"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. Deirdre H. Hill	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
Los Angeles County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 1.7 - 17 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 ()

* *

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. Deirdre H. Hill

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA40632
Rating:1.0

Comments:
[Redactged by Ed.] She came to the bench late every day one week, and sat there awith her big oversized beach glasses on, sipping a big oversized Slurpeee and is doing her makeup in front of the entire courtroom, while attorneys are talking and she’s not even paying attention, and she’s texting and doing her hair for 90 minutes on the bench. [Redacted] During motion practice for 1 month I was in the court room every day, and I have never seen the proper party win. Her courtroom is the perfect courtroom for the party who should not prevail on the merits. [redacted]

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA39983
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
[Redacted] This lady is worse than what everyone is saying on here, absolutely. She does not even deserve a 1-rating out of 10 if 1 is the worst and 10 is the best. She deserves a zero. She definitely did not read the paperwork submitted for a hearing by me that was “ex parte” (unless she did and just did not understand what she was reading) but (“she”) ruled anyway before I got there to argue. She should stick with photography because her getting elected the next time she makes in on a ballot would be unacceptable. Everyone that is scheduled to see her (unless she has a bias for that side) should file a motion under CCP 170.6.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA38537
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Hill has no desire to be a Judge and it shows. Literally every tentative ruling she issued she reversed after oral argument. She consistently got snowed and connned by frivolous and nonsensical legal arguments. He lack of knowledge of the law is shocking. I will never allow her to handle another case. She is truly one of the worst judges I have seen in 27 years of practice.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA36778
Rating:5.7

Comments:
Judge Hill is an average judge, but I have not experienced the negative that other persons commenting have noted.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA31263
Rating:1.4

Comments:
Let’s Start with positive- she attempts to be mild mannered and doesn’t raise voice but this is her only redeeming quality. However, she is crotchety and nasty but in a subtle manner. The only civilized aspect of her primitive existence. Now for the negative, she is the worst judge in terms of legal scholarship and knowledge and application of the law. She is a bloody stain on the State of California. Within 5 mins of being in her courtroom you will see that she reminds you of a low paid social worker. If you ever been to a welfare office in the ghetto, you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between her and the case managers. Read Michelle Malkin’s “Culture of Corruption.” You might forget your not in Detroit when in her courtroom. Mother and husband are in politics. She is example of why the Bar exam should be hire , California outlawed Aff. Action in colleges in the 90s. I’m not being facetious but she is mentally incompetent, look up Bell Curve theory. I’m sorry she just isn’t qualified. Deidre Hill is why we need judicial reform and why Federal Courts exist. Don’t ever try your case with her, especially if you are opposite race than her, or your opponent has huge financial resources. She has no sense of fairness , no moral compass and will not even review the docket. All of her decisions are overruled by her previous decisions. She will still make rulings after the case settles and will even fill wrong rulings in wrong case. She’s a disgrace to the legal community. She looks acts Talks like a welfare case manager. But this is your judge..: she is so cringy!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA27224
Rating:1.4

Comments:
Shocking but everything said on here is true , this woman is real piece of work. Refuses to follow the law , doesn’t know the law, states wrong defendants on rulings. This is the worst judge I’ve ever seen , how is this even real.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA26753
Rating:3.2

Comments:
I’ll agree with other posters on most things, Judge Hill is consistently late, unprepared, and very disorganized. I also agree that she probably doesn't read any briefs but relies solely on her law clerk or just copies and pastes what the defendant writes in his moving papers... BUT IF u listen to what she is telling you that she wants ... it can work in your favor, she will definitely subliminally give underhanded clues as to what she needs to see that she isn’t seeing ( so for the Plaintiff , listen to what she tries to tell you without actually telling you) . I do believe that she loves drama Bc one time her law clerk was out on vacation and another clerk was substituting and when she came she said to him “ too bad you missed it , they were here all week fighting!” Woww I was taken aback. Sometimes I’m not sure how to read her but what I do like is that she is no nonsense when it comes to the sanctioning part for recalcitrant parties who abuse discovery process. This is great thing for Plaintiffs and defendants clients. I also watched her conduct a bench trial, she seemed impartial and fair. And at the end of the bench trial , she gave excellent advice on humanity and how to come together for the sake of the old lady who was being used as a pawn as the family vexatiously litigated bloody wars over her wealth. I liked what she said and it was real. At times , In my case, i believed she had a Pro Defendant bias. She’s not thatttt bad , I’ve had worse. Best thing about her is that her judicial temperament is pretty mentally stable, unlike most. One time I made her laugh and she had to bury and hide her face to avoid showing that she was laughing. She doesn’t seem like a judge for a reason , more like a regular person and for some

