Procedurally questionable
My experience before Judge Kimberly Dotson in Los Angeles County Superior Court left me deeply concerned about whether my case received a fair and orderly review. One of my biggest concerns involved material that I believe was outside the proper appellate record. An opening brief or related material that, according to my understanding of the docket, was never filed in the appellate court had instead been filed only in the lower court. Despite that, the substance of that material appeared to become part of the proceedings and was treated as though it were properly before the reviewing court. I was also concerned about how my filings and objections were handled. I filed a Code of Civil Procedure §170.6 challenge before the December 9, 2025 hearing, yet the court proceeded with the hearing and lifted the stay. During the proceedings, I felt that important procedural objections and record-related concerns were not meaningfully addressed. There were also statements and rulings during my case that caused me to question whether my arguments were being fully considered. At one point, when I raised an issue I believed was legally significant, Judge Dotson responded, “THAT DON’T MATTER.” From my perspective as a litigant, that response added to my concern that I was not receiving a meaningful opportunity to have my legal arguments heard. My criticism is based on my personal experience, the filings, docket history, and court orders in my case. I believe judges should apply procedural rules consistently, rely only on material properly before the court, and give every litigant —represented or self-represented—a fair opportunity to be heard.