Judge Robert S. Draper

Judge Robert S. Draper was appointed to the Los Angeles County Superior Court by Governor Jerry Brown in 2012, following a 37-year career at O'Melveny & Myers LLP where he represented major corporate clients including Lockheed Martin, Paramount Studios, and IBM Corp. He earned both his undergraduate degree and law degree from the University of California, Berkeley (Boalt Hall). His pre-bench career as a senior partner at a major national firm gives him extensive exposure to complex commercial and employment litigation. Judge Draper's tenure on the bench has been marked by a significant and documented controversy. A $10 million sexual harassment verdict against the Los Angeles Community College District was reversed by a California Court of Appeal in April 2025. The reversal was based on Judge Draper's comments during trial, which the appellate court characterized as 'extreme and bizarre' and reflecting racial and gender bias. This reversal triggered a Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP) ethics investigation. The CJP record and the appellate reversal are the most critical documented facts about Judge Draper's current judicial conduct. Attorneys appearing before him must account for an active ethics investigation and a documented appellate finding of biased conduct during trial proceedings. No ruling analyses or attorney observations are available in the current dataset to supplement these profile-level facts.

Given the documented appellate reversal based on judicial comments reflecting racial and gender bias, attorneys — particularly those handling employment, civil rights, or harassment matters — must be prepared to create a thorough record of all in-court statements and rulings. Any comment from the bench that touches on race, gender, or protected characteristics should be addressed on the record immediately and professionally, preserving appellate rights. Attorneys should be aware that Judge Draper's long career at O'Melveny & Myers involved representation of large institutional defendants. This background is a documented fact, though no ruling data exists to confirm how it manifests in his judicial decision-making. Counsel for plaintiffs in employment matters should be especially diligent in building a complete record given the documented history of appellate reversal in an employment case. Given the active CJP investigation, courtroom conduct and professionalism are paramount. Attorneys should avoid any conduct that could be perceived as provoking or escalating exchanges with the bench. All objections to judicial comments should be made calmly, clearly, and on the record. Consulting recent docket entries and any newly published CJP findings before any appearance is strongly advised, as the status of the ethics investigation may have changed.

• critical

  Research Current CJP Investigation Status

  Before any appearance, check the Commission on Judicial Performance website for updates on the ethics investigation triggered by the April 2025 appellate reversal. The investigation's status directly affects whether recusal motions or reassignment requests are appropriate.

• critical

  Prepare Recusal Motion if Applicable

  In employment, harassment, discrimination, or civil rights matters, evaluate whether the documented appellate finding of racial and gender bias during trial supports a recusal motion under CCP 170.1. Have the motion drafted and supported by the appellate decision before the first appearance.

• critical

  Establish a Real-Time Record Preservation Protocol

  Given the documented reversal based on judicial comments, assign a team member to log all bench statements verbatim during proceedings. Ensure the court reporter is present for all substantive hearings. Preserve the record for appellate purposes from the outset.

• important

  Review the April 2025 Appellate Decision

  Obtain and read the Court of Appeal decision reversing the LACCD verdict. The opinion documents the specific nature of the comments found to be 'extreme and bizarre,' providing concrete guidance on the categories of conduct that have already drawn appellate sanction.

• important

  Prepare On-the-Record Objection Language

  Draft professional, neutral objection language for use if the judge makes comments touching on race, gender, or other protected characteristics during proceedings. Having prepared language reduces hesitation and ensures the record is preserved without escalating courtroom tension.

• important

  Assess Client Exposure to Appellate Delay Risk

  The documented history of reversal means any verdict obtained before Judge Draper in a sensitive matter carries elevated appellate risk. Advise clients accordingly and factor this into settlement analysis and litigation strategy.

• ›Maintain strict professionalism at all times and do not engage or respond in kind to any unexpected or inappropriate bench comments; address all concerns calmly and on the record.
• ›Ensure a certified court reporter is present for every substantive hearing and motion, given the documented importance of a complete record in this courtroom.
• ›If the judge makes any comment touching on race, gender, or protected characteristics, state a clear, professional objection on the record immediately without escalating the exchange.
• ›Do not assume familiarity or informality based on the judge's long career in private practice; maintain formal courtroom decorum throughout all proceedings.
• ›Monitor the CJP investigation status and be prepared to raise judicial disqualification issues through proper procedural channels if new findings are published.