Orange County Superior Court

00:49:37

Subscribe and listen on…

Apple Podcasts | Stitcher | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Amazon Music | PocketCasts | iHeartRadio | Player.FM Podcasts

Watch Full Interview | View Show Notes | View Transcript

Yolanda V. Torres of the Orange County Superior Court shares her journey from being the first in her family to graduate from college to serving on the bench. With host MC Sungaila, she shares how her diverse experience as both a law professor and family law attorney, and as a past president of the Orange County Hispanic Bar Association serves her well as a judge. Listen in to hear her inspiring journey.

Relevant episode links:

Orange County Superior Court in California , Hispanic Bar Association of Orange County , Orange County Bar Association , Celtic Bar Association , Lamoreaux Justice Centers , Sonia Sotomayor 

About Yolanda V. Torres:

Yolanda V. Torres is a Judge in the Orange County Superior Court. Previously, Torres was a Sole Practitioner. She was an Adjunct Professor at the Western State University College of Law and an Associate at the Law Office of Patrick A. McCall, Hughes & Sullivan, and at Alexandra Leichter Law Offices. She was also a Law Clerk at the Orange County District Attorney’s Office. Torres earned a Juris Doctor degree from the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law.

In this episode, I'm pleased to have join us Judge Yolanda Torres, who is on the Orange County Superior Court in California. I’m excited to have her describe her journey to the bench, especially when we have a lot of judges who have been very experienced on the bench and were appointed a long ago. Judge Torres, welcome. 

I appreciate the opportunity. Thank you. 

We'll talk about your practice before the bench, in the family law unit, and now in your current assignment in family law as a judge and maybe the differences between them, even the different walls in the same area of the law system. First, I wanted to start at the beginning. How did you decide to become a lawyer and go to law school? What inspired you to do that? 

I wanted to make a difference, not only in my life but in my family's life, be a difference and be a role model for our community. I'm the first generation on my mother's side, Latina, and the first to go to college in our family. I wanted to make a difference. I always thought the law was interesting. I thought that if I were to go down the path of becoming a lawyer, I could make a difference in the community, and help others. 

Oftentimes when I was growing up, there were very few Latinos and/or Latinas that I would see as practicing attorneys. I wanted to make a difference and change and be that role model for young Latinas, even Latinos, or even other people of color growing up. That was my primary focus. As far as the law, I've always loved the law. I thought I would be a DA at one point but we can get to that. That path didn't work out so much but I loved the law. I loved watching Law and Order growing up too and thought I would be one of those DAs at one point. 

There's always that impact of the various television shows. There's the L.A. Law generation, which was my generation, and then The Practice, and Law and Order, which is a long-running show and compelling drama. It can be hard to determine what you might like to do if you don't see anyone or know anyone that's in that area. There are no lawyers in the family who haven't imbed any lawyers. It's still entirely impossible for me to choose that, to choose something that's different, and follow what is meaningful to you and in your case, how you thought you could contribute the most. 

One of the other points that I'd like to make is that when I decide to become a lawyer, I thought one of the great aspects of being a lawyer is not only are you learning about your trade, your profession, whether it be a DA or a civil attorney. You're learning about other aspects of different professions and different ways of life. For example, if you have a medical malpractice case, you're learning about medical issues, and medical topics and I like to learn. The law would be a great way to learn about other areas along my path, so I thought that was also a good thing. 

Even within the law, there are so many different types of law to do so many different subject areas like criminal law, family law, and civil law. There’s a whole array of things that you can find your interest in or your niche in law because it's such a big tent. You originally saw Law and Order and thought about being a DA. You said that didn't quite work out. What happened there? Did you apply to do that or did you go through law school, thinking that's what you would do? 

I went through law school thinking that's what I would do. Let me back up a little bit. I went to Cal State Long Beach and I did this internship through Cal State Long Beach where I would go watch the criminal proceedings. It was Judge Chabot in Long Beach Superior Court. I would go watch the proceedings and I had to write a paper on the public safety exception to the Miranda warnings. I went and watched then the judge would allow me to come back into chambers and discuss the case that he was presiding over and asked if I had any questions. 

