Richard K. Park: Judge of the Year
by Charity Kenyon

Serving his second term as Presiding Judge of the Sacramento Superior Court, Richard K. Park adds to the necessary qualities of intelligence and experience, an incredible sense of humor. According to Mike Roddy, the court's executive officer, this took some getting used to. "You have to be on your guard constantly." But this is the "winning combination that makes the job so much more pleasant."

These qualities have also earned the admiration of the bench and bar and Park's nomination as Sacramento County Bar Association's Judge of the Year for 2001. The County Bar selected Park because he has streamlined the settlement of cases, often going the extra mile to get the parties together. He has worked with bar presidents Bruce Cline and Barbara Yonemura to keep open the lines of communication between bench and bar. Lawyers who appear before Park find him to be professional, courteous and prepared.

In the words of SCBA President Barbara H. Yonemura, "I am thrilled that Judge Park was selected as Judge of the Year. He is obviously a good leader. He not only fits, but also exceeds the objective criteria established for the award. At the same time he is kind and self-effacing and possessed with a wry sense of humor that is endearing."

Park was "stunned" by the award. "I'm just doing my job. There are so many other deserving judges." He gives lots of credit to his staff, his colleagues on the bench and to the wonderful lawyers in this community who just "give and give and give to this court."

What makes Park most proud? Only three civil cases in eighteen months have had to be reset on account of lack of a courtroom. At the same time Sacramento has, out of 52 allotted judicial positions, seven openings, one of the highest vacancy rates in the state.

The job of presiding judge has transformed itself on Park's watch. The consensus is that he is the right person at the right time. Sacramento County has a history of strong and innovative presiding judges whose creative solutions have been adopted by other courts around the state. The courts are now mid transition from county to state court funding, which has laid incredible unresolved landmines in the path of all presiding judges.

Although the counties are no longer obligated to maintain or build court facilities, Sacramento County has agreed to build a sorely needed new juvenile court. Looking forward, the existing courthouse will have to be reconfigured to accommodate up to 15 more courtrooms, perhaps with satellite office facilities.

When the court became employer of its 750 person staff, it took over collective bargaining obligations for 450 organized staff just as the staff had decertified its existing union. Yet negotiations have been concluded and a new contract is in place.

Judge Morrison England reflects the sense of his colleagues that Park has been instrumental in smoothing a very difficult transition. "With high numbers of vacancies he has used his tremendous civil litigation experience to bridge the gap between the number of cases that need to be assigned and the number of available court rooms. He has constantly been on the forefront and he is doing the best under the circumstances. At the same time, he is personable. We can walk in and talk about anything, anytime. He is really dedicated. He rolls up his sleeves and goes to work." Art Scotland, presiding justice of the Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District, finds Park has been an "exceptionally effective leader as a presiding judge." He has earned the respect and confidence of bench and bar. He is a "fine administrator and settlement judge, a talented fellow, with a particularly keen sense of humor."

On top of all this change, the Judicial Council has charged the courts with devising ten-year community-based long-range plans. How best can the courts serve the public? Should there be remote service centers in, for example, Folsom? How can the courts best assist pro pers? What is the future of e filing and other technological advances? Should the jury lounge be expanded? What grants are available to augment the court's $75 million budget? How do our court's needs fit with state-identified priorities?

Roddy confirms that the job of presiding judge has a new external focus. After the next election, the term of the presiding judge will be expanded to two years. Instead of walking across street to the board of supervisors, the PJ has to be more of politician, patient, willing to travel, and willing to work with judges and court executive officers across the state. "You have to represent your court with other courts. And you have to support court staff to do similar outreach." Roddy observes that Park has shown a willingness to try new things, to be creative in the constant struggle with limited resources, and to be responsive to demands from the state and from local community. Consolidating research staff, settlement conferences and law and motion into the Hardy Erich building, as well as doubling up law and motion departments into morning and afternoon sessions have saved facility costs. He is willing to "listen and stretch a bit," which is all we can ask of a presiding judge, says Roddy.

Innovations such as day-of-trial settlement conferences have been a tremendous service to litigants and counsel, keeping courtrooms available for those few cases that cannot be resolved without the expense of trial. An aggressive combination of existing and retired judges and lawyers acting as settlement pro tems has kept cases moving. Veteran litigator Dan Wilcoxen credits Park with being the only member of the bench who could have persuaded 75 of the community's top lawyers to work as pro tem judges for free for a week at a time. This accomplishment alone expresses how lawyers in the community feel about Park and about the entire Sacramento bench. No wonder he serves on the Executive Committee of the Judicial Council's Committee of Presiding Judges.

