Public Decisions Database
This database contains decisions on all public judicial disciplinary cases since the inception of the commission in 1960. Cases not involving public charges or public discipline remain confidential under the California Constitution and the commission’s rules.
Pursuant to amendments to the Constitution, which took effect in March 1995, the commission is authorized to impose all disciplinary sanctions, subject to discretionary review by the Supreme Court. Prior to that, the Supreme Court had the authority to censure or remove judges from office upon recommendation by the commission.
Case Profile
New Search| First Name | Charles W. |
| Last Name | Stoll |
| Title | Judge |
| Inquiry No. | |
| Court Level | Superior Court |
| County/Appellate District | Los Angeles |
| Discipline/Determination | Public admonishment |
| Decision By | Commission |
| Date of Decision | 06/03/1996 |
| Method of Resolution | Decision |
| Types of Misconduct | Disqualification/disclosure/post-disqualification conduct Off-bench abuse of office/misuse of court information |
| Petition For Review | |
| Summary | Judge Stoll failed to recuse in cases involving a company in which he owned stock valued in excess of the amount specified in the Code of Civil Procedure section applicable to disqualification. The judge also wrote two letters on court letterhead to a collection service regarding a claim against a member of the judge's family, which became the subject of litigation, in an attempt to influence the recipient. |
| Documents |