It was an eye-opener for me because no one in my family had been involved, not the way we probably want, to be involved in the legal process. To have this judge that was ready and willing and available to me to answer questions, he was so down to earth, it made me feel a bit more comfortable in that setting. That is how I initially became interested in the criminal law aspect.  

During law school, I clerked at the Orange County District Attorney's Office. That was the only place where I clerked because I thought I was going to be a DA. Unfortunately, after graduation, there was a hiring freeze. Even though I was qualified, it didn't happen because there were no funds in the budget in order to pay new DAs. I even thought about going to LA but they subsequently had a hiring freeze as well. I didn't want to leave and go back to Ventura or anywhere too far outside my community. 

That can happen in best-laid plans sometimes and with the government positions, in prosecuting positions that can happen. It's timing in terms of what's going on with the office and not hiring. You have to adjust what you might want to do. What did you decide to do instead? 

Interestingly enough, sometimes there's a greater force that pushes us in a direction, even though we think that direction A is our path. Somehow, path B will open up. I applied to work as a law clerk. At that time, the Orange County Department of Child Support Services was part of the DA's office. I thought, “I will work for the child support services unit then I could somehow get in at that point.” I applied for a job clerking. It was very interesting because I would prepare the summons petition and proposed judgments on family law child support actions thinking that I would, at some point once I took the bar and passed the bar, that would be a backdoor way into becoming a DA.  

However, that didn't quite work out. It was ironic because I'm no longer a child but I was a child of the system in the sense that my own mother had to seek the assistance of the DA and/or child support services in order to get my father to pay child support. That was an interesting experience I thought I didn't want to go that route. Growing up and hearing about these things as a child is not pleasant. 

On the other hand, you have that personal experience with it that would lend a certain amount of empathy to those who were involved in that. 

I can empathize with the litigants that are going through any type of family law matter. 

I wholeheartedly agree with your comment earlier that sometimes our own best-laid plans, we think we've got it figured out. Someone else's at work usually in directing and you think that's the perfect path but maybe there's something else that's even better suited to your skills and experience. It's always interesting when that happens and it seems like it turned you in that direction towards family law and also led to where you ended up practicing. 

That ended up in my area of practice, which was in the field of family law afterward. The wind was behind my back in that respect. Not only was that but it's also a mixture of maybe that could be luck but also 99% hard work as well but in whatever direction. I would think that there's a component of luck and then work. 

Usually, success requires some elbow grease. That was part of it. Sometimes I'm this way, too. It's like, “I have a goal. I'm going to be towards that goal and I'm going to find different ways. I can't come this way. I'll go around and come back to it.” Being intentional about that leads to where you want it to be, eventually in the DA's office, and say, “This isn't it but it's an avenue to that, potentially. That’s why I'm going to pursue that.” 

In the course of that, we found a whole separate avenue to pursue, which was good in line with the hiring freezes. You could have been otherwise like, “Now what do I do? I have no idea.” You completely directed yourself one way and not what you did isn't going to work out now. You have to reorient yourself. 

We have to adapt. I 100% agree. 

You went into family law practice. Did you have your own firm the whole time or did you work with others? 

One of the great things about starting your own firm is that you answer to no one except your client, but you have the flexibility.

At first, I was at the child support services and when I passed the bar, I applied to different firms but family law firms were interested in me because of my background. I was lucky. My first job was a temporary position at a family law firm in Beverly Hills. What was interesting about that is coming from my role of whether or not my mother could support us. That was in 2002. 

In a world where maybe $50,000 a month was not enough for this particular individual to survive. That was a complete eye-opener and an interesting experience. I did start off in a temporary position with a well-respected, high-profile attorney in Beverly Hills. She was incredibly smart and incredibly very detail-oriented with each and every client. She was amazing. I did that and I ended up wanting to come back to Orange County because it's my home. I wanted to be near my family. 

