"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. Patricia Nieto	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
Los Angeles County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 3.3 - 11 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 1.0 - 2 rating(s)	Please send me alerts on this judge E-mail Address:

Add your own rating

E-Mail Address ()

* *

Confirm E-mail Address

* * *

Zip

Occupation

Add a comment only

Only items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating.

General Rating Criteria

* Temperament		(1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Scholarship		(1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Industriousness		(1=Not at all industrious,10=Highly industrious)
* Ability to Handle Complex Litigation		(1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Punctuality		(1=Chronically Late,10=Always on Time)
* General Ability to Handle Pre-Trial Matters		(1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
* General Ability as a Trial Judge		(1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
Flexibility In Scheduling		(1=Completely Inflexible,10=Very Flexible)

Criminal Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation		(1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
General Inclination Regarding Bail		(1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
Involvement in Plea Discussions		(1=Not at all Involved, 10=Very Involved)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Pretrial Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Trial Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Sentencing Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)

Civil Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation		(1=Not at all Evenhanded,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Involvement in Settlement Discussions		(1=Not at all Involved,10=Very Involved)
General Inclination		(1=Pro-defendant, 10=Pro-plaintiff)

Comments

Please type what you see below:

Not an even number!

What others have said about Hon. Patricia Nieto

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA38161
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Nieto lacks judicial temperament. She is rude, insulting, and biased. She either does not understand the law, or has no respect for it. When a Judge becomes a King or a Queen, that is the end of justice. It is time to end Judge Nieto's Monarchy and return the rule of law to the Court.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA35786
Rating:4.0

Comments:
Appears to be biased against pro per litigants. Allows defense counsel to talk and argue as long as he wants but cuts me off before I finish making my points. Doesn't read my pleadings and doesn't address any of my points in her tentative. The reviews about her in this section are spot on. She definitely finds ways to rule for the defense, even if it means flipflopping on her own tentative. Contradicts herself from one order to the next. Accepts reviews and grants untimely motions without good cause. Not confident after reading these reviews and experiencing the same. Too late to file 170.6 most likely will file Motion to refuse and pay the filing fee for the appeal once she denies it.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA35729
Rating:1.0

Comments:
When judges know they have a conflict or bias that prevents them from being fair they’re supposed to recuse themselves. This judge instead will stay on the case, and not own up to her bias or recuse herself. She is very biased towards the defense and will find any way to disregard the law/facts and rule in their favor.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA35668
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Very defense oriented judge who misapplies the law. She doesn’t read the papers and errs against ruling on the merits. She will find any way she can to rule for the defense. She appears enamored with big law firms and bends over backwards to listen to them and take their side. Her ethics are questionable. If a judge cannot be fair they should recuse themselves. She is a 170.6.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA32711
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This has to be one of the worst lawyers in a black-robe, completely incompetent, abusive, ilinformed, biased,prejudiced, along with PJ Brazille in the LA south central. apparently old-[redacted] judges believe they can just abuse at will because unregulated. just look at the page ccp 170 complaint on-file. she got their a pro tem juveille court wining a one horse -race after being appointed by swartzeegger (black-pig) using a linguistics degree on writing fraudulent, null void groundless, and baseless unenforcable orders of fraud. Been all over the world and don't put up will illegal black-robes who will soon be losing their retarterment(sic)(k)!she is nothing but [redacted by Ed.]

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA31016
Rating:8.9

Comments:
Decent trial judge, but gives too much leeway to counsel to grandstand and waste time. Sometimes seems like she is uncomfortable making decisions.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA23748
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Not a good job. Never worked at a real law firm and does not do her homework.
Probably about the worst judge I have seen at the Stanley Mosk building and I have been practicing over 30 years. If you have a chance, 170.6 her to the curb.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA23747
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
She is lazy and does not do her homework.
Makes snap judgments and sticks with them no matter what the evidence or law is. Another mediocre lawyer filling a share and sucking down that $250,000 salary who would probably be starving if he has to be a real lawyer. No compassion. No heart.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA18983
Rating:3.6

Comments:
A very nice person who should not be a judge since she is so pro plaintiff.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA14789
Rating:9.9

Comments:
Excellent judicial temperament. Experience. Patient and willing to listen. Willing to invest the time necessary to resolve matters and make proper order.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA12385
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Opposing counsel untimely filed a motion to compel that was NEVER served. It was procedurally inadequate. Two statutes and a Rule of Court were thoroughly violated. Opposing counsel's motion was granted and they were given relief beyond that which was requested in the motion. Rules are supposed to matter, but apparently sometimes they don't. Not only that, but I was ambushed by an Informal Discovery Conference (which had previously been cancelled by the court) when the Judge realized one hadn't been done and she didn't want to get chastized. I never got the sense that the pleadings were ever read. I want to like her, since she has a nice person, but what good is a Judge who decides multiple statutes are simply irrelevant? That is not how our system is supposed to work.

Litigant

Comment #: CA9229
Rating:1.0

Comments:
The worst judge ever. Had not even read the file and determined to rule against the pro se litigants.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA8493
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I concur with the prior comment. This is the worst judge I have seen in recent years. She is rude on the beach and predisposed as to her ruling. She seemed to have made up her mind before hearing the entire case and rude to the party/attorney who disagreed with her. It is surprising to see a judge of such poor quality can sit on the bench today as overall, the quality of the judicial officers has improved greatly for the past few years.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA4560
Rating:3.5

Comments:
She is absolutely one of the worst trial judges I have ever worked with. She single-handedly engineered a guilty verdict from the jury by closing out the defense from challenging testifying witnesses, while knowing fully that the entire defense was to challenge the integrity of the El Monte police officers.