Justice Audra M. Mori

The Secretary of State's official guide lists Audra M. Mori, Associate Justice, Division Four, among the Second District justices on the retention ballot. Names and divisions only, each linked to the court's biography.

• Mori is listed under Division Four with Presiding Justice Helen Zukin and Justices Nicholas Daum and Armen Tamzarian.
• No qualifications, ratings, or arguments appear on this page.

A short post on the California Appellate Report blog praises Mori's Comedy Store opinion: the author writes that it takes "quite a few doctrinal moves" and "Justice Mori pulls them all," and quotes her closing paragraph on incentives as "Spot on right."

• Explains the holding in a sentence: a forum clause bundled with a jury waiver unenforceable in California does not justify dismissal, even with a stipulation.
• Quotes the opinion's paragraph on predispute jury waivers at length.

Census of Mori's published opinions, Oct. 2024 to Oct. 2026, from courts.ca.gov listings: 5 authored, 0 dissents or concurrences. Two entries are one case (Getzels, original and modification), so four distinct cases: three civil, one criminal.

• 5 authored published opinions (4 distinct cases); 0 separate opinions.
• Cases: New Commune DTLA v. Redondo Beach (housing vs. Coastal Act, 2026), People v. Millsap (capital resentencing jurisdiction, 2025), Getzels v. State Bar (equal protection, 2025), Comedy Store v. Moss Adams (forum clause and jury waiver, 2024).
• Covers published opinions only; most appellate decisions are unpublished.

Opinion by Mori as Acting Presiding Justice (Tamzarian, Cogliati concurring) upholding Redondo Beach's refusal of a 30-unit 'builder's remedy' condo project in a coastal zone its certified Local Coastal Program reserves for public access and recreation. Even assuming the Housing Accountability Act's builder's remedy applies, the Coastal Act required denial, and no feasible compliant path existed because the developer skipped the amendment process.

• Rejects the developer's proposal to allow denials only under 'specific, objective' Coastal Act policies as 'unworkable,' since nearly all the cited policies call for subjective judgment the Act assigns to the Coastal Commission.
• A certified LCP embodies state policy, not just local law; a city cannot approve a use the LCP does not permit without a Commission-certified amendment.
• Borrows CEQA case law on 'feasible' to hold that the City need not analyze a legally infeasible alternative.
• Acknowledges 'the friction in this conclusion and the HAA's laudable goal of providing affordable housing' and leaves any change to the Legislature.

Mori's published opinion holds that a trial court may not resentence a death-row defendant under Penal Code section 1172.75 (which invalidated most prior-prison-term enhancements) while his automatic appeal is pending in the Supreme Court, because that court's exclusive jurisdiction covers the whole judgment, noncapital counts included. Any error in holding the hearing without the defendant was harmless.

• Defendant Bruce Millsap faces eight death sentences plus more than 100 years to life; the challenged enhancement was a one-year prison prior.
• Construes the statute narrowly to avoid a conflict with the Supreme Court's constitutional jurisdiction (Cal. Const., art. VI, section 11).
• Reasons that resentencing would not serve the statute's purpose of reducing incarceration while eight death sentences stand.
• Distinguishes Velasco and parts ways in reasoning with Division Seven's Dixon decision, which allowed partial resentencing but did not address exclusive jurisdiction.
• Assumes without deciding that the right to be present was violated and finds no prejudice.

Order by the Mori panel modifying the June 26, 2025 Getzels v. State Bar opinion and otherwise denying rehearing, with the unmodified opinion attached. It narrows footnote 12: the Contract Clause argument raised only in reply is forfeited, and Spannaus does not support strict scrutiny.

• Rewrites footnote 12 to separate a forfeited Contract Clause challenge from the citation of Spannaus for strict scrutiny.
• Rehearing otherwise denied; no change in judgment.
• The attached opinion (by Mori) applies rational basis review and upholds State Bar Rule 2.30, which bars inactive licensees from serving as private arbitrators or mediators.

Mori's published opinion rejects an equal protection challenge to State Bar Rule 2.30, which bars inactive bar licensees from working as private arbitrators or mediators. Rational basis review applies, and the State Bar could rationally require those who do law-related work to pay active fees because they may burden its disciplinary system.

• Rejects the claim that "freedom of contract" is a fundamental right, noting the plaintiff relied on overruled Lochner-era cases.
• Relies on a 2005 State Bar staff report explaining why private neutrals should pay active fees.
• Distinguishes Cleburne's more searching review as reserved for laws motivated by prejudice against an unpopular group.
• Considers a constitutional argument raised for the first time on appeal; treats a Contract Clause argument raised only in reply as forfeited.

Mori's published opinion reverses dismissal of the Comedy Store's suit against accounting firm Moss Adams. Because the contract paired a Washington forum clause with a predispute jury waiver (unenforceable in California, enforceable in Washington), Moss Adams bore the burden of showing the Store's jury right would survive in Washington, and its one-sided stipulation not to enforce the waiver did not meet it.

• Holds the trial court wrongly placed the burden of proof on the Store.
• Finds Moss Adams cited no case in which a Washington court refused to enforce a jury waiver.
• Treats the unsigned stipulation as an unaccepted offer that a court cannot turn into a contract modification.
• Follows Division Seven's Lathrop and warns that accepting such stipulations would leave companies little incentive to remove unenforceable terms.
• Deems waived an argument raised first at oral argument.

Judicial Council news release: the Commission on Judicial Appointments unanimously confirmed Mori to Division Four on April 17, 2023, filling the seat of retired Justice Thomas Willhite. Gives her career dates.

• Confirmed by unanimous vote of Chief Justice Guerrero, Attorney General Bonta, and Presiding Justice Arthur Gilbert.
• Career: Superior Court judge since 2018; Perkins Coie partner 2005-2018 and Los Angeles managing partner 2017-2018; earlier at Piper Rudnick, Preston Gates and Ellis, Andrews Kurth, and Brobeck; law clerk at the U.S. Court of International Trade 1994-1996.

The court's official profile: appointed to Division Four in 2023 by Gov. Newsom after serving on the Los Angeles Superior Court since 2018 (civil and family law). Before that, an intellectual property and commercial litigator, mostly at Perkins Coie, where she was managing partner of an office.

• Appointed to the Superior Court in 2018 by Gov. Brown; chaired the court's Judicial Mentor Program.
• Unanimously confirmed after an "exceptionally well qualified" rating from the Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation, per the profile.
• Clerked for Judge Richard W. Goldberg of the U.S. Court of International Trade.
• Described as the first woman of color to serve as managing partner of a Perkins Coie office; chaired its global Diversity Committee.
• Past president of the Japanese American Bar Association; serves on the LA County Bar Litigation Section executive committee.