I ended up getting a job at a firm here in Orange County and I was there for a few years then decided to branch out on my own at that point. It was a complete, amazing, and unique experience all around because going from Beverly Hills back to my stomping grounds was an eye-opener. Here, in the cases that I dealt with or worked on, we pretty much had a whole aspect of clients. 

Not so much where the Beverly Hills firm were just high-end clients coming in as far as high net worth. People got lots of assets but back here, I was able to handle some of those types of cases but also the majority of those cases were hardworking individuals like everyone else. That was also very great and wonderful to come back here. 

It doesn't necessarily require a lot of net worth to be at issue. The case can be challenging in either of those settings. 

Sometimes it's more challenging when the individual does not have the funds or the means because they do not have access to expert witnesses and the tools that I would need in that tool chest to help us as a litigator gets through trial. Sometimes if they don't have the means, it becomes a little challenging. You need to be creative. 

It's good in all those different settings in terms of good training, working with experienced lawyers, and taking a leap to have your own firm as well, which has its own set of challenges. 

When I graduated from law school and passed the bar. I swore I would never take another exam in my life again. I was done, over, never again and the Beverly Hills Attorney was this certified family law specialist. The attorney I worked for out in Orange County was a certified family law specialist. I said, “What is this?” While I was working at the firm here in Orange County, I ended up taking the certified family law specialist exam because I didn't necessarily want to pass it. 

I wanted to learn about family law. I thought, “If I take another bar exam, I will learn about family law even if I don't pass it,” and, of course, I did pass it. I had to meet all the other requirements later on, which was putting the cart before the horse because normally, individuals will have the trial experience and all the other experience that is required for the specialization. That was helpful. 

Those are pretty rigorous with the exam component but also the experience component. You need a certain amount of cases in the areas as well in order to get the certification. I applaud you for taking another exam. That's a challenging one, too. It's an interesting thought process though because a lot of people take the certification, and do certification because that is a permissible way to show your expertise in a particular area. Otherwise, you can’t advertise yourself as a specialist to the public but they do that after they've had a lot of that experience already. 

I don't think many of them have that same approach that you did in terms of, “This is a great way to make sure I'm up to speed. I have a comprehensive understanding of this area of the law that I've started working in but it may not have yet reached the level of experience that I know if I pass this, I'm going to get certified for.” That doesn't think about you in terms of, “I'm going to add this other test to my plate but I'm going to do it because it's a good tool to make sure that I'm as up to speed as possible for my clients and for my work.” 

I love education. One of the great things about being a judicial officer now is that I can attend seminars that used to be expensive for free. I love it. With this whole Zoom way of life, there are pluses and minuses. One of the pluses is that I can sit here during lunch and chambers and watch a video and/or attend a conference virtually and learn maybe the new trends in the law or learn something about complex financial issues that I want to brush up on or anything. It's amazing. It's wonderful. 

I try to look at the silver lining of some of this stuff too as we discussed. That's one of them. Many more things are accessible online in that way without traveling to the conference. I also feel like that opens up new areas if you're interested in it but maybe you wouldn't devote the time to travel somewhere, go to the conference, and come back. In this case, you can learn about all other areas you might have an interest or curiosity in and it's much more accessible. I've taken advantage of that as well during COVID and with all of the online bins that are available. It's neat. You can dabble in a lot of different things there. 

It's interesting because during COVID before I was a judge, I purchased this Minor's Counsel Training to become certified to be on the list for Minor’s Counsel. I did not end up doing it but I thought it was interesting. I learned something from that seminar. It was good. During COVID, I took advantage of that downtime, too. See what else I could learn. 

Always try to think about the positive, the more ways you can continue to grow in situations that may not be ideal. Tell me about having your own firm because that's an interesting thing. Some people might think they might want to do that at some point but there are different challenges to that, especially starting a firm from scratch. You have so many more hats when you're in that role. 

One of the great things about starting one's own firm is that it's a plus and a minus. You answer to no one except your client and/or maybe the court but what I loved about it is that you have the flexibility to essentially accept a case or say, “Perhaps this case isn't the best suit. We're not that we're not suited well for each other if a client came in.” 

