Hon. Kenneth R. Freeman See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   5.4 - 7 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   - 0 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




What others have said about Hon. Kenneth R. Freeman


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5753
Rating:2.5
Comments:
He simply cannot handle complex issues, and he is perhaps the least qualified judge I have encountered in more than 30 years of practice. As noted by one other respondent, he does not understand the concept of the lodestar in calculating fee awards and simply picks a number out of his . . . hat. Authoritarian in the courtroom, rude to counsel, and not well prepared. I would NEVER try another case in front of him.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5719
Rating:3.0
Comments:
On an attorneys fees motion, he arbitrarily slashed our fees more than 50%, uncritically adopting the insurance defense self-serving "expert"and ignoring our expert. He read the tentative as if he hadn't ever seen it before, then angrily stayed with it, not listening to argument. It was an abuse of discretion, as attorneys fees lodestar reductions have to be justified with concrete citations to what the supposed excess fees consist of, and a judge can't just pick a percentage out of the air. Not a good first impression of this judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4844
Rating:9.9
Comments:
He is an excellent judge, who is very knowledgeable and well-prepared.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2619
Rating:1.8
Comments:
Worst judge I have appeared in front of in over 30 years of practice. Emotionally unstable.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1197
Rating:8.0
Comments:
Even handed and available to litigants. Very well prepared

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1156
Rating:3.4
Comments:
While nice enough demeanorwise, he never takes the bench less than a half hour late, usually more, reads tentatives written by his clerks as if he has never seen them before, and generally doesn't fathom more difficult or complex legal issues. Not an automatic paper, but surely we can do better.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA526
Rating:9.5
Comments:
Well reasoned tentatives and sensitivity to both sides of a case; very seasoned judge knowledgeable of his role.