlement.” Another said, “He is strong, strong,

strong on that issue and will have multiple settlement con-

ferences to try and get parties to an agreement.” Two others

said, “He works hard to facilitate resolution of cases that

appear in his court,” and “really wants to be involved in get-

ting the cases resolved.” A fifth interviewee said, “He will not

set a trial until all avenues for settlement have been exhaust-

ed. He does everything possible to settle cases. I don’t think

he likes adversity in family court.”

Proclivities

Two of the attorneys who were interviewed about Judge

Walsh had complaints about him, with one questioning his

grasp of family law and the other asserting that he is too

emotional. “He takes strong likes and dislikes from the gut

towards people who come into the courtroom and that’s how

he rules,” the latter attorney said. “I don’t think it’s so much

the attorneys because I’ve had him go both ways on me. But

I do think it is with the clients. If he takes a negative view

of somebody, he will punish them, whether the punishment

fits or not.” Another attorney said he has a pet peeve about

parents who fight over their children. “When it comes to

custody, he seems especially passionate and really doesn’t

want parties fighting over stupid stuff, and he will make it

very clear that the children are his priority,” the attorney

said. “He can be a little hard on people and really wants

people to start focusing on the children as opposed to the

petty issues they have with one another. So he is not always

the most gentle in his delivery of that message.” The other

interviewees had no complaints. “He is very fair,” said one.

“He is really a top-notch judge,” said another. One of the

attorneys who was interviewed about him rated him as “the

best judge on the bench in Santa Clara County, in my view.”

The attorney explained, “What distinguishes Walsh is that

he is very balanced. He is very respectful to everyone who

appears in front of him, whether represented or not. I don’t

find him leaning any way, but he is always looking for a

smart resolution of cases. He looks for economy whenever it

can be created. He is a very impressive guy.” That attorney

added, “I was in his court the other day observing, and I was

thinking he does such an extraordinary job that I felt like

volunteering some hours of the week to help with whatever

he needs to have done because he was so good. I couldn’t do

that because I had something in front of him, but I felt like

doing that.”

Summary

Judge Walsh is exceptionally interested in getting cases

settled short of trial. He will hold numerous settlement con-

ferences to help resolve matters, and won’t set a case for

trial unless every avenue for settlement has been exhausted.

In marital dissolution cases, he also emphasizes the needs

and interests of the children and doesn’t look favorably on

parents who seem to be more focused on their personal

squabbles. Several interviewees complained that Judge

Walsh lets his emotions dictate how he will rule and bases

some of his decision on which party he likes best rather than

on the law. But most interviewees praised his performance

in court and several rated him among the best family judges

in Santa Clara County. (11A)

WALSH, Harry J.

Temperament/Demeanor

Civil practitioners had no complaints about Judge Walsh’s

demeanor. “I really like his courtroom demeanor,” said one.

Another said, “He has a pleasant demeanor. He always runs

a good court. I was pretty satisfied with him. I thought he

was a fine judge.” Family law practitioners had mixed feel-

ings about him. By the end of his tenure in a family assign-

ment, he was, by the account of all attorneys interviewed

about him, burned out on that job and did not hide his feel-

ings from those who appeared before him. He had a “short

temper and a low level of tolerance for abuses heaped upon

the family law system by many family law attorneys, as well

as the nuances of people’s difficult situation[s],” one inter-

viewee said. Another family lawyer agreed that Judge Walsh

“did not have a lot of patience with the litigants and the

attorneys,” but he “wanted to do a good job.” The attorney

Profiles Walsh833

CJ_Volume_2.indb 833CJ_Volume_2.indb 833 9/5/2014 12:48:08 PM9/5/2014 12:48:08 PM

S–Z

added, however, that he “could be difficult at times. I would

not deny that.” Another family law practitioner called him

an “interesting man” who “would deal politely with people. I

liked him,” the attorney said.

Intelligence/Knowledge

One of the family law practitioners interviewed about

Judge Walsh called him “a good student of the law,” but

added, “He basically comes from a background in civil law.

Other attorneys agreed that he is best suited for civil cases.

“He seemed very knowledgeable and thorough,” one civil

practitioner said. “He was indeed up on the law,” another

civil practitioner added. “Even his gut reactions were pretty

right. When he said, ‘I think it has to go there’ and he would

go and look it up, sure enough, he was right. He was pretty

good about reading the case law or anything that you put in

front of him.” Another interviewee said, “He is a smart judge.

He understands the law, and he thinks through legal prob-

lems. But he is also a judge who has a very good heart and

understands that what he is doing is dealing with human

beings. He treats lawyers with great respect. He treats clients

with great respect.” A second family lawyer added, “I don’t

believe he had much of a family law background. He tried to

bring himself up to speed as much as possible. But that is a

complex area. At times, I don’t think he realized how complex

it could be.” Another family law attorney said “he knew the

law quite well. Overall, he was very good, a B+.” He is very,

very comfortable there.”

On Motions

Civil law practitioners had no complaints about the way

Judge Walsh handled hearings on motions. “He did not

always rule for me, but that’s the way it goes. He made

thoughtful and thorough rulings,” said one attorney. A sec-

ond civil attorney added, “He makes some rather courageous

rulings, in my view. Courageous may be an overstatement,

but he has made rulings that other judges might not make.

