Wow, all you need to do is look at the appellate case Vaca v Lewenfus. This judge let an attorney scam a former client by purchasing her house for $10k at a foreclosure by a scam and ruled that this attorney was protected by the SLAPP statutes. The court of appeal reversed, because fraudulent suppression of bids is not a protected activity. Thus, this judge tried to allow a corrupt attorney to buy a $500k house for $10k.
I had a case with this judge and I could not disagree more with the above reviewer. Reviewer #1 probably, unjustifiably, won the case and left such a positive feedback for this judge
This judge does not have judicial temperament. Does not like to get into a debate with any attorney on any issues. In my case , she had already made up her mind right after the opposing attorney completed his opening statement and no witness, case laws or testimony could change her mind. Her ruling was so off in my case that my attorney filed an appeal but, before the court of appeal could hear the case, the case was settled and we had to dismiss our appeal.
Her background was in taxation and now she handles civil matters.
Judge Weintraub is an exemplary judicial officer. She is thoroughly prepared, she follows the law (to a "T", which some attorneys find slightly annoying), and it is apparent that she strives for justice at all times. Her tentatives are extremely well-researched. Accepting an adverse finding is much easier when you can respect the judge's rationale, and her decisions are always solidly based. She generally sticks to her tentative (the preparedness really shows), but she will take a matter under submission if she feels she missed something.
I had a case with this Judge and found her to be quite impressive. She's old school: disciplined, correct, and wants the attorneys before her to be fully prepared. On the other hand, she is careful to ensure that each party has their "day in court." At times my client was concerned that the other side was getting the benefit of too many concessions by the Judge. However, it appears that was to ensure that once the Judgment was in, it would be solid. Unlike the above review, I found her entirely willing to allow the attorneys to argue. Then she made a well reasoned, well researched decision. Note that we did not win on all counts, but the Judgment was fair.