Harvey A. Silberman

Silberman was supposed to finish his term in January 2027. Yet despite his stated love for public service (http://www.metnews.com/articles/2008/judi041508.htm), Silberman retired in mid-2024. Hmmm!

By a MetNews Staff Writer Harvey A. Silberman, who won a seat on the Los Angeles Superior Court through a 2008 election contest and took office Jan. 5, 2009—but was barred from sitting for more than two years while a felony bribery charge was pending against him—is retiring. He was exonerated by a jury on Aug. 1, 2011. His last day on the bench in the Pasadena courthouse will be July 16. After using earned vacation days, he will officially retire Sept. 2. Silberman, then a court commissioner, was elected to a judgeship in 2008 over then-Deputy District Attorney Serena Murillo (who gained election in 2014 and remains on the bench). The indictment of Silbermann and his campaign consultants, Evelyn Jerome Alexander and Alan Randall Steinberg, was unsealed on July 8, 2009, disqualifying him from judicial duties, though he continued to draw a salary. He was accused of offering Murillo an $80,000 bribe to drop her bid for the seat Silberman had staked out. Alexander and Steinberg pled no contest to a misdemeanor conspiracy and testified against their former client. In 2012 the Pasadena Bar Association named him family law judge of the year and in 2015, the San Fernando Valley Bar Association named him judge of the year. Silberman’s law degree is from USC. The judge did not respond to a request for comment on his reflections and plans. Copyright 2024, Metropolitan News Company

This judge is a joke and should be removed. Constantly threatens to remove my child from me for no reason. I think it's all about power and control. He also continues to force to attend co-parenting sessions with my abuser. YOU CANNOT COPARENT WITH A NARCISSIST.

Judge Silberman has so many strikes against him it's hard to know where to start. He has was indicted by a grand jury on conspiracy charges and election bribery. He plead no contest. How is a man like this allowed to make lawful decisions regarding the constituents of Pasadena? Moreover he has taken the away the rights of fathers to participate in the diagnosis and decision making of their 5 year old children's "gender transition" and a father's rights to visitation with their children unless the father get vaccinated. He passes judgement before having all the facts or doing his research. LA County deserves better and more honest Judges. Work with us to remove Judge Silberman through the California Commission.

Judge Silberman has integrity and is thorough and prudent with his legal decisions. He could see through my ex's lies regarding the RO she was requesting, and called her out on them. The case was thrown out. I am so grateful there are honorable people like Judge Silberman who do the right thing and know the damage an untruthful person can cause. Thank you Judge Silberman.

He refuses to make the hard decisions, and kicks the can down the road, but has no problem ranting and raving and then kicks the issues to outside arbitration. He's all smoke! Does not enforce sanctions He focuses his time on trivial matters. Harvey is a joke.

Based on my experience, Silberman's decisions are rather positively disposed toward certain attorneys' clients. This reasonably raises significant questions about his impartiality.

This judge should not be hearing DVPA matters, he refuses to apply the actual law (unless it lets him dismiss the petition) and interferes in witness examination to ask entirely inappropriate and humiliating questions of domestic violence petitioners that would get a lawyer reprimanded and perhaps sanctioned in some courtrooms. Biased in favor men and respondents as though he just emerged from a rerun of Father Knows Best. Clearly is over his job, and permits his Clerks to conduct his court for him in every aspect he can. Needs to be retired before he discredits the DVPA process and harms the local citizens who foolishly file in Pasadena instead of Downtown.

Wow, I guess the presumption of innocence and constitutional right to a fair trial and the return of a verdict beyond a reasonable doubt only applies to certain folk. But if you are a judge in LA end merely accused of wrongdoing, you waive all consitutional rights and we burn you at the stake. I'd hate to have you on my jury --- or to have the tables turned and you seeking these constitutional protections. I'm assuming he would be lauded as a champion of justice if he ruled in your favor in whatever, I'm sure, family matter you had before him. So transparent! The truth really radiates out of you!! LOL

RE: CA45277 Dear Editor, "The above information is false." The fact that Judge Silberman was even ACCUSED and PROSECUTED is significant. Wrongful acquittals happen in court, especially considering the gamesmanship and nepotism that many judges enjoy to protect themselves from the court process. Saying that the accusation is false simply because a court ruled that way is misleading. Courts don't get to decide what is true or not. That right is reserved for the people. I believe Judge Silberman is guilty. Very Truly, Ventura County's Radiant Truth

Ballotpedia’s blurb that “Silberman was indicted by a grand jury and pleaded no contest to misdemeanor conspiracy charges” is partially incorrect. While it is correct that Silberman was indicted, it is incorrect that he entered into a no contest plea. It was Silberman’s two campaign advisors who entered into plea agreements and testified against Silberman.(See Metropolitan News-Enterprise, http://www.metnews.com/articles/2011/silb080211.htm) Silberman and his campaign advisors were accused of felony charges of bribe solicitation and election bribery. When indicted, Silberman claimed innocence, did not enter into a plea, and blamed his campaign advisors for orchestrating the entire scheme. Although Silberman never took the stand in his own defense, the jury sided with Silberman, so he was acquitted while his campaign advisors were convicted. Silberman blamed this debacle on his “naiveté” and posited that he should have been “better educated” about the election process. (See Metropolitan News-Enterprise, http://www.metnews.com/articles/2011/silb080211.htm) Fast forward a decade and a half, and Silberman is once again being accused of an ethical lapse: misuse of his judicial authority and promoting his friend’s business interests. If this accusation correct, who is Silberman going to blame this time around? Is he going to claim that his “naiveté” got the better of him once again? Or is he going to blame someone else, perhaps his clerk, or his bailiff, or even his friend? What Silberman is being accused of is rather serious (Comment # CA45203). If proven correct, Silberman should be suspended, or at the very least publicly reprimanded.

