Comment #: CA2742
Rating:1.0
Comments:
On November 4th 2009 judge patrick mahoney but me in custody for no reason charge me with contempt of court and terrorist threat 6 months later the district attorney file a motion to dismiss the contempt of court allegation this motion was granted by other judge but they still kept me in custody for a buried for years i was not allowed to hire attorney from outside I was not allowed to subpoena witnesses I was not allowed to have a speedy trial and after I completed my sentence in state prison the San Francisco sheriff department but me back to the county jail then they poisoned my food to make me look crazy so I cannot file lawsuit against those individuals involved in this misconduct . this is 1 of the most discrimination case in the history of the state of California , till this day I have being treated for the food poisoning this is injustice !!!

Comment #: CA1557
Rating:1.0
Comments:
His rulings are completely unfair and favor attractive female litigants over men. I have seen him completely disregard the recommendations of custody evaluators, awarding complete custody and no time share to men and remove men from their children's lives after prior 50%-50% custody orders of prior judges spanning nine years. Judge Mahoney is disgusting, unfair, listens to no one but himself talk, and does not read the papers in cases and instead rules for cronies. He has no ability whatsoever to recognize perjury in his courtroom and will make findings of facts entered into evidence that are completely fabricated. He should be removed from the bench. Judge Mahoney is biased against the poor and minorities.

Comment #: CA1367
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
As a supermodel and a MILF, I entirely disagree with CA1340. I would in fact urge everyone who litigates in SF to make sure they ask every judge if they are earning money outside of what the Legislature has proscribed under the CA Constitution and as affirmed in Sturgeon v. LA. Flat out ask if there is a conflict of interest you need to know about. Get the Form 700 Statement of Financial Interest for the judge, and make sure.

Comment #: CA1366
Rating:4.0
Comments:
As a supermodel, I entirely disagree with CA1340. I would in fact urge every litigant to make sure they ask every judge if they are earning money outside of what the Legislature has proscribed under the CA Constitution and as affirmed in Sturgeon v. LA. Flat out ask if there is a conflict of interest you need to know about. Get the Form 700 Statement of Financial Interest for the judge, and know who is influencing them.

Given the number of complaints about the female judicial officers, and the fact that there exists an entire magazine founded to expose the "injustices" of Commissioner Marjorie Slabach, I would have to say that Mahoney is unable to control his staff and does not show women respect if he is ogling them openly in front of you as you say.

Judges do not make clearly bad decisions based on superficial things like looks. That is a crock, and if anything, if you trace the funding for that court, you will see that their programs recieve the lionshare of grant $$$ from "Responsible Fatherhood" programs, which then go to pro-fatherhood nonprofits to which the court is beholden.

The facts demonstrate that fathers get custody 70% of the time when they ask. In addition, you have court officers in SF which belong to organizations co-founded by father's rights activists and who tour the country giving workshops with same.

In turn, you also have a IV-D/DCSS program designed by a father's rights consultant, and the DCSS staff is trained by the Fatherhood Coalition. A glance at their EPIC grant applications demonstrates how the court and DCSS allow fathers to choose between paying off arrears OR going for custody with a fine array of pro-fathers FREE litigation support to start custody wars. I believe this program extorts both parents, but ultimately the court must decide in favor of the father the majority of the time if it would like to keep the cooperation of these nonprofits and it's federal funding.

A little scratch on the surface tells a different story than you, and I would have to encourage you to follow the money. It does not lie.

Please locate a pro-mother court case that has come out of there.

I experienced the same issue you did re: sitting on orders, as I recieved one removing unnamed items from my file about a month after he signed it. In addition, many times I have not been given proper service on documents, and I have seen judges overlook evidence and ignore impropriety without providing an explanation, which leads me to the above referenced conclusion as well.

Comment #: CA1340
Rating:2.3
Comments:
Judge Patrick J. Mahoney Superior Court San Francisco (Family Law)is very crafty, bias and leans towards the litigant if they are attractive single woman. If your client is attractive, your going to win.

My personal experience:
I was present in the Court room when Judge Patrick J. Mahoney allowed the Move-away of a 4 year old girl to German with her mother who was an admitted escort.

My heart broke for the Father who put up a valiant, probably the most heroic fight I've seen by a Father. I've never seen spectators in the Court room cry before, but there wasnt a dry eye in the Court room.

The Mother was a very attractive White Female, age 28. Her attorney was a Very attractive mixed interracial white female. (Case law support Father and Mother's attorney was not very good.

I recently found the Appeals Opinion on this Father, "In re Marriage of Morgan (2010). As I was present that morning I will state that none of what happened in the Trial was correct in the Opinion. This Father was railroaded and why I have chosen to leave this filed.

You have to watch every steps this Judge takes and report to the Judical Committee.

For example, if Judge Mahoney issues a Statement of Decision, he will file it, then sit on the Decision before sending it out.

My recommendation is file an immediate CCP 170.6 and have Judge Patrick J. Mahoney Superior Court of San Francisco disqualified, especially if you client is not attractive.

I know this sounds one sided but trust me I've seen this Judge Perform so many time I could write a huge Joke book on his rulings.

I know I'm not suppose to talk down about members of the CalBar, but I dont care anymore and will leave this profession.