Micael P Estremera

This judge is completely biased towards men/fathers in family court. Mr. Estremera believes whatever accusations come out of the other parents mouth even if they are completely absurd and would require police reports (there aren’t any). I was accused of being on drugs while working two full time jobs and attending college to support my child and I because other parent refused to pay child support or financially help in any way. When it was my turn to speak during hearings Mr. Estremera would immediately interrupt me and my train of thought and shoot down anything I would say, I wouldn’t be able to even form a sentence beforehand. Mr. Estremera couldn’t see that my child was manipulated and bribed by the other parent. Mr. Estremera allowed the other parent to keep vital information about my child from me even though the other parent was court ordered BY HIM to give me the vital information each hearing (about 4-5 times). No consequence to the other parent but I was always threatened when I would question things during our hearing by Mr. Estremera that he will shut me off. Mr. Estremera placed my child into a neglectful and abusive household, and into the hands of some of the most disgusting vial people that walk this earth, and now my child is not graduating high school, is on mental health medications, in extensive therapy from Mr. Estremera’s vital mistakes.

I was shocked at a DVRO I saw granted by him. Just unbelievable.

I’m a Silicon Valley executive. I plan to support a challenger to Judge Estremera in 2030.

Total idiot, much ado about nothing, arrogant judge. Extremely insecure and a poor excuse for a man. 170.6 him immediately. How do these absolute loser trash bags get on the bench?

I personally saw Judge Estremera fabricate evidence, tamper with court records, and stop people from exercising their constitutional rights.

Court administration must provide an explanation for why he was removed from his position in Department 77. All of his victims deserve this clarification so they can submit the necessary documents to challenge his unlawful rulings.

Extremely rude, disrespectful and short tempered.

I have no words for how inhumane Estremera made my family court process. I was undergoing treatment for a serious medical condition and was instructed to stay out of court proceedings by my doctors until I recovered. There was no urgent need to resolve the motions being filed by my ex, who was also acutely aware of my condition. Estremera chose to override this documented medical instruction, ignore my requests for continuances and fast track the hearings for the many motions filed by my ex and his attorney. I am now dealing with what may be permanent medical complications as a result of not being given the time to heal. His style was punitive and condescending. Although I was self represented, he did not appear to be following family law in making his rulings. Someone within the courts should look at overthrowing his rulings as I have to imagine he has ruined a lot of lives. I know he ruined mine during that time period and I suffered tremendous PTSD as a result.

We are all pleased that he is no longer working in the building. No one liked or respected him. He was hired as part of a DEI initiative. He was appointed after his father engaged in extensive lobbying on his behalf.

There appears to be a systemic bias in family law cases, particularly against fathers, resulting in unjust outcomes. In my experience, the he failed to award fair visitation rights to the father, despite evidence supporting his involvement in the child’s life. Additionally, there is a consistent pressure on parties to reach agreements even when such agreements may not be equitable or in the best interest of all parties involved. The lack of detailed, transparent statements of judgment makes it difficult to understand the legal reasoning behind decisions, undermining trust in the judicial process.

Judge Estremera violated due process rights several times. When the other Party did not serve me filing, I objected and asked for a continuance as I had not been served. I asked the judge to check my emails and the emails of opposing counsel to prove that I had not been e-served as claimed by opposing counsel. Judge Estremera ignored both my request for a continuance and for the attending Deputy to check both party's emails. Instead he simply ruled that the matter was important to him, called a closed hearing, turned off the video camera, and forced me to proceed with ambush litigation.

Santa Clara County Hall of Justice (HOJ) website indicates that Judge Micael P. Estremera is currently assigned to Department 32. He previously presided over Department 77 (Family Court) and was the judicial officer assigned to my divorce and custody matter.

[Redacted by Ed.] If those allegations turn out to be true, he will not be able to serve as a judge again. He may also lose his right to practice law. He bullies court staff and looks down on them when they speak or make comments.

He was relieved of his seat in Department 77 and is currently without a judicial assignment. He deserved it.

[Redacted by Ed.] I’ve heard he no longer works in the building, but there hasn't been any official announcement.

He has a family law attorney. He is not well-versed in family law. He typically does not listen to males and less represented by an attorney. He has an outright disregard for the law and gives attorneys the ability to break or bend the law. He will rule in favor of the attorney. But on the same grounds, conversely rule the exact opposite way for the person who does not have an attorney. When the attorney represents facts that our contrary to the law and it is pointed out, he has given proof, and it is further confirmed by the family law department. He will still disregard and state that an attorney is an officer of the court, and he will rely on whatever they have stated he lacks empathy and common sense, and only relies on whether or not a form was filled out correctly.

I was surprised to see the other reviews on here, which frankly just seem like sour grapes by litigants who didn’t get the result they wanted. Just because a judge rules against you doesn’t mean they’re biased. I’ve been practicing for 20 years and have sat through many long sessions in his courtroom. I witnessed nothing even close to the things the sour grapes reviewers say. His rulings certainly don’t seem based on the gender of the litigant or lawyer (what a ridiculous thing to say). This judge does expect litigants (and their lawyers) to follow the rules and be respectful, and does call out people who aren’t up to those basic standards. But he does it in a professional way that’s normal and what I’ve seen that in about 90% of the courtrooms I’ve been in. Come to court prepared, follow the rules, and you’ll be fine.

I witnessed deeply concerning conduct from Judge Estremera in a custody case. Despite clear evidence that the mother was found in possession of cocaine while with her child and had a known history of substance abuse, the judge allowed her to retain custody. The father, who was unrepresented by counsel, was at a distinct disadvantage in the proceedings, while the judge appeared to show clear favoritism toward mother's attorney.

https://cjp.ca.gov/file_a_complaint/

Department 77 – A Danger to Survivors and Justice