The accusation that Silberman was illegally promoting his friend’s business interests (Comment # CA45203) has to be proven, there are some red flags in his past that raise questions whether he will be able to honestly and straightforwardly address this issue. For example, while campaigning for a judgeship, supposedly for his love of civic service, Silberman had pulled some stunts to weasel out of jury service (Link: http://www.metnews.com/articles/2008/judi041508.htm ) And according to Ballotpedia, in 2009, Silberman was indicted by a grand jury and pleaded no contest to misdemeanor conspiracy charges (Link: https://ballotpedia.org/Harvey_A._Silberman) [EDITOR'S NOTE: The above information is false. The judge was acquitted of all charges on August 2, 2011. See LA Times. https://www.latimes.com/local/la-xpm-2011-aug-02-la-me-judge-bribery-verdict-20110802-story.html] Of course for his part, Silberman would like us to believe that all these were simple misunderstandings, exploited by his ill-intentioned enemies. In short, either Silberman has been rather unlucky in the past, or more plausibly, where there's smoke there's fire. Given Silberman’s past escapades, one cannot but wonder that the accusation Silberman was colluding with his friend and promoting the friend’s business demonstrates a pattern of fast and loose conduct on Silberman’s part. Silberman has an obligation to address this accusation openly and candidly, but I am not counting on it.

I've got no problem wiht judges recommending programs for litigants to take. If you know a good service provider and they always perform, why not push the people into that program. Litigant surmises the judge is getting some secret payments, but that's just a smear, with no support at all. I nearly universally hear Judge Silberman is a great judge, by counsel and litigants alike, so one just b/c a litigant lost, dosent give them the right to smear a thoughtful, honorable, expert and devoted jurist. Sour grapes. No evidence of anything here.

While appearing in judge Silberman’s courtroom as a litigant, I was specifically instructed by Silberman to take, and pay for, a training class conducted by one Albert Gibbs. When I took Albert Gibbs’s class I found out that most, if not all, attendees were referred to him by the same judge, Harvey Silberman. At the time, I thought Gibbs had somehow managed to obtain a sole-source contract and had become the monopoly provider of such training classes. Later, to my great astonishment, I learned that besides Albert Gibbs, there were several other providers of such classes. The Superior Court had publicly available and periodically updated lists of similar class providers. Moreover, these lists came with a prominently displayed “not meant as an endorsement or recommendation of any individual or organization” stipulation. Thus, Harvey Silberman was deliberately ignoring the lists’ warning and explicitly mandating that litigants attend Gibbs’s particular class – and enriching Gibbs in the process. Essentially, litigants appearing in Silberman’s courtroom were deprived of the right to decide on their own which particular program from the list they wished to attend. A quick online search reveals that Silberman and Gibbs knew each other: they both served on the board of an organization called Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC-CA). To sum it all up, this much is indisputable: 1) Silberman knew Gibbs and vice versa; 2) Silberman specifically ordered litigants appearing in his courtroom to take Gibbs’s class; 3) Litigants had no choice but to comply with Silberman’s order; 4) Besides Gibbs, there were other class providers; 5) Silberman was not informing litigants and was depriving them of these other choices; 6) Gibbs was monetarily benefiting from this arrangement. The question that arises is the following: were Silberman’s actions ethical and within the bounds of proper judicial conduct? The answer to that is very straightforward an

An egotistical maniac, to put it bluntly. The man is so in love with his power and abuses it to the detriment of families and children. As stated, repeatedly, in other reviews here, he does not look at the evidence, does not inquire to both sides of the story, makes his mind up about the ruling before he even calls the case, and insists on prolonging litigation indefinitely. The man is a tyrant and should be thrown out of family court. If your case is assigned to Judge Silberman in Dept. L, do anything you can to have that case transferred to a different judge...our children deserve better.

[Redacted by Ed.] Definitely will side with women (makes it obvious). He will purposely drag on your case and force you to make a bad settlement with your ex wife. His intent is for you to avoid trail where he'll be forced to apply the law. Want's you to stay in the gray area to empower a dishonest attorney to extort you, he plays the game well..... This man will financially destroy you, your only chance is to hire an aggressive Pasadena lawyer, it's your only chance to survive this man. [Redacted] Your finances and children at the mercy of this man...... Amazing. There's really no law in his courtroom. He just makes it up as he goes......

Judge Silberman does not actually want to be a judge. He doesn't take the time to review and thoughtfully weigh the evidence. His ineptitude has caused irreparable damage to our child and our family. My faith in the legal system has been completely demolished by this man. He makes the presumption (and clearly states this) that both parties are equally at fault despite not looking at the evidence. He orders high conflict couples to use Our Family Wizard but doesn't take the time to actually look at the correspondence submitted into evidence. In my case, he has magnified the damage to my daughter that she is already experiencing at the hands of her abusive mother. He doesn't care about the law and he doesn't care about the human beings (especially the children) in his courtroom. He is as bad as they come.

Throughout the years I have come across a few decent and principled Family Court judges. Silberman unfortunately is not one of them.

Definitely a judge that is following within the guidelines of “DIVORCE CORP” you can see it on YOUTUBE You cannot trust any of these attorneys or judges smoke and mirrors

Talking to yourself again, Clarice? Clarice………….