I had a small boutique family law practice here in Santa Ana. No one in my family had their own business in the sense of like a white-collar type of business. That was a huge plus for us, my family and I, number one. Number two, I did like that flexibility of being that I need to skip out for a little bit to go take care of an errand. I was able to do that. However, if I did do that, I could potentially work when I'm free in the middle of the night. Work on something during the weekend. That was wonderful that I was able to have that flexibility. That was a huge plus.  

As far as having my own firm, I did have some employees and there are pluses and minuses that go along with that because I'm not biased or anything. My employees are wonderful. One thing I loved is that I was able to hire individuals whose hearts seem to be in it. They cared about the clients and the outcome. Sometimes if I had a high conflict divorce coming in, I would see my main paralegal there with my client and having or ending their conference and the client would give the paralegal a hug because it was challenging for that particular client. 

It was important for me for my employees to have empathy for the clients and be thoughtful of what it is in fact they were going through. Maybe not everyone understood but be thoughtful that this individual is going through something that you may have no idea about. That was wonderful. Also, teaching moments for them, whether it be in the law or also having empathy. 

I remember having a client come in with headphones and one of my staff members made a comment, “Why is this client coming in with my music blasting with headphones on?” I say, “Maybe that's their way of dealing with the stress.” Come to find out, it was their way of dealing with the stress. The client wasn't being rude when they came into the lobby. It was just that they found that the situation was incredibly stressful. We were operating by way of Zoom at the time with court hearings. The client would come into the office, set up, and we would have our Zoom court hearing. That was incredibly stressful for that particular individual. 

Especially in circumstances where it's high conflict and personal, you're not talking about the business dispute. You're talking about someone's family, marriage, and kids. That requires a different working with the client. There's so much going on and their experience to make sure that you consider personally what they're going through in terms of how you treat them and how the rest of your firm and your staff work with them as well. It sounds like you set a good example and a good tone in that regard. 

I try to, at least. Also, having the tools and/or the ability to refer the client out to whatever assistance they needed to those different angles, whether it may be mental health professional, life coach, or whatever it may be. Having that tool chest to be able to refer clients out. Also, make sure that my staff was aware that this particular client may need some assistance in this area, whatever it may have been. 

Have empathy for your clients and think about what they're going through. 

That is so important in family law, criminal law, and situations like that. The care with which the lawyer works with the client and the care with which the entire team works with the client makes a huge difference in the client experience. 

Thank you for mentioning that. That's a good point because I would often mention to the client, “We are a team.” If I am in court, my paralegal will be relaying messages to me but we are a team. It was important for them to understand that we're a team and we're going to get through this together. 

There's an emotional support aspect to people going through something personally formative and traumatic. 

There’s more handholding. 

How did you decide or what caused you to think about applying to the bench? You have your own great team, your own firm. What led you to think that the next way to serve was on the bench? 

Nothing about me has been traditional. Having said that, my pathway to the bench was very non-traditional in the sense that I didn't have any idea at first. I didn't think it was even possible, number one. Number two, being an attorney and having my own firm was the best thing ever but I was involved with the Hispanic Bar Association of Orange County. I was on the board for several years, working my way up to become President at some point. 

During the process of being on the Hispanic Bar Association, I started to attend seminars, even travel seminars, even though I would appear in court in front of judges, I had no idea. “How am I going to communicate with this judge outside of the courtroom setting? Also, is that even appropriate?” I had all these questions. Having been on the Hispanic Bar Association and even also through other organizations like the Orange County Bar Association and the Celtic Bar Association, they had these travel seminars. 

We would travel and I would present on family law. I was able to get to know some of the judicial officers a little bit better like Commissioner Wilson, Judge Kreber, Judge Miller, and many judicial officers. I was able to see the human aspect of them and how hard they work and establish some of their trust. For example, they knew who I was. I'd appear in front of them. They recognize me. “She's a trustworthy attorney,” didn't mean they'd rule in my favor or my client's favor all the time but they knew I was trustworthy at that point. 

