Ventura Judges Reviewed by the People They Serve

See All Comments

This judge is not acting as a neutral decision-maker — he is actively participating in the litigation he is supposed to be overseeing.

On March 19, 2026, Judge Mark S. Borrell issued a minute order on his own authority initiating an Order to Show Cause to declare us “vexatious litigants,” without any noticed hearing or adversarial process.

There was no hearing scheduled, no motion filed by any defendant, and no opportunity to be heard before the court set a path toward a statewide prefiling ban. That is not normal procedure — that is a judge initiating punitive action based on his own narrative of the case.

At the same time, the order relies entirely on litigation history that Judge Borrell himself presided over, ruled on, and shaped. He is not reviewing someone else’s record — he is acting as both the source of the record and the judge of that record.

This is the same judge I filed multiple CCP §170.1 disqualification challenges against. Instead of assigning those challenges out as required, he ruled on his own disqualification and denied them.

In related cases, I exercised CCP §170.6 and successfully removed him from four matters. That already establishes that his continued involvement is not neutral or appropriate.

Now he is using that same history — including rulings he made himself — to try to label us vexatious.

That is not impartial adjudication. That is circular self-justification.

It goes further.

Judge Borrell is also a named defendant in our federal civil rights case involving the same underlying conduct and litigation pattern.

That federal filing includes allegations of judicial misconduct, due process violations, and improper interference with court procedures — including actions taken without motion, without hearing, and outside standard authority.

Among those issues: court process irregularities involving entries of default and procedural handling of filings that did not follow normal motion practice. These are not minor clerical issues — they go to whether the process itself is being controlled rather than adjudicated.

Despite that, he continues to preside over related matters and now seeks to impose a statewide filing restriction based on those same disputed actions.

At the same time, the court allows multiple law firms to appear and litigate despite serious legal capacity issues — including Freeman Mathis & Gary LLP, which has documented compliance problems, yet continues to represent parties.

This is also an HOA dispute governed by the Davis-Stirling Act, which requires ADR before litigation. That requirement has been ignored, yet enforcement actions, liens, and court proceedings have continued anyway — all while being funded by HOA insurance and prosecuted through multiple law firms with overlapping representation and conflicts.

And none of the underlying facts have been addressed:

illegal liens were filed
financial misconduct was raised
the HOA’s own CPA admitted missing financial records and inability to complete a proper reserve analysis

Instead of addressing those issues, the court is attempting to shut down the party raising them.

This is not about losing a case.

This is about a judge:

ruling on his own disqualification,
presiding over matters where he is a named defendant,
initiating punitive proceedings without a hearing, and
relying on his own prior rulings as justification to restrict access to the courts.

That is a structural due process problem — not a disagreement with a ruling.

If others have experienced similar conduct in Ventura County, especially involving this judge, you are not alone.

Comment: #23, 3/2026, on Mark S. Borrell

https://thecurrentreport.com/the-ventura-probate-machine-a-pattern-of-isolation-financial-control-and-medical-decline/

Comment: #22, 2/2026, on Roger Lund

What judges like Ronda don’t seem to understand is how manipulative criminal perpetrators can be when they and their corrupt attorney shrug off ethics rules to weaponize the court system to go after their victims, over and over and over and over again. It’s revictimization and abuse by proxy. This is happening in Ronda’s court right now, and she seriously let me down by giving into the lies and false narratives. When an attorney knowingly lies, she opens herself up to serious ethical complaints through the state Bar.

Comment: #21, 2/2026, on Ronda J. McKaig

All for mothers and takes sides last I seen

Comment: #20, 2/2026, on Amy Van Sickle

Very fair judge believes in equal rights for both parties will work with you fairly and give you a equal opportunity to fix a issue understanding very strong powerful judge we need more like judge johnson

Comment: #19, 2/2026, on JoAnn Johnson

I spent thousands on a attourny to waste time and not get the justice I needed judge castillo only wants a show and will not correct or hold anyone in contempt for breaking orders

Comment: #18, 2/2026, on Michele M. Castillo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNfxM8s855k

Comment: #17, 2/2026, on Henry Walsh

Judge Hubner is out of her league and unfit to sit on the family court bench. She causes more problems than she resolves, creating confusion and prolonging conflict instead of providing clear direction. If she remains on the judiciary at all, she should be moved to a division that does not impact families and children, where the consequences of poor judgment and weak leadership are less harmful.

Comment: #16, 2/2026, on Carol L. Hubner

Judge Michele Castillo does not uphold the uphold justice for the victim. If you are a victim looking for justice know she will NOT protect you. Her court room reflects the feeling of a corrupt organization.

Comment: #15, 1/2026, on Michele M. Castillo

Judge Buehner would appear to be taking large bribes from litigants before her who belong to wealthy criminal cartels. For no legal reason, she sanctions family law litigants who are not cartel members tens of thousands of dollars for simply raising concerns about the removal of minor children to South American countries or raising concerns about broken teeth and severe bruises inflicted by the litigant who has the cartel backing. She refuses to even consider protecting minor children who have been severely harmed. Judge Buehner needs to be investigated for both immoral and illegal misconduct.

Comment: #14, 1/2026, on Charmaine Buehner

View limited to the 10 latest comments. See All Comments