Hon. Jon R. Takasugi See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.1 - 16 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 3 rating(s)
Please send me alerts on this judge
E-mail Address:




Add your own rating

E-Mail Address (will not be displayed)
   
Confirm E-mail Address      
Zip
Occupation

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:

    

What others have said about Hon. Jon R. Takasugi


Comments


Litigant

Comment #: CA51398
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Don't wait until it is too late. FILE YOUR PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE AT ONCE. Takasugi makes California judges look bad. His rulings are what he (or his research attorney) wants them to be, and are not in accordance with procedure and facts. He even makes slight omissions that at first glance seem accidental, but a closer look will show they are intentional to cover up his shortcomings. It would be of no surprise if under the table dealings comes to light for his department.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA46969
Rating:1.2
Comments:
Completely biased and jumps to conclusions prior to hearing all of the facts. Unable to handle complex litigation.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA42138
Rating:1.7
Comments:
Probably one of the worst judges. Very biased against plaintiffs. My biggest complaint is that he never seems to read the briefing - maybe only the first few pages of whatever the defendant writes. Doesn't seem to understand the law! Has anyone filed a judicial complaint? Or appealed any of his decisions?

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA41329
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Use your 170.6 plaintiffs. This man is against all plaintiffs’ cases. Defendants, thank the lord you have this judge, you’ll win.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA40703
Rating:1.5
Comments:
Terrible judge. Just terrible. So pre-defense that any plaintiff in a case before him is at a severe disadvantage. He makes pro-defense rulings that are sometimes almost comical.

Plaintiffs, DING this judge NOW. Or alternatively let him dismiss your very solid case on fundamentally-flawed and groundless reasons later.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA38478
Rating:7.8
Comments:
One of the only judges that other lawyers openly praise after their case is finished. I heard several lawyers on other cases as I waited for my time.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA31657
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge requires you use your challenge; when I read the comments, I thought they were from sore losers; the sad truth is his clerk does the work and not that a good a job; he does not read the materiel and does not allow oral argument on complex issues; use your challenge!! He is not even in his approach and does favor defendants no matter what the issue. He has the ability to ignore black letter law. It is a shame as his father had great reputation in all of his career. His father would be embarrassed his son took a paycheck for being a judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA28277
Rating:10.0
Comments:
I like him.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA26731
Rating:1.0
Comments:
DOES NOT READ THE PAPERS YOU SUBMIT OR MAYBE JUST HAS AN IDIOT FOR A RESEARCH ATTORNEY AND RUBBER STAMPS WHATEVER THE RESEARCH ATTORNEY STICKS UNDER HIS NOSE, BUT HE REFUSES TO FOLLOW BLACK LETTER LAW.

Litigant

Comment #: CA26100
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I agree with the comments of lawyers saying all plaintiffs are in trouble in front of this terrible judge. I wish I had looked here before I didn't affidavit him. He allowed a defense mental exam with no evidence whatever, just a request by the insurance company, and it has caused us untold damage. It is a real shame that someone so harmful is immune.

Litigant

Comment #: CA26099
Rating:1.0
Comments:
He spends his days schmoozing with insurance company lawyers, keeping litigants from obtaining justice by getting fair trials. The point of the whole system--and he plays a very willing, active part in it--is making 95% of the cases settle for the peanuts insurance companies pay.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA24211
Rating:2.6
Comments:
Lacks judicial decorum. Unprofessional. Engages in inappropriate discussion of matters not before the court. Rules without benefit of reading papers. Shocking behavior from a judicial officer. Not very smart. Makes inconsistent and conflicting remarks without understanding why those statements conflict. Practices law from the bench. Perhaps rode his father's coattails. Too bad, his father had a good reputation from what I understand.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA22372
Rating:2.4
Comments:
The WORST JUDGE in the history of judges. Absolutely DOES NOT UPHOLD THE LAW. Won't allow argument; goes by how he feels that morning. All Plaintiffs are in trouble.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA21878
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Very defense oriented. Not for plaintiffs at all.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA21874
Rating:3.5
Comments:
Very defense sided. Good luck to all plaintiffs. I miss judge GROSS. ??

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA16416
Rating:1.5
Comments:
He is a joke. He actually may be the worst judge at Stanley Mosk. That is saying a lot.

Other

Comment #: CA12438
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This guy does not realize what it means to be a judge in the Courts of Record. Not allowed to practice law form the bench

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA8613
Rating:4.3
Comments:
In his two stints in West Covina and Alhambra, he's left a bad impression. Off the bench, he's a congenial fellow but the Robe has seemed to give him a different temperament that is not suited for a judge. He's harsh and somewhat inflexible with parties before him. Not a good judge.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA7644
Rating:3.0
Comments:
Will remand anyone convicted.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA7152
Rating:5.9
Comments:
He is not a bad trial judge. He does what most good judges should do during trial, he stays on the sidelines and rarely interjects himself.

The downside is that his court is poorly managed. He gives harsh sentences for minor offenses. Many do not take this punishment and as a result they are brought back to court, which results in a clogged calendar.