Judge Rebuked for Doing Business From the Bench

An Orange County judge who managed his home-rental business out of his courtroom, using his bailiff to collect rent and sending his clerk to inspect his properties, has been reprimanded by the state for improper behavior.

In a letter made public Tuesday, the state Commission on Judicial Performance admonished Superior Court Judge John M. Watson, saying his actions threatened the “integrity of the judiciary.”

“Judge Watson’s use of court staff, court resources and the court facilities for his personal real estate business was improper,” the letter stated.

The commission began its investigation after a tenant of Watson’s complained in 2004 that the judge used his position to bully her over a maintenance dispute, communicating on court stationery and sending his clerk to check on his property.

Between 2000 and 2004, Watson used his court clerk as the contact person for tenants of his two rental condominiums in La Habra and Whittier, the commission found. Watson told tenants to call him at the courtroom and had his clerk prepare about 40 letters and legal notices, including one to the Los Angeles Housing Authority on Superior Court letterhead. His clerk and bailiff also collected rental payments in the courtroom, providing tenants with receipts.

“Judge Watson realizes this incident reflected poorly upon the Orange County Superior Court and was a disservice to the public the court seeks to serve. He accepts full responsibility and apologizes for any harm caused,” said Ed George, Watson’s attorney.

George noted that Watson thought the commission’s letter was fair “because that’s what he did. He did use some court services.”

The commission has the power to remove judges from the bench for violating the American Bar Assn.’s judicial rules of conduct. Its admonishment of Watson, who has served on the bench since 1990, represents a fairly mild rebuke, said legal ethics expert and Los Angeles lawyer Diane L. Karpman.

“The commission is saying, ‘We think you have merit in our society. And we need to keep you around,’ ” Karpman said. “Sometimes they just want to modify somebody’s behavior and say ‘We’re not happy you did this and we want to let you know, but it’s not the worst thing in the world.’ ”

The fact that Watson sold both properties in 2005 shows that he recognized the issue, she added.

Leticia Banuelos, 37, the tenant who complained about Watson to the commission, was disappointed by the reprimand.

“I’m not surprised that this is what they came out with,” she said. “It’s unfortunate that this is the way they chose to so-call ‘discipline.’ They should have removed him from the bench.”

Banuelos and two of the judge’s other former tenants sued Watson, saying he breached their leases and misused his authority as a judge. The case was dismissed by a Los Angeles judge and is on appeal.

This was not Watson’s first brush with controversy. In 2000 attorneys complained about a standing requirement in his courtroom that they disclose whether their clients or any witnesses had AIDS. Watson later dropped the requirement.

Two years later, Watson declared unconstitutional a county policy raising the assessed value of homes more than 2% annually. He argued that the policy was discriminatory because it meant some property owners received greater tax increases than others. A state appeals court later overturned his decision.