For example, I brought a motion for a new trial in a personal

injury case and he granted it, based on an inconsistent

defense verdict. That triggered an appeal, and ultimately the

defense settled. Many judges, particularly those who have

a decidedly defense history, would have just said, ‘the jury

has spoken.’ He did not do that. I saw that response pat-

tern in everything I’ve appeared on in his court over the last

seven or eight years,” the attorney said. Some of the family

law practitioners who were interviewed about Judge Walsh

were considerably more critical. “Listened to? I did not find

that with Walsh. I did not think he read what was in front

of him. I don’t think he wanted to read what was in front of

him.” Another family law attorney added, “At the end of his

tenure in family court, he was someone to be wary of. He

was known for shooting from the hip, making calls without

particularly caring so much for what the actual law might be,

and not fully applying himself.” A third family attorney said,

“Oftentimes, I thought he would get to the right conclusion.

But he got there on a tortured path. A lot of it had to do with

the fact that he did not have a lot of patience with the liti-

gants or with the attorneys.” Other family attorneys had bet-

ter recollections of their dealings with Judge Walsh. “People

have different styles, and if you are aware of his style, it was

easy to comply with that. He wanted you to get to the point,

which was fine. Give him the relevant stuff. Every time he

took something under submission, it was promptly returned.

He would give good decisions,” said the attorney, who added

that he “did not like spousal support, particularly.”

On Trial

Attorneys who had conducted civil trials in Judge Walsh’s

court praised his skills as a trial judge. “I thought he was

good in trial,” said one who tried a personal injury case in

his court. “The jurors seemed to like him. He had a good

demeanor. He was fair to both sides. I don’t have any criti-

cism of him. He would be one of the few judges I could say

that about.” Another civil practitioner said, “I thought it was

great the way he handled things. It was a civil case regarding

an accident. He would give you enough time to argue, but

he wouldn’t extend it out too long, either. I thought he was

very fair. As far as trial, and his demeanor in the courtroom

and all of those things, I give him a very, very high recom-

mendation. I thought he was great.” That attorney added, “I

thought he was particularly good during voir dire. He came

right up to the podium and talked to the prospective jurors. I

had never seen that before. I think in some ways he got them

very interested in the case early on, and it made voir dire a

lot easier than I have seen in some courtrooms where a lot of

[prospective jurors] come up with excuses. He got them kind

of excited about the case.” Judge Walsh came in for more

criticism from attorneys who tried cases before him in fam-

ily court, though some praised him for trying to bring higher

standards to that somewhat more freewheeling legal arena.

“If you have been around courthouses a lot, you would know

that there is a lot of nonsense sometimes. He did not like

nonsense. He wanted people to get to the point, which was

fine with me. But he obviously didn’t like that assignment. He

had a little note on the counsel table that said, ‘Upon request,

the evidence code will be enforced.’ If you have been around

family law, you would probably get the humor.” Other family

law practitioners had a more favorable view of the judge. “Yes,

he had that sign on his counsel table,” said an interviewee

who has appeared before Judge Walsh in family matters and

in criminal court. “His courtroom enforces the evidence code.

But that is not a knock against him. Most family law lawyers

don’t know the evidence code, but he said, ‘hey, in my court-

room, I am going to enforce it. Stop your yapping and be a

lawyer.’ It is a tough assignment. The attorneys oftentimes

are as much at fault as the judge, so I share his frustrations

pretty much,” said the attorney, who added that he “does a

[very wonderful] job” in civil court. “He absolutely controls

his courtroom, but he is compassionate,” the attorney said.

Another family law practitioner added, “He came with a steep

learning curve. He had never done this. He did well in the

assignment, but he was no-nonsense, so you didn’t stray

from things. That meant things were more focused, but I still

think people got their say. But he would move things along.”

One attorney had mixed feelings about Judge Walsh. “He

tended to have what I call ‘judges’ disease.’ Judge like that

have been on the bench so long that they come to believe they

can do the case better than the attorney and may get frus-

trated at how slow it is, so they want to speed it up, because

they are bored with it and they know what is coming up. But

we are not trying the case for the judge. We are trying it for

the jury. So he had a little bit of impatience as a trial judge

and wanted to move the evidence along. But overall, he is one

of the better judges. I wouldn’t give him tens or anything like

that. But he gets a seven or eight out of 10, overall.”

Continuances

Attorneys interviewed about Judge Walsh had no com-

plaints about how he handled requests for extensions of

time. “I don’t recall having any problem with him on that,”

said one. Another interviewee said, “There was one time

when we asked to have a short day. I don’t remember what

the reasoning was, but he granted it.” A third attorney tried

a case before Judge Walsh that was “ready to go” when it

reached his court, and neither side requested any continu-

ances, “so we didn’t deal with that.”

Settlement

In family court, Judge Walsh participated in settlement

discussions, but not very effectively, several attorneys

recalled. “He did participate in settlement negotiations, but

he didn’t have as much patience with family law issues

as other judges,” said one. Another family law practitio-

ner added, “Family law was just not his forte. The mun-

dane problems of who is going to see the kids on Friday

or Saturday night, and who is going to drive them to the

ballgame just became more than he could bear, and he just

burned out real quickly.” Civil attorneys who tried cases in

Judge Walsh’s court said the cases were beyond the point of

settling by the time they go to him. “He didn’t get involved”

in settlement negotiations, said one attorney. “There was a

separate settlement judge.” Another interviewee added, “His

purpose was to try the case. By that time, all discussions

of settlement had been exhausted. There was just no settle-

ment with the plaintiffs. They wanted to keep going.”

834Walsh California Judge Reviews

CJ_Volume_2.indb 834CJ_Volume_2.indb 834 9/5/2014 12:48:08 PM9/5/2014 12:48:08 PM