Park earns kudos not just as an administrator but as a trial lawyer's trial judge. Wilcoxen laments, "it's a shame we can't have him as a trial judge too." Mort Friedman, unwilling to take credit for teaching Park everything he knows, acknowledges he happened to have appeared before Park in Park's first jury trial on the bench. "I have come to view his capacity for fairness, wisdom, and judicial humor as the standard by which to compare judges. Judge Park has taken those standards to a higher level." Ted Bolling, who tried a malpractice action before Park, found he was extremely well prepared, knew the law thoroughly, was decisive and made excellent rulings on the evidence. "He is even-handed, does not become ruffled or upset with counsel, maintaining control of the courtroom." At the same time, Bolling observes, Park is practical. He does not get hung up with ACT rules, if parties have legitimate reasons to work around them to resolve a case. According to Roger Dreyer, "While he appreciates quality in advocacy he cannot be fooled or misled. He is all business, but appreciates the rigors of practicing law and gives attorneys the leeway to practice their craft. He expects one to do their job, and will not bail an attorney out of a hole they put themselves into. Nor will he set a trap or enjoy in another's mistake or misstep. Simply put, he is a class act." In 1991 and in 1996 the Capitol City Trial Lawyers Association named Park its Judge of the Year.

The criminal bar has similar praise for Park. "Judge Park dispenses justice in a fair evenhanded manner that has earned him the respect of prosecutors and defense attorneys alike," states District Attorney Jan Scully. She credits "his quick and spirited wit" with enlivening any meeting or court proceeding over which he presides, and with frequently moving parties to compromise and resolution. "Judge Park is truly one of our most outstanding jurists and an excellent presiding judge." Fern Laethem, administrator of the Indigent Defense Panel echoes Jan's sentiments. "Judge Park's responsiveness, support, problem solving ability, and understanding of our problems and issues, both managerial and substantive have greatly benefited the Indigent Defense Program, and the Indigent Defense panel. "These abilities are matched only by his dedication to a fair and just legal system. It has been my honor to work with him over the past year and half."

Has he always been this way? Park's quick retorts are matched only by his reticence. It takes some sleuthing to find out what brought the Southern California surfing beach boy from Lynwood, to Northern California, to the practice of law and to judging. Not surprisingly, one finds comedian Steve Martin was a friend from junior high days. Park worked at Knotts Berry Farm during the summer and on weekends. He says that Martin was in the Playhouse and he was in the warehouse. Summers were spent on construction jobs with his father. Describing his background as "not exactly privileged," Park explains that he stayed at home and attended Long Beach State University, about fifteen minutes away, working as the campus mailman. But he had his sights set on Northern California's great outdoors, inspired by visits to an uncle living in Redding, his early fishing mentor.

With no other lawyers in the family, Park's role model was his only sibling's husband, a Newport Beach practitioner. Park worked in brother-in-law's office and decided to go to law school. He applied only to UC Davis Law School, as close as he could get to good fishing. When he graduated in 1970 he clerked for two years with the late Thomas MacBride, former Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Judge MacBride was an avid outdoorsman and hunter. But he was also a fine jurist and from then on, Park knew he wanted eventually to be a judge. He caught the eye of the late Archie Hefner, who invited him to join Hefner, Stark and Marois in 1972, where he remained until his appointment to the bench in 1984. His former partner, Ken Stone provided the Steve Martin tip that seems to explain so much. Stone recalls that same sharp wit, intellect and sense of fairness imbuing Park's practice as a civil litigator.

The best part about being a judge is the complete autonomy says Park. He noted that the sense of freedom from political pressure is fragile, however. Increasingly organized and vocal critics of particular decisions and judges have made life very difficult for some individuals and groups of judges. The California Judges Association is only now devising a protocol that would guide judges in responding to such attacks, an especially difficult proposition. Still the position is relatively apolitical in California. And the rewards can be enormous.

It must have been gratifying for a person who came north for the fly fishing, to have presided over a case as important to fisheries protection as the Putah Creek decision of April 1996, one of Park's most notable and high profile cases. On his off-hours Park relishes fishing with his fiancée, Michelle, working on their cabin in remote Fall River Valley, skiing or enjoying a fine meal and a good novel. His children, despite early vows to the contrary, are all back in Sacramento. The youngest at 27, is just finishing the rigorous fire fighting academy. The second oldest is teaching in a North Sacramento elementary school and the oldest is working for Federal Express. Will he stand at his next election in 2004? Who knows? There's a lot to achieve both on and off the bench. And Park has shown it can be fun too.

For those achievements, and that attitude, the Sacramento County Bar Association salutes Judge Richard K. Park, Judge of the Year 2001.