Going to these organizations, I was able to see or get a better insight as to what their roles were and see that they were in fact approachable human beings as well, which I didn't necessarily consider prior to my involvement in these organizations. That played a key role. Through the Hispanic Bar Association, I was on our judicial evaluations committee.  

I had no idea that that had even existed until I joined that organization. I saw that the OCPA has a much bigger judicial evaluations committee but I did see how that worked. That was more of my pathway, getting to know the judges and people in the community and seeing how it worked. That was the way I became involved. It was an eye-opening experience. 

It opened your perspective as that being a potential opportunity and an opportunity that you might want to pursue as well. Seeing judges, meeting them in that particular setting, which is much more relaxed and you can see them as people, gives you that, “They are people, too. I could potentially do this.” I know a lot of people who have applied for the bench that have served on judicial vetting committees like the ones you've mentioned. I wonder if sometimes they're on the vetting committee because they think initially that they might want to eventually apply to become a judge themselves. 

It's good to see the process but more than that, and it sounds like in your case is that having been on that committee, you see what's involved, what the criteria are, what the various applications look like of people who apply and it puts you in the context of the same thing. “These are people, too.” They have an array of experiences but it may not be out of reach to apply for that.  

You look at the people who are applying and you say, “There are some similarities there. I have some of that experience. I am as positioned as they are to apply for that position as well if I want to.” There's something about that like permission to think about that as an opportunity in a sense that it's possible and doable. Was that part of it? 

That was a part of it and also, seeing some of the individuals going through it. We had the individuals that were, “They went to that law school? How amazing. I would even be excited to visit that law school.” We had individuals that also worked. I went to law school at night. I went to McGeorge in Sacramento because I had to work. I worked during the day and I went to law school at night. When I graduated law school, I would've never thought that a person who went to law school at night become a judge. I thought that they were a DA or they went to a certain law school. The rumor was that they knew someone in a high political office. 

I have no idea if that was true or not, but that's what I thought. It did open the doors. I remember Judge Kreber think he was a police officer and had a career change. I don't know if he went to Western City. He may have gone to Western State at night. I don't know if he was a public defender but he was in the criminal law field then he had his own practice and at some point, became a judge. Also, too, speaking of learning, I did also teach at Western State for approximately five springs because I wanted to learn. I loved interacting with the students. That also helped my pathway to the bench as well. I don't think it hurt in any way. That also helped. 

That depends on who is doing the appointments and who's interested in that background. That shows an interest in the law, a love of the law, and the lifelong learning aspect to you that you clearly show in other ways as well. It brings diverse experiences to that. You have practice experience but also teaching experience and that could be helpful, especially if you're dealing with the family law realm. To have that teaching aspect and patience from teaching that you get could be an additional tool for you on the bench and people will recognize that. 

Teaching was an additional tool and helpful to this pathway, especially as you indicated. The statistic is that approximately 80% of family law litigants are self-represented. There is quite a handful that do come through the door and we can't speak in legal ease or legal jargon. We need to make sure that they understand the process because it's nerve-wracking for them, coming through the courthouse. 

In terms of assignments, during the family law assignment which works out nicely given your background in practice and your knowledge of the law from that, that's not always the case. You move around to different assignments on the trial court in California and you wouldn't necessarily have been assigned to family law but it turns out that happened. It's a good thing. 

I was fortunate in that respect because typically, it’s not placed in their primary area of assignment. I probably should have been placed in criminal, civil, or something completely different but there is a huge need for family law judicial officers. The timing worked out to my benefit. It has been a little interesting in the sense that some of my colleagues are having to address me as, “Your Honor.” That's a change for them as well. Funny enough, my former boss came to my swearing-in. It was nice that he did so. He's happy and pleased. It was nice seeing people that also helped me in the community show up and support me. 

Your point is a good one in terms of when you're on the bench in the area of the law that you practiced. The lawyers appearing in front of you are people who you were either colleagues or opposing counsel with. There's an adjustment that needs to happen there in terms of that relationship. On the other hand, there's so much to learn when you first come on the bench. Being a judge, as opposed to being an advocate, is a very different role in the judicial system. 

