Candidate Profile Interview from "Santa Barbara Lawyer"

By Colleen K. Sterne

Colleen K. Sterne answers questions posed by the editor of the Santa Barbara County Bar Association Newsletter

1. What is your current position/area of practice?

I currently practice as a dispute resolution attorney, providing mediation, arbitration and settlement services. I serve the court as a settlement master, special master and small claims judge pro tem.

2. Describe your previous positions/areas of practice.

For more than ten years, my practice entailed general civil litigation. My practice included a wide variety of cases [auto, torts of all kinds, homeowner association liability, construction defect, sexual molestation, and many others]. I handled both insurance defense and plaintiff personal injury cases. I have advocacy experience in jury trial, court trial, arbitration and mediation. I have substantial law and motion experience, and have done a great deal of legal research and writing. I clerked for one of our Superior Court judges working on his weekly law and motion calendar.

3. What year were you admitted to the Bar?

1988.

4. What law school did you attend? Do you have other education credentials that contribute to your ability to be a judge?

I attended Santa Barbara College of Law.

I have a Certificate in Dispute Resolution from the Straus Institute of Dispute Resolution at Pepperdine University. This certificate and other ADR courses represent more than 300 hours of dispute resolution education and training. In addition to much practical experience as a successful mediator and settlement master, I have the intellectual resources represented by substantial dispute resolution education. These skills allow me to take an involved, informed, hands-on approach to design and management of dispute resolution programs. Dispute resolution education is particularly needed on the bench at this time, as courts work to provide improved service for our evolving community.

5. Why do you want to be a judge?

Being a judge combines a unique opportunity to serve the community with the type of legal work I feel best suited to perform. I like approaching problems from a neutral perspective. I enjoy helping people understand conflict better, so they can communicate more effectively and solve their own problems. When they cannot, and a decision is required, I find considering legal issues and factual questions from the point of view of accuracy and fairness rather than advocacy very satisfying. I have the capacity to be both decisive and flexible, and am most content when exercising both of these abilities. I find my work as a pro tem judge, settlement master and ADR practitioner fulfilling, and relish the opportunity to apply my skills on the bench.

6. Aside from your experience as an attorney, what qualities or experience qualifies you for the bench?

I have been involved in many law-related and community organizations, and have had leadership experience in many of those endeavors. A partial list includes: Santa Barbara County Bar Association (conference of delegates, trial skills workshop), Santa Barbara Women Lawyers (many committees, elected President 95-97), William L. Gordon Inn of Court, Southern California Mediation Association, Vestry (operating board) of Trinity Episcopal Church, Santa Barbara Women's Political Committee, Santa Barbara Museum of Art, Santa Barbara Zoo, Transition House. My most recent community endeavor is work on a committee that creates sober alternative events for UCSB students.

I have also done a great deal of pro bono work for our court. These activities demonstrate my dedication to our legal system and my desire to improve its function and reputation. My work in the community has exposed me to a wide variety of people whose needs are served by the court. Judges need to retain a sense of humility and connection to the community they serve. I believe that the position of judge is one of service to the community, and I have demonstrated my commitment to such service.

7. How do you distinguish yourself as the best candidate among those running for the office?

I am distinguished by my dispute resolution qualifications and practice, which represent a skill set that is needed by the court and our community. I have the necessary education and experience. I have an appropriate temperament. The combination of these three factors makes me uniquely suited for the job.

Judicial elections can be quite difficult for voters, because those who choose to run are generally qualified by education and experience, albeit in different ways. I have tremendous respect for my three fellow candidates, and I believe that all four of us meet the essential professional qualifications. But being a good judge entails more subtle attributes of personality, demeanor, temperament and intellect. Every candidate comes to the candidacy process having specialized in some manner, and will face the need to absorb new information. I believe I have the personality, temperament and ability to learn necessary to be an effective judge.

8. What changes, if any, would you like to make in order to improve judicial service at our Superior Court?

If elected, I will be an advocate for expanded and improved dispute resolution services, including refinement of the existing CADRe program, and I will be open to new approaches. I will be an advocate for improved family law services, particularly consolidation of all family law services within a single department. I will work for improved services for self-represented litigants, including a self-help center, and increased translation services.

9. What changes, if any, would you like to see by practitioners who would appear before you if you were elected?

In my experience, attorneys are hardworking people who do a good job and exhibit appropriate behavior in court and other legal proceedings. The reputation of the profession has suffered because of a few bad apples. I think attorney conduct is less an issue of change than one of reinforcing good habits.

Attorneys should exercise quality control in their submissions on paper, and be prompt and well prepared for hearings. Attorneys should be polite in their speech and behavior. They should avoid bluster and personal commentary in the court. I enjoy seeing good, spirited advocacy in action, but counsel need to exercise discipline and avoid excess. Attorneys should be kind and courteous to court staff. Attorneys should strive for excellence in their practice for the good of their clients, the court, and our society. Attorneys should show respect to the court as an institution. I will treat all persons entering the courtroom with dignity and respect, and I will expect counsel to do likewise.

I approve of judges who take a relaxed and natural approach to the unpredictability of the courtroom, who can enjoy a humorous moment gracefully. I will try to do the same. I do not, however, think that judges or lawyers should be proactive humorists, or look for opportunities to amuse. Judges and lawyers should be on guard against humor that is rude, inappropriate or divisive. Humor can be a natural release of tension for those appearing before the court and for juries, but it must be managed properly and in a manner that preserves the dignity of the court.

10. Are there any other comments you would like to make?

A courtroom does not belong to the judge who presides in it. The court belongs to the people who use it and the society that relies upon it. A judge must discharge his or her legal duties diligently and appropriately, provide leadership, and look for ways to improve the courts. The judge's role is to provide a level playing field, to assess the state of the law as accurately as possible, and to apply that law to the evidence in the clearest and most unbiased way possible, with fairness and in an appropriate spirit of equity. I believe I can do this job well, and hope that my colleagues and our community will agree.