Litigant

Comment #: CA18197
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Duty to maintain impartiality is a joke to her. Deirdre is a disgrace. She is Biased. Issues unjust sanctions on discovery motions without reading opposition papers. Inpatient. Doesn’t read … and she truly just makes so much work for the appellate.

Use §170.6 the moment you see her name!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA11774
Rating:1.6

Comments:
The worst judge I have ever dealt with at LASC. She is incredibly lazy and refuses to do her job. Will not read papers, overrules herself, and refuses to do anything on the case. She just grants whatever in favor of the defendant because all she cares about is maybe getting overruled. I cannot believe she is a judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10690
Rating:1.0

Comments:
How many of us have to complain and suffer before they realize that she is incompetent and throw her off the bench? She is an idiot.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10680
Rating:1.0

Comments:
She is unprepared and has not read the papers and she does not follow the law.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10679
Rating:2.2

Comments:
I thought that the other lawyers posting comments here on her might have been exaggerating. However, she really is a bad judge. She does not listen and she is a lazy thinker. I do not believe that my client can get a fair trial through her.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10422
Rating:2.2

Comments:
Judge Hill is not fit to wear the robe. She was consistently late, unprepared, and disorganized. I believe that she doesn't read any briefs but relies solely on her law clerk. Her current trial estimate is 4 hours per day of actual witness testimony.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA8537
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
the problem is the bar for bias or prejudice is higher than the incredibly bad rulings she makes. she just makes so much work for the appellate. lets vote her out
Over the Hill
textbook sociopath. she views her court as daily entertainment, like tv.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA8230
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Terrible and angry judge. Ignores the law to achieve her own agenda. Unfortunate for the state that she is a judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5630
Rating:1.3

Comments:
I agree 100% with the comment CA4658 posted on 12/19/2013. She definitely takes sides and loves to sanction. She clearly does not understand how to read a case or how to apply basic law to the case before her. She makes snap judgments and then makes her decisions based on that, regardless of the law. I was appalled at her lack of knowledge and it was clear she couldn't have cared less that she misread prior cases or that her rulings were contrary to settled law. When she finished her draconian and vindictive rulings against my client, she then provided the opposition with details on how to handle the rest of the case, and how they should not hesitate to come back into court for more relief if my client didn't "follow" the court's ruling. The only good thing to say about her is she didn't raise her voice....but everything else is a disaster.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4658
Rating:1.1

Comments:
She takes a side and then is merciless, ruthless, vindictive and punitive against the party she doesn't like. She likes to sanction, and likes to make rulings making sure that the losing party loses and loses big. If she's against you, she will do everything possible to help opposing counsel screw your client over.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2542
Rating:1.1

Comments:
Deidre Hill is an incompetent judge. If she was practicing law, I doubt that she could earn even a fraction of her judicial salary. She can also be extremely vindictive. She will openly refuse to follow black letter law, and does not care about the oath she took. Her husband works in state politics, as did her mother, so if your opposition is a donor, DQ her immediately. In my opinion, she is an embarassment to the state of California.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA397
Rating:2.4

Comments:
I tried a commercial unlawful detainer action in front of her to a jury, to avoid the customary prejudice against defendants so common among U/D judges. She rewrote the CACI Instructions on several critical elements of the cause sua sponte. My client was severely prejudiced. She does not understand that decisions, as to whether to litigate or to settle, are often based on the law -- often most succinctly stated in the CACI Instructions. Disqualify her in any commercial U/D matter where more than $5K is involved, and anticipate that she will ignore appropriate and applicable CACI Instructions, and draft her own -- to the prejudice of the defendant.