I’ve discovered I’m not the only one victimized by the egregious conduct in the San Francisco Small Claims Court of Judge Donald S. Mitchell. When confronted with facts that Judge Mitchell acted illegally in court by copying from erroneous past documentation I went to court to correct, the Judicial Commission, a self-policing agency refused to take action, and in a threatening manner told me not to contact them again as the commission refuses to review Mitchell.
In 2015 I had the unfortunate opportunity of experiencing first-hand the appalling lack of oversight of the San Francisco Superior Court and specifically illegal actions of San Francisco Small Claims Court Judge, Donald S. Mitchell. My case was to recover my deductible my parked car being crashed into as I was exiting my parked car. Judge Mitchell who illegally viewed insurance arbitration results based on my insurer not submitting my supporting statement and not supplying me with information I had a legal right to, Mitchell displayed bizarre thinking in comments that were pretty ridiculous. I was completely in the right, when parked and exiting my car in a parking lot when a man from Elk Grove driving at an excessive speed, which was documented, crashed into my opening door when he sped and turned left into the parking space next to my parked car. When confronted with facts that Judge Mitchell acted illegally in court by copying from erroneous past documentation I went to court to correct, the Judicial Commission, a self-policing agency refused to take action, and in a threatening manner told me not to contact them again as the commission refuses to review Mitchell. Two attorneys advised me that Mitchell’s actions were clearly illegal, though obviously his actions and demeanor in court were very wrong and witnessed by others.
Judge Mitchell acted illegally in the small claims courtroom and the Judicial Commission, which is a joke of a self-policing judicial arm, reuses to ever take action. Others have had serious issues in Judge Mitchell’s court, which clearly is viewed as his own operation. I refuse to let this go and suspect the City’s courts need to be investigated as part of the corruption investigation currently ongoing based on recent news reports and administrative arrests.
Donald S. Mitchell, what a piece of work. First of all, if you are a tenant suing a landlord in small claims, you should know not to waste your time with this judge, who is a landlord!
Google SF EXAMINER and DONALD S MITCHELL to see the article about his corruption
Judge Mitchell ruled with emotion and bias when overseeing my small claims case. Even though I had legal documents proving my case, he chose to ignore the evidence because he was upset with me that I wouldn't use the arbitrators. After much harassment from him to utilize the arbitrators and me respectfully declining, he then refused to listen or assess the evidence I had and spoke to me sharply. Then instead of providing his ruling in court, he said he would send it in a letter which I found odd. The letter ruled against me and I believe he sent the ruling in a letter because he could not legally justify it. I sent a letter of complaint to the Commission on Judicial Performance and found out that judges in small claims do not have to explain their legal ruling for their decision. I was shocked as I explained to the Staff Counsel that just allows a judge to use emotion, bias, and prejudice in their rulings. I asked that the Commission change that procedure to ensure transparency and minimize the ability for a judge to abuse their power. The staff counsel was patient and listened but was pretty apathetic about enacting any change. The people have no where to go for support if they encounter a corrupt judge.
This judge is an atrocity who blatantly and flagrantly does not follow the law, wastes all of your time allowing senseless and stupid distractions to dominate over facts and evidence, and yells at people who try to politely stand up for themselves and be heard. He is in a word, pathetic.
Base on these comments, there is a conflict of interests when Donald Mitchell presides a case, for he is a landlord. Does someone supervise this judge? And if there is someone why action has not been taken to disqualify Mitchell from hearing tenant-landlord disputes.