When you have to layer on top of that a whole new substantive area that you will have no experience with if you're assigned to family law and you practiced criminal law. There are a lot of moving parts of things to get up to speed on but at least, you have this subject area that you worked in and you can work on all the other things that you have the huge learning curve for in the judicial side. You get another assignment down the road in a new area of law. You'll get to apply that but at least it's not everything at once. You have to learn. 

I was fortunate in that respect. 

Be persistent, and don't be afraid to ask for advice.

What advice would you give to women in law school or early in their careers if they might think that they want to join the bench? Do you have any advice in terms of what things they might do to explore that? 

I would say be persistent and don't be afraid to ask for advice. One of the things from my teaching experience that I saw with my students as opposed to maybe my generation, they seem to be more willing to put themselves out there to ask for help. “Can I have some assistance with this?” Maybe it's more culturally for me. I don't know but they seem to be, “I'm interested in this. Is there any advice that you can give me? Can you help me out or tell me with whom I can speak to get to this path?” 

That's important to always be able to ask for help. Maybe person A may not have the answer but you go to person B. Do not give up and continue to ask for help. Don't be afraid to ask for help. That's incredibly important as far as my pathway or any young woman's pathway to the bench. Persistence, hard work, dedication, those words mean something. They're significant. That is something that we can all do. Don't give up. 

That can be particularly true in the judicial appointments process because there is some political aspect to it in terms of what the appointing governor might want or be looking for at a particular point in time and whether you happen to fit that. There's a timing aspect to it that doesn't have anything to do with your smarts or your qualifications. You have to be persistent. There are some judges and justices I've interviewed who are frank about that. They said, “I applied for this position ten times.” 

I did apply twice. This was my second. Luckily, I was able to. I became appointed my second time around but I did apply the first time. Here's a good example. Thank you for mentioning that because the first time I completed that 25-page application, I forget how many pages it is. It gets longer as you insert your answers but I did it. I was embarrassed about my background. That's an excellent point. 

People don't want to hear when you're growing up, that you come from a household played with domestic violence. They don't want to hear that, so you brush that aside and put your shiny hat on so that they will accept you. I did not want to release that application to show what my experiences were like but it was incredibly important. Thank you for mentioning that. That is a huge takeaway. Don't be embarrassed about your background. Some of the circumstances which we experience are not our fault. It's how you get through that process, which will make or break us but that's an excellent point.  

That's an important point. That's impactful because there are two primary reasons why people wouldn't start on that 25-page application. It isn't a lot of work to apply.  not just the work that's required prior to that. It's helpful to think that there's some chance that something will come up with this or at least you would go somewhere because that's a lot of work to fill up the application. One is that people think that there's a set path. “I don't have that particular step path. I don't have the school. I don't have the experience. It's very unlikely that this application would go far.” 

The second part of that, which is an equally human response to this is for various reasons, in your background. You're embarrassed about some aspect of it. You haven't shown that to anyone. Many people see this deer shot location. It could be daunting to be vulnerable and authentic in that way. That's a good point. Almost in the process of applying, you have to reconcile that with yourself. You have to say, “I have to get over that. This is okay. It's all part of me. It's all how I came to where I am.” There's this acceptance process you have to go through before you can start working on that 25-page obligation. 

It was a challenging, therapeutic, and interesting way. 

That's a helpful point because that is another barrier that you could put on yourself in the process that isn't necessary. I want people to feel that they have the opportunity. They can do whatever they want and have the opportunity of putting their hat in the ring and see if you get an appointment to the bench and not stop yourself from that unnecessarily. How are you enjoying it? How is it different from what you thought it would be? I'm curious. 

I'm loving it. I like to learn. I love the fact that if there's a new issue or something that I'm not well-versed in, I can sit down and learn about it. I love that aspect of this assignment in my job or my role as a judge. I like family law. I like helping people. I love that aspect. I hope I'm helping people with my rulings. As far as something I didn't expect, I didn't expect isolation. As far as my whole world, here I was primarily practicing at Lamoreaux Justice Centers. My whole world was on the other side of the building. Now, I'm not supposed to go to the other side of the building. We have this perimeter where our chambers are in our department. 

