Judge Susan L. Greenberg

Judge Susan L. Greenberg of San Mateo County Superior Court brings a distinctive defense-attorney perspective to the bench, having been appointed by Governor Jerry Brown in September 2014 after a contested election campaign in which she ran as a criminal defense attorney against a sitting commissioner. This background is significant: judges who come from defense practice often exhibit heightened sensitivity to procedural fairness, defendants' rights, and the equitable application of criminal procedure. Her pre-bench career as a defense attorney suggests she is likely attuned to arguments about due process, proportionality in sentencing, and the rights of the accused. The limited but notable case data available points to a judge willing to make bold, principled rulings. Her May 2023 ruling that a defendant cannot be penalized for a tardy attorney reflects a strong commitment to the principle that defendants should not bear the consequences of counsel's failures — a classically defense-oriented jurisprudential stance. Her presiding over the high-profile sentencing of a former Stanford pediatrician for felony distribution of child pornography (April 2022) demonstrates experience with serious felony matters requiring careful judicial temperament. The reported $30 million PAGA penalty against Trader Joe's over worker seating suggests she is willing to impose substantial penalties where statutory violations are established, and does not shy away from large-scale labor and employment rulings. Judge Greenberg's CJP record warrants attention, though the nature of any proceedings is not detailed in available data. Attorneys should be aware this record exists and factor it into their overall assessment. Overall, she presents as a principled, procedurally rigorous jurist with defense-side instincts, a willingness to impose significant remedies, and a demonstrated concern for fairness to parties who may be disadvantaged by circumstances outside their control.

Attorneys appearing before Judge Greenberg should lead with procedural fairness and equitable arguments, particularly in criminal matters. Her background as a defense attorney means she will likely be receptive to arguments that highlight systemic disadvantages faced by defendants or employees, and she has demonstrated a willingness to rule that parties should not be penalized for the failures of their counsel or other actors outside their control. In criminal proceedings, frame arguments around proportionality, due process, and the specific culpability of your client rather than relying on prosecutorial momentum. In civil and labor matters, the PAGA ruling against Trader Joe's signals that Judge Greenberg takes statutory worker protections seriously and is not reluctant to impose large monetary penalties when the record supports them. Plaintiff-side labor attorneys should present well-documented records of violations and be prepared to argue penalty calculations with specificity. Defense-side labor attorneys should focus on good-faith compliance efforts and any remediation steps taken, as these may be the most effective mitigating factors. Given the absence of detailed ruling data, attorneys should invest time in reviewing the San Mateo County Superior Court docket for her recent rulings prior to any appearance. Prepare thorough written submissions, as judges with defense backgrounds often value careful, record-based argumentation over oral advocacy alone. Avoid procedural shortcuts or late filings — her ruling on tardy counsel suggests she is attentive to timeliness and procedural regularity, even when she ultimately protects the party from the consequences.

• critical

  Research CJP Record Independently

  Before any appearance, search the Commission on Judicial Performance public database for any formal discipline, admonishments, or advisory letters involving Judge Greenberg. Understanding the nature of any CJP record is essential for assessing judicial temperament and identifying potential grounds for recusal if relevant.

• critical

  Pull Recent Docket Entries from San Mateo Superior Court

  With no analyzed rulings in the current dataset, independently review her recent tentative rulings, minute orders, and case dispositions on the San Mateo County Superior Court portal and Trellis. Focus on motion practice patterns, ruling timelines, and any recurring analytical frameworks she applies.

• critical

  Prepare Detailed Penalty or Damages Calculations in Labor Cases

  Given the $30M PAGA ruling, any labor or employment matter before her requires a fully documented, line-by-line penalty or damages analysis. Do not rely on rough estimates — she has demonstrated willingness to engage with large-scale statutory remedies and will expect counsel to be precise.

• important

  Develop Fairness and Proportionality Arguments in Criminal Matters

  Her defense background makes proportionality, due process, and equitable treatment arguments particularly salient. Prepare specific factual and legal arguments about your client's individual circumstances, culpability, and any systemic factors that bear on fairness.

• important

  Ensure All Filings Are Timely and Procedurally Complete

  Her attention to attorney conduct and timeliness — evidenced by the tardy-counsel ruling — means late or incomplete filings will be noticed. Build in buffer time for all submissions and double-check local rules compliance for San Mateo County Superior Court.

• Nice

  Review San Mateo Local Rules and Standing Orders

  Confirm whether Judge Greenberg has issued any standing orders, preferred motion formats, or courtroom-specific procedures. San Mateo County Superior Court may have department-specific requirements that differ from general civil or criminal procedure rules.

• ›Be punctual for all hearings and ensure your client and witnesses are present on time — her ruling protecting defendants from tardy counsel signals she tracks timeliness closely and will notice lateness even if she does not penalize the client for it.
• ›Present arguments with procedural precision and record-based support; her background as a defense attorney and her rulings suggest she values careful, evidence-grounded advocacy over rhetorical flourish.
• ›Treat all parties and opposing counsel with professional respect — judges appointed from contested elections and with defense backgrounds often have strong views about courtroom fairness and will react negatively to bullying or dismissive conduct toward opposing parties.
• ›In criminal matters, address sentencing and penalty arguments with specificity about the individual defendant's circumstances; avoid boilerplate mitigation arguments that do not engage with the specific facts of the case.
• ›In labor and employment matters, be prepared to discuss penalty calculations in detail at oral argument — do not assume she will accept summary figures without scrutiny given her demonstrated engagement with large PAGA remedies.