Superior Court Judges

Voters face an unusually large field of candidates vying for nine seats on the Los Angeles Superior Court. In some races, more than one of the candidates would be an asset to the bench; in others, the choice is between unspectacular candidates.

The Times makes the following endorsements for Superior Court judge in the March 2nd primary election:

Office 18: Miguel Dager, a deputy city attorney, has acquired broad trial and appellate experience in his 14 years with that agency. Dager also has the temperament and the enthusiasm needed for the job.

Office 29: Jeffrey Gootman, a deputy district attorney, is the only candidate in this open-seat contest to whom the Los Angeles County Bar Assn. gave its highest, “well qualified” rating.

Office 52: Laura Priver, a deputy district attorney for the last 19 years, is the only “well qualified” candidate in this race -- another open seat. Priver’s energy and temperament should serve her well on the bench.

Office 53: Craig Jordan Mitchell is an unusually impressive candidate who would bring to the bench the toughness he acquired in 10 years as a deputy district attorney, along with the compassion and commitment he gained in teaching in some of the county’s most challenging schools. We strongly endorse Mitchell for this open seat.

Office 67: Judge Richard Van Dusen, who has served in the El Monte courthouse for 17 years, is a better choice than the unimpressive civil attorney who has challenged him.

Office 69: Donna Groman. Voters must choose from two exceptionally strong candidates in this open-seat race, Groman and Judith Levey Meyer. We endorse Groman, Superior Court commissioner for the last seven years, because of her broad experience on the bench.

Office 72: Judge David Wesley. In six years on the bench, Wesley has been an outstanding judge and court leader. Wesley’s three less-qualified opponents were goaded into running by prosecutors bent on scoring political points after a nasty dispute last spring over late arraignments, for which the court and the district attorney’s office share equal blame. Wesley deserves reelection.

Office 95: Judge Dan Oki also faces a field of poorly qualified grudge-match challengers. Like Wesley, Oki is a respected veteran judge whom renegade prosecutors have unfairly targeted for last May’s arraignments screw-up. We endorse Oki for reelection.

Office 111: Stella Owens-Murrell. The Times historically has endorsed sitting judges for reelection, unless they have proved incompetent or unable to perform their job. The circumstances surrounding this race requires one of those exceptions. Judge Chesley McKay Jr. has been absent from the bench since September with serious medical problems. In a statement issued last week, he wrote that “it does not appear that my condition will improve.” McKay should have resigned last fall so that the governor could appoint a qualified replacement. Instead, McKay filed for reelection, and voters now have no choice but to elect Owens-Murrell, a lawyer with the state Department of Industrial Relations.