Sometimes I'll go a full day without seeing or interacting with other judicial officers because we’re in session. I'm in session and this other judge next to me is out of session. Our calendars don't meet up and that's okay. That was an interesting aspect because I came from a world of being involved in bar organizations such as the OCBA, being on committees, and coming to this world where I'm still finding my path. 

There are committees that I can join and I will but I'm not there yet. I'm trying to figure out where I should place my time. Even though when you're involved in these committees, it's still isolating to a certain extent. That part, I did not anticipate. I'm maybe hopeful. I'd like to see the silver lining in things. I'm hopeful that we're ending this COVID pandemic. Maybe part of the isolation is a result of that as well. Is there ever going to be an end declared to the pandemic? I'm hopeful that there will be and that the isolation will be reduced by that. 

It's interesting what you say about that because certainly, that's it. There are certain things that you used to do that it doesn't seem appropriate for judges to engage in. Also, it's interesting that you say that about being on the trial bench, and having some sense of isolation because I hear that from people on the Court of Appeal. You could go many days seeing your staff and maybe seeing some of your fellow judges. 

You don't have the interaction with litigants the way you do on a regular basis in the trial court. Normally, you hear that at the Court of Appeal level, not at the trial level. It's interesting that that's more experienced. Part of that is transitioning from advocate to judge, there’s interaction in general, whether you're on the trial court or in the Court of Appeal. Maybe that's exacerbated by COVID. 

Towards the end of my practice, perhaps maybe like the last two years, I did transition over into mediating as well. That was also helpful in terms of becoming a judicial officer as opposed to having to advocate or litigate for one side only. That was incredibly helpful as well. My mindset was changed early on and then I did take some courses and trying to negotiate the impossible and help individuals. That was the name of the course. 

That was also helpful in terms of that transition over. I didn't find that transition to be difficult going from an advocate to an impartial judicial officer. Because I was heavily involved in the community, that was more of a shocker for me. Even though I am a Trial Court Judge and even though I do have interactions with especially self-represented litigants, that helps the isolation and even attorneys coming in. It's nice to see that I do recognize some of them and some I don't. I'm meeting new ones as well but that's also very helpful. 

That's a helpful observation in terms of also people considering whether it's something they would enjoy because there is that aspect to it. Often people who become judges are engaged with the community and are out there. Some of that does fall away at least initially when you join the bench and that can be jolting. That’s something that you don't expect because you think your service to the community is often what leads to being on the bench as well and that changes. 

That's a good observation as well. Hopefully, I think to those who are practical in terms of what people can expect and to consider if you're wanting to apply. This has been so helpful and so interesting. I've learned so many new things, Yolanda, too, about your background and your approach to life. I wanted to end with a few of the lightning round questions that I’m going to ask. The first one is, which talent would you like to have but don't? 

I'd like to make light of certain things, not related to the law. I wish I had been able to speak more languages. I have a grasp of Spanish. I did take some German in college. That's an incredible talent. Here's a good example. I had some Japanese litigants appearing before me. A simple sentence that was hypothetical, “Where is the car?” In Japanese when it was interpreted, it seemed that it took like a paragraph. 

I would love to be talented and more versed in a different language. That would be a dream of mine. This way, I could hear things firsthand, even though we operate in English in court but it's interesting to hear that. I have foresight, for example, when Spanish litigators appear before me. I understand the question that's being asked or said in Spanish then I'm able to digest that a little bit more. That would be a trait that I wished that I had, the ability to speak more languages. 

I would tend to conflate when I'm learning new languages. I conflate the one I know the best. If I don't know the word, it ends up with this funny mix of French and Spanish together because those are the words I know. 

If you can't run, then walk. If you can't walk, then crawl. Essentially, don't ever give up.

I've done the same thing at a certain point. 

My brain put it in, “This is another language, fill it in with something else you know if you don't know the word for it.” It's funny. If you're doing high formal Spanish, there are a lot more words for that than more colloquial Spanish. I had that experience with a brief in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in Costa Rica. They wanted this full appellate brief, translated from English to Spanish but there had to be high formal Spanish. 

It was a similar experience to your experience in court, which was for every paragraph are four words in English. There would be twelve words in high formal Spanish because you have to talk with a lot of detail and a lot of adjectives before you get to the point. It was educational when you see that. It puts you into the mind of the decision-makers a little bit more, too. I think that's what you're talking about in terms of the witnesses and the litigants are like, “When I understand that, I can see the thought process that choosing the language. That adds another dimension to it.” It's nice to be able to do that. Who are some of your favorite writers? 

I don't know if I have a particular favorite writer. I like to read biographies and autobiographies, especially about women that have had their struggles. I don't want to necessarily mention them because some of the ones I have read are maybe seen as political. I don't necessarily want to get into the political realm but as, someone that has come from nothing and made something of themselves, I like reading those types of books. 

I like reading books about some of our Supreme Court Justices in the United States Supreme Court. Those are the type of books that I like to read. If you have any other suggestions as well, I love to read them. Sometimes I get drawn back into reading like a legal practice cut and I have to try and get away from that at times because I need to have fun. 

Unfortunately, all the fun reading fell away in law school because you have so much legal reading and then slowly seated back into your reading repertoire. Have you read the biography of Sandra Day O'Connor? 

I have not but that's what I will put on my list now. Thank you. 

I got it. I just started reading it. It's interesting. It goes in that category. Given the choice of anyone in the world, who would you invite as a dinner party or as a dinner guest? 

That is so difficult as far as one particular person. 

You can have anybody that you want. Sometimes the group has its own quality. If you have 1 or 2 people instead of one, you can extend it. 

I would most likely invite maybe Sonia Sotomayor. I'd be interested to hear about her path as opposed to maybe what I've read. She's quite interesting. There are so many different areas that I'm interested in. I'm interested in her life path. There is a German writer named Goethe. He was a poet and a lawyer. He had many different hats and even maybe even Frida Kahlo. I don't know what I would expect. 

I think she would be quite interesting to have over for dinner. I have a wide array of individuals that I would like to invite to dinner and especially Frida because of what she had gone through. It wasn't an easy path to get where she was. She suffered some physical ailments and her marriage was not one that was traditional and neither was her artwork. 

Neither one reflected her unique vision and mindset. That sounds like an interesting group. I liked that.  

Very eclectic. That would be me. I forget the painter who did the Girl with a Pearl Earring. I'm forgetting his name but I always wanted to see that painting. It was in San Francisco and I missed it. It was a Dutch painter if I recall correctly. I don't know if I'd want him or her. Maybe her. I don't know. One of those two or maybe both of them. I'm interested in why and more about this painting. 

I like that idea, too. You have the most eclectic set of dinner guests that I've heard from anyone yet. I like it. You're crossing all areas in all different kinds of work although there's a lot of artistic aspect to it. 

I find that I'm lacking in the artistic aspect field. I need to open my eyes to the art world. It's more than a painting. There's always a story or some maybe movement behind the painting. That would be probably why. I feel like that's an area that I can improve it. 

The last question, what is your motto if you have one? 

I don't necessarily have a motto. It depends because there are many different mottos, which is never giving up. Treat others as you want to be treated. That is huge in my world, especially when I have litigants before me that are going to family law issues but there was a saying and I'm forgetting the exact verbiage of it that Martin Luther King had said. 

It was, “If you can't run, then walk. If you can't walk, then crawl.” Essentially it was, “Don't ever give up.” I like that motto in addition to the other aspects of treating people with dignity and respect and treating them as you want to be treated. That would be my general way of thinking. Try to see the glass as half full. Try to find a positive in certain things because, in this day and age, there are so many negatives out there. Let's try and lift each other up and be positive so that we can all succeed in whatever aspect that we want to succeed in. 

All of those things encapsulate well what I've seen and know about you and what I've learned and what the readers learn during our discussion as well. That's a great way to sum things up and to close. Thank you so much, Judge Yolanda Torres, for joining the show. 

Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to be here. Thank you so much.